Update on Recent Scottish Government Planning Appeal Decisions
Argyll and Bute Council · 20 August 2025
Back to Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee — 20 August 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Argyll and Bute Council Development and Economic Growth PLANNING, PROTECTIVE SERVICES AND LICENSING COMMITTEE – 20th August 2025 _________________________________________________________________________ UPDATE ON RECENT SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT PLANNING APPEAL DECISIONS Appeal HHA-130-14 - 36, High Road, Port Bannatyne, Isle of Bute, PA20 0PP relating to High Hedge Application Reference 24/01562/HH Appeal ENA-30-2052 - Flat 2, 3 Shore Road, Port Bannatyne, Isle of Bute, PA20 0LQ relating to Enforcement Notice served in relation to a garden fence _________________________________________________________________________ (A) INTRODUCTION This report summarises a recent decision by Scottish Ministers following the above application being appealed. (B) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Members note the content of this report. (C) SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND – 24/01562/HH This appeal refers to high hedge application reference 24/01562/HH for the reduction of height of a boundary hedge to the side of 36 High Road, bordering the property at 34 High Road, Port Bannatyne. The High Hedge Notice was served by the planning authority requiring the whole hedge to be reduced to a height of 3 metres and maintained at that height as a preventative active. The hedge comprises of a row of Leylandii trees alongside the south east boundary wall of 36 High Road to a point beside the house where the variety of species changed. Since the high hedge application was made, most of the Leylandii has been cut to a consistent height of 3m and some branches of the Dawn Redwood facing 34 High Road have been cut but the Dawn Redwood the Red Escallonia, Leylandii trees, Yew trees remain above the required 3m height. The appeal was made on the grounds that the Dawn Redwood in particular should be removed from the High Hedge Notice. An appeal was subsequently submitted to the Planning and Environmental Appeals Division (PEAD), with the Reporter undertaking an accompanied site visit on the 17th June 2025. SCOTTISH MINISTERS’ DECISION – 24/01562/HH Scottish Ministers dismissed the appeal and concluded that the High Hedge Notice takes effect on the date of their decision (8th July 2025). In summary the key points are as follows: • In relation to the part of the hedge that was not cut back, the Reporter states it “would likely block direct sunlight in particular over the primary access to 34 High Road and its garden, and would be likely to somewhat reduce ambient light levels for the facing habitable rooms (including for 32 and 34 High Road).” And then
Page 2
states “consider that the portion of hedge not yet reduced in height would be likely to have an adverse effect on the reasonable enjoyment of 34 High Road, and the facing habitable rooms of 32 High Road.” • The Reporter examined the impact on the conservation area and concluded that “I observed more distant views of the Dawn Redwood from the road parallel to the gardens to the south east. I consider the backdrop of the buildings at 34 and 36 High Road, and the heavily wooded area to the west of the appeal site are significant features in the area. It is difficult to discern at distance which canopy is the Dawn Redwood, and which is the fir tree that does not form part of the hedge. Given these factors, I consider removal of the Dawn Redwood would be unlikely to have a significant effect on the character of the conservation area.” • The conclusion is that “the hedge includes the Dawn Redwood and Red Escallonia and is a high hedge adversely affecting the reasonable enjoyment of 34 High Road. As a result, I find that not all of the initial action has yet been completed and therefore I conclude that the high hedge notice should be confirmed without variation.” Full details of the appeal documents and decision can be viewed on the PEAD website under the reference PPA-130-14: Scottish Government - DPEA - Case Details (D) SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND – Enforcement Notice 23/00012/ENFHSH This appeal relates to an Enforcement Notice that was served on Flat 2, 3 Shore Road, Port Bannatyne, Isle of Bute, PA20 0LQ to require the reduction of a fence which was unauthorised and is located within a Conservation Area and in the grounds of a listed building. The fence subject to this Enforcement Notice is in the rear garden of 3 Shore Road, a flatted property but the fence is within 20m of a road – High Road, Port Bannatyne which runs behind the property and is in excess of 1m and it is also within the curtilage of a Listed Building (3 Shore Road C-Listed) and therefore does not benefit from permitted development rights under this Class. The fence was erected without the benefit of planning permission and is in breach of planning control. Planning permission was retrospectively applied for (reference 24/00925/PP) and refused and then an appeal made to the Local Review Body (reference 25/0001/LRB) where the planning decision was upheld. Following the refusal, an Enforcement Notice was issued on 6th March 2025 requiring the reduction of the fence to 1m in height. SCOTTISH MINISTERS DECISION – ENA-30-2052 Scottish Ministers dismissed the appeal and concluded that the Enforcement Notice is varied to allow so it takes effect 3 months from the date of the decision. In summary the key points are as follows: • The reporter did not dispute that the fence was unauthorised and did not have the benefit of planning permission or permitted development.
Page 3
• The reporter did not dispute that the fence had been in situ for less than 4 years so was not lawful. • In terms of harm to the amenity, the reporter stated that “although the land to the rear of the listed building is divided by a substantial hedge adjoining the parking area, it otherwise retains an open character with garden strips for individual properties. I observed one garden strip to be enclosed by a low fence that would not restrict views in.” And goes on to say they “observed the fence subject to this appeal to be solid, partially blocking views of a listed church to the north west. The solid style, height and extent of the fence mean it is imposing and dominant in the land to the rear of the listed building, creating a stronger sense of enclosure to the west side of that land. This would be detrimental to the otherwise open character of that land and therefore detrimental to the setting of the listed church and listed property related to that land. The visual dominance of the fence and greater enclosure would be detrimental to the open amenity of the adjacent garden strip.” • In turn the reporter found the required action would not exceed what is necessary to remedy the breach and as a result it is not excessive. The report also found that the appellant’s personal circumstances are not sufficient justification to set aside the breach or injury to amenity. Full details of the appeal documents and decision can be viewed on the PEAD website under the reference ENA-30-2052: Scottish Government - DPEA - Case Details (E) IMPLICATIONS Policy: None Financial: None Personnel: None Equal Opportunities: None Authors and Contact Officer: Kirsty Sweeney Fergus Murray Head of Development and Economic Growth