Update on Recent Kilmichael Glassary Parish Church Appeal Decision
Argyll and Bute Council · 18 June 2025
Back to Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee — 18 June 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
1 Classification: OFFICIAL ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT AND ECONOMIC GROWTH PLANNING, PROTECTIVE SERVICES AND LICENSING COMMITTEE (18.06.25) UPDATE ON RECENT KILMICHAEL GLASSARY PARISH CHURCH APPEAL DECISION _________________________________________________________________________ OUR REFERENCE: 23/01367/PP DPEA REFERENCE: PPA-130-2091 CASE DETAIL: Application for planning permission ref 23/01367/PP (Change of use of former church to form dwellinghouse, formation of vehicular access and driveway, erection of garage/carport, formation of opening in boundary wall to provide pedestrian access and associated works) refused by notice dated 21 August 2024 SITE ADDRESS: Kilmichael Glassary Parish Church, Kilmichael Glassary APPLICANT: Mrs Helen Tomolillo STATUS: Appeal Allowed by decision dated 10 March 2025 _________________________________________________________________________ 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 This report summarises a recent decision by Scottish Ministers following the above application being appealed. 2. RECOMMENDATION 2.1 It is recommended that Members note the content of this report. 3. BACKGROUND – 23/01367/PP 3.1 This report refers to planning application reference 23/01367/PP for the change of use of former church to form dwellinghouse, formation of vehicular access and driveway, erection of garage/carport, formation of opening in boundary wall to provide pedestrian access and associated works. 3.2 Planning permission was refused at Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee on the 21st August 2024 due a number of reasons including the unacceptable adverse impact the proposal would have on the setting of the listed building; the incompatibility of the proposal with the graveyard with resultant harm to the amenity of future residents and users of the graveyard; and the absence of any archaeological evaluation works prior to the determination of the planning application leading to significant uncertainty regarding the effect of the proposal in archaeological terms. The proposal was identified to be in conflict with LDP2 policies 01, 05, 08, 14, 21 and 66c) and NPF4 policies 7(o) and 14c). 3.3 An appeal was subsequently submitted to the Planning and Environmental Appeals Division (PEAD).
Page 2
2 Classification: OFFICIAL 4. REPORTER’S CONCLUSIONS 4.1 A Reporter, appointed by Scottish Ministers, allowed the appeal and concluded that the planning permission should be granted subject to 16 conditions. 4.2 In summary the key points are as follows: • Incompatibility of the proposal with the graveyard – the Reporter accepted that the graveyard is and will continue to be visited by the public. The decision notes that given the proposed amenity space, future residents would have no reason to use the graveyard for any recreation purposes and the Council own and thus have control over the land (a condition was also imposed to maintain public access to the graveyard). Albeit relatively quiet, the Reporter notes everyday activities and noise in the vicinity are apparent when in the graveyard and considers that the movements of residents are unlikely to cause any material disturbance or disruption to those buried in the graveyard or to those visiting. The decision notes that the windows would have lead glazing, and occupiers are unlikely to be at the property all day and visitors are unlikely to visit the graveyard at night, and that the appellant accepts members of the public could be in close proximity to their home at any time and it should be anticipated by any future residents. Overall, the Reporter accepts that the context of the graveyard would alter, but it would not be so great as to indicate that the uses are incompatible. Further on in the decision, the Reporter notes that it would be open to the council to ensure that the occupier is made aware of any burial so they could vacate the property should they choose to do so. • Setting of the listed building – The Reporter in summary states: “When viewing the church and entering the graveyard there would be no obvious signs that the use had changed. Visitors would still understand the building, its purpose, and its relationship with the graveyard. In my view there would be little change, if any at all, to the setting or the sense of place. As for the change of use, for the reasons set out above, I do not consider that it would significantly alter the relationship between the church and the graveyard. Accordingly subject to a landscaping condition, there would be no adverse impact on the setting of either the church or the wall.” • Archaeological matters – A Written Scheme of Investigation was submitted at appeal stage. The Reporter was satisfied that the processes set out in the written scheme of investigation would ensure that any remains are dealt with properly and respectfully and that this was a matter that can be dealt with by a suitably worded condition. 4.3 Full details of the appeal documents and decision can be viewed on the PEAD website under the reference PPA-130-2091: Scottish Government - DPEA - Case Details 5. IMPLICATIONS Policy: None. Financial: None. Legal: None HR: None Fairer Scotland Duty: None
Page 3
3 Classification: OFFICIAL Equalities – Protected Characteristics: None Socio-economic Duty: None Islands: None Climate Change: None Risk: None Customer Service: None The Rights of the Child (UNCRC): None Author: Bryn Bowker Date: 05.06.25 Fergus Murray Head of Development and Economic Growth