DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Cllr. Robin Currie PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 20th May 2005 MID ARGYLL, KINTYRE AND Committee Date - 7th September 2005

Reference Number: 05/00889/DET Applicants Name: Lucy M. A. Dawson Application Type: Detailed Planning Permission Application Description: Erection of a Log Cabin Location: Land at Easter Ellister Estate, Port Charlotte, Isle of Islay

(A ) THE APPLICATION

(i) Development Requiring Express Planning Permission:

• Site for erection of a ‘log-cabin’ dwellinghouse to provide holiday letting accommodation; • Installation of private foul drainage arrangements; • Formation of access track and new access point onto classified road.

(ii) Other Specified Operations:

• Connection to public water supply.

(B) RECOMMENDATION

Recommend that planning permission be refused for the reasons set out on the following page.

(C) DETERMINING ISSUES AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

This application is for the erection of a large Scandinavian style ‘Finlodge’ log cabin dwelling situated near to a prominent ridge line on high ground some 260 metres to the north of the A847. The site is located to the north east of the existing farm cluster at Easter Ellister, and situated approximately midway between Port Charlotte and . This is an area of undeveloped high ground characterised as ‘rocky moorland’ and situated at the edge of an existing coniferous forestry plantation. A new private access would be required to serve the site which has no means of access at present.

The proposed development takes the form of a 4 bedroom dwelling constructed in wood with a steeply pitched roof containing living accommodation, giving access onto a wide balcony area designed to provide commanding views out to the south over the coast. The applicant has stated that this dwelling is required for a proposed holiday letting enterprise and that her long-term aim would be to provide a further one or two such log cabin dwellings in the same general location. A statement submitted by the applicant in support of her proposal is included this report.

It is considered that both the siting and design of the proposed development are contrary to the Council’s local plan Settlement Strategy, in that they are unrelated to the existing settlement pattern and would result in isolated development in an elevated location involving a strident and alien design, which is both uncharacteristic of the traditional local vernacular, and which would fail to make any positive contribution towards the enhancement of local character or to its landscape setting. The proposed development is considered contrary to Structure Plan Policies STRAT SI 1, and STRAT DC 8; to adopted Local Plan Policy POL BE (11A); to the advice contained within Planning Advice Note 72 ‘Housing in the Countryside’, and the Council’s published design advice.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\PUBLISHED\INTRANET\C00000243\M00001882\AI00019894\PLANNINGAPPLICATION0500889DAWSONISLAY0.DOC

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning 16th August 2005

Author: Tim Williams – 01546 604084 Contact Officer: Richard Kerr – 01546 604080

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\PUBLISHED\INTRANET\C00000243\M00001882\AI00019894\PLANNINGAPPLICATION0500889DAWSONISLAY0.DOC

REASONS FOR REFUSAL RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 05/00889/DET

1. The siting of the proposed development is unrelated to that of the existing settlement pattern which is characterised by isolated farm clusters and occasional single dwellings located in close proximity to the public road. The site proposed would result in an isolated dwelling far above the public road where it would, by virtue of its elevation and uncharacteristic siting, detract from landscape setting of its surroundings. It would also necessitate the construction of a lengthy access track, which is shown to take the form of straight line between the public road and the site, cutting across contours and failing to respect the topography of the ground, which would constitute an unnecessary and discordant feature in the landscape. The development would therefore be contrary to the provisions of Policies STRAT SI 1, and STRAT DC 8 the ‘ Structure Plan’ 2002, and to the advice on the siting of houses in the countryside contained within Planning Advice Note 72, ‘Housing in the Countryside’.

2. The appearance of the proposed dwelling, based around an A-frame Scandanavian style log cabin, would by virtue of its design, materials and character, represent a strident and alien feature uncharacteristic of its landscape setting, and contrary to the traditional and distinctive architectural identity of the area, which comprises predominantly stone built or harled dwellings exhibiting vernacular design influences. The development would therefore neither conserve nor respect the character of existing settlement or the landscape character of its surroundings, and would be contrary to Policy POL BE (11A) of the ‘Islay, Jura and Colonsay Local Plan’ (1st Review 1988); and to the advice on the design of houses in rural areas contained within Planning Advice Note 72, ‘Housing in the Countryside’, and the Council’s published design advice ‘New Houses in the Countryside’.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\PUBLISHED\INTRANET\C00000243\M00001882\AI00019894\PLANNINGAPPLICATION0500889DAWSONISLAY0.DOC

APPENDIX RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 05/00889/DET

A. POLICY OVERVIEW

Argyll and Bute Structure Plan 2002

STRAT SI 1 – Sustainable Development

Argyll and Bute Council shall adhere to the following principles in considering development proposals, and in its policies, proposals and land allocations in Local Plans. It will seek to:

…

h) conserve the natural and built environment and avoid significant adverse impact on biodiversity, natural and built heritage resources;

i) respect the landscape character of an area and the setting and character of settlements;

…

STRAT DC 8 – Landscape and Development Control

A) Development which, by reason of location, siting, scale, design or cumulative impact, damages or undermines the key environmental features of a visually contained or wider landscape or coastscape shall be treated as ‘non-sustainable’ and is contrary to this policy. Outwith the National Park particularly important and vulnerable landscapes in Argyll and Bute are those associated with:

1. National Scenic Areas 2. Historic landscapes and their settings with close links with archaeology and built heritage and/or historic gardens and designed landscapes. 3. Landward and coastal areas with semi-wilderness or isolated or panoramic quality.

B) Protection, conservation and enhancement to landscape will also be encouraged in association with development and land use proposals.

Islay, Jura and Colonsay Local Plan (1st Review & Alteration) 1988

POL BE (11A)

The District Council will seek to achieve a high standard of layout and design where new developments are proposed. Proposals for new development should have regard to the District Council’s published design guidelines.

Planning Advice Note 72 – ‘Housing in the Countryside’

Page 11 – Location Within the Landscape

“Most new developments should try to fit into or nestle within the landscape. Skyline development should normally be avoided, as should heavily engineered platforms. This is to ensure that the building does not interrupt and conflict with the flow of the landform or appear out of scale. Even where sites are less visible they will still require a significant level of skill to assimilate buildings into the landscape.”

Page 15 – Design

“…The overall aim should be to ensure that new housing is carefully located, worthy of its setting, and is the result of an imaginative, responsive and sensitive design process.”

Page 17 – Materials

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\PUBLISHED\INTRANET\C00000243\M00001882\AI00019894\PLANNINGAPPLICATION0500889DAWSONISLAY0.DOC

“The use of inappropriate or too many materials can have a negative impact. The greater the use of local materials, the more the house may reflect aspects of the local character. This will also help to contribute to sustainability.”

Page 22 – Concluding Remarks

“Every settlement should have its own distinctive identity. This is determined in part by the local characteristics of the area’s architectural style of individual buildings and the relationship of these buildings to each another.”

Argyll and Bute Design Guide A ‘New Houses in the Countryside’ (1985)

B. OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

(i) Site History

There is no planning history relating to the current application site.

(ii) Consultations

West of Scotland Archaeology Service (10.06.05) – No objections.

SEPA (20.06.05) – No objections in principle.

Scottish Natural Heritage (15.08.05) – Although a suitable screening strategy and forestry management plan could lessen the impact of the proposal substantially, the proposed location of such a Scandinavian style building would not enhance the traditional settlement pattern of this area and would detract from the more traditional style of housing which is being encouraged through the ‘Landscape Character Assessment’ and the ‘Argyll and Bute Design Guide’ (under preparation).

Area Roads Manager (04.07.05) – No objection subject to conditions requiring access improvements and parking provision.

Scottish Water – No reply received to date.

(iii) Publicity

There have been no representations received.

C. ASSESSMENT

The proposal is a detailed application for the erection of a large Scandinavian-style, four bedroom ‘log-cabin’ dwelling situated on an isolated and elevated site, within a clearing at the edge of a large coniferous forest plantation overlooking an open area of rock moorland, the public road below and the coast beyond. The site stands some 260 metres to the north of the Port Charlotte – Portnahaven road, to the north east of the existing Easter Ellister farm cluster, where it is well removed from other development. A new means of access would be required to serve the site, which would comprise a track winding up from the public road over the hillside to the site of the proposed dwelling.

The applicant has stated that the new dwelling is intended for self-catering holiday accommodation and has been sited to give maximum views out over to and to Ireland beyond. Although it is the applicant’s current intention to use this dwelling as a holiday letting business, the form of development is that of a single detached dwellinghouse which is appropriately considered in terms of the housing policies of the development plan, rather than in terms of ‘tourism development’.

The development is therefore assessed against the following criteria:

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\PUBLISHED\INTRANET\C00000243\M00001882\AI00019894\PLANNINGAPPLICATION0500889DAWSONISLAY0.DOC

Environmental Impact:

The application site overlooks the mouth of and out towards Laggan Bay and The Oa beyond. The proposed dwelling is located on high ground characterised as ‘Rocky Moorland’ within the Landscape Character Assessment for Argyll. The key landscape features are extensive grassland, rocky outcrops, conifer plantations. The traditional settlement pattern in this wider location is characterised by sporadic single dwellinghouses of simple, traditional design located adjacent to and addressing the public road, together with scattered isolated farm clusters. Dwellings within this area predominantly take the form of stone built or harled buildings with slate or tiled roofs.

The two primary environmental impact characteristics of the proposed development are its siting and design:

(a) Siting

The proposed development would be sited in an isolated and prominent location occupying high ground a considerable distance from the public road. The site has been specifically chosen due to the expansive views it provides out to the south and west over Loch Indaal, Lagan Bay and The Oa and further out towards Ireland. Although the site is on the edge of an existing conifer plantation, it occupies a clearing within the forestry and will be readily visible from the public road to the west of Easter Ellister.

The proposed development is considered contrary to one of the primary Structure Plan objectives for Argyll and Bute. Structure Plan Objective SI 2 states that a key environmental objective is: “to promote a general improvement in the quality of design and encourage development of a scale, form and location appropriate to the character of the landscape and settlements of Argyll and Bute”. This key objective is reflected in Policy STRAT SI 1 – Sustainable Development, which states that: “Argyll and Bute Council shall adhere to the following principles in considering development proposals… It will seek to respect the landscape character of an area and the setting and character of settlements.”

The proposed siting of this new dwelling runs contrary to the existing form of development and pattern of existing settlements, and would be incongruous and unacceptable as it would not integrate visually with the settlement pattern of the area or its landscape setting. Structure Plan Policy STRAT DC 8 affords coastal landscapes with panoramic qualities particular protection form inappropriate developments of this nature.

(b) Design

The proposed development takes the form of a large Scandinavian style ‘log cabin’ of d to be of a size, design and appearance untypical of the existing local vernacular and which, if permitted in this location, would represent an alien form of development which would not visually integrate with the landscape or existing settlement pattern.

The design of the proposed dwelling is considered contrary to the Structure Plan policies and objectives detailed above and also to Policy POL BE (11A) of the adopted ‘Islay, Jura and Colonsay Local Plan’ (1st Review 1988) which states that the Council will seek to achieve a high standard of design, and that proposals for new development should have regard to the Council’s published Design Guidelines. The Council’s Design Guide (published 15th May 1985) states that: “Where the principle of development is acceptable, it is essential that the building design and siting do not detract from the environmental quality of the area”. The Design Guide goes on to state the importance of respecting the local identity of an area and that modern design should both recognise and complement the vernacular tradition.

The proposed development owes nothing to the local identity of this distinctive and important island environment and is considered completely at odds with the existing vernacular tradition.

The broad principles contained within the Council’s Design Guide is reflected in current Government policy advice. Planning Advice Note 72, ‘Housing in the Countryside’, published in February 2005, sets out the Scottish Executive’s expectations of the planning system to deliver high standards of design in housing development. One of the key concluding remarks within this document states that: “Every settlement should have its own distinctive identity. This is

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\PUBLISHED\INTRANET\C00000243\M00001882\AI00019894\PLANNINGAPPLICATION0500889DAWSONISLAY0.DOC

determined in part by the local characteristics of the area’s architectural style of individual buildings and the relationship of these buildings to each other.”

The proposed design runs contrary to both Council and Government policy advice on design and is considered unacceptable for the reasons stated above. Whilst Scottish Natural Heritage has indicated that a screening strategy and forest management plan could reduce the landscape impact of the proposal, SNH have concluded that “the proposed location of such a Scandinavian style building would not enhance the traditional settlement pattern of the area and would detract from the more traditional style of housing which is being encouraged through the Landscape Character Assessment and the Argyll and Bute Design Guide.” It should be noted that good design of buildings in the countryside should not need to rely on buildings having to be hidden by otherwise unnecessary planting.

Locational/Operational Requirement:

No claim of locational or operational need has been submitted in respect of the current application.

Economic Benefit:

None, other than that associated with construction, and indirectly, from any holiday occupancy. The applicant has indicated that the dwelling could make a contribution towards farm diversification and bring tourism related benefits the island. Such considerations, however laudable, cannot override the negative impacts associated with a development which has unacceptable siting and design characteristics. Should there be a case for supporting development at Easter Ellister, this should be in the form of development which respects vernacular building traditions and which is more appropriately sited closer to the existing farm cluster or the public road. The applicant has indicated her desire for a site located well away from the road (for the privacy of visitors) and in an elevated location (to afford views). Such requirements cannot lend weight to a proposal which is in other respects unsustainable.

Infrastructure & Servicing Implications:

The proposed dwellinghouse would need to be accessed via a new private access track leading from the existing public road some 260 metres to the south of the application site. Parking and turning would be provided at the site. The Area Roads Manager has indicated the need for junction improvements with the public road.

Although there are no highway safety implications relating to this proposal, it is considered that the new access required to serve the development could be prominent and incongruous unless very carefully designed and constructed. It is indicated as being a straight line between the public road and the site, cutting across contours and failing to respect the topography of the ground. If constructed as shown it would constitute a discordant feature in its own right.

Foul drainage is proposed to be to a new septic tank and soakaway and water shall be by connection to the existing public water supply.

Applicant’s supporting statement:

The applicant has submitted a statement in support of her proposal and has asked for it to be reproduced within this report in full. This statement is reproduced below with officer comments where necessary:

“Overview:

My family have owned Easter Ellister farm for over thirty years. It incorporates some 450 acres of organic agricultural land and 150 acres of forestry. We have a Highland Pony stud and a waterfowl collection and also let seasonal grazing to a local farmer; although the upkeep of the farm usually exceeds the income.

I renovated the farmhouse in 2002 and started running it as a self-catering property in 2003. It accommodates up to ten people and proved popular from the start.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\PUBLISHED\INTRANET\C00000243\M00001882\AI00019894\PLANNINGAPPLICATION0500889DAWSONISLAY0.DOC

Through experience I have realised that there is a great need for more tourist accommodation, (please see letter from Visit Scotland in support of this) particularly larger accommodations and decided that it would be an excellent idea to expand my self-catering business by building a luxury log cabin in the forestry.

Officer Comment: The proposed siting is within a clearing on the outer edge of the forestry plantation and would be prominent within the landscape)

I chose a log cabin design because I know from speaking to other self-catering operators that they are extremely popular with tourists. The high-standard design and fittings of the cabin combined with the perfect location at Ellister - a peaceful and elevated spot overlooking the glen, the lake and farmland and across to the Oa and Ireland - will be a winner with tourists from far and wide.

I envisaged a small development in this 50-acre forest - perhaps a total of 2 or 3 cabins - private, peaceful and accessed separately from each other with each of them still commanding the same stunning views.

Other than the obvious benefits to our tourism economy, other benefits are:

• Employment for at least 2 housekeeping/maintenance staff. • Short-term employment for local builders and local suppliers and one long-term maintenance position. • The cabin will not be a drain on local resources. The design incorporates thermo-insulated walls so is very heat efficient. A septic tank and a private water supply will make the cabin virtually self-sufficient. It will be as environmentally friendly as possible. Officer Comment: The submitted planning application forms indicate that the new dwelling would be connected to the existing public water supply. • It will help make me sufficient income to be able to move back to Islay one day and also

ensure the long-term sustainability of the farm.

Planning officers have had concerns over my chosen site. In summary their concerns are: 1. The site is too far from the main road and the access road will be visible from the main road.

2. The site is on a prominent ridgeline.

3. The design is not in keeping with other dwellings. i.e. there are no other log cabins on Islay and planners do not want log/wood dwellings built as they feel it will not fit in with its surroundings.

In support of these concerns, I point out that:

1. The site is approx 400 metres from the main road which I do not think is that far. Tourists who would want to rent out the cabin will be partly paying for the location of the cabin – they do not want traffic passing their front door!

Easter Ellister is booked out months in advance (I already have bookings/enquiries for 2007) and so I know that there is a demand for properties in rural locations.

I can cite many examples of recently built properties on Islay which have longer access roads – e.g. at and a new house off the road. So I feel that this concern should not apply to my site.

Officer Comment: The developments referred to at Nerabus and off the Kilchoman Road were in both cases a redevelopment of the substantial remains of a previously existing property.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\PUBLISHED\INTRANET\C00000243\M00001882\AI00019894\PLANNINGAPPLICATION0500889DAWSONISLAY0.DOC

Yes, the property will require a new access road but made of local stone not tarmac. My builder has calculated that only a portion of the road leading up the rise will be visible from the main road. Over a short period it will blend in with the environment and become much less visible. Again the two such examples at Nerabus and Kilchoman have much longer, very visible access roads.

Concern was also expressed regarding the forestry surrounding the cabin and the fact that the Sitka Spruce will reach maturity in 15-20 years. We will be harvesting trees in the short term and then landscaping the area. We would plant a variety of native trees such as Hazel, Willow and Birch so in the long term the area will always be covered and provide some screening to the site.

Officer Comment: The existing conifer plantation is outwith the application site. No landscaping or woodland management proposals have been submitted with this application and it is not considered that the proposed development would lend itself to screening. The Applicant has already stated that the main reason for selecting this elevated site has been to take advantage of the ‘stunning views’.

2. Yes, the site is situated on the upper edge of the glen. I chose this spot because it is a natural clearing, set back in the trees and has excellent views – which would not be available in a lower spot closer to the road. Again, I can cite many examples of houses built on more prominent ridgelines or on the skyline on Islay and therefore do not think this should be a concern in my application (e.g. Mr Monaghan, nr , house at Nerabus etc, and the new Council Civic Amenity building near , which is on the skyline).

Officer Comment: The development referred to by Mr. Monaghan near Port Ellen was approved following a site inspection. Although this is a prominent development when viewed from the seaward approach to Port Ellen, the design and scale of the development was considered appropriate to this location and in keeping with the local vernacular of the area. The dwelling at Nerabus was a redevelopment as has previously been stated and the resulting building is an acceptable traditional design. The Council’s Civic Amenity building near Bowmore serves an overriding operational need, and is not considered comparable with the current proposal.)

3. Yes, this would be the first Scandinavian designed log cabin on the island, chosen because this is far more appealing to tourists than staying in a modern kit home.

I don’t think there is a generic style on Islay at present. Indeed on our farm alone there is a very modern kit home, an 1800’s stone farmhouse and a 1970’s kit home – all of which are very different in style. Another example is the new building at Laggan bridge (Bridgend - Port Ellen) which has been allowed to be built - bright red with Colonial style shutters on the windows - how is this more in-keeping than a log cabin?

Officer Comment: It is not known which property is being referred to here. Certainly, if it is a poorly detailed building, it should not lend any weight to further unacceptable development.

In my opinion, a large white kit home on the hillside will be far more prominent and obvious than a natural log home, which will be stained a natural pine colour in keeping with the heather, bracken and Sitka Spruce in this area.

Further to this, my chosen site is within the ‘Rural Opportunity area’ as set out in the Local Plan. My point is why is this site deemed unsuitable if your Local Plan has identified it as a suitable area?

Officer Comment: The forthcoming local plan has only recently completed its final period of public consultation. It cannot be accorded materiality at this stage as its content may need to be reviewed in the light of representations received. Although the draft plan identifies broad areas with general capacity to absorb small scale development between Port Charlotte and Portnahaven, this would not support the development with unacceptable design or siting characteristics.

In summary

I understand that log cabins have been rejected in the past and it would therefore seem unfair to grant approval now. However, several wrongs do not make a right!

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\PUBLISHED\INTRANET\C00000243\M00001882\AI00019894\PLANNINGAPPLICATION0500889DAWSONISLAY0.DOC

The rest of Argyll and Bute and indeed most of the islands (Mull even has a Finlodge) have benefited from the added tourism these bring and I fail to see why Islay should be the only island not to be allowed to have them.

A development of Finlodges at Ardlui are proving to be extremely popular with visitors and the manager is extremely pleased with the finish and quality of the cabins.

I appreciate that planners feel that granting such an application will set a precedent but at the same time, I do not feel that there will be a sudden rush to build cabins. Where the development of a cabin is beneficial to a local tourism operator e.g. for tourist accommodation or for developing or enhancing a local business, which will overall encourage or support our tourist economy, then in my opinion, it should be encouraged not rejected

I have no wish to build an unsightly chalet development or any kind of Butlins. I am aiming at luxury, high-quality accommodation and feel that a log cabin will provide the romantic, tranquil country holiday environment, which many people come to Islay for.

I merely wish to embrace our thriving tourist economy and help support my family's farm for many more years to come.”

D. CONCLUSION

Having given consideration to the Applicant’s statement, it is still considered that the siting and design of the proposed ‘Finlodge’ are contrary to the Council’s Settlement Strategy, unrelated to the existing settlement pattern and would result in an alien design of building in an elevated location, which is both uncharacteristic of the traditional local vernacular, and which would fail to make any positive contribution towards the enhancement of local character. This proposal remains contrary to both development plan policy and government advice and is therefore recommended for refusal.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\PUBLISHED\INTRANET\C00000243\M00001882\AI00019894\PLANNINGAPPLICATION0500889DAWSONISLAY0.DOC