Item No. 4 SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE MINUTE of MEETING of the PLANNING AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMITTEE held in the Council Headquarters, Newtown St. Boswells on 31 March 2014 at 10 a.m. ------------------ Present: - Councillors R Smith (Chairman), M. Ballantyne (from para 4), S. Bell, J. Brown, J. Fullarton, I. Gillespie, D. Moffat, B. White (from para 3). Apologies:- Councillor S. Mountford. In Attendance:- Service Director Regulatory Services, Development Standards Manager, Major Applications, Review and Enforcement Manager, Managing Solicitor – Commercial Services, Democratic Services Officers (F. Henderson and F. Walling). ORDER OF BUSINESS 1. The Chairman advised that Item 6(a) of the agenda had been deferred. This was to have been a continuation of the consideration of application 13/01379/FUL, the erection of a poultry shed on Whim Poultry Farm, Lamancha. This application would now be determined at a meeting to be held on 14 April 2014 in the Council Headquarters at 2 pm. DECISION NOTED. MINUTE 2. There had been circulated copies of the Minute of the Meeting of 3 March 2014. DECISION APPROVED for signature by the Chairman. MEMBER Councillor White joined the meeting during the presentation and discussion below. PLANNING PERFORMANCE UPDATE 3. The Service Director Regulatory Services was in attendance to present Members with an update on planning performance in the Scottish Borders. This was in the form of contextual and trend information for the Council, based on Scottish Government performance measures. Having peaked around 2007 the number of applications submitted to Scottish Borders Council had reduced to previous averages, with about 700 pending at any one time. Performance in all categories had gradually improved over the past six years. However with regard to decision making timescales the Council was below the Scottish average and it was noted that this was typical for a rural authority. The reasons were identified as the longer distances to travel to sites; high numbers of listed buildings, requiring a further statutory process; the Council’s development contributions policy; and a high number of legal agreements. Action would be prioritised to continue to improve the time taken to process applications. Other areas being addressed, in terms of performance, related to enforcement and the streamlining of legal agreements. A new Enforcement Charter and revised scheme for processing legal agreements had recently been approved by Committee. In relation to other performance measures, now used by the Scottish Government, the Council was among the top performing authorities in respect of the age of Development Plan, early collaboration with applicants and the production of regular and proportionate policy advice. Scottish Borders Council was also at the forefront of E- planning with nearly 30% of applications now being submitted on-line. Although not apparently scoring well in terms of sharing good practice it was noted that Scottish Borders Council had representatives on several national benchmarking, user, strategy and working 1 Item No. 4 groups. Members discussed the performance data presented and received answers to their questions. In response to a request, the Service Director agreed to provide a breakdown of the Council’s performance in relation to non-householder planning applications. He advised that the Scottish Borders had a higher proportion of non- householder applications and that there were two officers dedicated to business applications. Scottish Government had acknowledged the significant progress the Council had made in processing applications from this sector. DECISION NOTED. MEMBER Councillor Ballantyne joined the meeting before consideration of the applications. APPLICATIONS 4. There had been circulated copies of reports by the Head of Planning and Regulatory Services on applications for planning permission requiring consideration by the Committee. DECISION DEALT with the applications as detailed in Appendix I to this Minute. APPEALS AND REVIEWS 5. There had been circulated copies of a report by the Head of Planning and Regulatory Services on Appeals to the Scottish Ministers and Local Reviews. DECISION NOTED that:- (a) there remained 3 appeals outstanding in respect of the following:- x Whitslade (Barrel Law), Selkirk x Allanshaws Farmhouse (Shawpark), Galashiels x Blythe Farm (Brunta Hill), Lauder (b) the Local Review Body had overturned the Appointed Officer’s decision to refuse the following:- (i) Erection of dwellinghouse with integral garage on Plot 1, land south west of Blackhouse Farm Cottages, Reston – 11/01657/FUL (ii) Erection of dwellinghouse with integral garage on Plot 2, land south west of Blackhouse Farm Cottages, Reston – 11/01658/FUL (iii) Erection of dwellinghouse and outbuilding/stables on Plot 2 (Site 2), land at Huntshaw Farm Steading, Huntshaw, Earlston – 13/00892/FUL (iv) Removal of condition from planning consents B315/94 and 00/00458/FUL to allow residency to be outwith connection to business or agriculture at Kinegar House, Cockburnspath. (c) there remained 1 review outstanding in respect of Deanfoot Road, West Linton - 2 Item No. 4 PRIVATE BUSINESS DECISION AGREED under Section 50A(4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 to exclude the public from the meeting during consideration of the business detailed in Appendix II to this Minute on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 6 of Part I of Schedule 7A to the Act. SUMMARY OF PRIVATE BUSINESS MINUTE 1. The Committee approved the private section of the Minute of the Meeting of 3 March 2014. The meeting concluded at 12.20 p.m. 3 Item No. 4 APPENDIX I APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION Reference Nature of Development Location 13/01379/FUL Erection of poultry shed (amendment Whim Poultry Farm to previous consent 12/00465/FUL) Lamancha West Linton Application deferred for determination at a meeting to be held on 14 April, 2014 at 2 pm. 13/00626/S36 Wind farm comprising 24 wind Land North East of Cathpair turbines, substation, control room Farmhouse, Girthgate, buildings and compound, access between Stow and Lauder – tracks, 2 No meteorological masts, Girthgate Wind Farm borrow pits and temporary constructions and site storage compound (Revised scheme involving deletion of 1 turbine, amendment to turbine layout and reduction in height of further 3 turbines) Decision: That the Council indicate to Scottish Government that it objects to the application for a 24-turbine wind farm on the Girthgate site. The 2 reasons for the objections are as follows: Reason for Objection 1: Impact on Landscape Character: 1. The proposed development would be contrary to Policies G1 and D4 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan 2011 and Policy 10 of the South-East Scotland Strategic Development Plan (SESplan) 2013 in that, taking into consideration the following factors, it would unacceptably harm the Borders landscape: (i) the prominence of the application site and the ability of the turbines to be seen as highly prominent and poorly contained new components of the landscape (ii) the unacceptable vertical scale of the turbines in relation to the scale of the receiving landscape and absence of good topographical containment (iii) the appearance of the development resulting from its massing, spread and layout design and its scale in relation to other wind energy developments with which it has cumulative landscape effects (iv) the coincident and sequential cumulative effects with other wind farms at Dun Law, Dun Law Extension, Toddleburn, Longpark and potentially at Rowantree and Shaw Park if consented; and (v) the adverse impacts caused in particular to the Lauder Common Landscape Character Area, which is highly sensitive to change due to its importance as a recreational/amenity landscape and its already high level of impact caused by consented developments, Reason for Objection 2: Adverse Visual and Amenity Impacts: 2. The proposed development would be contrary to Policies G1, D4, BE2, BE4, H2 and Inf2 of the Scottish Borders Local Plan 2011 and Policy 10 of the South-East Scotland Strategic Development Plan (SESplan) 2013 in that, taking into consideration the following factors, the development would give rise to unacceptable visual and amenity effects: 4 Item No. 4 (i) the unacceptably high level of visibility of the development due to lack of good topographical containment (ii) the adverse effects experienced by users of the Lauder Common, which is utilised as an important public recreation/amenity space and which includes several well used public paths (iii) the strong and unacceptable visual relationships of the development with the setting of Thirlestane Castle and its Designed Landscape and the conservation towns of Lauder and Stow and the potential for the development to be dominant in relation to those towns and the historic asset due to the high level of visibility from these receptors. (iv) the unacceptable level of visual impact caused by the dominance of the turbines in relation to a number of private residences within 2km of the development (v) the lack of certainty relating to the appropriateness of applying certain noise limitations in relation to properties having a financial interest in the development, when the nature of the financial interest is not clear, (vi) the adverse visual impacts relating to settings of scheduled monuments within a culturally rich landscape; and (vii) the coincident and sequential cumulative effects