Latest news with #LocalReviewBody
Edinburgh Reporter
a day ago
- General
- Edinburgh Reporter
Last chance appeal over dream house cancelled at 11th hour
A last chance appeal by a woman to turn a former bank into a dream home has been cancelled at the 11th hour over an administrative error. Pat Sharp has been fighting to have the former hall, in North Berwick, turned into a retirement home for her and her husband Nigel for eight years after buying it for more than double the asking price. However East Lothian Council's planners have repeatedly rejected applications for the change of use insisting the building has to remain a commercial building in the seaside town centre. Last week Mrs Sharp spoke out publicly for the first time about her fight and heartbreak that her husband, who has Parkinson's Disease, is no longer able to move in. And she said she had no idea what would happen if her latest attempt get permission to convert the building into a house failed at the Local Review Body meeting, scheduled to take place this morning. She said: 'If this fails I don't know what we will do. I spend £100 a month maintaining the gardens of the property and we have invested a lot to maintain and bring the hall itself into a maintained state but I can't go on with it forever.' Mrs Sharp and her husband bought the former bank hall seven years ago for £555,555 with the hope of retiring to the town. The couple had precious memories of time with their granddaughters at the seaside resort after losing their daughter Cheryl to cancer when the girls were very young. Former managing director Nigel, 78, was diagnosed with Parkinson's following his retirement and the hope had been that the house would give him the chance to live in an adapted home in the place they loved. Sadly Nigel is now in full time care and will never be able to live in the house, if it is every approved. Pat said: 'Nigel has been robbed of the chance to spend his final years in what we wanted to be our dream home, looking out over the North Berwick coast and remembering all our wonderful times here. it is devastating.' The Local Review Body was due to meeting this morning to hear the appeal against the latest decision by planners to refuse permission for the change of use of the hall. However late yesterday the council confirmed the meeting had been delayed and would now be held once elected members return from their summer holidays. A spokesperson for East Lothian Council said: 'One of the interested parties was accidentally omitted from our notification process so was not informed of the appeal in time for it to be heard at the Local Review Body meeting on Thursday 19 June. It will be heard at the next available meeting in August. The applicant's agent, interested parties and consultees have all been contacted.' By Marie Sharp Local Democracy Reporter Like this: Like Related
Edinburgh Reporter
a day ago
- Business
- Edinburgh Reporter
Councillors reject holiday cabins for second time
Plans to create a holiday site on the fringe of the Pentland Hills have been thrown out for a second time this year Lucy Crombie lodged an application to build 20 wooden holiday lodges on a site known as the Paddocks. The area of open countryside borders Leyden Road, a narrow, winding rural road bounded by open farmland and woodlands which climbs from Kirknewton up to the main A70 road which skirts the Pentland Hills regional park. The same application was rejected by the Development Management Committee in January last year and an appeal later dismissed by the Local Review Body. One objector called for the council to refuse to decide on the latest filing of the proposals saying they had not changed since the council rejected the same plans last year. And a lawyer suggested the proposal may have come back 'to wear down' resistance. Planning officers said the applicant had now supplied supplementary reports which validated councillors hearing the plans again. The latest application attracted 22 objections including one from the local community council and a neighbour Juliet Bentley who lives in the B- listed Ormiston Castle immediately adjacent to the site. Ewan MacLeod of legal firm Shepherd and Wedderburn, acting as agents for Ms Bentley told councillors: 'Both we and our client are surprised that the application has been made to the council. It is identical in all material respects to [the previous] application. 'The application has clearly been submitted within the 5-year window and there has been no change in the development plan or in any other material consideration. The council must therefore consider whether to exercise its discretion to refuse to determine the application.' In its written objection the firm said, ' [the] applicant's failure to address the well-founded planning issues raised by local residents and the council's reasons for refusal, we submit that it would be irrational for the council to determine the application.' Mr MacLeod said that if the application was refused ' the applicant can appeal to Scottish ministers and an unelected Scottish Government official can then take a decision which may overturn the democratic will of this committee… If you decline to determine the application the applicant has no appeal.' He said such a decision would also save the council the expenses of defending its decision at an appeal. An agent for the applicant denied planner's criticism of the proposals being 'too urban' in appearance, saying that the cabins on the site occupied less than a third of the area. Suggestions that the site would be too visible on the landscape were also questioned. He added that his client was prepared to explore road widening and passing spaces outlined in concerns highlighted by the planners. Planners outlined their objections stating: 'The proposals for the holiday chalets at this location would create a sense of urbanisation within a countryside setting. The Roads Officer would require works to be undertaken in order to improve road safety, including access works, road widening works at five points on the public road and application of a speed limit, to support the proposals. 'Mitigation measures can potentially address road safety concerns (although it is unclear if this will require agreement with third party landowners in respect of road widening works)' Councillor Damian Doran-Timson asked planning officers what had changed in the plans since they were rejected by the LRB in August last year. Planning officer Gillian Cyphus said there had been a lack of information when the proposals had gone to the review body; the slight change now was that drainage reports had been made available. That was why planners had recommended the proposals come before councillors for determination, with the recommendation for refusal. Councillor Pauline Clark said: 'I think we should be encouraging tourists to come here. However, I do think access is a big problem. I think the lack of being able to walk to the train station is a problem. I don't know if paths are something that could be sorted. It's major stumbling block She defended the planning appeal procedures of the Scottish Government as democratic. Councillor Doran-Timson agreed with her objections: He said ' We need to do more for tourism and economic development has been a failure, but I think the amount of non-conformities we have with the application, not just the paths there's a number of different issues that have me going toward officers' recommendations.' He added: 'Unlike Councillor Clark I share Mr MacLeods concerns about the Scottish Reporter overturns in recent years in West Lothian.' Councillor Pauline Stafford said she had concerns about families with children walking the main road to Kirknewton. 'The nature of the site would encourage people to drive to and from it,' she added. Councillor Willie Boyle said: 'My concern is that this looks like a caravan holiday park rather than holiday cabins you see in rural areas.I think the design is wrong. Councillor Doran Timson's motion to refuse planning permission was backed by Willie Boyle. By Stuart Sommerville, Local Democracy Reporter Like this: Like Related
Edinburgh Live
a day ago
- Business
- Edinburgh Live
Plans to create 'holiday village' near Edinburgh Pentland Hills refused by council
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info Plans to create a holiday site on the fringe of the Pentland Hills have been thrown out for a second time this year Lucy Crombie lodged an application to build 20 wooden holiday lodges on a site known as the Paddocks. The area of open countryside borders Leyden Road, a narrow, winding rural road bounded by open farmland and woodlands which climbs from Kirknewton up to the main A70 road which skirts the Pentland Hills regional park. The same application was rejected by the Development Management Committee in January last year and an appeal later dismissed by the Local Review Body. One objector called for the council to refuse to decide on the latest filing of the proposals saying they had not changed since the council rejected the same plans last year. And a lawyer suggested the proposal may have come back "to wear down" resistance. Planning officers said the applicant had now supplied supplementary reports which validated councillors hearing the plans again. The latest application attracted 22 objections including one from the local community council and a neighbour Juliet Bentley who lives in the B- listed Ormiston Castle immediately adjacent to the site. (Image: West Lothian Council) Ewan MacLeod of legal firm Shepherd and Wedderburn, acting as agents for Ms Bentley told councillors: 'Both we and our client are surprised that the application has been made to the council. It is identical in all material respects to [the previous] application. 'The application has clearly been submitted within the 5 year window and there has been no change in the development plan or in any other material consideration. The council must therefore consider whether to exercise its discretion to refuse to determine the application.' In its written objection the firm said ' [the] applicant's failure to address the well-founded planning issues raised by local residents and the council's reasons for refusal, we submit that it would be irrational for the council to determine the application.' Mr MacLeod said that if the application was refused ' the applicant can appeal to Scottish ministers and an unelected Scottish Government official can then take a decision which may overturn the democratic will of this committee… If you decline to determine the application the applicant has no appeal.' He said such a decision would also save the council the expenses of defending its decision at an appeal. An agent for the applicant denied planner's criticism of the proposals being "too urban" in appearance, saying that the cabins on the site occupied less than a third of the area. Suggestions that the site would be too visible on the landscape were also questioned. He added that his client was prepared to explore road widening and passing spaces outlined in concerns highlighted by the planners. Planners outlined their objections stating: 'The proposals for the holiday chalets at this location would create a sense of urbanisation within a countryside setting. The Roads Officer would require works to be undertaken in order to improve road safety, including access works, road widening works at five points on the public road and application of a speed limit, to support the proposals. 'Mitigation measures can potentially address road safety concerns (although it is unclear if this will require agreement with third party landowners in respect of road widening works)' Councillor Damian Doran-Timson asked planning officers what had changed in the plans since they were rejected by the LRB in August last year. Planning officer Gillian Cyphus said there had been a lack of information when the proposals had gone to the review body; the slight change now was that drainage reports had been made available. That was why planners had recommended the proposals come before councillors for determination, with the recommendation for refusal. Councillor Pauline Clark said: 'I think we should be encouraging tourists to come here. However I do think access is a big problem. I think the lack of being able to walk to the train station is a problem. I don't know if paths are something that could be sorted. It's major stumbling block She defended the planning appeal procedures of the Scottish Government as democratic. Councillor Doran-Timson agreed with her objections: He said ' We need to do more for tourism and economic development has been a failure, but I think the amount of non conformities we have with the application, not just the paths there's a number of different issues that have me going toward officers' recommendations.' He added: 'Unlike Councillor Clark I share Mr MacLeods concerns about the Scottish Reporter overturns in recent years in West Lothian.' Councillor Pauline Stafford said she had concerns about families with children walking the main road to Kirknewton. 'The nature of the site would encourage people to drive to and from it,' she added. Councillor Willie Boyle said: 'My concern is that this looks like a caravan holiday park rather than holiday cabins you see in rural areas. I think the design is wrong. Councillor Doran Timson's motion to refuse planning permission was backed by Willie Boyle.
Edinburgh Live
a day ago
- Business
- Edinburgh Live
East Lothian gran's plan to turn bank into her dream home halted over 'admin error'
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info A last chance appeal by a gran to turn a former bank into a dream home has been cancelled at the 11th hour over an administrative error. Pat Sharp has been fighting to have the former hall, in North Berwick, turned into a retirement home for her and her husband Nigel for eight years after buying it for more than double the asking price. However East Lothian Council's planners have repeatedly rejected applications for the change of use insisting the building has to remain a commercial building in the seaside town centre. Last week Mrs Sharp spoke out publicly for the first time about her fight and heartbreak that her husband, who has Parkinson's Disease, is no longer able to move in. And she said she had no idea what would happen if her latest attempt get permission to convert the building into a house failed at the Local Review Body meeting, scheduled to take place this morning. She said: "If this fails I don't know what we will do. I spend £100 a month maintaining the gardens of the property and we have invested a lot to maintain and bring the hall itself into a maintained state but I can't go on with it forever." Mrs Sharp and her husband bought the former bank hall seven years ago for £555,555 with the hope of retiring to the town. The couple had precious memories of time with their granddaughters at the seaside resort after losing their daughter Cheryl to cancer when the girls were very young. Former managing director Nigel, 78, was diagnosed with Parkinson's following his retirement and the hope had been that the house would give him the chance to live in an adapted home in the place they loved. Sadly Nigel is now in full time care and will never be able to live in the house, if it is every approved. Pat said: "Nigel has been robbed of the chance to spend his final years in what we wanted to be our dream home, looking out over the North Berwick coast and remembering all our wonderful times here. it is devastating." The Local Review Body was due to meeting this morning to hear the appeal against the latest decision by planners to refuse permission for the change of use of the hall. However late yesterday the council confirmed the meeting had been delayed and would now be held once elected members return from their summer holidays. A spokesperson for East Lothian Council said: 'One of the interested parties was accidentally omitted from our notification process so was not informed of the appeal in time for it to be heard at the Local Review Body meeting on Thursday 19 June. It will be heard at the next available meeting in August. The applicant's agent, interested parties and consultees have all been contacted.'
Edinburgh Reporter
11-06-2025
- Business
- Edinburgh Reporter
Retrospective planning applications in West Lothian have fallen over last two years
The number of retrospective planning applications in West Lothian has fallen over the last two years, councillors heard this week. But a report made clear that legal enforcement of planning remains a complicated and expensive process for the council if it is faced with deliberate and determined planning breaches. Jim McGinlay, Building Standards Manager, said it was primarily a legal problem, adding that: 'there is very little we can do if people ignore the legislation.' He added that there had been suggestions in the past that lending institutions to demand evidence of planning permission before funding developments, but this had been problematic to introduce. Council officers compiled a report after an SNP call two months ago responding to fears that a 'culture of non-compliance with planning regulations' was developing. A meeting of the Economy, Community Empowerment and Wealth Building PDSP also heard that a new flat fee of £143 is to be introduced by the Scottish government for anyone who wants to appeal a refusal of planning permission determined by the Local Review Body. The SNP call from depute group leader Pauline Stafford came in April after the Council Executive was told that there had been 800 enquiries from the public about retrospective planning applications in the last two years. Claire Johnston, a planning officer, told this week's meeting of the Economy PDSP that retrospective applications are submitted for a number of reasons, not only as a result of enforcement enquiries. Last year the number of retrospective applications validated, that means accepted and considered by the council, fell slightly, to 79 from 87 in 2023/24. In both 23/24 and 24/25 a total of 57 applications came as the result of enforcement enquiries by planning officers. In percentage terms planning enforcement generated 72% of last year's retrospective applications against 66% of those in 2023/24. A report to the PDSP explained: 'The requirement to submit a retrospective planning application is the main course of enforcement action utilised by the service. 'Officers pursue the owners to apply for the necessary permissions in order to allow the development to be fully considered in line with planning policy, and to allow the opportunity for the public to submit comments on the development.' It added: 'Applying for retrospective planning permission carries a level of risk, as these applications are assessed in the same manner as proposed development, and there is no guarantee that they will be supported. 'Where retrospective applications and any subsequent appeals are refused, officers re-commence enforcement action and if necessary, proceed to serving enforcement notices to have the breach resolved. 'The 25% surcharge on fees for retrospective applications was introduced by the Scottish Government, with the intention to primarily provide a means of recovering the costs of undertaking enforcement investigations, rather than to be seen as a punishment for breaching planning control.' Planning fees vary on the size and type of development but can run into tens of thousands of pounds for large housing developments. Generally, for individual plans they can amount to anything from a few hundred pounds to around the £1,000 mark. The council has a Development Management team of nine planning officers and three planning assistants. All Development Management officers carry out some level of enforcement- case officers will often visit development sites and check for compliance with relevant conditions and approved plans. There are two planning officers and one assistant who work primarily on enforcement cases. The cost of enforcement falls under the budget of the Development Management service. There is only a modest budget to support legal action. There would be an additional cost to the service if the option of taking direct action, as a result of non-compliance with enforcement notices, were to be instructed. There is currently no budget for taking Direct Action to resolve breaches of planning control. The SNP group said in April: 'A proactive approach to compliance and adequate resourcing are essential for a successful service.' Labour's Tom Conn suggested publication of applications under enforcement through regular DMC meetings that would reassure the public that enforcement was ongoing and 'there was progress'. Ms Johnston told the meeting: 'There is actually an enforcement register on the council's website. We recently added a column to add compliance date so that it's available to all members of the public.' Donald Stavert from the Joint forum of Community Councils said: 'My question is about getting to the people who start building extensions without getting planning permission. Is there a need for a general education programme for the public? Is it a question of ignorance? Ms Johnston said there is generally a lack of knowledge, but the Scottish Government does provide a lot of information on enforcement and does suggest to look at guidance documents. She added that beyond stressing on the council website what you can and cannot do without permission, it was difficult to know what to do.' Chairing the Meeting councillor Susan Manion said: 'It's certainly a tricky issue.' By Stuart Sommerville, Local Democracy Reporter Like this: Like Related
