Local Review Body - 16/08/2016
At a MEETING of the LOCAL REVIEW BODY held at Dundee on 16th August, 2016.
Depute Lord Provost Christina ROBERTS
Councillor Gregor MURRAY
Councillor Tom FERGUSON
Depute Lord Provost Christina ROBERTS, in the Chair.
The Convener welcomed those present to the meeting and briefly outlined the role of the Local Review Body and officers, in particular advising that, although the Planning Adviser was an employee of the Planning Authority, he had not been involved in the determination of the case under review and was present to provide factual information and guidance only.
I MINUTE OF MEETING OF LOCAL REVIEW BODY OF 5TH JULY, 2016
The minute of the above meeting was submitted and noted.
II REQUEST FOR REVIEW - LR6/16 - 57 BLACKSCROFT, DUNDEE
There was submitted Agenda Note AN62-2016, giving details of a request for a review of the refusal of planning permission for the change of use from offices to a children's nursery, including elevational alterations and boundary treatment.
The Planning Adviser gave a brief outline of the application and the reasons for the refusal.
Thereafter, the Legal Adviser advised of the undernoted procedural/legal issues which required to be considered by the Local Review Body:-
The applicant had intimated in the Notice of Review that new matters which were not before the Appointed Officer at the time of reaching his decision were included in the review application. It was stated that the application included the addition of the platform lift rather than a ramp, as was shown in the restaurant application. There was also confirmation that young children of 0-2 years of age would be included in the client group as this was not made clear in the application, although it was noted that it was included in the previous application. Finally, CCTV survey information which had been gathered since the application was refused had also been submitted with the review papers. The applicant provided no reason why the first two issues were not raised with the Appointed Officer before determination of the original application.
As far as the addition of the lift was concerned, the drawings which formed page numbers 23 and 25 of the review papers were the drawings which were submitted with the application for review. These made reference to a platform lift. The drawings which formed page numbers 57 and 58 of the review papers were the drawings which were submitted with the original application. These did not contain a reference to the platform lift. The role of the Local Review Body is to consider the application which was determined by the Appointed Officer. In this case, that application did not contain a platform lift. On one view it could be suggested that the application for review was not competent as it was asking the Local Review Body to determine an application which was different from the one before the Appointed Officer. However, on balance, the Local Review Body decided that the proper way to proceed was simply to disregard the drawings containing the reference to the platform lift and to review the application as it was submitted to the Appointed Officer.
In terms of Section 43B(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended, in a review, a party to the proceedings is not to raise any matter which was not before the Appointed Officer at the time the determination reviewed was made unless that party can demonstrate that the matter could not have been raised before that time, or that its not being raised before that time was a consequence of exceptional circumstances. If either of these tests were met then the Local Review Body should take the new information into consideration in reaching its decision.
In any event, in terms of Section 43B(2) of the 1997 Act as amended, the Local Review Body was, required, in reaching its decision, to have regard to the provisions of the development plan and any other material considerations. Therefore, if the Local Review Body considered that the new information contained material considerations, it was required to take these into account. If not, and if neither of the criteria in terms of sub-section (1) was met, the new information should not be considered.
The Local Review Body agreed that the age group of the children to use the nursery and the CCTV survey information were material considerations and should therefore be taken into consideration. The Local Review Body also noted that an application in respect of the proposal site had been lodged for temporary planning permission for a change of use to a (Class 10) charity/church related purpose (pages 109-120) of the review papers. This remains to be determined but it was also a material consideration which would be taken into account by the Local Review Body.
Thereafter, the Local Review Body considered whether it felt that it had sufficient information before it to determine the review at that time, or whether it required any further information. Members noted that the applicant had requested that the review be undertaken on the basis of the review documents.
The Local Review Body considered the documentation submitted and, after discussion, agreed to request further written submissions in respect of the undernoted matters under the provisions of Regulations 13 and 15 of the Town and Country Planning (Schemes of Delegation and Local Review Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2008 from the following individual:-
From the Applicant
(i) Additional information regarding CCTV records be provided;
(ii) CCTV footage be shared with the Local Review Board; and
(iii) Comments on Planning Application 16-00648-FULL be provided, should the applicant wish to do this.
The Local Review Body also agreed to hold an accompanied site visit (subsequently organised for 20th September, 2016).
Christina ROBERTS, Convener.