Millers win appeal for 10 homes at East Suffolk Road

On 18th December last year the Development Management Sub-Committee refused the application by Miller Homes to build 10 houses on the former St Margaret's playing fields.  The refusal was by 8 votes to six.  Permission was given for the moving of the Pavilion on an even closer vote - a 7-7 tied vote was approved by the Convenor's casting vote.

Miller Homes appealed to the Scottish Government Reporter and their appeal has been granted.  Here is a summary of the Reporter's views.
"The Reporter has issued an intentions letter stating she intends to grant planning permission subject to a legal agreement at the East Suffolk Road site for 10 dwellings.
Summary:  The Reporter considered the determining issues to be the impact on the conservation areaand listed buildings, whether the loss of open space accorded with the development plan and whether material considerations justify approval or refusal.
Conservation Area and listed buildings: The Reporter found that areas of open space and domestic gardens, irrespective of whether they are private or publically accessible, contributed to the character and appearance of the area.  The Reporter found the appeal site was discretely located in terms of its relationship with the wider conservation area and is largely hidden from view from all but the immediately surrounding properties. She noted Arthur's Seat was a prominent landmark from views within the site and at other parts of the conservation area. The Reporter found the site was not a particularly visible feature and did not contribute significantly in visual terms to the character or appearance of the wider conservation area.  She found views of Arthur's Seat would not be obscured by the development and the proposal would not be harmful to the views within and out of the conservation area.  The Reporter was also satisfied the proposed dwellings were in keeping with the conservation area's architectural character. The setting of nearby listed buildings would also be preserved. The Reporter raised no concerns about relocating the pavilion and found passive surveillance would be improved and assist in protecting the building.
 Open Space:  The Reporter found the site's contribution to quality and character was from its use of passive open space and had aesthetic value to the conservation area.  The Reporter noted the appeal proposal would leave 42% of the site as accessible open space, including generous gardens and improved public accessibility.  The Reporter found there would be no significant adverse impact on the quality or character of the environment as a result of the development.
Other consideration: The Reporter considered other material policy considerations and was satisfied the appeal proposal met them.
The  Reporter concluded the proposal accorded with the development plan and there were no material considerations to justify refusal."
Full details of the Reporter's decision should soon be available on this website.  The appeal reference is PPA-230-2172 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reasons for Jawbone delay

Police news - mosque suspect arrested

Lutton Court student accommodation