Plans for two-storey home on smallholding denied by West Lothian councillors
Gordon Bow had applied to demolish an agricultural shed on his Broxburn smallholding and replace it with a home for his son. Planners said the proposals for a five-bed two-storey home on site would contravene strict rules about housebuilding in the countryside and recommended refusal.
Committee debate and arguments for approval
Conservative group leader Damian Doran-Timson urged a rethink and pointed to a readiness to alter proposals put forward to comply with planning rules. He told the Development Management committee he had some sympathy, reminding the committee “rules are for the guidance of wise men and obedience of fools.”
An agent for Mr Bow said his client suffered from a debilitating illness and the new home would mean his son could live close to hand to help him at Holmes Holdings near Broxburn. He told the committee that he was happy to work with planning officers to alter proposals so they would comply with the 11 planning rules the plans do not currently fit.
Councillor questions regulation harshness
Councillor Doran-Timson questioned the harshness of the regulations. He agreed that the council cannot allow people to build “just anywhere” but pointed out that the committee had earlier been about to consider a plan to cover the countryside in hundreds of solar panels. He noted that acres of farmland had already been turned over to housing development around Winchburgh. He urged the committee to work with the applicant to devise more acceptable plans.
Planning officers' objections
In papers presented to the committee planning officers said: “The proposed house is a 2-storey design with an eaves height of 5.5m and overall height of 8.345m. These dimensions exceed that of the exiting agricultural building and increases the overall height of the resultant building by around 1.9m. This increased height, along with the additional massing of the house and the proposed materials, will result in the house being a dominant feature in the countryside setting.”
Committee chair explains refusal
Chair of the committee Councillor Harry Cartmill said “I can fully understand why you want this and how important family support is but the fact that it goes against 11 policies means that, as it stands, I simply can’t support this.” His motion to support the recommendation to refuse was backed by Councillor George Paul.
