Local Review Body - 20/04/2010
At a MEETING of the LOCAL REVIEW BODY held at Dundee on 20th April, 2010.
Councillor David BOWES
Councillor Christina ROBERTS
Councillor Tom FERGUSON
Councillor David BOWES, Convener, in the Chair.
I REQUEST FOR REVIEW - LR01/10 - 124, 126 AND 128 ALBERT STREET, DUNDEE
Details had been submitted of a request for review of the refusal of planning permission for change of use from Class 1 Retail to Class 2 Licensed Betting Office for the William Hill Organisation in respect of premises at 124, 126 and 128 Albert Street, Dundee.
The Chairman 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.
Thereafter, the Planning Adviser gave a brief outline of the application and the reasons for refusal.
He also advised that plans had been submitted with the application indicating internal and external alterations to the premises and proposed signage and that, within the Grounds of Review Statement, the applicant had indicated that the proposed physical alterations to the premises were "part of the application". However, description of the development, and the content of the Report of Handling, had indicated that the application was for change of use only. It was understood that the applicants were preparing for the submission of separate applications in respect of external alterations and signage.
The Local Review Body noted accordingly.
Thereafter, the Legal Adviser advised of the undernoted procedural/legal issues which required to be considered by the Local Review Body:-
(a) The applicant had referred in the Notice of Review to a previous appeal decision by a Reporter from the DPEA. This had not been before the case officer who decided the case under delegated powers. The applicant had also submitted a statement from the owner of the premises which had not been before the case officer.
(b) After intimation of the application for review, further representations were received from interested parties who had objected to the initial application. In terms of the Town and Country Planning (Schemes of Delegation and Local Review Procedure (Scotland) Regulations 2008), such representations were to be made within 14 days of the interested parties having been given notification of the application for review. In this case, the representations were received 17 days after notification.
(c) In addition to receiving late representations, representations were made from individuals who had not objected to the initial planning application. In terms of the 2008 Regulations, only "interested parties" were entitled to make such representations.
The Local Review Body was advised that in terms of Section 43(B)(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, 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.
The Local Review Body considered that the above mentioned new information did contain material considerations and agreed therefore to take these into account.
Thereafter, the Local Review Body considered whether they 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 one or more hearing sessions.
The Local Review Body considered the documentation submitted and, after discussion, agreed to proceed on the basis of the documentation before them, together with an accompanied site visit, and to continue consideration of the matter thereafter.
It was agreed to hold the site visit on Tuesday, 11th May, 2010 at 9.30 am.
David BOWES, Convener.