CLAIMS that a new house on vacant land in a rural location would enhance the area have been rejected by councillors, despite claims that the site had been housing in the past.
Applicant Haddington Estates Ltd was refused planning permission to build a house and detached garage on the site at Liberty Hall, near Gladsmuir, earlier this year by planners.
However, they took the case to East Lothian Council’s local review body on appeal, producing photographic evidence that the land had been home to a row of cottages in its past to back their plans.
Planning officers told the review body that the proposed house was a clear breach of their policy against allowing new homes to be built in the countryside without operational purposes.
And they warned that it could set an unwanted precedent against the policy which sought to protect the countryside.
The three members of the review body visited the site ahead of the hearing on Thursday afternoon and Councillor Donna Collins raised questions about the suitability of the land for other uses.
'Boggy and clay heavy'
She told the review body: “Putting my farmer’s hat on, the land itself is not really fit for agricultural use. It is boggy and clay heavy and it would be difficult to do anything with it.
“If the application is not passed, the land will go back to being disused and a mess.”
On behalf of the applicants, agents APT Planning and Development had argued that the residential development would “enhance the overall character and setting of Liberty Hall in removing an untidy and vacant plot and enabling the development of an attractive, modest family home, appropriate to the character and appearance of its setting and surroundings”.
The review body heard that there had been four objections to the original plans and a further representation made to the appeal in which the argument that the land had, in the past, been used for housing was challenged.
The planning officer told councillors: “The representation said that any previous dwellings on the site were demolished over three quarters of a century ago and were irrelevant.”
Councillor Liz Allan told fellow review body members that she had to agree with officers “with regret” that the application breached countryside policy.
And review body chairperson Councillor John McMillan agreed.
He said: “I’m not convinced a house on that site is something that is necessary or adds value.”
The body rejected the appeal by two votes to one.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here