Retrospective household alterations at Applegarth, Harbour Road, Wigtown

What was proposed

Retrospective permission was sought for a flue, garage, boundary wall, replacement garage doors, windows and a security bollard.

“These applications seek retrospective planning permission for the installation of flue to east elevation of dwellinghouse, erection of detached domestic garage and boundary wall, installation of replacement doors to existing domestic garage and bollard with late listed building consent being required for the installation of the flue and the installation of replacement garage doors.”

“In addition to the above, two 0.72m wide by 1.2m high timber windows have been installed on the east / side elevation. The garage is located approximately 14m north-west of the dwelling as it situated behind a segregated piece of land from the rest of the property with access into this area being taken via the replacement doors noted in paragraph 1.3 above.”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The site is beside a listed house in Wigtown, within the conservation area and several landscape and environmental designations.

“The application site is located 70m north-east of Wigtown County Buildings and sits on the north-east side of the 90° bend between South Main Street and Harbour Road. Applegarth is a Category C listed building, listed on 17/12/1979 and is described as an earlier 19 th century, 2-storey and basement, 3-bay house. Painted rubble with raised painted angle and window margins. Central margined doorway. Panelled door, arched fanlight.”

“As well as being a Category C listed building, the site lies within the Galloway and Southern Ayrshire Biosphere Reserve, the Dark Sky Park Transition Zone, the Wigtown Conservation Area and the Galloway Hills Regional Scenic Area. There are no other relevant planning constraints to the site.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended unconditional approval, finding the works acceptable in principle, appropriately designed overall and not harmful to the listed building or neighbours.

“The effect of the proposals on the character of the listed building 4.8 Aside from the redirection of the flue, all the work that has been carried out does not affect the listed building itself however, it is still within the curtilage of a listed building.”

“Overall, while the scale of the alterations is noted and their retrospective / late nature of the applications is unfortunate, the fact that the works undertaken are all reversable (aside from the demolition of the existing garage) is an important factor in their consideration. Accordingly, it is not considered that the harm to this Category C listed building is such to merit a recommendation of refusal in terms of LDP2 Policy HE1 or NPF4 Policy 7.”

Officer report

Community council comments

The community council said the garage and wall were unsuitable for the listed building and conservation area and raised concerns about vehicles and pedestrians.

“Royal Burgh of Wigtown and District Community Council – Comments. a) The application was considered at a RBWDCC meeting. Whilst it was appreciated that the Council will take the representations of the neighbours into account, Community Councillors have received comments from the wider community as follows: • Finish of new garage and wall are not in keeping with the Listed Building status or the Conservation Area.”

Officer report

Objections from residents

Objections concerned flue noise and fumes, the garage and doors, the bollard, and the wall’s appearance and road safety.

“The grounds of the objection received can be summarised as follows: - (a) The redirecting of the flue causes significant noise which can be heard by neighbouring properties, as well as the fumes now being emitted towards neighbouring properties; (b) The construction and design of the new garage is not in keeping with the surrounding Conservation Area;”

“(c) The metal retracting doors are not in keeping with the surrounding Conservation Area; [NB – these have since been covered – see paragraph 1.4 above] (d) The steel bollard is not in keeping with the Conservation Area and could be a potential hazard to passersby; (e) The new wall is not in keeping with the Conservation Area and is a potential road safety hazard with it being next to a road.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The committee heard from two objectors.

The committee’s decision

The committee deferred consideration to check the application boundaries and land ownership and to consult roads officers.

“DEFERRED consideration of this application to allow a) a request to be made to the applicant on the accuracy and possible disparity between the application site boundaries and the applicant’s land ownership; and b) a consultation with roads officers to be undertaken.”

Minutes