Angus Council’s enforcement stance against a Sidlaws family has been vindicated in the latest stage of a complex and ”stressful” planning case.
Almost a year to the day since refusing permission for the siting of a residential caravan at Woodside Cottage, Kirkton of Auchterhouse, Scottish ministers have for the second time upheld the authority’s order that the item should be removed.
The latest decision was reported to members of the development standards committee, with one local councillor saying that the reporter’s decision should be met with relief rather than any sense of satisfaction.
The case was centred on the residential caravan used by Dina Lams, who moved from the Netherlands with her disabled son Zen Willeboordse to be closer to her daughter Carina Roberts.
With a lack of room in the house, Ms Lams had been living in caravan adjacent to the property but planners took action on the basis that it was being used as a residence without permission.
The committee’s original enforcement decision was appealed and subsequently dismissed before that appeal decision was then the subject of legal challenge as the government reporter had made a procedural error and his decision was quashed.
The appeal was returned to the Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals and the latest findings against support the stance taken by Angus Council.
The reporter concluded that “the degree of functional independence of the caravan as living accommodation is too great for the caravan to be treated as incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse, and hence as exempt under section 26(2)(d) of the Act or as class 3 permitted development.
”It is in effect the primary dwelling for its occupant, and as such excluded from permitted development.”
The findings added: ”The family circumstances behind the situation at Woodside Cottage compel the greatest sympathy. Yet humane considerations do not all tend in the appellant’s favour.”
The reporter said neighbours had suffered anxiety and distress from a number of impacts, including noise and visual intrusion.
Senior Angus planning official Ian Mitchell told the development standards committee the family now have six months to comply with the decision, but hinted there may yet be another legal twist in the saga.
”They have effectively come back with the same answer and have taken the view that planning is required,” he said.
However, he added: ”It is possible that the owners may make a further appeal to the Court of Session.”
Monifieth and Sidlaws councillor Jean Lee said: ”I don’t know if the word would be to welcome this report. I have a sense of relief that we have got to this point it has been a very distressing case for all involved.
”I am impressed by the meticulous argument put forward by the council, the huge regret about this is the time that has been involved and that adds to the stress for everyone.
”It is a very long process and I think something should be done to speed it up. It’s playing against the balance of democracy to have things so extended and so tortured for all involved.
”August 6 could see the line drawn in the sand finally and I have my fingers crossed that’s the case.”
Mr Mitchell responded: ”Enforcement matters are often protracted in a sense that is the nature of the beast. This case demonstrates fairly vividly that what on face value appears to be straightforward can be very complicated. It is far from simple and that is part of the reason why this case has taken so long.
”When it is something as important as this for the individuals concerned it is perhaps no bad thing that it takes so long.”