Planners have approved four homes with views towards Montrose Basin after a failed attempt to block the “back door” development.
The Barns of Craig bid came before Angus development standards committee councillors in the wake of an earlier application for the conversion of a steading there into seven now-completed homes.
Part of that approval was that adjacent farm buildings had to be removed and the ground “returned to agriculture” but that wording proved to be a controversial aspect of the latest bid.
The proposal drew a dozen representations on grounds including road and pedestrian safety, the site’s previous planning history and land ownership, but the compatibility with planning policy and its description as redundant was the key plank of one objector’s address to the committee.
James Scoular said that at the time of the original application he had been “laughed at” over the suggestion that once the farm buildings were cleared that the land would be brought back into use as cultivated ground.
In response, the official report stated: “The condition required the removal of the buildings and for the site to be returned to agricultural use.
“It is apparent that the buildings were removed and whilst hardstanding was retained it was used in association with agricultural storage.
“That approach was not in breach of the requirement of the planning condition and does not alter my conclusion on the brownfield status of the site.
“The principle of a four-house development would be in accordance with policy.
“Overall the development would provide for an acceptable level of residential amenity for the proposed and existing houses adjacent to the site.”
Moving approval of the application, development standards convener, Councillor Rob Murray said: “I think the pictures show quite clearly that the area has been degraded. It was not returned to agricultural land but it was returned to agricultural use. “
Carnoustie councillor Bill Bowles attempted to block the permission by putting forward an amendment recommending refusal.
“It appears to me that the condition was not applied after the building of the steading previously and this seems to be exactly what the objector is saying.
“I think this application has come through the back door,” said Mr Bowles, but he was unable to find a seconder to support his amendment.
