A Mearns antiques dealer has been thrown a business lifeline by the Scottish Government after its reporter overturned council conditions for the expansion of his rural operation.
Peter Harrison set up Steptoe’s Yard at Nether Warburton Farm, St Cyrus, as a diversification in the wake of the BSE crisis. But the operation proved such a hit with both visitors and online customers that it became a victim of its own success, leading to complaints about the tidiness of the site and traffic issues.
Mr Harrison’s response was a plan to expand the sales and storage area of the yard, but he was unhappy when Aberdeenshire councillors applied conditions to a planning approval that required him to complete the development within nine months and limited the extended approval to just one year before it came back before the authority for review.
Following a visit to the premises, a Scottish Government appeal reporter has now given Mr Harrison a year to complete his display shed, and extended the period of approval to three years.
“The determining issue in this appeal is whether these conditions are valid, appropriate and reasonable in the circumstances of the case,” said the reporter. “The council has indicated that the first condition was imposed to allow the appellant to demonstrate that he could comply with the conditions imposed in the planning permission and could keep the site tidy and in order.
“The committee report on the planning application makes clear that problems have arisen in the past because of the untidiness and poor appearance of the site, which previously benefited from a temporary consent for general sales use.
“The undisputed evidence of the appellant is that the level of investment required to enable the development to proceed is in excess of £50,000.
“It is intended that this investment would take place over a three-year period, hence the appellant’s agreement to a temporary planning permission for three years.
“In view of this I find, given the success of the current business and the level of the proposed investment, that the grant of planning permission for one year only is unreasonable in the circumstances of the case.”
The reporter said the second condition was applied by the council in a bid to ensure the benefits derived from enhancement of the site were met within an acceptable timescale.
“The appellant is seeking an additional period of three months to allow adequate time to select a steelwork contractor and a structural engineer and to obtain building warrant approval.
“I can understand that the council would wish to be satisfied that improvements to the site are carried out in a structured manner within reasonable timescales. However, given the extent of the works involved and the expenditure likely to be incurred, the additional time sought by the appellant does not seem to me to be unreasonable.”
Mr Harrison said he was pleased with the outcome of the appeal.
“The problem that we have was that the conditions imposed gave us nine months to complete the building, but only three months later we would have to reapply for planning permission to operate it and that just didn’t give us any security over the future of the business,” he said. “It was a lot of money to invest with no guarantee that we would be allowed to keep going.
“We haven’t been absolutely perfect either but we have tried to rectify things. It’s not as if we are fighting against everything, and we want the place to look nice for people coming in. The majority of our customers are visitors so we don’t want the place to look scruffy.
“I think this was just a little bit of short-sightedness on the part of some of the councillors. You need a period of certainty when you are spending money on a business like this, and the conditions which they applied did not give us that.
“Things are ready to go ahead and I’m hoping that will happen next month. I’m pleased that there’s a little bit more certainty for us now, which is the main thing we were concerned about.”