Planning. Trouble at t'mill

Its good to know that our very transparent planning system sometimes seems to work: Cognoscenti should once again visit:

http://eplanning.scotborders.gov.uk/publicaccess/tdc/DcApplication/application_searchresults.aspx

and look at the 2nd application under the Hutton and Paxton Community Council bailiwick: House at Hutton Castle Mill. Bloggees with average memories will recall how popular response has led to an unpopular planning application for four new houses, just down the road, being withdrawn. People power in the form of an angry (but reasoned) comments recorded on this website helped to ensure that with the developer having second thoughts.Does not often happen but good sense prevailed.

In the HCM case the 'associated documents' are worth a read. In support of an application to build a house for a gamekeeper on site to look after the pheasantery, Guinea fowlness, salmon and trout fishing, self catering converted mill on behalf of the main agent for a syndicate who lives in Paxton-excellent idea. But wait- this document is dated November 2004! And we can recall that there actually is a house, recently built and lo and behold the occupant is no other than the gamekeeper who has been in occupation of a very pleasant dwelling for a couple of years. All the other papers, including the formal
application relate to a new house-bungalow- for, yes, a gamekeeper (indeed the same self guy), with exactly the same justification as the original application three and a half years ago. Urgency is stressed as the agent in Paxton really needs some one on the spot to look after his interests in the depths of the Whiteadder valley.

One can only speculate. And one does.

The Planning department at mediumheidyins level, at least, don't seem too impressed and having pointed out that there is one house there already -not a bungalow as it happens- (a fact omitted from the application and its supporting docs) reminds the applicant that permission was given for that house on the understanding that it was for just one building and for the purposes (tied to a gamekeeper) stated in the 2004 application, wonders,politely, what in earth is going on, and suggests equally politely that it might be best if the application be withdrawn.

It might indeed.

Strike one for the Planners.
For once.

In the meanwhile the Guinea Fowl at the mill peck on happily, seemingly not caring if they are to have a two house gamekeeper, or not.

Labels: Borders, Hutton Castle Mill, Planning

  ¶ 11:39 AM