Cousland bungalow plans rejected because garden is too small

A bid to build a three-bedroom bungalow in the garden of a Cousland house has been rejected because of “substandard amenity”.

Planning officers refused to grant permission for the new house saying the garden proposed for it was too small for a modern home. They said 16 objections were lodged over the application by James Scally, who lives in the property already on the site, with two letters of support.

Objectors claimed the garden was not big enough for a new house, trees would be removed affecting local wildlife and the bungalow would be out of character with the rest of the street. They also raised concerns about the impact on parking and in a report on the application, the planning officer said that only one parking space was included in the plans but council policy required 2.5 spaces for a three-bedroom home.

The report added: “There are concerns in relation to the ability of the site to provide sufficient amenity space for the proposed dwelling house. Detached, semi-detached and terraced dwellings should each be provided with a private outdoor space that is free from direct overlooking form public areas and neighbouring property as far as possible.

The Cousland home where plans to build a bungalow in the garden have been rejected.

“The council’ s standard requires that houses of three apartments to have useable garden ground no less than 110m². The proposed dwelling house is to be afforded approximately 73m² of useable rear garden ground; there is also a small area of garden ground to the front and sides of the proposed dwelling.

“Furthermore, the garden space provided would be significantly smaller than that of surrounding dwelling houses and would therefore be at odds to the character of the surrounding area.”

The council refused planning permission saying it had not been shown that the new house would “not be subject to substandard levels of amenity with a garden size smaller than that required for a modern house”. Adding that the proposed bungalow failed to “connect visually to the character, appearance and layout of the area”.

An appeal over the decision was lodged with Scottish Ministers but the Scottish Government Reporter has advised that it needs to go to the local authority’s own Local Review Body.