Fife farmer wins appeal after councillors refused bid to bid a house

Councillors in Fife who rejected plans for a house in the countryside have had their decision overturned by a Scottish Government Reporter.
Watch more of our videos on Shots! 
and live on Freeview channel 276
Visit Shots! now

Members of north east Fife planning committee refused John Smith permission to build a single-storey two-bedroom house at Pitmedden Farm in Auchtermuchty last year.

They felt the development was not justified and essential to support the existing needs of the rural business there.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Mr Smith was seeking a permanent residence after using a static caravan on site as temporary accommodation for over five years, but councillors voted 8-3 in favour of refusal.

Plans for the house have now been approvedPlans for the house have now been approved
Plans for the house have now been approved
Read More
38,000 days special leave for Fife Council staff due to COVID

He subsequently appealed to Scottish ministers, and Scottish Government Reporter Alasdair Edwards has upheld the challenge and granted permission.

The agricultural holding is home to a range of livestock, including ewes, alpacas and sows, while hens, goats and ponies were also present on site at the time of Mr Edwards’ inspection.

As such, the Reporter concluded there was “sufficient justification” to require a continuous on-site presence.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“The animals require to be checked every 24 hours for their well-being,” he commented.

“Without an on-site presence there is a risk that animal welfare could be harmed in circumstances where the rural narrow access roads were blocked by snow or flood water; or in a situation where there was a disease outbreak which meant those living off-site would not be able to access the holding.

“The appeal site is overlooked to some extent by a residential property to the north-west but otherwise the location is very remote.

“An on-site presence would reduce the risk of visitors interacting with the livestock and dissuade theft and other criminal activity or damage to the holding.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“Permanent residence would reduce the need to travel to and from the holding to attend livestock, particularly during lambing and farrowing (where hourly checks are required); and during winter months where travel could be impeded.”

Mr Edwards noted that while the present agricultural holding activity was not sufficient to warrant full-time employment, planning policy does not require evidence of a full-time operation but only that a permanent house might be considered on the basis of its financial viability.

Thank you for reading this article on our free-to-read website. We're more reliant on your support than ever as the shift in consumer habits brought about by Coronavirus impacts our advertisers.

Please consider purchasing a subscription to our print newspaper to help fund our trusted, fact-checked journalism.