Ross town residents angry over 'monstrosity' given go-ahead by council planners
Register for free to read more of the latest local news. It's easy and will only take a moment.
RESIDENTS on a Dingwall housing estate are angry at three double-storey properties having been built on a hill dominating the skyline near their homes without any consultation by Highland Council planners.
David and Naomi Forbes and their neighbours at Wallace Court whose homes were built nearly 20 year ago claim they had also understood that any housing to be built in the adjoining field would be single-storey dwellings.
But in December trees were felled and diggers moved in as construction started on the properties.
"We always knew the field was going to be developed," said Mr Forbes (64) who lives at 2 Wallace Court.
"Our house looks directly onto the site and all previous plans for the land indicated single storey houses at the top of the hill. But now three two-storey blocks are nearing completion. We have not been notified and we have tried to get an interview with the planners who dealt with the application but that has not happened.
"However we are now being told that it wasn't necessary to consult us because according to the planners, it's outwith 20 metres of our property. We would dispute that."
Mrs Forbes said: "You come into Dingwall from the Evanton direction and the first thing that hits you is this monstrosity. Six years ago they were planning to build single storey houses on the site. It's different builders but the same planners and they have gone ahead and granted consent with no neighbour consultation.
"We are closer than 20 metres to the application site. I phoned the builders and they said even though it would be double-storey the houses would be dug down into the hill but that hasn't happened. They are right at the top.
"All they (the planning department) needed to do was respond to our queries and involve us but they have failed to do so.
"It's too late to do anything about it but we have serious questions about the way this has been handled by the planning authority."
Sharon Maclean at 3 Wallace Court said the new properties were an eyesore.
"This was a private housing site and I think they had to allow for 20 per cent affordable homes which had already been built.
"These two-storey houses are low cost rental properties and if they had to be built I don't know why they couldn't have been at the end of the site where they would not have been as intrusive as they are on the top of this hill."
A Highland Council spokesman said: “Planning permission was granted to the Highland Housing Alliance for eight houses on 13.08.2019. The development comprises two semi detached bungalows and six semi-detached houses. A previous planning permission was granted to a different developer for bungalows on the site but this development did not proceed
“The Planning Service has written separately in response to local residents over their concerns relating to this development.
“The neighbour notification process was correctly followed with all properties whose garden ground lies within 20m of an application site being notified. In this case the application site, as identified by the Applicants Agents, did not extend up to Old Evanton Road, the 20m buffer did not include land to the north west of the road and therefore neighbour notification was not served on these properties.
"Whilst the Council considers this lack of neighbour notification to be regrettable, the correct procedures were followed based on the submitted site boundaries.The application was also advertised in the Ross-shire Journal on 22nd September 2018 which allowed other parties not notified, the opportunity to make comment on the application.
“The developer has advised that they proposed two storey properties in this location to provide the type of accommodation most needed at this time and to get the best value from the land available. The Council is not empowered to protect the views available from individual houses, the houses are set down below the level of the public road by over two metres but cannot be set down further due to access and drainage constraints."
