An Oban businessman has been allowed to keep the boat hut he built to take his disabled wife sailing.
Graham MacQueen, who as well as running a removal firm, does a lot of charity work and is a deputy lieutenant for Argyll and Bute, mistakenly built the hut without planning consent.
Planners recommended that his application for retrospective permission be refused, because the structure, at Clachan Seil near the famous Bridge Over the Atlantic near Oban, would have an adverse impact on the scenic area.
Mr MacQueen faced having to tear it down. The hut provides shelter on days out for wife Morven, who has MS, and other disabled family and friends. He takes them on trips in his specially adapted boat.
His application attracted 115 expressions of support and 17 objections.
At a public planning hearing earlier this month, councillors said they were moved to take the “moral” stance and support the application.
The final decision was delayed until yesterday’s planning committee to allow them to form a competent motion to save the hut.
Speaking following the meeting, Mr MacQueen said: “The truth is a good many people will benefit from this decision. I am overwhelmed by the support first of all of the planning committee but also of the public and my friends and family.
“The community has backed me and I will continue to work hard for the community.
“I would issue a caution to those who, like me, like volunteering. That caution would be, attend to your own business first.
“I would certainly not recommend the retrospective route for anything. It has been a dreadful experience not just for me but for the planning officers and the planning committee.”
The motion, put forward by Rory Colville and seconded by Roddy McCuish, was unanimously carried.
It stated that the claim of exceptional personal need was supported by written and verbal evidence presented by medical and health care professionals.
The motion continued that the impact of the hut would be mitigated by its small scale, its inaccessible location and appropriate landscaping.
While the development remains contrary to planning policy, the motion stated, “It is considered that the specific and unique set of personal and medical circumstances that exist in this case are sufficient to justify the development on the basis of a personal planning permission in favour of the applicant as a minor departure from the local development plan.”