A legal challenge against the approval of a small Moray housing development reached the Court of Session.
Robert Bruce wants to stop seven houses being built on Portessie woodland.
His campaign reached the Inner House of the Court of Session at Parliament House in Edinburgh.
Mr Bruce’s appeal was heard by three judges. The Lord President, Lord Carloway, sat with Lord Pentland and Lord Woolman.
In March 2020, an application from Morlich Homes to build seven houses on woodland adjacent to number 1-5 Station Road, Portessie, was approved by Moray Council’s planning review body.
Last year, lawyers representing the Save Slochy Woodlands campaign group member lodged an appeal to the Court of Session over the Moray local review body’s decision.
The developer had appealed against an earlier decision to refuse.
In a five to three vote, the scheme was approved.
This came despite it contravening six key policies in the Moray local development plan.
A majority of councillors agreed that this was an “acceptable departure” based on “community benefit”, in terms of housing and the school roll.
What happened in the hearing?
In the hearing, Mr Bruce was represented by Legal Services Agency.
The representative Scott Blair argued there was no attempt at any level to balance the community benefit and school roll against the policies of the local development plan.
He also raised concerns about the housing site being part of a small portion of the ENV5 green corridor within the Moray Local Development Plan 2020, known as the Slochy Woodlands.
He believed that councillors might have bypassed the concerns mentioned at the local review body meeting by planning officials.
Meanwhile, DWF LLP’s Graham Dunlop who represented Moray Council said the school roll and need for local housing were “clear reasons” for approving the housing development.
He noted that there were only five objectors in the original planning application. Meanwhile the seven supporters in the application said more housing was needed.
He also raised concerns about Mr Bruce’s lack of participation in the planning process up until the statutory appeal.
A written judgment will be published at a later date.
Conversation