Peterhead window plan refused by councillors

The organisation had submitted the application in a bid to replace five timber ground floor windows at the Broad Street building
The organisation had submitted the application in a bid to replace five timber ground floor windows at the Broad Street building

Planning permission for new windows at the North East of Scotland Fishermen’s Organisation Ltd in Peterhead has been refused.

The application was discussed by members of the Buchan Area Committee on Tuesday, January 14.

The organisation had submitted the application in a bid to replace five timber ground floor windows at the Broad Street building with new white uPVC windows.

The building is a Category B Listed building and is located within the Peterhead Central Conservation Area.

In a report issued to committee members Aberdeenshire Council’s Environment Team stated: “The installation of non-timber windows is contrary to Policy HE1 which does not allow development which would have a negative effect on the character, integrity or setting of a listed building.

“The proposal is also contrary to Historic Environment Scotland guidance, which suggests that replacement windows should seek to match the original units as closely as possible in terms of design, construction and material finish.”

The Environment Team added that it did not support the proposed replacement as it would “erode the traditional appearance of the building and wider character of the Peterhead Central Conservation Area.”

Aberdeenshire Council planners had recommended that the application be refused as it did not meet the requirements of policies within the Aberdeenshire Local Development Plan 2017 and they added that the changes “would fail to preserve or enhance the character and/or appearance of the Peterhead Conservation Area”.

Commenting at the meeting Councillor Norman Smith said: “I think it is wrong to demand it get replaced with wood, PVC is fine as long as it looks good.”

Councillor Stephen Calder stated that he agreed with the recommendation to refuse the application, while councillor Jim Ingram asked if it was possible to see an example of the PVC proposed in the plan.

The matter was put to a vote with a motion to refuse the plans and an amendment to see a PVC sample and deferal of the application.

The motion received six votes to four for the amendment and therefore the application was refused.

Kirstie Topp , Local Democracy Reporting Service