Issue - meetings

The Local Review Body then considered the second request for a review to evaluate the decision taken by an appointed officer under the Council’s Scheme of Delegation to refuse the application for the erection of timber decking along the rear boundary with associated steps and handrails retrospectively at 18 Home Farm Gardens Bridge of Don Aberdeen, 181431/DPP.

The Chairperson advised that the LRB would again be addressed by Mr Gavin Evans and reminded Members that although Mr Evans was employed by the planning authority he had not been involved in any way with the consideration or determination of the application under review and was present to provide factual information and guidance to the Body only.  She emphasised that the officer would not be asked to express any view on the proposed application.

In relation to the application, the LRB had before it (1) a delegated report by Sheila Robertson, Planning Technician; (2) the application dated 20 August 2018; (3) the decision notice dated 19 October 2018 (4) links to the plans showing the proposal and planning policies referred to in the delegated report;  and (5) the Notice of Review submitted by the applicant and (6) letters of objections from neighbouring properties.

The LRB was then addressed by Mr Evans who advised that the review had been submitted with all necessary information within the time limit of three months following the decision of the appointed officer.

Mr Evans then described the site advising that it was a 3 storey -mid terraced town house of recent construction.  The rear garden is level, measures 6m in width and 9.2m in length and backs onto an area of open space which occupies an elevated position relative to the application property.  The northern boundary is protected by a retaining gabion wall, a metal cage filled with stones, which is 2.6m in height and 550mm wide, and both side garden boundaries are screened by 1.8m high, vertical timber fencing.  There is also 1.8m high timber fencing above the retaining wall, to the rear of the boundary.

In terms of the Appointed Officer’s reasons for refusal, Mr Evans made reference to the following factors:-

·         a visually prominent and intrusive structure, out of character with the surrounding area that does;

·         failure to demonstrate regard for context or make a positive contribution to its surroundings – conflict with D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design);

·         height and dimensions result in adverse impact on residential amenity;

·         unacceptable loss of privacy to neighbours both to rear windows and to enclosed private gardens;

·         does not comply with Supplementary Guidance: Householder Development Guide and with Policy H1 (Residential Areas) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan; and

·         no material planning considerations which would warrant approval of consent in this instance.

In terms of the appellant’s case, Mr Evans referred to the Notice of Review which was submitted from the applicant, and highlighted the following:-

·         considers that the application was unfairly refused;

·         highlights that the decking is entirely within the boundary of number 18;

·         complains that changes  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2