Agenda and minutes

The agenda and reports associated with this minute can be found at:-

http://committees.aberdeencity.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=284&MId=4148&Ver=4

The Local Review Body of Aberdeen City Council met this day to review the decision taken by an appointed officer under the Council’s Scheme of Delegation to refuse three requests for planning permission.

Councillor Milne, as Chairperson, gave a brief outline of the business to be undertaken.  He indicated that the Local Review Body would be addressed by the Assistant Clerk, Mr Mark Masson, as regards the procedure to be followed and also, thereafter, by Mr Robert Forbes, who would be acting as the Planning Adviser to the Body in the case under consideration this day.

The Chairperson advised that a letter of representation dated 19^th February 2016, had been received by Dyce and Stoneywood Community Council (a statutory consultee) after the decision to refuse the application had been taken by the appointed officer. It was acknowledged that late submissions would not normally be considered by the Local Review Body unless there were exceptional circumstances, however it was agreed that on this occasion it would be considered as part of today’s proceedings as they were a statutory consultee, although he indicated that officers would write to all Community Council’s advising them that they must submit representations timeously or they would not be considered in future.

The Chairperson advised that Mr Robert Forbes 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.  Mr Forbes would not be asked to express any view on the proposed application.

Mr Forbes explained that the application which was the subject of the review was for the construction of a 1.5 storey extension to replace an existing extension and outbuilding at Knowsie, 10 Cordyce View, Dyce.  Mr Forbes explained that he had checked the submitted Notice of Review and found it to be valid and submitted within the relevant timeframes.

The report advised that the application site was located on the north side of Cordyce View, a small cul de sac to the immediate north of Aberdeen Airport’s East Terminal, and was occupied by a detached, hipped roofed, single storey dwelling house finished with render and a slate roof. The original dwelling house, which was ‘L’ shaped and positioned towards the east of the plot, had been substantially extended to the rear and western elevation by several single storey extensions, eventually linking with a lean to outbuilding located 1.4m off the western boundary. There was a small outhouse to the extreme north west of the rear garden which abutted an area of amenity space to the north planted with semi mature trees.  The front garden currently provided parking for several cars and was screened by a low wall to the street elevation backed by 1.8m high hedging.  The principal elevation of the dwelling house had open views towards the airport grounds.  Mr Forbes intimated that the footprint of the existing dwelling house, including the previous extensions, resulted in a built site coverage  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1.

The Local Review Body then considered the second request for a review.  The Chairperson advised that the LRB would again be addressed by Mr Robert Forbes and reminded members that Mr Forbes 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.  Mr Forbes would not be asked to express any view on the proposed application.

Mr Forbes indicated that the application which was the subject of the review was for the alteration and change of use from an office to 4 no. flats at 1 Claremont Street, Aberdeen.  Mr Forbes explained that he had checked the submitted Notice of Review and found it to be valid and submitted within the relevant timeframes. 

Mr Forbes explained that the application site comprised a two storey office block and area of car parking set back from Claremont Street. It dates from around the 1980s and has a vehicular access from Claremont Street. The building itself had windows and a door in its principal elevation (and three skylights to the rear). A two storey block of flats with mansard roof was located to the front, adjacent to the vehicular access. The surrounding area was formed largely of residential uses, reflected by its residential designation within the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2012 (ALDP).

The report advised that detailed planning permission was sought for the alteration and change of use of the office block to four residential flats. Two flats would be located on each floor, with the principal elevation of the building altered to accommodate a revised arrangement of windows and front door resulting in all flats being single aspect, apart from the upper floors where new skylights would be provided to the rear of the building.  Externally, the front of the building would contain 5 parking spaces, with a landscaped area and storage space for bins and cycle parking.

It was noted that although the report referred to 5 parking spaces, the actual figure was in fact 4.

In relation to documents which the Members of the Body should consider, Mr Forbes outlined that all the following documents were accessible via web links, and available as set out in the papers:-

In relation to the Aberdeen Local Development Plan:-

H1 – Residential Areas

Within existing residential areas (designated H1), proposals for new residential development and householder development will be approved in principle if it:

1. does not constitute over development;
2. does not have an unacceptable impact on the character or amenity of the surrounding area;
3. does not result in the loss of valuable and valued areas of open space. Open space is defined in the Aberdeen Open Space Audit 2010;
4. complies with Supplementary Guidance on Curtilage Splits; and
5. complies with Supplementary Guidance on House Extensions.

D1 – Architecture and Placemaking

New development must be designed with due consideration for its context and make a positive contribution to its setting. Factors such as siting, scale,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.

The Local Review Body then considered the third request for a review.  The Chairperson advised that the LRB would now be addressed by Ms Lucy Greene and reminded members that Ms Greene 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.  Ms Greene would not be asked to express any view on the proposed application.

Ms Greene explained that the application which was the subject of the review was for the proposed formation of a straight gable, extension to front dormer and erection of1.5 storey extension to rear.  

Ms Greene explained that she had checked the submitted Notice of Review and found it to be valid and submitted within the relevant timeframes. 

Ms Greene explained that the site referred to was located to the south of King’s Cross Road and extended to 511.7 sq.m and was occupied by a 1.5 storey semi-detached dwelling house and a detached single garage to the rear. The area was characterised by properties of similar design and materials.  The site was identified by the Adopted Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2012 as a residential area. 

Ms Greene explained that planning permission was sought to straighten the existing hipped gable and erecting a 1.5 storey rear extension to the existing dwellinghouse. The proposed extensions would accommodate a new kitchen/ living area at the ground floor and three numbers of enlarged bedrooms with an en-suite, a bathroom and a storage space on the first floor. The proposed rear extension would have an overall projection of 4m and would have an eaves height of 3.4m and a ridge height of 7.3m.

The proposal also included dormer extensions to the front of the property (north elevation) and a new dormer on the eastern pitch of the proposed rear extension pitched roof.  Finishing materials would include a slated roof and rendered cladding.

She also highlighted the site’s previous planning history, wherein it was advised that detailed planning application for formation of a dormer window was approved unconditionally in May 2005.

In relation to documents which the Members of the Body should consider, Ms Greene outlined that all the following documents were accessible via web links, and available as set out in the papers:-

In relation to the Aberdeen Local Development Plan:-

Policy D1- Architecture and Placemaking

To ensure high standard of design, new development must be designed with due consideration for its context and make a positive contribution to its setting. Factors such as siting, scale, massing, colour, materials, orientation, details, the proportions of building elements, together with the spaces around buildings, including streets, squares, open space, landscaping and boundary treatments, would be considered in assessing that contribution.

Policy H1- Residential Areas

Within existing residential areas (H1 on the Proposals Map) and within new residential developments, proposals for new residential development and householder development will be approved in principle if it:

1. did not have an unacceptable impact  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.