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=5543&Ver=4

With reference to the minute of the meeting of the Local Review Body (LRB)  of 28 October 2016, wherein the Members attended a site visit and agreed to defer consideration of the above application in order that they receive further information in the form of written submissions, the Local Review Body of Aberdeen City Council met on this day to review the decision taken by an appointed officer under the Council’s Scheme of Delegation to refuse the request for planning permission for the demolition of a former Mill building and erection of a replacement dwelling house at The Mill, Clinterty.

Councillor Milne as Chairperson gave a brief outline of the business to be undertaken.  He indicated that the LRB 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 stated that although the Planning Adviser was employed by the planning authority hehad 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.  He emphasised that the officer would not be asked to express any view on the proposed application.

The Local Review Body was then addressed by Mr Masson, Assistant Clerk in regards to the procedure to be followed, at which time reference was made to the procedure note circulated with the papers calling the meeting and to certain more general aspects relating to the procedure.

In relation to the application, the LRB had before it (1) a delegated report by Ms Dineke Brasier, Planner, dated 7 April 2016; (2) the decision notice dated 11 August 2016; (3) copies of the plans showing the proposal; (4) links to the planning policies referred to in the delegated report; (5) a letter of representation; (6) consultee responses; and (7) the Notice of Review submitted by the applicant’s agent along with an accompanying statement and documents.

The LRB also had before it the following written submissions:-

• confirmation from Aberdeen City Council’s Flooding Team on its position regarding the risk of flooding from/of the proposed development and required drainage;
• submission by SEPA of its position regarding the risk of flooding from/of the proposed development and required drainage;

·         confirmation from Aberdeen City Council’s Roads Team on its view regarding (a) the proposed parking provision, in particular, the potential requirement to reverse out onto a public road and whether there would be any impact on visibility; and (b) the possibility of creating a turning facility within the development; and

• submission from Aberdeen City Council’s Environment Policy Team of its position regarding the possible impact on trees from the proposed development.

Mr Forbes referred to the delegated report wherein a description of the site was provided, along with detail of the proposal, relevant planning policies, previous planning history of the site and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1.

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 request for planning permission for Change of Use from Class 1 (Shop) to Class 2 (Financial, Professional and Other Services) at 30-32 Chapel Street, Aberdeen.

The Chairperson advised that the LRB would now be addressed by Mr Andrew Miller and stated that although the Planning Adviser 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.  He emphasised that the officer would not be asked to express any view on the proposed application.

In relation to the application, the Local Review Body had before it (1) a delegated report by Mr Ross McMahon, Trainee Planner; (2) the decision notice dated 20 October 2016; (3) plans showing the proposal; (4) links to the planning policies referred to in the delegated report; and (5) the Notice of Review submitted by the applicant’s agent along with an accompanying statement.

Mr Miller advised that the submitted Notice of Review was found to be valid and submitted within the relevant timeframes.

Mr Miller referred to the delegated report wherein a description of the site was provided, along with detail of the proposal, relevant planning policies, previous planning history of the site and reason for refusal; and also the statement and submissions by the applicant’s agent.

Mr Miller outlined the relevant considerations as follows:-

• Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2012 (C1 – seeks to ensure the city centre remains a regional centre and is the preferred location for the vision of the city centre; H2 – Mixed Use Areas – new uses should be compatible with established neighbouring uses); and
• Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2015 (C1 and NC1 and City Centre Masterplan).

The Local Review Body then asked a number of questions of Mr Miller during which, he clarified the position in relation to the potential uses of the premises.

The Grounds of Appeal Statement which accompanied the Notice of Review advised (a) that the appointed officer had not applied policy correctly nor had he considered all the information submitted with the application; (b) that the appointed officer failed to deal with the application in a way that is consistent with that for another recent application in Chapel Street, Aberdeen; and (c) that the property lies within the city centre, no expressions of interest had been received for continuing Class 1 retail use and the proposal would ensure that the property was occupied and in doing so, will make a contribution to the viability and vitality of the area.

The delegated report advised that the stated reason for refusal of planning permission was as follows:-

The proposal is considered to generally comply with Policy H2 (Mixed Use Areas), however, fails to comply with Policy RT4 (Local Shops) of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.