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=5549&Ver=4

The Local Review Body (LRB) 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 proposed creation of two bedroom flat within roof space, including formation of dormer windows to front and rear elevations (retrospective) at Flat B, 12 Summerfield Terrace, Aberdeen.

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 Gavin Evans 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 Mr Ross McMahon, Trainee Planner; (2) the decision notice dated 12 October 2016; (3) copies of the plans showing the proposal; (4) links to the planning policies referred to in the delegated report; (5) four letters of representation; and (6) the Notice of Review submitted by the applicant’s agent along with an accompanying statement.

The LRB was then addressed by Mr Evans who advised that the submitted Notice of Review was found to be valid and submitted within the relevant timeframes.

Mr Evans advised that detailed planning permission had been sought retrospectively  for the formation of a new attic floor flat, achieved through the provision of a box dormer at the front and rear elevation of the property. He intimated that planning permission was previously granted for a proposal of the aforementioned description and that works had been completed on the site, however it had not been constructed in accordance with the consented plans and elevations.

Mr Evans referred to the reasons for refusal and indicated that the principle of creating an additional flat had been accepted by the Planning Officer, however the front dormer failed to comply with Aberdeen Local Development Plan Policies D1 (Architecture and Placemaking), aspects of H1 (Residential Areas), aspects of the Householder Development Guide Supplementary Guidance, relating to the design of dormer windows. He explained that the front dormer does not respect the scale and form of the existing property, is of size, scale and design that is considered inappropriate and visually intrusive to  ...  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 proposed dormers to the front of the ancillary building (Retrospective) at 1 Cairnview Crescent, Aberdeen.

The Chairperson advised that the LRB would now be addressed by Mr Paul Williamson 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 Ms Sepideh Hajisoltani, Trainee Planner; (2) the decision notice dated 22 August 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 Williamson advised that the submitted Notice of Review was found to be valid and submitted within the relevant timeframes.

Mr Williamson provided a brief description of the application and advised that the appeal relates to the refusal of planning permission for the retrospective formation of two dormer windows to the front elevation of an ancillary building to the rear of 1 Cairnview Crescent, Aberdeen.  He indicated that the existing property was of pink granite construction with a slate roof and the footprint of the existing 1½ storey semi-detached dwelling covered approximately 89 square metres.

Mr Williamson made reference to the delegated report and intimated that the proposal sought to obtain permission retrospectively for the formation of two dormers onto the east facing roof plane of an ancillary building previously approved under application 150474.  In that application, the floor area of the replacement garage was 70.56 square metres, with accommodation on the upper floor accessed via an external stair on the northern gable.  The floor plans indicate that the upper floor could be used as a gym/office, ancillary to the existing dwellinghouse.  In order to provide light to this area, two, double rooflights were shown on the plans.  The materials for the approved ancillary building were grey dry dash render, slate roof, and a UPVC roller door to the garage element, and a timber doors. 

Mr Williamson advised that it was identified that the amendment of the proposals to form two dormer windows could not be considered Non Material Variation, and an application requested to consider the proposals further. 

Mr Williamson then referred to the Decision Notice and advised that the application was refused on the grounds that the proposal fails to comply with Policies D1 and H1 of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan, in light of the proposal not demonstrating due regard for the design and context of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.

The Local Review Body then considered the third 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 a proposed dwelling house with associated parking at 25-29 Queen’s Road, Aberdeen.

The Chairperson advised that the LRB would again be addressed by Mr Paul Williamson and reminded those in attendance 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 Ms Jane Forbes, Planner; (2) the decision notice dated 13 September 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 Williamson advised that the submitted Notice of Review was found to be valid and submitted within the relevant timeframes.

Mr Williamson provided a brief description of the application and advised that the appeal relates to the refusal of planning permission for a proposed dwelling house with associated car parking at the rear of 25-29 Queen’s Road.  The existing property is Category C Listed, within the Albyn Place/Rubislaw Conservation Area, and of traditional construction.  The main dwelling is split into three flats, and following a grant of planning permission (Ref: 151798) is currently in the process of being extended by two storeys to the rear to form an additional 2 flatted properties.  The wider curtilage of the existing property extends to some 1800 square metres, while the site area for the appeal site is approximately 206 square metres

Mr Williamson referred to the delegated report and indicated that the proposals sought to erect a single storey mews style dwelling of two bedrooms within the south east most corner of the site.  The development would be accessed from Queens Lane South, with a 1.8 metre high traditional rubble boundary wall forming the southern boundary of the site.  The western boundary would be formed by another rubble wall varying between 1.1 and 1.4 metres in height, and two car parking spaces would be located to the north of the proposed dwelling.  In respect of materials, external walls would be of natural granite, with roof clad in slate.  Windows would be aluminium frames painted dark grey, with stone cills.

Mr Williamson then referred to the Decision Notice and advised that the application was refused on the grounds that the proposed development would result in the subdivision of an existing residential plot, which would not be in keeping with the established density and pattern of development in the area.  The Planning Authority considered  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.