Agenda and minutes

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

https://committees.aberdeencity.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=284&MId=6607

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 erection of a Carport to the Gable of 1 Woodburn Place, Aberdeen, Planning Reference 180643DPP.

Councillor Boulton as Chairperson gave a brief outline of the business to be undertaken.  She indicated that the LRB would be addressed by the Assistant Clerk, Mr Mark Masson with regards to 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, 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.

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 more general aspects relating to the procedure.

In relation to the application, the LRB had before it (1) a delegated report by Ms Sheila Robertson, Planning Technician; (2) the planning application dated 24 April 2018; (3) the decision notice dated 22 June 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 along with a supporting statement with further information relating to the application.

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 described the site, advising that the application site was located on the western site of Woodburn Place, occupying a corner plot at its junction with Woodburn Gardens. The site contained a detached, 1.5 storey dwelling of a hipped-roof design, which includes an integral garage. The dwelling had been previously extended in the past, with the addition of a single-storey extension to the rear (garden elevation) and more recently, the construction of a 1.5 storey extension on its south elevation facing onto Woodburn Gardens. This later extension allowed for the formation of an integral garage with internal accommodation above, within the roofspace. The site extended to approximately 970sqm, of which the extended property occupies a footprint of roughly 220sqm.The site was at the time of the officer’s report, enclosed by high leylandii hedging to its southern and eastern boundaries (onto Woodburn Gardens and Woodburn Place respectively. Woodburn Place rises northwards from Woodburn Gardens, and as a result the dwelling was slightly elevated when seen from Woodburn Gardens.

In relation to the proposal,  ...  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 application for the installation of replacement windows to the property at 85 Hamilton Place, Aberdeen, Planning Reference 180950DPP.

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 Alex Ferguson, Planner; (2) the planning application dated 11 June 2018; (3) the decision notice dated 30 August 2018; (4) links to the planning policies and plans referred to in the delegated report; and (5) the Notice of Review submitted by the applicant including a supporting statement with further information relating to the application.

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, however he then indicated that new evidence presented by the applicant in the form of (1) a letter dated 21 November 2018 which made reference to planning approval for a neighbouring property; and (2) a new drawing showing a different window had been submitted and therefore required approval from the LRB to accept the letter as part of the proceedings.

Ms Christie, Legal Advisor indicated that the new information, which was not before the planning officer, could only be taken into account where (a) that the matter could not have been raised before that time; or (b) that it not being raised before that time was a consequence of exceptional circumstances.

The Local Review Body agreed to accept the letter in to the proceedings as they were satisfied that the information could not have been submitted earlier, however they did not agree to accept the new drawing into the proceedings.

Mr Evans described the site, advising that the property in question was a  detached 2½  storey granite building of traditional style on the southern side of Hamilton Place. The building fronts onto Hamilton Place, but its western gable bounds an unnamed rear lane which runs from Hamilton Place to Desswood Place, and was characterised by garages serving properties on Blenheim Place and Fountainhall Road. The upper floor and roof level of number 85 Hamilton Place’s rear elevation were visible from this lane. The building was within the Albyn Place/Rubislaw Conservation Area.

Mr Evans indicated that this application proposed the replacement of windows on the building’s rear elevation which included two windows at ground floor level, two at first floor level, and six  ...  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 application for the installation of replacement windows to the front of the property at 85 Hamilton Place, Aberdeen, Planning Reference 181328DPP.

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 Alex Ferguson, Planner; (2) the planning application dated 11 June 2018; (3) the decision notice dated 30 August 2018; (4) links to the planning policies and plans referred to in the delegated report; and (5) the Notice of Review submitted by the applicant including a supporting statement with further information relating to the application.

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 described the site,advising that it was a semi-detached 1.5 storey dwelling, situated on the southern side of Whitehall Terrace, at its junction with Craigie Park. The building was understood to date from the 1920s/30s and was constructed in granite with a slated roof and ‘catslide’ dormer at first floor level and a 3-part bay window below. Existing windows were formed in timber with a brown stained finish, and were of a casement opening type. The site was within the Rosemount and Westburn Conservation Area.

He explained that the application proposed the replacement of all windows on the front elevation of the property. The proposed windows were ‘rosewood’ brown coloured uPVC frames, which were of a casement opening type. Besides the introduction of uPVC, the central window in the ground floor bay would be slightly different, with a single fixed pane instead of the two fixed panes presently. The lower sections of the left and right-hand-bays would open, with fixed panes above.

Mr Evans indicated that the Appointed Officer’s reasons for refusal make reference to the following factors:-

• The replacement of timber with uPVC on the principal elevation failed to demonstrate due regard for its context, and therefore failed to accord with policies D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design), D4 (Historic Environment) and H1 (Residential Areas) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan;
• The retention and reinstatement of traditional window forms and materials, or suitably sympathetic alternatives, was necessary to maintain and enhance the character of the conservation area;
• The replacement of existing timber framed windows with modern frames, formed in uPVC and the presence of visible surface mounted trickle vents to the front faces, would have a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.