Agenda and draft minutes

The agenda, reports and recording associated with this meeting can be viewed here.

Members, please note that all plans and supporting documents relevant to the review can be viewed online here and by entering the application reference number 240711.

The Local Review Body (LRB) of Aberdeen City Council met on this day to consider a review of the decision taken by an appointed officer under the Council’s Scheme of Delegation for the refusal of the application for the change of use to domestic garden ground, replacement and extension of boundary walls, removal of render to expose original granite on dwelling house, installation of flue, wall lights, CCTV and associated external alterations including to existing window/door openings (all retrospective); installation of intercom at 1 Bayview Road, Aberdeen, AB15 4EY, Planning Reference 240711/DPP.

Due to technical difficulties, the Chairperson Councillor McRae was unable to attend, therefore Councillor Copland chaired the meeting, gave a brief outline of the business to be undertaken, advising that the LRB would be addressed by the Assistant Clerk, Mr Mark Masson with regards to the procedure to be followed and thereafter, by Ms Lucy Greene who would be acting as the Planning Adviser to the Body in the following case under consideration this day.

The Chairperson stated that although the Planning Adviser was employed by the planning authority, she 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.

The Local Review Body was then addressed by Mr Masson, Assistant Clerk in regard 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 the Appointed Officer, Aberdeen City Council; (2) an application dated 5 August 2024; (3)  the Decision Notice dated 23 January 2025; (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/agent.

Ms Greene then described the site and outlined the appellant’s proposal for detailed planning permission.

Ms Greene indicated that the appointed officer’s reasons for refusal outlined in the draft report of handling was as follows:-

·       C/U of garden, intercom, alterations to door and window openings and new frames, removal of render, flue lighting, CCTV cameras – implemented and accepted;

·       Concerns about height and materials of boundary walls;

·       Use of blocks and render instead of granite rubble Height was at max 3.25m to south and max 4.2m to north and 4.4m to west;

·       Impact of height of south wall on daylight and overbearing impact on residents at 86 Queens Road;

·       Walls clearly visible from outside site;

·       Removal of 3 mature Western Red Cedars – no mitigation planting; and

·       Contrary to policies on trees, historic assets, residential areas and amenity.

Ms Greene outlined the key points from the appellant’s Notice of Review as follows:-

·       Three set of revisions were submitted, trying to address boundary  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1.

Councillor Clark took no part in the proceedings for the following review, for the reason that the property was located within her Electoral Ward.

Members, please note that all plans and supporting documents relevant to the review can be viewed online here and by entering the application reference number 241289.

The LRB then considered the second request to review the decision taken by an appointed officer under the Council’s Scheme of Delegation for the refusal of the application for the formation of driveway to the front at 11 Invercauld Road, Aberdeen, AB16 5UH, Planning Reference 241289/DPP.

The Chairperson advised that Ms Lucy Greene would again be acting as the Planning Adviser to the Body in the following case under consideration this day and reiterated that although the Planning Adviser was employed by the planning authority, she 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 LRB had before it (1) a draft delegated report by the Appointed Officer, Aberdeen City Council; (2) an application dated 6 November 2024; (3)  the Decision Notice dated 14 February 2025; (4) links to the plans showing the proposal and planning policies referred to in the draft delegated report; (5) the Notice of Review submitted by the applicant/agent; and (6) consultee correspondence from the Council’s Roads Development Management Team; and a letter of representation from Aberdeen Civic Society.

Ms Greene then described the site and outlined the appellant’s proposal for detailed planning permission.

Ms Greene indicated that the appointed officer’s reasons for refusal outlined in the draft report of handling was as follows:-

•       Road safety: The proposed driveway would not meet the minimum required length, as set out in the Council’s Transport & Accessibility Aberdeen Planning Guidance, and would also be situated immediately opposite a road junction. As such, the proposed driveway would cause a safety hazard to road users and pedestrians, therefore the proposal conflicted with several requirements of the Transport and Accessibility guidance and was therefore also contrary to the requirements of Policy T3 (Parking) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan.

Ms Greene outlined the key points from the appellant’s Notice of Review as follows:-

·       Neighbour has driveway the same as that proposed;

·       Although dimensions fall short of requirements, so does the neighbour’s drive, but was easily capable of parking a car;

·       Houses were set back from the road with little traffic movement;

·       Precedent had been set and same rules should apply; and

·       Applicant often used neighbour’s driveway and photo had been submitted showing how it fitted.

Ms Greene provided information in relation to the consultee responses and the letters of representation, noting that (1) the Roads Team had objected as the site was only approx. 4.5m long in front of the footway crossing. This was less than the required 5m. Vehicles were required to enter drives at 90 degrees to road, therefore the angle required to park was unacceptable. The site also lay opposite a junction which was not acceptable. There was not a controlled parking zone; (2) an objection was received from Aberdeen Civic Society, stating that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.