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=6538&Ver=4

REVIEWS

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 garage/hobby workshop to the rear of 24 Rubislaw Den South, Aberdeen, Planning Reference 180328DPP.

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 Sheila Robertson, Planning Technician; (2) the application dated 7 March 2018; (3) the decision notice dated 9 May 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 an accompanying 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 applicants in relation to the condition of the boundary wall had been submitted and therefore required approval from the LRB to accept the letter as part of the proceedings.

Mr Templeton, 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 new evidence in to the proceedings as they were satisfied that the information could not have been submitted earlier.

Mr Evans then described the site advising that it was a detached 2 storey dwelling, constructed in grey granite and situated on the northern side of Rubislaw Den South within a large feu. The rear garden extended to more than 40m and adjoins Rubislaw Den itself, to which access is afforded  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1.

The Local Review Body were advised that this review would now be considered on 3 October 2018.

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 erection of a residential development of eight two-bedroom flats and associated car parking and amenity space at 42A Seaforth Road, Aberdeen, Planning Reference 180352DPP.

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 Mr Gavin Clark, Senior Planner (2) the original planning application dated 5 March 2018; (3) the decision notice dated 3 May 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’s agent along with an accompanying statement; and (6) letters of representation relating to the planning application.

Mr Evans 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.

Mr Evans described the site, advising that it extended to approximately 636 sqm and was located on the southern side of Seaforth Road, at its junction with Urquhart Lane, incorporating a single storey, pitched-roof ‘warehouse’ type building. The building was constructed of synthetic aggregate blockwork with a metal sheet roof oriented with its gable facing onto Seaforth Road.

He indicated that the appointed officer’s report described the premises as currently vacant and most recently used as a storage shed for a plumbing business. The surrounding area was largely residential, which was reflected in its residential zoning in the Aberdeen Local Development Plan, and incorporated a mix of housing styles and scales, from 2 storey - four in a block flats, to more dense 3 and 4 storey flatted developments of both traditional and modern design.

Mr Evans provided details of the planning history of the site, prior to outling the proposal which sought permission for the erection of a four storey building containing 8 flats. The flatted building would have a footprint of approximately 176 sqm, with the site accommodating 6 car parking spaces to the rear of the building and one motorcycle space, accessed via Urquhart Lane (a one-way street only accessible by vehicles from the south via Urquhart Road).

He advised that landscaped amenity space would also be provided to the rear, with cycle lockers and bin storage facilities. A section of the boundary wall would be reduced to 1m in height to provide visibility at the site access. The building would be finished in a buff-coloured synthetic stone at ground floor  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.