Agenda and draft minutes

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

Councillor Lawrence took no part in the proceedings for reviews one and two, for the reason that the properties were located within his 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 250079.

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 against the conditions for the change of use from domestic outbuilding to class 1A (shops, financial professional and other services) (retrospective) at 43 Fairview Parade, Aberdeen, AB22 8ZX, Planning Reference 250079/DPP.

The Chairperson 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 27 January 2025; (3)  the Decision Notice dated 17 July 2025; (4) links to the plans showing the proposal and planning policies referred to in the delegated report; (5) the Notice of Review submitted by the applicant/agent; and (6) consultee responses from the Roads and Environmental Health Teams and 14 letters of representation.

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

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

·       The use of the outbuilding as a hairdressing salon would allow for the continuation of an existing business working from a residential home. Subject to a condition limiting opening hours, in particular during the weekend, the proposal would not have a detrimental impact on the residential amenity of neighbouring properties. The proposal was thus in compliance with Policy 26 (Business and Industry) of NPF4 and Policy H1 (Residential Areas) of Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2023;

·       Sufficient space for parking was available on the site and in the immediate surrounding area, and there were options for bike storage. The proposal is thus compliant with Policy T3 (Parking) of Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2023;

·       The proposal was for a small homeworking business in an existing outbuilding, and sufficient consideration has been given to Policy 1 (Tackling the Climate and Nature Crises) and Policy 2 (Climate Mitigation and Adaptation) of NPF4; and

·       Condition: The use hereby  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1.

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 250366.

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 erection of two storey extension to rear at 148 Victoria Street, Dyce, Aberdeen, AB21 7BE. Planning Reference Number 250366.

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 delegated report by the Appointed Officer, Aberdeen City Council; (2) an application dated 7 April 2025; (3)  the Decision Notice dated 4 September 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, provided information on planning history 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:-

·       Due primarily to its disproportionate scale as a 2-storey extension on a 1½-storey dwellinghouse, the proposed plain box form cutting into most of the roof, and the elevational treatment which would exaggerate the harmful effects of scale and form, the proposed extension would dominate the existing dwellinghouse at its prominent corner site when viewed from Gladstone Place, failing to be subordinate to it and harming its character and that of the surrounding area. This was particularly given the architectural merit of the traditional dwellinghouse and its rear elevation, which currently made a positive contribution to the character of the area; and

·       The development would therefore be contrary to the first General Principle of Aberdeen Planning Guidance: Householder Development Guide and against the design principles of Policies 14 (Design Quality and Place) of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and D1 (Quality Placemaking) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2023 (ALDP), in particular the requirements to be distinctive and welcoming. Likewise, the development would be contrary to Policy 16 (Quality Homes) of NPF4, which supported householder development only where it did not have a detrimental impact on the character of the home in terms of size, design and materials, and Policy H1 (Residential Areas) of the ALDP, which did not support development which would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of an area.

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

·       the extension design was a distinct and separate element. Old and new;

·       contemporary and subordinate – not exceeding ridge height;

·       sympathetic to surroundings  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.

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

Councillor Lawrence joined the meeting at this juncture.

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 250433.

The LRB then considered the third 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 installation of a fence to front (retrospective) at 36 Devonshire Road, Aberdeen, AB10 6XR. Planning Reference Number 250430.

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 delegated report by the Appointed Officer, Aberdeen City Council; (2) an application dated 28 April 2025; (3)  the Decision Notice dated 22 July 2025; (4) links to the plans showing the proposal and planning policies referred to in the delegated report; (5) the Notice of Review submitted by the applicant/agent; and (6) three letters of representation.

Ms Greene advised that the applicant had indicated on the Notice of Review that there were new mattersto be raised. The applicant had also expressed the view that a hearing should take place in order for the applicant to convey the impact this has had and answer questions from the LRB members.

She then described the site including planning history and outlined the appellant’s proposal for detailed planning permission.

The LRB then heard from Elena Plews, Legal Adviser, Aberdeen City Council who provided information relating to a request from the applicant to speak to the LRB. She explained that in terms of the Local Review Body Regulations, this could happen, if the LRB decided that it required further information before determining the review. Additionally, information could be by way of a site visit, further written submissions, or by holding a hearing session. In this situation, following this request, the only way the applicant could speak to the LRB would be by way of the LRB convening a hearing session.

Mrs Plews outlined the procedure for hearing sessions and indicated that the LRB members now needed to decide whether or not they needed further information relating to planning considerations, to be able to determine this review by way of holding a hearing session, or whether they believe that they have sufficient information to be able to determine this review.

The Chairperson and Councillors Lawrence, Macdonald and Thomson all indicated in turn that they each had enough information before them and therefore agreed that the review under consideration should be determined without the need of a hearing.

Mrs Plews then provided information relating to the consideration of new matters advising that it was for the LRB to consider whether or not to accept the new information.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.