Agenda item

Members can view all representations in relation to the application by clicking on the link below and entering the planning reference number 230414.

 

Simple Search (aberdeencity.gov.uk)

 

Planning Officer:  Lucy Greene

The Committee conducted a site visit prior to the hearing.  The Committee was addressed at the site by Ms Lucy Greene, Senior Planner, who summarised the proposal for the overall site.

 

The Convener explained that the Committee would return to the Town House to commence the hearing.

 

At the start of the hearing, the Committee heard from the Convener who began by welcoming those present at the hybrid Pre-Determination Hearing and providing information on the running order.  The Convener explained that the site under review at the hearing was for the erection of a mixed use restaurant (class 3) and takeaway (sui-generis) with car parking, landscaping, play frame and associated works including demolition at Rosehill House, 202 Ashgrove Road West, Aberdeen, planning reference 230414.  The Convener explained that the first person to address the hearing would be Ms Lucy Greene, Senior Planner and asked that speakers adhere to their allocated time in order for the hearing to run smoothly and in a timely manner.

 

The Committee then heard from Ms Lucy Greene, who addressed the Committee in the following terms. 

 

Ms Greene explained that the proposed planning application was for Detailed Planning Permission for the erection of a mixed use restaurant (class 3) and takeaway (sui-generis) with car parking, landscaping, play frame and associated works including demolition.

 

The site lay on the junction of Ashgrove Road West and Anderson Drive adjacent to the former SSE Headquarters and close to the NHS Foresterhill site and Aberdeenshire Council’s Woodhill House lying to the south east and south respectively. Immediately to the north was a telephone exchange building and the site was roughly square shaped of approximately 0.54ha in size and occupied by a vacant former social care day centre building of one and two storeys, as well as a large number of mature trees. The building had a narrow, roughly ‘U’ shaped footprint and a small off-street car park lay within the northern area of the site. The building was most recently used as a temporary covid testing centre during 2021.

 

In terms of the proposal, Ms Greene indicated that the application proposal was for a single detached building to be used as restaurant and takeaway with click and collect service. This would be sited at the northern part of the site with car parking and internal road network proposed to the south. The building would provide a single storey of floorspace, with solar panels and plant accommodated on the roof and concealed behind extended elevations, resulting in a ‘stepped’ elevational appearance. A ‘corral’ area would be formed by an enclosure on the west side of the building. Externally there would also be ancillary structures including a playframe, patio with outdoor tables to the south and east of the building, fencing and lighting to the outdoor seating area and a cycle store to the front.

 

The restaurant would provide seating for seventy-six people, dining area of 78m2, within an overall floorspace of approximately 377m2. The ‘corral’ included areas for deliveries and also for refuse management, with a refuse compacter on site.

 

Elevational cladding materials to the main building would be a roughly equal mix of timber effect cladding panels in a variety of shades and dark grey engineering brick. There would be full height glazed windows and doors on the southern frontage, and white canopies at two fascia levels. The ‘corral’ and stores areas would be clad in dark grey and lighter grey stone effect panels.

 

The plans also indicated a 1.4m high timber close boarded fence around the site perimeter, with steel mesh panels within ‘timber effect’ posts, handrails and approximately 2m high lampposts around the pedestrian and patio areas close to the building.

 

Ms Greene advised that the landscaping plan showed some existing trees retained on the site boundaries, together with grassed and landscape planted borders. 33 trees were shown as being planted along the site boundaries, with hedging and ground planting. The applicant’s tree survey indicated 55 trees lay within the site in addition to one group of trees along the northern boundary.  29 trees would need to be removed for development, whilst 26 trees and the group, would remain. Offsite, trees between Ashgrove Road West inset road and the Ashgrove Road West A9011 were surveyed.  This included 17 individual trees and one group, located close to the corner of Ashgrove Road West and North Anderson Drive. The report concluded that none of these would be required to be removed although the widening would take place within root protection areas of several. The landscape plan indicated the planting of 28 trees around the site edges. These were detailed as 3.5-4.0m heavy standards of species red maple, hornbeam and silver birch.

 

Ms Greene explained that the nearest residential properties were those to the south within the Woodhill House site (approximately 45m from the edge of the site), those on the west side of Anderson Drive (approximately 77m from the site) and Woodhill Court, a sheltered housing block of 18 storeys, which lay 94m to the north, with the three-storey telephone exchange building in between.

 

Ms Greene then spoke about the consultation responses to the proposed application.  295 letters of objection had been received with 33 letters received in support and the objections were summarised as:-

 

-          The health impact of fast food and car borne service;

-          Children from local schools would be attracted to the restaurant/takeaway at lunchtime and concerns related to obesity and the crossing of busy roads;

-          The change to the Click and Collect service was no different to the drive-thru option that was previously proposed;

-          The impact on visual amenity of  the building, signage and advertising;

-          Environmental claims were meaningless with no improvement for the community and impact of vehicle pollution;

-          Misleading statements about community support;

-          Increase in the amount of litter and potential for vermin;

-          Increase in traffic with road safety implications and delays for public transport and emergency services. The data provided was queried;

-          Air quality impact of increased amounts of traffic;

-          The area was unsuitable for the proposal, with many elderly and young residents being negatively affected;

-          Other fast food establishments were nearby therefore this was not required;

-          Alternative sites were available;

-          Proximity of the ambulance station and the impact on their access;

-          Tree loss with replacements not adequately compensating;

-          Reference to the Scottish Government’s report on healthy diets; and

-          Lack of integration with Ashgrove Connects sustainable transportation project;

 

In terms of the letters in support they were summarised as:-

 

-          McDonald’s would enhance the area compared to the existing site;

-          There would be an investment in the local area through business rates receipt;

-          120 jobs would be provided for the local community, with more in construction and through the supply chain; and

-          It would be a good facility for hospital staff, patients and visitors.

 

In terms of consultee responses, the following was noted:-

 

·       Roads Development Management

-          The site was out with parking control zones and was accessible by extensive walking and cycling networks and crossings and bus stop provision. Provision of the proposed path into the site from North Anderson Drive should be conditioned;

-          Parking provision exceeded standards, although take away restaurants were heavily utilised and additional parking would prevent over-spill. Electric vehicle charging points were required.

-          Internal site layout and servicing arrangements were acceptable, subject to conditioning size of vehicle;

-          Alterations to Ashgrove Road West / Castleton Drive junction would be altered as part of the proposals and it was expected that Ashgrove Road West should be resurfaced by the applicant. These should be conditioned. ‘Wig-Wag’ signals would be provided to assist access from the ambulance station; and

-          Balance of hard to permeable surface remained unacceptable. Drainage was otherwise acceptable.

·       Environmental Health - Odour Impact Assessment and  dust management considered acceptable. In respect of noise, they accepted the proposal only providing time restrictions (closed between 00:00 and 06:00, no deliveries between 23:00 and 07:00) be applied along with the noise mitigation measures identified in the assessment.

·       Waste and Recycling – general comments relating to commercial waste collection;

·       Scottish Ambulance Service - no objection providing the ‘Wig-Wag’ lighting system was installed at no cost to the ambulance service;

·       Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks objected due to concern relating to high power cable running adjacent to the southern site boundary;

·       Rosehill and Stockethill Community Council objected to the application

-          There would be a negative impact on the health of type of fast food offered and the nature of the proposed use in relation to active lifestyles. Reference was made to ‘A Healthy Future – Scotland’s Diet & Healthy Weight Delivery Plan’ 2018.

-          Drive thru lane removed, however, customers would drive up, order on the app and food delivered to car. This was ‘drive-in’.

-          There would be a heavily car dependent use of the site;

-          The area around the site was deprived with socially vulnerable groups;

-          The loss of community asset and lack of consultation. Rosehill House should be reused;

-          Improvement initiatives on Ashgrove Road West, and impact of proposal thereon;

-          Precedent for this type of use near schools and healthcare facilities;

-          Impact on access, parking and road safety- including proximity to schools. Traffic data was queried;

-          Number of fast-food outlets in city and therefore not required;

-          The design and visual amenity of the building, associated signage and play frame;

-          Loss of trees;

-          Impact on residential and visual amenity;

-          Increase in litter and anti-social behaviour – youth disorder at Kittybrewster McDonald’s;

-          Conflict of interest with Aberdeen City Council being the landowner and planning authority;

-          Net Zero claim ignored environmental impact of food production and vehicles visiting the premises;

-          Treatment of employees by applicant;

-          Sequential test approach was queried; and

-          The value of biodiversity measures queried on busy site.

 

Ms Greene then spoke about policy considerations.   In regards to the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2023, the following policies were relevant:-

 

·       B2 Business Zones

·       CF1 Existing Community Sites and Facilities 

·       WB1 Healthy Developments

·       WB2 Air Quality

·       WB3 Noise 

·       NE2 Green and Blue Infrastructure 

·       NE3 Our Natural Heritage 

·       NE4 Our Water Environment 

·       NE5 Trees and Woodland 

·       D1 Quality Placemaking

·       D2 Amenity

·       D4 Landscape

·       D5 Landscape Design

·       R5 Waste Management Requirements for New Development

·       R6 Low and Zero Carbon Buildings, and Water Efficiency

·       VC2 Tourism and Culture

·       VC3 Network of Centres

·       VC9 Out of Centre Proposals

·       I1 Infrastructure Delivery and Planning Obligations

·       T2 Sustainable Transport

·       T3 Parking

 

In relation to the National Planning Framework 4, the following policies were relevant:-

 

1. Tackling the climate and nature crises

2. Climate mitigation and adaptation

3. Biodiversity

4. Natural places

5. Soils

6. Forestry, woodland and trees

9. Brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings

12. Zero waste

13. Sustainable transport

14. Design, quality and place

15. Local living and 20 minute neighbourhoods

18. Infrastructure first

19. Heat and cooling

20. Blue and green infrastructure

21. Play, recreation and sport

22. Flood risk and water management

23. Health and safety

25. Community wealth building

26. Business and industry

27. City, town, local and commercial centres

 

The Committee then had the opportunity to ask Ms Greene questions and the following was noted:-

 

·       In regards to a query about the refuse compacter, Ms Greene advised that she would clarify the situation and include the information in the final report;

·       In relation to the location of electric charging points and cycle storage, if the application was approved these elements would be conditioned.

 

The Committee then heard from Mr Scott Lynch, Engineer, in relation to the roads aspects. 

 

Mr Lynch explained that the area was a well serviced area and was located in the outer city, outwith any controlled parking zone and the site was accessible via extensive existing walking and cycling infrastructure, as well as crossings.

 

The Roads department’s Supplementary Guidance document highlighted a requirement of 1 parking space per 12m2 for restaurants in the outer city.  This equated to a parking provision of 30 parking spaces, with 3 disabled parking spaces.  The applicant was proposing to provide 50 car parking spaces, which included 3 accessible spaces.  Mr Lynch indicated that the proposed level of parking exceeded the standards outlined in the Supplementary Guidance document .

 

Mr Lynch advised that the applicant was proposing 10 covered cycle parking spaces (5 Sheffield stands) for both staff and customers, and motorcycle parking was also proposed, all of which were acceptable.

 

In terms of the local road network, Mr Lynch advised that the applicant estimated, based on surveys of other McDonalds, that the predicted peak traffic was 40 trips in the AM peak, 78 trips in the PM peak, and 116 trips on the Saturday peak.  They then noted that 69% (weekday) and 81% (weekend) of these trips were already on the network, which would reduce the traffic generated to 12 combined Friday AM peak, 24 combined Friday PM trips, and 22 combined Saturday peak trips.  They then concluded by saying “it was considered that this level of additional traffic would have no material impact on the operation of the local road network” and, consequently, no junction analysis had been undertaken. 

 

Mr Lynch also explained that as part of the proposals the applicant was proposing alterations to Ashgrove Road West to facilitate their development, and these alterations came in the form of:

·       Realigning the Ashgrove Road West / Castleton Drive junction;

·       Widening Ashgrove Road West to formalise the on-street parking adjacent to the SSE offices and to provide a 5.5m two-way carriageway past these parking bays to facilitate access to McDonalds;

·       A new access to the site from Ashgrove Road West, with the existing access being closed and the footway reinstated.  The new access would have a pedestrian refuge which would aid pedestrian crossing and restrict the site from being serviced by oversized vehicles.

·       Wig-Wag signals on Ashgrove Road West as well as the required lining and signing to facilitate these.  This would alleviate any concerns over the proposals preventing ambulance access/ egress onto Ashgrove Road West.  The specifics of the lining and signing would be covered during the Road Construction Consent stage.

 

Mr Lynch advised that due to the increase in traffic which would be brought about by the proposed change of use it would be expected that Ashgrove Road West (inset road) be resurfaced by the applicant from the junction with Castleton Drive up to the proposed site access, which would be conditioned.

 

The Committee then heard from the applicant and the presenters consisted of Mat Carpenter, Planware Town Planning consultants, Catherine Champman, ADL Traffic & highways and Abbie McGrath and Andrew Cruther, McDonald’s.

 

Ms McGrath began by explaining that McDonald’s brand was globally recognised and had been trading in the UK since 1974 with more than 1450 McDonald restaurants across the UK and Ireland, employing around 180,000 people.  In 2023, McDonald’s sites across Scotland contributed £457.2 million to the national economy and supported 15,425 jobs across Scotland.  McDonald’s had identified a need for further investment on new sites across Aberdeen.

 

Ms McGrath advised that they wanted Aberdeen to be a city where everyone thrived with jobs and training for young people, and they shared the ambition to make Aberdeen a more prosperous place, noting that if the application was approved the following benefits would be achieved:-

 

·       The creation of 120 new jobs in a range of full and part time positions;

·       It would generate an additional £6million in gross investment;

·       They would offer an increased choice and variety of food/drink outlets in the city;

·       There would be the generation of approximately £74,000 per year in business rates to support key local services;

·       Aiding the local voluntary sector, with franchises supporting a range of charitable and community causes.

 

In regards to the planning history of the proposed application it was noted that an initial application was submitted in 2022 but was withdrawn in September 2022 and a refreshed application was resubmitted in 2023 and was reviewed in line with National Planning Framework 4.

 

Ms McGrath then spoke about environmental issues and noted that they shared the Council's commitment to addressing the Climate Emergency and had pledged to achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2024 across the entire UK and Ireland business, and restaurants would be designed, built and operated to UK Green Building Council Net Zero Framework and Standards.  100% of the power used by the restaurant would be from renewable sources and they planned to source all of their packaging from renewable and recyclable materials by 2025.  Ms McGrath indicated that over 80% of kitchen waste was recycled which equated to 40% of total waste, and they had been a zero landfill business since 2020.

 

The Committee then heard from Catherine Chapman in regards to road and transport issues.  Ms Chapman explained that a Transport Assessment had been prepared for the site and expected traffic levels were 20 vehicles in the AM peak, 39 vehicles in the PM peak and 58 vehicles at Saturday peak time.  This equated to 31% additional weekday trips and 19% additional Saturday trips.  Ms Chapman indicated there was no material impact on Castleton Drive/ Ashgrove Road junction of A92/Ashgrove Road signal junction, and the site was accessible by walking, cycling and by public transport.

 

Mc McGrath then explained that McDonald’s shared the Council’s commitment to a healthier city and community and noted there goal was to help people balance health, taste and value by working to improve choice and show the nutritional information on their products.  She indicated that 54% of their menu was now classified as not high in fat, salt or sugar and 89% of their items in the core menu contained under 500 calories.  McDonald’s were also the first major restaurant to display nutritional information on their menu boards, over 30 years ago.

 

In terms of employment, Ms McGrath advised that the new restaurant would create between 100 and 120 new jobs with a clear development path to management and McDonald’s were rated a Times Top 100 Graduate Employer.  They also invested £43m in training and educating their staff each year which included basic courses in English and Maths through to business degrees.

 

In regards to anti-social behaviour, Ms McGrath advised that they had invested in Staff Sale in the restaurants which provided staff and customers with added security should they experience any issues, which essentially was a direct link to a call room who could liaise directly with the police should it be required.

 

In relation to cleaning up the local area, Ms McGrath advised that working alongside their neighbours and local community was of utmost importance and a big part of that was ensuring the roadsides and local areas were litter free.  All of the restaurants carried out at least three litter patrols every day and recently some restaurants in Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire had partnered with Keep Scotland Beautiful to complete a litter pick of Seaton Park.  

 

Members were then given the opportunity to ask questions of the applicants and the following was noted:-

 

·       There would be 53 car parking spaces in total which would include 3 disabled spaces;

·       6 spaces would have electric vehicle charging points;

·       In terms of parking, it was noted that McDonalds actively managed their car parks and if required they could introduce a 90 minute limit in order to stop people attending other places whilst parking in the car park;

·       In terms of landscaping, each franchise had a gardener and they maintained the greenspace to a high standard;

·       There was not a proposal for a barrier for the car park;

·       It was envisaged that that the opening hours would be from 6am to 12am, with midnight being last orders. 

 

The Committee then heard from Dr Martin Mosley, on behalf of Rosehill and Stockethill Community Council. 

 

Dr Mosley explained that the local community objected to the planning application, noting that it was an area of multiple deprivation and advised that although some changes had been made to the application, much of the original application remained and he had concerns in this regard. 

 

Dr Mosley explained that there were four key themes to their objection.

 

1.    Increased risk to children, pedestrians, cyclists and residents’ property;

2.    The application was inconsistent with the Local Development Plan and improvement initiatives;

3.    It was inappropriate.  A precedent would be set and there would be exposure of deprived residents/children; and

4.    There would be many negative impacts.  The health and wellbeing of residents, amenity and loss of the potential benefit of a community asset.

 

Dr Mosley also advised that there would be a loss of good quality trees and felt that the roads and access to the site would have a negative impact to residents.

 

In summary Dr Mosley outlined that the local community felt that the proposed development was a flawed proposal and he knew people who were keen to take on Rosehill House, without requiring it to be demolished. 

 

The Committee then heard from Jamie Leadbeater, Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks (SSEN), who objected to the proposed application.  Mr Leadbeater explained that they were the only transmission operator in Aberdeen and provided a safe and reliable supply to the local area.  Mr Leadbeater highlighted that their objection was based on the fact that they operated high voltage 132kV underground cables which ran through the southern edge of the site and the cables were integral to Aberdeen electricity transmission.   Mr Leadbeater noted that the cables were of a significant age and were much more fragile than other cables, and the proposed new road would be on top of these cables.  He indicated that any breakage to the cables would cause a significant supply issue, and the cables were very difficult to mend.

 

Members asked a number of questions of Mr Leadbeater and he advised that (1) they were looking to update the cables after 2026, but at the moment there was no guarantee of this happening and (2) there were two cables roughly two metres down from the ground and about one to two metres apart.

 

The Committee then heard from Mr Martin Shaw, who also objected to the proposed planning application.  Mr Shaw advised that he had a strong objection to the proposal and feared if it went ahead it would cause anti social behaviour in the area as well as having concerns with traffic levels.   He noted that at peak hours the road network was very busy and this would cause more issues, and more carbon monoxide in the local area.  Mr Shaw also explained that there were significant health challenges in the local area and a new McDonald’s would encourage unhealthy food choices. 

 

Mr Shaw indicated that there were multiple McDonald’s in the close vicinity and there was no need for another one, noting that a fast food restaurant did not align with the aesthetics in the area.  He also felt it would attract littering especially in the later hours, and felt that the safety of children in the local area should be paramount, and the increase in traffic would affect them.  In conclusion he asked that the proposed application be refused.

 

The Committee then heard from Mr Brian Rattray who also objected to the proposed application.  Mr Rattray explained that the original planning application was for a 24 hour drive through however this was removed and replaced with a pick up facility, but he felt that drive through and pick up appeared to be the same thing but with a different name, and felt that McDonald’s were trying to manipulate residents and were treating them with contempt.  He noted that there were two lots of eighteen storey buildings close by with elderly and disabled residents that did not need the noise and pollution that this application would create.

 

Mr Rattray highlighted that consideration must be given to all residents in the local area and noted that were over 300 objections by residents with only 32 in support.   Mr Rattray also explained that the ambulance station was close by that required 24 hour access and felt that this application would affect the service and also indicated that the increased traffic to the local area would cause congestion and affect the air quality in the area which was very worrying.

 

Mr Rattray then highlighted that there was the possibility of pupils from Northfield Academy crossing the very busy dual carriageway to access the proposed facility, which would cause a danger to themselves and other vehicle users.  He also indicated that the littering would become a haven for seagulls, rats and other vermin. 

 

Mr Rattray concluded that the senior and disabled council tenants in the area should have their voices listened to and this application should be refused.

 

The Committee then heard from Dr Martin Mosley, who spoke as an individual and objected to the application.  Dr Mosley explained that he had two main concerns that he would like to be addressed.

 

Firstly, did the current Aberdeen City Council (ACC) planning process cover the consideration of the broad scope of “Health and Wellbeing”, which included eat well, have a healthy weight, within the Health Impact Assessment and secondly what was the current position of ACC in regards to the “whole systems approach to promoting a healthy weight and active living”, as proposed by NHS Grampian and its interaction with the planning process.

 

Dr Mosley spoke about ultra processed food and their effects on individuals and also the cost of obesity, noting that the impacts of poor diet were profound, and that they affected not only people’s health but also their ability to lead happy and fulfilling lives.  Obesity had also led to increased unsustainable demands on NHS Grampian and other public services.    

 

In response Ms Greene explained that in regards to the Health Impact Assessment, this would be covered in more detail when the report was brought forward to Planning Development Management Committee and the policy would be a material consideration.

 

The Committee then heard from Ms Fiona Meade who also objected to the proposed planning application.  Ms Meade explained that she lived on Ahsgrove Road West about 300 metres from the site and indicated that she had major concerns about the increase in traffic this development would create.

 

Ms Meade advised that McDonald’s referred to local passing traffic as being their main target market, bearing in mind that the entrance to the restaurant would be off Ashgrove Road West.  Ashgrove Road West had been downgraded to a C road, with a recommended 20MPH speed limit and no longer functioned as a priority route.  Ms Meade believed it was naïve to think McDonald’s were not looking at North Anderson Drive as their primary source of customers, feeding large volumes of extra traffic onto Ashgrove Road West.  After 8pm, there was very little traffic on Ashgrove Road West at present and this application would encourage increased traffic up until midnight.

 

In terms of road safety, Ms Meade explained that there had been 17 reported accidents between 2012 and 2022. However, these were only accidents that had been reported to Police Scotland, and she noted that social media showed there had been at least an additional two accidents.

 

Ms Meade then spoke about sustainable transport and explained that the buses on Ashgrove Road West and North Anderson Drive were regional buses serving Inverurie, Elgin and Oldmeldrum, not functional local routes.  Pedestrians coming from Westburn Road bus routes and beyond would have to cross at the Westburn Road/ North Anderson Drive junction which had no pedestrian crossing.  Ms Meade felt that the restaurant would attract people in cars, and the use of more cars would increase local emissions.

 

In terms of anti social behaviour, Ms Meade advised that the area was a quiet area with a high proportion of vulnerable elderly people and she had concerns that it would be a focus for anti social behaviour particularly in the evening.  Residents would find the area less safe and uncomfortable to walk in the dark, noting that local policing was already stretched in the local area.

 

Ms Meade also advised that Dunfermline, Fort William, Falkrik and Glasgow restaurants had to introduce youth bans, along with hiring bouncers and involving the police. The Dunfermline restaurant was granted permission after much local objection and was run by the same franchise holder who proposed to run the Ashgorve Road West branch, Mr Buchanan-Smith.

 

Ms Meade also explained that the proposed restaurant would create a lot of litter and litter picks would not be undertaken enough to deal with the situation.

 

In terms of the community benefit, Ms Meade advised that the McDonald’s consultation website stated they were partners with Friends of  Westfield Park and Bridge of Don’s men’s shed, however she stated that this was not true and they had asked McDonald’s to remove these claims, but they had not.

 

In summary, Ms Meade highlighted that this site was one of the few large publicly owned buildings in the local area and if it were to sold to a multinational company then a valuable asset would be lost forever, and she stated that increased traffic would affect the local roads and pedestrian safety, reducing air quality for local residents. 

 

The Committee then heard from Mr Mikael Reid who also objected to the proposed application.  Mr Reid explained that the area was zoned as specialist employment area and only a class 4 application should be considered in this location, however the proposed application was a class 3.

 

Mr Reid indicated that planning policy T2 stated that new developments must demonstrate trying to reduce traffic, but he felt that this proposal would increase traffic dramatically. 

 

Mr Reid also advised that there were seven other McDonald’s restaurants, five of which had drive thru facilities in Aberdeen, so there was not a deficiency in provision for fast food facilities and therefore this one was not required.

 

Mr Reid also advised that the number of staff related car journeys detailed in the travel plan amounted to 4 x car journeys per shift, leading to a total of 24 car journeys per day.  He felt this was unacceptable in terms of the remit of the developer to minimise traffic generated and there was a failure to mention anywhere in the Travel Plan the total car journeys generated in a residential area.  Mr Reid also disagreed with the statement from Roads Development Management who stated that the Travel Plan was fulfilling the Local Plan Policy T2 requirement on minimising traffic generated by the development and that the plan was acceptable. 

 

Mr Reid also felt that there was a conflict of interest with Aberdeen City Council being the landowner of Rosehill House, and determining this proposed planning application.

 

The  Convener thanked all those who attended the hybrid hearing, specifically those who had presented their case, submitted representations and provided information. He advised that the Chief Officer – Strategic Place Planning would prepare a report for submission to a meeting of the Planning Development Management Committee (PDMC) for subsequent consideration and determination.

-       Councillor Ciaran McRae - Convener