Agenda item

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 231558.

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 for the refusal of the application for the erection of a 2.5 storey extension to side/rear and formation of dormers to front and rear at 21 Balgownie Crescent, Aberdeen, AB23 8EJ.

Councillor McRae as Chair for 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 8 December 2023; (3) the Decision Notice dated 14 February 2024; (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 correspondence from the Council’s Roads Development Management Team.

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 report of handling was as follows:-

·       Overdevelopment, with footprint was proposed 3 times original;

·       Scale and design of rear extension not subordinate;

·       Projection did not accord with Householder Guidance (4m rule) resulting in overshadowing of neighbouring site;

·       2.5 storey extension to 1.5 storey dwelling, had appearance of 3 storey;

·       Second floor was overbearing, with extension of roof adding to this; and

·       Contrary to policy D1 - Quality Placemaking,  14 – Design, 16 - Quality Homes, H1 – Residential Areas and Aberdeen Planning Guidance (APG) – Householder Guide

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

·       Area has mix of house types, many extended – much variety (not in Conservation Area);

·       Proposal reflected scale and design of house and made best use of sites garden;

·       As part of streetscape proposal would fit as part of the mix and not detract from character of area;

·       Proposal to front was consistent with design of original house;

·       Rear would be unseen from public view, made use of large plot with high quality design. Due to levels, there was existing basement – 2.5 storeys to rear;

·       No. 23 had side and rear extension of 5.96m;  Did not detract from amenity of neighbours by overshadowing, privacy or overlooking;

·       Complied with National Planning Framework 4 and Local Development Plan, some conflict with APG, but that was guidance – the plot could accommodate alterations;

·       Examples within area; and

·       Designed to modern insulation requirements – climate change.

In terms of Consultations, Ms Greene advised that the Roads Development Management Team had referred to the garage being slightly too small, however there would be sufficient parking to the front. There were no comments received by Bridge of Don Community Council and there were no representations submitted.

Ms Greene advised that the applicant had expressed the view that the review may proceed on the basis of the information submitted, however the supporting statement recommended that a site visit be undertaken to view extended properties in the area.

The Chairperson and Councillors Boulton, Farquhar, Greig and Macdonald all indicated in turn that they each had enough information before them and therefore agreed that the review under consideration should be determined without any further procedure.

In terms of relevant policy considerations, Ms Greene referred to the National Planning Framework 4, the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2023 and the Householder Design Guide – general principles.

Ms Greene responded to various questions from members relating to the application including the issue relating to overshadowing, the size of the neighbouring extension, the materials being used and the length and size of the rear garden.

Members each advised in turn and by a majority of 4 to 1, agreed toreverse the appointed officer’s earlier decision. Planning permission was therefore granted conditionally.

The Chairperson and Councillors Boulton, Farquhar and Macdonald agreed to reverse the decision of the appointed officer, however Councillor Greig advised that he supported the appointed officer’s decision to refuse planning permission.

In coming to their decision, the Local Review Body had regard to the provisions of the development plan as required by Sections 25 and 37 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) and other material considerations in so far as these were pertinent to the determination of the application. More specifically, the reasons on which the Local Review Body based this decision are as follows –

The proposed extension is acceptable as providing additional space for modern living requirements despite not complying with the guidelines within the Householder Guide Aberdeen Planning Guidance (APG) in respect of its extent of projection from the rear of the house. A number of factors are taken into account: the particular topography of the site on a south facing slope, meaning that the rear garden is at a lower level than the front; materials are acceptable as complementing those in the surrounding area. The extent of overshadowing of neighbouring plots would not be significant, and it is noted that the neighbours also have rear extensions. There are a variety of extensions within the surrounding area and this would not be out of keeping with the character of

The proposal has tensions with Policy H1 – Residential Areas in the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2023 (LDP), due to the non-compliance with part of the Householder Guide APG, however, it is considered to otherwise accord with Policy 14 – Design, Policy 16 – Quality Homes in National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and Policy D1 – Quality Placemaking and D2 – Amenity in the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2023.

CONDITIONS

This permission is granted subject to the following conditions.

(01)    DURATION OF PERMISSION

The development to which this notice relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date of this notice. If development has not begun at the expiration of the 3-year period, the planning permission lapses.

Reason - in accordance with section 58 (duration of planning permission) of the 1997 act.