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 240268.

The Local Review Body (LRB) of Aberdeen City Council met on this day to consider the non-determination of the application for the change of use from commercial office space into two residential dwellings including formation of french doors from existing window opening, window enlargement to form new openings with Juliet balconies, replacement door and installation of rooflights (rear); reinstatement of railings and gate (front); formation of car parking (rear) and landscaping works with associated boundary treatment at 11 Victoria Street, Aberdeen, AB10 1XB.

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 draft delegated report by the Appointed Officer, Aberdeen City Council; (2) an application dated 5 March 2024; (3) links to the plans showing the proposal and planning policies referred to in the draft delegated report; (4) the Notice of Review submitted by the applicant/agent; and (5) consultee correspondence from the Council’s Environmental Health and Waste and Planning and Roads Development Management Teams.

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:-

• Unacceptable level of residential amenity for 1 bedroom flat to rear;
• Unacceptable level of private amenity space for 3 bedroom flat;
• Flat to rear would have single aspect, with high level of glazing – overlooking;
• Access to rear flat unlit, unadopted service lane, limited surveillance and no active street frontage – safety, women’s safety;
• Property with no public face to the street - would not fit with established pattern of street facing buildings;
• Neither dwelling had acceptable amenity – single aspect;
• Contrary to D1: Design and D2: Amenity of LDP 2023 and APG on Amenity and Space standards NPF4 – Policy 14 (Design, Quality and Place) and 16 (Quality Homes); and
• No adverse impact on Conservation Area, climate and nature crises.

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

• The principle of residential use was acceptable for the area and for the property – Policy B3 of the ALDP;
• It was acknowledged that the proposal would have no adverse impact on the character or appearance of the Albyn Place/Rubislaw Conservation Area;
• Proposal would suitably address the aims of Policies 1, 2, 3 and 9 of NPF4;
• It suitably accorded with the aims of Historic Environment Policy for Scotland and Policy D4 of the ALDP;
• NPF4 Policy R6, Policies 12 and 13 are also all satisfied;
• Planning history recounted, with previous LRB approval;
• Main change was removing internal access from front house to rear – 70m walk, not unusual in cities. And swap of bedroom/living space to rear;
• 3 bed flat had garden to front / west and generous windows, planting could  be conditioned or remove parking space;
• 1 bed flat had garden and pleasant surroundings, light enhanced by change;
• Access from well used lane and safe area;
• Openings between new and old would be infilled – acoustic separation and disturbance;
• Property was close to Rusbislaw Terrace Gardens, cafes and facilities;
• Single aspect was a common feature, large windows and larger ground floor area;
• Lane was shorter than many driveways (15m);
• Applicant would accept lighting fixed to boundary wall; and
• Rear flat would have public frontage to lane, which is used to access other properties, fence could be heightened by conditioned.

In terms of Consultations, Ms Greene advised that the Roads Development Management Team had no objections. There were no comments from Environmental Health; and the Waste Team highlighted that the residents would use a communal street bin, however on further investigation, the Waste Team had now considered that the residents from the rear flat would need to walk more than the guidance 30 metres to the bins, and would have to walk 70 meters. For that reason the Waste Team stated that they would object to the application. There were no comments received by the Community Council and there were no representations submitted.

Ms Greene advised that the applicant had expressed the view that the review may benefit from a site visit.

The Chairperson and Councillors Copland, Clark and Lawrence 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 and the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2023.

Ms Greene responded to various questions from members relating to the application including the rear of the property and wall to be built and also waste management bin collections.

Members each advised in turn and unanimously agreed toreverse the appointed officer’s earlier decision. Planning permission was therefore granted conditionally.

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 –

That the proposal would result in the reuse of the building and creation of two residential properties within an area where changes to residential use are supported under Policy VC6 (West End Area) in the Local Development Plan 2023 (LDP) and reuse supported under Policy 9 of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4). An adequate level of residential amenity would be achieved within the properties with all habitable rooms having adequate lighting and separate entrances. With the attachment of conditions to ensure external lighting and refuse storage are provided, the application is considered acceptable.

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.

(02) EXTERNAL LIGHTING

That the flat to the rear shall not be occupied unless there has been external lighting installed within the rear area adjacent the lane in accordance with details that have been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. The lighting shall thereafter remain in place and operational.

Reason - in the interests of safety and security.

(03) REFUSE STORAGE

That the flat to the rear shall not be occupied unless there has been installed a refuse bin storage enclosure within the rear curtilage, in accordance with details that have been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority.