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 241224.

The LRB then considered the third 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 change of use of amenity land to domestic garden ground and the erection of a fence, gate and steps (retrospective), at 43 Middleton Circle Aberdeen, planning reference 241224.

The Chairperson stated that although the Planning Adviser for the LRB 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 and decision notice by the Appointed Officer, Aberdeen City Council; (2) an application dated 17 October 2024 (3) links to the plans showing the proposal and planning policies referred to in the delegated report; (4) and the Notice of Review submitted by the agent. 

Ms Greene then described the site and outlined the appellant’s proposal.   The site comprised a c.63sqm area of open space to the southwest of 43 Middleton Circle. The site had been the subject of an unauthorised change of use to garden ground to be incorporated into the rear garden ground of 43 Middleton Circle. An unauthorised fence on a raised platform had been erected enclosing the area and an outbuilding had also been installed within the enclosed area. Prior to the unauthorised change of use, the area formed part of a large band of woodland open space known as ‘West Belt’ which surrounded the site to the southeast, southwest and northwest. The open space was zoned as Policy NE2 (Green Space Network) in the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2023 and was known as part of Grandhome Moss, providing links between the green spaces within Bridge of Don and Balgownie to the Grandhome Moss Local Nature Conservation Site to the north. It also formed part of an important woodland buffer between the Grandhome development to the southwest (allocated as OP9 in the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2023) and the established Middleton residential area to its north and east.

The open space had a well-used public footpath running through the site, which provided extensive links to the residential areas of Bridge of Don to the north, as well as to Core Path 26, which was c.50m to the southeast on Whitestripes Avenue. The open space corresponded with the mapped layer of Ancient Woodland Inventory and was identified on historic maps dating from 1899 as being woodland. It was however noted that there were no trees within the application site boundary.

Ms Greene noted that planning permission was sought retrospectively for the change of use of the application site from amenity land to domestic garden ground and for the erection of a raised fence, gate and steps enclosing the space. The ground level of the area gradually sloped away from the original garden boundary and was thus a maximum of 0.5m below that garden. The fence was 1.8m in height and was attached to a 0.5m high raised timber platform which levelled the resultant garden ground and resulted in the development being a total of 2.3m in height. The northwest and southeast sections of the fencing were c.5.2m in length and the southwest section of fence was c.12.3m in length. The outbuilding in the area was not included in the description, nor was it shown on all plans submitted with the application. It was therefore not included in this application.

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

The change of use of this land to domestic garden ground and the erection of the fence, gate and steps results in the enclosure and loss of a valued area of open space, part of the Green Space Network and an area of ancient woodland. The site forms part of an important natural woodland buffer between the Middleton area of Bridge of Don and the Grandhome development and is shown as such on the agreed Grandhome Development Framework.

The proposal thus conflicted with Policies 6 (Forestry, Woodland and Trees) and 20 (Blue and Green Infrastructure) of NPF4 and NE2 (Green and Blue Infrastructure) of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and Policy NE2 (Green and Blue Infrastructure) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2023.

Whilst it was unclear if the development had resulted in the loss of any specific trees given the retrospective nature of the application, the proposal results in the loss of an area of ancient woodland. The proposal therefore conflicts with Policy 6 (Forestry, Woodland and Trees) of NPF4 and Policy NE5 (Trees and Woodland) of the ALDP. The resultant irregular boundary layout adversely affects the character and appearance of the area, in conflict with Policies 14 (Design, Quality and Place) and 16 (Quality Homes) of NPF4, and Policy D1 (Quality Placemaking) of the ALDP and the Householder Development Guide Aberdeen Planning Guidance.

If the proposal were to be granted planning permission, it would result in the permanent loss of an area of ancient woodland, as well as result in the area being afforded domestic Permitted Development Rights whereby development could occur without the need for express planning permission. This would be to the detriment of, rather than an enhancement to, biodiversity. Whilst the development is of a small scale, the removal of an area of Green Space Network would have an adverse impact on biodiversity, no mitigation is proposed and there are furthermore no material considerations in assessing this development proposal whereby it could be considered that the development is placing significant weight in positively addressing the global climate and nature crises. As such, proportionate to the scale of the development, the proposal conflicts with the aims of policies 1 (Tackling the Climate and Nature Crises), 2 (Climate Mitigation, and Adaptation), 3 (Biodiversity) and 4 (Natural Places) of NPF4.

Noting the abundance of similar residential properties which bound this band of open space in the wider area and, notwithstanding every application is assessed on its merits, the proposal could give rise to the setting of a precedent that would make it difficult to resist similar proposals in the future which cumulatively could result in the gradual erosion of and fragmentation of open space, the defined Green Space Network and ancient woodland. Such an approach would exacerbate the adverse impacts cumulatively be significantly detrimental to the character and amenity the area, as well as biodiversity.

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

·       There statement included photos of other properties allegedly showing use of amenity space;

·       The amenity ground within the extended garden still served as an environmental buffer, which had been enhanced;

·       There had been an enhancement through the removal of vegetation, bat boxes and birdhouses with no negative impact;

·       They had communicated with the landowner and others with no objections;

·       The proposals complied with the policies cited with no harm to the amenity, biodiversity or landscape and with conditions, it would be a reasonable outcome;

·       The land was unmanaged with no trees and also was neglected with no clear ownership or public use;

·       Biodiversity measures and future maintenance could be conditioned;

·       The development was climate neutral and was small scale; and

·       There was no precedent as decisions are made on merits of each case.

In terms of consultations, one letter of objection was received.   

Ms Greene advised that the applicant had expressed the view that a site visit should take place before determination. 

The Chairperson and Councillors Blake, Copland, Macdonald and van Sweeden 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 then answered various questions from Members. 

Members each advised in turn and unanimously agreed to uphold the officers earlier decision and to refuse the application.     

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 were as follows:-

The change of use of this land to domestic garden ground and the erection of the fence, gate and steps resulted in the enclosure and loss of a valued area of open space, part of the Green Space Network and an area of ancient woodland. The site formed part of an important natural woodland buffer between the Middleton area of Bridge of Don and the Grandhome development and was shown as such on the agreed Grandhome Development Framework. The proposal thus conflicts with Policies 6 (Forestry, Woodland and Trees) and 20 (Blue and Green Infrastructure) of NPF4 and NE2 (Green and Blue Infrastructure) of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and Policy NE2 (Green and Blue Infrastructure) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2023.

Whilst it was unclear if the development had resulted in the loss of any specific trees given the retrospective nature of the application, the proposal resulted in the loss of an area of ancient woodland. The proposal therefore conflicted with Policy 6 (Forestry, Woodland and Trees) of NPF4 and Policy NE5 (Trees and Woodland) of the ALDP.

The resultant irregular boundary layout adversely affects the character and appearance of the area, in conflict with Policies 14 (Design, Quality and Place) and 16 (Quality Homes) of NPF4, and Policy D1 (Quality Placemaking) of the ALDP and the Householder Development Guide Aberdeen Planning Guidance.

If the proposal were to be granted planning permission, it would result in the permanent loss of an area of ancient woodland, as well as result in the area being afforded domestic Permitted Development Rights whereby development could occur without the need for express planning

permission. This would be to the detriment of, rather than an enhancement to, biodiversity. Whilst the development was of a small scale, the removal of an area of Green Space Network would have an adverse impact on biodiversity, no mitigation was proposed and there were furthermore no material considerations in assessing this development proposal whereby it could be considered that the development was placing significant weight in positively addressing the global climate and nature crises. As such, proportionate to the scale of the development, the proposal conflicted with the aims of policies 1 (Tackling the Climate and Nature Crises), 2 (Climate Mitigation, and Adaptation), 3 (Biodiversity) and 4 (Natural Places) of NPF4.

Noting the abundance of similar residential properties which bound this band of open space in the wider area and, notwithstanding every application was assessed on its merits, the proposal could give rise to the setting of a precedent that would make it difficult to resist similar proposals in the future which cumulatively could result in the gradual erosion of and fragmentation of open space, the defined Green Space Network and ancient woodland. Such an approach would exacerbate the adverse impacts cumulatively be significantly detrimental to the character and amenity the area, as well as biodiversity.

-       COUNCILLOR CIARAN MCRAE, Chairperson