Agenda item

The documents associated with this application can be viewed at –

http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=150141

The Local Review Body of Aberdeen City Council met this day to review the decision taken by an appointed officer under the Council’s Scheme of Delegation to refuse two requests for planning permission.

Councillor Milne, as Chairperson, gave a brief outline of the business to be undertaken.  He indicated that the Local Review Body would be addressed by the Assistant Clerk, Mr Mark Masson, as regards the procedure to be followed and also, thereafter, by Mr Gavin Evans, who would be acting as the Planning Adviser to the Body in the case under consideration this day.

The Chairperson stated that although the Planning Adviser was employed by the planning authority he 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 as regards the procedure to be followed, at which time reference was made to the procedure note circulated with the papers calling the meeting and to certain more general aspects relating to the procedure.

Mr Evans explained that the application which was the subject of the review was to erect an extension to the front (southern elevation) of the existing garage at 21A Farburn Terrace, Dyce, to create additional workshop space for vehicle servicing, etc.  The extension would be 14.6m wide, 4.9m high and 8.5m deep, providing a further 136m² of floor space.  To the west, it would extend 3.4m past the current building line and a slightly smaller projection of 1.2m from the east.  The principal elevation would feature two electronically operated garage doors, which open onto the existing yard, of 4m and 3m wide respectively, and a staff access door.  The extension would see composite cladding on a steel frame, roofed with insulated panels.

Mr Evans advised that he had checked the submitted Notice of Review and had found it to be valid and submitted within the relevant timeframes.

In relation to documents which the members of the Local Review Body should consider, Mr Evans outlined that all of the following documents were accessible via web links and available as set out in the papers:-

Development Plan – Aberdeen Local Development Plan - H2 – Mixed Use Areas - Development or change of use within Mixed Use Areas must take into account the existing uses and character of the surrounding area, and avoid undue conflict with the adjacent land uses and amenity.  Where new industrial, business or commercial uses are permitted, development should not adversely affect the amenity of people living and working in the area; D1 – Architecture and Placemaking - Policy D1 states that development must be designed with due consideration for its context and make a positive contribution to its setting.  Key factors in assessing proposals are siting, scale, massing, colour, materials, orientation, and details; H8 – Housing and Aberdeen Airport - Applications for residential development under or in the vicinity of aircraft flight paths where the noise levels are in excess of 57dbB LAeq (using the summer 16-hour dB LAeq measurement) will be refused, due to the inability to create an appropriate level of residential amenity, and to safeguard the future operation of Aberdeen Airport.

Sections 25 and 37(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) required that where, in making any determination under the planning acts, regard was to be had to the provisions of the development plan and that determination should be made in accordance with the plan, so far as material to the application, unless material considerations indicated otherwise.

In relation to the proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan, the following policies substantively reiterate policies in the adopted plan:- H2 – Mixed Use Areas (see Policy H2 – Mixed Use Areas in adopted LDP), D1 – Quality Placemaking by Design (see Policy D1 – Architecture and Placemaking in adopted LDP), B4 – Aberdeen Airport (see Policy H8 – Housing and Aberdeen Airport in adopted LDP)

Mr Evans added that the Supplementary Guidance on Harmony of Uses was also a relevant consideration.

In relation to consultations, Mr Evans explained that the only comment received from statutory consultees was from Environmental Health, who advised that the area does not currently enjoy a high level of amenity, and there is already disturbance from noise sources.  They advised that the likelihood of nuisance caused by the proposals would not be significantly increased, although the primary objective must be the protection of the public and therefore it was prudent to take a precautionary approach.  The recommendation to refuse the application was supported by Environmental Health.

Three letters of objection had been received all relating to the impact of the proposals on the neighbouring house.

Mr Evans advised that the stated reason for refusal was as follows:-

These proposals are unacceptable when considered against Policy H2 of the Local Development Plan, which states that new development in Mixed Use Areas must not adversely affect the amenity of people living and working in the area.  It is considered that the proximity and position of the proposed extension would have a significant negative impact on the residential amenity of the adjacent house at 21 Farburn Terrace, through loss of privacy, increased nuisance (noise, smell, fumes) and heightened sense of enclosure.  It is acknowledged that some of these impacts already exist due to the current operation of the garage.  However, they would be significantly increased as a result of the extension, to an unacceptable degree.  For the same reason, the proposals are also unacceptable according to the relevant Policy H2 – Mixed Use Areas in the Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan.

Members then asked a number of questions of Mr Evans.

At this point, the Local Review Body considered whether it had sufficient information before it to determine the review.  Members thereupon agreed that the review under consideration be determined without further procedure.

Following discussion of the application, Members unanimously agreed that the proposal was contrary to Policy H2 of the Local Development Plan.  The Local Review Body therefore unanimously agreed to uphold the decision of the appointed officer and 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(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) which required that where, in making any determination under the planning acts, regard was to be had to the provisions of the development plan and that determination should be made in accordance with the plan, so far as material to the application, unless material considerations indicated otherwise.

More specifically, the reasons on which the Local Review Body based this decision were as follows:-

These proposals are unacceptable when considered against Policy H2 of the Local Development Plan, which states that new development in Mixed Use Areas must not adversely affect the amenity of people living and working in the area.  It is considered that the proximity and position of the proposed extension would have a significant negative impact on the residential amenity of the adjacent house at 21 Farburn Terrace, through loss of privacy, increased nuisance (noise, smell, fumes) and heightened sense of enclosure.  It is acknowledged that some of these impacts already exist due to the current operation of the garage.  However, they would be significantly increased as a result of the extension, to an unacceptable degree.  For the same reason, the proposals are also unacceptable according to the relevant Policy H2 – Mixed Use Areas in the Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan.