Agenda item

Members, please access all relevant plans at the following link:-

http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=151391

The Local Review Body of Aberdeen City Council met on this day to review the decision taken by an appointed officer under the Council’s Scheme of Delegation to refuse the request for retrospective planning permission for the proposed erection of a tree house to the rear of the existing dwelling.

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, Mrs Lynsey McBain,in regard to the procedure to be followed and also, thereafter, by Mr Andrew Miller, 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 Mrs McBain, the Assistant Clerk 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.

In relation to the application, the Local Review Body had before it (1) a delegated report by Ross McMahon, Planning Officer, dated 3 December 2015; (2) the decision notice dated 4 December 2015; (3) links to online plans showing the proposal; (4) links to online planning policies referred to in the delegated report; (5) the Notice of Review submitted by the applicant along with an accompanying statement; and (6) representationsreceived in respect of the proposal.

The LRB was then addressed by Mr Miller who explained that the application was for retrospective consent for the erection of an elevated wooden structure, referred to as a tree house, and an associated area of decking to the south-east of the site.  The overall height of the erected structure measured approximately 4.8m from ground level and approximately 2.5m to the timber deck, forming a large timber lined screen which sat on the existing granite boundary wall and measured 4.5m in overall height, with an overall width of 6.7m along the east boundary facing onto the side lane.  Mr Miller advised that the structure was constructed primarily in timber, with stained timber linings/cladding used to form screening to the side lane.

It was noted that two letters of representation were received in connection with the application, and the points raised related to the following:-

(1)  That the east wall should be stained/treated in its entirety;

(2)  That the proposal was out of character with the area and adversely affected the privacy of adjacent properties; and

(3)  That the application would set a precedent for similar types of development.

Mr Miller advised that the stated reason for refusal of planning permission was as follows:-

The proposal would have a negative impact on the residential amenity of the locality and the Albyn Place/Rubislaw Conservation Area.  The proposal failed to comply with the relevant policies of Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2012, namely Policies D1 (Architecture and Placemaking), D5 (Built Heritage), the Council’s Supplementary Guidance: Householder Development Guide and therefore H1 (Residential Areas) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2012 by virtue of its overall size, scale and prominence to the street and its impact on the setting of the Category ‘B’ listed building, as it did not preserve the character and amenity of the Albyn Place/Rubislaw Conservation Area in line with the principles of Historic Scotland's SHEP and the associated Managing Change in the Historic Environment - Setting.  On the basis of the above, and following on from the evaluation under policy and guidance, it had been considered that there were no material planning considerations – including the Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan – that would warrant approval of the application.

It was noted that the submitted Notice of Review was found to be valid and submitted within the relevant timeframes. 

Members were then given the opportunity to ask the Planning Adviser any questions on the application.   Members asked various questions in regards to privacy aspects to the neighbouring properties, the overall height of the tree house and potential staining of the wood structure.

At this juncture, the Chairperson asked if members were happy to proceed with determining the application.  Members felt that they had sufficient information in order to reach a decision and did not require a site visit. 

Members unanimously agreed that notwithstanding its retrospective nature, the proposal was considered to be of a suitable scale and sited at a level appropriate to the character of the curtilage of the B-listed house in which it was situated and the surrounding Albyn Place/Rubislaw Conservation Area.  Accordingly they considered that the proposals complied with the requirements of policies D1 (Architecture and Placemaking), D5 (Built Heritage), the Council’s Supplementary Guidance: Householde Development Guide and therefore H1 (Residential Areas) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan.  The proposals were also considered to comply with Historic Environment Scotland’s SHEP and associated Managing Change in the Historic Environment  - Setting.   Members also agreed unanimously to add the following condition to approval of the application:-

(1)  That within two months of the date of the decision, a scheme for staining/painting of the external woodwork of the structure hereby permitted should be submitted to the Planning Authority for agreement in writing and thereafter should be completed in accordance with this scheme - to ensure the development was complementary to the character of the surrounding Conservation Area.

Following discussion of the application, all three Members agreed that the proposal was not contrary to Policies D1, D5, the Council’s Supplementary Guidance, Householder Development Guide and H1 of the Local Development Plan.  The Local Review Body therefore agreed unanimously to dismissthe decision of the appointed officer and grant 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.