Agenda item

The Local Review Body 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 request for planning permission for the proposed change of use from agricultural land to domestic and erection of 1.5 storey dwelling with double garage at a site adjacent to The Haughs, Clinterty, Planning Reference 161572.

The Chairperson advised that the LRB would now be addressed by Mr Gavin Clark and 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.

In relation to the application, the Local Review Body had before it (1) a delegated report by Ms Dineke Brasier, Planner; (2) the decision notice dated 20 December 2016; (3) plans showing the proposal; (4) links to the planning policies referred to in the delegated report; and (5) the Notice of Review submitted by the applicant’s agent along with an accompanying statement.

Mr. Clark advised that the submitted Notice of Review was found to be valid and submitted within the relevant timeframes.He also indicated that the appellant had indicated that the review could proceed to conclusion based on a review of the relevant information without any further procedures.

Mr Clark advised that the appeal relates to the refusal of planning permission for the change of use from agricultural land to domestic and erection of 1.5 storey dwelling with double garage. The site is located within an agricultural field some 500m to the North West of the Tyrebagger to Westhill Road and can be accessed via both the B979 and A96. To the south is a group of three dwellings and a distance to the west are the associated agricultural buildings. 100m to the north is the campus of NE Scotland College and to the east is the exiting farm complex at Meikle Clinterty

Mr Clark referred to the Notice of Review and applicant’s agent accompanying statement which indicated that the dwelling was essential for agricultural purposes for the following reasons:

Principle

• using cropping and livestock data, a labour requirement of 2.31 had been calculated; with only one dwelling on site there is scope for a second dwelling on site;
• a large proportion of the man hours were required for growing crops. According to the report of handling – however 3150 man hours were required for livestock, against 1231.13 for crop production; and
• almost 200 cattle would be housed at Clinterty, which accounts for 1800 man hours and 1 labour unit therefore it would appear sensible to have a dwelling here, where the majority of cattle were located – the cattle would be housed inside for more than 6 months of the year, and would also still require daily checks when outside.

Location

• the location would allow for the potential future development of the farm steading – primarily farm buildings due to the extended business. Due to the existing access, the only available site would be to the east and therefore this is why this area needs to remain clear;
• another site closer to the farm was deemed inappropriate due to the siting of an old dam; and would also not relate to surrounding buildings.  The site proposed related to the cluster of dwellings to the south. Due to the linear nature of the current buildings, the natural development would be to continue this to the north. The footprint of the dwelling would also match those in the area;
• the report of handling also mentioned commuting from Blackburn. The agent had highlighted reasons why this would not be the case; the site is within walking distance of the farm steading; Blackburn is 2 miles away and this site would therefore be more sustainable. The farm buildings no longer have a “bothy” on site – therefore any paperwork needs to be done in the existing house – this would not be feasible from Blackburn; and
• a house off-side could have an adverse impact on cattle. By not having the house nearby to cattle, this would have impacts on theirs and humans welfare.

For the above reasons, they believe a farm workers house at the Haughs, Clinterty was essential for the safe and efficient operation of the farming enterprise and in particular with reference to the cattle which are housed at Clinterty for much of the year. For the business having a house and worker near to the cattle was very much a necessity as opposed to a luxury.

Mr Clark outlined the principle considerations which were as follows:-

• whether the proposal would be acceptable against green belt policy;
• whether the location of the dwelling house was acceptable, and all other alternative sites had been assessed;
• whether the layout, siting and design of the dwelling house was acceptable; and
• would the proposal set an undesirable precedent for development of a similar nature.

The members of the Local Review Body agreed that there was no requirement for a site visit, a hearing session, or further written representations, as they felt they had enough information before them. The Local Review Body thereupon agreed that the review under consideration should be determined without further procedure. 

Members unanimously upheld the decision of the appointed officer 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(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 in which the Local Review Body based this decision were as follows:-

1.         It was not been proven that the proposed dwelling would be essential for the running of the farm complex at the Haughs of Clinterty, or that the existing farmhouse at Bishopston is insufficient for the agricultural needs of the farm. In that its extent and positioning is respectively excessive and significantly detached from the associated agricultural buildings. The proposal would therefore not comply with the criteria as set out in policy NE2 (Green Belt) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan and policy NE2 (Green Belt) of the Proposed Local Development Plan as it would undermine the principles of controlling development and preventing the construction of additional unjustified housing in the Green Belt, leading to the erosion of the character and landscape qualities of the surrounding areas.

2.         Due to its positioning, scale, design and massing the dwelling and garage are considered to have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of this open field and wider area of the Green Belt, as it would be considered to significantly increase the built-up appearance of this part of the green belt to the detriment of its open character and the landscape setting of the City. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies NE2 (Green Belt) and D1 (Architecture and Placemaking) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan and policies NE2 (Green Belt) and D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design) of the Proposed Local Development Plan.

3.         The proposed location of the dwelling and its associated residential curtilage would not be clearly connected to either the farm buildings to the west or the existing dwellings to the south. It would therefore appear detached and unrelated to any existing dwelling or grouping, and would thus have an unacceptable impact on the character and appearance of the immediate surrounding area, and as such would be contrary to the requirements of policy D1 (Architecture and Placemaking) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan and policy D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design) of the Proposed Local Development Plan.

-       Councillor Ramsay Milne, Chairperson