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 a change of use from amenity ground to form a driveway at 85 Arnage Drive Aberdeen, 170664.

The Chairperson advised that the LRB would again be addressed by Mr Andrew Miller and reminded members 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.  She 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 by Mr Roy Brown, Planning Technician; (2) the decision notice dated 7 August 2017; (3) copies of the plans showing the proposal; (4) links to the planning policies referred to in the delegated report; (5) comments from consultees and (6) the Notice of Review submitted by the applicant’s agent along with an accompanying statement.

Mr Miller explained that the site subject to the review forms an area of amenity space to the front of 85 Arnage Drive and it contains a tree and provides a buffer between the public road and pavement. It is located within a residential area as designated in the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2017.

Mr Miller indicated that the application sought consent for the change of use of the land to form a driveway to access 85 Arnage Drive. The remainder of the proposed works do not require planning permission (those within the curtilage of the house).

Mr Miller outlined thatthe request sought the review of the decision of the appointed officer to refuse the application under delegated powers and the stated reasons for refusal were as follows:-  

the proposed change of use to form a driveway would result in the removal of an established street tree and likely damage to another, which both contribute to local landscape character and amenity. Their loss would adversely affect the character and amenity of the surrounding area. The loss of the soft landscaped amenity land to accommodate a tarred access would be detrimental to the visual amenity of the streetscape. The proposal would set an unwelcome precedent for similar proposals in the surrounding area, which cumulatively would be significantly detrimental to the surrounding area. The design of the driveway would, however, not adversely road safety. The proposal would therefore fail to comply with Policies D1 – Quality Placemaking by Design; D2 – Landscape; NE3 – Urban Green Space; H1 – Residential Areas; and NE5 – Trees and Woodlands of the adopted Aberdeen Local Development Plan; and the Supplementary Guidance: ‘The Householder Development Guide’. While it would accord with road safety guidelines, it would adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding area, and therefore the proposal would not comply with the general aims of ‘Supplementary Guidance’: ‘Transport and Accessibility’.

In relation to the Notice of Review, the applicant highlighted that (a) there would only be the loss of one tree and the adjacent tree would not be adversely impacted, (b) the area of land is relatively small, (c) the land has been left in poor state, (d) there are issues with parking in the surrounding area and (e) there are permitted development rights established for a garage therefore this application should be allowed.

In regards to consultees and objections, Mr Miller advised that no letters of objection were received, however Environmental Services raised concerns in regards to the loss of one tree and the possible damage to the second.

Mr Miller also made reference to the relevant planning considerations, as follows:-

• H1 – Residential Areas: seeks to ensure that all development is suitable for the character and amenity of the surrounding area, as well as general compatibility with residential uses.
• D1 – Quality Placemaking by Design: requires development to be of a high standard of design.
• NE3 – Urban Green Space: Planning permission would not normally be granted to redevelop urban green space, though there are exceptions where the following can be met:
  • no loss of landscape character,
  • no loss of valuable green space,
  • no loss of trees and
  • a requirement for suitable replacement land.
• NE5 – Trees and Woodland: Development should not result in loss of established trees that contribute to landscape character.

Householder Supplementary Guidance – there should be no loss/fragmentation of amenity space.

Transport SG – No loss of amenity or street trees.

Members asked Mr Miller various questions in regards to the application, particularly in regards to the loss of a street tree and the potential damage to the second.

The Local Review Body thereupon agreed that the review under consideration should be determined without further procedure.  The members of the Local Review Body therefore agreed that a site visit, a hearing session nor further written representations were required, as members felt they had enough information before them.

Mr Miller highlighted that whendetermining the appeal, members should take into consideration any material considerations they feel would be relevant to the application that would point to either overturning the original decision or dismissing the review. 

Members agreed unanimously to overturn the decision of the appointed officer to refuse the application and therefore approve 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:-

The proposed change of use of the land to the front of the house is not considered to result in a precedence, given that there are already a number of similar arrangements in the surrounding area. There would be no loss of amenity or character for the surrounding area, with the proposals comply with the requirements of policies D1 - Quality Placemaking by Design, D2 - Landscape, NE3 - Urban Green Space, H1 - Residential Areas and NE5 - Trees and Woodlands of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2017. The proposals are also considered to accord with the requirements of the Householder and Transport and Accessibility Supplementary Guidance documents.

The Local Review Body highlighted their concern at the loss of a street tree and the possible loss of a second.  As a result an advisory note was added that requested that the applicant consider the planting of a replacement tree.

-       Councillor Marie Boulton, Chairperson