Agenda item

The Local Review Body (LRB) 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 planning permission for the replacement windows to the front and rear of 77 Whitehall Road, 171507/DPP.

Councillor Boulton as Chairperson gave a brief outline of the business to be undertaken.  She indicated that the LRB would be addressed by the Assistant Clerk, Mrs Lynsey McBain as regards 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 hehad 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.

The Local Review Body was then addressed by Mrs McBain, Assistant Clerk in regards to 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 LRB had before it (1) a delegated report by Ms Sheila Robertson, Planning Technician; (2) the decision notice dated 23 February 2018; (3) copies of the plans showing the proposal; (4) links to the planning policies referred to in the delegated report; (5) and the Notice of Review submitted by the applicant along with an accompanying statement.

The LRB was then addressed by Mr Miller who advised that the submitted Notice of Review was found to be valid and submitted within the relevant timeframes.

Mr Miller explained that the site subject to the review was a three storey traditional granite tenement building comprising 6 flats on Whitehall Road, close to its junction with Hamilton Place. The review related to the ground floor right flat, which had a tripartite timber sash and case window to the front and a casement aluminium framed window to the rear. Both were finished in white. The surrounding area was largely residential with traditional tenements and houses and was located within the Albyn Place/Rubislaw Conservation Area.

Mr Miller indicated that the application sought permission for a replacement of the windows, and noted that to the front, the three windows would be replaced by PVCu framed windows with a sash and case opening mechanism, and to the rear, the window would be replaced by a single paned PVCu window.

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:-  

Although the proposed uPVC window to the rear elevation would be acceptable, as there would be no adverse impact on the wider Conservation Area, the replacement of the traditional white timber framed windows on the principal elevation with uPVC would not comply with Policies D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design), D4 (Historic Environment) and H1 (Residential Areas) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan as the proposal would result in the loss of a traditional material and, as such, fails to demonstrate due regard for its context where the retention and reinstatement of traditional window forms and materials, or suitably sympathetic alternatives, are

necessary to maintain and enhance the character of the Conservation Area. The replacement of traditional timber framed windows with modern frames, formed in uPVC, would have a negative impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, and would therefore not align with Scottish Planning Policy and Historic Environment Scotland’s Policy Statement. Moreover, they also do not accord with the Supplementary Guidance: The Replacement of Windows and Doors and Historic Environment Scotland’s Managing Change Document: Windows. Approval would risk setting an unwelcome precedent for further unsympathetic window replacement within the Conservation Area, contrary to the aims of the Albyn

Place/Rubislaw Conservation Area Character Appraisal and which, if replicated, could lead to a significant cumulative erosion of the Conservation Area’s character and appearance. It is considered that the proposal does not accord with the provisions of the Development Plan and that there are no material planning considerations that would warrant approval of this application.

In regards to consultees and objections, Mr Miller advised that no letters of objection were received.

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

·         D1 – Quality Placemaking by Design: Requires development to be of a high standard of design.

·         D4 – development should comply with SPP and HESPS.

·         Windows SG – all windows on public elevation in Conservation Areas should be timber.

·         SPP and HESPS – Development should preserve and enhance the character of conservation areas.

·         Managing Change in Historic Environment: Windows

In relation to the Notice of Review, the applicant highlighted that (a) the sash and case windows cannot be opened as they don’t have handles, (b) other properties had  windows that weren’t original and (c) windows would match the shape and profile of existing windows.

The Local Review Body then asked questions of Mr Miller in regards to the application.

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 unconditionally.

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:-

Whilst not fully compliant with the Windows and Doors Supplementary Guidance and policy H1 – Residential Areas, due to the mixture of window types within the block of flats, coupled with a wide variety of window types in the surrounding area, it is considered the proposed replacement windows would not result in an adverse impact on the character of the surrounding area.