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 installation of a replacement window on the rear elevation at 27 View Terrace Aberdeen, planning reference 181429.

Councillor Stewart as Chair, gave a brief outline of the business to be undertaken, advising that the LRB would be addressed by the Assistant Clerk, Mrs Lynsey McBain with regards to 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 cases 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.  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 regard 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 more general aspects relating to the procedure.

In relation to the application, the LRB had before it (1) a delegated report by Ms Jacqui Thain,  (2) the application dated 9 August 2018; (3) the decision notice dated 5 October 2018 (4) links to the plans showing the proposal and 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 with further information relating to the application.

The LRB was then addressed by Mr Evans who advised that the review had been submitted with all necessary information within the time limit of three months following the decision of the appointed officer.

Mr Evans explained that the site in question was a traditional 1.5 storey granite-finished dwelling with single storey offshoot, conservatory and small dormer and rooflights to the rear.  The existing rear dormer window had a UPVc frame and a horizontal transom bar which divided the window roughly in half and was located within the Rosemount Conservation Area. 

In regard to the proposal, Mr Evans explained that the application sought to replace the window within the rear dormer which was currently one-over-one PVCu, with a white PVCu frame and single pane of glass.

Mr Evans then outlined the applicant’s proposal making reference to the history of the site and outlined the appointed Officer’s reasons for refusal as follows:-

·         That the proposed replacement window would neither reinstate a window of traditional style and proportions, nor maintain the style and proportions of the existing window;

·         As a result, it was contended that the modern design and styling of the window would be incongruous to the character of this traditional building, and would be to the detriment of the character and appearance of the Conservation Area more generally;

·         It was concluded that the proposal would not comply with Scottish Planning Policy, Historic Environment Scotland’s Policy Statement and policies D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design) and D4 (Historic Environment) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan, as well as the relevant  ‘Repair and Replacement of Windows and Doors’ Supplementary Guidance and Historic Environment Scotland’s ‘Managing Change in the Historic Environment’ publication relating to windows.

In relation to the appellants case, Mr Evans highlighted the following:-

(1)  The glazing pattern on the rear face of the house had a strong vertical emphasis, and the window to be replaced was the only one which was divided horizontally;

(2)  They queried the officer’s description of the proposed replacement as not matching the dimensions of the existing frame and highlighted that the omission of this transom bar to horizontally divide the window was the only difference from the existing window;

(3)  They provided photographs to illustrate the height of the rear boundary wall and the growth of vegetation, both of which the applicant considered limit the visibility of the window from any public place;

(4)  Highlights the wide variety of windows on the rear elevations of properties on View Terrace and Loanhead Terrace, including uPVC frames, varying colours etc.

(5)  highlighted that the limited visibility of the window was such that it would have negligible impact on the character of the area; and

(6)  Concluded that the alteration would allow for this window to harmonise with the rest of the rear elevation.

Mr Evans advised that no letters of objections had been received from individuals or statutory consultees. 

Mr Evans noted that the applicant had indicated on the Notice of Review that no further procedure was required, and that the application could be determined without further procedure. 

The Chairperson and Councillors Cooke and Donnelly advised in turn that they all had enough information to proceed without further procedure and were content to make a decision today without further procedure.   

Mr Evans outlined in detail, the relevant policy considerations, making reference to the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2017, namely policy H1 (Residential Areas: Householder Development), D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design) and D4 (Historic Environment).  Mr Evans also highlighted the Supplementary Guidance on Windows and Doors as well as the Householder Supplementary Guidance.

In determining the appeal, Mr Evans advised that members should also take into consideration any material considerations they feel were relevant to the application that would point to either overturning the original decision or dismissing the review.

In addition to the relevant policies from the development plan, the following would be material considerations:

·        Scottish Planning Policy (re Conservation Areas);

·        Historic Environment Scotland Policy Statement;

·        Aberdeen City Council’s Great Western Road Conservation Area Character Appraisal and the overarching Management Plan for Aberdeen’s Conservation Areas; and

·        HES Managing Change guidance on ‘Windows’

Members then asked a number of questions of Mr Evans. 

The Chairperson and Councillors Cooke and Donnelly advised in turn and agreed by majority that the proposal was acceptable and therefore the Local Review Body’s decision was to overturn the decision of the appointed officer and 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 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) and other material considerations in so far as these were pertinent to the determination of the application.

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

The rear lane is narrow, overgrown and not well-used, and visibility would largely be limited to views from the upper floors of neighbouring properties On that basis, the LRB did not consider that the rear elevation of this property represent a 'public elevation' for the purposes of assessment against the Council's Repair and Replacement of Windows and Doors Supplementary Guidance.

It was considered that this area is characterised by a wide variety of window types present on the rear elevations of buildings in the surrounding area, that this proposal would not involve the loss of any historic fabric, and that the proposed replacement would result in the upper floor window matching the vertical proportions of windows in the remainder of the rear elevation. In that context the proposed window replacement would not be harmful to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area, or the amenity of the area generally.

Based on the above, it was considered that the proposal would accord with the relevant policies of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan, namely Policies D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design), H1 (Residential Areas) and D4 (Historic Environment) and the associated 'Repair and Replacement of Windows and Doors' Supplementary Guidance.