Agenda item

The Local Review Body then considered the second request for a review to evaluate the decision taken by an appointed officer under the Council’s Scheme of Delegation to refuse the application for the change of use from amenity open space to domestic garden ground, erection of a wall and re-positioning of the rear boundary fence at 7 Fairview Walk Danestone, Planning Reference 190776/DPP.

The Chairperson advised that the LRB would again be addressed by Mr Gavin Evans and reminded Members that although Mr Evans 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 Roy Brown, Planning Trainee; (2) the application dated 10 May 2019; (3) the decision notice dated 2 August 2019 (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 agent along with an accompanying statement.

The Local Review Body then heard from Mr Evans, who explained 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 then described the application and advised that it comprised a semi-detached bungalow, with its front and rear curtilage and a 23sqm area of open space to its southwest, in a residential area in Danestone.  The site sloped slightly from north to south.  The dwelling had a northeast elevation that fronts Fairview Walk and was bounded with 9 Fairview Walk to its northwest and 5 Fairview Walk to the southeast.

In regards to the proposal, Mr Evans explained that planning permission was sought for the change of use of an area of 23sqm of open space to domestic garden ground, the raising of the ground level of the area by 0.3m to the existing garden level, the erection of a 0.3m high fyfestone finished retaining wall and a 1.8m high treated timber boundary fence around the space so that it would form part of the garden ground of 7 Fairview Walk.  Mr Evans noted that ownership of the site was not relevant to the assessment of the planning application. 

Mr Evans outlined the appointed Officer’s reasons for refusal as follows:-

•      It resulted in a loss of a valuable area of green space;

•      The existing green space provided soft landscaped and open setting to the north of Fairview Street and the public path linking it to Fairview Walk;

•      It conflicted with Householder Development Guide Supplementary Guidance as it would fragment a wider area of open space, would result in an irregular boundary, and would result in the narrowing of the footpath corridor, making it less inviting;

•      There was the potential for setting a precedent and incremental erosion of amenity space if repeated elsewhere; and

•      It conflict with Policies NPF3,Policies H1, NE3, and D1 of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan and Scottish Planning Policy. 

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

·         Argued that this area serves little purpose and its amenity value is not significant, in contrast to the much larger area of green space beyond;

·         Contended that the proposal would improve the appearance of the north side of the path, with minimal disturbance to any limited useability the area may presently possess;

·         Considered that the enclosure of this small area would not fragment a larger open space, but rather would continue a smooth boundary line to the path;

·         Highlighted that it was common in the surrounding area for fences to be constructed hard up to footpaths;

·         Noted that the footpath would still remain very open in comparison to many others in the area, due to the remaining unaffected green space to the western side of the path;

·         Highlighted that this path also differs from most others in the area in that it is curved away from a property boundary;

·         Highlighted a local example of a much larger area of encroachment onto open space; and

·         Referred to photographs appended to supporting statement

In relation to the consultee response, Mr Evans advised that there were no objections from consultees and no letters of representation from individuals. 

Mr Evans then advised that the applicant had expressed the view that further procedure should take place, by way of a site visit. 

The Chairperson and Councillors Macdonald and Wheeler advised in turn that they each had enough information before them and agreed that a site visit was not required and that the review under consideration should be determined without further procedure.

Mr Evans outlined in detail, the relevant policy considerations, making reference to the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2017, namely policies D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design), H1 (Residential Areas) and NE3 (Urban Green Space) and the Householder Development Guide, Supplementary Guidance. 

The Chairperson and Councillors Macdonald and Wheeler 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 conditionally.  Councillor Macdonald voted to refuse the application and Councillors Boulton and Wheeler voted to 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 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:-

Members of the Local Review Body (LRB) agreed by majority to overturn the decision and approve the application with a condition in regard to the finishing of the fence. The Local Review Body considered that the proposal would not harm the character and and amenity of the area, nor would it result in a loss of valuable open space as safeguarded by policy NE3, and further felt that the incorporation of this space into a domestic curtilage would not cause the fragmentation of the wider area of open space. It was concluded that the proposal would accord with the relevant policies of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan, including policies D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design), H1 (Residential Areas) and the associated Householder Development Guide Supplementary Guidance.  The LRB felt that no precedent would be set for similar proposals and the proposal would not be detrimental to the continued use of the adjacent footpath.

                                                           CONDITION

(1)  No development pursuant to this grant of planning permission shall be undertaken unless full details of any stain/colouring of the approved fence have first been submitted to the planning authority and subsequently approved in writing. Thereafter, all works shall be carried out in full accordance with the details so agreed.

Reason: In order to ensure that the appearance of the approved fence is appropriate to its context.

-       Councillor Marie Boulton, Chairperson