Agenda item

Planning Officer:  Matthew Easton

The Forum had before it a report by the Chief Officer – Strategic Place Planning, on a submission of a Proposal of Application Notice by Aurora Planning, for a major development of c.250 private flats, gym, function room, public bistro, promenade, car parking and amenity space, at land adjacent to Rubislaw Quarry, Hill of Rubislaw Aberdeen, 191486.

The report advised that the application site was situated on the southern edge of the Hill of Rubislaw office park and comprised the land adjacent to the northern edge of the disused Rubislaw Quarry, which was now filled with water.

The report noted that the land was underdeveloped and comprised mostly scrub vegetation and bare ground.  A small area at the western end of the site was covered by broadleaved semi-natural woodland which continued outwith the site around the entire north west, west and south west edges of the quarry.

The report also stated there was no public access to any part of the quarry site and public views into the site were very limited.  The quarry edge on the north side largely comprised a rocky cliff face with areas of vegetation and the whole quarry site was designated as a Local Nature Conservation Site.

In regards to planning history, planning permission was refused from the Planning Development Management Committee in 2018 for a residential development consisting of 299 flats, gym, function room, public heritage bistro, promenade, car parking and amenity space.  The refusal of the application was subject to Scottish Ministers, where the decision of the PDMC was upheld by the reporter.  The reporter found that there were aspects of the development which would attract considerable support from national policy and advice.  The application was refused however on the grounds that the building would have dominated and overshadowed the adjacent commercial buildings and would have an adverse impact on the visual amenity of nearby residential properties.  This Planning Permission in Principle was a reduced scale version of the proposal previously considered by PDMC in 2018.

The Forum heard from Matthew Easton, Senior Planning Officer, who addressed the Forum and provided details regarding the planning aspects of the application. 

Mr Easton explained that as part of the application, the applicant had been advised that the following information would need to accompany the formal submission:-

• Badger Survey;
• Drainage and Flooding Assessment;
• Design and Access Statement;
• Habitat Survey;
• Ground Investigation Report;
• Landscape Design Framework;
• Landscaping and Visual Impact Assessment;
• Planning Statement;
• Pre-application Consultation Report;
• Sustainability Statement;
• Transport Statement; and
• Tree Survey.

The Forum then heard from Pippa Robertson, Aurora Planning and Jamie Smilie, IBI Group.  Ms Robertson explained that the size of the previous planning application was the only part that the reporter had said warranted a refusal and as such they had amended the size of the development.  They had addressed the areas of concern but kept the parts that were supported in the previous planning application.

Mr Smilie advised that the scheme was now lower and took on board the reporter’s comments.  The new proposal was two floors lower and they had also reduced the amount of buildings by one.  He explained that this would help with the visual amenity.

Mr Smilie also advised that there was public concern in regards to parking for the development.  The reporter had no concern in regards to parking, however with the amended plans they had added a further 40 parking spaces to the development.

Members then asked a number of questions of both the applicant/agent and the case officer and the following information was noted:-

·         There would be 240 parking spaces in the new proposals with car club spaces also included;

·         There would be roughly twenty tables within the bistro area;

·         Members of the public would be able to access the history of the granite feature within the bistro;

·         There would be separate parking for visitors to the bistro;

·         In regards to visibility, local residents would not be affected with the amended proposals;

·         From Queen’s Road there would be no negative visual impact;

·         A new drainage assessment would be carried out to mitigate any concerns and to update from the previous assessment carried out;

·         Parking was a real concern for residents in the surrounding area; and

·         To note that a revised Transport Assessment would be submitted with the new application.

The report recommended:-

That the Forum –

(a)       Note the key issues identified;

(b)       If necessary, seek clarification on any particular matters; and

(c)        Identify relevant issues which they would like the applicant to consider and address in any future application.

The Forum resolved:-

(i)            to request that the applicant consider the key points above; and

(ii)          to thank the presenters for their informative presentation and to encourage continuing dialogue with Council officers and also local residents.

-       Councillor Marie Boulton, Convener