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 formation of a driveway to the front of the dwellinghouse, at 16 Don Terrace Aberdeen, 200036/DPP

Councillor Boulton 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 Jamie Leadbeater, Planner; (2) the application dated 18 January 2020; (3) the decision notice dated 17 March 2020; (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 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 also noted that the applicant had indicated no new matters had been raised however he provided correspondence with his local Councillor in regard to vandalism in the area, which did not form part of the earlier application.  Mr Evans indicated that it was for the Local Review Body to decide whether this information is taken in account when determining the application.  Members agreed unanimously that the information should not be taken into account, as this would have been available previously and could have been submitted with the original application. 

Mr Evans then described the site advising that the application site was located on the southern side of Don Terrace, and occupied by a detached 1 ½  storey granite building of a traditional style.  The house was elevated approximately 1.1m above street level. The garden ground sits at the same level as the house, and was retained by a granite boundary walls to the street frontage (1m-1.3m high), topped with metal railings and gate.   Mr Evans also noted there were single yellow line parking restrictions to both sides of Don Terrace (no parking between 8am and 5pm, Monday to Friday). Don Terrace rises from west to east, with the properties being set progressively higher above street level westwards.

In regard to the proposed application, Mr Evans advise that the application sought permission for the formation of a single car parking space within the front garden, positioned at a right-angle to the street. The formation of the parking space would require the removal of a section of existing boundary wall and railings, the excavation of part of the front garden and the formation of a new retaining wall between the lowered parking area and the remaining front garden.

Mr Evans advised that the plans indicated that the new retaining wall would re-use materials from the original wall in its construction, along with the railings, however a section of new railings would also be required.  The proposal would necessitate the relocation of an existing gas service pipe, however this was something that would have to be arranged separately with the relevant service providers by the applicant.

Mr Evans also indicated that there had been two previous planning application at this address in recent years.

Mr Evans then outlined the applicant’s proposal and outlined the appointed Officer’s reasons for refusal as follows:-

•        The proposed creation of a driveway within the front curtilage of the dwellinghouse would alter the pattern and appearance of development along Don Terrace, involving the removal of a historic granite front wall with cast iron railings which are intrinsic features to the narrow street's character;

•        The subsequent loss of these features through breakage in the front boundary and substantial excavation of the front garden area resulting in the creation of unsympathetic eye-catching retaining walls with unsympathetic modern railings would disrupt the visual continuity of historic railings and walls along the street, thus adversely affecting the visual character and amenity of the Don Terrace streetscene; and

•        As such, the proposal was not considered to be compliant with Policy H1 (Residential Areas) and Policy D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design) in the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2017. Subsequently, overall, the proposal was not considered acceptable.

Mr Evans highlighted the following key points from the appellant’s review statement:-

·        A single concession need not threaten Don Terrace streetscape – as echoed by Aberdeen City Council’s Roads comment;

·        Number 16 was a special case for consideration, because neighbouring properties either have access to rear parking or have more convenient access to unrestricted on-street parking;

·        Alternative options have been exhausted with no scope for parking to rear;

·        On-street parking not practical due to the narrowness of Don Terrace and lack of pavement;

·        Aberdeen City Council had recently added double-yellow lines to the closest section of Don Street, so that closest available parking was on Gordon’s Mills Road;

·        It was reasonable for a family home to have a driveway and points to requirements for new-build homes;

·        Recent incidences of vandalism to cars on Gordon’s Mills Road;

·        Granite cope and iron railings would be re-used;

·        Contends that the proposal was consistent with policy D1, relating to design quality and policy H1, relating to preserving the character and amenity of residential areas; and

·        Need a dedicated space in order to provide for Electric vehicle charging point.

In relation to consultation, Mr Evans indicated that there was a neutral response received from Aberdeen Civic Society and that there was no objection from Roads Development Management. 

Mr Evans indicated that the applicant had indicated on the Notice of Review that further procedure was required, and that a site visit should take place before determination. 

The Chairperson and Councillors Allan and Mason advised in turn that they had enough information to determine the application and did not require any further procedures. 

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 and Transport and Accessibility Supplementary Guidance.

Members asked a number of questions of Mr Evans in relation to the proposed application. 

The Chairperson and Councillors Allan and Mason advised in turn and unanimously agreed to overturn the decision of the appointed officer to refuse the application and approve the application conditionally. 

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 Local Review Body (LRB) noted that the proposed driveway would satisfy the relevant technical roads specifications from the Council's 'Transport and Accessibility' Supplementary Guidance, and that there was no objection from the Council's Roads Development Management Team on road safety grounds. The existence of some other properties with in-curtilage parking was noted, and members considered that approval of this application would not result in any harmful precedent.

Members noted that the proposal would involve the re-use of granite downtakings and existing railings within the new retaining wall around the driveway, which it was felt would mitigate any impact on the character or appearance of the area. It was noted that the property does not lie within a Conservation Area, and that various alterations and interventions to neighbouring properties had to some extent impacted on the historic character of the area. In that context, the re-use of materials was considered to be sufficient to preserve any historic interest. The proposal was considered to have been sympathetically designed, with a notable improvement on an earlier proposal considered by the LRB. Members recognised that in-curtilage parking would offer greater security for residents, and the potential for installation of an Electric Vehicle charging point was also supported. On balance, the LRB concluded that the proposal would accord with policies D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design), D5 (Our Granite Heritage) and H1 (Residential Areas) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan.

CONDITIONS

(1)  Re-use of granite downtakings & railings

That no development pursuant to this grant of planning permission shall be undertaken unless a detailed scheme for the re-use of granite downtakings and existing railings in the construction of the new retaining wall and enclosures has first been submitted to and agreed in writing by the planning authority. Thereafter, all works shall be carried out in full accordance with the scheme so agreed.

Reason - in order to ensure that existing downtakings and features are appropriately re-used, in accordance with policy D5 (Our Granite Heritage) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan.

(2)  Materials/Finishes

That no development pursuant to this grant of planning permission shall be undertaken unless full details of all materials and finishes has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. For the avoidance of doubt, this scheme shall include details of the surfacing materials for the driveway surface and in the facing of the retaining wall in the event that granite downtakings are not sufficient, as well as a specification for the new railings to be installed (including details of means of fixing, materials, colouring and dimensions, in order to ensure that these complement the retained and re-used existing railings). Thereafter, all works shall be carried out in full accordance with the scheme so agreed.

Reason: In order to ensure that materials are appropriate to their context and respect the character of the area, as required by policies D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design) and H1 (Residential Areas) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan.

(3)  Drainage per plans

That the driveway hereby granted planning permission shall not be brought into use unless provision for surface water drainage has been made in full accordance with the approved site plan 110/3-Rev D, or any other such drawing as has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority.

Reason: In order to ensure that the driveway is internally drained and does how shed water onto the public road, as required by the Council's 'Transport and Accessibility' Supplementary Guidance.