Agenda item

The LRB 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 partial conversion of an existing coach house to domestic garage including erection of single storey extension; installation of replacement door; formation of garage door and installation of electric vehicle charging point to rear of 9 Marine Terrace, Aberdeen, Planning Reference number 210677/DPP. 

The Chairperson advised that Mr Gavin Evans would again be acting as the Planning Adviser to the Body in the following case under consideration this day and reiterated 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.

In relation to the application, the LRB had before it (1) a delegated report by the Appointed Officer, Aberdeen City Council; (2) an application dated 14 May 2021; (3) the decision notice dated 13 July 2021; (4) links to the plans showing the proposal and planning policies referred to in the delegated report; (5) the Notice of Review submitted by the applicant’s agent; and (6) a consultee response from the Roads Team, Aberdeen City Council.

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 then described the site advising that it was a residential curtilage comprising a one-and-a-half storey plus basement, mid-terraced dwellinghouse designed by Archibald Simpson and built in 1837, with associated front and rear gardens. At the far end of the large rear garden was a mews coach house, accessed via Marine Lane. The application concerned the alteration and extension of that building. 9 Marine Terrace, along with all the other properties in the terrace was Category B Listed and was located within the Marine Terrace Conservation Area. The coach house building spanned the entire width of the plot, measuring c.13m in width, 5.5m in length and 6m in height. The officer report noted that it may originally have been used as stables with hayloft, ancillary to the main dwellinghouse. Previously, it has been used as ancillary residential accommodation, which saw the most recent alterations carried out to the building. Currently, the building was used for storage purposes.

Mr Evans outlined the planning history and proposal for Detailed Planning Permission (DPP) which was sought for the partial conversion of the existing coach house to a domestic garage including the erection of a single storey extension; the installation of a replacement door; the formation of a garage door and the installation of an electric vehicle charging point to the rear. While it was proposed to convert part of the existing coach house to a domestic garage, the remainder of the building would be retained as a garden store/workshop. In order to accommodate the garage, it was proposed to erect a single storey extension on the east elevation of the coach house (to its garden side), which was required in order to provide sufficient depth for the parking of vehicles. The proposed extension would be of a flat-roofed design, projecting 1.3m from the face of the existing building and measuring 6.9m wise. It would be finished with timber cladding. On the elevation to the garden, it was also proposed to replace the existing aluminium sliding doors with timber framed double doors. On the west elevation (to the lane) it was proposed to remove the existing timber doors (circa 1.2m wide) and create an enlarged 5m wide opening to allow for the installation of a horizontal sliding sectional timber garage door. Additionally, the existing timber slats and hayloft door at upper floor level would be refurbished.

He indicated that the Appointed Officer’s reasons for refusal stated in the decision notice was as follows:-

·       Proposed works would detract from the character of the coach house, which contributed significantly to the special historic and architectural interest of the listed building and the rear lane of the terrace;

·       Impact arose from the excessive removal of historic fabric, including granite, and alteration of the form of the building;

·       Proposal failed to accord with the statutory duty to have regard to the preservation and enhancement of the character and appearance of the Marine Terrace Conservation Area and would conflict with Policies D1 – Quality Placemaking by Design, D4 – Historic Environment, D5 – Our Granite Heritage and H1 – Residential Areas of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2017;

·       Also contrary to Scottish Planning Policy and Historic Environment Policy for Scotland, notably HEP4 in which detrimental impact had not been demonstrated to be minimal.

Mr Evans outlined the key points from the appellant’s Notice of Review as follows:-

·       Proposal complied with the vision and aims of the SDP, the relevant Policies of the LDP, including Policies H1, D4, D5, and D1, and relevant provisions of the associated Supplementary Guidance;

·       Would have no adverse impact on the listed terrace, or on any individual elements within that;

·       Would have no impact on the character and appearance of the Marine Terrace Conservation Area by virtue of its location on a rear lane with no through access;

·       Was consistent with the principles of SPP and HEPS in terms of facilitating positive change in the historic environment;

·       Complied with the requirements of the relevant Historic Environment Scotland Managing Change Guidance notes;

·       On the basis that the application was supported by the Development Plan, and no material considerations indicate otherwise, it was submitted that the Review should be allowed and the application approved;

·       Points to the recent approval of application 201069/DPP as demonstrating that later additions to a listed property would not necessarily have the same special architectural or historic interest as the main building(s) with which they were associated; and

·       Highlighted the lack of any objection from neighbours or statutory consultees.

In terms of consultee responses, Mr Evans advised that the Roads Development Management Team indicated that they had no concerns with the proposal.

No response had been received from the Ferryhill and Ruthrieston Community Council and there were no letters of representation submitted.

Mr Evans advised that the applicant had expressed the view that an inspection of the area to which the review relates should be undertaken.

At this point, the LRB considered whether they had sufficient information before them to proceed to determine the review.  Councillor Mason requested that a site visit be held prior to determining the review in order for him to make an informed decision based on the location of the property.  The Convener and Councillor Bell also agreed with the request that the review under consideration should be adjourned in order for a site visit to be conducted in due course.