Agenda item

Members, please note that all plans and supporting documents relevant to the review can be viewed online here and by entering the application reference number 220358.

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 Detailed Planning Permission for the erection of first floor extension over existing garage to the front at 1 West Craigbank Crescent Aberdeen, planning reference 220358.

The Chairperson stated that although the Planning Adviser for the LRB was employed by the planning authority, she 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.  He 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 and decision notice by the Appointed Officer, Aberdeen City Council; (2) an application dated 23 March 2022 (3) links to the plans showing the proposal and planning policies referred to in the delegated report and (4) the Notice of Review submitted by the agent. 

Ms Greene then described the application site and noted the application site comprised a large, modern, two-storey detached dwelling and its front, side and rear curtilage. The dwelling sat within a large corner plot fronting onto West Craigbank Crescent.  A detached double garage sat to the south of the dwelling and was accessed via West Craigbank Crescent.

In terms of the proposal, Ms Greene indicated that Detailed Planning Permission was sought to alter the existing detached double garage to accommodate a deeper floor plan and provide upper floor accommodation including a store, hallway, staircase, shower room, kitchen and multi-functional room, including the existing garage space.  The altered structure would have a rectangular floor plan measuring c. 8.9m by 6m and a gable roof measuring c.4.1m to the eaves and 7m to the proposed ridge, thus becoming a 1¾-2 storey structure. Finishing materials would match those of the existing garage, including concrete roof tiles, dry dash render, pre-cast stone blockwork and door surrounds, black PVCu rainwater goods and white PVCu windows, doors and fascia.

Ms Greene indicated that the appointed officer’s reasons for refusal outlined in the report of handling was as follows:-

The proposed garage extension/alterations by reason of its layout, composition, size and scale in combination with its location and exposure to the public road would cause harm to the visual amenity and character of the streetscape. The proposed extension is not considered to be suitably secondary to the host building owing to its size, scale and form. The proposal is therefore considered to have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the building and, owing to its exposed nature, the surrounding area. The proposed extension therefore conflicts with the relevant provisions of Policy H1 (Residential Areas) and Policy D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2017, including the Council’s Supplementary Guidance: Householder Development Guide. On the basis of the above, it is considered that there are no material planning considerations of sufficient weight that would warrant approval of the application.

Ms Greene outlined the key points from the appellant’s Notice of Review as follows:- 

•       The application was on a corner plot and was set back from the street with green space, young trees and shrubs, which would grow and together with fencing would provide screening from Craigbank Drive;

•       The proposed design and scale match similar structures built by Cala elsewhere in the development;

•       The proposed design and materials would align;

•       The applicant had personal reasons for the proposals;

•       An alternative proposal would be a gable extension which would have more of an impact on the area.

In terms of consultation responses, none were received and there were also no letters of representation received. 

Ms Greene advised that the applicant had expressed the view that no further procedure should take place before determination. 

In terms of the further procedure, the Chairperson and Councillors Clark and van Sweeden all indicated in turn that they each had enough information before them and therefore agreed that the review under consideration should be determined without any further procedure.

In terms of relevant policy considerations, Ms Greene referred to the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2017.

Ms Greene responded to various questions from members.

Members each advised in turn and unanimously agreed to overturn the appointed officers  decision.  Planning permission was therefore granted 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 development would provide on a part time basis for someone with a disability, on balance the proposal would not result in over development, the height would not appear out of keeping with the adjacent neighbouring house and there would be no impact on the character of the area. There is no significant detrimental impact on light to the neighbours. The proposed design and materials would match the house and overall the proposal would comply with Policy H1 : Residential Areas and D1: Placemaking by Design of the adopted Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2017 and associated Householder Design Guide.

The policies in the Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan 202 substantially reiterate those in the adopted plan where relevant to this application.

CONDITIONS

(01) DURATION OF PERMISSION

The development to which this notice relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date of this notice. If development has not begun at the expiration of the 3-year period, the planning permission lapses.

Reason - in accordance with Section 58 (duration of planning permission) of the 1997 Act.

(2) Building Approved for Domestic use only

That the proposed accommodation above the garage shall be used only for purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse as such.

Reason: In order to retain effective planning control of the development in the interests of the residential amenity of the surrounding area.