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 220805.

The LRB then considered the third 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 erection of a detached double garage with home office above at Fairhill, 275 North Deeside Road, Milltimber, Aberdeen, AB13 0HA, Planning Reference number 220805/DPP.

 

The Chairperson advised that Ms Lucy Greene 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, 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 by the Appointed Officer, Aberdeen City Council; (2) an application dated 23 June 2022; (3) the Decision Notice dated 7 September 2022; (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; and (6) a consultee response from the Council’s Roads Development Management Team.

 

Ms Greene then described the site advising that it consisted of a 2 storey detached house within a large plot and accessed off North Deeside Road, with the garden ground bounded by Station Road East to the east. A small existing garage existed alongside the eastern boundary of the garden which contained a number mature trees mainly around the edges and these were protected by Tree Preservation Order(s).The driveway split so that one route leads to the rear of the house. To the south east of the house and running parallel at a distance of some 8 metres from the eastern boundary of the site, lay an overgrown path which had been identified as an old driveway. The path extended from the hardstanding which lay to the east of the property and to the southern boundary of the site.

 

Ms Greene indicated that the proposal was for the erection of a two storey extension next to the existing projecting gable.The proposal would result in the loss of 11 spruce trees which lay within the footprint and to the north of where the proposed garage would be located, with 6 of these rising to a height of 20-21m and the remaining 5 measuring between 12-19m in height. The Survey highlighted the trees had a life expectancy of less than 10 years and recommended their removal within 12 months, outlining that such removal would create significant opportunity for replacement planting and allow for the establishment of a more diverse range of trees of long-term potential. The Survey advised that a mixture of Scots Pine and Silver Birch were used to maximise biodiversity and tree cover, with tree planting locations included within the Tree Survey Drawing.

 

Ms Greene outlined the Case Officer’s reason for refusal in the report of handling as follows:-

The proposed garage development was deemed to be of an inappropriate scale and massing which does not reflect the typical proportions of an ancillary building. It would appear overly dominant from out with the site, failed to respect the context of the surrounding area, nor any established pattern of development, and would have a negative visual impact on its established character. The proposal would result in the loss of 11 protected trees which form part of a continuous line of trees along the eastern boundary of the site (TPO 225) and whilst their removal may be necessary due to their limited long-term potential, their loss to enable this unacceptable development was not supported. The proposal was therefore considered to be contrary to the requirements of Policies H1 (Residential Areas), D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design) and NE5 (Trees and Woodlands) of the adopted Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2017; does not address the expectations of the Council’s Supplementary Guidance: ‘The Householder Development Guide’ or ‘Trees and Woodlands’; and failed to comply with Polices H1, D1, D2 and NE5 of the proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2020.

 

In terms of the applicant’s case, Ms Greene advised that this was outlined in full within their Notice of Review documents, but could be summarised as follows:-

• New detached garage with first floor was approved;
• Tree loss was as approved previously;
• First floor above ancillary buildings is permitted by policy, height would be 435mm higher (5590mm approved previously);
• Extra height would improve headroom and amenity;
• Large site and 70 trees;
• Trees to be removed are spruce, no broadleaf trees. Removal recommended within 12 months. This was unaltered by proposal;
• No visible impact by increased size;
• No objections;
• Existing garage was too small for modern cars;
• Various proposals included amendments to reduce ridge height from 6735mm to now 6025mm, removal of external stair;
• Eaves height would be only 57mm more than approved;
• Eaves run parallel to Station Road East, meaning ridge was set back from boundary;
• Approved scheme was drastic reduction in utility of space;
• Stair was internal – garage would retain appearance of single storey;
• Garage was 58m2, ancillary within this plot size; and
• Would be screened by boundary wall and trees to north and south

 

In terms of consultee responses, Ms Greene advised that there was no objection from the Roads Development Management Team,  No comments were received from the Community Council and no representations were received.

 

Ms Greene advised that the applicant had expressed the view that the review could proceed without the need for further procedure.

 

At this point in the proceedings, the LRB considered whether they had sufficient information before them to proceed to determine the review.

The Chairperson and Councillors Clark and Cooke 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 following in the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2017 and the proposed Local Development Plan 2020.

 

Ms Greene responded to questions from members in relation to the tree loss and the height of the extension.

 

The Chairperson and Councillors Clark and Cooke each advised in turn and by a majority of 2 to 1 agreed to reverse the appointed officer’s earlier decision and to therefore grant planning permission conditionally.

 

The Chairperson agreed with the appointed officer’s decision to refuse the application.

 

Councillors Clark and Cooke indicated that they believed that in this instance, and on balance, they were comfortable with the proposed development, particularly as the trees would be replaced, there was no loss of open space/footprint, materials being used were in keeping with the area, there was no huge increase in height and the development would have no impact on neighbours.

 

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 proposed garage development will be sited within the boundary of the existing residential site and on balance is deemed to be of an appropriate scale and massing which reflects the proportions of an ancillary building.  The garage building has been designed with due consideration for its context and will not appear overly dominant, including from outwith the site, with limited effect on the established character of the surrounding area and no adverse impact on existing residential amenity.  Whilst the proposal will result in the loss of a number of protected mature trees which form part of a continuous line of trees along the eastern boundary of the site (TPO 225), it is acknowledged that in this instance removal of the trees has been deemed necessary in the short-term regardless of this development proposal, due to their very limited life expectancy.  As such, it has been accepted that with an appropriate scale and design of development being proposed, the level of replanting that will be secured and delivered as part of the proposal will allow for the landscape character and amenity of the area to be suitably maintained and protected in the long term.  Weight is also given to the extant permission for a garage in this location (Reference: 211634/DPP) is a material consideration, which would involve removal of the same trees.

 

Taking all of the above into account it is considered that subject to appropriate conditions being applied, the proposal would not be contrary to the expectations of Policy NE5 (Trees and Woodlands) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan (ALDP) and would suitably comply with both Policy H1 (Residential Areas) and Policy D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design) of the ALDP, whilst also addressing the requirements of the Council’s Supplementary Guidance on Householder Development.  It is considered that there are no material planning considerations, including evaluation under the Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2020, and the Revised Draft National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) that would warrant refusal of the application. 

 

CONDITIONS

 

This permission is granted subject to the following 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.

 

(02)    Ancillary Building Use

 

That the proposed domestic garage shall not be used for any purpose other than incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse.

 

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

 

(03) Tree Protection Fencing

 

No development shall take place unless tree protection fencing has been erected as shown on drawing 2152707 entitled ‘Tree Survey Drawing’.  Thereafter the tree protection fencing shall remain in place until the completion of development unless the planning authority gives written consent for a variation.  

 

Reason: in order to ensure adequate protection for the trees on site during the construction of the development.

 

(04) Tree Protection

 

No materials, supplies, plant, machinery, spoil, changes in ground levels or construction activities shall be permitted within the protected areas specified in the approved scheme of tree protection as shown on drawing 2152707 entitled ‘Tree Survey Drawing’, without the written consent of the planning authority and no fire shall be lit in a position where the flames could extend to within 5 metres of foliage, branches or trunks. 

 

Reason: in order to ensure adequate protection for the trees on site during the construction of the development.

 

(05) Tree Work

 

Any tree work which appears to become necessary during the implementation of the development shall not be undertaken without the prior written consent of the planning authority; any damage caused to trees growing on the site shall be remedied in accordance with British Standard 3998: 2010 "Recommendations for Tree Work" before the building hereby approved is first occupied. 

 

Reason: in order to preserve the character and visual amenity of the area.

 

(06) Tree Planting Scheme

 

That all tree planting shall be carried out in the first season following completion of the development and in accordance with the approved tree planting scheme within the Tree Survey Report by Struan Dalgleish Arboriculture dated January 2022, or such other scheme as shall be subsequently approved through this condition. Any planting which, within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development, in the opinion of the planning authority is dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased, shall be replaced by trees of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted.

 

Reason: to ensure the implementation of a satisfactory scheme of replacement tree planting which is suitably in-keeping with the location and in the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

 

(07) Tree Protection – No-Dig Construction

 

That any resurfacing of the area of driveway highlighted by magenta hatching on the approved drawing 2152707 entitled ‘Tree Survey Drawing’, shall be undertaken in full accordance with the methodology detailed within Item 4.5 of the Tree Survey Report by Struan Dalgleish Arboriculture dated January 2022, unless the planning authority has given prior written approval for a variation. 

 

Reason: in order to ensure adequate protection for the trees on site.

 

Advisory Notes For Applicant

 

Bats:

During construction work the applicant and/or the developer should remain vigilant for signs of bats, and if they come across any bats or any signs of bats, all work in that area must cease immediately and NatureScot must be contacted for further advice.

 

It should be noted that bats are a European Protected Species, and it is illegal to:

·            Deliberately kill, injure, disturb or capture/take a European Protected Species of animal; and

·            Damage or destroy the breeding sites or resting places of such animals.

Where it is proposed to carry out works that will affect a European Protected Species or their shelter/breeding places, whether or not they are present, a licence is required from the appropriate licensing authority.

-         COUNCILLORS DELL HENRICKSON AND MARIE BOULTON, Chairpersons