Public Document Pack
To : Councillor Milne, Convener ; Councillor Finlayson; Vice Convener ; and Councillors Boulton, Corall, Cormie, Crockett, Dickson, Greig, Jaffrey, Lawrence, Malik, Jean Morrison MBE, Jennifer Stewart, Stuart and Thomson.
Town House, ABERDEEN 15 April 2015
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
The Members of the PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE are requested to meet in Committee Room 2 - Town House on THURSDAY, 23 APRIL 2015 at 10.00 am .
RODERICK MACBEATH SENIOR DEMOCRATIC SERVICES MANAGER
B U S I N E S S
MEMBERS PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL LETTERS OF REPRE SENTATION, INCLUDING THOSE NOT IN THE REPORT PACK, ARE AVAILABLE TO VIEW IN THE MEMBERS' LIBRARY
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS
1.1 Minute of Meeting of the Planning Development Management Committee of 19 March 2015 - for approval (Pages 1 - 24)
PLANNING APPLICATION S WHICH ARE THE SUBJ ECT OF WRITTEN REPORTS
WHERE THE RECOMMENDA TION IS ONE OF APPRO VAL
2.1 27 Whitehall Terrace - Erection of Boundary Fence and Lean to Extension of Existing Studio - 150159 (Pages 25 - 40) Planning Reference – 150159 The documents associated with this application can be found at:- http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=150159
2.2 227 Union Street - Erection of Table and Chairs on Pavement - 150179 (Pages 41 - 48) Planning Reference – 150179 The documents associated with this application can be found at:- http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=150179
2.3 25 Farburn Terrace, Dyce - Part Change of use of Guesthouse (Class 7) to Hot Food Takeaway (Sui generis use) - 150052 (Pages 49 - 64) Planning Reference – 150052 The documents associated with this application can be found at :- http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=150052
2.4 2 Station Road East, Milltimber - Retrospective Demolition of House and Erection of New Dwellinghouse - 150128 (Pages 65 - 78) Planning Reference – 150128 The documents associated with this application can be found at:- http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=150128
2.5 44 Bedford Road, Kittybrewster - Erection of three and a half Storey Services Apartment Development (8 units) with Associated Car Parking - 141664 (Pages 79 - 92) Planning Reference – 141664 The documents associated with this application can be found at – http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=141664
WHERE THE RECOMMENDA TION IS ONE OF REFUS AL
3.1 31 Hillside Road, Peterculter - Redevelopment of existing site to create 2 detached dwelling houses - 150009 (Pages 93 - 120) Planning Reference - 150009 The documents associated with this application can be found at:- http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=150009
3.2 Land at Brookfield, Murtle Den Road, Milltimber - Demolition of Existing Dwellinghouse and Errection of 3 Dwellinghouses - 141858 (Pages 121 - 148) Planning Reference – 141858 The documents associated with this application can be found at:- http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=141858
3.3 The Bieldside Inn, 37 North Deeside Road - Proposed Balcony Extension to Rear of Bieldside Inn - 150220 (Pages 149 - 170) Planning Reference – 150220 The documents associated with this application can be found at:- http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=150220
OTHER REPORTS
4.1 Confirmation of Tree Preservation Orders (Pages 171 - 182)
4.2 Extensions to the Old Aberdeen Conservation Area (Pages 183 - 190)
Website Address: www.aberdeencity.gov.uk
Should you require any further information about this agenda, please contact Martyn Orchard on 01224 523097 or email [email protected]
This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 1.1
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
ABERDEEN, 19 March 2015. Minute of Meeting of the PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE. Present :- Councillor Milne, Convener ; Councillor Finlayson, Vice Convener ; and Councillors Boulton, Corall, Cormie, Crockett, Greig, Jaffrey, Lawrence, MacGregor (as substitute for Councillor Dickson), Malik, Jean Morrison MBE, Jennifer Stewart, Stuart and Thomson.
The agenda and reports associated with this minute can be found at: - http://committees.aberdeencity.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=348&MI d=3467&Ver=4
Please note that if any changes are made to this minute at the point of approval, these will be outlined in the subsequent minute and this document will not be retrospectively altered.
MINUTE OF MEETING OF PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE OF 12 FEBRUARY 2015
1. The Committee had before it the minute of its previous meeting of 12 February 2015.
The Committee resolved :- to approve the minute as a correct record.
MINUTE OF MEETING OF PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE (VISITS) OF 18 FEBRUARY 2015
2. The Committee had before it the minute of the Planning Development Management Committee (Visits) of 18 February 2015.
The Committee resolved :- to approve the minute as a correct record.
AGENDA ORDER
3. The Convener advised that item 3.3 (10 Hermitage Avenue – Sub-division of house plot and erection of new house) had been withdrawn.
THE CHESTER HOTEL, 59-63 QUEENS ROAD - 140990
4. The Convener advised that item 3.5 (The Chester Hotel – Formation of balcony for external dining area – retrospective planning permission) had been withdrawn. The Committee noted the concerns raised by the residents of neighbouring properties in
Page 1 2
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
relation to the noise and disturbance when the balcony was in use and agreed that an enforcement notice be served to ensure that the use of the external roof terrace ceased until formal planning permission was in place for any such use.
The Committee resolved :- (i) to note that the application had been withdrawn; and (ii) to request that an enforcement notice be served instructing that all use of the external roof terrace cease until such time as formal planning permission was in place for any such use.
FRIARSFIELD ROAD / KIRK BRAE, LAND TO THE NORTH, CULTS (PART OF OP51) - 140272
5. The Committee had before it a report by the Head of Planning and Sustainable Development which recommended :-
That the Committee express a willingness to approve the application for planning permission for a residential development of 107 private dwellings, 12 affordable apartments and ancillary works, subject to the conclusion of a legal agreement to secure (a) delivery of 10% on site affordable housing units and a commuted sum for 15% affordable housing units; (b) developer contributions towards primary and secondary education, sport and recreation and healthcare; and (c) financial contributions towards the delivery of the Link Road and restriction to no more than 160 units on the wider Friarsfield Opportunity Site (OP51) until the completion of a new link road from Kirk Brae to Craigton Road, and subject to the following conditions:- (1) That no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless a detailed delivery statement for the entire Link Road has been submitted for the further written approval by the Planning Authority – in the interests of promoting sustainable transport; (2) that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority a detailed design for the section of the Link Road which runs through the application site. The plans shall include details of junctions, cycle/pedestrian paths, laybys and bus stops – in the interests of promoting sustainable transport; (3) that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless details of a controlled pedestrian crossing adjacent to Kirkbrae Avenue, footway on Kirk Brae and associated linkage to that footpath within the application site, have been submitted for the further written approval of the Planning Authority and thereafter no house on the west side of the Link Road shall be occupied unless said footpaths and crossing are fully operational – in the interests of pedestrian safety and safer routes to school; (4) that no development shall take place within the application site unless a full programme of works relative to the realignment of the core path along the eastern boundary of the site (to include but not limited to time lines for path closures and undertaking work, specification of path, soft and hard landscaping, and protective fencing during construction stage) has been Page 2 3
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. Thereafter, the path shall be implemented in full accordance with the approved details and be available for public use prior to, and during, any other construction works within the application site – in order to ensure the use of the core path is disrupted as little as possible and upgraded to the best possible standard; (5) that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless an updated SUDS scheme has been submitted for the written approval of the planning authority, in consultation with SEPA, and thereafter, no individual house shall be occupied unless the drainage required for the house has been carried out in accordance with the approved scheme - to ensure adequate protection of the water environment from surface water run-off; (6) that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless the mitigation measures as identified in the Ecological Assessment (dated September 2013) by Nigel Rudd Ecology have been taken account of and implemented in their entirety – in the interests of safeguarding the fauna and habitats on-site; (7) that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless until a site specific Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) has been submitted and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with SEPA, SNH or other agencies as appropriate. All works on site must be undertaken in accordance with the approved CEMP unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. The CEMP must address the temporary measures proposed to deal with surface water run-off during construction and prior to the operation of the final SUDS which shall be implemented for the duration of works on site and the following issues (a) surface water management; (b) site waste management; and (c) buffer strips - In order to minimise the impacts of necessary demolition/construction works on the environment; (8) that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless details of the protection and enhancement of the water course and associated buffer strip, including access for maintenance, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning Authority consultation with SEPA. All works on site must be undertaken in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority – in the interests of nature conservation and safeguarding the fauna and habitats on-site; (9) that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless a full site waste management plan for the processing of construction and demolition waste has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. No work shall be carried out unless in accordance with the approved plan unless the planning authority has given written consent for a variation - to ensure that waste on the site is managed in a sustainable manner; (10) that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless a scheme of street and footpath lighting has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the planning authority. No individual house shall be occupied unless the lighting relative to that part of the site (e.g. east or west of the Link Road) has been implemented in accordance with the approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing - in the interests of public safety, protecting residential amenity and protecting wildlife; (11) that no Page 3 4
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority a further detailed scheme of hard and soft landscaping for the site, which scheme shall include (a) the materials to be used for all hard surfaces including footpaths; (b) detailed specification of children’s play equipment; (c) indications of all existing trees and landscaped areas on the land, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development, and (d) the proposed areas of tree/shrub planting including details of numbers, densities, locations, species, sizes and stage of maturity at planting - in the interests of the amenity of the area; (12) that no development pursuant to this planning permission shall take place, nor shall any part of the development hereby approved be occupied, unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, a detailed scheme of site and plot boundary enclosures for the entire development hereby granted planning permission and to include details of the access into the agricultural field adjacent to plots 101 & 102 and details of the new dry stone dykes. No individual house shall be occupied unless the enclosure relative to that house has been implemented in accordance with the approved plans - in order to preserve the amenity of the neighbourhood (13) that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless further details and samples of all external finishing materials to the roof and walls of the development hereby approved has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the planning authority and thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the details so agreed unless otherwise agreed in writing- in the interests of visual amenity; (14) that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing a detailed Residential Travel Pack, which outlines sustainable measures to deter the use of the private car, in particular single occupant trips and provides detailed monitoring arrangements, modal split targets and associated penalties for not meeting targets - in order to encourage more sustainable forms of travel to the development; (15) that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing, visibility splays for each junction within the development, which shall include details of the bin collection points and any hard and soft landscaping within the line of sight – in the interests of road safety; (16) that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless plot specific site sections have been submitted for the further written approval of the Planning Authority. Sections shall also be provided for the proposed access into the agricultural field between plots 101 & 102 and the usable open space as shown on drawing L(--)007 rev B– in order to better understand the site levels; (17) that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless further details are submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority relative to the sub-station. Such details shall include size and colour of unit, along with the proposed access and servicing arrangements and screening – in the interests of visual amenity; (18) that no residential unit within the development hereby approved shall be Page 4 5
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
occupied unless a phasing plan for the entire development, which shall include timing of delivery of affordable units, provision of footpath and road linkages to the adjacent sites and provision of open space and play park, has been submitted for the further written approval of the Planning Authority and thereafter the construction is undertaken in accordance with the plan unless the Council provide written agreement to the contrary – in the interests of the ensuring pedestrian and vehicular connectivity, facilitating the future Link Road in accordance with the Development Framework; (19) that no dwellinghouse hereby granted permission shall be occupied unless the Proposed Playground Area as indicated on plan no L(--)006 rev F and L(--)002 rev L is completed, laid out and equipped in accordance with a detailed scheme, including sections through the land north-south and a programme of future maintenance, which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The approved ‘Play Area’ shall not be thereafter used for any purpose other than a Play Area – in order to ensure the timeous and future provision of play facilities within the site; (20) that no part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied unless a plan and report illustrating appropriate management proposals for the care and maintenance of all trees to be retained and any new areas of planting (to include timing of works and inspections) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The proposals shall be carried out in complete accordance with such plan and report as may be so approved - in order to preserve.the character and visual amenity of the area; (21) that none of the affordable housing flats hereby granted planning permission shall be occupied unless (a) a scheme detailing cycle storage provision has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the planning authority, and thereafter implemented in full accordance with said scheme; and (b) further details of the proposed car park layout are submitted to, and approved in writing by the planning authority, and thereafter implemented in full accordance with said scheme – in the interests of road safety and encouraging more sustainable modes of travel; (22) that no part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied unless details of the zero and low carbon equipment to be incorporated into the development and predicted carbon emissions, using SAP or SBEM calculations, have been approved in writing by the planning authority and unless the equipment has been installed in accordance with those approved details - to ensure this development complies with requirement for on-site carbon emissions contained in Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) and specified in the City Council's relevant published Supplementary Planning Guidance 'Low and Zero Carbon Buildings'; (23) that no residential unit on the east or west side of the Link Road respectively shall be occupied unless the vehicular access roads and pedestrian footpaths relative to that section have been constructed to the legal boundary of the land in the applicant’s ownership (even if this requires the demolition of a mutually owned wall) as shown on drawing no’s L(--)006 rev F and L(--)002 rev L unless the planning authority has given written consent for the variation – in the interests of ensuring pedestrian and vehicular connectivity, facilitating a future link to the existing site to the east and prospective site to the west, and in accordance with the adopted Development Framework; (24) that no development, including SUDS embankments, should be constructed within the Page 5 6
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
modelled 1 in 200 year flood envelope except indicated road infrastructure crossing the flood plain which must be built at present ground levels unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with SEPA – in order to limit potential flooding as a result of the proposal; and (25) that no development shall take place within the application site until the application has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work which shall include post-excavation and publication work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the planning authority – in the interests of protecting items of historical importance as may exist within the application site.
INFORMATIVES 1. That, except as the Planning Authority may otherwise agree in writing, (a) no piling work shall be carried out; and (b) no construction or demolition work shall take place outwith the hours of 7.00 am to 7.00 pm Mondays to Fridays; 9.00 am to 4.00 pm Saturdays; or at any time on Sundays; except (on all days) for works inaudible outwith the application site boundary. [For the avoidance of doubt, this would generally allow internal finishing work, but not the use of machinery] in the interests of residential amenity.
2. It is recommended that the CEMP is submitted at least 2 months prior to the commencement of any works on site; this is to allow the necessary agencies sufficient time to fully review the mitigation proposals to avoid any potential delays to the project moving forward.
The Convener moved, seconded by Councillor Corall:- (a) that the application be approved, subject to the conclusion of the legal agreement and the conditions set out in the report; (b) that officers be instructed to enter into discussions with the developer with a view to securing the construction of the 12 affordable housing units within the first 160 units on the wider Friarsfield Development Framework site – to ensure delivery of affordable housing should the completion of the link road not proceed; and (c) that officers be instructed to enter into discussions with the developer to ensure that appropriate temporary traffic calming measures were provided on Friarsfield Road until the link road was completed.
Councillor Boulton moved as an amendment, seconded by Councillor Jennifer Stewart:- That consideration of the application be deferred to the next meeting of the Planning Development Management Committee to allow further discussion with the developer in relation to mitigation of the roads concerns; the production of a phasing plan; and evidence that the link road would be delivered.
On a division, there voted:- for the motion (9) – the Convener; and Councillors Corall, Cormie, Crockett, Jaffrey, Lawrence, MacGregor, Jean Morrison and Sandy Stuart; for Page 6 7
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
the amendment (6) – the Vice Convener; and Councillors Boulton, Greig, Malik, Jennifer Stewart and Thomson.
The Committee resolved :- to adopt the motion..
A944 PARK AND RIDE, KINGSWELLS - LINK TO PRIME FOUR - 141578
6. The Committee had before it a report by the Head of Planning and Sustainable Development which recommended :-
That the Committee approve the application for the construction of new lengths of road at the A944 Park and Ride Car Park, Kingswells, to enable alternative routes of bus access through the site, subject to the following conditions:- (1) That the development hereby approved shall not come into use unless the car parking areas, shared use path, crossing point, height restriction barriers and landscaping hereby granted planning permission have been constructed, drained, laid-out and demarcated in accordance with drawing No. 1/P/D5343/R/01A of the plans hereby approved or such other drawing as may subsequently be submitted and approved in writing by the planning authority. Such areas shall not thereafter be used for any other purpose other than the purpose of the parking of cars ancillary to the development and use thereby granted approval - in the interests of public safety and the free flow of traffic; and (2) that the development hereby appoved shall not come into use unless suitable measures have been put in place to promote bus only access along the new length of road. Prior to commencement of work on site, details of such measures shall be submitted for the further written approval of the planning authority and thereafter shall be carried out in full accordance with said scheme – in order to restrict the use of the new road to buses only.
The Committee resolved :- to approve the recommendation.
DECLARATIONS OF INTE RESTS
Councillor Jean Morrison MBE declared an interest in the following item by virtue of her role as the Council’s representative on Langstane Housing Association.
Councillor Jennifer Stewart declared an interest in the following item by virtue of her involvement with Somebody Cares, the charity organisation which presently occupied the site under consideration.
Both Members withdrew from the meeting during consideration of the item. Page 7 8
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
80 SUMMERHILL ROAD - 141755
7. The Committee had before it a report by the Head of Planning and Sustainable Development which recommended :-
That the Committee express a willingness to approve the application for the construction of 26 affordable flats, but to withhold the issue of the consent document until a legal agreement was secured to ensure the development was restricted to solely affordable housing, as well as the agreement of developer contributions towards primary and secondary education, the core path network and the Strategic Transport Fund, and subject to the following conditions:- (1) That none of the flats with balconies proposed, as identified on drawing no APL_10 Rev A, shall be occupied unless the balconies have been provided for use – in order to ensure the balconies are delivered as part of the scheme, their provision considered necessary to provide useable amenity space for residents of the development in accordance with policy D2; (2) that notwithstanding the details shown on drawing no. APL_10 rev A or any drawing superseding this and agreed with the planning authority, the balcony on the western elevation of Block B at third floor level shall be omitted from the scheme – in order to avoid any detriment to the privacy of neighbouring properties; (3) that no development other than works of demolition and site clearance shall take place unless it is carried out in full accordance with a scheme to address any significant risks from contamination on the site that has been approved in writing by the planning authority. The scheme shall follow the procedures outlined in "Planning Advice Note 33 Development of Contaminated Land" and shall be conducted by a suitably qualified person in accordance with best practice as detailed in "BS10175 Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites – Code Of Practice" and other best practice guidance and shall include (a) an investigation to determine the nature and extent of contamination; (b) a site-specific risk assessment; (c) a remediation plan to address any significant risks and ensure the site is fit for the use proposed and (d) verification protocols to demonstrate compliance with the remediation plan. The dwelling shall not be occupied unless (a) any long term monitoring and reporting that may be required by the approved scheme of contamination or remediation plan or that otherwise has been required in writing by the planning authority is being undertaken; and (b) a report specifically relating to the dwelling has been submitted and approved in writing by the planning authority that verifies that remedial works to fully address contamination issues related to the dwelling has been carried out, unless the planning authority has given written consent for a variation. The flats shall not be occupied unless a report has been submitted and approved in writing by the planning authority that verifies that the remedial works have been carried out in full accordance with the remediation plan, unless the planning authority has given written consent for a variation - to ensure that the site is suitable for use and fit for human occupation; (4) that all planting, seeding and turfing comprised in the approved scheme of landscaping (drawing no APL_30 Rev A) shall be Page 8 9
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
carried out in the first planting season following the completion of the development and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a size and species similar to those originally required to be planted, or in accordance with such other scheme as may be submitted to and approved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority - in the interests of the amenity of the area; (5) that no development shall take place unless a scheme for external lighting has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and thereafter implemented in full accordance with said scheme - in the interest of public safety; (6) that no development shall take place unless samples of all external finishing materials to the roof and walls of the development hereby approved has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the planning authority and thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the details so agreed - in the interests of visual amenity; (7) that the visibility splay as shown in drawing no 900 Rev 4 hereby approved shall be provided and maintained free of any obstruction above 1 metre in height (measured from the level of the public carriageway) from the first occupation of the development and shall be maintained in perpetuity – in the interests of road safety, to ensure that vehicles entering or exiting the access can undertake the manoeuvre safely and with minimum interference to the safety and free flow of traffic on Summerhill Road; (8) that no development shall commence until details of the SuDS sub- base have been provided and approved by the Planning Authority (in consultation with SEPA), that demonstrate a minimum depth of 500mm of the sub-base from the porous block paving. Thereafter no unit within the development shall be occupied until such time as the agreed scheme of drainage has been implemented in full, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the planning authority – in order to ensure an acceptable level of SuDS treatment; (9) that no unit within the development hereby granted planning permission shall be occupied unless provision has been made within the application site for refuse storage and disposal in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority – in order to preserve the amenity of the neighbourhood and in the interests of public health; and (10) that the development hereby approved shall not be occupied unless the car, cycle and motorcycle parking areas have been constructed, drained, laid-out and demarcated in accordance with the drawing of the plan hereby approved, or such other drawing as may subsequently be submitted and approved in writing by the planning authority. Such areas shall not thereafter be used for any other purpose - in the interests of public safety, encouraging sustainable modes of travel and the free flow of traffic.
INFORMATIVES
1. During construction work the applicant and/or the developer should remain vigilant for signs of bats, if they come across any bats or any signs of bats, all work in
Page 9 10
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
that area must cease immediately and Scottish Natural Heritage must be contacted for further advice.
2. It should be noted that as bats are a European Protected Species, as listed in the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 it is illegal to: • Deliberately kill, injure, disturb or capture/take European Protected Species of animal • Damage or destroy the breeding sites or resting places of such animals.
The Committee resolved :- to approve the recommendation.
UNITS 1-3, UNION GLEN - 141430
8. The Committee had before it a report by the Head of Planning and Sustainable Development which recommended :-
That the Committee express a willingness to approve the application for the demolition of existing industrial units and the erection of an apart-hotel comprising 71 room suites with associated parking and landscaping, but to withhold the issue of the consent document until the applicant had entered into a legal agreement with the Council to secure developer contributions towards works to the core path network; environmental and access improvements in the area; and the Strategic Transport Fund, and subject to the following conditions:- (1) that no development other than the works of demolition/site clearance shall take place within the application site until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work which shall include post- excavation and publication work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the planning authority - in the interests of protecting items of historical importance as may exist within the application site; (2) that no development shall take place unless a scheme, including submission of material samples, detailing all external finishing materials to the roof and walls of the development hereby approved has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the planning authority and thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the details so agreed - in the interests of visual amenity; (3) that the development hereby granted planning permission shall not be occupied unless all drainage works detailed on Plan No 107549/2001, as set out in the Drainage Assessment dated 17/12/2014 and submitted in support of this application by Fairhurst, or such other plan as may subsequently be approved in writing by the planning authority for the purpose have been installed in complete accordance with the said plan - in order to safeguard water qualities in adjacent watercourses and to ensure that the proposed development can be adequately drained; (4) that all proposed stairwell and amenity room windows on the west elevation of the proposed development hereby approved shall not be fitted
Page 10 11
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
otherwise than with with obscure glass to a minimal level 2 obscuration unless the planning authority has given prior written approval for a variation - in the interests of protecting the privacy of neighbourng residential properties; (5) that the development hereby granted planning permission shall not be occupied unless a scheme detailing cycle storage provision has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the planning authority, and thereafter implemented in full accordance with said scheme - in the interests of encouraging more sustainable modes of travel; (6) that the development hereby granted planning permission shall not be occupied unless provision has been made within the application site for refuse storage and disposal in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority - in order to preserve the amenity of the neighbourhood and in the interests of public health; (7) that no development shall take place, other than the works of demolition/site clearance, unless it is carried out in full accordance with a scheme to address any significant risks from contamination on the site, and such scheme has been approved in writing by the planning authority. The scheme shall follow the procedures outlined in Planning Advice Note 33 Development of Contaminated Land and shall be conducted by a suitably qualified person in accordance with best practice as detailed in BS10175 Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites - Code of Practice and other best practice guidance and shall include (a) an investigation to determine the nature and extent of contamination; (b) a site- specific risk assessment; (c) a remediation plan to address any significant risks and ensure the site is fit for the use proposed. No building(s) on the development site shall be occupied unless (a) any long term monitoring and reporting that may be required by the approved scheme of contamination or remediation plan or that otherwise has been required in writing by the planning authority is being undertaken and (b) a report specifically relating to the building(s) has been submitted and approved in writing by the planning authority that verifies that remedial works to fully address contamination issues related to the building(s) have been carried out, unless the planning authority has given written consent for a variation. The final building on the application site shall not be occupied unless a report has been submitted and approved in writing by the planning that verifies that completion of the remedial works for the entire application site, unless the planning authority has given written consent for a variation - in order to ensure that the site is fit for human occupation; (8) that the development hereby approved shall not be occupied unless the parking areas hereby granted planning permission have been constructed, drained, laid-out and demarcated in accordance with drawing No. L(00)10 Rev B of the plans hereby approved or such other drawing as may subsequently be submitted and approved in writing by the planning authority. Such areas shall not thereafter be used for any other purpose other than the purpose of the parking of cars or motorcycles ancillary to the development and use thereby granted approval - in the interests of public safety and the free flow of traffic; (9) that the staff changing rooms as shown on the approved plan Ref L(00)10 Rev B, or such other plan as may subsequently be approved in writing by the planning authority for the purpose, shall have been provided in accordance with the details hereby approved prior to first occupation of the building and retained thereafter at all Page 11 12
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
times for such use - to ensure suitable facilities to support and promote sustainable modes of travel; (10) that no development shall take place unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing a detailed Green Travel Plan and Travel Information Pack, which should be site specific and outline measures to deter the use of the private car and promote all kinds of sustainable travel and provide detailed monitoring arrangements, modal split targets and associated penalties for not meeting targets - in order to encourage more sustainable forms of travel to the development; (11) that the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) required to deliver the proposed taxi drop off/pick up area, as per drawing number L(00)10 Revision B, is in place prior to occupation of the development hereby approved, or any other such timescale agreed by the planning authority, and the total cost of all works including the promotion of the TRO are met by the applicant - in the interests of public safety and the free flow of traffic.
INFORMATIVES
1. It is recommended that no construction or demolition work shall take place: (a) outwith the hours of 7.00 am to 7.00 pm Mondays to Fridays; (b) outwith the hours of 9.00 am to 4.00 pm Saturdays; or (c) at any time on Sundays, except (on all days) for works inaudible outwith the application site boundary. [For the avoidance of doubt, this would generally allow internal finishing work, but not the use of machinery] - in the interests of residential amenity.
2. It is recommended that the applicant contact Aberdeen City Waste Aware section to ascertain further information regarding refuse storage/removal. Waste Team - Tel 08456 080919 / E-mail - [email protected]
3. It is recommended that consideration be given to any potential noise related issues to surrounding residents due to plant installed on site.
4. A Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) will be required for the proposed taxi drop off/pick up area as per drawing number L(00)10 Revision B. It should be noted that the applicant has responsibility for applying for the TRO.
The Convener moved, seconded by Councillor Corall, that the application be approved in accordance with the recommendation contained within the report.
Councillor Thomson moved as an amendment, seconded by Councillor Boulton:- That the application be refused due to the loss of the three ongoing businesses in the industrial units and the effect on employment; on the grounds that the height and massing of the development would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the surrounding area; and due to concerns over the minimal level of car parking to be provided.
Page 12 13
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
On a division, there voted:- for the motion (9) – the Convener; and Councillors Corall, Cormie, Crockett, Lawrence, MacGregor, Malik, Jean Morrison MBE, and Sandy Stuart; for the amendment (6) – the Vice Convener; and Councillors Boulton, Greig, Jaffrey, Jennifer Stewart and Thomson.
The Committee resolved :- to adopt the motion.
DECLARATION OF INTER EST
Councillor Sandy Stuart declared a personal interest in the following item by virtue of him knowing the applicant, and chose to withdraw from the meeting during consideration of the item.
16 VICTORIA STREET, DYCE - 141147
9. The Committee had before it a report by the Head of Planning and Sustainable Development which recommended :-
That the Committee approve the application for planning permission for an extension to the building at 16 Victoria Street to form bed and breakfast accommodation, subject to the following conditions:- (1) That occupation of the hereby approved development shall not take place unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority a detailed scheme of landscaping for the site, which scheme shall include proposed areas of tree/shrub planting in particular along the street frontage including details of numbers, densities, locations, species, sizes and stage of maturity at planting - in the interests of the amenity of the area; (2) that all planting, seeding and turfing comprised in the approved scheme of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting season following the completion of the development and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a size and species similar to those originally required to be planted, or in accordance with such other scheme as may be submitted to and approved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority - in the interests of the amenity of the area; (3) that the use hereby granted planning permission shall not take place unless provision has been made within the application site for refuse storage and disposal in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. Details shall include the location of refuse storage area - in order to preserve the amenity of the neighbourhood and in the interests of public health; (4) that the development hereby approved shall not be occupied unless the car parking areas hereby granted planning permission have been constructed, drained, laid-out and demarcated in accordance with the approved plans hereby approved or such Page 13 14
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
other drawing as may subsequently be submitted and approved in writing by the planning authority. Such areas shall not thereafter be used for any other purpose other than the purpose of the parking of cars ancillary to the development and use thereby granted approval - in the interests of public safety and the free flow of traffic; and (5) that no development shall take place unless a scheme of all drainage works designed to meet the requirements of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and thereafter no part of the development shall be occupied unless the drainage has been installed in complete accordance with the said scheme - in order to safeguard water qualities in adjacent watercourses and to ensure that the development can be adequately drained.
The Committee resolved :- to approve the recommendation.
DONSIDE PHASE 2, GORDON MILLS ROAD - 140823
10. The Committee had before it a report by the Head of Planning and Sustainable Development which recommended :-
That the Committee approve the application for planning permission for the erection of 24 flats in a 7, 8 and 9 storey block and associated infrastructure, but to withhold the issue of the consent document pending agreement of a suitable mechanism to secure developer contributions towards community facilities, and subject to the following conditions:- (1) That no development shall take place unless a scheme detailing all external finishing materials to the roofs, walls and hard surfaces of the development hereby approved has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the planning authority and thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the details so agreed - in the interests of visual amenity; (2) that the full details of the compensatory storage proposals, including cross sections and drawings clearly showing how the scheme will fill and drain freely during a flood event, are agreed with relevant parties including SEPA and implemented in full prior to the commencement of development. The detailed proposals are to be designed in accordance with Appendix C of the Flood Risk Assessment (dated 1 March 2012) and the plan of “Flood Extents” ref 62299/WS/11 (dated 14 March 2012) or other as so agreed with the planning authority – in the interests of preventing flooding; (3) that the existing piling and any retaining structures shall not be removed or altered unless a detailed method statement, including measures for satisfactorily dealing with contaminated land, has been submitted to and agreed in writing with the planning authority – in order to ensure that there is no adverse impact on the river; (4) that the development hereby granted permission shall not be occupied unless the agreed compensatory storage have been implemented in full and are fully available for use; (5) that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall be carried out unless there has been Page 14 15
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
submitted to and approved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority a further detailed scheme of landscaping for the site, which scheme shall include indications of all existing trees and landscaped areas on the land, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development, and the proposed areas of tree/shrub planting including details of numbers, densities, locations, species, sizes and stage of maturity at planting - in the interests of the amenity of the area; (6) that all planting, seeding and turfing comprised in the approved scheme of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting season following the completion of the development and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a size and species similar to those originally required to be planted, or in accordance with such other scheme as may be submitted to and approved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority - in the interests of the amenity of the area; (7) that no development shall take place unless a scheme for external lighting has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and thereafter implemented in full accordance with said scheme - in the interest of public safety and wildlife; (8) that no development shall take place unless there has been submitted, at least two months prior to the commencement of any works, and approved in writing by, the planning authority (in consultation with SEPA and other agencies such as SNH as appropriate) a site specific construction method statement for all works, including to the river bank and including the sheet piling, and construction of wildlife corridor and any other works affecting the river bank. The method statement shall include methods for the prevention of pollution reaching the River Don, including measures to control dust, run-off, timing of works in relation to water levels and the management of waste. The scheme shall be implemented in complete accordance with details as so approved and work shall not take place unless the measures as so agreed are in place and fully operational - to control pollution of air, water and land; (9) that the development shall not take place unless full details are provided of the surface water drainage system to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority in consultation with SEPA. The development shall not be occupied unless the agreed details have been implemented and are available for use – in the interests of the water environment and flood prevention; (10) that no development shall take place that alters the riverbank unless there has been submitted to that full details are provided of the treatment of the river banks to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority in consultation with SEPA and the agreed details are implemented in full prior to the occupation of the development – in the interests of protecting the riverside environment; (11) that notwithstanding the refuse storage indicated on the plans, no development shall take place unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority details of the siting, design and materials of the refuse storage. The development shall not be occupied unless the refuse storage as so approved has been implemented on site and is ready for use – in the interests of public safety and visual amenity; (12) that no development shall take place unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning Page 15 16
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
authority, details of cycle storage. The development shall not be occupied unless the cycle storage as so approved has been provided and is available for use – in the interests of encouraging the use of sustainable modes of transport and visual amenity; (13) that no development shall take place unless there have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the planning authority, reports on pre- construction surveys by suitably qualified specialists, for wildlife, including foxes, badgers, watervoles, birds and otters. Any measures recommended shall be implemented fully in accordance with the report as so agreed and in accordance with recommended timescales – in order to ensure protection of wildlife; and (14) that the development hereby approved shall not be occupied unless the car parking areas hereby granted planning permission have been constructed, drained, laid-out and demarcated in accordance with the approved plans hereby approved or such other drawing as may subsequently be submitted and approved in writing by the planning authority. Such areas shall not thereafter be used for any other purpose other than the purpose of the parking of cars ancillary to the development and use thereby granted approval - in the interests of public safety and the free flow of traffic.
The Committee resolved :- (i) to approve the recommendation; and (ii) to instruct that officers approach the developer and request that an accessible external water tap be considered for inclusion in the proposals.
44 BEDFORD ROAD - 141664
11. The Committee had before it a report by the Head of Planning and Sustainable Development which recommended :-
That the Committee express a willingness to approve the application for the erection of a three and a half storey serviced apartment development with associated car parking, but to withhold the issue of the consent document until the applicant had entered into a legal agreement to ensure that the development remained in single ownership and that no apartment could be occupied for more than 90 days by the same occupant, and subject to the following conditions:- (1) That no development pursuant to this planning permission shall take place, nor shall any part of the development hereby approved be occupied, unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, a detailed scheme of site and plot boundary enclosures for the entire development hereby granted planning permission. None of the buildings hereby granted planning permission shall be occupied unless the said scheme has been implemented in its entirety - in order to preserve the amenity of the neighbourhood; (2) that no development shall take place unless a scheme detailing all external finishing materials to the roof and walls of the development hereby approved has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the planning authority and thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the details so agreed - in the interests of visual amenity. For the Page 16 17
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
avoidance of doubt, samples of the finishing materials should be provided to inform the planning authority's assessment; (3) that the development hereby approved shall not be occupied unless the Car, cycle and motorycycle parking areas hereby granted planning permission have been constructed, drained, laid- out and demarcated in accordance with drawing No. 015a of the plans hereby approved or such other drawing as may subsequently be submitted and approved in writing by the planning authority. Such areas shall not thereafter be used for any other purpose other than the purpose of the parking of cars ancillary to the development and use thereby granted approval - in the interests of public safety, encouraging sustainable modes of travel and the free flow of traffic; (4) that the serviced apartments hereby granted planning permission shall not be occupied unless a scheme for the provision of foul sewerage and wholesome water facilities has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and that the said scheme has been implemented - in the interests of public health; (5) that the use hereby granted planning permission shall not take place unless provision has been made within the application site for refuse storage and disposal in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority – in order to preserve the amenity of the neighbourhood and in the interests of public health; (6) that the building hereby approved shall not be occupied unless a scheme detailing compliance with the Council's 'Low and Zero Carbon Buildings' supplementary guidance has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority, and any recommended measures specified within that scheme for the reduction of carbon emissions have been implemented in full - to ensure that this development complies with requirements for reductions in carbon emissions pecified in the City Council's relevant published Supplementary Guidance document, 'Low and Zero Carbon Buildings'; (7) that the use hereby approved shall not be brought into use until such time as a sample Residential Travel Pack has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the planning authority, and thereafter prominently displayed for the benefit of occupants. For the avoidance of doubt, this should be site-specific and detail the sustainable transport options available to occupants of the development - in the interests of promoting sustainable travel; (8) that no development pursuant to this grant of planning permission shall be undertaken unless street furniture on Bedford Place has been re-sited in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted and agreed in writing by the planning authority – in order to ensure that existing street furniture is not inappropriately sited relative to bedroom windows and the proposed vehicular access; and (9) that prior to the commencement of any works on site, a detailed scheme for surface water drainage shall be submitted to and agreed by the Planning Authority, in consultation with SEPA and Scottish Water. This shall include drainage calculations for a sensitivity test up to a 200 year return period. Thereafter, all work shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme – to ensure adequate protection of the water environment from surface water runoff.
Page 17 18
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
The Convener moved, seconded by Councillor Cormie:- That the application be approved in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
Councillor Boulton moved as an amendment, seconded by the Vice Convener:- That consideration of the application be deferred to allow further discussion of the original plans with the developer which would alleviate the safety concerns raised in the objection by the Roads Project Team, and to request that the application then come back before Committee for consideration.
On a division, there voted:- for the motion (7) – the Convener; and Councillors Corall, Cormie, Crockett, Lawrence, Malik and Sandy Stuart; for the amendment (8) – the Vice Convener; and Councillors Boulton, Greig, Jaffrey, MacGregor, Jean Morrison MBE, Jennifer Stewart and Thomson.
The Committee resolved :- to adopt the amendment.
DECLARATIONS OF INTE RESTS
The Convener declared an interest in the following item of business by virtue of having been involved in the property transaction while he was employed by NHS Grampian, and withdrew from the meeting. Thereupon, the Vice Convener took the Chair.
Councillor Crockett also declared an interest by virtue of his membership of the Board of NHS Grampian and withdrew from the meeting during consideration of the item.
MAY BAIRD AVENUE, ASHGROVE - 140810
12. The Committee had before it a report by the Head of Planning and Sustainable Development which recommended :-
That the Committee express a willingness to approve the application for the erection of 46 apartments with associated car parking, landscaping and external works, subject to the conclusion of a legal agreement to secure (a) 25% affordable housing provision on adjoining land, as described in application P141696; (b) developer contributions in relation to primary education in line with the assessment carried out by the Council’s Developer Obligations team; and the Strategic Transport Fund as advised by the Roads Development Management team; and (c) participation in a Car Club, including leasing and associated administrative costs for a single vehicle for a period of 3 years, in order to mitigate the identified shortfall in car parking, and subject to the following conditions:- (1) That no development pursuant to this consent shall commence on site until a site specific Construction Method Statement has been submitted to and Page 18 19
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with SEPA. All works on site must be undertaken in accordance with the approved CMS unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority - In order to minimise the impacts of necessary demolition/construction works on the environment; (2) prior to the commencement of any works on site, a detailed scheme for surface water drainage shall be submitted to and agreed by the Planning Authority, in consultation with SEPA. Thereafter, all work shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme – to ensure adequate protection of the water environment from surface water runoff; (3) that no development besides excavations and laying of foundations shall take place unless a scheme detailing all external finishing materials to the roof and walls of the development hereby approved has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the planning authority and thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the details so agreed - in the interests of visual amenity; (4) that the development hereby approved shall not be occupied unless the car, cycle and motorycycle parking areas hereby granted planning permission have been constructed, drained, laid-out and demarcated in accordance with drawing No. L(90)-100-D of the plans hereby approved or such other drawing as may subsequently be submitted and approved in writing by the planning authority. Such areas shall not thereafter be used for any other purpose other than the purpose of the parking of cars ancillary to the development and use thereby granted approval - in the interests of public safety, encouraging sustainable modes of travel and the free flow of traffic; (5) that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall be carried out unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority a further detailed scheme of landscaping for the site, which scheme shall include indications of all existing trees and landscaped areas on the land, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development, and the proposed areas of tree/shrub planting including details of numbers, densities, locations, species, sizes and stage of maturity at planting - in the interests of the amenity of the area; (6) that all planting, seeding and turfing comprised in the approved scheme of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting season following the completion of the development and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a size and species similar to those originally required to be planted, or in accordance with such other scheme as may be submitted to and approved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority - in the interests of the amenity of the area; (7) that no development shall take place unless a plan showing those trees to be removed and those to be retained and a scheme for the protection of all trees to be retained on the site during construction works has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority and any such scheme as may have been approved has been implemented - in order to ensure adequate protection for the trees on site during the construction of the development; (8) that no materials, supplies, plant, machinery, spoil, changes in ground levels or construction activities shall be permitted within the protected areas specified in Page 19 20
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
the aforementioned scheme of tree protection 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 - in order to ensure. adequate protection for the trees on site during the construction of the development; (9) that no development shall take place unless there has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the planning authority (i) a scheme for the supervision of the arboricultural protection measures and works to include the time and method of site supervision, record keeping including updates and that this supervision is administered by a qualified arboriculturalist approved by the planning authority but instructed by the applicant; and (ii) a plan and report illustrating appropriate management proposals for the care and maintenance of all of the trees to be retained and any new areas of planting (to include timing of works and inspections) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. The proposals and scheme of supervision shall subsequently be carried out in complete accordance any information thereby approved in writing by the planning authority - in order to ensure adequate protection for the trees on site during the construction of the development and in order to preserve the character and visual amenity of the area; (10) that no unit within the development hereby granted planning permission hall be occupied unless provision has been made within the application site for refuse storage and disposal in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority – in order to preserve the amenity of the neighbourhood and in the interests of public health; (11) that the buildings hereby approved shall not be occupied unless a scheme detailing compliance with the Council's 'Low and Zero Carbon Buildings' supplementary guidance has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority, and any recommended measures specified within that scheme for the reduction of carbon emissions have been implemented in full - to ensure that this development complies with requirements for reductions in carbon emissions pecified in the City Council's relevant published Supplementary Guidance document, 'Low and Zero Carbon Buildings'; (12) that no unit within the development hereby approved shall be occupied until such time as a 'Car Club' only parking space has been made available at a prominent position within the application site, in accordance with site plan L(90)-100-D of the plans hereby approved, or such other plan as has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority for this purpose -in order to ensure that the identified shorftall in on-site parking is adequately mitigated; (13) that no development pursuant to this planning permission shall take place, nor shall any part of the development hereby approved be occupied, unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, a detailed scheme of site and plot boundary enclosures for the entire development hereby granted planning permission. None of the buildings hereby granted planning permission shall be occupied unless the said scheme has been implemented in its entirety - in order to preserve the amenity of the neighbourhood; (14) that no development pursuant to this grant of planning permission shall be undertaken unless a further detailed scheme of the footpath links within areas of open space has been submitted to any agreed in writing by the planning authority, in consultation with the Council's Page 20 21
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
Roads Projects Team. Thereafter no residential unit within the development shall be occupied until such time as those approved routes have been constructed and made available for use in accordance with the agreed scheme - in order to ensure that the shared surface paths are designed to the required standard, thereby enhancing recreational access and permeability; and (15) that no unit within the development hereby approved shall be occupied until the site access from May Baird Avenue and associated upgrading of May Baird Avenue to adoptable standard has been carried out in accordance with drawing L(90)-100- D, or such other drawing as has been submitted to and approved in writing for this purpose - in order to ensure appropriate vehicular and pedestrian access to the development.
INFORMATIVES
Please note that in SEPA's consultation response, it was stipulated that the required Construction Method Statement (CMS) should be submitted at least 2 months prior to the intended commencement of works, in order to give consultees sufficient time to review submissions.
The Committee resolved :- to approve the recommendation
At this juncture, the Vice Convener vacated the Chair in favour of the Convener upon his return.
LAND ADJACENT TO 169 QUEENS ROAD - 141815
13. The Committee had before it a report by the Head of Planning and Sustainable Development which recommended :-
That the Committee refuse the application for the conversion of ancillary accommodation to form a single dwellinghouse on the following grounds:- (1) That the proposed development would constitute backland development in the rear garden of 169 Queens Road. It would not have a public face to a street, would create a second building line behind an existing formal building line, and would suffer from a contrived access solution without adequate pedestrian access. The proposal would result in a form of development that was alien to the established density, character and pattern of development. It was considered to be contrary to the requirements of Policies D1 (Architecture and Placemaking), D2 (Design and Amenity) and H1 (Residential Areas) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan, Policies D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design) and H1 (Residential Areas) of the Proposed Local Development Plan and the Subdivision and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages Supplementary Guidance; and (2) due to the proximity of the building to the rear boundary with 8 Page 21 22
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
and 10 Kepplestone Avenue, the proposal could result in excessive overlooking of the private rear garden of these properties to the detriment of their residential amenity. This was contrary to the requirements of Policy H1 (Residential Areas) and the Subdivision and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages Supplementary Guidance.
The Committee resolved :- to approve the recommendation and refuse the application.
1 AND 2 ALBERT TERRACE GARDENS, PART OF 1, 2, 3 CARDEN TERRACE - 141587
14. The Committee had before it a report by the Head of Planning and Sustainable Development which recommended :-
That the Committee refuse the application for the erection of 2 blocks (incorporating 4 flats) with associated car parking and landscaping on the following grounds:- (1) That the proposal would be significantly detrimental to the character and appearance of the Albyn Place/Rubislaw Conservation areas and the setting of the adjacent listed buildings due to its inappropriate and poor design, the integration of feus resulting in the loss of the historic feu pattern, the removal of interfeu and boundary walls and through the introduction of a second building line facing Albert Terrace. This is contrary to Scottish Planning Policy, Scottish Historic Environment Policy, Historic Scotland Document ‘Managing Change in the Historic Environment: Boundaries’, the requirements of policies D1 (Architecture and Placemaking), D4 (Aberdeen’s Granite Heritage) and D5 (Built Heritage) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan and policies D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design) and D4 (Historic Environment), D5 (Our Granite Heritage) of the Proposed Local Development Plan, and the Subdivision and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages Supplementary Guidance; (2) that the proposal would result in a site layout dominated by hard surfacing between the proposed new buildings and 1, 2 and 3 Carden Terrace, and providing inadequate provision of outdoor amenity space for the entire development, both the new and existing buildings at 1, 2 and 3 Carden Terrace and 1 and 2 Albert Terrace Gardens and is consequently an over development of the site. This is contrary to the requirements of policy D2 (Design and Amenity) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan and policy D1 (Quality Design by Placemaking) of the Proposed Local Development Plan; (3) that the development would have a detrimental impact on the residential amenity of adjacent properties due to a loss of light to 2 Albert Terrace Gardens, and a loss of privacy to 2 and 3 Carden Terrace and the rear gardens of 1 and 2 Albert Terrace Gardens. This is contrary to the requirements of policy H1 (Residential Areas) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan, policy H1 (Residential Areas) of the Proposed Local Development Plan and the Subdivision and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages Supplementary Guidance; and (4) that the applicant has failed to provide sufficient information regarding the potential impact of the development Page 22 23
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
on the health of the trees covered under Tree Preservation Order No.15 on the boundary of the site with Albert Terrace. This is contrary to the requirements of policy NE5 (Trees and Woodlands) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan, policy NE5 (Trees and Woodlands) of the Proposed Local Development Plan and the Trees and Woodlands Supplementary Guidance.
The Committee resolved :- to approve the recommendation and refuse the application.
33A BURNS ROAD - 141274
15. The Committee had before it a report by the Head of Planning and Sustainable Development which recommended :-
That the Committee refuse the application for the erection of a single dwelling within the boundary of the existing property at 33A Burns Road on the following grounds:- (1) That the proposed development as a result of the plot location, shape and size was fundamentally at odds with the established character of the wider area and as a result would have a detrimental impact upon the amenity of existing residents in terms of privacy and the general enjoyment of their gardens, contrary to Policy D1 (Architecture and Design), Policy D2 (Design and Amenity) and Policy H1 (Residential Areas) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan (2012) and the Supplementary Guidance on The Sub-division and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages; (2) that the proposed development as a result of the plot location, shape and size would fail to provide a satisfactory level of amenity for future residents of the new house, specifically in relation to availability of daylight and lack of quality garden ground contrary to Policy D1 (Architecture and Design), Policy D2 (Design and Amenity) and Policy H1 (Residential Areas) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan (2012) and the Supplementary Guidance on The Sub-division and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages; and (3) that the proposed development was likely to require the removal of or cause damage to established trees which contribute to the character of the area, contrary to Policy NE5 (Trees and Woodlands) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan and the Supplementary Guidance on The Sub-division and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages.
The Committee resolved :- to approve the recommendation and refuse the application.
MATTER OF URGENCY
The Convener intimated that he had directed in terms of Section 50(B)(4)(b) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 that following item be considered as a matter of urgency to enable the response to the new Historic Environment Scotland Act 2014 to be submitted timeously.
Page 23 24
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 19 March 2015
HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT SCOTLAND ACT 2014: SECONDARY LEGISLATION
16. The Committee had before it a report by the Director of Communities, Housing and Infrastructure which set out the proposed consultation response to secondary legislation which underpinned the new Historic Environment Scotland Act 2014.
The report recommended:- that Committee approve the consultation response on the Historic Environment Scotland Act 2014: Secondary Legislation as set out in Appendix 1 of the report.
The Committee resolved :- to approve the recommendation. - RAMSAY MILNE, Convener ; and ANDREW FINLAYSON, Vice Convener
Page 24 Agenda Item 2.1
Planning Development Management Committee
27 WHITEHALL TERRACE, ABERDEEN
ERECTION OF BOUNDARY FENCE AND LEAN- TO EXTENSION OF EXISTING STUDIO
For: Mrs Olga Sevastyanova
Application Type: Detailed Planning Permission Advert : None Application Ref.: P150159 Advertised on: N/A Application Date: 25/02/2015 Committee Date: 23/04/2015 Officer : Andrew Miller Community Council : No response Ward: Hazlehead/Ashley/Queen's Cross(M received Greig/J Stewart/R Thomson/J Corall)
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve subject to conditions
Page 25 DESCRIPTION
The application site forms a one and half storey semi-detached dwelling, located on the western corner of Whitehall Terrace and Craigie Park. The dwelling dates from circa the 1920s, though has been altered in recent years. Within the rear garden of the dwelling is a relatively large one and a half storey studio building which is ancillary to the use of the dwelling.
The studio dates from the early 1990s and is a simple gabled roof building. An area of hardstanding, raised from the garden level by circa 300 mm is located to the front of the studio. The rear garden is enclosed by a random granite rubble approximately 1.2 metres in height. The mutual boundary with number 25 Whitehall Terrace is also supplemented with a diagonally slatted timber fence 1.7 metres in height though this only spans half of the boundary closest to the house.
The surrounding area is residential, with dwellings of a similar style and scale. It is located on the western edge of the Rosemount Conservation Area, with the Albyn Place/Rubislaw Conservation Area immediately to the west of the site.
RELEVANT HISTORY
91/0628 – Planning permission was granted by the then Planning Committee on 23 May 1991 for the erection of a studio in the rear garden. This was subject to the condition:
“that the use hereby approved shall ensure to the benefit of the present applicant only – in order that this permission may be reviewed in the event of the present applicant relinquishing interest therein.”
P111143 – Planning permission was sought for the removal of the condition granted under application reference 91/0628. The Development Management Sub Committee granted permission on 29 September 2011, subject to the following condition:
“that the studio shall not be used for any purpose other than that which is ancillary to the domestic use of the dwelling house – in order to preserve the amenity and character of the neighbourhood”
P140440 – Planning permission was sought for the change of use of 27 Whitehall Terrace from a dwelling (Use Class 9) to a mixed use of a dwelling and childminding (Use Class 10). The Planning Development Management Committee granted permission on 24 July 2014 subject to the following conditions:
“that no more than 10 children shall be accommodated within the childminding element of the mixed use at any given time – in order to ensure acceptable development in the interests of the amenity of the surrounding area.”
Page 26 and
“that the childminding use be restricted to the hours of 0800 to 1800 Monday to Friday – in order to preserve the amenity of the area during antisocial hours.”
In addition, the Committee requested that the applicant be made aware that additional screening should be sought along the boundary of 27 Whitehall Terrace with number 25. It was also requested the applicant make patrons of the childminding service aware of parking arrangements in the local area and to ensure patrons avoid parking in dangerous positions – e.g. double yellow lines at junctions.
PROPOSAL
Detailed planning permission is sought for the extension of a fence on the south eastern boundary of the rear garden with 25 Whitehall Terrace, and a lean to porch extension on the north eastern elevation of the studio building, on a raised platform.
Originally, the boundary would have been formed by a wall some one metre in height, though a diagonally slatted timber fence 1.7 metres in height was erected sometime later. The proposed fence would extend to the rear boundary of the property and would infill the 7 metre gap (approx.) to provide additional screening between the gardens of the application site and number 25 to the south east.
The extension to the studio would consist of a small lean to timber framed porch and would be open ended with a glazed roof. It would extend 5 metres along the frontage of the studio and protrude out from the front of studio by approximately 3 metres at the Craigie Park side of the studio and 2.2 metres at the other side, reaching a height of 2.5 metres. The open sided porch would be built up with vertical timber cladding to 1.2 metres. The applicant has indicated the porch would provide a sheltered area for buggies/prams of the users of the childminders operating out of the property.
Supporting Documents
All drawings and the supporting documents listed below relating to this application can be viewed on the Council’s website at http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=150159
On accepting the disclaimer enter the application reference quoted on the first page of this report.
Page 27 REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
The application has been referred to the Planning Development Management Committee because the application attracted 6 in time letters of objection. Accordingly, the application falls outwith the scope of the Council’s Scheme of Delegation.
CONSULTATIONS
Roads Development Management – No observations. Environmental Health – No observations. Enterprise, Planning & Infrastructure (Flooding) – No observations. Community Council – No response received.
REPRESENTATIONS
6 in time letters of objection have been received. The objections raised relate to the following matters –
1. The extension is out of keeping with the surrounding conservation area – no other properties have such large ancillary buildings in their rear gardens and this should not be allowed to get any bigger. 2. The porch would result in overdevelopment of the small garden. 3. The extension will overlook the properties in Craigie Park and will result in a lack of privacy and increased noise. 4. Over 30 objections were made to the change of use application but the proposal was still passed. There are concerns that every year the applicant will make additional applications so they can gradually increase the size of their business. 5. The plans submitted by the applicant are of a poor standard, and fail to show a large shed, mature trees and a trampoline in the garden. 6. The porch will enable the business to have a separate entrance/exit, which would mean the business would no longer be ancillary and in breach of conditions attached to the studio building. 7. No details of material finishes have been included though it is to be an open porch. There would be nothing stopping the applicant adding glass at a later date. 8. With every application, the residential standing of the Conservation Area is being eroded away.
The following point is not a material consideration for this application:
9. The garden should be used to provide further off-street parking for the childminders, due to the current parking pressures within the area.
PLANNING POLICY
Page 28
National Policy and Guidance
Scottish Planning Policy (SPP)
Development should pay regard to the layout, design, materials, scale, siting and use of listed buildings, as well as their surrounding area’s character and appearance. It also states development should have a neutral effect on the character or appearance of a conservation area.
Aberdeen Local Development Plan
H1 – Residential Areas
Within existing residential areas, proposals for non-residential uses will be refused unless:
1. they are considered complementary to residential use; or 2. it can be demonstrated that the use would cause no conflict with, or any nuisance to, the enjoyment of existing residential amenity.
D1 – Architecture and Placemaking
New development must be designed with due consideration for its context and make a positive contribution to its setting. Factors such as siting, scale, massing, colour, materials, orientation, details, proportions, coupled with the physical characteristics of the surrounding area, will be considered in assessing that contribution.
D5 – Built Heritage
Proposals affecting Conservation Areas will only be permitted if the comply with Scottish Planning Policy.
Supplementary Guidance
The Council’s Householder Development Guide – Supplementary Guidance is a material consideration in this instance. It states that extensions should be architecturally compatible in design and scale with the original house and the surrounding area and provides general principles against which householder development can be assessed.
In relation to boundary enclosures, it states that they should be of a scale and form appropriate to their context.
Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan
Related policies within adopted ALDP in brackets after policies, all of which have similar principles.
Page 29
H1 – Residential Areas (H1 – Residential Areas)D1 – Quality Placemaking by Design (D1 – Architecture and Placemaking) D4 – Historic Environment (D5 – Built Heritage)
Other Relevant Material Considerations
None
EVALUATION
Sections 25 and 37(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) require that where, in making any determination under the planning acts, regard is to be had to the provisions of the development plan and that determination shall be made in accordance with the plan, so far as material to the application, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
Section 64 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 places a duty on planning authorities to preserve and enhance the character or appearance of conservation areas
The main considerations in this instance relate to the design and siting of the fence and porch and the impact on the character of the surrounding Conservation Area.
Design and Siting
Policy H1 of the ALDP states that all householder development should not constitute over development, have an unacceptable impact on the character or amenity of the surrounding area and should comply with the requirements of the Council’s Householder Development Guide – Supplementary Guidance (SG). Policy D1 states that all new development should be designed with due consideration for its context. Also, policy D5 requires new development that affects the Conservation Area should comply with the requirements of Scottish Planning Policy (SPP). SPP states that development within conservation areas should either preserve or enhance their character.
Relating to the fence, the SG states that all boundary enclosures should be appropriate to their context and should not detract from the street scene. In this instance the fence would be an extension of the existing fence that covers approximately half of the boundary with the attached neighbour. The proposed fence would match the style of the existing timber fence and would complete the gap currently in place between the existing fence and the rear boundary. The design of the proposed fence is considered suitable for its context in this case. In addition, the fence is also relatively hidden, and would not be readily visible from the surrounding streets. Accordingly, it is considered the fencing is designed and sited at a level appropriate for the amenity of the surrounding area.
Page 30 In relation to the porch, the SG states that all new extensions should be architecturally compatible with their parent dwelling. Whilst this policy specifically makes reference to dwellings, the principles contained within it are considered pertinent to extensions to ancillary buildings, such as the studio subject to this application. The porch would be a relatively small additional to the studio building, but the structure itself would not provide additional internal floor space for the porch, rather it would form a sheltered area to the front of the studio, which is in full compliance with the Council’s SG. Dark red timber would be used for the structure and the roof glazed. The open nature of the porch, coupled with the transparent roof proposed, would match the materials used in the dwelling, notably the conservatory to the rear of the house.
The garden contains sufficient space to accommodate the proposed porch, which would be accommodated upon an area of hardstanding to the front of the porch and would not diminish the provision of useable green areas of the garden . It would therefore not constitute overdevelopment of the site, taking up some 7.5 % of the overall external rear garden.
Overall, the proposed works are considered to be designed with due consideration for their context and are of a relatively small scale. Accordingly and for the specific reasons above, the proposals are considered to comply with the requirements of policies H1 and D1 of the ALDP, as well as guidance contained with the SG.
Furthermore, and owing to the minor scale and location of the proposal, it would be considered to have a neutral impact on the appearance of the Conservation Area, satisfying the requirements of SPP and subsequently policy D5 of the ALDP.
Matter Raised in Representations
Points 1 and 2 of the representations raised concerns that the porch would result in the overdevelopment of the site and would be out of keeping with the surrounding area. The above evaluation notes that the development is considered to be designed and sited without detriment to the appearance of the surrounding area, nor would it constitute overdevelopment.
Point 3 of the objections raised concerns that the porch would result in overlooking of properties in Craigie Park. No overlooking or loss of privacy to the detriment of the amenity of neighbouring houses would occur. The majority of the porch would look into the feu of number 27 itself and a slight outlook to Craigie Park, which itself is a wide road and a sufficient distance from the windows of houses on the opposite side of the road (at least 20 metres). That said; the porch itself is not of a nature where it is likely to be occupied by persons for a substantial period of time.
Point 4 raised concerns that the development will result in further planning applications that will gradually increase the size of the applicants business (childminding). The application in this instance is for the provision of a physical
Page 31 porch and fence, which would have no bearing on the numbers of children permitted as part of the application, and must be assessed as such.
Point 5 stated the plans provided were of a poor standard. Whilst the plans provided were hand drawn by the applicant, they were sufficient to validate the planning application, to describe the development, and to allow the Planning Authority to fully evaluate the proposal.
Point 6 raised concerns the application would enable the childminding business to operate with a separate entrance/exit from the house. However, the porch would simply provide an additional, covered area to the existing access, and would not in any way change how the business currently operates. Accordingly it would not result in a breach of the conditions attached to the studio.
Point 7 stated there were no details of the material finishes of the proposed works, and raised concerns that the open sided porch can be enclosed by glass at a later date without any control. Details of the material finishes were provided by the applicant and are noted in the description section above. The site falls within a conservation area, therefore any further works to the porch would require submission of a planning application.
Point 8 raised concerns that the residential standing of the Conservation Area is being eroded away with each application submitted for the property. The above evaluation notes that the proposals would have a neutral impact on the appearance of the Conservation Area.
Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan
The Proposed ALDP was approved at the meeting of the Communities, Housing and Infrastructure Committee of 28 October 2014. It constitutes the Council’s settled view as to what should be the content of the final adopted ALDP and is now a material consideration in the determination of planning applications, along with the adopted ALDP. The exact weight to be given to matters contained in the Proposed ALDP (including individual policies) in relation to specific applications will depend on whether: - these matters have been subject to public consultation through the Main Issues Report; and - the level of objection raised in relation these matters as part of the Main Issues Report; and - the relevance of these matters to the application under consideration The foregoing can only be assessed on a case by case basis. In relation to this particular application, the relevant policies and designations are similar to those of the adopted ALDP. Therefore the above evaluation is considered sufficient in respect of the requirements of the proposed ALDP.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve subject to conditions
Page 32
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION
The proposed fence and porch would be sited and designed at a level appropriate to the amenity of the surrounding area, in line with the requirements of policies H1 – Residential Areas and D1 – Architecture and Placemaking of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2012, as well as guidance contained within the Council’s Supplementary Guidance “Householder Development Guide”. The proposals will have a neutral impact on the character of the Rosemount Conservation Area, satisfying the requirements of Scottish Planning Policy and subsequently policy D5 – Built Heritage of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2012.
In addition, the proposals also comply with the requirements of the policies contained within the proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2015, insofar as they are relevant. Full consideration has been given to all matters raised in representation, however they neither outweigh the policy position above nor justify refusal of the application.
CONDITIONS
1. that no development shall take place unless samples of all external finishing materials to the porch hereby approved have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the planning authority and thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the details so agreed - in the interests of visual amenity.
Dr Margaret Bochel Head of Planning and Sustainable Development.
Page 33 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Agenda Item 2.2
Planning Development Management Committee
227 UNION STREET, ABERDEEN
ERECTION OF TABLE AND CHAIRS ON PAVEMENT
For: Greggs Plc
Application Type : Detailed Planning Permission Advert : Application Ref. : P150179 Advertised on: Application Date: 10/02/2015 Committee Date: Officer : Grace Harrison Community Council : No response Ward : Torry/Ferryhill (Y Allan/A Donnelly/J received Kiddie/G Dickson)
Page 41 RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Unconditionally
DESCRIPTION This application relates to a retail unit on the south side of Union Street, which is the principal thoroughfare for pedestrians, cars and public transport in Aberdeen City Centre. The unit (number 227) is currently occupied by a ‘Gregg’s’ hot food takeaway, which is on ground floor level with its shop frontage opening onto Union Street. It is neighboured by retail units on both sides with offices above. The site is located within the Union Street Conservation Area.
RELEVANT HISTORY None.
PROPOSAL This proposal is for a pavement café for patrons of the take away, consisting of two tables and eight chairs to be placed on the footway directly in front of the shop unit. Four portable freestanding barriers will form an enclosure. These barriers will be canvas separators between metal posts, 1m tall and 1.3m and 1.6m wide, featuring the company name and marketing slogans.
Supporting Documents
All drawings and the supporting documents listed below relating to this application can be viewed on the Council’s website at http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=150179
On accepting the disclaimer enter the application reference quoted on the first page of this report.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
The application has been referred to the Planning Development Management Committee because the Roads Development Management Team has objected to the proposals. Accordingly, the application falls outwith the scope of the Council’s Scheme of Delegation.
CONSULTATIONS
Roads Development Management – Object to this proposal. The location of the proposed pavement café is in an area of very high pedestrian flow and an obstruction on the footway would create a pinch point and trip hazard for pedestrians. Environmental Health – No observations Communities, Housing and Infrastructure (Flooding) – No observations
Page 42 Community Council – No response received.
REPRESENTATIONS None.
PLANNING POLICY National Policy and Guidance Scottish Planning Policy (2014) Proposals for development within conservation areas which will impact on their appearance, character or setting, should preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area.
Aberdeen Local Development Plan LDP Policy D1 – Architecture and Placemaking Policy D1 – Architecture and Placemaking states that development must be designed with due consideration for its context and make a positive contribution to its setting. Key factors in assessing proposals are siting, scale, massing, colour, materials, orientation, and details.
LDP Policy D5 – Built Heritage Policy D5 – Built Heritage states that proposals affecting Conservation Areas or Listed Buildings will only be permitted if they comply with Scottish Planning Policy. C1 – City Centre Development- Regional Development This policy states that the city centre is the preferred location for retail, commercial and leisure development serving a city-wide or regional market.
C2 – City Centre Business Zone and Union Street This policy states that the City Centre Business Zone is the preferred location for major retail developments.
Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan (LDP) The following policies in the Proposed LDP substantively reiterate those contained in the adopted 2012 LDP: • Policy D1 –Quality Placemaking by Design (see Policy D1 – Architecture and Placemaking in adopted LDP) • Policy D4 – Historic Environment (see Policy D5 – Built Heritage in adopted LDP) • Policy NC1 – City Centre Development- Regional Centre (see Policy C1 – City Centre Development- Regional Centre in adopted LDP) • Policy NC2 – City Centre Retail Core and Union Street (see Policy C2 – City Centre Business Zone and Union Street in adopted LDP).
Supplementary Guidance Harmony of Uses Supplementary Guidance Aberdeen City Council supports and encourages the provision of street cafes in the city centre in principle because they add vitality, colour, life and interest to the street scene. However, they should not obstruct public space or create a hazard
Page 43 for pedestrians, especially for blind, partially-sighted and other disabled people. Before agreeing to planning permission for a street café, the Council must ensure: 1) It does not constitute a hazard. There should be enough pavement width or equivalent space to accommodate the seating, tables and café without causing hazard to, or invading the privacy of, other adjacent uses, impeding access or egress from nearby buildings; or blocking a desire line. 2) It does not result in or contribute to inadequate amenity for existing residential uses. Factors which can adversely affect amenity include noise, smell and litter. Appropriate facilities to dispose of litter should be provided, without adversely affecting the quality, amenity or cleanliness of the city centre.
Other Relevant Material Considerations Pavement Cafes on the Public Footway- A Design Guide for Applicants This document, produced by the Council, contains guidance on the location, scale, layout, design and furniture of pavement cafes, as well as management and cleanliness.
EVALUATION
Sections 25 and 37(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) require that where, in making any determination under the planning acts, regard is to be had to the provisions of the development plan and that determination shall be made in accordance with the plan, so far as material to the application, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
Section 64 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 places a duty on planning authorities to preserve and enhance the character or appearance of conservation areas.
Aberdeen City Council supports the principle of pavement cafes the city centre, insofar as the location is appropriate, as outlined in the Harmony of Uses Supplementary Guidance. Pavement cafes bring vitality, colour, life and interest to the street scene, aid the local economy and add to the facilities offered to people who visit, live and work in Aberdeen. What needs to be assessed in this instance is whether a pavement café is appropriate in this location.
Location on Union Street Council guidance on pavement cafés states that a clear pedestrian route of at least 2.0m must be maintained between the kerbline and a pavement café boundary. However, in areas of very high pedestrian flow it may be necessary to leave a clear route greater than this.
The footway at this point is 5.4m wide and the proposed pavement café would extend 1.8m into it, meaning there would still be over 3.5m of pavement remaining for pedestrian traffic. There is no additional street furniture present to obstruct the remaining pavement. Although Union Street as a whole has high
Page 44 pedestrian flows, this site is located on a section towards the western end which is considerably quieter than sections at the eastern end, where retail units are concentrated. For these reasons, it is considered that the pavement has sufficient width to accommodate a pavement café at this location and the proposals would not constitute a hazard. This location is considered to be appropriate for a pavement café, in accordance with Council guidance and Supplementary Guidance on Harmony of Uses.
Visual Impact The proposed furniture is considered to be of an appropriate style, materials and quality, inkeeping with its context on Union Street, in accordance with Policy D1. Union Street has a good deal of varied street furniture on its pavements, including planters, bus stops, waste bins, benches and street signs, meaning a pavement café would not be out of keeping. At this point on the street, however, there is no street furniture, so a modest pavement café would not contribute to a cluttered street scene. For the same reasons, there will be no detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the Union Street Conservation Area, in accordance with Policy D5 and Scottish Planning Policy.
Impact on Amenity Issues of noise and litter are also relevant to the evaluation of this proposal, in terms of the impact a pavement café would have on the amenity of nearby residents. Although the introduction of a pavement café would result in additional activity on the street, it would have a negligible impact on noise in the area, given the high volume of traffic noise already affecting Union Street and the daytime opening hours of the shop (7.30am-5pm). A pavement café will also generate litter and while there is no litter bin provided through these proposals, existing litter bin provision in the city centre would be adequate. Therefore, the impact on the amenity of nearby residents and street users would be acceptable in terms of the Harmony of Uses Supplementary Guidance.
Although Policies C1 and C2 also apply to this site, these concern the location of new retail, commercial and leisure developments and changes of use, and are therefore not relevant to this application.
Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan The Proposed ALDP was approved at the meeting of the Communities, Housing and Infrastructure Committee of 28 October 2014. It constitutes the Council’s settled view as to what should be the content of the final adopted ALDP and is now a material consideration in the determination of planning applications, along with the adopted ALDP. The exact weight to be given to matters contained in the Proposed ALDP (including individual policies) in relation to specific applications will depend on whether: - these matters have been subject to public consultation through the Main Issues Report; and - the level of objection raised in relation these matters as part of the Main Issues Report; and - the relevance of these matters to the application under consideration
Page 45 The foregoing can only be assessed on a case by case basis. In relation to this particular application, the following relevant policies substantively reiterate those contained in the adopted 2012 LDP: • Policy D1 –Quality Placemaking by Design (see Policy D1 – Architecture and Placemaking in adopted LDP) • Policy D4 – Historic Environment (see Policy D5 – Built Heritage in adopted LDP).
In this case, there are no other material planning considerations which would have a bearing on the acceptability of the proposal. It is therefore recommended for unconditional approval.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve Unconditionally
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION
Aberdeen City Council supports the principle of pavement cafes the city centre, insofar as the location is appropriate, as outlined in the Harmony of Uses Supplementary Guidance. Pavement cafes bring vitality, colour, life and interest to the street scene, aid the local economy and add to the facilities offered to people who visit, live and work in Aberdeen.
This point on Union Street is considered to be an appropriate location for a pavement café, because there is sufficient pavement width to accommodate it, and there is no other street furniture on the remaining pavement which would cause an obstruction. Overall, Union Street already has a good deal of street furniture which is varied in terms of design and quality, so a pavement café would not be out-of-keeping. However at this particular point there is no street furniture present, so a pavement café would not contribute to a cluttered street scene or have an impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The impact on the amenity of nearby residents would be also be acceptable, because the café would have a negligible impact on noise in the area, and existing bin provision would be adequate for any litter. For these reasons, the proposals are considered to be acceptable according to Policies D1 and D4 of the Local Development Plan and the Harmony of Uses Supplementary Guidance, as well as Council guidance on pavement cafés. The proposals are also acceptable in terms of Proposed Plan policies D1 – Quality Placemaking by Design and D4 – Historic Environment.
Dr Margaret Bochel Head of Planning and Sustainable Development.
Page 46
Page 47 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 48 Agenda Item 2.3
Planning Development Management Committee
25 FARBURN TERRACE, DYCE
PART CHANGE OF USE OF GUESTHOUSE (CLASS 7) TO HOT FOOD TAKEAWAY (SUI GENERIS USE)
For: Mr Yong Yang
Application Type : Detailed Planning Permission Advert : Application Ref. : P150052 Advertised on: Application Date: 14/01/2015 Committee Date: 23 April 2015 Officer : Dineke Brasier Community Council : Comments Ward : Dyce/Bucksburn/Danestone(B Crockett/G Lawrence/N MacGregor/G Samarai)
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve subject to conditions
Page 49
DESCRIPTION
25 Farburn Terrace is currently in use as a guesthouse. It has a complicated design/ layout with an original one and a half storey, gabled and granite built house, with a large ‘box’ dormer in the front roof slope orientated towards railway. This ‘original’ building has gradually been extended to the rear (west), with both a two storey and more modern lower extension(s). The building has an overall ‘U’ shape, creating an internal south facing courtyard used for parking. Access is taken via a driveway to the west, off Farburn Terrace, this is shared with the builders yard.
The site is located in a mixed-use area, with numerous residential and commercial uses, including: builders’ yard; garage; and businesses related to the airport. Attached to the west elevation of the modern extension is 25a Farburn Terrace, which appears to be in use as an office associated to a builders yard located immediately to the south. There are residential properties to the north and west.
The airport is a short distance away to the south west and the Aberdeen- Inverness railway line runs immediately east, with Dyce Station a short distance to the north-east. A footpath runs between the railway line and the property, providing a pedestrian link from the station towards the airport.
RELEVANT HISTORY
Permission was granted in 2012 (Ref: 121669) for a change of use of the property from a dwelling house to a bed and breakfast, formation of additional doors and windows and re-roofing of the rear extension. This permission has been implemented and the property is currently trading as a guesthouse.
It is noted that a further rear dormer has been provided in the west roof face of the modern rear extension (2 further bedrooms – so 12) This dormer was not included in the plans for the original change of use application (121669) and at present does not have planning permission. This issue has been raised with the agent, and a planning application is expected imminently. PROPOSAL
Planning consent is sought for a change of use to a small part (c.52m2) of the ‘original’ building from bed and breakfast/ Class 9 (spare room and part of a kitchen) to a hot food takeaway/ sui generis . The hot food takeaway would be accessed off the ‘station’ footpath to the front, and comprise a reception and new kitchen. The existing parking arrangements (7 spaces) would be retained.
Supporting Documents
All drawings and the supporting documents listed below relating to this application can be viewed on the Council’s website at
Page 50 http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=150052
On accepting the disclaimer enter the application reference quoted on the first page of this report.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
The application has been referred to the Planning Development Management Committee because the Dyce and Stoneywood Community Council and Roads Development Management Team have objected to the application and 9 timeous letters of representation have been received. Accordingly, the application falls outwith the scope of the Council’s Scheme of Delegation.
CONSULTATIONS
Roads Development Management – (Initial comments) The existing guest house has ten bedrooms and part is to a hot food takeaway. The proposal appears to retain all bedrooms. The plans submitted do not show the takeaway area in terms of m² gross floor area (GFA)and this is required to calculate the parking standard. Aberdeen City Council guidance on parking requires takeaways to provide 1 parking space for each 33m² of GFA. The applicant revised plans should also detail refuse storage and collection arrangements, vehicle access and parking provision.
(Revised comments): The existing guesthouse has 10 bedrooms and standards require 10 off-street parking spaces. Plans show an existing provision of 7 off- street parking spaces, an existing shortfall of 3.
The proposed layout for the change of use, i.e. providing for both a guest house and small takeaway indicates the current 7 off-street parking spaces. No additional parking is proposed.
Aberdeen City Council (ACC) parking standards requires takeaways to provide parking of 1 space per 33m². Here the area is estimated to be 52m², thus 2 additional off-street parking spaces are required by the standards. The change of use would result in a cumulative shortfall of 5 off-street parking spaces, when assessed against ACC standards.
Although, given the intention for the guest house to continue trading alongside the takeaway it may be reasonable to expect additional parking. This likelihood is tempered by the proposed takeaway’s proximity to the heliport, local businesses and railway station. The direct footway to Dyce railway station is expected to be the source of much of the custom for the takeaway and this will reduce the volume of vehicular traffic.
It is acknowledged that the existing shortfall has not made a significant impact on parking in the area and the proposed takeaway is not likely to further increase parking demand. Additonally Farburn Terrace and Cordyce View have on-street
Page 51 parking restrictions in place. This will serve to deter illegal parking and may prevent parking and access problems at neighbouring properties.
Waste collection and storage may be problematic due to constrained access and lack of turning space at the property. The lack of turning space for a bin vehicle within the site would prevent ACC collection being an option. The alternative of a private waste operator cannot see collection from the footway and non- compliance may result in a fine.
Cycle parking is not provided. I would ask the applicant to provide a minimum of two long-stay cycle parking spaces in accordance with requirements of ACC guidelines for fast food takeaways.
No objection to the proposal.
Environmental Health – The proposal will not have a significant impact on residents in the immediate area, as it will form a comparatively small part of the existing guest house; the nearest residences are sufficiently distant; and background noise levels are already elevated, primarily due to airport activities. No objection, but recommend the following conditions: 1. Provision of suitable means of ventilation, filtration and dispersal of cooking fumes; 2. The terminal hour for operation shall be no later than 11pm; 3. Suitable provision is made for waste storage, including recycling; and 4. No service/ deliveries activity shall take place before 7am Monday to Saturday and 10am on Sunday.
(Following submission of ventilation measures): The proposed measures are acceptable.
Enterprise, Planning & Infrastructure (Flooding) – No observations
Community Council – Objection. The proposal would result in a negative impact on the residential amenity of neighbouring residents due to noise, smells and litter.
REPRESENTATIONS
9 letters of objection have been received. The objections raised relate to the following matters:
1. Insufficient parking. No on-street parking available as double yellow lines along Farburn Terrace; 2. Unsuitable access. The existing access already serves two businesses operating from an area with very restricted access; 3. Increase in traffic resulting from change of use and in association with further approved development in the area; 4. Farburn Terrace has been approved as a cycle/footpath from Dyce Railway Station which is in the process of being constructed;
Page 52 5. Impact on residential amenity due to an increase in noise, smells and litter; 6. Late night/ early morning traffic from taxis visiting the Bed and Breakfast already exists.
PLANNING POLICY
Aberdeen Local Development Plan H2 – Mixed Use Areas : Application for change of use within Mixed Use Areas must take into account the existing uses and character of the surrounding area and avoid undue conflict with the adjacent land uses and amenity. Where new commercial uses are permitted, development should not adversely affect the amenity of people living and working in the area.
T2 – Managing the Transport Impact of Development : New development will need to demonstrate that sufficient measures have been taken to minimise the traffic generated. Maximum car parking standards are set out in Supplementary Guidance on Transport and Accessibility.
R6 – Waste Management Requirements for New Developments : Details of storage facilities and means of collection must be included as part of any planning application for development which would generate waste.
Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan The following policies substantively reiterate policies in the adopted local development plan as summarised above: H2 – Mixed Use Areas (H2 - Mixed Use Areas) T2 – Managing the Transport Impact of Development (T2 – Managing the Transport Impact of Development) R6 – Waste Management Requirements for New Developments (Waste Management Requirements for New Developments)
Supplementary Guidance Harmony of Uses Supplementary Guidance : Sets out guidance in relation to a change of use of premises to hot food takeaways. In mixed use residential areas (H2) there is a presumption against the introduction of other activities including hot food shops, unless the development would cause no conflict with or any nuisance to residential amenity.
EVALUATION
Sections 25 and 37(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) require that where, in making any determination under the planning acts, regard is to be had to the provisions of the development plan and that determination shall be made in accordance with the plan, so far as material to the application, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
Principle of development: The site is located in a mixed use area, where a mix of residential properties and commercial uses exists alongside each other. Applications for changes of use
Page 53 must take account of existing uses and the character of the surrounding area. Any new business or commercial uses should not have an adverse impact on the residential amenity of nearby properties. As such, there is a presumption against the introduction of hot food takeaways in these areas, unless the proposal would not conflict with residential amenity. This issue is discussed below.
Impact on the residential amenities of neighbouring properties: The introduction of a hot food takeaway can result in an increase in noise, smells and litter and thus impacting on the residential amenity. In this case, the nearest residential properties are located 25m to the north, 30m to the west, 35m to the south, and 40m to the east.
With regards to the introduction of smells. The site is in a mixed use area, with the nearest residential dwellings at a distance of more than 25m. The existing guesthouse already provides some level of catering for guests in a separate kitchen and the proposed hot food takeaway would occupy a small part of the building. The proposed kitchen would measure approximately 30m² and the reception 20m². The applicant has provided details of ventilation and filtration measures that would be installed. The Council’s Environmental Health Service has assessed the proposals and considered them to be acceptable for the scale of the proposed takeaway. As such, it is considered that the proposal would not result in an unacceptable impact on the residential amenity of neighbouring properties with regards to smells.
With regards to an increase in noise, the site is located immediately adjacent to the railway line, is within close proximity of the airport and is surrounded by a mix of uses including residential, commercial and industrial. As such, there is an existing high level of background noise, often until late in the night. Furthermore, the takeaway would not be the main element of the business, but would be secondary to the use of the building as a guesthouse. Additionally the main source of trade is expected to come from people walking along the footpath between the railway station and the airport, or persons awaiting transit offshore via helicopter, from nearby airport facilities. As such, it is not considered that a significantly larger number of people would be attracted to the area, and the additional noise, especially when taking account of the distance between 25 Farburn Terrace and the nearest neighbouring property would be acceptable. The Council’s Environmental Health Team does not raise any concerns with regards to this issue, subject to a condition restricting opening and delivery hours.
Impact on waste: The proposal includes a bin store to the rear of the building. This bin store is directly accessible from the kitchen, and its size is considered acceptable for a business this size. However, some concerns have been raised in relation to the position of the bin store and its accessibility to bin lorries. There is no space within the site for a bin lorry to turn, so pick-up would need to be kerbside, with the bin lorry turning at the end of Farburn Terrace. Furthermore, due to its location behind the parking spaces, if all the parking spaces were used, then there would be a risk of damaging these cars whilst moving the bins. However, it
Page 54 is accepted that commercial waste does not have to be picked up by Aberdeen City Council with other operators readily available and individual arrangements could be made to suit the site and the location. As such, this part of the proposal is considered acceptable, subject to a condition providing further details of bin storage and refuse collection arrangements prior to commencement of works.
Impact on local highway conditions, especially in relation to parking, access and servicing: The Transport and Accessibility Supplementary Guidance sets out parking requirements for various uses, including guesthouses and hot food takeaways. In this ‘Outer City Area’, one parking space needs to be provided for each bedroom, and one for each 33m² GFA of hot food takeaway.
Both the existing and proposed site layout show 7 on-site parking spaces. At present, that is a shortfall of 3 spaces for a 10-room guesthouse. This arrangement was accepted at the time of the initial planning consent for the guesthouse. No additional parking would be included in this current proposal.
The overall gross floor area for the takeaway would be roughly 50m², which would equate to a requirement for two on-site parking spaces. As such, a total shortfall of 5 on-site parking spaces would exist.
However, the hot food takeaway is only a small, ancillary part of the overall business/ planning unit at 25 Farburn Terrace, with the guesthouse being the main component. The entrance to the proposed hot food takeaway and the guesthouse face onto the footpath running between the station and Farburn Terrace. It is expected that most of the business will be rail passengers (mainly oil and gas related) moving between the station and the airport and vice versa. Otherwise there is limited visibility of the takeaway from Farburn Terrace, neither is there ready vehicular access. This would mean that it is likely that those visiting the hot food takeaway would be pedestrians and not users of private cars, but also drawn from a limited catchment. This in part is aided by the nature of this part of Farburn Terrace itself, which is a narrow cul-de-sac which has parking restricted by double yellow lines along its length. This local context, road configuration, and parking restrictions are unlikely to see significant car borne traffic attracted to or able to access the site. On this basis, it is considered that on this occasion, the shortfall in parking is acceptable and would not warrant the refusal of the application in itself.
Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan
The Proposed ALDP was approved at the meeting of the Communities, Housing and Infrastructure Committee of 28 October 2014. It constitutes the Council’s settled view as to what should be the content of the final adopted ALDP and is now a material consideration in the determination of planning applications, along with the adopted ALDP. The exact weight to be given to matters contained in the Proposed ALDP (including individual policies) in relation to specific applications will depend on whether:
Page 55 - these matters have been subject to public consultation through the Main Issues Report; and - the level of objection raised in relation these matters as part of the Main Issues Report; and - the relevance of these matters to the application under consideration The foregoing can only be assessed on a case by case basis. In relation to this particular application no new issues were raised.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve subject to conditions
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION
The proposal is considered not to have a significant detrimental impact on the residential amenity of neighbouring dwellings or businesses with respect to noise, smells and litter. On balance, it is considered to present an acceptable situation with respect to parking and waste collection. The proposal therefore complies with policies H2 (Mixed Use Areas), T2 (Managing the Transport Impact of Development) and R6 (Waste Management Requirements for New Developments) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan; policies H2 (Mixed Use Areas), T2 (Managing the Transport Impact of Development) and R6 (Waste Management Requirements for New Developments) of the Proposed Local Development Plan; and the Harmony of Uses Supplementary Guidance.
Condition(s)
(1.) That hot food shall not be sold from the premises after 11.00 pm, Tuesdays to Sundays inclusive, and no delivery activities shall take place before 7am Monday - Saturday and before 10am on Sundays – in order to preserve the amenity of the neighbourhood.
(2.) That the use hereby granted planning permission shall not take place unless a scheme showing the proposed means of filtering, extracting and dispersing cooking fumes from the premises has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority and that the said scheme has been implemented in full and is ready for operation – in order to preserve the amenity of the neighbourhood.
(3.) That the use hereby granted planning permission shall not take place unless provision has been made within the application site for refuse storage and disposal in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority – in order to preserve the amenity of the neighbourhood and in the interests of public health.
Dr Margaret Bochel Head of Planning and Sustainable Development.
Page 56
Page 57 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Agenda Item 2.4
Planning Development Management Committee
SANSAR, 2 STATION ROAD EAST, MILLTIMBER
RETROSPECTIVE DEMOLITION OF HOUSE AND ERECTION OF NEW DWELLINGHOUSE.
For: Mr And Mrs Sarin
Application Type : Detailed Planning Permission Advert : Application Ref. : P150128 Advertised on: Application Date: 28/01/2015 Committee Date: 23 rd April 2015 Officer : Tommy Hart Community Council : No comments Ward : Lower Deeside (M Boulton/A Malone/M Malik)
RECOMMENDATION: Appro ve subject to conditions
Page 65 DESCRIPTION
The application site comprises a rectangular feu of around 0.6 acres in size, on the eastern side of Station Road East, Milltimber and to the immediate north of the former North Deeside Railway Line (NDRL) which is a Core Path and forms part of the Green Belt and Green Space Network. The site previously contained a 1 ½-storey house, with a slated mansard roof, extensive glazing and grey dry dash render finish to the walls. That house was demolished without the relevant planning consent in early 2015. There is also a single-storey double garage to the north, taking access off Station Road East (to the west). To the north and south of the previous property the extensive garden is laid to lawn. Along the east, west and south boundaries, there is extensive planting, which is a mixture of mature trees and bushes. The site has a reasonable slope from north to south. In the immediate vicinity, there are a number of residential properties of varying sizes which generally have a traditional design approach, most of which have been extended in some form, with a north-south orientation, such that they face towards the NDRL. On the western side of Station Road East, the trees are covered by TPO.
RELEVANT HISTORY
Planning ref A7/2276 for a replacement dwelling was approved conditionally under delegated powers in April 2008.
Planning ref 091060 (Outline Planning Permission) for the construction of 2no houses was refused by the Planning Committee in November 2009. The reasons for refusal were; ( 1) that the proposals, if implemented, would result in over- development of the site, would be unacceptable in terms of siting, would not respect the form and density of the immediate surrounding area and would detract from the area’s established residential character and amenity contrary to Policies 1 and 40 of the adopted Aberdeen Local Plan, to the adopted Supplementary Guidance on The Sub-Division and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages and to Scottish Planning Policy 3 (Planning for Housing). (2) that the proposals, if implemented, would set an undesirable precedent for developments of a similar nature, leading to cumulative erosion of the character of the area contrary to the adopted Supplementary Guidance on The Sub- Division and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages and to Scottish Planning Policy 3 (Planning for Housing). (3) that the proposals, if implemented, would not be absorbed within the site without significant adverse impact upon the Deeside Way which is an existing landscape element and linear feature that contributes to local amenity and would be contrary to Policy 31 of the adopted Aberdeen Local Plan.
The subsequent appeal was received out of time and could not be progressed.
Planning ref 100304 (Planning Permission in Principle) for the construction of 2no houses was refused by the planning committee in June 2010. The reasons for refusal were the same as the previous refusal.
Page 66 A subsequent appeal to the Scottish Government was dismissed.
Planning ref 141377 (Full Planning Permission) for the erection of a replacement dwelling and demolition of existing house was refused under delegated powers for reason; The design, scale, massing and use of materials for the proposed new house are considered acceptable in this location and is compliant with the Aberdeen Local Development Plan Policies D1 (Design and Placemaking) and H1 (Residential Areas), as well as the Supplementary Guidance Subdivision and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages. Further, the proposal is also acceptable in terms of the Proposed Local Development Plan Policies D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design) and H1 (Residential Areas). Notwithstanding, despite numerous requests, the applicant has failed to submit the necessary Bat survey. The lack of information makes it difficult to assess any impact on any bats. Likewise, the lack of information means that no potentially required mitigation measures are proposed. As such, the application is considered to be contrary to Policy NE8 (Natural Heritage) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan and the Council's Supplementary Guidance Bats and Development, as well as Policy NE8 (Natural Heritage) in the Proposed Local Development Plan. As such the application is therefore refused.
Planning ref 150087 (Demolition Notification) for the demolition of the existing dwelling was returned to the agent as the demolition had already taken place, hence the ‘prior notification’ had not followed the correct procedure.
PROPOSAL
Detailed planning permission is sought for the erection of a 1¾ -storey dwelling as well as retrospective demolition of the previous dwellinghouse. The new 5-bed house would have a ridge height of roughly 8.5m high, be 20.5m wide and 12.5m deep and would sit on generally the same footprint of the existing dwelling. A wing attached to the east elevation would contain a utility room and 2no en-suite bathrooms and would be 1m off the eastern boundary where a new boundary wall is proposed. The north elevation would have two projecting gables of differing size, either side of the main glazed entrance, whilst the southern elevation would have one large gable with a chimney incorporated atop. There is extensive glazing proposed on the north and south elevations, as well as an upper floor balcony and ground floor terrace area to the east side of the south elevation.
In terms of materials, the roof would be finished with ‘Marley’ interlocking slate, with the external walls finished with white/off-white drydash render. There would also be feature panels which would be finished in a smooth cement render. All window frames are to be white painted timber.
Supporting Documents
All drawings and the supporting documents listed below relating to this application can be viewed on the Council’s website at
Page 67 http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=150128
On accepting the disclaimer, enter the application reference quoted on the first page of this report.
Tree survey and associated plans
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
The application has been referred to the Planning Development Management Committee because more than 5 objections have been received. Accordingly, the application falls outwith the scope of the Council’s Scheme of Delegation.
CONSULTATIONS
Roads Development Management – no observations
Environmental Health – no observations
Enterprise, Planning & Infrastructure (Flooding) - on submission of additional information pertaining to drainage, there are no objections
Community Council – no comments received
REPRESENTATIONS
Six letters of objection have been received. The objections raised relate to the following material planning considerations;
• The property is out of keeping with the surrounding area; • There would be noise impact due to the location of utility and bathrooms close to adjoining boundary; • The existing garage is in the wrong location and out of keeping with the new house; • No details are provided of the new section of boundary wall; • No additional car parking is proposed and this would add pressure on the immediate area.
PLANNING POLICY
Aberdeen Local Development Plan
Policy D1 – Architecture and Placemaking To ensure high standards of design, new development must be designed with due consideration for its context and make a positive contribution to its setting. Factors such as siting, scale, massing, colour, materials, orientation, details, the proportions of building elements, together with the spaces around buildings,
Page 68 including streets, squares, open space, landscaping and boundary treatments, will be considered in assessing that contribution.
Policy H1 – Residential Areas Proposals for new residential development in these areas will be supported in principle so long as there is no negative impact on the existing character or amenity.
Policy NE5 – Trees and Woodland There is a presumption against all activities and development that will result in the loss of or damage to established trees and woodlands that contribute significantly to nature conservation, landscape character or local amenity, including ancient and semi-natural woodland which is irreplaceable.
Policy NE8 – Natural Heritage Development that, taking into account any proposed mitigation measures, has an adverse effect on a protected species or an area designated because of its natural heritage value will only be permitted where it satisfies the relevant criteria in Scottish Planning Policy.
Supplementary Guidance
The Council’s guidance ‘the Subdivision and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages’, ‘Trees and Woodlands’ and ‘Bats and Development’ are relevant material considerations.
Other Relevant Material Considerations
Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan
The following policies substantively reiterate policies in the adopted local development plan as summarised above;
• Policy D1 – Quality Placemaking by Design
• Policy H1 – Residential Areas
• Policy NE5 – Trees and Woodlands
• Policy NE8 – Natural Heritage
EVALUATION
Page 69 Sections 25 and 37(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) require that where, in making any determination under the planning acts, regard is to be had to the provisions of the development plan and that determination shall be made in accordance with the plan, so far as material to the application, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
Principle of Development
The application is for the retrospective demolition of the previous residential dwelling and construction of a new house, of much larger proportions, within an area designated for residential purposes. A previous application has been approved for a replacement house of the same scale and design. Therefore, it is considered that the principle of the development is acceptable and there is no immediate conflict with Policy H1 in that respect.
Design, scale, massing and visual impact of development
The general design, scale and position with the site is similar to the immediate neighbours on the east side of Station Road East, and as such is acceptable in this context. The new house would be moved off the eastern boundary by 1m, but would be more than double the height (around 7m tall) of the former flat roofed single storey extension, which sat on that boundary. The adjacent property to the east does not have any windows on their western elevation so the impact of a larger structure, in terms of privacy and amenity, on the adjacent property would be negligible. The proposed first floor balcony would have a solid wall on the western elevation to prevent any overlooking and there are no windows looking directly into the adjacent property or garden.
In terms of height, the proposed house would have a roof ridge of around 2m higher than the former flat mansard roof, this arrangement would be similar to nearby properties and as such would not be a cause for concern in this location. Similarly, the increase in depth by around 3m is considered to be acceptable, having no significant negative impact on the amenity of adjacent houses or character of the immediate area.
A basic sun/day light assessment was submitted in support of the application, which indicates that due to the orientation of the application property and adjacent property to the east, the introduction of a much larger dwelling would not have a significant impact on the adjacent property to the east, beyond the current situation. There is likely to be an increase in overshadowing during the latter part of the day in the front garden of the adjacent property but this would not be a significant increase on the current situation nor such to be considered an unacceptably detrimental impact.
The proposed dwelling is approximately 50sqm (around 1/3) larger in footprint than the proposed house. In terms of the Council’s SG on redeveloping residential curtilages, the increase in footprint is considered acceptable and within tolerable limits. The increase in size would have little impact on the density
Page 70 of the site, rising by roughly 1.5% to around 10% site coverage, even when taking account of the existing garage.
Due to the line of mature trees along the south and west boundaries of the site, the new house would not be visually prominent from the surrounding area and as such is considered acceptable.
In summary, it is considered that the proposed new house is acceptable in terms of Policies H1 and D1, as well as the SG on redeveloping residential curtilages.
Access and parking
The existing driveway/turning/parking area to the immediate north of the new house is considered acceptable and adequate to allow additional cars to park on- site. Further, it should be noted that no observations were received from the Roads Development Management section in terms of access or parking provision .
Trees
A total of 26 trees were surveyed, with the Tree Reports indicating that three trees – ‘purple leaf plum’, ‘cypress’ and ‘red cedar’ - are required to be felled in order to allow development. In addition, the removal of a ‘privet hedge’ and a ‘laurel’ are required for health and safety reasons. Further, it is noted that large shrubs ‘laburnum’, a ‘laurel’ and a ‘privet hedge’ were all removed during the demolition of the house. Lastly, during demolition of the previous house, a ‘cherry’ adjacent to the garage was damaged and should now be felled, as well as the cypress near the foot of the garden which is in poor condition and should be felled for tree management purposes.
The trees are predominantly class ‘C’ and are not considered to be of high quality and as such their removal is not considered to be a reason for refusal. No replacement planting plan has been submitted and it is suggested that a suitable planning condition is attached to request details of replacement planting prior to the commencement of works.
The trees which have already been felled, and those proposed to be felled, are not considered to fall under the criteria of Policy NE5 and thus there is no conflict with the policy or the Trees and Woodlands SG in that respect.
Ecology
A bat survey was submitted in support of the application and was undertaken in December 2014 within the previous house. The survey indicated that there was limited bat roost potential within that structure and there was no evidence of bat roosts within the building at that time. Notwithstanding the submission of a bat survey, it should be noted this was undertaken on the former dwelling which has subsequently been demolished. The survey also notes that “while there is good bat foraging potential in the area and bats are observed in the Milltimber area,
Page 71 there are many buildings in the immediate area of Milltimber that are in good condition and which offer good, dry, bat roosting potential”.
The updated tree survey indicates that the trees on site have bat roosting potential.
There is no conflict with the Policy NE8 or the SG Bats and Development in that respect .
Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan
The Proposed ALDP was approved at the meeting of the Communities, Housing and Infrastructure Committee of 28 October 2014. It constitutes the Council’s settled view as to what should be the content of the final adopted ALDP and is now a material consideration in the determination of planning applications, along with the adopted ALDP. The exact weight to be given to matters contained in the Proposed ALDP (including individual policies) in relation to specific applications will depend on whether: - these matters have been subject to public consultation through the Main Issues Report; and - the level of objection raised in relation these matters as part of the Main Issues Report; and - the relevance of these matters to the application under consideration
The foregoing can only be assessed on a case by case basis. In relation to this particular application, the policies listed below are of relevance;
• Policy D1 – Quality Placemaking by Design
• Policy H1 – Residential Areas
• Policy NE5 – Trees and Woodland
• Policy NE8 – Natural Heritage
These policies substantively reiterate policies in the adopted local plan. In addition, for the same reasons that the proposal complies with the adopted local development plan, it also does complies Policies D1, H1, NE5 and NE8 of the Proposed Plan.
Matters raised by objectors
• The property is out of keeping with the surrounding area – this has been addressed in the design, scale, massing and visual impact of development section above;
• There would be noise impact due to the location of utility and bathrooms close to adjoining boundary – the likely impact of these rooms are not
Page 72 considered to cause any significant detrimental impact on the neighbouring property and are expected and considered acceptable in the context of a modern housing ;
• The existing garage is in the wrong location and out of keeping with the new house – the existing garage is to remain and therefore is not part of the evaluation of this application;
• No details are provided of the new section of boundary wall – a planning condition is recommended below;
• No additional car parking is proposed and this would add pressure on the immediate area – this has been addressed in the access and parking section above.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve subject to conditions
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION
The design, scale, massing and use of materials for the proposed new house is considered acceptable in this location and is compliant with the Aberdeen Local Development Plan Policies D1 (Design and Placemaking) and H1 (Residential Areas), NE5 (Trees and Woodlands) and NE8 (Natural Heritage), as well as the Supplementary Guidance Subdivision and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages. Further, the proposal is also acceptable in terms of the Proposed Local Development Plan Policies D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design), H1 (Residential Areas), NE5 (Trees and Woodlands) and NE8 (Natural Heritage).
Subject to the following conditions;
1. that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall be carried out unless details of the proposed new boundary wall on the East boundary has been been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. Thereafter, the wall shall be built in complete accordance with the approved details and be in place prior to the occupation of the new house – In the interests of the appearance of the development and the visual amenities of the area
2. that no development pursuant to the planning permission hereby approved shall be carried out unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority a further detailed scheme of landscaping for the site, which scheme shall include the proposed areas of tree/shrub planting, including details of numbers (on a 2-for-1 basis), densities, locations, species, sizes and stage of maturity at planting to
Page 73 mitigate the loss of trees due to the development - in the interests of the amenity of the area.
3. that no part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied unless a plan and report illustrating appropriate management proposals for the care and maintenance of all trees to be retained and any new areas of planting (to include timing of works and inspections) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The proposals shall be carried out in complete accordance with such plan and report as may be so approved - in order to preserve.the character and visual amenity of the area.
INFORMATIVES
1. that, except as the Planning Authority may otherwise agree in writing, no construction or demolition work shall take place: (a) outwith the hours of 7.00 am to 7.00 pm Mondays to Fridays; (b) outwith the hours of 9.00 am to 4.00 pm Saturdays; or (c) at any time on Sundays, except (on all days) for works inaudible outwith the application site boundary. [For the avoidance of doubt, this would generally allow internal finishing work, but not the use of machinery] - in the interests of residential amenity
Dr Margaret Bochel Head of Planning and Sustainable Development.
Page 74 Page 75 Page 76 Page 77 Page 78 Agenda Item 2.5
Planning Development Management Committee
44 BEDFORD ROAD, KITTYBREWSTER
ERECTION OF THREE AND A HALF STOREY SERVICED APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT (8 UNITS) WITH ASSOCIATED CAR PARKING
For: ASA Ltd
Application Type : Detailed Planning Permission Advert : Application Ref. : P141664 Advertised on: Application Date: 06/11/2014 Committee Date: 23 April 2015 Officer : Gavin Evans Community Council : Ward : George Street/Harbour (A May/J Morrison/N Morrison)
RECOMMENDATION: Willingness to approve subject to conditions, but to withhold the issue of the consent document until the applicant has entered into a legal agreement to ensure that the development remains in single ownership and that no apartment may be occupied for more than 90 days by the same occupant
Page 79
DESCRIPTION The application site is located on the eastern side of Bedford Road, at its junction with Bedford Place. The site extends to 292sqm and represents the existing plot of 44 Bedford Road, a 2 ½ storey end-terrace building of traditional granite construction, which incorporates a small newsagent/grocer at ground floor level and box-dormers in its roof space. To the rear of the building lies an area of garden ground, set approximately 1m below the level of Bedford Place and enclosed by a granite rubble boundary wall measuring 1.2m from pavement level. The rear of the site appears neglected and overgrown, with no notable trees or landscaping besides overgrown shrubs and apparently self-seeded saplings. The boundary to the adjoining property at 42 Bedford Road is defined by a brick boundary wall of approximately 1.2m.
The northern side of Bedford Place is characterised by 1 ½ storey, mansard- roofed terraces of dwellinghouses. Immediately opposite the application site is a more recent row of 2-storey terraced houses, fronted with synthetic granite block. The southern side of Bedford Place is largely similar, however 2 ½ storey tenement-style blocks are present at the junctions of Bedford Place and streets running south-west. The blank gable of one such block abuts the south-eastern end of the application site.
RELEVANT HISTORY An application in January 2014 (ref P140090) sought detailed planning permission for a development comprising 8 flats within the rear garden of 44 Bedford Road. This was refused under delegated powers on 31 st March 2014, on the basis that it would represent an over-development of the site; an adverse impact on amenity arising from the loss of private garden space and the under- provision of garden space for the new development; the design would not relate well to it surroundings; some windows within the building would have limited opportunity for natural light; and there would be a significant shortfall in car parking provision.
Following that refusal, the applicants sought review of the decision via the Local Review Body (LRB). The LRB considered the proposal at its meeting of 4 th July 2014, where members upheld the planning authority’s earlier decision.
PROPOSAL This application seeks detailed planning permission for the construction of a new 3½ storey building, containing 8no serviced apartments, on a site which currently forms part of the rear garden of 44 Bedford Road.
The building would face onto Bedford Place, with the remainder of the newly formed site incorporating 2no off-street car parking spaces and landscaped garden spaces to its rear and side. The building itself would be finished in a silver-grey granite at ground floor level, with granite string and cornice courses. Upper floors would be given a rendered finish. The roof would be finished in smooth grey concrete roof tiles, featuring a slimline leading edge and broken bond laying technique in order to better replicate the characteristics of a natural
Page 80 slate product. Aluminium-framed windows would incorporate fixed green panels on the front elevation, whilst grey PVC rainwater goods would be utilised.
Supporting Documents
All drawings and the supporting documents listed below relating to this application can be viewed on the Council’s website at http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=141664
- Supporting statement
On accepting the disclaimer enter the application reference quoted on the first page of this report.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
The application has been referred to the Planning Development Management Committee because members had previously resolved (at the March 19 th meeting) ‘to defer consideration of the application to allow further discussion of the original plans with the developer which would alleviate the safety concerns raised in the objection by the Roads Development Team, and to request that the application then come back before Committee for consideration’ . These discussions have taken place, and are detailed further below.
CONSULTATIONS
Roads Development Management Team – No objection to the proposed development, subject to suitable conditions to address matters raised in the Roads Development Management Team’s response.
As stated in an earlier response 2 off-street spaces is considered to be acceptable in this instance. The applicant will be required to alter the existing road markings to accommodate the development access. Cycle storage within the site is welcomed.
Through further discussion with the Road Safety and Traffic Management section, an acceptable compromise has been reached to improve the visibility while exiting the development without the requirement to supply a turning area within the site. A revised drawing has been provided, demonstrating an acceptable access arrangement, with the height of the wall either side of the access reduced to a height of no more than 1m. The use of adjustable bollards has been dismissed in order that vehicles can reverse into the parking spaces in one movement, without blocking traffic. It is also suggested that a sign indicating ‘reverse parking only’ be included.
Submitted drainage proposals are acceptable in principle, however drainage calculations are requested to demonstrate that the proposed scheme can deal
Page 81 with specified flood events. This can be conditioned and agreed in detail prior to commencement.
A Residential Travel Pack should be produced and made available to occupants. This should be site specific and detail the sustainable transport options available. Roads colleagues request that the contents of this are conditioned to be agreed prior to occupation.
Environmental Health - No objection to approval of this application, but recommend the attachment of a suitable condition addressing provision for suitable means of waste storage , including recycling facilities. Developer Contributions Team – Not applicable, as new floorspace does not exceed threshold for developer contributions. Enterprise, Planning & Infrastructure (Flooding) – No observations. Education, Culture & Sport (Archaeology) – No response. Community Council – No response.
REPRESENTATIONS
No letters of representation have been received in relation to this proposal.
PLANNING POLICY
National Policy and Guidance
Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) Sections on sustainability, placemaking, promoting sustainable travel and supporting business and employment are of relevance to this proposal.
Aberdeen Local Development Plan (ALDP)
Policy T2: Managing the Transport Impact of Development New developments will need to demonstrate that sufficient measures have been taken to minimise the traffic generated.
Maximum car parking standards are set out in Supplementary Guidance on Transport and Accessibility and detail the standards that different types of development should provide.
Policy D1: Architecture and Placemaking To ensure high standards of design, new development must be designed with due consideration for its context and make a positive contribution to its setting. Factors such as siting, scale, massing, colour, materials, orientation, details, the proportions of building elements, together with the spaces around buildings, including streets, squares, open space, landscaping and boundary treatments, will be considered in assessing that contribution.
Policy D2: Design and Amenity
Page 82 Policy D2 sets out a series of criteria for new development, intended to ensure that an appropriate level of amenity can be secured for residents of both that new development and neighbouring land and buildings. These criteria include residential development being designed with a public face to a street and a private face to an enclosed garden or court; appropriate privacy being provided for; the provision of areas for sitting out, such as private gardens, communal gardens, balconies etc; and that development proposals should include measures to ‘design out’ crime and ‘design in’ safety.
D3: Sustainable and Active Travel New development will be designed in order to minimise travel by private car, improve access to services and promote healthy lifestyles by encouraging active travel.
Policy H1: Residential Areas The site lies within a designated Residential Area (H1), as defined in the Aberdeen Local Development Plan. Within such areas Policy H1 of the ALDP will apply, stating that non-residential uses will be refused unless (a) they are considered complementary to residential use; or (b) it can be demonstrated that the use would cause no conflict with, or any nuisance to, the enjoyment of existing residential amenity.
R6: Waste Management Requirements for New Development Housing developments should have sufficient space for the storage of residual recyclable and compostable wastes. Flatted developments will require communal facilities that allow for the separate storage and collection of these materials. Recycling facilities should be provided in all new supermarkets and in other developments where appropriate. Details of storage facilities and means of collection must be included as part of any planning application for development which would generate waste.
Further details are set out in Supplementary Guidance on Waste Management.
Policy R7: Low and Zero Carbon Buildings All new buildings, in meeting building regulations energy requirements, must install low and zero carbon generating technologies to reduce the predicted carbon dioxide emissions by at least 15% below the 2007 building standards. This percentage requirement will be increased as specified in Supplementary Guidance.
Supplementary Guidance ‘Low and Zero Carbon Buildings’; ‘Transport and Accessibility’, ‘Waste Management’, ‘Serviced Apartments’ and ‘Sub-division and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages’ documents are of relevance.
Other Relevant Material Considerations The matters raised in representations are material to the assessment of this application, so far as they relate to legitimate planning considerations.
Page 83 Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan In relation to this particular application the policies listed below are of relevance: Policy D1 – Quality Placemaking by Design Policy T2 – Managing the Transport Impact of Development Policy H1 – Residential Areas
EVALUATION
Sections 25 and 37(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) require that where, in making any determination under the planning acts, regard is to be had to the provisions of the development plan and that determination shall be made in accordance with the plan, so far as material to the application, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan The Proposed ALDP was approved at the meeting of the Communities, Housing and Infrastructure Committee of 28 October 2014. It constitutes the Council’s settled view as to what should be the content of the final adopted ALDP and is now a material consideration in the determination of planning applications, along with the adopted ALDP. The exact weight to be given to matters contained in the Proposed ALDP (including individual policies) in relation to specific applications will depend on whether: - these matters have been subject to public consultation through the Main Issues Report; and - the level of objection raised in relation these matters as part of the Main Issues Report; and - the relevance of these matters to the application under consideration.
In relation to this particular application the policies listed below are of relevance. Policy D1 – Quality Placemaking by Design Policy T2 – Managing the Transport Impact of Development Policy H1 – Residential Areas
The policies listed above substantively reiterate policies in the adopted local plan. The proposal is generally in compliance with the Proposed Plan.
Principle of serviced apartment use & zoning The application site is located within a predominantly residential area, which has been zoned as such in the Local Development Plan, with policy H1 applicable. Policy H1 allows for non-residential uses where either the use is considered complementary to residential use or where it can be demonstrated that the use would cause no conflict with, or any nuisance to, the enjoyment of existing residential amenity. This application proposes the construction of a building containing 8 serviced apartments, a use which is defined in the Council’s ‘Serviced Apartments’ Supplementary Guidance as ‘ residential flats used as quasi hotel accommodation by business and leisure visitors to the city, where periods of occupation are generally but not necessarily less than 90 days by any individual, family or group, and services such as cleaning and laundry are provided, either on a daily basis or between periods of occupation’. The
Page 84 Supplementary Guidance also states that serviced apartments outwith the City Centre but within the existing built up area will be assessed on their own merits, with further content on matters including amenity, servicing, sustainable travel and parking, developer contributions and legal agreements being relevant to that assessment.
The surrounding area is predominantly in residential use and the proposed use is considered to represent a complementary use which would, in principle, be consistent with the provisions of policy H1 (Residential Areas) of the ALDP. The impact of the proposal on existing residential amenity must also be considered in order to establish its acceptability.
There is significant overlap between the criteria stated in policy H1 and the principles set out in the ‘Sub-division and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages’ Supplementary Guidance, so it is appropriate to consider these together.
Car Parking and access As noted in the consultation response from the Council’s Roads Development Management Team, the current ‘Transport and Accessibility’ Supplementary Guidance sets out that the proposed development should provide 8 car parking spaces, but it is recognised that the standards to be applied to serviced apartment developments are under review as part of the preparation of a new Local Development Plan. The guidance to accompany the Proposed Plan indicates that 4 spaces would be required for a development of this type, and Roads colleagues are satisfied that this upper limit should be applied. The identified shortfall of 2 spaces from the identified maximum is not considered to be significant in this location, and has been agreed. Earlier concerns over the absence of a turning area within the site, allowing vehicles to enter and exit the site in a forward gear, have been addressed through further discussion. It has been accepted that the site access can be made acceptable through the lowering of the boundary wall adjacent to the access and the use of these spaces on a reverse-in basis. This allows for better visibility for drivers when exiting the site across the footway.
It is noted that Bedford Place does not currently allow for access directly from Bedford Road, and this street is therefore relatively lightly trafficked. On that basis, it is not considered that a limited degree reversing across the footway would be significant in terms of road safety. It is acknowledged that there are plans for the Bedford Place/Bedford Road junction to be opened to 2-way traffic on the opening of a bus gate on Bedford Road, and Roads colleagues anticipate that this will lead to an increase in traffic on this route as drivers seek routes to the adjacent retail park. Nevertheless, it remains officers’ view that this limited increase in reversing manouevres over the footway, though not an optimal arrangement on purely roads grounds, would not be excessive or lead to a significant road safety hazard, and would allow for the more equitable division of the existing plot and more meaningful provision of garden grounds at both 44 Bedford Road and the new building on Bedford Place. It is further noted that there would be limited scope for this situation to be replicated at other properties
Page 85 on Bedford Place, due to the limited depth of front gardens, which would not generally allow for car parking to the front of properties, and therefore there is a degree of comfort that this arrangement would not set any potentially unwelcome precedent for similar driveways on Bedford Place, with a corresponding cumulative impact. Taking these matters into account, officers consider the proposal to be an appropriate response to the constraints posed by the site, and on balance are satisfied that this can be supported without undue conflict with the provisions of policy T2 (Managing the Transport Impact of Development) and its associated ‘Transport and Accessibility’ supplementary guidance.
As noted in the Roads Development Management Team’s response, appropriate provision has been made for long-stay cycle storage within the site, in accordance with the aims of Policy D3 (Sustainable and Active Travel) of the ALDP, the relevant section of the Council’s ‘Transport and Accessibility’ Supplementary Guidance, which encourage measures to promote sustainable travel.
Siting and Design The proposed new building would be oriented to face onto Bedford Place, with the majority of its rear face set in from the rear boundary by circa 3.2m, save for a small section to the very eastern end of the site. External amenity space/garden would be provided in this space to the rear of the building and adjacent to its western gable.
The scale and styling of the building demonstrates due regard for its immediate context and the neigbouring building at 57 Bedford Place, reflecting the characteristic mansard-style roof, roof ridge height and general proportions of the adjacent block. Whilst of a contemporary design, using different materials such as aluminium framed windows and rendered upper floors, the proposed block presents a simple and well-ordered elevation which is sympathetic to its surroundings in terms of design and scale, and is therefore considered to accord with the provisions of policy D1 (Architecture and Placemaking) of the ALDP.
Privacy & amenity It is apparent that the proposed development has been designed with regard for its relationship with adjacent buildings and gardens, with its internal layout arranged in order to avoid any windows from habitable rooms (e.g. bedrooms and living rooms as opposed to bathrooms and hallways) looking out over the rear garden of number 42 Bedford Road. This ensures that there would be no loss of privacy for residents of this adjacent block, however it should also be highlighted that these are communal gardens which are currently overlooked to some extent by the flatted blocks facing onto Bedford Road. There are bedroom windows present in the western gable, facing towards 44 Bedford Road, however the distance between the faces of these buildings, estimated at circa 17m, is considered to be sufficient to ensure that there would not be any undue loss of privacy for residents of either the new block or the existing block at 44 Bedford Road. This arrangement of windows is considered to successfully avoid any direct overlooking or loss of privacy to adjacent properties or their gardens.
Page 86 The proposed building would present a clear street frontage to Bedford Place, in a manner similar to existing flatted blocks, and would also present a private face to an area of garden ground to the rear. It is acknowledged that this area of garden ground is somewhat limited in scale, and would certainly not satisfy the Council’s minimum standards for dwellinghouses, however it is recognised that serviced apartments are a pseudo-residential use which have a higher degree of turnover in occupation, and are arguably somewhere between residential flats and hotels. Such uses are not considered to generate the same demand for private amenity space, and it is considered that the provision made is sufficient to serve this use. It is nevertheless relevant to consider the extent of any impact on adjacent properties as a result of this building’s proximity to mutual boundaries and its associated prominence. Whilst the proposed block would abut the mutual boundary at the bottom of number 42’s plot, it subsequently steps in from the boundary by approximately 3.2m. Whilst this is closer than is commonly seen in the surrounding area, it is noted also that numbers 42 and 44 benefit from plots which are significantly longer than those of other blocks along this part of Bedford Road. Bearing this in mind, it is considered that the presence of the proposed block close to this boundary would be particularly prominent only for a portion of its length, and a meaningful area of garden space would be unaffected. Furthermore, the position of the proposed block to the north of the adjacent garden is such that the extent of overshadowing would be limited. There would be a degree of increased overshadowing from morning sun, though it is noted that there are existing blocks to the east which currently cast shade at this time. Taking account of these points, it is concluded that the proposed building would make adequate provision for garden space to serve a serviced apartment use, and that there would not be any excessive impact on existing amenity or privacy as a result of this proposal. The proposal is therefore considered to accord with policies D2 (Design and Amenity) and the relevant privacy, daylight and sunlight sections of the Council’s ‘Sub-Division and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages’ Supplementary Guidance.
Impact on character and amenity of surrounding area The proposal would result in a reduction in the size of the plot at 44 Bedford Road. It is noted that the garden is currently poorly maintained, however current and future residents remain afforded the option to enjoy this space as they see fit. The proposed development would result in the private rear garden of 44 Bedford Road being reduced from approximately 30m to 10m in length, however this remains a meaningful and useable area of rear garden, which is not significantly smaller than other plots along Bedford Road. It is noted also that there is a retail unit at the ground floor of 44 Bedford Road, which would have no demand for garden space to the rear. The removal of a vehicle turning point within the site has allowed for a more appropriate division of the plot than had previously been shown, with a greater proportion of garden space afforded to both the new building and number 44 than had previously been shown. The concerns expressed by colleagues in the Roads Development Management Team are noted, however it is considered that, on balance, the benefits of an improved arrangement in relation to plot size, availability of garden space and amenity afforded to residents of both the donor property and the new apartments would justify accepting this limited degree of impact.
Page 87
As noted in the ‘Design’ section of this report, the proposed building relates well to the design and scale of the adjacent block on Bedford Place. The proximity of the new block to the rear garden of 42 Bedford Road is noted, however as noted previously this would affect a limited proportion of this large plot, and on balance this situation is considered to be acceptable in this urban context. The limited extent of the new plot would not be readily discerned from the development’s street frontage, and it is not considered that there would be any significant adverse impact on the character or amenity of this predominantly residential area, as required by policy H1 (Residential Areas).
Relationship with pattern of development The established pattern of development in the surrounding area is that of buildings positioned close to the pavement’s edge. There is a combination of flatted blocks and dwellinghouses on Bedford Place, with flatted blocks generally positioned abutting the footway and terraced rows of houses generally benefitting from front gardens of modest depth, with private gardens laid out to the rear. The rear gardens of 44 Bedford Road and the adjacent no.42 Bedford Road are significantly longer than other blocks in this part of the street, and they currently benefit from a largely open aspect to the north-east, which would be partially enclosed by the presence of the proposed building. Nevertheless, this would affect only a proportion of the available gardens, and it is considered that both properties would still benefit from meaninful areas of communal garden space. As has been mentioned previously, the position of the proposed block relative to adjacent gardens is such that overshadowing would be limited to an increased degree of overshadowing from morning sun, which is already partially present due to the position of buildings at 53-57 Bedford Place. Taking account of these points, the proposal is considered to accord with the relevant provisions of the Council’s supplementary guidance on the ‘Sub-Division and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages’.
Further matters Additional submissions will be required in order to demonstrate that the site has made adequate provision for the storage and collection of refuse, including recycling, and also that the development can demonstrate compliance with the Council’s Low and Zero Carbon Buildings supplementary guidance, which seeks to reduce carbon emissions from new development. Planning conditions can be attached to any consent to be granted, ensuring compliance with policies R6 (Waste Management Requirements for New Development) and R7 (Low and Zero Carbon Buildings) of the ALDP and the aforementioned supplementary guidance.
Proposed Legal Agreement In accordance with the supplementary guidance ‘Serviced Apartments, a s75 legal agreement is required to ensure that the development remains in single ownership and that no apartment may be occupied for more than 90 days by the same occupant.
Summary
Page 88 The proposed development is not considered to result in any significant adverse impact on existing residential amenity, and would afford an appropriate level of amenity to residents of the proposed serviced apartments. It is acknowledged that the necessity of reversing across the footway is not encouraged, however the limited number of spaces is such that the degree of any impact on road safety is not considered to be significant, and would not be dissimilar from many residential driveways across the city, where driver behaviour adjusts accordingly. The design and scale of the proposed building is consistent with its surroundings, and demonstrates due regard for its context. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be approved subject to both the conditions described below, and to a section 75 legal agreement, which would ensure that the units are not sold off as individual flats, and that the maximum stay is set at 90 days.
RECOMMENDATION
Willingness to approve subject to conditions, but to withhold the issue of the consent document until the applicant has entered into a legal agreement to ensure that the development remains in single ownership and that no apartment may be occupied for more than 90 days by the same occupant
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION
The proposed serviced apartments are considered to be acceptable in this predominantly residential area, having no significant detrimental impact on the existing uses surrounding the application site. There is not considered to be any fundamental conflict with the Council's 'Serviced Apartments' and 'Sub-division and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages' Supplementary Guidance documents or Policy H1 (Residential Areas) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan (ALDP). The general design and scale of the proposed building is considered to be appropriate for this site, and demonstrates due regard for its context, as required by Policy D1 (Architecture and Placemaking) of the ALDP. The application generally conforms to the principles of Policy D2 (Design and Amenity) by presenting an appropriate street frontage to Bedford Place, making provision for garden/amenity space and addressing potential overlooking issues through the careful arrangement of the internal layout.
Whilst it is noted that the building would be in close proximity to the mutual boundary, this applies to only the furthest part of a particularly generous plot, and would not be dissimilar from the existing arrangement at the foot of number 44's curtilage.
The proposal makes adequate provision for car any cycle parking and, whilst the arrangements for vehicular access to the site require reversing across a footway, it is considered that the two off-street spaces would not suggest intensive use of
Page 89 this access, and this arrangement would not be dissimilar to many residential driveways across the city. It is acknowledged that Bedford Place would become more heavily trafficked once the junction onto Bedford Road is altered to permit two-way access, however it is noted that the shallow front gardens of properties in Bedford Place would not lend themselves to replication of this driveway arrangement. On this basis, the degree of conflict between pedestrian and vehicle movements and the safety implications of this small number of reversing manoeuvres onto Bedford Place are not considered to result in an unacceptable impact on road safety which would warrant refusal of this application, and it is therefore considered to be acceptable on balance.
Access and car/cycle/motorcycle parking provision are considered to be sufficient to serve the demand arising from this development, and are to the satisfaction of the Council's Roads Projects Team. In this regard, the proposal is considered to accord with the provisions of Policy T2 (Managing the Transport Impact of Development) and the associated 'Transport and Accessibility' Supplementary Guidance.
CONDITIONS it is recommended that approval is granted subject to the following conditions:-
(1) that no development pursuant to this planning permission shall take place, nor shall any part of the development hereby approved be occupied, unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, a detailed scheme of site and plot boundary enclosures for the entire development hereby granted planning permission. None of the buildings hereby granted planning permission shall be occupied unless the said scheme has been implemented in its entirety - in order to preserve the amenity of the neighbourhood.
(2) that no development shall take place unless a scheme detailing all external finishing materials to the roof and walls of the development hereby approved has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the planning authority and thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the details so agreed - in the interests of visual amenity. For the avoidance of doubt, samples of the finishing materials should be provided to inform the planning authority's assessment.
(3) that the development hereby approved shall not be occupied unless the Car, cycle and motorycycle parking areas hereby granted planning permission have been constructed, drained, laid-out and demarcated in accordance with drawing No. 015a of the plans hereby approved or such other drawing as may subsequently be submitted and approved in writing by the planning authority. Such areas shall not thereafter be used for any other purpose other than the purpose of the parking of cars ancillary to the development and use thereby
Page 90 granted approval - in the interests of public safety, encouraging sustainable modes of travel and the free flow of traffic.
(4) that the serviced apartments hereby granted planning permission shall not be occupied unless a scheme for the provision of foul sewerage and wholesome water facilities has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and that the said scheme has been implemented - in the interests of public health.
(5) That the use hereby granted planning permission shall not take place unless provision has been made within the application site for refuse storage and disposal in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority – in order to preserve the amenity of the neighbourhood and in the interests of public health.
(6) that the building hereby approved shall not be occupied unless a scheme detailing compliance with the Council's 'Low and Zero Carbon Buildings' supplementary guidance has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority, and any recommended measures specified within that scheme for the reduction of carbon emissions have been implemented in full - to ensure that this development complies with requirements for reductions in carbon emissions pecified in the City Council's relevant published Supplementary Guidance document, 'Low and Zero Carbon Buildings'.
(7) that the use hereby approved shall not be brought into use until such time as a sample Residential Travel Pack has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the planning authority, and thereafter prominently displayed for the benefit of occupants. For the avoidance of doubt, this should be site-specific and detail the sustainable transport options available to occupants of the development - in the interests of promoting sustainable travel.
(8) that no development pursuant to this grant of planning permission shall be undertaken unless street furniture on Bedford Place has been re-sited in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted and agreed in writing by the planning authority - in order to ensure that existing street furniture is not inappropriately sited relative to bedroom windows and the proposed vehicular access.
(9) Prior to the commencement of any works on site, a detailed scheme for surface water drainage shall be submitted to and agreed by the Planning Authority, in consultation with SEPA and Scottish Water. This shall include drainage calculations for a sensitivity test up to a 200 year return period. Thereafter, all work shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme – to ensure adequate protection of the water environment from surface water runoff.
Page 91
Dr Margaret Bochel Head of Planning and Sustainable Development.
Page 92 Agenda Item 3.1
Planning Development Management Committee
31 HILLSIDE ROAD, PETERCULTER
REDEVELOPMENT OF EXISTING SITE TO CREATE 2 DETACHED DWELLING HOUSES, SPLITTING EXISTING FEU
For: Ms Charleen Miller
Application Type : Detailed Planning Permission Advert : Application Ref. : P150009 Advertised on: Application Date: 09/01/2015 Committee Date: 23 April 2015 Officer : Dineke Brasier Community Council : Comments Ward : Lower Deeside (M Boulton/A Malone/M Malik)
RECOMMENDATION:
Refuse
Page 93 DESCRIPTION
The application site is located at the western end of Hillside Road, opposite the corner with Hillside Place and at the point where Hillside Road narrows and drops steeply down to The Bush. The site measures approximately 1000m² and has a frontage of 27m. It slopes steeply from north to south and from east to west with the lowest point being the south west corner of the plot, which is some 5 metres below the level of the north east corner.
The existing dwelling is a small single storey bungalow with an attached single garage and has a floor area of approximately 91m². It has a simple construction, and is one of the original dwellings in Hillside Road. It is single storey with a pitched tiled roof and rendered walls.
The building is set in the north east corner of the plot, on a levelled area that is clearly built up to the rear. A small shed and greenhouse are located to the south of the dwelling. The western part of the site and boundary is overgrown with a mix of shrubs, hedges and trees. The boundary to the south consists of a wooden fence with a mix of stone wall and hedges making up the boundary to the east.
Hillside Road is located within an existing residential area, and consists of a mix of dwelling of various styles, sizes and designs. Various properties along this road have been replaced, and there are only few original dwellings left.
RELEVANT HISTORY
None
PROPOSAL
Planning permission is sought for the construction of two detached dwellings. Each property would front onto Hillside Road, and have a footprint of approximately 114m². The main footprint of the dwellings would be 9.0m x 7.5m, with a rear wing extension of 6.5 x 6.3 and a front porch of 3.2m x 1.7m. Accommodation would be over two levels with an additional basement level for Dwelling A (on the east side of the plot) in the rear wing extension. At ground level the accommodation would include a porch, living room, study/ bedroom, showerroom, kitchen/ family/ dining area and a utility room. The first floor accommodation would comprise four further bedrooms, two with en-suite bathroom and a bathroom. The basement level at Dwelling A is indicated as a playroom with direct access into the garden.
Externally, the front elevation includes two dormers facing Hillside Road, with rooflights in the remainder of the roof slopes. The application was amended to incorporate three parking spaces for each dwelling and they would each have its own driveway. The parking areas and driveways would occupy the majority of the front gardens with only limited space left for soft landscaping.
Page 94 Supporting Documents
All drawings and the supporting documents listed below relating to this application can be viewed on the Council’s website at http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=150009
On accepting the disclaimer enter the application reference quoted on the first page of this report.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
The application has been referred to the Planning Development Management Committee because the Culter Community Council objects to the scheme and 8 timeous letters of representations have been received. Accordingly, the application falls outwith the scope of the Council’s Scheme of Delegation.
CONSULTATIONS
Roads Development Management – (Initial comments) The application is for the redevelopment of the existing site to create 2 detached dwelling houses. Residential units with 4 or more bedrooms in the outer city should supply 3 off street parking spaces. It is not clear form the drawing submitted that this can be achieved. An updated drawing should be submitted showing that 3 off street parking spaces are achievable at the site leaving suitable manoeuvrability and accessibility.
A visibility splay should be submitted showing a visibility splay of 2m x 25m is achievable within which there shall be no obstruction between 0.26m and 1.05m above carriageway level.
The gradient of the driveway should not exceed 1:20. The applicant should confirm the gradient of the driveway.
(Additional comments): The applicant has supplied a revised drawing showing access and parking layouts for both properties. These include parking spaces for 3 vehicles within the curtilage of each property. The parking and driveway arrangements appear acceptable and the visibility splays of each junction have been considered.
The access to the eastern property has an acceptable visibility splay and is sited on the existing access. The access to the western property is acceptable, though the situation is not ideal. Looking west, i.e. downhill, is acceptable. Looking to the east, i.e. uphill, the difference in height level affects visibility. The applicant has considered this aspect by removal of vegetation and adjusting the fencing layout to improve the visibility. The proposed gradient of the driveway and materials are acceptable and the layout is generally acceptable given the character of the roadway.
Page 95 No objections to the application.
Environmental Health – No observations
Enterprise, Planning & Infrastructure (Flooding) - No observations
Community Council – Objection based on the following grounds: 1. The very limited number of affordable houses in Peterculter will be reduced by this proposed curtilage split to provide two large three storey five bedroom executive style houses. These will dominate the streetscape in this part of Hillside Road and have an adverse impact on its character. 2. Removal of the trees and shrubs on the western boundary will not only remove the privacy between numbers 31 and 33, but will also largely disturb the water table and ground water movement within the sloping garden to the detriment of 33 Hillside Road, ‘Siglavik’ and 46 Hillview Road. 3. Onsite parking appears very limited for such large houses. If cars were to park on Hillside Road in front of the properties, then this would virtually prevent the owners of 28 and 30 Hillside Road using their driveways. 4. The SUDS pond would not be located in the lowest part of the garden, and could result in water running/ seeping into lower lying neighbouring properties. 5. The proposal would result in overdevelopment of the site.
REPRESENTATIONS
8 letters of objection have been received. The objections raised relate to the following matters –
1. Two five bedroomed dwellings would be out of character in this area and would constitute an overdevelopment of the site. The plot is not wide enough to accommodate these two houses and would be against the general grain of development in Hillside Road, which consists of dwellings set in spacious plots. 2. The dwellings appear excessively high from the rear compared to the front. 3. Adverse impact on neighbouring houses on grounds of a loss of natural light and a loss of privacy, loss of views, loss or reception through satellite dish. Properties would have a dominating impact on 33 Hillside Road as that dwelling is set at a significantly lower level. 4. Disruption to neighbouring properties during construction. 5. Insufficient on-site parking 6. The existing access point on Hillside Road should be retained. This part of Hillside Road is already in a poor state of repair and additional traffic, including construction traffic, would increase wear and tear. 7. Loss of trees on the western boundary. This might also have an adverse impact on the structural integrity of 33 Hillside Road as removal of all tree roots might result in a destabilising of the ground.
Page 96 8. If this proposal would be granted it might set a precedent for similar developments in this area in the future. 9. The proposal might result in additional run-off resulting in flooding of neighbouring properties, especially 33 Hillside Road and 46 Hillview Road.
PLANNING POLICY
Aberdeen Local Development Plan H1 – Residential Areas: Within existing residential areas, new residential development shall be approved in principle provided it: 1. Does not constitute overdevelopment; 2. Does not have an unacceptable impact on the character or amenity of surrounding areas; 3. Does not result in the loss of valuable and valued areas of open space; 4. Complies with the Householder Development Guide and the Subdivision and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages Supplementary Guidance. D1 – Architecture and Placemaking: New development must be designed with due consideration for its context and make a positive contribution to its setting.
D2 – Design and Amenity: Privacy shall be designed in to higher density housing, residential development shall have a public face to a street and a private face to an enclosed garden or court, residents should have access to a sitting-out area, car parking should not dominate the site layout, opportunities should be made of views and sunlight, measures should be included to design out crime and external lighting should take into account amenity and the effects of light spillage.
T2 – Managing the Transport Impact of Development : Maximum car parking standards are set out in the Transport and Accessibility Supplementary Guidance.
NE6 – Flooding and Drainage : Surface water drainage associated with development must be the most appropriate available in terms of SuDS and avoid flooding and pollution both during and after construction.
R7 – Low and Zero Carbon Buildings : All new buildings, in meeting building regulations energy requirements, must install low and zero carbon generating technology to reduce the predicted carbon dioxide emissions by at least 15% below 2007 building standards.
Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan The following policies substantively reiterate policies in the Adopted Local Development Plan as summarised above: H1 – Residential Areas (H1 – Residential Areas) D1 – Quality Placemaking by Design (D1 – Architecture and Placemaking and D2 – Design and Amenity) T2 – Managing the Transport Impact of Development (T2 – Managing the Transport Impact of Development) NE6 – Flooding, Drainage and Water Quality (NE6 – Flooding and Drainage)
Page 97 R7 – Low and Zero Carbon Building, and Water Efficiency (R7 – Low and Zero Carbon Buildings)
Supplementary Guidance (SG) Subdivision and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages Supplementary Guidance: Guidance is provided on specific topic areas, including privacy, residential amenity, daylight and sunlight; design and materials; density, pattern and scale of development; trees and garden ground; pedestrian/ vehicular safety and car parking and precedent.
Transport and Accessibility Supplementary Guidance: Sets out maximum parking standards for all types of development.
EVALUATION
Sections 25 and 37(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) require that where, in making any determination under the planning acts, regard is to be had to the provisions of the development plan and that determination shall be made in accordance with the plan, so far as material to the application, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
Principle of development The site is located within a residential area where the principle of residential development is acceptable provided the proposal would not constitute overdevelopment, would not have an adverse impact on the character of the surrounding area or residential amenity, and complies with guidelines as set out in the Subdivision and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages SG.
The existing dwelling on the site has a footprint of 91m² on a plot of approximately 1000m², resulting in a developed area of only 9.1%. The proposal would result in two dwellings, each with a footprint of 114m² on a plot that is split roughly in half. The developed area for each plot would therefore be 22.8%. Furthermore, the plot has a relatively rectangular shape with a road frontage measuring 28m and a depth of 36m. This means that, theoretically, the site would be sufficiently large to accommodate two dwellings whilst retaining satisfactory gaps towards the neighbouring properties to ensure the dwellings would not appear crammed in.
However, due to the significant steep change in levels (some 5 metres across the site) and the complicated relationship with especially 33 Hillside Road which is set at a significantly lower level, any development would need to be site specific and be individually designed to take account of these distinct characteristics. The remainder of this report will discuss the submitted design and assess its impact on the surrounding area and its impact on the residential amenity of neighbouring properties and will conclude whether it is considered that this particular design would be suitable for these specific site characteristics.
Impact on character and appearance of the surrounding area, especially in relation to scale and design:
Page 98 Hillside Road is characterised by mostly detached houses, of a variety of designs and conforming to formal building lines on both sides of the street. The Bush, which is to the west of the site has a more irregular pattern of development. However, the application site is more readily seen as part of Hiilside Road and thus it is the character and built form of that street which is important in assessing the acceptability of the proposed development. The proposal is for the construction of two detached dwellings to replace the existing single house on the plot. The plot is considered to be sufficiently large to accommodate two dwellings. The two dwellings are effectively split in a front section facing the road with a rear projection facing the private garden. The position of the houses on the plots would respect the building line to the east, being set sufficiently far back from the front boundary. The resultant site coverage of approximately 23% would be in keeping with many of the properties on the street, although it would be significantly higher than the density of development on the fours plots immediately to the east of the site. Further, relative to those plots to the east, the houses on the application site would appear somewhat crammed in.
The front section of the proposed houses is of a fairly traditional design of a one and a half storey property with two dormers in the front roof slope. This design has been used in more locations in Hillside Road and as such, even if the design of the dormers could be considered a bit top-heavy and close to the ridge line of the roof, would be considered acceptable in this location.
The use of a rear projection to increase the floorspace is also an accepted form of design in this location. However, in this instance, site specific characteristics need to be taken into consideration. The site slopes from north to south and from east to west, with the lowest point being in the south western part of the garden. The design of Dwelling A includes a basement level and a full gable to the rear elevation, resulting in a three storey rear elevation. The basement level has been removed from Dwelling B, but due to the change in levels and the use of a full gable, the rear elevation still appears to be two and a half storeys. As a result the bulk and massing of the dwellings is out of context in the surrounding area.
Impact on residential amenity: The most crucial aspect of the proposal in terms of its impact on residential amenity is the relationship between Dwelling B and 33 Hillside Road. This latter dwelling is set at a lower level than the garden of number 31 with a steep drop of roughly 1.5 metre from the side boundary into its garden. This side boundary would again be significantly lower than the ground floor levels of Dwelling The ridge height of Dwelling B would be significantly higher than the ridge height of 33 Hillside Road. There would be a gap of 3m from Dwelling B to the side boundary, and the main building line would be approx. 5m in front of 33 Hillside Road, whilst the rear elevations would be level.
Due to its scale, massing and positioning on the plot, the resultant dwelling would be considered to have an overbearing impact on 33 Hillside Road. The overall side elevation would be relatively long at 14m and would appear to increase in height due to the change in levels along the property. At the rear, the side elevation would have a ridge height of 7m, but the difference in ground levels
Page 99 between this part of the site and the garden of number 33 would be between 2 and 3m, resulting in a ridge height that would be between 9 and 10m when viewed from 33 Hillside Road.
Attempts have been made to reduce the impact of this side elevation on number 33 through stepping the rear projection down and removal of the basement level for Dwelling B. However, it is felt that these do not fully satisfy concerns with regards to the relationship between these two dwellings. It is felt that a more site specific solution would be necessary through significantly reducing the height, scale and massing of the rear projection, and making better use of the change in levels on the site.
Furthermore, the building would be sited to the east of the garden of number 33. Due to its height, it would be considered that it is likely the proposal would result in some loss of natural daylight and cast a shadow in the morning to especially the part of the garden adjacent to the boundary with number 31.
The proposal would not result in a significant loss of residential amenity to 29 Hillside Road. Dwelling A is sufficiently far removed from this dwelling not to result in a significant loss of light and there are no windows directly overlooking this property.
The proposal contains high level windows, front door and a door serving the utility room facing between the two proposed dwellings. The high level windows and the doors would not result in unacceptable levels of overlooking between the two properties. The distance between the rear elevation and properties on Hillview Road exceeds 18m. It is acknowledged that this distance would be decreased when compared to the current situation, but it is considered that this would not result in unacceptable levels of overlooking between these properties, especially as there is only one small window serving each floor in the side gable of this building.
Impact on vehicular and pedestrian safety, including access and car parking: Each dwelling would have three on-site parking spaces accessed through a private driveway. Dwelling A would use the existing driveway, and a new driveway would be constructed in the narrow part of Hillside Road going down to The Bush. The plans indicate that the driveways would have a maximum gradient of 1:20, which would comply with comments from the Road Development Management Team. A visibility splay has been submitted setting out that a clear visibility splay of 25m x 2.4 can be achieved for this new driveway. Furthermore, The Bush and this part of Hillside Road have relatively low levels of traffic as it only serves a few properties. Notwithstanding, there is no footway between Dwelling B and the existing footway on Hillside Road, which would mean that the occupants of that house would not have a safe pedestrian route to/from the property.
Impact on Flooding and Drainage: The site plan shows an indicative location for a SuDS pond in the rear garden near the boundary between the two plots. Details of this SuDs pond would need
Page 100 to be confirmed. Policy NE6 (Flooding and Drainage) sets out that a full Drainage Impact Assessment would be required for any development with a floorspace exceeding 100m². In this case, both dwellings would have a footprint exceeding 100m² and as such a full Drainage Impact Assessment would need to be conditioned. This could be conditioned. The Council’s Flooding Team have assessed the application and did not raise any concerns.
If the application were approved, then a condition would be added setting out that a Drainage Impact Assessment would be required. This should deal with any issues arising from surface water run-off.
Impact on Trees: The majority of the western part of the site is covered in vegetation, primarily shrubs and semi-mature trees. The site is not covered by a TPO and as a result all vegetation could be cleared without permission from the Council. The loss of the trees would change the character of the immediate locality, especially when viewed from The Bush. Due to the lack of vegetation on this boundary, it would result in Dwelling B appearing to sit very high within the plot relative to the adjacent property and street level within The Bush to the detriment of the character of the area.
Other matters raised: All valid planning concerns raised by the Community Council and in the letters of representation have been addressed above.
The impacts of construction traffic and ground stability are not considered to be planning matters.
Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan
The Proposed ALDP was approved at the meeting of the Communities, Housing and Infrastructure Committee of 28 October 2014. It constitutes the Council’s settled view as to what should be the content of the final adopted ALDP and is now a material consideration in the determination of planning applications, along with the adopted ALDP. The exact weight to be given to matters contained in the Proposed ALDP (including individual policies) in relation to specific applications will depend on whether: - these matters have been subject to public consultation through the Main Issues Report; and - the level of objection raised in relation these matters as part of the Main Issues Report; and - the relevance of these matters to the application under consideration The foregoing can only be assessed on a case by case basis. In relation to this particular application no new issues were raised.
Suggested conditions
If members were minded to approve the application, then the following conditions would be recommended:
Page 101 1. Materials 2. Boundaries 3. Drainage Impact Assessment 4. Details of driveway construction (gradient)
RECOMMENDATION
Refuse
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION
Due to its scale, size and design of the proposed Dwelling B, in combination with the significant change in levels of the site, Dwelling B is considered to have an unacceptable, overbearing impact on the residential amenity of 33 Hillside Road, which is set at a lower level than the application site. The proposal therefore fails to meet the criteria as set out in planning policies H1 (Residential Areas) and D1 (Architecture and Design) of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan, policies H1 (Residential Areas) and D1 (Quality Placemaking by Design) and the Subdivision and Redevelopment of Residential Curtilages Supplementary Guidance.
Dr Margaret Bochel Head of Planning and Sustainable Development.
Page 102 Page 103 Page 104 Page 105 Page 106 Page 107 Page 108 Page 109 Page 110 Page 111 Page 112 Page 113 Page 114 Page 115 Page 116 Page 117 Page 118 Page 119 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 120 Agenda Item 3.2
Planning Development Management Committee
LAND AT BROOKFIELD, MURTLE DEN ROAD, MILLTIMBER
DEMOLITION OF EXISTING DWELLINGHOUSE AND ERECTION OF 3NO. DWELLING HOUSES.
For: Mr Richard McDonald
Application Type : Planning Permission in Advert : Dev. Plan Departure Principle Advertised on: 21/01/2015 Application Ref. : P141858 Committee Date: 23 April 2015 Application Date: 12/12/2014 Community Council : No response Officer : Paul Williamson received Ward : Lower Deeside (M Boulton/A Malone/M Malik)
RECOMMENDATION:
Refuse
Page 121 DESCRIPTION
The application site of 1.0088 hectares forms the domestic curtilage of the residential property known as ‘Brookfield’. It is located on the east side of Murtle Den Road, a private road, situated to the north of North Deeside Road (A93) between Milltimber and Bieldside.
Murtle Den Road is characterised by (thirteen) large detached dwellinghouses set within generous plots in a mature woodland setting. It is a no-through road and can only be accessed from North Deeside Road.
The existing dwelling ‘Brookfield’ is a one and a half storey modern detached dwellinghouse facing south with a garage extension on the north (rear) elevation. A block driveway leads down into the site, from the gated entrance. The existing dwelling lies to the north of the site, with relatively open yet in some places landscaped gardens, towards North Deeside Road.
In respect of topography, the site slopes down from Murtle Den Road from west to east, while also falling from north to south.
The boundaries of the site are defined by a number of coniferous and deciduous trees, with a total of 10 groupings identified, in addition to 14 individual specimens. They can be summarised as follows: - G1 – G5: Dense Hedges along the southern and eastern boundary comprising Lawson Cypress, estimated at around 30 to 40 years old. Height of up to 20 metres. Some interspersed species including sycamore, Norway maple, holly and rhododendron; - G2: Group comprises 17 mature mixed broadleaves (including sycamore, Norway maple, small leafed lime, and horse chestnut) up to 24 metres in height. Located to the western boundary at Murtle Den Road; - G7: This group overhangs the northern boundary of the site to ‘Birkdale’ and includes a row of 45 Douglas Fir of approximately 50 to 60 years old; - G9: Overhang the stream to the south west, and comprise Sitka Spruce and Larch, together with some younger Leyland Cypress. Up to a height of 24 metres.
It should be noted that the Arboricultural report indicated the majority of the trees as Category C, with a limited value, and perceived lifespan.
A small water course runs along the south western boundary of the site.
To the west of the site across Murtle Den Road, which is itself tree lined, are open fields associated with Oldfold Farm. To the north beyond Brookfield, is the house known as ‘Birkdale’. To the south, beyond the existing line of trees, are open fields which are also in the ownership of the applicant. To the east, are open fields.
Page 122 RELEVANT HISTORY
A0/0146 – Proposed Dormer Window and Balcony – Approved unconditionally on 22 March 2000.
131419 – Erection of New Three Storey Dwellinghouse (Feu Split) at ‘Pinelands’, Murtle Den Road – Initially refused under Delegated Powers on 7 February 2014. Subsequent appeal to the Local Review Body was sustained on 4 July 2014.
PROPOSAL
Planning permission in principle is sought to demolish the existing property ‘Brookfield’ and erect three detached dwellinghouses on the site. The feu split would see three curtilages of similar size (The indicative layout illustrates broad curtilages of 4000 sq.m for one plot, with the remaining two plots being in the region of 3000 sq.m), within this broadly triangular site.
At this time, with the application being for planning permission in principle, the submitted plans are only indicative at this time. As such, there are no details of the dwelling design (or scale), nor any external finishing materials. The Design Statement does however state that the dwellings would be west facing to provide an active frontage to Murtle Den Road
The dwellinghouses would share the existing driveway accessed off Murtle Den Road. Minimal tree removal of some recently planted species would be required to allow development. Tree management is recommended by the applicant’s arboriculturalist, with some additional/replacement planting in its place.
The applicant acknowledges that SEPA do not allow for private drainage systems in areas covered by a public sewer. As such, the proposed development is indicated as being connected to new public sewers which shall run down Murtle Den Road, and connect into the existing main sewer. Surface water drainage would be dealt with via SUDS, with some infiltration, and some discharge to the local watercourse.
Supporting Documents
All drawings and the supporting documents listed below relating to this application can be viewed on the Council’s website at http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=141858
On accepting the disclaimer enter the application reference quoted on the first page of this report. Design Statement Supporting Statement Tree Report Drainage Impact assessment Protected Species Survey
Page 123
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
The application has been referred to the Planning Development Management Committee because the proposal has been the subject of six letters of representation which express objection or concern about the proposal. Accordingly, the application falls outwith the scope of the Council’s Scheme of Delegation.
CONSULTATIONS
Roads Development Management – No objection. The section of Murtle Den Road from the application site entrance to North Deeside Road, should be upgraded to an adoptable standard. This should be secured by planning condition. A condition should also be attached with regard to the provision of the required visibility splay. No loose material should be used in the first 5m of driveway. Parking shall have to be provided in accordance with the Council’s Standards. Environmental Health – No observations. Enterprise, Planning & Infrastructure (Flooding) - No observations. Scottish Natural Heritage – Awaiting comments. Community Council – No comments received.
REPRESENTATIONS
A total of 11 letters of representation have been received, with 6 objecting, and 5 in support.
The objections raised relate to the following matters –
1) More houses shall increase congestion; 2) The dwellings shall harm wildlife in the area; 3) The development is on garden ground which is not appropriate; 4) There are too many new build developments across the City; 5) The city does not need large detached dwellings. The young and elderly need smaller houses in such areas; 6) The proposal is out of keeping with the character of Murtle Den Road; 7) The development is not capable of implementation due to existing access rights over the property; 8) The development shall change the capacity of Murtle Den Road; and, 9) The proposal does not fit with the wider Masterplan for the area.
The letters of support highlight the following benefits: 1) The land has good potential for development, and additional properties would be a good solution. 2) These dwellings would replace many of the large houses demolished as a result on the bypass; 3) The plot is secluded, and there would be no negative visual impact;
Page 124 4) The properties would meet part of the demand for new houses in the area; 5) There would be no impact on wildlife; and, 6) The proposal does not affect the Green Belt.
PLANNING POLICY
Policy NE1 – Green Space Network: states that the Council will protect, promote and enhance the wildlife, recreational, landscape and access value of the Green Space Network. Proposals for development that are likely to destroy or erode the character or function of the Green Space network will not be permitted.
Policy NE2 – Green Belt: no development will be permitted in the green belt for purposes other than those essential for agriculture, woodland and forestry, recreational uses compatible with an agricultural or natural setting, mineral extraction or restoration or landscape renewal.
Policy D1 (Architecture and Placemaking) – To ensure high standards of design, new development must be designed with due consideration for its context and make a positive contribution to its setting. Factors such as siting, scale, massing, colour, materials, orientation, details, the proportions of building elements, together with the spaces around buildings, including streets, squares, open space, landscaping and boundary treatments, will be considered in assessing that contribution.
Policy D2 (Design and Amenity) – Privacy shall be designed into higher density housing, residential development will have a public face to the street and private face to an enclosed garden or court, residents shall have access to sitting out areas, car parking should not dominate, opportunities should be made of views and sunlight, measures should be included to design out crime and external lighting shall take into account amenity and the effects of light spillage.
Policy NE5 (Trees and Woodland) – There is a presumption against all activities and development that will result in the loss of, or damage to, established trees and woodlands that contribute significantly to nature conservation, landscape character or local amenity, including ancient and semi-natural woodland which is irreplaceable.
Policy NE6 (Flooding and Drainage) – Surface water drainage associated with development must be the most appropriate available in terms of SUDS and avoid flooding and pollution both during and after construction.
In areas not served by the public sewer, a private sewer treatment system for individual properties will be permitted provided that the developer demonstrates that there will be no adverse effects on the environment, amenity and public health.
Policy NE8 (Natural Heritage) – Development that, taking into account any proposed mitigation measures, has an adverse effect on a protected species or
Page 125 an area designated because of its natural heritage value will only be permitted where it satisfies the relevant criteria in Scottish Planning Policy.
Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan
Policy D1 – Quality Placemaking by Design Policy D2 – Landscape Policy I1 – Infrastructure Delivery and Planning Obligations Policy T2 – Managing the Transport Impact of Development Policy T3 – Sustainable and Active Travel Policy NE1 – Green Space Network Policy NE2 – Green Belt Policy NE5 – Trees and Woodlands Policy NE6 – Flooding, Drainage and Water Quality Policy NE8 – Natural Heritage Policy R7 – Low and Zero Carbon Buildings, and Water Efficiency
Supplementary Guidance
Oldfold Development Framework and Masterplan
The agricultural land predominately to the west is identified in the Local Development Plan as Opportunity Site 62 (OP62) and is known as ‘Oldfold’ and extends to 48.9 hectares. Oldfold is allocated for the development of 550 residential units and 5 hectares of employment land in the period between 2007 and 2026.
EVALUATION
Sections 25 and 37(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) require that where, in making any determination under the planning acts, regard is to be had to the provisions of the development plan and that determination shall be made in accordance with the plan, so far as material to the application, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
Principle of Residential Development
Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) is clear in identifying that the aim of green belt is to direct planned growth to the most appropriate location, and to protect and enhance the quality, character and setting of towns and cities. In this instance, while replacing an existing dwelling, and providing an additional two properties, the site is located within the wider Green Belt. As such, the allowance of additional residential development in this location may have a detrimental impact on the character of the landscape setting of this part of the green belt, which would be contrary to the advice within paragrpah 163 of SPP which states: “the cumulative erosion of a green belt’s integrity through the granting of individual planning permissions should be avoided”.
Page 126
On a related consideration are the principles of policies NE2 - Green Belt and NE1 - Green Space Network. The wider aim of the green belt has already been addressed, although the Local Development Plan does provide specific criteria for acceptable development in the Green Belt. In this instance, the proposal does not meet any of the defined criteria for acceptable development in such an area, contrary to the claims of the applicants agent, and is therefore deemed to be contrary to Policy NE2. In respect of the Green Space Network (GSN), as the proposal would seek to develop existing garden ground which is synonymous with the character of housing along Murtle Den Road, it is considered that there is potential for further development to erode or destroy the character or function of the GSN in this location and would therefore be contrary to the aims of policy NE1.
Changing Character of the Area
Through the allocation of the Oldfold Masterplan site (which acts as an extension to Milltimber), the provision of 550 homes on land to the western edge of Murtle Den Road, shall undoubtedly have an effect on the wider character of the area. However, it should be noted that the Opportunity Site shall almost in its entireity be accessed from either a new road, or existing roads to the west. Accordingly, only a further 10 dwellings (with 9 as part of the Masterplan area and 1 additional dwelling obtained through the Local Review Body) are to be accessed to the north off Murtle Den Road. In light of the general topography, and the large presence of trees and woodland, the Oldfold Development would not necessarily be seen in the same context as the Murtle Den valley itself, and would therefore not justify the provision of further development in the Green Belt, as proposed by this application. Accordingly, the provision of development at Oldfold represents planned growth of an existing urban area, and would not act as a precedent for development of this nature. It must also be noted that the Oldfold development meets the housing needs for Lower Deeside, with no further sites identified for the release of housing land in this area. Therefore there is no need for a further release of development land, especially so close to the existing allocation, or within a Green Belt location.
Layout, Access and Design
The character of Murtle Den, which comprises large homes in sizeable grounds within a high quality woodland setting, is acknowledged. However as noted above, the general principle of development on site cannot be established against Scottish Planning Policy nor the Local Development Plan Policy as it relates to Green Belt locations. The general character of the area would not be reflected through the scale and density of development proposed. The general size of individual curtilages does vary along Murtle Den Road, with the likes of Brookfield being in the region of 1 ha, and Birkdale at 0.8 ha. The development proposal would introduce three plots varying around 0.3 ha to 0.4ha, and while it is comparable to the likes of ‘Tree Tops’ at 0.32 ha, it is not synonymous with the predominant scale and character of dwelling curtilages.
Page 127 While the principle has not been established, there is some merit in outlining the difficulty in complying with the more detailed aspects of Council Policy relating to design and amenity. Policy D2 Is clear in outlining that residential development shall have a public face to a street, and a private face to an enclosed garden or court. In this instance, the layout which is indicative, indicates that one dwelling would front (westwards) towards Murtle Den Road, with the remaining two dwelling effectively being ‘backland’ development beyond to the east. In addition, none of the dwellings are currently indicated as maximising views to the south, or to be orientated to maximise from passive solar gain. This would result in these aspects of the proposal being contrary to Policy D2 of the Adopted Local Development Plan. However, as the proposed layout is indicative, it would not in itself be a reason for refusal given that the principle of the dwellings has not been established.
Drainage
In terms of foul drainage, the closest Scottish Water sewer is located at the junction of Murtle Den Road with North Deeside Road, some 250m to the south of the site access. Advice from SEPA states that within sewered areas, there is a principle against the use of private foul drainage systems. As such, unless unviable, a connection should be made to the public system. However, if the principle of planning permission had been established, it is recommended that the use of a planning condition requiring a connection to the public system, once it is provided down Murtle Den Road, as a part of the associated Oldfold proposals. Surface water drainage could ultimately be adequately addressed through a suspensive planning condition.
Transport
The traffic generated by the three proposed dwellinghouses would be relatively minor. However, Roads Officers have indicated that in addition to the provision of the necessary visibility splays and surfacing requirements, the applicant would also have to upgrade the initial stretch of Murtle Den Road to an adoptable standard, from North Deeside Road to the site entrance. If the principle of the development had been established, this would be dealt with by means of a suspensive condition which would have prevented development prior to such works being undertaken. However, it appears from one of the submitted representations that the applicant may not have the necessary legal right to undertake such works. That, however, is not a material consideration in the determination of this planning application. Ample parking can be provided within the proposed plots for the size of the properties and the proposed means of access to each site is acceptable. Accordingly, no concerns have been raised by the Council’s roads service in this regard.
Wildlife, Habitat and Protected Species
In light of the proposal including the demolition of the existing dwellinghouse, and the general landform and environment being a suitable habitat for foraging bats, it
Page 128 was requested that a Protected Species Survey be undertaken. This included a Scoping Report for all protected species, and a specific Bat Inspection Survey.
The latter survey indicated that the presence of the following evidence was recorded: bat droppings; corpses of young or adult bats; scratch marks; urine staining; grease marks; cobweb free gaps around potential roost locations; and, the sound of bats in a roost. The licenced bat surveyor did highlight that the survey was undertaken at a time outwith the main active season for bats in the UK. As such, it recommends that a further summer survey including bat emergence and re-entry surveys would be necessary. Policy NE8 of the Adopted Local Development Plan, makes it clear that proposals which may have an impact upon protected species, should ensure that there can be appropriate mitigation in place in line with the requirements of Scottish Planning Policy. In this instance, the initial Bat Survey has indicated that the presence of bats is likely but a further summer emergence survey would be necessary. Therefore at this specific time, it cannot be demonstrated that there would not be a detrimental impact on a protected species. Planning authorities have a duty to determine planning applications within statutory timescales, as well as having a duty of care towards protected species. In this instance, the applicant could in theory come back with additional supporting information in respect of the potential impacts on potential bat roosts. However, given that the principle of the development has not been established, it is considered prudent to ensure the determination of this application at the earliest opportunity. It must however be noted that even if the principle of the development had been accepted, the issue of the protection of the bats would have itself been a reason for refusal.
In addition, the Protected Species Scoping Report, did highlight the potential for breeding birds on site. However, in light of the development being for planning permission in principle, and the potential to implement the development without disturbing or resulting in the loss of the existing trees, breeding birds are not of a particular concern at this time.
The submitted Tree Survey also noted that some of the younger planting on sites did have significant grazing damage from rabbits and roe deer. However, as noted above the principle of development cannot be accepted at this time. Notwithstanding, the development in theory could proceed without damaging the wildlife habitat for roe deer, whom are transient in the area.
In respect of trees, while there are a substantial number of trees particularly to the site boundaries, development could in theory take place with minimal impact on the existing trees, apart from the removal of some more recent planting additions within the garden ground, and the provision of a visibility splay on Murtle Den Road. However, the principle of the development has not been established due to the over-riding conflicts with Green Belt policy.
Letters of representation
The following matters were raised within the letters of representation, which have not already been addressed above:
Page 129
• Scale/Size of Dwellings Proposed – Overall, there is a recognised need across Aberdeen City to provide a range of house types and sizes to meet the needs of the expected expanding population across the City. As such, development is directed to the most appropriate sites, and allocated accordingly. Thereafter there are separate policy requirements for the provision of a range of types of accommodation for applicants to meet, however in this instance, the principle of the development has not been established. • Conflict with the Oldfold Masterplan – The proposal lies in an area outwith the defined boundary of the Oldfold Masterplan, and within the Green Belt of Aberdeen City. As such, it is not expected to comply with the requirements of the Masterplan, and is instead assessed upon its own merits against the policies of the extant Local Development Plan. • No Negative Visual Impact – while the application site is relatively secluded by the presence of substantial treed boundary features, it does not in itself outweigh the over-riding policy context. As noted above, the purpose of the Green Belt is to protect the landscape setting of the City, and prevent coalesence of built up areas. As such, the allowance of such a development could cumulatively lead to the erosion of the Green Belt, which is not in accordance with Scottish Planning Policy or Policy NE2 of the Adopted Local Development Plan.
The following matters are not material planning considerations: - There are too many new build developments across the City; and, - These dwellings would replace many of the large houses demolished as a result on the bypass.
Summary
In summary, the proposal to demolish the existing residential dweliing and to provide three dwellinghouses is considered to be contrary to the principles of Green Belt policy, in that the proposal would result in the loss of character, or landscape setting of the area, and could lead to a precedent for similar development proposals which cumulatively would be to the detriment of the wider Green Belt of Aberdeen City.
Should Members be minded to approve this application, a number of conditions would have to be attached in respect of the following matters: Submission of Matters Specified in Conditions (i.e. design, layout, landscaping, materials etc); drainage via SUDS; connection to the public sewer; tree protection/management; provision of upgraded section of road; provision of visibility splays; bin storage provision; details of boundary treatments; and, bat mitigation.
Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan
The Proposed ALDP was approved at the meeting of the Communities, Housing and Infrastructure Committee of 28 October 2014. It constitutes the Council’s settled view as to what should be the content of the final adopted ALDP and is
Page 130 now a material consideration in the determination of planning applications, along with the adopted ALDP. The exact weight to be given to matters contained in the Proposed ALDP (including individual policies) in relation to specific applications will depend on whether: - these matters have been subject to public consultation through the Main Issues Report; and - the level of objection raised in relation these matters as part of the Main Issues Report; and - the relevance of these matters to the application under consideration The foregoing can only be assessed on a case by case basis. In relation to this particular application the policies of the Proposed LDP largely reflect those contained within the extant LDP, and therefore there are no material considerations which would outweigh those existing policies.
RECOMMENDATION
Refuse
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION
1) That the site lies within the Green Belt which is defined to protect and enhance the landscape setting and identity of urban areas and in which there is a presumption against most kinds of development with only limited exceptions. The proposed development does not comply with any of the specified exceptions to the presumption against development within the Green Belt and therefore does not comply with Policy NE2, and could erode the character or function of the Green Space Network thus conflicting with Policy NE1 of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2012, Policies NE2 and NE1 of the Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan. If permitted, this application would create a precedent for more, similar developments to the further detriment of the objectives of the Green Belt policy.
2) That the application is deficient in information in respect of a full summer bat survey, following the indication in the winter survey that bats may be present. As such it is therefore not possible to make a full assessment of the implications of the development on a protected species in order to ensure that the development would not be detrimental to that species. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy NE8 Natural Heritage of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan 2012 and Policy NE8 of the Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan.
Dr Margaret Bochel Head of Planning and Sustainable Development.
Page 131 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 132 Page 133 Page 134 Page 135 Page 136 Page 137 Page 138 Page 139 Page 140 Page 141 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 142 Page 143 Page 144 Page 145 Page 146 Page 147 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 148 Agenda Item 3.3
Planning Development Management Committee
THE BIELDSIDE INN, 37 NORTH DEESIDE ROAD, BIELDSIDE
PROPOSED BALCONY EXTENSION TO REAR OF THE BIELDSIDE INN
For: PB Development Co Ltd
Application Type : Detailed Planning Permission Advert : Section 34 -Proj. Pub. Application Ref. : P150220 Concern Application Date: 11/02/2015 Advertised on: 25/02/2015 Officer : Hannah Readman Committee Date: Ward : Lower Deeside (M Boulton/A Malone/M Community Council : Comments Malik)
RECOMMENDATION:
Refuse
DESCRIPTION The application site relates to a detached public house located on the south side of North Deeside Road at the junction with Bieldside Station Road which borders the site to the east. The site slopes southwards giving rise to a 1 ½ storey principle elevation and a two storey rear elevation consisting of a modern extension, ground floor terrace and first floor balcony which extends to 42sq m. The rear of the application site provides parking for 23 vehicles, accessed from Bieldside Station Road. Marchbank Road adjoins the southern boundary of the
Page 149 site. The surrounding area is characterised predominantly by residential dwellings with a few local amenities including a shop and church nearby.
RELEVANT HISTORY 99/0691 – Detailed planning permission was approved unconditionally in May 1999 for replacement windows.
P031516 – Detailed planning permission was approved conditionally in December 2003 for an extension to the public house which included a first floor balcony.
PROPOSAL Detailed planning permission is sought for a 30sq m extension to the existing balcony located at the rear of The Bieldside Inn. Located on a downwards slope, the maximum height would be 4m above ground level, extend from the existing balcony by a further 2.2m and at the existing width of 13.7m. A 1.1m high glazed barrier would be situated around the perimeter of the balcony and a 2m high wooden fence stained dark green to provide privacy with the neighbouring property to the west.
Supporting Documents All drawings and the supporting documents listed below relating to this application can be viewed on the Council’s website at http://planning.aberdeencity.gov.uk/PlanningDetail.asp?ref=150220 On accepting the disclaimer enter the application reference quoted on the first page of this report.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE The application has been referred to the Planning Development Management Committee because seven letters of objection have been received. Accordingly, the application falls outwith the scope of the Council’s Scheme of Delegation.
CONSULTATIONS Roads Development Management – Requested further information relating to existing and proposed business activity in regard to parking provision, a plan showing the current bin store location and what effect the proposed balcony may have on future collection of the car park is full. Also informed that the proposed columns are within a vehicle movement area and should be protected from accidental damage which may result in further parking spaces being lost. No objection. Environmental Health – Concerns raised over the potential for noise nuisance, especially during evenings and weekends which is likely to have a negative impact on the amenity of existing residents. No effective measure of controlling noise available. Unable to support the application but if it be recommended for approval, suitable conditions should be attached. Flooding – No observations Community Council – Object to the proposal on the grounds of unacceptable noise levels and existing lack of parking that would be made worse.
Page 150
REPRESENTATIONS Seven letters of objection have been received. The objections raised relate to the following matters: • Neighbours not notified • Exacerbated noise levels • Increased number of patrons • Exacerbate overspill and inconsiderate parking problems on local roads • Parked cars left all weekend • Environmental health hazards including smoking, vomiting, litter, shouting on surrounding streets after closing time • Cooking smells • Overlooking/loss of privacy • Contrary to Policy H1 – Residential Areas
PLANNING POLICY Aberdeen Local Development Plan Policy H1 – Residential Areas - Within existing residential areas, proposals for non-residential uses will be refused unless: 1. They are considered complementary to residential use; or 2. It can be demonstrated that the use would cause no conflict with, or any nuisance to, the enjoyment of existing residential amenity.
Policy D1 - Architecture and Placemaking – To ensure high standards of design, new development must be designed with due consideration for its context and make a positive contribution to its setting.
Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan The following policies substantively reiterate policies in the adopted local development plan as summarised above: Policy H1- Residential Areas (H1 Residential Areas in LDP) Policy D1 - Quality Placemaking by Design (D1 Architecture and Placemaking)
Supplementary Guidance Supplementary Guidance: Harmony of Uses Liquor licensed premises – Factors such as noise, anti-social behaviour and the impact on residential amenity need to be carefully considered. Within residential areas (H1 in the local plan) activities that would include liquor licensed premises will not be permitted unless the council can be satisfied that the use would cause no conflict with, or any nuisance to, the enjoyment of residential amenity.
Page 151 EVALUATION Sections 25 and 37(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) require that where, in making any determination under the planning acts, regard is to be had to the provisions of the development plan and that determination shall be made in accordance with the plan, so far as material to the application, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
Principle of Development The application property has provided a local public house facility for the residents of Bieldside and the wider area for some time. In 2004, 8 bedrooms were converted and an extension added to increase the dining and function room facilities. Concerns were raised in relation to parking provision, car and patron noise but the redevelopment was locally supported on the basis of an improved facility. A short fall of parking (32 spaces were required to meet Council parking standards, simplified assessment by the applicant recommended 27 spaces, actual on site provision of 24 spaces) was accepted as a detailed traffic survey indicated additional on road parking availability in the area. The surrounding area is designated as residential (H1 in the Local Plan) and therefore small scale development that would cause no conflict with, or any nuisance to, the enjoyment of residential amenity is considered acceptable in principle. Therefore, the matters to be assessed are the scale of the balcony, the impact on car parking provision and any impact it may have on the residential amenity of the surrounding area.
Design and Scale The proposed balcony extension has been designed using materials that match those of the existing balcony and it is therefore considered to be architecturally compatible. An additional 30sqm of space would create an overall balcony to the size of 72sqm which would be prominent from the rear and side elevations but would not over dominate the original form of the inn. The visual impact of an enlarged balcony would have a neutral impact on the visual amenity of the area and would not greatly alter the setting of the inn. It is therefore considered to accord with Policy D1 – Architecture and Placemaking.
Car Parking The previous planning application ref P031516 stated that 24 parking spaces would be provided after the extension was built. In reality there is a parking provision of 23 spaces, including two disabled. The balcony extension would be supported by three steel columns. Two of the columns are positioned on the white line between 2 parking spaces resulting in the loss of 1 space and the partial obstruction of a second. Submitted plan ‘001 B’ indicates that the balcony extension could accommodate an additional 6 tables with 4 chairs around each, a potential additional patronage of 24 people. It is acknowledged that the site has good access to public transport and that local residents may walk to the site however additional car parking pressure is likely to occur at peak times. The Roads Development Management Team requested more information in the form of an assessment of the current verses the proposed business activity with consideration given to any current or perceived issues with overspill parking onto adjacent streets in order to assess the potential impact of the development.
Page 152 Further information was provided in email format and the team recognise that there are issues that need to be addressed aside from this application but do not object to the proposal alone. Several letters of objection have been received from local residents expressing concerns of overspill and inconsiderate parking onto Golfview Road (private), the bottom of Bieldside Station Road (private) and Marchbank Road, creating a hazard and inconvenience despite double yellow lines and clear signage being in place. It is difficult to assess and directly correlate instances of overspill and inconsiderate parking to patronage at the inn however it remains a concern that could potentially be exacerbated as a result of the proposed development.
Residential Amenity – Privacy and Noise The existing 2m high timber panel would be extended to maintain a satisfactory degree of privacy between the balcony and the neighbour to the west. Established conifer trees provide additional screening along this boundary. No 1 Bieldside Station Road sits across the road from the inn and also possesses mature shrubs and trees alongside the boundary wall. The additional 2.2m depth would not raise any additional concerns over the privacy of the garden that extends for some 30m.
An existing level of variable noise associated with use of the balcony for dining and drinking is accepted within this residential area as it provides a local facility. To an extent, the use of the balcony is weather dependant however the use of umbrellas, suitable clothing and outdoor heaters could encourage prolonged use. The submitted drawings indicate that the use of large umbrellas is proposed, however they do not require planning permission and therefore the use of them can’t be controlled. A 71% increase in floor space is proposed with submitted drawings indicating an additional 24 seats. The existing balcony already sites more tables and chairs than what is shown on the drawings and therefore it is a concern that additional seats could be accommodated on the extension. The objection letters received indicate that the existing level of use and associated noise and behaviour is considered unacceptable on occasions and therefore permitting an extension could aggravate this. In the case of planning permission being granted, the planning authority would have no control over the actual number of people who could use the balcony or the activity which would take place there such as drinking, dining and smoking. The Environmental Health Service is unable to support the application for this reason of there being no effective measure of control.
Whether the proposed balcony could be made acceptable by attaching planning conditions restricting its use has been considered. The conclusion is that any condition would be difficult to make precise enough to ensure it restricted activity to that which would limit noise. A condition restricting the hours of operation to particular times, whilst theoretically enforceable is unlikely to address noise disturbance occurring during the day. Due to its elevated position and exposed nature, the use of the extended balcony has the potential to create additional disturbance during the day which would impact on the ability of neighbours to enjoy their gardens peacefully. Even if a condition could be framed in that context, it would in reality be very difficult to monitor and enforce. Ultimately, it is
Page 153 difficult to control the volume at which people communicate, especially in a social setting and even more so where alcohol is typically involved.
Taking into account the lack of robust noise related information, concerns raised through objections and the residential character of the area, the conclusion is that it is likely that neighbours would be affected by exacerbated noise from the balcony to an unacceptable degree which is contrary to Policy H1 and the Supplementary Guidance: Harmony of Uses. Due to the unpredictable nature of noise generated by people communicating, it is likely that if planning permission were granted, and complaints about noise were subsequently received and verified, the statutory nuisance provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 may not be sufficient to allow the Environmental Health Service to address any noise from customers on the balcony.
If Councillors were minded to approve the application, suitable conditions should be attached to prevent the playing of amplified music outwith the fabric of the building, to prevent the use of heaters on the balcony, to provide sufficient litter bins that are suitable to extinguish cigarette butts and to ensure that suitable and sufficient refuse storage is available to accommodate any additional refuse. A car park barrier system should also be explored.
Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan The Proposed ALDP was approved at the meeting of the Communities, Housing and Infrastructure Committee of 28 October 2014. It constitutes the Council’s settled view as to what should be the content of the final adopted ALDP and is now a material consideration in the determination of planning applications, along with the adopted ALDP. The exact weight to be given to matters contained in the Proposed ALDP (including individual policies) in relation to specific applications will depend on whether: - these matters have been subject to public consultation through the Main Issues Report; and - the level of objection raised in relation these matters as part of the Main Issues Report; and - the relevance of these matters to the application under consideration The foregoing can only be assessed on a case by case basis. In relation to this particular application, policies D1 Quality Placemaking by Design and H1 Residential Areas substantively reiterate the guidance given from policies in the Adopted Local Development Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
Refuse
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION Due to the unpredictable nature of how people communicate in a social setting, it would be difficult to control any noise generated by patrons using the extended balcony. This, in combination with its elevated and open nature, is likely to result in residential properties being adversely affected by noise and activity on the balcony to an unacceptable degree. The planning authority does not consider
Page 154 that sufficient control could be imposed by planning conditions to mitigate this impact to an acceptable degree. Therefore, the proposed development is not considered to be complementary to residential use and is contrary to Adopted Local Development Plan Policy H1 (Residential Areas), Proposed Local Development Plan Policy H1 (Residential Areas) and Supplementary Guidance: Harmony of Uses.
Dr Margaret Bochel Head of Planning and Sustainable Development.
Page 155 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 156 Page 157 Page 158 Page 159 Page 160 Page 161 Page 162 Page 163 Page 164 Page 165 Page 166 Page 167 Page 168 Page 169 Page 170 Agenda Item 4.1
ABERDEEN CITY COUNCIL
COMMITTEE Planning Development Management Committee
DATE 23 April 2015
DIRECTOR Pete Leonard
TITLE OF REPORT Confirmation of Tree Preservation Order numbers 128, 155, 185, 195, 203, 187, 114, 208
REPORT NUMBER: CHI/15/138
CHECKLIST RECEIVED Yes
1. PURPOSE OF REPORT
To have confirmed eight provisional Tree Preservation Orders (TPO) made by the Head of Planning and Sustainable Development under delegated powers. The Orders currently provide temporary protection for the trees, but are required to be confirmed by the Planning Development Management Committee to provide long term protection.
2. RECOMMENDATION(S)
It is recommended that Members:
1) confirm the making of Tree Preservation Orders 128, 155, 185, 195, 203, 114, 208 without modifications; 2) confirm Tree Preservation Order 187 with the modification that “in the ‘situation’ secti on of the first Schedule of the Order, amend date of recording of the relevant disposition from ‘thirtieth day of August Nineteen Hundred and Forty Seven’ to ‘thirtieth day of October Nineteen Hundred and Forty Seven’ ”; and 3) instruct the Head of Legal and Democratic Services to attend the requisite procedures.
3. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The cost of confirming the Orders will be met through existing budgets.
4. OTHER IMPLICATIONS
The making of a Tree Preservation Order generally results in further demands on staff time to deal with any applications submitted for
Page 171
consent to carry out tree work and to provide advice and assistance to owners and others regarding protected trees. This is undertaken within existing staffing resources.
5. BACKGROUND/MAIN ISSUES
A TPO gives statutory protection to trees that contribute to the amenity, natural heritage or attractiveness and character of a locality. As outlined in the Local Development Plan Policy NE5: Trees and Woodland, the Council will take the necessary steps to ensure that trees are protected in the longer term. Protecting trees has the further benefit of contributing to the Council’s policies on improving air quality and helping combat climate change. Promoting the improvement and maintenance of environmental quality and townscapes in turn supports investment and economic competitiveness.
The process of applying for work to protected trees allows for Elected Members, Community Councils and members of the public to have an opportunity to comment on work to protected trees.
The trees in the following Tree Preservation Orders contribute to the local character of the area. The loss of these trees would have an adverse effect on this character. A Tree Preservation Order would ensure that trees could not be removed without the consent of the Council who would have an opportunity to have regard to the environmental implications of any proposals.
• Tree Preservation Order Number 128, Braemar Place
• Tree Preservation Order Number 155, Newton Farm, Kingswells
• Tree Preservation Order Number 185, Cliff Park, Cults
• Tree Preservation Order Number 195, Kingswells House
• Tree Preservation Order Number 203, 15 Summerhill Road
• Tree Preservation Order Number 187, Nether Kingshill, Kingswells
• Tree Preservation Order Number 114, 63 Holburn Street
• Tree Preservation Order Number 208, 41 Hillview Road, Cults
6. IMPACT
There are no anticipated impacts on equalities with this proposal hence an Equalities and Human Right Impact Assessment is not required. As outlined in Policy NE5: Trees and Woodland, the Council will take the
Page 172
necessary steps to ensure that trees are protected in the longer term thus the need to confirm the aforementioned Tree Preservation Orders.
7. MANAGEMENT OF RISK
There is a risk of loss of the trees if the recommendations are not accepted which would impact on people and the environment. If recommendations are accepted the Orders will ensure the long term protection of the trees on each of the sites by ensuring the trees could not be cut down or otherwise damaged without the express permission of the Council, hence securing the public amenity and environmental value of each site.
8. BACKGROUND PAPERS
Files of Tree Preservation Orders 128, 155, 185, 195, 203, 187, 114, 208; maps attached
9. REPORT AUTHOR DETAILS
Kevin Wright Environmental Planner [email protected] (01224) 522440
Page 173
Page 174
Page 175
Page 176
Page 177
Page 178
Page 179
Page 180
Page 181 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 182 Agenda Item 4.2
ABERDEEN CITY COUNCIL
COMMITTEE Planning Development Management Committee
DATE 23 April 2015
DIRECTOR Pete Leonard
TITLE OF REPORT Extensions to Old Aberdeen Conservation Area
REPORT NUMBER CHI/15/173
1 PURPOSE OF REPORT
This report outlines proposed extensions to the boundary of Old Aberdeen Conservation Area following public consultation.
2 RECOMMENDATION(S)
2.1 It is recommended that the Committee:
(a) Approve the extensions to the boundary of Old Aberdeen Conservation Area as shown in Appendix 1 and instruct officers to comply with the statutory notifications required.
3 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
3.1 There are no direct financial implications arising from this report. Any future publication and notification costs can be met through existing budgets.
4 OTHER IMPLICATIONS
4.1 There are no known legal, resource, personnel, equipment, sustainability and environmental, health and safety policy implications arising from this report. Section 62 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 requires notification of conservation area boundary amendments to be reported to the Scottish Government and advertised in the Edinburgh Gazette and local press. Property implications of the Conservation Area extensions include Sunnybank Park and the school at Old Aberdeen House, Dunbar Street that are in Council ownership. Normally permitted development rights are removed with conservation area status, but the local authority has the right to undertake works up to the value of £250,000 on its own properties without seeking planning permission. It is anticipated that most works to Council owned land and property would fall below this financial threshold.
Page 183 5 BACKGROUND / MAIN ISSUES
5.1 A public consultation exercise was conducted in spring 2014 on the draft Old Aberdeen Conservation Area Character Appraisal that proposed extensions to its boundary. Whilst there were detailed comments on the contents of the Character Appraisal, the proposed extensions (Appendix 1) to the Old Aberdeen Conservation Area boundary met with approval. On 15 January 2015, the Planning and Sustainable Development Committee noted representations received as a result of this public consultation and approved officers’ responses to them. It further approved a revised draft of the character appraisal for consultation with key stakeholders and a small alteration to the proposed extension area B.
5.2 Extension area B was enlarged (Appendix 1 area B1) to include three properties (14 Cheyne Road and 88 and 106 Don Street) because it enables the whole of the east side of Don Street to be covered by conservation area designation. Don Street is historically important as it was the principal route form Aberdeen to the medieval crossing of the River Don at Brig 0’ Balgo wnie. The owners/occupiers of these three properties have been consulted and one representation received (Appendix 2) from the occupier of 88 Don Street who objected to the inclusion of her property. The property is not of significant architectural or historical merit in itself, but if not included in the Conservation Area, Permitted Development rights may have an adverse impact upon the adjoining properties and the area in general. The inclusion of the indicated properties allows for all of the east side of the historically important Don Street to be within the Conservation Area.
5.3 Appendix 3 contains a description of the proposed extension areas and reasons for their inclusion. As long as these areas remain outside, they are not protected by the stricter planning controls that operate within the Conservation Area There is a very real concern that some of these areas may soon be subject to alterations that would undermine their historical and architectural contribution to Old Aberdeen Conservation Area. This is why the Committee is being asked now to extend the boundaries of the Conservation Area rather than waiting until the character appraisal is finalised.
6 IMPACT
6.1 The proposal contributes to the Single Outcome Priorities 10: We live in well- designed, sustainable places where we are able to access the amenities and services we need and 12: We value and enjoy our built and natural environment and protect it and enhance it for future generations.
6.2 The proposal contributes to Smarter Aberdeen’s aspiration of Smarter Environment – Natural Resources – providing an attractive streetscape.
6.3 The proposal contributes to the EP & I Directorate Priority 3: Protect and enhance our high quality natural and built environment and to the Planning and Sustainable Development Operational Priority PSD3 : Protect and enhance our heritage and high quality built environment.
2 Page 184 7 BACKGROUND PAPERS
7.1 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/9/contents
7.2 Scottish Government’s Planning Advice Note 71: Conservation Area Management http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2004/12/20450/49052
7.3 Aberdeen Local Development Plan (2012) http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.asp?lID=42278&sID=94 84
8 REPORT AUTHOR DETAILS
Bridget Turnbull Senior Planner – Masterplanning, Design & Conservation ( 01224 (52) 3953 8 [email protected]
3 Page 185 Appendix 1
4 Page 186
Appendix 2
5 Page 187 Appendix 3 Proposed Extensions to Old Aberdeen Conservation Area
Please refer to plan in Appendix 1. It is proposed that the Conservation Area boundary will be extended to include the following new additions:
A land north of the River Don including parts of Balgownie Road, and the private access road to Kettock’s Mill, Seaton Cottage and Glenseaton Lodge. The riverside setting to the north of the River Don is an extension of that to the south, which is already within the Conservation Area. In many ways, it is a better example of the riverside’s historic character as it has been largely undeveloped. There are also significant views from this area across the river to the Cathedral and Seaton Park. Two listed buildings are located within the proposed extension - Glenseaton Lodge (Category B Listed) and 79 Balgownie Road (Glover House) (Category B Listed). Tree Preservation Order 65, located on Balgownie Road and Thomas Glover Place, is also within this proposed extension. The 1993 Old Aberdeen Conservation Area Report identified this area for inclusion in the Conservation Area. Addresses affected: Glenseaton Lodge; Kettock’s Mill and Seaton Cottage
B 68-70 Don Street (even) and Old Aberdeen House, Dunbar Street; 3-8 (inc) St Machar Place; 14 Cheyne Road; 88 and 106 Don Street Old Aberdeen House on Dunbar Street is an imposing, austere turn of the 20th century granite building designed as a school and set in a limited former playground now used for parking. It has a strong boundary treatment of granite wall and railings. Three traditional properties on the east side of Don Street are the only Don Street properties not to be included in the Conservation Area. Their inclusion redresses this anomaly. 3-8 St Machar Place comprises six largely unaltered inter war semi- detached houses laid out in a semi-circle. They are typical examples of suburban development associated with the building of the new inner ring road of St Machar Drive in the 1920s. Addresses affected: B1 14 Cheyne Road; 88 and 106 Don Street B2 68-70 (even) and Old Aberdeen House, Dunbar Street; 3-8 (inc) St Machar Place;
C 7 – 17 (odd) University Road This is a group of six flatted properties whose design reads as three Victorian terraced houses. They are the only houses on University Road that are not already included in the Conservation Area and it is unclear why they were not included in the original designation. The 1993 Old Aberdeen Conservation Area Report identified them for inclusion and they still make a positive contribution, providing completeness to University Road. Addresses affected: 7-17 (odd) University Road
D 9 – 21 (odd); 40 – 54 (even) King’s Crescent and the western boundary wall of the bus depot on King’s Crescent and 1 Jute Street These groupings of buildings to either side of King’s Crescent mark the transition from the 20th century development of Mounthooly. The area’s character changes noticeably at this point, which this proposed extension recognises. 17-21 King’s Crescent and 1 Jute Street is a category B listed residential terrace built in a traditional Victorian style in 1875, but of concrete making these buildings highly unusual. The bus depot’s granite wall on the east side of King’s Crescent is a strong linear feature, reflecting the walls on the western side. The wall also shows evidence of former buildings belonging to a prominent granite merchant. The 1993 Old Aberdeen Conservation Area Report identified most of this area for inclusion and it still makes a positive contribution to the Conservation Area. Addresses affected: 1 Jute Street; 9 – 21 (odd) and 40 – 54 (even) King’s Crescent and bus depot
6 Page 188 E Sunnybank Park Sunnybank Park adjoins the Conservation Area to the west of Firhill Road by a path that is marked clearly on 1828 map by John Wood, as is Firhill Well. Firhill Place lies within the Conservation Area and a path in front of these properties links College Bounds to Sunnybank Park to the west. The park adds much to the contemporary character of the Conservation Area, providing valuable public open space, as well as being of historic importance in its own right.
7 Page 189 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 190