Old Aberdeen and Footdee Conservation Area Character Appraisals

Home , Footdee, Old Aberdeen, Tillydrone

COMMITTEE Planning Development Management

DATE 10 December 2015

DIRECTOR Pete Leonard

TITLE OF REPORT Old Aberdeen and Footdee Conservation Area Character Appraisals

REPORT NUMBER CHI/15/333

CHECKLIST COMPLETED No

1. PURPOSE OF REPORT

1.1 This report outlines the results of a consultation exercises undertaken on the draft character appraisals for Old Aberdeen and Footdee Conservation Areas. A summary of the representations received, officers’ responses and detail of any resulting action is provided in Appendix 1 of this Report. Full, un-summarised copies of representations are detailed in Appendix 2. It also proposes extensions to Footdee Conservation Area as shown in Appendix 3.

1.2 The two draft character appraisals can be viewed by accessing the following link: www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/masterplanning.

2. RECOMMENDATION(S)

2.1 It is recommended that the Committee:

(a) Note the representations received on the draft Old Aberdeen and Footdee Conservation Area Character Appraisal documents;

(b) Approve Appendix 1, which includes officers’ responses to representations received and any necessary actions;

(c) Approve Old Aberdeen and Footdee Conservation Area Character Appraisals, amended as per Appendix 1, for inclusion in the Conservation Area Character Appraisals and Management Plan.

(d) Approve the extensions to the boundary of Footdee Conservation Area as shown in Appendix 3 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, property, 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.

5. BACKGROUND/MAIN ISSUES

5.1 The Conservation Area Character Appraisals and Management Plan was approved by the then Development Management Sub-Committee on 18 July 2013 as Interim Planning Advice. It contained character appraisals for six out of the City’s eleven conservation areas as well as an overarching Strategic Guidance and Management Plan. A character appraisal for Pitfodels Conservation Area was added to this document as approved by the Planning Development Management Committee on 15 January 2015.

Old Aberdeen Conservation Area

Public consultation process

5.2 On 20 March 2014 the Planning Development Management Committee approved a draft conservation area character appraisal for Old Aberdeen Conservation Area, together with draft proposed boundary amendments and guidance, as a basis for public consultation. The results of the public consultation were reported to Committee on 15 January 2015 and a revised draft approved for a further round of consultation with key stakeholders, which took place in Jan – March 2015.

5.3 Key stakeholders are Historic Environment Scotland; Old Aberdeen Community Council; University of Aberdeen; Old Aberdeen Heritage Society and local Ward Members. A summary of their consultation responses made since the public consultation of spring 2014 (May – July 2014) and how the final draft character appraisal (September 2015) was revised in light of them can be found on http://thezone/directorate_zone/enterprise_planning_infrastructure/psd/ SL_stratlead_reports.asp and in the Members’ Lounge. This detailed breakdown of comments made was submitted to the individual key stakeholders for their information, together with a copy of the final draft character appraisal (September 2015), for comment in October. The latest key stakeholder feedback and officer response is summarised in Appendix 1.

5.4 Committee approved the boundary extensions to Old Aberdeen Conservation Area on 23 April 2015 and the necessary legal notification work has been completed.

Consultation results

5.5 Historic Environment Scotland gave the character appraisal its unqualified support. Old Aberdeen Community Council (OACC) and the University of Aberdeen (UoA) were positive about the document; however, they each had certain reservations. The final key stakeholder, Old Aberdeen Heritage Society (OAHS), thought that the Committee should delay its consideration of the document to a later date as its letter of 20 July 2014 had not been responded to. The issues raised by OAHS in that letter were similar to those in other correspondence and these comments have been addressed already.

5.6 The major issue of contention from OACC and OAHS is that the appraisal recognises that the UoA has strategic aspirations for its estate as set out in its Estates Strategy and supporting development framework. They argue that this is tantamount to the Council giving the proposals in these documents an “unqualified testimonial”. The appraisal acknowledges that these documents exist and views them as an opportunity for engagement, which is not the same as endorsing the University’s plans for its estate. Any UoA development proposals would be subject to national and local planning policies. The UoA, on the other hand, welcomes recognition of its documents as a basis on which to work with the Council and HES.

Footdee Conservation Area

Public consultation process

5.7 The public consultation period ran for six weeks from 12 October until 20 November 2015. A wide range of organisations and groups were consulted including statutory consultees; Castlehill and Pittodrie Community Councils; affected Ward members and local amenity groups. A summary leaflet was delivered to all properties within Footdee Conservation Area inviting them to attend a public drop in session. All occupiers directly affected by draft proposals to extend Footdee Conservation Area were contacted, outlining the proposed boundary changes and sent a copy of the summary leaflet relevant to their area.

5.8 The draft Footdee Conservation Area Character Appraisal was available to view and publicised via the following methods:

Publication of document on Aberdeen City Council Website ‘Current Consultations’ page http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/consultations

Publication of document on Aberdeen City Council Website ‘Masterplanning’ page http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/masterplanning

Hard copy of document available for viewing at Marischal College between 9am and 5pm Monday to Friday, by contacting the Planning and Sustainable Development Reception. Relevant planning officers were also identified to be available to help answer queries from members of the public who visited the Planning Reception regarding the draft Conservation Area Character Appraisals.

Hard copies of the document were also made available at the Central Library.

Summary leaflets for the conservation area were available online and at the central library. A leaflet was hand delivered to every property in Footdee including those currently outwith the conservation area.

Information giving details of the consultation was published on the Aberdeen Local Development Plan Facebook and Twitter pages and in its newsletter.

A public drop in session was held between 3pm-7pm on 16 October 2015 in the Gospel Hall, which 29 people attended. Details of this session were included in the summary leaflet.

Consultation results

5.9 A total of 16 representations on the draft Conservation Area Character Appraisal were received from the following:

Historic Environment Scotland Sea Cadets Scottish Environmental Protection Agency Barton Willmore on behalf of Aberdeen Harbour Board Castlehill and Pittodrie Community Council 11 individuals, all local Footdee residents

5.10 Representations are summarised in Appendix 1, with officer responses and any resulting proposed amendments to the document. Whilst in general the response to the character appraisal and proposed extension to the Conservation Area’s boundary was positive, several key issues emerged:

5.11 There was consensus that tourism has an adverse impact on the quality of life for Footdee residents with many visitors showing little respect for residents’ privacy. Text identifying increased tourism opportunities has therefore been removed from the appraisal.

5.12 There was general support for the proposed extension to the Conservation Area’s boundary, including from Historic Environment Scotland and residents and occupiers of the land affected. The one objection was from Aberdeen Harbour Board because it argued that designation would compromise its ability to fulfil its role as a commercial port and that the Sea Cadets site detracts from the character of the Conservation Area.

The Harbour Board has the ability to carry out certain works authorised under the Harbour Act 1964 without the need for planning permission; being in a Conservation Area does not affect the its permitted development rights.

The Sea Cadets site contains Nissen huts that date from 1936 and housed a wartime barrage balloon unit, intended to defend the harbour entrance. Whilst not part of the original planned fishing village of Footdee, the site has been the headquarters of Aberdeen Sea Cadets since 1954 and forms part of the historic pattern of local uses.

Future Appraisals

5.13 A draft character appraisal for Rosemount Conservation Area Character Appraisal has been prepared and will be submitted to Committee for its consideration next spring after public consultation. This will complete the ten conservation area character appraisals that form the Conservation Area Character Appraisals and Management Plan.

5.14 Officers will undertake a revised character appraisal for Union Street Conservation Area during 2016. This work will inform development in the city centre and support the delivery of the City Centre Masterplan.

6. IMPACT

Improving Customer Experience – Up to date conservation area character appraisals for Old Aberdeen and Footdee will provide useful background information for local residents, developers, elected Members, community groups and planning staff. The documents are of general public interest and will also inform development in these areas.

Improving Staff Experience – The character appraisals will aid planning officers when considering applications for development by providing details of what is architecturally and historically important in these conservation areas.

Improving our use of Resources – The documents outline what is of significance in the conservation areas. This will aid staff make quicker, better informed consideration of planning applications in these areas.

Corporate - The proposal contributes to:

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.

Smarter Aberdeen’s aspiration of Smarter Environment – Natural Resources – providing an attractive streetscape.

CHI 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

Public – The report has no know impact on equality and human rights or personal privacy.

7. MANAGEMENT OF RISK

Local planning authorities are required to review conservation areas in their areas. Having up to date conservation area character appraisals will improve the Council’s reputation with regard to this statutory requirement. There are no known legal, resource, personnel, property, equipment, sustainability and environmental, health and safety policy implications arising from this report.

8. BACKGROUND PAPERS

8.1 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/9/contents

8.2 Scottish Government’s Planning Advice Note 71: Conservation Area Management http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2004/12/20450/49052

8.3 Aberdeen Local Development Plan (2012) http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.asp?lID=422 78&sID=9484

8.4 Proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan (2015) http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/planning_environment/planning/local_d evelopment_plan/pla_aldp_review_2016.asp

9. REPORT AUTHOR DETAILS

Bridget Turnbull Senior Planner – Masterplanning, Design & Conservation  01224 (52) 3953  [email protected]

Draft Old Aberdeen Conservation Area Character Appraisal (September 2015) Appendix 1 Summary of consultation responses

A Main issues raised

1. Historic Environment Scotland - 29 October 2015

Summary of Representation Officer’s Response Action as a result of Representation HES is content with the document and appreciates the HES’ thanks and comments noted and welcomed. No response required. considerable amount of work that this appraisal has entailed. Thanked for taking on board the previous comments provided by Historic Scotland. HES noted the value of the character appraisal in guiding and informing management of one of Aberdeen’s and indeed Scotland’s most important historic areas.

2. Old Aberdeen Community Council - 20 November 2015

Summary of Representation Officer’s Response Action as a result of Representation The Community Council notes that the Character Appraisal is Comments noted and welcomed. Minor factual, Factual and typographical now generally satisfactory, identifies minor factual and typographical errors, and changes in images errors to be addressed typographical errors and makes some suggestions regarding detailed individually at end of this table. and some images altered. images used. It raises two substantive issues – how the University is included within the Appraisal and how OACC can help owners and residents in the Conservation Area become aware of the constraints and obligations arising from being in a conservation area. While mentioning the University’s strategy in the main text The University of Aberdeen’s Estate Strategy and Page 75 Character Area B (reference page 40) seems perfectly reasonable to King’s Campus Framework Plan 2012 are Opportunities – “University OACC, it considers that the inclusion within the Strengths documents the University had prepared for its own of Aberdeen’s aspirations and Opportunities of the SWOT analysis is not use. The University is a substantial landowner in for its estate is set out in Appropriate. the Conservation Area and having such documents its Estates Strategy and It cannot be appropriate for the local authority to provide an in the public domain reflects a positive approach to King’s Campus unqualified testimonial for University Strategy documents development and one that the character appraisal Framework Plan.” to be within a major Council policy document that will remain in should recognise. deleted and replaced with place for the next 10 years irrespective Acknowledging that these documents exist and “University of Aberdeen’s of what the University’s next strategy document might contain viewing them as an opportunity for engagement is aspirations for its estate as and we ask you to limit supportive comments to not at all the same as the Council endorsing the set out in its Estates the general text. University’s business and estate aspirations. It Strategy and supporting most certainly is not an unqualified testimonial for development framework. the University’s strategic Any proposals would be documents. The University’s development subject to national and proposals, like any other landowner’s, is subject to local planning policies.” national and local planning policies and processes. Page 76 Character Area C Strengths – delete “University of Aberdeen’s strategic planning framework setting out its aspirations for future development.” Opportunities – replace “University of Aberdeen’s aspirations for its estate as set out in its Estates Strategy and supporting development framework and underlying design principles.” with “University of Aberdeen’s aspirations

for its estate as set out in its Estates Strategy and supporting development framework. Any proposals would be subject to national and local planning policies.” OACC acknowledges that the University has done some Whilst there are some examples where the Page 74 Character Area B good work, particularly with regard to King’s College University has not been of the same opinion as Strengths - delete “Good Buildings, it points to a few examples where the University others with regard to conservation, it has done stewardship of the historic has not had conservation as its main agenda. good conservation work particularly on the King’s built environment by the College complex of buildings. This is a strength University of Aberdeen.” and should be recorded as such. The University of And replace with “Good Aberdeen generally has a conservation-focused stewardship of significant approach that provides a positive basis for historic buildings by the opportunities for the future. Like any other University of Aberdeen” landowner, not all of its conservation work and development is of the same quality. The Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Agreed, but that is not the purpose of a character The comment does not Management Plan does not explain adequately to owners the appraisal. This is why the overarching Strategic require any amendments constraints and responsibilities arising from living within a Overview and Management Plan for all of the City’s to the document. conservation area. A new document should be created conservation areas contains Policy O Information ACC will work with OACC which is aimed at property owners, summarising the main and communication that recognises the need to on an information leaflet issues. provide information for owners on the implications for Conservation Area of living in a conservation area. ACC will produce residents/owners. guidance for all conservation areas in due course and welcomes OACC’s willingness to collaborate in developing such a project. Page 58 – OACC disagree with the statement ‘There is also Agreed in part. The signage is largely associated Page 58 3.3.5 Signage signage located within Seaton Park that directs people with paths running through Seaton Park. Signage Replace “There is also around the park and beyond’ as they do not believe that it within the Park could be improved. signage located within directs people around the park, Seaton Park that directs

people around the park and beyond.” with “There is also some signage within Seaton Park however this is focused more on longer distance routes than accessing areas within the park. “ Page 77 Opportunities “New and improved facilities in Seaton Park.” To be replaced by “New and improved facilities and signage in Seaton Park.” Page 76 - ‘Uncoordinated piecemeal development impacting Even if it is perceived that some of this has already No change required adversely on the Conservation Area’ should be listed under happened, the chance that it could happen in the ‘Weakness’, rather than ‘Threat’. future is a threat, and so this is in the correct place. 3. University of Aberdeen - 13 November 2015

Summary of Representation Officer’s Response Action as a result of Representation The University is highly supportive of the work that has been Comments noted and welcomed. No response required. done and the process that has been followed by Aberdeen City Council.

The descriptor of Character Area B as “The Heart” seems It is agreed that ‘the core’ is the more logical name No change required. illogical and based on nostalgic sentiment rather than an however, this has been changed at the suggestion accurate description, as given to the other areas of this of the OACC and OAHS. Conservation area. The original term of Historic core or Historic corridor would describe the area better. Other comparable areas in Fraserburgh and Kirkcaldy use the term Historic core and accordingly there is strong grounds to use

10 this term Recognition of the steps taken by the University to advance Comments noted and welcomed. No response required. and embed the importance of the conservation area through its own documentation and Policy such as our Estate Strategy , Development Framework etc. is welcomed and supported and a strong basis to advance further work with the Council and Historic Environment Scotland.

The specific reference to Edward Wright Annex ( pages 44 The Edward Wright Annexe was granted planning No amendment and 51 ) is not relevant and should be left to established permission as a temporary building until 2016 with considered necessary. processes. This should be removed. a condition that the landscaping be restored once it has been removed. This is a relevant consideration as it the building’s removal will affect the amount and quality of open space available. Page 74 , welcome recognition of good stewardship by the Comments noted and welcomed. No response required. University which recognises the commitment given to invest in the historic built environment and engage with regulatory bodies.

Page 75 - recognition of policy direction being put in place is Comments noted and welcomed. No response required. welcomed.

Page 75 – reference to restoration of tennis court is Agreed that site could be developed for alternative Page 75 Opportunities inappropriate , many alternative uses are open for this area uses. It still remains an Opportunity “Restoration of tennis from development to basketball court. Comment should be court” to be replaced with “Restoration or re-use of removed. tennis court site” Page 75 – Threats . The statement on Visual impact of new New development can have both a positive and a Page 75 “Visual impact of development and tall buildings………… is inappropriate and negative impact on the setting of Old Aberdeen’s new development and tall

11 need be removed or better defined . One of our tallest historic core. The Council is preparing draft buildings on the Old building , if not the tallest in the Historic Core is Kings Supplementary Guidance on Big Buildings, which Aberdeen Heart area, College and the crown tower , I doubt anyone suggests this will support its Draft Local Development Plan 2015. notably from the growth of is a threat. New development and tall building with the University of appropriate design can and should enhance the built Aberdeen.” to be deleted environment and public realm. Suggest this is removed. and replaced by “Visual impact of new development and big buildings on the Old Aberdeen Heart area.” under both the Opportunities and the Threats headings. Page 75- The reference to HMO’s is not a threat in our view In and of themselves HMOs are not a threat to the No amendment or if it is perceived to be so in one quarter the contra view of character of Old Aberdeen Heart character area. considered necessary. them as an opportunity should be introduced under They provide essential accommodation for students opportunities. Alternatively, it could be removed. This and University staff. What is a potential threat is the statement in my view is imbalanced and driven by local increasing density of HMOs in this area. If this politics rather than conservation density were to become very high, it could exacerbate the seasonal periods of activity and relative emptiness during vacation time. The Council is currently consulting on HMO overprovision across the city as a whole with the suggested definition of overprovision being 15% of qualifying properties within any one Census Output Area (COAs). As a whole, the HMO density level in Old Aberdeen Heart is currently well below that threshold. Section 4 Character Area C Comment agreed with regard to Elphinstone Road Page 76 Weaknesses – Page 76- Do not support the statement regarding lack of Halls. “Lack of residential residential amenity. The residents have access to all facilities amenity for Elphinstone in the hub , library , Cruickshank garden , bus stop at door , Road Halls, Hunter and

12 café on high street etc. I would support statement on other Coopers Courts.” To be two properties. Please justify statement or remove replaced with “Lack of residential amenity for Hunter and Coopers Courts.” Page 76 – I do not support the statement regarding the visual Elphinstone Road flats are on an important site in No amendment proposed. impact of Elphinstone Road flats given the context of the built this character area, on the corner of Elphinstone for of the surrounding buildings. Could this statement be Road and the library square. The 1980’s design of justified or removed the flats is lacklustre and they are domestic in scale. This contrasts with the other mid/late C20 buildings in the vicinity whose scale and design command a greater presence.

Page 77 – The statement on refurbishment of Hillhead former Error. Opportunity should have read: Page 77 Opportunities – student accommodation site, I do not recognise this “Redevelopment of former Dunbar Halls site, Don delete “Refurbishment of site/development opportunity- where is it? Please explain or Street.” Hillhead former student remove accommodation site.” and replace with “Redevelopment of former Dunbar Halls site, Don Street.” Page 77 – the statement regarding development pressure is Agreed. The character area includes a large Page 77 Threats – remove not required as area has established planning policy, this is a amount of open space, which is designated in the “Development pressure on self-interest group statement and could equally be seen as Aberdeen Local Plan as Green Belt and Green green space adjacent to opportunity. I would support removal. Space Network and thus protected from supermarket and public inappropriate development. house on King street.” And “Development pressure on green space and sports pitches along east side of Don Street.”

Page 78 – statement on Rose Cottage appears strange. Acknowledged and agreed. A request will be made No amendment to

Rose Cottage has in my experience of 22 years always been to Historic Environment Scotland to de-list the document necessary. A a ruin. The was some interest to have it rebuilt but this was building. request will be made to not supported in planning terms. It would be help to clarify Historic Environment status of this site/ruin/building Scotland to de-list the building

4. Old Aberdeen Heritage Society - 19 Nov 2015

Summary of Representation Officer’s Response Action as a result of Representation Concern that matters raised in OAHS’s letter of 20 July have This was an oversight. Matters raised by OAHS in Any issues in OAHS’s not been responded to. their letters of 25 May and 2 July 2015 have been letter of 20 July 2015 that meticulously responded to. have not already been addressed will be included in this summary table.

Request that the Planning Development Management Several issues in OAHS’s letter of 20 July 2014 No change considered Committee delays its final consideration of the appraisal until have already been raised in their earlier letters of necessary. officers have responded to OAHS’s letter of 20 July. 25 May and 2 July 2014 and responded to.

Further delay will have an adverse impact on the revision of Union Street Conservation Area Character Appraisal, which is needed to inform the delivery of the City Centre Masterplan. OAHS wish to see references to the University of Aberdeen’s The University of Aberdeen owns numerous listed Page 74 Character Area stewardship of the historic built environment removed. Claim and historically significant buildings, which it B Strengths - delete “Good that the Council is endorsing the University’s record of care maintains well. In recent years, the University has stewardship of the historic of its historic buildings. undertaken some unauthorised works, which have built environment by the been the subject of subsequent action by the University of Aberdeen.” Council. This does not diminish the University’s And replace with “Good overall good record of stewardship over the stewardship of significant centuries, particularly of the King’s College historic buildings by the

complex. University of Aberdeen” SWOT sections of Character Areas B and C refer to the The University of Aberdeen’s Estate Strategy and Page 75 Character Area University of Aberdeen’s Estate Strategy and King’s Campus King’s Campus Framework Plan are documents it B Opportunities – Framework Plan. OAHS regards this as inappropriate had prepared for its own use. The University is a “University of Aberdeen’s Council endorsement of the University’s business and estate substantial landowner in the Conservation Area aspirations for its estate is aspirations. and having such documents in the public domain set out in its Estates reflects a positive approach to development. Strategy and King’s Acknowledging that these documents exist and Campus Framework Plan.” viewing them as an opportunity for engagement is to be deleted and replaced not at all the same as the Council endorsing the with “University of University’s business and estate aspirations. Aberdeen’s aspirations for The University’s development proposals, like any its estate as set out in its other landowner’s, are subject to national and local Estates Strategy and planning policies and processes. supporting development framework. Any proposals would be subject to national and local planning policies.” Page 76 Character Area C Strengths – delete “University of Aberdeen’s strategic planning framework setting out its aspirations for future development.” Opportunities – replace “University of Aberdeen’s aspirations for its estate as set out in its Estates Strategy and supporting development framework and underlying design

principles.” with “University of Aberdeen’s aspirations for its estate as set out in its Estates Strategy and supporting development framework. Any proposals would be subject to national and local planning policies.” Old Aberdeen Heritage Society – 20 July 2014 Excluding comments previously made in OAHS’ letters of 25 May and 2 July 2014 that have already been responded to and its letter of 20 November 2015 addressed above. Perceived threats to the High Street are not covered Policies regarding land use are covered by the No change considered sufficiently within the Appraisal or by Local development Plan Local Development Plan. A conservation area necessary. Policies CF1 and RT4l. There needs to be a presumption character appraisal is not an appropriate vehicle to against change of use to office in order to protect quality of deliver this type of planning policy. This is a matter High Street to be addressed through the Local Development Plan process. The 2015 Plan is currently at examination stage; the Main Issues stage of the next draft Local Development Plan is scheduled for 2017. Not all change is inevitable and the changes affecting Old Guidance in the Conservation Areas Management No change considered Aberdeen need to be addressed more effectively than in the Plan is set within the framework of national and necessary. management plan local planning policy. Scottish Historic Environment Policy recognises this and the very name given to the suite of national guidance underpinning SHEP is “Managing Change in the Historic Environment”. The appraisal does not give a proper description or The subject of walls has been addressed already in No change considered assessment of the particular importance of the (category B responses to OAHS’ previous letters. necessary. listed) ancient, substantially built boundary walls with the Historic Environment Scotland’s Managing Change sloping coping which is unique to Old Aberdeen. The in the Historic Environment is national guidance

16 appraisal does not make provision to protect these from underpinning the Scottish Historic Environment being breached or altered. Historic Scotland’s document on Policy. Boundaries is only guidance. Page 74 Character Area B Strengths already

highlights the importance of these walls Neither the national or local documents give necessary “Historic boundary walls especially in The protection to the ancient boundary walls. There needs to be specific, unique policy to be included in the Appraisal and Chanonry area.” Management Plan; giving complete protection from being altered or breached. Concerned with the lack of understanding of our reference to Text in September 2015 draft appraisal has been No change considered the unsympathetic building spanning Church Walk. The amended on p 48 to read “…..whilst others necessary. concern covers the ugly overhead corridor building spanning terminate in an uninspiring view such as the Church Walk damaging the view up the close. Geography Department down Church Walk”

Also the associated carpark which is also negative. Page 76 “Amount of visible car parking” is highlighted as a Weakness in Character area C Want this listed as a negative factor. SWOT analysis. Edward Right Annex should be added as a negative factor Page 76 Edward Wright Annexe site is identified as No change considered for Area C. an Opportunity. necessary. Agree with H.S suggestion of the threat “ the visual impact of New development can have both a positive and a Page 75 “Visual impact of new development /tall building on the setting of Old negative impact on the setting of Old Aberdeen’s new development and tall Aberdeen Core, notable from the growth of the university historic core. The Council is preparing draft buildings on the Old area” Supplementary Guidance on Big Buildings, which Aberdeen Heart area, will support its Draft Local Development Plan 2015. notably from the growth of the University of Aberdeen.” to be deleted and replaced by “Visual impact of new development and big buildings on the Old

Aberdeen Heart area.” under both the Opportunities and the Threats headings. B Minor matters including factual and typographical errors

Old Aberdeen Community Council – 20 November 2015

Page 10, page 28, page 74 and page 75: Benholm’s Historic Environment Scotland’s list description Page 81 Tillydrone Road Lodgings should be replaced with Benholm’s Lodging refers to the building as Benholm’s Lodgings and Benholm’s “Lodging” to be the Ordnance Survey calls it Benholm’s Lodge. For amended to “Lodgings”. consistency, Benholm’s Lodgings is used. Page 17: confusion as to whether a phrase about ‘no specific The phrase ‘There are no specific night time uses’ No change required night time uses’ refers to just Applebank House or to the refers to the Spital as a whole, not just Applebank whole of the Spital. House, and should be read in context. Page 18: the frequency of the number 20 bus should be Bus timetables are subject to frequent changes. Page 18 3.3.2 Replace amended as it does not run every 10 minutes The point here is that the bus runs on a regular “The Number 20 bus basis. traverses the route and runs every 10 minutes…” with “The Number 20 bus traverses the route and runs regularly…” Page 22: the lower left photo is of 3 and 4 The Orchard (not It is agreed that this photo is not correct. A new Page 22 lower left photo to Spital Walk) which is not in Character Area A. As such, a photo will be used instead be replaced different picture should be used. Page 26: the picture on the right does not show “the High The photo shows the High Street forking to the Page 26 “High Street Street forking west” west in comparison to its previous northerly forking west” to be trajectory. changed to “High Street forking towards the west” Page 55: caption ‘Top: 55-61 Lord Hays Grove” should have Comment noted and welcomed Page 55: ‘Top: 55-61 Lord an apostrophe Hays Grove” to be changed to ‘Top: 55-61

Lord Hay’s Grove” Page 58 – OACC disagree with the statement ‘There is also Agreed in part. The signage is largely associated Page 58 3.3.5 Signage signage located within Seaton Park that directs people with the Core Paths that run through Seaton Park. Replace “There is also around the park and beyond’ as they do not believe that it signage located within directs people around the park, Seaton Park that directs people around the park and beyond.” with “There is also some signage within Seaton Park however this is focused more on longer distance routes than accessing areas within the park. “ Page 77 Opportunities “New and improved facilities in Seaton Park.” To be replaced by “New and improved facilities and signage in Seaton Park.” Page 61 – planning permission was granted for change of This is still relatively recent. No change needed use for the public toilets over a year ago. This is no longer recent. Page 64 – top right photo should be Balgownie Hall Cottage This is a mistake and will be rectified. Page 64 “Balgownie Mill Cottage” to be replaced with “Balgownie Hall Cottage” Page 65 – the first line ‘The Chapter House, as known as Agreed – text will be changed Page 65 The Chapter Cruickshank’s Lodgings’, should read; ‘The Chapter House, House, as known as also known as Cruickshank’s Lodgings’. Cruickshank’s Lodgings’ to be replaced with ‘The Chapter House, also known as

Cruickshank’s Lodgings’. Page 74 – The age of the Mote listed under ‘Strengths’ is From information on CANMORE the actual age of Page 74 Strengths – different to that listed on the timeline on page 6. the Mote appears unknown. One layer has been Delete “14th century Mote” radiocarbon dated as AD170 and replace with “Mote dating from at least 2nd century AD” Page 6 Early history timeline “2nd century Tillydrone Mote is an early..”– replace with “2nd century – evidence of Tillydrone Mote, an early…” Also change timeline at bottom of page - replace “…an early wooden defensive structure is erected” with “.. evidence of an early wooden defensive structure..” Old Aberdeen Heritage Society - 19 November 2015

Page 6 second bullet - Bishop Elphinstone established King’s Noted. Amendment required. Page 6 second bullet – College, not the University of Aberdeen. delete “Bishop Elphinstone establishes the University of Aberdeen. Making it Scotland’s...” and replace with “Bishop Elphinstone establishes King’s College, making the University of Aberdeen Scotland’s…”

Page 10 Plan of historic routes incorrectly identifies Parson Gordon’s map of 1661 shows a track in the No change needed. . Tillydrone Road as being first shown on John Wood’s map of location of Tillydrone Road, but not a road. 1821. Pages 12 Character Area B description should include The road names are used to indicate very broadly Pages 12 Description of B Tillydrone Road, Tillydrone Avenue (south) and St Machar where the character area is rather than it being a Old Aberdeen Heart to be Place definite boundary. The plans clearly show where amended to read “Spital the character areas are. (north); College Bounds; High Street; St Machar Agreed that the inclusion of Tillydrone Road would Drive; Chanonry; aid description. Tillydrone Road; Don Street and Dunbar Street

(north).” Page 23 - to keep consistency of style description of Character Area B needs to be removed Page 23 – “Spital (north); College Bounds; High Street; St Machar Drive; Chanonry; Don Street: Dunbar Street (north)” to be removed from under heading of “Character Area B : Old Aberdeen Heart” Page 12 Character Area C description should read Tillydrone Agreed that Character Area C description should Page 12 Description of C Avenue and not Tillydrone Road and include Meston Walk, read Tillydrone Avenue and not Tillydrone Road. Modern University campus part of Sunnybank Road to be amended to read: “area bounded by Dunbar Street (south); Regent Walk; King Street and St Machar Drive and area bounded by Tillydrone Avenue;

Bedford Road; Elphinstone Road and College Bounds Page 19 3.3.2 The no 20 bus runs every 15 Minutes not Bus timetables are subject to frequent changes. Page 18 3.3.2 Replace every 10 minutes The point is that the bus runs on a regular basis. “The Number 20 bus traverses the route and runs every 10 minutes…” with “The Number 20 bus traverses the route and runs regularly…” Page 26 end of para 2 - King’s Pavilion is at the eastern edge Noted and agreed. Page 26 end of para 2 – of this group, not the western. delete “… at the western edge of this group.” Page 27 Chaplain’s Court was not part of the Bishop’s Noted. Page 27 final sentence Palace, but built for the Chaplains at the south end of the deleted “It is thought that Bishop’s extensive garden. this building would have formed one corner of the Bishop’s Palace.” Page 28 Tillydrone Avenue – 2nd last sentence should Noted. Page 28 Tillydrone include pink and grey granite. Last sentence - Major Hay not Avenue end first Hey and not Seaton park, but Seaton Estate. paragraph to read “Most of the two storey dwellings were built with pink and grey granite. The harled houses however date from 1924 and were built by Major Hay of Seaton Estate.” Page 32 – 2nd paragraph Coopers’ Place should read Noted. Page 32 2nd paragraph - Wrights’ and Coopers’ Place “Coopers’ Place” to be replaced with “Wrights’

and Coopers’ Place”. Page 35 4th paragraph – “(currently just outside the Noted. Page 35 4th paragraph – Conservation Area)” is now out of date delete “(currently just outside the Conservation Area)”. Page 64 top right photo Balgownie Hall Cottage and not Noted and agreed. Page 64 top right photo to Balgownie Mill Cottage be renamed “Balgownie Hall Cottage”. Page 65 1st line – “as” should be “also” Noted and agreed. Page 65 1st line – “as” altered to “also” Page 66 lower photo – not mill cottages as they are modern Agreed, however the postal address of these No change considered bungalows built long after the mill closed. properties is Mill Cottages. necessary Page 75 Opportunities 10th bullet point – not 348 Don Street, Error noted. Page 75 Opportunities 10th but 34 bullet point – change “348 Don Street” to “34 Don Street”. Some of the photographs that illustrated the text are very Most of the suggestions have been acted upon and Photographs changed on similar and a number of suggestions for alternatives made. alternative images used where they support the pages 4; 5; 26; 32 and 34. text. Old Aberdeen Heritage Society – 20 July 2015 (only those not already included in Draft Character Appraisal (September 2015). Page references given are those of the September draft appraisal. Page 3 1.2 2nd paragraph – “heart” should read “core” Agreed. Page 3 1.2 2nd paragraph – “…which has left its historic heart largely intact. “ to be replaced with “…which has left its historic core largely intact.” OAHS believes that Tillydrone Mote is pre-Iron Age. From information on CANMORE the actual age of Page 6 Early history the Mote appears unknown. One layer has been timeline radiocarbon dated as AD170 “2nd century Tillydrone Mote is an early..”–

replace with “2nd century – evidence of Tillydrone Mote, an early…” Also change timeline at bottom of page - replace “…an early wooden defensive structure is erected” with “.. evidence of an early wooden defensive structure..” Page 37 Add “in the form of a village green belonging to the Added in part. Page 37 3.4.1 - Replace pink granite houses” after “amenity open space” “… a significant piece of grassed open space.” with “a significant piece of grassed open space in the form of a central green belonging to the surrounding houses.”.

Draft Footdee ‘Fittie’ Conservation Area Character Appraisal Summary of consultation responses

1. Mr and Mrs Ashcroft (three letters submitted)

Summary of Representation Officers Response Action as a result of Representation Green “tarry shed” opposite number 25/26 South Square has Comments noted. Text revisions to appraisal Amend appraisal been owned by number 24 since 1997. Amendments need to be document required. Amend page 13 last paragraph to document in made to last para on p13, photo title on p14 and threats on p 27. read, “Green, tarry shed, opposite number 26 South accordance with

Happy for text to be amended to read “Green, tarry shed, Square, owned by 24 South Square”. Amend photo officers’ response. opposite number 26 South Square, owned by 24 South Square.” caption on page 14. Amend page 27 ‘Threats’ to read sheds belonging to …“24 South Square”. Appreciate the recognition that this the best preserved tarry Comments noted and welcomed. No amendment to shed. Are committed to preserving the shed and have appraisal is maintained it regularly. proposed. Support the extension to the conservation area. Comments and support for boundary extensions Amend boundaries welcomed. of the conservation area to include proposed extensions. Concern about the SWOT analysis, though the natural and built Comments and concerns noted. It is acknowledged Remove second environment is important it is the residents that sustain the that the residents of Footdee are a fundamental part bullet point from village. The village evolves but the core values remain. The of its character, and interestingly how the urban form ‘Opportunities’ on layout of the squares encourages socialising but this is has allowed this sense of community to endure. page 27 replace with balanced with a careful regard for privacy, and adherence to the alternative text and unwritten village customs. Second bullet point from ‘Opportunities’ on page 27 include opportunity will be removed, page 18 (3.2.4) amended and for additional The tourist footfall through Footdee is challenging in terms of replaced with the following text “Living in a historically signage. Amend text volume of people, noise, invasion of limited footpath space and interesting area of Aberdeen undoubtedly comes with on page 18 (3.2.4). intrusiveness. Living in a historic area one expects and a degree of tourism interest; however tourists and welcomes tourists, however visitors do not seem to be advised visitors to the area should respect the privacy and or understand that the village is comprised of people’s homes. residential amenity. There is the opportunity to explore Signage at the entrance would be beneficial. Enhanced tourism additional signage at key entrances to Footdee with as identified under “Opportunities” p27 brings no benefit to appropriate wording so that visitors are aware of residents and this is seen as a significant threat rather. Without residents”. Wording could be along the lines of the residents and the community the village will change entirely ‘Residential area: Please respect our privacy’. Exact and the unique features of the village will be lost. wording and location of any signage can be explored in co-ordination with local residents through consultation with the local Community Council.

Significant problem with cyclists using the village footpaths as a Comments and concern noted, the appraisal can Amend Section 3.3.7

25 cycle track. They often travel in groups and at speed posing a certainly note the potential conflict of users however in accordance with risk to elderly, children and pets. Any assistance the any policing of this issue is beyond the remit of the officers’ response. Conservation Area Appraisal could give on this would be document. Add the following text to Section 3.3.7 welcomed. regarding “Inappropriate use of pavements within the squares by cyclists causes conflict between users”. 2. Ms Woodall

Summary of Representation Officers Response Action as a result of Representation In favour of extending the area of conservation as proposed as Comments and support for boundary extensions Amend boundaries important part of retaining the character of the area. welcomed. of the conservation area to include proposed extensions. 3. Mr McLennan

Summary of Representation Officers Response Action as a result of Representation Concrete at sea wall, rear of North Square is in need of repair. Comments acknowledged, although this is outwith the Contact the The concrete slabs which help retain the sea wall is in danger of remit of the conservation character appraisal and Council’s breaking up if nothing is done very soon. planning authority – contact with the Council ‘Structures’ team to ‘Structures’ team will be made. communicate these concerns. Extending the conservation area is in my opinion a very good Comments and support of boundary extensions Amend boundaries idea. welcomed. of the conservation area to include proposed extensions.

4. Sea Cadets, Mr Masson

Summary of Representation Officers Response Action as a result of

Representation Being located within the conservation area would be a fantastic Comments welcomed. However, this area could be Amend boundaries opportunity to locate vital funding to carry out repairs to our roof subject to change as it lies within the port authority of the conservation and continue other major refurbishments required to our historic boundary and as such is governed by the Harbours area to include Nissen Huts to make this into a first class training facility for our Act 1964 legislation. proposed extension. cadets.

Once refurbished the building could then also be used as a venue to host local events.

We confirm that we are fully supportive of the extension of the Conservation Area at Footdee to incorporate our historic building at Pocra Quay.

5. Ms Paterson

Summary of Representation Officers Response Action as a result of Representation There is a mistake on page 12, in the caption to the photograph Comments welcomed and accepted. Apologise for the Amend photo at the bottom right. Incorrectly labelled as the outhouse 5a error. Due to the inherent character of Fittie, caption on page 12. South Square. This is shed belonging to number 4 South identifying precise ownership for shed plots is a Square. complex task; therefore specific shed captions will be Edit photo captions removed from the document to avoid confusion and in the entire Suspect that the ownership of the sheds along this side of South errors. appraisal to remove Square has been wrongly recorded when photographs were potential errors in taken at least 3 years ago to judge by the photo. Check the identification of the shed plots in the photo shed identification. survey records. 6. Ms Brown

Summary of Representation Officers Response Action as a result of Representation In principle, I support the intention to continue Fittie's status as a Comments and support for boundary extensions Amend boundaries

27 conservation area. If the extension to the current perimeter welcomed. of the conservation serves to protect more of our village, and particularly the Gospel area to include Hall, from inappropriate development, then I am in favour. proposed extensions. With some dismay that I read content on pages 18 (Character, Comments and concerns noted. The reference to a Amend text on 3.2.4) and 27 (4.1 Swot analysis, Opportunities paragraph 2) potential variety of uses was intended to support pages 18 (3.2.4) and that referred to Uses and Opportunities suggested for our projects which could potentially be coming forward 27 (4.1 SWOT village, including, ' the area could benefit from a wider variety of from the community in Footdee, for example re-use of analysis). uses focused on tourism, for example harbour and/or local Gospel Hall and supporting local artists who already history interpretation boards, guided walks, cafes, local crafts based in the area selling artwork and/or postcards etc. and art galleries, perhaps on a 'pop-up shop basis'. There was perhaps through North East Open Studios events and also mention of 'pop up cafes, fairs and other community similar. However, references to expanding the tourism events'. offer in Footdee will be removed due to concerns raised from the community during this consultation. Whereas the addition of a few well-considered local history boards may enhance the enjoyment of the current level of Second bullet point from ‘Opportunities’ on page 27 visitors, the other suggestions would not be appropriate within will be removed; page 18 updated and replaced with the area and would have serious negative impact. We live in the following text “Living in a historically interesting Fittie for the peace and genuine sense of Community that has area of Aberdeen undoubtedly comes with a degree of existed here for two centuries. tourism interest, however tourists and visitors to the area should respect the privacy and residential amenity. There is the opportunity to explore additional signage at key entrances to Footdee with appropriate wording so that visitors are aware of residents”. Wording could be along the lines of ‘Residential area: Please respect our privacy’. Exact wording and location of any signage can be explored in co- ordination with local residents through consultation with the local Community Council.

7. Mrs Sheila Sandsbury

Summary of Representation Officers Response Action as a result of Representation Supports the proposal to extend the Conservation Area. Comments and support for boundary extensions Amend boundaries welcomed. of the conservation area to include proposed extensions. Concerned about the reference to tourist amenities. Footdee is Comments noted. Second bullet point from Amend text on primarily a residential area and the tourist footfall is already ‘Opportunities’ on page 27 will be removed, page 18 pages 18 (3.2.4) and challenging. It is important that no further activity in relation to (3.2.4) updated and replaced with the following text 27 (4.1 SWOT the tourism industry such as pop- up cafes and fairs are “Living in a historically interesting area of Aberdeen analysis). developed as suggested in the opportunities section on p27. undoubtedly comes with a degree of tourism interest; however tourists and visitors to the area should respect the privacy and residential amenity. Careful signage would be welcomed to advise visitors of the Comments noted. There is the opportunity to explore Opportunity added private nature of the village. additional signage at key entrances to Footdee with to SWOT analysis appropriate wording so that visitors are aware of on page 27 residents”. Wording could be along the lines of regarding potential ‘Residential area: Please respect our privacy’. Exact for additional wording and location of any signage can be explored signage. in co-ordination with local residents through consultation with the local Community Council.

Support the hiding of bins and recycling arrangements. Comments welcomed. No amendment to appraisal is proposed. 8. Mr B Cronin

Summary of Representation Officers Response Action as a result of Representation Found the document very informative and a useful update Comments welcomed. No amendment to statement. appraisal is

proposed. Welcome the extension to the conservation area. Comments and support for boundary extensions Amend boundaries welcomed. of the conservation area to include proposed extensions. Fittee is a very busy tourist area and this is generally welcomed Comments and concerns noted. Second bullet point Amend text on and residents frequently talk to visitors. Many visitors think that from ‘Opportunities’ on page 27 will be removed; page pages 18 (3.2.4) and the village is full of artisans who mend nets etc. This can be 18 updated and replaced with the following text “Living 27 (4.1 SWOT trying at times and particularly in North Square where people in a historically interesting area of Aberdeen analysis). peer into windows and walk into gardens, take photos into undoubtedly comes with a degree of tourism interest, windows etc. Section 3.2.4 suggests a wider variety of uses however tourists and visitors to the area should focussed on tourism. Is cafes a use appropriate to Fittee? The respect the privacy and residential amenity. There is Silver Darling had a café but then they closed it. Not sure that the opportunity to explore additional signage at key this is what residents want, they are almost at saturation point. entrances to Footdee with appropriate wording so that visitors are aware of residents”. Wording could be along the lines of ‘Residential area: Please respect our privacy’. Exact wording and location of any signage can be explored in co-ordination with local residents through consultation with the local Community Council.

Replaced a dangerous asbestos shed /cellar with a modern The order of the bullet points is not reflective of the Amend Section shed/ cellar. Though modern it is already a welcomed addition severity of any issue; however, the 3rd bullet point can 3.2.5, images and to the square. The roof has the same pitch as other sheds in be moved to the top of this list to reorder this list captions on pages north square and has a chimney echoing some others. accordingly. 16 and 18 in Negative factors mentions ‘inappropriate’ and ‘unsympathetic’ accordance with finishes ahead of property maintenance. The last bullet point was not intended to criticise any officers’ response. individual shed. This will be reworded to read The last point in 3.2.5 on” Lack of design and imagination and “Inappropriate materials and lack of maintenance to material used for shed replacement” is another non specific sheds”. bullet that could be seen as criticism. More so when a photo of

30 my shed on page 18 with ‘shed’ put in inverted commas does Amend image caption (bottom right corner of page 18) look like a direct criticism. Disappointed that their shed appears to read “contemporary addition” and move to page 16. to be being criticised. There are many inappropriate sheds in Replace photo space on page 18 with a different fittee of which this is not one. It is not possible for all residents image. to spend money on more expensive renovations to their sheds/cellars.

Request that bullet points in section 3.2.5 are reordered to have sensitivity to residents who may not have the capital to invest in such renovations and some sensitivity to those who do- and have made considerable efforts to improve their properties.

Also could the photo of my shed on p 18 be moved away from section 3.2.5, sure there was no intention to link the two but it has already been interpreted by others to be a direct criticism. 9. Mrs Brack

Summary of Representation Officers Response Action as a result of Representation Happy with the conservation area character appraisal. Support Comments welcomed. Amend boundaries for house being included. of the conservation area to include proposed extensions. 10. Gordon Wilson

Summary of Representation Officers Response Action as a result of Representation A resident of Fittie and in favour of extending the conservation Comments and support for boundary extensions Amend boundaries area to control developments in the area better. welcomed. of the conservation area to include proposed

extensions. Not sure that the document itself will have any effect, as it is The legislation states that for properties within No amendment to only guidance. People will do what they want unless they are conservation area, or within the curtilage of a listed appraisal is made to do otherwise by regulation or supervision. Design building, the resulting building [ancillary proposed. details also appear to be altered to lesser quality from the building/outhouse/shed] requires planning permission design specified by the architect. if the size exceeds 4 square metres, height of the eaves would exceed 3 metres, or any part of the development exceeds 4 metres in height.

In addition, any changes which are deemed to materially affect the exterior appearance also may require planning permission.

It is advised that any resident intending to undertake works to their property and/or shed/outhouse should contact the planning authority to discuss the proposed alterations and whether planning permission (and/or listed building consent) would be required.

We intend on producing a short guidance leaflet for residents in the future, to outline what likely works/alterations may require permission.

The community are carrying out a feasibility study of the former Comments noted and the potential for Gospel Hall to No amendment to Gospel Hall obtain funding to upgrade it and use the hall as the be used as a community facility is welcomed. appraisal is focus for the Fittie community. Information boards about Fittie proposed. and its history are planned to assist visitors. The playpark was recently improved and is fine for the size of Comments noted. Amend corresponding bullet point in Amend text on page the village. SWOT analysis on page 27 to read “Ongoing 27 in Opportunities maintenance and investment in the Footdee section of SWOT playground area”. analysis. Fittee already has plenty visitors, including coach trips and the Comments and concerns noted. Second bullet point Amend text on

32 general feeling is that we don’t want any more looking in from ‘Opportunities’ on page 27 will be removed; page pages 18 (3.2.4) and through windows and taking photos while residents try to live 18 updated and replaced with the following text “Living 27 (4.1 SWOT their lives. The idea that "the area could benefit from a wider in a historically interesting area of Aberdeen analysis). variety of uses focused on tourism" is ok in theory but a bad undoubtedly comes with a degree of tourism interest, idea because Fittie is where we live. It is not a theme park! however tourists and visitors to the area should respect the privacy and residential amenity. There is the opportunity to explore additional signage at key entrances to Footdee with appropriate wording so that visitors are aware of residents”. Wording could be along the lines of ‘Residential area: Please respect our privacy’. Exact wording and location of any signage can be explored in co-ordination with local residents through consultation with the local Community Council. The section on roads states that Fittie is largely unaffected by Comment noted and agreed. Amend text in Section Amend text in industrial traffic. Low frequency vibration from lorries and boats, 3.3.2 Roads to read “Footdee is close to the industrial Section 3.3.2 Roads noise and air pollution are frequent problems but consequences traffic associated with Aberdeen Harbour, and as a in accordance with of deciding to live here. Those working locally use New Pier consequence it does frequently experience low officers’ response. Road as free parking, increasing the traffic. frequency vibration from lorries and boats, noise and air pollution. People who work locally also use New Pier Road for free parking, which does increase level of car presence and traffic in the area.” As detailed in the draft, traffic signage is mainly found at either Comments and concern noted. The level of road Amend Section 3.3.7 end of New Pier Road. The signs state "No Vehicles except for signage is considered acceptable when considering in accordance with access" and a speed limit of 20 MPH. All ignored by most traffic the nature of the built environment and ensures the officers’ response. which is through traffic. On New Pier Road there is an accident conservation area doesn’t become littered with waiting to happen with the combination of pedestrians, children, unnecessary road markings/signs. cyclists, parked cars etc. The problem is that too many vehicles are using New Pier Road for through access and are going too Any resident may contact the Council’s ‘Road Safety fast. Pocra Quay is available for through traffic to use. There & Traffic Management team’ regarding any road are speed bumps but they are too infrequent and do not go all safety or traffic management issues they encounter. the way across the road so can be straddled by larger vehicles.

Do not want more vehicles looking for parking in the area. Add bullet point to Section 3.3.7 Negative Factors to read “Traffic use New Pier Road as a through route and often travel at speeds above 20 mph limit”. 11. SEPA

Summary of Representation Officers Response Action as a result of Representation As this site is adjacent to the indicative flood envelope and we Comments noted. No amendment to hold no additional information to indicate that the site is at flood appraisal is risk, we have no objection on flood risk grounds to the proposed proposed. extension of the Conservation Area. Supporting Appraisal states that the area would benefit from a Comments noted, however, reference to wider variety No amendment to wider variety of uses focussed on tourism. If there is a potential of tourism uses is now proposed to be removed from appraisal is change of use in the conservation area extension we would the appraisal document following feedback received proposed as a result have no objection to this on flood risk grounds provided finished during this consultation exercise. of this comment. floor levels are at least 3.17m AOD plus a recommend freeboard of 600mm (or an appropriate freeboard set by the Local Authority). 12. Shirley and Robin Harding

Summary of Representation Officers Response Action as a result of Representation Concern about the section in the Appraisal that talks about The reference to a potential variety of uses was Amend text on raising the profile of Footdee further. The area does not need intended to support projects which could potentially be pages 18 (3.2.4) and further promotion and none of the proposals benefit the coming forward from the community in Footdee, for 27 (4.1 SWOT community but detract from our quality of life. example re-use of Gospel Hall and supporting local analysis). artists who already based in the area selling artwork and/or postcards etc. perhaps through North East Open Studios events and similar. However, references to expanding the tourism offer in Footdee will be removed due to concerns raised from the community during this consultation.

Privacy is hugely compromised already and there has been a Comments and concerns noted. Second bullet point Amend text on huge increase in visitors particularly with the recent “the secret from ‘Opportunities’ on page 27 will be removed; page pages 18 (3.2.4) and history of our streets” and the global exchange of information via 18 updated and replaced with the following text “Living 27 (4.1 SWOT internet. While it may be one of the jewels of Aberdeen, the in a historically interesting area of Aberdeen analysis). council should always bear in mind that this is a residential area, undoubtedly comes with a degree of tourism interest, where people actually live and not Disneyland. Pop up cafes in however tourists and visitors to the area should theory sound like a good idea but in practice they are not. respect the privacy and residential amenity. Obvious problems include parking, litter and noise (particularly in the summer). Careful consideration needs to be given to There is the opportunity to explore additional signage issues such as these and bear in mind the residents of fittie who at key entrances to Footdee with appropriate wording are left to live with the consequences. so that visitors are aware of residents”. Wording could be along the lines of ‘Residential area: Please respect our privacy’. Exact wording and location of any signage can be explored in co-ordination with local residents through consultation with the local Community Council. 13. Barton Willmore on behalf of the Aberdeen Harbour Board

Summary of Representation Officers Response Action as a result of Representation Wish to object to the proposed extension to the Conservation Objection noted. The extension of the conservation No amendment to area into land owner/ operated by Aberdeen Harbour Board. area is not considered to conflict with the port appraisal is boundary, provisions of the Harbours Act 1964, or the proposed. The expansion of the Conservation Area would reduce the flexibility of harbour operations. flexibility for the Harbour Board in fulfilling its role as a commercial port – compromising the harbour board’s ability to A portion of the existing conservation area is already undertake operation. within the port authority boundary and therefore the boundaries already overlap to a degree, and as far as This outcome could lead to unreasonable complications for the we are aware no issues have been encountered as harbour in its ability to fulfil its operational role and respective result of this to date. commitments as a commercial port under the Harbours Act

(1964). Specifically, all land within the harbour operational The area for boundary extension is not considered to boundary benefits from permitted development rights under have restrictive implications to the wider economic Class 29 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted development opportunities or harbour activities. Development (Scotland) Order 1992 as amended (‘GDPO’) in that works authorised under the Harbours Act 1964 negate the We consider that the Sea Cadets site contributes need for planning approval. towards the character of the conservation area.

Acknowledged that an extension to the conservation area would not prohibit all future development, by its nature the extensions would create an additional statutory concert prior to development within this area. This is not supported by the Aberdeen Harbour Board.

The expansion of the conservation area would not be in keeping with the overarching aims within the adopted/proposed planning policy frameworks - which seek to safeguard and encourage harbour activities - and could have restrictive implications to wider economic development opportunities; and harbour activities.

Extension would appear to contradict the aspirations of the Aberdeen Harbour Development Framework, which seeks to explore how the harbour and city can develop in partnership with the surrounding area over the next 20 years.

The extension is also contrary to ALDP 2012 policy BI4 which expressly requires a presumption in favour of development for operational land for the harbour. This policy framework seeks to safeguard all ‘harbour related’ industrial/operational uses whilst also protecting any accompanying uses and/or buildings that complement this primary use. As such the buildings within the Conservation area boundary extension (AHBs operational land

36 that temporarily contains the Sea Cadets huts) would need to be safeguarded to protect operational activity associated with the harbour.

The extensions would also be contrary to wider strategic economic development aspirations within Aberdeen as follows:

- It would stifle potential operational opportunities for the harbour,

- It would include land and buildings specifically identified to be protected for harbour activity,

- It would restrict strategic economic growth aspirations within Aberdeen and the wider region.

The expansion of the conservation area would not represent a logical extension of the Conservation Area boundary, detracting from the existing character and would bring little continuity in terms of the existing character and streetscape pattern within the immediate area.

The extension is not logical because the proposed land includes the Sea Cadets huts which would detract from the character of the conservation area.

The inclusion of this area would be isolated to 5 buildings which combined bring very little continuity to the existing character of the Conservation area in terms of built form or streetscape pattern.

The buildings to the north and west of the proposed extension are industrial in nature that would severely detract from the historic character and setting should it be included in the Conservation area. 15. Historic Scotland

Summary of Representation Officers Response Action as a result of Representation We welcome this draft CA Appraisal, for one of Aberdeen’s Comments noted and welcomed. No amendment to most distinctive conservation areas, strongly associated with the appraisal is city’s great fishing and maritime heritage. proposed.

We agree with the format for the appraisal to align with your Comments noted and welcomed. No amendment to Council’s Strategic Overview and Management Plan 2013 for appraisal is Conservation Areas. As a management tool we are content that proposed. the appraisal sets out the special historic and architectural character of the conservation area that is desirable to preserve and enhance. It stresses the important distinctiveness of Footdee (Fittie), its significance as a 19th century planned model village; and notably the ‘tarry’ sheds.

3.2 Built Environment, pages 14 – 15 Pocra Quay and New Pier Comment noted. Page 14-15 typo will be amended. Amend typo. Road Typo in heading for ‘Pocra’

Worth stressing that the former Pilot House is a category C Comments noted. Reference to Pocra Quay being Add reference to listed building. Category C listed will be added to page 14. listing to page 14.

We agree with the rationale for including 21, 23 and 29 Pocra Comments noted and welcomed. Specific mention of Amend boundaries Quay, the Sea Cadets site, and the former Gospel Hall, due to the Dock Labourers’ War Memorial will be added to of the conservation their location and as being part of the Fittie community. You page 15 of the appraisal. area to include may also wish to mention the Dock Labourers’ War Memorial. proposed

extensions. It would be desirable to elaborate on the significance of these Comments noted. Typos for Nissen huts will be Add text to pages 15 proposed additions to the conservation area. For example, is amended in the appraisal document. Additional text to and 26 in there any notable significance for the Sea Cadets Nissen huts, be added to page 15 and accordance with such as a wartime interest connected to the Fittie community, officers’ response. and/or are they good Aberdeen examples of a distinctive “The Sea Cadets site contains Nissen huts that date building type which add to the distinctiveness of Fittie? from the late 1930’s and are part of the area’s seafaring tradition. This group of Nissen huts has been the headquarters of Aberdeen Sea Cadets since 1954. Erected in 1936, it housed a wartime barrage balloon unit, intended to defend the harbour entrance. Whilst not part of the original planned fishing village of Footdee, the site nevertheless forms part of the pattern of local uses. The Gospel Hall and additional residential properties within the proposed extension are in order to encompass all properties which are significant to the wider historical and social character of the Footdee community”.

You may also wish to mention the architectural merit of the It is our understanding that the Gospel Hall is No amendment to Gospel Hall fine coursed granite classical façade contributing to constructed of concrete, although the fine detailing appraisal is the streetscape of New Pier Road. would give the impression that it is composed of proposed. granite masonry. Management Comments noted and welcome. Additional reference Additional As mentioned above, we agree with the proposed extension to to the historic interest of the proposed extension areas supporting text the CA and suggest that you elaborate on the special will be added to page 26 of the appraisal. added to page 26 of architectural and historic interest of the buildings/sites within the the appraisal in extended area. “The Sea Cadets site contains Nissen huts that date accordance with from the late 1930’s and are part of the area’s officers’ response. seafaring tradition. This group of Nissen huts has been the headquarters of Aberdeen Sea Cadets since 1954. Erected in 1936, it housed a wartime barrage

balloon unit, intended to defend the harbour entrance. Whilst not part of the original planned fishing village of Footdee, the site nevertheless forms part of the pattern of local uses. The Gospel Hall and additional residential properties within the proposed extension are in order to encompass all properties which are significant to the wider historical and social character of the Footdee community”.

We note that management guidance is generally set out in your The conservation area appraisal sets out the No amendment to Council’s Conservation Area Strategic Overview and importance and significance of the sheds within the appraisal is Management Plan 2013, section 2. Given the distinctiveness context of Footdee, and focuses attention on the ones proposed. and special idiosyncratic character of Fittie, including the of most historic interest, the original ‘tarry sheds’. The traditional ‘tarry’ sheds, you may wish to highlight what regulations for change to sheds are governed by regulations/measures are in place to manage development in permitted development legislation and additional Fittie and protect its special character. advice to residents will be development in future by means of an informative leaflet. The most historically significant and believed original ‘tarry sheds’ are also protected by listed building legislation as they lie within the curtilage of listed buildings. We understand that you may also publish guidance for owners. Comments noted, We intend on producing a short No amendment to You may also wish to consult us on this, if appropriate. guidance leaflet for residents in the future, to outline appraisal is what likely works/alterations may require permission. proposed. The offer of consultation advice on this is welcomed.