Minutes for Development Management Sub Committee meeting, Oct 29 2009, 10.00AM official page

Prior to the commencement of the meeting, the Convener intimated that the application in respect of Dunlinn, Dalmuinzie Road, Bieldside (Reference No. P 090892), which appeared on the agenda as item 4.3, had been formally withdrawn by the applicants and as a result could not now be considered.   The Sub Committee noted the situation.

MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS

The Sub Committee had before it, for approval as a correct record, the Minute of its Meeting on 1^st October, 2009.  

The Sub Committee resolved:-

that the Minute be approved.

The Sub Committee had before it, for approval as a correct record, the Minute of its Meeting on 8^th October, 2009.

The Sub Committee resolved:-

that the Minute be approved.

PLANNING APPLICATIONS WHICH ARE THE SUBJECT OF WRITTEN REPORTS

DEVELOPMENT PLAN DEPARTURE

The Sub Committee had under consideration a report by the Head of Planning and Infrastructure on the application (090271) seeking planning permission for the construction of nine flats within a six-storey building to be located on ground lying to the north of the children’s nursery car park at West Lodge, Woodend Hospital, Aberdeen.   The application had been processed by the planning authority as a departure from the Development Plan for the reason that the use proposed was not related to healthcare provision and the site was part of the Green Space Network.   It was established within the officer’s report, however, that the guidance contained within Planning Advice Note 41 – Development Plan Departures, as regards the appropriateness or otherwise of a departure hearing, would not be relevant in this case because of a lack of interest in the application by members of the general public from whom there had been no letters of representation.  

The report described the application site, the surrounding area and the proposal for development;  made particular reference to the intention that car parking for the occupants of the flats proposed would be provided on a shared basis from within the existing car park area serving the children’s nursery located adjacent;  explained that the existing area was to be re-configured to provide additional spaces, making twenty-four in total;  made reference also to the likely tree loss arising from the development proposal, which would involve the felling of twelve trees to accommodate the building and the extended car parking area to be formed;  and confirmed that, with the application, the applicants had submitted a supporting statement, a design statement, a tree report and landscape specifications.   Circulated with the report were the views of roads officers who had formally objected to the application for reasons related to the lack of sufficient parking spaces and concerns about a likely conflict involving residents’ vehicles and children being dropped-off and picked-up from the nursery, all within the same general area.   Roads officers were also concerned that some of the spaces identified by the applicants within the extended car parking area would be blocked by others, thereby reducing the number of effective spaces that could be made available.  

In dealing with the policy position, the report highlighted that although the site was generally a “healthcare” site it was not currently in use for that purpose;  that the proposal represented development within a green space which would normally only be granted for a use such as sport or recreation and only then if equivalent alternative provision was to be made in the locality;  that there would be a loss of trees and the landscape character and amenity of the site would be affected by the proposal;  that any compensatory tree planting or landscaping would have to take place on ground outwith the application site which was not under the control of the applicants;  and that the Council’s car parking standards would not be met.  The proposed design of the building was also highlighted in the context of relevant local plan policies with the view being expressed that the scale and massing of the building would result in a structure that would be dominant in the short and medium distance views when approached from Woodend Hospital and also that the appearance would be somewhat incongruous next to the bridge over the burn and the Category “B” listed Lodges.

The conclusions arrived at in the report were that the proposal was contrary to the development plan for the reasons identified and there were no material planning considerations which would justify making an exception to the local plan position in this case.

The report recommended:-

that the application be refused on the grounds that the proposal, if approved, would be contrary to Policies 1, 31, 33, 36, 45 and 75 of the Aberdeen Local Plan by reason of the inappropriate siting, scale and massing of the building resulting in a detrimental impact on the character and amenity of the area;  the loss of mature trees on the site leading to an erosion of the landscaped character and its surroundings;  the loss of an area of open space identified as part of the Green Space Network;  the inappropriate land use within an area identified as “Existing Community Sites and Facilities”;  and the insufficient provision of on-site car parking that would be likely to cause overspill parking on to the adjacent road resulting in a hazard to other road users and to the children attending the adjacent nursery.

The Sub Committee resolved:-

that the application be refused in accordance with the terms of the report recommendation.

WHERE THE RECOMMENDATION IS ONE OF APPROVAL

VARIOUS SITES AND VARIOUS PROPOSALS.  

The Sub-Committee had before it reports which the Head of Planning and Infrastructure had prepared relative to the undernoted applications. 

Each report described the site in question and the proposed development and/or the reason for submission of the application;  made reference to the responses of statutory consultees, relevant policies and guidance and, where appropriate, the representations received, some or all of which were appended to the report;  and concluded by giving an evaluation of the proposal. 

In each case, the report recommended:-

that the application be approved with our without conditions or if required in terms of the legislation, referred to the Scottish Ministers with a favourable recommendation.

The Sub-Committee resolved:-

to approve the application (090670) for planning permission for a replacement house and the conversion and extension of an existing granite steading to form a double garage and workshop, on the following conditions:-  (1)  That the developer shall afford access at all reasonable times to any archaeologists nominated by the planning authority and shall allow them to observe work in progress and record items of interest and finds.  No development pursuant to this planning permission shall take place unless written notification of the commencement date has been given to the Keeper of Archaeology, Aberdeen City Council not less than fourteen days before development commences.  (2)  That no development shall take place unless there has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the planning authority a detailed scheme for the provision of a septic tank and suitable secondary treatment system, which shall be installed in accordance with British Standard Code of Practice BS6297:1982 – ‘Design and Installation of Small Sewage Treatment Works’.  (3)  That no development shall take place unless samples of all external finishing materials to the roof and walls of the house and details of the surface material for the driveway/parking area of the development 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.

to approve the application (091277) for planning permission in respect of a proposal for the removal of the existing floodlights system and the installation of a replacement, extended scheme of floodlighting, on the following conditions:-  (1)  That the floodlights shall not become operational unless details of their power and direction of illumination have been submitted to and approved in writing by, the planning authority.   Thereafter the lights shall only be operated in full accordance with the said details.  (2)  That, except as the planning authority may otherwise agree in writing, no construction or demolition work shall take place:  (a) outwith the hours of 7.00am to 7.00pm Mondays to Fridays;  (b) outwith the hours of 8.00am to 4.00pm Saturdays;  or (c) at any time on Sundays, except (on all days) for works inaudible outwith the application site boundary.

to approve the application (091093) for renewal of the existing time-limited consent in respect of the temporary canopy, railings and external seating area, on the following conditions:-  (1) That in the event of road or utility maintenance becoming necessary, the development hereby approved shall be cleared for the duration of the works under the instruction of the roads authority.  (2)  In the event that the approved use becomes obsolete or redundant, all associated structures and equipment must be removed within three months of such event.  Following removal of all equipment, the site shall be made good, in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority.  (3)  That at least 1.8m of clear footway shall remain open on the line of the existing footway through the application site.

to approve the application (091384) for planning permission in respect of a change of use of the ground floor unit from Class 1 (Retail) to Class 3 (Food and Drink) to facilitate the sale of tea, coffee, hot soup and cold food for sit-in or take-away, on the following conditions:-  (1) That no cooking or deep fat frying is undertaken at ground floor level, other than for the making and re-heating of soup, teas, coffees etc.  (2)  That the use hereby granted planning permission shall not take place unless provision has been made within the application site for litter disposal and, if appropriate, recycling facilities in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority.  (3)  That food shall not be sold from the premises other than during the hours from 7.00am until 6.00pm, Mondays to Saturdays inclusive.  Food shall not be sold from the premises at any time on a Sunday.  (4)  That the use hereby granted planning permission shall not take place unless the property has been adapted to provide sound attenuation against internally generated noise.  Such a scheme shall ensure that the internal noise level in residential properties above and adjacent to the hot food shop is not greater than 45dB[A] during the day in each habitable room, all in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority before development commences.  (5)  That, except as the Planning Authority may otherwise agree in writing, no construction or demolition work shall take place:  (a) outwith the hours of 7.00am to 7.00pm Mondays to Fridays; (b) outwith the hours of 9.00am to 4.00pm 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.  (6)  That, except as the planning authority may otherwise agree in writing, no deliveries shall take place:  (a) outwith the hours of 7.00am to 7.00pm Mondays to Saturdays inclusive, or (b) outwith the hours of 10.00am and 4.00pm Sundays.

to approve the application (091219) for planning permission in respect of a change of use from a storage facility to a fitness studio, on the following conditions:-  (1)  That no development shall take place unless there has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the planning authority a noise assessment report by a suitably qualified person.  The assessment shall identify the likely sources of noise and indicate the measures to be taken to protect the amenity of adjacent residents from all such sources of noise that have been identified.  The fitness studio shall not operate unless the noise attenuation measures identified in the report have been implemented.  (2)  That the premises shall not be operational outwith the hours of 5.00pm to 10.00pm, on Mondays to Fridays inclusive, and from 10.00am to 10.00pm, on Saturdays and Sundays. (3) That except as the planning authority may otherwise agree in writing, no construction or demolition work shall take place:  (a) outwith the hours of 7.00am to 7.00pm Mondays to Fridays;  (b) outwith the hours of 8.00am to 4.00pm 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.

to approve the application (091091) for planning permission in respect of (one) a change of use from general merchant/florist shop with post office to general merchant/hot food take-away shop with post office, and (two) the replacement of the existing timber framed shop front with a new UPVC shop front, on the following conditions:-  (1)  That the hot food take-away element of the mixed 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.  (2)  That no deep fat frying operations shall be carried out on the premises without the further written consent of the planning authority.  (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.  (4)  That no hot food preparation shall take place other than in the kitchen area indicated on drawing no. 4SP without further written consent of the planning authority.

to defer consideration of the application (090537) for planning permission in respect of (one) change of use of fish and chip/hot food take-away shop to use as additional hotel bedrooms, and (two) an extension to the existing hotel building to create additional bedrooms;  to visit the site and consider the application;  and to note the terms of the application report meantime.

WHERE THE RECOMMENDATION IS ONE OF REFUSAL

Reference was made to Article 2(B) of the Minute of Meeting of the Planning Committee on 23^rd July, 2009, at which time there was under consideration (one) the application (090507) seeking planning permission for a new three-storey extension to the rear of the office premises at 2 Albyn Place, Aberdeen, which is a Category “B” listed property;  and (two) the resolution thereon of the Planning (Visiting) Sub-Committee, who had visited the site on 2^nd July, 2009 and had resolved to defer consideration of the matter pending discussions between the applicants and the Head of Planning and Infrastructure in an attempt to identify amendments to the plans which would address the concerns expressed on the visit as regards the modern design and materials proposed for the extension and the scale of the building, in the context of its impact on neighbouring properties and the character and appearance of the outstanding Albyn Place/Rubislaw Conservation Area of which it formed part.  The resolution of the Planning Committee at the said meeting was to note that amended plans had been lodged as a result of the discussions held and to await a further report by the Head of Planning and Infrastructure on the application.  The Sub-Committee now had before it the further report referred to.

The report before members again described the site, which represented a prominent location within an outstanding Conservation Area;  outlined recent planning history in the attempt to secure permission to extend the listed building, which had resulted in approval being granted in August 2008, for a two-storey rear extension;  and described also the proposals now under consideration for a three-storey extension at the rear, which would occupy the entire courtyard area and require the removal of the 2.0m high granite boundary wall on the Victoria Street frontage and the granite mews building, now a double garage, on the rear boundary of the site at its junction with the access lane and Victoria Street.  The proposals contained within the amended drawings submitted were described by the report author as a “three-storey version of the two-storey extension for which consent had been granted in August 2008”.  The report contained further detail of the proportions of the building now proposed and commented thereon to the effect that the bulk of the structure, which it was conceded did incorporate traditional design elements, would not be significantly different from the initial approach utilising contemporary design.  In highlighting the domestic scale of the existing properties on Victoria Street, the report author expressed the view that the magnitude of the extension proposed would be totally inappropriate and would have an adverse impact on the established character of that street.  It was also pointed out that the height of the extension proposed, in the wider context of the Conservation Area, would be much more apparent and damaging as it would project significantly above the height of the properties in Victoria Street and would also be higher than the existing rear extension at 2 Albyn Place, which it was intended to replace.  The amended proposals represented, in the view of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure, a contrived approach which failed to work for reasons related to the storey height of the new structure, the window proportions and the roof dimensions, all of which were totally at variance with neighbouring traditional buildings. 

The conclusion arrived at within the report was that whether the original contemporary approach was used or a more traditional design adopted, there would be significant negative impacts on the visual amenity of adjacent buildings and the wider area in general.  The over dominant scale of the building proposed and the poor quality design would, it was felt, be inappropriate in such a prominent location and would have a significant detrimental impact on the character of the listed building to which it would be attached and also the appearance of the Conservation Area within which it would be located. 

The report recommended:-

that the application be refused for the reason that the proposals are out of place and out of keeping with the established character of the Conservation Area and would adversely affect the setting of the listed building by virtue of the incompatible scale and detailing of the proposed extension, contrary to the provisions of Policy 1 of the Aberdeen Local Plan.

The Convener moved, seconded by Councillor Cormie:-

            that the application be refused in accordance with the report recommendation.

Councillor Hunter moved as an amendment, seconded by Councillor Clark:-

            that the application be approved and planning permission granted subject to such conditions as are considered appropriate by the Head of Planning and Infrastructure.

On a division, there voted:-  for the motion (5) – the Convener;  and Councillors Adam, Cormie, Jaffrey and Milne;  for the amendment (4) – Councillor Allan, Clark, Hunter and Penny;  declined to vote (1) – Councillor Kirsty West.

The Committee resolved:-

that the application be refused in accordance with the successful motion.

The Sub-Committee had before it reports which the Head of Planning and Infrastructure had prepared relative to the undernoted applications.

Each report described the site in question and the proposed development and/or the reason for submission of the application; made reference to the responses of statutory consultees, relevant policies and guidance and, where appropriate, the representations received, some or all of which were appended to the report; and concluded by giving an evaluation of the proposal.

In each case, the report recommended:-

that the application be refused.

to refuse the application (090522) seeking listed building consent in respect of a proposal to erect a three-storey rear extension involving the demolition of the existing double garage, for the reason that the proposals are out of place and out of keeping with the established character of the conservation area and would adversely effect the setting of the listed building by virtue of the incompatible scale and detailing of the proposed extension, contrary to the provisions of Policy 1 of the Aberdeen Local Plan.

to refuse the application (091388) seeking planning permission to install a streetworks monopole (15 metres high) with antennae (6) within a glass reinforced plastic shroud and involving two equipment cabinets and one electrical mains pillar at ground level, on the following grounds:-  (1)  That the proposed development would, by reason of its excessive height and prominence in relation to the scale of existing development within a predominantly residential area, result in an adverse impact on the existing character and amenity of that area, contrary to the terms of Policy 40 of the Aberdeen Local Plan.  (2)  That the proposed development would, by way of its excessive height and prominence, result in a significantly adverse impact on the existing character and amenity of the Ferryhill Conservation Area, representing a failure on the part of the planning authority to exercise their duty under section 64 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997.  (3)  That the proposed mast has not been sited and designed to minimise visual impact and intrusion and would result in a significantly adverse impact on an area of built heritage within the city, contrary to the criteria set out in Policy 9 of the Aberdeen Local Plan and the guidance contained in Planning Advice Note (PAN) 62.

to defer consideration of the application (090386) seeking retrospective listed building consent in relation to (one) the installation of external light fittings and (two) the installation of external floodlight fittings not in accordance with the consent previously granted under planning reference A7/2466; to visit the site and consider the application; and to note the content of the application report meantime.

to refuse the application (091060) seeking outline planning permission in respect of a proposal to construct two new dwelling houses on the cleared site of the existing property, on the following grounds:-  (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.

OTHER REPORTS

Reference was made to Article 17 of the Minute of Meeting of the Planning Committee on 21 May 2009, at which time there was under consideration a report by the Head of Planning and Infrastructure which had annexed the draft of the Planning Brief prepared on behalf of the Council in relation to the Bon Accord Baths on Justice Mill Lane, Aberdeen, which closed in March 2008 and were subsequently declared surplus to council requirements in August of that year.  The decision taken to declare the baths building surplus to requirements included also a decision that the property be disposed of on the open market at an appropriate future time.  The decision of the Planning Committee at its meeting in May 2009 was to approve the draft Brief for the purpose of a public consultation exercise designed, in part, to attract ideas about possible new uses for the building.  The Sub-Committee now had before it a further report by the Head of Planning and Infrastructure which advised with regard to the responses received.

The report outlined the manner in which the consultation exercise had been conducted and the level of response achieved; provided details of the responses submitted and the alternative uses being suggested; confirmed that the consensus view being expressed was that the building should be retained as a swimming pool; and highlighted the changes made to the draft Brief to reflect some of the other suggestions, particularly by Historic Scotland and the Architectural Liaison Officer at Grampian Police.

The report recommended:-

(a)               that the amended Brief be approved as guidance for the future use or development of the Bon Accord Baths building on Justice Mill Lane, Aberdeen;  and

(b)               that the Planning Brief as finalised, be remitted to the Finance and Resources Committee of the Council to assist in the future sale or lease of the property.

The Committee resolved:-

that the report recommendations be approved and appropriate officers authorised accordingly.

-  KATHARINE DEAN, Convener.