aberdeen city planning committee · millburn street – a7/0157) and item 5.5 (4 millburn street...

2237

ABERDEEN CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE

ABERDEEN, 15th March, 2007. - Minute of Meeting of ABERDEEN CITYPLANNING COMMITTEE. Present:- Councillor Cassie, Convener;Councillor Delaney, Vice-Convener; and Councillors Clark, Collie, Cormack,Hunter, Jaffrey, James Lamond, June Lamond, Leslie, May, Porter andStephen.

AGENDA

The Convener announced at the start of the meeting that two of the applicationshad been withdrawn by the applicants, being the matters reported at item 5.4 (3Millburn Street – A7/0157) and item 5.5 (4 Millburn Street – A7/0158).

REQUEST FOR DEPUTATION

The Committee were advised by the Convener that a request to address themeeting had been received from an agent on behalf of the applicant for planningpermission reported at item 5.6 on the agenda (59 Beechhill Gardens – A7/0274).The Convener moved that the request be declined on the basis that the writtenrepresentations received from both the applicant and the objectors were alreadybefore Members and to hear further representation from only one side in the matterwould not be acceptable in the interests of fairness. The Committee unanimouslyagreed that the request be declined.

MOTION

1. CONTRIBUTION OF MICRO-RENEWABLES IN THE REDUCTION OFCARBON EMISSIONS – MOTION BY COUNCILLOR DELANEY. Reference wasmade to Article 16 of the Minute of Meeting of the Council on 28th February, 2007,at which time there was remitted to the Planning Committee (and the Environmentand Infrastructure Committee), the Notice of Motion intimated by CouncillorDelaney in the following terms:-

“That Council recognises the contribution of micro-renewables in thereduction of carbon emissions and urges our representatives in the ScottishParliament to (1) review planning regulations in light of the Stern Report torelax the regulatory regime and make it easier for individuals to retro-fit solarpanels and wind turbines to their homes, bringing such devices within thepermitted development regime where appropriate; and (2) introduce

2238

ABERDEEN CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE15th March, 2006

appropriate planning and building control legislation and where appropriatepolicy and guidance to require all new build properties to be constructed in asustainable manner and fitted with appropriate micro-renewable capability.”

Councillor Delaney was heard in support of his motion when he made reference tothe need, at present, for people to engage with the very bureaucratic process thatis the planning system if they wanted to change to a more eco-friendly system ofheating and/or power, a situation which does nothing to help the Governmentachieve its stated goal of increasing the amount of energy generated fromrenewable sources by 40% in the next few years. Councillor Delaney felt that theintroduction of guidelines which, if met, would mean that the solar panels and thewind turbines could become permitted development, would make that option amuch more attractive proposition. On the matter of new build properties and theintroduction of a requirement for these to be constructed in a more sustainablemanner, Councillor Delaney was eager that the Committee adopt the terms of hismotion and take steps to make their views known in time for inclusion within newlegislation and guidance that is currently being prepared.

The Head of Planning and Infrastructure at this point advised the Committee thatwhile a new guidance note at local level could be prepared, it would be difficult toenforce without supporting legislation.

The Committee resolved:-(i) that the principle of Councillor’s Delaney’s motion be adopted on the

understanding that development involving the erection of wind turbineswould almost certainly require to be the subject of appropriate controls andlimitations in the interests of amenity;

(ii) that as a first step, to request the Head of Planning and Infrastructure at theappropriate time to write to the Scottish Executive and to the ScottishParliament on the need to address the issues raised by Councillor Delaney,with a view to implementing any necessary regulatory changes at theearliest possible opportunity; and

(iii) that the Head of Service keep the Committee advised on progress by way ofup-date reports on the matter as necessary.

VISITS

2. PLANNING (VISITING) SUB-COMMITTEE – MINUTE OF MEETING. TheCommittee had under consideration the Minute of the Planning (Visiting) Sub-Committee meeting held on 22nd February, 2007, the terms of which arereproduced in full at Appendix A hereto.

2239


The Committee resolved:-that the decisions of the Sub-Committee, as recorded in the Minute, be noted.

PLANNING APPLICATIONS WHICH ARE THE SUBJECT OF WRITTENREPORTS.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN DEPARTURES

3. CLINTERTY CROFT, CLINTERTY, ABERDEEN – NEWDWELLINGHOUSE (OUTLINE). Reference was made to Article 3 of the Minute ofMeeting of the Planning Committee on 16th November, 2006, at which time therewas under consideration a report by the Head of Planning and Infrastructure on theapplication (A6/1752) seeking outline planning permission in respect of a proposalto erect a new dwellinghouse and garage on the footprint of an existing commercialbuilding at Clinterty Croft, Clinterty, Aberdeen. The resolution of the Committee atthe time was that the application which was being processed as a departure fromthe Development Plan for the reason that the site was designated as Green Beltland within the Aberdeen City District-wide Local Plan (1991), be not the subject ofa departure hearing in terms of the guidance contained within Planning Advice Note41 – Development Plan Departures and it be remitted to the Head of Planning andInfrastructure to prepare a further report on the application containing an evaluationof the proposal and a recommendation as to its determination. The Committee nowhad before it the further report requested.

The report again identified the application site with reference to surrounding usesand the means of access thereto; made reference to a previous similar proposal in1993, which had been refused; advised of the content of the supporting statementand the one letter of representation received; and outlined the planning policyframework against which the application would fall to be assessed. The reportcontained a full evaluation of the proposal in light of all the material planningconsiderations and concluded that, as with the situation in 1993, the DevelopmentPlan and National Planning Policy did not support the development and there wereno other material considerations sufficient to outweigh the Plan position.

The report recommended:-that the application be refused, on the following grounds:- (1) That the proposalwould be contrary to approved Structure Plan Policy 28 – Development in theGreen Belt and Adopted Aberdeen City District-Wide Local Plan Policy GB1 –Green Belt Areas by way of seeking a non-essential use within the Green Belt. (2)That the proposal is contrary to SPP17 – Planning for Transport by way of beinginaccessible to a range of transport modes other than the private car. (3) That the

2240


proposal would set an undesirable precedent for applications of a similar naturethat would be difficult to resist.

The Committee resolved:-to refuse the application in accordance with officer recommendation.

4. QUARRYBRAE CROFT, CLINTERTY, ABERDEEN – RESIDENTIALDEVELOPMENT (OUTLINE). The Committee had under consideration a report bythe Head of Planning and Infrastructure on the application (A6/1751) seekingoutline planning permission in respect of a proposal for a three-unit residentialdevelopment as a replacement for the existing dwellinghouse and outbuildings atQuarrybrae Croft, Clinterty, Aberdeen. The application had been advertised as adeparture from the Development Plan because of the location of the site within anarea designated as Green Belt within the Aberdeen City District-wide Local Plan(1991).

The report described the application site with reference to the surrounding land andthe means of access thereto; gave a brief description also of the proposal fordevelopment; advised of the nature of the objection raised by local roads officersand of the submission by agents for the applicant of a supporting statement; andidentified the planning policy position against which the proposal would fall to beassessed. Although clearly a departure from the Development Plan, the lack of anyrepresentations from members of the public in respect of the application wasconsidered by the report author to render the guidance contained within PlanningAdvice Note 41 (Development Plan Departures), as regards a departure hearing,irrelevant. Accordingly, the report proceeded to provide a detailed evaluation of theproposal as a result of which the officer concluded that there were no materialconsiderations which outweighed the Plan position in this case.

The report recommended:-that the application be refused, on the following grounds:- (1) That the proposalwould be contrary to Policy GB1 – Green Belt Areas of the Adopted Aberdeen CityDistrict-Wide Local Plan (1991) by way of seeking a non-essential use within theGreen Belt. (2) That the proposal is contrary to SPP 17 – Planning for Transport byway of being inaccessible to a range of transport modes other than the private car.(3) That the proposal would set an undesirable precedent for applications of asimilar nature that would be difficult to resist.

The Committee resolved:-to refuse the application in accordance with officer recommendation.

2241


5. ARDSHEILING, BAIRDS BRAE, CULTS – NEW DWELLINGHOUSE (FEUSPLIT). The Committee had under consideration a report by the Head of Planningand Infrastructure on the application (A6/1929) for planning permission to erect anew dwellinghouse with integral double garage within the garden ground of thesubjects, Ardsheiling, Bairds Brae, Cults. The application had been advertised as adeparture from the Development Plan by virtue of the fact that the site was locatedwithin an area identified as Green Belt in the Aberdeen City District-wide Local Plan(1991) and the proposal did not appear to fall within any of the listed exceptions ofappropriate development within such areas.

The report described the site which was well screened by trees and shrubs andabutted on three sides by the grounds of the former Woodlands Hospital, currentlythe subject of large scale residential development; described also the proposal fordevelopment; advised of the views expressed by the local Community Council whohad objected to the application because of the loss of trees that would result andthe unsatisfactory nature of the access road which was narrow and unfinished;indicated that, apart from the Community Council, no letters of representation hadbeen received in respect of the proposal; and identified the planning policy issuesagainst which the application would fall to be assessed. As regards the guidancecontained within Planning Advice Note 41 (Development Plan Departures), thereport author expressed the view that in the absence of any letters ofrepresentation, a hearing in accordance with that guidance would not seem to beappropriate in this case.

The report recommended:-that a hearing in accordance with the guidance contained within Planning AdviceNote 41, be not held in this case.

The Committee resolved:-that the recommendation that no hearing be held be adopted and it be remitted tothe Head of Planning and Infrastructure to prepare and submit a final report on theapplication containing a detailed evaluation of the proposal and a recommendationas to its determination.

WHERE THE RECOMMENDATION IS ONE OF APPROVAL – SOUTH AREA

6. VARIOUS SITES AND VARIOUS PROPOSALS. The Committee hadbefore it a report which the Head of Planning and Infrastructure had preparedrelative to the undernoted applications.

2242


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

In each case, the report recommended:-that the application be approved with or without conditions or if required in terms ofstatute, referred to Scottish Ministers with a favourable recommendation.

The Committee resolved:-(i) 276 North Deeside Road, Cults – to approve the application (A6/2161) for

planning permission for a replacement dwellinghouse with integral garage,on the following conditions:- (1) That no development shall take placeunless a plan showing those trees to be removed and those to be retainedand a scheme for the protection of all trees to be retained on the site duringconstruction works has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, theplanning authority and any such scheme as may have been approved hasbeen implemented. (2) That no part of the development hereby approvedshall be occupied unless a plan and report illustrating appropriatemanagement proposals for the care and maintenance of all trees to beretained and any new areas of planting (to include timing of works andinspections) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planningauthority. The proposals shall be carried out in complete accordance withsuch plan and report as may be so approved. (3) That any tree work whichappears to become necessary during the implementation of the developmentshall not be undertaken without the prior written consent of the planningauthority; any damage caused to trees growing on the site shall beremedied in accordance with British Standard 3998: 1969“Recommendation for Tree Works” before the building hereby approved isfirst occupied. (4) That no materials, supplies, plant, machinery, spoil,changes in ground levels or construction activities shall be permitted withinthe protected areas specified in the aforementioned scheme of treeprotection without the written consent of the planning authority and no fireshall be lit in a position where the flames could extend to within 5.0 metres offoliage, branches or trunks. (5) No development shall take place unless theplanning authority has approved in writing a scheme for the supervision ofthe arboricultural protection measures and works that have been approvedby the planning authority for the construction phase of the development.Such a scheme shall include the timing and method of site supervision andrecord keeping. Supervision shall be carried out by a qualifiedarboriculturalist approved in writing by the planning authority but instructedby the applicant. (6) That no development shall take place unless a scheme

2243


of all drainage works designed to meet the requirements of SustainableUrban Drainage Systems has been submitted to and approved in writing bythe planning authority and thereafter no part of the development shall beoccupied unless the drainage has been installed in complete accordancewith the said scheme. (7) That no development pursuant to the planningpermission hereby granted shall be carried out unless there has beensubmitted to and approved in writing for the purpose by the planningauthority a further detailed scheme of landscaping for the site, which schemeshall include indications of all existing trees and landscaped areas on heland, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for theirprotection in the course of development, and the proposed areas oftree/shrub planting including details of numbers, densities, locations,species, sizes and stage of maturity at planting. (8) That all planting,seeding and turfing comprised in the approved scheme of landscaping shallbe carried out in the first planting season following the completion of thedevelopment and any trees or plants which within a period of five years fromthe completion of the development die, are removed or become seriouslydamaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season withothers of a size and species similar to those originally required to be planted,or in accordance with such other scheme as may be submitted to andapproved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority. (9) That,except as the planning authority may otherwise agree in writing, noconstruction or demolition work shall take place:- (a) outwith the hours of7.00am to 7.00pm Mondays to Fridays; (b) outwith the hours of 9.00am to4.00pm Saturdays; or (c) at any time on Sundays, except for worksinaudible outwith the application site boundary. [For the avoidance of doubt,this would generally allow internal finishing work, but not the use ofmachinery]. (10) That the beech hedge that runs parallel to North DeesideRoad shall not be realigned as shown on drawing no 675-10 Rev.C;

(ii) 2 Fonthill Terrace, Aberdeen – to approve the application (A6/1729) forplanning permission to erect a single storey sun-lounge extension and toreplace two basement windows on the rear elevation, on the followingconditions:- (1) That the sash and case basement window to be replacedshall be replaced with a timber sliding sash and case window to matchexisting and the timber casement basement window to be replaced shall bereplaced by a timber casement window to match existing and both windowsshall be constructed in full accordance with the detailed cross-sectionssubmitted and approved with the application. (2) That all the windows on thewest facing elevation of the sun lounge extension hereby approved shall befitted with obscure glazing. A sample of the obscure glass shall besubmitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority and thereafterinstalled in complete accordance with the details agreed.

2244


(ii) 2 Fonthill Terrace, Aberdeen (Category “B” Building) – (one) to express awillingness to approve the application (A6/1691) for listed building consent inrespect of a proposal to erect a single storey sun-lounge extension and toreplace two basement windows on the rear elevation, subject to the twoconditions narrated within the report; and (two) to remit to the Head ofPlanning and Infrastructure to forward the application and the detail of theCommittee decision thereon, to Historic Scotland for their consideration interms of the listed building regulations;

(iii) 68B Countesswells Road, Aberdeen – at the request of the local member,Councillor Wisely, who has some concerns related to the traffic situationlocally, to defer consideration of the application (A6/2031) for planningpermission in respect of a proposal for an extension and partial change ofuse from residential to retail to facilitate the formation of three shop units, toremit to the Planning (Visiting) Sub-Committee to visit the site and considerthe application and to note the terms of the application report meantime.

WHERE THE RECOMMENDATION IS ONE OF REFUSAL – SOUTH AREA

7. VARIOUS SITES AND VARIOUS PROPOSALS. The Committee hadbefore it reports which the Head of Planning and Infrastructure had preparedrelative to the undernoted applications.


In each case, the report recommended:-that the application be refused.

The Committee resolved:-(i) Cliff House, Craigton Road, Cults – to refuse the application (A6/2242)

seeking planning permission for a proposal to form a vehicular access trackthrough lawn and woodland for tree management purposes, on the groundthat the proposal if implemented would be over-engineered in terms of itsscale, design, retaining walls and railings and would result in the loss oftrees which together would change the character of the woodland to thedetriment of the character and amenity of Pitfodels Conservation Area andthe Green Belt, contrary to policies 9.3.1, 10.1.1 and 10.2.22 of theAberdeen City District-wide Local Plan;

2245


(ii) 72 Albury Road, Aberdeen – at the request of the local member, CouncillorCormack, to defer consideration of the application (A6/2017) seekingplanning permission to install replacement windows on the front and rearelevations, to remit to the Planning (Visiting) Sub-Committee to visit the siteand consider the application and to note the terms of the application reportmeantime;

(iii) 59 Beech-hill Gardens, Aberdeen – to refuse the application (A7/0274)seeking planning permission to erect a new dwellinghouse within the existingrear garden area, on the following grounds:- (1) That the proposal, ifimplemented, would be contrary to Policy R1 of the Adopted Local Plan andthe City Council’s Splitting of Residential Feu’s Policy Guidelines by reasonof the inappropriate siting of the dwellinghouse, the unsatisfactoryrelationship of the house to existing residential property and the potentialdetriment to the amenity of adjacent houses and the adverse impact on thegeneral character and pattern of development in the area. No overridingjustification to set aside the above considerations has been demonstrated.(2) That approval of the proposal would establish an undesirable precedentfor similar applications which would be difficult to resist and which would notbe in the interests of residential and visual amenity generally.

8. 117 SOUTH ANDERSON DRIVE, ABERDEEN – VEHICLE DRIVEWAY.The Committee had under consideration a report by the Head of Planning andInfrastructure on the application (A6/2385) seeking planning permission to form avehicle driveway into the front garden area of the property at 117 South AndersonDrive, Aberdeen.

The report described the driveway which would be 7.0 metres in length, 4.0 metreswide and would cross an area of grass verge before crossing the footway on SouthAnderson Drive; advised of the views of Transport Scotland in its capacity as theTrunk Roads Network Management Directorate, who indicate that the drivewaywould only be acceptable if the proposal involved a turning area such that vehiclesentering and leaving the site could do so in a forward gear; indicated that theassessment of local roads officers was that that condition could not be compliedwith in this case and, as a result, the application could not conform to the Council’sown driveway policy; and concluded that although there were other similardriveways in the area, these were historical and their existence should not be usedto justify the approval of the current proposal which it was felt failed to meetreasonable safety requirements.

2246


The report recommended:-that the application be refused on the ground that the proposal would have anunacceptable impact on road safety and the free flow of traffic on the trunk roaddue to the additional manoeuvres to and from the site that would result, contrary tothe safety and interest of other road users.

Councillor Collie moved, seconded by the Convener:-That consideration of the application be deferred and it be remitted to thePlanning (Visiting) Sub-Committee to visit the site.

The Vice-Convener moved as an amendment, seconded by Councillor Hunter:-That the Committee indicate a willingness to approve the application andinstruct the Head of Planning and Infrastructure to forward it to ScottishMinisters for their consideration.

On a division, there voted:- for the motion (9) – the Convener; and CouncillorsClark, Collie, Cormack, Jaffrey, June Lamond, May, Porter and Stephen; for theamendment (4) – the Vice-Convener; and Councillors Hunter, James Lamond andLeslie.

The Committee resolved:-that it be remitted to the Planning (Visiting) Sub-Committee to visit the site andconsider the application.

WHERE THE RECOMMENDATION IS ONE OF APPROVAL – CENTRAL AREA




2247


The Committee resolved:-(i) Hillhead Halls of Residence Site, Don Street, Old Aberdeen – having heard

Councillor Sandra Macdonald regarding on-going discussions with theUniversity on improvements to the pedestrian access provision between thesite and Kings College, which cuts through Seaton Park and having alsodiscussed the issue of the material proposed for use on the roof of thebuildings, to approve the application (A6/2006) for planning permission toerect replacement student residential accommodation (104 units),associated facilities and an electricity sub-station on the followingconditions:- (1) That no development shall take place within the applicationsite until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme ofarchaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigationwhich has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the planningauthority. (2) That no development pursuant to the planning permissionhereby granted shall be carried out unless there has been submitted to andapproved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority a further detailedscheme of landscaping for the site, which scheme shall include indications ofall existing trees and landscaped areas on the land and details of any to beretained together with measures for their protection in the course ofdevelopment and the proposed areas of tree/shrub planting including details ofnumbers, densities, locations, species, sizes and stage of maturity at planting.(3) That all planting, seeding and turfing comprised in the approved scheme oflandscaping shall be carried out in the first planting season following thecompletion of the development and any trees or plants which within a period offive years from the completion of the development die, are removed or becomeseriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting seasonwith others of a size and species similar to those originally required to beplanted or in accordance with such other scheme as may be submitted to andapproved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority. (4) That nodevelopment shall take place unless a scheme for the protection of all trees tobe retained on and adjacent to the site during construction works has beensubmitted to, and approved in writing by, the planning authority and any suchscheme as may have been approved has been implemented. (5) That anytree work which appears to become necessary during the implementation ofthe development shall not be undertaken without the prior written consent ofthe planning authority; any damage caused to trees growing on the site shallbe remedied in accordance with British Standard 3998: 1989“Recommendation for Tree Works” before the building hereby approved is firstoccupied. (6) That no materials, supplies, plant, machinery, spoil, changes inground levels or construction activities shall be permitted within the protectedareas specified in the aforementioned scheme of tree protection without thewritten consent of the planning authority and no fire shall be lit in a positionwhere the flames could extend to within five metres of foliage, branches or

2248


trunks. (7) That no development shall take place unless the planning authorityhas approved a scheme for the supervision of the arboricultural protectionmeasures during the construction phase, to include the time and method of sitesupervision, record keeping including updates and that this supervision isadministered by a qualified arboriculturalist approved in writing by the planningauthority but instructed by the applicant. (8) That no development shall takeplace unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing by theplanning authority a plan and report illustrating appropriate managementproposals for the care and maintenance of all trees to be retained and any newareas of planting on completion of the development and shall include timings ofworks and inspections. (9) That the development hereby approved shall notbe occupied unless the cycle storage facilities shown on Drawing No. 708-P-010D have been provided in accordance with the said Drawing. (10) That nodevelopment shall take place unless samples of all external finishing materialsto the roof and walls of the development hereby approved have beensubmitted to, and approved in writing by, the planning authority and thereafterthe development shall be carried out in accordance with the details so agreed.(11) That no development shall take place unless a scheme of all drainageworks designed to meet the requirements of Sustainable Urban DrainageSystems has been submitted to and approved in writing by the PlanningAuthority and thereafter no part of the development shall be occupied unlessthe drainage has been installed in complete accordance with the said scheme.(12) That except as the planning authority may otherwise agree in writing, noconstruction or demolition work shall take place: (a) outwith the hours of7.00am to 7.00pm Mondays to Fridays; (b) outwith the hours of 9.00am to4.00am Saturdays; or (c) at any time on Sundays, except for works inaudibleoutwith the application site boundary. [For the avoidance of doubt, this wouldgenerally allow internal finishing work, but not the use of machinery]. (13) Thatthe development hereby approved shall not be occupied unless all thesustainable measures to deter the use of the private car, including modal sharetargets, measures to encourage the use of public transport and the provision ofan advisory cycle lane on Don Street have been implemented and thereafterthe effectiveness of the travel plan shall be reviewed in accordance withprocedures set down in the Green Travel Plan, the results of which shall besubmitted to the planning authority. (14) That a maximum of fifty-two flats ortwo hundred and sixty bed spaces in the development hereby approved shallbe used at any one time for out of term conference use. (15) That thedevelopment hereby approved shall not be occupied unless the car parkingspaces in planning application reference A7/0267 have been constructed, laidout and demarcated and thereafter the parking spaces shall be used for nopurpose other than in association with the development hereby approved.

(ii) Hillhead Halls of Residence Site, Don Street, Old Aberdeen – to approve theapplication (A7/0267) for planning permission to create hard surface areas

2249


for parking (58 spaces) in association with the new development approvedunder planning application A6/2006, on the following conditions:- (1) Thatexcept as the planning authority may otherwise agree in writing, noconstruction or demolition work shall take place: (a) outwith the hours of7.00am to 7.00pm Mondays to Fridays; (b) outwith the hours of 9.00am to4.00am Saturdays; or (c) at any time on Sundays, except for worksinaudible outwith the application site boundary. [For the avoidance of doubt,this would generally allow internal finishing work, but not the use ofmachinery]. (2) That the car parking spaces related to this application shallnot be constructed unless the student accommodation approved underplanning application reference A6/2006 has been implemented andthereafter the parking shall be used for no purpose other than in associationwith the residential accommodation at Carnegie Court. (3) That nodevelopment shall take place unless there has been submitted to andagreed in writing by the planning authority a detailed scheme for entrybarriers to the car park and thereafter the car park shall not be brought intouse unless the said scheme has been implemented. (4) That nodevelopment shall take place within the application site unless the applicanthas secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work inaccordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submittedby the applicant and approved by the planning authority.

(iii) 31/33 Union Grove, Aberdeen – at the request of the local member, CouncillorGreig, to defer consideration of the application (A6/1990) for planningpermission to erect a four-storey flatted residential development containingsixteen flats with twenty car parking spaces to the rear and secure cycleparking for fourteen bicycles, to remit to the Planning (Visiting) Sub-Committeeto visit the site and consider the application and to note the terms of theapplication report meantime.

(iv) King Street, Aberdeen (Opposite St Ninian Court) – to refuse the application(A6/2064) for planning permission to erect a 12.0 metre hightelecommunications streetpole with three antennae and associated equipmentcabinets (ground level), on the following grounds:- (1) The proposed mast,because of its location, would have a detrimental impact on visual amenityespecially that of the adjoining Conservation Area and would not fit into thestreetscene. (2) The siting of the mast and associated equipment cabinets ona relatively narrow footpath adjacent to a busy traffic thoroughfare has thepotential to create a serious safety hazard for pedestrians.

(v) 4 and 4A Alford Place, Aberdeen – to approve the application (A7/0011) forplanning permission for change of use at ground and basement floor level fromClass 1 (retail) to Class 2 (financial, professional and other services).

(vi) Albyn Bar/Restaurant, 11 Albyn Place, Aberdeen – to approve the application(A6/2368) for planning permission for change of use of the bar/restaurant onthe ground floor to use as a place of entertainment, on the following

2250


conditions:- (1) That no part of this development shall take place unless adetailed assessment of the likely sources and levels of noise arising within,and those audible outwith, the premises has been submitted to, andapproved in writing, by the planning authority. The noise assessment shallbe carried out by a suitably qualified independent noise consultant. All noiseattenuation measures identified by the noise assessment which are requiredin order to prevent any adverse impacts on the amenity of the residents inthe surrounding area shall be installed prior to commencement of the usehereby approved. (2) That food and beverage deliveries to the premisesshall not take place:- (i) during the opening hours of the uses herebyapproved, or (ii) in the hours between 7pm and 7am the following morningon Mondays to Saturdays inclusive, or (iii) in the hours between 4pm and10am the following morning on Sundays. (3) That refuse and empty bottlesare not stored outside the building. (4) That there shall be no pedestrianaccess and egress to the interior of the premises hereby granted planningpermission other than via the main entrance doors on Albyn Place unless bydisabled users or in the event of an emergency.

(vii) 44-46 Willowbank Road, Aberdeen – to approve a request under Section 64of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, for a non-materialvariation to the development approved as application A5/0846 (residentialdevelopment – 24 flats), as detailed within the officer report.

(viii) 164-166 Market Street, Aberdeen (Category “B” Building) – (one) to expressa willingness to approve the application (A6/2135) for listed building consentin respect of proposals for change of use from offices to student flats (17units) and involving internal alterations only, subject to the two conditionsnarrated within the report; and (two) to remit to the Head of Planning andInfrastructure to forward the application and the detail of the Committeeresolution thereon, to Historic Scotland for their consideration in terms of thelisted building regulations.

(ix) 164-166 Market Street, Aberdeen – to approve the application (A6/2136) forplanning permission in respect of change of use from offices to student flats(17 units), on the following conditions:- (1) That no development pursuant tothis planning permission shall take place nor shall the building be occupiedunless there has been submitted to and approved in writing for the purposeby the planning authority an assessment of the noise levels likely within thebuilding. The assessment shall be prepared by a suitably qualifiedindependent noise consultant and shall recommend any measuresnecessary to ensure a satisfactory noise attenuation for the building. Theproperty shall not be occupied unless the said measures have beenimplemented in full. (2) That no development shall take place unless therehas been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authoritydetails of the location and design of storage areas for refuse bins. (3) Thatno development shall take place unless there has been submitted to and

2251


approved in writing by the planning authority, details of cycle storage. (4)That no development pursuant to this planning approval shall take placeunless details of the finish materials, including details of windows to theground floor Market Street elevation and the rooflights, have been submittedto and approved in writing by the planning authority and thereafter theextension shall not be occupied unless it has been finished in accordancewith the details approved. (5) That the use hereby granted planningpermission shall not take place unless a scheme showing the proposedmeans of filtering, extracting and dispersing cooking fumes from thepremises has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planningauthority and that the said scheme has been implemented in full and isready for operation. (6) That except as the planning authority may otherwiseagree 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 thehours of 9.00am to 4.00pm Saturdays; or (c) at any time on Sundays, exceptfor works inaudible outwith the application site boundary. [For the avoidanceof doubt, this would generally allow internal finishing work, but not the use ofmachinery]. (7) That original cornicing and skirtings within the building shall beretained in accordance with the approved drawings unless agreed in writingwith the planning authority. (8) That prior to the date of occupation of each unithereby approved, the developer shall provide one bus pass per flat for a periodof five years.

10. GALLOWHILL, PITTODRIE, ABERDEEN (FORMER GAS WORKS SITE) –RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (34 FLATS). The Committee had underconsideration a report by the Head of Planning and Infrastructure on the application(A6/1304) for planning permission to erect thirty-four flats within two, 4/5 storeybuildings on part of the site of the former gas works at Gallowhill, Pittodrie,Aberdeen, the proposed development to be a substitute for an earlier proposal(June, 2003) to erect eighteen dwellinghouses at the same location as part of alarger development on the site comprising one hundred and forty-nine flats and theeighteen dwellinghouses.

The report described the larger area of ground at Gallowhill currently underdevelopment for residential purposes in pursuance of the June, 2003 permissiongranted on appeal; indicated the dimensions of the two blocks proposed, the finishmaterials to be used and the mix of accommodation to be provided; advised thatforty-three parking spaces would also be provided as part of the development withaccess to the site being from Merkland Road East; and confirmed that, by way of aplanning gain measure, five of the total number of flats proposed were beingoffered by the developer as long-term rental, affordable housing. The report

2252


highlighted the fact that no letters of representation in respect of the proposal hadbeen lodged and, in view of the earlier approval, that the principle of housing on thesite had already been deemed acceptable subject to appropriate conditions.

The report recommended:-(a) that the application be approved, on the following conditions:- (1) That,

except as the planning authority may otherwise agree in writing, noconstruction or demolition work shall take place:- (a) outwith the hours of7.00am to 7.00pm Mondays to Fridays; (b) outwith the hours of 9.00am to4.00pm on Saturdays; and (c) at any time on Sundays, except for workinaudible outwith the application site boundary. [For the avoidance of doubtthis would generally allow internal finishing work, but not the use ofmachinery]. (2) That the use hereby granted planning permission shall nottake place unless provision has been made within the application site foradequate refuse storage facilities in accordance with a scheme which hasbeen submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. (3)That no development pursuant to this planning permission shall take placenor shall the building be occupied unless there has been submitted to andapproved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority an assessmentof the noise levels likely within the building. The assessment shall beprepared by a suitably qualified independent noise consultant and shallrecommend any measures necessary to ensure a satisfactory noiseattenuation for the building. The property shall not be occupied unless thesaid measures have been implemented in full. (4) (a) Prior tocommencement of any site works, a comprehensive contaminated landinvestigation shall be carried out. The investigation shall be completed inaccordance with British Standards Institution “The Investigation of potentiallycontaminated sites – Code of Practice” (BS 10175:2001). The report mustinclude a site-specific risk assessment of all relevant pollutant linkages; (b) Ifthe risk assessment identifies any unacceptable risk or risks as definedunder Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act, a detailed remediationstrategy shall be submitted to the planning authority for approval. No works,other than investigative works, shall be carried out on the site prior toreceipt of written approval of the remediation strategy by the planningauthority; (c) Remediation of the site shall be carried out in accordance withthe approved remediation plan. No variations to the plan or remediationworks shall be implemented except as approved in writing by the planningauthority; (d) When the developer considers the remediation works to becomplete, he shall submit a report to the planning authority to confirm thatthe works have been carried out in accordance with the remediation plan,and the planning authority shall confirm in writing whether or not – on thebasis of the information submitted – such works may indeed be regarded ascomplete; and (e) The presence of any previously unsuspected

2253


contamination which becomes evidence during the development of the siteshall be brought to the attention of the planning authority within one week or,if possible, earlier. In this event, the developers shall carry out:- (i) a moredetailed site investigation to determine the extent and nature of thecontaminant(s), followed by (ii) a site specific risk assessment of anyassociated hazards together with (iii) such further remediation as the riskassessment shows to be necessary. All in terms to be agreed in writing bythe planning authority. (5) That the development hereby approved shall notbe occupied unless the car parking areas hereby granted planningpermission have been constructed, drained, laid-out and demarcated inaccordance with drawing No. A3959/L(0)01 of the plans hereby approved orsuch other drawing as may subsequently be submitted and approved inwriting by the planning authority. Such areas shall not thereafter be used forany other purpose than the parking of cars ancillary to the development anduse hereby granted approval. (6) That no development pursuant to theplanning permission hereby approved shall be carried out unless there hasbeen submitted to and approved in writing for the purpose by the planningauthority a further detailed scheme of landscaping for the site, which schemeshall include indications of all existing trees and landscaped areas on theland, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for theirprotection in the course of development, and the proposed areas oftree/shrub planting including details of numbers, densities, locations,species, sizes and stage of maturity at planting. (7) That all planting,seeding and turfing comprised in the approved scheme of landscaping shallbe carried out in the first planting season following the completion of thedevelopment and any trees or plants which within a period of five years fromthe completion of the development die, are removed or become seriouslydamaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season withothers of a size and species similar to those originally required to be planted,or in accordance with such other scheme as may be submitted to andapproved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority. (8) That nodevelopment shall take place unless a scheme of all drainage worksdesigned to meet the requirements of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systemshas been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority andthereafter no part of the development shall be occupied unless the drainagehas been installed in complete accordance with the said scheme; and

(b) that the Head of Planning and Infrastructure be authorised to withhold therelease of the approval Notice pending the conclusion, in terms satisfactoryto the City Solicitor, of a binding legal agreement under which the developerwould undertake to make available to a Registered Social Landlord, five ofthe flats erected for use as long-term rental, affordable housing.

2254


At this point the Convener drew the Committee’s attention to the terms of a letterfrom the local member, Councillor Webster, who raised some concerns aboutparking difficulties and traffic congestion generally, especially on days when therewere football matches taking place at Pittodrie Stadium.

The Convener moved, seconded by Councillor Porter:-That the application be approved in accordance with officerrecommendation.

The Vice-Convener moved as an amendment, seconded by Councillor Clark:-That the application be refused on the ground that the proposal, ifimplemented, would increase the number of residential units to be providedby sixteen and, as a result, represented over development on the site to thedetriment of residential amenity and the parking situation locally.

On a division, there voted:- for the motion (3) – the Convener; and CouncillorsPorter and Stephen; for the amendment (10) – the Vice-Convener; andCouncillors Clark, Collie, Cormack, Hunter, Jaffrey, James Lamond, June Lamond,Leslie and May.

The Committee resolved:-that the application be refused in accordance with the terms of the successfulamendment.

WHERE THE RECOMMENDATION IS ONE OF REFUSAL – CENTRAL AREA




2255


The Committee resolved:-(i) 84 Crown Street, Aberdeen (Category “B” Building) – to refuse the

application (A6/2240) seeking listed building consent for change of use atbasement level to form a hot food take-away facility involving a newentrance door and the formation of new steps down from the pavement, onthe grounds:- (1) That the proposal if implemented would be contrary toPolicy 10 of the finalised Local Plan in that the proposed alterations neededto accommodate the new uses would seriously harm the essential characterof the building. (2) That the proposal would be contrary to paragraph 2.21of Historic Scotland's Memorandum in that additions would not be in keepingwith other parts of the building, and that the new external features would notharmonise with their surroundings.

(ii) Cruickshank Botanical Gardens, St Machar Drive, Aberdeen – having heardthe local member, Councillor S Macdonald, to approve the application(A5/2254) for planning permission to erect lighting columns along the lengthof the central footpath, subject to the condition that the applicants shallsubmit for prior approval of the planning authority, a method statement inrespect of the erection of the proposed columns.

(iii) 75 Don Street, Woodside, Aberdeen – to refuse the application (A7/0196)seeking planning permission for a flat-roofed, two-storey rear houseextension, on the following grounds:- (1) That the proposed extension iscontrary to Policy Guideline 3.4.3 of the adopted Local Plan, Policy 1 of theFinalised Aberdeen Local Plan and the City Council's Guidelines for DwellingExtensions in Aberdeen, as it results in an extension of a scale and designwhich is unsympathetic to the original building and would constitute avisually intrusive feature in both the residential and visual amenity in general.(2) That approval of this proposal would establish an undesirable precedentfor similar applications which would be difficult to resist, to the detriment ofresidential amenity and the visual character of the area.

(iv) 20 Beechgrove Avenue, Aberdeen – having heard the DevelopmentManagement Manager to the effect that since the agenda was preparedamended plans had been received which now address all the issues ofconcern previously identified by officers, to approve the application(A6/2253) for planning permission for a rear house extension and theconstruction of two dormer windows also at the rear of the property.

WHERE THE RECOMMENDATION IS ONE OF APPROVAL – NORTH AREA

12. UNIT 3, JESMOND DRIVE, BRIDGE OF DON – EXTENSION OFOPENING HOURS (TAKE-AWAY FACILITY). The Committee had underconsideration a report by the Head of Planning and Infrastructure on the application

2256


(A7/0099) which related to the approval on appeal of an application for change ofuse of a proposed retail unit, Unit 3, Jesmond Drive, Bridge of Don, to use as a hotfood take-away facility. The appeal decision to permit the change of use wassubject to conditions, one of which restricted the hours of opening of the take-awayto those between 8.00am and 7.00pm on each day of the week. The applicationnow before members sought approval to vary the condition dealing with openinghours to permit the facility to operate between the hours of 8.00am and 10.00pm onMondays to Thursdays and also on Sundays, with the hours for Fridays andSaturdays being extended to those between 8.00am and 11.00pm.

The report by the Head of Service outlined the background surrounding thedevelopment of the site and the surrounding area; advised particularly with regardto the appeal decision to permit the proposed retail unit (Unit 3) to be used in partas a hot food take-away despite opposition for such a use by the local CommunityCouncil who were also opposed to any extension of the operating hours; referredto the concerns raised within the five letters of objection received; and identifiedthe relevant planning policy issues arising. The proposal under consideration wasthe subject of evaluation within the report from the point of view of traffic andamenity, as a result of which it was the conclusion of the planning officers that theproposed extension to the opening hours would not cause any unacceptabledetriment to residential amenity nor would it cause any additional road safetyhazards on Jesmond Drive.

The report recommended:that the application be approved, on the following conditions:- (1) Thedevelopment shall be commenced not later than five years beginning with the dateof this planning permission. (2) The shop unit shall not be used as a hot foodtakeaway unless a detailed scheme showing the proposed method of filtering,extracting and dispersing of fumes arising from the premises together withproposals for the regular maintenance of the equipment, have been submitted toand approved in writing by the planning authority and the approved scheme hasbeen implemented in full and is fully operational. (3) The shop unit shall not beused as a hot food takeaway unless a scheme for the storage and collection of litterand refuse arising from the premises has been submitted to and approved in writingby the planning authority, and thereafter implemented in full. The said schemeshall include the provision of litter bins for the use of customers and arrangementsfor the regular monitoring and collection of litter from the premises and within anarea around the premises shall be agreed in writing with the planning authority. (4)The use hereby permitted shall operate only between the hours of 8.00am to10.00pm on Mondays to Thursdays inclusive and Sundays, and from 8.00am to11.00pm on Fridays and Saturdays.

2257


The Convener moved, seconded by Councillor Clark:-That the application be approved in accordance with officerrecommendation.

Councillor Leslie moved as an amendment, seconded by Councillor Jaffrey:-That the application be refused, on the following grounds:- (1) The proposal

if implemented would give rise to instances of noise nuisance at unsociable times(late evening) and increased litter, to the detriment of residential amenity in thearea. (2) The later opening hours, if granted, would result in increased levels ofspeeding traffic in the immediate vicinity to the detriment of residential amenity androad safety.

On a division, there voted:- for the motion (4) – the Convener; and CouncillorsClark, May and Stephen; for the amendment (9) – the Vice-Convener; andCouncillors Collie, Cormack, Hunter, Jaffrey, James Lamond, June Lamond, Leslieand Porter.

The Committee resolved:-that the application be refused in accordance with the terms of the successfulamendment.




The Committee resolved:-(i) Cairnfield Place, Bucksburn - having heard the local member, Councillor K

Stewart, who asked for and received assurances that the development onCairnfield Place as erected was no closer to the houses on CairnfieldCrescent and was also advised that the houses on Cairnfield Crescent wereoutwith the scope of the neighbour notification requirements in respect of the

2258


proposal, to approve the application (A7/0290) for retrospective approval inrespect of changes to the siting and design of the blocks of flats previouslyapproved as planning application A4/0446 (residential development - 43units), on the following conditions:- (1) That the flats hereby approved shallnot be occupied unless there has been submitted to and approved in writingfor the purpose by the planning authority a further detailed scheme oflandscaping for the site, which scheme shall include indications of allexisting trees and landscaped areas on the land, and details of any to beretained, together with measures for their protection in the course ofdevelopment, the proposed areas of tree/shrub planting including details ofnumbers, densities, locations, species, sizes and stage of maturity atplanting and measures to enhance screening with and to minimiseoverlooking of adjacent residential property. (2) That all planting, seedingand turfing comprised in the approved scheme of landscaping shall becarried out in the first planting season following the completion of thedevelopment and any trees or plants which within a period of five years fromthe completion of the development die, are removed or become seriouslydamaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season withothers of a size and species similar to those originally required to be planted,or in accordance with such other scheme as may be submitted to andapproved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority. (3) That theflats hereby approved shall not be occupied unless provision of cyclestorage facilities for residents and visitors has been provided in completeaccordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by theplanning authority. (4) That the flats hereby approved shall not be occupiedunless the proposed footpath links within the site and the works to theexisting pavements on Cairnfield Place, as shown on drawing no.1100 H ofthe approved plans, have been implemented to the satisfaction of theplanning authority. (5) That the development hereby approved shall not beoccupied unless the car parking areas hereby granted planning permissionhave been constructed, drained, laid-out and demarcated in accordance withdrawing No. 1100 H of the plans hereby approved or such other drawing asmay subsequently be submitted and approved in writing by the planningauthority. Such areas shall not thereafter be used for any other purposethan the parking of vehicles ancillary to the development and use herebygranted approval. (6) No part of the development hereby approved shall beoccupied unless the site drainage has been installed in completeaccordance with an approved SUDS scheme for the site. (7) That the flatshereby granted planning permission shall not be occupied unless provisionhas been made within the application site for refuse storage and storage ofrecyclates in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted to andapproved in writing by the planning authority. (8) The flats hereby approvedshall not be occupied unless a contaminated land validation report has been

2259


submitted to and agreed in writing by the planning authority. This reportshall demonstrate that any on-site contamination has been addressed inaccordance with the recommendations of the approved reclamation strategy,that no further remediation measures are required and shall demonstratethat any residual on-site contamination does not pose a significant risk to thehealth of residents or groundwater quality. (9) That, except as the PlanningAuthority may otherwise agree in writing, no construction or demolition workshall take place:- (a) outwith the hours of 7.00am to 7.00pm Mondays toFridays; (b) outwith the hours of 9.00am to 4.00pm Saturdays; or (c) at anytime on Sundays, except for works inaudible outwith the application siteboundary. [For the avoidance of doubt, this would generally allow internalfinishing work, but not the use of machinery].

(ii) Victoria Street, Dyce (former McIntosh of Dyce site) - (one) to approve theapplication (A6/1962) for planning permission to erect eighteen affordablesemi-detached family houses with off-street parking provision (to replacenine detached houses previously approved), on the following conditions:- (1)No development shall take place until full details of soft and waterlandscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by thePlanning Authority, details must comply with Advice Note 3 'Potential BirdHazards from Amenity Landscaping & Building Design'. These details shallinclude:- grassed areas; the species, number and spacing of trees andshrubs. No subsequent alterations to the approved landscaping scheme areto take place unless submitted to and approved in writing by the PlanningAuthority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. (2)Development shall not commence until a Bird Hazard Management Plan hasbeen submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Thesubmitted plan shall include details of:- (one) the netting to be used to coverthe surface water detention basin to ensure that there is no access to birdsand all netting is to comply with health and safety requirements; and (two)confirmation that the netting will be regularly inspected and maintained toensure that there is no access to birds. The Bird Hazard Management Planshall be implemented as approved upon completion of the surface waterdetention basin. No subsequent alterations to the plan are to take placeunless first submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.(3) That no development pursuant to this planning permission shallcommence unless a detailed site specific construction method statement forthe site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planningauthority. The method statement must address the temporary measuresproposed to deal with surface water run-off during construction and prior tothe operation of the final SUDS. Such statement shall be implemented in fullfor the duration of works on the site. (4) That, except as the PlanningAuthority may otherwise agree in writing, no construction or demolition workshall take place: (a) outwith the hours of 7.00am to 7.00pm Mondays to

2260


Fridays; (b) outwith the hours of 9.00am to 4.00pm Saturdays; or (c) at anytime on Sundays, except for works inaudible outwith the application siteboundary. [For the avoidance of doubt, this would generally allow internalfinishing work, but not the use of machinery]. (5) That all planting, seedingand turfing comprised in the approved scheme of landscaping shall becarried out in the first planting season following the completion of thedevelopment and any trees or plants which within a period of five years fromthe completion of the development die, are removed or become seriouslydamaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season withothers of a size and species similar to those originally required to be planted,or in accordance with such other scheme as may be submitted to andapproved in writing for the purpose by the planning authority. (6) That nopart of the development hereby approved shall commence unless there hasbeen submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority, ascheme detailing: (i) the facilities for bin storage, (ii) the uplift of refuse fromthe approved bin stores and provision for kerbside collection, (iii) full andspecific details of all external lighting as proposed as part of thedevelopment and the locations thereof and (iv) full and specific details offacilities for lockable cycle storage. (7) That no development pursuant tothis planning permission shall take place nor shall any building be occupiedunless there has been submitted to and approved in writing for the purposeby the Planning Authority, an assessment of the noise levels likely within thebuildings. The assessment shall be prepared by a suitably qualifiedindependent noise consultant and shall recommend any measuresnecessary to ensure a satisfactory noise attenuation for the buildings. Theproperties shall not be occupied unless the said measures have beenimplemented in full. (8) That no development pursuant to this planningpermission shall take place, nor shall any part of the development herebyapproved be occupied, unless there has been submitted to and approved inwriting by the Planning Authority, a detailed scheme of site and plotboundary enclosures for the entire development hereby granted planningpermission. None of the buildings hereby granted planning permission shallbe occupied unless the said scheme has been implemented in its entirety.(9) (a) Prior to commencement of any site works, a comprehensivecontaminated land investigation shall be carried out. The investigation shallbe completed in accordance with British Standards Institution 'TheInvestigation of potentially contaminated sites - Code of Practice' (BS10175:2001). The report must include a site-specific risk assessment of allrelevant pollutant linkages. (b) If the risk assessment identifies anyunacceptable risk or risks as defined under Part 11A of the EnvironmentalProtection Act, a detailed remediation strategy shall be submitted to thePlanning Authority for approval. No works, other than investigative works,shall be carried out on the site prior to receipt of written approval of the

2261


remediation strategy by the Planning Authority. (c) Remediation of the siteshall be carried out in accordance with the approved remediation plan. Novariations to the plan or remediation works shall be implemented except asapproved in writing by the Planning Authority. (d) When the developerconsiders the remediation works to be complete, he shall submit a report tothe Planning Authority to confirm that the works have been carried out inaccordance with the remediation plan, and the Planning Authority shallconfirm in writing whether or not - on the basis of the information submitted -such works may indeed be regarded as complete. (e) The presence of anypreviously unsuspected contamination which becomes evident during thedevelopment of the site shall be brought to the attention of the PlanningAuthority within one week or, if possible, earlier. In this event the developersshall carry out: (i) a more detailed site investigation to determine the extentand nature of the contaminant(s), followed by (ii) a site-specific riskassessment of any associated hazards together with (iii) such furtherremediation as the risk assessment shows to be necessary. All in terms tobe agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. (10) That no developmenthereby approved shall take place prior to the planning authority beingsatisfied that the land to the north of the site is under the full control of theapplicant; and (two) to authorise the Head of Planning and Infrastructure towithhold the release of the approval Notice pending the conclusion, in termssatisfactory to the City Solicitor, of a binding legal agreement under whichthe developer will undertake that the properties to be erected in pursuanceof this planning permission will all be made available for use as affordablefamily homes.

WHERE THE RECOMMENDATION IS ONE OF REFUSAL - NORTH AREA


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


2262


The Committee resolved:-(i) 134 Victoria Street, Dyce – notwithstanding the unsupported motion by

Councillor Clark that the application be approved, to refuse the application(A6/2039) seeking planning permission to erect a new dwellinghouse withinthe rear garden area (feu split), involving off-street parking provision and anew vehicle access from Victoria Street, on the following grounds:- (1) Thatthe proposal is contrary to Policy R1 - Residential Areas of the AdoptedAberdeen City District-Wide Local Plan (1991) and the Splitting ofResidential Feus Guidelines (1990) by way of being detrimental toresidential amenity and the character of the area. (2) That the proposal setsan undesirable precedent for similar applications that would further erode theresidential character and amenity of the area.

(ii) Britannia Hotel, Malcolm Road, Bucksburn - (one) having heard the localmember, Councillor K Stewart, to refuse the application (A7/0094) seekingretrospective planning permission to install a razorwire barrier to the parapetwall of an outbuilding, on the following grounds:- (1) That the razorwire isdetrimental to the visual and residential amenity of the area by reason of itsunsightly appearance, such that the proposal is considered to conflict withR1 policy within the adopted Local Plan. The proposal is considered toconflict with paragraph 10.2.21 of the adopted plan as use of razorwire isconsidered to be incompatible with ensuring high visual standards and isvisible from Inverurie Road, which is a main approach to the city. Noevidence of an overriding security need for the use of razorwire has beenprovided and it has not been demonstrated that alternative securitymeasures would be inadequate. (2) That approval of this application wouldestablish an undesirable precedent for similar proposals throughout the city,to the detriment of visual and residential amenity; and (two) to authorise theHead of Planning and Infrastructure, should it prove to be necessary, toinstigate appropriate enforcement action to secure the removal of theunauthorised razorwire as soon as practically possible.

PLANNING (VISITING) SUB-COMMITTEE

15. APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS. The Committee had under considerationthe matter of the appointment of members to the Planning (Visiting) Sub-Committeefor the purpose of undertaking visits to the sites identified during consideration ofthe applications before it.

2263


The Committee resolved:-that the Vice-Convener and Councillors Clark, Collie, James Lamond, May, Porterand Stephen be appointed to membership of the Planning (Visiting) Sub-Committeefor the meeting to be held on 22nd March, 2007.

PLANNING COMMITTEE

16. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS. The Committee had underconsideration the Minutes of its Meetings held on 14th December, 2006 and 18th

January, 2007, for approval as a correct record.

The Committee resolved:-that the Minutes be approved.

REPORTS BY HEADS OF SERVICE

17. PAVEMENT CAFES ON THE PUBLIC FOOTPATH. Reference was madeto Article 3 of the Minute of Meeting of the Environment and InfrastructureCommittee on 6th September, 2005, at which time there was under considerationthe Notice of Motion in the name of Councillor Clark requesting the Committee toinstruct relevant officers to report on how best to deal with the increasing number ofrequests being received for pavement cafes and it was resolved to establish aWorking Group to revise the Pavement Cafes Design Guide which sets outappropriate criteria for consideration in response to requests for chairs and tablesto be placed on a public thoroughfare outside certain types of premises.

The Committee had before it, for information, a report by the Head of Service,Shelter and Environment for the Neighbourhood South Area of the City, which hadannexed the revised Design Guide for Pavement Cafes on the Public Footway.

The Committee resolved:-that the content of the Guide be noted.

18. UNION STREET FRONTAGES - POLICY GUIDANCE REVIEW. TheCommittee had under consideration a report by the Head of Planning andInfrastructure which related to the policy guidance in place in respect of UnionStreet Frontages which as the principal street at the heart of an outstanding

2264


Conservation Area was considered to play a prominent and wide ranging role in thelife of the city, not least a major role as the retail centre. The report drew theCommittee's attention to certain concerns regarding the operation of the guidance,identified two possible options for addressing the situation and sought approval forconsultation in respect of these options with a view to a revision of the Policy.

The report before members reiterated the aim of the Frontages Policy to protect theretail function of Union Street by controlling the level of non-retail units along itslength; referred to the mechanism employed of setting minimum percentagefigures for retail frontage for each of the individual sectors into which the street wasdivided; identified the criteria against which applications for change of use areconsidered with a view to maintaining lively and interesting street level frontagesalong Union Street; and confirmed that the policy guidance had been the subject ofregular reviews since its adoption in 1977, ie. in 1981, 1992 and 2000. In outliningthe national policy background to city centre retailing, the Head of Servicerecognised within her report (one) that the retail sector had become increasinglycomplex and diverse and that leisure, entertainment, recreation and other uses cancontribute towards the vitality and viability of town centres; (two) that it was theview of some applicants that the imposition of minimum percentages in respect ofretail frontages towards the west-end of Union Street may no longer be assisting inthe aim of supporting vitality and viability in the city centre as there was lessdemand for traditional retail uses there, resulting in a high number of vacantproperties; and (three) that the Council's record in successfully defendingdecisions to refuse applications for change of use, at appeals, was indicative of thefact that a strict minimum percentage approach was possibly not sufficiently flexibleto take account of the fact that town centre vitality and viability was dependent onuses other than shopping. The report went on to comment with regard to proposalsfor pedestrianising Union Street between Bridge Street and Market Street, thecommencement of the major retail development at Guild Street and also individualprojects which together made up the Urban Realm Strategy, the aim of which wasto enhance the environmental and economic aspects of the city centre byrevitalising the central core and to suggest that all of these examples seem toemphasise a shift in focus of prime retail in the city centre from the historiceast/west axis to a north/south one.

As further evidence to support the view that the Frontages Policy in its present formand as regards certain parts of Union Street, may no longer be assisting vitality andviability, the report made reference to the key findings of the Aberdeen andAberdeenshire Retail Study 2004 (AARS), in particular the finding that theconfiguration and limited size of older units located in the western part of UnionStreet had resulted in reduced demand by retail occupiers in locations more remotefrom the prime pitch of the city centre. The report also emphasised, however, theAARS assessment that the situation can be regarded as an opportunity to refocus

2265


the range of uses and quality of ancillary provision to the benefit of the wider citycentre by encouraging an appropriate mix of uses in the peripheral areas andthereby improving levels of activity and quality of streetscape. The role of the LocalPlan process in improving the overall environment of the city centre was alsohighlighted within the report which referred to the original and amended title andwording for policy 48 in the Finalised Aberdeen Local Plan "Green Spaces NewPlaces", which now sought to take account of the extent to which daytime vitalitywould be maintained and enhanced by allowing a mix of active ground floor uses,such as financial and professional services (Class 2), cafes and restaurants andhotels at the west end of Union Street. The nature of the objections to theproposed change and the Council's response to those objections were also detailedin the report.

The Head of Service in her report, although stating categorically that the UnionStreet Frontages Policy Guidelines had provided an effective tool in preventingretail units being used for other non-retail activities, thereby maintaining the vitalityof the whole of Union Street by providing active street frontages, and refuting anysuggestions that a relaxation of the guidance would automatically mean that all theshop units that are currently vacant will become occupied, citing in support of thatview the other factors such as rent levels, structural problems and the configurationand limited size of older units located in the west end of the city centre, didacknowledge that a relaxation of the minimum retail percentages for that area mayhelp to maintain and increase the vitality and viability of the overall city centre. Thereport thereupon proceeded with an analysis of the Union Street Frontages PolicyGuidelines on a sector by sector basis and by comparing the actual occupancyfigures with the minimum percentage figures, for the period 1994 to 2007. Theconclusions drawn from the analysis were that whereas most of the sectors alongUnion Street sit on or above their minimum retail percentage with little or nopressure from developers looking for changes of use, the two main exceptions tothat were sectors D (Union Row to Alford Place) and sector E (Justice Mill Lane toBon Accord Street) where the low percentage was considered to reflect theirunique multifunctional role and identity as compared to the prime retail locations atthe eastern end of Union Street. The two sectors referred to were also identified ashaving the highest total of vacant units of any sector within the Frontages PolicyArea.

By way of addressing the issues identified from the analysis and the Aberdeen andAberdeenshire Retail Study, the Head of Service in her report proposed that thefollowing options for the Union Street Frontages Policy Guidelines be put out forpublic consultation, viz:- (one) the minimum percentages for sectors D and E bereduced from 40% to 30% and that planning applications for proposed changes ofuse from Class 1 (retail) to non-retail be considered acceptable where (a) the actualretail percentage remains above the minimum retail percentage, (b) the change

2266


makes a positive contribution to the overall vitality and viability of the city centreand either (c) the sector retains an acceptable level of continuity of live frontage or(d) the change brings into use a vacant unit (consideration being given to the lengthof time a unit has been vacant and the number of vacant non-retail units); and(two) Sectors D and E have their existing minimum retail percentages removedaltogether and that proposals for change of use from Class 1 (retail) to non-retailuse are required (a) to make a positive contribution to the overall vitality andviability of the city centre and (b) to either satisfy a requirement that the sectorretains an acceptable level of continuity of live frontage or the change brings intouse a vacant unit, (consideration being given to the length of time a unit has beenvacant and the number of vacant non-retail units).

As regards the criteria outlined within the two options, the report also identified as amaterial consideration in respect of any proposed change of use, the possibleimpact of the non-retail use on amenity. The need to apply the criteria morerigorously in respect of prominent and prestigious units, such as corner units, wasalso referred to in acknowledgement of the importance of such sites along thelength of Union Street.

The report recommended:-(a) that the Committee approve the report as the basis for a review of the Union

Street Frontages Policy Guidelines; and(b) that the two options identified as the basis for a possible revision of the

Guidelines be put out for consultation with key stakeholders and members ofthe public with the outcome of the consultation exercise being the subject ofa report back to Committee in due course with a view to producing revisedPolicy Guidelines as supplementary planning guidance to the Local Plan.

The Vice-Convener was heard at this point when he expressed support for a reviewbut concern that no attempt was being made to classify what types of non-retailuses might be suitable for Union Street before going out to consultation. In supportof this concern, he made reference to the problems that arise from what hebelieves to be an over-provision of licensed premises at the west end of UnionStreet.

In response to the matters raised by the Vice-Convener, the Head of Planning andInfrastructure made reference to the proposals included within the finalisedreplacement Local Plan - Green Spaces New Places - in an attempt to address theconcerns about vacant units in the west end part of Union Street, which had,following the receipt of objections, been the subject of changes to reflect the needto consider the extent to which daytime vitality can be maintained and enhanced byallowing a mix of active ground floor uses. In support of the reportrecommendation, the Head of Service made reference to the conclusions arrived at

2267


as part of the Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire Retail Study to the effect that arelaxation of the Frontages Policy Guidance could assist in encouraging greaterdiversity of use in the city centre as a whole and emphasised the benefits offeedback from the consultation exercise in coming to a decision on the extent andnature of any relaxation. In this latter regard the inclusion of a specific question aspart of the consultation exercise was mooted.

The Committee resolved:-(i) that the Union Street Frontages Policy Guidelines be revised and that the

report by the Head of Planning and Infrastructure form the basis of thatreview; and

(ii) that the consultation exercise to be undertaken with key stakeholders andmembers of the public, in addition to the two options identified within thereport also include a specific question on what types of non-retail use wereconsidered acceptable/unacceptable on Union Street.

19. NORTH COVE AREA – DRAFT PLANNING BRIEF. Reference was madeto Article 25 of the Minute of Meeting of the Planning Committee on 1st September,2005, at which time there was under consideration and noted by the members, areport by the then Head of Physical Development, City Development Servicesregarding the reasons for the delay in the preparation of an up-dated Planning Brieffor the North Cove Area of the City. The Committee now had before it a furtherreport on the matter with a view to securing progress on the preparation of a Brieffor the area.

The report by the Head of Planning and Infrastructure made reference to theallocation within the 1991 City District-wide Local Plan of a large site for housing atCove, despite which a part of the original area to the north has remainedundeveloped; explained again the reason for that situation which had at its rootsthe location within part of the area involved of a former landfill site which appearedto be producing gas; acknowledged that since the potential for gas generationcould last for some decades, any development of land situated within 250 metres ofthe infilled waste, which involved invasive excavation, disturbance, etc, had to bediscouraged; and confirmed that until such time as appropriate tests areconcluded, the problem was likely to have an adverse impact on up to 50% of thearea covered by the intended Brief. In making reference to the requirement on thepart of the Council to meet the housing targets set out within the Aberdeen andAberdeenshire Structure Plan 2001 (North East Scotland Together), the Head ofService in her report indicated that some development of the area, identified withinthe finalised Aberdeen Local Plan as Opportunity Area 9 (OP9) be promoted now;and set out the basis for a three phase development of the site, with the first phase

2268


located furthest from the contaminated area and the second phase locatedimmediately to the south of phase 1 and extending to the nearest existing fieldboundaries located outwith the 250 metre exclusion zone extending north from thelandfill site. The proposed phasing was illustrated within three sketches annexed tothe report.

The report went on to explain that whereas the first phase of development would beserved by a new access road from Langdykes Road, the second phase would bedependent upon prior completion of a new road junction with Wellington Road inaddition to an extension of the new internal access road from the phase 1development area. It was further explained that because the proposed newWellington Road junction would also incorporate a new spine road that wouldconnect with the existing residential road network at Charleston Road, passing veryclose to or within part of the landfill area, the road infrastructure would have to bedesigned to include remediation measures agreed with the Council’s ContaminatedLand Unit and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA). The thirdphase of development would include all of the remaining land within the OP9 areaand it was emphasised that during the design and development of the first twophases, investigative work to confirm the extent of contamination affecting thephase 3 land and to identify any feasible remediation should be carried out inconsultation with SEPA and the Council’s Contaminated Land Unit. The need for alegal agreement and, possibly, a financial bond covering the cost of projects toensure that the road infrastructure, contamination investigation and remediationand also the structural landscaping serving the whole of the area of the Brief, willbe designed and completed at the appropriate stages of development, were alsohighlighted.

The report recommended:-That members agree that in order to ensure progress on the Local Plan’s housingallocation for North Cove, a draft Planning Brief be prepared promotingdevelopment in three phases and that this Brief be presented to the Committee forapproval as the basis for public consultation on the matter.

The Committee resolved:-that the recommendation contained within the report be adopted and appropriateofficers authorised accordingly.

20. PLANNING GAIN SUPPLEMENT – CONSULTATION. The Committee hadunder consideration a report by the Head of Planning and Infrastructure whichadvised of the release in December 2006, of a series of consultations on behalf ofthe Department for Communities and Local Government, HM Revenue and

2269


Customs and the Valuation Office Agency, on proposals for the introduction of aPlanning Gain Supplement. The report sought retrospective approval from theCommittee for the joint response submitted by officers on behalf of both AberdeenCity and Aberdeenshire Councils.

The report reminded members of the initial consultation by HM Treasury in 2005,on a proposal to introduce a new tax to be known as the Planning GainSupplement, the aim of which would be:- (one) to finance additional investment inlocal and strategic infrastructure to support housing growth while preservingincentives to develop, (two) to help local communities to share better the benefits ofgrowth and manage its impact, (three) to provide a fairer, more efficient and moretransparent means of capturing a modest portion of land value uplift and (four) tocreate a flexible value capture system that responds to market conditions and doesnot inappropriately distort decisions between different types of development; andconfirmed that the views expressed at that time by both Council’s highlightedconcerns regarding the implementation of such a tax and the uncertainty regardingits potential implications. The Head of Service now advised that in December2006, three follow-up consultation documents were issued relating to the valuationof the tax, paying the tax and changing the developer contribution system (inEngland) to accommodate the new measure.

As regards the joint response prepared and submitted prior to the closing date of28th February, 2007, the report indicated that it was not of a detailed nature as theprincipal proposals which relate to changes to developer contributions, only coverEngland; that it raised three main issues, being (i) the incentive to artificially phasedevelopment so as to stage payment of the tax, (ii) the need to ensure thatinfrastructure is delivered to remove development constraints, and (iii) the need toensure that the tax does not have differential impacts on different types ofdevelopment and in different parts of the country; that it was anticipated that if thetax was introduced (2009 at the earliest), a consultation by the Scottish Executivewould be required to address the implications for Scotland; and thatimplementation of the tax could impact on the work of the joint Planning Gain Teamrecently put in place with Aberdeenshire Council as well as create a need toestablish a mechanism for recycling tax revenues to relieve developmentconstraints. The full text of the joint response was annexed to the report whichfurther emphasised the provisional nature of the points raised pending Committeeconsideration.

The report recommended:-that the Committee agree that the provisional joint response to the consultationdocuments be approved as the formal response of Aberdeen City Council.

2270


The Committee resolved:-to approve the terms of the response made on the Council’s behalf.

21. PLANNING DIGEST. The Committee had under consideration the latestPlanning Digest prepared by the Head of Planning and Infrastructure whichcontained information on the outcome of various planning appeals determinedrecently, any implications arising therefore and also any other matters regarded asbeing of interest to the Planning Committee.

The Digest intimated (one) that the application (A5/1753) for planning permission torelocate the Cockers Roses Nursery and Garden Centre from one part of LangStracht to a site further out towards Kingswells on land currently designated asGreen Belt, had been refused consent by Scottish Ministers who had called theapplication in for determination and who ultimately considered the proposal to becontrary to existing Local Plan policy 9.3.1 and premature in advance of the releaseof the report on the recently held Local Plan Public Inquiry which considered amongother things the modifications to the finalised Local Plan which could result in theapplication site being designated as an opportunity site for development for GardenCentre purposes; (two) that the appeal against refusal of the application (A6/0256)for change of use of part of the intended retail unit (Unit 3) at the newNeighbourhood Centre on Jesmond Drive, Bridge of Don, in order to house a hotfood take-away facility, had been upheld with the Reporter in this case concurringwith the view expressed by an earlier Appeal Reporter that a hot food take-awaycan provide a valuable service and contribute to overall vitality and viability, thatthere would be no adverse impact on road safety and that, subject to a limit beingplace on operating hours, amenity issues could be satisfactorily addressed byconditions; (three) that the claim made by the applicants in the appeal referred toat (two) hereof, that they be awarded the expenses of their appeal on the ground ofthe Council’s unreasonable refusal of the proposal, had been dismissed; (four) thatthe appeal against refusal of the application (A6/0277) for change of use of theretail unit at 306 Clifton Road, to use as a hot food take-away had been dismissed,with the Reporter agreeing with the Council that the proposal would give rise toparking problems, congestion and concerns for road safety and also thatsurrounding residential amenity would be adversely affected; (five) that the appealagainst refusal of the application (A6/0827) for planning permission to erect a 12.5metre high telecommunication mast on Pistruan Place (to the rear of 239 GreatWestern Road) had been dismissed on the basis that the mast would have adetrimental impact upon visual and residential amenity and would detract from theappearance and character of the Conservation Area; (six) that the appeal againstrefusal of the application (A6/0898) for retrospective approval to erect a smokingshelter within the car park at the Holburn Bar, 225 Holburn Street, had been

2271


dismissed as the location of the shelter was considered to have a detrimentalimpact upon nearby residential amenity; and (seven) that the appeal againstrefusal of the application (A4/2314) for listed building consent in respect of aproposal to extend the car parking area at the rear of 91-95 Crown Street (Category“B” listed) had been dismissed on the basis that the removal of the out-building andthe reduction in the height of the wall would not serve to preserve the character ofthe listed building nor the appearance of the Conservation Area.

The Committee resolved:-That the terms of the Digest be noted.

COMMITTEE BUSINESS

22. STATEMENT. The Committee had under consideration a Statement ofCommittee Business prepared by the Head of Democratic Services which advisedof the progress of each item.

The Head of Planning and Infrastructure advised with regard to (one) the reportrequested on the Council’s existing feu split policy (item 2), which it was anticipatedwould be available soon; (two) the proposal for a Study Tour of the City (item 3),which it was agreed would not now happen within the life of the currentadministration and should be removed from the Statement; (three) the North CovePlanning Brief situation (item 4), progress on which had been reported to membersthat day; (four) the E-Planning initiative (item 5), which had suffered a temporarysetback with the failure of the Project Manager elect to take up the post; and (five)the Triple Kirks situation (item 8), which had resolved itself with the removal fromthe outdoor seating area of all unauthorised structures.

The Committee resolved:-(i) that the terms of the Statement be noted and updated as appropriate; and(ii) that the entries in respect of the Study Tour of the City (item 3), the North

cove Area Draft Planning Brief (item 4) and the Triple Kirks Site (item 8) beremoved.

SCOTT CASSIE, Convener

2272


(Article 2) – APPENDIX A

Planning (Visiting) Sub-Committee22nd February, 2007

ABERDEEN, 22nd February, 2007. - Minute of Meeting of the PLANNING(VISITING) SUB-COMMITTEE. Present:- Councillor Cassie, Convener;and Councillors Collie, Hunter, Jaffrey, Leslie and Porter.

VISITS

1. 1 TRINITY QUAY, ABERDEEN – CHANGE OF USE TO RESIDENTIAL.With reference to Article 5(ii) of the Minute of Meeting of the Planning Committeeon 15th February, 2007, the Sub-Committee had under consideration (a) theapplication (A6/1798) for planning permission for change of use to residential of theformer warehouse and ancillary office premises located on the ground and firstfloors of the subjects at 1 Trinity Quay, Aberdeen, a four and one-half storeybuilding the upper floors of which were currently in residential use; and (b) thereport on the application which the Head of Planning and Infrastructure hadsubmitted to Committee, recommending conditional approval.

The Sub-Committee visited the site where the Planning Case Officer described theproposal with reference to the application drawings and the existing building;indicated that since the meeting of the Planning Committee on 15th February, 2007,amendments to the proposed development had been intimated such that thenumber of flats to be formed was now nineteen (an addition of one), cycle parkingprovision was to be included and railings were now proposed for the ground floorwindows on the Shiprow elevation by way of a screening and security measure;highlighted the alterations to be made to the exterior of the building in order toaccommodate the nine flats proposed for the ground floor; and referred also to theoverall layout of the development, in particular, the communal lobbies to beprovided on each of the two floors involved. In dealing with the representationsreceived, the Planning Officer advised that the concerns expressed that one of theretail outlets at ground level on Trinity Quay (Q Stores) would be forced to relocateas a result, had been clarified in favour of retention; and advised also that theconcerns relating to noise, both from traffic generally and from the adjacentMoorings public house where live bands perform regularly, would be the subject ofcomment by the Council’s Environmental Health Officer. The planning policyposition was also addressed with particular reference to the fact that the buildingwas Category “B” listed and had been partly vacant for a number of years; theneed for the change of use to be justified in order to displace the presumption ofretaining commercial uses within the Central Business District of the City; and alsowith reference to the existing residential use on the upper floors of the building.The conclusion arrived at by the Planning Officer was that provided the noise issuecould be satisfactorily addressed, the proposal was to be welcomed as helping tosecure the future of a listed building.

2273



The Sub-Committee at this point heard the Council’s Environmental Health Officerwho confirmed that because of its location significant noise nuisance from trafficand live music was an issue as far as the proposed development was concernedbut that, having studied the noise assessment submitted in support of theapplication, he was satisfied that the attenuation measures identified would allowan acceptable level of amenity within the building to be attained. The Council’sRoads Engineer who was also in attendance, made reference to the absence ofany physical possibility that off-street parking could be provided as part of thedevelopment and requested that should the Committee be of a mind to support theapplication, a condition requiring the developer to provide bus passes to theoccupants of the flats be considered. The Roads Officer was also of the view thatthe central location of the site and its proximity to the multi-storey car park onnearby Virginia Street, would assist in addressing the parking issue.

The Sub-Committee resolved:-That the application be approved, on the following conditions:- (1) That thedevelopment shall not be brought into use unless the measures recommended inthe reports on traffic and music noise by Charlie Fleming dated 20th January and23rd January 2007 respectively, have been fully implemented and are operational.(2) That the replacement windows at ground floor level shall be timber sash andcase in accordance with the detail shown on drawing 103 Rev A, or as otherwiseagreed with the planning authority. (3) That no development shall take placeunless a scheme detailing all external finishing materials, including the submissionof samples of the infill panels in window and door openings at ground floor level ofthe development hereby approved, has been submitted to and approved in writingby the planning authority and thereafter the development shall be carried out inaccordance with the details so agreed. (4) That the development shall not bebrought into use unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing by theplanning authority details, including the location, of refuse storage and disposalbins. (5) That the development shall not be brought into use unless there has beensubmitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority, a detailed schemeof ventilation to the flats. (6) That, except as the planning authority may otherwiseagree in writing, no construction or demolition work shall take place:- (1) outwiththe hours of 7.00am to 7.00pm Mondays to Fridays; (b) outwith the hours of9.00am to 4.00pm on Saturdays; or (c) at any time on Sundays, except for worksinaudible outwith the application site boundary. [For the avoidance of doubt, thiswould generally allow internal finishing work, but not the use of machinery]. (7)That the development hereby approved shall not be occupied unless the cyclestorage areas hereby granted planning permission have been constructed andmade available for use in accordance with drawing No. 101 E of the plans herebyapproved or such other drawing as may subsequently be submitted and approvedin writing by the planning authority. Such areas shall not thereafter be used for anyother purpose other than the storage of cycles ancillary to the development and use

2274



hereby granted approval. (8) That from the date of occupation of the units herebyapproved, the developer shall provide two bus passes per flat for a period of fouryears in accordance with the Finalised Aberdeen Local Plan SupplementaryGuidance on Transport.

2. 1 TRINITY QUAY, ABERDEEN (CATEGORY “B” BUILDING) –ALTERATIONS AND CHANGE OF USE TO RESIDENTIAL. With reference toArticle 5(iii) of the Minute of Meeting of the Planning Committee on 15th February,2007, the Sub-Committee had under consideration (a) the application (A6/1842) forlisted building consent in respect of alterations to the Category “B” listed building at 1Trinity Quay, Aberdeen, to form nineteen flats at ground and first floor level; and (b)the report on the application which the Head of Planning and Infrastructure hadprepared containing a recommendation that the Committee express a willingness toapprove the proposal subject to conditions.

The Sub-Committee visited the site where the Planning Case Officer explained thatwhereas all the original sash and case windows at first floor level would be retained,new sash and case windows would be installed at ground floor level in place of theexisting openings and shop front windows and also that access to the new flats wouldbe by way of the existing arched entrance on Trinity Quay. As regards the policyposition, the Officer highlighted a duty to encourage active use and conservation ofthe City’s built heritage, for the windows and doors to conform with adopted policy andfor development in general to improve or preserve the appearance and character of aconservation area. The Officer concluded his report by reiterating the view that theproposal would secure the re-use of a currently under used listed building, would helpensure the future of the property and should be supported.

The report recommended:-

(a) that the Committee indicate a willingness to approve the application subject tothe two conditions narrated within the report; and

(b) that it be remitted to the Head of Planning and Infrastructure to forward theapplication and the detail of the Committee decision thereon to HistoricScotland for their consideration of the matter in terms of the listed buildingregulations.

The Sub-Committee resolved:-that the recommendations contained within the report be adopted- SCOTT CASSIE, Convener

aberdeen city planning committee · millburn street – a7/0157) and item 5.5 (4 millburn street...

Documents