Planning Committee (including Former Development Management And Development Quality) - 13/08/2012

At a MEETING of the DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE held at Dundee on 13th August, 2012.

Present:-

BAILIES

COUNCILLORS

Councillor David BOWES, Convener, in the Chair.

The minute of meeting of this Committee of 18th June, 2012 was held as read.

Unless marked thus * all items stand delegated.

I DECLARATION OF INTEREST

Councillor Asif declared a financial interest in Articles III and IV by virtue of being a trader in the Broughty Ferry area, and took no part in their determination.

II PLANNING APPLICATIONS

(a) 12-00253-FULL - LAND TO SOUTH OF PEDDIE STREET - PROPOSED NEW BUILD LOCAL AREA HOUSING OFFICE WITHIN GROUNDS OF EXISTING DWELLING - FOR ONE PROPERTIES UK

The Committee acceded to a request which had been received for a deputation to address the Committee in support of the application.

After the deputation had stated their case and answered questions from members of the Committee, it was thanked for its attendance and withdrew.

Thereafter, having considered objections received, the Committee refused the application on the grounds that:-

(i) the application is contrary to Policy 1 (Vibrant and Sustainable Communities) of the Dundee Local Plan Review by virtue of the proposed design and layout which would be likely to result in an unacceptable degree of overlooking, loss of sunlight/daylight, a detrimental effect upon the outlook enjoyed by the existing dwelling and by virtue of the isolated position in which the development is proposed. There are no material considerations to justify a decision contrary to this;

(ii) the application is contrary to Policy 1 (Vibrant and Sustainable Communities) of the Dundee Local Plan Review 2005 as the proposal would lead to an increase in demand for on-street parking in the vicinity of the site where there is existing congestion. This would be to the detriment of the existing residential occupiers and be detrimental to the road safety of the area. There are no material considerations to justify a decision contrary to this; and

(iii) the application fails to comply with Policy 15 (Development in Garden Ground) of the Dundee Local Plan Review in relation to criteria (a) Design, (c) Amount of buildings/hard standings on site and criteria (e) No new building in front of the main elevation. These breaches would be to the detriment of the existing dwelling and surrounding area. There are no material considerations to justify a decision contrary to this.

(b) 12-00338-FULL - FOOTWAY OPPOSITE 28 PANMURE STREET, BROUGHTY FERRY - ERECTION OF TELECOM MAST AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT - FOR VODAFONE LTD

It was reported that a request had been received for a deputation to address the Committee relative to objections to the above application.

After considering objections received, the Committee refused the application on the grounds that:-

(i) by virtue of scale and design the proposed 17.5m high telecommunications mast shall have an adverse impact on the visual amenity of the area surrounding the application site and the outlook of residential properties on Panmure Street and the surrounding Reres Hill and Broughty Ferry Conservation Areas. The proposals are therefore contrary to the requirements of Policy 1 (Vibrant and Sustainable Communities) of the Dundee Local Plan Review 2005. There are no material considerations that would justify laying aside the provisions of the Development Plan to grant planning permission;

(ii) the proposed development is contrary to Policy 1 of Dundee City Council's adopted Non-Statutory Planning Policies in Relation to Telecommunications Masts and Other Apparatus as the applicant has failed to provide sufficient justification for the proposed development in terms of location and design. There are no material considerations that would justify approval of planning permission;

(iii) the proposed development is contrary to Policy 2 - "Residential Areas" of the Council's adopted Non-Statutory Planning Policies in Relation to Telecommunications and Other Apparatus as there is a general presumption against the siting of free standing masts in residential areas unless the mast is sensitively designed and sufficient justification is provided. The proposals do not demonstrate that the proposed mast has been sensitively designed or located to minimise the impact on the surrounding residential environment; and

(iv) the proposed development is contrary to Policy 15 "Mast Sharing and Design Issues" of the Council's adopted Non-Statutory Planning Policies in relation to Telecommunications Masts and Other Apparatus as the scale and design of the shared mast is considered to be out of character with the surrounding area and would adversely impact on the level of environmental quality afforded to neighbouring residential properties.

In the circumstances, the Committee declined to hear the deputation.

(c) 12-00213-FULL - 4 CITY SQUARE, DUNDEE - INSTALLATION OF NEW DOOR AND SCREENS AND FABRIC AWNINGS - FOR HENRY'S COFFEE HOUSE LTD

The Committee approved the application.

(d) 12-00267-FULL - FOOTWAY TO THE WEST OF 97 CLEPINGTON ROAD, DUNDEE - INSTALLATION OF TELECOM MAST AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT - FOR TELEFONICA UK LTD

The Committee refused the application on the grounds that:-

(i) the application is contrary to Policy 1 (Vibrant and Sustainable Communities) of the Dundee Local Plan Review 2005 due to the unacceptable environmental impact on the area by reason of the siting of the structure. There are no material considerations that would justify a departure to the provisions of the development plan in this instance;

(ii) the proposed development is contrary to Policy 1 of Dundee City Council's adopted Non-Statutory Planning Policies in Relation to Telecommunications Masts and Other Apparatus as the applicant has failed to provide sufficient justification for the proposed development and has failed to investigate all alternative options in order to minimise the impact of the proposals;

(iii) the proposed development is contrary to Policy 2 - "Residential Areas" of Dundee City Council's adopted Non-Statutory Planning Policies in Relation to Telecommunications Masts and Other Apparatus as there is a general presumption against the siting of free standing masts in residential areas and the proposal is not considered to be an exception to that policy as it is not sensitively located; and

(iv) the proposed development is contrary to Policy 15 - "Mast Sharing and Design Issues" of Dundee City Council's adopted Non-Statutory Planning Policies in Relation to Telecommunications Masts and Other Apparatus as the location of the shared mast is considered to be insensitively located in such close proximity to the housing site to the north and east.

(e) 12-00321-FULL - LAND ADJACENT TO DOUGLAS TERRACE, BROUGHTY FERRY - REFURBISHMENT OF A MULTISPAN STRUCTURE WHICH CARRIES A PUBLIC FOOTPATH; REMOVAL OF EXISTING PARAPET, INSTALLATION OF A NEW POST AND RAIL BARRIER INFILLING UNDER THE STRUCTURE AND SURFACING IN ASPHALT - FOR DUNDEE CITY COUNCIL

The Committee approved the application.

III SAINSBURYS SUPERMARKETS LTD, 1 TOM JOHNSTON ROAD, DUNDEE - APPLICATION TO MODIFY S75 OBLIGATION TO REDUCE TO 70% THE NET SALES FLOOR AREA FOR FOOD AND OTHER CONVENIENCE GOODS

The Committee acceded to a request for a deputation to address the Committee in support of the above application (Ref: 1200296 MDPO). After the deputation had stated its case and answered questions from members of the Committee, it was thanked for its attendance and withdrew.

Thereafter, there was submitted Report No 305-2012 by the Director of City Development advising of an application to modify the terms of a Section 75 Agreement to reduce the percentage of the net sales floor area which can be allocated for the display and sale of food and other convenience goods from not less than 90% to not less than 70%. The proposed modification would result in an equivalent increase in the percentage of comparison ie non-food sales floor area. It was noted that the current terminology for such an agreement was "a Section 75 Obligation".

Clause 6(i), the subject of this application, was as follows:-

"not less than 90% of the net sales floor area shall be allocated for the display and sale of food and other convenience goods".

The application proposed that Clause 6(i) of the Obligation be modified as follows:-

"not less than 70% of the net sales floor area shall be allocated for the display and sale of food and other convenience goods".

The Committee refused this request to vary the terms of the Obligation and agreed that the Obligation continue to have effect without modification.

IV SAINSBURYS SUPERMARKETS LTD, 1 TOM JOHNSTON ROAD, DUNDEE - APPLICATION TO MODIFY S75 OBLIGATION TO REDUCE TO 80% THE NET SALES FLOOR AREA FOR FOOD AND OTHER CONVENIENCE GOODS

There was submitted Report No 306-2012 by the Director of City Development advising of an application (Ref: 1200295 MDPO) to modify the terms of a Section 75 Agreement to reduce the percentage of the net sales floor area which can be allocated for the display and sale of food and other convenience goods from not less than 90% to not less than 80%. The proposed modification would result in an equivalent increase in the percentage of comparison ie non-food sales floor area. Members noted that the current terminology for such an agreement was "a Section 75 obligation".

Clause 6(i), the subject of this application was as follows:-

"not less than 90% of the net sales floor area shall be allocated for the display and sale of food and other convenience goods".

The application proposed that Clause 6(i) of the Obligation be modified as follows:-

"not less than 80% of the net sales floor area shall be allocated for the display and sale of food and other convenience goods".

Councillor Guild, seconded by Councillor Cordell, moved refusal of the application on the grounds that there is concern that Broughty Ferry District Centre could be vulnerable to changes which could adversely affect its vitality and viability. It is considered that taking into account all the relevant issues, including the fact that there is ample provision for comparison retailing within the local catchment, the City Council's stated aims of maintaining the vitality and viability of the Broughty Ferry District Centre are not served by approval of the proposed modifications to the Section 75 Obligation and that the planning Obligation should continue to have effect without modification.

Councillor Lynn, seconded by the Lord Provost, moved that the application be approved and the Section 75 Obligation shall have effect, subject to the modifications specified in the application.

On a division, there voted for the motion - the Convener, Bailies Borthwick and Scott, Councillors Guild, Campbell, Cordell, Murray, Bidwell, Gordon, McCready and Macpherson (11); and for the amendment - Lord Provost Duncan, Bailie Wright, Councillors Black, Dawson, Hunter, Lynn, McDonald, Melville, Ross, Keenan, Brennan, Cruickshank and Ferguson (13); Councillor Asif declining to vote - and the amendment was declared carried and the application approved.

V PLANNING APPEAL DECISIONS

There was submitted Agenda Note AN115-2012 advising of the undernoted planning appeal decisions.

(a) 56 WILLIAM FITZGERALD WAY, DUNDEE - INCREASE IN NUMBER OF NURSERY PLACEMENTS FROM 26 TO 36 PLACES

Reference was made to Article I(a) of the minute of meeting of this Committee of 20th February, 2012, wherein the above proposal was refused planning permission because the Council considered that:-

(i) the proposed development is contrary to Policy 1 - "Vibrant and Sustainable Communities" of the Dundee Local Plan Review 2005 as the increase in placements would have an adverse impact on parking and traffic movement, would be likely to increase traffic noise and be contrary to other policies in the Plan. There are no material considerations of sufficient strength to justify the granting of planning permission contrary to the policy; and

(ii) the proposed development is contrary to Policy 19 - "Private Day Nurseries" of the Dundee Local Plan Review 2005 as it fails to meet the criteria for outdoor play space or parking. Previous applications set aside the Local Plan criteria to grant planning permission for 26 children. There are no material considerations of sufficient strength to justify the granting of planning permission for a further 10 children in this case.

It was noted that the decision was subsequently appealed by the applicant under the provisions of Section 47 and Schedule 4 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 and had been dismissed.

(b) DUDHOPE BOWLING CLUB, ADELAIDE PLACE, DUNDEE - ERECTION OF TWO REPLICA FLAGPOLE TELECOM MASTS

Reference was made to Article I(b) of the minute of meeting of this Committee of 20th February, 2012, wherein the above proposal was refused planning permission, contrary to the Director's recommendation, because the Council considered that:-

(i) the proposed development is contrary to Policy 1 - "Vibrant and Sustainable Communities" of the Dundee Local Plan Review 2005 as the scale and location of the proposed telecommunications masts will have an adverse effect on the visual and residential amenity of the area, including the adjacent Conservation Area and will reduce the environmental quality enjoyed by local residents, and there are no material considerations of sufficient strength to justify the granting of planning permission contrary to the policy; and

(ii) the proposed development is contrary to Policy 2 "Residential Areas" of Dundee City Council's adopted Non-Statutory Planning Policies in Relation to Telecommunications Masts and Other Apparatus as there is a general presumption against the siting of free standing masts in residential areas unless the proposal is sensitively sited and designed and, by reason of their scale and location the proposed telecommunications masts will fail to comply with this requirement and are thus contrary to the policy.

It was reported that the decision was subsequently appealed by the applicant under the provisions of Section 47 and Schedule 4 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 and had been dismissed.

(c) FORMER LARCHFIELD WORKS, LARCH STREET, DUNDEE - DISCHARGE OF S75 PLANNING OBLIGATION RESTRICTING THE USE OF EIGHT DWELLINGS AS HOUSES IN MULTIPLE OCCUPATION

Reference was made to Article I of the minute of meeting of this Committee of 23rd January, 2012, wherein the Council refused to discharge this planning obligation. The Council questioned the competency of the application and considered that even if it were competent it should be refused as the restriction on HMO's in this case was consistent with the Council's aims to control HMO's in the area and the use of these dwellings as HMO's would further erode the Council's objectives to retain new residential properties for occupation by families.

It was reported that the decision was subsequently appealed by the applicant under the provisions of Section 75B of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 and had been dismissed.

(d) UNIT G NORTH TAY COMPLEX, BALFIELD ROAD, DUNDEE - METAL RECYCLING/END OF LIFE VEHICLE SITE GLASS PLASTIC RECYCLING

Reference was made to Article I(e) of the minute of meeting of this Committee of 20th February, 2012, wherein the above proposal was refused planning permission, contrary to the Director's recommendation, because the Council considered that:-

(i) the proposed end of life vehicle, metal, plastic and glass recycling facility at Unit G, North Tay Complex, Balfield Road, Dundee would generate instances of significant noise disturbance and smell nuisance to the detriment of local residential amenity and, therefore, fails to satisfy the requirements of Criteria (a) of Policy 26 (General Development Areas) of the Dundee Local Plan Review 2005; and

(ii) the proposed end of life vehicle, metal, plastic and glass recycling facility at Unit G, North Tay Complex, Balfield Road, Dundee would generate instances of airborne and water-based pollution that would adversely affect the health of neighbouring residents as well as the level of environmental quality afforded to the area surrounding the application site and there are no material considerations that would justify approval of planning permission.

It was reported that the decision was subsequently appealed by the applicant under the provisions of Section 47 and Schedule 4 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 and been upheld with conditions covering the height of storage of materials and hours of operation.

VI DELEGATED APPLICATIONS

There was submitted Agenda Note AN116-2012 advising that from 22nd May to 21st July, 2012, 92 applications were decided under delegated powers. Twelve of these applications had attracted objections, ten of these applications were approved, and two were refused.

David BOWES, Convener.