Replacement listed dwelling at 73 Main Street, Fraserburgh

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing the existing dwelling and building a larger replacement house with improved accessibility and an attached garage.

“The proposed dwellinghouse design comprises 1½ storey with single garage attached to the east side (as per current arrangement). The front elevation comprises 2 gable dormers within the roof space with 2 windows below this in the wall facilitating the ground floor space. There are 2 larger gable dormers proposed off the rear elevation of the main house which sit further into the wall head.”

“There is also an area of raised decking proposed within the rear garden which would sit approximately 1m off ground level and steps are proposed from here leading to the remaining rear garden ground. The accommodation comprises a bedroom at ground level with en-suite and living space (lounge, kitchen/ family room, study and utility room) with the upper floor accommodating 2 rooms. Attic space is proposed above the proposed garage.”

Officer report

The site and existing house

The site contains a Category C listed cottage in the Broadsea Conservation Area, within an established residential grouping beside the coastal path.

“The application relates to a Category ‘C’ listed building situated within the Broadsea Conservation Area, within the settlement of Fraserburgh. The property is a detached, 1½ storey traditional cottage-style dwelling located within an established residential area. It forms part of a linear grouping of detached dwellings that front the public road along Main Street. To the rear (north) of the dwelling, the land falls steeply towards the sea.”

“The proposal seeks to demolish the existing dwellinghouse. The listing description on HES website indicates that the house dates from the 1960s. The description states that no 73 is “a good example of mid 20th century conservation architecture, closely referencing the scale, form and treatment of the 18th and 19th century single-storey cottages and terraced rows that characterise the Broadsea township.”

Officer report

Earlier applications and surveys

Listed building consent for demolition was refused, an earlier demolition application was withdrawn, and a structural survey recommended rebuilding.

“APP/2025/1394: Listed Building Consent for Demolition of Dwellinghouse (Refused 26.02.2026)”

“Structural Survey Report by Cameron and Ross Civil and Structural Engineers, November 2025”

Officer report

The replacement design

The proposed house would be substantially higher and larger, with prominent dormers and massing considered unsympathetic to the conservation area.

“Whilst the proposed replacement dwelling is sited at the location of the existing house with ridge line running parallel with the existing street, it has a much larger footprint area (almost double the existing) and is 1.7m higher. The proposed garage with pitched roof is also considerably higher (5.4m) than the existing lean-to garage structure (2.5m high).”

“The agent claims that, “...the house is designed to be a replica of the existing house.” However, the increase in the height combined with the overall resultant mass of the dwelling and inclusion of wall head dormer windows means that the dwelling will not replicate the existing scale of the existing house on the site.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Built Heritage and Historic Environment Scotland objected, while roads, water, flood risk, archaeology and environmental health consultees raised no objection or had no further comments.

“Environment and Infrastructure Services (Archaeological Service) Environment and Infrastructure Services (Archaeological Service) has confirmed that the application affects archaeological site NJ96NE0171, a Category C-listed mid-20th-century house located within the historic core of Broadsea, Fraserburgh (Aberdeenshire HER NJ96NE0078).”

“Scottish Water has no objection. It indicates that in terms of water supply, there is currently sufficient capacity in both the public water (Turriff Water Treatment Works) and drainage (Fraserburgh Waste Water Treatment works) to serve the development but notes that in each case further investigations may be required to be carried out once a formal application has been submitted.”

Officer report

Public support

One neighbour supported the redevelopment, citing its local connections, future accessibility, traditional appearance and expected limited disruption.

“A total of one valid representation (in support) has been received, and all matters raised have been fully considered. The representation raises the following material points:”

“The neighbour (53 Main Street) offers full support for the proposal, noting that the applicant has strong local and family connections, along with a respectful understanding of the area’s history and character. • It is acknowledged that, while the proposal involves demolition of the existing dwelling, the neighbour considers that the subsequent redevelopment will remain in keeping with conservation requirements.”

Officer report

Who spoke at the meeting

The Senior Planner introduced the application, the applicant spoke with another person present to answer questions, and an Environmental Planner was available for questions.

Members’ questions

Members asked about appeals, the building’s listing, repair costs, sustainability, construction materials and whether further structural evidence could be provided.

“Members asked a number of questions and received responses relating to the potential for appeals to Historic Environment Scotland, the reasons for listing a building dating from the 1960’s, repair costs, and the future sustainability of the site.”

“Following the presentation, members sought clarification on the types of building materials and whether a more detailed structural survey, including associated rebuild costs, could be provided.”

Minutes

Why consideration was deferred

The committee deferred the application for a site visit and requested more structural, cost and visual information, followed by renewed consultation with Historic Environment Scotland.

“Following discussion, the Committee agreed to defer consideration of the application pending a site visit to allow non-local Members the opportunity to assess the property in the context of the surrounding area. The Committee also requested a detailed structural survey, more comprehensive cost information, and a visual mock- up of the proposed development.”

Minutes