North Lanarkshire Council · 12 Athelstane Drive Greenfaulds Cumbernauld 38 N/08/01214/FUL Mr & Mrs...

North Lanarkshire

Council

Planning Applications for considerat ion of Planning and Transportation Committee

Committee Date : gth October 2008

Ordnance Survey maps reproduced from Ordnance Survey with permission of HMSO Crown Copyright reserved

1

APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE gth October 2008

Page no. Application No. Applicant DevelopmentlLocus Recommendation

4 N/05/01822/OUT Cala Management Ltd Construction of Motorway Grant (P) Service Area Request for Hornshill Farm Site Visit Hornshill Farm Road and Hearing Stepps

Dwelling house Land Adjacent To Garbethill House Arns Road Abronhill Cumbernauld

17 N/08/00515/OUT Broadleys Graziers Construction of a Grant (P)

27 N/08/01067/FUL Campsies Centre Construction of Replacement Grant Cumbernauld Ltd Footbridge Request for

Former Cross Town Link Tummel Way and Hearing Central Way Cumbernauld

Site Visit

34 N/08/01205/FUL Mrs P MacWilliam Part Use of Dwellinghouse for Grant Childminding 12 Athelstane Drive Greenfaulds Cumbernauld

38 N/08/01214/FUL Mr & Mrs Pillar Extension to Dwellinghouse and Grant Formation of Front and Rear Dormers 8 Lochearnhead Road Millerston Stepps

43 N/08/01278/MIN Farrans (Construction) Reprofiling of Bing Area by the Grant (P) Limited Removal and Depositing of

Material in Connection with Adjacent Motorway Construction Works Auchengeich Bing Auchengeich Road Moodiesburn

52 C/08/01081/FUL Coatbridge College Erection of Temporary Teaching Grant and Office Portacabins at Coatbridge College, Kildonan Street, Coatbridge

58 C/08/01170/FUL T Mobile Installation of 14.7m Refuse Telecommunications Mast and Ancillary Base Cabinets at Land at Heritage Way Summerlee Coatbridge

2

63

68

78

C/08/01203/FUL Scottish Water Installation of a Maintenance Grant Access to Service Drainage Infrastructure at Land South of 2-6 Quarry Road Ai rd rie

S/07/01796/FUL Wishaw And District Construction of Four Blocks of Grant Housing Association Flats (26 Flatted Properties)

Land At Hill Street Wishaw

S/07/02036/FUL John Staniford Change of Use and Conversion Grant of Derelict Water Filter House into Three Residential Dwellinghouses with Associated Gardens and Parking Forrestburn Filter House, Blairmuckhole And Forrestdyke Road, Harthill, Shotts

88 S/08/00578/FUL Summit Healthcare Formation of 350 Additional Car Grant Parking Spaces Wishaw General Hospital, 50 Netherton Street, Wishaw

94 S/08/00889/FUL Mr P Allan

100 S/08/01072/FUL Miss J Taylor

105 S/08/01120/FUL Mr E Caira

111 S/08/01190/OUT Stuart Chapman

Formation of Basement Grant (Retrospective) and Rear Request for Extension to Dwellinghouse to Hearing Incorporate Swimming Pool Land East Of 100 Bellshill Road, Uddingston

Two Storey Extension to Rear of Dwellinghouse and Erection of Front Porch Visit 58 Frood Street, Motherwell

Grant Request for Site

Change of Use of Class 1 Retail Refuse to Hot Food Takeaway 205A Motherwell Road. Bellshill

Erection of Two Dwellinghouses Refuse (In Outline) Land Adjacent To 18 Hirst Road/37 Llynallan Road, Harthill

117 S/08/01261/FUL Telefonica 0 2 (UK) Installation of 15 Metre High Grant Ltd Monopole Mast and Ancillary

Equipment Cabinet Land To The Rear Of Tannochside Miners Club, 438 Old Edinburgh Road, Uddingston

(PI N/05/01822/FUL N/08/00515/OUT N/08/01278/MIN

If granted, refer to Scottish Ministers (Development in the Green Belt) If granted, Section 75 Agreement to be concluded If granted, Section 75 Agreement to be concluded

3

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Agent

Development:

Location :

Ward:

Grid Reference:

File Reference:

Site History:

Development Plan:

N/05/01822/OUT

3rd November 2005

Cala Management Ltd Cairnlee House Callendar Business Park Callendar Road Falkirk FKI I X E

Farningham McCreadie Partnership Ltd 4 Chester Street Edinburgh EH3 7RA

Construction of Motorway Service Area

Hornshill Farm Hornshill Farm Road Stepps

5 - Strathkelvin. Councillors Hogg, McGlinchey, Shaw & Wallace

266298669456

N/05/01822/OUT

The proposal is covered by Motorway Service Area Opportunities policy (Strategic Policy 4) of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 (incorporating the third alteration 2006) and the site is covered by Green Belt policies (ENV 2-8) of the Northern Corridor Local Plan, 2005

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: Transport Scotland (Comments) Scottish Natural Heritage (Comments) West Of Scotland Archaeology Service (Comments) Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Comments) Scottish Water (Comments) Glasgow City Council (No Objection)

Representations: 39 letters of representation received.

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 16th November 2005

4

Recommendation: Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a further planning application shall be submitted to the Planning Authority in respect of the following reserved matters:- (a) the siting, design and external appearance of all buildings and other structures; (b) the means of access to the site; (c) the layout of the site, including all roads, footways, and parking areas; (d) the details of, and timetable for, the hard and soft landscaping of the site.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

That within three years of the date of this permission, an application for approval of the reserved matters, specified in condition 1 above, shall be made to the Planning Authority.


That the development hereby permitted shall be started, either within five years of the date of this permission, or within two years of the date on which the last of the reserved matters are approved, whichever is the later.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997

That the Motorway Service Area shall incorporate a petrol filling station; a general services building covering catering, retail sales, toilets and visitor/ local services information; and parking. No overnight accommodation shall be provided unless backed by study submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority demonstrating a need for such accommodation and no economic detriment to local by passed communities.

Reason: To accord with the definition of a Motorway Service Area in PAN 75 "Planning for Transport" and to ensure that there is no adverse affect on existing local hotel facilities and the economic wellbeing of local communities.

That notwithstanding the generalities of condition 1 above buildings shall be no greater than 2 stories or 10 metres in height (whichever is the lower) and shall not encroach within 10 metres of the edge of the adjacent tree canopy.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the site and the Green Belt area in general.

That notwithstanding the generalities of condition 1 above the required scheme of landscaping to be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, shall include:- (a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, boundary treatment, grass seeding and turfing ; (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; this shall include buffer landscaping with particular emphasis on the southern boundary with the adjacent Garnkirk Woodlands Site of Importance for Nature Conservation and shall incorporate habitat to maximise biodiversity on the site; (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development (d) a detailed timetable for all landscaping works which shall provide for these works being carried out in advance of and contemporaneously with the development of the site

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the site and general area.

That notwithstanding the generalities of Condition 1 before the development hereby permitted

6

starts, the following additional details shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority:- - A programme of archaeological works in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and agreed by the West of Scotland Archaeology Service; thereafter the developer shall ensure that the programme of archaeological works is fully implemented and that all recording recovery of archaeological recourses within the development site is undertaken to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority in agreement with the West of Scotland Archaeology Service.

Reason: In the interests of local archaeology.

That prior to the commencement of any development on site a detailed scheme design and specification for site access from the proposed M80 Hornshill Interchange shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, in consultation with Transport Scotland.

8.

Reason: To ensure that the standard of access layout complies with the current standards and that the safety of the traffic on the trunk road is not be diminished (as required by Transport Scotland).

9. That no part of the development shall commence trading until the site access has been completed in accordance with the approved plans, referred to in Condition 8 above, to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority, in consultation with Transport Scotland.


10. That the internal layout of the site shall be designed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority in consultation with Transport Scotland, and in a manner that prohibits vehicular movements between the development access and the local road network, namely Hornshill Farm Road.


11. That the provision of roadside facilities, including parking provision, shall be in accordance with SPP 17 and PAN 75 "Planning for Transport".

Reason: To be consistent with the requirements of SPP 17: Planning for Transport (as required by Transport Scotland).

That prior to the opening of any part of the development pedestrian/ cycle links shall be provided between the development and Cumbernauld Road via Hornshill Farm Road to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority in consultation with Transport Scotland.

12.

Reason: To be consistent with the requirements of SPP 17: Planning for Transport (as required by Transport Scotland).

That prior to the commencement of any development a barrier of a type approved by the planning authority, after consultation with the Transport Scotland, shall be provided and maintained along the proposed boundary of the site with the trunk road.

13.

Reason: To minimise the risk of pedestrians and animals gaining uncontrolled access to the trunk road with the consequential risk of accidents (as required by Transport Scotland).

That details of all lighting and advertising features within the site shall be submitted to and 14.

7

approved in writing by the Planning Authority, in consultation with Transport Scotland.

15.

16.

17.

18.

Reason: To ensure that there will be no distraction or dazzle to drivers on the trunk road (as required by Transport Scotland).

That notwithstanding the generalities of condition 1 above the required scheme of drainage to be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, shall include full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the requirements of the publication titled “Drainage Assessment: A Guide for Scotland” and any other advice subsequently published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) or the Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party (SUDSWP). The post-development surface water discharges shall ensure that the rate and quantity of run-off to any watercourse are no greater than the pre-development run-off for any storm return period. SUDS shall still be provided even where discharges are proposed to public sewers notwithstanding any conditions imposed by Scottish Water. If the area of ground illustrated for the SUDS is inadequate for the purpose, a revised layout drawing for this part of the proposed development shall be submitted to and for the approval of the Planning Authority prior to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the said Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater.

That notwithstanding the generalities of condition 1 above the required scheme of drainage to be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, shall include a letter of confirmation from Scottish Water that the drainage proposals are acceptable to them.

Reason: In the interests of ensuring that drainage proposals are acceptable.

That notwithstanding the generalities of condition 1 above the drainage and development proposals shall comply with the terms of the submitted and approved Flood Risk and Surface Water Drainage Impact Assessment.

Reason: In the interests of ensuring that drainage and flood risk proposals are acceptable.

That notwithstanding the generalities of condition 1 above the development proposals shall comply with the terms of the submitted and approved Noise Impact Assessment.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of occupiers of Hornshill Farmhouse.

NOTE TO COMMITTEE: If granted, this application will have to be notified to the Scottish Ministers in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 2007 because the proposed development falls within an area of land designated as Green Belt.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 3rd November 2005

Letters from Scottish Natural Heritage received 14th December 2005, 5‘h September 2008 and 18‘h September 2008 Letter from West of Scotland Archaeology Service received 23rd December 2005 Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 28th November 2005 Letter from Scottish Water received 17th November 2005

8

Letter from Glasgow City Council received F d May 2006 Letter from Transport Scotland received 10 June 2008

Memo from Head of Protective Services received 21st November 2005 Memo from Countryside and Landscape Manager received 25th November 2005

Letter from Sheila Nicol, 1 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6DB received 30th November 2005. Letter from J G Keith Davidson, 75 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6DD received 1st December 2005. Letter from Dr Mary McCallum, 4 Hornshill Farm Road, Glasgow, G33 6DE received 5th December 2005. Letter from E G Ceresa & M E Ceresa, 50 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6DQ received 5th December 2005. Letter from J J T MacGregor, 65 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6DD received 5th December 2005. Letter from Mr Bernard Morgan, 73 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6DD received 5th December 2005. Letter from J Paul Noble, 68 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6DG received 5th December 2005. Letter from Mr & Mrs A G Manuel, 6 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6DS received 6th December 2005. Letter from Mr Raymond Reid, 34 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6DN received 6th December 2005. Letter from Mr Mervyn Pallister, "Ardenlea", 39 Lenzie Road, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6BX received 6th December 2005. Letter from R Wallace, 32 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6DN received 7th December 2005. Letter from Mr Colin McManus, 66 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6DG received 7th December 2005. Letter from Mr & Mrs R Russell, 12 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Lanarkshire, G33 6DS received 8th December 2005. Letter from Miss Kirsten Campbell, 60 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6DG received 8th December 2005. Letter from Mr Gerard Campbell, 60 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6DG received 8th December 2005. Letter from Mr Donald Adie, 62 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6DG received 12th December 2005. Letter from Stepps & District Community Council, C/o Mr R Stuart, 57 Whitehill Avenue, Stepps, G33 6BN received 12th December 2005. Letter from Mr lain Shaw, 41 Lenzie Road, Stepps, G33 6BX received 9th December 2005. Letter from Mrs Rose Campbell, 60 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, G33 6DG received 9th December 2005. Letter from Mr Richard Thornton, 22 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, G33 6DN received 9th December 2005. Letter from Mary Thornton, 22 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, G33 6DN received 9th December 2005. Letter from Mr John Robertson-Gregg, 38 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, G33 6DN received 6th December 2005. Letter from Mr John Robertson, 18 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, G33 6DN received 13th December 2005. Letter from Lorna Mitchell, 74 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6DG received 20th December 2005. Letter from Morag Pender, 71 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6DD received 28th December 2005. Letter from E G Adams, 8 Alexandra Avenue, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 BP received 28th December 2005. Letter from Sheila Stuart, 57 Whitehill Avenue, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6BN received 28th December

9

2005. Letter from Mr Campbell Provan, 13 Alexandra Avenue, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6BP received 28th December 2005. Letter from Owner/Occupier, 3 Fourth Avenue, Millerston, G33 6JX received 28th December 2005. Letter from Dr Carol K Graham, 22 West Avenue, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6ES received 28th December 2005. Letter from Chris Hamilton, 33 Cardowan Drive, Stepps, G33 6HE received 28th December 2005. Letter from M Mair, 150 Cumbernauld Road, Stepps, G33 received 28th December 2005. Letter from Janet W Hyslop, 19 West Avenue, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6ES received 28th December 2005. Letter from H Erentz, 5 Mount Harriet Avenue, Stepps, G33 6DH received 28th December 2005. Letter from Louise Pender, 26F Cumbernauld Road, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6EL received 28th December 2005. Letter from RPS Planning Transport & Environment Ltd, Fairwater House, 1 High Street, Swindon, SN4 9JX, received 3rd April 2006. Letter from E Hamilton, 69 Mount Harriet Drive, Stepps, G33 6DD received 18th January 2006. Letter from Mr & Mrs Davidson, Dunvegan, 2 Hornshill Farm Road, Stepps, Glasgow, Lanarkshire, G33 6DE received 26th January 2006. Letter from Elaine Smith MSP, The Scottish Parliament, Constituency Office, Unit 65, Fountain Business Centre, Coatbridge, ML5 3AA received 6th February 2006.

Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2006, Northern Corridor Local Plan, 2005

Scottish Planning Policy 17 "Planning for Transport" and Planning Advice Note 75 "Planning for Transport"

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Martin Dean at 01236 616466.

Date: 25th September 2008

10

APPLICATION NO. N10510182210UT

REPORT

1.

1.1

1.2

1.3

2.

2.1

2.1

3.

3.1

Description of Site and Proposal

The application is in outline for the construction of a Motorway Service Area (MSA) off the proposed M80 motorway junction at Hornshill junction, by Stepps. Indicative plans show a general services area, a petrol filling station and a hotel with extensive wooded and grassed landscaping. Vehicular access is off the M80 with a potential footpath and cycleway link to Stepps via Hornshill Farm Road (required by Transport Scotland).

The site covers 9.5 hectares and is characterised by rough pasture which rises gently in a northern direction. The site is bounded by the M80 Stepps bypass to the north and east, by the wooded Garnkirk Burn corridor to the south and by Hornshill Farm to the west.

Back up information has been provided in the form of a Supporting Planning Statement, Landscape Overview, Protected Species Survey, Transport Assessment, Flood Risk and Surface Water Drainage Impact Assessment, Noise Impact Assessment and Air Quality Assessment.

Development Plan

Under the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 (incorporating the third alteration 2006) Strategic Policy 4 Schedule 4 “Strategic Transport Development Proposals” notes an opportunity for Motorway Service Areas on the route of the M80 (Robroyston - Stepps Corridor).

The application site is covered by Green Belt (ENV 2-8) and M80 Extension (TR 1) (part site) policies in the Northern Corridor Local Plan, 2005

Consultations and Representations

Summaries of consultation responses received are as follows.

Glasgow City Council: No objections. Scottish Environment Protection Agency: Comments are provided concerning the advisability of a SUDS surface water drainage system, waste strategy, licensing and pollution prevention.

0 Scottish Natural Heritage: SNH is satisfied with the Protected Species Survey, including the requested re-survey for otters.. Works should be sited a minimum of 10m from the edge of the adjacent tree canopy. Scottish Water: A condition should be imposed requiring that before works commence confirmation should be provided by the developer that agreement has been reached with Scottish Water concerning sewerage and water provision.

0 Transport Scotland: Conditions should be imposed covering the approval of a detailed access; the implementation of the approved access prior to any commencement of trading; approval of a scheme that prohibits direct vehicular access to Stepps; provision of footpath/ cycleway access to Stepps; appropriate parking provision; provision of an appropriate barrier with the motorway; and submission and approval of lighting and advertising details. West of Scotland Archaeology Service: It is recommended that a planning condition be imposed requiring that there be an agreed scheme of archaeological investigation.

11

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6

3.7

3.8

My Conservation and Greening Manager has no objection to the proposal and notes that the site has no ecological designation. It is recommended that conditions be imposed covering landscaping and enhancement for biodiversity, protection of the adjacent Site of Importance for Nature Conservation and the provision of a wetland pond based SUDS drainage system.

My Landscape Services Manager requests that further landscape information be provided.

My Pollution Control Team Leader has commented that a Site Investigation is required and has expressed initial concern over some of the methodology used in producing the Noise Assessment and Air Quality Assessment. (These concerns have been largely overcome through discussion and the provision of further information).

My Geotechnical Team Leader has no objections to the submitted drainage/ SUDS strategy.

My Transportation Team Leader has no objections to the indicative layout but wishes to ensure that the access from the proposed motorway upgrade roundabout is properly designed.

Thirty nine letters of objection have been received including from Elaine Smith MSP and Stepps and District Community Council. Points of objection plus comments are as follows.

Point of Objection: /Development Plan: National Policies; Green Belt: Nature Conservation) The development is contrary to National Planning Policy, to Structure Plan Policy and to Local Plan Policy. In particular it is contrary to the following policies: Green Belt (Contrary to national policies contained within SPP 1 “The Planning System”, SPP 21 “Green Belts” and Local Plan policy ENV 2 “Green Belt”): The site is protected Green Belt countryside which is used for recreation purposes, contains wildlife, provides a rural setting for Stepps and which helps separate Stepps from Muirhead./ There will be an adverse affect on the adjacent Garnkirk Glen Site of Importance for Nature Conservation./ There was a previous assurance from the Scottish Development Department in 1984 in connection with the construction of the Stepps by-pass motorway that land between Stepps and the M80 would remain as agricultural land./ Green Belt land requires to be maintained due to recent release of such land in Stepps and the consequential expansion of the settlement./ Development of greenfield Green Belt land is contrary to sustainability policies which promote development of brownfield sites. Motorway Service Area Locations (Contrary to national policy SPP 17 “Planning for Transport” and not supported by Structure Plan strategic policy 4 ‘I.. . Opportunities for Motorway Service Areas” and Local Plan policy TR 4 “Motorway Service Areas”): There is no requirement for a MSA at this location due to its proximity to existing MSAs and to facilities in Stepps, Cumbernauld and Glasgow./ No Needs Assessment has been submitted for the proposed MSA.1 The Local Plan Inquiry Reporter required that the local plan avoid any site specific policy for a MSA.

Comments: With respect to national and development plan policies the following is noted. a) National policy on MSAs (SPP 17 and PAN 75) no longer has specific restrictions on minimum and maximum distances between roadside facilities. Such facilities should, however, be judged, amongst other matters, in relation to need, environmental considerations and the affect on the economies of bypassed communities. Subject to the deletion of the proposed hotel (overnight accommodation is available in Stepps and other local communities) it is considered that the proposal complies with national policy. b) Development Plan policy (Structure Plan strategic policy 4 and Local Plan policy TR 4) supports a MSA on the M80 in the Robroyston, Stepps and Mollinsburn area. The required further investigation on the best location for a MSA has been carried out on behalf of the Council and supports the application site. It is considered that the proposal complies with the development plan MSA policies. c) The proposal does not strictly comply with Green Belt policy in that it is not specified as an

12

appropriate use in Local Plan policy ENV 4. However only two out of the eleven possible sites for MSAs investigated in the comparative study are not in the Green Belt and all of the sites deemed worthy of further consideration after checking physical and access characteristics are in the Green Belt. There is an argument that in a practical sense the MSA is "...development...which can be shown to require to be located in the Greenbelt." (ENV 4) and as such is compatible with Green Belt policy. Development Plan issues are looked at further in 4.1 - 4.8 below.

3.9 Point of Objection: [Potential Residential DeveloDment) The proposal will set a precedent for residential development on land between Stepps and the M80.1 Any such wider development will be detrimental to the setting and interests of Stepps.

Comrnenfs: This concern by residents is understandable as a sister company of the applicants has an option on a wider area between Stepps and the M80 and is seeking a local plan review to allow residential development. The current application is, however, being judged solely on the acceptability or otherwise of a MSA and there will be no precedent for housing. As covered in paragraph 3.8 above there is Development Plan support for a MSA in the area but no such support for residential development.

Point of Objection: LResidential Amenitv) The proposed MSA will adversely affect the amenity of residents of Stepps by interfering with views onto open countryside and by creating light pollution, noise nuisance and environmental pollution.

3.10

Comments: The proposed MSA will have some limited affect on local residents. It is noted from submitted reports that there will be filtered views into the site from some local houses but that this will be mitigated by robust boundary planting; that a proposed noise barrier will ensure that there is no noise nuisance; and that there will be no air quality problem for local residents. The issue of residential amenity is covered in 4.10 below.

3.1 1 Point of Objection: /Local Services) The proposed MSA will adversely affect existing services in Stepps. Stepps and local communities already have petrol filling stations, shops and hotels which should be better signposted to attract travellers. These services will lose trade to the proposed MSA.

Comments: The need for an MSA in the area has been established through the approved Development Plan. Under national guidelines an MSA requires to sell fuel and it is established practise to have an attractive shop and restaurant area. No case has been submitted, however, for the proposed hotel and it is recognised that this would potentially adversely affect existing hotels in the local area which serve the needs of travellers. A recommended planning condition makes clear that the MSA permission does not cover a hotel unless need is proved through a submitted report. Improved trunk road and motorway signposting for local facilities would be welcomed. This is a matter, however, for Transport Scotland.

3.12 Point of Objection: (Alternative Sites) There are better available alternative sites for an MSA i.e. on nearby scrubland, away from the built up area or at Robroyston.

Comments: In accordance with the requirement of the local plan a comparative study was carried out of all potential MSA sites on the M80 in the Stepps area. Eleven sites were looked at the existing and proposed motorway junctions at Robroyston, Hornshill (Stepps) and Mollinsburn. Comparative issues examined included traffic and access, physical characteristics, planning policy, planning history and landscape/ visual impact. It was concluded that the application site is the best MSA site in that it can achieve direct access to the motorway (via the proposed roundabout), there are no obvious physical constraints, the Green Belt designation is similar to almost all local potential sites and the site is capable of absorbing the

13

scale and form of development.

3.13

3.14

3.15

4.

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

Point of Objection: /Development Details) DeveloDment details are substandard. There will be road safety problems due to the sites location at a bend on the M80 and served by a complex junction. There may be poor access sight lines.

Comments: The development proposal relates to the proposed upgraded motorway scheme rather than the existing road layout. The scheme is deemed acceptable by Transport Scotland who have control over motorway planning and safety.

Point of Objection: /Procedures and Public Participation) With regards procedural matters there should have been more extensive neighbour notification and better publicity./ There should be a site visit and hearing and if necessary a call-in public inquiry to allow local residents to express their views.

Comments: Neighbour Notification and advertising in the local newspaper have been properly carried out. The requests for a site visit and hearing are noted and this issue will be decided on by the Planning and Transportation Committee.

Point of Objection: LCrime) The MSA will encourage crime and in this respect the site is too close to the new Stepps Primary School.

Comments: This concern has not been substantiated. The principal of an MSA in the local area is established by the Development Plan.

Planninn Assessment

In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Development Plan: The Development Plan consists of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 (incorporating the third alteration 2006) and the Northern Corridor Local Plan, 2005. Relevant policies are as follows.

Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 (incorporating the third alteration 2006) Strategic Policy 4 covers the development of a “Strategic Transportation Network”. Schedule 4 “Strategic Transport Development Proposals” includes “Opportunities for Motorway Service Areas” at “M80 (Robroyston - Stepps Corridor)”. The proposed development accords with this Strategic Policy.

Structure Plan Strategic Policy 9 covers the general assessment of development proposals. The proposed MSA accords with this policy as it does not breach any Section A (Making a Case for Development) requirements, it accords with the Promote Sustainable Transport requirement (see 4.3 above) of Section B (Appropriate Location) and there are satisfactory Section C (Appropriate Provision) proposals in terms of infrastructure, sustainable transport measures, environmental action/ maintenance of related greenspaces, sustainable urban drainage and archaeology.

Northern Corridor Local Plan, 2005 policy TR 4 (Motorway Service Areas) states that North Lanarkshire Council will undertake a study of the M80 and its proposed extension to establish the most suitable location for a MSA in the context of Structure Plan Strategic Policy 4 (see 4.3 above). This study has been undertaken and the Hornshill application site is identified as the

14

best MSA location. The proposed development therefore accords with this policy.

The application site is identified as Green Belt (ENV 2) in the Local Plan. Relevant policy ENV 4 specifies appropriate Green Belt developments such as those required for agriculture, forestry and horticulture. Clearly an MSA does not accord with these specified uses, although it could be argued that it does accord with the policy allowance for “...development...which can be shown to require to be located in the Greenbelt...“. This is in view of the application site being identified in the comparative study as the best potential MSA site (see 4.5 above) and nine out of the eleven study sites being within the Green Belt. Notwithstanding this argument about being required to be in the Green Belt it is considered on balance that the proposal is contrary to Green Belt policy. Should it be the decision of the Committee to approve the proposal the application will require to be referred to the Scottish Ministers under the Development in the Green Belt notification procedure.

The north west corner of the application site is covered by Local Plan policy TR 1 (M80 Extension) whereby the Council supports the proposed motorway extension and upgrade between Stepps and Haggs. This policy is not directly relevant to the proposed development.

Other material considerations are considered to be national planning policies, residential amenity and local ecology.

National Planning Policies: The main national guidance for MSAs is Scottish Planning Policy 17 “Planning for Transport”. Relevant policy statements are as follows:

“...The level of facilities provided should be realistic relative to traffic flow, operator interest, the impact on the economies of the wayside and bypassed communities, infrastructure costs, and the environmental character of the route corridor.. . ”. (Paragraph 74) “. . . Planning authorities should make appropriate provision in their development plans for a range of roadside facilities and should avoid being unduly restrictive unless there are legitimate land use, environmental, road safety or traffic management justifications.” (Paragraph 74) “...A proposal for a new MSA whether accessed directly from the motorway or via an interchange, and whether serving one or both directions of travel, will be considered in relation to the general criteria for designation as an MSA, to applicable planning policies relating to siting and design, and in terms of the free flow of motorway traffic and general road safety...”. (Paragraph 77).

It is considered that need for an MSA has been established by the Development Plan and that the environmental impact is satisfactory. With the required removal of a proposed hotel (unless backed by an approved report proving the need for such a facility) it is not considered that there will be any adverse affect on the economies of bypassed communities. The proposed MSA is deemed to accord with SPP 17.

4.6

4.7

4.8

4.9

4.10 Residential Amenity: Reports have been submitted covering landscaping/ visibility, noise and air quality. These reports indicate that:

0 There will be filtered local views from parts of Stepps to the proposed development. The site is well defined and sits within a well vegetated landscape context. It is considered to have the landscape capacity to absorb an appropriate scale and form of new development. Visual impact will be addressed through comprehensive structure planting strategy incorporating advanced planting. (A recommended condition requires that a structural landscape scheme, including advanced planting, be submitted with the detailed application.) The principal sources of noise will be from vehicles moving to and from the services and the motorway junction/ slip roads, from vehicles using the fuel services and from vehicles using the car parks. An assessment of typical MSA noise found that the closest residential property at Hornshill Farm could be subject to occasional noise which exceeds acceptable levels. A boundary noise control barrier will be required to preclude

15

significant disturbance. (A recommended condition requires that the recommendations of the Noise Assessment be complied with.) There should be no unacceptable affect on air quality for local residents.

4.1 1 Ecology and Countryside Setting: The submitted Protected Species Survey and part re survey found no indication of any protected species on the application site. It is concluded that the development will not adversely affect protected species and that proposed boundary planting will increase the feeding habitat for the bats which were noted as using the woodland to the south of the site for feeding. As covered in 4.10 above it is concluded in the Landscape Overview that this is a site which is well defined by the motorway and the Garnkirk Burn and that it has the capacity to absorb development subject to care over the development and landscape strategy.

5. Conclusion

5.1 Although the proposal is contrary to Green Belt policy it is considered that the location as well as the principle of the MSA is rendered acceptable by its compliance with the Development Plan MSA policies.

Notwithstanding the large number of objections it is considered that there are no overriding problems in terms of residential amenity, affect on the economy of local communities and local ecology. Taking account of the above it is recommended that outline planning permission be granted.

5.2

5.3 It should be noted that there have been a request for a) a site visit and hearing by Stepps and District Community Council due to their concerns over development in the Green Belt and non conformity with local plan and national policies and b) a request for a site visit by RPS Planning on behalf of RoadChef Motorways Ltd due to their concerns over non conformity with national policies.

16

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Agent

Development:

Location:

Ward:

Grid Reference:

File Reference:

Site History:

Development Plan:

N/08/00515/OUT

8th April 2008

Broadleys Graziers Broadleys Farm Stirling FK7 7LP

Rennick Architecture & Design The Studio Homestead Station Road Buchlyvie FK8 3NE

Construction of a Dwellinghouse

Land Adjacent To Garbethill House Arns Road Abronhill Cum bernauld G67 3JW

4-Abronhill,Kildrum&The Village.Councillors Grant, lrvine & Johnston

28 1566 675432

N/08/00515/OUT

N/94/00015/AG: Erection of Sheep Shed. Granted 12.10.94 N/06/01879/FUL: Conversion of Two Outbuildings to Dwelling houses. Granted 12.12.07 N/08/00622/FUL: Alterations to Dwellinghouse and Conversion of Outbuilding to Living Accommodation. Granted 28.07.08

Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 (incorporating the third alteration 2006). Strategic Policy 1 (Development Locations) applies.

Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993. Policies EN13 and EN14 (Green Belt) and EN18 (Nature Conservation) apply.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: Scottish Natural Heritage (Comments) Scottish Water (No objections)

Representations: No letters of representation received.

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 16th April 2008

17


1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a further planning application shall be submitted to the Planning Authority in respect of the following reserved matters:- (a) the siting, design and external appearance of all buildings and other structures; (b) the means of access to the site; (c) the layout of the site, including all roads, footways, and parking areas; (d) the details of, and timetable for, the hard and soft landscaping of the site. (e) the details of the boundary treatment for the site.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.

That within three years of the date of this permission, an application for approval of the reserved matters, specified in condition 1 above, shall be made to the Planning Authority.


That the development hereby permitted shall be started either within 5 years of the date of this permission, or within 2 years of the date of which the last of the reserved matters are approved, whichever is later.


That before any works of any description start on site, an agreement under Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 shall be concluded in respect to the occupancy of the dwelling hereby permitted and to tie the dwelling to the agricultural unit.

Reason: In accordance with ENV14 of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 and to confirm the justification on which this approval of permission is founded.

That planning consent is only granted for the plot outlined in red on the approved plans and for the purpose of one dwelling.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure a satisfactory plot for the purpose of one dwelling.

That notwithstanding the generalities of Condition 1 above, the proposed development shall accord with the following:

a.) The front of the dwelling within the site outlined in red shall front onto Arns Road. b.) The dwelling shall be sympathetically located in a position that the Planning Authority and Scottish Natural Heritage consider will limit any potential impact on the proposed Special Protection area located north east of the site. For the avoidance of doubt, a sympathetic location may be the lowest point of the site. c.) The dwelling shall be no greater than a storey and a half in height or 7.5 metres in height, which ever is the lower. d.) The floor space of the dwelling shall not exceed 200 square metres. e.) The design and finishing materials shall be to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority and shall relate to the rural Green Belt setting in which the dwelling shall be located. For the avoidance of doubt, quality materials such as traditional slate, natural stone, smooth

19

render and timber will be expected. Guidance on siting, layout, orientation, scale, design and materials can be found in Planning Advice Note 76: Housing in the Countryside and should be given careful consideration. E) That unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority through consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage, no part of the shelterbelt of trees and natural vegetation along the eastern side of the plot shall be affected by the construction of a dwelling. g.) With the exception of the connection with the public road and required visibility splays, a boundary hedge shall be planted around the entire curtilage of the plot.

Reason: In accordance with the requirements of Scottish Natural Heritage and to ensure a dwelling of appropriate siting, scale and design is achieved in the interests of the Green Belt setting and adjacent Special Site of Scientific Interest and proposed Special Protection Area.

7. That notwithstanding the generalities of Condition 1 above, full details of the existing and proposed ground levels and finished floor levels for the dwelling shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the dwelling is sensitively located within the plot in order to safeguard the adjacent Special Site of Scientific Interest (SSSI) and Proposed Special Protection Area (PSPA).

8. That any works in relation to the construction of the dwelling shall only be carried out between 1 April and 30 September. No construction works shall take place out with this period of time.

Reason: In accordance with the requirements of Scottish Natural Heritage in order to safeguard the Taiga Bean Geese whose habitat is located at the adjacent SSSI and pSPA.

9. That notwithstanding the generalities of Condition 1 above, the following requirements of the Council as Roads Authority shall be incorporated into the development:

a.) A visibility splay of 2.5 metres x 120 metres shall be achieved at the connection with Arns Road. Anything within the visibility splay shall not exceed 900mm in height. (Or such other scheme as may be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority). b.) Any access gates shall open into the site and not out to the public road. c.) The first 5 metres of driveway into the site shall be fully paved in a material considered acceptable by the Council's Roads Authority. d.) Turning facilities shall be provided within the plot to ensure that all vehicles can leave the plot in forward gear. e.) In curtilage parking shall be provided at the following levels:

1-2 bedroom dwelling shall have 2 parking spaces (a space being required to measure a minimum of 3 metres x 3 metres in all instances). 3-4 bedroom dwelling shall have 3 parking spaces.

Note that garages will only be included in the parking assessment if they have minimum internal dimensions of 3 metres wide x 6 metres deep.

Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities within the plot and to ensure that there is a satisfactory vehicular access facility to the dwelling.

20

10. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, tree protection measures in accordance with British Standard BS 5837 shall be erected along the drip line of the trees within the curtilage of the plot and shall not be removed without the approval in writing of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the boundary trees within the site in accordance with the requirements of Scottish Natural Heritage in order to screen the dwelling from the SSSI.

That unless otherwise dictated by any other condition of this consent, the storage of building materials, soil or machinery in relation to the construction of the dwellinghouse shall only take place within the plot boundaries identified on the approved plan.

11.

Reason: In order to protect the qualifying interest (Tiaga Bean Geese) of the pSPA.

12. That BEFORE to any works start on site, the applicant must confirm in writing to the Planning Authority that the drainage arrangements to be provided are to the satisfaction of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA). The preferred method for the disposal of septic tank effluent is the provision of a sub soil soakaway system. The septic tank and soakaway must be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements set out in The Scottish Building Standards : Technical Handbook : Domestic issued in May 2005.

In terms of the Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations (CAR) 2005, the discharge of treated sewage effluent will require registration with SEPA. Further details on this matter can be found @ www.sepa.org.uk.wfd. Surface water should be excluded from the foul drainage treatment system.

In order to reduce the risk of contamination of controlled waters, any soakaway should be located at least 50 metres from any private water supply or other groundwater resource and at least 10 metres from any watercourse or permeable drain.

(Note : If poor soil porosity or risk to groundwater resources preclude the use of a soakaway, alternative arrangements will have to be agreed with SEPA. Further advice on the disposal of sewage where no mains drainage is available, is contained within Pollution Prevention Guidance Note 4 which is available on the SEPA website www.sepa.org.uWguidance or from any SEPA office).

Reason: To prevent groundwater or surface water contamination in the interests of environmental and amenity protection.

13. That unless dictated by any other condition of this consent, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- AL(0)Ol and AL(0)02 and AL(0)03.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

21

NOTE TO COMMITTEE:

If the Committee accepts the above recommendation, the planning permission should not be issued until an agreement under Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 has been concluded with the applicant in respect of the dwelling always remaining in the occupation of a person employed wholly and locally in agriculture or any other rural use considered appropriate by the Planning Authority and to tie the dwelling to the agricultural unit.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 8th April 2008

Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 27th June 2008 Letter from Scottish Water received 12th May 2008

Memo from Traffic & Transportation (Northern Area) received 24th April 2008

Agricultural Justification Report from Scottish Agricultural College received 8 September 2008.

Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 (incorporating the third alteration 2006) Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993

SPP3: Planning for Housing SPP 21: Green Belts

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Erin Louise Deeley at 01236 6 16464.

Date: 23”‘ September 2008

22

APPLICATION NO. N/08/00515/0UT

REPORT

1.

1 .I

Description of Site and ProPOsal

This is an outline application to establish the principle of a dwelling on the application site. The dwelling is proposed to be accessed from Arns Road. This would be a shared access with Garbethill House.

The application site is a remote, rural location approximately 2 miles east of Abronhill, Cumbernauld. It is located south east of Garbethill House and associated buildings. The application site does not form part of the curtilage of Garbethill House. To the south west of the application site is Arns Road, the access road to the application site. To the north east of the site is the Slamannan Plateau SSSl (Special Site of Scientific Interest) designated for its nationally important numbers of migratory taiga bean geese. This area is also a pSPA (Proposed Special Protection Area). It is recommended for classification as a SPA because of the taiga bean geese.

DeveloPment Plan and Scottish Planning Policies

1.2

2.

2.1 The application site lies within the Green Belt and planning policies relevant to the consideration of the proposed development can be summarised as follows :-

I . Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 (incorporating the third alteration 2006)

Strategic Policy 1 - Strategic Development Locations: The Metropolitan Development Strategy requires the continued designation and safeguarding of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Belt within which there is a presumption against the spread of built up areas and the encroachment of development into the countryside. Local Plans shall define the detailed boundaries and policies to safeguard the Green Belt.

2. Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993

ENV13- There will be a presumption against new development in the Green Belt unless required for agriculture, forestry, nature conservation, out door recreation, telecommunications development where there is a proved need and there is no alternative location, and other uses appropriate to a rural area. In particular, prime agricultural land will be safeguarded.

ENV14- There will be a presumption against residential development in the Green Belt unless it is shown to be necessary for the furtherance of agriculture, forestry, nature conservation, or other uses appropriate only to a rural area. Where a proposal meets these criterions, the following will apply:

The design and siting of the development reflects a functional and visual association with existing buildings and should be sited in proximity to existing farm groups Planning consent shall be subject to an occupancy condition to the affect that the house must remain in the occupation of a person employed wholly and locally in agriculture or any other appropriate rural use. Where an existing agricultural dwelling is sold separately from the associated unit, there can be no assumption that consent will be allowed for the construction of a replacement dwelling.

ENVl8- There will be a general presumption against development which could adversely affect sites of nature conservation.

23

3. Scottish Planning Policy 3: Planning for Housing

The key themes are promoting development in brown field sites rather than green field locations and seeking to maintain the effectiveness of existing Green Belts and safeguarding the character and amenity of the countryside.

3.

3.1

3.2

3.3

4.

4.1

4.2

4. Scottish Planning Policy 21: Green Belts

The three main purposes of the Green Belt are :- I . To maintain the identity of towns by establishing a clear definition of their physical

boundaries and preventing coalescence 2. To provide countryside for recreation or institutional purposes of various kinds 3. To maintain the landscape setting of towns.


Scottish Water has no objection to this application. Scottish Water has issued drainage advice to be applied as a condition in the instance that planning consent is granted.

My Traffic and Transportation Section has no objections to this application. Advice has been provided on parking, access and visibility.

SNH (Scottish Natural Heritage) has no objections subject to the following restrictions being attached to any consent in the form of conditions:

No part of the shelterbelt which lies within the application site should be altered without the approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with SNH. The house should be located within the application site in a position as close as possible to the lowest point at the south corner of the site adjacent to the road. Any works in relation to the construction of the house should only be carried out between April and September. A hedge should be planted around the curtilage of the dwelling. Storage of building materials, soil or machinery in relation to the construction of the proposed house shall only take place within the vicinity of the proposed house west of and out with the shelterbelt within the application site.

SNH indicated that with these planning restrictions, the proposed dwelling is unlikely to have a significant effect on the Tiaga Bean Geese and the related pSPA. As such, it is considered that an Appropriate Assessment is not required in this case.

Planninn Assessment and Conclusions

In terms of Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning applications must be determined in accordance with the relevant development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

The applicant has submitted a comprehensive agricultural justification report prepared by The Scottish Agricultural College. The report indicates that the operational agricultural land under the ownership of the applicant is 121.50ha of which 96ha lies within the SSSI. The business currently comprises of 350 breeding sheep. The farm is also involved in the Bean Geese Scheme that involves managing certain fields for Bean Geese wintering. The agricultural report advises that Broadley’s Graziers has a daily duty of care to the animals in terms of their welfare and security. Based on these circumstances and based on legitimate labour calculations, the report concludes that 1 permanent on site stockman is required.

24

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6

4.7

4.8

4.9

4.10

4.1 1

4.12

It is worth noting that the agricultural report advises that the proposed plot does not comprise any of the land utilised for the existing farm business.

Based on the justification contained within the agricultural report, the proposal is not considered contrary to Strategic Policy 1 or ENVl3.

The agent for this application has confirmed that his client will be prepared to enter into a Section 75 legal agreement prior to the granting of any planning consent in order to ensure that the dwelling always remains in the occupation of a person employed wholly and locally in agriculture or any other rural use considered appropriate by the Planning Authority and also that the dwelling is tied to the agricultural unit. Such a legal agreement ensures compliance with part 2 of policy ENV14.

Particular attention should be paid to point 3 of ENV14. “Where an existing agricultural dwelling is sold separafely from the associated unit (as in this case) there can be no assumption that consent will be allowed for the construction of a replacement dwelling.”

In addition to the agricultural report, a supporting statement has been submitted. Part of this statement advises that the previous owner of Garbethill House and Farm (Mr Jamieson) sold off the farmland separately from the farm house in 1999. Broadley’s Graziers, the applicants, purchased the farmland. Since the purchasing of the land, Mr Jamieson of Garbethill House looked after the farming stock on behalf of Broadley’s Graziers. In 2005, Mr Jamieson sold Garbethill House and associated Outbuildings but at that time Broadley’s Graziers were not in a financial position to purchase them. According to the statement, Broadleys Grazier’s have continued to service Garbethill Farm remotely from their base in Stirling. ”This has become increasingly difficult to sustain on a long term basis, not only for obvious logisfical and geographical reasons, but more imporfanfly on an animal welfare basis. The only viable solution under fhese circumstances would be to locate an on-site farm manager which means providing a new dwelling.”

SPP3 advises that attention should be given to suitable development in a remote rural location that assists economic regeneration. Under the circumstances outlined in point 4.7 above, it is apparent that an on site dwelling is required in order for the current farming business to be sustained and that the economic community benefit of the business is a sound justification for an on site dwelling. It would appear that the remote managing of the business is becoming increasingly difficult and thus the expanding of the business restricted.

Point 1 of ENV14 refers to appropriate siting and design of a dwelling. This is only relevant if the application is approved and therefore this particular point has been managed as a condition of consent.

As a robust agricultural justification report has been submitted, the proposal is considered to be supported by the guidance contained within SPP21-Green Belts.

It should be noted that the supporting statement makes a case for the proposal complying with SPPl5: Planning for Rural Development. There has been no reference in this report to SPPl5 as it advises that “SPP3 Planning for Housing remains the first point of reference on the general policy for housing. This SPP advances policy in respect of small scale rural housing developments. ’I

It should be noted that planning consent has been granted for the conversion of 2 outbuildings associated with Garbethill House. N/06/01879/FUL: Conversion of Two Outbuildings to Dwellinghouses, granted on 12.12.07 and N/08/00622/FUL: Alterations to Dwellinghouse and Conversion of Outbuilding to Living Accommodation, granted 28.07.08. It is understood that once constructed, these dwellings will be advertised for sale to the public. Although not a

25

consideration of this application, it may be suggested that one of these dwellings may be suitable for the purposes of a manager associated with the surrounding farm business. Notwithstanding this, the timescales for development are uncertain and may not coincide with the impending need for a managers dwelling and the conversions may not fulfil the personal requirements of the manager in terms of accommodation.

Although the Slamannan Plateau SSSl is in close proximity to the site, SNH do not object to the proposal. Instead they advise that in the instance that the Planning Authority are minded to grant this application, that conditions be attached in order to safeguard the taiga bean geese. This requirement has been complied with. Given this, the proposal is not considered to be contrary to policy ENV18-Nature Conservation of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993.

Having considered the merits of this case, I recommend approval of this application.

4.13

4.14

4.15 If the Committee accepts the above recommendation, the planning permission should not be issued until an agreement under Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 has been concluded with the applicant in respect of the dwelling always remaining in the occupation of a person employed wholly and locally in agriculture or any other rural use considered appropriate by the Planning Authority and to tie the dwelling to the agricultural unit.

26

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Agent

Development:

Location:

Ward:

Grid Reference:

File Reference:

Site History:

N/08/010671FUL

17th July 2008

Campsies Centre Cumbernauld Ltd Fleming House 2 Tryst Road Cumbernauld G67 IJW

Halcrow Group Ltd 368 Alexandra Parade Glasgow G31 3AU

Construction of Replacement Footbridge

Former Cross Town Link Tummel Way Centra I Way Cumbernauld

3-Cumbernauld South Councillors: Carrigan, Goldie, Homer & McElroy

275978674561

N/08/01067/FUL

The site is covered by Town Centre Policies (SHI, 8) in the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 Development Plan:


Consultations: Strathclyde Police (Comments)

Representations:

Newspaper Advertisement:

2 letters of representation received.

Advertised on 6th August 2008

27


1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

That the development hereby permitted shall be started within five years of the date of this permission.


That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers: TB-CUMB-STR-009, 01 0,014 and 015.


That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the external materials shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of amenity by ensuring that the external materials are appropriate for the site and the general area.

That before the development hereby permitted commences, a scheme of replacement landscaping for the currently landscaped area to the west of the bridge and of hard landscaping for the area currently occupied by the redundant stair/ ramp pod shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include:- (a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, grass seeding and turfing; (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development (d) the use of bio-diversity appropriate landscaping species.

Reason: In the interests of amenity by ensuring that landscaping is appropriate for the site and for the general area.

That within the first planting season of the opening of the footbridge hereby permitted all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of Condition 4 above, shall be completed and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased within two years of the completion of the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.


That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of internal and external lighting shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority; thereafter the approved lighting works shall be carried out and maintained in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason: In the interests of amenity by ensuring that lighting is appropriate for the structure and the general area.

That before the development hereby permitted starts, amended plans showing aesthetically improved railing details shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority; thereafter the approved railings shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the approved

29

scheme.

Reason: In the interests of amenity by ensuring that the design of the footbridge is appropriate for the prominent town centre location.

That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of directional signage to alternative pedestrian routes over and under Central Way shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority; thereafter the approved signage shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the approved scheme.

8.

Reason: In the interests of public access by ensuring that alternative pedestrian routes are publicised for use in the event that the bridge is closed or the lift is out of operation.

That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of bridge security measures (i.e. CCTV) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority; thereafter the approved security measures shall be carried out and maintained in accordance with the approved scheme.

9.

Reason: In the interests of public security and wellbeing by ensuring that appropriate security measures are in place for the bridge, including the lift.

10. That within one month of the bridge being completed all buildings, structures, works, plant or machinery shall be removed from the approved site compound area and this area shall be reinstated to its previous condition.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the site compound area.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 17th July 2008

Letter from Strathclyde Police received 25th August 2008

Memo from Traffic & Transportation (Northern Area) received 1'' September 2008

Letter from Cumbernauld Community Forum, The Link C E Centre, Bron Way, Cumbernauld, G67 received 14'h August 2008. Letter from North Lanarkshire Disability Access Panel, 5 Gainburn Crescent, Condorrat, Cumbernauld, G67 4QN received 22"' September 2008.

Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Martin Dean at 01236 616466

Date: 23rd September 2008.

30

APPLICATION NO. N/08/01067/FUL

REPORT

1.

1 .I

1.2

2.

2.1

2.2

3.

3.1

3.2

3.1

3.2


The application is for a replacement pedestrian footbridge across Central Way leading from Tummel Way to Ettrick Walk in Cumbernauld Town Centre. The existing footbridge is closed due to structural problems.

It is proposed to erect an open asymmetric cable stayed bridge with a lift and spiral staircase at the southern Tummel Way end. The application also covers a detached site compound on the grassed open space in front of the former Esso Garage.

Development Plan

The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of Local Plan policies.

The site is covered by Town Centre Policies (SHI, 8) in the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993. These policies cover the retail prominence of the town centre and the potential to improve its environment.


Summaries of external consultation responses received are as follows.

Strathclyde Police: The existing enclosed bridge has been extensively vandalised and presents and creates an unwelcoming and hostile environment. Bridges similar to that proposed have created policing issues through objects being thrown at passing vehicles and suicide attempts. The proposed bridge stairway is wide enough to provide sufficient passing room but wraps around the lift shaft thus creating blind spots for concealment. There is a problem with lack of visibility due to overgrown landscaping at the eastern end of the bridge. It is suggested that control be put in place to stop abuse of the bridge and lift. The height of the handrail is such as to enable miscreants to climb and target vehicles below and to allow for self harm. Lighting should meet appropriate intensity and evenness standards to deter crime. It is suggested that the road section of bridge be sympathetically enclosed and realistic out of hours restrictions put in place.

My Head of Roads and Transportation has no objections to the proposed footbridge. The provision of a lift instead of a ramp should satisfy Disability Discrimination Act requirements. There is no concern over the open nature of the proposed footbridge which is typical of conventional and cable-stayed footbridges. The new footbridge will be adopted by North Lanarkshire Council.

Letters of objection have been received from Cumbernauld Community Forum and North Lanarkshire Disability Access Panel with the following points being raised.

Point of Objection: The footbridge should be enclosed. The proposed access stair and the bridge deck will be exposed to the elements in the most exposed site in Cumbernauld. This is unacceptable for a link between two shopping areas and for a bridge which will be attractive, because of the lift, to the disabled and to people with limited mobility.

31

Comments: It would be desirable for the bridge to be enclosed. The applicants are not, however, agreeable to this suggestion due to issues of affordability and ease of maintenance. Notwithstanding the obvious problems to bridge users in bad weather it is not considered that this is an overriding problem with it being noted that the footpath link is open to the weather on the southern side and semi open on the northern side. This matter is discussed further in paragraph 4.7 below.

Point of Objection: There should be both a lift and ramp for disabled access with a ramp being preferable to a lift as it would be available at all times. The lift will have maintenance issues due to its outside location and the alternative disabled access route during periods when the lift is out of operation involves a lengthy detour. Comments: There are advantages and disadvantages relating to a lift and to a ramp. While a lift provides easy and quick access it has the disadvantage of needing careful maintenance and potentially being out of action if in need of repair. A lift may also encourage loitering. On the other hand a ramp has the advantage of always being available for use but, due to the height difference that it needs to cover, it will be extremely lengthy at almost 100 metres plus a further distance from the bridge pylon to the end of the ramp. This compares to a bridge deck length of less than 50 metres. It is considered that this excessive length of ramp will represent a deterrent to use by disabled persons. The applicants have insisted that the only proposal is for a lift plus stairs and that the application should be determined on this basis. The issue of the lift is further examined in paragraph 4.6 below.

Point of Objection: There should be a site visit and hearing prior to a decision being reached. Comments: This is a matter for the Committee to decide.

3.3

3.4

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

4.2 The application is not of strategic significance and as such only requires to be assessed against the local plan. Relevant policies within the Cumbernautd Local Plan are SH1 and SH8 which cover the retail prominence of the town centre and the potential to improve its environment.

4.3 Policy SH1 seeks to maintain and enhance the role of the town centre as the main shopping centre of the district. It is considered that the proposal complies with this policy by providing easy pedestrian access between important, but currently separated parts of the town centre. This will enhance the general retail attractiveness of the town centre as a whole.

4.4 Policy SH8 seeks to improve the environment of the town centre. The proposed footbridge complies with this policy by removing a redundant and unattractive footbridge and replacing it with an operational footbridge with a striking design which echoes other footbridges in the wider Cumbernauld area.

4.5 It is considered that the principle of the footbridge is acceptable because there has been a footbridge at this location for a considerable number of years and there is an obvious need for safe pedestrian access across Central Way in this area. At present pedestrians often make the dangerous journey directly across Central Way due to the existing bridge being closed and the distance to alternative safe crossing points. A recommended planning condition requires that signage be put up informing users of alternative routes over and under Central Way in the event that the bridge is closed or the lift is not operational.

Key design issues are the use of a lift for disabled access, the open nature of the footbridge and its design quality. Although the lift is in general an acceptable means of getting from ground to

4.6

32

bridge deck level there is concern over means of access for those who cannot use the stairs if the lift is out of operation. The bridge, including lift, will, however, be taken over by North Lanarkshire Council as Roads Authority and it must, therefore, be assumed that the lift will be kept in good working order. The alternative of a ramp has been discounted by the applicants due to its excessive length. It is noted that Strathclyde Police suggest that there be a security scheme put in place (Police comments have been forwarded to the agents). A recommended condition requires that details of bridge and lift security measures be submitted and implemented.

4.7 The proposed footbridge differs from the existing one in that it is open rather than enclosed. Although there is the obvious disadvantage of exposure to the weather there are advantages of improved security and ease of maintenance. The existing closed bridge had serious problems of persons loitering in its dry interior to the concern of general users. The difficulties of maintenance of its outer fabric meant that it became an unattractive and shabby structure. It is anticipated that these problems will not arise with the proposed bridge, although the lift may need to have security measures.

4.8 There is concern that the design of the proposed footbridge does not reflect or emphasis its important town centre location. Although the applicants have failed to take up the suggestion of a radical redesign it is noted that the bridge is based round a bold and aesthetically pleasing tapered pylon. Recommended planning conditions require that improved handrail details and lighting details be submitted. More interesting handrails and artistic lighting will markedly improve the appearance of the footbridge.

4.9 It is considered that the replacement footbridge is a welcome development which will benefit both pedestrians and this section of the town centre. It is recommended that planning permission be granted.

4.10 It should be noted that there has been a request for a site visit and hearing.

33

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Development:

Location :

Ward:

Grid Reference:

File Reference:

Site History:

Development Plan:

Contrary to Development Plan:

Consultations:

Representations:


N/08/01205/FUL

18th August 2008

Mrs P MacWilliam 12 Athelstane Drive Greenfaulds Cum bernauld G67 4BD

Part Use of Dwellinghouse for Childminding

12 Athelstane Drive Greenfaulds Cum bernauld G67 4BD

3 - Cumbernauld South: Councillors Carrigan, McElroy, Goldie and Homer

274970673356

N/08/01205/FUL

04/01 033lFUL Erection of a Conservatory Approved 11/08/04

The site is covered by Policy HG4: Residential Amenity in the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993

No

No letters of representation received.

Advertised on 27th August 2008


1.

2.

3.



That the childminding use hereby permitted shall only operate between the hours of 7.30 am and 6 pm Monday to Friday.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the surrounding area.

That the number of children looked after shall be limited to a maximum of 12.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the surrounding area.

34

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 15th August 2008

Memo from Traffic & Transportation (Northern Area) received 9th September 2008

Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mrs Kirsten Devlin at 01236 616463.

Date: 22"' September 2008

36

APPLICATION NO. N1081012051FUL

REPORT

1.

1 . I

1.2

2.

2.1

2.2

3.

3.1

3.2

4.

4.1

4.2


The applicant seeks planning permission to use part of the dwellinghouse at 12 Athelstane Drive, Greenfaulds, for a child minding business. The intention is to provide placements for a maximum of 12 children of various ages all year round, including school holidays. 2 childminders and 1 assistant will look after the children.

The dwellinghouse is 1.5 storeys in height and sits at the end of the cul-de-sac. It is bounded to the west and east by residential properties, to north by a footpath and play area and to the south by open space and Greenfaulds Road. The house has double garage and a large driveway that can easily accommodate 4 vehicles.

Development Plan

This application raises no strategic issues and therefore can be assessed in terms of the relevant Local Plan Policy

In terms of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 the application site is covered by Policy HG4: Residential Amenity which states there is a presumption against the loss of houses to other uses, and development which could be detrimental to residential amenity. There is however a presumption in favour of developments of an ancillary nature which enhance the provision of local community facilities and services, although the introduction of a non-residential activity will not be acceptable if it is likely to lead to a loss of amenity.

Consultations and Rewesentations

My Traffic and Transportation Section has no objections to the proposal.

No letters of representation have been received as a result of the neighbour notification process or advertisement in the local press.

Planning Assessment and Conclusions

Under Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 planning decisions must be made in accordance with the relevant development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise, In this case, Policy HG4: Residential Amenity of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 is of particular relevance. It states there is a presumption in favour of development that enhances the provision of local community facilities and services, providing it is not likely to lead to a loss of amenity.

The part use of the property for child minding purposes is considered to be a suitable development of a complimentary nature to housing which will enhance the provision of local facilities and services. Given the location of the site (next to a play area and with good footpath connections to the local High School and Baird Memorial Primary School) and the ability to provide sufficient in-curtilage parking provision the proposal is considered to be compatible with the residential setting and is unlikely to adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding area. The proposal will provide a welcome local community facility. It is therefore recommended that planning permission is granted subject to conditions.

37

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Agent

Development:

Location:

Ward:

N/08/012 14lFUL

18th August 2008

Mr & Mrs Pillar 8 Lochearnhead Road Millerston Stepps G33 6LH

Mr G Maher 19 Second Avenue Bearsden Glasgow G61 2LR

Extension to Dwellinghouse and Formation of Front and Rear Dormers

8 Lochearnhead Road Millerston Stepps G33 6LH

5 - Strathkelvin: Councillors Hogg, McGlinchey, Shaw & Wallace

Grid Reference: 265061 668178

File Reference: N/08/012 14lFUL

Site History:

Development Plan:


Northern Corridor Local Plan, 2005

Consultations: None

Representations : One letter of representation received.

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required


1, That the development hereby permitted shall be started within five years of the date of this permission.


2. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with plans stamped approved.


38

3. That except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority the facing materials to be used for the external walls and roof shall match in colour and texture those of the existing adjoining dwelling.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 18th August 2008

Letter from Mr Young, 6 Lochearnhead Road, Stepps, G33 6LH: received on 23'' September 2008.


Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Jennifer Thomson at 01236 616473.


40

APPLICATION NO. N/08/01214/FUL

REPORT

1.

1.1

1.2

2.

2.1

2.2

3.

3.1


This application is for the formation of a garage and utility room to the side and a kitchen and sitting room to the rear of 8 Lochearnhead Road, Stepps. Additionally, front and rear dormer windows would be added to form three bedrooms in the upper floor.

The application property is situated within an established residential area and has a large rear garden surrounded by a 2 metre high mature hedge.

Development Plan


In the Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005 the site lies within a defined residential area where housing Policy HG3 (Retention of Residential Amenity) applies. The policy seeks to ensure that development is in keeping with the residential setting and does not adversely affect the amenity of housing areas


A letter of representation was received from an occupant of the adjacent property on 23'' September 2008. The objections raised are as follows:

The height of the proposed extension and the length projecting into the present garden area will severely reduce the light coming into the rear garden and create an abnormal loss of daylight into our rear bedroom.

Comments: The light received by the side window of the existing extension in the neighbouring property may be affected to a degree. An assessment of the daylight and sunlight availability has been carried out. Both adjacent properties would be affected to a degree by the proposal, however sufficient daylight is shown to be received by each and the impact is within the acceptable range and would not warrant refusal of permission. Additionally the removal of the existing garage has the potential to increase the amount of daylight received at number 6 Lochearnhead Road.

0 The building is proposed to be built up to the feu line, and at least 2 to 3 feet would be required to allow access for workmen, foundations to be constructed and walls rendered.

Comments: Access required for construction is not a planning matter but a legal matter, however the applicants have been advised that permission would not be granted by neighbouring proprietors for access to construct the extension.

While conceding that other extensions have been permitted, the siting of the garage in other bungalows is not immediately adjacent to the property. The proposed location of the garage is not in keeping with the positioning of other garages in Lochearnhead Road.

Comments: The proposed design has been assessed and is considered to be acceptable.

41

The plans do not indicate proposals for drainage / water / sewerage etc that presently run along the middle of the driveway. The drains are 4 inch pipes which was adequate in 1938, but will they be adequate for this extension?

Comments: Drainage for the extension and ensuring maintenance of pipes is possible would be covered at the Building Warrant stage.

Is there anything in Planning Regulations that would prohibit excessive noise caused by garage doors opening and closing?

Comments: This is not a planning consideration and it is felt that the noise of a garage door is acceptable in a residential setting.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

4.2 Other properties in this street have been previously extended. An assessment of the overshadowing impact of the extension has been carried out and overshadowing was found to be within the acceptable range. Additionally, the existing single storey garage in the rear garden is to be removed which will increase the amount of light received at the side window and rear garden of the objector’s property. The proposal is therefore not considered to be detrimental to the residential amenity of the area.

The proposed extensions are considered to have acceptable designs with the rear extension having a pitched roof and the side extension a mono pitched roof. The dormers are in keeping with design guidance, are relatively modest in size and are set below the roof line.

4.3

4.4 The proposed extension is not considered to be contrary to the Northern Corridor Local Plan, in particular policy HG3 (Retention of Residential Amenity) in that the design is acceptable and the dormers are not excessively large for the roof.

Having taken account of all relevant material considerations, and notwithstanding the concerns raised by the neighbouring proprietor, it is recommended that planning permission be granted for a side and rear extension and front and rear dormers at 8 Lochearnhead Road, Stepps.

4.5

42

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Development:

Location:

N/08/01278/MIN

1st September 2008

Farrans (Construction) Limited Oakbank Mid Calder West Lothian EH53 OJS

Reprofiling of Bing Area by the Removal and Depositing of Material in Connection with Adjacent Offline Phase of the M80 Motorway Construction Works

Auchengeich Bing Auchengeich Road Mood ies bu rn North Lanarkshire

Ward: 5 - Strathkelvin. Councillors Hogg, McGlinchey, Shaw & Wallace

Grid Reference: 268337671174

File Reference: N/08/01278/MIN

Site History:

Development Plan:

P/64/669: Removal of Blaes Bing at Auchengeich Colliery granted on 7'h September 1964.

The site is covered by Green Belt policies (ENV 2-8) in the Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005


Consultations: Scottish Natural Heritage Scottish Water Transport Scotland

(Comments) (No Objections) (No Objections)

Representations : No letters of representation received.

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 10th September 2008

43


1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

That the development hereby permitted shall be started within five years of the date of this permission


That all extraction and deposition of materials shall cease within 2 years from the date of commencement of the development.

Reason: To accord with the submitted details and to give the Planning Authority the opportunity to review their position.

That the site shall be restored to final contour levels as specified in the approved cross sections (or such other levels as may be approved in writing by the Planning Authority), no later than 6 months after the cessation of the extraction and deposit of materials.

Reason: To accord with submitted details and to ensure the timeous restoration of the site.

That the operators shall at all times deal with the areas forming the subject of this consent in accordance with the application form, plans as stamped approved, and other supporting information, except as amended by the terms of the approval hereby given and shall omit no part of the approved operations and shall not amend the development without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control.

That the materials extracted from and deposited on the application site shall only go to and be sourced from the associated off line phase of the M80 Stepps to Haggs motorway construction works; or such other scheme as may be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to define the permission and ensure that there is no impact on local roads and communities through the transportation of materials.

That before the development hereby permitted starts, vehicular access details from the bing to the motorway construction corridor shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, the vehicular access to and from the site shall solely be from the adjacent motorway construction corridor and will not involve vehicular movements on the public road network. Thereafter, and for the duration of the works the approved access arrangements shall be used by all traffic associated with the development.

Reason: In order to ensure that there is no impact on local roads and communities through the transportation of materials.

That there shall be a 15 metres stand off from the Bothlin Burn, the Garnkirk Burn and the Strathkelvin Walkway within which there shall be no development, including the siting of soil mounds, formation of drainage ditches etc and such areas shall be protected by fencing of a specification to be agreed in advance of the commencement of work on site by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of nature conservation and local amenity.

That all trees within the site to be retained shall be maintained and protected from damage by

45

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

appropriate temporary fencing where required throughout the duration of the operations until restoration is completed, the position of the fencing to be agreed with the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the wellbeing of the protected trees.

That no excavation works or deposition of any material shall be carried out within 3 metres of the canopy of any protected tree.

Reason: To protect the protected trees.

That should the approved protected species survey be more than 12 months out of date prior to the commencement of works an updated protected species survey shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that protected species are not adversely affected by the proposed development.

That the ecological mitigation measures described in the approved protected species survey shall be implemented in full.

Reason: To ensure that protected species are not adversely affected by the proposed development.

That the proposal shall comply with the terms of the approved Noise Mitigation Statement.

Reason: To minimise noise generation from the site in the interests of amenity.

That the proposal shall comply with the terms of a dust action plan to be agreed with the Planning Authority in advance of any works commencing on site.

Reason: To minimise dust generation from the site in the interests of amenity.

That before any part of the site is excavated or is traversed by heavy vehicles or machinery (except for the purpose of stripping that part), or is used for the stacking of subsoil or overburden, all available topsoil shall be stripped from that part of the site; topsoil and subsoil for use in the site restoration shall be stored in separate mounds.

Reason: In the interests of soil management and effective afteruse.

That prior to the commencement of any earthworks within the site, secure fencing of a specification, height, style and position to be agreed in advance by the Planning Authority shall be erected around the perimeter of the working area of the site.

Reason: In the interests of public safety.

That before the development hereby permitted starts, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority, For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the requirements of the publication titled "Drainage Assessment: A Guide for Scotland" and any other advice subsequently published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) or the Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party (SUDSWP). The post-development surface water discharges shall ensure that the rate and quantity of run-off to any watercourse are no greater than the pre-development run-off for any storm return period unless it can be demonstrated that a higher discharge is necessary to protect or improve the aquatic habitat. SUDS shall still be provided even where discharges are proposed to public sewers notwithstanding any conditions imposed by Scottish Water. If the area of ground

46

illustrated on the approved drawing is inadequate for the purpose, a revised layout drawing for this part of the proposed development shall be submitted to and for the approval of the Planning Authority prior to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the said Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater.

That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 16 shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Within three months of the construction of the SUDS, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in drainage works) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved plans.

17.

Reason: To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution

That measures shall be taken to ensure that drainage from areas adjoining the site is not impaired or rendered less efficient by the operations hereby permitted, and adequate precautions shall be taken to prevent the pollution of ditches, watercourses and drains within and adjacent to the site to the satisfaction of SEPA and the Planning Authority.

18.

Reason: In the interests of water management and to prevent pollution of natural watercourses.

19. That all contaminated water on site shall be treated in the appropriate water treatment areas prior to discharge into any watercourse in accordance with a detailed scheme which shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for approval, in consultation with SEPA, prior to the commencement of development. The water treatment facilities shall be of adequate capacity to cater for the likely maximum volume of contaminated water, and to control the discharge flow into any watercourse in accordance with the requirements of SEPA.

Reason: In the interests of protecting the local water regime.

That except where stored in double skinned tanks any oil, fuel, lubricant, paint or solvent stored within the site shall be provided with a suitable bund or other means of containment for 110% of the storage capacity, and with no passive means of drainage.

Reason: In the interests of protecting the local water regime.

20.

21. That prior to the commencement of development a detailed restoration scheme based on the proposals illustrated in Indicative Restoration Proposals shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for approval. That scheme shall include, but not be limited to: (i) a full description of the methodologies to be used in reinstating the various types of habitat (ii) a timetabled schedule of works (iii) details of the extent, species, type and size of trees and hedging to be planted as part of the restoration of the site (iv) details of the width, alignment and surfacing of any footpaths to be formed within the site and on adjoining land in the applicants ownership and (v) details of any reinstated wetland/ ponds.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these matters in detail and to ensure satisfactory restoration.

22. The Restoration Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the timetable approved under condition 21 above.

47

Reason: To ensure the reinstatement of the site within a satisfactory timescale in the interests of amenity.

That, notwithstanding condition 21 above, the following conditions shall be observed in the restoration of the site to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority:

(a) following the replacement of overburden, and before the replacement of subsoil, the upper layers of the overburden shall be rooted and cross-rooted to a depth of 500mm, with boulders and stones exceeding 250mm in one dimension being removed from the site or buried on the site at a considerable depth; (b) all available subsoils shall be re-spread evenly in separate layers of 300mm depth and each layer shall be rooted and cross-rooted, with boulders and stones exceeding 150mm in one dimension being removed; (c) all subsoil areas which have been used for the storing of other subsoil or topsoil shall be rooted and cross-rooted in a similar manner to (b) above; (d) following the replacement of subsoil, all available topsoil shall be re-spread evenly to achieve the final level and configuration, and shall be rooted and cultivated as required with all stones exceeding 1 OOmm in one dimension being removed; and (e) all operations involving subsoil and topsoil replacement and cultivation shall only be carried out when the full volume of soil involved is in a suitably dry soil moisture condition to minimise soil damage and to maximise the effects of the rooting operations.

23.

Reason: In the interests of sound soils management.

24. That in the areas identified in the restoration plan for woodland planting, soils should be loosely tipped with subsequent spreading by a backacting excavation.

Reason: To ensure suitable woodland planting conditions.

25. That upon cessation of extraction and importation of materials, all settlement ponds that are not to be reinstated to water based features shall be emptied of slurry, filled with dry inert material and restored, and all areas of hardstanding shall be broken up and restored.

Reason: In the interests of effective land management and reinstatement.

26. That within three months of the completion of the restoration of the site, all fixed equipment, plant, machinery and buildings shall be removed from the site.

Reason: In the interests of amenity.

27. That at least three months prior to the importation of topsoil on the site, a 5 year aftercare scheme for areas defined in the restoration plan as grassland shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for approval, and the scheme shall specify such steps as may be necessary to bring the land to a standard suitable for agricultural use and shall include cultivating, fertilising following soil sampling and analysis, watering, draining and otherwise treating the land.

Reason: In the interests of sound land management and agricultural effectiveness.

That at least three months before the reprofiling of the area defined in the restoration plan as woodland a 5 year aftercare scheme for woodland development shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for approval, and the scheme shall be prepared and implemented by suitably qualified experts on the individual elements of the scheme.

28.

Reason: In the interests of sound land management and nature conservation.

48

29 That the requirements of condition 27 and 28 above shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed timescale and shall be managed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority in accordance with the agreed prescriptions during the relevant aftercare period.

Reason: In the interests of amenity, agricultural effectiveness and woodland development.

NOTE TO COMMITTEE:

If the Committee accepts the above recommendation, the planning permission should not be issued until an agreement under Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 has been concluded with the applicant in respect of a restoration bond, the duration of works plus restoration, routing of vehicles solely within the motorway construction corridor and the limiting of the bing removal and depositing of materials to the associated off line phase of the M80 Stepps to Haggs motorway construction works.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 1 st September 2008

Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 12th September 2008 Letter from Scottish Water received 30th September 2008 Letter from Transport Scotland received 22nd September 2008

Memo from Geotechnical Team Leader received 1 !jth September 2008


Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Martin Dean at 01236 616466.


49

APPLICATION NO. N1081012781MIN

REPORT

1.

1.1

1.2

1.2

2.

2.1

2.2

3.

3.1

3.2

3.3

4.

4.1


The application is for the reprofiling of Auchengeich Bing, north of Moodiesburn in connection with the adjacent M80 extension motorway works. The approved route of the motorway extension goes through the middle of the bing area.

It is proposed that material from the bing be used to provide 250,000m3 of an estimated 400,000m3 shortfall of suitable fill material on the section of proposed motorway to the east Of the bing. The bing will be reprofiled and finished with subsoil, peat and topsoil from the road building operation. This reprofiling will give a more regular roadside embankment appearance to the site, with the area to the north of the line of motorway being reinstated as woodland and the area to the south of the motorway being reinstated as agricultural land. It is proposed to retain planted buffer areas between the proposed earthworks and the adjacent Bothlin Burn, Garnkirk Burn and Strathkelvin Walkway. The application is accompanied by a protected species survey plus information on noise mitigation and ground conditions.

The bing currently consists of stockpiles of waste formed into a generally concentric formation with a raised circular outer area and an inner lower area. The site has regenerated such that it is now heavily wooded.

Development Plan


The site is covered by Green Belt policies (ENV 2-8) in the Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005. These policies presume against inappropriate forms of development but support development required for agriculture and forestry and development which requires to be in the Green Belt.


Summaries of external consultation responses received are as follows.

Scottish Natural Heritage: It is noted that there is a proposal for a more detailed Protected Species Survey and SNH wishes to reserve its position until this is carried out. On the basis of the submitted walkover survey it would appear that protected species are unlikely to pose any significant constraints to the proposal. Scottish Water: No objections. Transport Scotland: No objections.

My Geotechnical Team Leader has requested additional drainage information.

There have been no representations against the proposed development.


In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 planning

50

decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

4.2 The application is not of strategic significance and as such only requires to be assessed against the local plan. Relevant policies within the Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005 (ENV 2-8) identify the site as being within the Green Belt. Of particular relevance are the following policies.

0 ENV 3 (Improving the Green Belt): This policy supports urban fringe planting in the interests of visual amenity, nature conservation and public access. The proposed development accords with this policy with it involving a substantial amount of new woodland planting.

ENV 4 (Development in the Green Belt): This policy presumes against most forms of development but does potentially allow for development necessary for agriculture and forestry and development shown to be required to be located in the Green Belt. The proposed development accords with this policy in that there will be woodland and agricultural afteruses and there is no alternative to a Green Belt location as this is a unique situation of an existing source of material immediately adjacent to a proposed motorway route.

0

4.3 A recommended condition requires that additional SUDS compliant drainage information be provided and that there be appropriate measures to protect the adjacent watercourses. Further protected species information will be forwarded to SNH. It is noted, however, that SNH agree that the current survey indicates that no protected species will be at risk from the development. It is considered that this is sufficient to allow the application to be processed.

4.4 It is noted that planning permission was granted in 1964 for the removal of the bing. This permission may have been partially implemented and it is therefore possible that this permission may still be valid. However this permission would only allow for the removal of material from the bing and not the deposition of materials and reprofiling of the site.

4.5 All vehicle movements associated with the extraction and importation of materials will take place within the motorway construction corridor and will not impact on local roads. Recommended planning conditions tie the development to the motorway construction operation.

4.6 It is considered that the proposed works will improve the appearance of the site, will create effective afteruses and will not adversely affect local communities during operations. It will also reduce the need for vehicle movements on local roads by providing a source of materials and a location for deposition of surplus materials immediately adjacent to the proposed motorway. It is recommended that planning permission be granted.

If the Committee accepts the above recommendation, the planning permission should not be issued until a Section 75 Legal Agreement is entered into in respect of a restoration bond, the duration of works plus restoration, routing of vehicles solely within the motorway construction corridor and the limiting of the bing removal and depositing of materials to the associated off line phase of the M80 Stepps to Haggs motorway construction works.

4.7

51

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Agent

Development:

Location:

Ward:

Grid Reference:

File Reference:

Site History:

Development Plan:

C/08/0 1 08 1 /F U L

17th July 2008

Coatbridge College Kildonan Street Coatbridge ML5 3LS

SMC Jenkins & Marr 53 Bothwell Street Glasgow G2 6TS

Erection of Temporary Teaching and Office Portacabins

Coatbridge College Kildonan Street Cliftonville Coatbridge North Lanarkshire ML5 3LS

6 Coatbridge North And Glenboig:

273943665336

Councillors Clarke, McWilliams Shields, & Wilson

CIPLICTK425ICMNIEL

Previous ADplications of Relevance 0

0

0

0

82/00194 Extension to College (Construction of Northern Building) - Granted September 1982 96100326 External Alterations - Granted August 1996 C/99/01616 External Alterations - Granted February 2000 C/08/00233/FUL Refurbishment and Extension of College Facilities Including Formation of Entrance Atrium, Alterations to Parking and Road Layout (to Form 1-Way System) and Formation of Footways and New Accesses on Laird Street - Granted 4th September 2008

Zoned as EDUC 1: Protect and Improve Schools, and ENV 1511 and ENV 16: Conservation Area Improvements in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991, including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996.


Consultations:

Representations:

Newspaper Advertisement: 30th July 2008

1 letter of representation received.

52


1. That except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the portacabins, hereby permitted, shall be removed no later than 1" July 201 1.

Reason: To clarify the temporary nature of the permission and ensure the limited impact of the development.

2. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:-


(90)200 (90)201, (2-)200, (2-)201, & (2-)202,

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 17th July 2008 Memo from Traffic and Transportation Team Leader received 30th May 2008 (applies to Planning Permission C/08/00233/FUL) Memo from Traffic and Transportation Team Leader received 25'h September 2008 Letter from 8 Gallagher, 47 Laird Street, Dunbeth, Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire, ML5 3LW received 23rd July 2008. Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, 6 & C September 1996

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Christopher McNey at 01236 812375.


54

APPLICATION NO. C1081010811FUL

REPORT


Planning permission is sought for the temporary erection of portacabins until April 2011 on Eglinton Street, at Coatbridge College, Coatbridge.

Planning permission was recently granted to form an entrance atrium and other refurbishment works to Coatbridge College (08/00233/FUL granted 4'h September 2008). In order to allow the College to remain operational this application proposes to partially re-house the displaced staff and students while the works are ongoing. The intention is to relocate the majority (around two thirds of those displaced) to the former Coatbridge High school building on Albert Street, with the remainder decanted to portacabins buildings within the existing College grounds. The focus of the application is the northern end of the privately owned section of Eglinton Street to the west of the College. This section of Eglinton Street is currently used as a parking area and as a means of access for goods vehicles, car repair students, and disabled students (refer to location plan).

The proposal would include a large two storey p!rtacabin adjoined to a single storey portazcabin. The total ground floor coverage would be 570m and the first floor area would be 370.5m . The portacabins are of modular design with windows to the east and west. The two storey segment would be to the north and would be 7.1 metres in height.

Pre-application discussions were held regarding the options for decant while the refurbishment works were undertaken. These included a full decant to portacabins on site which would require the entirety of Eglinton Street to be closed off and a three storey block to be erected. The application under consideration has been forwarded as the option with the least impact to the immediate area.

Development Plan

There are no strategic implications and the application will therefore be considered in relation to Local Plan Policy which includes policies EDUC 1 - Protect and Improve Schools, and ENV 15/1 and ENV 16 - Conservation Area Improvements, in the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991,


The Transportation Section made comments regarding the associated proposal for the atrium and refurbishment works which are relevant:

0

0

0

The existing car parks and surrounding residential streets are saturated in terms of parking The junction of Park Street and Kildonan Street is substandard Parking provision of 264 spaces required, existing layout allows for 161 spaces (shortfall 103 spaces). The proposed buildings would temporarily remove a further 36 car parking spaces.

55

3.2

4.

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

One letter of representation was received from 47 Laird Street to the north of the site, following the standard notification procedure and advertisement in the Coatbridge and Airdrie Advertiser on 30th July 2008. The objection can be summarised as follows:

0 No parking provision 0

0

Vehicle and pedestrian traffic disruption to already congested area

Damage to property caused by heavy goods vehicles Unnecessary din in addition to work on other buildings Pollution caused by increased traffic

Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires that the application be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Policy EDUC 1 states that the Council will seek to protect and improve schools, and that it will encourage greater community use of educational facilities. The principle of using Eglinton Street to temporarily site portacabins for educational purposes is therefore in accord with the policy.

The site is within the Blairhill and Dunbeth Conservation area and as such policies ENVI511 and ENV 16 of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 apply. The policies essentially seek to protect the special character of the conservation area. Whilst the proposed building design is not of a traditional design it would compliment the existing neighbouring primary school buildings, which are of a modern contemporary design. Therefore there would be minimal impact on the character of the conservation area. In addition, the temporary nature of the proposal would ensure there would be no long term impact on the conservation area and as such it is considered that the proposal would be considered acceptable.

In response to the letter of objection the following comments are made:

0 It is considered that there would be minimal disruption to traffic as the position of the portacabins would not block or cause a re-routing oftraffic, excepting those cars that would normally park there. There is likely to be a focus of pedestrians where the entrances to the portacabins would be but this is considered to be acceptable given the temporary nature of the proposed building. The proposal is for a temporary period and it would include a reduction of staff and student numbers on site and therefore a reduction of site bound traffic, both vehicular and pedestrian. It is accepted that the proposal would reduce the number of on campus car parking spaces, however, as the works would include the re-housing of students to Coatbridge High it is considered likely that there would be reduced demand over the period of the permission. In addition the car spaces would become available on expiry of any permission. Damage caused by vehicles on the public road is a civil legal matter and should be dealt with by the police. It is not a planning consideration. While noise is a material consideration in this case it is considered that there is little basis for the objection. The use of the proposed buildings would be for educational purposes, which is well established in the area. The proposed building would not be located near existing houses. The number of staff and students on campus is likely to be lower and the construction noise would be temporary and brief given the modular nature of the proposed buildings. In addition, any perceived statutory noise nuisance would be dealt with under separate legislation.

0

0

0

56

The proposed building would be used for alternative accommodation for existing staff and students at the College. It is considered unlikely that there would be any change to air quality caused by the temporary buildings with the same use. The area has not been highlighted as an area of air pollution concern and as such it is considered air pollution is not a significant issue in the assessment of this application.

4.5 In making any determination under the planning Acts, regard must be paid to the development plan, the determination shall be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case, the principle use of the site for educational purposes is well established and the proposal generally accords with the terms of the development plan.

The objector highlighted concerns about parking, traffic and pollution and these have been assessed and cannot be sustained. No other representations following the formal notification and advertisement in the local press were received. The proposal and the associated refurbishment works, would likely affect a great number of people, those who attend the college, primary school, Dunbeth Park, and those who live in the Conservation Area to the north on Laird Street etc. The single objection must therefore be assessed in this context and weighted accordingly.

4.6

4.7 One key material consideration is the adverse impact on parking through the loss of on campus parking spaces and likely stress on nearby streets including Laird Street, Eglinton Street, and Park Street to the north where parking is already at saturation point (as previously noted by Transportation Section dated 30/05/08). It is accepted that this is a significant concern, however there is no obvious alternative or mitigation measures other than closure of the College while the works are undertaken. It is considered that the closure of the College, even for a temporary period, would have a greater adverse impact on the community. The College and its associated use bring a unique character to the area. That it does not achieve the parking and traffic standards required by the Transportation Section is a measure of its historic position in the area and its long standing association with this part of Coatbridge. Given the temporary nature of the proposal and reduced staff and student demand, it is considered that the loss of car park spaces is acceptable in this instance.

4.8 The general impact on the character of the area is considered to be reasonably positive since it would be seen in association with similar modular buildings within the primary school and against a backdrop of construction work. The temporary nature of the proposal would ensure that the character of the conservation area would not be adversely affected in the long term.

4.9 In conclusion, the adverse affects on amenity to the immediate surroundings that would be caused by the proposal, namely parking and traffic impact, although relatively significant, are outweighed by the positive impacts the development would make to the greater community by ensuring the College facilities are available throughout the refurbishment works. While it is accepted that this is not ideal the proposal would appear to form an acceptable temporary solution to re-house the students and staff displaced by the associated refurbishment works. It is therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to the attached conditions.

57

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Agent

Development:

Location :

Ward:

Grid Reference:

File Reference:

Site History:

Development Plan:

C/08/01170/FUL

7th August 2008

T Mobile Hamilton International Park Hamilton

Tom Gallivan WHP Projects Ltd Unit 4, Evans Easy Space Belgrave Bellshill ML4 3NP

Installation of 14.7m Telecommunications Mast and Ancillary Base Cabinets

Land At Heritage Way Summerlee Coatbridge North Lanarkshire

6 Coatbridge North And Glenboig Councillors Clarke, McWilliams, Shields & Wilson

272941 665273

C/PL/CTH220/SM/EL

The application site is located in an area designated as ECON 8 (General Urban Areas) and is assessed against policy TELI (Telecommunications Development) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.


Consultations: None

Rep resen tat io ns : No letters of representation received.


58

Recommendation:

Refuse for the reason that the development is considered contrary to policy TEL 1 (Telecommunications Development) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 as the removal of two mature trees to accommodate the telecommunication mast in this location would have a detrimental impact on the existing streetscape along Heritage Way and on the strategically important listed buildings and tourist attractions at Summerlee Heritage Park.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 7th August 2008 Supporting statement received 7'h August 2008 Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Susan Miller at 01236 812374.

Date: 23 September 2008

60

APPLICATION NO. C/08/01170/FUL

REPORT

1.

1.1

1.2

1.3

2.

2.1

3.

3.1

4.

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4


Planning permission is being sought for the erection of a 14.7 metre high mast with 3 antenna and associated ground based equipment cabinets. The proposed 14.7 metre monopole would be sited on a grass verge adjacent to the public footpath on the east side of Heritage Way, Coatbridge located between Summerlee Heritage Park (to the north) and the Summerlee Gatehouse (to the south).

Three ground based cabinets require to be installed and each shall be painted grey. The first is 0.9 metres wide by 0.9 metres deep and is 1.25 metres high. The second measures 1.3 metres wide by 0.9 metres deep and is 1.6 metres high. The third measures 0.5 metres wide by 0.6 metres deep and is 1.2 metres high.

In order to accommodate the mast and associated ground based equipment cabinets the applicant has indicated that two trees require to be removed from the verge.

Development Plan

The application site is located in an area designated as ECON 8 (General Urban Areas) and is assessed against policy TELl (Telecommunications Development) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. There are no strategic implications.


No consultations were required and no representations have been received.


In assessing this application the local plan policy ECON 8 (Existing General Urban Areas) is relevant. In land use terms the proposal is compliant with the development plan. There are no strategic issues.

Policy TEL 1 Telecommunications Development contained in the Monklands District Local Plan indicates that any telecommunications developments will be considered with regard to national policy and against; economic benefit, specific locational need, and environmental impact.

The applicant has supplied a supporting statement that indicates the need for a mast within this area to meet a shortfall in 3G coverage, which it claims will be of general benefit to business and domestic users in the area. It is unlikely that there would be a significant negative or positive impact with regard to economic benefit that can be measured. It will be of general benefit to the community to have full signal coverage.

The applicant submitted a supporting statement outlining the need for a telecommunications mast in this location and has provided the required site selection survey for possible alternative sites. Several sites within the vicinity were investigated before this location was put forward. Most were found to have site owners unwilling to accommodate a telecommunication mast.

61

4.5 It is acknowledged that the design of the telecommunication pole in itself is acceptable. It is considered that the monopole itself would not have a significant adverse impact on visual amenity of the surrounding area, There is an existing 2G mast in close proximity to the application site located on the public footpath. This existing mast requires to be moved to allow improvement works to the road to be carried out. These are required as part of the restoration and improvement scheme at Summerlee Museum. There are standard street lighting columns along Heritage Way.

The same telecommunications provider (T-Mobile) was granted permission C/06/019071FUL in January 2007 for the erection of a mast on the former Rentokill site on the opposite side of Heritage Way from the current application site. The mast was erected, however, due to land ownership issues the applicant was required to remove the mast.

The applicant entered in to pre-application discussions with the Development Management Team on the 17'h of July 2008. The applicant was advised that the scheme may be unacceptable as it involved the removal of two mature trees which contribute towards the amenity of the area and the setting of the Summerlee Heritage Park and the nearby gatehouse, both of which are Listed Buildings and (with the recent and significant scheme of improvements) form a very important part of the regeneration of the area. The applicant has did not altered the scheme prior to submission. The applicant has indicated that the dimensions of the ground based equipment cabinets is such that they cannot be accommodated nearby and that the 2 trees must be removed.

4.6

4.7

4.8 Whilst not covered by a Tree preservation Order, the line of trees along the east side of Heritage Way contributes to the setting and entry point of Summerlee Heritage Park. The Heritage Park has recently been the subject of a redevelopment scheme to upgrade facilities at the park. These works also involved additional hard and soft landscaping around the park. As part of the improved landscaping a line of trees has been carried along from the existing planted area to the Heritage Park. It is therefore considered that the loss of any existing trees from the canopy which lines Heritage Way would be unacceptable as it would adversely impact on the streetscape and setting of the listed buildings.

4.9 It is noted that the required ICNIRP Declaration has been supplied stating that the proposal complies with the international safety standards for electromagnetic radiation emissions.

Taking the foregoing into account it is recommended that planning permission be refused as it is contrary to policy TEL 1 in that the environmental impact of the siting of a telecommunication mast in this location requires the removal of two mature trees which would detract from the visual amenity and character of the area on approach to the strategically important listed buildings and tourist attractions at Summerlee Heritage Park.

4.10

62

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Agent

Development:

Location:

Ward:

Grid Reference:

File Reference:

Site History:

Development Plan:

C/08/0 1 203/FU L

15th August 2008

Scottish Water Clo Agent

Scottish Water Solutions Watermark Alba Campus Livingston EH54 7HH

Installation of a Maintenance Access Road to Service Drainage Infrastructure

Land South Of 2-6 Quarry Road Airdrie North Lanarkshire

Ward 8 Airdrie Central

275984665988

C/PL/AIQI 66/WWS/EL

Councillors Devine, Stocks and Logue

Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996: Zoned as LR11- Improve Public Open Space


Consultations:

Representations: 1 letter of representation received.


63


1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started within five years of the date of this permission.


2. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- 031 351 -0000-20-DRG-9925-OA, 031 351 -0000-20-DRG-9602-01 and 031 142-0000-20-DRG- 9001 -0A.


In the event that the maintenance access hereby approved becomes redundant it shall be removed and the site reinstated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority within one month of it becoming redundant.

3.

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the site and the general area.

4. That during the works a 1.8 metre high fence shall be erected around the tree marked in red on the approved plans in accordance with BS5837:2005- Trees in Relation to Construction Recommendations.

Reason: To protect the tree during the works.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 15th August 2008 Letter from G. Collins, 3 Quarry Road, Airdrie, North Lanarkshire, ML6 6NG received 26th August 2008. Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr William Shand at 01236 812231.


65

APPLICATION NO. C/08/01203/FUL

REPORT

1. DescriPtion of Site and ProPosal

1, l The application is for the installation of a maintenance access road at an area of open space south of 2-6 Quarry Road, Airdrie. The access will be used by Scottish Water to service their drainage equipment which is located within the open space. The piece of land is a grassed area which has several trees and a piece of drainage equipment near the centre of it, approximately 45 metres south of Quarry Road. The open space fronts onto both Quarry Road and Commonside Street. There is no formal play equipment on the site. The site slopes downward in a south-west direction, however the route to the drainage equipment from Quarry Road is relatively flat. The site is bound by houses to the north, north west and south and further open space to the west (on the opposite side of Commonside Street) and to the east behind a row of trees. The drainage equipment is associated with the Luggie Burn which runs through a pipe network underneath the area of open space.

1.2 The maintenance access road would enter the site from Quarry Road and would curve from the junction of Quarry Road for a distance of approximately 20 metres to ensure that access could only be taken travelling west to east when entering the site. The entrance would be directly across from 4 and 6 Quarry Road. The access would have an approximate length of 65 metres and would include a turning head approximately 35 metres south of Quarry Road. The width of the access would vary throughout its length. To ensure that there is no significant open space loss only the first 10 metres of the access will be paved with hard surface. The remaining access would be surfaced in a synthetic cellular paving. This material creates a degree of hard surface for vehicles to drive on, but allows for vegetation to grow through it. New Scottish Water equipment will also be installed on the site, however these works are considered as Permitted Development under the General Permitted Development (Scotland) Order 1992.

2. DeveloDment Plan

2.1 This area is designated as L R l l (Improve Public Open Space) in Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991. Policy LRI 1 states that the Planning Authority will protect existing public open space from inappropriate development.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Following the standard neighbour notification procedure 1 letter of representation was received. The terms of objection can be summarised as follows:

a) The access road would cause a detrimental effect to parking on the street which is already well used by people using the shops on Commonhead Road.

b) The use of the access track by vehicular traffic would conflict with those children using the open space

66


4.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires that the application be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

4.2 It is considered that the proposed development does not conflict with the local plan policy for this area which identifies it as open space. In particular, the use of synthetic cellular paving should allow the access road to integrate visually with the open space. The use of this material and the fact that the road is relatively small in area compared with the size of the open space area would prevent any detrimental effect in terms of visual amenity and loss of open space. Furthermore, the design and layout of the access track would not prevent it or adjoining land from being used as open space.

In relation to the grounds of objection, the following comments can be noted: 4.3

(a) It is accepted that the new access track will impinge to a degree on on-street parking within this part of Quarry Road. However, this is not likely to be so significant as to merit the refusal of permission. Furthermore, it likely that the implementation of the access road should reduce on- street parking at times when Scottish Water require to service their equipment.

(b) It is considered that there are no significant safety concerns arising from this development. In particular, the access road would be used relatively infrequently thereby there will be few occasions where conflict may arise between users of the open space and the users of the access road. Much of the time, the access would be usable open space and therefore it is felt that there would be no detrimental impact to the neighbouring properties in terms of loss of open space or areas to play.

In conclusion, having regard to the foregoing, the proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of policies within the Adopted Monklands Local Plan 1991. There would be no loss in usable open space and the impact on the amenity of the surrounding residential areas would be minimal and at few times of the year. The benefits of the access would outweigh any nuisance to local residents. It is therefore recommended that the application be granted subject to conditions.

4.4

67

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Agent

Development:

Location:

Ward:

Grid Reference:

File Reference:

Site History:

Development Plan:


Consultations:

Representations:


S1071017961FUL

6th November 2007

Wishaw And District Housing Association 55 Kirk Road Wishaw ML2 7BL

D Stewart Toy Chartered Architect 29 High Street Lanark ML11 7LU

Construction of Four Blocks of Flats (26 Flatted Properties)

Land At Hill Street Wishaw

20 Wishaw: Councillors Adamson, Love, McKay and Pentland

279504655126

SIP LIB Fl101331GS/G F

S/04102067lOUT Residential use on site 2 -Approved on the 15th March 2005

0 S1051009181FUL Erection of 11 No Flatted Dwellinghouses at site 1 - Approved 1 st November 2005

The site is zoned as RTL 5 (Wishaw Town Centre) of the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008)

No

Scottish Environment Protection Agency (no objections) Scottish Water (no objections) Scottish Natural Heritage (no objections)

1 letter of representation received

Not Required

68


1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.



That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of all external materials to be used in construction, including walls, roofs, windows, doors, gutters and downpipes, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and or the avoidance of doubt the roofs of the flatted dwellinghouses hereby permitted shall be finished in slate or a grey roof tile to match the adjacent terraced row.


That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all boundary treatment to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.


That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping for the areas coloured GREEN on the approved plans and within the retaining wall, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include:- (a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, grass seeding and turfing; (b) a survey of all existing trees on site and the proposals for the retention of as many trees as

possible; and the replacement planting to mitigate for trees lost. (c) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety

and size of trees and shrubs to be planted. (d) a timetable for the completion of these works contemporaneously with the development.

For the avoidance of doubt, the scheme should include native and ornamental tree species beneficial to wildlife and which maximise bio-diversity on the site.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these details.

Notwithstanding condition 4 no tree shall be removed from either site unless otherwise agreed by the Planning Authority and that BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, tree protection measures in accordance with British Standard BS 5837 shall be erected along the drip line of the trees to be retained, as shown on the approved plans, and shall not be removed without the approval in writing of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to protect the trees to be retained on the sites.

That all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 4 and 5, above, shall be completed in accordance with the approved time table and before the last unit within each part of the site is occupied; and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased within two years of the completion of the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area and to maximise bio-diversity.

That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of:-

70

(a) the proposed grassed, planted and landscaped areas coloured GREEN; on the approved

(b) the proposed parking areas; and (c) the proposed fences/walls. (d) a timetable for the completion of the works contemporaneously with the development.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these details.

That the management and maintenance scheme approved under the terms of condition 4 shall be implemented in accordance with the approved timetable and shall be fully in operation before the last unit within the development is occupied.

plans;

8.

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

That before any flatted property hereby permitted is occupied with each part of the site all the access shall be formed in accordance with the specifications of the Roads Authority and all of the parking and manoeuvring areas shown on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained, surfaced in a material which the Planning Authority has approved in writing before the start of surfacing work and clearly marked out, and shall, thereafter, be maintained as access, parking and manoeuvring areas.

9.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access facilities to the dwellings.

10. For the avoidance of doubt, that before the occupation of the first flatted property within each part of the development hereby permitted, access from Hill Street shall be constructed to a 5.5 metre (maximum) drop kerb footway arrangement.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access facilities to the dwellings

That PRIOR to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) in terms of the relevant ClRlA Manual and other advice published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA).

11.

Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater, and in the interests of the amenity of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site respectively.

12. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 11 above shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Before any of the flatted properties hereby permitted are occupied, a certificate (signed by a chartered Civil Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS scheme has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans.

Reason: To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the interests of the amenity of existing and future residents.

That notwithstanding the requirements of condition 11 & 12 above, PRIOR to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, the following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority:

13.

(a) copies of all calculations to justify treatment volumes/storage attenuation/sensitivity testing of surface water system and if applicable, surcharge volumes for the critical 1 :200 year event, and how such flood volume would be accommodated within the site.

71

(b) Fully developed drainage design for the site, with copies of drawings - plans, longitudinal sections, SUDS, details and narrative.

(c) Explicit information on who is to adopt the various elements of the drainslsewerslSUDS.

Should the information required result in any amendments to the layout hereby approved revised plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority before any development commences.

Reason: To protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater, and in the interests of the amenity of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site respectively.

That PRIOR to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175: The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites, or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required as part of the above report.

14.

Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity of future residents.

15. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation report required in terms of Condition 14 above shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to the first occupation of the dwellinghouses hereby approved. A certificate (signed by a chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the Remediation Strategy.

Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity of future residents.

16. That before the development hereby permitted is commenced, full details of the proposed bin stores shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects.

17. That before the occupation of the 1st flatted property in each block of the development hereby permitted, the bin stores associated with that block and approved under the terms of condition 17 above shall be built to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate bin storage facilities.

18. That before the development hereby permitted starts. Full before and after cross sections and site levels shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall be constructed in accordance with the plans approved under the terms of this condition unless otherwise agreed in writing beforehand by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and the proper planning of this area by ensuring that ground levels are appropriate for the site and the general area.

19. That pedestrian and vehicular access along Hill Street shall be maintained free from obstruction at all times during the construction of the dwellings.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access along Hill Street in the interests of residential amenity.

72

20. That should 6 months or more elapse between the timing of the initial ecological survey dated September 2007 hereby approved, and development commencing, a further survey shall be undertaken on the site to determine the presence of any statutorily protected species, particularly for bats, and badgers, the said survey shall thereafter be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before any development commences on the site. As a result of the study, should any remediation measures be required for the relocation of any protected species, this shall be implemented in accordance with a timetable agreed in writing with the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage before works commence on the site.

Reason: To ensure compliance with The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2007 and the Protection of Badgers Act 1992.

21. That, except for the terms of conditions 16 and 22 or as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the plans stamped approved as part of this permission.


Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 6th November 2007 and revised plans received 19th and 30th September 2008

Protected Species by Entec UK Limited received 1" July 2008 Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 1 Oth September 2008 Letter from Scottish Water received 22nd November 2007 Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 25th July 2008 Memo from Conservation and Greening Manager received 25'h July 2008 Memo from Transportation Team Leader received 1 1 th January 2008 Memo from Head of Protective Services received 21" November 2007 Memo from Geotechnical Team Leader received 22nd September 2008

Letter from Ruth Morris, 41 Belhaven Terrace, Wishaw, ML2 7AY received 20th November 2007

Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008)

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Graham Smith at 01698 27 4104.

Date: 1 October2008

73

AP PLlCATlO N N 0. S/07/01796/F U L

REPORT

1.

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

2.

2.1

3.

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

Description of Site and ProPosal

This application seeks full planning permission for the erection of four blocks of flats (26 flatted properties) on 2 pieces of land at Hill Street, Wishaw.

Site 1 comprises of a U shaped area housing three of the blocks located north east of Hill Street and is bounded by a mixture of uses including churches, public halls, retail units, and residential dwellinghouses. This site slopes downwards from Hill Street gradually and is currently vacant and overgrown with a derelict outbuilding and several mature trees. Site 2 is located south of Hill Street and houses the remaining block of flats. This site is rectangular and flat and is surrounded by a mixture of uses including a telephone exchange, retail units, a car park and a funeral service. Access to each site is from Hill Street into private parking courts. Site 1 will incorporate a 2nd access for emergency vehicles from Hill Street.

The applicant proposes 24 two bedroom flats and 2 one bedroom flats comprising four blocks that are three storey in height. Three blocks would be located in site 1 and the fourth in site 2. The proposal includes areas of open space around the flats as well as dedicated parking areas. Areas of open space within the site are located on the south east edge of block 4 and north west of block 2 and 3.

Phase 1 of this development S/05/01705/FUL for the erection of 12 flatted dwellinghouses, 12 terraced dwellinghouses and 4 semi detached dwellinghouses on another site at Hill Street was approved on the 21'' April 2006 and is almost complete. The current application sites will be accessed off Hill Street. Site 1 was granted Planning Permission on the 18 November 2005 for the erection of 11 Flatted Dwellings (05/00918/FUL). Site 2 was granted Outline Planning Permission (S/04/02067/OUT) for residential use on the 1 5'h March 2005.

Development Plan

The Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008) identifies the site as RTL 5 (Wishaw Town Centre).


My Transportation Team Leader raised no objections subject to conditions relating to minimum parking provision and aisle widths at site 1, access arrangements and the location of the bin stores.

My Protective Services Team Leader was consulted and indicated that a site investigation is required and made comments relating to noise during construction, dust emissions, waste burning and lighting.

My Geotechnical Team Leader has confirmed that they are unaware of any history of flooding in the vicinity and have no reason to consider the site an undue risk. They have confirmed that they have insufficient information relating to surface water, drainage design and information relating to future maintenance arrangements to assess the drainage and flood risk further. In this case it is considered acceptable that a condition be attached to ensure that this information is submitted and approved prior to development commencing on site.

Scottish Water have offered no objections to this application but have stated that there may be

74

issues in relation to the waste water network serving the development. The applicant will be required to ensure that the development will not have a detrimental impact on their water services. SEPA advised that for drainage from the site must be connected to the public sewer. They also commented that the applicant should consult Scottish Water in order to mitigate the effect on drainage. They have also recommended that planning permission be conditioned to ensure surface water is treated by a Sustainable Urban Drainage System (SUDS) scheme. The type of SUDS required may be dependant on the outcome of the site investigation.

The Conservation and Greening Section were consulted and raised no objections to the development however indicated that a bat survey would be required, They also requested the retention of mature trees around the boundary and mitigation for loss of other trees within the site. They recommended that the developer should seek appropriate guidance when eradicating Japanese Knotweed and that landscaping be incorporated. The Landscape Services Manager has provided guidance notes for the applicant in relation to landscape design.

SNH were consulted and commented that the development is not likely to result in an adverse impact on protected species and that they endorse the mitigation measures as outlined in the protected species survey.

1 letter of representation has been received by the owners of 41 Belhaven Terrace, Wishaw. The points of objection were:

3.5

3.6

3.7

i. The rear of the objector’s garden will be directly overlooked resulting in a loss of privacy. ii. The proposal will overshadow the objector’s garden. iii. The close proximity of the development to the objector’s property is unacceptable. Part of the

development will be 5 metres away. iv The height of the buildings will create an eyesore. v The noise pollution from building works and cars accessing the proposed development will

be unacceptable. vi The proposal will affect the value of the objector’s property.


4.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. This application is not of strategic significance and can therefore be assessed against local plan policies. In this instance the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008) is relevant where the site is zoned as RTL 5 (Wishaw Town Centre). Policies HSG 9 (Assessing Applications for Housing Development) and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implication of Development) are also relevant in this case together with the Council’s minimum space standards around dwellings.

Policy RTL 5 states that proposals providing residential units in Town Centre Areas on suitable gap sites will be encouraged, where appropriate. Planning permission has previously been granted for residential developmenton both parts of this application site, the principle of residential development on this site has therefore been established as acceptable. The site has been vacant for a number of years.

4.2

4.3 Policy HSG 9 (Assessing Applications for Housing Development) sets out the criteria against which new housing proposals will be assessed including: impact of the development on the existing built and natural environment; density; layout and mix of housing; detailed design elements; reducing crime; provisions made for landscaping and open space; and provision made for roads, access, parking and garage space. In assessing this particular proposal in terms of Policy HSG 9, as the sites have been vacant and unsightly for a number of years, it is considered that the proposal will result in a marked improvement in the overall environment of

75

the area. The proposal would aid in the reduction of crime given that the flats would increase casual supervision and pedestrian activity in the area, particularly in the evenings. The open space is short of the standard normally expected. On balance however, this is a Town Centre location and the density of flats fits with the established character of the area, as opposed to a suburban environment where usual standards are fundamental. The site also benefits from its urban setting with good links with public transport. The design of the flatted blocks are considered acceptable and would complement the existing dwellings and flats approved in phase 1 of the Housing Association development at Hill Street, while complementing the established character of the wider area. The height of the flatted dwellings are in keeping with the three storey neighbouring buildings along Hill Street. With regards to privacy the window to window distances between buildings are acceptable and will not result in a significant loss of privacy. The applicant has submitted revised plans changing the lounge windows on the rear elevation of Block 3 and relocating them to the side elevation in order to reduce overlooking of the dwellings at Belhaven Terrace. In relation to sunlight and daylight received by the neighbouring dwellings, the proposed flatted dwellings will be located far enough away not to result in any adverse overshadowing. The development is considered to improve the residential amenity of the area as the vacant sites are currently a mixture of hardstanding and overgrown vegetation. The proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of Policy HSG 9. The transportation issues are considered below.

4.4 In assessing the transport implications of development, Policy TR13 applies. This policy requires assessment of the proposal against various criteria including: the level of traffic generated and its impact on the environment and adjoining land uses; the scope to integrate development proposals with existing public transport facilities; impact of the development on road traffic circulation and road safety; and provisions made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. It is considered that there will not be a detrimental increase in traffic levels caused by the proposed flatted development, such as to have any significant impact on the environment or the surrounding residential and commercial properties and it is not considered there will be any significant impact on traffic circulation or road safety. The development will provide adequate off street parking and turning facilities and is accessed via a private access which will not be adopted. My Transportation Team Leader has no objection subject to conditions such as minimum parking, aisle and access widths. The proposal meets the minimum provision as recommended by Transportation. In relation to site 1 the width of the aisle is 500mm short of Transportation’s minimum recommended 6 metre. Transportation have also recommended that the bin store on site 2 be located closer to Hill Street to allow refuse vehicle collection. The positioning of the bin store and aisle width are not considered to be significant enough to warrant refusal of the application. The proposal is therefore considered to be in compliance with Policy TR13.

4.5 With regards to SNH and my Conservation and Greening Manager’s comments the applicant submitted a protected species survey that confirms that the development is unlikely to have an adverse impact on bats. In relation to their comments relating to the mature trees and landscaping I recommend these matters can be addressed through planning conditions to control retention or replanting. The guidance on eradication of the Japanese Knotweed on site can be covered by an advisory note. In relation to Scottish Water, SEPA and Geotechnical’s comments on SUDS, drainage and flooding I recommend conditions to be attached requiring the applicant to submit the additional information required.

4.6 In relation to the points of objection I would comment as follows:-

i. The distance between the proposed flats and the existing dwellinghouses is significantly over the minimum 18 metres required and is therefore not considered to result in a loss of privacy. Lounge windows on the rear elevation of Block 3 have been omitted reducing overlooking further.

ii. The overshadowing of the objector’s garden ground is not likely to be significant due to the orientation and distance from the proposed block 3.

76

iii. The boundary of the proposed development would be approximately 5 metres from the objector's garden boundary. In relation to the distance between the objector's dwellinghouse and block 3 this would be approximately 35 metres and this is considered to be acceptable.

iv. The height of the flatted dwellings is in keeping with the surrounding properties and the design is considered to be acceptable therefore the visual impact of the development is not considered to be significant.

v. Noise pollution resulting from construction work is not a material planning consideration and the noise from the extra traffic visiting the sites is unlikely to have a significant impact.

vi. The impact of the development on the value of the objector's property is not a material planning consideration.

4.7 In conclusion, the application is considered to comply with policies RTL 5, HSG 9 and TR13 of the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008). I am satisfied that the design and impact of the flatted dwellinghouses are acceptable from a planning viewpoint and can be accommodated without significant detriment to the surrounding area. The proposal is therefore in compliance with the development plan. Notwithstanding the objections raised by the neighbour and for the reasons stated above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

77

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Agent

Development:

Location :

Ward:

Grid Reference:

File Reference:

Site History:

Development Plan:

S107/02036/FU L

11 th December 2007

John Staniford 42 Hall Street Aveley Essex RM15 4MJ

Do-Architecture Ltd 139 Stockwell Street Glasgow G1 4LR

Change of Use and Conversion of Derelict Water Filter House into Three Residential Dwellinghouses with Associated Gardens and Parking

Forrestburn Filter House Blairmuckhole And Forrestdyke Road Harthill Shotts ML7 5TS

12 Fortissat: Councillors Cefferty, McMillan and Robertson

287762665337

S/PL/BF/17/84/AN HIGF

0 S/98/01412/OUT Demolition of Former Treatment works and Erection of Two Dwellinghouses -Withdrawn on the 5th June 2000

0 S/00/00787/OUT Change of Use of Former Filter Treatment Work to Workshop and Stables and Erection of Dwellinghouse (in Outline) -Withdrawn on the 18thApril2005

The site is zoned as Policy ENV8 (Rural Investment Area) within the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008)


Consultations: (Comments) Scottish Natural Heritage Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Comments)

Representations: 1 letter of representation received

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 17th January 2008

78


1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.



That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- (EX) 01; (EX) 02; (EX) 03; (EX) 04; (EX) 05; (EX) 06; (PL) 01 Rev 6; (PL) 02 Rev B; (PL) 03; (PL) 04 Rev B; (PS) 01; (PS) 02; (PE) 04 Rev B; (DE) 05 Rev B; 2007087/C.002 rev B; 2007087/C.002; 2007087/C.003; 2007087/C.004.


That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing materials to be used on all external walls and roofs shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved under the terms of this condition.


That notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992, no development shall take place within the curtilage of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted, other than that expressly authorised by this permission.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control of this development.

That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include:-

(a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, boundary treatment, grass seeding and turfing;

(b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted;

(c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development

(d) a detailed timetable for all landscaping works which shall provide for these works being carried out contemporaneously with the development of the site.


That all works included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 5 above, shall be completed in accordance with the approved timetable, and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the occupation of the last house within the development hereby permitted, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.


That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Walls and fences shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with this approval.

80

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail and in the interests of visual amenity.

That before the development hereby permitted starts, full plans of before and after site levels shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and the proper planning of the area by ensuring that ground levels are appropriate for the site and the general area.

That should 6 months or more elapse between the timing of the initial ecological survey dated September 2007 hereby approved, and development commencing, a further survey shall be undertaken on the site to determine the presence of any statutorily protected species, particularly for bats, and badgers, the said survey shall thereafter be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before any development commences on the site. As a result of the study, should any remediation measures be required for the relocation of any protected species, this shall be implemented in accordance with a scheme and timetable agreed in writing with the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage before works commence on the site.

8 .

9.

Reason: To ensure compliance with The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2007 and the Protection of Badgers Act 1992.

That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175 : 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required.

10.

Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

11. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 10, shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a Chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the Remediation Strategy.

Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

12. That before the first house within development hereby permitted is occupied, all the parking and manoeuvring areas shown on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained, surfaced in a material which the Planning Authority has approved in writing before the start of surfacing work and clearly marked out, and shall, thereafter, be maintained as parking and manoeuvring areas.

Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities within the site.

13. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the requirements of the publication titled 'Drainage Assessment : A Guide for Scotland' and any other advice subsequently published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) or the Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party (SUDSWP).

81

The post-development surface water discharges shall ensure that the rate and quantity of run-off to any watercourse are no greater than the pre-development run-off for any storm return period unless it can be demonstrated that a higher discharge is necessary to protect or improve the aquatic habitat. SUDS shall still be provided even where discharges are proposed to public sewers notwithstanding any conditions imposed by Scottish Water.

If the area of ground illustrated on Drawing No.2007087/C.002 B for SUDS is inadequate for the purpose, a revised layout drawing for the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority prior to any works by any description being commenced on the application site.

Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site.

That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 13 shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Within three months of the construction of the SUDS and before the last house is occupied, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in drainage works) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved plans.

14.

Reason: To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site.

15. That before the development hereby permitted starts, the applicant shall provide written confirmation to the Planning Authority that all the requirements of Scottish Water have been fully met in respect of providing the necessary site drainage and infrastructure to serve the development.

Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory site drainage arrangements.

16 Before development commences, details of a temporary fence to be erected along the buffer zone as outlined on drawing number (PL) 01 during the building operations shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To demark the site of building operations and the buffer zone from the adjacent SINC.

That before development starts on site, the applicant must confirm in writing to the Planning Authority that the percolation values provided are to the satisfaction of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) and full details of the proposed soakaway area shall be submitted to and approved in writing by Planning Authority.

17

Reason: To ensure that the site can be adequately served by sewage disposal facilities to protect adjacent watercourse and groundwater.

18 That the soakaway approved under the terms of condition 17 shall thereafter be retained and no development should take place upon it.

Reason: To ensure that the site can be adequately served by sewage disposal facilities to protect adjacent watercourse and groundwater.

19. That before the development starts a scheme detailing access improvements to the site from the public road shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. This shall include the formation of passing spaces and any other works required to upgrade the surface of

82

the existing track.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 11 th December 2007 Habitat and Mammal Survey by Quadrat Scotland received 1'' April 2008 and 30th June 2008

Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 1 gth February 2008 and 1 8'h July 2008 Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 31'' March 2008 and 14'h July 2008

Memo from Head of Protective Services received 11 th January 2008 and 23'' of June 2008 Memo from Landscape Services Manager received 1 6'h January 2008 Memo from Conservation and Greening Manager 21'' January 2008, 30th April 2008 and 18'h August 2008 Memo from Transportation Team Leader received gth July 2008 Memo from Geotechnical Team Leader received 28'h of May 2008 and 7" of August 2008

Letter from Davidson & Robertson, Riccarton Mains, Currie, Midlothian, EH14 4AR received 4th January 2008


Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Andrew Henderson at 01698 2741 02.


83

APPLICATION NO. S/07/02036/FUL

REPORT

1.

1 .I

1.2

2.

2.1

3.

3.1

4.

4.1

4.2

4.3


This application seeks full planning permission for the change of use and conversion Of a derelict water filter house into three residential dwellinghouses with associated gardens and parking at Forrestburn Filter House, Blairmuckhole and Forrestdyke Road, Harthill. The proposal is to create three, three bedroom dwellinghouses within the existing water filter house with one dwelling to the front and two to the rear, Part of the existing building is two storey in height. It is proposed to raise the height of rear section of the ro$ from an existing height of 6.9 metres to a total of 7.6 metres to the ridge to accommodate a 2 storey. Access into the site is via a single track, rural, shared access road which is to be upgraded to include equally spaced passing places. Parking is proposed for each residential unit, accessed via a private perimeter road which shall be constructed within the site boundary. This shall provide a separate boundary from the private gardens proposed for each dwelling and the communal surrounding landscape area. The plot is irregular in shape and the total site area amounts to some 1.43 hectares.

The application site is located within and is surrounded by an area of open countryside. Redundant farm buildings are located to the south west of the site while former wash pits and a clear water tank in association with the previous use on the site are also located within the site and are to be retained as part of the proposed landscaping for the site.

Site History

There are several applications relevant to this proposal. An application for the demolition of former treatment works and erection of two dwellinghouses (Reference S/98/01412/OUT) was submitted but later withdrawn on the 5'h June 2000. A further application for the change of use of former filter treatment work to workshop and stables and erection of dwellinghouse (in outline) was submitted and also later withdrawn on the 18'h April 2005.

Development Plan

The site is zoned as Policy ENV8 (Rural Investment Area) within the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008).


SEPA has been consulted and has raised no objection, drainage details require to be to their approval. Further details will be required of the proposed soakaway system for their approval. The Geotechnical Team have no objections subject to appropriate drainage conditions being imposed.

Scottish Natural Heritage commented that the proposal is acceptable. They also commented that measures should be taken to ensure a suitable buffer zone be retained between the development site and the adjacent area which is a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC); measures are put in place to safeguard protected species and that any construction works which may have an impact on breeding birds should be outwith the breeding season of March to July.

My Protective Services Section raised no objections to the proposed development subject to the requirement for a Site Investigation Report to ensure the site is free of any contaminants.

84

4.4

4.5

4.6

4.7

5.

5.1

5.2

5.3

My Landscape Services Section raised no objections to this proposal as it reuses a derelict building. They had some concern regarding the integration of other parts of the development and access routes into the landscape and over the treatment of the common grounds. They also commented that further information should be submitted detailing existing and proposed levels and an existing tree survey with an indication of protections measures for those to be retained.

My Conservation and Greening Section raised no objections to this development. They commented however, that tree protection measures be implemented to protect any trees within the site and recommended suitable hedge species to be used around the development. They also commented that the adjacent glen is a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) and the proposed development should enhance this area through planting native species of trees and scrub of local origin along the common boundary to buffer the woodland Glen from the development. They have raised no objections. Advice was also given relating to protection of birds and trees.

My Transportation Section have no objections. They raised comments relating to visibility and in regards to suitable parking arrangements.

There has been one letter of representation received with regards to this application. The points of objection can be summarised as follows: - a) The objector owns the access road into the site and has concerns over the state of this road.

The objector wishes this road to be upgraded to an acceptable standard through this planning application, this should include surfacing with tarmac and provision of passing places.


The application raises no strategic issues and requires to be assessed against the relevant development plan policies which are in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Deposit Draft). The site is zoned as ENV 8 (Rural Investment Area) in the Southern Area Local Plan, (Deposit Draft 2008). Policy HSG 11 (Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside) and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development), together with the Council’s Adopted Open Space Guidelines for minimum spacing requirements around dwellings are relevant to the consideration of this application.

Within the Southern Area Local Plan, Policy ENV8 (Rural Investment Area) indicates that development for housing is not normally permitted unless it relates to agriculture or a similar rural use. However it is considered that as this development relates to the conversion of an existing building, that residential use would be acceptable in principle. It is further considered that it would not set an undesirable precedent for development in the countryside. The application should therefore be assessed against the criteria set in Policy HSG 11 for the acceptability of a conversion to housing within this location.

Policy HSG11 allows for the conversion of existing buildings where they are worthy of preservation, are substantially complete and do not result in a significant increase in floor space. In assessing new applications for houses in the Countryside the following must be taken into account: - the visual prominence of the site; the compatibility of the design to a rural location; the incorporation of traditional design features and external finishing materials and; the provision made for vehicular access and site drainage. In assessing the proposal in terms of suitable conversion it is considered the former Filter House, albeit abandoned is still complete and is worthy to be converted. The proposal involves preserving the existing window openings on the main section of the building and does not result in expanding the floor area or increasing the

85

height of the main building. The character to the front of the building is to be maintained with the windows to be replaced with double glazed sash and case windows. It is proposed to finish the building in render and charcoal Marley roof tiles. Amended plans have since been received to alter the style of the proposed windows on the side and rear of the building and reducing the ratio of tiling on the external walls of the rear section in order to maintain the character of the building. The section to the rear involves raising the roof height and inserting a number of windows and sliding doors of modern design. In light of these alterations the raising of the roof height is to allow a second floor and would not appear disproportionate in scale in relation to the existing building and the design and number of inserted windows are not considered to be visually intrusive to warrant refusal of the application on the basis of poor design, particularly as the original building is of an unusual design. In assessing the impact of the proposal on the character and amenity of the surrounding area in relation to Policy HSG 1 1, it is considered that the proposed development would not have a detrimental impact on the character or amenity of the surrounding area given the spacious location of this site within a significant area of open countryside. There will be no privacy or overshadowing issues from this proposal due to the distance from buildings on all sides with the closest building being a group of dilapidated farm buildings measuring some 120 metres away. The site is of a size that will be able to accommodate the requirements of the Council’s open space guidelines sufficiently for each proposed dwelling, without adversely affecting any nearby dwellings. The area of the proposed dwellings will be within the same footprint of the existing ‘T shaped building. Although addition of upper floor accommodation will result in a building which is slightly larger in size than that of the previous building, it is considered that this is acceptable given the reasonable size of this overall plot and surrounding amenity space, and would still be sympathetic to the character to the existing building. Taking all matters above into account, it is considered that this proposal meets the criteria of Policy HSG 11. The provision for vehicular access and parking arrangements are considered in the following paragraph.

5.4 Policy TR13 states that the Council will take account of various criteria including the impact of the development on road traffic circulation/road safety and the provision made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. The site is currently accessed via a private access road from Forrestburn Holdings, which the applicant has a right of access over. This conversion will not significantly affect such access arrangements, although the applicant has agreed to upgrade this single track road into the site and also surrounding the perimeter to a 5.5 metre width and to include equally spaced passing places leading into the site. It is considered that this access is acceptable given the countryside setting and that this is an established access which has served this building in the past. A condition has attached to cover this aspect. This was further confirmed by the Transportation Section. The applicant has also shown that there will be sufficient space within this application site to accommodate two and three parking spaces within each individual driveway and there is sufficient driveway space for vehicle manoeuvrability to and from the site. It is therefore considered that the proposed development is acceptable in terms of Policy TR13.

5.5 In relation to the points of objection raised, I would comment as follows:-

1. The objector’s concern over the condition of the access road into the site likelihood of this being upgraded to an acceptable standard through this planning application has been incorporated into the proposed plans for this development which my Transportation Section have confirmed are acceptable and a condition is proposed to address this.

With regards to the consultation responses received, appropriate matters may be addressed through the imposition of planning conditions,

In conclusion, it is considered that this proposal is in accordance with Policies ENV 8 , HSG12 and TR13 of the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008) in that the proposal is for the conversion of an existing derelict building into an appropriate alternative use. The site is large enough to accommodate residential units that can meet the requirements of Policy HSG 12 and

5.6

5.7

86

access and parking arrangements are acceptable in terms of Policy TR13. Therefore, taking all matters into consideration, I would recommend that planning consent be granted, subject to conditions.

87

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Agent

Development:

Location:

Ward:

0 .S Map Ref File Reference:

Site History:

Development Plan:

08/00578/FUL

17th July 2008

Summit Healthcare CIO Wishaw General Hospital 50 Netherton Street Wishaw ML2 ODP

David McCallum URS Corporation Limited 243 West George Street Glasgow

Formation of 350 Additional Car Parking Spaces

Wishaw General Hospital 50 Netherton Street Wishaw

18 Motherwell South East and Ravenscraig: Councillors Harmon, Lunny, McKay and Valentine

278294655081

S/PL/BF/I 1 IWCCAIG F

0 S/97/00307/REM: Erection of Hospital, Staff Accommodation and Ancilliary Facilities, Granted - 4th November 1997

0 S/O1/001 16/AMD: Amendment to Consent No. S/97/00307/REM Revised Car Parking Layout, Granted - 11 th April 2001

0 S/05/00868/FUL: Construction of a Cancer Care Centre with Associated Car Park and Landscaping, Granted - 20th September 2005

The site is zoned as CS 2 (Established Community Facilities) in the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008)


Consultations: No external consultations required

Representations: 1 letter of representation received


88

N A

W I S ~ W GENERaL HOSPITAL, 50 NETHERTON ROAD, WlSHAW * Representation Site area = 8 50 ha. 1 mlO1898 17424234 'I

faw OlbR 403053

89


1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started within five years of the date of this permission.


That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- 49335234/0111, 49335234/0112, 49335234101 13.

2.

Reason: To clarify the drawings of which this approval of permission is founded.

That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the requirements of the publication titled ‘Drainage Assessment: A Guide for Scotland and any other advice subsequently published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) or the Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party (SUDSWP). The post-development surface water discharges shall ensure that the rate and quantity of run-off to any watercourse are no greater than the pre-development run-off for any storm return period unless it can be demonstrated that a higher discharge is necessary to protect or improve the aquatic habitat. SUDS shall still be provided even where discharges are proposed to public sewers notwithstanding any conditions imposed by Scottish Water. If the area of ground illustrated on Drawing No. 49335234101 11 for the SUDS is inadequate for the purpose, a revised layout drawing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority prior to any works of any description being commenced on the application site.

3.

Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site.

4. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping, for the area hatched RED on the approved plans, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include:-

(a) Details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, boundary treatment, grass seeding and turfing ;

(b) A scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted;

(c) An indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development,

(d) Details of the phasing of these works.

Reason: In the interest of the adjacent residential dwellings and the general area

5. That all works included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 4; above, shall be completed by the first planting season following the car park being brought into use, and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the completion of the landscaping, shall be replaced within the following year.

Reason: In the interest of the adjacent residential dwellings and the general area.

90

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 1 7'h July 2008

Memo from Transportation Team Leader received 1 8'h July 2008 Memo from Head of Protective Services received 2!jth July 2008 Memo from Conservation and Greening Manager received 8th September 2008 Memo from Geotechnical Team Leader received 2dh July 2008

1 Letter from Mr Colin Clive Brooks, 54 Berryhill Crescent, Wishaw, ML2 ONF, received on 18'h August 2008


Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Colin Campbell on 01698 274 118.


91

APPLICATION NO. S108/00578/FUL

REPORT

1.

1.1

1.2

2.

2.1

3.

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

4.

4.1

4.2


This application seeks planning permission for an additional 350 car parking spaces at Wishaw General Hospital. The application site is bounded by a railway line and a mixture of residential dwellings, industrial units, community facilities and areas of open space.

The additional 350 car parking spaces are to be created in the area immediately to the front and on the land to the rear of the hospital building. The applicant has stated that at present there is insufficient parking and the additional parking spaces would reduce the amount of inappropriate parking that exists at the site.

Development Plan

The site is zoned as Policy CS 2 (Established Community Facilities) in the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008).


My Transportation Team Leader had no objections to this proposal.

Protective Services have no objections to the proposal.

The Conservation and Greening manager advised that they only require a further input to this application if there are mature trees to be felled or bats present. If neither is an issue Conservation and Greening have no objection to development.

The Geotechnical Team Leader advised that insufficient information had been submitted with regards to drainage and flooding matters.

One letter of representation was received from the owner of number 54 Berryhill Crescent, Wishaw. The letter of objection can be summarised as follows:

i. The property at 54 Berryhill Crescent is located approximately 10 metres from the site road and the sheer volume of additional traffic will have a detrimental effect on the residential amenity of the owner of this property.

ii. The proposal will have a severe impact on the quality of life for the family at 54 Berryhill Crescent as well as others that share a common boundary with the Hospital.

Planninn Assessment and Conclusions

Planning applications require to be assessed against the Development Plan and other material considerations. This application is not of strategic significance and requires to be assessed in terms of the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008). The site is zoned as Policy CS 2 (Established Community Facilities). Policies CS 4 (Assessing Applications for Community Facilities) and TR 13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) are relevant to this application.

Policy CS 4 is only relevant in so far as it expects that community facilities will be adequately provided with parking facilities. In this case the application is to improve such facilities at an existing site. The additional parking is proposed to address the the current lack of provision that results in inappropriate parking in the vicinity. Pedestrian access will be improved as a consequence. The nearest dwellinghouses at present beyond the existing car park are approximately 12 metres away. It is considered that the proposal will not cause any significant detrimental effect to these

92

dwellinghouses as it will not be located any closer than the existing car parking spaces currently at the site. The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with the requirements of Policy cs 4.

4.3 Policy TR13 requires assessment of the proposal against various criteria including, traffic generation and its impact on road traffic circulation and road safety. The Transportation Team Leader has no objections to the additional car parking spaces at the site. The increase in car parking spaces at the site will improve the existing car parking facilities, enhance pedestrian safety and reduce the amount of congestion within the area. The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with the transportation requirements of Policy TR13.

4.4 On the grounds of the objections raised, I would comment that it is anticipated that the proposal will primarily assist with existing parking problems rather than generate additional vehicle numbers using the site. Although there will be additional parking created to the rear of the site and by passing the boundary with the adjacent residential area it is considered that this is unlikely to have any significant effect on the adjacent area.

4.5 In conclusion I am satisfied that the impact of the additional car parking spaces are acceptable from a planning viewpoint and that the proposal is therefore in compliance with Policies CS 2, CS 4 and TR 13 of the development plan. Notwithstanding the objections raised by the neighbour and for the reasons stated above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

93

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Agent

Development:

Location:

Ward:

Grid Reference:

File Reference:

Site History:

Development Plan:

S/08/00889/FU L

10th June 2008

Mr P Allan Clo Agent

Architectural Design Solutions 108 Main Street Carnwath ML11 8HR

Formation of Basement (Retrospective) and Rear Extension to Dwellinghouse to Incorporate Swimming Pool

Land East Of 100 Bellshill Road Uddingston

13 Thorniewood: Councillors Burrows, McCabe and McShannon

270997660403

S/PL/08/00889/F U L/AM/G F

0

0

S/02/00903/OUT Erection of One Dwellinghouse (Outline) - Granted 1 1 th September 2002 S/05/01534/FUL Erection of Dwellinghouse - Granted 4th January 2006

Zoned ENV6 ‘Green Belt’ in the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008)


Consultations: Scottish Water No objection

Representations: 2 letters of representation received


94


1.

2.

3.



That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing number 07 379 01 revision B.


That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the facing materials to be used for the external walls and roof shall match in colour and texture those of the existing adjoining dwelling.

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the site and the general area.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 4'h June 2008 Amended plans received 12'h September 2008

E-mail from Pollution Control dated 23" September 2008 Letter from Scottish Water dated 25'h August 2008

Letter from Maclay Murray & Spens, Quartermile One, 15 Lauriston Place, Edinburgh, EH3 9EP received 26'h August 2008 Letter from J Robertson, 118 Bellshill Road, Uddingston, G71 6NU received 25'h July 2008


Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Alistair Maclean at 01698 274105

Date: 1 October2008

96

APPLICATION NO. S1081008891FUL

REPORT

1.

1 .I

1.2

2.

2.1

3.

3.1

3.2

3.3


This application is for the formation of a basement (retrospective) and an extension to the rear of a dwellinghouse to contain a private swimming pool. The site is located on Bellshill Road, Uddingston, i n a small triangle of residential development close to Bothwellpark Industrial Estate. The house to which this extension is proposed is under construction but is substantially complete. The site fronts Bellshill Road, close to the bridge over the main railway line and slopes gently downwards from the road.

The basement has been formed in the undercroft of the house while the rear extension is to create a swimming pool for personal use. The latter will measure 7.5 metres in width by 10 metres in length and will be 4.7 metres in height to the ridge of the hipped roof. The extension will be located such that it would be approximately 1 metre from the side and 1 metre from the rear boundary of the site.

Development Plan

The Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008) zones the site as ENV 6 ‘Green Belt’.


Scottish Water does not object to this application but states that approval for connection can only be granted by Scottish Water once appropriate application and technical details have been received. Camps and Daer Water Works and Daldowie Treatment Works have capacity to service the development, however, Scottish Water raised concerns that there may be a requirement for the developer to carry out works on the local water network to ensure there is no loss of service to existing customers.

Pollution Control were consulted with regard to potential noise from the swimming pool filtration system. The reply stated that there was no knowledge of noise from domestic swimming pool plant being a problem in this country and that the building structure should contain any noise from plant.

Two representations were received from neighbouring householders. The points of objection can be summarised as follows:

1. the development will not be in keeping with the surrounding properties; 2. the development will have an effect on sun/light levels within adjacent properties; 3. the prevailing pattern of development is properties with large gardens, the swimming pool

extension would significantly decrease the area of garden ground which would not be in keeping with the amenity of the area and would thus not comply with Policy HSG12 of the Local Plan;

4. the development will have an effect on privacy of the property at 97 Fallside Road; 5. the development is at a higher level than the property at 97 Fallside Road and the terrace

will cause overlooking issues; 6. the proposed glass roof of the extension will be highly visible; 7. noise nuisance from the pool filtration system is likely to be audible in an adjacent garden; 8. the design and nature of the extension will impact on the amenity of the surrounding area; 9. the sewage pipe serving the houses presently leaks and an additional flow from the

swimmina DOOI into it would exacerbate the situation:

97

10. neighbour notification was not carried out correctly and at least one neighbouring property was not notified.

4.

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5


The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be considered on the basis of the local plan policies. The Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008) zones the site as ENV 6 ‘Green Belt‘ however, planning permission has been granted for the house on the site thus the principle of residential development on the site has been established.

Policy HSG12 ‘House Extensions’ is relevant to consideration of this application. This Policy sets out various criteria for assessing such applications, including the size, proportion and position of extensions; the effect on the amount of private garden ground; the impact on the streetscene and relationship to neighbouring properties especially in relation to privacy, daylight and sunlight; parking provision, access and road safety; and design details.

With regards to the basement this was formed within the undercroft of the house and is not apparent from viewing the house either at road level or from within the site. As this has no impact on the streetscene or neighbouring properties, the formation of the basement causes no issues in planning terms and is in accordance with the Local Plan.

The development lies within an area which currently contains four houses, while detailed planning consent exists for a further two dwellings. The dwellings, including those proposed, are a mixture of styles varying between single storey and two storey. The rear extension will be located to the rear of the house, on the eastern side, and will be accessed internally through the lounge/dining room. The size, proportion and position of the extension are considered acceptable. Although it would be only 1 metre from the rear boundary sufficient garden ground would be retained (1 17 square metres) to the western side of the extension. With regard to the impact on the streetscene, the proposed development will be situated to the rear of the dwellinghouse and will be virtually unseen from neighbouring streets. The proposed development will cause no overlooking issues as the only windows on the extension will be on the western side of the development, the nearest windows being some 27 metres distant. A sunlightldaylight test shows that the extension will cause some overshadowing to the extreme rear of the rear garden of the existing house at 97 Fallside Road, however this area is already partially overshadowed by existing vegetation and the proposed extension will result in little difference to the existing situation. The test shows there will be no overshadowing of any windows of rooms of existing houses. The design of the proposal and its relationship to neighbouring properties is therefore considered acceptable. Parking provision, access and road safety will be unaffected by this development as the proposed extension is positioned to the rear. Taking all the criteria into consideration, the proposed development accords with Policy HSG 12 of the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008).

With regard to the grounds of the objections received, I comment as follows:

1.

2. 3.

4. 5.

the dwellings within the vicinity are a mixture of styles and this proposed development will not be out of keeping with other developments in the area; the issue of sun/light levels is dealt with in paragraph 4.4 above; as indicated in paragraph 4.4 the amount of rear garden ground post-development will be acceptable; the extension has no windows on the eastern wall to cause any privacy issues; while the floor level of the development will be approximately 1 metre higher than the floor level of the house at 97 Fallside Road the impact is not considered to be significant especially in view of existing vegetation; the terrace has been removed from the amended plans which are the subject of this consideration; the roof of the proposed extension will be tiled; earlier plans showed windows on the western elevation of the roof but these have been deleted in the amended drawings which

6.

98

also shows that the height of the proposed roof is significantly reduced; 7. this issue is dealt with in paragraph 3.2 above; 8. the issue of the design and nature of the extension is dealt with in paragraph 4.4 above; 9. these issues are the responsibility of Scottish Water who had no objections to the

application; 10. the applicant is responsible for neighbour notification and stated this had been done

correctly, nevertheless neighbours have been re-notified by registered post with regard to the amendment.

4.6 In conclusion, I am satisfied that the design and impact of the proposal are acceptable from a planning viewpoint and that the proposal is therefore in compliance with Policy HSG 12 of the development plan. Notwithstanding the objections raised by the neighbour and for the reasons stated above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted.

It should be noted that one of the objectors has requested that a Hearing be held prior to determination of this application.

4.7

99

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Agent

Development:

Location :

Ward:

Grid Reference:

File Reference:

Site History:

Development Plan:


Consultations:

Representations:


S/08/01072/FUL

17th July 2008

Miss J Taylor 58 Frood Street Motherwell MLI 3TA

Alistair MacFarlane RlBA 84 Buchanan Drive Cam buslang Glasgow G72 8BA

Two Storey Extension to Rear of Dwellinghouse and Erection of Front Porch

58 Frood Street Motherwell ML1 3TA

16 Motherwell West: Councillors Kelly, Ross and Valentine

274125 658477

S/PL/BFICCAIGF

None relevant

The site is zoned as HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008)

No

None

2 letters of representation received

Not Required

100


1.

2.

3.

4.



That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the facing materials to be used for the external walls and roof shall match in colour and texture those of the existing adjoining dwelling.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

That before the development hereby permitted is brought into use, 2 off-street car parking spaces shall be provided within the site, as indicated on the approved plans and shall, thereafter, be maintained as car parking spaces.

Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities within the site.

That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- D115, 215, 3/5, 415, 515.


Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 17'h July 2008

Letter from Owner/Occupier, 60 Frood Street, Motherwell, MLI 3TA received 1'' Auryust 2008 Letters from Mr & Mrs Wilson, 56 Frood Street, Motherwell, MLI 3TA received 23 July and 4'h August 2008

Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005)

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Colin Campbell at 01698 2741 18.


102


REPORT

1.

1.1

1.2

2.

2.1

3.

3.1

3.2

4.

4.1

4.2

4.3


This application seeks planning permission for the erection of a two storey rear extension and the erection of a front porch at 58 Frood Street, Motherwell. The application property is a two storey end terraced dwellinghouse and is bound by dwellings on all sides apart from the west which is a sub station.

The two storey extension would project 2.5 metres from the rear of the property and would measure 4.5 metres in width. The roof would be pitched and be lower in height than the existing roof of the property. The extension would extend the lounge on the ground floor and the bedroom on the first floor. The proposed porch shall project 1.5 metres from the house and shall measure 2.56 metres in width. The porch would reach a height of 4 metres with a sloping roof. The proposed rear extension and front porch will be finished in materials and rooftiles to match the existing house.

Development Plan

The site is zoned as Policy HSG7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008).


No consultations were required.

Two letters of representation were received from the owners of number 56 and 60 Frood Street. Their objections can be summarised as follows:

i The proposed extension will block sunlight getting to the decked area at 56 Frood Street which will affect their quality of life and resale value of their property.

ii As the gardens at 58 and 56 Frood Street are small the proposed extension will affect the quality of use of the garden for the residents at 56 Frood Street.

iii The house is rented and the extension would be closer to the neighbour’s bedroom at 60 Frood Street and would lead to increased noise levels.

iv A single storey extension would be more appropriate.


Planning applications require to be assessed against the Development Plan and other material considerations. This application is not of strategic significance and requires to be assessed in terms of the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008). The site is zoned as HSG7 (Established Housing Areas).

Policy HSG 7 seeks to protect the established character of existing housing areas by opposing development that adversely affects their amenity. Applications for extensions in such areas are acceptable subject to meeting the requirements of Policy HSG 12 (Established Housing Areas).

Policy HSG 12 sets out various criteria for assessing such applications, including the design, size, proportion and position of extensions, the effect on the amount of garden ground retained and the impact on the streetscene, the impact of the proposal on neighbouring properties in

103

relation to privacy, daylightlsunlight and parking provision and access.

With regards to size and scale, the two storey rear extension and front porch are considered to integrate satisfactorily with the house and not dominate it. Their design is in keeping with the existing house and other properties in the vicinity. The application site has a relatively small garden area remaining however, an adequate rear garden length of approximately 5 metres remains after the proposed extension and due to its relationship with other properties this would be acceptable. The neighbouring row of terraced properties are set back from each other and the proposed front porch will not cause any detrimental effect as it will not project in front of the building line of the adjacent properties.

With regards to the impact on the privacy of neighbouring properties the proposed rear extension raises no adverse overlooking issues due to the location of the proposed windows and a sufficient window to window distance to the property at 12 Bluebell Gardens. In relation to sunlightldaylight and the impact on the neighbouring dwellinghouse at 56 Frood Street, a detailed test has confirmed that the impact on the levels of sunlight and daylight received following the development would remain acceptable. Existing parking and access is affected by the proposal however, a condition has been set to ensure that 2 off street parking spaces are to be provided within the site.

4.4

4.5

4.6 On the grounds of the objections raised, I would comment as follows:

i As indicated above a sunlightldaylight test showed that sunlightldaylight levels would remain acceptable. Concerns regarding the resale value of the property is not a material planning consideration.

ii Although the rear garden is small at 56 and 58 Frood Street the proposed extension only projects 2.5 metres from the existing property. This is deemed acceptable with an adequate amount of garden ground remaining and there will be no significant detrimental effect on the quality of use of the garden at 56 Frood Street.

iii The fact that the house is rented is not a planning material consideration. The proposed extension is unlikely to result in any significant increase in noise levels at the site.

iv It is noted that a single storey extension would be equally acceptable.

4.7 In conclusion I am satisfied that the design and impact of the rear extension and front porch is acceptable from a planning viewpoint and that the proposal is therefore in compliance with Policies HSG 7 and HSG 12 of the development plan. Notwithstanding the objections raised by the neighbour and for the reasons stated above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

4.8 A site visit has been requested by the objector at 56 Frood Street, Motherwell. The reason being, that the objector is of the opinion that the gardens in the area are not that large and the proposed extension will take away the sunlight that is received to their decked area which will affect their quality of life.

104

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Development:

Location:

Ward:

Grid Reference:

File Reference:

Site History:

Development Plan:


Consultations:

Representations:


S/08/01120/FUL

4th September 2008

Mr E Caira 24 Dalbeattie Braes Chapelhall ML6 8GQ

Change of Use of Class 1 Retail to Hot Food Takeaway

205A Motherwell Road Bellshill ML4 2JG

15 Mossend and Holytown: Councillors Coyle, Delaney and McKeown

273853659486

SIPLIB/7/64IHMGIG F

No planning applications of relevance

The site is covered by Policy HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008)

Yes

None

3 letters of representation and a petition with 11 signatures received

Advertised on 18th September 2008

105

Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. That the proposed development is contrary to the Council's aim of directing such development to the town centre or secondary retail areas and would be detrimental to the character and amenity of the adjoining residential area by virtue of noise, odours and general disturbance through the introduction of an inappropriate use to the area. It would also pose a hazard to traffic safety as there is inadequate car parking at the site and would result in vehicles parking on-street to the detriment of the surrounding residential area. As such, the proposal is contrary to Policies HSG7, RTLI, RTL4, RTLI 1 and TR13 of the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008).

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 2gth July 2008

Letter from C Reddin, 207 Motherwell Road, Bellshill, ML4 2JG received 7'h August 2008 Letter from C Gray, 1 Crinan Place, Bellshill, ML4 2LZ received 4th August 2008 Letter from Stephen Martin, 185 Motherwell Road, Bellshill received 6 August 2008 Letter attaching petition from Stephen Martin received 23rd September 2008

Memo from Transportation Team Leader received 30th September 2008 Memo from Protective Services received 23rd September 2008


Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Miss Heather Gebbie at 01698 2741 12.


107

APPLICATION NO. S/08/0112O/FUL

REPORT

1.

1.1


This application seeks planning permission for the change of use of an existing Class 1 shop unit to a hot food takeaway at 205A Motherwell Road, Bellshill.

The unit is one of two set within a single storey block on Motherwell Road. The application site is the smaller of the two units at 53 square metres and currently lies vacant. The adjacent unit is a small neighbourhood supermarket and post office which serve the surrounding residential area. The site is bounded by two storey dwellings to the southeast, Motherwell Road to the south west, a senior citizens day centre to the northwest and an area of public open space to the northeast.

1.2

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site is covered by Policy HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan Deposit Version 2008.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 The Transportation Team Leader have objected to the proposal in that the proposed development would require 5 parking spaces and the required parking provision cannot be provided within the application site. The proposed development would therefore result in on- street parking at this particular location which would be to the detriment of other road users.

3.2 The Protective Services Section have commented that construction hours of noise producing works should be limited and suitable dust measures should be put in place. They have also made comments in relation to the design, installation and operation or any mechanical ventilation, air conditioning or other plant and this should comply with the their noise guidelines due to the close proximity to dwellings. They have made comments in relation to any proposed external lighting equipment and careful consideration for lighting positioning should be undertaken in order to avoid upward spread of light and glare which can become obtrusive. A site investigation is recommended to be submitted for the extension to the shop.

3.3 Following the press advertisement and neighbour notification procedure, three letters of representation and a petition with 11 signatures have been received in relation to this application. Their representations can be summarised as follows:

a) The proposed development would adversely affect the surrounding properties due to the increase in: on-street parking; cooking odours; anti-social behaviour; littering including attraction of vermin, and youths congregating around the shop.

b) There are already 4 existing fish and chip shops located within a 1 miles radius of this site therefore resulting in overprovision.

4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The proposal raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed against Local Plan Policies.

108

4.2 In terms of local plan policy, the site is zoned under Policy HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas) of Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008). Policies RTLI, RTL4, RTLII and TR13 are also relevant to this application.

Policy HSG 7 (Established housing Areas) seeks to protect the established character of existing and new housing areas by opposing development which is incompatible with a residential setting or adversely affects the amenity of Established Housing Areas. Whilst local retail uses can be considered acceptable in principle, within predominantly residential areas, hot food takeaway shops (Sui Generis use) often do not accord with the terms of Policy HSG 7 where they may cause harm to residential amenity. The site of the proposal is located within a predominantly residential area. The adjoining shop unit which comprises of a small supermarket and post office is open until 10pm Monday to Saturday and 6pm on Sundays and serves the wider residential area. While there is an existing retail use at this location, this proposal introduces a late night hot food use. The proposal is likely to adversely affect the character and amenity of the established residential area. The applicant proposes to erect a flue on the roof and it is considered that there will be an adverse impact on adjacent housing from the cooking odours emitted from the extraction system. In terms of customer and staff parking, there is an access to the rear of the building however the land to the rear is not of a sufficient size to accommodate customer parking and the access is in close proximity to the neighbouring dwellings. As a result there is no provision for the increased traffic movements from customers. Delivery vehicles and members of the public visiting the shop via pedestrian routes or by car are likely to result in increased levels of noise and disturbance to the detriment of the amenity of the surrounding residents. I consider this to be an inappropriate location for a hot food take away and the proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to Policy HSG7.

4.3

4.4 Policy RTLI (Retail Development) seeks to direct lesser retail development to town centres, village, neighbourhood and secondary commercial areas. Policy RTL 4 (Assessing Applications for Retail Development) details criteria against which retail development proposals should be assessed and includes: the availability of suitable alternative sites in or around town centres and the provisions made for vehicular access & parking and the proposal's impact on pedestrian safety and traffic circulation. In relation to the proposed hot food take away, I consider that permitting this would be contrary to the aims of policy RTLI. Given that the site is not defined as a town centre, or a secondary, village or neighbourhood commercial area and taking into account the proximity of nearby residential properties I consider this to be an inappropriate location for a hot food takeaway. No justification has been provided to demonstrate that there are no alternative sites in or around the Bellshill area for the proposed hot food take away. Therefore the proposal is also contrary to Policy RTL4. The traffic issues relating to the proposal will be considered under assessment of the application against policy TR13 in paragraph 4.6 below.

4.5 Policy RTLI I seeks to locate developments such as hot food takeaways and other bad neighbour developments within Town Centres and/or Secondary Village or Neighbourhood Commercial Areas. Proposals are assessed on their potential impact on the character and amenity of the surrounding environment. Those which conflict with the surrounding environment causing nuisance through noise, smells or litter; are visually intrusive, result in traffic congestion, create a road safety hazard, have unsociable hours of operation, or do not satisfy parking requirements will generally be opposed. Granting permission for a hot food takeaway at this location would unacceptably conflict with the surrounding residential amenity of the area. While there is an existing shop adjacent to the application site, this location is not identified as a Neighbourhood Commercial Area and the proposed use should be located outwith residential areas in accordance with Policy RTLI 1. The proposed use is likely to increase activity levels from customers during late opening hours to the detriment of residential amenity and cause nuisance to residents. In this respect it is considered that the proposal would also generate additional traffic, increase activity levels during evening hours, and lead to litter problems. As noted at paragraph 4.4 above, access and parking issues will be assessed against Policy TRI 3.

109

Taking the above into account, it is considered that the development is contrary to Policy RTLI 1 in that such a development would be detrimental to the character of the surrounding environment.

4.6 Policy TR13 requires account to be taken of criteria including: the impact of development on road traffic circulation, road safety and provision made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. The Transportation Team Leader recommends that the application be refused as there is no parking within the site. As a result of insufficient road width and the positioning of a traffic island it is not possible to accommodate on-street parking, therefore the proposed takeaway is likely to increase on-street parking and vehicle manoeuvres to the detriment of road safety. Even if a rear car park was available to customers it would be likely that most customers would park outside. Therefore due to the insufficient parking provision and the subsequent detrimental effect on road safety, the proposal does not comply with local plan policy TRI 3.

4.7 With regard to the consultation response received from my Protective Services Section, it is incumbent upon developers to undertake site investigations and applicants are advised of this when planning consents are issued. In terms of the proposed extraction system, it is considered the location of the flue is unacceptable and would adversely impact on the amenity of the neighbouring properties from the emission of cooking odours. In terms of external lighting, the applicant has not proposed any external alterations to the shop unit within this application. Should the applicant intend to make external alterations including advertisement signage and lighting, this matter will be assessed through a subsequent planning application and advertisement application. With regards to hours of construction and dust measures, these matters are covered by environmental health legislation. If planning permission was to be granted, a condition relating to noise restrictions would be recommended.

4.8 In relation to the points of objection, I would comment as follows:-

a) It is agreed that the proposed change of use to hot food takeaway would lead to an increase in noise levels and loss of amenity and would be detrimental to the character and amenity of the adjoining residential area.

b) Concerns regarding over provision is not a material consideration in the determination of this application.

In conclusion it is considered that the proposal is contrary to policies HSG7 (Established Housing Areas), RTLI (Retail Development), RTL 4 (Assessing Applications for Retail Development), RTLl 1 (Assessing Applications for Bad Neighbour Development), and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) of the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008) in that the development site is not located within the town centre or any defined neighbourhood shopping centre and the proposal is likely to be detrimental to the character and amenity of the surrounding residential area by virtue of noise, odours and general disturbance and would cause a traffic and road safety hazard due to on street parking congestion.. As such, I hereby recommend that planning permission be refused.

4.9

110

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Agent

Development:

Location:

Ward:

Grid Reference:

File Reference:

Site History:

S/08/01190/OUT

27th August 2008

Stewart Chapman Stepend Coaches Unit 4 Flowerhill Industrial Estate Airdrie ML6 6BH

Block Architects 18 Haddow Street Hamilton ML3 7HX

Erection of Two Dwellinghouses (In Outline)

Land Adjacent To 18 Hirst Road 137 Llynallan Road Harthill ML7 5TL

12 Fortissat: Councillors Cefferty, McMillan and Robertson

288076 663991

S/PL/B F/17/85/EM L/G F

0 S/08/00568/FUL Construction of Storage Building for Coach/Bus Business -Approved 11 th June 2008 (Land adjacent to the site)

0 S/08/00197/FUL Change of use from Public House to Dwellinghouse -Approved 26th June 2008 (Land adjacent to the site)

Development Plan: The site is zoned as ENV8 (Countryside Around Towns) in the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008)

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: Scottish Water (No Objections)

Rep resen ta t io ns : 1 letter of representation received

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised 11 th September 2008

111

Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. That the proposed dwelling is contrary to Policies ENV 8 (Countryside Around Towns) and HSG 11 (Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside) of the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008) as there is no proven appropriate countryside operational need and that the development would therefore constitute unjustified development in the countryside to the detriment to this semi- rural location. Furthermore, the approval of a dwellinghouse would set an undesirable precedent for other similar developments within the countryside.

The proposed development is contrary to policies TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development), HSG9 (Assessing Applications for Housing Development) and HSG11 (Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside) of the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008) in that the visibility and access arrangements are unsatisfactory and would result in additional braking and turning manoeuvres on this de-restricted section of Hirst Road to the detriment of road safety.

2.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 8th August and 16'h September 2008 Supporting Statement received 16'h September 2008

Letter from Veronica Burns, 37 Llynallan Road, Harthill, Shotts, ML7 5TW received lgth August 2008

Memo from Transportation Team Leader received 16'h September 2008 Memo from Head Of Protective Services received gfh September 2008

Letter from Scottish Water received 1 5ifh September 2008


Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Edward McLennaghan at 01698 2741 13.


113

APPLICATION NO. S10810119010UT

REPORT

1.

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

2.

2.1

3.

3.1

3.2

3.3

Description of Site and ProPOsal

The applicant seeks outline planning permission for the erection of two dwellinghouses at land adjacent to 18 Hirst Road and 37 Llynallan Road, Harthill.

The site comprises the car park and land associated with the former “Burnside” public house/transport cafe located between Hirst Road and Lynallan Road. Residential properties lie to the north and east of the site with the M8 motorway to the north, and Tams Loup Quarry to the south and the bus depot to the west.

The application seeks outline planning consent for two dwellings. Plot 1 is located adjacent to Llynallan Road and measures an area of approximately 580 square metres. Plot 2 measures approximately 810 square metres. Both plots are proposed to be serviced off the existing access located on Hirst Road.

A supporting statement has been submitted on behalf of the applicant in respect of the proposed development. The supporting statement highlights the following issues to be taken into consideration.

1. The application would assist in improving the visual appearance of a disused parking area associated with the former public house which is currently unsightly.

2. Since the change of use of the public house to residential dwelling the applicant is left with a substantial parking area which the two plots would financially assist in the visual betterment and eradication of the parking area.

3. The application proposes to utilise an existing access previously utilised for parking associated with the public house and therefore its use for 3 dwellings would not have as significant an impact on road safety as the previous use.

Development Plan

The site is zoned as ENV8 (Countryside Around Towns) in the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008).


The Transportation Team Leader has recommended refusal of the application as the proposals show access via Hirst Road which would result in additional braking and turning manoeuvres on this de-restricted section of 6-class road to the detriment of road safety. Hirst Road is de- restricted and as such requires visibility splays of 2.5 metres by 215 metres in both directions which is unachievable.

Scottish Water have offered no objections to this application but have stated that the applicant will be required to contact Scottish Water Development Planning Team prior to the commencement of any development on site, and that non objection does not guarantee connection to Scottish Waters infrastructure. A SUDS drainage system will be required.

My Protective Services Team Leader has no objections to the proposed development subject to conditions relating to the requirement for a site investigation report and noise impact

114

assessment.

3.4 The Council has received 1 letter of objection pertaining to the application. The issues of concern raised are set out below:-

1. The sewage line runs across the land to the right of the objectors house and into a septic tank shared with house No. 41.

2. The rear of the objectors garden is being continually flooded with water coming off the embankment due to the drainage problems with the embankment.


4.1 Planning applications require to be assessed against the Development Plan and other material considerations. The proposal raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed against Local Plan Policies.

4.2 The site is zoned as ENV8 (Countryside Around Towns) in the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008). Policies HSG 9 (Assessing Applications for Housing Development), HSG 11 (Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside), and TR 13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) are also relevant.

4.3 Policy ENV 8 (Countryside Around Towns) seeks to promote and protect the Countryside and will not normally permit development other than that which relates to specified rural uses including agriculture, forestry, outdoor leisure and recreation. Policy HSGl2 (Housing in the Greenbelt and Countryside) provides scope for new houses in the Countryside, but only where there is a proven operational need in accordance with the criteria set out in policy ENV8. The applicant is unable to provide relevant justification for the new dwelling as there is no associated agricultural or business operation or adequate land holding associated with the proposed dwelling. There is therefore no justification for the proposed dwellinghouses at this location and the development constitutes unjustified development in the countryside contrary to policies ENV8 and HSGI 1. Approval of such an application would set an undesirable precedent and it should be noted that similar applications have previously been refused for such proposals.

4.4 Policy HSG 9 sets out the criteria against which new housing proposals will be assessed including: the impact of the development on the existing built and natural environment; the site layout; detailed design elements; and access arrangements. In assessing this particular proposal in terms of Policy HSG 9, it is considered that in land use terms the development of the site for two plots is unacceptable and would adversely affect the character and amenity of the area. There is no detailed design included as the proposals are in outline however it appears that the proposals could be accommodated in terms of building form and scale, and the proposals comply with the current open space requirements in the Council’s “Developers Guide to Open Space”. The proposals would however set an undesirable precedent for this semi rural countryside location and is therefore considered contrary to the terms of policy HSG9. The transportation issues are considered below.

4.5 Policies HSG9, HSGl1 and TR13 require suitable provision for access, parking and manoeuvring to a development site. It is considered that the development is likely to have an adverse impact on road safety as there is inadequate provision for visibility and access on Hirst Road. Furthermore it is considered that the proposals would increase braking and turning manoeuvres on a de-restricted section of B-class road to the detriment of road safety. My Transportation Team Leader has recommended refusal of the application given the substandard nature of the access proposed.

In response to the submitted supporting information I would make the following comments:- 4.6

115

1. It is not considered that the financial assistance afforded by the construction of two plots and the improvement of the visual appearance of the site is sufficient justification to warrant approval of the proposed dwellings which are contrary to the local plan countryside zoning of the site. Approval on such a basis would set an undesirable precedent for other similar developments within the countryside.

2. It is noted that the applicant intends to utilise the existing access which previously served as the access to the parking area associated with the public house and that its use for 3 dwellings would not have as significant an impact on road safety as the previous car park use. The previous use is noted and it is accepted that traffic generated by the proposal is not likely to be significantly more than that of the previous use. However it has to be recognised that the access arrangements are substandard, It is therefore not desirable to allow further residential traffic to take access at this location.

4.7 Finally, turning to the letter of representation I note the concerns regarding the sewage line running across the land and the issues highlighted regarding flooding and drainage problems with the embankment. Should the application be granted suitable planning conditions can be attached to address these issues.

4.8 The current application does not comply with policies designed to protect the Countryside and to safeguard and to promote road safety. The new dwellings will adversely effect the semi rural nature of this location with substandard visibility and access provision. The proposals are therefore considered contrary to policies ENV8, HSG, HSG 11 and TR 13 of the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008). I therefore recommend that planning permission be refused for the reasons outlined above.

116

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Agent

Development:

Location:

Ward:

Grid Reference:

File Reference:

Site History:

Development Plan:


Consultations:

Representations:


28th August 2008

Telefonica 0 2 (UK) Ltd 260 Bath Road Slough SL14DX

Walker Fraser & Steele 125 Buchanan Street Glasgow G1 2JF

Installation of 15 Metre High Monopole Mast and Ancillary Equipment Cabinet

Land To The Rear Of Tannochside Miners Club 438 Old Edinburgh Road Uddingston G71 6PJ

13 Thorniewood: Councillors Burrows, McCabe and McShannon

270380661443

S/PL/B/9/80/KD/GF

0 S/06/00492/FUL Formation of Outdoor Smoking Area with 2.4 metre high Palisade Fence (Retrospective) - Approved 12th June 2006

The Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008) zones the site as Policy HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas)

No

None

2 letters of representation received

Not Required

117

Recommendation:

1.

Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-



2. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- 101, 102 and 103.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded

3. That in the event that the telecommunications equipment, supporting structure or the apparatus within the site becomes redundant it must be removed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority within one month of becoming redundant. If the site ceases to be used for telecommunications transmission, it must be reinstated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority within six months of cessation.

Reason: To minimise the level of visual intrusion and to ensure the reinstatement of the site to a satisfactory standard.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 28'h August 2008

Letter from Councillor Robert Burrows, Civic Centre, Windmillhill Street, Motherwell, MLI IAB received 1 8'h September 2008 Letter from Councillor Jim McCabe, Civic Centre, Windmillhill Street, Motherwell, MLI IAB received 1 8'h September 2008


Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Kevin Divin at 01698 274107.


119


REPORT

1.

1.1

1.2

1.3

2.

2.1

3.

3.1

3.2

4.

4.1

4.2


This application seeks details planning permission for the installation of 15 metre high monopole mast and ancillary equipment cabinet at land to the rear of Tannochside Miners Club, 438 Old Edinburgh Road, Uddingston.

The application site is located within the car park of the Tannochside Miners Club, to the immediate south of the building. This area of Old Edinburgh Road is located within an established residential area of Uddingston. To the west, south and east of the application site are a mixed tenure of residential properties with the closest residential property located approximately 22 metres to the south.

The applicant has supplied a supporting statement that indicates the need for a mast within this area to meet a shortfall in coverage, which will be of general benefit to business, and domestic users in the area. An ICNIRP compliance certificate was also submitted confirming that the mast is within public health guidelines.

Development Plan

The Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008) zones the site as Policy HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas).


The Transportation Section raised no objections to the proposals subject to a condition relating to location of gates at the access.

Two letters of representation has been received from Councillors Burrows and McCabe. The point of objection raised was that:

i It is not acceptable for a mast to be located in the area as described in the application. The objection is based on the very close proximity to residential housing which is adjacent to the site. It must be noted that a previous application for similar apparatus was refused by the Planning Committee at an adjacent site.

Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The application is not of strategic significance and therefore only requires to be assessed against the relevant Local Plan for this area. In this instance the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008) is relevant, where the site is zoned as HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas). Policy CS 6 (Telecommunications Development) and advice set out in NPPG 19 and PAN 62 on Radio Telecommunications are also applicable.

Policy HSG 7 states that the Council will seek to protect the established character of existing and new housing areas by opposing development which is incompatible with a residential setting or adversely affects the amenity of Established Housing Areas. It is considered that the monopole will cause very little impact on the character of the residential area given its discrete,

120

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6

4.7

4.8

slimline proportions and as such the amenity levels currently enjoyed by the neighbouring residents will be safeguarded. The acceptability of this proposal will be considered in full under policy CS 6 below.

Policy CS 6 states that the Council will adopt a precautionary approach to new telecommunications development and will seek to locate them primarily in industrial and commercial areas which are not densely populated or contain sensitive uses such as residential areas, schools, nurseries or hospitals. The policy also states that site sharing will be encouraged where it is the best environmental solution, that applicants should demonstrate how the proposal fits into the wider network and make an ICNIRP declaration, stating that the proposal is within acceptable limits in terms of non-ionising radiation. Design and visual impact, and the extent to which more suitable alternative sites exist, are also included in the criteria for assessment under the policy.

The nearest residential properties lie approximately 22 metres to the south of the site, and due to the aspect and orientation of these properties, and the difference in ground levels, no windows will look directly on to the proposed mast thus causing no detrimental effects to residential or visual amenity. The proposed mast is 15 metres in height and is a slimline design. There are a number of trees adjacent to the site, measuring approximately 4 metres high, which will reduce the impact of the proposed telecommunications installation, Therefore the visual impact of the installation will be minimal due to its location behind the line of buildings along the Old Edinburgh Road. The applicant has provided a supporting statement relating to the siting of the proposed mast and this site was chosen to provide the appropriate network coverage. Details of other sites considered and reasons for discounting them were also provided. The development is therefore considered to be acceptable in terms of Policies HSG 7 and CS 6.

NPPG 19 and PAN 62 provides support for telecommunications development where the applicants have demonstrated the ability to carefully consider the siting and design options, and where the possible environmental effects have been minimised. It indicates that where the applicant has taken all these factors into consideration, refusal is unlikely to be warranted. The applicant has satisfied the criteria set out in both NPPG 19 and PAN 62. Overall, the proposal is in accordance with all relevant national planning policy and the applicant has submitted the ICNIRP compliance certificate.

Policy TR 13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) sets out criteria relating to matters including the level of traffic generated and its impact on the environment and adjoining land uses, impact of the development on road traffic circulation and road safety and provisions made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. As indicated in paragraph 3.1 my Transportation Team Leader has no objection to the proposed telecommunications installation subject to a condition relating to the location of the access gate. However, the site visit confirmed that the existing access gate meets those requirements. Therefore, it is considered that the proposal would comply with the criteria set out in Policy TR 13.

With regards to the point made in the letters of objection, I would respond as follows:

i It is considered that the proposed telecommunications installation will cause very little impact on the character of the residential area given its discrete, slimline proportions and its location in the car park behind the social club. A recent telecommunications application S/05/00543/FUL was refused on 1 5'h July 2005. However, that previous proposal is located approximately 750 metres to the east of this current proposal and located on a more open area adjacent to a sports area which is very different from this current proposal which was located behind a building within a car park therefore not as visually prominent.

In conclusion, taking account of the development plan and other material considerations, it is considered that in terms of siting and design the proposed development is acceptable and it should not significantly impact on the amenity of the adjacent areas. Therefore, the proposal

121

would conform to policies HSG 7, CS 6 and TR 13 of the Southern Area Local Plan (Deposit Version 2008) and national policy guidance in PAN 62 and NPPG 19 Radio Telecommunications. It is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

122

North Lanarkshire Council · 12 Athelstane Drive Greenfaulds Cumbernauld 38 N/08/01214/FUL Mr & Mrs...

Documents

Transcript of North Lanarkshire Council · 12 Athelstane Drive Greenfaulds Cumbernauld 38 N/08/01214/FUL Mr & Mrs...