North Lanarkshire Council - Committee Administration System

Transcription

North
Lanarkshire
Council
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT
PIanning Ap pIicat io ns for cons iderat ion
of Planning and Environment Committee
Committee Date : 13thDecember 2006
Ordnance Survey maps reproduced from Ordnance Survey
with permission of HMSO Crown Copyright reserved
APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE
1fhDecember 2006
Page
No
22
Application No.
Applicant
DevelopmentlLocus
Recommendation
N/06/00345/FUL
Taylor Woodrow
Developments Ltd.
Residential Development
Roadworks and a Nature
Reserve
Land at Frankfield Loch
Cumbernauld Road
Stepps
Grant (P)
36
N/06/01756/FUL
Airwave 02
Installation of Two
Transmission Dishes and
Ancillary Equipment
Cabinets
1 Tay Walk
Cumbernauld
Grant
41
N/06/01758/OUT
Mr. Mohammed
Ashraf
Station Garage
South Carbrain Road
Cumbernauld
Grant
51
N/06/0 18 16/FU L
Hutchison 3G UK
Ltd.
Installation of Three Face
Mounted
Telecommunications
Antennae
Carrickstone Water Tower
Portland Road
Cumbernauld.
Grant
56
N/06/01860/FUL
J. Logan
Extension to a
Dwellinghouse
46 Nicolson Court
Cardowan
Stepps
Grant
Request for Site
Visit & Hearing
61
C/05/00290/OUT
Mr A. Watt
Refuse (P)
Formation of Country Park
Including the Construction of
11 Dwellinghouses,
Associated Buildings to
Accommodate Rural Uses
(e.g. Equestrian Centre and
Ancillary Infrastructure
Works) at Staylee Farm (off
Hulks Road), Riggend
Airdrie
C/06/00802/0UT
Mr R McGregor
Erection of Residential
Development (in Outline) at
Archer's of Airdrie Ltd.,
Carlisle Road
Ai rdrie
Grant
77
C/06/01479/FUL
George Wimpey
West Scotland Ltd
Erection of 74
Dwellinghouses
At George Wimpey Phase 7
Lancaster Avenue
Chapelhall
Airdrie
Grant
84
C/06/01664/FUL
Mr C. McCrindle
Grant
Erection of Mixed
Request for Site
Development Retail on
Ground Floor with Four Flats Visit & Hearing
Above at 23 Forrest Street
Clarkston
Airdrie
92
S/06/01555/FUL
Brian McCusker
Erection of a 2 Metre High
Boundary Fence (In
Retrospect)
16 Thomson Drive
Bellshill
Refuse
98
S/06/01608/FUL
Mrs O'Neill
Conversion of Garage to
Habitable Space
11 Leesland
Uddingston
Refuse
103
S/06/01703/FUL
Sharon Scally &
John Murdoch
Change of Use of Open
Space to Garden Ground
20 Allandale Avenue,
Newarthill
Grant
108
S/06/0 17 18/F UL
Mohammed Bashir
Erection of Detached Double Grant
Garage/Garden Store
3 / 5 Iona Quadrant
Wishaw
113
S/06/01755/FUL
T-Mobile (UK)
Limited
Installation of 15 metre High Grant
Telecommunications
Request for Site
Visit & Hearing
Flagpole, 3 Antennae with
Ground Based Equipment
and Electrical Meter Cabinet
Bellshill Bowling Club
Hattonrigg Road
Bellshill
125
S/06/01791/OUT
C & F Developments Construction of a Flatted
18 Thrashbush Road
Wishaw
70
Grant
132
S/06/01793/FUL
Vodafone UK Ltd
Installation of 15m Street
Works Monopole and
Associated Equipment
Land at Earn Avenue
Righead Industrial Estate
Bellshill
Grant
137
S/06/01802/FUL
Mr G Watson
Construction of a
Dwellinghouse
Currieside Piggery, Station
Road
Shotts
Refuse
Request for Site
Visit & Hearing
(P) N/06/00345/FUL : If Granted, Legal Agreements will be required.
(P) C/05/00290/OUT If Granted Refer to Scottish Ministers Contrary to Policy
Application No:
N/06/00345/FUL
Date Registered:
1st March 2006
Applicant:
Taylor Woodrow Developments Ltd
2 Garbett Road
Kirkton Campus
Livingston
EH54 7DL
Agent
Keppie Planning Ltd
160 West Regent Street
Glasgow
G2 4RL
Development:
Residential Development, Formation of a Nature Area and
Associated Infrastructure Works
Location:
Land at Frankfield Loch
Cumbernauld Road
Stepps
North Lanarkshire
Ward:
70 Stepps
Grid Reference:
265654668074
File Reference:
N/06/00345/FUL
Site History:
03/01845/FUL : Residential Development and Associated
Infrastructure Works - Withdrawn in November 2005
Development Plan:
Councillor Brian Wallace
The site is zoned in the Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005 as jointly
Green Belt, Site of Importance for Nature Conservation, Nature
Reserve, Residential, Retail, Educational and Road Building, with
the balance between nature conservation and development
interests to be achieved through the submission and approval of a
masterplan for the site.
Contrary to Development Plan:
No
Consultations:
Representations:
NLC Education
(No Objection)
Scottish Natural Heritage
(Comments)
West of Scotland Archaeology Service (Comments)
Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Comments)
Scottish Water
(Comments)
Health and Safety Executive
(Com ments)
Glasgow City Council
(No Objection)
British Gas
(Comments)
Two Representation Letters
Newspaper Advertisement:
Advertised on 22nd March 2006
1:8,000
Recommendation:
1.
Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-
That the development hereby permitted shall be started within five years of the date of this
permission
Reason:To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.
2.
That before the development hereby permitted starts a Construction Environmental Management
Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority: the Plan shall
include phasing for avoiding disturbance to vulnerable wildlife species; measures to reduce the
impact on the local ecology; measures to suppress noise, vibration and dust; measures to
safeguard against pollution; measures to safeguard against mud on the road; restriction on hours
of operation; and minimisation of the period of closure of the Loch Road right of way.
Reason:ln the interests of public health, safety and wellbeing, nature conservation and road
safety.
3.
That before the development hereby permitted starts on Site B a ground investigation/
remediation report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority: the
report shall address remediation measures proposed for ground contamination and land gas and
potential contamination of shallow ground water and surface water (and the means of ensuring
that there is no worsening of any such contamination); approved decontamination works shall be
verified by North Lanarkshire Council as being satisfactorily carried out prior to the related section
of construction works commencing.
Reason:ln the interests of public health and safety by ensuring that ground conditions are fully
investigated and appropriate remediation measures are put in place.
4.
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 for the approval of 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). If the area of ground illustrated for the
notional 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 and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of
existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site respectively.
5.
That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 4
above shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably
practical. Following the construction of the SUDS, a certificate (signed by a responsible Civil
Engineer) 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.
Reason:To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the interests
of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents.
6.
That no development shall commence until evidence is exhibited to the Planning Authority that an
agreement has been reached by the applicant with Scottish Water for the provision of a drainage
and/or water scheme to serve the development.
Reason:ln the interests of public health and well-being by ensuring that there is satisfactory
drainage and water provision.
7.
That the upgraded Lochend Road adjacent to Frankfield Loch and the nature area shall accord
with plans 1/SNH (Environ) and SP/402-116/E (The Scott Partnership) with respect to the
formation of a watervole culvert, three amphibian/ wildlife tunnels, lateral drainage pipes,
amphibian fencing, amphibian gulley ladders, a single pavement/ cycle path, wildflower grass
verges and semi-natural vegetation on the embankments (or such other scheme as may be
approved in writing by North Lanarkshire Council as Planning or Roads Authority).
Reason:To ensure that the road meets road safety, ecological and landscape interests.
a.
That the last five dwellinghouses within Site A shall not be occupied until the approved link
road/cycleway/footpath is completed and open for public use.
Reason:ln order to achieve an effective early link with Cardowan.
9.
That all of the roads, footways, junctions and car parking provision within the application site shall
be constructed or provided to the satisfaction of North Lanarkshire Council as Planning and
Roads Authority.
Reason:In the interests of road safety by ensuring that these elements of the development are of
an acceptable standard.
10.
That before the development hereby permitted starts full details of the closure of the adjacent
nursery car park access shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority:
the details shall include the reinstatement of the footpath and landscaping and the formation of
the relocated car park access.
Reason:ln the interests of road safety by ensuring that closure of the existing adjacent nursery
car park access is carried out in a safe and appropriate manner.
11.
That no dwellinghouse hereby permitted shall be occupied until the nursery car park access
closure works approved under condition 10 above have been carried out to the satisfaction of the
Planning Authority.
Reason:In the interests of road safety by ensuring that closure of the existing adjacent nursery
car park access is carried out in a safe and appropriate manner.
12.
That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping, including
boundary treatment, 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) details of the phasing of these works.
Reason:To ensure that the landscape is appropriate for the site and the general area.
13.
That in accordance with the landscape phasing approved under Condition 12 above or within one
year of the occupation of the last dwellinghouse within respectively Site A and Site 6,all
respective phase planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of
landscaping and planting approved under Condition 12 above shall be completed and any trees,
shrubs or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged or become diseased shall be
replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species or such other scheme
as is to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.
Reason:ln the interests of the landscape setting of the site.
14.
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:a) the proposed private access roads, parking areas and footpaths;
b) the proposed grassed, planted and landscaped areas;
c) the proposed site B play areas as covered by Condition 15 below.
Reason:To ensure effective future maintenance.
15.
That before the development of Site B starts, a scheme for the provision of two play areas within
Site B shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any
modifications as may be required, and this shall include:(a) details of the type and location of play equipment, seating and litter bins to be situated within
the play areas;
(b) details of the surface treatment of the play areas, including the location and type of safety
surface to be installed;
(c) details of the fences to be erected around the play areas, and
(d) details of the phasing of these works.
Reason:To ensure the provision of adequate play facilities within the site.
16.
That before occupation of the last five dwellinghouses within Site B, all the works required for the
provision of equipped play areas included in the scheme approved under the terms of condition
15 above shall be completed
Reason:To ensure the provision of adequate play facilities within the site.
17.
That before the development hereby permitted starts full details of the proposed local nature area
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and any approved
measures shall be incorporated into the development proposals: the local nature area details
shall include a management and maintenance plan, funding details and proposed physical works.
Reason: In the interests of nature conservation, ecological education, recreation and access.
18.
That before occupation of the last five dwellinghouses within the approved site all local nature
area set up works within the application site approved under the terms of condition 17 above shall
be completed.
Reason:ln order to ensure that the local nature area is an integral part of the development
proposals.
19.
That before the development hereby permitted starts on Site A or separately on Site B, resurveys
of the relevant sites for protected species shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Planning Authority and any approved measures shall be incorporated into the development
proposals; the resurveys shall take place within 12 months of the commencement of work on
Site A or separately on Site B, shall be carried out by a suitably qualified person and shall cover
species which receive statutory protection (particularly water voles, amphibians and otters).
Reason:ln the interests of nature conservation.
20. That before the development hereby permitted starts on Site A or separately on Site B a survey
for bat roosts of all trees to be felled shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning
Authority and any approved measures shall be incorporated into the development proposals.
Reason:ln the interests of nature conservation.
21.
That before the development hereby permitted starts an archaeological assessment for Site A
from an approved consultant (incorporating a field evaluation in accordance with the requirements
of North Lanarkshire Council and West of Scotland Archaeology Service) shall be submitted to
and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and any approved measures shall be
incorporated into the development proposals.
Reason:ln the interests of local archaeology.
22.
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.
Reason:ln the interests of amenity by ensuring that external materials are appropriate for the site
and the general area.
23. 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.
Reason:ln the interests of amenity by ensuring that boundary walls and fences are appropriate
for the site and the general area.
24.
That before the development hereby permitted starts amended bin store details (allowing for 2
bins per flat or such other scheme as may be deemed appropriate) shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Planning Authority and any approved measures shall be incorporated
into the development proposals.
Reason : For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure that the bin stores are appropriate for the site
and the general area.
NOTES TO COMMITTEE
If granted, the planning permission will not be issued until:a)
An Agreement under Section 75 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997
has been concluded with the applicant and landowner in respect of the financing, laying
out and management of a nature area at Frankfield Loch and the associated wetlands; and
b)
An Agreement under Section 69 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 has been
concluded in respect of a financial contribution towards the upgrading of the existing NLC
play area at Frankfield Road.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 1st March 2006
Memo from NLC Education received 20th April 2006
Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 30th May 2006
Letter from West of Scotland Archaeology Service received 27th April 2006
Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 19th June 2006
Letter from Scottish Water received 2gthMarch 2006
Letter from Health and Safety Executive received 7th April 2006
Letter from Glasgow City Council received 2nd May 2006
Letter from British Gas received 9th May 2006
Letter from Mr Jack Keenan, 4 Blaneview, Stepps, G33 6BH received 13th March 2006.
Letter from Mr Henry Corbett, 4 Cumbernauld Road, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6EL received 10th March
2006.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Martin Dean at 01236 616459.
DATE: 5'h December 2006
AP PLlCAT1ON NO. N/06/00345/FU L
REPORT
1.
Description of Site and Proposal
1.1
The Frankfield Loch application site covers approximately 30 hectares and is currently an
unmanaged greenfield site within the Stepps and Cardowan area. It is located on the southern
side of Cumbernauld Road, Stepps with the site being bounded to the north by Cumbernauld
Road, housing and a railway line, to the east by open land and existing housing, to the south by
Cardowan housing, recreational open space and open land and to the west by open land and
Strathclyde University playing fields.
1.2
The application is for the construction of 233 houses and the formation of a local nature area.
The housing development is split into two distinct sections as follows :0
0
Site A (Cardowan), located on rising land with scrubland cover to the east of Frankfield
Loch, will contain 87 detached houses and 16 semi-detached houses (103 units).
Site B (Stepps), located on open formerly tipped land to the rear of mounding on the loch
side, will contain 99 detached houses, six semi-detached houses, two blocks of flats each
with nine units and seven three-storey townhouses fronting on to Cumbernauld Road (130
units).
A through road from Cumbernauld Road to Cardowan will serve both sites.
1.3
Taylor Woodrow estimate that the development programme will last about seven years.
1.4
It is proposed that Frankfield Loch (which is in Glasgow Council’s area), the immediate loch
margins and the wetland to the east of Loch Road be incorporated into a developer-financed
local nature area.
1.5
The application is supported by an Environmental Statement covering visual impact, hydrology,
flooding, drainage, ground modification, ground contamination, ecology, heritage and
archaeology, air quality, noise and vibration, access and recreation, and construction. In
addition a ground investigation report, further hydrological and flood assessment details and an
initial local nature area management plan have been submitted.
1.6
It should be noted that a previous application (N/03/01845/FUL) for residential development and
a nature park area was withdrawn in November 2005. The Council determined that planning
permission should be granted, but the application was subsequently called in by the Scottish
Ministers to allow consideration of the housing layout and design and to consider Green Belt
issues. Rather than go through the Public Inquiry process, the applicant withdrew the
application and submitted the current application for the Committee’s consideration.
2.
Policv Guidance and the Development Plan
2.1
The following planning policy and guidance have been taken into account in the consideration of
this planning application :-
0
Scottish Planning Policy 3 : Planning for Housing
This Policy indicates that a key aim of planning is to provide well-located, high quality new
housing. In meeting the requirements of housing markets across Scotland, planning authorities
and housing providers should work closely together to :
0
a)
Create quality residential environments - New housing should make a positive
contribution to the built and rural environment, and should be designed and laid out to
provide lasting benefits. The planning system has an important role in promoting good
design, specifying the requirements for landscaping and open space, and indicating
where higher densities will be suitable.
b)
Guide new housing developments to the right places - New housing areas should be
easily accessible by public transport and well integrated into walking and cycling
networks. As part of a long-term settlement strategy, previously developed land and
buildings will have a key role and should be reused where a viable and environmentally
satisfactory development can be achieved. Extensions to cities, towns and villages or
new settlements should be developed in a sustainable way.
c)
Deliver housing land - Planning authorities should meet the housing land requirement
for each housing market area in full. The planning system can help to support a strategy
to provide affordable housing in an area.
National Planning Policy Guideline 14 : Natural Heritage
This Guideline draws attention to the importance of safeguarding and enhancing natural
heritage. It specifies that Planning Authorities should have full regard to natural heritage
considerations in determining planning applications. It encourages the retention and
enhancement of features of natural heritage interest and seeks to avoid the fragmentation or
isolation of habitats.
0
Scottish Planning Policy 21 : “Green Belts”
The key objectives of Green Belt policies are :9 to direct planned growth to the most appropriate locations and support
regeneration;
9 to protect and enhance the character, landscape setting and identity of towns and
cities; and
9 to protect and give access to open space within and around towns and cities, as
part of the wider structure of greenspace.
A strong presumption against inappropriate development in the Green Belt is an established
part policy.
0
Scottish Executive Policy Statement : Designing Places
This emphasises the importance of good design.
0
Planning Advice Note 76 : New Residential Streets
This advice note responds to concerns that housing layouts are being dominated by roads
engineering. Better quality, more attractive and safe residential environments are promoted
with there being particular emphasis on creating housing areas that are distinctive, safe and
pleasant, and with good access links. While the layout proposed by Taylor Woodrow is fairly
conventional, and not really in the spirit of PAN 76, it will result in an acceptable housing
environment with which potential proprietors will be familiar.
0
Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 and Finalised Draft Joint Structure Plan
2006
The relevant strategic policies relating to the application site and the proposed development
are as follows:1. Strategic Policy 1 - Strategic Development Locations
The Metropolitan Development Strategy requires the continued designation and
safeguarding of the Glasgow and the 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. The Metropolitan Development Strategy also promotes a green network
within the Structure Plan area under Strategic Policy 6 .
0
2. Strategic Policy 6 - Quality of Life and Health of Local Communities
0
This Policy indicates that the quality of life and health of the communities will be supported
through environmental improvements and the provision of open space and facilities for
sport and recreation.
3.Strategic Policy 9 - Assessment of Development Proposals
0
This Policy indicates that proposals that fail to meet set criteria will be regarded as a
departure from the Development Plan and require to be justified against Strategic Policy 10.
It is a requirement of this policy that the Green Belt be safeguarded.
4. Strategic Policy 10 - Departures from the Structure Plan
0
0
This Policy indicates that consideration should be given to the appropriateness of the
development having regard to set criteria and to any other material consideration. The
criteria includes the protection and enhancement of environmental resources identified in
Local Plans and the significant restoration of vacant land for environmental purposes.
Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005
The application site is zoned jointly as Green Belt, and Site of Importance for Nature
Conservation and for nature reserve, residential, retail, education and road building purposes.
(ENV5, ENV12, ENV13, HG1/22, SC2, EDUC I, TR3/4). The balance between the above
nature conservation and development interests is to be achieved through the submission and
approval of a masterplan for the site.
3.
Consultations and Representations
3.1
Summaries of consultation responses to the planning application and related environmental
statement are as follows:
0
Glasgow City Council : No objection subject to investigation of public transport and
pedestrian links.
0
Health and Safety Executive : No comments.
0
Historic Scotland : No comments.
0
Scottish Environment Protection Agency : Initial flood risk objections are withdrawn in light
of further information. Concerns relating to contaminated land issues remain.
0
Scottish Executive (Environment Group) : There are inconsistencies in information provided
on contamination and land gas emissions.
0
Scotland Gas Networks : Details are provided of a trunk gas mains approximately 200
metres from the application site.
0
Scottish Natural Heritage : No objections subject to conditions to secure :a) an appropriate appearance to that section of Loch Road adjacent to the loch,
b) an acceptable impact on the sensitive north west corner of the loch, and
c) appropriate ecological buffer zones.
It is further recommended that SNH be involved in assessing the required Construction
Environmental Management Plan, that there be a legal agreement concerning the
management of the nature area and that there be updated surveys for protected species.
0
Scottish Water : No objection subject to a condition requiring agreement between the
developer and Scottish Water regarding drainage and water supply.
0
Transport Scotland : No specific trunk road comments.
0
West of Scotland Archaeology Service : It is recommended that further information be
provided on the potential for past settlement on the high ground in proposed housing Area A
and on parchmarks observed within this area.
0
NLC Leisure Services (previous application) : Ecological recommendations are given for the
protection of amphibians, bats, watervoles and breeding birds; the provision of sustainable
urban drainage systems; the provision of a local nature reserve area; the resurveying for the
presence of badgers; the narrowing of the upgraded Loch Road; and the provision of
appropriate access routes through the site. Such recommendations will, however, only
provide partial mitigation against the loss of important nature conservation habitats. The
proposal will lead to the loss of prominent landmark features. Play areas are required for
Site B. It is understood that the play area and open space adjacent to Site A are to be
upgraded with a contribution from the developer in lieu of play provision at Site A. The
developer should contribute f52,500 (f500 per dwelling) as an alternative to local play
provision.
0
3.2
NLC Education : No objections. All pupils in the area can be fully accommodated.
0
My Transportation Section has no objections to the basic layout, although certain matters of
detail require to be resolved.
0
My Pollution Control Section may have some concerns in relation to contamination of the
site.
Two letters of representation have been submitted. Points of objection with my comments are
as follows :0
The site is a green wildlife oasis much loved by pony treckers, bird watchers, walkers,
cyclists and ramblers. Wildlife in the area will not recover from development pressures.
The amenity of the Frankfield Loch area will be spoiled by the proposed residential
development. The openness of Frankfield Loch contributes to the well being of Stepps
residents.
Comments: Different aspects of the development have different effects on nature
conservation interests. This is covered in detail in paragraphs 4.3-4.6 below. The visual
impact of the development is covered in paragraphs 4.8 and 4.9.
0
The proposal is contrary to the Development Plan Green Belt zoning.
Comments: The proposed residential development accords with the Structure Plan, and the
Local Plan. This is covered in detail in paragraph 4.2 below.
0
The character of Stepps will be unacceptably altered by the proposed large development.
There may be an adverse impact on some properties in the vicinity of the application site
through the proposed development.
Comments; There will be an alteration to the character of this part of Stepps, but in an
acceptable manner. New houses will be a minimum of 35 metres from existing houses at
Cumbernauld Road and in most cases there will be a considerably greater distance.
Existing adjacent residents should not, therefore, be adversely affected by the final
development. There are, however, likely to be some adverse effects during construction
works, although this should be mitigated by measures required by the Construction
Environment Management Plan. The applicants have been advised of the concerns about
potential garden drainage problems.
No additional facilities are proposed for the large number of proposed new residents.
Existing infrastructure may not be able to cope. The development should be integrated into
Cardowan by providing a through road.
Comments ; This is a relatively low density development with the majority of units being
detached. Site B is close to existing Stepps facilities and Site A has pedestrian and cycling
links to Cardowan facilities. A link road will be formed from Stepps to Cardowan. There are
no objections from the Education Department.
0
The local sewage system is currently under pressure and will not be able to cope with the
proposed substantial new development.
Comments ; A recommended planning condition requires that no works commence until
Scottish Water has confirmed in writing that either the existing sewage system can cope with
the proposed development or that the developer will finance suitable improvements.
4.
Plannina Assessment and Conclusions
4.1
In terms of Section 25 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions
must be made in accordance with the development plan unless there are material
considerations which dictate otherwise. The following are the key areas of consideration.
4.2
Development Plan : The proposed development accords with the Glasgow and the Clyde
Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000. Under the terms of Strategic Policy 9 (Assessment of
Development Proposals), the proposal meets the following criteria.
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
The site is promoted for housing (amongst other potential uses) in the Local Plan partly
on the basis that there is a housing land supply requirement for such sites.
The site is in a sustainable location, being close to services and public transport at
Stepps and Cardowan.
It has been established that there is no undue flood risk.
The Site of Importance for Nature Conservation is enhanced.
This is not isolated or sporadic development in the Green Belt or the wider countryside.
f)
g)
With regards infrastructure, a road link is being formed between Stepps and Cardowan.
Contamination will be tackled such that there is no risk to health and safety.
The Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005 allows for residential development so long as it is part of
a balanced set of proposals which promotes ecological as well as development interests. It is
considered that the development proposals provide such a balance.
4..3
Ecology : The site comprises a mosaic of habitat types including wetland, marginal swamp,
scrub/woodland and grassland. A large proportion of the site is designated as a Site of
Importance for Nature Conservation. The proposed residential development will lead to an
overall loss of habitat, particularly grassland. The site is known to support North Lanarkshire
and Glasgow biodiversity action plan priority species such as watervole, pipistrelle bat,
daubentons bat, palmate newts, reed, bunting and song thrush. In addition to the forgoing, the
site supports a large number of amphibians and a wide variety of birds.
4.4
Scottish Natural Heritage’s initial concerns have been overcome through negotiation and
through the supply of further information. SNH recommended conditions have been imposed.
4.5
Adverse impacts on nature conservation interests are mitigated by the following proposals:Residential development is only proposed on the least valuable habitats. No development is
proposed on an area of wetland or on the immediate margins of Frankfield Loch.
Ecological studies show that certain areas outwith the designated Site of Importance for
Nature Conservation (SINC) have high ecological value and certain areas within the SINC
designation are less valuable. The positioning of the proposed residential development
reflects the true ecological value of the land.
0
A local nature area (LNA) will be formed and funded by the developers of Frankfield Loch
covering the immediate loch environment and the adjacent wetland area. The LNA, which
will be in both North Lanarkshire and Glasgow, will have the following objectives :To maintain and enhance aquatic and wetland habitats.
o To maintain and enhance terrestrial habitats.
U To support access by the public without compromising ecological
resources.
P To maintain and enhance conditions for watervole populations.
U To maintain and enhance conditions for amphibian species.
P To maintain and enhance conditions for breeding birds.
The upgrade of Loch Road has been specifically designed such that it presents less of a
wildlife barrier. It has culverts designed for watervole passage, a surface water drainage
system designed to avoid trapping amphibians and its form of construction will allow a
hydrological link between Frankfield Loch and the wetland area.
4.6
It is considered that the proposed development will have some adverse effects on nature
conservation interests, but that there will be acceptable compensation through the proposed
remedial measures.
4.7
Contamination : SEPA has expressed some concern about recorded contamination on parts of
the site. This issue is being investigated by my Pollution Control Section and our consultants,
Jacobs Babtie, but, at the time of writing, no conclusions have been reached.
4.8
Low levels of pollution have been recorded at Site B (Stepps) and this will be tackled by forming
and inert capping layer. Some contaminants will be removed. Low levels of contamination
have been noted in ground water and in Frankfield Loch. This important issue of contamination
was fully explained through the previous planning application for residential development on the
site. It was established that there was no risk to human health and that the site did not have to
be formally classified as “contaminated land”.
4.9
Notwithstanding the above comments, a condition is attached to the recommended permission
requiring that remedial measures for contamination and land gas emissions be approved prior
to Site B house building commencing. This will cover the possible need to review this matter in
light of updated legislation.
4.10
Visual Impact: The main effect on visual impact will arise from the removal of dense scrubland
from the development areas and from the close relationship of housing at Area A to Frankfield
Loch. The principle landscape components of open water and wetland will remain
undeveloped.
4.11
Retention of areas of scrub along with new planting will provide visual mitigation. It is concluded
in the Environmental Statement that the visual impact of the development will initially be
moderately adverse. This impact will, however, lessen when replacement planting matures.
4.12
Conclusion : This planning application reiterates development proposals which have already
been approved by North Lanarkshire Council prior to the previous application being withdrawn
after it was called in for determination by the Scottish Ministers. This is a significant
development proposal on an environmentally sensitive site which has unique hydrological and
contamination issues. Although there may be some adverse effect on certain ecological
interests and on the visual amenity of the area, it is considered that the proposed mitigation
measures satisfactorily alleviate the development impact. In particular the setting out and
funding of a local nature area with improved recreational access will be of general benefit.
4.13
Taking all relevant material considerations into account, it is concluded that the proposed
development meets the Northern Corridor Local Plan requirement for a balance between
ecological and development interests. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be
granted.
4.14
If the Committee accepts the above recommendation, the planning permission should not be
issued until :a) An agreement under Section 75 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 has
been concluded with the applicant and landowner in respect of the financing, laying out and
management of a nature area at Frankfield Loch and the associated wetlands; and
b) An Agreement under Section 69 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 has been
concluded with the applicant in respect of a financial contribution towards improvements to
the existing NLC play area at Frankfield Road.
Application No:
N/06/01756/FUL
Date Registered:
13th November 2006
Ap pI icant :
Airwave 02
Clo Agent
Agent
Mono Consultants Ltd
48 St Vincent Street
Glasgow
G2 5TS
Development:
Installation of Two Transmission Dishes and Ancillary
Equipment Cabinets
Location:
1 Tay Walk
Town Centre
Cumbernauld
G67 1BU
Ward:
60 Carbrain East
Grid Reference:
27581 1 674417
File Reference:
N/06/01756/FUL
Councillor William Homer
N/99/00105/FUL : Installation of One 300mm Microwave Dish,
Approved 12 March 1999
N/99/00974/FUL : Installation Of One 1200mm Microwave
Dish, Approved 20 September 1999
N/02/00239/FUL : Upgrading of Telecommunications
Apparatus, Approved 5 June 2002
N/03/00402/FUL : Installation of 4 Microwave Dishes, Approved
5 June 2003
N/05/00776/FUL: Installation of 6 No. Pole-Mounted Antennas,
Refused 18 April 2006.
N/06/00213/FUL: Installation of 3 No. 3G Antennas and 3 No.
2G Antennas and 2 No. Equipment Cabins, Mark Ill Cabinet
and Associated Ancillary Development on the Rooftop, Refused
18 April 2006. Decision appealed - Appeal sustained 14
September 2006
Site History:
Development Plan:
The site is covered by shopping centre policies SH1 and SH8 in the
Cum bernauld Local Plan 1993
No
Consultations:
Representations:
None received
Not Required
k
r"!
= . ~ ~
zaA-rp---.?z!!L>
I I
-I.YCl.r-L."",
L% =z;zr.i'*
m
*.--.-.*
E;:;=
N106101756fFUL
Aiwave 0 2
1 Tay Walk Town Centre Cumbernauld
Installation of Two Transmission Dishes and
Anc iII a y Equipment Cabinets
H ~ - - ~
A
Recommendation:
1.
permission
Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997
2.
That in the event that the equipment becomes redundant it must be wholly removed and the site
reinstated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority within one month of the equipment
becoming redundant.
Reason: To ensure the reinstatement of the site to a satisfactory condition, in the interests of visual
amenity.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 24th October 2006
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Graeme Lee at 01236 616474.
DATE : 5'h December 2006
APPLICATION NO. N/06/01756/FUL
REPORT
1.1
This application is for the installation of 2 transmission dishes on existing antenna support poles
on the rooftop of 1 Tay Walk, Cumbernauld. The works also include the installation of an
equipment cabinet on a lower section of roof and a diesel generator at ground level. This
development is required to ensure that, in the event of a failure in the normal operation of the
network, coverage is maintained for emergency services and public safety organisations. This
will be achieved by installing the two dishes which will form part of a network of radio links
between existing base stations using line of sight links between the existing base stations.
1.2
The site is located within the town centre, with the library to the south and Central Way to the
north. The nearest housing is situated 250 metres north at Lennox Road, Seafar. The nearest
school is St. Margaret of Scotland Primary School (formerly St. Joseph’s Primary School), which
is situated 400 metres south-west, whilst Cumbernauld College is located 190 metres southwest of the site. To the west of, and below, the application site is a children’s day nursery at
Allander Walk, which was granted permission for an outdoor play area on part of an adjoining
roof of the town centre in 2004. This play area has now been formed.
1.3
The site is currently utilised by telecommunications code system operators, and a considerable
amount of equipment is currently located on the rooftop of the plant room. The applicants have
submitted the required ICNIRP Certificate of conformity to E.U. guidelines and confirmed that
this certificate takes account of both existing and proposed equipment.
2.
2.1
There are no strategic issues in terms of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan
2000, and the proposal can be assessed relative to Local Plan policies. The site is covered by
shopping centre policies in terms of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993. Policy SH1 supports
the town centre’s shopping role and Policy SH8 seeks to improve the environment of the town
centre.
2.2
It should be noted that there are no specific telecommunications policies in the Cumbernauld
Local Plan.
3.
3.1
No consultations were required for the consideration of this proposal.
3.2
No letters of representation have been received.
4.
4.1
This application must be assessed against government planning policy and advice as set out in
NPPG 19 and PAN 62. NPPG 19 states (para. 65) that where applicants have properly
considered siting and design options and minimised any environmental effects, refusal is
unlikely to be warranted. The proposed site has been chosen as the best available option to
provide both 2G and 3G telecommunications coverage to Carbrain. The application site is well
distanced from both housing and schools, although it is directly adjacent to the outdoor play
area of a children’s day nursery at Allander Walk. A considerable amount of
telecommunications equipment is already located on the site and was present when Happitots
applied for planning permission for their outdoor play area.
4.2
In this instance, I consider that the addition of 2 transmission dishes and the related works
being proposed will have no impact on amenity and are otherwise acceptable in planning terms.
As indicated above, this development is required to ensure that, in the event of a failure in the
normal operation of the network, coverage is maintained for emergency services and public
safety organisations.
4.3
The Committee should note that the recent refusal of planning application N/06/00213/FUL for T
Mobile equipment on the same site was successfully appealed to the Scottish Ministers. That
proposal comprised a total of 6 new antennas (3 x 3G antennas anyh3 x 2G antennas) and
various equipment cabinets. In granting planning permission (on 14 September 2006) the
Scottish Executive Inquiry Reporter concluded that that development would not have a
significant impact on amenity; would not appear incongruous or result in unreasonable or
unacceptable clutter and that the proposal represented a good example of site sharing as
recommended in PAN 62.
4.4
In summary, this application follows the relevant national planning policy and advice and there is
no conflict with the development plan. The key issues of visual amenity and location have been
assessed and found to be satisfactory. It is recommended that planning permission be granted.
Application No:
N/06/01758/OUT
Date Registered:
25th October 2006
Applicant:
Mr Mohammed Ashraf
Station Garage
South Carbrain Road
Carbrain
Cumbernauld
G67 2PL
Agent
Architects Design Studio
Flat 5
3 St Andrews Drive
Glasgow
G41 5SL
Development:
Location:
Station Garage
South Carbrain Road
Carbrain
Cumbernauld
G67 2PL
Ward:
60 Carbrain East
Grid Reference:
276309 673851
File Reference:
N/06/01758/OUT
Site History:
No recent applications - last planning applications were in the mid
1990’s and were in relation to signage for the garage.
Development Plan:
The site is covered by Housing Policy HG4 (protection of residential
amenity) of the Cum bernauld Local Plan 1993.
No
Consultations:
NLC Education
Scottish Environment Protection Agency
Scottish Water
Railtrack Scotland
Representations:
5 letters of representation
Not Required
Recommendation:
1.
Councillor William Homer
(No Objection)
(No Response)
(No Response)
(No Objections)
That before development starts, a further planning application shall be submitted to the Planning
Authority in respect of the following reserved matters:-
Station Garage South Carbrain Road Cumbernauld
Representations
*
A
1 : l ,250
(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, parking and turning areas;
(d) the details of, and timetable for, the hard and soft landscaping of the site;
(e) details for management and maintenance of the areas identified in (d) above;
(f) the design and location of all boundary walls and fences;
(9) the provision of drainage works;
(h) the disposal of sewage;
(i) details of existing and proposed site levels.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
2.
That within three years of the date of this permission, an application for approval of reserved
matters, specified in condition 2 above, shall be made to the Planning Authority.
Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.
3.
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 the later.
4.
For the avoidance of doubt, no approval is hereby given for the submitted indicative layout.
Reason: To define the terms of the planning consent.
5.
That the site is developed in accordance with the Council's 'Developer's Guide to Open Space' in
terms of the minimum space standards and space around dwellings.
Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory amenity space for the dwellings.
6.
That notwithstanding the terms of condition 1 above no building erected on the site will be higher
than the adjacent Station Buildings and shall otherwise not exceed the height of Station Buildings
when measured from the road level to the front of these buildings.
Reason: To safeguard the residential and visual amenity of the area.
7.
That before the development hereby permitted starts, a report describing the soil and ground
conditions prevailing over the application site (including details of the nature, concentration and
distribution of any contaminants), shall be submitted to the Planning Authority and the works
required in order to remove or render harmless these contaminants, having regard to the
proposed use of the site, shall be agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, and development
shall not be commenced until these works have been completed.
Reason: To ensure the site is free of contamination.
8.
That before the development hereby permitted starts, a detailed report shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Planning Authority detailing the measures to be taken to decommission
the petrol station. For the avoidance of doubt the scheme shall include the following:
a) That the decommissioning process should take place as soon as is practicable after petrol
operation has ceased
b) Carrying out a full risk assessment taking into consideration all matters concerning health and
safety and environmental protection
c) The removal from site of the storage tanks and associated pipework or rendering the tanks
safe in situ - see note below
d) The removal of the dispensers
e) The cleaning and where appropriate the removal of the oil/water separator and connected
surface water drainage system
f) The disconnection and where appropriate the removal of the electrical installation.
Note : Guidance relating to the decommissioning of underground storage tanks can be obtained
in the IP/APEA guidance booklet 'Design, Construction, Modification, Maintenance and
Decommissioning of Filling Stations'. This document provides detailed guidance on acceptable
methods of decommissioning.
The preferred method is gas freeing and removal from the ground. However, North Lanarkshire
Council accepts filling with appropriate hydrophobic foam, whereby the tanks can remain in situ,
as an alternative.
Reason: In the interests of the safety of local residents, future residents of the development and
the environment.
9.
That the decommissioning plan approved under the terms of Condition 8 above shall be
implemented prior to any construction work commencing in connection with the residential
development.
Reason: In the interests of the safety of local residents, future residents of the development and
the environment.
10.
That as part of the reserved matters application required under the terms of Condition 1 above,
full details of the location and design of the surface water drainage scheme to be installed within
the application site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and
for the avoidance of doubt the scheme requires to be approved by Scottish Water and the
Scottish Environment Protection Agency in terms of their principles of Sustainable Urban
Drainage Systems.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail and to safeguard
the amenity of the area, to prevent groundwater pollution and to ensure that the proposed
drainage system complies with the latest Scottish Water and SEPA guidance.
11.
That as part of the reserved matters application required under the terms of Condition 1 above
the applicant shall provide written confirmation to the Planning Authority that all the requirements
of Scottish Water have been fully met to demonstrate that the development will not have an
impact on their assets, and that suitable infrastructure can be put in place to support the
development.
Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory drainage arrangements.
12.
That unless as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the building line of
the development hereby permitted shall be no closer to South Carbrain Road than the adjacent
building occupied by Bombay Dreams Restaurant.
Reason: In the interests of visual and residential amenity.
13.
That before the start of the development hereby permitted, a noise and vibration report taking into
account rail noise and vibration from the adjacent rail line and the requirements of PAN 56 shall
be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority and the development shall not
proceed until such times as any remedial works, mitigation measures or revisions to the layout
identified in the report as being necessary to alleviate either noise or vibration associated with the
adjacent rail line have been approved by the Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of the amenity of residents of the proposed development given the
proximity of the adjacent rail line.
14.
That notwithstanding the terms of Condition 1 above, the development shall comply with the
following requirements of the Council as Roads Authority:
1) Due to the size, number of junctions, and the speed limit of South Carbrain Road; the access
point should be located towards the eastern side of the site, with the road lining altered to
accord with the “geometric design for major / minor priority junctions” (td42/95), or as agreed
by the Roads Authority.
2) The proposed access for the residential site should be via junction arrangement with a 6
metre wide carriageway and 10 metre junction radii.
3) Modifications to the existing access(es) to the “Station Buildings” will be necessary to achieve
a suitable private access via dropped kerb vehicular arrangement.
4) The pedestrian network to be extended to link with the existing public footways / footpaths
and should include a pedestrian crossing island on South Carbrain Road.
5) Parking to be provided in accordance with the Council’s standards at the following rates:
For flatted developments:
0
0
0
1 / 2 bedrooms = 1.5 spaces per flat
3 / 4 bedrooms = 2 spaces per flat
visitor parking = at a rate of 30% of the overall number of flats
For dwellings, in curtilage parking at the following rates:
0
0
0
0
0
1-2 bed room houses
= 2 spaces
3-4 bed room houses
= 3 spaces
5 bedroom
= 4 spaces
visitor parking
= at a rate of 30% of the overall number of dwellings
garages will only be counted if they have internal dimensions of 3.0 metres by 6.0 metres
6) No direct pedestrian access paths will be permitted out onto South Carbrain Road
Reason: In the interests of road safety and to ensure that appropriate car parking levels are
provided within the site.
15.
That the siting and design of the flats must adequately preserve the residential amenity of the
neighbouring properties and the gable windows should be restricted to non habitable rooms.
Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the adjoining properties and future residents.
Background Papers:
Memo from Traffic & Transportation (Northern Area) received 27 November 2006
Memo from Head of Protective Services received 13 November 2006
Email from NLC Trading Standards 8 November 2006.
Memo from Education received 6 November 2006
Letter from Railtrack Scotland received 31 October 2006
Letter from Messrs D J McNaughton & A Munro, 10 Greenfaulds Road, Greenfaulds, Cumbernauld,
G67 2PH received 8th November 2006.
Letter from Gillian Martin, 12 Greenfaulds Road, Greenfaulds, Cumbernauld, G67 2PH received 14th
November 2006
Letter from Mr & Mrs Flockton, 14 Greenfaulds Road, South Carbrain, Cumbernauld, G67 2PH received
9th November 2006.
Letters from Francis Power, 8 Greenfaulds Road, South Carbrain, Cumbernauld, G67 2PH received
10th and 21st November 2006.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Graeme Lee at 01236 616474.
Date : 5'h December 2006
APPLICATION NO. N/06/01758/OUT
REPORT
1.
Description of Site and ProPosal
1.1
The applicant is seeking to establish the principle of redeveloping his site at South Carbrain
Road, Cumbernauld for residential use. At present the site contains a petrol filling station and
shop and an associated house.
1.2
The Falkirk to Glasgow Rail Line runs along the southern boundary of the site. To the west
there is a former industrial building that has been converted to a restaurant. Station Buildings lie
immediately to the east, on the ground floor of which are a shop, a hot food takeaway and a
garage. It should be noted that there are two flats on the upper floor of Station Buildings. South
Carbrain Road runs along the northern boundary of the site and access will be taken from this
road. On the opposite side of South Carbrain Road are the houses on Greenfaulds Road and
Greenfaulds Crescent.
1.3
There is a significant difference in levels between South Carbrain Road and the rear of the site
adjacent to the rail line.
2.
DeveloPment Plan
2.1
In terms of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 the development raises
no strategic issues. Accordingly, the development need only be assessed against the local plan.
2.2
In terms of the Cumbernauld Local Plan the site is included within the established residential
area of Carbrain. Policy HG4 is of relevance. This policy seeks to protect established residential
areas from inappropriate forms of development.
3.
3.1
Network Rail has no objection to the proposed development, but due to the close proximity of
the site to the rail line make a number of recommendations regarding the manner in which the
works are carried out.
Comment: Network Rail’s interests will be highlighted by attaching a note and a copy of their
letter to the outline planning permission.
3.2
NLC Director of Education advises that all of the local schools have sufficient capacity and
accordingly he has no objections to the proposed development. As this is an outline application
with no indication of numbers a figure of 18 flats was assumed for the assessment.
3.3
My Protective Services Section has no objection to the proposed development, but suggest a
number of planning conditions to ensure that the petrol station is decommissioned in an
appropriate manner; that a detailed site investigation is carried out to address any
contamination on the site and that a noise impact assessment is carried out due to the proximity
of the rail line.
Comment: These matters can be covered by planning conditions.
3.4
My Traffic and Transportation Section has no objection to the proposed development and
recommend the imposition of planning conditions to ensure that the site is accessed in an
appropriate manner; that Council car parking standards are achieved and that pedestrian links
between the site and the town centre and the station are improved.
Comment:These matters can be covered by planning conditions
3.5
Scottish Water has no objections to the proposed development, but advises that there are
known constraint issues regarding Dunnswood Waste Water Treatment Works and that surface
water arising within the site should be dealt with in accordance with the principles of Sustainable
Urban Drainage.
Comment Planning conditions can be imposed to address these matters.
3.6
Five letters of representation have been received from residents of Greenfaulds Road. The
matters raised are summarised below along with my comments:
0
0
Impact on amenity of existing residents
Noise and overshadowing
Comment It is considered that, due to the distances involved and the fact that the existing
residential properties lie to the north of the application site, any flatted development on the site
will not have so significant an effect on residential amenity as to justify refusing planning
permission. It should be noted that the closest property that directly fronts and overlooks the site
is some 29 metres away from the edge of the application site. The properties on Greenfaulds
Road also sit in an elevated position.
Furthermore, the constraints of the site and the requirements to provide a safe access,
sufficient car parking within the site and sufficient amenity open space will all have an effect on
the number of flats that can be built on the site. This in turn will limit the number of floors that
any flatted blocks will have. It is true that the fact that the rail line runs along the rear of the site
will tend to push any buildings close to South Carbrain Road. However, even if the flats were to
be located closer to the road than the garage, the distances between the edge of the application
site and existing houses are such that sufficient separation would be achieved.
I am satisfied that the appropriate redevelopment of the site can be satisfactorily guided through
the imposition of planning conditions.
0
0
Loss of view
Adverse impact on property values
Comment These matters are not material planning considerations.
0
Lack of detail and concern that this will lead to an inappropriate form of development
Comment The application is in outline only and as such the submitted details are limited to a
red line around the application site. It is appreciated that this does make it difficult for local
residents to consider the proposed development and make an assessment as to how the
development will impact upon them. However, as indicated I am satisfied that the
redevelopment of the site accords with the Local Plan so the principle of the development is
acceptable in planning terms. I have also indicated above that the constraints of the site will limit
the number and height of any flats that are erected on the site. Conditions will be imposed to
require the submission of further details regarding the design and layout of any residential
development and, to reflect the character of the surrounding area, I consider it appropriate that
a condition is added to set a maximum height for any building. The adjacent Station Buildings
will set the maximum heiaht for anv block.
0
0
Increased traffic on an already busy road
The existing parking problems in the area will be made worse if the development proceeds
Comment My Traffic and Transportation Section has not objected to the development and no
concerns have been raised regarding the capacity of the local roads network. Sufficient car
parking will have to be provided as part of the development and planning conditions will be
imposed to ensure that these are achieved.
0
Impact on environment
Comment It is assumed that this comment relates to the fact that the development will require
the removaVdecommissioning of a petrol station. My Protective Services Section has
recommended the imposition of planing conditions that will ensure that this is achieved without
there being an adverse impact on the environment.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
The application site is a longstanding commercial property
Loss of a well used shop
The garage is one of the few suppliers of calor gas in the area
The garage and shop contribute to the character of the local area
Garage is a local landmark
Modern flats will change the character of the area
No need for additional new build houses/flats
Comment Whilst it is true that the garage has existed on this site for some considerable time,
the Cumbernauld Local Plan shows the application site lies within an established residential
area and as such the redevelopment of the site for residential use accords with the plan. The
redevelopment of the site for residential use will alter the character of the area, but I am
satisfied that the resulting development will be acceptable. It should also be noted that
regardless of this application, the applicant could chose to close the shop and stop the sale of
calor gas from the site so this is not sufficient justification to refuse planning permission. Finally,
the local plan process always assumes that so called ‘windfall housing sites’ will arise from time
to time so a small scale residential development such as this does not require to demonstrate
that there is a need for the development.
0
Loss of amenity during the construction of the new flats
Comment Any such loss of amenity will be temporary and does not justify refusing planning
permission.
0
The development will place increased strain on local services such as the schools, doctors
and dentists.
Comment I can only comment on the impact of the development in terms of education
provision. As indicated above, the Council’s Director of Education has stated that there is
sufficient capacity in the local schools to accommodate the redevelopment of the site for
residential purposes. There are unlikely to be more than 18 new households in the area
resulting from this development.
4.
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. In this case the proposed development does not raise any
strategic issues so can be assessed against the Cumbernauld Local Plan. The Local Plan
identifies the site as being within an established residential area. Housing Policy HG4 seeks to
protect such areas from inappropriate forms of development. In this case it is proposed to
redevelop an existing petrol filling station for residential use and I consider that this accords with
the local plan.
4.2
Despite the objections received from local residents, I am satisfied that there are no material
planning considerations that would justify refusing planning permission in this case. Accordingly
it is recommended that outline planning permission be granted.
Application No:
N/06/01816/FUL
Date Registered:
31st October 2006
Applicant:
Hutchison 3G Uk Ltd
Glasgow
G2 5TS
Agent
Glasgow
G2 5TS
Development:
The Installation of 3 Face Mounted Antenna, 4 Face Mounted
Dishes & 1 Equipment Cabinet
Location:
Water Tower
Portland Road
Carrickstone
Cumbernauld
Ward:
57 Westerwood, Carrickstone & Dullatur: Councillor Gordon Murray
Grid Reference:
275477 676155
File Reference:
N/06/01816/FUL
Site History:
Six telecommunications structures have been installed on the Water
Tower under Permitted Development rights.
N/04/01602/FUL Installation of 3 Antenna, 3 Transmission Dishes
and Equipment Cabinet for Hutchison 3G refused on 15 December
2004 and allowed on appeal 22 December 2005
N/04/01525/FUL Installation of 3 Antenna on existing 0 2 structures
refused 15 December 2004, allowed on appeal 26 April 2005
N/05/00425/FUL Installation of Six Antenna and Associated
Telecommunications Equipment granted 15 May 2005
Development Plan:
Cum bernauld Local Plan 1993. Policy HG4 applies
No
Consultations:
Representations:
No
Not Required
Installationof Three Face Mounted Antennae,
Four Face Mounted Dishes & 1 Equipment Cabinet
Recommendation:
1.
permission
2.
That the external colour finish of the face-mounted antenna and dishes shall match as closely as
possible, that of the water towers external wall surface.
Reason: To minimise the visual impact of the development on the surrounding area.
3.
That in the event that the equipment becomes redundant, it must be wholly removed and the site
reinstated within one month of the equipment becoming redundant.
Reason: To ensure reinstatement of the site to a satisfactory standard, in the interests of visual
amenity.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 31 October 2006
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Erin Louise Deeley at 01236
616464.
Date: 5'h December 2006
APPLICATION NO. N/06/01816/FUL
REPORT
1.
1.1
Carrickstone Water Tower is a prominent landmark on the Cumbernauld skyline measuring
18.9 metres in height. The site is surrounded by residential properties including flats that are
located South East of Portland Road. The inclusion of flats in the area has lessened the visual
prominence of the tower. There are a number of telecommunications structures and equipment
on top of the tower, on the outer face of the tower and there are associated equipment cabinets
at ground level.
1.2
The current application by Hutchison 3G seeks consent for the installation of 3 face-mounted
antenna, 4 face mounted dishes and 1 equipment cabinet located on the top of the tower.
2.
Development Plan
2.1
This proposal raises no strategic issues in terms of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint
Structure Plan 2000 and can therefore be assessed against local plan policies.
2.2
The site is included within an area zoned for new housing by policy HG5 of the Cumbernauld
Local Plan 1993. Policy HG4 seeks to protect the residential amenity of residential areas. It
should be noted that there is no specific telecommunications policy within this local plan.
3.
3.1
Other than the local councillor and the community council, no other consultations were
necessary.
3.2
No letters of representation have been received.
4.
4.1
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 only relevant development plan policy for the
assessment of this application is policy HG4 of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993.
4.2
The site history highlights that two other applications for telecommunications equipment on the
tower were refused by the Committee in December 2004 on visual grounds. The Scottish
Executive Inquiry Reporter concluded that the proposed structures would have a minimal impact
on the visual amenity of the surrounding area and would not result in the tower becoming any
more visually dominant, intrusive or unattractive. In this case it is proposed that the equipment
will be face mounted on the water tower so it will not exceed the height of the tower. The
equipment will be painted to match the tower in order to camouflage it as best as possible.
Accordingly, it is considered that the equipment would have a minimal impact on the visual
amenity of the area. The equipment cabinet would not be visible from around level.
Consequently, I consider the proposal complies with policy HG4 of the Cumbernaild Local Plan
1993.
4.3
This application must also be assessed against government advice as set out in National
Planning Policy Guideline 19 (NPPG 19) and Planning Advice Note 62 (PAN 62) both on Radio
Telecommunications.
4.4
The applicant considers that the current proposal to site share on the water tower to be the best
available option to provide the required coverage and I accept this conclusion.
4.5
NPPG19 states that where applicants have properly considered siting and design options and
minimised any environmental effects, the application is unlikely to be refused. PAN62 lists water
towers among sites where the impact of telecommunications may be minimised and notes that
siting below the roofline or skyline and colouring equipment to match the structure, as in this
case, is desirable.
4.6
As stated above, there is already a number of telecommunications installations on top of the
tower. In an attempt to improve the visual appearance of the water tower and disguise the
equipment, Scottish Water have been asked on numerous occasions to consider a perimeter
boundary structure on top of the tower and re-cladding/paintingof the tower. It should be noted
that in relation to previous planning applications, both the local member and residents have
expressed concerns about the visual impacts of telecommunications developments and the
appearance of the water tower. With regards to this application, a further letter has been sent to
Scottish Water asking them to consider improving the appearance of the tower and erecting a
perimeter boundary structure. It should be noted that the Reporter comments on the appeal for
N/04/01602/FUL were that these matters are not the responsibility of the applicant but of
Scottish Water and all users of the water tower.
4.7
It should be noted that the applicant has submitted the required ICNIRP declaration of
conformity with the guidelines of the EU International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation
Protection. Scottish Executive guidance in NPPG19 Radio Telecommunications states that with
this Declaration submitted to demonstrate that the known health effects have been properly
addressed, Planning Authorities should not treat radio frequency emissions as a material
planning consideration in the assessment of a planning application.
4.8
Having considered all the relevant issues in this case, it is recommended that planning
permission be granted subject to conditions.
Application No:
N/06/01860/FUL
Date Registered:
13th November 2006
Applicant:
J Logan Esq
46 Nicolson Court
Stepps
G33 6HY
Agent
G M Thomson RlBA ARIAS
28 Crossveggate
Milngavie
G62 6RA
Development:
Extension to a Dwellinghouse
Location:
46 Nicolson Court
Stepps
G33 6HY
Ward:
70 Stepps: Councillor Brian Wallace
Grid Reference:
265957668426
File Reference:
N/06/01860/FUL
Site History:
None
Development Plan:
The site is covered by Housing Policy HG3 in the adopted Northern
Corridor Local Plan 2005
No
Consultations:
Not Required
Representations:
One letter of representation
Not Required
Recommendation:
1.
permission
2.
That the facing materials to be used for the external walls and roof shall match in colour and
texture those of the existing adjoining building.
Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity of the area.
1:I
,250
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 13th November 2006
Letters from Mr James Beattie, 44 Nicolson Court, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6HY received 23rd November
and 5'h December 2006.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Alan Graham at 01236 616394.
Date: 5'h December 2006
APPLICATION NO. N/06/0186O/FUL
REPORT
1.
1.1
This application seeks consent for a single storey side extension on a detached two-storey
dwellinghouse at 46 Nicolson Court, Stepps. The extension will measure 5 metres in height, 8.7
metres in length and 4.3 metres wide and will have a pitched and hipped roof. The application
site is a flat side garden area comprising of red chips and an area of timber decking.
2.
Development Plan
2.1
The application raises no strategic issues in terms of The Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint
Structure Plan 2000 and can therefore be assessed against Local Plan policies.
2.2
Within the adopted Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005 the application site is located within an
area covered by Housing Policy HG3. This policy 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.
3.
3.1
No consultations were required in respect of this planning application, other than with the
Community Council.
3.2
One letter of representation has been received from the neighbours at 44 Nicolson Court, with
the following objections being raised:0
Overlooking and invasion of privacy
Comments: The impact of overlooking on to the front window of 44 Nicolson Court would be
minimal given that the position of the window on the proposed extension is at a more acute
angle than the existing front window of No. 46. The privacy of No.44 should therefore not be
compromised.
0
Overbearing and crowding effect
Comments: Whilst it is acknowledged that the proposal is for a large extension (37 square
metres, which represents a 33% increase in the current gross floorspace of the house) it is
considered to be within the limits of acceptability in terms of scale and design and is in keeping
with the original design. Furthermore, the applicant is entitled to build up to boundary line of the
application site.
0
Overshadowing and loss of daylight/sunlight
Comments: The relevant sunlight calculations have been carried out in order to assess the
impact of the proposed extension and it was found that any overshadowing and loss of
daylight/sunlight would be minimal. There would only be a limited detrimental effect on the
amenity currently enjoyed by the residents of No. 44.
0
View
Comments; While no individual has a legal entitlement to a view, I am of the opinion that the
proposed extension would not have a detrimental impact on the residential amenity of the
neighbouring properties in terms of general outlook and privacy.
0
Access to front door/driveway and parking
Comments: During construction there is no reason why access should be restricted to the front
door, garage and driveway of No.44. It is acknowledged that parking provision may be restricted
during construction, however such restrictions would be for a temporary period only.
0
Generated noise, dirt and fumes
Comments: I am of the opinion that the construction of an extension would not have a
detrimental impact on the residential amenity of the neighbouring properties in terms of noise
pollution and the creation of dirt and fumes, although there could well be short term problems as
in the case with all construction projects.
0
Danger to pedestrians caused by construction site environment and associated vehicles
Comments: I am of the opinion that the construction of an extension would not have a
detrimental impact on the residential amenity of the neighbouring properties in terms of
presenting a danger to pedestrians, although a certain amount of care will be required during
the construction period.
0
Appearance
Comments: The design of the proposed extension is considered to be in keeping with the
existing house and the surrounding residential area.
0
The proposed extension would adversely affect the valuation of the property.
Comments: The future value of neighbouring property is not a material planning consideration
and therefore cannot be taken into account in the determination of the application. However,
single storey extensions at the side of detached properties are not uncommon features.
4.
4.1
decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material
considerations indicate otherwise.
4.2
The application is considered acceptable as it complies with Housing Policy HG3 of the adopted
Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005 in that the proposal is neither incompatible with a residential
setting not adversely affects the amenity of an established housing area.
4.3
The extension is considered acceptable given that the design and scale of the proposal are both
in keeping with the existing house and surrounding residential area and will create no significant
adverse effect on adjacent residents.
4.4
Having taken account of all relevant material considerations, and notwithstanding the concerns
raised by the neighbouring proprietors at 44 Nicolson Court, it is recommended that planning
permission be granted for a single-storey extension to the side of 46 Nicolson Court, Stepps.
4.5
Note that Mr. Beattie of 44 Nicolson Court has requested that the Committee carry out a site
visit and hearing prior to determining this planning application.
Application No:
C/05/00290/0UT
Date Registered:
15th September 2005
Applicant:
Mr A. Watt
Staylee Farm (off Hulks Road)
Riggend
Airdrie
Lanarkshire
ML6 7SS
Agent
Fouin & Bell Architects
3/2 Boroughloch Square
Edinburgh
EH8 9NJ
Development:
Formation of Country Park Including the Construction of 11
Dwellinghouses, Associated Buildings to Accommodate Rural
Uses (e.g. Equestrian Centre and Ancillary Infrastructure
Works)
Location:
Staylee Farm (off Hulks Road)
Riggend
Airdrie
Lanarkshire
ML6 7SS
Ward:
45 New Monklands West
Grid Reference:
277003 671 114
File Reference:
C/PL/GW H8401LMILR
Site History:
C/Ol/OO247/FUL Conversion of Outbuildings to Form 3 No. SelfContained Dwellinghouses Granted 16 August 2001
Development Plan:
The site is covered by policy GBI (Restrict Development in the
Greenbelt), HGIO (Residential Development Outwith Residential
Areas) and LI 1/1 (High Quality Landscape) in the Monklands
District Local Plan 1991.
Yes
Consultations:
NLC Community Services
(Com ments)
Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Comments)
Scottish Water
(No objection)
Health and Safety Executive
(No objection)
British Gas
(No objection)
Scottish Power
(No objection)
Central Scotland Forest Trust
(No objection)
West Of Scotland Archaeology Service (Comments)
NLC Finance
(Com ments)
Representations:
Advertised on 28th September 2005
Councillor Sophia Coyle
Planning Application No. C/05/00290/OUT
TrndYCBdb,
h:n" .anrhinr*co"-c,l
Planrsrg 2°C Emrannerf ue:dnlb"l
FlerningHo.ia Gd7
C~miorrscle
: i wl.Yr
iPcn,
11, J2366'6i13
ldx "1231 B I S 2 S i
Formation of Country Park Including the Construction of
11 Dwellinghouses, Associated Buildings to Accommodate Rural Uses
(e.g. Equestrian Centre and Ancillary Infrastructure Works)
Not to Scale
Recommendation:
Refuse for the Following Reasons:-
1.
That the proposed development is contrary to policy GBI Restrict Development in the Greenbelt
of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 as the residential units proposed are not required for
full time workers in connection with forestry or agriculture.
2.
That the proposed development is contrary to policy GBI Restrict Development in the Greenbelt
of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 as the viability of the proposed rural uses which are
required to justify the proposed associated residential units has not been adequately supported
by the submitted business plan.
3.
That the proposed development is contrary to policy HGIO and the Development Control
Guidance associated with policy GBI, ‘New Houses in the Countryside’ in the Monklands
District Local Plan 1991 as there is no safe vehicular access. Both accesses to the site would be
from de-restricted roads with no footways or street lighting and would have substandard visibility
splays.
4.
That the proposed development is contrary to the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure
Plan 2000 (as altered) as it does not accord with Strategic Policy 9 (Assessment of
Development Proposals) in that it fails the following criteria:
a)
b)
c)
B(ii)b : Safeguarding the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green belt
B(v) : Avoid isolated and sporadic development in the Green Belt and the wider countryside
C(i) : Infrastructure to make development acceptable.
The proposal is also not appropriate in terms of Strategic Policy 10 as the appellant has not
demonstrated specific locational need (A.v) nor does the development allow for significant
restoration of vacant or derelict land ((B.(iii.b)
Note to Committee
If granted, this application will have to be notified to the Scottish Ministers in accordance with
the Town and Country Planning (Notifications of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 1997
because the proposed development constitutes a significant departure from the Glasgow and
Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 24th February 2005
Monklands District Local Plan 1991
Memo from Transportation Section received 22nd May 2006
Memo from NLC Community Services received 24th October 2005
Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 21st October 2005
Letter from Scottish Water received 13th October 2005
Letter from Health and Safety Executive received 31st March 2005
Letter from British Gas received 5th October 2005
Letter from Scottish Power received 4th October 2005
Letter from Central Scotland Forest Trust received 10th October 2005
Letter from West Of Scotland Archaeology Service received 26th October 2005
Memo from NLC Finance received 17th November 2006
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Leigh Menzies at 01236 812372.
Date: 5 December 2006
APPLICATION NO. C/05/00290/OUT
REPORT
1.
1.I
This application is for the creation of a country park that would incorporate the creation of 11
dwellinghouses and associated buildings to accommodate a variety of rural uses. The
application site covers approximately 27 hectares. A large proportion of the land was planted up
in 1998 with support from Central Scotland Forrest Trust, these areas are now well developed.
The remaining area is rough grassland with an existing farmhouse and steadings located at the
east of the site. The farmland is Class 4 which is not considered prime agricultural land.
1.2
The application is for the creation of a country park, which initially would require the conversion
of the existing steading into 3 units and the construction of an additional 5 dwellinghouses to
create a courtyard. On completion of this it is proposed that the profits generated would then
help to fund the creation of a visitor centre, 4 workshops and an equestrian centre, all with an
associated dwellinghouse. The units would be located sporadically throughout the site and
connected by a network of roads, paths and bridleways that would allow for nature pursuits. As
the application is in outline no detailed proposals have been submitted in terms of the site
layout, building types etc, as these matters would be considered at the reserved matters stage,
should this application be successful. Notwithstanding this indicative details have been
submitted indicating that the site would have two access points, one to the north east of the site
off Hulks Road and the other south west at a junction of the B8039 and Old Biggar Road.
1.3
The applicant has indicated in the supporting statement that the livelwork units would offer
visitors a view of how the countryside operates and activities would include stables, plant centre,
children’s farm or fishery, craft workshops and a visitor centre providing the focal point for the
park. It is proposed that the livelwork units would be sold to interested parties and their
restricted use written into title deeds and further controlled by a Section 75 agreement.
1.4
The supporting statement also highlights the following issues that should be considered:
a) The development complies with national policy with regard to the following:
NPPG 1: promote regeneration; protect and enhance areas for recreation and natural
i)
heritage; encourage energy efficiency.
ii)
NPPG2: encourage formation and expansion of small businesses; local plans to
allocate sites for development of workshops attached to new housing.
iii) NPPG3: isolated development should be discourage in the open countryside unless
particular circumstances are clearly identified in development plans or are special
needs.
iv) NPPG3 consult draft 2002: low impact housing eg. Houses incorporating workspace
using innovative energy-efficient technologies with low impact on the environment may
be acceptable where conventional buildings are not.
NPPGl4: identify appropriate opportunities to improve public access for the purpose
v)
of enjoying our natural heritage.
vi) NPPG15: in areas where the quality agricultural land is low and the landscape
degraded, councils should actively consider promoting in their development plans,
innovative forms of substantial, low density, low impact housing and small scale
economic developments.
b) The development meets the criteria set out in North Lanarkshire Communities
Smallholdings Initiative in that it provides sustainable housing, on vacant, under used land
on a marginal farm.
c) The development would enhance the environment and provide long term secure future to
the area creating economic benefit to the local community
1.5
A further supporting statement was submitted in the form of a business plan that was compiled
by the Scottish Agricultural College, indicating that the proposal would be loosely modelled on
the lowland crofting concept, where degrade land was divided into a number of separate units
each with consent for a dwellinghouse and the ability to start minor business activity in
exchange for a proportion of the return given over for woodland or other environmental benefit.
The report indicates that the market for a Country Park would attract its custom by displacement
from other centres, with the potential annual visitor numbers in the order of 25,000 per year, but
that these numbers are dependant on the quality and range of services.
1.6
In addition the business plan also highlights that there is a proven demand for rural living and
low density housing with associated business uses within North Lanarkshire and together with
the location of the development within the central belt, close to arterial routes, could be
anticipated to make these developments attractive. However the restrictive nature of the
covenants are likely to be a deterrent, but it is probably that the required number of partners
could be found initially.
1.7
The report further states that due to the duplication of other such established developments
within North Lanarkshire that there is concern that the location may not be strong enough to
make the proposal successful.
1.8
Finally the business plan also looks at the financial viability of the site and concludes that once
the proposed park is established it is likely to attract sufficient custom, and when operated at a
basic level would provide a modest profit and living for the operator. However it is unlikely that
there would be a sufficient profit to make a substantial financial contribution to the park. The
combined effect of their presence within the park is important in attracting visitors and seen as
essential to the overall success of the project.
1.9
Planning permission was granted in August 2001 (Ref:C/O1/00247/FUL) for the conversion of
outbuildings to form 3 self contained dwellinghouses. Work on this part of the development is
already underway.
2.
Development Plan
2.1
The site is zoned as GBI Restrict Development in the Countryside and LI 1/1 High Quality
Landscape in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The proposal is also assessed against
the Design Guidance for ‘New Houses in the Countryside’ which is associated with policy HGIO
HGI 0 (Residential Development Outwith Residential Areas).
2.2
The Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 is the appropriate strategic
Development Plan. The proposed development is of strategic significance in that the proposal
includes the creation of 11 dwellinghouses in the Greenbelt and Strategic Policy 9 (Assessment
of Development Proposals) is relevant in the consideration of this application.
3.
3.1
Central Scotland Forrest Trust has no objections to this application and has indicated that they
are broadly supportive of this type of application.
3.2
Scottish Water have indicated no objection to the development provided the appropriate
permissions are received with regard to the connection to the public water system and the siting
of a septic tank.
3.3
The Health & Safety Executive and British Gas were consulted due to the location of a high
pressure gas main through the north west corner of the site. Both consultees indicated no
objection to the development, whilst British Gas also stated in the normal manner that the
various equipment and underground services within the site would require to be protected. The
applicant would be advised of this should the application be approved.
3.4
West of Scotland Archaeology Service has indicated that the application site is located in an
area of low archaeology potential. However due to the former uses of the land should any
features of archaeological significance exist on the site that they may have survived. As such it
has been requested that a condition be placed on any approval to ensure the carrying out of an
assessment of the site prior to the commencement of works and that any recovery of
archaeology within the site be recorded in the correct manner. Should the application be granted
the appropriate condition would be included.
3.5
SEPA submitted the following comments:
a) The foul drainage would required to be agreed with SEPA
b) A scheme of Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDS) would require to be submitted
c) That any construction works associated with the development would require to ensure that
no pollutants enter the adjacent water course
d) In relation to the proposed equestrian centre a separate SUDS scheme would be required
and any solid waste must be collected, contained and disposed of in accordance with the
associated guidance.
3.6
The Transportation Section recommended refusal of the application due to the road safety
implications of the severely restricted visibility splays. The proposed development takes access
onto the public road at two locations, the access to the south of the site is via a single track,
unlit, rural road with no footways. The public road, Old Biggar Road is an unlit, rural road with no
footways and is subject to the national speed limit. (60mph). The achievable junction visibility
splay from the access road onto Old Biggar Road is nil in both directions. The required visibility
splay is 4.5m x 215m. The access to the north is onto Hulks Road which is also an unlit, rural
road with no footways and is subject to the national speed limit. (60mph). The achievable
junction visibility splay from the access road onto Hulks Road is 4.5m x 6.0m (approx.) in both
directions. The required visibility splay is 4.5m x 215m.
3.7
NLC Community Services has provided the following comments:
a) In terms of landscaping it has been indicated that there is insufficient information provided
by the application and that more details are required these include:
i) A contour map to show the proposed fit of the new buildings within the application site
ii) Full details of planting and construction details/materials for the arena & exercise area,
footpaths and picnic areas
iii) An indication of other planned activities to justify the change of use to a countryside
park
b) In terms of conservation and greening no objection has been indicated to the development
provided that detailed information regarding certain conditions and recommendations are
incorporated into the development, this includes species of planting to be used, survey to
establish protected species within the site, incorporation of SUDS and further consultation
on any proposed path network.
3.8
NLC Finance has provided comment on the viability of the development based on the
supporting statements. The response highlighted that this type of development is highly
competitive and needs continuous refinancing to keep visitors coming back. The reluctance of
the report to provide costing for staff required for revenue raising, safety and security purposes
suggests that the park will be run on a shoe string and leaves it vulnerable to legal claims, loss
of income and vandalism costs. In addition it is suggested that, even if all of the houses and
craft businesses on the site are taken up the surpluses generated would be inadequate to
maintain the present infrastructure with little or nothing to update facilities in the future. Related
to this it has been indicated that some of the costing provided may not be a true representation,
for example labour costs have been under estimated or not included. Furthermore the
undeveloped area of the country park would be very small once the area required for land for
the dwellings and businesses are taken into account, as well as such attractions as the fisheries
sites.
3.9
Following the standard neighbour notification and advertisement in the local press no letters of
representations were received.
4.
Planning Assessment and Conclusions
4.1
Policy GBI In the Monklands District Local Plan states that no development will be permitted
except for; new houses for full time workers in Agriculture or Forestry; non residential
developments in connection with Agriculture or Forestry and Uses requiring a rural location. In
addition the related guidance ‘New Houses in the Countryside’ requires that some sort of track
record is required for the proposed activity.
4.1
In assessing the application in relation to the structure plan it does not accord with Strategic
Policy 9 (Assessment of Development Proposals) in that it fails the following criteria:
d)
e)
f)
B(ii)b : Safeguarding the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green belt
B(v) : Avoid isolated and sporadic development in the Green Belt and the wider countryside
C(i) : Infrastructure to make development acceptable.
4.2
Departures from the Structure Plan are given further opportunity to demonstrate
appropriateness in Strategic Policy 10 (Departures from the Structure Plan). However the
proposal still fails to prove itself as acceptable when assessed against the criteria. In particular,
the appellant has not demonstrated specific locational need (Criterion AV) and the development
will not allow for the significant restoration of vacant or derelict land for restoration purposes
(B( iii)b).
4.3
Policy HGIO (Residential Development Outwith Residential Areas) applies housing policy within
the rural context. This policy states that development will not be permitted outwith residential
areas unless it occurs in identified housing sites in the Local Plan, is a minor development in a
Secondary Core Area, General Urban Area or is justified under policy GBI. The proposal is
therefore contrary to policy HGIO. Notwithstanding the above, the associated design guidance
also requires that the site have an adequate vehicular access provided. For the reasons
outlined in the following paragraphs 3.6 and 4.8 this could not be achieved.
4.4
It is considered that the comments provided by NLC Finance would indicate that the
business plan provided on behalf of the applicant does not prove the projected profitability of the
development.
4.5
In terms NLC Community Services comments it is considered that should the application be
granted planning permission that the majority of these matters could be conditioned and
adequately dealt with at the reserved matters stage. However in terms of the request for a
survey of protected species this would require to be undertaken prior to the issuing of any
planning consent. This survey has not previously been requested as it was considered that the
cost of would be an unnecessary expense for the applicant should planning permission be
refused on policy grounds.
4.6
With reference to the comments provided by SEPA the following should be noted:
a) In terms of agreeing the foul drainage with SEPA this is a matter that requires to be
undertaken by the applicant.
b) With regard to SUDS, should the application be granted, this matter could be conditioned to
be considered at the reserved matters stage.
c) & d) With respect,to both pollution at the construction stage and disposal of the waste from
the equestrian centre, these are matters that are can be dealt with through more
appropriate legislation.
4.7
Comments from the Transportation Section highlight road safety concerns and it is considered
that the generation of additional traffic would be significant and detrimental to thw surrounding
area and the ability of the visitors to the site to enter and exit in a safe manner.
4.8
The original supporting statement submitted highlights that the development complies with
national policy, in this respect the following should be noted:
a) In respect of the national policy outlined in the supporting statement the following should be
noted:
i)
In terms of NPPGI, which is superseded by SPPl, the policy looks to ‘enable
sustainable development through co-ordinated action, combining economic
competitiveness and social justice with environmental quality and justice ’. It is
considered that the proposed development has not provided suitably robust financial
case that would ensure the viability of the to be sustained in the long-term.
ii) With regard to NPPG2, which has been superseded by SPP2, this policy also requires
‘the planning system to provide support for.. .new and expanding businesses, where it
is consistent with other national and local polices’. It is considered that the
development plan does not support this application due to the lack of a sound
business plan for the development.
iii) and iv) A key aim of SPP3, which replaces NPPG3, is to bring ‘forward sufficient
land to meet the requirement of new dwellings.. ...the planning authority should
encourage the creation of attractive, sustainable residential environments’. Relating
this to the proposed development there is concern regarding the security and
maintenance of the country park which would have an effect on the long term
attractiveness of the site for visitors. In addition in reference to the incorporation of
buildings using innovative energy-efficient technologies with low impact on the
environment no information has been provided indicating that this is a proposed
design strategy for the development.
v) NPPG 14 requires that the local plan process ‘identify appropriate opportunities to
improve public access for the purposes of enjoying and learning about the natural
heritage’. It should be noted that although there is currently a process to review the
local plan covering this area that no documents have yet been published and this
application requires to be based on the current adopted document.
vi) SPPl5, which supersedes NPPGl5, this also policy also indicates that ‘greenbelts will
continue to presume against most new development and play a key role in maintaining
the setting and separation of fowns and cities. Any proposals to release land for
development which is currently designated as green belt should be part of a longer
term strategic settlement policy and set out in the development plan’. As such it would
be more appropriate to pursue any development of this nature through the
development plan process and in particular the Local Plan. In addition to this the area
is also zoned as policy LI 1 (Landscape Improvement) this promotes the protection of
higher quality landscapes and improvement poorer ones, with the application site
designated as being ‘High Quality Landscape’.
b) With regard to the North Lanarkshire Communities Smallholdings Initiative this was a pilot
study that was carried out assessing the possibility of a lowland crofting within 4 broad
areas within NLC boundaries, none of which covered the application site. Notwithstanding
the above, the pilot study concluded that the case for this type of development with NLC
boundaries was not proven and that the initiative would not be pursued.
c) In terms of the development enhancing the environment and providing long-term benefit to
the local community it is considered that the supporting information does not adequately
show the long-term viability of the site.
4.9
With regard to the submitted business plan it is considered that the conclusions provided within
the applicant’s report are less than conclusive, this is borne out by the comments received from
the NLC Finance (paragraph 3.8 and 4.5). Therefore the report does not meet the policy GBI
requiring that an operational need be demonstrated.
4.10
Although the submission is only in outline at this stage the principle of this form of development
on this site is not acceptable. In terms of the development the viability of the proposed uses in
the short and long term have not been sufficiently proven in relation to the environmental
enhancement and economic viability and it is therefore contrary to the development plan. With
regard to road safety it is considered that the introduction of 25,000 visitors annually could have
a detrimental impact on road safety should access to the site be taken from the points
highlighted on the submitted plans.
4.1 1
In conclusion, having regard to the foregoing, it is considered that the development is contrary
to the terms of the development plan and that there are no material planning considerations that
would merit departing from those policies. The proposal is of a scale to be of strategic
significance as it is a proposal for over 10 residential units outwith the identified Urban
Expansion Areas and it is contrary to the aims of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan
which seeks to control sporadic and isolated development in the Greenbelt. It is therefore
recommended that planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed above. Should the
Committee be minded to approve the proposal it will be referred to the Scottish Ministers for
consideration.
Application No:
C/06/00802/OUT
Date Registered:
12th May 2006
Applicant:
Mr R. McGregor
Clo Archers Of Airdrie Ltd
Carlisle Road
Airdrie
ML6 $AA
Agent
Stanley C. Cook MRTPI
12 Beveridge Terrace
Mossend
Bellshill
ML4 2RJ
Development:
Erection of Residential Development (In Outline)
Location:
Archers Of Airdrie Ltd
Carlisle Road
Ai rdrie
North Lanarkshire
ML6 $AA
Ward:
50 Calderbank
Grid Reference:
277159 664378
Councillor Patrick Donnelly
File Reference:
Site History:
Development Plan:
The site is covered by policy ECON 8:General Urban Areas in the
Monklands District Local Plan 1991.
No
Consultations:
Scottish Environmental Protection Agency
Scottish Water
British Gas
Scottish Power
Representations:
2 Letters of Representation
Not Required
(No response)
(No objections)
(No objections)
(No objections)
Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:1.
PrndYCECbY
Planning Application No. C/06/00802/OUT
Erection of Residential Development (In Outline)
Archers of Airdrie Ltd, Carlisle Road, Airdrie
2.
That within three years of the date of this permission, an application for approval of the reserved
matters, specified in condition 3 following, shall be made to the Planning Authority.
3.
That before development 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;
(c) the layout of the site, including all roads, footways, and parking areas;
(d) the provision of equipped play areas;
(e) the provision of public open space;
(f) the details of, and timetable for, the hard and soft landscaping of the site;
(9) details for management and maintenance of the areas identified in (d),(e) and (f) above;
(h) the design and location of all boundary walls and fences;
(i) the provision of drainage works;
(j) the disposal of sewage;
(k) details of existing trees, shrubs and hedgerows to be retained;
(I) details of existing and proposed site levels.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail
4.
Notwithstanding the terms of condition 3 above, details of the design of the proposed site access
serving the development onto Carlisle Road, together with details of the proposed traffic control
system at the Petersburn RoadlCarlisle Road junction, shall be submitted to, and approved in
writing by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, works shall not commence on these
approved details until an appropriate timescale for their implementation has been agreed with the
Planning Authority.
5.
That no part of the development hereby permitted shall exceed 2 storeys in height and shall
incorporate a traditional double pitched roof.
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
6.
That, notwithstanding the requirements of condition 3 above the development shall accord with the
standards set down within the Council’s Developer’s Guide to Open Space : Minimum Space
Standards : Space around Dwellings.
Reason: To ensure sufficient space standards with the development.
7.
That a landscape buffer zone shall be incorporated within any proposed landscaping scheme, as
required under condition 3 above, to provide a screen between any new housing and the A73
Carlisle Road.
Reason; In the interests of visual amenity.
8.
That car parking should be provided on the minimum basis of 3 spaces per 2 flats for residential
use (150%) and 3 spaces per 20 flats for visitor use (15%). Any single dwellinghouses within the
site shall be provided with 2 car parking spaces within the curtilage of the plot and visitor parking
in relation to the proposed density of the development.
Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities within the site.
9.
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.
Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the
amenity and wellbeing of future residents
10.
That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 9
above shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a
responsible 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 from contamination in the interests of amenity and
wellbeing of future residents.
11. That prior to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless
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 be provided even when discharge are proposed to public sewers
notwithstanding any conditions imposed by Scottish Water.
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 well being of
12.
practical. Following the construction of the SUDS, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil
Engineer experienced in drainage work) 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.
Reason: To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the interests
13.
Notwithstanding the requirements of condition 3 above, before the development hereby approved
starts, a Noise Impact Assessment Report, to be undertaken in accordance with the guidelines
contained within BS 4142 1997 - Method for Rating Industrial Noise Affecting Mixed Residential
and Industrial Areas, and detailing the anticipated levels of noise emitted from the adjacent
industrial sites, shall be submitted to the Planning Authority including details of any associated
impact on the application site and including any amelioration measures proposed to be
incorporated in the site layout/building design, and the development shall not be started until
these details have been agreed in writing with the Planning Authority.
Reason: To safeguard residential amenity.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 12th May 2006
Monkland District Local Plan 1991
Memo from the Protective Services Section received 30th May 2006
Letter from Scottish Water received 5th June 2006
Letter from British Gas received 30th May 2006
Letter from Scottish Power received 24th May 2006
Letter from Monkland Glen Community Council, C/o Dr I.A. Glen, 21 Monks Road, Airdrie, ML6 9QW
received 23rd June 2006.
Letter from D Hodson, 18 Premier Way, Abbey Park Ind.Estate, Romsey, Hants, SO51 9DQ received
7th July 2006.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr lan Johnston at 01236 812382.
APPLICATION NO. C/06/00802/OUT
REPORT
I.
1.I
The application site measures 1.26 hectares approximately and is located on the west side of
the A73 Carlisle Road opposite the junction with Petersburn Road, Airdrie. The site slopes
upwards in a northerly direction and is currently utilised as a Car Sales operation i.e. Archers of
Airdrie. The lands to the west slope markedly downwards towards Brownsburn Industrial Estate,
the lands to the northlnorthwest are open fields and the lands to the south are open
spacellndustrial premises. The surrounding uses are a mix of Industrial/CommerciaI and
Residential.
1.2
The proposal is for the re-development of the application site for residential. Outline permission
is being sought at this time and therefore no details have been submitted in terms of site layout
etc. as these matters would be considered at a subsequent “reserved matters” stage should this
present submission be considered favourably. The only known factor at this stage is that
vehicular access to the site would be taken from Carlisle Road at a point to be agreed with the
Transportation Section.
1.3
An indicative site layout was initially submitted with this planning application which showed a
mixed 3 & 4 storey flatted layout fronting onto Carlisle Road and accessed onto Carlisle Road
from the northern most part of the site. Following discussions the applicant subsequently
withdrew that indicative layout.
2.
Development Plan
2.1
The site is covered by policy ECON 8:General Urban Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan
1991. There are no strategic implications
3.
3.1
Neither Scottish Power nor Scottish Water offered any objection to this proposal. British Gas
have not objected to the proposal subject to the developer demonstrating that the development
will not have an impact on their assets, and that suitable infrastructure can be put in place to
support the development.
3.2
Protective Services have no objection subject to conditions. Transportation initially objected to
the application but have now assessed the amended Traffic Statement submitted on behalf of
the applicant and are satisfied that acceptable site access arrangements can be achieved as
part of associated junction improvements on Carlisle RoadlPetersburn Road. Design details of
these accessljunction improvements would be considered as part of any “reserved matters”
submission.
3.3
Following the standard neighbour notification procedures 2 letters of representation were
received against this proposal. The relevant points of these objections are as follows:
a. the introduction of a residential development on this site may result in complaints from
future residents about noise levels emanating from the vehicle hire premises that currently
operates without a restriction on hours on the site opposite on the east side of Carlisle
Road.
b. Concern is raised about potential heights of any flats on the site as the predominance within
the area is for 1 and 2 storey buildings and anything exceeding that would be unacceptable.
3.4
c. Concern is raised over the likely numbers of units proposed for the site and requiring
excessive on site parking requirements which in turn would result in increased traffic flows
onto the already congested Carlisle Road.
Monkland Glen Community Council stated that they would welcome housing of an appropriate
style on this (application) site adjacent to the Community Nature Park at Brownsburn/Gartlea.
Their concerns were highlighted in paragraph 3.3 a & b above.
4.
Planninn Assessment and Conclusions
4.1
In terms of Section 25 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 planning decisions
require to be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations
indicate otherwise. The Development Plan i.e. the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 includes
the application site as Policy ECON 8: General Urban Areas where the principle of a mixture of
uses is considered acceptable. While the predominance within the surrounding area is for
Industrial and Commercial uses, there are residential properties directly opposite the application
site and the site itself is physically detached from the other uses by both land and Carlisle Road
itself. The introduction of a residential use on this prominent road frontage site within an area of
mixed land uses is generally compliant with Local Plan Policy ECON 8. The proposal does not
raise any strategic issues.
4.2
Having regard to the points of objection raised I would offer the following comment.
a. matters of detail such as potential noise conflict are dealt with at the “reserved matters”
stage where a requirement could be put on the applicant to demonstrate that there would be
no conflict between the proposals and existing uses. The applicant would be required to
initiate a noise assessment survey as part of any “reserved matters” submission.
b. While the applicant had initially submitted an indicative sketch layout of the site which
showed a flatted type development of 3 and 4 storeys in height that sketch was
subsequently withdrawn and does not form part of this current application. Detailed matters
of design, heights etc. can be dealt with at a “reserved matters” stage at which time any
concerns raised by the general public can be given full and proper consideration.
c. A Transport Statement was submitted by the developer and, following discussions and
subsequent amendment, now demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Transportation
Section that the application site could be accessed directly from Carlisle Road by means of
traffic lights around the junction with Petersburn Road. This will also improve the current
congestion problems on Carlisle Road at that junction.
4.3
The proposal under consideration is acceptable in policy terms and will, through proper planning
control, replace a rather unattractive commercial use (car sales) with a potentially attractive
residential development on a prominent “gateway” site into Airdrie. The Community Council
welcome the residential development of this site and the incorporation of appropriate conditions
on any planning permission will mitigate those concerns raised by the Community Council over
the site layout to ensure that any subsequent development takes full account of the sites
prominent location and environmentally sensitivities. The individual points of representation
raised are noted although these do not merit the refusal of this application as matters of
concern over detail would be addressed at a “reserved matters” stage. Taking all matters into
consideration I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to the stated
conditions.
Application No:
C/06/01479/FUL
Date Registered:
1st September 2006
Applicant:
George Wimpey West Scotland Ltd
Unit C, Cirrus
Marchburn Drive
Paisley
PA3 2SJ
Development:
Erection of 74 Dwellinghouses
Location:
George Wimpey Phase 7
Lancaster Avenue
Chapelhall
Ai rdrie
North Lanarkshire
Ward:
52 Salsburgh
Grid Reference:
278297 662147
File Reference:
C/PL/CHL180/CM/LR
Site History:
The site is part of the Dunalistair Strategic Land release that was
granted permission in outline on 8 May 1989 for Residential
Development of approximately 800 houses.
C/OO/OO115/AMD Granted for Formation of Areas of Landscaped
Openspace within Dunalistair Housing Area, Chapelhall
(Amendment To Planning Consent 93/181) on 1Oth May 2000
C/93/181 Granted for Formation Of Areas of Landscape Openspace
within Dunalistair Housing Area (Ref P89093) on 30thApril 1994
Development Plan:
The site is zoned as HG3 (Private Housing Development) within the
Monklands District Local Plan 1991.
No
Consultations:
NLC Education
Scottish Environment Protection Agency
Scottish Water
British Gas
Scottish Power
British Telecom
West Of Scotland Archaeology Service
Representations:
Not Required
Councillor David Fagan
(No Objection)
(Comments)
(Comments)
(No Objection)
(No Objection)
(No Objection)
(No Objection)
(Comments)
(No Objection)
permission.
2.
That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all
Planning Authority.
3.
That before any of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted are occupied, the fences, or walls, as
approved under the terms of condition 2 above, shall be erected.
Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.
4.
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.
5.
(d) details of the maintenance of these works.
6.
That prior to the occupation of the last two dwellinghouses within the development hereby
permitted, all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping
and planting, approved under the terms of condition 5 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.
7.
That prior to the occupation of the last two dwellinghouses hereby permitted, the management
and maintenance scheme approved under the terms of condition 5 shall be in operation.
8.
That PRIOR to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless
otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report
shall be submitted to and for the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in
accordance with the best practice, 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.
9.
Strategy.
Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and
10.
That prior to any works commencing on site, the applicant must confirm in writing to the Planning
Authority that the foul drainage can be connected to the public sewer in accordance with the
requirements of Scottish Water. The surface water must be treated in accordance with the
principles of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for Scotland and Northern
Ireland published by ClRlA in March 2000. The post-development surface water discharges shall
ensure that the rate and quantity of run-off to any watercourse are no greater than the predevelopment 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.
Reason: To prevent groundwater and surface water contamination in the interests of
environmental and amenity protection.
11.
Reason: To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the
interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents.
12.
Notwithstanding the terms of Conditions 10 and 11, a Flood Risk Assessment shall be submitted
to 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. For the avoidance of
doubt, the Flood Risk Assessment must take account of Scottish Planning Policy 7 (SSP 7):
Planning & Flooding and Planning Advice Note 69 (PAN 69) : Planning and Building Standards
Advice on Flooding.
Reason: In order that the Planning Authority might be satisfied that the proposed development
will not give rise to flooding within the application site and will not increase the flood risk
elsewhere.
13. That the mitigation measures noted in the Ecological Impact Assessment dated November 2006
shall be introduced and managed by the developer during the construction works to the
satisfaction of the Planning Authority.
Reason: To minimise the impact of the development on the ecological habitats at the site
14.
That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the finished floor levels for all
dwellinghouses hereby approved shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 1st September 2006
Revised Layout Plan received 27'h November 2006
Memo from Transportation Section received 20th November 2006
Memo from Protective Services received 3rd November 2006
Memo from Geo-technical Section received 15th November 2006
Memo from Community Services received 28th November 2006
Memo from Education received 6th November 2006
Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 10th October 2006
Letter from Scottish Water received 13th September 2006
Letter from British Gas received 19th September 2006
Letter from Scottish Power received 19th September 2006
Letter from British Telecom received 19th September 2006
Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 12th October 2006
Letter from West Of Scotland Archaeology Service received 18th October 2006
Letter from Dr A. Insausti, Airdrie Health Centre, Monkscourt Avenue, Airdrie, ML6 OJU received 14th
September 2006.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Colin Marshall at 01236 812376.
APPLICATION NO. C/06/01479/FUL
REPORT
1.
1.I
This application is for the erection of 75 dwellinghouses, on land to the north of Lancaster
Avenue, Chapelhall. This development represents Phase 7 of a development by George
Wimpey and is located to the west of the phase 6 housing area and south of Turnberry Crecent
and Honeywell Crescent, Chapelhall.
1.2
This development relates to part of the outline planning permission 89/089 that was granted on
8'h May 1989. The applicant proposes to access the site from Lancaster Avenue. The proposed
road layout is designed to accommodate an extension to the final phase 8 development phase
situated further west of the phase 7 area.
1.3
The proposed house types generally comprise a mix of two storey detached and semi-detached
houses with a row of 5 terraced houses to the north of the site. There are no play areas included
in this phase. The existing play area at the phase 6 site is to serve both developments.
2.
Development Plan
2.1
The site is zoned HG4 (Strategic Housing Site) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.
3.
3.1
The Geotechnical Section advised that whilst indicative surface water drainage proposals were
provided, further supporting information on the drainage design would be required including
confirmation from Scottish Water that the attenuation methods are acceptable.
3.2
The Transportation Section had no objections subject to conditions following submission of the
revised layout plan.
3.3
NLC Community Services had no objection to the proposals. The existing children's play area at
the phase 6 area is designed to serve the proposed phase 7 area.
3.4
NLC Education advised that whilst the local secondary schools have sufficient accommodation
provision, the new local primary schools may have accommodation problems if all catchment
area pupils attend. The Council may then need to consider extensions to the primary schools, or
the transportation of pupils to other schools or the rezoning of existing catchment areas to
evenly distribute the rising school roles. The Education Department's preference would be to
request a financial contribution towards the costs of extensions to the schools. Current costs
are approximately f500,OOO for a 4-classroom extension for Chapelhall Primary and f250,000
for a 2-classroom extension for St Aloysius Primary.
3.5
NLC Protective Services had no objection provided a full site investigation survey is carried out
and that all site works accord with current environmental regulations.
3.6
There was no objection from Scottish Natural Heritage following the submission of an
Ecological Impact Assessment. The EIA included mitigation measures that should be adhered
to be the developer should planning permission be granted.
3.7
SEPA had no objection provided the drainage scheme includes SUDS provisions.
3.8
There was no objection from BT, Scottish Power, Scottish Gas or the West of Scotland
Archaeology Service.
3.9
There was no objection from Scottish Water provided a satisfactory drainage scheme is
provided and that this includes SUDS provisions.
3.10
There was on letter of objection and the main points of objection can be fairly summarised as
follows:0
Loss of privacy to rear garden area. The proposed terraced houses should be removed
from the layout to provide some distance between the development and the objectors’
property.
4.
4.1
The proposals require to be assessed under the terms of the development plan and any other
material considerations. There are no strategic planning issues. The proposals accord with the
terms of the above noted local plan policy and concur with the previous planning permissions
noted above.
4.2
The proposals also meet the terms of the Council’s design guidance on new housing areas and
with the guidance on space around dwellings. The access and roads layout is acceptable to the
Transportation Section. The need for additional information on the drainage scheme and ground
contamination issues can be covered by conditions. Whilst the Education Department have
suggested that the proposed development may affect the school role projections, it should be
noted this development site has been zoned for housing development in the local plan since
1991 and as such should have been accommodated in projected school roles. It is therefore
inappropriate to request a financial contribution from the developer in this instance.
4.3
With regards to the terms of objection the following comments can be made.
0
As noted above this site has been zoned as a potential housing development site for many
years. The proposal accords with the development plan and the site layout meets the terms
of the design guidance as noted above The proposed terraced houses at plots 31-35
inclusive would all be provided with 10m length rear garden areas. The terraced houses
would be positioned approximately 26 metres from the objectors house. This is considered
satisfactory and would not affect the privacy or amenity of the objectors’ property. There is
no justification to provide a “buffer” landscaped area between the proposed and existing
dwellinghouses.
The objection cannot be sustained in this instance.
4.4
Taking all of the above into account it can be concluded that the proposals accord with the
development plan and relevant design guidance. It is therefore recommended that planning
permission be granted subject to conditions.
Application No:
C/06/01664/FUL
Date Registered:
16th October 2006
Applicant:
Mr C. McCrindle
Fouracres
Stoneheap Crofts
Bents
West Lothian
EH47 8BX
Agent
Hardie Associates
78 Hopetoun Street
Bathgate
West Lothian
EH48 4PD
Development:
Erection of Mixed Development Retail on Ground Floor with
Four Flats Above
Location:
23 Forrest Street
-
Clarkston
Airdrie
North Lanarkshire
ML6 7BA
Ward:
44 Clarkston
Councillor Campbell Cameron
Grid Reference:
277687665570
File Reference:
C/PL/AIF714023/CM/LR
Site History:
OQ1006921FUL Erection Of Boundary Fence (In Retrospect)
Granted
Development Plan:
Under the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991
the application site is located within an area covered by the following
policies:HG9 Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas
ENV 15 Conservation Areas
No
Consultations:
(No Objection)
Scottish Environment Protection Agency (No response)
Scottish Water
(No Objection)
(No Objection)
Scottish Power
Representations:
4 letters of representation
Advertised on 25th October 2006
Planning Application No. C/06/01664/FUL
-
Erection of Mixed Development Retail on Ground Floor
with Four Flats Above
23 Forrest Street, Clarkston, Airdrie
*
Representations
Site Area 0.09 HA
N
Recommendation:
1.
permission
2.
That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all
Planning Authority.
3.
That before any part of the development hereby permitted is brought into use, all the fences, or
walls, as approved under the terms of condition 2 above, shall be erected.
Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the site and the general area.
4.
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.
5.
(d) details of the screen fencing to the upper garden terrace
(e) details of the enhanced landscape screening works along the northern boundary of the site
(e) details of the maintenance of these works.
6.
That prior to the occupation of the first flatted dwellinghouses within the development hereby
permitted, all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping
and planting, approved under the terms of condition 5 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.
7.
That prior to the occupation of the first flatted dwellinghouse, the management and maintenance
scheme approved under the terms of condition 5 shall be in operation.
Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the site and the general area.
8.
That before the development hereby permitted starts, a detailed drawing showing the bin store
location and boundary enclosure shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning
Authority.
9.
That before any part of the development hereby permitted is brought into use, 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.
10.
That PRIOR to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless
otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report
shall be submitted to and for the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in
accordance with the best practice, 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.
11.
Strategy.
Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and
12.
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.
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
13. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 12
Reason: To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the interests
14.
That before any works start on site, Conservation Area Consent shall be sought for the demolition
of the existing buildings.
Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas)
(Scotland) Act 1997
15.
That the permission hereby granted shall relate to the use of the ground floor shop and ancillary
storage area solely for a use included within Class 1 of the Town and Country Planning (Use
Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997. For the avoidance of doubt there shall be no hot food take-away
service permitted from the shoplstorage unit hereby approved.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control over the use of the class 1
shop in the interests of amenity.
16.
That not withstanding the terms of conditions 2 & 5 above, and before works start on site, full
details of the boundary screening proposals to the northern boundary of the site shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
17.
That before any part of the development hereby permitted is brought into use, the layby parking
hereby approved shall be fully completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities in the interests of road safety.
Background Papers:
Memo from Transportation Section received 27th November 2006
Memo from Protective Services received 15th November 2006
Memo from NLC Community Services received 2nd November 2006
Letter from Scottish Water received 26th October 2006
Letter from Scottish Power received 30th October 2006
Letter from S & S Brown, Tintagel, 21 Forrest Street, Airdrie, ML6 7BA received 17th October 2006.
Letter from T McDonald, Property Manager, Botterills Stores Ltd, Block 9, South Avenue, Blantyre
Industrial Estate, High Blantyre, Glasgow, G72 OXB received 1st November 2006.
Letter from E Blair, Dunedin, 19 Forrest Street, Airdrie, ML6 7BA received 31st October 2006.
Letter from A Lorimer, Property and Development, Scottish Midland Co-op Society, Hillwood House, 2
Harvest Drive, Newbridge, Edinburgh, EH28 8QJ received 8th November 2006.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Colin Marshall at 01236 812376.
APPLICATION NO. C1061016641FUL
REPORT
1.
1.I
Planning permission is being sought for the erection of a shop and 4 flatted dwellinghouses at a
site located at 23 Forrest Street, Airdrie. The site is currently occupied by a car garagekales
area and sits on the corner of Forrest Street and Drumgelloch Street, Airdrie. The site is
bounded to the east by Drumgelloch Street, to the south by Forrest Street and to the west and
north by residential properties. There is an existing Class 1 shop located on the south side of
Forrest Street.
1.2
The proposals would involve the demolition of the existing garage building and clearance of the
site area. The proposed building would be three storeys in height and provided with a doublepitched roof with extended skews to the gable ends. External materials would consist of a mix of
render and reconstituted stone facings to the mid-section with upper roof pediment feature. In
addition stone banding would be provided around door and window openings.
1.3
The proposed Class 1 retail unit on the ground floor and 4 two bedroom flatted dwellinghouses
on the two upper floors. Vehicular access would be taken from Drumgelloch Street to provide
access to a shop staff parking area and residents parking court. There would be a total of 12
car-parking spaces. The building would be set back from Forrest Street to improve visibility at
the adjacent road junction and this in turn will enable a lay-by parking area to be provided on
Forrest Street for shop customers and service vehicles.
1.4
The shop floor area would extend to some 156m2 in floor area with an additional ancillary
storage area extending to some 80mZ in floor area. The shop frontage would face onto Forrest
Street and would have a traditionally designed shop front with centrally positioned recessed
doorway. Traditional stall risers would be incorporated within the frontage.
1.5
The upper floor flats would have two bedrooms, lounge, kitchen and bathroom. There would be
a shared roof terrace over the storage area at first floor level, which would be screened. Access
to the flats would be from the rear residents’ car parking area, which provides 6 dedicated
spaces. Vehicular access would be from Drumgelloch Street. The first floor roof terrace would
provide approximately 80m2of shared amenity space and include screen fencing to protect the
privacy of residents and neighbouring properties. There would be additional amenity space
adjacent to the car park area and bin store area.
1.6
The developer intends to enhance and improve the hedgerow to the rear of the site as part of a
landscaping plan.
2.
Development Plan
2.1
Under the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is
located within an area covered by the following policies:-
0
HG9 Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas
ENV 15 Conservation Area
2.2
There are no strategic planning issues.
3.
3.1
There were no objections from consultees, however Protection Services requested that a site
contamination survey be carried out. Scottish Water has requested that any drainage system
meets their requirements and that a Sustainable Urban Drainage System (SUDS) be included
with the proposals.
3.2
There was no objection from the Transportation Section subject to conditions.
3.2
There were four letters of representation and the main points of objection can be fairly
summarised as follows:0
0
0
0
0
0
0
There are insufficient parking spaces for the commercial use
There is no need for an additional class 1 development in the area
The development would generate additional vehicle movements and this would be
detrimental to road safety
Conservation Area Consent would be required for the demolition
The proposed development would cause overshadowing of an adjacent house
There would be a loss of privacy
The proposed development would have a detrimental impact on the drainage infrastructure
One of the objectors has subsequently requested to be heard by Committee.
4.
4.1
material considerations. There are no strategic planning issues to address. In this instance the
proposals require to be assessed under the terms of policies HG9 and ENV 15 as noted above
and under the terms of the associated design guidance on Housing In-fill and Conservation
Areas.
4.2
The application site is located within an area zoned as HG9, where the principle of providing
additional housing and other ancillary developments such as corner shops would be acceptable
provided there would be no detrimental impact on the amenity of such areas.
4.3
The proposed Class 1 shap unit is considered acceptable in principle as it is relatively small in
terms of its floor space and would provide an additional “corner shop” facility to this side of
Forrest Street. The proposed shop is considered to be ancillary to the surrounding housing area
and is acceptable in principle servicing, customer and staff parking arrangements are
satisfactory.
4.4
The proposals are considered to be acceptable under the terms of the design guidance on
Housing In-fill Developments. The site is large enough to support this mixed-use development
and would be provided with adequate access and parking for the residents and shop customers
and staff. Servicing from the proposed lay-by arrangements is acceptable to the Transportation
Section. The proposed communal amenity space of approximately 80mZ on the roof terrace
along with additional amenity space and bin store at the car parking area is considered
acceptable. The proposals would not have any detrimental impact on the amenity of the
surrounding properties. There would be no loss of sunlight or privacy following an assessment
of SunlightlDaylight Indicators.
4.5
The proposed building also meets the terms if the Councils design guidance on Conservation
as the design of the building would be traditional and incorporate many traditional design
features as noted above. Moreover the proposals would represent an improvement to the
surrounding conservation area as the existing garage buildings and car sales yard are of poor
visual quality and add nothing to the character of the area. The proposed shop unit would be
provided with a traditional shop-front, which is also in keeping with the standards required in a
Conservation area.
4.6
Each element of the proposals accords with the terms of the local plan policies and design
guidance and are considered acceptable. There were no adverse comments noted in the
consultation responses. A report on any ground contamination issues could be covered by
condition. Provision of a SUDS would also be covered by a condition.
4.7
With regards to the terms of objection the following observations can be noted.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
The Transportation Section considered the proposed parking and access arrangements
were acceptable.
The shop unit is considered to be ancillary to the housing area on the north side of Forrest
Street. Issues over the commercial need for such a development are not strictly material to
the consideration of a planning application.
The Transportation Section considered the proposed parking and access arrangements
were acceptable. The current garage use generates traffic movements and it is considered
the proposal would not harm traffic safety at the locus.
Conservation Area Consent would be required for the demolition of the existing buildings. It
would be a condition of any planning permission that this be sought before works start on
the site. As noted above the existing garage building is not of significance in terms of
conservation value therefore the demolition works would not be detrimental to the visual
amenity of the conservation area.
There would be no significant overshadowing of adjacent properties following an
assessment of SunlighVDaylight Indicators.
There would be no loss of privacy to adjacent residences. The upper communal amenity
space would be provided with screen fencing to prohibit overlooking to the north and to
protect the privacy of any new residents.
There was no objection from Scottish Water and it is envisaged that an appropriate
drainage system could be provided to their satisfaction.
4.8
The above noted objections cannot be sustained in this instance.
4.9
Taking all of the above points into consideration it can be concluded that the proposals are
acceptable and it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.
It should be noted that an objector has requested that a hearing be conducted prior to
the determination of this application.
Application No:
S1061015551FUL
Date Registered:
20th October 2006
Applicant:
Mr Brian McCusker
16 Thomson Drive
Bellshill
North Lanarkshire
ML4 3ND
Development :
Erection of 2 metre high boundary fence (In Retrospect)
Location:
16 Thomson Drive
Bellshill
North Lanarkshire
ML4 3ND
Ward:
24 Bellshill North
Grid Reference:
271 700660415
File Reference:
SIPLIBI911171SMIMM
Site History:
None
Development Plan:
The site is zoned as Policy HSG 8 (Established Housing Areas)
within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001,
2004 and 2005).
No
Consultations:
No external consultations required
Representations:
None
Not Required
Councillor Harry McGuigan
Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:.
1
That the fence is contrary to Policy HSG 8 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft
(Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005) by virtue of its positioning which causes a detrimental effect on the
amenity of the residential area.
2
That the fencing has been erected over the existing Service Strip, contrary to good practice for
allowing maintenance1inspection by Utility Bodies.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 1gthSeptember 2006
Memo from Transportation Team Leader received 27th November 2006
Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 8,2005)
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Stewart MacCallum at 01698
302085.
Date: 30 November 2006
APPLICATION NO. S1061015551FUL
REPORT
1.
1.I
Retrospective planning permission is sought for the re-location and extension of a 2 metre high
fence along the western side boundary of 16 Thomson Drive, Bellshill. Originally, the fence was
positioned in alignment with the rear building line, projecting 1.5 metres to the side, then
returning on a splayed trajectory to the north and thereafter wrapping around the rear garden.
This arrangement made provision for an uninterrupted grass verge, part of which comprises a 2
metre wide Service Strip, outwith the fence line. However, the applicant has relocated the fence
in alignment with the front building line which now witnesses its projection 3.5 metres to the
side, continuing on a similar trajectory but encompassing the entire grass verge inclusive of the
Service Strip, within the rear garden. As such, the fence is now located hard against the heel of
the footway and carriageway. A 1 metre high fence has also been erected along the front of the
property under permitted development rights. The fences combined, denote a clear visual
marker of the extent of land ownership in association with the property. The fence is made of
timber construction and matches those commonly found within residential estates.
1.2
The application site comprises a corner plot located adjacent to Crighton Wynd which is
positioned centrally within an open plan established housing estate. All roads within the estate
are constructed to adoptable standards with the exception of Crighton Wynd which is
constructed as a shared surface access with no defined footways other than a short length
measuring 15 metres long, stretching northward from its junction with Thomson Drive. As such,
entrance to the Wynd carries a narrower definition which when coupled with the close gable
massing of the property at 16 Thomson Drive, results in the perception of a visual bottleneck
thereby creating a more oppressive environment in contradiction with the spacious attributes
experienced elsewhere within the estate. Furthermore, the side boundary of the application site
is accorded visual prominence owing to its position on a corner and its relationship with a play
area opposite the Wynd, comprising a 1 metre high timber fence, low height and sparse placing
of equipment, which thereby ensures clear sightlines of the fence from the south and west.
Lastly, the open plan nature of the front gardens of properties to the rear on Crighton Wynd,
ensures that the fence is also highly visible from the north.
1.3
A restrictive condition was imposed on the original consent for the estate which dictated that no
fences or walls should be erected, or trees or shrubs planted within the public utility strip on
Crighton Wynd which forms part of the application site.
2.
Development Plan
2.1
The site is covered by Policy HSG 8 (Established Housing Areas) within the Southern Area
Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005). Policy TR 13 (Assessing the
Transport Implications of Development) is also relevant to the consideration of this application.
3.
3.1
No external consultations were required.
3.2
My Transportation Section have recommended refusal of the proposal as the fence has been
erected within the boundaries of the public road (e.g. the 2 metre wide grass Service Strip) and
therefore is an obstruction. Transportation will pursue its removal under the Roads (Scotland)
Act 1984.
3.3
Following neighbour notification procedures, no objections were received on the proposal.
4.
4.1
The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of the Local
Plan Policies. Policy HSG 8 (Established Housing Areas) and Policy TR 13 (Assessing the
Transport Implications of Development) are relevant to the proposal.
4.2
Policy HSG 8 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. The height, design and finish of the fence is similar to
those commonly found within residential estates, and is therefore considered acceptable in this
regard. Similarly, the erection of fences is a common householder development and is therefore
compatible with a residential setting. However, the position of the fence is considered to
adversely affect the amenity of the estate. As noted above in paragraph 1.2, the building pattern
of the estate, coupled with the narrow road definition of Crighton Wynd, dictates that entrance to
this cul-de-sac is more visually oppressive and is perceived as a bottleneck in streetscape
terms. The re-positioning and extension of the fence from its original position has reinforced this
visual effect and sought to remove precious amenity space which acted both as a softening
device in association with the gable massing of the adjacent property, but which also assisted in
the perception of a more spacious gateway to the cul-de-sac in harmony with its matching
counterparts on corner plots at Halpin Close and Agnew Grove. Where previously the green
space provided a direct visual link with the open plan gardens radiating outward to the rear, now
only glimpses of these gardens can be stolen, such that the fence appears stark against, and in
contradiction with this spacious backdrop. In addition, its visual prominence and position hard
against the footway (where it exists) and the carriageway edge comprehensively along the
entire side boundary length, makes it appear “fortress-like” giving rise to a negative perception
of the estate. Only one other example of a 2 metre high fence positioned hard against the
footway exists on the corner plot of 3 Thomson Drive. However, in this instance, whilst the side
boundary matches the length of the application site, the fence has only been re-positioned over
half its extent. The fence maintains its original position projecting sideward from midway along
the gable of the dwelling, and similar with its rear boundary which wraps around in recess from
the utmost limit of their plot ownership. As such, the spacious gateway to adjacent Halpin Close
is maintained with little impact on the visual amenity at this corner and is considered acceptable
in streetscape terms. However, the proposal differs from this arrangement and for the reasons
noted above, the proposal is considered contrary to Policy HSG 8 and could set a dangerous
precedent which would make it difficult to resist similar proposals on other corner plots, to the
detriment of the amenity of the estate.
4.3
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. My Transportation Section did not raise any objections on these grounds, as the
fence does not interfere with junction visibility or the inter-visibility splay of the driveway on the
property to the rear, given its sufficient siting to the north away from the fence. The fence also
causes no impact on vehicular or pedestrian access, parking or circulation. As such, the
proposal is considered to comply with Policy TRI 3.
4.4
However, my Transportation Section did raise concerns over the fence’s positioning over the
Service Strip and advised that it should be removed immediately. In addition, a restrictive
condition was imposed on the original consent for the estate which dictated that no fences or
walls should be erected, or trees or shrubs planted within the public utility strip. Good practice
dictates that Service Strips should remain free of obstructions to enable Utility bodies to gain
unrestricted access at all times to allow for maintenancehspection of apparatus. The
encompassing of the Service Strip within the rear garden has sought to reduce access
arrangements and would be dependent on the pedestrian access gate remaining unlocked at all
times. Such practices are not considered acceptable and should not be encouraged. As such, I
consider that the proposal should also be refused on this basis.
4.5
In conclusion, it is considered that the proposal is unacceptable and would not accord with Local
Plan Policy HSG 8, nor the original restrictive planning condition, all to the detriment of the
amenity of the estate, and access arrangements for Utilities. Therefore I recommend that
planning consent be refused.
Application No:
S/06/01608/FUL
Date Registered:
21st September 2006
Applicant:
Mrs O’Neill
11 Leesland
Uddingston
G71 6TW
Development:
Conversion of Integral Garage to a Habitable Space
Location:
I 1 Leesland
Uddingston
G71 6TW
Ward :
21 Tannochside
Grid Reference:
2701 11661762
File Reference:
SIPLIBFI9I85SMIMM
Councillor David Saunders
Site History:
Development Plan:
The site is zoned as Policy HSG 8 (Established Housing Areas)
within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001,
2004 and 2005).
No
Consultations:
No external consultations
Representations:
None Received
Not Required
Recommendation:
1.
The proposal would be contrary to Policies HSG 13 and TRI 3 of the Southern Area Local Plan
Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) as the proposed parking layout will not meet
the minimum requirement of two off-street parking spaces, which is likely to lead to increased
on-street parking to the detriment of vehicular and pedestrian road safety.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 21st September 2006 and amended plans received 20th November
2006
Memo from Transportation Team Leader received 7thNovember 2006
Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005).
Produced by
North Lanarkshire Council
Planning and Envimnmant Oept
Fleming House 2TryrtRoad
Cvmbernauld G67 I J W
te 01236 616210
tax 01238 618232
This map 1s reproduced from Ordnance Survey
material hnth the permission Of Ordnance Surrey
on behalf afthe Controller d Her Majesty$
Stationerv Office 0 Crown cowrioht
, " Unauthorised
repioduction infringes Crown copyright and may
lead to prosecution or civil proceedings
North Lanarkhire C0~n~ilIO00233962004
Planning Application No. S / 06 I01608 / FUL
Conversion of Garage to Habitable Space
11 Leesland, Regency Park, Uddingston
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Stewart MacCallum at 01698
302085.
REPORT
1.
1.I
This application seeks planning permission for an integral garage conversion at 11 Leesland,
Uddingston. The dwellinghouse is a two-storey detached property situated on a flat site and is
bounded by dwellings to the north, west and east with a shopping area to the south.
1.2
The proposed garage conversion is to form an additional room. It is proposed to replace the
existing garage door with a UPVC window in keeping in style with the existing windows and
brick up the remaining space below in facing brick to match the existing dwelling.
1.3
The applicant proposes to provide off-street parking provision for two cars. One parking space
is to be located in front of the proposed garage conversion in the existing driveway and one to
be located adjacent to this in the front garden area, however this could not be accessed
independently of the first space and would require to be accessed over an existing visitor
parking area.
2.
Development Plan
2.1
The application raises no strategic issues and the site lies within an area covered by Policy
HSG 2 (Private Housing Development Opportunities) in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised
Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005). HSG 2 seeks to promote the release of sites identified
for private sector housing development. Policies HSG 13 (House Extensions) and TR13
(Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) are also of relevance in this case.
3.
3.1
No external consultations were issued for this application and there were no letters of
representation received.
3.2
The Transportation Section have advised that a dwelling of this size and type requires a
minimum of 2 off street parking spaces. The proposed parking arrangement would not be
acceptable and the site is not large enough to allow or accommodate an acceptable layout.
4.
4.1
The application raises no strategic issues and therefore only needs to be assessed against
Local Plan policies and other material considerations.
4.2
In terms of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005), Policy
HSG 13 sets out the criteria for the assessment of applications for extensions and conversions
to dwellings including: - the size, proportion and positioning of any extensions or conversions
and its effect on parking provision, access and road safety. The design of the proposed
conversion in terms of the replacement window and bricked up surrounding frontage is
considered to be acceptable and in keeping with the surrounding area. However the garage
conversion would have an adverse effect on parking, access and road and pedestrian safety as
will be discussed further below.
4.3
Policy TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) sets out the criteria for the
assessment of applications where transport issues must be considered including:- the level of
traffic generated from the proposal; the impact a development will have on road traffic
circulation and road safety and the provisions made for access, parking and vehicle
manoeuvring. Presently, the site has two off-street parking spaces - one inside the garage and
one in front formed by a 5.5 metre length driveway. The proposed garage conversion would
result in one space being removed from the application site. It is proposed that a second space
be created within the curtilage of the existing dwelling but this space could only be accessed
across an adjacent visitor parking bay. Were permission to be granted it would cause conflict
with the use of the visitor parking space and would be a detriment to road and pedestrian safety.
This has been confirmed by the Transportation section. Any alterations to create a second
space in the front garden are not possible because of the size and physical layout of the site. If
the garage were to be converted this would leave only one useable car parking space, which is
inadequate for a four-bedroom dwellinghouse. For the proposal to provide only one sufficient
parking space within the curtilage of the property is unacceptable and does not comply with the
terms of the planning permission for the housing development.
4.4
In conclusion it is considered that this proposal is unacceptable in that the proposed
development would result in the loss of an existing car parking space within this plot, leaving the
level of provision below that required. This is likely to result in on-street parking which would
have a detrimental affect on road safety within the residential estate contrary to Policies TR 13
(Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) and HSG 13 (House Extensions). On
this basis I recommend that planning permission be refused for this application.
Application No:
S106101703/FUL
Date Registered:
6th November 2006
Applicant:
Sharon Scally &John Murdoch
20 Allandale Avenue
Newarthill
Motherwell
MLI 5TA
Development:
Change of Use
(Retrospective)
Location:
20 Allandale Avenue
NewarthiII
Motherwell
MLI 5TA
Ward:
29 Newarthill
Grid Reference:
278700660062
File Reference:
SIPLIBFl5188lCMIMM
of
Open
Space
to
Garden
Ground
Councillor John Lafferty
Site History:
Development Plan:
The site is zoned as E l (Green Belt), E2 (Urban Fringe) and E3
(Improvement of Derelict and Underused Land within the Green
Belt) in the adopted Northern Area Local Plan 1983.
On the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001,
2004 and 2005) the site is zoned as ENV 6 (Green Belt), ENV 7
(Urban Fringe Improvement Opportunities) and ENV 14 (Site of
Importance for Nature Conservation).
Yes
Consultations:
Representations:
None
16 November 2006
(No Objections)
That no trees within the application site shall be lopped, topped or felled, or otherwise affected,
without the approval in writing of the Planning Authority.
Reason: In order to afford adequate protection to the existing trees in the interests of visual
amenity.
Background Papers:
Memo from Community Services received 28'h November 2006
Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 23rdNovember 2006
Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005)
The Northern Area Local Plan 1986
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Miss Charmaine Mills at 01698 302136.
REPORT
1.
1.I
This application is for the change of use from public open space to private garden ground
(retrospective) to the rear of 20 Allandale Avenue, Newarthill. The adjoining site is a semidetached property with an existing rear boundary fence approximately 2 metres in height,
located within an established residential estate.
1.2
This proposal seeks to incorporate a wedge of land measuring 4.7 metres at the widest point by
18.5 metres long, into the existing rear garden area for the purpose of a vegetable garden. The
development involved relocating the existing 2 metre fence to include this area. The site is level
with the adjoining garden and comprises rough scrubland and two mature trees which have
become part of the applicants garden ground, and are not intended for removal. The
development was started early in 2005, however due to unforeseen circumstances was not
completed until summer 2006.
1.3
To the rear of the proposal is a large expanse of open space which includes a Site of
Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). The area directly adjacent to the rear of the
proposal slopes southwards towards the Legbrannock Burn and comprises a mixture of grass
and natural regeneration.
2.
Development PIan
2.1
The proposal raises no strategic issues in terms of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint
Structure Plan 2000 and can therefore be assessed in terms of Local Plan policies.
2.2
The site is zoned as E l (Green Belt), E2 (Urban Fringe) and E3 ((Improvement of Derelict and
Underused Land within the Green Belt) on the adopted Northern Area Local Plan.
2.3
On the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) the site is
zoned as ENV 6 (Green Belt), ENV 7 (Urban Fringe Improvement Opportunities) and ENV 14
(Site of Importance for Nature Conservation).
3.
3.1
SNH have been consulted and have no objections to the proposal.
3.2
The Community Services Section have advised that they have no objections subject to the
condition that the existing trees should either remain in situ or if they are to be removed then the
applicant should mitigate for the loss through replacement.
3.3
Following standard neighbour notification and advertisement procedures there have been no
letters of representation.
4.
4.1
relevant material considerations. The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore
be assessed in terms of the local plan policies. In terms of The Northern Area Local Plan the
site is within an area covered by Green Belt policies E l (Green Belt), E2 (Urban Fringe) and E3
(Improvement of Derelict and Underused Land within the Green Belt). These policies
collectively seek to protect the rural area from sporadic urban development, safeguard
agricultural interests, aim to reduce urban pressures on the contiguous agricultural areas within
the green belt and encourage landowners to improve derelict and underused areas through
woodland planting and management schemes.
4.2
Similarly, the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005)
perpetuates the adopted zoning as ENVG (Green Belt) and ENV 7 (Urban Fringe Improvement
Opportunities) but introduces new protection in the form of ENV 14 (Site of Importance for
Nature Conservation). Policy ENVG states that the Council will safeguard the character and
function of the green belt. Policy ENV7 seeks to promote improvements to the Green Belt and
Urban Fringe at the locations identified and will encourage and support public, private and
voluntary sector initiatives which enhance its amenity and ecological value. The site is also
covered by Policy ENV14 which states that the Council will resist developments which would
adversely affect the areas so covered.
4.3
Given the small area of land involved in the proposal, it is considered that the character and
function of the Green Belt will largely remain unchanged and can easily sustain the visual loss
of 2 trees into adjacent garden ground, given the wealth of planting which currently exists and
will be retained under the proposal. Similarly, the expansive Green Belt area can cope
comfortably with the marginally closer proximity of a 2 metre high screen fence, as it will be
visually subsumed against the uniform background of screen fencing which runs extensively
along rear gardens. The ground in question forms no part of functional agricultural land and will
not stigmatise any future aspirations for improvement via woodland planting initiatives. It poses
no issues in terms of sporadic and isolated development given its union with the urban edge
and alignment with the forward most projecting rear garden boundary of adjacent properties,
thereby representing no significant incursion into the countryside.
4.4
Impact on the visual amenity of the Green Belt will be negligible for the reasons noted above. In
addition, the sloping topography, existing planting and lack of public access into the area,
ensures that the site is largely screened and can only be viewed at close quarters by adjoining
residential properties. In such circumstances, the similar ground level, trimmed scrubland and
incorporation of the 2 trees, renders the land a discrete addition which could easily be
interpreted by the viewer as original ground for the dwellinghouse. The only sign which alludes
to an extension of garden ground relates to the converse projection of the fence line in
comparison with its neighbour to the east, but this is considered insignificant and not sufficient
to warrant refusal. The only features of nature conservation value relate to the 2 trees which
happily have been incorporated into the garden. The applicant has confirmed his intention to
retain these trees given the contribution they make to the visual environment. However, in order
to accord further protection, a condition will be imposed requiring their protection, if Committee
are minded to grant the application. Overall, it is considered that the proposal accords with both
adopted and emerging local plan policies.
4.5
Scottish Natural Heritage advised that they have no objections to the proposal and a condition
has been set for the protection of the existing trees which reflects the comments made by
NLC's Community Services Section.
4.6
In conclusion the proposal is considered acceptable when assessed against local plan policies
given the small area of land involved and consultees have raised no objections to the proposal.
It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.
Application No:
S1061017181FUL
Date Registered:
7th November 2006
Applicant:
Mohammed Bashir
3/5 Iona Quadrant
Cambusnethan
Wishaw
ML2 8XL
Agent
J. Kerr McDougall Ltd
13 Canyon Road
Netherton Industrial Estate
Wishaw
ML2 OEG
Development:
Erection of Detached Double GaragesIGarden Stores
Location:
3 I 5 Iona Quadrant
Cambusnethan
Wishaw
ML2 8XL
Ward:
9 Cambusnethan
Grid Reference:
281 183 656091
File Reference:
SIPLIBF/3/73/LMIMM
Site History:
None Relevant
Development Plan:
The site is covered by policy HSG 8 (Established Housing Areas) in
the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004
and 2005)
No
Consultations:
None Required
Representations:
One Letter of Representation Received
Not Required
Councillor Thomas Selfridge
permission
2.
That the facing materials to be used on the external walls and roof shall match in colour and
texture those of the existing dwelling.
3.
That the use of the garages hereby permitted shall be restricted to private use incidental to the
enjoyment of the dwellinghouse on the site and no commercial activity shall be carried out, in, or
from, the garages.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control of the development.
Background Papers:
Letter from Derrick Kokot, 6 Iona Quadrant, Cambusnethan, Wishaw, ML2 8XL received 26th October
2006.
Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005)
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Laura Murray at 01698 302134.
APPLICATION NO. S/06/01718/FUL
REPORT
DescriDtion of Site and Proposal
This application seeks planning permission for the erection of a building containing two separate
single detached garages with garden stores at 3/5 Iona Quadrant, Cambusnethan, Wishaw.
The proposed development would be associated with two separate two-storey, detached
dwellinghouses. Both are located within an established residential area and are bounded by
dwellings on all sides.
The proposed garageslstores will be located to the rear of both dwellinghouses and are to
replace two separate existing flat roofed garages within both sites. The applicant originally
submitted plans showing a double garage and store measuring 10.6 metres in length, 8.77
metres in width and 4.6 metres in height at the highest point of the pitched roof. This original
proposal incorporated two internally divided garages and one large garden store to the rear,
which measured 4.2 metres in length and 8.77 metres in width. Amended plans have since
been submitted reducing the size of the proposed garages and stores to measure a total of 9.1
metres in length, 7.42 metres in width and 4.3 metres in height. They would remain two
internally divided garages with two separate significantly smaller garden stores to the rear. The
agent also confirmed in writing that the development will be used for domestic purposes only.
Development Plan
The application raises no strategic issues and the site lies within an area covered by Policy
HSG 8 (Established Housing Area) in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified
2001, 2004 and 2005). HSG 8 seeks to protect the established character and amenity of
existing housing areas. Policy HSG 13 (House Extensions) sets the criteria that the Council
should take into account in determining such applications and is also of relevance.
No consultations have been carried out on this application.
One letter of objection has been received from the occupant at 6 Iona Quadrant in relation to
this amlication.
The obiection can be summarised as follows:
. ,
The applicant is bringing vehicles onto the site between the hours of 4.00 am and 6.00am
in relation to his business and disturbing the neighbouring residents.
The proposed garden store measures the equivalent in size to that of a further two
garages which is both an unnecessary size and unnecessary to both applicants involved
as they have little garden ground and what exists is not maintained. Other neighbouring
proprietors use their standard sized garages for storage of gardening tools which is
considered to be a more adequate sized storage area.
Both existing garages are not used for the storage of vehicles at present.
The applicant has added additional security measures to the existing garage due to a
previous break in which is believed to have been due to the applicant storing goods
associated with his commercial business.
The applicant has visitors with 5 or 6 cars parking on-street at the weekends, presumably
in line with his business, which is dangerous and obstructs vehicle movement to and from
this street.
4.
4.1
The application raises no strategic issues and therefore only needs to be assessed against
Local Plan policies and other material considerations.
4.2
In terms of the Local Plan, Policy HSG 8 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft
(Modified 2001,2004 and 2005), seeks to protect the established character and amenity of
existing housing areas. As the application relates to domestic garageslstores in principle they
are acceptable within such a residential area. Policy HSG 13 of the Local Plan, sets out the
criteria for the assessment of applications for extensions to dwellings. In this respect, the size,
proportion and positioning of the garages and stores are relevant and their relationship to
neighbouring properties, especially the potential effects on the privacy and amenity of the
adjacent dwellings. The proposed development would be located 1 metre from the rear
boundary to the west which is located at a right angle to the rear garden of the neighbouring
dwelling at 10 Barra Avenue. There are windows proposed to the rear and access doors on
both sides, with two roller shutter doors to the front. At present a 1.8metre high boundary fence
exists to the rear of the application sites providing sufficient screening for the neighbouring
dwelling at 10 Barra Avenue from this proposal. Due to the positioning of the proposed garage
and store to the rear of both properties, away from all neighbouring dwellings, there will be no
detrimental impact to the amount of daylight I sunlight currently enjoyed by the surrounding
dwellings. There is also currently sufficient parking on each site for over 2 cars excluding the
existing and proposed garages. It is therefore considered that the development is consistent
with the aims of Policy HSG 13 (House Extensions).
4.3
In response to the points of objection given, I would comment as follows: -
(1)&(4)The ongoing issue with regards to the applicant disturbing neighbours at early hours of
(2)
(3)
(5)
4.4
the morning with vehicles arriving on site in relation to his business is not considered to
be a material pianning consideration and the applicant has confirmed that the
development would be used only for domestic purposes. It is recommended that if
planning permission is granted that a condition be imposed restricting the use of the
development to domestic purposes in order to protect the amenity of neighbouring
residents. The objector has confirmed that this is currently being pursued by another
Section within the Council and this is therefore a separate matter.
Amended plans have been submitted showing the size of the development to be
considerably reduced. The rear garden ground of No. 5 measures over 180 square
metres, while that for No. 3 measures 150 metres. Both these measurements exclude
garages and parking. The rear gardens are well in excess of minimum Council
Guidelines for rear garden ground. The need for the proposed development and
condition of the gardens are not material planning considerations
The allegation that the existing garages are not used to store vehicles is not a material
planning consideration.
Current parking problems are not material to the consideration of this application.
In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed garages and stores are in accordance with
Local Plan Policies HSG 8 (Established Housing Areas) and HSG 13 (House Extensions).
Despite the concerns raised by the objector it is considered that the proposed development
would be acceptable subject to a condition restricting use to domestic purposes only. It is
therefore recommended that planning permission be granted.
Application No:
S106/01755/FUL
Date Registered:
30th October 2006
Applicant:
T-Mobile (UK) Limited
Clo Agent
Agent
Stappard Howes
122 Dundyvan Road
Coatbridge
ML5 I D E
Development:
installation of 15 metre High Telecommunications Flagpole, 3
Antennae with Ground Based Equipment and Electrical Meter
Cabinet
Location:
Bellshill Bowling Club
Hattonrigg Road
Bellshill
North Lanarkshire
NIL4 I L Q
Ward:
30 Hattonrigg
Grid Reference:
273777660908
File Reference:
SIPLIBI7I931CMIMM
Councillor Harry Curran
Site History:
Development Plan:
The site is zoned as E5 Urban Park to the East of Hattonrigg Road
in The Bellshill and Mossend Local Plan 1985. The site is zoned as
policy L1 (Established Leisure Facility) in the Southern Area Local
Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005). Policy CS6
(Telecommunications Development) is also applicable.
No
Consultations:
Representations:
91 Representation Letters and Petition with 199 Signatories
Not Required
Recommendation:
1.
permission
2.
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:
The Bellshill and Mossend Local Plan 1985
Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 8.2005)
National Planning Policy Guidance 19 Radio Telecommunication, July 2001
Planning Advice Note 62 Radio Telecommunication, September 2001
Memo from Education received 10th November 2006
Memo from Transportation Manager received 27'h November 2006
Email from Councillor Harry Curran, PO Box 14, Civic Centre, Motherwell received 25th October 2006.
Letter from Mrs Catherine Mex,l Allan Grove , Bellshill, ML4 1BX received 1st November 2006.
Letter from Mark & Karen Griffin, Meadow Rise, 34 Love Drive , Bellshill, ML4 1BY received 2nd
November 2006.
Letter from M Gibb,l Harvey Way, Bellshill, ML41TF received 6th November 2006.
Letter from J And B Maxwell, 67 Clay Crescent, Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 I T A received 6th
November 2006.
Letter from M Mcfall,l Kelvin Road, Bellshill, ML4 1LN received 6th November 2006.
Letter from K Sanderson, 15 Glenfinnon Drive, Mossend, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from Owner/Occupier, 6 Senga Crescent, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from E Sanderson, 2F Deedes Street, Airdrie, ML69AG received 6th November 2006.
Letter from B R Welsh, 19 Park Gate Place, Bellshill, ML4 3HE received 6th November 2006.
Letter from D Welsh, 19 Park Gate Place, Bellshill, ML4 3HE received 6th November 2006.
Letter from N Harmson, 8 Hill Place, Bellshill, ML4 2UE received 6th November 2006.
Letter from I Dunn, 10 Marina Court, Bellshill, ML4 2SD received 6th November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 17 Hawthon Gardons, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from A Banks, 7 Felford Street, Bellshill, ML4 1HQ, received 6th November 2006.
Letter from K Mulle, 29 Bramley Drive, Bellshill, ML4 3GA received 6th November 2006.
Letter from M Grerson, 10 Robert Burns Quad, Bellshill, ML4 3DF received 6th November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 11 Love Drive, Bellshill, ML4 1BY received 6th November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 9 Forres Crescent, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 23 Carrick Place, Bellshill, ML41NN received 6th November 2006.
Letter from S Kerr, 5 Trilir Place, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from S Gibb, 18 Mackenyie Terrace, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from J Rilley, 60 Lolay Crescent, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from R Simpson, Clayten Pate, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from R Simpson, Naesmith Walk, Belshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from T Crummie, 11 Clayton Pate, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from J Kean, 71 Hattonrigg Road, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from M Strachan, 23 Murdock Square, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from A Hay, 23 Forres Crescent, Bellshill, ML4 1HL received 6th November 2006.
Letter from K Sanders, 52 Love Drive, Bellshill, ML4 1BY received 6th November 2006.
Letter from M Hutchell, 5 Burns Path, Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 1LT received 6th November
2006.
Letter from L Thomson, 14 Gilmour Place, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from G McKee, 134A Rockburn Crescent, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from L McGregor, 20 Thistle Gardens, Holytown, MLI 4x2 received 6th November 2006.
Letter from N Horrester, 124A Rockburn Crescent, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 53 Movisbank Gardens, Bellshill, ML4 3E1 received 6th November 2006.
Letter from A Murrey, 28 A Baird Place, Bellshill, ML41HA received 6th November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 33 Diamond Street, Bellshill, ML4 2EN received 6th November 2006.
Letter from E Ball, 57 Napier Square, Bellshill, ML4 I T F received 6th November 2006.
Letter from S Bradley, 11 Amethyst Avenue, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from R Brownlie, 60 Glenmere Avenue, Mossend received 6th November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 42 Love Drive, Bellshill, ML4 I B Y received 6th November 2006.
Letter from L Kelly, 4 Love Drive, Bellshill, ML4 1BY received 6th November 2006.
Letter from W And E Warrender, 54 Love Drive, Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 1BY received 6th
November 2006.
Letter from W And E Mulligon, 12 Love Drive, Bellshill, Lanarkshire received 6th November 2006.
Letter from E Bettley, 75 Love Drive, Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 1BY, received 6th November
2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 22 Love Drive, Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 1BY, received 6th
November 2006.
Letter from M Findlay, 6 Love Drive, Bellshill, ML4 1BY received 6th November 2006.
November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 5 Love Drive, Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 1BY received 6th
November 2006.
Letter from M Kane, 1 Love Drive, Bellshill, ML4 1BY received 6th November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 9 Allan Grove, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from L Belley, 19 Allan Grove, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from D Owen, 77 Love Drive, Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 IBY, received 6th November
2006.
Letter from J Jamieson, 73 Love Drive, Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 1BY, received 6th November
2006.
November 2006.
November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 45 Love Drive, Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 IBY, received 6th
November 2006.
November 2006.
Letter from M Bartlett, 35 Love Drive, Bellshill, ML4 1BY received 6th November 2006.
November 2006.
Letter from P Hawthorne, 28 Love Drive, Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 1BY, received 6th November
2006.
November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 16 Love Drive, Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 1BY received 6th
November 2006.
Letter from M Guel, 14 Love Drive, Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 1BY, received 6th November
2006.
November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 10 Love Drive, Meadon Rise, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 10 Centenary Crescent, Bellshill, ML4 1B2 received 6th November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 19 Centenary Crescent, Bellshill, , received 6th November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 24 Centenary Crescent, Bellshill received 6th November 2006.
Letter from Owner Occupier, 2 Centenary Crescent, Bellshill, , received 6th November 2006.
Letters from G Sloan, 67 Love Drive, Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 1BY, received 6th November
and 21'' November 2006.
Letter from E McCrory, 61 Love Drive, Bellshill, ML4 I B Y received 6th November 2006.
Letter from B Skea, 65 Love Drive, Meadow Rise, Bellshill, ML4 1BY received 6th November 2006.
Letter from J Ure, 30 Love Drive, Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 1BY, received 6th November 2006.
Letter from John Wright, 69 Love Drive, Bellshill, ML4 1BY, received 8th November 2006.
Letter from Hattonrigg Residents Association, 287 Hattonrigg Road, Bellshill, ML4 1LY received 16th
November 2006.
Email from J Devlin, 287 Hattonrigg Road, Bellshill received 23rdNovember 2006
Petition with 199 Signatories received 6'h November 2006.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Miss Charmaine Mills at 01698 302136.
REPORT
1.
1.I
The applicant is seeking planning permission to erect a 15 metre high telecommunications mast
designed as a flagpole (with 3 No antennae), with ground based equipment and electrical meter
cabinet. All proposed structures and associated cabinets are to be painted grey.
1.2
The proposed 15 metre telecommunications flagpole would be sited to the southwest corner of
the Bellshill and Mossend Bowling Club on Hattonrigg Road, Bellshill. There is a 1.8 metre high
wall along the boundary of the bowling club site and a large area of open space immediately to
the south and to the west of the bowling club comprising Bellshill Athletic Football Club’s
grounds. It is predominantly residential properties to the north and east of the bowling club
which are characterised by 2 storey detached dwellings and 3 storey flatted dwellings. There is
semi mature landscaping to the north and to the east of the bowling club which gives some
assistance in screening the proposed mast from the dwellings. The nearest residential property
is situated over 55 metres south east of the application site and the nearest school lies over 190
metres to the northwest.
1.3
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. Several sites were investigated including mast sharing before this was put
forward. The mast is also designed to resemble a flagpole to minimise the visual impact and
would be viewed in association with a 5 metre high lamppost and 9 metre high floodlight directly
east.
2.
Development Plan
2.1
Structure Plan 2000 and can therefore be assessed in terms of Local Plan policies.
2.2
The site is zoned as E5 Urban Park to the East of Hattonrigg Road in The Bellshill and Mossend
Local Plan 1985. The site is zoned as policy L1 (Established Leisure Facility) in the Southern
Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005). Policy CS6
(Telecommunications Development) is also applicable.
3.
3.1
The Education Department were consulted and raised concerns regarding the health risks
associated with telecommunication masts.
3.2
The Transportation Section were consulted and have no objections. However they have advised
that the access road on the west side and the south side of the Bowling Club is currently private,
however the proposal does not effect the access road.
3.3
Councillor Curran considers that this type of development is unsuitable adjacent to a residential
area and due to the close proximity to the Hattonrigg Senior Citizens Centre which is used by a
local playgroup five days a week. He requests that a Site Visit be undertaken prior to
determination of the application. However a Site Visit and Hearing has been requested by
objectors of the application.
3.4
There were 91 letters of objection and a petition with 199 signatures received following
neighbour notification. A total of 79 of these letters are all in petition style. Three letters have
been copied which local residents have then signed. The main objections are as follows:
Objector’s have previously objected to the telecommunications mast proposed at Clay
Crescent and this application should be refused on the same grounds.
Concern over the unknown health risks involved with Telecommunication Masts being in
close proximity to housing as well as a children’s grass play area, children’s daycare
centre, senior citizens hall and the bowling club.
A precautionary approach should be adopted when siting these mast due to the unknown
health risks. Is NLC prepared to face future recriminations for their failure to safeguard
the publics health?
The potential health and safety risks to all residents and in particular to the health
development of the numerous young children within the vicinity of the proposed site. If the
mast is sited near the grass area which is used by children this will deter parents who
reside in Meadow Rise from allowing their children to play in this area.
Due to the close proximity of the proposed site in relation to the local amenities would we
be exposing our community members and in particular most vulnerable to a health risk
that doesn’t exist in our community today. This would mean exposure to microwave
radiation 24 hours a day. Is this reasonable when we cant be 100% sure that there are no
ill effects from this technology?
What conclusive research has been done with the proposed mast type (2G or 3G) with
regards to effects on health and in particular long term health?
The bowling club tends to promote good health in a good sociable environment and this
seems to go against the principle.
The objectors 5 year old will sleep less than 120 metres away from the mast for 12 hours
and plays in the rear garden. There is a high ratio of children in this 4 bedroom
development.
Perceived health concerns related to masts create anxiety levels that are in themselves
unhealthy and detrimental to the well being of the local community. Therefore, the
presence of the mast would be a constant reminder reinforcing the fear of health issues
and under Regulations PPG8 (29) this is a material consideration.
The intended future development of football/sports facilities on ground adjacent to the
proposed site. This sport development aims to promote diversity for children in this area
and develop good citizenship qualities within our young people. More children coming into
the area will be potentially at risk of developing health problems.
The Stewart Report recommends an individual risk assessment should be carried out on
any proposed telecommunications site and to date Stappard Howes have failed to
produce such a report. The failure to carry out such a risk assessment shows that
Stappard Howes are only assuming that there will be no adverse effect on the local
residents and they are unaware of any local anomalies that may aggravate the situation.
The North Road Play Group, St Geralds Primary School and Noble Primary School are
far too near the site which is in direct conflict with national guidelines on the location of
these structures. The mast should not be erected near schools as young children should
not be exposed to these masts for more than 6 hours per day.
Why does Stappard Howes not investigate less populated areas e.g. the nearby industrial
area. Reports from Government, the Private Sector and Lobbyists have suggested that
mast sharing should be first option and the location of a mast within a residential area
should only be considered once all the other commercial areas, industrial areas and
farmland areas are exhausted.
Have T-mobile investigated the use of any other sites that are less densley populated e.g
the open fields at the other side of the housing estate. Is the proposed site the best
location for the mast or is it simply a matter of the easiest and most convenient for TMobile. There are a number of masts within this area most visible from certain parts of
the Hattonrigg Road and is site sharing an option?
There is no justification for further mobile phone masts in the area when we have
perfectly good receptions in the area and certainly would not endorse further equipment
for the purposes of texting and picture messaging.
The lack of proper factual consultation of the type of equipment being used (power
involved).
All the residents of the ‘George Wimpey Estate’ should be neighbour notified as this
would act as a ‘negative signpost’ to the entrance of the new estate. All residents
concerned or potentially affected by this structure should have been neighbour notified,
for example, the residents of Hattonrigg Road who would see this tall structure from their
homes and families with children using the play area or attending children’s activities
within the bowling club.
The effect the mast installation will have on the value of local property. Should the local
residents be asked to take on the burden of suffering material measurable loss in
property price for the sake of T-Mobile and Bellshill and Mossend Bowling Club.
Will the 15 metre mast grow as new technology is established? Can the old or new
technology be added to the mast without the residents being consulted and will other
phone service providers be adding to the mast in the future?
The description ‘flagpole’ is objectionable as the objector has been in contact with 3
producers of flagpoles and the tallest that is in production by these manufacturers is 12
metres whilst the most common is 10 metres.
Due to the height of this structure it would totally dominate the skyline and would be
visible from most houses within the area, especially the objector’s own and immediate
neighbours, as well as the flats and housing on Hattonrigg Road. The proposed structure
would be far higher than the natural trees, lampposts and current buildings.
The structure will ruin views from 80% of one of the objectors home such as his living
room, kitchenldiner, 3 bedrooms and backgarden. There is a thin boundary of trees to the
rear of his dwellinghouse but this is sparse most of the year and there would be a
constant view through to the mast which is less than 50 feet from his boundary
Recently NLC have been trying to push forward development within this part of Bellshill
e.g. new houses, road upgrades, new training park and new lighting. Erecting this
structure would set back the regeneration of this area as well as label this immediate area
as a phonemast ‘hotspot’, due to the number of already existing masts.
This area has a history of cars being burned out and is there any proof that this structure
would be safe under these circumstances? The mast will also cause anti social behaviour
as children will no longer be able to play on the nearby grass area.
The photograph example of a flagpole given by Stappard Howes (Bowling Club, St
Vincent Street, Glasgow) show the flagpole having a flag. The objector has been on site
and spoken to a club representative who has advised that there has never been a flag on
the pole. Is this then a true picture?
It is appreciated that the club will receive revenue from the supplier for the mast, the
members of the club will only see this structure for a few hours in the week, however the
residents will have the burden everyday. The Bellshill Bowling Club is only interested in
financial gain and has not given consideration for the wider community.
The Committee who represent the Club and its members should have read the Stewart
Report and sought independent advice and feedback from its neighbours before they
made a decision on the lease of the land.
Other countries have introduced more stringent regulations regarding emission levels and
positioning of such structures.
The installation of a base station at the proposed site ignores all previous
recommendations of any credible scientific survey carried out and adopts the attitude
similar to that with the tobacco industry when CEPs believed that smoking didn’t cause
death or addiction.
This application has caused a great deal of anguish to the local community and although
it is not a material consideration it should be noted.
The residents pay to maintain the piece of land on the left of the bowling club and the
children play on this ground which is near the mast.
4.
4.1
relevant material considerations. The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore
be assessed in terms of the local plan policies. The site is zoned as E5 Urban Park to the East
of Hattonrigg Road which aims to promote the development of an urban park on land to the east
of Hattonrigg Road. However, this zoning has been superseded by the surrounding residential
development, thus the contemporary zoning and policies contained within the Southern Area
Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005) are more relevant to the consideration
of this proposal.
4.2
The Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 8, 2005) zones the site as
policy L1 (Established Leisure Facility). This policy states that the Council will seek to protect
and enhance existing leisure facilities by: implementing a programme of upgrading and
refurbishment of Council facilities, supporting private sector and community initiatives in suitable
locations, and resisting the loss of leisure facilities where a shortfall in provision for that locality
will result. The telecommunication mast will not be detrimental to the amenity of the bowling
club which has been established for many years and will not effect people from using this
leisure facility. In land use terms the proposal is compliant with the development plan.
4.3
Policy CS6 indicates that telecommunications developments will be considered using a
precautionary approach and will seek to locate such developments outwith densely populated
areas or areas where there are sensitive uses and will encourage the use of site sharing and
mast sharing where it represents the best environmental solution in other cases. The policy also
seeks to resist developments where the environmental impact of the development would
adversely affect the appearance of Green Belt areas. The proposed flagpole design of the mast
is visually acceptable, and will have a similar appearance to the surrounding street furniture and
will not have a significant visual impact. Given that there is a mix of trees and shrubbery nearby
which provide a degree of screening, the visual impact will be minimal and the boundary wall will
hide the associated cabinets. The nearest residential property is situated over 55 metres south
east of the application site, the nearest school lies over 190 metres to the northwest and there is
a Senior Citizens Centre which is also used as a children’s day care centre approximately 90
metres north of the application site. Efforts have been made by the applicant to distance the
equipment from the school and other buildings with sensitive uses as much as possible. The
applicant has provided details of several sites that were investigated prior to the submission of
this application however due to limited coverage, lack of site providers and the inability to siteshare with any other telecommunications installations in the surrounding area, the application
site was chosen to provide the appropriate network coverage. Thus, the proposal is held to
comply with policy CS6.
4.4
NPPG 19 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. With regards to
PAN 62, it should be noted that it is preferred to locate telecommunication equipment in
unobtrusive locations. The applicant has satisfied the criteria set out in both NPPG 19 and PAN
62.
4.5
In relation to the comments from the Education Department, the ICNIRP Declaration supplied
states that the proposal is in compliance with the international safety standards for electromagnetic radiation emissions. NPPG 19 states that where the ICNIRP declaration has been
carried out, the role of the planning authority shall be to assess such proposals in terms of siting
and design and the consideration of options or alternatives.
4.6
In relation to the grounds of objection these are addressed as follows:
The planning assessment can only take into consideration the merits of the current
proposal.
The nearest residential property is situated over 55 metres south east of the
application site, the nearest school lies over 190 metres to the northwest and there is
a Senior Citizens Centre which is also used as a children’s day care centre
approximately 90 metres north of the application site. The required ICNIRP
Declaration has been supplied stating that the proposal is in compliance with the
international safety standards for electro-magnetic radiation emissions. It is accepted
that there is significant public awareness of the possible health risks associated with
telecommunications apparatus. However, given that the applicant has provided the
necessary ICNIRP certificate, it is considered that concerns about health implications
are not sufficient to justify refusal of this planning application and complies with local
plan policy CS6 and national planning guidance in this respect.
In terms of health risks associated with telecommunication equipment this is
addressed in points 2-8 above. PPG28 is irrelevant in this case as this is Planning
Policy Guidance for England. The proposed development is in accordance with
national policy guidance as issued by the Scottish Executive. The proposal is in
accordance with NPPG 19 and PAN 62 as established in paragraph 4.4.
proposal and not future developments. In terms of health risks associated with
telecommunication equipment this is addressed in points 2-8 above.
In terms of an individual risk assessment, the ICNIRP certificate represents that the
planned equipment is in full compliance with the requirements of radio frequency (RF)
public exposure guidelines of the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation
Protection (ICNIRP).
The proposed mast is located approximately 190 metres from the nearest school
building. Efforts have been made by the applicant to distance the mast from the
school as much as possible. This position is considered acceptable.
The technical justifi'cation submitted as part of the application states that the site is
required to provide coverage for the residential area of Bellshill. There are a limited
number of sites available within the locality. Nonetheless the proposed location is
considered acceptable from a planning viewpoint. Many alternative sites were
considered. However due to limited coverage, lack of site providers and the inability to
site-share with any other telecommunications installations in the surrounding area, the
application site was chosen to provide the appropriate network coverage. This position
is considered to be accepted.
The relevant supporting statements, justification and ICNIRP certificate have all been
submitted as part of the application and satisfies the criteria set out in the Ten
Commitments as set out by the Mobile Operators Association.
The neighbour notification carried out was done so as per statutory requirements.
Property value is not a material consideration and cannot therefore be assessed as
part of this application.
proposal.
This is the description of the telecommunication mast as given by the applicant due to
the design of the mast. The description provided is considered appropriate.
(21 &22)The proposed mast is located approximately 55 metres from the nearest
dwellinghouse. It is thought that the proposal will not have a detrimental effect on the
residential area surrounding Hattonrigg Road. The national guidance requires that any
masts minimise any detrimental visual impact on surrounding residential areas and
the applicant has taken measures to achieve this. Telecommunication equipment
generally requires to be located in prominent positions in order to maximise coverage,
to ensure the number of installations is kept to a minimum. In this instance it is felt that
the applicant has reached a balance between providing a large area of coverage while
utilising the landform, buildings and mast structure to minimise the visual impact on
the surrounding area. It is thought that the proposal will not change the character of
the area and will not detract from its quality.
(23)
Whilst the concerns of the objectors are noted the mast is sited within the existing
Bowling Club grounds and is not on a public road or an area intended for open space
or the proposed training park. Therefore it is considered that the mast will not have a
detrimental impact on the recent improvements made within the surrounding area of
Hattonrigg Road.
(24)
The concerns raised by the objectors are noted in respect of the possible increase in
anti-social behaviour, however these concerns are not material planning
considerations and therefore cannot be assessed as part of this application. In any
case of anti-social behaviour this is a matter to be dealt with by the enforcing
authorities, namely the police, not the Planning Authority.
(25)
The photograph provided was for indication purposes only and the design and
proposed elevations of the flagpole is provided within the submitted plans.
(26&27) This is not a material consideration and cannot therefore be assessed as part of this
application.
(28)
In terms of regulations for telecommunications equipment installed in other countries
this is not a material consideration and cannot therefore be assessed as part of this
application.
(29)
The required ICNIRP certificate has been submitted. In regard to the point raised
about the tobacco industry this is not a material considerations and cannot therefore
be assessed as part of this application.
(30)
The concerns and feelings of the objectors are noted and have been addressed within
the context of this report.
(31)
In regard to who is responsible for paying the maintenance of the adjacent land this is
not a material consideration and cannot be assessed as part of this application. In
regard to children playing on this land in terms of health risks this has been addressed
in points 2-8.
4.7
In conclusion it is considered that in terms of siting and design the proposed development is
acceptable and it should not significantly impact on the existing residential area or the
surrounding areas of open space. The proposed development is in accordance with national
policy guidance and advice in NPPG 19 and PAN 62 Radio Telecommunications and meets the
criteria stipulated in local plan policy CS6. Taking into account the development plan and all
material considerations including national and local policies, it is recommended that planning
permission should be granted in this case.
4.8
A Site Visit has been requested by the local member and a Site Visit and Hearing has
been requested by objectors prior to the determination of this application.
Application No:
S/06/01791/OUT
Date Registered:
30th October 2006
Applicant:
C & F Developments
11 Westwood Road
Newmains
Wishaw
ML2 9EL
Agent
Stanley C. Cook M.R.T.P.1
12 Beveridge Terrace
Mossend
Bellshill
ML4 2RJ
Development:
Construction of a Flatted Residential Development
Location:
18 Thrashbush Road
Cambusnethan
Wishaw
ML2 8LN
Ward:
9: Cam busnethan
Grid Reference:
280777655560
Councillor Thomas Selfridge
File Reference:
Site History
S/OO/O1226/FUL: Erection of Garage approved 3" November 2000.
Development Plan:
The site is zoned for residential use in the Burgh of Motherwell and
Wishaw Development Plan 1953.
The site is covered by Policy HSG 8 (Established Housing Areas) in
the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004
and 2005). Policies HSG 10 (Assessing Application for Housing
Development) and TR 13 (Assessing the Transportation
Implications of Development) are also relevant to this proposal.
No
Consultations:
Scottish Water
Representations:
No letters of representation
Not Required
Recommendation:
1.
(Com ments)
Produced by
Nolth Lanarbhire Council
Planning and Environment Dept
Fleming House 2 Tryst Road
Curnbernauld, G67 1JW
tel01236 616210
fax 01236 616232
This map IS reproduced from Ordnance Sulvey
mateiialvnth the permission of OrdnanceSurvey
on behalf of the Controller of Her Mapsty's
Stationeiy Oftlce 0 Crown copyright Unauthorised
reprodudion infrlngesCrovm mpyllghtand may
lead to prosecution 01clvll proceedlngs
North Lanarkshire Council 100023396 2004
Planning Application No. S / 06 / 01791 /OUT
Construction of a Flatted Residential Development
18 Thrashbush Road Cambusnethan Wishaw
Site Area
= 0.08 ha
N
2. That before development 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;
(c) the layout of the site, including all roads, footways, and parking provision to the Council's
standards and turning areas;
(d) the details of, and timetable for, the hard and soft landscaping of the site;
(e) details for management and maintenance of the areas identified in (d) above;
(f) the design and location of all boundary walls and fences;
(9) the provision of drainage works;
(h) the disposal of sewage; and
(i) details of existing and proposed site levels.
3.
That within three years of the date of this permission, an application for approval of the reserved
matters, specified in condition 2 above, shall be made to the Planning Authority.
Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997,
4.
That before the development hereby permitted starts, a report describing the soil and ground
conditions prevailing over the application site (including details of the nature, concentration and
distribution of any contaminants), shall be submitted to the Planning Authority and the works
required in order to remove or render harmless these contaminants, having regard to the
proposed use of the site, shall be agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, and development
shall not be commenced until these works have been completed.
Reason: To ensure the site is free of contamination
5.
For the avoidance of doubt, no approval is hereby given for the submitted indicative layout plans
comprising of a two storey flatted development of eight flats.
Reason: This layout is not acceptable and to enable the Planning Authority to consider these
aspects in detail.
6.
That the reserved matters application referred to in Condition 2 above shall include full details of
the location and design of the surface water drainage scheme to be installed within the
application site and for the avoidance of doubt the scheme requires to be approved by Scottish
Water and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency in terms of their principles of Sustainable
Urban Drainage Systems.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail and to safeguard
the amenity of the area, to prevent groundwater pollution and to ensure that the proposed
drainage system complies with the latest Scottish Water and SEPA guidance.
7.
That prior to the commencement of development, the applicant shall provide written confirmation
to the Planning Authority that all the requirements of Scottish Water can be fully met to
demonstrate that the development will not have an impact on their assets, and that suitable
infrastructure can be put in place to support the development.
Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory drainage arrangements.
8.
That the site must be developed in accordance with the Council's 'Developer's Guide to Open
Space' in terms of the minimum space standards and space around dwellings.
Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory amenity space for the dwellinghouses.
9.
Notwithstanding the requirements of Condition 2 above, a 1.8 metre high timber fence shall be
erected along the northern and eastern boundaries of the application site, a walI/fence
combination shall be provided along the southern boundary and a 1 metre high wall along the
western boundary, details of which shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning
Authority.
Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity of the area and amenity of future residents.
10.
That no part of the development hereby permitted shall exceed two storeys in height.
Reason: To safeguard the character and visual amenity of the area and to safeguard the amenity
of the adjoining residential properties.
11.
Notwithstanding the terms of Condition 2 above, the site shall be accessed by a 5.5m wide
dropped kerb footway arrangement from Northmuir Drive incorporating a 2 metre wide footway
connecting to the existing footway network.
Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.
12.
Notwithstanding the requirements of Conditions 2 and 9 above, a visibility splay of 2.5 metres by
60 metres, measured from the road channel, shall be provided to the left from the access onto
Northmuir Drive and of 2.5 metres to the junction with Thrashbush Road to the right, and
everything exceeding 1.05 metres in height above the road channel level shall be removed from
the sight line areas and, thereafter, nothing exceeding 1.05 metres in height above road channel
level shall be planted, placed, erected, or allowed to grow, within these sight line areas.
Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.
13.
That car parking should be provided on the minimum basis of 3 spaces per 2 flats for residential
use (150%) and 3 spaces per 20 flats for visitor use (15%). Any single dwellinghouses within the
site shall be provided with 2 car parking spaces within the curtilage of the plot and visitor parking
in relation to the proposed density of the development.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 30th October 2006 and 28th November 2006.
Memo from Traffic and Transportation Team Leader (Southern) received 10th November 2006
Memo from Head of Protective Services received 13th November 2006
Memo from Geotechnical Team Leader received 1st December 2006
Letter from Scottish Water received 6th November 2006
Burgh of Motherwell and Wishaw Development Plan 1953.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Miss Heather Gebbie at 01698 302102.
Date 1 December 2006
APPLICATION NO. S/06/01791/0UT
REPORT
1.
1.I
Outline planning permission is sougt for the erection of a flatted residential development at 18
Thrashbush Road, Cambusnethan, Wishaw. The application site comprises of an existing
single-storey cottage style dwellinghouse, which has fallen into a state of disrepair. There is an
existing detached garage to the north of the dwellinghouse which is accessed from Thrashbush
Road. The site is bounded by flatted dwellings to the north, an associated garage court to the
northeast, a small retail store to the east, Northmuir Drive to the south and Thrashbush Road to
the west, with further residential properties across these roads.
1.2
The applicant has submitted an indicative layout comprising of a two-storey block with a total of
8 flats. The block would front onto Thrashbush Road and a parking court with a total of 13 carparking spaces would be provided at the rear of the site. Access to the parking area would be
taken from Northmuir Drive.
2.
DeveIopment PIan
2.1
The application raises no strategic issues in terms of the Structure Plan and can therefore be
assessed in terms of local plan policies.
2.2
The site is zoned for residential use in the Burgh of Motherwell and Wishaw Development Plan
1953.
2.3
The site is covered by Policy 8 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan
Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005). Policies HSG 10 (Assessing Applications for
Housing Development) and Policy TR 13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of
Development) are also relevant to this proposal.
3.
3.1
My Transportation Section has no objections to the proposed development subject to
appropriate conditions regarding access, footway provision, location of bin storage facilities and
the marking out of parking bays.
3.2
My Protective Services Section have commented that the construction hours of noise producing
works should be limited and suitable dust measures put in place. Furthermore, they have
commented that a site investigation survey should be submitted prior to the commencement of
the development.
3.3
Scottish Water have commented that there is sufficient capacity at Daer Water Treatment
Works to service the proposed development, however there is insufficient capacity at Carbarns
Waste Water Treatment Works. They would have no objections if the developer can
demonstrate that suitable water infrastructure can be put in place to support the development.
They also request a SUDS based surface water drainage scheme.
3.4
My Geotechnical Section have commented that there have been no reported incidences of
flooding within the application site, and they consider that the submitted SUDS based drainage
strategy meets the requirements of the Drainage Assessment: A Guide for Scotland.
3.5
Following the neighbour notification procedure, no letters of representation have been received
in relation to this application.
4.
4.1
4.2
The site is covered by Policy HSG 8 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local
Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005). Policy HSG 8 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. It is considered that the proposed development, subject to the detailed design and layout
being considered at the reserved matters stage, will not adversely affect the amenity of the
established housing area and that it can be accommodated without detriment to the surrounding
residential properties. Furthermore given the existing unsightly nature of the site it is considered
that the proposed redevelopment would enhance the setting and amenity of the area. It is
therefore considered that the proposal complies with Policy HSG 8.
4.3
Policy HSG 10 (Assessing Applications for Housing Development) requires the following criteria
to be taken into consideration: the impact on the existing built and natural environment; design,
density, layout and mix of housing; provision of landscaping, screening and open space; the
environmental condition of the site; and provision made for roads, access and parking. Detailed
consideration of the impact on the character of Thrashbush Road and the surrounding
residential properties would be undertaken at the reserved matters stage. The majority of the
surrounding residential buildings are two storeys in height and the proposed building would be
prominent, as it would be located at the junction of Thrashbush Road and Northmuir Drive. A
planning condition is therefore recommended to restrict the height of the development to two
storeys. The applicant has submitted an indicative layout for a two storey flatted development,
however this is considered to be unacceptable. While the indicative layout shows a parking area
to the rear, there is no amenity space provided within the application site. The layout therefore
doe not meet the requirements set out in the Council’s Open Space Guidelines. It is considered
that the site is a sufficient size for a flatted residential development, however a planning
condition is recommended to ensure that the development accords with the Council’s Open
Space Guidelines at the reserved matters stage. An appropriately designed development
should not be detrimental to the amenity of the surrounding residential properties and this can
be fully assessed at the reserved matters stage. It is therefore considered that the proposal
meets the criteria contained in Policy HSG 10, subject to the imposition of suitable conditions.
4.4
Policy TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) sets out criteria relating to
matters such as 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. My Transportation Section has no
objections subject to conditions regarding the access, footway and parking provision and
location of bin storage facilities. These matters can be addressed through the imposition of
suitable planning conditions and as such, the proposal is in accordance with Policy T R I 3.
4.5
In terms of the consultation responses received from my Protective Services Section, NLC
Geotechnical Section and Scottish Water, all relevant planning issues raised may be addressed
through the imposition of suitable conditions.
4.6
In conclusion, the principte of residential development at this site complies with the relevant
local plan policies contained within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft. Given the
surrounding residential land uses, it is considered that, subject to an appropriate design and
layout, the proposal will positively enhance the character at this particular location at
Thrashbush Road. It is therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to
conditions.
Application No:
S/06/01793/FUL
Date Registered:
30th October 2006
Applicant:
Vodafone UK Ltd
Clo Agent
Agent
Glasgow
G2 5TS
Development:
Installation of 15m Street Works Monopole and Associated
Equipment
Location:
Land At Earn Avenue
Righead Industrial Estate
Bellshill
Ward:
23 Viewpark
Grid Reference:
272896665400
File Reference:
S/PL/BF/9/112/LC/MM
Site History:
None relevant
Development Plan:
Councillor James McCabe
The site is zoned in the Adopted Bellshill and Mossend Local Plan
as I1 - Areas where new Industrial Developments will be
Concentrated. The Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft
(Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) zones the site as IND 8
(Established Industrial Areas).
No
Consultations:
None required
Representations:
None received
Not Required
permission
2.
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:
Adopted Bellshill and Mossend Local Plan 1985
NPPG 19 - Telecommunications Development
PAN 62 - Radio Telecommunications
Memo from Transportation Team Leader received 3rdNovember 2006
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mrs Lesley Carus at 01698 302142.
APPLICATION NO. S/06/01793/FUL
REPORT
1.
1.I
The application site lies to the north of Old Edinburgh Road within the Righead Industrial Estate,
Bellshill. This area is primarily industrial in nature, and the application site lies on the grass
embankment to the immediate north of an existing unit on Earn Avenue, set back approximately
6 metres from the road. There are a number of small business units to the south of the
application site and larger industrial units to the north, east and west.
1.2
This application seeks permission to install a 15-metre high telecommunications streetworks
monopole with 3 antennas, 1 transmission dish, associated ground-based cabinets and
palisade fence. The monopole will be largely screened when viewed from the south, east and
west by the adjacent industrial building.
1.3
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.
2.
DeveloDment Plan
2.1
Structure Plan 2000.
2.2
The site is zoned as 11 (Areas Where New Industrial Developments will be Concentrated) in the
Adopted Bellshill and Mossend Local Plan. The Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft
(Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) zones the site as IND 8 (Established Industrial Areas) and also
relevant is Policy CS6 (Telecommunications Developments).
3.
3.1
The Transportation Team Leader had no comments to make with regards to this application.
3.2
Following the standard neighbour notification procedure, no representations were received.
4.
4.1
decisions must be in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations
indicate otherwise.
4.2
In assessing this proposal it is necessary to consider that the site is zoned in the adopted
Bellshill and Mossend Local Plan as an industrial area. This policy seeks to concentrate
industrial development within the designated areas. As expected of a local plan of this age,
there are no policies relating to telecommunications development.
4.3
Similarly, the emerging Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and
2005) zones the site as IND,8 - Established Industrial and Business Areas. This policy states
that the Council will seek to retain the existing character of established industrial and business
areas by safeguarding the existing uses. It is considered that the monopole will cause very little
impact on the character of the industrial area given its discrete, slimline proportions and as such
the existing uses will be safeguarded. In terms of the industrial policies, the proposal is
acceptable.
4 .4
Policy CS 6 (Telecommunications Development) is also relevant in this case. This policy
indicates that telecommunications developments will be considered using a precautionary
approach and will seek to locate such developments outwith densely populated areas or areas
where there are sensitive uses. Proposals should be sited and designed to minimise the visual
impact of the apparatus. The policy outlines the following criteria which should be taken into
account when considering applications for telecommunications equipment:
0
0
0
0
The proximity of the equipment to housing or public buildings;
The design and visual impact of the apparatus;
The extent to which more suitable alternative sites exist;
The scope for sharing existing facilities, buildings and other suitable structures.
4.5
The nearest residential properties lie approximately 190 metres to the south east of the site, and
due to the aspect and orientation of these properties, no windows will look directly on to the
proposed mast. The business unit to the immediate south of the site of the proposed mast is
approximately 7 metres in height, and sits slightly higher than the road due to level differences.
However, the existing industrial properties act as a visual buffer for the proposed mast, and
coupled with the substantial distance to the nearest residential properties, the mast would not
be visible from any residential properties, thus causing no detrimental effects to residential or
visual amenity.
4.6
The proposed monopole is 30cm in diameter at the bottom, and gradually reduced to 20cm at
the top. The lampposts on Earn Avenue are approximately 8 metres in height, therefore the
visual impact of the installation will be minimal due to the presence of existing street furniture,
and the fact that the proposed mast would not be a incongruent feature at this industrial
location. 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 was also provided. The development is
therefore considered to be acceptable in terms of Policy CS 6.
4.7
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 com pliance certificate.
4.8
In conclusion, the proposal is in accordance with the Local Plan policies. 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. The proposed development is in
accordance with national policy guidance in PAN 62 and NPPG 19 Radio Telecommunications,
and meets the criteria stipulated in local plan policy CS6. Taking into account the development
plan and all material considerations including national and local policies, I recommend that
planning permission be granted, subject to conditions.
Application No:
S/06/01802/FUL
Date Registered:
1st November 2006
Applicant:
Mr G Watson
15 Hawthorn Drive
Shotts
ML7 5NB
Agent
Hardie Associates
78 Hopetoun Street
Bathgate
EH48 4PD
Development:
Construction of a Dwellinghouse
Location:
Currieside Piggery
Station Road
Shotts
North Lanarkshire
Ward:
18 Dykehead
Grid Reference:
286512 659987
File Reference:
S/PL/B/I 7/47(6)/EM/MM
Site History:
S/05/01107/FUL Conversion and Extension to Outbuilding to Form
Dwellinghouse. Refused 1gthSeptember 2005.
Development Plan:
The site is zoned RUR 2 Rural Area in the Shotts Local Plan 1982
and ENV 8 Countryside Around Towns in the Southern Area Local
Plan Finalised Draft (modified 2001, 2004 & 2005)
Yes
Consultations:
None
Representations:
Advertised on 8th November 2006
Recommendation:
Councillor James Robertson
1.
That the proposed dwelling is contrary to Policies ENV 8 and HSG 12 of the Southern Area
Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005) and RUR 2 of the adopted Shotts Local
Plan 1982 as there is no proven operational need and that the development would therefore
constitute unjustified sporadic development in the countryside.
2.
The proposed development is contrary to policies HSGIO (Assessing Applications for Housing
Development), HSG12 (Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside) and TR13 (Assessing the
Transport Implications of Development) of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft
(Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005) in that access arrangements are unsatisfactory in terms of width,
visibility and geometry, with no passing places, and would lead to additional vehicular traffic on
Deas Road to the detriment of road safety.
Background Papers:
Application form, plans and supporting statement received 1st November 2006
Memo from Transportation Team Leader received 7th November 2006
Memo from Head of Protective Services received 20th November 2006
Letter from Scottish Water received 10th August 2005
Letter from British Gas received 7th July 2005
Letter from Scottish Power received 11th July 2005
Letter from Robert McKee, 107 Rosehall Road, Shotts ML7 5BS, received 13th November 2006.
Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005)
Shotts Local Plan 1982
SPP3 Planning For Housing
SPPl5 Planning for Rural Development
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Edward McLennaghan at 01698
302137.
Date 28 November 2006
APPLICATION NO.S/06/01802/FUL
REPORT
1.
1.I
This application is for the erection of a dwellinghouse at land at Currieside Piggery, west of
Station Road, Shotts. The application site is situated at the end of Deas Road, a minor private
access extending from the end of Station Road. The site itself comprises a mix of outbuildings
of stone, wood and corrugated iron construction. The positioning of the buildings is such that
they form a compound with additional fencing marking the perimeter. The applicant operates
from the property training and breeding sheepdogs, utilising further agricultural land under his
ownership to the south. Historically the property was operated as a piggery. The application
proposes to erect a new single storey dwelling, measuring 160 square metres in area and
comprising a traditional rural design. The applicant has stated in a previous application that
there was originally a farmhouse on the site, however it is noted that much of the north elevation
of the building in question has been reconstructed with red brick and that the building is now
somewhat far removed from a dwellinghouse both in terms of construction and use.
1.2
The site is surrounded by farmland with the land dropping away in level to the south. The wider
area comprises a mix of fields and trees and the site has open aspects to the south.
1.3
A previous application S/05/01107/FUL for the conversion and extension of an outbuilding to
form a dwellinghouse was refused by committee on lgth September 2005. The grounds for
refusal were that the proposed conversion and extension of the outbuilding to a form a
dwellinghouse was contrary to Policies ENV 8 and HSG 12 of the Southern Area Local Plan
Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) and RUR 2 of the adopted Shotts Local Plan 1982 in
that the building was not worthy of preservation, there was no proven operational need and that
the development would therefore constitute unjustified sporadic development in the countryside.
1.4
A supporting statement has been provided stating that an application was submitted to convert
an outbuilding into a residential dwelling in June 2005 and was subsequently refused on various
grounds. The applicant states that they are aware of major development in this area and of new
build housing being approved in the immediate vicinity. In light of this the applicant is submitting
a new application for a replacement dwelling on the site. Furthermore the applicant states that
they would like to emphasise that the site is a former piggery, Currieside is a brownfield site and
the proposal is for the replacement of a semi-derelict farmhouse and outbuildings. Having
consulted NPPG15 and SPP3, the applicant is confident that the latest proposal more
accurately complies with policy.
2.
Development PIan
2.1
The site is zoned as a rural area in the adopted Shotts Local Plan 1982. In terms of the
emerging local plan, the site is zoned as Countryside Around Towns in the Southern Area Local
Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005). Local Plan Policies HSG12 (Housing in the
Countryside) and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) also apply.
3.
3.1
My Transportation Team Leader has recommended refusal of the application as Deas Road is
currently a private road, which is substandard in terms of geometry, visibility and width being
less than 3 metres at its narrowest point with no passing places. The construction of the
proposed dwellinghouse at this location would lead to additional vehicular traffic on Deas Road
to the detriment of road safety.
3.2
My Protective Services Section has no objections to the application subject to a condition
regarding the submission of a site investigation report.
3.3
Scottish Water have no objection to the proposal although advise that the applicant would need
to make a separate application to Scottish Water in order to connect to the public system.
3.4
SEPA has advised that there are no public sewers in the vicinity and foul drainage requires to
be taken to a soakaway via septic tank. No development should commence until all drainage
arrangements are provided and verified by SEPA.
3.5
Scottish Power has apparatus in proximity to the site, which may require alteration at the
applicant’s expense.
3.6
Transco indicate that existing equipment may require to be protected or diverted.
3.7
One letter of representation has been received from the occupier of 107 Rosehall Road raising
the following issues;
1. Concern that the access track connecting Rosehall Road to Deas Road is kept open to the
public.
2. Concern that any disruption to this route would cause a great deal of inconvenience to the
public.
4.
4.1
4.2
The Adopted Shotts Local Plan 1982 designates the site as ‘Rural Land’ and policy RUR 2
applies. Policy RUR 2 details a general prohibition against new residential proposals unless it
can be justified against certain criteria, including (1) development for the management and use
of land for the purposes including agriculture and landscape improvement and (2) semiagricultural uses (such as breeding kennels) with a presumption against associated residential
development unless it can be shown to be subsidiary to the main use and cannot practically be
located within an existing community.
4.3
The information supplied in the supporting statement referred to in paragraph 1.4 above forms
insufficient justification in terms of a new dwelling in the countryside and provides no information
on any agricultural or business operations that may be associated with the proposed dwelling.
The visual appearance of some of the outbuildings is not particularly attractive, however, in
general terms, the visual quality of the ‘landscape’ at this location is not particularly poor. It
should also be noted that the assessment of application S/05/01107/FUL concluded that
conversion of an outbuilding to a dwelling would not be acceptable. In relation to agricultural
uses, as indicated above no justification has been supplied despite the applicant being invited to
submit further justification in relation to the proposed development. The application is therefore
considered contrary to policy RUR 2 of the adopted Shotts Local Plan 1982.
4.4
The up-to-date policy position that found in the emerging Southern Area Local Plan Finalised
Draft Modified (2001, 2004 & 2005). 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 agriculture, forestry, renewable energy, outdoor leisure and recreation,
telecommunications or other appropriate rural uses. Policy HSGl2 Housing in the Greenbelt
and Countryside provides scope for new houses in the Countryside, which do not form
replacement dwellings, but only where there is a proven operational need in accordance with
the criteria set out in policy ENV8.
In light of this, the applicant was invited to provide additional justification for the new dwelling,
however, no evidence of any agricultural or business operation associated with the proposed
dwelling, the long term viability of any business and detailed requirements for the necessity for a
4.5
dwellinghouse on-site to properly manage any associated business operations, has been
forthcoming. In the lack of such evidence and a detailed business plan I consider that there is
no justification for a new dwellinghouse at this location. Should these matters have been
established a period of temporary accommodation would also be required, as well as the
promotion of a Section 75 Legal Agreement to tie the occupation of the proposed new dwelling
to someone engaged full-time in an appropriate rural business, and to prevent the subdivision of
the proposed dwelling from the associated land. These issues have not been addressed by the
applicant. In the absence of any satisfactory operational need to justify an additional
dwellinghouse at this location I consider it to constitute unjustified sporadic development in the
countryside contrary to policies ENV8 and HSG12. Approval of such an application would set an
undesirable precedent and it should be noted that similar applications have previously been
refused in this area.
4.6
Policies HSG10, HSG12 and TR13 require suitable provision for access 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 access in terms of width, visibility and geometry and additional traffic
would be generated. My Transportation Team Leader has recommended refusal of the
application given the substandard access proposed.
4.7
In terms of national planning policy SPP15 (Planning for Rural Development) and SPP3
(Housing) are relevant in this case. SPP3 states (paragraph 40) that the Scottish Executive
looks to planning authorities to safeguard the character of the countryside, and that ‘countryside
around towns’ policies play an important role. SPP15 states (paragraph 25) that a key planning
principle is to focus most additional housing at accessible locations, and the proposed dwelling
does not meet this particular criteria. The application therefore is considered contrary to national
planning policy.
4.8
In terms of the points raised by the third party representation, the applicant has confirmed that
public use of the access track between Rosehall Road and Deas Road will not be affected by
this proposal.
4.9
Scottish Water, Scottish Power and Transco have offered no objections to the proposed
development and the condition recommended by my Protective Services Section in relation to
the submission of a site investigation report could be imposed if planning permission were to be
granted.
4.10
In terms of the points raised in the applicants supporting statement, I can confirm that there has
been no change in circumstances since the previous refusal of application S/05/01107/FUL.
There are no new build proposals in the vicinity of the site and no approved developments on
land zoned ENV 8 (Countryside Around Towns) similar to the circumstances of the proposed
development. Whilst the application site is a former piggery, it is not considered to be a
brownfield site and is zoned as stated previously as ENV 8 (Countryside Around Towns). The
applicant has provided no justification or information on any agricultural or business operations
that may be associated with the proposed dwelling and as such the application fails to meet the
criteria set in the relevant local plan policies as highlighted in the assessment above. In terms of
national planning policy the application has been assessed in paragraph 4.7 above and is
considered contrary to the guidance as set out in the relevant national planning policy.
4.11
The current application does not comply with policies designed to protect countryside within
which it lies, and I therefore consider that Development Plan policies preclude the granting of
consent for residential development. For the reasons identified this is an inappropriate form of
development in the countryside and I do not consider that other material considerations justify
departing from the presumption against development. The application is contrary to policies
ENV 8, HSG 10, HSG 12 and TR 13 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft Modified
(2001, 2004 & 2005) and is therefore recommended for refusal.
4.12
The applicant has requested that the application be subject to a site visit and hearing.

North Lanarkshire Council - Committee Administration System

Transcription

Similar documents

A Planning Guide to Working From Home

Open living room

city place

23 Bramley Drive,Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 3GA

BIRKDALE VILLAGE | HUNTERSVILLE, NC MIXED-USE

Amendments to L. E. Kastner`s Edition of Drummond`s Poems

Get the pdf HERE.

Fright Nights Show - Gatlinburg Cabin Rentals

Residential Fire Safety Kits

Rafco Exceptional Service