North Lanarkshire Council

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT

Plann i ng Ap p Ii cat ions for consideration of Planring and Environment Committee

Committee Date : 1gthJuly 2006

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

13 APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 19 JULY 2006

Page Application No. Applicant DevelopmentlLocus Recommendation No.

17 N/06/0081YFUL Murray Brady Change of Use from Transport Grant Depot to Transport Depot and Waste Recycling Facility 20A Garrell Road Kilsyth

N/06/00889/FUL Arqiva 3 Metre Extension to 22.5 Metre Grant High Telecommunications Mast Request for Site and the Installation of 3 No. Visit Antenna and 1 No. Equipment No papers issued Cabinet - Glaudhall Farm Drumcavel Road Muirhead

22 N/06/00973/FUL Mr Chan Change of Use from Grant Office/Showroom to Hot Food Take-Awa y 58 Lochinvar Road Greenfaulds Cumbernauld

29 Vodafone Ltd Installation of One Transmission Grant Disc (300mm) Fleming House 2 Tryst Road Town Centre Cumbernauld

33 C/06/00359/FUL M. Cameron Erection of Temporary Building for Grant Use as Hot Food Take-Away at 38 Flowerhill Industrial Estate Road, Flowerhill Industrial Estate, Airdrie

37 C/06/00442/OUT Mr & Mrs B Residential Development Grant Hopkins Comprising 12 Plots (in Outline) at Glengowan House, Gowan Brae. Caldercruix

44 C/06/00746/REM Mario Rea Erection of Residential Grant Development (40 Units) at 50 Main Street, Plains

53 C/06/0083O/FUL Caldervale Extension to Existing Industrial Grant Forge & CO Ltd Building at Caldervale Forge, Dunrobin Road, Clarkston, Airdrie.

58 C/O6/00839/FUL Waste Erection of 60m high Anemometry Grant Recycling Group mast (Mast No.2) at Greengairs Landfill Site, Meikle Drumgray Road, Greengairs

63 C/06/00840/FUL Waste Erection of 60m high Anemometry Grant Recycling Group mast (Mast No.1) at Greengairs Landfill Site, Meikle Drumgray Road, Greengairs

14 APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 19 JULY 2006

Page Application No. Applicant DevelopmentlLocus Recommendation No.

68 C/06/008940UT A.Bartlett & Erection of Retail Unit, Laying out Grant Sons of Car Parking, and Alterations to Existing Access at Former Townhead Filling Station, Motherwell Street, Airdrie

74 C/06/00936/FUL T-Mobile (U K) Installation of 15M Grant Ltd c/o Stappard Telecommunications Monopole Howes Including Ancillary Equipment Cabinets at Riggend Farm, Stirling Road, Airdrie

79 S/04/0 15 16/F UL Galloway & Conversion of Existing Mill into a Grant MacLeod Dwellinghouse and Conversion of Adjacent Old Mill Cottage Outbuilding into a Dwellinghouse Allanton Mill, Old Mill Road, Allanton,

S/O6/00404/FUL Bett Homes Erection of 22 Semi - Grant (Central Detached/Terraced Request for Site Visit and Scotland) Ltd Dwellinghouses Hearing Site South of Existing No papers issued 'Ladywell Road' Site Via James Street, Motherwell

87 S/06/00707/FUL Meridian Erection of Flatted Development Grant Residential Comprising Two Blocks, Access Road and Landscaping Land To The North Of 21 - 27 Bonkle Road, Newmains

95 S/06/00753/FUL R Coke Erection of Dwellinghouse With Refuse (P) Detached Double Garage, Stables and Septic Tank Plot 2 Gertrudebank, A71, Overtown

104 S/06/00762/FUL R Coke Erection of Dwellinghouse with Refuse (P) Detached Double Garage, Stables and Septic Tank Plot 1 Gertrudebank, A71, Overtown

113 S/06/00935/FUL Khalid Shah Change of Use from Class 1 Refuse Retail to Hot Food Takeaway 265 North Dryburgh Road, Wishaw

S/06/00943/FUL Mr & Mrs J Erection of Semi-Detached Grant Walker Dwellinghouse Request for Site Visit & Windyknowe, Stewart Grove, Hearing Harthill No papers issued

120 S/O6/00949/FUL William Rundell Change of Use from Public Open Grant Space to Private Driveway 32 Coldstream Crescent, Wishaw

15 APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 19 JULY 2006

Page Application No. Applicant Development/Locus Recommendation No.

126 S/06/00968/FUL Hikmet Onal Change of Use from Shop to Hot Refuse Food Takeaway Request for Site Visit & 31A St Brides Avenue, Hearing Uddingston

133 S/06/00974/FUL General Motors Formation of Beer Grant Social Club Garden/Smoking Area and Erection of Canopy General Motors Employers Social Club, Melrose Avenue, Holytown

(P) S/06/00753/FUL, If granted, refer to Scottish Ministers (Contrary to Development Plan) S/06/00762/FUL, If granted, refer to Scottish Minister (Contrary to Development Plan)

16 Application No: N/06/00815/FUL

Date Registered: 15th May 2006

Applicant: Murray Brady Clo Environmental Troubleshooters 2 Old Coach Road East Kilbride G74 4DP

Development: Part Change of Use from Transport Depot to Transport Depot and Waste Recycling Facility

Location: 20A Garrell Road Kilsyth

Ward: 65 Queenzieburn and Kilsyth West Councillor Jean Jones

Grid Reference: 271 241 677596

File Reference: N/06/00815/FUL

Site History: 06/00235/FUL : Construction of a Storage Shed Granted in April 2006.

Development Plan: The site is covered by Industrial Policies in the Kilsyth Local Plan 1999.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: Scottish Water (Comments)

Representations: One Representation Letter

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 24th May 2006

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1. 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 the development and method of operations shall comply with the approved application Supporting Statement or such other scheme as is approved in writing by the Planning Authority and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and public wellbeing.

17 20A Garrell Road Kilsyth Change of Use from Transport Depot to Transport Depot and Waste Recycling Facility

18 3. That there shall be no incineration of waste materials on site.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and public wellbeing.

4. That the waste recycling operation shall not extend outwith the approved area.

Reason: In order to ensure that the full site can accomodate both waste recycling and transport operations.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 15th May 2006

Memo from Roads (Northern Area) received 22nd May 2006 Letter from Scottish Water received 26th May 2006

Letter from Mr John T Alford, "Redcroft", 1 Glasgow Road, Kilsyth, G65 9AE received 12th June 2006.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Martin Dean at 01236 616459.

DATE : lothJuly 2006

19 APPLICATION NO. N1061008151FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.1 The application is for the formation of a waste transfer facility on the rear section of the existing transport yard at 20A Garrell Road, Kilsyth, within the Burnside Industrial Estate. It is proposed to form a receiving bay and five storage bays. Building and construction materials will be brought in by heavy goods vehicles and skips and will be sorted both mechanically and manually to allow the recycling of metals, timber, cardboardlpaper and glass. In the companion SEPA License Application it is proposed that there will be a maximum of 100 tons brought on to the site per day which equates to approximately 10 loads.

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 the relevant Local Plan policies.

2.2 The site is covered by the following policieslproposals in the Kilsyth Local Plan 1999 :-

IB I: This is a defined industrial area where there is a presumption in favour of industrial and business development.

IB 3: The Council will support the development of the site for industrial purposes.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Summaries of consultation responses are as follows :-

1. Scottish Water: No objections subject to satisfactory sewerage arrangements.

2. My Transportation Section has no objections in principle, although there is some concern that the waste recycling facility can satisfactorily co-exist with the existing haulage operation. In this respect, the applicants have given details concerning the ability of the site to accommodate both the existing and proposed uses. A planning condition requires that the waste recycling facility does not extend beyond its approved boundaries in order to ensure that sufficient space remains for the transport operation.

3.2 One letter of objection has been received from a resident of Glasgow Road, with the following points being raised :-

0 There is the potential for loss of residential amenity through views into the site, noise and extended working hours.

Comments: The application site is almost 400m from the objector’s house. It is not anticipated that there will be any adverse effects on residential amenity as the site is within an industrial estate and is over 1OOm from the nearest house.

20 In view of the industrial location of the application site, it is not considered necessary to restrict hours of operation or vehicle numbers beyond those proposed by the applicant in his Statement of Operations for the site.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 All planning decisions must be made in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The proposed waste transfer facility accords with the Local Plan zoning.

4.2 Waste recycling is promoted both nationally and locally. The application site is considered to be a suitable location for a waste recycling facility with there being no anticipated adverse effects to occupants of adjacent premises or to more distant residents.

4.3 Notwithstanding the objection received from one resident of Glasgow Road, it is recommended that planning permission be granted.

21 Application No: N/06/00973/FUL

Date Registered: 6th June 2006

Applicant: Mr Chan 185 Birch Road Abron hill Cumbernauld

Agent Gordon T Hotchkiss 12 Garrioch Drive Glasgow

Development: Change of Use from Office/Showroom to Hot Food Take-Away

Location: 58 Lochinvar Road Greenfaulds Cumbernauld

Ward: 61 Carbrain West and Greenfaulds Councillor William Goldie

Grid Reference: 275097 673177

File Reference: N/06/00973/FU L

Site History: N/97/0021O/FUL: Change of Use From Vacant Commercial Premises to Hot Food Preparation and Delivery Premises - Refused 1 October 1997 N/05/00759/FUL: Use of Building as Hot Food Take-Away - Refused 12 July 2005. Appeal dismissed by SEIRU in December 2005. N/06/00131/FUL: Use of Building for Hot Food Preparation and Delivery- Refused on 26 April 2006

Development Plan: Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993, Policies HG4 (Residential Amenity) Policy TRIO (Parking) and NPPG 8 and PAN 46 apply.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: 52 letters of representation, including one with 41 signatories.

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 14th June 2006

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions: -

1. 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 development will be carried out in accordance with the approved plans and shall not operate until the footpath link, the bin and the wall mounted light have been installed.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

22 Representation Received From: - Councillor Wiliam Goldie & Greenfaulds & Luggiebank Community Council -

Ta ke-iway *Representation

23 3. That at all times the window on the north east elevation shall be kept void of any advertisement posters or signs.

Reason: To enable natural surveillance of the car park area.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 6th June 2006

Memo from Roads (Northern Area) received 16 June 2006 Memo from Head of Protective Services received 22 June 2006

Letter from Councillor Wm. Goldie, Civic Centre, Motherwell, MLI ITW received 14th June 2006. Letter from Mr & Mrs Durham,23 Ashiestiel Place, Greenfaulds, received 15th June 2006. Letter from Mr & Mrs G Moffat,3 Ashiestiel Road, Greenfaulds, received 19th June 2006. Letter from Mr David Docherty,5 Ashiestiel Road, Greenfaulds, received 19th June 2006. Letter from Owner/Occupier,3 Ashiestiel Road, Greenfaulds, received 26th June 2006. Letter from Greenfaulds & Luggiebank Community Council, 26 Scott Drive, Greenfaulds, received 2gth June 2006.

Letters from 47 local residents of Greenfaulds supporting the application, received on 30thJune 2006

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Erin Louise Deeley at 01236 616464.

DATE : lothJuly 2006

24 APPLICATION NO. N/06/00973/FUL

REPORT

I. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The application site is a vacant single storey building on Lochinvar Road with a floor space of 57m2 and adjoins a licensed convenience store/post office. The community hall and church lies to the south west of the property. The building is surrounded by residential properties, with the nearest being approximately 24 metres away. The current access to the site is from the north west elevation. To the north east is a public car park and the rear of the Swan Inn Public House.

1.2 The proposal is for the change of use from a vacant office/showroom to a hot food take away that would be opened from noon to 12 midnight. The proposed access would be at the north east of the building facing on to the public car park which would be connected by a mono blocked path. There are 4 proposed car parking spaces to the front of the building and one to the north east side of the building.

1.3 The most recent previous application for a change of use of the premises to a hot food takeaway was refused by the Council in July 2005 and the subsequent appeal was dismissed by the Scottish Executive Inquiry Reporters Unit in December 2005. The application which was refused by the Council in April 2006 was in respect of a hot food preparation and delivery business and did not involved a take-away shop for the general public.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The 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 In the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993, the site lies within a defined residential area where the following policies apply :- Policy HG4 - There will be a presumption in favour of developments of an ancillary nature which enhance the provision for local community facilities and services. The introduction or extension of a non-residential activity will not be accepted if likely to lead to a loss of amenity; and Policy TR6 - There will be a general presumption against any development which would substantially adversely affect the surrounding area by virtue of its car parking or traffic generation implications. Adequate provision of parking in all changes of use must be made in conformity with NLC Traffic and Transportation requirements

2.3 In terms of NPPG 8 (Town Centres & Retailing), generally hot food shops are most appropriately sited in secondary shopping areas or in areas of mixed commercial development. They are unlikely to be acceptable in primary shopping areas close to housing. In terms of PAN 46 (Planning for Crime Prevention), buildings should be located to maximise natural observation. The fewer the number of people in an area, the lower the level of social interaction and control so the risk of detection reduces and the opportunities for crime increase.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 My Traffic and Transportation and Protective Services Sections were consulted on the previous applications for a change of use to a hot food take away. Both had concerns regarding the proposal with respect to the location of the public customer access and the designloperation of

25 the ventilation system. This current application addresses their previous concerns and, accordingly, neither has objected.

3.2 There have been five letters of objection received, one of which was from the local Councillor and one from Greenfaulds and Luggiebank Community Council. Furthermore, there was a petition lodged with 41 signatures in opposition to the proposal. The following concerns were raised :-

0 The hot food shop would result in increased traffic in the area and there is a elderly home adjacent to the proposal

Comment: A previous application 05/00759/FUL for the same change of use was refused in July 2005. The applicant lodged an appeal, and the SEIRU Reporter (while dismissing the appeal) commented that parking provision is generous in the area mainly because the public house car park is not in demand by its customers. It was also noted that to some extent there would be home deliveries. Furthermore, my Traffic and Transportation Section suggested that the access to the building be from the north east elevation. This has been addressed in this application and they therefore have no objections to the proposal.

0 The lighting is very poor in the area, making it feel unsafe, particularly for the elderly residents. Crime is already a major problem in the area.

Comment: One of the reasons for refusal of a previous application was that the car park suffered minimal natural surveillance. The proposed access to the unit is from the north east elevation where, in addition to a door, there is a proposed wall mounted light and a window. This elevation faces on to the car park. The issue of natural surveillance has therefore been addressed. The premises are located within a cluster of community uses. The public house is open late, as is the community hall and convenience store: evening activity already occurs which adds to a sense of security.

0 Litter is a problem in the area already, this proposal would only make this problem worse

Comment: The Reporter commented in his appeal decision that the installation of a litter bin would help encourage responsible disposal of customer waste. This application demonstrates a proposed bin to be located close to the access of the hot food take away and therefore addresses the Reporters concern. However, there can be no guarantee that increased litter would not occur.

0 The community hall would lose the support of the local residents if the change of use was granted permission

Comment: The amount of custom and usage of the community hall is not a material planning consideration. In any event, I am not persuaded that a hot food take away would discourage residents from using the community hall.

0 The proposal is detrimental to residential amenity

Comment: The impact on residential amenity had been mentioned in the above comments and it is considered that the likely adverse impact dose not warrant a refusal of permission.

26 3.3 It should also be noted that 47 letters of support for the proposed hot food take-away have been received. The standard letters, from various addresses in Greenfaulds (Lochinvar Road, Ashiestiel Place & Road, and Marmion Place & Road) support the proposal on the following grounds :-

I. The hot food take-away would introduce a welcome addition to the limited facilities in the local shopping area and would make use of a vacant unit which in turn could help revitalise the area.

2. The proposal will help bring people into the shopping area, particularly in the early evening thus regenerating the area and giving some surveillance to the surrounding area and car park which in the past has suffered from anti-social behaviour.

3. The proposal, by virtue of its design and proposed odour filtration system would not be intrusive in this mixed commercial / residential area.

4. There is adequate parking adjacent to the proposal and this use will help to oversee the parking area.

5. The use is in accordance with the Development Plan for this mixed commercial I residential area in Greenfaulds.

3.4 It should be noted that the Reporter for the 2005 appeal commented that there was no indication that the applicant was in control of the land immediately outside the proposed north east customer entrance and there was no footway. In the current application, the plans indicate a 2.0 metre wide path between the proposed door and the existing public footpath across ground in NLC ownership. The applicant has formally notified the Head of Property Services relative to the crossing of Council land.

4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 Planning applications must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case, I consider the proposal complies with relevant development plan policies, particularly HG4, TR6 of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993. The proposal also complies with NPPG8 and PAN 46.

4.2 This application has addressed the reasons why the previous applications were refused. A take away shop could be expected within a local service centre such as this. It should be noted that there was a take away located within the Swan Inn which in the past. The Reporter for the 2005 appeal stated that a proposed take away shop would be likely to serve a local market and therefore could be seen as ancillary to the residential area and therefore complies with policy HG4.

4.3 The access is now from the north east elevation of the building, facing on to the car park. There is a proposed path that will connect the building to the car park. This complies with policy TR6 and the previous requirement from my Traffic and Transportation Section in the 2005 application. The public car park and the proposed parking spaces at the front of the building are considered sufficient to accommodate the parking requirements of this change of use.

4.4 A window and wall mounted light are proposed, adding to a sense of security and natural surveillance over the car park and complies with guidance in PAN 46.

27 4.5 In responding to previous applications, my Protective Services Section indicated that measures needed to be taken to control noise. Alterations to the development proposals, specifically changing the point of access to the unit, will mean that any noise that will be generated will be in the car park, further away from residential properties and nearer the Swan Inn where some volume of noise is expected. Charcoal filters to remove odours have been proposed (it was noted by the reporter in the 2005 appeal that no charcoal filters were specified) and this should address the issue of cooking smells. Furthermore, in accordance with the previous recommendations of the Council and the Reporter, a bin will be installed as part of the development. This should encourage the responsible disposal of rubbish.

4.6 Notwithstanding the legitimate concerns of some local residents, Councillor Goldie and the Community Council, it is recommended that permission be granted for a hot food take-away at 58 Lochinvar Road, Greenfaulds.

28 Application No: N/06/01037/FUL

Date Registered: 15th June 2006

Applicant: Vodafone Ltd Clo Mono Consultants 21 Gordon Street Glasgow G13PL

Agent Mono Consultants 21 Gordon Street Glasgow G1 3PL

Development: Installation of One Transmission Disc (300mm dia.)

Location: Fleming House 2 Tryst Road Town Centre Cumbernauld

Ward: 60 Carbrain East Councillor William Homer

Grid Reference: 276029674604

File Reference: N/06/01037/FUL

Site History: N/04/01493/FUL: Installation of 3 Rooftop Antenna- Granted 13 October 2004

Development Plan: The site is covered by policies SHI-8 (Shopping) of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: None

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1. 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.

29 2 Tryst Road, Town Centre, Cumbernauld I:i ,250 ' Installation of One Transmission Disc (300mm)

30 Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 15th June 2006

NPPG 19 : Radio Telecommunications, 2001 PAN 62 : Radio Telecommunications, 2001 Cumbernauld Local Plan, 1993

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Erin Louise Deeley at 01236 616464.

DATE : lothJuly 2006

31 APPLICATION NO. N/06/01037/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The application site is located on the roof of Fleming House, Cumbernauld and is a current telecommunications site.

1.2 The proposal is for the installation of one transmission disc measuring 300mm diameter.

2. DeveloDment Plan

2.1 The 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 covered by shopping centre policies in terms of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993. Policy SHI supports the town centre’s shopping role and Policy SH8 seeks to improve the environment of the town centre.

2.3 It should be noted that there are no specific telecommunications policies in the Cumbernauld Local Plan.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 No consultations were considered necessary in this case, and no representations have been received.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 As there are no relevant policies in the Local Plan, 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, and being an existing telecommunication site accords with the guidance which encourages site sharing. The application has been accompanied by the appropriate Declaration of Conformity with ICNIRP Public Exposure Guidelines.

4.2 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

32 Application No: C/06/00359/FU L

Date Registered: 16th May 2006

Applicant: M. Cameron Unit 7A Flowerhill Industrial Estate Ai rdrie ML6 6BH

Development: Use of Temporary Building as Hot Food Take-Away

Location: 38 Flowerhill Industrial Estate Road Flowerhill Industrial Estate Airdrie North Lanarkshire ML6 6BH

Ward: 43 Airdrie Central Councillor James Logue

Grid Reference: 276735665827

File Reference: C/PL/A IB 56 7/Y/GA/L R

Site History:

Development Plan: The application site is zoned as ECON 2 (Existing General Industrial Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: None

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 31st May 2006

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1. That the permission hereby granted is for a temporary period only and shall expire on 16th June 201 1.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control, in order to safeguard amenity.

33 34 Background Papers:

Memo from Protective Services Section received sthJune 2006. Memo from the Transportation Section received 27'h June 2006

Application form and plans received 6th March 2006

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Gordon Arthur at 01236 812375.

Date: 10 July 2006

35 APPLICATION NO. C1061003591FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I This application seeks planning permission for the use of a temporary (portacabin-type) building as a hot food take away within the yard of Unit 7(a) 38 Flowerhill Street, Flowerhill Industrial Estate. The yard forms an area within a larger industrial estate.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The application site is zoned as ECON 2 (Existing General Industrial Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. There are no strategic issues.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 As a bad neighbour development the application was advertised in the Airdrie & Coatbridge Advertiser (31/05/2006). No letters of representation were received.

3.2 Protective Services and Transportation were consulted and had no objections.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The proposal is use a temporary building currently within the tarmaced yard of an industrial unit. The footprint site appears to not conflict with the requirements of the core business activity. The structure is located along the southern curtilage boundary of the existing unit and will be inaccessible to customers from the adjacent internal footway within the industrial estate due to a palisade fence, which encloses the site. The facility will be located within the yard compound and customers will have to take access from within the yard area.

4.2 Mobile snack vans are generally a common and acceptable feature on industrial estates. Although this facility is located within a temporary building it is noted that such facilities provide a useful service to local employees. There are no anticipated overriding road safety problems, with the structure being located off the public road. Similarly it is not anticipated that there will be any amenity problems in the immediate area being located within an industrial estate.

4.3 I would therefore recommend that the hot food take away use be granted subject to the condition stated.

36 Application No: Cl06l00442lOUT

Date Registered: 17th March 2006

Applicant: Mr & Mrs Brian Hopkins Glengowan House Gowan Brae Caldercruix Ai rd rie North Lanarkshire ML6 7RB

Development: Residential Development Comprising Individual Plots (In 0 utl ine)

Location: Glengowan House Gowan Brae Caldercruix Airdrie North Lanarkshire ML6 7RB

Ward: 46 Plains And Caldercruix Councillor Thomas Morgan

Grid Reference: 282782668003

File Reference: C/PL/CCG78000/1JlLR

Site History:

Development Plan: The site is covered by policy HG9: Existing Residential Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: SEPA (No objections) Scottish Water (No objections)

Representations: 2 Letters received

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1. 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.

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

37 38 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; (b) the design and location of all boundary walls and fences (c) the laying out of the plots, including driveways; (d) the provision of drainage works; (e) the disposal of sewage; (f) details of existing trees, shrubs and hedgerows to be removedhetained; (9) details of existing and proposed site levels.

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

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 the permission hereby granted relates solely to an unspecified number of individual plots and notwithstanding the requirements of condition 2 above, a further planning application shall be submitted to the Planning Authority detailing the setting out of the site as individual plots and no work shall start on site until these details have been approved in writing.

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

5. That the dimensions of each and every plot within the site 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 within each plot.

6. 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.

7 That on completion of any remedial works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 6, a certificate (signed by an Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any such remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the submitted details.

Reason: To ensure the site is free of contamination

39 8. That before the development starts, full details of the location and design of the drainage scheme to be installed shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for written approval, and these shall include full details of the location and design of the surface water drainage scheme, and for the avoidance of doubt the scheme shall comply with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency's principals of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS).

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area and to ensure that the proposed drainage system complies with the latest guidance on SUDS.

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

Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory site drainage arrangements

10. That no part of the development hereby permitted shall exceed 2 storeys in height and the dwellinghouses shall all have traditional double-pitched roofs.

Reason: To define the permission.

11. That the proposed carriageway shall be 5.5 metres wide with 2 metre wide footways on both sides and terminating in a 21 metre diameter turning circle.

Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access facilities.

12. That all driveways shall be 5 metres wide by 6 metres long (minimum) and be fully paved over at least the first 2 metres.

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

13. That visitor parking shall be provided on the basis of 30% (4 off) and these shall be positioned in laybys, to be approved by the Planning Authority.

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

14. That Gowanbrae shall be realigned and widened as shown on the amended drawing dated lgth. June 2006 so that the proposed new carriageway within the site shall be a continuation of Gowanbrae, and these works shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Local Highway and Planning Authorities before work on the dwellings is commenced..

Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access facilities.

15. That all tree within the application site shall be retained and not lopped, topped, felled, or otherwise affected, without the agreement in writing of the Planning Authority.

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

16. Notwithstanding the details requested in condition 2 above a 2 metre high screen fence shall be provided along the entire western boundary of the site prior to the occupation of any houses which back onto that boundary.

40 Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 17th March 2006 Monklands District Local Plan 1991

Memo from Transportation received 28th April 2006 Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 18th January 2006 Letter from Scottish Water received 12'h January 2006 Letter from Scottish Power received 13'h January 2006 Letter from British Gas received 30thDecember 2006 Letter from Mr & Mrs J Bell, 99 Gowan Brae, Caldercruix, Airdrie, ML6 7RB, received 23rdstMarch2006. Letter from Mr AD Johnston, 4 Arthur Gardens, Caldercruix, Airdrie ML6 7RN, received 31 March 2006

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr tan Johnston at 01236 812382.

Date: 10 July 2006

41 APPLICATION NO. C/06/00442/OUT

REPORT

Description of Site and Proposal

The application site measures 0.78 hectares and currently contains a single large detached dwellinghouse set in its own substantial garden grounds. The site is located to the east of the main settlement of Caldercruix and is accessed directly from Gowanbrae. The site slopes gradually downwards in a north to south direction and is bounded to the north and west by residential properties, and to the east and south by fields. Hillend Reservoir is located to the south east of the application site.

The proposal is seeking outline permission for the creation of up to 12 individual house plots with associated new site access road served directly from the existing Gowanbrae public road. While the submitted site layout plan has delineated individual plot areas varying in size with the smallest being 418 sq. metres to the largest at 1157 sq. metres, this plan is only for information purposes and does not form part of the submission under consideration. The internal site road will serve each individual plot will be constructed to adoptable standards i.e. 5 metre wide with 2 metre footways either side and incorporating a turning circle.

To accommodate the proposal the existing dwellinghouse on site will require to be demolished.

Development Plan

The site is covered by policy HG9: Existing Residential Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991, There are no strategic issues.

Consultations and Representations

Neither SEPA nor Scottish Water have offered any objection to this proposal subject to the site foul drainage being connected to the public foul sewer and the surface water being treated in accordance with the principles of the “SUDS Design Manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland”. Scottish Power and British Gas offered no objection to the proposal.

NLC Transportation Section has highlighted that Gowanbrae is unsuitable for further development but have recommended specific conditions to be placed on any subsequent planning permission. NLC Pollution Control Section has recommended a site investigation survey to determine the stability of the site.

Following the standard neighbour notification procedures one letter of objection was received against this proposal. The relevant points of objection are as follows: a. any proposed dwellinghouse in the plot adjacent to Gowanbrae would block the view, lighting and privacy cf the property on the north side of the road. b. The inevitable increase in traffic created by this development would be detrimental to the safety of children and the increased noise would shatter the peaceful nature of the area. c. The limited width of Gowanbrae would make reversing movement onto that road difficult and dangerous.

A further letter was received from another party in which while no objection was made to the proposal the writer requested that the existing established trees along the boundary of the site be retained and that adequate boundary screen fencing be erected along the sites western boundary with the adjacent housing estate.

42 4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 provides that in making any determination under the Planning Act, regard has to be had to the development plan. In particular, the determination shall be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In respect of this proposal policy HG9 is appropriate together with the design guidance on new housing.

4.2 The site is located within an area designated for residential purposes in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 and therefore in policy terms the proposal is considered acceptable. Taken also that the adjacent lands (to the west) have previously been developed for similar (residentrial) purposes then in principle the proposed use is also considered acceptable at this location. Having been considered in the light of the relevant Design Guidance on “New Housing Areas” the layout of the site, in terms of road detail, is being proposed to the standards required by the Roads Authority. Being in outline, the proposal cannot be considered against the criteria for individual dwelling/window positions etc. as these are matters that would be considered at any subsequent “reserved matters” stage. However, the indicative individual plot dimensions are comparable with those of the adjacent estate cul-de-sac development and will easily accommodate standard sized dwellinghouses and adequate levels of front and rear gardens.

4.3 With regard to the points of objection submitted the following comments are made in response: a. It is often an inevitable consequence of development that loss of open outlook from existing premises will result although this in itself is not a justification for refusing a proposal. At this time it is not known where the dwellings will be positioned within the individual plots as these matters will be considered at a subsequent “reserved matters” stage should this application be granted. It is at that stage of the process that issues such as privacy and daylight impacts can properly be considered. b. Again, increase in noise levels and traffic movement are inevitable consequences of development. However, the applicant has sought to comply with the requirements of the Roads Authority in terms of road and footpath widths both within the application site and the connections into the new roadlfootpaths to ensure safety of vehicularlpedestrian movement. c. The section of Gowanbrae opposite the objectors dwelling is currently of sub-standard width, currently making the reversing of vehicles from that driveway difficult. The proposal under consideration seeks to increase the width of that section of road to the benefit of both the objector (in terms of reversing manoeuvres) and the general public.

4.4 Having regard to the additional letter received in which it was requested that the existing tree cover be retained along the boundary of the site and adequate screen fencing be provided, these matters will be conditioned appropriately on any planning permission granted.

4.5 Taking all of the above matters into consideration then the proposal is considered compliant in terms of the Local Plan and accords with the general principles of the Design Guidance on New Housing Areas. The points of objection are noted but do not merit the refusal of this application. I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to the attached conditions.

43 Application No: C/06/00746/REM

Date Registered: 03.05.2006

Applicant: Mario Rea Clo Agent

Agent The John Russell Partnership Anderson House Dundyvan Road Coatbridge ML5 IDB

Development: Erection of Residential Development (41 Units)

Location: Express Dairies 50 Main Street Plains Airdrie North Lanarkshire ML6 7JE

Ward: 46 Plains and Caldercruix Councillor T Morgan

Grid Reference: 279315 666557

File Reference: PLM03000050/1JlLR

Site History: 05/01029/0UT Change of Use of Industrial Land to Residential (In Outline) Granted I4th September 2005

Development Plan: The site is covered by policy ECON 2:Existing General Industrial Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: Scottish Environment Protection Agency (No objections) Scottish Water (No objections) British Gas (No objections) Scottish Power (No objections) Network Rail (No objections)

Representations: 2 Letters of Representation

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:.

1. 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.

44 Planning Ap plicat ion N0. C/06/00746/RE M

Erection of Residential Development (41 units)

Express Dairies 50 Main Street Plains Airdrie * Representations Site Area 0.02 HA

45 2. 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, including any modifications as may be required.

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

3. That, notwithstanding the requirements of condition 2 above, a feature wall shall be erected along the frontage of the site corresponding with the rear boundaries of plots 1-7, details of which shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required, before the development hereby permitted starts.

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

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, including any modifications as may be required.

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

5. That before the development starts, full details of the location and design of the drainage scheme to be installed shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for written approval, and these shall include full details of the location and design of the surface water drainage scheme, and for the avoidance of doubt the scheme shall comply with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency’s principals of Sustainable .Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS).

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area and to ensure that the proposed drainage system complies with the latest guidance on SUDS.

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

Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory site drainage arrangements

7. That before the development hereby granted starts, detail of the design and method of construction of the proposed junction alterations on Main Street and the new access road serving the development shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

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

8. That for the avoidance of doubt, the proposed site access, as required under the terms of condition 7 above, shall be the sole means of access to the development site and if removed to accommodate works for the reopening of the Airdrie Bathgate Railway shall revert to a landscaped amenity area.

Reason: To define the permission.

9. That the access arrangements described in Conditions 6 and 7 (the junction of the new access road with the A89 and any roundabout required) above shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to any construction work on dwellings being commenced.

Reason: To ensure the proper planned and phased development of the site, and in the interests of highway safety.

46 10. That all driveways shall be a minimum of 6 metres (long) by 5 metres (wide) shall be fully paved over at least the first 2 metres and, where sloping towards the public road shall include a drainage facility.

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

11. That a minimum of 2 in curtilage car parking spaces shall be provided within each plot and any garage shall require minimum internal dimensions of 3 metres by 6 metres to be considered as a parking space.

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

12. That a minimum of 8 visitor car parking spaces shall be provided and these shall be in the form of double lay-bys evenly distributed throughout the site.

Reason: To define the permission.

13. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a Phase 2 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.

14. That on completion of any remedial works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 6, a certificate (signed by an Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any such remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the submitted details.

Reason: To ensure the site is free of contamination

15. That before any of the dwellinghouses hereby granted are occupied, acoustic barriers shall be provided along the site's southern (4 metres high) and eastern boundaries (4.5 metres high), details of which shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, before any works start on site.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity and to enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects.

16. 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, including any modifications as may be required, 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 enable the Pianning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.

47 17. That prior to the occupation of the fourth last dwellinghouse 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 16 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.

Reason: In the interests of amenity

18. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme, for the provision of an equipped play area within the area hatched green on the approved plans shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and this shall include:- (a) details of the type and location of play equipment, seating and litter bins to be situated within the play area; (b) details of the surface treatment of the play area, including the location and type of safety surface to be installed; (c) details of the fences to be erected around the play area, (d) details of the phasing of these works.

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

19. That prior to the occupation of the fourth last dwellinghouse within the development hereby permitted, the play area approved under the terms of Condition 18 shall be fully completed.

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

20. 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 footpaths shown on the approved plans; (b) the proposed parking areas shown on the approved plans; (c) the proposed play area shown on the approved plans; (d) the proposed grassed, planted and landscaped areas shown on the approved plans; (e) the proposed fenceslwalls to be erected along the boundaries shown on the approved plans.

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

21. That prior to the occupation of the fourth last dwellinghouse within the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance scheme approved under the terms of Condition 20 shall be in operation.

Reason: To define the permission.

48 Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 3rd May 2006 Monklands District Local Plan 1991

Memo from the Transportation Section received 3'' July 2006 Memo from theprotective Services Section received 18th May 2006 Memo from Community Services received 19th May 2006 Memo from Education received 16th June 2006 Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 30th June 2006 Letter from Scottish Water received 23rd May 2006 Letter from British Gas received 18th May 2006 Letter from Scottish Power received 17th May 2006 email from Network Rail received 1Oth May 2006 Letter from Planterra, 16 St. Ninian's, Lanark, received gth May 2006. Letter from Wheel Services, 40 Main Street, Plains received 1lth May 2006

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact lan Johnston at 01236 812382.

Date: 10 July 2006

49 APPLICATION NO. C/06/00746/REM

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1 .I The application site extends to approximately 1.78 hectares (4.403 acres) and is located on the south side of Main Street, Plains at the western edge of the village. The site is bounded to the north by Main Street (A89), to the south and west by open fields and to the east by industrial premises. The site currently contains a large single storey industrial type building with attached office block on the westernmost elevation and a large surfaced car park to the north of the main building. A large service/dock-loading yard together with additional car parking is located to the south of the buildings.

1.2 The proposal is for the erection of 41 residential properties comprising 3 optional house types, all of which will be two storey in height with internal accommodation including a lounge, dining area, kitchen, WC, utility room and integral garage on the ground floor. On the upper floor 4 bedrooms (one with en-suite) and a bathroom will be provided. Externally the new build will be a mix of render and facing brick with concrete roof tiles. A dedicated play area is to be provided within the site.

1.3 Vehicular access to the site will be taken directly from the Main Street frontage of the site via a new roundabout arrangement formed to adoptable standards. To accommodate the proposed development the existing industrial buildings on site will require to be demolished and the site cleared.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site is covered by policy ECON 2: Existing General Industrial Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. There are no strategic issues raised.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Following the standard neighbour notification procedures 2 letters of representation were received in respect of this proposal. The main points raised are as follows: a. there is some confusion over an area within the north eastern part of the application site that appears on site to form part of the adjacent commercial operation (Wheel Services). b. The adjacent business (Rowan Timber) sometimes operates 24 hours a day and uses heavy fork-lift trucks on site. Taken also that there is a significant level of noise generated from the site then any potential residential development should take account of these factors and not affect the continued viability of that operation.

3.2 Neither Scottish Power nor British Gas (Transco) offered any objection to this proposal. SEPA and Scottish Water offered no objection to the proposal on the understanding that the foul drainage is connected to the public sewer and that surface water from the site is treated in accordance with the principles of the Sustainable Urban Drainage System Design Manual (SUDS).

50 3.3 The Transportation Section has offered no objection to the proposal subject to satisfactory site access arrangements and the Pollution Control Section have requested a full site investigation survey to determine any potential of contamination of the site and a noise assessment survey due to the close proximity of the site to residential properties. The Education Department has advised that while the anticipated level of school children, both primary and secondary, can currently be accommodated within existing educational facilities in future years it is anticipated that the increased roll will result in accommodation difficulties which will have to be resolved by the Council. The Community Services have highlighted the requirements for a play area within the site which can be accommodated.

4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 This is a Reserved Matters application pursuant to Outline Permission no.C/05/01029/FUL for the Change of Use of Industrial Land to Residential on this same site was considered acceptable by the Council on 14th September 2005. The principle of residential use is therefore established already.

4.2 Concerning the actual site detail, the proposals have met with the approval of the statutory consultees including SEPA and Scottish Water who are satisfied that the development can connect to the existing surface waterlfoul drainage system, The Transportation Section is satisfied with the proposed road detail including the formation of a new roundabout at the site access onto Main Street. The Pollution Control Section has been in discussion with the applicant in respect of the required Ground Investigation Report and the Environmental Noise Assessment. Following on from those discussions and the subsequent submission of the required reports the Pollution Control Section have accepted the proposed noise mitigation proposals along the site’s southern and eastern boundaries. The submitted Phase 1 Site Ground Investigation Desk Study concluded that it is possible that some contaminants may be present on site and, on the advice of the Pollution Control Section, a Phase 2 report will be required. A condition requiring this would be attached to any planning permission granted.

4.3 The application site is located directly to the east of an area of ground proposed to facilitate a new section of road to be formed as part of the Airdrie to Bathgate Railway Project to link Main Street with the southern part of the village. In discussion with Network Rail the applicant had initially proposed to connect directly into that new road to access the development site although given the uncertain timescale for implementation of the Railway project the applicant has reverted to the site access proposals (roundabout onto Main Street) previously accepted in the outline permission (ref: C/05/01029/OUT). Provision has however been made within the current submission for a possible future link into that new road.

4.4 The proposed layout of the site is considered to be of a high standard and will provide for 41 individual plots of reasonable dimensions and good quality house typeslfinishes. The inclusion of an enlarged dedicated play area will enhance the residential amenity within the site and taken as a whole it will create a visually pleasing gateway feature into the village of Plains from the west.

4.5 With regard to the points of representation raised I would comment as follows: a. The applicant has submitted a copy of the relevant land certificate to demonstrate that he has control over all land contained within the application boundary. Notwithstanding this land ownership is a legal matter not within the remit of the planning system. b. The applicant has taken full account of the operations currently carried out by Rowan Timber and to their concerns over the continued viability of those operations. As such the applicant has carried out a comprehensive Noise Assessment Survey and proposed to implement specific noise attenuation proposals to minimise the effects of existing noise levels on the development site.

51 4.6 Having regard to the foregoing I consider that the proposal is an acceptable alternative use for the application site, both in terms of the Development Plan and also taking account of previous granting of outline planning permission C/05/01029/0UT which established the principle of residential use on the site. The nature and form of development will environmentally enhance the western approach gateway into the village and while the points of concern raised are noted, these in themselves do not merit the refusal of the application. I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to the attached conditions.

52 Application No: C/06/0083O/FUL

Date Registered: 16th May 2006

Applicant : Caldervale Forge & CO Ltd Dunrobin Road Clarkston Airdrie ML6 8LS

Agent Angus Design Associates Ltd 125 Muir Street Hamilton ML3 6BJ

Development: Extension to Existing Industrial Building

Location: Caldervale Forge Dunrobin Road Clarkston Airdrie North Lanarkshire ML6 8LS

Ward: 44 Clarkston Councillor Campbell Cameron

Grid Reference: 278183 665493

File Reference: C/PL/AID81200Y/GNLR

Site History:

Developmen t PI an : Designated as HG9 (Existing Residential Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: British Gas (Received 15th May 2006) Scottish Power (Received 22ndMay 2006)

Representations: None

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

53 54 Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

3. That before development starts, details of a scheme, which provides sufficient space within the curtilage of the application site for the parking and manoeuvring of an additional 3 cars shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required.

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

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 15th May 2006

Letter from British Gas received 5'h June 2006. Letter from Scottish Power received 22ndMay 2006. Memo from Transportation received 27'h June 2006.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Gordon Arthur at 01236 812375.

Date: 5 July 2006

55 APPLICATION NO. C/06/00830/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1 .IThis application seeks permission for the erection of an extension (9m x 25 m) to existing Industrial premises on land adjacent to Dunrobin Road, Petersburn, Airdrie. The application site lies within a larger 7800 metre square site bounded on south and east by residential properties on Dunrobin Road and on the remaining boundaries by a currently disused rail embankment and screen planting. The extension lies to the north of the site and will form part of the existing manufacturing industrial unit, production and assembly. The site of the extension is tucked within an indentation of the north face of the premises and will be totally screened from the Petersburn houses.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The application site is located within an area designated as HG9 (Existing Residential Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. It must be stressed that the policy highlights the predominant land use in the area. The proposals are assessed against this policy and associated guidance on developments of this nature. The proposal is not, in itself, of a scale to be of strategic importance. In view of the established nature of the use, policy ECON2 (Existing General Industrial Areas) is also considered relevant.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Following the standard neighbour notification procedure no letters of representation were received.

3.2 Following the statutory consultation process no objections were received. However, the Transportation Section has requested an additional 3 in-curtilage parking spaces be included in the development.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusion

4.1 Under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 development proposals require to be considered under the terms of the development plan and any other material considerations. In this instance the proposals require to be assessed under policy ECON 2 (Existing General Industrial Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 and guidance NPPG2 on business and industry.

4.2 This is a long established engineering works, which for reasons of urban growth and morphology is situated in an established residential area. The inclusion of the site under policy designation HG9 is therefore considered to be an anomaly, and probably arose as a result of the graphic presentation needs of the Plan at the time. The development is therefore more appropriately assessed against policy ECON 2 (Existing General Industrial Areas). The Monklands District Local Plan 1991 gives emphasis to industrial development sites geared towards retaining the established industrial character of areas indicated on the proposal maps. The Council supports the continuation of industrial uses where existing industrial land is redeveloped, unless this is proved to be impracticable due to poor ground stability, unsuitability of buildings, or if there are major benefits to the community from a change of use.

4.3 NPPG2 (Business and Industry) paragraph 61 on the location of industrial developments advises that Planning Authorities should bear in mind that subsequent intensification of the use may become unacceptably intrusive. Unless it amounts to a material change in the character of the use, intensification can be controlled by planning conditions as an appropriate means of preventing foreseeable harm to amenity.

56 4.4 In conclusion it can be seen that the proposal of extending the current production and assembly area would be in accordance with the relevant policies contained within the development plan. The design and scale of the proposed extension would integrate satisfactorily with the existing unit.

4.5 It is recommended that permission be granted subject to conditions.

57 Application No: C/06/00839/FUL

Date Registered: 16th May 2006

Applicant: Waste Recyling Group Ground Floor West 900 Pavillion Drive Northhampton Business Park Northhampton NN4 7RG Northhampton

Agent ENTEC UK Ltd 6/7 Newton Terrace Glasgow

Development: Erection of 60M High Anemometry Mast (Mast Site No2)

Location: Mast Site No. 2 Greengairs Landfill Site Meikle Drumgray Road Greengairs North Lanarkshire

Ward: 45 New Monklands West Councillor Sophia Coyle

Grid Reference: 278602668593

File Reference: CIPLIGW M400/PB/LR

Site History: There is an extensive planning history to the site which are all permitted applications relating to the use of the site over many years as a landfill operation.

Development Plan: Under the terms of the Monklands Local Plan (1991) the site falls within an area allocated as GB2 (Restrict Development in Countryside Around Towns) and CUI/!? (Landfill Gas Monitoring Zone)

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: Scottish Natural Heritage (no objection) OFCOM (Scotland) (no response) British Telecom (no response) Royal Soc. for the Protection of Birds (no objection) Greengairs Community Council (no response) Landscape Services (no objection)

Representations: None

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

58 59 Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1. That the development hereby approved shall be removed within 2 years of the date of this Planning Permission

Reason: To safeguard the long term visual amenity of the area

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 16th May 2006 Moklands District Local Plan 1991

Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 28'h. June 2006 Letter from Royal Society for the Protection of Birds received 8'h. June 2006 Memo from Community Services received 2Ist.June 2006

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Peter Barker at 01236 812381

Date: 10 July 2006

60 APPLICATION NO. C/06/00839/FUL

REPORT

(This proposal should be read and considered in conjunction with C/06/00840 - Mast no.l)

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1 .I The site lies at the south-western end of the Greengairs Landfill Site but outside the area intended to be used for future waste disposal. As such it comprises original and firm ground but lies within the wider ownership of the applicants. The nearest public highway, Meikle Drumgray Road/Darngavil Road, is 500 metres away to the south and west.

1.2 The mast will be 60 metres high, to be secured by steel guy ropes, and can be either of lattice or tubular construction. Small instruments will be affixed to the mast at appropriate intervals. The applicants state that they require at least one year’s worth of wind data.

1.3 The proposal forms one of a pair of identical structures (see application C/06/0084OFUL on this agenda) to be sited at opposite sides of the Greengairs landfill Site for the purpose measuring wind conditions as background work towards furthering an intended future windfarm proposal. The windfarm proposal itself has been in the general public domain for some months by virtue of public exhibitions held locally by the applicants, as well as a Scoping Opinion for an Environmental Assessment currently being sought.

2. Development Plan

2.1 Under the terms of the Monklands Local Plan (1991) the site falls within an area allocated as GB2 (Restrict Development in Countryside Around Towns) and CU1/5 (Landfill Gas Monitoring Zone). The proposal is appropriate to a rural area and there are no strategic implications at this stage.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 None of the consultees mentioned overleaf have raised objection to the development including Scottish Natural Heritage (after carefully considering a potential birds conflict issue).

3.2 There were no representations received.

4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The proposal is to erect an anemometry mast for a temporary period only, to measure wind speeds as part of the assessment of the potential for a future windfarm at Greengairs. It is part of the background research necessary to establish the very viability of a windfarm. The permitting of such a mast in no way commits the Council into accepting the principle or design of any possible future accompanying windfarm proposal. After all, the wind monitoring exercise could itself establish tk?! 3 windfarm is not a viable proposition, irrespective of any planning issues. The development process for this application is very similar to that of the nearby site at Longriggend where a monitoring mast and windfarm already both been approved.

4.2 The site is within 4km of the proposed Slammanan Plateau Special Protection Area, (pSPA) which includes Fannyside Loch where Bean Geese are the species under intended protection. SNH were initially concerned at the mast proposals potentially conflicting with this interest, but following the submission of further information, they are now raising no objections at this stage.

61 4.3 RSPB, however, whilst holding a similar opinion have indicated future opposition to a windfarm proper. It should be pointed out that the matter of the subsequent windfarm would be the subject of a future planning application to be considered at the appropriate time.

62 Application No: C/06/00840/FU L

Date Registered: 16th May 2006

Applicant: Waste Recyling Group Ground Floor West 900 Pavillion Drive Northhampton Business Park Northhampton NN4 7RG Northhampton

Agent ENTEC UK Ltd 6/7 Newton Terrace Glasgow

Developmen t : Erection of 60M High Anemometry Mast (Mast Site Nol)

Location: Mast Site No. 1 Greengairs Landfill Site Meikle Drumgray Road Greengairs North Lanarkshire

Ward: 45 New Monklands West Councillor Sophia Coyle

Grid Reference: 279583 669183

File Reference: CIPLIGWM4001PBILR

Site History: There is an extensive planning history to the site which are all permitted applications relating to the use of the site over many years as a landfill operation 981009501FUL Extension to Site Offices 06/0061O/MIN Alteration to Phasing of Existing Landfill Site (Phases 7D, 8A, 8B, 8C, 8D)

Development Plan: Under the terms of the Monklands Local Plan (1991) the site falls within an area allocated as GB2 (Restrict Development in Countryside Around Towns) and CU1/5 (Landfill Gas Monitoring Zone)

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Representations: None

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

63 64 Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1. That the development hereby approved shall be removed within 2 years of the date of this Planning Permission

Reason: To safeguard the long term visual amenity of the area

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 16th May 2006 Monklands District Local Plan 1991

Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 28thJune 2006 Letter from Royal Society for the Protection of Birds received 8'h June 2006 Memo from Landscape Services received 21 st June 2006

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Peter Barker at 01236 812381

Date: 10 July 2006

65 APPLICATION NO. C1061008401FUL

REPORT

(This proposal should be read and considered in conjunction with C/06/00839 - Mast no.2)

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The site lies at the south-eastern end of the Greengairs Landfill Site but outside the area intended to be used for future waste disposal. As such it comprises original and firm ground but lies within the wider ownership of the applicants. The nearest public highway, the cul-de-sac lane to the Stanrigg Memorial, is 900 metres away to the south.

1.3 The proposal forms one of a pair of identical structures (see application C106100839FUL on this agenda) to be sited at opposite sides of the Greengairs landfill Site for the purpose measuring wind conditions as background work towards furthering an intended future windfarm proposal. The windfarm proposal itself has been in the general public domain for some months by virtue of public exhibitions held locally by the applicants, as well as a Scoping Opinion for an Environmental Assessment currently being sought.

2. Development Plan

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 None of the consultees mentioned overleaf have raised objection to the development including Scottish Natural Heritage (after carefully considering a potential birds conflict issue).

3.2 There were no representations received.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The proposal is to erect an anemometry mast for a temporary period only, to measure wind speeds as part of the assessment of the potential for a future windfarm at Greengairs. It is part of the background research necessary to establish the very viability of a windfarm. The permitting of such a mast in no way commits the Council into accepting the principle or design of any possible future accompanying windfarm proposal. After all, the wind monitoring exercise could itself establish that a windfarm is not a viable proposition, irrespective of any planning issues. The development process for this application is very similar to that of the nearby site at Longriggend where a rnortitoring mast and windfarm already both been approved.

4.2 The site is within 3km of the proposed Slammanan Plateau Special Protection Area, (pSPA) which includes Fannyside Loch where Bean Geese are the species under intended protection. SNH were initially concerned at the mast proposals potentially conflicting with this interest, but following the submission of further information, they are now raising no objections at this stage.

66 4.3 RSPB, however, whilst holding a similar opinion have indicated future opposition to a windfarm proper. It should be pointed out that the matter of the subsequent windfarm would be the subject of a future planning application to be considered at the appropriate time.

67 Application No: C1061008941OUT

Date Registered: 23rd May 2006

Applicant : A Bartlett & Sons (Airdrie) Ltd 251 Stirling Road Airdrie

Agent The Kerr Practice 47 Broad Street Glasgow G40 2QW

Development: Erection of Retail Unit (800Sqm), Laying Out of Car Parking Areas and Alterations to Existing Vehicular Access

Location: Former Townhead Service Station Motherwell Street Ai rd rie Lanarkshire ML6 7HU

Ward : 43 Airdrie Central Councillor James Logue

Grid Reference: 2771 24 666460

File Reference:

Site History: 0010051 3/FUL Installation Of Automatic Cash Dispenser Within Shop

Development Plan: Under the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area covered by Policy ECON2 (Existing General Industrial Area). Policies ECONl8 (Vacant Industrial Premises) and COM2 (Criteria for New Shopping Developments) are also relevant

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations:

Representations: None

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 14th June 2006

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

68 Former Townhead Service Station, Motherwell Street Airdrie NdtoScale

69 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; (b) the means of access to the site; (c) the layout of the site, including all internal roadways and parking 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 for loading and unloading of all goods vehicles; (h) the provision of drainage works; (i) the disposal of sewage; (j) details of existing and proposed site levels.

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

3. That a 2m high screen fence or wall (as measured from the level of the development site) shall be maintained or erected along the northern boundary common with no.51 Motherwell Street. The design of this boundary enclosure shall be submitted to and approved by the Council before it is erected.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of adjacent dwellings

4. Details of measures to make good the exposed walls to adjacent buildings to be left exposed by the demolition of the existing warehouselshowroom in the western limb of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Council before the development hereby approved is commenced. Furthermore, these treatment measures shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Council before the retail unit is brought into use.

Reason: To safeguard the appearance of the area

5. 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, including any modifications as may be required, 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;

Reason: To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the area

6. That before development starts, details of a scheme, which provides sufficient space within the curtilage of the application site for:- (a) the parking and manoeuvring of cars; (b) the loading and unloading of delivery vehicles, and (c) the provision of turning areas so that all vehicles enter and leave the site in forward gear

shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required.

Reason: To avoid customers parking on the A73 carriageway and in the interests of highway safety

70 7. That before development starts, details of the surface finishes to all parking and manoeuvring areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required.

Reason: To prevent dust and deleterious matter from being carried onto the public highway, and in the interests of visual amenity

8. That before the use of the development hereby approved commences all details approved under the terms of conditions 5, 6 and 7 above shall be fully completed.

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

9. That before any development is commenced details of a surface water drainage scheme for the development site shall be submitted to and approved by the Council, and such scheme shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Council prior to the development hereby approved being brought into use. Such a scheme shall include a drainage assessment of soil porosity and flooding risk

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory drainage of the site

10. That the use of retail unit hereby permitted shall be in restricted to Class 1 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997 and the floorspace shall be limited to 800sq metres gross.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure the proper planning control of the site

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 23rd May 2006 Monklands District Local Plan 1991

Memo from Geotechnical Team Leader received 27th. June 2006

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Peter Barker at 01236 812381.

Date: 5 July 2006

71 APPLICATION NO. C10610089410UT

REPORT

I. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I Planning Permission is being sought for the erection of modest sized retail unit with associated car parking. The shop type envisaged is a local convenience store (‘Spar’ or similar) which is generally lacking in the wider area.

1.2 The site frontage was formerly occupied by a petrol filling station, but all traces of this are now removed and all that remains is a levelled - the northern portion of which has been recently tarmacadamed, and to the south, hardcore. The site includes a leg to the rear currently occupied by a vacant warehouselshowroom building.

1.3 The site lies amongst mixed uses. On the opposite side of the A73 are dwellings, a takeaway and small commercial premises, and the former Boots site (earmarked for housing). To the south is a Sea Cadet meeting room, and to east are commercial premises occupied by Jewson, Lyreco, as well as the former Bartlett complex (currently vacant). A dwelling, no. 51 Motherwell Street, lies to the immediate north.

1.4 The application is outline only but an indicative layout plan has been supplied to show how the site could be developed. It shows a square 800 square metre building sited approximately midway across the site frontage, with a loading area to the south, and car parking to the north. The car parking would extend over the site of the warehouse/showroom to the rear of the site, implying its intended demolition. In summary, the existing former filling station access/egress points provide entrances for delivery and customers’ vehicles, and ample car parking can be provided.

2. Developmen t Plan

2.1 Under the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area covered by Policy ECON2 (Existing General Industrial Area). Policies ECONl8 (Vacant Industrial Premises) and COM2 (Criteria for New Shopping Developments) are also relevant. There are no strategic planning issues.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 No objections have been received from neighbours and the press advert has not generated a response. The Geotechnical Team has advised that a drainage assessment should be carried out and submitted for approval, and this includes porosity tests and potential for flooding risk.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The proposals need to be assessed under the terms of the Development Plan and any other material planning considerations. There are no strategic planning issues.

4.2 The site is identified in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 as an “Existing General Industrial Area” (Policy ECON2). This policy supports the retention of the predominant industrial character of such areas, encouraging industrial uses unless impractical. This policy states explicitly that whilst wholesale or distribution outlets are acceptable in such locations, retail units are not. The proposal is therefore technically contrary to the Development Plan.

72 4.3 However, Policy ECON 13/3 (Improvement of Industrial Sites) seeks to improve the quality and maintenance of industrial sites. While it is ideally preferable for the allocated use to remain the fact remains that the site is currently vacant and the proposed development would serve to improve its quality by a positive physical development, and the active use of the land. As such, the development complies with the policy.

4.4 The proposal also needs to be judged against Policy COM2 (Criteria for New Shopping Developments), namely: 0 Support for existing shopping centres 0 Convenience of access for pedestrians and vehicles 0 Creation of a safe and pleasant shopping environment 0 Balance of unit size and mix of retaillnon-retail uses 0 Adequacy of car parking and public transport 0 Quality and sensitivity of design

4.5 On balance it is considered therefore that the proposal is in the spirit of the Local Plan and it will lead to the tidying up and beneficial use of a currently redundant prominent site. Furthermore, it will provide a useful facility in an area where such ‘local shops’ do not currently exist, and with an eye to the future, it will also be of service to residents of forthcoming housing developments in the locality (ie. former Boots site).

4.6 Turning to the issue of drainage the comments of the Geotechnical Section are noted. However, it is not felt appropriate to withold consent at this stage pending site investigation given the previous use of the site which involved impermeable surfaces throughout, and where the drainage regime coped adequately.

4.7 It is suggested that as long as conditions are imposed that cover site specific technical issues such as: Screening Landscaping 0 Car park provision and vehicle manoeuvring areas 0 Treatment of walls of abutting buildings left exposed by the removal of the existing (vacant) warehouselshowroom Drainage .- then the proposal is acceptable and should be an asset to the locality if implemented.

73 Application No: C/06/00936/FUL

Date Registered: 1st June 2006

Applicant: T-Mobile (UK) Ltd Clo Agent

Agent Stappard Howes 122 Dundyvan Road Coatbridge ML5 1DE

Development: Installation of 15M Telecommunications Monopole Including Ancillary Equipment Cabinets

Location: Riggend Farm Stirling Road Airdrie North Lanarkshire ML6 7SS

Ward : 45 New Monklands West Councillor Sophia Coyle

Grid Reference: 276528669808

File Reference: C/PL/RG02970000/SMl/LR

Site History:

Development PI an : The application site is located in an area covered by policy GBI (Restrict Development in the Greenbelt), LI1/1 (High Quality Landscape) and TEL 1 (Telecommunications Development) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: None

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1. 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.

74 NCnhP.odYEBdbY Lan*ih,rs CauM Planning Application No. C/O6/00936/FUL Pl~nn~npmd Enr8mnmct Deosmnerl Fllrning HOYOI :iwsfR:ae C"rn,em.,,d to, 1N1 111 0'238 I,52 10 '101133616232 Installation of 15m Tellecommunications Monopole

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

Reason: To ensure restoration of the site to a satisfactory standard.

3. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping, for the area surrounding the compound; shown on the approved plans, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include:- (a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, 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 enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.

4. That within one year of the start of works on the development hereby permitted, all planting, seeding and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 3; 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.

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

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 1st June 2006 Monkland District Local Plan 1991

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

Date: 5 July 2006

76 APPLICATION NO. C/06/00936/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and ProDosal

1.I This application seeks planning ermission for the installation of 15 metre high telecommunications monopole together with ancillary ground based equipment cabinets. The proposed monopole is to be sited to the west of Old Biggar Road, Riggend approximately 125 metres north of its junction with Greengairs Road.

1.2 The proposed monopole will accommodate 3 antenna and 2 transmission dishes and will be painted grey in colour. The compound meaures 6.3 metres by 4.3 metres and is to be enclosed by a 2 metre high chainlink fence. In addition the applicant has indicated that the compound will also be screened by planting made up of native species found in the surrounding area. The applicant has submitted the required ICNIRP compliance certificate. The nearest residential property lies approximately 320 metres to the west of the site.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The application site is located in an area covered by policy GBI (Restrict Development in the Greenbelt), LI1/1 (High Quality Landscape) and TEL 1 (Telecommunications Development) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Following standard neighbour notification procedures no letters of representation have been received.

3.2 The Transportation section was consulted and has not commented.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 In assessing this application Policy TEL 1 and LI1/1 contained in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 are relevant. Policy TEL 1 states that any telecommunications developments must be assessed in terms of economic development, specific locational need and environmental impact.

4.2 In terms of economic benefit it is unlikely that the proposed mast itself would generate a significant negative or positive impact that could be measured. However, forming part of a wider network it will be of general benefit to the community to have full signal coverage within the area.

4.3 The applicant has submitted a supporting statement which indicated the need for a mast within this specific area. NPPG 19 provides support for telecommunications development where the applicants have demonstrated the ability to carefully consider the siting and design options, and where possible environmental impacts have been minimised. Should the applicant have taken all these factors into consideration, refusal is unlikely to be warranted. In line with national policy and guidance (NPPG 19 and PAN 67) the applicant has investigated several sites within the area including the possibility of mast sharing. Due to the topography of the surrounding area, limited coverage and undesirabilityto mast share at this location the current application site has been selected.

77 4.4 In assessing environmental impact the main consideration in this case is that the mast is located in a rural area designated as LI1/1 (High Quality Landscape). It should, however, be pointed out that the application site does fall within a few metres of the boundary of the L11/5 designation (Devastated Landscape) which perhaps more accurately describes the nature of the surrounding area. The primary consideration therefore is the visual impact that the development would have on the surrounding area. As outlined in national policy and guidance NPPG 19 and PAN 67 there is a preference to facilitate mast sharing where possible and to avoid numerous ground-based masts in one location.

4.5 There is an existing lattice tower approximately 40 metres to the south west of the application site. Site sharing of this mast was investigated prior to the applicant submitting this application. The applicant has confirmed that an additional operator cannot be accommodated on the existing lattice mast without redevelopment works to the structure which would significantly increase its height and density. It is considered that such redevelopment works would cause a significant increase in the mast's visual presence on the skyline at this location. Therefore the proposed slimline monopole, which would have less visual impact, adjacent to the existing mast would be acceptable at this location.

4.6 The applicant has indicated that they are willing to paint the mast an alternative colour to help the mast blend in with the landscape and skyline. However, it is felt that a grey monopole will be less visually intrusive on the skyline than o ne of a darker colour, such as dark green. In addition the applicant has indicated that the ground-based compound will be screened with planting to match the surrounding vegetation minimising the impact at ground level.

4.7 In conclusion it is considered that the proposal meets the criteria stipulated in policy TEL 1 and has been designed and sited in a location that should not significantly impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding area. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted.

78 Application No: S/04/01516/FUL

Date Registered: 23rd September 2004

Applicant : Galloway & MacLeod 55 King Street Stonehouse ML9 3EH

Agent Cullen Lochhead & Brown 10 Auchingrammont Road Hamikon ML3 6JX

Development: Conversion of Existing Mill into a Dwellinghouse and Conversion of Adjacent Old Mill Cottage Outbuilding into a Dwellinghouse

Location: Allanton Mill, Old Mill Road, Allanton, Shotts. Lanarkshire ML7 5BX

Ward: 17 Stane Councillor Frank Gormill

Grid Reference: 285383658458

File Reference: S/PL/B/I 7/59/FM/MM

Site History: S/04/01504/LBC - Conversion of Existing Mill Into a Dwellinghouse, Allanton Mill, Allanton. Decision Pending

Development Plan: The site is zoned as ENV8 (Countryside Around Towns) in the Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) and Policies HSG12 (Housing in the Greenbelt and Countryside), ENVl8 (Listed Buildings) and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) also apply.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: NLC Community Services (Comments) Scottish Environment Protection Agency (No Objections) Scottish Water (No Objections) British Gas (No Objections) Scottish Power (No Objections) Scottish Natural Heritage (No Objections)

Representations: None Received

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

79 \ Mrth Lanahtire Couroil Planning and Erwkomed kdquarlers CONVERSION OF EXISTING MILL INTO A DWELLINGHOUSE Sule 501, fleming House 2 Tryst Road AND CONVERSION OF ADJACENT OLD MILL COTTAGE WMBERNAULD OUTBUILDING INTO A DWELLINGHOUSE -71 JW Telephone01238818210 Fax. 01238818232 ALLANTON MILL, OLD MILL ROAD, ALLANTON, SHOTTS

OS Licence 10002388 2004 Site Area = 0 29 ha

80 Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1. 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, full details and finish of all new external materials to be used in construction or repair, including the natural slates for the roof, wall finish, door, window details and gutters and downpipes, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the planning authority.

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

3. That notwithstanding the windows shown on the approved drawings, the details of the new windows to be installed in the positions shown are specifically not yet approved, and further detailed 1:20 drawings showing window type and opening details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before the development commences.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail and to ensure the replacement windows preserve the character of the listed building.

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

5. That notwithstanding the provisions of Class 7 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992, no gates, fences, walls, or other means of enclosure, shall be erected between the front of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted and the adjoining road.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to preserve the setting of the Listed Allanton Mill.

6. That before each of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted are occupied 2 car parking spaces shall be provided within the curtilage of the associated plot as shown on the approved site plan, and thereafter be maintained as parking spaces.

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

7. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping incorporating native species 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) a time table for the implementation of these works.

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

8. The landscaping scheme required under the terms of condition (7) above shall be implemented in accordance with the approved timetable unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning

81 Authority.

Reason: In the interests of nature conservation, visual amenity and the amenity of future residents.

9. That within one year of the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 8 and 9; 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 landscaping, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: In the interests of nature conservation, visual amenity and the amenity of future residents,

10. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the location and design of the septic tank and soakaway scheme to be installed within the application site shall be submitted to and the applicant shall provide written confirmation that all the requirements of Scottish Environmental Protection Agency and Scottish Water have been fully met.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider this matter in detail.

11. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the proposed flood prevention measures to be utilised as recommended by the Flood Risk Assessment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and for the avoidance of doubt the scheme requires to comply with the requirements of the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider this matter in detail.

12. That before each of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted are occupied the flood prevention measures to be utilised as approved under the terms of condition 11 shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority and the requirements of the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency.

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the future residents of the site.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 16th August 2004, amended plans received 2IStJuly 2005, 21 st September 2005 and 4'h May 2006 and additional information received 20thJune 2006.

Memo from NLC Transportation Manager received 4th February 2005 Memo from NLC Geotechnical Team Leader received 5th May 2006 Memo from NLC Head of Protective Services received 2nd December 2004 Memo from NLC Community Services received 29th November 2004 and 7th July 2006 Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 17th December 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received 13th December 2004 Letter from British Gas received 22nd November 2004 Letter from Scottish Power received 25th November 2004 Letter from SNH received 5th July 2006

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

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Fraser Miller at 01698 302087.

82 APPLICATION NO. S/04/01516/FUL

REPORT

I. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I This application seeks detailed planning permission for the conversion of Allanton Mill a category C(S) Listed Building into a dwellinghouse. In addition it is proposed to carry out the conversion of the agricultural storage building adjacent to Old Mill Cottage as a supporting development. Allanton Mill is situated on the east side of Old Mill Road, Allanton approximately 90 metres from the junction of Old Mill Road and Bowhousebog Road, with the agricultural storage building being located on the west side of Old Mill Road, at 90 degrees to Old Mill Cottage. The application site is bounded by Mill House to the south, open countryside land to the east, the South Calder Water to the north and by Old Mill Cottage to the west.

1.2 Allanton Mill is a Category C(S) Listed Building dating back to the late lgthcentury which was refitted and extended in 1921. The building is three storeys in height at it highest point with a two storey section at the southern end of the building. The extensions to the building in 1921 take the form of two single storey extensions on both gables with the northern extension running the width of the building and the southern extension running half the width of the bzilding. There are three large sliding doors on the front elevation with a single door on the 1 storey. The windows on the building are timber sash and case units. The materials used in the construction of the mill are natural stone walls with natural slate on the roof with a steel capped vent at the apex of the two-storey element of the building. It is proposed to remove the single storey extension to the north of the building that dates back to the 1920s and install a new window and access door on this elevation, beneath the three existing windows. It is proposed to carry out alterations to the principle elevation through the replacement of a door on the southern extension with a window. The existing two sliding doors will be repaired behind which will be a full height glazed entrance to the building with a window behind the second of the two sliding doors. Overall the proposed changes to the exterior of the building respect the existing openings and include the replacement of the single paned sash and case units with new double glazed timber windows.

1.3 Turning to the proposed supporting development, the agricultural storage building is a single storey brick built building painted white to match Old Mill Cottage. It is proposed to construct a new slate pitched roof, and to remove the 2 sliding doors and existing front door and install 4 new windows and a dOdWdy. On the rear elevation it is proposed to cut 5 new window openings and a doorway. The overall floorspace of the building will not increase as a result of the development and the living accommodation provided within the dwelling would consist of 2 bedrooms, a living area, bathroom and kitchen.

1.4 The original application sought consent for the conversion and extension of the Mill Building to form two dwellings and the conversion of Old Mill Cottage outbuilding into a dwelling. However following discussions in relation to the Listed Building Application, the application has been amended for the conversion of the Mill Building into one dwelling.

1.5 The applicant has submitted a separate Listed Building application S/04/01504/LBC for the proposals which is currently under consideration.

2. Developmen t Plan

2.1 The site is zoned as Policy ENV8 (Countryside Around Towns) in the Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). This policy seeks to promote and protect the Countryside and contains a presumption against any development other than that relating to

83 agriculture of other appropriate rural uses. Policies HSG12 (Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside) and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) are also applicable.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 My Transportation Section have recommended that the application be refused as Old Mill Road is presently substandard in width being only 3.5m wide for most of its length with no passing places and no lighting or footway provision on either side of the carriageway. Any further development on this stretch of road would be detrimental to road safety. Visibility from the driveways is unacceptable given the close proximity of the existing building to the carriageway and no turning facility has been included with the proposals.

3.2 The NLC Geotechnical Team Leader requested that a flood risk assessment be submitted for this application due to proximity of the Mill to the South Calder Water. This assessment has subsequently been submitted and the Geotechnical Team Leader has offered no objections.

3.3 NLC Community Services have offered no objections to the application provided that a number of conditions are attached to the consent. They have requested that a landscaping scheme be submitted and that prior to the application being determined a protected species survey is submitted to determine if any protected species are present at the site. The protected species survey has subsequently been submitted and NLC Community Services and SNH have confirmed their acceptance that there is no evidence of protected species on the site.

3.4 Scottish Water and SEPA have offered no objections to the proposal subject to conditions. They indicate that there are no public sewers in the area and that a septic tank would be required to the serve this site.

3.5 The Head of Protective Services, Scottish Power and Transco have offered no objections to the proposal.

3.6 There have been no third party representations received on this application following neighbour notification.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 It should be noted that the application raises no strategic issues. This application must be assessed against the relevant development plan policies, which are Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) Policies ENV8 (Countryside Around Towns), HSG12 (Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside), ENV18 (Listed Buildings) and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) together with other material cons iderat ions.

4.2 The application site lies within land designated as Countryside Around Towns in the Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005). Policy ENV8 applies and states that the Council will seeks to protect the Countryside and will not normally permit development other than that which relates to agriculture or other appropriate rural uses. However in the context of this application, it is considered that the proposals are in accordance with policy ENV8 as the proposal relates to the conversion and re-use of two existing units in the countryside as opposed to the formation of new build dwellings. Therefore the principle of the conversion of both buildings is considered acceptable subject to the detailed assessment of the proposals in relation to Policy HSG12 (Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside).

84 4.3 Policy HSG12 (Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside) states that the conversion of existing buildings to residential use will be considered favourably where they are worthy of preservation, are substantially complete and do not result in a significant increase in floorspace. In assessing the detailed proposals against the relevant policy and guidance, it is considered that Allanton Mill is in a good condition considering it has not been in use for a number of years. Furthermore the C(S) Listed Building is considered to be worthy of preservation and the proposed removal of the single storey extension of the building is not considered to be detrimental to the appearance of the building. In addition the proposed new window and door opening on the gable wall are similar in style and size to the existing window and door openings of the building, although I recommend a condition to ensure the details are acceptable. The proposed alterations to the principle elevation are to be carried out in a sensitive manner that maintains the original appearance of the building whilst bringing the building into a residential use that meets current building regulations. Turning to the proposed conversion of Old Mill Cottage, it is noted that the building does not have a roof at present. However the building forms an integral part of the successful conversion of Allanton Mill. The building does require a lot of external work to be brought into residential use, however once completed it will be similar in style to Old Mill Cottage and will be fitted with new timber sash and case windows, a natural slate roof and will be rendered to match Old Mill Cottage. Although the conversion of this building requires the formation of a number of new window openings these are necessary to allow the conversion to residentil use and the design and style of the windows are in keeping with the traditional style of the building. Having given consideration to the sensitive nature of the proposed conversions it is considered that the proposals are in accordance with policy HSG12 given that both buildings are substantially complete, worthy of preservation and that there are no proposed floor space increases to either building.

4.4 Policy ENV18 indicates that the Council will resist proposals which would harm the historic of architectural interest of a Listed Building but will encourage proposals, which enhance the character of a Listed Building. The proposed development seeks the re-use of an existing C(S) Listed Building, which has been vacant for a number of years and that is in a reasonably good condition. The proposals seek to preserve much of the original character of the building whilst upgrading and repairing the windows on all elevations. In this regard I find the proposals are acceptable when assessed against Policy ENV18 and it should be noted that the proposals are subject to a separate Listed Building application S/04/01504/LBC which is currently under consideration. None of the historic buildings consultees have raised any objections to the proposals.

4.5 In assessing the transportation implications of a development, Policy TR13 is a material consideration and states that the Council will take account of criteria including: the impact of the development on road traffic circulation/road safety and the provision made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. My Transportation Section have objected to the application on the grounds of road safety as detailed above in paragraph 3.1. However the concerns raised relate predominantly to Old Mill Road and its width, a matter which is outwith the applicants control. Furthermore there is a large existing tarmac area to the front of Allanton Mill that provides more than sufficient space for the parking of two vehicles and visitor spaces off the public road. Furthermore the application site was previously used for commercial purposes and historically commercial vehicles used this section of the road. In addition the proposals detail two off street parking spaces are to be provided to the north east of Old Mill Cottage outbuilding and are to be accessed by the looped private access that currently serves Old Mill Cottage. Overall, although the requirements of Policy TR13 are not fully satisfied I consider that the proposed reuse of these existing buildings cannot justifiably be refused on these grounds.

4.6 The flood risk assessment requested by the Geotechnical Team Leader indicates that the source of risk of flooding is the South Calder Water and that the Mill Cottage and Old Mill Cottage should be outwith the estimated extent of flooding arising from a 200 year event. However in relation to Allanton Mill, it is recommended that it would be prudent to use water- resistant materials in the conversion of the Mill Building. The report states that the proposed

85 floor level of 10.6m LD is just above the predicted 200 year peak water level under the worst case scenario. It is therefore recommended that a planning condition be attached to the consent to ensure that the flood prevention measures are carried out in accordance with recommendations the Flood Risk Assessment and that full details of the measures to be utilised are to be provided for approval, prior to the start of work on site.

4.7 In terms of landscaping and boundary treatment issues raised by NLC Community Services and SNH, it is proposed to attach a planning condition requiring that this information be submitted and approved prior to works starting on site. In addition the applicant has submitted a protected species survey for the site to which SNH and NLC Community Services Dept have confirmed their acceptance that there is no evidence of protected species on the site.

4.8 With respect to the comments made by Scottish Water and SEPA a condition is recommended to address their comments requiring approval of septic tank details.

4.9 In conclusion have due regard to the provision of the Development Plan, the application proposals are considered to be acceptable and to comply with Policies ENV8, ENV18 and HSG12. Although the proposals do not fully comply with policy TR13, I do not consider there is justification to refuse permission on this basis in this case. While some details are outstanding, these matters can be satisfactorily covered by conditions. I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

86 Application No: S/06/00707/FUL

Date Registered: 24th April 2006

Ap piican t : Meridian Residential DalserF House Linnet Way Strathclyde Business Park Bellshill ML4 3RA

Development: Erection of Flatted Development Comprising Two Blocks (20 Units), Access Road and Landscaping

Location: Land To The North Of 21 - 27 Bonkle Road Newmains North Lanarkshire

Ward: 16 Newmains Councillor David McKendrick

Grid Reference: 282408 656146

File Reference: S/PL/BF/3/61 (117)/EM/MM

Site History: S/03/01724/0UT Residential Development (In Outline) approved 6th February 2004.

S/98/00873/OUT Retail and Leisure Development with parking and landscaping on Westwood Bing (including part of current application site) approved 16th June 1999

Development Plan: The site is zoned for Urban Uses in the Central Industrial Area Development Plan 1964.

Most of the site is zoned within an Established Housing Area, with the northern corner zoned within Retail and Leisure Development Opportunities sites (RTL 1.6 and L2.8) in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005). Policies HSG 8, HSGIO, RTL 1 and L2 apply.

Contrary to Development Plan: In Part

Consultations: NLC Community Services (Comments) Scottish Water (Com ments)

Representations: One letter of representation.

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 10th May 2006

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1. 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, 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. Notwithstanding the terms of this condition the roofing material should be a flat profiled, dark grey, slate substitute tile and the walls should be finished in light coloured render and buff brick.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail and to protect the visual amenity and character of the surrounding area.

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

4. That notwithstanding the terms of condition 3, before any flat is occupied, a wall/railing shall be erected along the Westwood Road boundary of the site. Furthermore no pedestrian access shall be permitted directly onto Westwood Road.

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

5. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping incorporating native species 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) the planting of standard trees in the gardens fronting onto Westwood Road. (d) 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 (e) a time table for the implementation of these works.

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

6. That notwithstanding the terms of condition 7 above, the proposed development must ensure the preservation of the trees in the adjoining public open space to the southeast of the site. No trees within this area that overhang the site shall be lopped or reduced, without the prior written approval of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the nature conservation and visual amenity value of these important trees in this central location alongside a strategic route.

7. The landscaping scheme required under the terms of condition (5) above shall be implemented in accordance with the approved timetable unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority 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.

89 Reason: In the interests of nature conservation, visual amenity and the amenity of future residents.

8. That no flat hereby permitted shall be occupied until the road and footpath adjacent to it have been constructed to basecourse standard and the road and footpath shall be maintained thereafter to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority during the construction phase.

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

9. That before the last of the flats hereby permitted is occupied, all roads and footways shall be completed to final wearing course.

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

10. That notwithstanding the requirements of condition (3) above, before the development hereby permitted is commenced details of a site entrance feature shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority.

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

11, That before the last flat within the site is occupied the site entrance feature approved under the terms of condition (10) above shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the site and in order to clearly identify the site entrance in the interests of road safety.

12. That before the developrnent 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.

13. That before the development hereby permitted is commenced 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 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. Should this result in any amendments to the approved layout then a revised application will require to be submitted.

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.

14. That before the development hereby permitted starts, the applicant shall provide written confirmation to the Planning Authority that all the requirements of Scottish Water have been fully met 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. I. Reason: To ensure that there is sufficient capacity in the sewerage and water supply systems to allow the residential development to proceed.

15. That notwithstanding the terms of condition 3 above the boundary wall adjacent to 28 Westwood Road marked BLUE on the approved plans shall be reinstated and the replacement wall shall

90 match the height and materials of the existing wall.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

16. Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved the proposed access and parking area shown is not hereby approved and further details regarding the access, visibility splay, parking provision, aisle width and turning provision shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development on site.

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

17. That before the development upon the site hereby permitted starts, tree protection measures in accordance with British Standard BS5837 shall be erected along the drip line of the trees to be retained within or overhanging the site, in accordance with condition 5 and 6 above, and shall not be removed without the approval in writing of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to protect the trees.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 24th April 2006 and amended plans received 26'h June 2006.

Memo from Transportation Manager received 24'h May 2006 Memo from Protective Services received 1'' June ?;OS Memo from NLC Community Services received 17 May 2006 Letter from Scottish Water received 12'h May 2006

Letter from Elizabeth Tweedie, 28. ..Westwood Road, Newmains, Wishaw, ML2 9DA received 10th May 2006.

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

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Edward McLennaghan at 01698 302137.

Date: 4 July 2006

91 APPLICATION NO. S/06/00707/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The applicant seeks full planning permission for the erection of 20 No 2 bed flats, associated access road and landscaping at land to the north of 21-27 Bonkle Road, Newmains.

1.2 This T-shaped application site of 0.35 hectares has frontages to both the A73 Westwood Road and to Bonkle Road, and lies immediately north of the Clock Tower and public open space at Newmains Cross. The Westwood Road site frontage was until recently occupied by single storey buildings of derelict appearance, with a one and a half storey derelict building and tarmac yard behind. These buildings have now been demolished. The part of the site fronting Bonkle Road consists of a gravel-surfaced informal car park, serving the adjoining former bing land to the north and northeast, which has been landscaped and is used for informal public open space. The rear corner of the site is currently scrub grassland. Existing residential properties lie to the northwest, north and south of the site. To the west and southwest is St Bridget’s Hall and a number of commercial properties, whilst to the southeast is a Gospel Hall.

1.3 The development as proposed by the latest amended plans comprises two blocks of flats (20 units) which are two storey in height. Block 1 located on Westwood road measures 8.5 metres at its highest point. Block 2 located to the rear of the site measures 8.5 metres in height also but is split into three sections with the middle section recessed 6.4 metres back from the front elevation.

2. Development Plan

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 Urban Uses in the Central Industrial Area Development Plan 1964.

2.3 Most of the site is zoned within HSG8 (Established Housing Area), with the northern corner zoned within Retail and Leisure Development Opportunities sites (RTL 1.6 and L2.8) in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 2004). Policies HSG 10 (Assessing Applications for Housing Development), RTL 1 (Retail Development), L2 (Leisure Development Opportunities) and TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) are also relevant.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 My Transportation Team Leader has no objections subject to the following conditions:

0 Access to the flatted development should be via a 5.5 metre wide dropped kerb footway crossing hard surfaced for the first 2 metres behind the heel of the footway. 0 Visibility splay of 2.5 metres by 90 metres in both directions should be provided (or maximised if this is not achievable) 0 There should be no direct pedestrian access onto Westwood (the A73) Road from the flats. 0 The internal access layout should be no less than 5.5 metres in width and increasing to 6 metres in width where right angle parking bays are concerned. It would not be adoptable by the Roads Authority.

92 0 The applicant should provide a turning facility suitable enough for the largest vehicle likely to serve the flats at the termination of the access. 0 The applicant shows a total of 30 parking spaces. A minimum of 26 spaces should be provided (20 resident and 6 visitor). A 6 metre aisle width should be provided in conjunction with all parking bays.

3.2 North Lanarkshire Council Community Services Department offer no objections to the amended proposals subject to appropriate conditions regarding suitable boundary treatments, landscaping and a SUDS drainage scheme to service the site.

3.3 The Protectives Services Section have no objections to the proposed development subject to the requirement for a site investigation report. Such a condition was recommended by SEPA in their response to the outline residential application for the site.

3.4 Scottish Water has objected to the application on the grounds of that there is no provision of a drainage and water scheme to serve the development. However they will withdraw the objection if the applicant can demonstrate that there will not be an impact on Scottish Water’s assets and that suitable water infrastructure can be put in place to support the development.

3.5 One third party letter of representation from an adjoining resident had been received based on the original three storey proposed development, however this has now been withdrawn following the submission of amended plans.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

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

4.2 The principal of residential development on this site has already been established through the granting of outline consent in application S/03/01724/OUT. The current application is a detailed rather than a reserved matters application because the site boundary has been extended to include an additional area of open space in the north of the site, but the proposed siting of the buildings is similar to that shown indicativelywithin the approved outline application.

4.3 Policy HSG 8 indicates that the Council will seek to protect the established character of existing and new housing areas by opposing development which is incompatible with a residential setting or adversely affects the amenity of Established Housing Areas. It is considered that the proposed flatted development as amended will not adversely affect the amenity of the established housing area and that it can be accommodated without detriment to the surrounding residential properties. Further detailed consideration of this matter is given at paragraph 4.4 below. Furthermore given the existing unsightly nature of the site it is considered that the proposed development will only serve to enhance the setting and amenity of the area. The application therefore accords with policy HSG 8 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005).

4.4 Policy HSG 10 (Assessing Applications for Housing Development) is also a material consideration in the determination of this application. This local plan policy requires the following matters 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. The application site has just recently been cleared of the derelict buildings but still has a derelict appearance. The amended design will ensure that the proposed flats will have a minimal impact on the adjacent residential properties. The new design ensures that there are no issues of overshadowing or impact on the sunlight/daylight received by the properties. It should

93 also be noted that given the location of the flats there are no issues of overlooking. The proposed design is considered acceptable given its incorporation of two storey blocks and it will have a minimal impact on the adjacent residential properties of Westwood Road. The block adjacent to Westwood road will maintain the existing established building line and will present an attractive aspect to the site much improved on the existing derelict site. The proposed layout provides some landscaping for the site and a further condition has been proposed requesting a landscaping scheme to be submitted and approved prior to the commencement of development. Access and parking issues are considered in paragraph 4.5. The application therefore accords with policy HSG 10.

4.5 Policy TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) is also a consideration. The Transportation Team Leader has offered no objections to the proposed revised layout subject to conditions regarding the access, visibility splay, parking provision, aisle width and turning areas. These matters can be addressed through the imposition of suitable planning conditions.

4.6 With regards to the responses received from Scottish Water, NLC Protective Services and NLC Community Services, all matters raised may be addressed through the imposition of suitable planning conditions.

4.7 In conclusion, I consider that the proposed residential development complies with the relevant policies of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

94 Application No:

Date Registered: 12th June 2006

Applicant: R Coke Gertrudebank Orchard Overtown ML2 ORW

Agent Laurence Wilson 23 George Street Dumfries DGI IEA

Development: Erection of Dwellinghouse with Detached Double Garage, Stables and Septic Tank

Location: Plot 2 Gertrudebank Orchard Land west of A71 Wishaw

Ward: 15 Garrion Councillor John Pentland

Grid Reference: 279192 652124

File Reference: SIP LIBF/2/4 1 /EM L/MAW

Site History: 164/76 Erection of a Farm house Approved April 1976

290189 Removal of Condition 2 of 164/76 (restrictive occupancy) Approved October 1989

S/04/01824/FUL Erection of Two Dwellinghouses, Each with Detached Double Garages, Stables and Septic Tanks Withdrawn May 2006

Development Plan: The site lies in an area zoned as Green Belt and as Area of Great Landscape Value in the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000, the Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan 1964 and the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005).

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: NLC Community Services (Com ments) Scottish Natural Heritage (Objection) Scottish Water (Comments) British Gas (Com ments) Scottish Power (Comments)

Representations: 6 Letters of Representation.

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 22nd June 2006

95 PLANNlNGAPPLlCATlON No. S106/00762/FUL R.ir~-homthOrdnur.O*nNm.Plmiwlh N& Lanarkshire Council w p"",a,ad v. CaVdIr d nrmpj 8 Planrung and Environment Wlav mu OCnwnWmL Headquarters ERECTION OF DWELLINGHOUSEWITH DETACHED DOUBLE GARAGE SuiteSol, Fleming House ~~~::::a~"~~~~*' 2 Tryst Road STABLES AND SEPTIC TANK CUMBERNAULD GB71 JW PLOT 2, GERTRUDE BANK ORCHARD, LAND WEST OF A71, &shire Tebephene 01238 618210 OVERTOWN, WISHAW. Council Fax. 01236818232 OS Lu;an;s 100023358 2W4 * Representation

96 Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. The proposed development is contrary to policies 1, 7, 9 and 10 of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 and policies ENV6 (Green Belt), ENV15 (Area of Great Landscape Value), HSGI 0 (Assessing Applications for Residential Development) and HSGl2 (Housing in the Green Belt) of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005) in that it would adversely affect the character of the Green Belt and an Area of Great Landscape Value due to its physical and visual impact upon the site and surrounding area.

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 scope to satisfactorily improve the access, and would be prejudicial to road safety.

Note to Committee:

If granted this application will require to be referred to the Scottish Ministers in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 1997 as a development contrary to the development plan.

Background Papers: t

Application form and plans received 4th May 2006 and supporting statemenVbusiness plan received 16'h May 2005.

Memo from Transportation Team Leader received 28th June 2006 Memo from Geotechnical Team Leader received 27th June 2006 Memo from NLC Community Services received 28th June 2006 Memo from NLC Finance Department received 10th January 2006 Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 26th June 2006 Letter from Scottish Water received 1st November 2004 Letter from British Gas received 23rd June 2006 Letter from Scottish Power received 26th June 2006

Letter from George S Finlayson, East Lodge, Cambusnethan Priory, Overtown, Wishaw, ML2 ORW received 17th May 2006. Letter from Thomas Paterson, Pathhead Orchard, Overtown, ML2 ORW received 19th May 2006. 2 Letters from Mr Camp, Stewartbank Orchard, Overtown, received 6th June and 3rd July 2006. Letter from Mr John Paterson, Garrionhaugh Farm, Overtown, ML2 ORW received 23rd June 2006. Letter from Mrs Paterson, Garrionhaugh Farm, Overtown, Wishaw, ML2 ORW received 23rd June 2006.

Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005) SDD Circular 1211996 Planning Agreement's SPPl The Planning System SPP3 Planning For Housing SPPl5 Planning for Rural Development SPP 21 Green Belts

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr E. McLennaghan at 01698 302137 Date: 4 July 2006

97 APPLICATION NO. S/06/00753/FUL

REPORT

Description of Site and Proposal

This application seeks planning consent for the erection of a dwellinghouse, with detached double garage, stables building and septic tank at a site at Gertrudebank Orchard, within the Clyde Valley, south of Overtown.

The application site is located on the sloping north side of the Clyde Valley, north of an existing access track. It comprises part of a larger area of land also under the ownership of applicant, which includes the applicant’s house, surrounding gardens, grassland, woodland and old orchards. The site is surrounded by a mix of mature woodland and orchard trees. Access is taken from the A71 via a private road which serves a number of other properties. To the south of the site, opposite the private track, the land declines away to the River Clyde.

The proposal is for a single storey dwellinghouse adjacent to another, similar proposed dwelling, which is subject to a separate planning application S/06/00762/FUL and is also subject to determination by this committee. The size of the current application plot is approximately 33 metres wide by 29 metres deep, and the front boundary is to be marked by the existing hedge line. The submitted plans also include the entire private access road to the A71, which consists of a rough track.

Two supporting statements have been submitted as well as a break down of costs required to implement various environmental proposals. The applicant’s intention, indicated in the supporting information, is to sell the properties to release capital to facilitate the re-instatement of the orchard as well as various other environmental enhancements on the land with interpretation boards and a viewing area for the public. It is proposed to market the properties for people with an interest in horseslriding. The supporting statements set out in broad terms the redeveloping and planting of an area of 1.2Ha with orchard fruit trees, introducing traditional varieties to the area, enhancing and protecting wildlife habitats, preserving rare grasses and creating pond-life habitats. Information is provided on the advantages of this project including the landscape and biodiversity of the area being greatly enhanced. A comparison is given of the potential effects of the environmental improvements not being implemented, the orchards being lost and the site deteriorating as a result of fly tipping, vandalism and becoming overgrown should planning permission not be granted.

Previous applications in and around the site include the refusal in 1980 of the replacement of a dwellinghouse because of no agricultural justification and recent refusal of two holiday cottages, which was also dismissed at appeal, both at Stewartbank. More recently, an application registered in October 2004 for two dwellings and stables (equivalent to the two current applications combined) was withdrawn by the applicant in May 2006.

Development Plan

The proposed development raises strategic issues in terms of the Glasgow & Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 Strategic Policy 1 ‘Strategic Development Locations’ and Strategic Policy 7 ‘Strategic Environmental Resources’. These policies seek to protect and enhance the Green Belt and Areas of Great Landscape Value (AGLV) and detail a presumption against proposals which could have a significant adverse effect.

Strategic Policies 9 (Assessment of Development Proposals) and 10 (Departures from the Development Plan) are also relevant. SP9 states that in order to comply with the Structure Plan, proposals should satisfy various criteria, including B(iv) - safeguard AGLV’s and the

98 landscape character of the Green Belt; and (v) - avoid isolated and sporadic development in the Green Belt and wider countryside. SPlO states that any proposal which fails to meet the relevant criteria in SP9 will be regarded as a departure from the development plan and consideration requires to be given to the appropriateness of the development with regard to justification in terms of economic, social and environmental benefits and any other material considerations.

2.3 The site is zoned as Green Belt in the adopted Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan 1964. The same zoning applies in the up to date Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005) and is covered by policies ENVG (Green Belt) and ENVI 5 (Area of Great Landscape Value). Policy ENVG (Green Belt) indicates that the Council will safeguard the character and function of the Green Belt within which there will be a presumption against development or change of use other than that directly associated with specific rural uses. Policy ENV15 aims to protect and enhance the Clyde Valley Area of Great Landscape Value by resisting any proposal, which would have a significant adverse effect on the character and quality of the environment.

2.4 Policy HSG12 details criteria against which new housing proposals in the Green Belt should be assessed. In particular it details specific criteria to be taken into account including operational need, the visual prominence of the site and the provision made for vehicular access

2.5 Policies ENVlO (Trees and Woodland Management), HSGlO (Assessing Applications for Housing Development), ENV9 (Flooding) and TRI 3 (Transportation Implications of Development) are also relevant.

3. Consultations and Reoresentations

3.1 My Transportation Team Leader recommends refusal of the application and comments;

(i) The granting of this application would increase the number of vehicular braking, turning and manoeuvring operations on this de-restricted length of A-class road (The Horsley Brae), all to the detriment of road safety. (ii) The existing junction arrangement onto the A71 is not substantial enough to accommodate a vehicle wishing to enter the development while another vehicle waits to join the main road. In terms of alignment it is substandard horizontally and vertically and is only 3.3 metes wide along most of its length with no passing places. The access for its vast majority is unsurfaced and in poor condition. (iii) The above junction has existing substandard sightlines and, due to the embankment and hedge in both directions, there is little scope for their improvement to the recommended 4.5 metres by 215 metres visibility splay standard. (iv) The granting of this application may provoke future demands for improvements to the public road network. (v) The existing access serves approximately 6 dwellings plus nurseries. According to current design standards, this scale of development should be served by a public road network. The granting of this application will further exacerbate the present situation. (vi) A 2 metre wide footway on both sides of the private road connecting to the existing road network is required although it would appear this is unachievable on land in the applicants control.

3.2 Scottish Natural Heritage have indicated that they have already been consulted over similar proposals for this site (S/04/01824/FUL) and at that time registered their objection over the location of the development in relation to the ancient woodlands and the AGLV. SNH note that the applicant has relocated the development, it has only been moved by approximately 100 metres and is still within the areas of original concern. SNH therefore still recommend refusal of the application on the grounds of adverse impact on the AGLV and Ancient Woodland. They

99 indicate that Local Plan policies ENV6 & 15 recognise the value of this area and highlight support for the Council in this respect. Due to the site location SNH do not consider that the aims of these policies can be met. SNH consider that as the proposed development will be visible from the A72 it is therefore likely to contribute to the incessant erosion of the scenic and rural characteristics of the valley as well as to the cumulative urbanisation of the Green Belt. SNH therefore considers the proposal will have adverse landscape and visual impacts within and outwith the application site. In addition to these impacts the application site is at the end of a narrow gorge woodland listed as ancient woodland. The site is also adjacent to a potential local nature reserve at Cambusnethan Woods. SNH stress that whilst the woodlands affected by this development are not the subject of any formal additional designation, all native woodlands within the valley contribute to the healthy function of woodland habitat. In response to further justification submitted by the applicant arguing that environmental improvements and orchard re-instatement out-weigh the provision of two new dwellinghouses to raise capital for the project, SNH maintain their objection.

3.3 NLC Community Services indicate that the comments issued in their previous consultation response to application (S/04/01824/FUL) still apply to the new proposals. Community Services have reservations regarding this development on the grounds of the sensitivity of its location in relation to the ancient woodland. They indicate that the application site falls within a wider area designated as ancient woodland due to there being continuous tree cover in the area for over 250 years. It is recommended that the area is not developed due to the loss and fragmentation of this ancient woodland resource. It is noted that the proposal will require the removal of regenerating tree cover. Also noted is that the site lies on the fringe of the woodlands associated with nearby Cambusnethan House and lies within an AGLV, visible from the A72. Finally, Community Services highlight that vehicular access can only be gained with difficulty. The landscape services section has requested further details of the house types and their precise location with access arrangements and planting shown.

3.3 The Finance Department examined and commented on the business plan for the previous application (S/04/01824/FUL) and the applicant has submitted the same plan for the new application. The Finance Department comments that the business plan does not demonstrate any long-term viable business proposal that would justify an associated dwellinghouse in the Green Belt. The financial figures supplied simply detail that the re-instatement works proposed will cost in the region of f55,000.

3.4 My Geotechnical Team Leader has noted that due to the lack of detail submitted with the application only general comments can be made. It is noted that the site lies in a mining area and could be unstable. It should be noted, made ground is commonly present in all areas where previous development has taken place. Harmful gases can also be generated within abandoned mineral workings. A drainage assessment should be submitted for consideration.

3.5 Scottish Water have not responded to their consultation but had previously commented for application (S/O4/1824/FUL) that they had no objection to the proposals although noted that foul drainage would require to be treated by a septic tank. The level of development is such that SEPA recommend standard conditions. Scottish Power and Transco have no objection although note the proximity of their apparatus in relation to the application site.

3.6 Six letters of objection have been received from notified neighbours. The points of objection are summarised as follows: -

(i) The proposal is contrary to the Local Plan and an inappropriate use of a rural area. (ii) The current access track cannot accommodate any further traffic especially in view of a lack of passing places and a deterioration in quality. If planning permission was to be granted provision of adequate passing places and protection of existing ditches and drainage is essential. (iii) Previous similar applications have been refused and circumstances have not changes.

100 (iv) Concerns regarding safety and security and the implications that an upgrade of an footway to an access road might have. (v) Concern regarding the impact of the development on the local wildlife and natural habitats. (vi) Concerns regarding drainage and contamination due to the lack of drainage and an available soak away and flooding at the site.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.2 It is considered that the determining issues in this case are as follows: -

4.3 The application raises issues of a strategic nature and must be considered in terms of the Structure Plan. The aims of the Structure Plan which are relevant are the safeguarding and enhancement of the landscape character of the Green Belt and Areas of Great Landscape Value, as advocated in strategic policies 1 and 7. The proposal would constitute an encroachment of development into the countryside. It would also significantly adversely affect the character of the Green Belt and Area of Great Landscape Value at this location by virtue that it will displace a natural greenfield site and trees with significant ground clearing and levelling. The proposed development would have a visual impact at the site and from the wider area as it is visible from the A72 (a national tourist route). This would be to the detriment of the landscape setting of the area. The location of the dwellinghouse is also in proximity to an area designated Ancient Woodland of Semi-Natural Origin and the removal of trees and levelling of ground to facilitate the development will also have an unacceptable ecological impact. It is considered that the impact of the development cannot be lessened by the use of conditions or modification of the proposal.

4.4 For these reasons, the proposal fails two criterion of Structure Plan Policy SP9 relating to the safeguarding of the Area of Great Landscape Value and the avoidance of isolated sporadic development in the Green Belt. The proposal is therefore a departure from the Structure Plan. In terms of Structure Plan Policy SPlO (Departures from the Structure Plan), there is no specific quantitative, qualitative or specific locational need for the house proposed. Neither would there be any economic, social or environmental benefit as listed in Policy SPlO which would justify the proposal. While the proposed reinstatement works in relation to the orchard are commendable these do not justify permitting a dwellinghouse in the Green Belt to raise capital. While each application is considered on its individual merits, I consider that granting permission in this instance could encourage similar applications (which would have serious cumulative impacts) and would harm the integrity of Green Belt and AGLV policy.

4.5 With regard to the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) it is considered that there are several policies, which the proposal is contrary to, namely, policies:-

ENVG ‘Green Belt’ ‘ . ENVlO ‘Trees and Woodland Management’ ENVl5 ‘Area of Great LandscaDe Value

101 HSGl 0 ‘Assessing Applications for Residential Development’ HSG12 ‘Housing in the Green Belt’ TRI 3 ‘Assessing the Transport Implications of Development‘ ENV9 ‘Flooding’

4.6 The proposed development is contrary to ENV6 and ENV15 for the reasons already stated in paragraphs 4.2 and 4.3 above. Although policy ENVIO supports trees and woodland management it does not include any allowance for the construction of a dwellinghouse in the Green Belt to fund such activities. Furthermore, policy HSGl2 clearly details circumstances where new housing is acceptable in the Green Belt and I do not consider this to be met by the proposal. The applicant currently stays in close proximity to the application site hence there is no requirement for further on-site accommodation and the proposed business plan simply costs the environmental works which could be funded by the sale of the a dwellinghouse. No long- term viable rural business is proposed nor are the costs of the construction of the dwellinghouse included. Further, it is not possible to ensure that funds generated would be directly used for the proposed environmental improvements. Even if that was the case it would not provide acceptable justification of a house in the Green Belt and AGLV.

4.7 Policies HSGIO, HSG12 and TR13 require suitable provision for access. It is considered that the development is likely to have an adverse impact on road traffic circulation and road safety as there is inadequate provision for access in terms of width, visibility and geometry, both at the junction with the public road (A71) and up to the application site. While the applicant has indicated that he owns the application site, the access appears to be shared and it is not clear that appropriate improvements could be made on land under the applicants full control. It should be noted that a third party who shares this access has objected on grounds of inadequate access. Notwithstanding any potential to upgrade the access to an adoptable standard, this issue is effectively immaterial. The works required are likely to be unacceptable in environmental and visual amenity terms, given the location of the site in the Green Belt and in an Area Great Landscape Value.

4.8 Relevant national planning policy is contained firstly in Scottish Planning Policy 1 (The Planning System) and Scottish Planning Policy 21 (Green Belts). SPPl does not preclude Green Belt development but seeks to promote brownfield development and minimise development in the Green Belt. SPP21 states that there will be a strong presumption against inappropriate development in the green-belt. Development plans will define the uses that are appropriate in individual green belts including agriculture, woodland and forestry, horticulture and outdoor recreation. New developments in the green belt must be of a suitable scale and form for the location and many uses will only be appropriate when the intensity is IOW.Where a proposed use would not normally be consistent with green belt designation, exceptionally it may still be considered appropriate, either as a national priority or to meet an established need. No such justification has been submitted and it is therefore considered the application does not meet the requirements of SPP21 “Green Belts”. Furthermore SPP 15 “Planning For Rural Development” also states that Green Belts will continue to presume against most new development and play a key role in maintaining the setting and separation of towns and cities. Any proposals to release land for development, which is currently designated as Green Belt, should be part of a longer- term strategic policy and set out in the development plan. The proposed development does not fall within the criteria set out in both SPP21 and SPP15 and as such is considered contrary to this national planning policy.

4.9 Circular 12/1996 (Planning Agreements) indicates that restricting occupancy, particularly of new houses in the countryside, is a specific purpose for which planning agreements are commonly used. In this instance I consider that a Section 75 has no role to play in the consideration of the application, as there is insufficient justification for the development. The applicant has noted a willingness to enter into a legal agreement to ensure no further dwellinghouses are constructed on his land, however I consider that this does not have any impact on the wider over-riding reasons for refusal of the current application.

102 4.10 In terms of consultation responses, SNH recognise that while the woodland affected by the development is not subject to any specific formal woodland designation, all native woodlands within the area contribute to the healthy function of the woodland habitat and encourage biodiversity. They consider the proposal unacceptable due to it being within an area of ancient woodland. SNH highlight that the cumulative impacts of this form of development will have a negative urbanisation effect on an Area of Great Landscape Value and that the proposal is visible and can be overlooked from the A72, which is a national tourist route. On this basis SNH have therefore objected to the application on grounds that it is an inappropriate location where discrete and cumulative impacts will have an unacceptable effect. NLC Community Services also object on similar grounds and these matters cannot be addressed by conditions. My Transportation Team Leader has recommended refusal of the application for the reasons detail in paragraph 3.1 above and while such matters could otherwise be conditioned, the applicants do not control the appropriate land. Regardless of this, the landscape impact of such works is also likely to be unacceptable. In terms of other issues raised in consultation responses, conditions could be imposed to deal with the matters raised by SEPA, Scottish Water and Transco.

4.11 In terms of the points of objection raised in third party representations, I would comment as follows:

(i) The point relating to the proposal being contrary to the Local Plan and inappropriate in a rural area is agreed as detailed in paragraph 4.2 to 4.8 above. (ii) The point relating to the condition of the current access track is agreed as detailed in paragraphs 4.7 and 4.10 above. (iii) Previous proposals having been refused planning permission in the past is acknowledged, most recently at the neighbouring property, Stewartbank. (iv) Concerns regarding the implications that an upgrade to the access road might have on safety and security for the area are not a material planning consideration. (v) Concern regarding the impact of the development on the local wildlife and natural habitats is agreed as detailed in paragraph 4.10 above. (vi) Concerns regarding drainage and contamination due to the lack of available soak away are noted and could be addressed by suitable conditions if the committee choose to grant consent as outlined in paragraph 4.10 above.

4.12 It is considered that the development is contrary to the development plan and national planning policy in that the impact of the development on the site and surrounding area, as well as the access and transportation implications, are unacceptable and would set a precedent for further urbanisation of the. Clyde Valley. The applicant’s desire to enhance the ecologicaVenvironmenta1value of the area is acknowledged, however the overriding issue in this case is the integrity of Green Belt and AGLV policy. I do not consider that the justification provided offers sufficient reason to depart from the development plan, a view supported by the statutory consultee, Scottish Natural Heritage. I also draw Members attention to the recent refusal of planning permission for two holiday cottages at the adjacent Stewartbank. The resulting appeal was dismissed, with the Reporter concurring with the Council’s view of adverse impact on the Green Belt and Area of Great Landscape Value and the shortcomings in the existing access to which this application also relates.

4.1 3 Therefore, taking into account the development plan, national planning policy and other material considerations, including representations, I recommend that this application be refused.

.. 103 Application No: S/06/00762/FU L

Date Registered: 12th June 2006

Applicant : R Coke Gertrudebank Orchard Overtown ML2 ORW

Agent Laurence Wilson 23 George Street Dumfries DGI 1EA

Development: Erection of Dwellinghouse with Detached Double Garage, Stables and Septic Tank

Location: Plot I Gertrudebank Orchard Land west of A71 Wishaw

Ward: 15 Garrion Councillor John Pentland

Grid Reference: 279159 652162

File Reference: SIPLIBF/2/4 1 /E M/MM

Site History: 164/76 Erection of a Farm house Approved April 1976

290/89 Removal of Condition 2 of 164/76 (restrictive occupancy) Approved October 1989

S/04/01824/FUL Erection of Two Dwellinghouses, Each with Detached Double Garages, Stables and Septic Tanks Withdrawn May 2006

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: NLC Community Services (Comments) Scottish Natural Heritage (Objection) Scottish Water (Comments) British Gas (Com ments) Scottish Power (Comments)

Representations: 6 Letters of Representation.

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 22nd June 2006

104 105 Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. The proposed development is contrary to policies 1, 7, 9 and 10 of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 and policies ENV6 (Green Belt), ENV15 (Area of Great Landscape Value), HSGl 0 (Assessing Applications for Residential Development) and HSGl2 (Housing in the Green Belt) of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005) in that it would adversely affect the character of the Green Belt and an Area of Great Landscape Value due to its physical and visual impact upon the site and surrounding area.

Note to Committee:

Background Papers:

Application form and plans rece,ive.d 4th May 2006 and supporting statementlbusiness plan received 16th May 2005.

Letter from George S Finlayson, East Lodge, Cambusnethan Priory, Overtown, Wishaw, ML2 ORW received 17th May 2006. Letter from Thomas Paterson, Pathhead Orchard, Overtown, ML2 ORW received 19th May 2006. 2 Letters from Mr Camp, Stewartbank Orchard, Overtown, received 3rd June, 6th June & 3rd July 2006. Letter from Mr John Paterson, Garrionhaugh Farm, Overtown, ML2 ORW received 23rd June 2006. Letter from Mrs Paterson, Garrionhaugh Farm, Overtown, Wishaw, ML2 ORW received 23rd June 2006.

Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 &. 2005) SDD Circular 12/1996 Planning Agreement’s SPPl The Planning System SPP3 Planning For Housing SPPl5 Planning for Rural Developtnent SPP 21 Green Belts

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr E. McLennaghan at 01698 302137. Date: 4 July 2006

106 APPLICATION NO. S1061007621FUL

REPORT

Description of Site and Proposal

This application seeks planning consent for the erection of a dwellinghouse, with detached double garage, stables, bililding and septic tank at a site at Gertrudebank Orchard, within the Clyde Valley, south of Overtown.

The proposal is for a single storey dwellinghouse adjacent to another, similar proposed dwelling, which is subject to a separate planning application S/06/00753/FUL and is also subject to determination by this committee. The size of the current application plot is approximately 33 metres wide by 29 metres deep, and the front boundary is to be marked by the existing hedge line. The submitted plans also include the entire private access road to the A71, which consists of a rough track.

Two supporting statements have been submitted as well as a break down of costs required to implement various environmental proposals. The applicant’s intention, indicated in the supporting information, is to sell the properties to release capital to facilitate the re-instatement of the orchard as well as various other environmental enhancements on the land with interpretation boards and a viewing area for the public. It is proposed to market the properties for people with an interest in horsedriding. The supporting statements set out in broad terms the redeveloping and planting of an area of 1.2Ha with orchard fruit trees, introducing traditional varieties to the area, enhmcing and protecting wildlife habitats, preserving rare grasses and creating pond-life habitats. Information is provided on the advantages of this project including the landscape and biodiversity of the area being greatly enhanced. A comparison is given of the potential effects of the environmental improvements not being implemented, the orchards being lost and the site deteriorating as a result of fly tipping, vandalism and becoming overgrown should planning permission not be granted.

Development Plan

107 landscape character of the Green Belt; and (v) - avoid isolated and sporadic development in the Green Belt and wider countryside. SPlO states that any proposal which fails to meet the relevant criteria in SP9 will be regarded as a departure from the development plan and consideration requires to be given to the appropriateness of the development with regard to justification in terms of economic, social and environmental benefits and any other material considerations.

2.3 The site is zoned as Green Belt in the adopted Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan 1964. The same zoning applies in the up to date Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005) and is covered by policies ENVG (Green Belt) and ENVl5 (Area of Great Landscape Value). Policy ENVG (Green Belt) indicates that the Council will safeguard the character and fundion of the Green Belt within which there will be a presumption against development or change of use other than that directly associated with specific rural uses. Policy ENV15 aims to protect and enhance the Clyde Valley Area of Great Landscape Value by resisting any proposal, which would have a significant adverse effect on the character and quality of the environment.

2.5 Policies ENVlO (Trees and Woodland Management), HSGl 0 (Assessing Applications for Housing Development), ENV9 (Flooding) and TR13 (Transportation Implications of Development) are also relevant.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 My Transportation Team Leader recommends refusal of the application and comments;

The granting of this application would increase the number of vehicular braking, turning and manoeuvring operations on this de-restricted length of A-class road (The Horsley Brae), all to the detriment of road safety. The existing junction arrangement onto the A71 is not substantial enough to accommodate a vehicle wishing to enter the development while another vehicle waits to join the main road. In terms of alignment it is substandard horizontally and vertically and is only 3.3 metes wide along most of its length with no passing places. The access for its vast majority is unsurfaced and in poor condition. The above junction has existing substandard sightlines and, due to the embankment and hedge in both directions, there is little scope for their improvement to the recommended 4.5 metres by 21 5 metres visibility splay standard. The granting of this application may provoke future demands for improvements to the public road network. The existing access serves approximately 6 dwellings plus nurseries. According to current design standards, this scale of development should be served by a public road network. The granting of this application will further exacerbate the present situation. A 2 metre wide footway on both sides of the private road connecting to the existing road network is required although it would appear this is unachievable on land in the applicants control.

108 indicate that Local Plan policies ENV6 & 15 recognise the value of this area and highlight support for the Council in this respect. Due to the site location SNH do not consider that the aims of these policies can be met. SNH consider that as the proposed development will be visible from the A72 it is therefore likely to contribute to the incessant erosion of the scenic and rural characteristics of the valley as well as to the cumulative urbanisation of the Green Belt. SNH therefore considers the proposal will have adverse landscape and visual impacts within and outwith the application site. In addition to these impacts the application site is at the end of a narrow gorge woodland listed as ancient woodland. The site is also adjacent to a potential local nature reserve at Cambusnethan Woods. SNH stress that whilst the woodlands affected by this development are not the subject of any formal additional designation, all native woodlands within the valley contribute to the healthy function of woodland habitat. In response to further justification submitted by the applicant arguing that environmental improvements and orchard re-instatement out-weigh the provision of two new dwellinghouses to raise capital for the project, SNH maintain their objection.

3.3 NLC Community Services indicate that the comments issued in their previous consultation response to application jS/Q4/01824/FUL) still apply to the new proposals. Community Services have reservations regarding this development on the grounds of the sensitivity of its location in relation to the ancient woodland. They indicate that the application site falls within a wider area designated as ancient woodland due to there being continuous tree cover in the area for over 250 years. It is recommended that the area is not developed due to the loss and fragmentation of this ancient woodland resource. It is noted that the proposal will require the removal of regenerating tree cover. Also noted is that the site lies on the fringe of the woodlands associated with nearby Cambusnethan House and lies within an AGLV, visible from the A72. Finally, Community Services highlight that vehicular access can only be gained with difficulty. The landscape services section has requested further details of the house types and their precise location with access arrangements and planting shown.

3.6 Six letters of objection have been received from notified neighbours. The points of objection are summarised as follows: -

109 (iv) Concerns regarding safety and security and the implications that an upgrade of an footway to an access road might have. (v) Concern regarding the impact of the development on the local wildlife and natural habitats. (vi) Concerns regarding drainage and contamination due to the lack of drainage and an available soak away and flooding at the site.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.2 It is considered that the determining issues in this case are as follows: -

(i) whether the development complies with the development plan and national planning policies and guidance; (ii) the acceptability of the impact of the development on the site and the surrounding area; (iii) whether the benefits of the proposed environmental works outweigh the release of Green Belt/AGiV land for the proposed dwellinghouse; (iv) the access and transportation implications of the proposal. 4.3 The application raises issues of a strategic nature and must be considered in terms of the Structure Plan. The aims of the Structure Plan which are relevant are the safeguarding and enhancement of the landscape character of the Green Belt and Areas of Great Landscape Value, as advocated in strategic policies 1 and 7. The proposal would constitute an encroachment of development into the countryside. It would also significantly adversely affect the character of the Green Belt and Area of Great Landscape Value at this location by virtue that it will displace a natural greenfield site and trees with significant ground clearing and levelling. The proposed development would have a visual impact at the site and from the wider area as it is visible from the A72 (a national tourist route). This would be to the detriment of the landscape setting of the area. The location of the dwellinghouse is also in proximity to an area designated Ancient Woodland of Semi-Natural Origin and the removal of trees and levelling of ground to facilitate the development will also have an unacceptable ecological impact. It is considered that the impact of the development cannot be lessened by the use of conditions or modification of the proposal.

4.4 For these reasons, the proposal fails two criterion of Structure Plan Policy SP9 relating to the safeguarding of the Area of Great Landscape Value and the avoidance of isolated sporadic development in the Green Belt. The proposal is therefore a departure from the Structure Plan. In terms of Structure Plan Policy SPIO (Departures from the Structure Plan), there is no specific quantitative, qualitative or specific locational need for the house proposed. Neither would there be any economic, social or, environmental benefit as listed in Policy SPIO which would justify the proposal. While the proposed reinstatement works in relation to the orchard are commendable these do not justify permitting a dwellinghouse in the Green Belt to raise capital. While each application is considered on its individual merits, I consider that granting permission in this instance could encourage similar applications (which would have serious cumulative impacts) and would harm the integrity of Green Belt and AGLV policy.

4.5 With regard to the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) it is considered that there are several policies, which the proposal is contrary to, namely, policies:-

ENVG ‘Green Belt‘ ENVlO ‘Trees and Woodland Management’ ENVI 5 ‘Area of Great Landscape Value

110 HSGI 0 ‘Assessing Applications for Residential Development’ HSGl2 ‘Housing in the Green Belt’ TRI 3 ‘Assessing the Transport Implications of Development’ ENV9 ‘Flooding’

4.6 The proposed development is contrary to ENV6 and ENV15 for the reasons already stated in paragraphs 4.2 and 4.3 above. Although policy ENVIO supports trees and woodland management it does not include any allowance for the construction of a dwellinghouse in the Green Belt to fund such activities. Furthermore, policy HSGl2 clearly details circumstances where new housing is acceptable in the Green Belt and I do not consider this to be met by the proposal. The applicant currently stays in close proximity to the application site hence there is no requirement for further on-site accommodation and the proposed business plan simply costs the environmental works which could be funded by the sale of the a dwellinghouse. No long- term viable rural business is proposed nor are the costs of the construction of the dwellinghouse included. Further, it is not possible to ensure that funds generated would be directly used for the proposed environmental improvements. Even if that were the case it would not provide acceptable justification of a house in the Green Belt and AGLV.

4.8 Relevant national planning policy is contained firstly in Scottish Planning Policy 1 (The Planning System) and Scottish Planning Policy 21 (Green Belts). SPPl does not preclude Green Belt development but seeks to promote brownfield development and minimise development in the Green Belt. SPP21 states that there will be a strong presumption against inappropriate development in the green belt. Development plans will define the uses that are appropriate in individual green belts including agriculture, woodland and forestry, horticulture and outdoor recreation. New developments in the green belt must be of a suitable scale and form for the location and many uses will only be appropriate when the intensity is low. Where a proposed use would not normally be consistent with green belt designation, exceptionally it may still be considered appropriate, either as a national priority or to meet an established need. No such justification has been submitted and it is therefore considered the application does not meet the requirements of SPP21 “Green Belts”. Furthermore SPP 15 “Planning For Rural Development” also states that Green Belts will continue to presume against most new development and play a key role in maintaining the setting and separation of towns and cities. Any proposals to release land for development, which is currently designated as Green Belt, should be part of a longer- term strategic policy and set out in the development plan. The proposed development does not fall within the criteria set out in both SPP21 and SPP15 and as such is considered contrary to this national planning policy.

4.9 Circular 1211996 (Planning Agreements) indicates that restricting occupancy, particularly of new houses in the countryside, is a specific purpose for which planning agreements are commonly used. In this instance I consider that a Section 75 has no role to play in the consideration of the application, as there is insufficient justification for the development. The applicant has noted a willingness to enter into a legal agreement to ensure no further dwellinghouses are constructed on his land, however I consider that this does not have any impact on the wider over-riding reasons for refusal of the current application.

111 4.10 In terms of consultation responses, SNH recognise that while the woodland affected by the development is not subject to any specific formal woodland designation, all native woodlands within the area contribute to the healthy function of the woodland habitat and encourage biodiversity. They consider the proposal unacceptable due to it being within an area of ancient woodland. SNH highlight that the cumulative impacts of this form of development will have a negative urbanisation effect on an Area of Great Landscape Value and that the proposal is visible and can be overlooked from the A72, which is a national tourist route. On this basis SNH have therefore objected to the application on grounds that it is an inappropriate location where discrete and cumulative impacts will have an unacceptable effect. NLC Community Services also object on similar grounds and these matters cannot be addressed by conditions. My Transportation Team Leader has recommended refusal of the application for the reasons detail in paragraph 3.1 above and while such matters could otherwise be conditioned, the applicants do not control the appropriate land. Regardless of this, the landscape impact of such works is also likely to be unacceptable. In terms of other issues raised in consultation responses, conditions could be imposed to deal with the matters raised by SEPA, Scottish Water and Transco.

4.11 In terms of the points of objection raised in third party representations, I would comment as follows:

4.1 2 It is considered that the development is contrary to the development plan and national planning policy in that the impact of the development on the site and surrounding area, as well as the access and transportation implications, are unacceptable and would set a precedent for further urbanisation of the Clyde Valley. The applicant’s desire to enhance the ecological/environmentalvalue of the area is acknowledged, however the overriding issue in this case is the integrity of Green Belt and AGLV policy. I do not consider that the justification provided offers sufficient reason to depart from the development plan, a view supported by the statutory consultee, Scottish Natural Heritage. I also draw Members attention to the recent refusal of planning permission for two holiday cottages at the adjacent Stewartbank. The resulting appeal was dismissed, with the Reporter concurring with the Council’s view of adverse impact on the Green Belt and Area of Great Landscape Value and the shortcomings in the existing access to which this application also relates.

4.1 3 Therefore, taking into account the development plan, national planning policy and other material considerations, including representations, I recommend that this application be refused.

112 Application No: S/06/00935/FUL

Date Registered: 1st June 2006

Applicant : Khalid Shah 14 Ambleside Rise Hamilton ML3 7HJ

Agent Aitchison Architects 5 Bourne Street Hamilton ML3 7BW

Development: Change of Use from Class 1 Retail to Hot Food Takeaway

Location: 265 North Dryburgh Road Wishaw North Lanarkshire ML2 7HW

Ward: 10 Coltness Councillor Ernest Holloway

Grid Reference: 280054657061

File Reference: S/PL/B/4/8(181 )

Site History: No relevant site history

Development Plan: The site is zoned as residential in the Burgh of Motherwell and Wishaw Development Plan 1953. On the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) the site is zoned as an Established Housing Area and policies HSG 8, RTLI (Retail Development), RTL 4 (Assessing Applications for Retail Development), RTLI 1 (Bad Neighbour Developments) and policy TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) are relevant to this development.

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: None

Representations: 3 Letters of Representation and Petition with 67 signatories

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 8th June 2006

113 114 Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. That the proposed development is contrary to the Council’s aim of directing such development to the town centre or secondary retail areas and would be detrimental to the character and amenity of the adjoining residential area by virtue of noise and general disturbance. It would also pose a hazard to traffic safety owing to the provision of no car parking spaces and would result in vehicles parking on-street on a narrow residential road which already experiences significant occurrences of on-street parking. As such, the proposal is contrary to Policies HSG8, RTLI, RTL4, RTLI 1 and TR13 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005).

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 1st June 2006

Memo from Transportation Manager received 30thJune 2006 Memo from Head of Protective Services received 14th June 2006

Letter from Teresa Cassidy, 270 North Dryburgh Road, Wishaw, ML2 7HW received 7th June 2006. Petition from Teresa Cassidy, 270 North Dryburgh Road, Wishaw, North Lanarkshire, ML2 7HW with 67 signatories received 14th June 2006. Letter from Mrs J Greechan, 267 North Dryburgh Road, Wishaw, ML2 7HW received 14th June 2006. Letter from Elizabeth Jordan, 273 North Dryburgh Road, Coltness, Wishaw, ML2 7HW received 23rd June 2006.

Burgh of Motherwell and Wishaw Development Plan 1953 Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005)

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Miss Charmaine Mills at 01698 302136.

Date: 6 July 2006

115 APPLICATION NO. S/06/00935/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I Planning permission is sought for a change of use of a Class 1 retail shop to a hot food take away at 265 North Dryburgh Road, Wishaw.

1.2 The proposal site is a vacant single storey, rectangle shaped detached building with a pitched tiled roof and solid, galvanised, brown security shutters. The building measures 11.4 metres in length by 4.8 metres in breadth and faces onto North Dryburgh Road. There are steps with metal railings leading down to the application site, which sits at a lower level than North Dryburgh Road. The north east side of the building is adjacent to a triangular shaped grassed area. There is a timber fence between the rear of the building and the side of a neighbouring dwellinghouse. The building is hard against this boundary fence with no gap between the fence and the building. Further two-storey terraced properties lie to the northwest and east of the application site. To the southwest is woodland area and to the south of North Dryburgh Road are two-storey terraced properties.

1.3 There are no designated off street parking spaces available with the application property. Intended hours of operation are to be confirmed.

1.4 The proposal would involve an alteration to the interior of the shop to provide a serving counter and kitchen. External changes would include an external flue on the roof of the building approximately one metre in height, which would not protrude above the original roofline.

2. Development Plan

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 residential in the Burgh of Motherwell and Wishaw Development Plan 1953.

2.3 On the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) the site is zoned as an Established Housing Area and policies HSG 8, RTLI (Retail Development), RTL 4 (Assessing Applications for Retail Development), RTLI 1 (Bad Neighbour Developments) and policy TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) are relevant to this development.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 The Transportation Section have been consulted and have recommended refusal of the proposal. As the development is outwith a town centre location the recommended minimum parking provision of 5 spaces for this type of development, but this cannot be provided. They have also advised that the existing shop would have been primarily used by local residents within walking distance, therefore not requiring the same off street parking as for the type of development now proposed.

3.2 Protective Services have been consulted and have no objections subject to cooking odours from the premises being controlled and that noise levels associated with the completed development are within recommended guidelines.

116 3.3 Following the standard neighbour notification and public advertisement procedures three letters of objection, and a petition with 67 signatories were received. The main reasons for objection are as follows:

Litter and food disposal may attract unwanted vermin, as the premises are adjacent to a woodland area.

On the basis of demand there is no need for any further provision of hot food outlets within the surrounding area. As hot food takeaways can now be phoned and delivered there is no necessity for another at this location. Another hotfood outlet at this location would cause over provision.

The proposal would cause litter within the immediate area and within the resident’s gardens.

This type of development is not suited within a residential area and would cause a certain degree of noise pollution.

Local residents could not open their windows and will not be able to enjoy their rear garden areas or hang clothes out to dry due to the smell from the hot food being cooked.

The proposal does not have any parking provision, which would lead to traffic congestion within the area and would cause concern in terms of pedestrian safety. An increase in on street parking, which is currently a problem, would raise safety issues in terms of children and the elderly crossing the road.

4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions

4.2 The proposal also requires to be in accordance with Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005). The site is zoned as an Established Housing Area and policies HG8, RTLl , RTL4, RTLI 1 and TRI 3 are relevant to this development.

4.3 Policy HSG8 seeks to protect the established character of existing and new housing areas by opposing development which is incompatible with a residential setting or adversely affects the amenity of Established Housing Areas. Whilst local retail uses can be considered acceptable in principle, within predominantly residential areas, hot food take-away shops (Sui Generis use) often do not accord with the terms of Policy HSG8 where they may cause harm to residential amenity. The rear of the building shares a boundary fence with a residential property on North Dryburgh Road with the house plot 3 metres away. The front of the existing building which would be the entrance and exit to the hot food shop would face towards residential properties on North Dryburgh Road which are approximately 20 metres in distance. Although these residential properties sit at a higher level the building is still in full view from the front of the properties. Its present use as a local shop would have attracted custom from local residents who would most likely have walked as opposed to travelling by car. In addition to this the hours of operation for a shop are generally acceptable within a predominantly residential area. This proposal introduces a late night hot food use where currently there are none and delivery vehicles and members of the public visiting the shop via pedestrian routes or by car are likely to result in increased levels of noise and disturbance to the detriment of the amenity of the surrounding residents. Given that the site is not defined as a town centre, or a secondary, village or neighbourhood commercial area and taking into account the proximity of nearby residential properties and that the site is

I17 within a high density residential area I consider this to be an inappropriate location for a hot food take away and that the proposal is contrary to Policy HG8.

4.4 Policy RTLI (Retail Development) seeks to direct lesser retail development to town centres, village, neighbourhood and secondary commercial areas. Policy RTL 4 (Assessing Applications for Retail Development) details criteria against which retail development proposals should be assessed and includes; the availability of suitable alternative sites in or around town centres and the provisions made for vehicular access & parking and the proposal’s impact on pedestrian safety and traffic circulation. In relation to the proposed retail unit, I consider that permitting this hot food take away would be contrary to the aims of policy RTLI. Given that the site is not defined as a town centre, or a secondary, village or neighbourhood commercial area and taking into account the proximity of nearby residential properties I consider this to be an inappropriate location for a hot food take away. No justification has been provided to demonstrate that there are no alternative sites in or around the Wishaw area for the proposed hot food take away and I remain unconvinced that this is the case. Therefore the proposal is also contrary to Policy RTL4. The traffic issues relating to the proposal will be considered under assessment of the application against policy TRI 3.

4.5 Policy RTLll seeks to locate developments such as hot food takeaways and other bad neighbour developments within Town Centres andlor Secondary Village or Neighbourhood Commercial Areas. Proposals are assessed on their potential impact on the character of the surrounding environment. Those which conflict with the surrounding environment causing nuisance through noise, smells or litter; are visually intrusive, result in traffic congestion, create a road safety hazard, have unsociable hours of operation, or do not satisfy parking requirements will generally be opposed. Granting permission for a hot food takeaway at this location would unacceptably conflict with the surrounding residential amenity of the area. Such uses should be located outwith residential areas as supported by RTLI1 as they can generate additional traffic and require dedicated off-street parking areas. Increased activity levels from customers during late opening hours can be detrimental to residential amenity and cause nuisance to residents. In this respect it is considered that the proposal would generate additional traffic and noisy activity including during late evening hours. Therefore the development is also contrary to local plan policy RTLll in that such a development would be detrimental to the character of the surrounding environment and that it does not satisfy recommended parking requirements.

4.6 Policy TR13 requires account to be taken of criteria including: the impact of development on road traffic circulation: road safety and provision made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. My Transportation Section have recommended against the application as there is no scope for the required 5 off street parking spaces needed for an application of this type. When the building was used as a local newsagent it would have been used by local residents within walking distance. However, given that there has been no provision made for off street parking, access, or vehicle manoeuvring the proposal does not comply with local plan policy TR13 and RTL4.

4.7 In relation to the grounds of objection these are addressed as follows:

(land3)lt is accepted that due to the proposal site being in such close proximity to residential properties, litter generated from a hot food takeaway may have a detrimental effect on the surrounding environment. Possible nuisance from vermin would be a matter for control by my Protective Services Section.

(2) The issue regarding over-provision of hot food takeaways does not constitute a material planning considerations and cannot therefore be assessed as part of this application.

(4) It is accepted that the introduction of this type of facility will increase the level of public concentration around the site, both during the day and in the evening hours and while

118 there is unlikely to be any significant increase in noise levels during the day, it is accepted that during evening hours the increased noise levels may be more evident to the nearby residential properties. I agree that this development would not be suitable within this residential area.

(5) Pollution Control have indicated that provided that the applicant can give sufficient details of odour control measures then the proposal maybe acceptable. However I consider that due to the location of the proposal being in such close proximity to residential properties that smells from a hot food takeaway will case problems, in this instance, including by adversely affecting the amenity of rear garden areas.

(6) My Transportation Section has advised against the proposal due to the lack of any dedicated parking provision for the proposal that would encourage short term parking on the roads around the site. It is accepted that such a development at this location may cause an unacceptable level of traffic congestion and on street parking, to the detriment of road safety.

4.8 In conclusion it is considered that the proposal is contrary to policies HSG8 (Established Housing Areas), RTLI (Retail Development), RTL 4 (Assessing Applications for Retail Development), RTLI 1 (Assessing Applications for Bad Neighbour Development), and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft in that the development site is not located within the town centre or any defined neighbourhood shopping centre and would be detrimental to the character and amenity of the surrounding residential area by virtue of noise and general disturbance through the introduction of an inappropriate use to the area and could pose a traffic hazard.

119 Application No: S/06/00949/FU L

Date Registered: 5th June 2006

Applicant: William Rundell 32 Coldstream Crescent Coltness Wishaw North Lanarkshire ML2 8QL

Development: Change of Use from Public Open Space to Private Driveway

Location : 32 Coldstream Crescent Coltness Wishaw North Lanarkshire ML2 8QL

Ward: 8 Stewarton Councillor John Moran

Grid Reference: 280287656011

File Reference: S/PL/B/4/4

Site History: S/96/10401/FUL Single Storey RearlSide Extension - Granted 17 September 1996

S/06/00686/FUL Erection of a Single Storey Front Extension - Application under consideration

Development Plan: The site is zoned as HSG 8 (Established Housing Areas) within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005).

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: No external consultations required

Representations: 3 Letters of Representation Received

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1 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 the proposed entrance gates of the driveway shall open inward into the site as shown on the approved plans and not outward onto the public footpath.

120 I 1 PLANNING APPLICATION NO. S /06/00949 / FUL I

121 Reason: In the interests of pedestrian and vehicular safety.

That before 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.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

That before the development hereby permitted is brought into use, a dropped kerb vehicular access of 3.0 metres in width shall be constructed in the position shown on the approved plans, in accordance with the specifications of the Roads Authority and as described in the Roads Guidelines published by the said Roads Authority.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

That the driveway hereby permitted, shall be surfaced in an impervious material such as tarmacadam, to be approved in writing by the Planning Authority before work commences upon the development.

Reason: To prevent loose material being carried onto the public footpath in the interests of pedestrian safety.

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.

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

That within one year of the development hereby permitted being brought into use, all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under terms of condition 6 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 landscaping, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: To ensure proper implementation of the landscaping scheme.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 5th June 2006

Memo from Transportation Manager received 30thJune 2006

Letter from E McAllister, 30 Coldstream Crescent, Wishaw, ML2 8QI received 7th June 2006. Letter from J Fagan, 34 Coldstream Crescent, Wishaw, ML2 8QL received 7th June 2006. Letter from Philip J Carmichael, 28 Coldtsream Crescent, Wishaw, ML2 8QL received 8th June 2006.

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

122 Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Laura Murray at 01 698 302081.

Date: 5 July 2006

123 APPLICATION NO. S1061009491FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I This application seeks planning permission for the change of use from public open space to private driveway at 32 Coldstream Crescent, Coltness, Wishaw, ML2 8QL. The site in question is currently a grassed area lying to the front of four properties which are positioned at right angles to Coldstream Crescent. The applicant proposes to create a private access way over this grassed area to the parking space at the side of the dwelling.

1.2 The proposed driveway will measure 3 metres in width and 25.5 metres in length from the adjoining public footpath to the end boundary of the Crescent. The proposed driveway will be between 7.4 metres and 8.7 metres distant from the adjacent houses. The driveway provides sufficient space for a vehicle to manoeuvre to and from the application site allowing the applicant to park his vehicle within his own property in a safer environment.

2. Development Plan

2.1 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.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 The Transportation Team Leader raised no objections to this proposal. Property Services also raised no objections to this proposed development.

3.2 Three letters of objection have been received from the surrounding neighbouring dwellings which can be summarised as follows: (1) The proposed driveway will cause an increase in noise level and will create a negative environmental impact on the area. (2) The proposed driveway would have an impact on the natural environment. (3) The driveway is unnecessary given that the applicant has a private lock-up garage a few yards away from his property. (4) The driveway would affect the future sale of surrounding properties.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The application raises no strategic issues and therefore only needs to be assessed against the Local Plan.

4.2 In terms of the development plan, Policy HSG 8 (Established Housing Areas) 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. In this respect, the loss of the existing, established area of open space is not considered to be significant. It is considered that each individual property has sufficient front and rear garden space to meet the Council’s open space guidelines out with this existing strip of open space. The plan shows a 1 metre strip on either side of the proposed driveway shall be planted with a variety of shrubs to enhance the appearance of the area, which is considered to be acceptable. The applicant has opted to

124 surface the proposed driveway in tarmacadam base, which is also acceptable. It is therefore considered that the development is consistent with the aims of Policy HSG 8 (Established Housing Areas).

4.3 In response to the points of objection given above I would comment as follows: - (1) In relation to the issue over noise pollution, it is considered that there will not be any significant rise in noise levels from this proposal given that this driveway is to be used for access to one house only. The proposal will result in the loss of a grassed area however, as indicated above the applicant proposes to complete the driveway in tarmacadam and to undertake planting on both sides. It is recommended that conditions be imposed to secure these works. In that case I am satisfied that the development will not result in a negative impact on the environment of the area. (2) The proposed driveway will not result in the loss of any natural habitat or protected trees, therefore the concerns relating to a loss of natural environment cannot be justified. (3) The need for the development in relation to the applicant’s ownership of a private lock-up garage is not considered to be a material planning consideration. (4) The affect of the proposed development upon property values is not a material planning consideration.

4.4 In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed driveway is in accordance with Local Plan Policy HSG 8 (Established Housing Areas). It is considered that subject to the attached conditions, the driveway will not cause any adverse amenity issues nor impede on the existing character of the surrounding area. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted.

125 Application No: S/06/00968/FUL

Date Registered: 6th June 2006

Applicant: Hikmet Onal Clo Friels Solicitors 5 Bank Street Coatbridge ML5 IAN

Agent Marion Robertson 36 Catherine Street Motherwell MLI 2RN

Developmen t : Change of Use from Shop to Hot Food Takeaway

Location: 31A St Brides Avenue Viewpark Uddingston North Lanarkshire G715DS

Ward: 22 Fallside Councillor Robert Burrows

Grid Reference: 271 158 661281

File Reference: SIPLIBFI9I89CMIMM

Site History:

Development Plan: The adopted Uddingston-Tannochside Town Map zones the site as an Area Primarily for Residential Use. On the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) the site is zoned as an Established Housing Area and policies HSG 8, RTLI (Retail Development), RTL 4 (Assessing Applications for Retail Development), RTLI 1 (Bad Neighbour Developments) and policy TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) are relevant to this development.

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: None

Representations: 9 Letters of Representation and one petition with 39 signatories

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 15th June 2006

Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

126 127 vehicles parking on-street on a narrow residential road which already experiences significant occurrences of on-street parking. As such, the proposal is contrary to Policies HSG8, RTLI, RTL4, RTLI 1 and TRI 3 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005).

NOTE TO COMMITTEE

A Site Visit has been requested by the local member prior to the determination of this application should the Committee be minded to approve it.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 6th June 2006

Memo from Transportation Manager received 23rd June 2006 Memo from Head of Protective Services received 16th June 2006

Email from Councillor Robert Burrows, received 23rd June 2006 Letter from Eileen Mullen, 33 St Brides Avenue, Viewpark, G71 5DT received 16th June 2006. Letter from Francis Mullen, 6 Douglas Street, Viewpark, G71 5DR received 16th June 2006. Letter from Mrs Murphy, 48 St Brides Avenue, Viewpark, received 19th June 2006. Letter from A Kerr, 27 St Brides Avenue, Viewpark, G71 5DS received 21st June 2006. Letter from Mr & Mrs N Sommerville, 34 St Brides Avenue, Viewpark, G71 5DS received 21st June 2006. Letter from Mr & Mrs J Marshall, 36 St Brides Avenue, Viewpark, G71 5DS received 21st June 2006. Letter from W Allan, 39 St Bride's Avenue, Viewpark, Uddingston received 23rdJune 2006 Letter from Teresa McGraw, 44 St Brides Avenue, Viewpark, received 26'h June 2006 Letter from Alice McDowell, 47 St Brides Avenue, Viewpark, received 26'h June 2006

Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005) Uddingston-Tannochside Town Map 1973

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Miss Charmaine Mills at 01698 302136.

128 APPLICATION NO. S/06/00968/FUL

REPORT

I. Description of Site and Proposal

1 .I Planning permission is being sought for a change of use of a newsagent shop to a hot food take away at 31a St Brides Avenue, Viewpark.

1.2 The application site comprises a small vacant single storey detached building, previously used as a shop. The building is finished in roughcast with a corrugated iron roof and presents only 1 active elevation to the streetscene, containing a single door and window covered by security shutters. The building is located within an area of amenity open space comprising maintained grassland set on the corner of a short cul-de-sac. Further open space adjoins the site to the south and east, opposite St Bride’s Avenue, which renders it highly exposed in visual terms. The building bears no relationship with the building pattern at this location and contains no boundary definition, such that it appears anomalous in urban design terms. It is located within a densely populated residential area where dwellings surround it at very close quarters. The property boundary of 1 Beechgrove Avenue to the west is located only 1 metre from the rear of the building and has become victim of indiscriminate dumping, whilst properties located directly opposite St. Bride’s Avenue to the east are only 20 metres away. High incidences of on-street parking occur on the narrow St Bride’s Avenue owing to a historical absence of driveways to properties.

1.3 The proposal would involve an alteration to the interior of the shop to provide a serving counter and kitchen. External changes would include a new fascia sign to the front of the building and an external flue on the roof of the building. The hours of intended use are 5pm till 12am Sunday to Thursday and 5pm till 1am Friday and Saturday. No off-street parking is offered as part of the proposal.

2. Development Plan

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 adopted Uddingston-Tannochside Town Map zones the site as an Area Primarily for Residential Use.

2.3 On the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) the site is zoned as an Established Housing Area and policies HSG 8, RTLI (Retail Development), RTL 4 (Assessing Applications for Retail Development), RTLl1 (Bad Neighbour Developments) and policy TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) are relevant to this development.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 The Transportation Section recommended refusal of the proposal as the recommended minimum of 5 parking spaces for this type of development has not been demonstrated as part of the application. They also advised that the existing shop would have been primarily used by local residents within walking distance, therefore not requiring the same level of off street parking.

3.2 Protective Services had no objections subject to cooking odours from the premises being controlled, that noise levels associated with the completed development are within

129 recommended guidelines and that any construction work associated with the development is within recommended guidelines.

3.3 Councillor Burrows raised concerns regarding the over provision of hotfood takeaways within the immediate area and that this type of development is unsuitable within a residential area. He requested a Site Visit to be undertaken prior to determination of the application should the Committee be minded to approve it.

3.4 Following the standard neighbour notification and public advertisement procedures nine letters of objection, including one from Councillor Burrows, and a petition with 39 signatories were received. The main reasons for objection are as follows:

There are already fast food outlets at the end of St Brides Avenue and the litter generated from these outlets is unpleasant.

On the basis of demand there is no need for any further provision of hot food outlets within the surrounding area. Another hotfood outlet at this location would cause over provision.

Due to anti social behaviour there is a degree of noise pollution at present, which the Anti Social Task Force are involved with, within the area and this proposal, if granted, would add to this.

This type of development is not suitable within a residential area and noise from delivery vans, opening and closing of shutters and a general increase in public noise associated with this type of proposal is cause for concern to local residents who live adjacent to the proposal site.

Local residents could not open their windows due to the smell from the hot food being cooked.

The existing shop does not have any parking provision which would lead to traffic congestion within the area and would cause concern in terms of pedestrian safety. An increase in on street parking may restrict access for Ambulances or entrances to local residents front gates.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of the local plan policies. The proposals require to be assessed under the terms of the development plan and any other relevant material considerations. The Uddingston-Tannochside Town Map zones the development site as an Area Primarily for Residential Use.

4.2 The proposal also requires to be in accordance with Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005). The site is zoned as an Established Housing Area and policies HG8, RTLI, RTL4, RTLI 1 and TRI 3 are relevant to this development.

130 St Brides Avenue. Furthermore only the public road at St Brides Avenue, which measures 10 metres in width, separates the front of the building from the front of the residential dwellings along St Brides Avenue. This proposal introduces a late night hot food use where currently there are none and delivery vehicles and members of the public visiting the shop via pedestrian routes or by car are likely to result in increased levels of noise and disturbance to the detriment of the amenity of the surrounding residents. I consider this to be an inappropriate location for a hot food take away and contrary to policy HSG8.

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

4.5 Policy RTLII seeks to locate developments such as hot food takeaways and other bad neighbour developments within Town Centres and/or Secondary Village or Neighbourhood Commercial Areas. Proposals are assessed on their potential impact on the character of the surrounding environment. Those which conflict with the surrounding environment causing nuisance through noise, smells or litter; are visually intrusive, result in traffic congestion, create a road safety hazard, have unsociable hours of operation, or do not satisfy parking requirements will generally be opposed. Granting permission for a hot food takeaway at this location would unacceptably conflict with the surrounding residential amenity of the area. This location is not identified as a Neighbourhood Commercial Area and such uses should ideally be located outwith residential areas as supported by RTLI 1 as they can generate additional traffic, require dedicated off-street parking areas and increase activity levels from customers during late opening hours to the detriment of residential amenity and cause nuisance to residents. In this respect it is considered that the proposal would generate additional traffic, increase activity levels during evening hours, be visually intrusive and lead to litter problems. Therefore the development is also contrary to local plan policy RTLII in that such a development would be detrimental to the character of the surrounding environment and that it does not satisfy recommended parking requirements.

4.6 Policy TR13 requires account to be taken of criteria including: the impact of development on road traffic circulation, road safety and provision made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. The Transportation Section have recommended against the application as there is no scope for the required 5 off street parking spaces needed for an application of this type. When the building was used as a local newsagent it would have been used by local residents within walking distance. However, given that there has been no provision made for off street parking, access, or vehicle manoeuvring the proposal does not comply with local plan policy TR13 and RTL4.

4.7 In relation to the grounds of objection these are addressed as follows:

(1) It is accepted that due to the proposal site being in such close proximity to residential properties, litter generated from a hot food takeaway would have a detrimental effect on the surrounding environment.

131 The issue regarding over-provision of hot food takeaways or commercial competition do not constitute material planning considerations and cannot therefore be assessed as part of this application.

It is considered that the proposal is contrary to local plan policy HG8 and RTLII. A ‘Bad Neighbour’ development of this type is unsuitable within such close residential surroundings. It is accepted that the introduction of this type of facility will increase the level of public concentration around the site, both during the day and in the evening hours and while there is unlikely to be any significant increase in noise levels during the day, it is accepted that during evening hours the increased noise levels may be more evident to the nearby residential properties.

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.

Pollution Control have indicated that provided the applicant can demonstrate successful odour control then the proposal maybe acceptable. However it is accepted that due to the location of the proposal being in such close proximity to residential properties that smells from a hot food takeaway may be cause for concern, in this instance.

The Transportation Section has advised against the proposal due to the lack of any dedicated parking provision for the proposal which would encourage short-term parking on the roads around the site. Therefore it is accepted that such a development at this location may cause an unacceptable level of traffic congestion and on street parking all to the detriment of highway safety.

4.8 In conclusion it is considered that the proposal is contrary to policies HSG8 (Established Housing Areas), RTLI (Retail Development), RTL 4 (Assessing Applications for Retail Development), RTLI 1 (Assessing Applications for Bad Neighbour Development), and TRI 3 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft in that the development site is not located within the town centre or any defined neighbourhood shopping centre and would be detrimental to the character and amenity of the surrounding residential area by virtue of noise and general disturbance through the introduction of an inappropriate use to the area and could pose a traffic hazard.

132 Application No: S/06/00974/F UL

Date Registered: 9th June 2006

Applicant : General Motors Social Club Melrose Avenue Holytown Motherwell North Lanarkshire MLI 4SG

Agent David Gables MAST Architecture and Design Ltd 47 Broad Street Glasgow G40 ZQW

Development: Formation of Two Beer GardenlSmoking Areas and Erection of Ancillary Canopies

Location: General Motors Employers Social Club Melrose Avenue Holytown Motherwell MLI 4SG

Ward: 27 Holytown Councillor James Coyle

Grid Reference: 276777660560

File Reference: S/PL/B/5/14(67)

Site History:

Development Plan: The Northern Area Local Plan includes the site within an area covered by Mixed Use Policy DC1. The site is zoned in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005) as Other Commercial Uses and policies RTL9, RTLl 1 and policy TR13 are relevant to this development.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: None

Representations: None

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 15th June 2006

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

133 MM LansrksIWe Cwnoil Planning and Ewironmnt PLANNING APPLICATION No. S I06 / 00974 I FUL badqudrs Sute 501. Fhmg House 2Twat Road FORMATION OF BEER GARDEN I SMOKING ARE4 WMBEFINAULD AND ERECTION OF CANOPY 017 $ JW A Telephone 01236 61621 GENERAL MOTORS EMPLOYEES SOCIAL CLUB, FBX 01238 016232 MELROSE AVENUE, HOLYTOWN, MOTHERWELL OS Lbmoe 100023319 2004 I

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

2. That the permission for the change of use to beer gardens hereby granted relates only to the areas of ground indicated as the beer gardens on the approved plans and to no other area within the grounds of the public house.

Reason: To define the use of the land.

3. That no music shall be played at any time within the beer gardens.

Reason: To protect the amenity of nearby residents.

4. That before the beer gardedsmoking areas are brought into use, double doors shall be provided at the entrance/exit doors marked BLUE on approved plans, in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required.

Reason: To protect the amenity of nearby residents.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 5th June 2006

Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005) Northern Area Local Plan 1986

Memo from Head of Protective Services received 30thJune 2006 Memo from Transportation Section received on 30thJune 2006

Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) Northern Area Local Plan 1986

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Miss Charmaine Mills at 01698 302136.

Date: 5 July 2006

135 APPLICATION NO. S1061009741FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The application site is the General Motors Social Club on Melrose Avenue, Holytown which has been in existence for many years. The site faces onto Melrose Avenue, which is southward sloping, with properties to the north at a higher level than the Club and properties to the south at a lower level. In addition, substantial mature planting is evident on 3 sides providing effective screening to neighbouring properties, whilst the frontage presents an open aspect to the road in common with adjacent residential properties through the provision of metal railings, manicured lawns and ornamental planting. The Club itself is single storey and largely rectangular in shape but has protrusions on the north and eastern sides resulting from piecemeal extensions over the years. Vehicular access is located at the south western corner of the site and leads to a large car parking area to the rear which accommodates approximately 62 spaces.

1.2 The site is located within a mixed use area where residential properties prevail to the north and south, whilst the Christ the King Primary School is located to the west, and a large expanse of open space is located to the east.

1.3 The building pattern in the immediate vicinity of the site is arranged on a perpendicular format with the Club and Primary School accommodation facing onto Melrose Avenue, whilst adjacent residential properties to the north face towards Main Street and the residential properties to the south face towards Violet Place with the sole exception of a new dwelling currently under construction to the north of the Club which faces onto Melrose Avenue. However this house is set further forward and sits at a higher level than the existing Club. In general, associated gardens measure a minimum of 15 metres in length and dictate that the Club is perceived as an isolated entity from the residential pattern in urban design terms. This separation is reinforced by the mature planting on either side of the Club which serves as visual 'book ends' to the site.

1.4 Consent is sought for the formation of 2 beer gardenslsmoking areas with ancillary canopies, which will be sited along the northern side of the Club. The smaller of the 2 areas will be sited centrally on the northern elevation and will measure 5 metres wide by 6.5 metres long. The existing retaining wall will be relocated to accommodate the beer gardenlsmoking area and will be enclosed by 2 metre high decorative walling and piers with a timber fence infill. A canopy will project 2.5 metres along the entire length of the beer garden and will comprise a slim-line polycarbonate roof. This area will be accessible from the front site entrance. The second beer gardenlsmoking area will occupy the external north eastern corner of the building and will comprise a converse L-shape which wraps around the existing. This area is sufficiently large at 20 metres long by 9.5 metres wide (at its widest point) to accommodate 12 picnic-style benches. However, the polycarbonate canopy in this case will only measure 3 metres wide by 4 metres long and will be located on the eastern-most corner. This area will also be enclosed by a decorative wall and fence'combination and will be accessible from the function room of the Club and from the car park to the rear.

2. Development Plan

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 Northern Area Local Plan includes the site within an area covered by Mixed Use Policy DCI which seeks to encourage a mixture of residential and commercial uses in such areas, subject to there being no overriding highway, safety or environmental reasons for refusal of a development.

136 -. 2.3 On the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) the site is zoned as Other Commercial Uses and policies RTLS (Other Commercial Uses), RTLI1 (Bad Neighbour Developments) and policy TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) are relevant to this development.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Protective Services have been consulted and recommended that no piped music is allowed to the canopy covered area, the use of the area be limited to 10pm and that double doors be incorporated at the entrance to the area to minimise transmission of music outdoors.

3.2 Transportation Section raised no objections to the proposal.

3.3 Following the standard neighbour notification and public advertisement procedures no objections were received.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of the local plan policies. The proposals require to be assessed under the terms of the development plan and any other relevant material considerations. In terms of The Northern Area Local Plan the site is within an area covered by Mixed Use Policy DCI which seeks to encourage a mixture of residential and commercial uses in such areas. The existing use of a Social Club is not detrimental to the area and therefore the addition of the proposed beer gardenlsmoking areas accords with this policy.

4.2 The Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005) zones the site as Other Commercial Uses. Policy RTLS “Other Commercial Uses” of the emerging plan indicates that the Council will accept the continuation of such uses and while any changes of use or proposed new uses will be considered in light of the other policies contained within the Local Plan, particular regard will be given to their potential compatibility with surrounding land uses. Given that the General Motors Social Club has been established at this site for many years that the beer garden and smoking areas are acceptable in principle. The proposed developments pose relatively discrete additions, with the nearest dwellinghouse located approximately 15 metres on the north side of the site and with the existing adequate screening, it is considered that the proposed development will not adversely affect the existing setting. Its effect should be localised only within the immediate commercial environment given that the residential properties benefit from adequate screening from planting and fencing. In addition, the proposal will also be screened from Melrose Avenue by the provision of screen fencing around the beer gardenkmoking areas with only the slimline canopy being visible thereby lessening its impact. Furthermore, conditions are recommended restricting the use of the area as a beer gardenkmoking area to those specific areas identified on the approved plans and no piped music shall be allowed at any time and to require double doors at both entrance/exit doors. Both beer gardens will be sandwiched between the Club building, raised banks and thick planting thereby reducing the impact on neighbours from noise disturbance and smoke fumes. Only the smaller area will be visible from Melrose Avenue owing to the building configuration, and this will largely be concealed by the walllfence enclosure. Overall, the detached location, lower ground level and thick perimeter screen planting of the Club ensures that the juxtaposition of this commercial operation is reconciled comfortably alongside residential neighbours. Thus, the addition of a beer gardenlsmoking area as an ancillary facility to an established social club is considered acceptable at this location and will not have a detrimental effect on the surrounding area.

137 4.3 Policy RTL11 “Bad Neighbour Developments” seeks to locate such developments within Town Centres andlor Secondary Village or Neighbourhood Commercial Areas. Proposals are assessed on their potential impact on the character of the surrounding environment, with developments expected to complement the existing streetscene. In relation to Policy RTLl 1, it is considered that the relevant determining factors are whether the beer gardenlsmoking areas are acceptable in terms of their location, design and effect on the adjoining neighbours. The location, design and size of the beer gardenlsmoking areas poses complementary discrete additions to the Club’s building and they would also be well screened by existing vegetation and proposed boundary walls. In terms of its effect on neighbours, although the beer gardenlsmoking areas are located approximately 15 metres away from the nearest residential property, due to the orientation of the residential property being set further forward towards Melrose Avenue, than the proposed beer gardenlsmoking areas, the substantial screening provided and lower ground level it is considered that any additional impact upon residential amenity from the proposed development would be marginal. The proposal will not be visible to residential properties to the south as the social club building will act both as a visual and noise barrier. As the social club has been established for many years it is considered that there would be no significant increase in fumes, noise or general disturbance from the proposed beer gardenlsmoking areas. Thus, the proposal is held to comply with policy RTL11.

4.4 Policy TR13 “Assessing the Transport Implications of Development” requires account to be taken of criteria including: the impact of development on road traffic circulation, road safety and provision made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. The beer gardenlsmoking areas do not encroach upon parking bays thus it is held that parking, vehicular access and circulation arrangements will remain unaffected. The Transportation Section have no objections to the proposal. Thus, the proposal also accords with policy TR1 3.

4.5 In regard the comments received from Protective Services a condition has been set advising that at all times no music shall be played within the canopy covered area and the installation of double doors at both entrancdexit doors to the beer gardenlsmoking areas. However in regard to the time limit this is not a relevant planning consideration and any condition relating to this would be considered in planning terms as unreasonable.

4.6 As detailed above the proposed external beer gardenlsmoking areas at this long established social club are considered to be in accordance with Local Plan Policies RTLS, RTLl 1 and TR13. The design of the proposals are acceptable and the impact of the development on surrounding neighbours is considered to be of marginal significance given the current use of the site as a social club. In summary, it is considered that taking into account the development plan and all material considerations, I recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

138