North Council

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT

Plann in g Applications for cons iderat io n of Planning and Environment Committee

Committee Date : 12thDecember 2001

AGENDA ITEH IIOe-ww- B

Ordnance Survey maps reproduced from Ordnance Survey with the permission of HMSO Crown Copyright reserved APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 12'h DECEMBER 2001 Page No. Application No. Applicant Development/Locus Recommendation

8 N/O 1/00364/OUT Mr & Mrs J Wilson Development Comprising Housing, Refuse Hotel, Golf Course & Clubhouse, Holiday Chalets & Leisure Facilities (Part Site) - Farm, Auchinstarry

19 NiO 1 IOO8791FUL Fannfoods Ltd Erection of 4 (Class 1) Units, Refuse Totalling 1096 Square Metres and Associated Parking and Landscaping - 6 South Muirhead Road,

24 N/O 1/010 1O/FUL A L Bankier Part Use of Commercial Garage for Grant Car Sales - Commercial Garage, Deacons Road, Kilsyth

27 N/O 1/O 13 12/OUT Blackmill Properties Construction of Dwellinghouse - Grant Plot at Junction of Parkbum Road and Garrell Avenue, Kilsyth

31 Ni011013 13IFUL Mr R Blair Construction of Dwellinghouse - Grant Plot 11 Coach Close, Kilsyth

35 N/O 1/0 1314/FUL BT Cellnet Limited Erection of Telecommunications Tower Refuse and Ancillary Equipment - Garden Centre, Eastfield Road, Cumbemauld

41 N/O 1/0 134 1/FUL Carter & Cowan Conversion of Workshop to Grant Dwellinghouse, Construction of 4 Flats And formation of 10 Parking Spaces - Land to the Rear of 93/95 Main Street/ Gartferry Road,

46 N/O 1/0 135 8/FUL Mr & Mrs McLeish Erection of Conservatory - Grant 56 Dunalastair Drive,

50 N/O 1/O 1359/FUL Mr & Mrs A Green Erection of Conservatory - Grant 58 Dunalastair Drive, Stepps

54 N/O 1/0 137l/FUL Mr J McCarroll Erection of Garage and Formation of Grant Driveway - 24 Cawder Road, , Cumbernauld

58 Ni011013801FUL Malcolm McNally Change of Use of Property to a Refuse Children's Nursery - The Rectory, 15A Fleming Road, Seafar, Cumbemauld

63 N/O 1/01384/AMD Ms A Morrison Use of Premises as Book Distribution Grant Centre - 17 Register Road, Kilsyth

68 N/O 1/O 1464/FUL Mr & Mrs P Diamond Extension to Dwellinghouse - Grant 7 Kings View, Cumbernauld APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 12“’ DECEMBER 2001

Applicant Development/Locus Recommendation

73 C/9 9/0 16 65/FUL Mr S Couper Culverting of and Extension Grant to Yard to Form HGV Turning Area and Paddock (In Retrospect) - Land to Rear of 19 Airdrie Road Mollinsburn, Cumbernauld

79 c/01/00081/FuL Enviroscot Limited Extension to Recycling Yard - Grant (P) Languir Way,

90 C/O I /00296/FUL Mr A Stewart Land Engineering Works Comprising Grant (P) Removal of Ash Material, Importation of Clay/Soils and Subsequent Restoration - Land At Old Gartliston Works, 301 Gartgill Road, ,

98 C/O 1100702MIN J Haig Hamilton & Sons Remediation of Land for Agricultural Use Refuse (P) including the Importation of Inert Waste Material - North Medrox Farm,

c ni 0071 I FUL Loretto Housing Association Alterations to and Use of Vacant Grant Building as Single Dwellinghouse Including Upgrading of Vehicular Access - 5 West Canal Street, Coatbridge

110 C/O1/00712/LBC Loretto Housing Association Alterations to and Use of Vacant Grant (P) Building as Single Dwellinghouse Including Upgrading of Vehicular Access - 5 West Canal Street, Coatbridge

115 C/O 1/00847/FUL Mr & Mrs Beekman Erection of Two Storey Extension to Refuse Dwellinghouse - 16 Alder Grove, Coatbridge

119 C/O 1/0086O/FUL Mr & Mrs J McLauchlan Change of Use from Dwellinghouse to Refuse Nursery - Heath Park, 37 Victoria Place, Airdrie

125 C/O U009 19/LBC John C Dalziel (Properties) Demolition of ‘C’ Listed Flats and Grant (P) Limited Shops - 77 - 83H High Street, Airdrie

131 C/O 1/00964/FUL 186K Limited Installation of Three Containers within Grant Enclosed Compound (in Retrospect) - British Gas Plc, Mollinsburn Road, , Airdrie

134 C/O 110 1 184iMIN GM Mining Limited Extraction of Coal by Opencast Methods Grant (P) in Advance of Approved Landfill Operations with Ancillary Road Crossing Point - Site of Former ‘Park Pit’ Opencast Coal Site, Drumshangie OCCS,

144 C/O 1/O 1 192/FUL Dundas Estates and Erection of Residential Development Grant Development CO Ltd Comprising 14 No Flats and 12 No Houses and Formation of Vehicular Access - Glen Hotel, 63 Main Street, , Airdrie APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 12'h DECEMBER 2001

Page No. Application No. Applicant Development/Locus Recommendation

148 C/Ol/Ol198/FUL One 2 One Personal Erection of 10 Metre High Grant Communications Telecommunications Mast and Associated Ground Works - Land South of 1 12 Townhead Road , Coatbridge

153 C/O 1/0 1207/FUL Robert Shaw Erection of Conservatory - Grant 57 Balmoral Avenue, Glenmavis

156 C/O 1 /O 1268/FUL Mr & Mrs R Allison Erection of Garden Wall (In Retrospect) - Grant 39 Willow Crescent, Coatbridge

161 C/O1/01288/FUL Heron Property Limited Erection of 3 No IndustriaVWarehouse Grant Units - Site Adjacent To and South of Blocks 1-3 (West of Dalrymple Drive), Dundyvan Industrial Estate, Coatbridge

167 C/O1/01334/FUL Oakmall Properties Alterations to Listed Building as Part of Grant Change of Use of Residential Home to Flatted Residential Accommodation (7 in Total) Including the Erection of 4 Flatted Dwellinghouses - Kennilworth, 5 1 Blairhill Street, Coatbridge

I75 CIO 110 1335lLBC Oakmall Properties Alterations to Listed Building as Part of Grant (P) Change of Use of Residential Home to Flatted Residential Accommodation (7 in Total) - Kennilworth, 5 1 Blairhill Street, Coatbridge

178 ClO 1/0 135OMIN GM Mining Limited Formation of Road Crossing Point - Grant Arbuckle Road, Drumshangie Opencast Coal Site, Greengairs

182 C/Ol/Ol366/FUL Mr McCluckie Erection of 2 Storey Side Extension to Grant Dwellinghouse -1 1 Dykehead Crescent, Airdrie

187 C/O1/01397/FUL One 2 One Personal Installation of 14.45 Metre High Grant Communications Limited Telecommunications Mast and Associated Apparatus and Compound - Braefoot Farm, Airdrie Road,

191 S/OO/O 1002/AMD George Wilson (Stonehouse) Construction of 47 Dwellinghouses Grant (P) Ltd (Amendment to Layout) - Land to Rear of 1- 1 1 High Road. Cleland

300 S 0 I '00 180IOUT Special Project Services Mixed Use Development - Refuse (P) North West of Park

209 S/O 1/00827/OUT Robert and John Johnston Erection of Dwellinghouse - Rehse Herdshill Farm, Bogside, , Wishaw

214 Si0 1/00902/FUL Travelex UK Plc Installation of Free Standing ATM - Refuse McDonalds Restaurant, Road, Wishaw

I DATACOMMZ\WORD\PLA"ING\I2-declplgappsdoc APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 12'h DECEMBER 2001

Page No. Application No. Applicant DevelopmentlLocus Recommendation

217 SI0 1100974iFUL Scotmid Co-op Alterations and Extensions to Shop - Grant 2 Street,

222 Si0 1/01023/0UT NLC Property Services Residential Development Construction Grant (P) Services - Council, Philip Murray Road, Bellshill

228 Si0 1/O 1045FUL George Wilson (Stonehouse) Erection of 23 Dwellinghouses Grant (P) Ltd Bellshill Athletic Football Club - Land East of 13 Bowling Green Street, Bellshill

2 7 ii 5 0 1 0 I047 FUL Hutchison 3G UK Limited Installation of 20 Metre High Lattice Grant Mast with 3 Antennae, 3 Microwave Dishes and Associated Telecommunications Equipment - Service Area, Harthill

24 1 Crown Castle International Installation of 3 No 600mm Microwave Grant Dishes and Ancillary Development - Telephone Exchange, Mason Street,

244 S/O1101073/FUL Mrs Elizabeth Hayes Siting of Snack Bar - Grant Motherwell Business Centre, Dalziel Street, Motherwell

247 S/O1/01089/0UT Investments Ltd Erection of Dwellinghouse (Plot 1) - Refuse Land East of 2 Alpine Grove,

252 S/O 1/0 109l/OUT Carmyle Investments Ltd Erection of Dwellinghouse (Plot 2) - Refuse Land East of 2 Alpine Grove, Uddingston 255 SI0 1/O 109210UT Carmyle Investments Ltd Erection of Dwellinghouse (Plot 3) - Refuse Land East of 2 Alpine Grove, Uddingston

258 S/O 110 109310UT Carmyle Investments Ltd Erection of Dwellinghouse (Plot 4) - Refuse Land East of 2 Alpine Grove, Uddingston

26 1 Si0 1/0 1094/OUT Carmyle Investments Ltd Erection of Dwellinghouse (Plot 5) - Refuse Land East of 2 Alpine Grove, Uddingston

264 S/O 1/O 1/O 1126/FUL Colin Nailen Change of Use of Vacant Site to Grant Car Breakers - 2 1 Meadow Road, Motherwell

267 S/01/01181/FUL P McCloskey Partial Change of Use of Site to Refuse Construct Garden Sheds for Commercial Sale - 2 Sprig Way, Harthill

I DAl4 COVM2 WORD\PLANNING 12-declplgapps doc APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 12thDECEMBER 2001 Page No. Application No. Applicant Development/Locus Recommendation

272 S/01/01191/OUT T Young Ltd Engineers Residential Development(in outline)- Rehse (PI Land West of Sunnyside Nursery Wishaw High Road, Cleland

280 S,'O 1 /01249/FUL David McKendrick Change of Use of Open Space to Garden Grant Ground and Rear Extensions to Dwellinghouse - 28 Clark Street, Newmains

284 S/01/01256/FUL Orange PCS Ltd Erection of 15 Metre High Grant Telecommunications Mast with Associated Microwave Dishes Antennae, Equipment Cabins and Fencing - Millbank Caravans Netherton Road, Wishaw

289 Si0 110 127l/FUL Mr Townsley Erection of Dwellinghouse - Refuse (P) Land South West of 7 1 Chapel Road, Wishaw

295 S/O 1/O 128 1 /FUL One 2 One Personal Erection of 14.4 Metre High Refuse Communications Telecommunications Mast with Associated Electrical Equipment - Land South East of Cemetery, Airbles Road, Motherwell

299 Si011013321FUL BT Cellnet Ltd Erection of 15 Metre High Grant Telecommunications Mast with 6 Antennae and Associated Equipment - Cleland Timber Supplies, North and South Road, Cleland

305 S/O1 /O 1352/FUL BT Cellnet Ltd Installation of 15 Metre Tower Grant Supporting 6 No. Antenna, 2 No. Transmission Dishes and Associated Equipment Cabin Located within a Fenced Compound - Land at Woodhead Farm, Uddingston

309 Si0 1 10 1364/FUL Mosshill Credit Union Erection of Two Storey Office Building - Grant Land South East of 3 1-36 Greenmoss Place, Bellshill

315 S/O 110 13 72/FUL Carrick Care Homes Erection of Residential Care Home - Grant Land East of 608 Old Road, Bellshill

321 S/O1 /O 1377/FUL BT Cellnet Ltd Erection of Telecommunications Base Grant Station - Land South of GDS Services Ltd, Bothwellpark Road, Bellshill

S/0 I /01 3 82IAMD Sport & Fitness Erection of Sport and Fitness Club Grant Club with Changing Rooms - Land East of Community Centre, Burnhead Street, Uddingston APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 12thDECEMBER 2001

Page No. Application No. Applicant DevelopmentlLocus Recommendation

328 S/01/01385/FUL W S Millar and Son Erection of Bungalow - Grant Newlands Farm, Uddingston

(P) If approved, applications C/01/00702/MIN, C/01/00296/FUL and C/01/01184/MIN not to be issued until Section 75 Agreement and Bond of Caution concluded

(P) If approved, refer to Scottish Ministers C/O1/00081/FUL,C/O1/00919/LBC, C/O1/00712/LBC and C/O1/01335/LBC

(P) If approved Section 75 agreement required S/OO/O1002IAMD

(P) If approved, refer to Scottish Ministers S/O 1/00 180/OUT; SI0 110 1023/OUT; Si0 1/0 1045FUL; S/O 110 1 19 1/OUT; and s/o U0 127I/FUL

I: IDATA\COMM2\WORDPLAN"G\12-dec 1plgapps.doc Application No: N/O 1/003 64/OUT

Date Registered: 23rd. March 200 1

APPLICANT: MR. & MRS. J. WILSON, AUCHINSTARRY FARM, AUCHINSTARRY, KILSYTH

Agent: Mr. James Rae, 12 Hurworth Street, FK1 5EN

DEVELOPMENT: DEVELOPMENT COMPRISING HOUSING, HOTEL, GOLF COURSE & CLUBHOUSE, HOLIDAY CHALETS & LEISURE FACILITIES (PART SITE)

LOCATION: AUCHINSTARRY FARM, AUCHINSTARRY, KILSYTH

Ward No: 64 Grid: 272003 - 676806 File Reference: MD Site History: None

Development Plan: Kilsyth Local Plan:- GB2 & 3: Greenbelt; CT5: Local Plan; BE8: Scheduled Area Monument; CF10: Pipeline Consultation Zone;

Forth & Clyde Canal Local Plan:- Policy 27: Area of High Nature Conservation Value; Policy 43: Scheduled Ancient Monuments:

Strathclyde Structure Plan:- GB 1: Greenbelt; GB 1A: Development within Greenbelt; RES 1: Residential Development; RES 1A: Greenfield Residential Development; STRAT(X): Potential Flooding as a material consideration;

Glasgow & Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan:- Strategic Policy 1: Greenbelt; Strategic Policy 6: Future Housing Requirements: Strategic Policy 7: Environmental Resources

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

CONSULTATIONS:

Objection: Historic , Scottish Natural Heritage, West of Scotland Archaeological Service No Objection: No Reply: Conditions: The Coal Authority, East of Scotland Water, Scottish Environment Protection Agency, West of Scotland Water

REPRESENTATIONS:

Neighbours: Four letters of objection Newspaper Advert: Five letters of objection including, Croy Community Council and Mrs. MSP. Kilsyth Community Council part support and part object to application A1 JCHINSTARRY

relephone 01236 616400 This copy has been produced speclfically for Planning and Buildlng Control purposes Only. and may IaM 10 PIO~CSUIDR07 dY11 prmaadmgs :ax. 01236 616420 No further copies may be made COMMENTS: This outline application is for development comprising of housing, hotel, golf course and clubhouse, holiday chalets and leisure facilities at Auchinstany Farm, Auchinstany, by Kilsyth. A companion application has been submitted to and refused by East Council for the majority of the proposed development area.

A Draft Master Plan has been submitted showing anticipated locations for the various elements of the application proposal. In view of the “Draft” status of these plans it has been assumed that development proposal locations may alter and the application has been processed on that basis.

Key concerns are as follows:-

a) Amenity - The attractive rural amenity of the area including the setting of Auchinstany will be adversely affected by the built development proposals i.e. housing, hotel, golf clubhouse, chalet park and interpretation centres; b) Antonine Wall and Forth & Clyde Canal - The proposed development will adversely affect these structures and their settings. They are nationally important features which are designated as Scheduled Ancient Monuments; c) Road Safety - It is not possible to form a clear view on road safety implications as the applicant has failed to supply the necessary Transportation Assessment. It is however obvious that the proposed development will lead to substantial extra traffic on local roads and junctions some of which are rural in character. This may represent a roads danger; d) Sustainability - The proposed residential development will be detached from Kilsyth, and as such will be at some distance from shops, schools and other services. This detachment will lead to a high percentage of car trips by residents in order to access local facilities to the detriment of the local and general environment; e) Potential Flooding - Part of the site is within the Flood Plain. The applicant has failed to supply the necessary Flood Risk Assessment to determine whether there is a potential problem from flooding on the site, whether there is a potential problem of worsened downstream flooding and to propose any necessary remedial measures; f) Nature Conservation - The local environs of the River Kelvin and the Forth and Clyde Canal area designated as an Important Nature Conservation Site in the Forth & Clyde Canal Local Plan. The proposed development has the potential to adversely affect nature conservation interests in this area; g) Lack of Information - The application has failed to lodge the necessary Environmental Statement, Flood Risk Assessment and Transportation Assessment. These documents are required to cover such issues as landscape character, nature conservation, potential flooding problems, affect on scheduled ancient monuments, and road safety. Notwithstanding this lack of information it is still considered appropriate to process the application and make a planning decision. h) National Planning Guidelines and Development Plan Policies - The proposal runs contrary to National Planning Guidelines and Development Plan policies covering development within the greenbelt; new residential development; sustainable development; scheduled ancient monuments; planning and flooding; transport; road safety; compatibility with the local environment and protection of environmentally sensitive sites.

Taking all the above matters into account it is recommended that planning permission be refused.

NOTE : The applicants’ agent has requested that the determination of the application by North Lanarkshire Council be delayed to allow for the submission of an Environmental Statement in April/May 2002. I see no merit in delaying a decision for the following reasons :- 1. Council have already refused consent for the major part of the application site; 2. The applicant has been aware since May 2001 that an Environmental Assessment was required; 3. It is not appropriate to have further excessive delay; 4. There is sufficient current information to allow a decision to be made; and 5. It is almost certain that the further information that would be contained within the necessary Environmental Statement would not lead to a different recommendation, namely that permission be refused. This is because the further information would not override policy objections.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse permission on the following grounds:-

1. In the interests of visual amenity in that the proposed development will adversely affect:-

a) the attractive and sensitive rural environment; b) the rural setting of the settlement of Auchinstarry.

2. In the interests of amenity, natural heritage and built heritage in that the proposed development will adversely affect the character and setting of the Antonine Wall and the Forth & Clyde Canal, both of which are scheduled ancient monuments.

3. In the interests of nature conservation in that the proposed development will adversely affect flora and fauna in a sensitive Kelvin Valley and Forth & Clyde Canal location.

4. In the interests of amenity and public safety in that part of the site is within the River Kelvin flood plain and it has not been demonstrated that:-

a) The relevant part of application site will not flood to the detriment of human and environmental well being; b) There will be no displacement of flood storage capacity to the detriment of sensitive sites downstream.

5. The proposed development will lead to substantial extra traffic on local roads and junctions to the potential detriment of road safety.

6. In the interests of sustainability in that the detached location of the proposed residential and hotel development will require high levels of car trips to the detriment of the local and general environment. 7. The applicant has failed to supply sufficient further information (including an Environment Assessment, a Transport Assessment and a Flood Risk Assessment) necessary for the fullest consideration of the application.

8. In the interests of the proper planning of the area in that the proposed development is contrary to national planning guidance (NPPG’s 1,3,5,7,14, 17 and 18) and to Development Plan (Kilsyth Local Plan 1999, Forth & Clyde Canal Local Plan 1996, Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995 and the Glasgow & Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000) policies concerning:-

Greenbelt (inappropriate development not required for agricultural use or for other uses deemed suitable for greenbelt location); New residential development (inappropriate greenfield and greenbelt location); Sustainable development (inappropriate detached car dependant residential location); Schedule Ancient Monuments (adverse effect on the character and setting of the Antonine Wall and the Forth & Clyde Canal; failure to supply relevant information); Flooding (failure to supply a Flood Risk Assessment; potential for flooding on that part of the site within the Kelvin Valley flood plain and/or potential to displace flood water to the detriment of downstream sensitive sites); Transport (lack of suitable alternatives to car use); Road safety (failure to supply a Transport Assessment; substantial extra traffic on local roads and junctions); Compatibility with the local environment (the non-compatibility of the built development with the sensitive rural environment); Protection of environmentally sensitive sites close to the Forth & Clyde Canal (adverse effect on flora and fauna adjacent to the Forth & Clyde Canal).

9. That should planning permission be granted for this development a precedent may be set which would make it difficult for the Planning Authority to refuse similar applications.

Note: Should it be the decision of the Council to grant planning permission, the application will require to be notified to the Scottish Ministers as a significant departure from the provisions of the Development Plan under the terms of the and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 1997.

List of Background Papers:

Application form and plans dated 17th. April 2001 Kilsyth Local Plan 1999; Forth & Clyde Canal Local Plan 1996; Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995; Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 National Planning Policy Guidelines 1, 3, 5, 7, 14, 17 and 18. Consultation letters from The Coal Authority; East of Scotland Water; Historic Scotland; Scottish Environment Protection Agency; Scottish Natural Heritage; Transco; West of Scotland Archaeological Service; West of Scotland Water Consultation memo from the Countryside and Landscape Manager Letters of objection from - Mrs. Cathie Craigie MSP., 6 Market Square, Kilsyth G65 OAZ; Croy Community Council, c/o Mr. J. McColl, Secretary, 24 Culmuir Terrace, Croy, Kilsyth; Antonine Walkway Trust, c/o Mr. J. Hunt, 42 Smithstone Crescent, Croy, Kilsyth G65 9HG; Scottish Wildlife Trust, c/o Mr. A. Jones, Cumbernauld Greenspaces, , Cumbernauld G67 3JG; George Beattie & Sons Ltd., Auchinvole Castle, Kilsyth G65 OSA; British Waterways, Canal House, 1 Applecross Street, Glasgow G4 9SP; Mr. P. Carter, Woodlyn, High Banton, Kilsyth G65 ORA; Mr. S. Glover and Mrs. S. Coyle, Canalbank House, Auchinstarry, Kilsyth G65 9SG; Mr. & Mrs. H. McCann, Bridge House, Auchinstany, Kilsyth G65 9SG; John & Anne Rafferty, Macatho, Canal Bank, Auchinstarry, Kilsyth G65 9SG

Letter of part support and part objection from Kilsyth Community Council, do Mr. R. Kay, 104 Road, Kilsyth G65 OHY.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr. Dean on 01236-616459 APPLICATION NO: N/01/00364/OUT

SITE AND PROPOSAL

The outline application is for development comprising, housing, hotel, golf course and club house, holiday chalets and leisure facilities at Auchinstany south of Kilsyth. A companion application has been submitted to East Dunbartonshire Council for the main part of the site which is outwith North Lanarkshire. The full development area covers approximately 70 ha of which approximately 6 ha is within North Lanarkshire.

A Draft Master Plan has been submitted showing anticipated locations for the various elements of the application proposal. In view of the “Draft” status of these plans it has been assumed that development proposal locations may alter and the application has been processed on that basis.

It should be noted that East Dunbartonshire Council has recently refused their planning application for reasons relating to urban sprawl, greenbelt, flood risk, adverse affect on the Antonine Wall and on the Forth and Clyde Canal, visual amenity, nature conservation, precedent, lack of information, and non compliance with National Planning Guidelines and with Development Plan policies.

The site consists of attractive open countryside lying to the south of Kilsyth. It is traversed by the River Kelvin, the Forth and Clyde Canal and the Antonine Wall.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES AND NATIONAL PLANNING GUIDELINES

Relevant Development Plan policies are as follows:-

Kilsyth Local Plan: GB2 & 3 Greenbelt with presumption against development unless required for agriculture, forestry, horticulture, nature conservation, appropriate countryside recreation and tourism dependant upon a countryside location; CT5: Policies within the Forth and Clyde Canal Local Plan apply; BE8: Presumption against any development which will adversely affect or threaten a Scheduled Ancient Monument or its setting (this covers the Antonine Wall and the Forth & Clyde Canal); CF 10: Gas Pipeline Consultation Zone.

In addition Policy CT1 applies whereby the Council seek to enhance and expand tourism providing that proposals are sympathetically designed, there is no significant loss of amenity to the surrounding area and proposals are consistent with appropriate local plan policies.

Forth & Clyde Canal Local Plan: Policy 27: General presumption against new development in areas identified as important nature conservation areas (this covers the application site); Policy 43 : Presumption against development which would threaten Scheduled Ancient Monuments (Antonine Wall and Forth & Clyde Canal) and their setting.

Strathclyde Structure Plan: GB 1: The spread of built up areas and the encroachment of development into the greenbelt shall not accord with the Regional Development Strategy; GB 1A: Development within the Greenbelt requires to be justified against economic benefit, specific locational need, infrastructure implications and environmental impact; RES 1: Preference to be given to residential development on brownfield infill or re-development sites within existing urban areas rather than greenfield sites; RESlA: Proposals to extend the greenfield supply of housing land require to be justified against the criteria of clear evidence of a shortfall in effective housing land supply, evidence of need for social or rented housing, accessibility to the public transport network and town centres, infrastructure implications, and impact on environmental quality and on greenbelt policy; STRAT(X): Risk of flooding to be taken into account in local plan preparation and development control decisions. Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan: Strategic Policy 1: Presumption against encroachment or development into the greenbelt; Strategic Policy 6: Seeking to ensure that there is sufficient housing to meet future specified housing requirements; Strategic Policy 7: Safeguard and positively manage strategic environmental resources. (This includes the Antonine Wall).

2.2 Government planning guidance is issued through National Planning Policy Guidance Notes (NPPG’s) and Planning Advice Notes (PAN’S).

Policy on housing in the countryside is set out in SDD Circular 2411985 which states that “outwith the areas identified in (a) settlement structure development should be very strictly controlled by greenbelt policies and designations and that “ and villages should not be allowed to expand beyond the limits thus established”. The Circular is supplemented by guidance in NPPG3: “Land for Housing “and is based on the following principles:-

Development should be encouraged on suitable sites in existing settlements; The coalescence of settlements and ribbon development should be avoided; and Isolated development should be discouraged in the open countryside unless particular circumstances are clearly identified in development plans or there are special needs.

NPPG3: “Land for Housing” defines the factors to be taken into account when considering planning applications and indicates the considerations that should be taken into account when preparing development plan policies and when determining planning applications.

In particular, it is stated in para. 37 that “ ...... greenfield sites in greenbelts should not normally be allowed for housing development. The release of sites in greenbelts should be considered only in exceptional circumstances and where the release can be justified as part of a strategic appraisal of housing land requirements in a structure plan and where it does not undermine the continued overall effectiveness of the greenbelt”.

Also relevant are: NPPG1: The Planning System; NPPGS: Archaeology and Planning; NPPG7: Planning and Flooding; NPPG14: Natural Heritage, NPPG17: Transport and Planning and NPPGI 8: Planning and the Historic Environment.

NPPG 1 promotes sustainable development by minimising greenfield development, conserving important cultural and historic assets, protecting natural heritage, supporting better access by means other than car, encouraging energy efficiency and encouraging the prudent use of natural resources. The effective provision of pedestrian, cycle and public transport alternatives to car use are also promoted through NPPG17.

NPPGS states that where development is proposed, Planning Authorities should weigh the relative importance of the archaeological features in question and their potential use for amenity, tourism and education purposes against other factors, including the benefits of the proposed development. Complimenting NPPGS, NPPG18 states that maintaining and enhancing the quality of the historic environment and preserving the country’s heritage are important functions of the planning system. Deciding whether development proposals demonstrate best viable use will require a balance to be found between the economic viability of possible uses against the special historic interest of the area.

NPPG7 “Planning and Flooding” sets out the Government’s policy on this issue and addresses the problems that flooding can cause by emphasising that the susceptibility of land to flooding is a material consideration in planning decisions and applying the precautionary principle to decision making so that risk is avoided where possible and managed elsewhere. NPPG14 states that, as part of its commitment to sustainable development, the Government is concerned to ensure that the natural heritage is preserved and enhanced for the benefit of present and future generations. It recognises that in some cases, the need to protect the natural heritage will necessitate refusing planning permission for development which otherwise might have other short term benefits.

3. CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

3.1 Summaries of consultation responses are as follows:-

The Coal Authority: The site is underlain by seams of coal at shallow depth and there are 15 mine entries within or close to the site. In view of the mining circumstances a prudent developer would seek appropriate technical advice before works are undertaken on site; East Dunbartonshire Council: The proposed development is the subject of an application to this Council and accordingly it would not be appropriate to provide detailed observations at this stage; East of Scotland Water: There is a trunk main within the site which the proposed layout will require to be amended to accommodate. There is a distribution main within the site which may require to be diverted at the developer’s expense; Historic Scotland: The proposal will have a direct impact on the setting of the Forth & Clyde Canal and on the site and setting of the Antonine Wall, both of which are Scheduled Ancient Monuments. There will be a particular negative affect on the setting of the Antonine Wall in an area which is currently free from modem development. Due to the effect on Scheduled Ancient Monuments, an Environmental Impact Assessment is required; Scottish Environment Protection Agency: Foul sewage to be connected to the public foul sewer. Surface water should be attenuated and treated by sustainable urban drainage to reduce flood flows and pollution from run-off; Scottish Natural Heritage: Further information is required. SNH may be likely to object to the proposal in principle as certain aspects of the development such as housing, chalet and hotel developments may have a negative impact on the natural heritage features of the area, and that the whole of the development is situated in the greenbelt; Transco: Apparatus details provided; West of Scotland Archaeological Service: A detailed archaeological and landscape assessment is required. This is particularly the case as the proposals would affect two monuments of national significance with the Antonine Wall being arguably a monument of international significance, being on of the boundaries of the Roman Empire in Europe. It is noted that the countryside of the Antonine Wall would be affected by the proposals and much of the proposed development would be in full view from the Fort at Croy Hill as well as from the Fort at Barr Hill in East Dunbartonshire; West of Scotland Water: The nearest sewer is located some distance from the site and sewerage provision would require an Agreement between the developer and West of Scotland Water. In addition, the development may require a provision of pumping facilities with an emergency overflow to a suitable watercourse.

3.2 Ten letters of objection have been received including letters from Mrs. Cathie Craigie MSP and Croy Community Council. Kilsyth Community Council have supported part of the proposal and objected to part. 3.3 Points of objection are as follows:-

The proposal will adversely affect visual amenity in that it will create ribbon development and suburbanisation within an extremely attractive Kelvin Valley rural location. The proposal will adversely affect the attractive countryside canal setting of the settlement of Auchinstany. The proposed hotel may cause nuisance to Auchinstany residents; The proposal will adversely affect the Ancient Monuments of the Antonine Wall and the Forth & Clyde Canal as tourist attractions and as walkways; The proposal will adversely affect nature conservation in that the Kelvin Valley is one of the most prestigious natural wildlife sites in central Scotland; The proposal will adversely affect local tourism in general and will in particular adversely affect tourism related to the Forth & Clyde Canal and its millennium upgrading. This is one of the few really attractive rural stretches of the canal and will destroy the very aspect that canal visitors come to enjoy; There may be an adverse affect on site drainage and on drainage on adjacent properties. The development is on the Kelvin Flood Plain which may cause flooding problems on adjacent land; There will be an adverse affect on road safety due to significant extra traffic on unsuitable local roads. There is no current programmed road improvements for the area. There will be extra pedestrians in the area with no suitable footpaths; The proposal is contrary to structure plan and local plan zonings. In particular the proposal is contrary to greenbelt policy for the area; There is no requirement in the Cumbernauld and Kilsyth area for such aspects of the proposed development as housing and golf course; Any sewage treatment plant may create nuisance conditions for existing residents; Extensive water discharge to the canal may cause canal problems; There is a lack of information on such matters as housing layout, drainage and building designs; Auchinstany Basin (on other side of Auchinstarry Road from application site) has been in existence for over 200 years and should be the focal point for local canal related developments i.e. hotel/public househestaurant; Any grant of planning permission should involve planning gain for the canal i.e. a commuted sum of money for canal dredging; Previous local developments by the application agent have caused nuisance to local residents; If the Council are minded to grant permission there should be a site visit and hearing; The application agent has intimidated objectors.

3.4 It should be noted that Kilsyth Community Council state that the proposals would make a significant contribution to the exploitation of economic benefits arising from the Millennium Canal link. They however oppose the proposed residential development in the greenbelt stating that it would have a significant adverse impact on the environment and would reduce the attractiveness of the area to visitors.

4. OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSION

4.1 It is considered that the key issues are as follows:-

a) Amenity: The application site is attractive and rural in character. The northern section is part of the important Kelvin Valley flood plain and the central and southern sections consist of rolling countryside with steep sided spurs running from the southern ridge towards the river. The River Kelvin, the Forth & Clyde Canal and the Antonine Wall traverse the site. Auchinstarry settlement sits in a canal side rural setting. It is considered that this attractive rural environment will be adversely affected by the buildings associated with the development. At average house densities it is anticipated that approximately 180 dwellings would be built within the full East Dunbartonshire/North Lanarkshire development area. In addition, the hotel, golf clubhouse, chalet park and interpretation centre buildings are likely to have an urbanising affect on the rural environment to its significant disadvantage. This includes an adverse affect on the settlement of Auchinstany; b) Antonine Wall and Forth & Clyde Canal: The proposed urbanising of the area as covered in (a) above will significantly adversely affect the settings of the Antonine Wall and the Forth & Clyde Canal. These settings are of national (and international in the case of the Antonine Wall) importance. The rural character of this section of the canal is of particular importance for attracting visitors. The relationship of the Antonine Wall to its landscape setting is an important feature for this area and will be greatly diminished through the proposed developments. There is a lack of information from the applicant on how the proposed developments will affect both these Scheduled Ancient Monuments. It is however anticipated that there may well be direct adverse affect on the Monuments as well as on their settings; c) Road Safety: It is not possible to form a clear view on road safety implications as the applicant has failed to supply the necessary Transport Assessment. It is however obvious that the proposed development will lead to substantial extra traffic on local roads and junctions, some of which are rural in character and all of which have shortcomings in their horizontal and vertical geometry. This extra traffic may well represent a roads danger; g) Sustainability: The proposed residential development is detached from Kilsyth with most proposed housing being approximately 700 metres from the nearest part of Kilsyth plus further distance to main facilities such as shops, schools and local services. While acknowledging that there is a reasonable bus service along Auchinstany Road, it is anticipated that this detachment from Kilsyth will lead to a high percentage of car trips by residents in order to access local facilities. This will be to the detriment of the local and general environment; e) Potential Flooding: The northern part of the site is within the River Kelvin flood plain. Government advice makes it clear that potential flooding is a material planning consideration. Clearly there is the potential for parts of the site themselves to flood, and any upfilling or building works may simply displace flood water to sensitive downstream sites. Such flooding can be to the detriment of human and environmental well being. Full information on these potential flooding problems plus any potential remediation measures are required through a Flood Risk Assessment. Unfortunately, the applicant has failed to supply such a report. f) Nature Conservation: The local environs of the River Kelvin and the Forth & Clyde Canal are designated as an Important Nature Conservation Site in the Forth & Clyde Canal Local Plan. Consultees and objectors have confirmed the nature conservation value of the area. Clearly the proposed development has the potential to adversely affect flora and fauna in the area; g) Lack of Information: Due to the impact of the proposed development on a sensitive rural site with nationally and internationally important Scheduled Ancient Monuments, it has been determined that the Environmental Impact Assessment requires to be gone through as part of the application processing. This involves the submission of an Environmental Statement covering such issues as landscape character, nature conservation, potential flooding, affect on Scheduled Ancient Monuments and road safety. There is also a requirement for a Flood Risk Assessment and a Transportation Assessment in view of part of the site being within the River Kelvin flood plain and the potential impact proposals will have on local roads. The Transportation Assessment would also require to cover the degree of appropriate pedestrian links plus public transport provision. Notwithstanding the applicant having been initially advised in April and formally notified in May 200 1 of the need for the above further information, no such information has been forthcoming. It should be noted that the applicant has now requested via his agent that the processing of the application be delayed until the submission of an Environmental Assessment in April/May 2002. It is not however considered appropriate to further delay the processing of an application which was originally submitted in March 2001. Notwithstanding the lack of submitted information, it is still considered appropriate to process the application and make a planning decision. h) National Planning Guidelines and Development Plan Polices: The proposal runs contrary to National Planning Guidance and Development Plan Policies covering a variety of matters. Relevant National Planning Policy Guidelines are as follows:-

NPPG: 1 - “The Planning System”, 3 - “Land for Housing”, 5 - “Archaeology and Planning”, 7 - “Planning and Flooding”, 14 - “Natural Heritage”, 17 - “Transport and Planning” and 18 - “Planning and the Historic Environment”. Greenbelt policy is covered by Scottish Development Department Circular 24/1985. Development Plan policies are covered by the Kilsyth Local Plan 1999, the Forth & Clyde Canal Local Plan 1996, the Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995 and the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000.

Guidance and policies which are breached are as follows:-

9 Greenbelt (inappropriate development not required for agricultural use or for other uses deemed suitable for greenbelt location); > New residential development (inappropriate greenfield and greenbelt location); 9 Sustainable development (inappropriate detached car dependant residential location); k Schedule Ancient Monuments (adverse effect on the character and setting of the Antonine Wall and the Forth & Clyde Canal; failure to supply relevant information); > Flooding (failure to supply a Flood Risk Assessment; potential for flooding on that part of the site within the Kelvin Valley flood plain and/or potential to displace flood water to the detriment of downstream sensitive sites); 9 Transport (lack of suitable alternatives to car use); > Road safety (failure to supply a Transport Assessment; substantial extra traffic on local roads and junctions) ; k Compatibility with the local environment (the non-compatibility of the built development with the sensitive rural environment); > Protection of environmentally sensitive sites close to the Forth & Clyde Canal (adverse effect on flora and fauna adjacent to the Forth & Clyde Canal).

i) Other matters raised by objectors: The tourism policy as promoted through the Kilsyth Local Plan (Policy CT1) is based on seeking to enhance and expand tourism through the improvement of existing visitor attractions and infrastructure provided that such proposals are sympathetically designed and there is no significant loss of amenity to the surrounding areas, and are consistent with appropriate local plan policies. It is considered that an important part of the attraction of the Forth and Clyde Canal and the Antonine Wall area to visitors is the attractive countryside location. It is accepted that the significant urbanisation of this section of the setting of these features will reduce the attractiveness of the area to visitors. The means of preserving the local rural environment and yet having a canal based visitor attraction is best achieved through potential development at Auchinstany Basin. This is a long established canal facility area which is promoted for further development in the Forth & Clyde Canal Local Plan. This site is adjacent to Auchinstany Road and will allow linked trips to Kilsyth. No housing land supply need argument has been advanced for the proposed housing development in this greenfield greenbelt location. Should planning permission be granted, sewerage arrangements would require to be to the full satisfaction of SEPA and West of Scotland Water. Certain other matters raised by objectors are not relevant to the planning merits of this application.

4.2 Taking the above into account it is recommended that planning permission be refused for reasons relating to an adverse affect on visual amenity, scheduled ancient monuments, nature conservation, road safety and sustainability plus reasons covering potential flooding problems, being contrary to National Planning Guidance and Development Plan policies, lack of information and precedent. Application No.: N/O 1/00 879/FUL

Date Registered: 24th July 200 1

APPLICANT : FARMFOODS LTD, 7 GREENS ROAD, , CUMBEFWAULD, G67 2TU

Agent: Darnton Elgee Architects, The Coach House, Monkfryston Hall, Monkfryston, Leeds, LS25 5DU

DEVELOPMENT: ERECTION OF 4 (CLASS 1) RETAIL UNITS, TOTALLING 1096 SQUARE METRES AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING

LOCATION: 6 SOUTH MUIRHEAD ROAD SEAFAR CUMBERNAULD G67 1AX

Ward: 54 Grid Reference: 276244.674916.

File Reference: N/Ol/00879/FUL Site History: N/OO/O1414/FUL Erection of Retail Unit (376m) and Car Wash Withdrawn 24thJuly 2001

Development Plan Cumbernauld Local Plan : Shopping Centre Contrary to Development Plan: No (But contrary to guidance)

CONSULTATIONS:

Objection: No Objection: East Of Scotland Water West Of Scotland Water British Gas Transco

Conditions: NLC Countryside And Landscape Manager Scottish Power S.E.P.A. (East)

No Reply:

REPRESENTATIONS: Neighbours: No Response Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

COMMENTS : The applicants propose the erection of four retail units within this site, which is currently in use as a vehicle cleaning facility for commercial vehicles and cars. A previous application which proposed the retention of the car wash on part of the site and the erection of a single retail unit was withdrawn. In terms of the adopted Cumbernauld Local Plan, the proposal accords with the land use policy for the site but does not comply with the guidance on standards of parking provision. Amended proposals were submitted, but these failed to take account of concerns expressed in relation to the site layout, parking and servicing provision, footpath connections and landscaping.

RECOMMENDATION:

Refuse on the following grounds :-

1 That the proposal is contrary to the terms of policy TRlO and Appendix 5 of the adopted Cumbemauld Local Plan 1993 in that the number of parking spaces and facilities for loading and unloading are below the minimum standard required and the circumstances in which this requirement could be relaxed do not apply in this case.

2 That the proposal would have a serious detrimental effect on traffic and pedestrian safety in that the proposed layout would result in an unacceptable level of conflict between different classes of road users and pedestrians within and in the vicinity of the site.

3 That the proposal would constitute an over-development of the site to the detriment of the surrounding area.

4 That should planning permission be granted it would create an undesirable precedent making it difficult for the Council to refuse other applications of a similar nature.

List of Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 24th July 200 1 Letter and Amended Plans received 2gthOctober 2001

Letter received 24th August 200 1 from NLC Transportation Manager Letter received 22nd August 2001 from NLC Environmental Services Letter received 24th August 200 1 from NLC Countryside And Landscape Manager Letter received 3rd September 200 1 from East Of Scotland Water Letter received 9th August 2001 from West Of Scotland Water Letter received 1st August 200 1 from British Gas Transco Letter received 6th August 200 1 from Scottish Power Letter received 10th August 2001 from S.E.P.A. (East)

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mrs. Stewart at 01236 616473. APPLICATION NO. N/01/00879/FUL

REPORT

1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 The site comprises an existing car and commercial vehicle wash facility within the central area of Cumbernauld. The site is triangular in shape and is accessed from South Muirhead Road, but is also prominent from both the A801 1 and the slip road from the A801 1 to the Muirhead roundabout. The applicant proposes the erection of 4 similarly sized retail units with associated parking and landscaping. The total retail floorspace proposed would be 1096 square metres.

2. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

2.1 The site is covered by retail policies SH1 and SH8 in the adopted Cumbernauld Local Plan. Policy SH1 seeks to maintain and enhance the role of the Cumbernauld Central Area as the main shopping centre of the District by presuming in favour of major shopping development where proposals accord with other local plan policies. SH8 states that the Council will seek to improve the environment of the existing Town Centre and District Centres.

2.2 Also of relevance is Policy TRlO which presumes against development which would adversely affect the surrounding area by virtue of its car parking or traffic generation implications and states that adequate provision of parking must be made in all new development, conforming to Strathclyde Regional Council’s adopted standards.

2.3 Policy TRlO is amplified by Appendix 5 which outlines the minimum levels of parking considered acceptable for different categories of development and provides for relaxation in circumstances where :- 0 there is existing surplus provision 0 there are overriding considerations of conservation. It further states that provision should also be made for loading and unloading of goods.

3. REPRESENTATIONS AND CONSULTATIONS

3.1 Scottish Power commented that due to the size of the development proposed, a substation could be required within the site.

3.2 S.E.P.A. commented on the need for surface drainage to be disposed of via a system that complies with the design manual for sustainable urban drainage systems. This could be achieved through the use of porous paving, French drains or swales.

3.3 The Countryside and Landscape Manager commented on the proximity of the buildings to the south-eastern boundary of the site and considered that this left no opportunity to provide meaningful ‘buffer’ landscaping or open space where it is most required. He also commented on the lack of any screening of the car parking from South Muirhead Road and the poor provision for pedestrian links to the bus stop and the ‘Asda’ underpass.

3.4 He further considered it likely that the positioning of parking spaces at the top of a steep bank would result in the requirement for vehicle barriers and there was no opportunity to provide screen planting to make this acceptable visually.

3.5 The Area Transportation Manager commented that the junction design of the site access road was unacceptable and that the servicing arrangements for all four units was unacceptable. He further commented that the parking requirement for the proposed development would be 71 spaces (on the basis of 6.5 spaces per 100 square metres gross floor area) whilst only 66 were proposed. In addition, the 66 spaces proposed were substandard in terms of their dimensions, being 2.4 metres x 4.8metres rather than 2.5metres x 5.0 metres. A requirement to provide a 2 metre wide footpath along South Muirhead Road was also intimated.

3.6 In a further response in relation to the amended proposals submitted, he re-iterated his concerns in relation to the deficiency in the number of parking spaces proposed and the inadequacy of servicing provision, He further commented on the poor links to existing pedestrian facilities in terms of pedestrian desire lines.

3.7 East of Scotland Water, West of Scotland Water and Transco supplied information as to the location of their equipment and availability of supplies and had no objections to the proposed development. No objections or representations were received as a result of publicity measures.

4. PLANNING ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSIONS

4.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act requires that planning applications be determined in accordance with the provisions of the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Whilst the proposed development accords with Policies SH1 and SH8 of the adopted Cumbernauld Local Plan it fails to comply with Policy TRlO and the guidance contained in Appendix 5 in relation to parking and servicing provision.

4.2 Whilst the amended proposals submitted took account of a number of the initial concerns raised in relation to parking and servicing arrangements, these remain unsatisfactory in terms of the number of spaces provided, the operational difficulties in utilising the servicing arrangements proposed and the poor links to the existing pedestrian network. No accommodation is made in relation to the potentially heavy pedestrian flow on the southward link through the Asda underpass.

4.3 In terms of the layout and landscaping of the site, the proposed development fails to relate satisfactorily to South Muirhead Road and is in very close proximity to the A8011 Muirhead roundabout slip road. Whilst the amended proposals did increase the proposed landscaping within the site, much of it would be unlikely to survive and difficult to maintain because of the narrowness of the areas and the poor siting and specification. The landscape treatment fails to address the most significant views of the site, particularly in relation to the screening of rear service elevations and car parking areas.

4.4 No provision is outlined in relation to the requirements for sustainable urban drainage nor the potential requirement for a sub-station. Whilst ultimately the latter may not be required, it is difficult to envisage where this could be accommodated, given the density of development proposed.

4.5 In conclusion, I consider that the proposed development maximises the use of the site for the provision of retail floorspace to the detriment of the provision of adequate ancillary facilities such as parking servicing and landscaping. As such the proposal would constitute an over-development of the site to the detriment of the surrounding area.

4.6 I therefore recommend that planning permission be refused. Application No: N/O 1/O 10 1O/FUL

Date Registered: 15th. August 2001

APPLICANT: A.L. BANKIER (ALB), DEACONS ROAD, KILSYTH G65 OBN

Agent:

DEVELOPMENT: PART USE OF COMMERCIAL GARAGE FOR CAR SALES

LOCATION: COMMERCIAL GARAGE, DEACONS ROAD, KILSYTH

Ward No: 64 Grid: 272099 - 677622 File Reference: MD Site History: N/95/00137/PL: Change of Use of Workshop and Lockups to Commercial Garage (including garaging of three mini-buses) - Approved January 1996

Development Plan: Kilsyth Local Plan 1999: General Residential (HG3-5)

Contrary to Development Plan: No

CONSULTATIONS:

Objection: No Objection: No Reply: Conditions:

REPRESENTATIONS:

Neighbours: None Newspaper Advert: Not Required

COMMENTS: The application is for the part use of the ALB Commercial Garage at Deacons Road, Kilsyth for car sales. The site currently contains car repair workshops and a tyre and exhaust outlet. It is proposed that one group of four workshops be used for car sales with vehicles for sale and customer parking also being located on the yard area directly in front of the workshops. It is estimated that approximately eight vehicles for sale and two/three customer parking spaces can be located in the relevant area. Car repairs would take place in the remaining garage area.

There are no objections from the Transportation Manager subject to conditions requiring that the car sales fully replace car repairs on that section of the site and that customer parking bays be marked out in accordance with an approved plan. There is a requirement for two customer parking spaces.

It is considered that the proposed part use of the site for car sales is acceptable subject to the above transportation requirements and it is recommended that planning permission be granted accordingly.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant subject to the following conditions:-

1. That the approved development 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 car sales and related customer parking shall be the sole activity within the area bounded in brown on the approved plan, and no cars for sale or related visitor parking shall extend outwith this area.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and road safety by limiting the level of activity within the full garage application site.

3. That customer parking spaces and manoeuvring area shall be provided within the full car saledgarage workshop site as shown on the approved plan and thereafter shall be kept available for these uses.

Reason: In the interest of amenity and road safety by ensuring that parking and manoeuvring can satisfactorily take place within the full application site.

4. That no signage shall be placed on the exterior boundary wall without the prior consent of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of this partly residential area.

List of Background Papers:

Application form and plans dated 15th. October 200 1 Kilsyth Local Plan 1999

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Martin Dean on 01236-616459 Application No: N/O 1/O 13 12/OUT

Date Registered: 9” of October 200 1

APPLICANT: BLACKMILL PROPERTIES LTD CASTLEHOUSE, ALLANFAULDS ROAD, KILSYTH

Agent: Alastair MacFarlane 84 Buchanan Drive Glasgow G72 8BA

DEVELOPMENT: CONSTRUCTION OF DWELLINGHOUSE

LOCATION: PLOT AT JUNCTION OF PARKBURN ROAD AND GARRELL AVENUE, KILSYTH

Ward No: 66 Grid: 271800678452 File Reference: N/O 1/O 13 12/OUT Site History: None

Development Plan: Kilsyth Local Plan 1999 : Housing Policy HG1

Contrary to Development Plan: No

CONSULTATIONS:

Objection: No Objection: East of Scotland Water, West of Scotland Water No Reply: Conditions:

REPRESENTATIONS:

Neighbours: Two letters of objection Newspaper Advert: Not required

COMMENTS: This application seeks consent in outline for the construction of a single dwellinghouse on a plot of ground at the junction of Parkburn Road and Garrell, Kilsyth. The plot is the sole remaining undeveloped part of the ex-hosiery factory, which once occupied the larger surrounding site. Two letters of objection have been received from proprietors immediately to the south of the site, on the grounds of privacy. However, it is considered that any potential problems of overlooking can be overcome by limiting the height of the proposed new house to single storey. This application is therefore recommended for approval, subject to appropriate conditions.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant, subject to the following conditions:- Produced by N/01312/OUT Departmenl of Planning and Environment Blackmill Properties Ltd Northern Division Plot at Junction of Parkburn Road and Garrell Avenue Kilsyth C nstruction of Dwellinhouse in Outline Reproducedfrom the Ordnanca Survey mapplng Wlth Objectors meStationery permirrion Omceof 0he Crom Contoller copynghl of her Metesty", Telephone 01236 616400 Fax. 01236 616420 4 250 ' ' ' Unaulhonoed iepioduslhn infringer Crown oopynghl This copy has been produced specifically for Planning and Building Control purposes only. and may led to proseoutionor clvll prmwdlnga OS Licence LA 09041 L No further copies may be made 1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started, either within five years of the date of this permission, or within two years of the date on which the last reserved matters are approved, whichever is the later.

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

2. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a further application shall be submitted to the Planning Authority in respect of the following reserved matters:-

(a) the siting, design and external appearance of all buildings and other structures; (b) the means of access to the site; (c) the layout of the site , including all roads, footways and parking areas; (d) the design and location of all boundary walls and fences.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail in the interests of the residential amenity of the surrounding area.

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 provision of The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

4. That the vehicular access to the site shall be from the existing dropped kerb access on Garrell Avenue.

Reason: To ensure that the vehicular access is adequately positioned in the interests of residential amenity.

5. That the dwellinghouse hereby approved shall be restricted to single storey in architectural style.

Reason: To ensure that the existing dwellinghouses to the south of the site are not overlooked in the interests of privacy and residential amenity.

List of Background Papers:

Application forms and drawings dated 7.10.01 Letter of objection from Mrs T McKay, 3 Glenalva Court, Kilsyth dated 18" October 2001. Letter of objection from Mr H Coyle, 2 Glenalva Court, Kilsyth dated IS' November 200 1. Kilsyth Local Plan 1999

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr. Williams on 01236-616464 APPLICATION NO: N/01/0 13 12/OUT

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 This outline application seeks consent for the construction of a single house on a plot of ground at the junction of Parkburn Road and Garrell Avenue, Kilsyth.

1.2 The plot originally formed part of a hosiery factory, the site of which has subsequently been developed for housing with the exception of this plot, which is the last remaining. It lies at the most northerly and highest point of the old factory site and is at a level at least 3 metres higher than the hoses immediately to the south.

1.3 The site extends to 500 square metres and is identified as a housing site in the Kilsyth Local Plan1999. It has an existing vehicular access from Garrell Avenue which complies with Council standards.

2. CONSULTATIONS AND OBJECTIONS

2.1 No adverse comments have been received as a result of consultation.

2.2 Letters of objection have been received from the proprietors of Nos. 2 & 3 Glenalva Court, immediately to the south. The objections are on the grounds that their houses will be overlooked by a house on this site because of ground-level differences. Concern was also expressed that a new house could potentially damage the retaining wall at the rear of their gardens and also overshadow their houses.

3. OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSION

3.1 It is considered that the principle of residential development is in accordance with local plan policy. It is also concluded that the plot can accommodate a single house and space for two private vehicles in compliance with the relevant Council standards, provided that it is sensitively sited and of an appropriate scale.

3.2 The existing vehicular access from Garrell Avenue is acceptable and appropriate for the plot, and for reasons of streetscape quality and road safety should be the sole vehicular access.

3.3 With respect to the objections, I have the following comments to make :-

1. The issue relative to the retaining wall will have to resolved between the applicant and the neighbouring proprietors if planning permission is granted. 2. Overshadowing is considered to be inconsequential as the application site is to the north of the objectors’ houses. 3. The potential for the objectors’ houses to be overlooked by the proposed house is a material consideration. However any overlooking can, to some extent, be ‘designed out’ with appropriate siting and screen fencing. It would also be appropriate to limit the new house to single storey.

3.4 Having taken account of the objectors’ concerns, I am satisfied that an acceptable form of development can be achieved at this site in Kilsyth. I recommend that permission be granted. Application No: N/O 1/013 13/FUL

Date Registered: 9thOctober 200 1

APPLICANT: MR ROBERT BLAIR 5B ARDEN DFUVE KILSYTH G65 9NU

Agent: JG Gray Architects The Old Fire Station Bridge of Weir PAll 3SX

DEVELOPMENT: CONSTRUCTION OF DWELLINGHOUSE

LOCATION: PLOT 11, COACH CLOSE, KILSYTH

Ward No: 66 Grid: 273117677661 File Reference: N/O 1/0 13 13/FUL Site History: None

Development Plan: Policy HG 3-5, Kilsyth Local Plan 1999, Established Residential Area

Contrary to Development Plan: No

CONSULTATIONS:

Objection: No Objection: Transco, West of Scotland Water, SEPA, East of Scotland Water and The Coal Authority No Reply: Conditions:

REPRE SENTATIONS :

Neighbours: One letter of objection Newspaper Advert: Not Required

COMMENTS: This application seeks consent for the construction of a one and a half storey dwelling on plot 11, Coach Close, Kilsyth. This plot is the last remaining undeveloped plot within this private plot development, which currently comprises of seven dwellings A letter of objection has been received from 10 Coach Close immediately to northwest of the site. This objection is not considered to be valid for the reasons outlined in the accompanying report. The proposed dwelling would if constructed be the only one and a half storey dwelling in the close which is made up exclusively of single storey dwellings. It is, however, considered that the proposed dwelling is acceptable in terms of scale, design, location and its relationship to existing surrounding dwellings. This application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the application of the appropriate conditions. Produced by Department of Planning and Environment NI01I01 3 13lFUL Northern Division Mr Robert Blair 1 aron Way Plot 11 Coach Close Kilsyth j I CUMBERNAULD G67 1DZ Construction of Dwellinghouse Repr0du-d from the Ordnance SuNey mapping with !he permission of the Cantrailer of her MaleSW ‘ASlationwy Ofice Crown copyright Objector :2500 Telephone 01236 616400 Fax. 01236616420 * ’ Unsulhonsed reproduction infringer Crow copyright This copy has been produced specifically for Planning and Building Control purposes only. and may lead to p101ecut10n or clvtl prwedlngr No further copies may be made 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 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 retain effective control of these issues in the interests of residential amenity.

3. 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 retain effective control of these issues in the interests of the residential amenity of the site.

4. That the use of the garage hereby permitted shall be restricted to a private use incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse on the site and no commercial activity shall be carried out, in, or from, the garage.

Reason : To ensure that no activity incompatible with a residential area takes place from the garage in the interests of residential amenity.

5. That the integral garage shall not be altered for use as a habitable room without the prior consent of the Planning Authority.

Reason : To ensure that there is adequate and acceptable accommodation for private vehicles within the plot in the interests of road safety and residential amenity.

List of Background Papers:

Application Forms and drawings dated 8.10.200 1 Letter of objection from Mr J Egan of 10 Coach Close undated Letters from J G Gray dated 3 1.10.2001, 1.11.200 1, 6.1 1.200 1 and 12.1 1.200 I Kilsyth Local Plan 1999

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Paul Williams on 01236-616464 APPLICATION NO: N/O 110 13 13/FUL

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 This application seeks consent for the construction of a one and a half storey dwelling on plot 11, Coach Close, Kilsyth. The plot in question lies at the southern end of an established residential plot development of seven single storey houses and is the lowest lying plot on the site.

1.2 The site lies within Policy HG3 to 5, an established residential area in the local plan. The overall residential plot development is laid out with a vehicular cul-de-sac access and is on the side of a hill sloping downwards in a southeasterly direction.

1.3 The proposed dwelling comprises of lounge, dining room, kitchen and integral garage at ground level with three bedrooms in the roof space. It has two traditional styled dormer windows to the front with ‘velux’ type windows to the front and rear.

2. CONSULTATIONS AND OBJECTIONS

2.1 No adverse responses have been received as a result of the consultation process.

2.2 A letter of objection has been received from the adjacent Dwelling at 10 Coach Close. The objection is on the grounds that the proposed one and a half storey dwelling is out of character with the existing single storey dwellings within the close. The objector also claims that the proposed dwelling will overshadow his house.

3. OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSION

3.1 The proposal accords with the relevant Local Plan policies and it is also considered that the dwelling is acceptable in terms of scale, positioning on the site and design.

3.2 The objector claims that the one and a half storey nature of the proposed dwelling would be incongruous in the setting of a cul-de-sac of single storey dwellings. It is however considered that the proposed design of the dwelling with traditional dormers is acceptable and in fact complies with current government guidance regarding the design of new dwellings in the countryside.

3.3 Many of the existing ‘single storey’ dwellings have significant depths of underbuilding due to the sloping nature of the site. In the case of the adjacent property (no lO), this amounts to almost a two storey height at its southern gable end. In practicle terms, this means that the roof ridge of the proposed dwelling will sit below that of number 10.

3.4 The plot lies at the entrance to the cul-de-sac at its southern extremity on the lowest part of the overall site. It is therefore difficult to envisage how the proposed dwelling will overshadow no 10 Coach Close, given the above and the fact that there will be a gable to gable distance of at least 4 metres.

3.5 The proposed dwelling is therefore considered to be acceptable and as such, this application is recommended for approval subject to the application of the appropriate conditions. Application No.: N/O 1/O 13 14/FUL

Date Registered: 9thOCTOBER 200 1

APPLICANT: BT CELLNET LTD, 260 BATH ROAD, SLOUGH, SL14DS

Agent: Walker, Fraser & Steele, 125 Buchanan Street, Glasgow, G1 2JF

DEVELOPMENT: ERECTION OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER AND ANCILLARY EQUIPMENT

LOCATION: WESTERWOOD GARDEN CENTRE, EASTFIELD ROAD, CUMBERNAULD

Ward: 57

Grid Reference: 276720 676602

File Reference: MT

Site History: No Relevant Site History

Development Plan Cumbemauld Local Plan 1993 : Significant Areas of Open Space

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

CONSULTATIONS:

Objection: Historic Scotland, The Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland No Objection: Conditions: NLC Landscape Services Manager No Reply:

REPRE SENTATIONS :

Neighbours: Newspaper Advertisement: 7 letters of objection received and one from the local Councillor

COMMENTS: This application seeks permission for the erection of a 15 metre high telecommunications lattice mast with an equipment cabin and compound at a site adjacent to Dobbies Garden Centre, Eastfield Road, Westerwood, Cumbernauld.

The proposed mast would have a significant impact on the setting of the Category B Listed Building and is contrary to Local Plan policy.

It is recommended that planning permission be refused.

RECOMMENDATION:

Refuse on the following grounds: -

1 That the proposal is contrary to the terms of policy EN 2 of the Cumbemauld Local Plan 1993 in that the proposal would have an adverse effect on the setting of a Category B Listed Building.

2 That the proposal is contrary to the terms of policy EN 8 of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 in that the proposal would not relate to the landscape in which it is set by virtue of its location and size.

3 That no overriding reason for justifying the proposed erection of telecommunications equipment at this particular site as opposed to other less sensitive ones in the vicinity has been presented.

4 That the approval of this proposal would establish an undesirable precedent that would be difficult to oppose in other locations.

List of Background Papers:

Application forms and plans received 9thOctober 200 1 Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 Planning Application N/OO/O 13 14/FUL Letter received 29* October 2001 from Mr I K Stark, 2 Meadow View, Cumbernauld Letter received 30* October 2001 from Mr Lawrence Shiach, 24 Park Way, Cumbemauld Letter received 3 lstOctober 200 1 from The OwnedOccupier, 19 Roadside, The Village, Cumbernauld Letter received 22"d October 2001 from Mr David Wilson, 3 Edenside, Westerwood, Cumbernauld Letter received 5'h November 200 1 from Mr William Dempsey, 1e Clouden Road, Cumbernauld Letter received 3 lstOctober 2001 from Councillor Gordon Murray Letter received 9thNovember 2001 from Mrs J M Mason, 34 Meadow View, Cumbemauld Letter received 13" November 200 1 from George Lallaway, on behalf of The Village Community Council Letter received 13* November 2001 from Historic Scotland Letter received 12thNovember 2001 from The Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland Letter received 15" May 2001 from Walker, Fraser and Steele

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr. Thomson on 01236 616466. APPLICATION NUMBER: N/01/01314/FUL

REPORT

1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 This application seeks permission for the erection of a 15 metre telecommunications mast with associated equipment cabin and infrastructure at a site adjacent to Dobbies Garden Centre, Westerwood, Cumbernauld.

1.2 Dobbies Garden Centre occupies a prominent and exposed site to the North of and the A80 trunk road. The commercial premises occupy a collection of converted buildings formerly known as Mainhead Farmhouse, which are now Category B Listed Buildings. The applicant plans to erect telecommunications equipment on the north-west side of the main building. The site is relatively exposed with very little existing mature vegetation or trees.

2. BACKGROUND

2.1 Walker, Fraser and Steele acting as agent for the applicant, BT Cellnet initially wrote to the Council on the 15‘h of May 2001 outlining their clients’ intention to pursue one of two sites within this part of Cumbemauld. On that occasion they were advised that the site identified at Dobbies Garden Centre would be likely to be strongly resisted by the Council, as it would seriously affect the setting of a listed building. The agents were advised that BT Cellnet should pursue an alternative site in the vicinity.

3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

3.1 The adopted local plan for the area within which this site is located is the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993. The application site is located within the area designated as a significant area of open space where limited development is to be allowed. Policy EN26 presumes against new development in areas of open space except where the development provides for outdoor recreation, nature conservation or landscape protection.

3.2 Policy EN2 of the Cumbernauld Local Plan states that there will be a presumption against any development, including demolition, which could adversely affect the character, appearance or setting of a listed building.

3.3 Policy EN 8 of the Cumbemauld Local Plan states that there will be a presumption against any development which does not relate to the landscape within which it is set by virtue of its location on the site.

3.4 The Local Plan also recognises that, in accordance with Circular 25/85, there will be a presumption in favour of development required in connection with telecommunications in Green Belt areas.

4. NATIONAL PLANNING GUIDANCE

4.1 Recently the Scottish Executive has published a new NPPG (National Planning Policy Guidelines) on Radio Telecommunications, which is of particular relevance to this application. The Scottish Executive’s policy is to enable the telecommunications industry to expand so that Scotland is served by the best radio telecommunications infrastructure. The expansion must however be undertaken in a manner that keeps the environmental impact of telecommunications equipment to a minimum. It goes on to say that Planning Authorities should not, however, question whether the service to be provided is needed nor seek to prevent competition between operators, but must determine applications on planning grounds.

4.2 The NPPG also stresses that proposals affecting a listed building or its setting must receive very careful consideration. The NPPG instructs Planning Authorities to have regard to the guidance contained in the Memorandum of Guidance on Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas 1998, published by Historic Scotland.

4.3 To demonstrate to planning authorities that the known health effects have been properly addressed, applications for planning permission involving antennas must be accompanied by a declaration that the equipment and installation is designed to be in full compliance with the appropriate ICNIRP guidelines for public exposure to radiofrequency radiation. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the Scottish Executive and the UK Government to decide what measures are required to protect public health.

5. REPRESENTATIONS AND CONSULTATIONS

5.1 Three objections to the proposed development have been received from consultees. The Council’s Landscape Services Manager advised that insufficient details about the potential screening of the telecommunications equipment were submitted with the proposal, and concluded that the exposed nature of the site meant that the proposal will have a high visibility and large impact in the area and that it would be difficult to see how a mast in this location can be successfully integrated into the landscape.

5.2 Historic Scotland advised that the “mast and ancillary works will obviously have a severe effect upon the setting of the Listed Building and consideration should be given to siting it elsewhere”. The Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland advised that the “visual intrusion into the curtilage is unacceptable and would object to the proposed location of the telecommunications tower”.

5.3 The proposed development was advertised in the local press as development which affects the setting of a Category B Listed Building and a total of seven letters of representation, as well as one from the local Councillor, where received detailing objections to the proposed development. These can be summarised as follows :-

1. Listed Building - the proposed telecommunications equipment would have a detrimental effect on the setting of a Category B Listed Buildings and on one of Cumbernauld’s oldest buildings, which had previously been restored and converted in a sympathetic manner. 2. Visual Intrusion -that due to the exposed position of the site the structure would be visible from miles around and that it would dominate the views of this part of Cumbernauld in particular. 3. Necessity - BT Cellnet already have telecommunications equipment in the area and this extra equipment is therefore not necessary. 4. Health Grounds - regardless of advice from the Scottish Executive there is still no definitive proof that these structures would not cause negative health effects among the general public. This is of particular relevance when you bear in mind that a new housing development at Westenvood is being constructed on a site opposite to the Garden Centre. 5. Suitable Alternative Sites - Less intrusive sites in North Industrial Estate, or off of the disused road to the north of Dobbies Roundabout, or at the Burger King site would be potentially more appropriate for telecommunications development. 6. Attitude of Dobbies Garden Centre - who should be aware that in their rush to grab at profit from this abomination that the mast, could seriously harm their trade by frightening customers away. 7. The Village Conservation Area - although the mast is not located in the Conservation Area, the structure could have an adverse effect on the setting of the Conservation Area due to it’s location within the vicinity of this area. 8. Lack of Regard for Landmarks in Cumbernauld - that this proposal is another example of the vandalism of anything of any historical significance in Cumbernauld. 6. PLANNING ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSIONS

6.1 Planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. It is considered that the proposal is not in accordance with Local Plan policy as outlined in Policy EN2. This policy presumes against development which will adversely affect the setting of a listed building. It is the opinion of North Lanarkshire Council’s Landscape Services Manager, of Historic Scotland and of the Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland that this development will have a detrimental impact on the setting of the listed building.

6.2 The Memorandum of Guidance on Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas 1998 produced by Historic Scotland advises that, “ ----- at all times the listed building should remain the focus of its setting. Attention must never be distracted by the presence of any new development whether it be within or outwith the curtilage”. In this instance the proposed telecommunications mast will clearly affect the setting of the Listed Building as it,“ ----- will restrict or obstruct view of or from the listed building, or rise above or behind the listed building so that its silhouette can no longer be seen against the sky from more familiar view-points”.

6.3 The applicants, plan to erect a 15 metre high lattice tower within 15 metres of the nearest part of the listed building. No evelational drawings were submitted which would have detailed the height of the existing buildings which would have allowed a fuller assessment of the mast’s impact. Despite this lack of information it can be assumed that the tower will be at least two to three times the height of the existing buildings and consequently it will be the most visible structure on this site. Furthermore, the mast will be the most visible part of the site when viewed from a distance or along roads such as the A80 or Eastfield Road which approach it.

6.4 Policy EN 8 of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 presumes against development that is not well related to the landscape within which it is set by virtue of its location. The prominent location of this site means that it is exposed to the A80 trunk road on the south east and the south east with long views to Cumbernauld. Its location at the foot of a hill and adjacent to Eastfield Road means that it is also clearly visible on approaches from newer parts of Cumbernauld. The proposed installation of a 15 metre telecommunications mast will be a highly visible feature on the landscape of this part of Cumbernauld and it is therefore likely to have a detrimental effect on the amenity of this area.

6.5 In this case the applicants have demonstrated in their supporting evidence that alternative sites were considered and found to be unsuitable. BT Cellnet have decided to proceed with this site, despite previous advice from North Lanarkshire Council that it was unlikely to be suitable for telecommunications development. Although several alternative sites have been outlined by those who made representations, it may be that these sites would not fulfil the locational needs of the telecommunications operator. However, these arguments are sufficient to call into question the extent to which the applicants exhausted all potential alternative sites before opting on such a sensitive site.

6.6 Seven letters of objection and one letter from the local councillor have been received outlining legitimate concerns about the impact that the siting and design of this mast will have on the listed building and the immediate vicinity.

6.7 Given that the proposal is not in accordance with Local Plan policy, is likely to be detrimental to the setting of the listed building and the amenity of the area, and that serious concerns have been raised by Historic Scotland, The Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland, by North Lanarkshire Council’s Landscape Services Manager and by members of the public, it is recommend that planning permission be refused. Application No: N/O 1/O 134 1/FUL

Date Registered: 1 1th October 200 1

APPLICANT: CARTER AND COWAN (PLUMBERS MERCHANTS) 93 MAIN STREET, CHRYSTON, G69 9LA

Agent: Norris Hamilton, Parkland Design Studio, 14 Meadow View, Cumbemauld, G67 2BY

DEVELOPMENT: CONVERSION OF WORKSHOP TO DWELLINGHOUSE, CONSTRUCTION OF FOUR FLATS AND FORMATION OF TEN PARKING SPACES

LOCATION: LAND TO REAR OF 93/95 MAIN STREET, GARTFERRY ROAD, CHRYSTON

Ward No: 69 Grid: 268809670184 File Reference: N/O 1/O 134 1/FUL Site History: None

Development Plan: Southem Area Local Plan 1983. : Policy E.PRO 6 Northern Corridor Local Plan, Finalised Draft 2000 : Policies HG 1-4, Residential Zoning

Contrary to Development Plan: No

CONSULTATIONS:

Objection: Chryston Community Council No Objection: Transco, Coal Authority, Fire Brigade and West of Scotland Water No Reply: Conditions:

REPRESENTATIONS:

Neighbours: None Newspaper Advert: Not required

COMMENTS : This application seeks consent for the conversion of a workshop to a dwellinghouse, the construction of a block of four flats and the formation of ten parking spaces on land to the rear of 93/95 Main Street, Chryston. The site forms part of an existing Plumbers Merchants yard, which is operated from 93 Main Street.

A letter of objection has been received from the Community Council on the grounds that residential development is contrary to local plan policy and that it would be detrimental to road safety. Notwithstanding this objection, it is recommended that permission be granted.

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 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 retain effective control of this aspect in the interests of the amenity of the surrounding area.

3. That before the dwellinghouse and flats hereby approved are occupied, the parking bays illustrated on the approved layout drawing No. 337/3 shall formed and laid out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason : To ensure that adequate parking provision exists within the site in the interests of residential amenity and road safety.

4. That before the dwellinghouse and flats hereby permitted are occupied, a 1.0 metre high pedestrian safety barrier shall be erected at the kerb of the pavement along the frontage of the flats and dwellinghouse to the satisfaction of the Roads Authority.

Reason : To ensure that there are no on-street parking opportunities at this location in the interests of road safety and residential amenity.

5. That within three months of the commencement of work on site, details of the proposed bin store provision shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason : To ensure that adequate bin store facilities will be provided in the interests of residential amenity.

6. That the bin stores approved in terms of Condition 5 above shall be constructed prior to the occupation of the dwellinghouse and flats hereby approved.

Reason : To ensure that adequate bin store facilities will be provided in the interests of residential amenity.

7. That before the flats and dwellinghouse hereby approved are occupied the following shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Roads Authority :-

a) A 5.5 metre wide dropped kerb footway type crossing access to be constructed in accordance with the Council’s specification. b) A visibility splay of 2.5metres by 90 metres to be provided to the left and right at the site access connection with Gartferry Road, into which nothing higher than 1.0 metre shall be allowed to encroach. c) A 2.0 metre wide adoptable footway to be provided along the frontage of the development. Reason : To ensure that adequate pedestrian and vehicular access facilities have been provided to the satisfaction of the Roads Authority in the interests of road safety.

List of Background Papers:

Application Form and Drawings dated loth October 200 1 Letter of objection from Chryston Community Council dated 31StOctober 2001 Strathkelvin Southern Area Local Plan 1983 Northern Corridor Local Plan Finalised Draft 2000

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr. Williams on 01236-616464 APPLICATION NO: N/O 1/0 134UFUL

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 This application is for the conversion of a workshop to a house and the construction of 4 flats with car parking at the rear of 93/95 Main Street, Chryston, with a vehicular access from Gartfeny Road. The applicants operate from 93 Main Street and the site is currently used as a storage yard.

1.2 The site extends to 600 m2 and is situated at the southern end of Gartfeny Road. It slopes downward to the north and has an open aspect to the Campsie and Kilsyth Hills. It is within an Area Unaffected by Specific Proposals in the adopted Strathkelvin Southern Area Local Plan 1983, and falls within Policy HG 3 in the emerging Local Plan, which identifies it within a residential area.

1.3 The flats comprise one on the ground floor, two on the second floor and one studio flat in the roof space. The existing workshop is of traditional sandstone construction and dates back to the 19" century. The conversion will result in a traditional cottage with roof dormers and a private garden.

2. CONSULTATIONS AND OBJECTIONS

2.1 No adverse comments have been received as a result of neighbour notification. However, an objection has been received from the Community Council, who argue that the proposal is contrary to the adopted Local Plan and that it will increase traffic at the junction with Gartfeny Road and Main Street to the detriment of road safety.

3. OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSION

3.1 It is considered that the proposed development is acceptable in terms of scale, siting and design. Furthermore, it will not detrimentally affect surrounding adjacent residential amenity and it provides adequate on-site dedicated car parking.

3.2 The Transportation Manager is satisfied that it will not present any road safety issues provided that a pedestrian safety barrier is erected along the frontage of the site to prevent on-street parking along Gartfeny Road. This, in effect, overcomes the Community Council's road safety objection.

3.3 In terms of policy, the emerging Local Plan represents a material consideration, which outweighs the adopted, but now outdated Local Plan. In this context, the application must be assessed in terms of Policies HG 1-4 in the Northern Corridor Local Plan Finalised Draft 2000, which has Council approval.

3.4 Policy HG 1 seeks to provide housing development opportunities; HG 2 encourages residential development on brownfield sites and HG 3 seeks to retain residential amenity. The proposal complies with these policies, and also the detailed design criteria contained within policy HG 4.

3.5 The development is not regarded as contrary to the terms of policy E.PRO 6 in the adopted Local Plan, which states that proposals will be considered on merit and in terms of Local Plan criteria. Furthermore, the application site is situated at the edge of a residential area on the fringe of the urban envelope and the proposal is not significant in terms of scale or potential effect to adjacent dwellings. In this context the proposal is not in conflict with policy E.PRO 6.

3.6 It is concluded that this proposal is acceptable and recommended that planning permission be granted. Application No.: NI0 110 135 8IFUL

Date Registered: 12 October 2001

APPLICANT: MR & MRS MCLEISH, 56 DUNALAISTER DRIVE, STEPPS, G33 6LX

Agent:

DEVELOPMENT: ERECTION OF CONSERVATORY

LOCATION: 56 DUNALASTAIR DRIVE, STEPPS

Ward: 70

Grid Reference: 265004 6683 13

File Reference: ML

Site History: No Relevant Site History

Development Plan Northern Corridor Local Plan, Finalised Draft, 2000 HG3 - Maintenance of Residential Character

Contrary to Development Plan: No

CONSULTATIONS:

Objection: No Objection: Conditions: No Reply:

REPRESENTATIONS:

Neighbours: One letter of objection Newspaper Advertisement: Not required

COMMENTS: The applicants seek planning permission for the erection of a conservatory to the rear of their semi-detached dwellinghouse at 56 Dunalastair Drive, Stepps. One letter of objection has been received from the neighbour at 54 Dunalastair Drive. The grounds of objection were that the proposed conservatory will reduce sunlight into their garden and there would also be a loss of privacy. It is considered that the conservatory will not block sunlight or reduce privacy to an extent which would merit withholding planning permission. I therefore recommend that permission be granted.

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 provision of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997

2. That the facing materials to be used for the conservatory shall match in colour and texture to those of the existing adjoining building.

Reason : To ensure that the development hereby approved complements the adjoining dwellinghouse in the interests of amenity.

List of Background Papers:

Application forms and plans received 12'h October 2001 Northern Corridor Local Plan (Finalised Draft) 2000 Letter from Mrs Ellen O'Brien, 54 Dunalastair Drive, dated 16 October 2001

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Marlaine Lavery on 0 1236 6 16477. APPLICATION NUMBER: N/01/01358/FUL

REPORT

1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 The application site is 56 Dunalastair Drive, Stepps, located within an established private residential area.

1.2 The applicants are proposing to construct a rear conservatory measuring 3.5 metres x 4 metres on to the north elevation of their semi-detached dwellinghouse. Its height will be 4 metres, within 4metres from the boundary of 54 Dunalastair Drive.

2. REPRESENTATIONS

2.1 One letter of representation was received from the neighbours at No.54 Dunalastair Drive regarding this proposal. The basis of their concern was that the proposed conservatory would significantly reduce the available sunlight to their garden and that there would be a loss of privacy.

3. PLANNING ASSESSMENT & CONCLUSION

3.1 The main consideration in assessing this application is how the proposed conservatory will impact on the amenity currently enjoyed by the residents of Nos4 Dunalastair Drive.

3.2 It is considered that the conservatory will not overshadow the objectors’ garden. It should also be noted that both rear gardens are north facing and are already in the shade for most of the time. The objectors have also complained about the loss of privacy to their garden. It is concluded that the extent of the overlooking is not sufficient to justify refusing planning permission.

3.3 In conclusion, it is recommended that permission be granted. Application No.: NI0 110 13 5 9lFUL

Date Registered: 12 October 2001

APPLICANT: MR & MRS A GREEN, 58 DUNALAISTER DRIVE, STEPPS, G33 6LX

Agent:

DEVELOPMENT: ERECTION OF CONSERVATORY

LOCATION: 58 DUNALASTAIR DRIVE, STEPPS

Ward: 70

Grid Reference: 264997 668313

File Reference: ML

Site History: No Relevant Site History

Development Plan Northern Corridor Local Plan, Finalised Draft : HG3 - Maintenance of Residential Character

Contrary to Development Plan: No

CONSULTATIONS:

Objection: No Objection: Conditions: No Reply:

REPRESENTATIONS:

Neighbours: One letter of objection Newspaper Advertisement: Not required

COMMENTS: The applicants seek planning permission for the erection of a conservatory to the rear of their semi-detached dwellinghouse at 58 Dunalastair Drive, Stepps. One letter of objection has been received from the neighbour at 54 Dunalastair Drive. The grounds of objection were that the proposed conservatory will reduce sunlight into their garden and there would also be a loss of privacy. It is considered that the conservatory will not block sunlight or reduce privacy and I therefore recommend that permission be granted.

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 provision of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997

2. That the facing materials to be used for the conservatory shall match in colour and texture to those of the existing adjoining building.

Reason : To ensure that the development hereby approved complements the adjoining dwellinghouse in the interests of amenity.

List of Background Papers:

Application forms and plans received 12thOctober 2001 Northern Corridor Local Plan (Finalised Draft) 2000 Letter from Mrs Ellen O’Brien , 54 Dunalastair Drive, dated 16 October 200 1

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Marlaine Lavery on 01236 616477. APPLICATION NUMBER: N/01/01359/FUL

REPORT

1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 The application site is 58 Dunalastair Drive, Stepps, located within an established private residential area.

1.2 The applicants are proposing to construct a rear conservatory measuring 3.5 metres x 4 metres on to the north elevation of their semi-detached dwellinghouse. Its height will be 4 metres, within 10 metres from the boundary of 54 Dunalastair Drive.

2. REPRESENTATIONS

2.1 One letter of representation was received from the neighbours at No.54 Dunalastair Drive regarding this proposal. The basis of their concern was that the proposed conservatory would significantly reduce the available sunlight to their garden and that there would be a loss of privacy.

3. PLANNING ASSESSMENT & CONCLUSION

3.1 The main consideration in assessing this application is how the proposed conservatory will impact on the amenity currently enjoyed by the residents of Nos4 Dunalastair Drive.

3.2 The objectors have complained about the loss of sunlight and privacy to their garden. Having carried out an assessment, and taken account of the fact that the rear garden of No. 56 Dunalastair Drive lies between Nos. 58 & 54, it is concluded that the proposed conservatory will not over- shadow or overlook the objectors’ garden.

3.3 In conclusion, I recommend that permission be granted. Application No.: N/O 1/O 13 7 1/FUL

Date Registered: 7thAugust 200 1

APPLICANT: JOSEPH McCARROLL, 24 CAWDER ROAD, CARRICKSTONE, CUMBERNAULD

Agent:

DEVELOPMENT: ERECTION OF GARAGE AND FORMATION OF DRIVEWAY

LOCATION: 24 CAWDER ROAD, CARRICKSTONE, CUMBERNAULD

Ward: 57

Grid Reference: 275004 67601 1

File Reference: MT

Site History: Previous Application N/O1/00532/FUL for the conversion of the existing garage to living accommodation granted in June 2001

Development Plan Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 : Residential

Contrary to Development Plan: No

CONSULTATIONS:

Objection: No Objection: Conditions: No Reply:

REPRESENTATIONS:

Neighbours: One letter of objection Newspaper Advertisement: Not required.

COMMENTS: This application seeks permission for the erection of a side garage and the formation of a new driveway at 24 Cawder Road, Carrickstone, Cumbernauld.

It is considered that the development is in accordance with the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 and that the objection received is not significant enough to warrant refusal of permission. It is recommended that planning permission be granted. Produced by N/01/01371/FUL Department of Planning and Environment Mr J McCarroll Northern Division 24 Cawder Road Carrickstone Bron Way Cumbernauld CUMBERNAULD Erection of Garage R Formation G67 1DZ of Drivewav Reproduced fiom the Ordnance Survey mapping With Ihe permission of the Conlroller Of her Mapsly 5 Smonery Ofrice 0 Crown copyrtght Unauthonrsd reprOdYCllon lnfrlnger Clown copynghl This copy has been produced specifically for Planning and Building Control purposes only and may lead 10 P~OSBEU~IO~or SIYII proceedings OS Licence LA 090411 No further copies may be made 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: To enable the Planning Authority to safeguard the residential amenity of the adjoining residential area.

List of Background Papers:

Application forms and plans received 17* October 200 1 Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 Planning Application N/O 1/00532/FUL Letter of objection from Ms. G. Moore, 26 Cawder Road dated 25'h October 2001

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr. Thomson on 01236 616466. APPLICATION NUMBER: N/01/01371/FUL

REPORT

1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 This application seeks permission for the erection of a garage and the formation of a new driveway at the side of a dwellinghouse at 24 Cawder Road, Carrickstone, Cumbemauld. The property is a modem detached bungalow that occupies a large corner plot within the Carrickstone housing area in Cumbemauld.

1.2 The applicant has previously converted his original garage to create extra living accommodation and so this application seeks permission to erect a replacement garage and create a new access on to the site.

2. BACKGROUND

2.1 The applicant has previously been granted planning permission in June 2001 for the conversion of his existing garage to living accommodation.

3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

3.1 The Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 is the adopted Local Plan for this area. Established areas of housing are covered by policy HG 3, which states that alterations and extensions to existing residential properties should be in keeping with the scale and character of the surrounding area and in particular there should be an acceptable amount of garden ground remaining, there should be sufficient car parking on the site and that extensions should relate to the design of the original building and should not dominate it’s appearance.

4. REPRESENTATIONS AND CONSULTATIONS

4.1 One letter of objection was received fi-om the adjoining proprietor at 26 Cawder Road. In her letter of objection she states that she is opposed to the replacement garage on the basis that it is likely to affect the amount of sunlight which reaches her garden of.

4.2 The Transportation Manager has no objection to the proposal as long as two car parking space can be provided within the curtilage of the site. He would prefer only one dropped-kerb access.

5. PLANNING ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSIONS

5.1 Planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The proposal under consideration is in accordance with Local Plan policy.

5.2 One objection was received to this proposal. The nature of this objection is that the proposed garage could restrict the amount of light that the neighbouring property would receive. Following a site visit and close inspection of the plans submitted, it is apparent the garage is unlikely to lead to a significant loss of sunlight to the neighbouring rear garden due to its position on the north-west elevation of 24 Cawder Road. As the rear garden of No. 26 faces east it has an open aspect to the rising and mid day sun. Daylight to the rear garden is more likely to be obscured in the afternoon by the property itself rather than by the neighbour’s proposed garage.

5.3 While the house plot will end up with two-dropped kerb accesses, this is not unacceptable in the present circumstances. The site can readily accommodate the parking requirements for a private house, and, notwithstanding the neighbour’s objections, it is recommended that permission be granted. Application No.: NI0 1/O 13 80lFUL

Date Registered: 23” October 2001

APPLICANT: MR MALCOLM McNALLY, THE RECTORY, 15A FLEMING ROAD, SEAFAR, CUMBERNAULD

Agent:

DEVELOPMENT: CHANGE OF USE OF PROPERTY TO A CHILDREN’S NURSERY

LOCATION: THE RECTORY, 15A FLEMING ROAD, SEAFAR, CUMBERNAULD

Ward: 54

Grid Reference: 275856 674983

File Reference: ML

Site History: No Relevant Site History

Development Plan Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993, HG4 - Mainly residential areas, exiting residential character and amenities to be protected.

Contrary to Development Plan: No (But contrary to Guidance)

CONSULTATIONS:

Objection: No Objection: Conditions: No Reply:

REPRESENTATIONS:

Neighbours: One letter of objection Newspaper Advertisement: No Response

COMMENTS: The application relates to the change of use of a detached dwelling to a children’s nursery at The Rectory, 15A Fleming Road, Seafar, Cumbernauld. The dwellinghouse is situated in a residential area between a church and a mission hall. An existing car park separates the property from a row of terraced houses adjacent. There is a strip of waste ground and road to the rear. The applicant proposes to use the existing car park which is currently used by local residents and the church.

The proposal has been advertised as a ‘bad neighbour’ development and has received on objection.

Whilst this type of use can be acceptable in a residential area, there are serious concerns regarding the proposed parking and the overall impact this will have on highway safety. It has been noted that even in quiet periods during the day there are generally few unoccupied parking spaces and this would lead to displacement parking on adjacent roads to the detriment of road safety. N

A Reprcdu~~dfrom the hdnance Survey mapping with !he permission of me conboiier of her ~aierty's Slalimsry Otfice @ CIOIMI copyright 1:1250 Unauthanrad reproduction infringer Crown copynght This copy has been produced specifically for Planning and Butldlng Control purposes only and may lead 10 ploleS"ll0" or UVIi plOS.dl"gS OS Licence LA 09041 L No further copies may be made RECOMMENDATION:

Refuse, for the following reasons:

1. That the proposal is contrary to the terms of policy TRlO of the adopted Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 in that it fails to make provision for parking. 2. That the proposal would have a detrimental effect on road safety in the vicinity in that it would lead to displacement parking in Fleming Road. 3. That should planning permission be granted it would create an undesirable precedent making it difficult for the Council to refuse other applications of a similar nature.

List of Background Papers:

Application forms and plans received 23 October 2001 Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 Internal Consultation Response from Transportation Manager dated 25 November 200 1 Internal Consultation Response from Director of Education dated 20 November 200 1 Letter of objection from Revd. David A Cook, 1R Blake Road, Cumbernauld dated 30 October 2001

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Marlaine Lavery on 01236 616477 APPLICATION NUMBER: N/O 1/0 138O/FUL

REPORT

1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 This application seeks permission for the change of use of a detached dwellinghouse to a children’s nursery at The Rectory, 15A Fleming Road, Cumbernauld. The works to the building are all internal.

1.2 The Rectory occupies a site of 24 metres X 26 metres in area within a predominately residential area at the far end of Fleming Road. There is a church to the east of the property and a mission hall to the west. There is an existing car park to the front of the property and the rear of the property is hemmed in by a wall and mature trees.

1.3 The site is zoned HG4 - Mainly residential areas, existing residential character and amenities to be protected.

2. REPRESENTATIONS AND CONSULTATIONS

2.1 Following neighbour notification one letter of objection was received. The letter was from Revd. David Cook from the neighbouring church.and the grounds of objection raised were that :

(a) The existing car park, which the nursery proposes to use is already fully utilised. This would lead to congestion and inconvenience for everyone concerned, especially when there is a mid-week funeral or wedding.

(b) The occupants of 15A Fleming Road already use church property for siting their wheely- bin and there is a concern that there will be an increase in the amount of bins and rubbish if the house changed to a nursery.

(c) That there is no provision for an emergency exit at the back of the property and there is concern that the steps will be converted to a ramp for the use of prams.

2.2 The Transportation Manager has advised that the proposal is not acceptable unless the applicant can provide additional parking. The reason being that the existing car park is already congested with residents parking for approximately 30-40 dwellings and it also doubles as a car park for the church.

2.3 The Director of Education has no objections to the proposal. However, it is estimated that the nursery could accommodate up to 20 children. This would require at least 4 members of staff.

3. AS SESSMENT

3.1 This application should be assessed in terms of the Local Plan and other material considerations. In this instance the development is for a children’s nursery within an established residential area. The proposal is considered to be of a nature ancillary to the residential area therefore the principle of a nursery in this location is in line with policy HG4 in the Cumbernauld Local Plan.

3.2 As noted above, the Transportation Manager and objector have raised serious concerns regarding the implications for road safety as a direct result of the proposed use. It is possible that these concerns could be allayed if the applicant could provide additional parking. However, this is not possible due to the constraints of the site.

3.3 The objector has also complained about the siting of the applicants “wheely-bin” on the church’s land and that the stairs between the two properties may be replaced with a ramp.

4. CONCLUSION

4.1 On balance, the proposal complies with the spirit and intentions of Policy HG4. However, I believe that the proposal would have a serious impact on the road safety almost certainly requiring dangerous displacement parking in Fleming Road. It is not the principle nor the size of the development that is considered unacceptable, rather the absence of parking provision. To comply with current guidance, 12 car parking spaces should be accommodated within the site. In my opinion, there is no way of making this proposal acceptable without the provision of an additional car park, which would be used solely by the nursery. Accordingly, I recommend that planning permission be refused for the reasons noted. Application No: N/O 1/0 1384/AMD

Date Registered: 22nd. October 2001

APPLICANT: Ms. A. MORRISON, 12 MID BARRWOOD ROAD, KILSYTH G65 OER

Agent:

DEVELOPMENT: USE OF PREMISES AS BOOK DISTRIBUTION CENTRE

LOCATION: 17 REGISTER ROAD, KILSYTH

Ward No: 66 Grid: 272236 - 677700 File Reference: MD Site History: SCC/66/344: Conversion of Commercial Garage to Light Industrial Building - Approved June 1966 CN/77/05 : Temporary permission for builder’s yard. Renewed in 1982 and in 1984 for period of two years CN/86/20: Renewal of temporary permission - Withdrawn CN/88/36: Renewal of temporary permission - Granted for one year CN/89/19: Renewal of temporary permission - Granted for one year CN/90/26, 46: Renewal of temporary permission - Granted for six months CN/90/116: Erection of eight flats - Approved August 1990 CN/99/00302/FUL: Change of Use from Builder’s Yard to Book Distribution Business - Approved April 1999

Development Plan: Kilsyth Local Plan 1999: General Residential (HG3-5)

Contrary to Development Plan: No

CONSULTATIONS:

Objection: No Objection: No Reply: Conditions:

REPRESENTATIONS:

Neighbours: Two letters of objection. Newspaper Advert: Not Required

COMMENTS: The application is for the use of premises at 17 Register Road, Kilsyth as a book distribution centre. Planning permission (N/99/00302/FUL) was previously granted in April 1999 for a temporary two year period in view of a potential conflict with the general residential environment and in view of continued aspirations that the site be residentially developed.

Notwithstanding two letters of representation it is considered that the book distribution centre does not cause any undue nuisance to nearby residents. It is also noted that there has been commercial activity on the site (commercial garage, light industrial, builder’s yard and book distribution centre) for a number of years and that there has been no residential development interest since 1990. It is therefore considered that it is appropriate to grant a permanent planning permission for the book distribution use. A planning condition is recommended ensuring that there is no business activity during the night or in the early morning or late evening.

It is recommended that full planning permission be granted.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant, subject to the following condition:-

1. That commercial operations shall only take place on the site between the hours of 8.00 a.m. to 9.00 p.m. Mondays to Saturdays and 9.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. on Sundays.

Reason: In the interest of residential amenity by ensuring that commercial operations do not take place at night, in the early morning or in the late evening.

List of Background Papers:

Application form and plan dated 28th. October 2001 Kilsyth Local Plan 1999 Letter of representation from Ms. M. MacIntosh, 32 Register Roads, Kilsyth G65 ODS, dated 29” October 200 1 Letter of representation from J.W. Andrews, 46 Anton Crescent, Kilsyth G65 ONY, dated lstNovember 200 1.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr. Dean on 01236-616459 APPLICATION NO: N/01/01384/AMD

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 The application is for full permission for a book distribution centre at 17 Register Road, Kilsyth. The site is currently used for this purpose with a temporary permission (N/99/00302/FUL) having been granted in April 1999 for two years.

1.2 The site is surrounded by residential properties.

2. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

2.1 Under the terms of the Kilsyth Local Plan 1999 the site is identified as being within a general residential area (HG3-5).

3. CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

3.1 The Transportation Manager has reservations over the orientation of the access. It should be noted, however, that this is the long established access arrangement.

3.2 Two letters of objection have been received with the following points being made:-

- The building has a poor appearance; - The location of the business in a residential area is not ideal; - There is disturbance to local residents through groups of young people gathering at the site at night; - Any grant of permission should be limited thus requiring that the applicants look for other premises; - Any permission should be restricted to Monday-Friday business hours; - There is a large pile of demolition rubble spoiling the view from adjacent dwellings to the west; - The premises should have an efficient alarm system and lockable gates.

4. OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSION

4.1 It is considered that the key issues are as follows:-

a) Commercial development within a general residential area: As currently operated, there does not appear to be any general residential nuisance associated with the book distribution business, It is recognised, however, that there could be some nuisance from a more intensive book distribution operation or from other forms of storage/distribution or business uses as could be allowed through normal planning procedures. Planning can not require a “low key” form of operation. As such, it should be accepted that this is a site with a long history of commercial uses and that it is not possible to fully ensure that there will be no occasional future residential nuisance. It is not anticipated, however, that there will be problems with the current form of operation.

b) Potential restrictions to the commercial operation through the imposition of planning conditions: Planning conditions have previously been imposed restricting the length of the planning permission, the hours of operation and the precise nature of the business.

Having reviewed matters, it is now considered that the only condition that needs to be imposed is a restriction on commercial operations during the early morning, the late evening and at night. This is in order to protect local residents from undue nuisance. It is not considered that there should be a further temporary permission as it must be acknowledged that the site has a long history of commercial uses (commercial garage, light industrial building, builder’s yard and book distribution centre) and there are no strong grounds for not allowing continued commercial use. Although there are aspirations that the site be developed residentially, this cannot be achieved by restricting the commercial planning permission.

c) Specific points of complaint concerning the site: The suggested provisions of a lockable gate and an effective alarm system have no bearing on the planning merits of the business. Although the soiled mounds of demolition rubble are deemed unsightly by an objector, it is not considered that they represent an overriding loss of amenity or have an effect on public views of the site. Although it is not considered appropriate to impose planning conditions covering the above matters, the applicant has been made aware that they are points of concern to local residents.

Anti social behaviour by local youths on the site in the evening is a police matter and does not affect the acceptability or otherwise of the distribution use.

It is not accepted that the design or condition of the building detracts from the local area.

4.2 In conclusion it is recommended that full planning permission be granted to the book distribution business subject to a condition limiting hours of operation. Application No.: N/O 1/O 1464/FUL

Date Registered: 14 November 200 1

APPLICANT: MR AND MRS DIAMOND, 7 KINGSVIEW, CUMBERNAULD

Agent: GILLIES RAMSAY DIAMOND, 163 WEST GEORGE STREET, G2 255 DEVELOPMENT: EXTENSION TO DWELLINGHOUSE

LOCATION: 7 KINGSVIEW, CUMBERNAULD

Ward: 57

Grid Reference: 2758120 6767190

File Reference: ML

Site History: No relevant site history

Development Plan Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993, HG4 - Mainly Residential areas, existing residential character and amenities to be protected.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

CONSULTATIONS:

Objection: No Objection: Conditions: No Reply:

REPRESENTATIONS:

Neighbours: Three letters of objection Newspaper Advertisement: Not required

COMMENTS : This application relates to the erection of a rear extension for use as a granny flat at 7 Kings View, Cumbernauld. The dwellinghouse is detached and is situated in an existing private residential area. The house is bounded to the north, west and east by similar type houses with open ground adjacent.

The proposal has received three objections from neighbours at 3,5 and 9 Kings View. The main grounds of objection are the size of the extension in that it appears to be a separate house which could be sold on at a later date. Also the loss of sunlight and amenity to the adjoining gardens.

The site is zoned HG4 - Mainly residential areas, existing residential character and amenities to be protected. The proposed extension is considered acceptable in principle. The applicant has since amended the plans showing a change in design and size of the extension.

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: To ensure that the development hereby approved complements the adjoining dwellinghouse in the interests of amenity.

3. That the approved extension shall not be occupied at any time other than for purposes ancillary to the residential use of the adjoining dwelling and shall not be let or sold separately from the main dwelling.

Reason: To ensure that the property remains as one residential unit in the interests of surrounding residential amenity.

List of Background Papers:

Application forms and plans received 7 November 200 1 Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 Letter of objection from Dr R J McNeill, 9 Kings View, Cumbernauld Letter of objection from Mr John Frame, 5 Kings View, Cumbernauld Letter of objection from Mr & Mrs Speedie, 3 Kings View, Cumbernauld

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Marlaine Lavery on 01236 616477 APPLICATION NUMBER: N/O1/01464/FUL

REPORT

1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 This application seeks permission for the erection of a rear extension for use as a granny flat at 7 Kings View, Cumbernauld. The house is located within a private residential area and is bounded by similar house types to the north, east and west. There is an area of open space to the south with houses beyond.

1.2 The applicants are proposing to construct a single storey rear extension measuring 7 metres X 10 metres. The extension is long and narrow along the eastern boundary of the existing garden. The existing garden is substantial and is 17 metres X 18 metres in area.

1.3 The extension comprises an additional lounge/dining room, kitchen, bedroom and bathroom. It is separated fiom the existing house by a family room. Various windows are proposed on the east and north facing elevations and two patio doors and a window are proposed on the west facing elevation.

1.4 Overall the extension will provide 70 square metres of floorspace. It height will be 4.5 metres with a pitched roof. The extension will be 1 metre from the boundary of No. 9 Kings View and 10 metres from the rear boundaries of Nos. 5 and 7 Kings View.

2. BACKGROUND

2.1 The initial extension proposed by the applicant was larger in size and was separated from the existing house by a conservatory. This gave the illusion of a separate dwellinghouse. The applicant has however reduced the size of the extension and has removed the conservatory in favour of a smaller family room.

3. REPRESENTATIONS AND CONSULTATIONS

3.1 Three letters of objection were received from the neighbours at 3, 5, and 9 Kings View. The grounds of objection were as follows:

The extension is too large and looks like a separate house. The extension could be sold as a separate dwelling at a later date. The extension will overlook the adjoining gardens and thus reduce privacy currently enjoyed by the residents. There will be a loss of sunlight and amenity to the adjoining gardens. Concerns are raised regarding the drainage of rainwater. There would be a danger to the surrounding residents if there was a fire in the extension as it would be difficult for the Fire Services to gain access quickly. There will be an increase in vehicle parking at No.7 Kings View. The proposed new fence will cause damage to the climbing plants at No.5 Kings View There would be a reduction in the value of houses in the area. The proposed construction is contrary to the title deeds for housing in Kings View. There will be a considerable nuisance during construction due to the number of commercial vehicles and these vehicles could lead to lawn and monoblock repairs. 4. PLANNING ASSESSMENT

4.1 The main consideration in assessing this application is how the proposed extension will impact on the amenity currently enjoyed by the residents of Nos. 3, 5 and 9 Kings View.

4.2 Whilst the extension is large in terms of the additional floor area, it is single storey and to the rear of the existing two storey dwelling. The house has a substantial garden area and as the materials will match the existing house it is considered that the extension will not overwhelm the dwellinghouse.

4.3 With regard to the extension appearing like a separate dwelling it should be noted that the applicant has amended the plans reducing the size of the extension and has replaced the conservatory with a small family room. This has improved the design and appearance of the extension. A condition can be included which restricts the future use of the extension to being part of the existing dwelling.

4.4 In terms of potential loss of privacy, the new windows on the extension generally do not look directly over neighbouring residences. The north elevation windows face the rear boundary at a distance of 7 metres. The west elevation windows face the common boundaries of 3 and 5 Kings View at a distance of 10 metres. Adequate screen fencing exists on both boundaries. There is a small window on the east elevation however there is already an existing door and window on this elevation.

4.5 It is conceded that the extension will overshadow part of the objector’s garden at No.9 Kings View. However, both rear gardens are north facing and are already in the shade for most of the time. The extension will only cast a shadow over a small section of the objector’s garden for a relatively short time in the evening during the summer months. The objector at No.9 has a large garden, the vast majority of which will be unaffected by overshadowing. It is considered that the extension will not overshadow the gardens of Nos. 3 and 5 Kings View.

4.6 The other matters raised as noted above are not material planning considerations and as such cannot be taken into account in assessing this proposal.

5. CONCLUSION

5.1 Having considered the impact of the proposed extension on the amenity of the objector’s properties. I am of the opinion that the extension will not adversely affect the amenity of the neighbours to an extent which would merit withholding planning permission. Application No. C/99/01665/FUL Date registered 20 December 1999 APPLICANT MR S COUPER, 19 AIRDRIE ROAD, MOLLINSBURN, CUMBERNAULD

Agent C Stewart, ‘Lismore’, The Lane, , G68 OAW DEVELOPMENT CULVERTING OF MOLLINS BURN AND EXTENSION TO YARD TO FORM HGV TURNING AREA AND PADDOCK (IN RETROSPECT) LOCATION LAND TO THE REAR OF 19 AIRDRIE ROAD MOLLINSBURN CUMBERNAULD GLASGOW G67 4HS

Ward No. 33 Grid Reference 271985 671703

File Reference CIPLIANM650ICMILR

Site History This retrospective proposal is the subject of a planning contravention notice served on 29 November 1999.

Development Plan Under the terms of the Adopted District Local Plan 1991 the site is partly located with an area covered by the following policies:

GB 1 Restrict Development in the Green Belt L1/1 High Quality Landscape.

Under the terms of the Northern Corridor Local Plan Finalised Draft 2000 the site is partly located within an area covered by the following policy:

HG3 Maintenance of Residential Character

Contrary to Development Plan Yes

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection SEPA Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours Two letters of support

Newspaper Four letters of support Advertisement

COMMENTS Planning permission is being sought in retrospect for the culvert works, extension to HGV yard and formation of a horse paddock on land to the rear of 19 Airdrie Road, Mollinsburn. Whlst the proposal is considered in part to be contrary to the development plan the works have improved road safety and resulted in an improvement to the visual amenity of this part of the village. Moreover the encroachment is considered minimal and the formation of the horse paddock is considered to be a conforming and acceptable greenbelt use. As such it is my view that these factors when considered together mitigate or offset any harm to the greenbelt in this instance. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

C:\TEMP\R990 1665.doc Produced by Department of Plmniw and Environment "I *LI;;;;;; PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 99/01665/FUL Directorate Supprt Urrt NORM - Sute 501 Fleming House CULVERTING OF MOLLINS BURN AND EXTENSION TO YARD TO ,; LANARKSHIRE 2 Tryst Road FORM HGV TURNING AREA AND PADDOCK (IN RETROSPECT) 25 COLNCiL - CUMBERNAULD G67 J W AT LAND TO THE REAR OF 19 AlRDRlE ROAD, MOLLINSBURN, 1 FbpdYadtomtkOdnmSurreymwpnpwlh CUMBERNAULD PLa prmisdon d PLa Cmtdc d har MjWs Telephone 01236 616210 Fax 01236 616232 sill!-FI mce 0 C,W* W!$lt UlMhonadrepmdvsPin 8rdrimesCihln cwwhl This mpy has been produced specifically for Pbnning and Building Control purposes only nd malead topro-Io1 WCIVII pced rw OS Licence LA 09041L No further copes may be made RECOMMENDATION

Grant, subject to the following conditions:-

1. That within one month of the date of this permission fill details of a bridge/culvert inspection chamber 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.

2. That within one month of the date of this permission fill details of a screen fencing and landscaping scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority including any modifications as may be required.

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

3. That following completion of the development the agreed maintenance schedule shall be started and therafter continued on a permanent basis to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

4. That within three months of the date of this planning permission all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of fencing, landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 2 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. Damaged fencing shall also be replaced to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

5. That for the avoidance of doubt the approved culvert inspection chamber shall be completed within 2 months of the date of this consent all to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of ensuring the Planning Authority can inspect the bridge and for the safety of pedestrians.

List of Background Papers

- Application forms and accompanying plans received on 20 December 1999 - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 - Northern Corridor Local Plan Finalised Draft 2000 - Consultation from SEPA received 3 March 2000 - Consultation response from the Environmental Control Manager received 3 1 January 2000 - Consultation response from Transportation manager received 23 February 2000 - Memo from Road Network Operations Manager dated 12 October 2001 - Memo from Planning Manager, Northern Division received 8 February 2000 - Letter from R Carr, 40 Cumbernauld Road, Mollinsbum received 24 January 2000 - Letter from D Carr, 40 Cumbernauld Road, Mollinsburn, received 24 January 2000 - Letter from Proprietor, Adamslie Car Sales, 56 Cumbernauld Road, Mollinsburn, received 24 January 2000 - Letter from P. Gallagher do Agent Lismore, The Lane, Dullatar G68 OAW, received 24 January 2000 - Letter from G Jackson, Badenheath Park Farm, Mollinsburn, received 24 January 2000 - Letter from Charles Kirkwood, 2 1 Airdrie Road, Mollinsburn, received 24 January 2000

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 8 12376 and ask for Colin Marshall.

C:\TEMP\R990 1665.doc APPLICATION NO. C/99/01665/FUL

REPORT

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 Planning permission is being sought in retrospect for the culverting of the Mollins burn and extension to a yard to form a HGV turning area and horse paddock on land to the rear of 19 Airdrie Road, Mollinsburn, Cumbernauld.

1.2 The application site is bounded to the north by Cumbernauld Road, to the east by open grazing fields and, to the south and west by adjacent dwellinghouses. Access to the yard is taken from Cumbernauld Road. The extended site now measures some 40m x 30m and consists of a HGV parking area and horse paddock. The site is partly screened from the public road by a timber fence. The burn has been subject to culvert works between its southern and northern boundaries and a culvert inspection chamber has been partially constructed to the south side of the road bridge on Cumbernauld Road.

2. SITE HISTORY

2.1 The yard area has been used as a HGV parking area by the applicant for some time. It has also been used as a paddock and stable for two horses. The applicant has advised he undertook the culvert works and extended the yard area for the purpose of creating a turning area for the HGV. Previously the vehicle needed to reverse into the public road which the applicant considered dangerous.

2.2 The yard extension and culvert works were undertaken without the benefit of planning permission and a planning contravention notice was served on 29 November 1999. Following discussions with the department the applicant agreed to submit a formal planning application.

3. PLANNING POLICIES

3.1 The application site is zoned in part (existing yard area) as policy HG3 (Maintenance of Residential Character) in the Northern Corridor Local Plan Finalised Draft 2000. The yard extension area is covered by Policy GB1 (Restrict Development in the Green Belt) and policy LI1/1 (High Quality Landscape) in the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The site is also zoned as policy GB1 and GBlA in the Approved Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995.

3.2 Policy HG3 of the Northern Corridor Local Plan generally seeks to maintain residential character of such areas.

3.3 Policy GB 1 restricts development in the Greenbelt except for: new houses for full time farm or forestry workers; development required for agricultural of forestry; uses requiring a rural location and areas identified as having substantial development potential.

4. CONSULTATIONS

4.1 There were no objections received from the Environmental Control Manager

4.2 The Transportation Manager had no objection provided the developer undertakes the following revisions. 4 Demonstrate the culvert pipe can support vehicle loads b) Provide an appropriate bridge inspection chamber c> Remove the newly formed access to the north of the site d) Reposition the stock fence 2.0m from the public road

4.3 SEPA had no objection to the proposal.

5. REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 There were six letters of support received from surrounding neighbours. 6. ASSESSMENT

6.1 In determining the application the main consideration is that of the development plan policies and any other material considerations. The yard extension i.e. the area of ground situated to the east of the Mollins Burn falls entirely within the designated greenbelt area and as such the unauthorised development is considered to be contrary to the development plan. However the following material factors need to be taken into account. Firstly, that the yard extension would improve road safety at this location, as the applicant’s delivery vehicle would be able to manoeuvre within the site and would not need to reverse onto the Cumbernauld Road. The applicant has removed a newly formed access following discussions on site. Secondly, the developer intends to improve the visual amenity of this part of Mollinsburn village by erecting a screen fence and complete a tree planting scheme. Indeed this has partly been completed with notable improvements. The fence is now set back from the public road by 2.0 metres to meet the concerns noted by the Transportation manager. Thirdly, the developer has agreed to minimise the area needed for the HGV turning area. The extra ground measures some 5m x 20m and is fenced off to prevent further encroachment to the greenbelt. The adjacent paddock area has also been fenced off and has a sand surface. It is my view that the paddock use can be considered as an acceptable and conforming green belt use. The new fencing also provides an appropriate demarcation of the site boundary and the respective uses.

6.2 Taken together I consider these material factors would justify a departure from the development plan. Road safety would be improved, the greenbelt encroachment would be minimal and the visual amenity of this part of Mollinsburn would be improved. It is therefore my view that planning permission should be granted subject to conditions. Application No. C/01/0008 UFUL Date registered 26 January 2001 APPLICANT ENVIROSCOT LIMITED, LANGMUIR WAY, BARGEDDIE, GLASGOW, G69 7RW

Agent John S Angus Associates, 7 Victoria Place, Airdrie, ML6 9BU DEVELOPMENT EXTENSION TO RECYCLING YARD

LOCATION ENVIROSCOT LIMITED, LANGMUIR WAY, BARGEDDIE, GLASGOW

Ward No. 36 Grid Reference 270518 664104

File Reference

Site History See accompanying report.

Development Plan Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991: Policy GB 1 (Greenbelt), policy CU1/5 and policy Lull Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995: Policy GB 1 (Greenbelt), Policy GBlA (Greenbelt).

Contrary to Yes Development Plan

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Scottish Power, West of Scotland Water, Transco, Coal Authority, and SEPA Conditions Protective Services No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours One

Newspaper No response Advertisement

COMMENTS The applicants, Enviroscot Limited, seek detailed planning permission for the extension of their existing materials recycling yard at Bargeddie. The development would involve the use of 2 hectares of open land lying to the east of the existing site at Langmuir Way.

Following assessment of the proposal, taking into account the development plan and other material considerations, it is concluded that planning permission may be granted, subject to conditions.

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.

R010008 1.doc Departmenfof Plrnnirg and Environment PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01/00081/FUL Directorate Supprt Unit Sute 501, Fleming House EXTENSION TO RECYCLING YARD 2 Tnst Road AT ENVIROSCOT LIMITED, LANGMUIR WAY, BARGEDDIE. CUMBEPAAULD G67 1 JW * LOCATION OF OBJECTOR Telephone 01236 616210 Fax. 01235 616232 This copy has been produced specifically for Planning and Building Control purposes only. I OS Licence LA 090411 No further coDieS mav be made 2. That before the materials recycling use hereby permitted starts, all boundary screening bunds as shown on the approved drawings shall be constructed in fill to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the recycling process does not give rise to adverse noise impacts.

3. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping for all the boundary screen bunds shown on the approved drawings 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 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; and (c) details of the phasing of these works.

Reason: To mitigate the visual impact of the development and to complement the noise mitigation properties of the screen bunds.

4. That within six months of the start of the materials recycling use hereby permitted, all planting, seeding and turfing included in the scheme of landscaping , 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: To mitigate the visual impact of the development and to complement the noise mitigation properties of the screen bunds.

5. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of all of the components of the landscaping scheme approved under the terms of condition 3.

Reason: To mitigate the visual impact of the development and to complement the noise mitigation properties of the screen bunds.

6. That on the completion of the landscaping works in accordance with condition 4, the management and maintenance schemed approved under the terms of condition 5 shall be in operation.

Reason: To mitigate the visual impact of the development and to complement the noise mitigation properties of the screen bunds.

7. That operations on the site, for which planning permission is hereby granted, shall take place only between the hours of 8.00 hours and 1800 hours.

Reason: To ensure that the operations do not give rise to adverse noise impacts

8. That the noise generated by the operations hereby approved shall not in itself, or cumulatively along with the operations from the existing yard, exceed 5dE3 above the relevant background level for the time of day at the boundary of any residential property when it is assumed that there are no tonal or impulsive characteristcs in accordance with BS4 142 "Method of Rating Industrial Noise Affecting Mixed Residential and Industrial Areas".

Reason: To ensure that the operations do not give rise to adverse noise impacts.

R0100081.doc 9. That any noise created from the site itself, or cumulatively along with the operations from the existing yard, that is tonal, intermittent or impulsive shall not exceed a level of 7dB above the relevant background level for the time of day at the boundary of any residential property in accordance with BS4 142 "Method of Rating Industrial Noise Affecting Mixed Residential and Industrial Areas".

Reason: To ensure that the operations do not give rise to adverse noise impacts.

10. That before the use of the site hereby permitted starts, there shall be provided gates into the new extended area set back 18 metres from the end of the existing public road at Langmuir Way.

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian and traffic safety.

11. That before the use hereby permitted starts, there shall be provided a delineator kerb to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian and traffic safety.

12. That before the use hereby permitted starts, drainage facilities shall be provided to prevent surface water affecting the public road.

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian and traffic safety.

13. That the proposed access and turning facilities as shown on the approved drawings shall be paved and maintained to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian and traffic safety.

14. That there shall be no pedestrian access facilities provided along the entire length of the new proposed vehicular access road as shown on the approved drawings.

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian and traffic safety.

NOTE TO COMMITTEE

Should it be the decision of the Council to grant planning permission, the application will require to be notified to the Scottish Ministers as a significant departure from the provisions of the Development Plan under the terms of the Town and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 1997.

List of Background Papers

Application form, plans and supporting statement BS 4142 Noise Assessment by Robin Mackenzie Partnership Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995 Glasgow and Clyde Valley joint Structure Plan Coatbridge and Airdrie area Local Plan Issues report Strategic Development Framework For North Lanarkshire Circular 24/1985 National Planning Policy Guideline 1 - The Planning System National Planning Policy Guideline 2 - Business and Industry National Planning Policy Guideline 17 - Planning and Transport Circular 10/1999 Planning and Noise Planning Advice Note 56 - Planning and Noise Consultation response from SEPA dated 20 February 2001 Consultation response from Scottish Power dated 05 February 2001 Consultation response from West of Scotland Water dated 05 February 2001

R0100081 .doc - Consultation response from Transco dated 05 February 2001 - Consultation response from Coal Authority dated 06 February 2001 - Consultation responses from Protective Services dated 6 September and 16 November 2001 - Internal memorandum from Transportation Manager dated 20 November 200 1 - Letter of representation from Mrs Catherine Richardson 263 Mitchell Street Coatbridge dated 01 Sept 2001

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812381 and ask for Mr Gerard Quinn.

R0100081 .doc APPLICATION NO. C/01/00081/FUL

REPORT

1. INTRODUCTION

1.2 Planning permission is being sought by Enviroscot to extend their established recycling operation at Langmuir Way, Bargeddie.

2. APPLICATION SITE

2.1 The site lies immediately to the east of the existing recycling yard, which along with other operations, makes up a small conglomerate of industrial uses lying on the eastern edge of the Bargeddie settlement. Being part of a previous landfill operation, it comprises a mix of soils and rubble. The site extends to around 2 Ha. and is bounded on 3 sides by the remainder of the former landfill area whilst further north and east lies established agricultural land. Beyond the former landfill area to the south lies the valley of the which sits north of the established eastIGlasgow rail line which separates the site from the north east extremity of the built up area of Coatbridge.

3. SITE HISTORY

3.1 As indicated above, the site lies within area that was formerly worked as landfill, before closure around 10 years ago. Since then the site has lain as soil and rubble, showing some remnants of its previous use. There has been no “activity” in terms of planning proposals directly affecting the site.

3.2 However, part of the former landfill area (0.3 Ha.), north of the existing site, was the subject of a planning application (U9910 1598FUL) for an extension to industrial land operating from Langmuir Way. Despite the greenbelt zoning, this application was granted permission subject to conditions in October 2000.

3.3 The existing Enviroscot site at Langmuir Way was the subject of planning permission (C/98/01093/FUL) for waste transfer and waste recycling. This permission was granted subject to conditions in October 1999. A subsequent application(C/00/01484/FUL) was granted in March 2001 for changes within the site including new staff premises, facilities and extra storage areas.

4. PROPOSAL

4.1 The applicant, Enviroscot Limited, is a subsidiary of the Churngold group of companies based in Bristol. Enviroscot is a waste and recycling company that is intent on consolidating within the of Scotland. The provision of the existing facility at Langmuir Way has allowed the company to process industrial, commercial, construction demolition waste and a variety of other waste products. Enviroscot processes around 1600 tonnes of material per week (amounting to 70% of the total tonnage handled). So far, Enviroscot has established itself as a successful Lanarkshre based company, with more than 60 employees.

4.2 The company now seeks planning permission to extend its operation in the light of new modem demands for waste recycling and processing in line with European and national requirements to shift the emphasis on waste treatment away from landfill and towards significantly more recycling.

4.3 Physically, the applicant wishes to extend the existing concrete hardstanding area eastwards into the proposed new site, to create area for material storage and recycling. For visual and noise impact mitigation purposes, the site would be extensively bunded on the northern, eastern and southern boundaries. This extended area would complement the existing facilities and, according to the applicant, provide the capacity to handle 300 tonnes of waste per day, rising to 600 tonnes within 12 months. As highlighted in the applicant’s supporting statement, the extended operation would create an additional 30 to 40 personnel over 5 years.

R0100081 .doc 5. PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT

5.1 The proposal requires to be presented and, like all others, assessed with proper regard being paid to all material considerations including all existing and emerging statements of planning policy at the national, strategic and local level. In the case of the proposals put forward, the relevant policy context is represented by the following productions.

National Policy

Circular - 24/1985 NPPG 1 - Planning System NPPG 2 - Business and Industry NPPG17 - Transport and Planning

(Planning Advice Note 46, Planning and Noise, is also applicable to the assessment of the proposal)

Strategic Policy

The approved Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995 (In particular, policies GB1, GBlA,).

The Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000

Local Policy

The Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 (In particular policy GB 1).

The emerging Airdrie and Coatbridge Area Local Plan.

6. CONSULTATIONS

6.1 Following consultations with all the statutory consultees, no objections were expressed against the proposals. The issues of traffic impact and potential noise disturbance have been assessed closely in consultation with in-house consultees, (Head of Protective Services and the Transportation Manager) and the final conclusions have been that the proposals can be acceptable, subject to conditions.

7. REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 One letter of representation was received from the following party:

- Mrs Catherine Richardson of 263 Mitchell Street, Coatbridge.

The objection is on the grounds that the development may give rise to unacceptable noise nuisance. The objector indicates that this concern has arisen from the previous record of Enviroscot at the present site at Langmuir Way. She also believes that similar noise problems have been allegedly associated with the company’s operation in Edinburgh.

8. ASSESSMENT

8.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 provides that where, in making any determination under the Planning Act, regard has to be had to the development plan, the determination shall be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Under both the Adopted Local Plan and the Approved Structure Plan, the site is zoned within the Greenbelt. Therefore, any new development, such as the application proposal, is generally expected not to be acceptable on the site at Langmuir Road.

8.2 It is considered that the determining issue in the assessment of the application proposal is whether there are any such material considerations as mentioned by the 1997 Act which indicate that the proposal should be accepted notwithstanding the development plan position. In this respect, the Structure Plan, in dealing with greenbelt policy, states that whilst most development can be met within the built up

R0100081 .doc area, it is acknowledged that circumstances could arise which might justify an exception being made to the general approach. In this respect, policy GBlA of the Structure Plan lists guiding criteria against which any proposal within the greenbelt should be justified. These criteria are (a) economic benefit; (b) specific locational need; (c) infrastructure implications, and (d) environmental impact. It is considered that these criteria represent material considerations of relevance to the proposal. It is considered appropriate therefore that the proposal is firstly assessed against these material considerations, and then against any others, before a determination is made.

8.3 Material Considerations

la) Economic Benefit

From the applicant’s supporting planning statement, it is proposed that an extended yard would lead to the creation of 30 to 40 additional jobs. Additionally, it is noted that 60 jobs would be retained. Furthermore, as highlighted by the supporting statement, the provision of an enhanced recycling facility may be an attraction to potential users who may conceivably provide a boost to the local economy.

It is considered that this economic impact, if the proposal were to be implemented, would be beneficial to the local area as well as have possible knock-on effects to North Lanarkshire as a whole. However, the question remains as to whether it is necessary to impinge on a greenbelt area such as that at Bargeddie, to allow these benefits to become a reality. This issue leads on to the next area of consideration i.e. locational need.

/b) Locational Need

It is noted that the applicant has expressed a desire to remain in the existing area. The local plan of course seeks to provide a land use framework for economic development of the urban areas and surrounding villages, The assumption here is that there would be sufficient provision to allow business growth and expansion in the Local Plan area. As far as the local position is concerned i.e. Bargeddie, it would certainly appear that given the nature of the use involved there would not be any suitably zoned sites to accommodate the recycling operation as expanded. Indeed, in terms of the Local Plan area in its entirety, there is only limited provision for “bad neighbour” industrial uses and there is no such zoning for the Bargeddie area. However, it is clear that the development process for the land immediately feeding off Langmuir Way has resulted in groups of bad neighbour types of uses evolving in this specific area, Indeed, as shown through recent planning applications and various developments, the area is now characterised by such operations relating to, for example, Taylor Haulage, Tilcon, and Enviroscot.

It would seem therefore that there is a locational justification for using the site for expansion purposes in the sense that any new development would need to be physically linked to the existing operation, there is no other way of extending at this particular location, and there are no conceivable alternative sites in the local area that could absorb the nature and scale of use proposed. The only alternative would be to force the company and the employment opportunities and economic activity out of the local area. It is considered that provided there were no serious attendant problems (such as adverse environmental impacts or infrastructural problems,) the development plan generally would not be intended to be so restrictive as to let this happen.

(c) Infrastructure Implications

From the advice received from statutory undertakers, there would appear to be adequate services to accommodate the development. Indeed, whilst there are no proposals to improve local infrastructure, there would not appear to be any public cost implications for existing services.

(d) Environmental Impact

It is important that any development can be introduced without causing significant detrimental environmental effects, It is noted first of all that statutory consultees have not indicated any major problem or potential problems in terms of pollution to the environment. The Department’s own Protective Services function had highlighted potential noise nuisance problems with the proposals in

R0100081.doc terms of the effects on local residents. However, as a result of detailed examination of noise mitigation measures proposed by the applicant,( including extensive landscaped bunding along the boundaries of the site) it has been concluded that the development could be introduced without causing any serious nuisance in this respect. Although any operation in practice would of course be subject to planning conditions and normal environmental control legislation, it is now not expected that there would be any adverse effects from noise.

The visual impact of the development is another key environmental issue requiring appropriate attention. It is considered that the nature of the proposal is such that it mherently may be unsightly to neighbouring land users. In this case however, given the distance between the site and sensitive receptors such as local roads and housing areas, and the proposed screen bunds, the visual impact of the proposals would be minimal. Moreover, in respect of the bunds proposed, there is considered to be significant scope for substantial structural tree planting, which in addition to providing effective mitigation, could in itself bring positive environmental benefits.

As for the impacts on the site itself, it is noted that the land involved is a restored landfill area characterised primarily by soil and rubble surface and scrub. It is not considered to be of any particular conservation or visual value. The impacts in these respects are therefore considered not to be serious.

8.4 Following assessment of the proposal against the above material considerations derived from the strategic policy GBlA, it is considered that there can be justification for this development within the greenbelt. The applicant has demonstrated that the proposal would bring economic benefits with no serious detriment to environment. In addition, a reasonable planning case has been established for the need to locate the development at the site proposed.

8.5 Other Material Considerations

The material considerations assessed so far indicate that the determination of this application could be not in accordance with the development plan which intends, through greenbelt policy, that development is resisted. In other words, the material considerations so far assessed suggest that the proposal could be accepted notwithstanding the development plan position. It remains to be considered therefore whether there are any other material considerations that would outweigh the position so far established against the development plan.

Other Policies of the Development Plan

In terms of the development plan, the site is also zoned under policy CU1/5 which highlights the extra care that has to be taken in respect of developments within or adjacent to former landfill sites. This zoning would not prevent the particular development going ahead, although, as in this case, the applicants would be required to take account of such previous land uses in the implementation of any new development. (In this respect, the previous landfill operation involved inert material, with little prospect therefore of any longer term problems). The site is also zoned within an area identified as high quality landscape. However on-site conditions would suggest that the area is not one that would be subject to the higher standards of protection afforded by the policy. Indeed, the site visually is not in a remarkable condition and, as already highlighted, may in fact benefit from the landscaping proposals included in the application.

National Planning Policy

Government policy which pertains direct to the greenbelt is SDD Circular 24/1985. This Circular provides Government guidance on how greenbelt and countryside land should be handled within the planning system. This guidance underlines the importance of protecting greenbelt from inappropriate development and identifies the main purposes for which greenbelts have been established. It is clearly stated that there should be a presumption against any intrusion into the greenbelt except in very special circumstances. As far as this proposal is concerned, the principles and objectives of this guidance are built into the current development plan. It is this development plan which is the primary point of reference in any assessment of the proposal. As indicated in para. 8.2, this assessment, in effect, seeks to establish whether any such circumstances do indeed prevail in the case of this proposal.

R0100081 .doc As far as National Planning Guidelines 1 and 2 are concerned (the “Planning System” and “Business and Industry)” there are no statements which would suggest that the assessment so far undertaken of the proposal is conflictive in terms of relevant issues. Indeed, of particular relevance to the proposal is the general theme of expectation of both Guidelines for the planning system to accommodate all development proposals, including those related to economic growth and development.

The relatively recent National Planning Guideline 17 (Transport and Planning) promotes an integrated approach to land use, economic development, transport and environment. In this respect, national policy expects new development proposals to provide accessibility by all modes of transport. Firstly, it is noted that the Langmuir Way roadway connects directly to the main northisouth A752 (Langmuir Road). This road forms part of the major road hierarchy from which potential users will gain access to the site, by either private vehicles or public transport. The local nearby Bargeddie train station would also complement public transport opportunities. As for walking and cycling, there are also opportunities by virtue of the stretch of the GlasgowIEdinburgh footpath which lies nearby to the south of the site and forms part of the National Cycle Route.

In summary therefore it is considered that the site in transportation terms represents a reasonably sustainable location and the development is considered to be consistent with the principles of national policy in this respect.

Emerainn Land Use Policies

Emerging strategic and local planning policy is largely expressed respectively in the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000, and the Coatbridge and Airdrie Areas Issues Report. The North Lanarkshire Council’s own Strategic Development Framework for North Lanarkshre is also of some relevance to emerging planning policies.

These policies effectively reinforce the principles against which the proposals have been judged in relation to the present development plan. In addition, threaded through the emerging policies is the increasing emphasis on sustainable development principles and in this connection the need to include focus on the regeneration of existing local settlements and communities. It is considered therefore that emerging policies would add weight to the position established through assessment of the proposals against the current development plan.

Site History

The site history as described above makes it clear that the land involved was in relatively recent times used for landfill. Previous land use planning history also involved the site being zoned in the urban area. Recent representations in relation to the Local Plan review process have also involved requests for the site to be “reinstated” within the urban envelope. These events suggest therefore that the site is certainly not of an undisturbed greenfield nature the likes of which planning policy would be more conventionally expected to protect. It is fair to conclude that this history, (together with the new proposal and emerging planning policies) means that in the planning sense the site is in a condition of flux and at the very least would not rule out the possibility of new development.

Consultation Responses

It is noted that no objections have been expressed by any of the statutory bodieslconsultees who were formally asked for their views on the proposals. As for in-house consultations, the Department’s Transportation Manager has expressed no objection subject to conditions of a normal nature. The Head of Protective Services had originally raised concerns over potential noise impacts from the development. As already stated, ths issue has been thoroughly assessed in liaison with the Department’s Protective Services. It has been concluded by the Head of Protective Services that with the mitigation measures proposed, the development should not give rise to noise nuisance. In this connection, it is considered therefore that the development should be consistent with requirements of Planning Advice Note 56 “ Planning and Noise”.

R0100081.doc Representations

It is noted that one letter of objection has come in from local resident, Mrs. Catherine Richardson, of 263 Mitchell Street Coatbridge. In regard to her concerns over noise, this issue has already been addressed in this report.

9. CONCLUSION

9.1 Despite the greenbelt zoning, detailed assessment has revealed that the proposal can be justified as an exception to greenbelt policy. Indeed, the material considerations that justify an exception to the greenbelt are:

- The economic benefit from the retention and creation of jobs. - The need for the applicant to locate at the site to fulfil operational requirements that could not be met by any other site within the local urban area. - The fact that development could be introduced without adverse infrastructure implications, or significant effects on the environment.

9.2 Furthermore, no other “competing” material considerations have been found which suggest that the proposal should not be accepted from a planning viewpoint. Indeed, issues such as other development plan policies, national planning policy, emerging planning policies, sustainability, amenityhoise impact, site history, consultations, and representations, have been assessed in detail, and have not raised any major planning concerns. Indeed some in fact add weight to the direct assessment made of the proposals against the main policies of the development plan.

9.3 It is concluded therefore that planning permission with appropriate conditions should be granted for the proposals.

R0100081.doc Application No. C/O 1/00296/FUL Date registered 12 March 200 1 APPLICANT A. STEWART, 4 CARRICK PLACE, GLENBOIG

Agent W. Banks, 2B Dundyvan Road, Coatbridge ML5 1DN

DEVELOPMENT LAND ENGINEERING WORKS COMPRISING REMOVAL OF ASH MATERIAL, IMPORTATION OF CLAY/SOILS AND SUBSEQUENT RESTORATION OF LAND

LOCATION OLD GARTLISTON WORKS, 301 GARTGILL ROAD, GLENBOIG, COATBRIDGE, LANARKSHIRE ML5 2QA

Ward No. 33 Grid Reference 272298667860

File Reference C/PL/CTG 12 0 30 10 0 OILWJC

Site History Council authorised Enforcement Action 19 April 2000 to prevent unauthorised extraction and processing of minerals

Development Plan Greenbelt: Monklands District Local Plan 1991

Contrary to No Development Plan

CONSULTATIONS No Objections

Objection No Objection West of Scotland Archaeology Service Health and Safety Executive Transco West of Scotland Water Conditions The Coal Authority NLC Community Services SEPA Scottish Power Scottish Natural Heritage Railtrack No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours No Response

Newspaper No Response Advertisement

COMMENTS The application site extends to approximately 4.5 hectares and contains the remains of buildings and chimneys associated with its former use as a brickworks. In April 2000, the applicant removed some ash material from the site without the necessary planning permission, although these works have now stopped.

The applicant wishes to remove ash material .from the site and thereafter import a variety of inert soils to facilitate the site’s eventual restoration to agricultural grassland with ancillary planting. The application is in accordance with Local Plan policy and there have been no objections from local residents.

I:Plan\Docs\Cttee\2001MpprepsRO 100296.doc _- Produced by Dspaltmentof Pla 1172ar,o Environment Dindorate Supp? Unit Sute 501. Fleming HOuje 2 Tryst Rod CUMBERNAULD 067 1 JW

Telephone01236616210 Fbx. 01236616232

OS Licance LA 0904,. A key issue in this instance is the routing of lorry traffic. The applicant originally proposed to route lorry traffic southwards towards Coatbridge or eastwards along Glenboig New Road. However, the Transportation Section is concerned that Glenboig New Road is not suitable for any additional heavy traffic and has suggested that traffic travelling northwards should pass through Glenboig and thereafter onto the M73.

Following discussions with the applicant, the extent of ground to be used for ash removal and subsequent infill has been reduced and defined. This requirement was to ensure the protection of the shrub and tree areas around the site.

If approved, the applicant has agreed to enter into a Section 75 Agreement and deliver a Bond of Caution, both of which would ensure the eventual restoration of the site. Further details of this and other matters can be found within the attached report.

RECOMMENDATION

Gran:, subject to the following conditions:-

1. That the operations and works hereby permitted shall be begun within 2 years of the date of this permission, unless a longer period has been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, and the Planning Authority shall be advised in writing of the start date in advance of any works starting on site.

Reason: To define the permission and in the interests of the amenity of the area.

2. That all operations for the removal of ash material and importation of clay and soils shall cease within 2 years of the start date of operations and all buildings, plant and machinery, including foundations and hardstandings shall have been removed from the site and the restoration of the site completed in full (including the capping of the mine shaft) no later than 3 years after the start date.

Reason: To defme the permission in the interests of the visual amenity of the site and the residential amenity of local communities.

3. That notwithstanding the details submitted as part of this application, the excavation and infilling operations shall accord with the following:

(a) no infill or excavation operations to take place outwith the area outlined in GREEN on approved plans

(b) area outlined in GREEN on approved plans to be marked out on site by fencing or posts prior to works commencing on site and retained for the duration of the operations

(c) excavations to be no deeper than 6.0 metres below ground level or any other depth as agreed in advance by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To define the permission in accordance with submitted plans in the interests of the amenity of the area, and to protect the safety of the adjoining railway.

4. That the development shall be carried out in accordance with this schedule of conditions and accompanying plans and supporting information, and for the avoidance of doubt, where discrepancies occur, the schedule of conditions shall take precedence over other parts of the permission.

Reason: To defme the permission in the interests of the visual amenity of the site and the residential amenity of the surrounding area.

1:Plan' Docs\Cttee\200 1\ApprepsRO 100296.doc 5. That notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992, other than has been allowed by the terms of this planning permission, no buildings, plant or machinery shall be installed, erected, re-arranged, replaced or extended on the site without the prior written approval of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To define the permission and to allow the Planning Authority to retain effective control of the site in the interest of the visual amenity and character of the area.

6. That with the exception of essential maintenance or emergency repairs, operations shall take place only between 0800 and 1900 hours on weekdays and 0800 and 1300 hours on Saturdays with no working outwith these hours including Sundays or public holidays.

Reason: To define the operational hours for operations in the interests of the amenity of nearby residential properties.

That all vehicles arriving at or leaving the site with a load of material shall be sheeted.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to prevent the deposit of any material onto the public road.

That before any excavation or infill operations take place, the following works shall be completed in full to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority:

(a) Junction with B804 to be improved to allow for 10.5 metre radii

(b) First 18.0 metres of access road ftom the B804 to be widened to 7.3 metres, all of which shall be surfaced in a suitable hard material to be agreed in advance by the Planning Authority.

(c) Improvements to surface of access road other than that area outlined in (b) above, details of which shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for its prior approval.

Reason: In the interests of road safety.

9. That before any works start on site, full details of wheel and road cleaning measures shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for its prior approval.

Reason: To ensure that the public road is kept clear of mud or debris in the interest of road safety.

10. All plant, machinery and vehicles used on site shall be effectively silenced at all times in accordance with manufacturers' recommendations and insofar as is reasonably practical, the operator \+illensure that the best practice methodologies in terms of noise as set out in PAN 50 are adopted.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of nearby residential properties.

11. That the site will be operated in such a manner as to minimise the transmission of airborne particulate from site operations and to prevent dust fi-om migrating fi-om the site. In this regard, insofar as is reasonably practical, the operator will ensure that best practice methodologies set out in PAN 50 are adopted.

Reason: Iii the interests of the amenity of nearby residential properties.

12. That no fixed chemical, oil or diesel storage tanks shall be erected within the application site without the prior written authority of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area and to prevent the pollution of land and watercourses in the area. 13. That before any works shall start on site, details of a reception area for the temporary storage of ash and soil materials shall be submitted to the Planning Authority, and for the avoidance of doubt, this area shall be located away from areas of existing trees and shrubs and shall be defined on site by fencing or similar for the duration of the operations.

Reason: To define the permission in the interests of the amenity of the area.

14. That, notwithstanding the details submitted as part of this application, prior to the commencement of any operations, the applicant shall submit and obtain written approval of the Planning Authority for full details of the restoration of the site and the details shall include, but not be limited to, the following-

a) a description of the restoration proposals in the form of a method statement covering all worits.

b) a detailed site layout plan including all existing site features to be retained (including trees and shrubs) and all proposed works including fencing, hedging, planting,

c) a timetable/schedule of all works.

d) a detailed drainage scheme.

e) detai Is of soil analysis, soils replacement, drainage, vegetation cover, hedging, shelterbelts and an) other works.

f) details for all areas of woodland or tree planting proposed, including full details of all works such as specifications, species, ground preparation, drainage, chemical treatments, and protection methods, and for the avoidance of doubt this shall include a significant proportion of \\ i I Imv and hawthorn.

g) plans showing proposed site contours, and for the avoidance of doubt, these shall tie in with and complement the contours of the existing and adjoining land form.

Reason: In thinterests of nature conservation and the visual amenity and character of the area, to protect the saiety of the adjoining railway, and to ensure that the site is restored to an acceptable standard at the end of all infill operations.

15. That the rsstoration scheme approved under the terms of condition (14) above shall be implemented in full \\ithin one year of all operations being completed or within 3 years of the start date of operations. ~liicheveris the earlier.

Reason: In the interests of nature conservation and the visual amenity and character of the area and to ensure hat the site is restored to an acceptable standard at the end of all operations.

16. Uiat if b! I ea on of any circumstances not foreseen it becomes necessary or expedient in the course of the peimiiied operations to amend or abandon any of the provisions hereof, the operator shall submit ail aiiiznded application, plan and a statement of intentions, but shall adhere to and comply U Ith the tei 111s of this permission until such time as the amended proposal has been approved by the Planning Au[ lority.

Reason: 1.3 ili. line the permission and to take account of possible changes in circumstances.

17. That pilot to ,lie implementation of all or any individual part of the restoration scheme as described 111 condition 13 above, a detailed aftercare scheme shall have been submitted to and approved by the Planning Aut'iority in writing (with appropriate alterations as required) and this shall detail the on- going maintei .rice of the restored areas for a period of 5 years following the completion of the individual ph,lse of restoration.

Rcason: To e,;stire the necessary management and aftercare of the restored areas.

I:\Plan\Docs\Ctlec200 l\/\pptcl) 1:0100296.doc 18. That before 3 1 July of every year during the aftercare period as outlined in condition no. (17), a report shall be submitted to the Planning Authority and this shall include the following:

a) A description and assessment of the operations carried out during the previous 12 months

b) A description and assessment of the operations to be carried out during the next 12 months

c) An assessment of whether further works are required in order to secure the reinstatement of the site in accordance with approved restoration and aftercare details and a commitment to rectify and alter the aftercare and management scheme as necessary.

Reason: To enstire the necessary management and aftercare of the restored areas.

19. That before any works commence on site, full details of protective crash barriers or high kerbs to be erected as required along the site access road shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for its prior approial. and these shall be in place before any extraction or infill operations commence on site.

Reason: In tlii: interests of safety.

20. That befoie ally works commence on site, full details of all means of water treatment and managemcnt nieasures to be undertaken during extraction and infill operations shall be submitted to the Plann~iigArithority for its prior approval, and that the approved scheme shall be implemented in full before any works commence on site.

Reason: 111 thc interests of water management and to ensure adequate precautions are taken to prevent pollii~ionof natural watercourses.

21. That tluoughoiit the period of working, restoration and aftercare, the applicants shall protect and maintain or di\ert any ditch, stream, watercourse or culvert passing through the site so as not to impair the flo~nor render less effective drainage onto and from adjoining land.

Reason: 111 the interests of water management and to ensure adequate precautions are taken to prevent po!I ution of natural watercourses, and to protect the safety of the adjoining railway.

List of Background 1':1pet~s

Application forms and accompanying plans received on 12 March 2001 1991 Monldands Dis!rict Local Plan Letters from Transco dated 4 April 2001 and 19 April 2001 Letter from West of Scotland Water dated 9 April 2001 Letter from Health act! Safety Executive Dated 9 April 2001 Memo from NLC Pro1;itive Services Dated 11 April 2001 Letter from Scottisli Natural Heritage Dated 20 April 2001 Letter from Scottisii Pc\ver Dated 19 April 2001 Letter froin SEP/';datcii 18 April 2001 Memo from NLC Con I inunity Services dated 15 May 2001 Letter from Coal Authority dated 6 April 2001 Letter froin West oi'S:otland Archaeology Service dated 6 July 2001 Memo from KLC Tw,isportation dated 2 August 2001

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812379 and ask for Lindsay Kellock. APPLICATION NO. CiO 1/O0296/FUL

REPORT

1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 The application site comprises a former brickworks site which extends to approximately 4.5 hectares. It is located immediately to the east of the Coatbridge to Cumbernauld Railway Line and an existing farm lane alloL\ s access to the B804 GlenboigKoatbridge Road. The closest residential properties to the site are at Iiamonn some 200m to the north east. The site contains 3 chimneys and several brick buildings associa:eil \\ ith its former use as a brickworks. The site is bounded by shrub and woodland planting. There are also several voids within the site as a result of material being taken without planning permission in 2000. These unauthorised works were reported to the Planning and Environment Committee at its meeting of 19 April 2000 where authority was approved to serve an Enforcement Yotice However, the works stopped and the Notice was never served.

1.2 It is proposed to remove the ash material associated with the former brickworks and thereafter import inert clay and soil\ to facilitate the restoration of land to grassland with additional tree planting. The ash material noiild be screened and if necessary crushed before leaving the site. An old mine shaft within tlie site \\otiIc: be capped. Vehicular access would be via the existing farm access which would be the subject of iiiirirovements. The site would operate between 8.00 a.m. and 7.00 p.m. Monday to Friday and S Ocim to I .OO pm on Saturdays. The extraction and infill operations are expected to last for tkio yeais L\ itli a further year allowed for restoration. The proposed restoration scheme allows for agricultural gi azi iig with ancillary planting. In his original submission, the applicant proposed to route heavy trafi7c to and irom the site via Glenboig New Road to the north and Gartgill Road to the south and expects tlie siic on average to generate 30 lony movements per day.

2. CONSULTATIOS AND REPRESENTATIONS

2.1 The application tvCs qubject to the normal neighbour notification procedure and an advert was placed in the local press Thti c have been no letters of objection fiom local residents.

2.2 The Transpo,tation iection has asked that conditions be placed to ensure the upgrade of the access lane and that whcel-\\asliiiig facilities be used. They have also stated that Glenboig New Road is not suitable foi my ' dditional heavy traffic and have asked that all vehicles use the B804 north and south meaning that son,? tidfic would pass through the village of Glenboig on its way to the M73.

2.3 West of Scotland Archaeology Service has stated that the site does not contain any items of archaeological intei csr.

2.4 Tlie Coal AtlLliorir! ,LIS noted the presence of shallow mine working and old mine shafts within or close to tlie site.

2.5 Tlie Directoi oi'Coii11:itiiiityServices agrees with the need for the overall remediation of the site but has as14 that the e\i\~iiy mub areas adjoining the operations be retained and enhanced.

2.6 SE1)A raises no ubjcLtions to the proposal but has noted that the works are likely to require a waste management licence. 111 addition, the grading or screening of materials may require an authorisation unclcr the Eii~ironmtnt Protection Agency 1990.

2.7 Scottish Power ha\ I>( tcd there are overhead lines in the area and reserves the right to protect and or dcviate the apparalcij ai the applicant's expense.

2.8 Scottish Natural Heritage raises no objections to the proposal but reserves the right to comment further on detailed rcstoratioii plans.

2.9 Tlie Head of Protecti\rc Services has asked that conditions be placed on any condition relating to hours of operation and iioisc 'iiid dust mitigation measures.

2.10 Ra;ltrack has no objections subject to detailed measures to ensure the protection of the adjoining track. 3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

3.1 In terms of tile adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991, policies Minl (Mineral Extraction) and WDR 1 (Landuse and Refuse Disposal) both seek to focus mineral extraction and the disposal of soils to the area of ‘Devastated Landscape.’ The application site is outwith this area, but both policies also presume in favour of applications which would ‘significantly improve an area’s amenity, environment and safety’. The Plan also identifies the area as being a ‘Low Quality Landscape’ and policy LU4 states that mineral extraction will only be approved in exceptional circumstances, and where it can be shown that (amongst other things) significant landscape enhancement would result. Policy Min 6 (Applications for Mineral Extraction) asks that (amongst other things) that the operator submits a Bond of Caution and signs a Section 75 agreement to ensure eventual site restoration.

4. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSIONS

4.1 The site is considered to be both unsightly and dangerous and the proposed works would result in the long term bet1ei-t to the amenity and safety of the area. As such, the principal of the proposal is considered to be accepiable and in accordance with local plan policy.

4.2 The distance beLween the site and nearby houses means that disturbance from noise and dust should be minimal, and suitable conditions should ensure that this remains the case

4.3 The routing of traffic is a key issue. In particular, a decision has to be made on whether some traffic should be allowed through the village of Glenboig, or whether the less populated but badly surfaced route along Glenboig New Road should be used. Given the amount of traffic likely to be generated by the site (approximate’) 5 lorries per hour average) I would not object to the routing of traffic through Glenboig on amenity or road safety grounds. Suitable improvements to the access will ensure that road safety is protectd.

4.4 The extent of the extt

4.5 In conclusion. the apriicarton is in accordance with the aims ofthe adopted local plan and should allow for the enhancement c‘r ciii unsafe and unsightly area without any undue harm to the local environment or residential an cnit! of those living nearby. Traffic levels through the village of Glenboig are also considered acceplabli: Accordingly, I would recommend that planning permission is granted subject to a Section 75 agt .:met : and Bond of Caution and to the attached conditions.

I:\PlanDocs\CtteeVOO IL-\ppre,)s\~I

Agent Envirocentre, Wolfson Centre, 106 Rottenrow East, Glasgow, G4 ONW DEVELOPMENT REMEDIATION OF LAND FOR AGRICULTURAL USE INCLUDING THE IMPORTATION OF INERT WASTE MATERIAL LOCATION NORTH MEDROX FARM, BY ANNATHILL, CUMBERNAULD, G67 4HH

Ward No. 33 Grid Reference 272506671547

File Reference CIPLIANM65029 60000/LWLR

Site History Planning Application C/OO/O 1298/OUT Proposed farmhouse granted permission subject to signing on Section 75 Agreement relating to agricultural occupancy.

Development Plan Monklands District Local Plan 199 1. Site is zoned as Greenbelt and is within an area of ‘High Quality Landscape’.

Contrary to Yes Development Plan

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Scottish Power, West of Scotland Water, The Coal Authority, Transco, Conditions NLC Community Services, SNH, Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department. No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response

Newspaper 8 Letters of objection including letter from Local MP, and letter of petition with 117 signatures Advertisement

COMMENTS The site comprises badly drained agricultural land extending to 8.5 hectors and is sited on the east side of Mollinsburn Road some 500metres to the north of Annathill and 450metres to the south-east of Mollinsburn. The farmer wishes to raise ground levels through the importation of inert waste thus allowing for drainage improvements. Lorry traffic to the site would be routed from the A80 via Mollinsburn with no traffic being routed through nearby Annathill. The applicant has not put a timescale on the operation which will be dependant on the availability of suitable materials, although it is expected to take in the region of 4 years.

The application has been the subject of significant local objection, the main concern being the impact of heavy traffic from the operations on road safety and amenity in the area.

The applicant has argued that the proposal will result in the long-term improvement to the quality of the farm land and the viability of the farm business. He has also offered to carry out a Woodland Management Scheme for adjoining woodland should planning permission be granted. However, I feel that these benefits would be outweighed by the environmental disruption caused by the operations on the site and its surroundings, including the impact of HGV traffic on local communities. Local Plan Policy also presumes against the disposal of clays and soils at the

R0100702 "

OBJECTORS NOT SHOWN ON PLAN E DAVIS, HAZEL COTTAGE, ANNATHILL - R DAVIS, JANEFIELD, ANNATHILL P B M G SMITH, SCHOOLHOUSE, ANNATHlLL The Rt. Hon. TOM CLARK CBE, JP, MP PETITION WITH 117 SIGNATORIES

CUMBERNAULD G67 1 JW Pepcdusod hom,rh~~rS"ncymippinpwlh orprm~rcnol~CcordwdhrMaleiNr Telephone 01236 616210 Fax 01236 616232 application site and I must therefore recommend that planning permission should be refused for the attached reasons. Further details can be found within the attached report.

RECOMMENDATION

Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. That the proposed development is contrary to the terms of policy WDRl (Landfill and Refuse Disposal) of the 1991 Monklands District Local Plan, in that it represents the disposal of clay and soils outwith the 'Devastated Landscape' and provides insufficient justification in terms of benefits to amenity, safety and the environment.

2. That the proposed development is contrary to the terms of policy LI1 (Landscape Improvement) of the 1991 Monklands District Local Plan which seeks to divert development proposals away from areas of 'High Quality Landscape' and concentrate any available finance for landscape improvements on towards poorer quality areas.

3. That the proposed development is contrary to policy GBlA of the Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995 in that the applicant has been unable to demonstrate sufficient economic benefit and that the proposal will have an adverse environmental impact on the visual character and appearance of the site and the surrounding area and on the amenity local communities in proximity to the route of lorry traffic generated by the developement.

List of Background Papers

Planning application and accompanying plans and supporting information registered 18 June 200 1 Letters from applicant dated 7 August, 8 August and 8 October 2001. Planning permission C/O 1/00297/FUL Monklands District Local Plan 1991 Letter from Transco dated 26 June 200 1 Letter from The Coal Authority dated 30 June 2001 Letters from The Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department dated 3 July 2001 and 21 November 2001 Letter from West of Scotland Water dated 4 July 2001 Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage dated 2 July 2001 Memorandum from Head of Protective Services dated 26 June 2001 Memo from NLC Community Services dated 19 July 2001 and 20 November 2001 Letter from SEPA dated 19 September 2000 Memorandum from Service Manager, Roads and Transportation dated 11 October 2001 Letter from Scottish Power dated 25 July 2001 Letter of objection from J. Nicholson, Ochilview, Annathill dated 8 July 2001 Letter of objection from Mr. May, 8 Annathill Gardens, Annathill dated 9 July 2001 Letter of objection from Mr. Tom Clarke MP dated 10 July 2001 Letter of objection from E. Davie, Hazel Cottage, Annathill dated 2 July 2001 Letter of objection from K. Keir Lees, 11 Bedlay Place Annathill dated 3 July 2001 Letter of objection from Mr. R. Davie, Janefield, Annathill dated 8 July 2001 Letter of objection from P & M Smith, Schoolhouse, Annathill dated 15 July 2001 Letter of objection from M. Callan, Medrox Villa, Annathill dated 14 August 2001 Letter of petition with 117 signatures submitted by Mrs. May, 8 Annathill Gardens, Annathill dated 9 July 2001.

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812379 and ask for Mr Lindsay Kellock.

R0100702 APPLICATION NO. C/01/00702/MIN

REPORT

1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 The application site comprises an area of agricultural land which is part of North Medrox Farm and extends to appropriately 8.5 hectares. It is situated a minimum of 500metres to the north of Annathill and 450metres to the south-east of Mollinsburn. The application site is on the eastern side of Mollinsbum Road immediately to the south of the farm buildings. The site lies within a hollow below the level of the road and its current use for agricultural grazing is limited by poor drainage which affects the central part of the site. The applicant claims that the drainage problem is due to the fall in ground levels caused by old mine workings. The fields are bounded alongside Mollinsburn Road by hedges and by the ‘Spouty Braes’ woodland to the east.

1.2 It is proposed to raise the ground levels of the site by a maximum of 2.75 metres through the importation of approximately 185,000 cubic metres of inert material consisting mainly of soil and rock from construction sites, All lorries would enter and leave the site at a new access point to be formed at the north-west corner of the site and would be routed from the A80 through Mollinsburn with no traffic passing through nearby Annathill. It is estimated that around 6 vehicles would arrive at the site per hour. The site would operate from 8.00 am to 4.30 pm Monday to Saturday. The duration of the entire operation is at present unknown and would be dependent largely on the availability of the required inert waste, but, in any case, it is likely to last around 4 years. The increase in ground levels would allow for drainage improvements which it is argued cannot be achieved using existing ground levels.

1.3 Through the submission of supporting information which accompanies the planning application, the applicant has argued that the proposal has the following merits:

The applicant has submitted a detailed account of how the works will enhance the productivity of the field and the viability of the farm unit. In particular, the works would allow for an increase in productive land by 5% and 27,000 of savings per annum

0 If planning permission is granted a woodland management plan for the Spouty Braes area could be instigated. This area is identified by the Council as a ‘SINC’ (Site of Interest for Nature Conservation).

0 Although located next to a main road, the site cannot be seen clearly from surrounding areas. The applicant also describes the site as an eyesore.

2. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

2.1 The site is zoned as greenbelt within the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. Policy GB1 (Restrict Development in Greenbelt) states that no development will be permitted except for amongst other things non-residential developments in connection with forestry or agriculture or areas identified as having substantial development potential.

2.2 Policy RE1 (Support Rural Economy) states that the Council will take active steps to support the rural economy of Monklands by amongst other things encouraging improvements to the rural landscape.

2.3 The site is identified as being part of a “High Quality Landscape” and Local Plan Policy LI1 (Landscape Improvement) states that the Council will seek to divert development proposals away from these areas and to concentrate any available finance for landscape improvements on poorer quality areas.

2.4 Policy WDRl (Landfill and Refuse Disposal) states that the Council will limit the disposal and recycling of waste (including the disposal of clays and soils) to sites lying within the area of “devastated landscape” except where the applicant can prove that the proposal is beneficial to amenity, safety and the environment, The site is outwith the area of “devastated landscape”.

R0100702 2.5 In terms of the Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995, the zoning of the site within the greenbelt in the Local Plan requires the proposal to be assessed against policy GBlA of the Structure Plan. This policy requires proposals to be assessed against 4 criteria namely, economic benefit, specific locational need, infrastructure implications and environmental impact.

3. CONTEXT

3.1 There are two other land engineering operations in the vicinity of the site (see attached plan) which are of relevance to the consideration of this application. Firstly, W H Malcolm has been importing inert material to the Medrox Quarry site since 1991. This site is located to the south of Annathill and much of the lorry traffic is routed through the village, past the application site currently under consideration and through Mollinsburn towards the A80. Members will recall that at its meeting of 10 October 2001, planning permission was granted subject to a revised Section 75 legal agreement and Bond of Caution to allow the operations to continue for a Wher 5 years. Secondly, the Bedlay Colliery site lies to the west of Annathill (see attached plan). This has planning permission until December 2006 for infill operations and the exportation of blaes. Access is taken from Birkenshaw Road and all traffic is routed westwards away from Annathill towards the M74.

3.2 In 14 February 2001 of this year, the Council granted planning permission (ref. no. C/OO/O1298/OUT) for an additional farmhouse at North Medrox Farm subject to the signing of a Section 75 agreement relating to agricultural occupancy. This agreement has still to be signed and is the basis of going discussion between the Council and the applicant.

4. CONSULTATIONS

4.1 Transco, West of Scotland Water, The Coal Authority and Scottish Power all have no objections to the proposal.

4.2 The Director of Community Services has noted that the development would result in the loss of an area of established wetland. Although this area was not seen to support any species of great conservation interest, the area does add to the diversity of habitat types in the area. He also asks how successful the development may be given that mining subsidence and further drainage problems may re-occur at some time in the future. The Department does not consider the proposals to be particularly intrusive within the existing landscape once re-establishment of vegetation has taken place and it is also considered that none of the proposals should be detrimental to the health and longevity of the tree and shrub vegetation in surrounding fields. The proposed implementation of a woodland management scheme at ‘Spouty Braes’ is particularly welcomed, particularly given its designation as a ‘Site of Interest for Nature Conservation’.

4.3 The Transportation Manager has no objections in principle subject to detailed conditions regarding access layout, the provision of suitable wheel cleaning facilities and a Section 96 Agreement whereby the site operator makes a contribution to the ongoing repair costs of roads in the area traveled by HGV traffic from the site.

4.4 SEPA has no objections in principle subject to restrictions being placed on the types of material to be imported. These restrictions would be the responsibility of SEPA to enforce.

4.5 The Scottish Executive Rural Affairs Department has made several detailed comments on the scheme. In conclusion, the Department acknowledges that the fields in their present form are of no agricultural value and that the works may create some improvement. However, they are not convinced that the benefits would be as great or as long term as suggested by the applicant.

4.6 NLC Protective Services has raised no objection to the proposals, including the likely impact of noise and dust.

5. REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 I have received 8 letters of objection to the proposal including one from Tom Clarke, MP. A petition with 117 signatories has also been submitted. The key concern of the objectors is the impact of heavy traffic generated by the operations on road safety and the amenity of the area. In particular, they

R0100702 believe that traffic from the site would be a danger to other road users and pedestrians, cause the roads in the area to deteriorate quickly, damage verges, bring mud and debris on to the roads, would be the cause of blocked gullies, and the lorries would be too large for the narrow roads in the area. In addition, they are concerned about the cumulative impact of the proposal on top of the existing operations at Medrox Quarry and Bedlay Quarry as noted above. One objector has also raised specific concerns about the positioning of the proposed site access and its proximity to blind summits.

5.2 It should be noted that several objectors were under the impression that traffic from the proposed operations would travel through Annathill but the application clearly states that all traffic would travel northwards towards Mollinsburn.

6. ASSESSMENT & CONCLUSIONS

6.1 Section 23 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires that planning applications be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless specific considerations dictate otherwise. In general terms, there is no doubt that the Council supports the rural economy wherever possible, and this is confirmed in Local Plan Policy RE1 as noted above. However, this is tempered by equally valid environmental concerns as outlined in several other Local Plan Policies. In particular, the Local Plan quite clearly identifies a preferred area for waste disposal (including soils and clays) and this does not include the application site. In addition, the Local Plan also identifies the site as being within the highest landscape designation and that development proposals should be diverted from such areas towards poorer quality areas. In principle, therefore, I would argue that the proposals are contrary to the terms of the adopted local plan.

6.2 In assessing matters of detail, I consider that the key issues are the degree to which the proposals would impact on the visual amenity and character of the site and its surroundings; the amenity of local communities (including those living near or close to lorry routes) and finally on road safety.

6.3 The site and its surroundings are considered to be attractive and worthy of their ‘High Quality Landscape’ designation. I do not accept the applicant’s assertion that the site is an eyesore. Although the site is not clearly visible from far afield, it can be seen clearly from the adjoining roadway, and the impact on the visual amenity of this area is considered to be adverse.

6.4 The impact of HGV traffic on the amenity of local communities is a key issue for all objectors. It is noted that almost all objectors and signatories of the petition are from the Annathill area, and not Mollinsburn, the village through which all traffic would pass and the community most affected by the increase in traffic. However, it is also noted that much of the HGV traffic from the Medrox Quarry infill site as noted above already passes through Mollinsburn. If granted, the two sites would operate concurrently over a period of around 4 years resulting in as many as 22 return lorry journeys through the village each hour. The impact of the traffic from both sites on the community at Mollinsburn is considered to be adverse, although may not be sufficient in itself to merit the refusal of planning permission.

6.5 In terms of road safety, the Transportation Section is satisfied that the operation can be carried out without any adverse impact on road safety including at the site access or on the road between the site and the A80.

6.6 The applicant has argued that there are certain matters of detail particular to this proposal which should allow for the strict interpretation of the local plan to be overturned. These are summarised in paragraph 1.3 above and discussed below. The argument that the works are required in order to enhance and maintain the viability of the farm is noted, although the comments from the Scottish Executive Rural Affairs Department suggest that the likely benefits may be overstated. Given that the poor drainage may have been caused by subsidence due to old mine workings, there is also the possibility that further subsidence may impact again on the drainage of the site after the proposed works were completed. It is accepted that most of the site cannot be seen clearly from the adjoining road, but I would also argue that the site does not need and would not benefit from any form of landscape improvement, Finally, the offer to implement a woodland management scheme for the ‘Spouty Brae’ woodland ‘SINC’ would certainly be welcomed, but in my opinion would not in itself justify the grant of planning permission. These suggested benefits should also be assessed against part of Local Plan Policy WDRl which allows for the disposal of waste outwith the ‘Devastated Landscape’ where the proposals would be beneficial

R0100702 to the amenity, safety and the environment. In this respect, I would argue that the proposal would do nothing to enhance any of these matters either at or around the application site.

7. CONCLUSION

6.1 In conclusion, the principle of the proposed works in this location has been seen to be contrary to the aims of local plan policy. There proposal would also detract from the visual amenity of the area and the cumulative impact of traffic from the application site and existing works at Medrox Quarry would detract from the amenity of those living on or near the intended lorry routes. The applicant has in my opinion provided insufficient justification for overturning the provisions of the development plan, and therefore I must recommend that planning permission should be refused for the attached reasons. The Committee should note that if planning permission is granted, the applicant would be required to enter into a Section 75 agreement and deliver a Bond of Caution to ensure the proper implementation of the works.

R0100702 Application No. C/01/0071 l/FUL Date registered 15 June 2001 APPLICANT LORETTO HOUSING ASSOCIATION, 472 BALLATER STREET, GLASGOW

Agent Vernon Monaghan Architects, 76 Firhill Road, Glasgow G20 7 BA DEVELOPMENT USE OF VACANT BUILDING AS SINGLE DWELLINGHOUSE INCLUDING UPGRADING OF VEHICULAR ACCESS LOCATION 5 WEST CANAL STREET, COATBRIDGE, LANARKSHIRE ML5 1 PR

Ward No. 32 Grid Reference 272745664988

File Reference CIP L/CTW 2700 0 5ICMILR

Site History C/OOIO 1329IFUL Erection of Residential Development Comprising 16 Dwellinghouses, Formation of Access and Parking, Granted on 1 May 2001

C/OO/O 1357ILBC Demolition of Listed Building and Incorporation of Listed Facade and Gatehouse within Residential Development. Granted on 1 May 2001

Development Plan Under the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area covered by the following policies:-

HG 9 Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas ENV 15I1 Blairhill and Dunbeth Conservation Area

Contrary to No Development Plan

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours One letter of Objection

Newspaper Advertisement

COMMENTS Planning permission is being sought for alterations to and use of a vacant building as a single dwellinghouse including the upgrading of a vehicular access at 5 West Canal Street, Coatbridge. The single storey building is located in the south west corner of the former Cattle Market Site and was formerly used by the Women’s Royal Voluntary Service (WRVS) as a meeting hall. The building is a Grade B Listed Building. Alteration works would include general improvements to the external fabric of the building, the most significant of which is the removal of an incongruous flat roofed extension that was not part of the original design and formation of a new door and window to the side elevation. An existing front doorway would be closed off but the front door would be retained to maintain the original fenestration. Internally there would be two bedrooms, living room kitcheddining area and bathroom. Traditional building materials and finishng would be used in all repair works to the slate roof, chimney, external doors and windows. The proposed curtilage would be integrated with the developers’ associated redevelopment proposals for the former Cattle Market Site. (refer to site

C:\TEMPRO10071 I.doc Produced by PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01/0071 I/FUL Department of Plmnina and Environment ."I+ *C NOR3 Directorate Supprt Unit ALTERATIONS TO AND USE OF VACANT BUILDING AS SINGLE Suite 501. Fleming House DWELLINGHOUSE INCLUDING UPGRADING OF VEHICULAR I,,:,: ;! IANARJKSH~~E 2 Tryst Rod COLNCIL CUMBERNAULD ACCESS G67 1 JW AT 5 WEST CANAL STREET COATBRIDGE. mSpdvsd ~rmm~~rn homlhd We Crntdb'Odnnse dSu~eymappw hrMajcWl wm Telephone01236 616210 Fax. 012% 616232 Jc LOCATION OF OBJECTOR sut,mry mse acron SiPYli*t lhwlbnsad rcpmdusbrn mhlwar Crcwn mpYn*l This mpy has been produced specifically for Planning and Building Control purwes only. d mw1eadtopmsa;ubrn C(riYilp106&lm OS Licence LA 09041 L No further copies may be made history) The developer intends to provide an off street car parking space with segregated pedestrian link to the larger redevelopment site to the rear.

A letter of objection was received from a neighbour who considered that Lorretto Housing Association would use the dwellinghouse to house homeless people and this would be detrimental to the amenity of the area. The neighbour also considered there was already enough problems with underage drinkers, fire damage to the Cattle Market site and general vandalism.

These concerns can be noted however they are not considered to be material factors in this assessment. Indeed, whilst I can accept there may be ongoing security issues with the Cattle Market site, these would be removed once the site is developed, brought into use and managed and maintained by Loretto Housing Association. As such I do not consider the terms of objection can be sustained.

I consider the proposal to convert this building to a dwellinghouse is acceptable. The original design features would be retained and the proposal would bring the listed building into a use that would secure its future and accord with the development plan. The segregated pedestrian access as requested by the Transportation Manager can be provided by erecting a metal railing between the walkway and the parking area.

Following consideration of the above I have the view that the proposal is acceptable and recommend that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

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 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.

3. That before the dwellinghouse is brought into use all boundary fences and walls approved under the terms of condition 2 above shall be erected.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

4. That notwithstanding the requirements of condition 2 above a metal railing fence shall be erected along the fence line marked blue on the approved drawing no LT2 (AD) 012. Details of this fence shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority before the dwellinghouse is occupied.

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian safety.

5. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of all external materials to be used in construction and repair works, including walls, roofs, windows, doors, gutters and downpipes, 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 and to preserve the character of the Listed Building.

C:\TEMP\R010071 I.doc 6. That the proposed built-up windows and doors shall be finished in materials to match those used on the existing building.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to preserve the character of the Listed Building.

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 all hardstandings

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

8. That within one year of the occupation of the dwellinghouse hereby permitted, all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 7 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: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

9. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection Of:- (a) the proposed communal footpath; (b) the proposed parking area; (c) the proposed communal garden area; (d) the proposed boundary walls, fences and gates if provided (e) the existing stone boundary wall (9 the existing and proposed trees Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects.

10. That before completion of the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance schemed approved under the terms of condition 9 above shall be in operation.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

11. That before development starts, details of a scheme, which provides 2 parking spaces within the curtilage of the application site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required.. This layout shall allow for the provision of a turning area to enable vehicles to enter and leave the site in forward gear.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

12. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a sample of the natural slate to be used for roofwork 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.

C:\TEMP\R010071 l.doc 13. That the chimneyhead and chimney pots shall be retained at their original height and the profile of existing chimney copes shall be retained.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to preserve the character of the Listed Building.

14. That new windows shall match the originals in all aspects of their design including materials and opening method.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to preserve the character of the Listed Building.

List of Background Papers

- Application forms and accompanying plans received on 2 1 June 200 1 - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991. - Consultation Response from the Transportation Manager received on 20 June 2001 - Letter of objection received from Elizabeth McGowan, 16 West Canal Street, Coatbridge.

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812376 and ask for Colin Marshall.

C:\TEMP\R010071l.doc Application No. C/O1/00712/LBC Date registered 15 June 200 1 APPLICANT LORETTO HOUSING ASSOCIATION, 472 BALLATER STREET, GLASGOW

Agent Vernon Monaghan Architects, 76 Firhill Road, Glasgow G20 7 BA DEVELOPMENT ALTERATION TO AND USE OF VACANT BUILCNG AS SINGLE DWELLINGHOUSE INCLUDING UPGRADING OF VEHICULAR ACCESS LOCATION 5 WEST CANAL STREET, COATBRIDGE, LANARKSHIRE ML5 1 PR

Ward No. 32 Grid Reference 272745 664988

File Reference C/PL/CTW270005/CM/KH

Site History C/OO/O 1329EUL Erection of Residential Development Comprising 16 Dwellinghouses, Formation of Access and Parking. Granted on 1 May 2001

C/OO/O 1357LBC Demolition of Listed Building and Incorporation of Listed Facade and Gatehouse within Residential Development. Granted on 1 May 2001

Development Plan Under the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area covered by the following policies:-

HG 9 Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas ENV 1511 Blairhill and Dunbeth Conservation Area

Contrary to NO Development Plan

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Historic Scotland, The Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland Conditions No Reply

REPRE SENTA TIONS Neighbours Not Required

Newspaper Advertisement None

COMMENTS Listed Building Consent is being sought for alterations to a vacant building to form a single dwellinghouse including the upgrading of a vehicular access at 5 West Canal Street, Coatbridge. The single storey building is located in the south west corner of the former Cattle Market Site and was formerly used by the Women’s Royal Voluntary Service (WRVS) as a meeting hall. The building is a Grade B Listed Building. Alteration works would include general improvements to the external fabric of the building, the most significant of which is the removal of an incongruous flat roofed extension that was not part of the original design and formation of a new door and window to the side elevation. An existing front doorway would be closed off but the front door would be retained to maintain the original fenestration. Internally there would be two bedrooms, living room kitchenidining area and bathroom. Traditional building materials and finishing would be used in all repair works to the slate roof, chimney, external doors and windows. The proposed curtilage would be integrated with the developers’ associated redevelopment proposals for the former Cattle Market Site. (refer to site

C:\TEMP\RO1007 12.doc

history) The developer intends to provide an off street car parking space with segregated pedestrian link to the larger redevelopment site to the rear.

I consider the proposed alteration works to be acceptable. The original design features would be retained and the proposal would bring the listed building into a use that would secure its future and accord with the development plan.

Following consideration of the above I have the view that the proposal is acceptable and recommend that Listed Building Consent be granted subject to conditions.

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 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.

3. That before the dwellinghouse is brought into use all boundary fences and walls approved under the terms of condition 2 above shall be erected.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

4. That notwithstanding the requirements of condition 2 above a metal railing fence shall be erected along the fence line marked blue on the approved drawing no LT2 (AD) 012. Details of this fence shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority before the dwellinghouse is occupied.

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian safety.

5. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of all external materials to be used in construction and repair works, including walls, roofs, windows, doors, gutters and downpipes, 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 and to preserve the character of the Listed Building.

6. That the proposed built-up windows and doors shall be finished in materials to match those used on the existing building.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to preserve the character of the Listed Building.

7. 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 all hardstandings

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

C:\TEMP\ROlOO712.doc 8. That within one year of the occupation of the dwellinghouse hereby permitted, all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 7 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: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

9. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection Of:- (a) the proposed communal footpath; (b) the proposed parking area; (c) the proposed communal garden area; (d) the proposed boundary walls, fences and gates if provided (e) the existing stone boundary wall (f) the existing and proposed trees Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects.

10. That before completion of the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance schemed approved under the terms of condition 9 above shall be in operation.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

11. That before development starts, details of a scheme, which provides 2 parking spaces within the curtilage of the application site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authorit), including any modifications as may be required.. This layout shall allow for the provision of a turning area to enable vehicles to enter and leave the site in forward gear.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

12. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a sample of the natural slate to be used for roofwork 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.

13. That the chimneyhead and chimney pots shall be retained at their original height and the profile of existing chimney copes shall be retained.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to preserve the character of the Listed Building.

14. That new windows shall match the originals in all aspects of their design including materials and opening method.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to preserve the character of the Listed Building.

NOTE TO COMMITTEE

Committee should note that if they are minded to grant the matter needs to be referred to the Scottish Ministers for consideration.

C:\TEMP\RO1007 12.doc List of Background Papers

- Application forms and accompanying plans received on 21 June 2001 - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 199 1 - Consultation Response from Historic Scotland received on 4" July 2001 - Consultation Response from The Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland received on 9 July 2001

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812376 and ask for Colin Marshall.

C:\TEMP\R01007 12.doc Application No. CiO 1/00847/FUL Date registered 4th September 2001 APPLICANT MR & MRS BEEKMAN, 16 ALDERGROVE, VICTORIA PARK, COATBRIDGE ML5 3PT

Agent Carlin Design Associates, 25 Laberge Gardens, New Stevenson, Motherwell, ML1 4F0 DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF TWO STOREY EXTENSION TO DWELLINGHOUSE LOCATION 16 ALDER GROVE COATBRIDGE LANARKSHIRE ML.5 3PT

Ward No. 34 Grid Reference 273924 664599

File Reference CIPLiCTA4250 16000iDBILR

Site History Development constructed under Planning Consent P94368 for Erection of Residential Development (3 17units) -Variation of Consent P93562

Development Plan The site is zoned HG3/32 New Private Sector Housing Development in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Contrary to Yes Development Plan

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection The Coal Authority Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours No Response

Newspaper Not Required Advertisement

COMMENTS This application relates to a 2 storey extension to 16 Alder Grove, Coatbridge. The extension would involve building above the integral garage and extending out some 4.5metres along the rear of the property. The existing house is a detached 3 bedroom with approximately 78 sq.m. floorspace. The proposal would increase the building to approximately 160sq.m. floorspace while providing one additional bedroom and substantial increases in the floorspace of each existing room. The site is zoned HG3/32 New Private Sector Housing Development in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The development is assessed in terms of Design Guidance House Extensions included within the Local Plan. There was no objection to the proposal following normal neighbour notification procedure. The Design Guidance on House Extensions indicates that extensions should not be so large as to overwhelm or drastically change the character of the original house. Although the plans were amended to remove the rear facing windows partially resolving a privacy issue the design of the extension is still overly large and would overwhelm the existing property. I therefore consider that the proposal is contrary to the guidance provided within the Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION

Refuse on the grounds that the proposed extension by nature of its size and design would adversely affect the character of the existing building in contravention of guidance set out in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 to the detriment of residential amenity.

C:\TEMP\RO100847 .doc Produced by .,I. *!+: Of ‘lrnniw and Environment Directorate Supprt Urit PLANNING APPLICATION C/01/00847/FUL ERECTION OF NOEH - Suite 501, Fleming House TWO STOREY EXTENSION TO DWELLINGHOUSE fi ,,:; LANARJKSHJE 2Tlyst Road .,...-..- Y..,’ .. COLNCIL CUM BERNAU LD 16 ALDER GROVE COATBRIDGE G67 1 J W bpcduad homfhs hblsxcSurre!ymqprgvlh maprmi~~ncnd~Crntrdi-dhs,~,~y, Telephone U236 616210 Fax. 01236 616232 Not to Scale sfslDnri mse,ocr~wnscpyripht thatbnmdre+m&uchrn 8nfrlngesCiown -light This copy has been produced specifically for Planning and Building Control purpmes only. md maylaadfoprn8aculoo oovilposed~w OS Licence LA 09041L No further copies may be made List of Background Papers

- Application forms and accompanying plans received on 4 September and 8 November 2001 - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 - Letters to Applicant dated 11 October and 22 November 2001 - Consultation response from The Coal Authority received on 17 September 2001

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 8 12372 and ask for Mr. Baxter

C:\TEMP\RO 100847.doc APPLICATION NO. C/01/00847/FUL

REPORT

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 This application relates to a 2 storey extension to 16 Alder Grove, Coatbridge. The extension would involve building above the integral garage and extending out some 4.5metres along the rear of the property. The existing house is a detached 3 bedroom with approximately 78 sq.m. floorspace. The proposal would increase this to approximately 160sq.m. providing one additional bedroom with substantial increases in the floorspace of each existing room.

1.2 The site is zoned HG3/32 New Private Sector Housing Development in the Monklands District Local Plan 199 1.

2. CONSULTATION

2.1 The Coal Authority indicated that their site is within the zone of influence of shallow mine workings and appropriate technical advice should be sought prior to the start of construction works.

3. ASSESSMENT

3.1 The development should also be assessed in terms of Design Guidance House Extensions included within the Local Plan. The Design Guidance on House Extensions indicates that extensions should not be so large as to overwhelm or drastically change the character of the original house. Large extensions at the rear that take up much of the garden ground may be considered over-development. The guidance also indicates that to protect privacy rear facing windows should be at least 18m from directly facing neighbours windows.

3.2 The proposed extension would only be 14m from the rear of the adjoining property. As such it was requested that the extension be reduced in height at the rear to single storey to ensure that privacy was retained. The plans were amended to remove the rear facing windows on the upper floor and replace them with velux windows in the roof of the extension. This technically achieved the requirement for ensuring privacy yet did not address the main concern of the size of the extension relative to the existing property. The applicant was advised of the concern about the overwhelming nature of the proposal and the Design Guidance relative to the size of development. At a meeting it was suggested to the Agent that by reducing the rear element of the extension to a single storey additional ground floor accommodation could be achieved. This along with an upper floor over the garage and the area immediately behind it would provide the required additional bedroom and increase the floorspace of one of the others. This was suggested to reduce the bulk of the extension and address the overwhelming nature of the proposal against the existing house. The applicants have however indicated that this option was not acceptable and that it was preferred to put the current proposal to Committee for their consideration.

3.3 I consider that the existing dwellinghouse would be overwhelmed by the size of the extension that would more than double the floorspace thereby affecting the character of the property to the detriment of residential amenity.

4. CONCLUSION

5.1 In conclusion I consider that the proposal by nature of its size and design would overwhelm the existing character of the property and is therefore contrary to the guidance set out in the Monklands District Local Plan 199 1. Application No. C/O 1/00860/FUL Date registered 20’ August 2001 APPLICANT MR & MRS J. MCLAUCHLAN Agent John Angus Associates, 7 Victoria Place, Airdrie DEVELOPMENT CHANGE OF USE FROM DWELLINGHOUSE TO NURSERY LOCATION 37 VICTORIA PLACE, AIRDRIE

Ward No. 47 Grid Reference 275828.66504

File Reference CIPLIAIV450003 7IGLlKH

Site History 9 1/531 Erection of Single Storey Rear Extension to Flatted Dwellinghouse For Use As Pre-School Nursery - Granted and implemented.

921537 Re-Roofing of Flatted Dwellinghouse - Granted

94/095 Use of Lower Floor of Dwellinghouse As Day Nursery - Granted but not implemented.

Development Plan The site is located within the Victoria and Town Centre Conservation Area (Policy ENV15 and Policy ENV16 in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991). The site is also zoned HG9 Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas.

Contrary to Not contrary to zoning Development Plan

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours Two

Newspaper No response Advertisement

COMMENTS This application relates to the entire change of use of a large detached dwellinghouse to a pre-school nursery at 37 Victoria Place, Airdrie. There is an existing nursery attached to the property in the form of a purpose built rear extension. The applicant proposes 20 off street car parking spaces within the front garden area with the provision of an ‘in-out’ style access arrangement. The existing property is situated in substantial garden grounds, bounded by a stone wall along the side and rear site boundaries and a 1.8 metre high mature hedge along the frontage. The property is set 16m back from the main frontage to Victoria Place. The proposal has received two letters of objection and has been advertised as a ‘bad neighbour’ development. The site is zoned ENV15 Victoria and Town Centre Conservation Area and HG9 Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 and should be assessed in terms of the design guidance on nurseries. The proposed change of use is considered to conflict with design guidance on nurseries in that it displaces all residential use within the application site. The combination of the entire use of the building as a nursery, the presence of the existing:Dumose built nursery within the rear garden ground and the

R0100860 Produced by Department of Plmnirg and Environment PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01/00860/FUL .#I 31. Directorate Support Unit NORTH e’l.,ya: Suite 501, Fleming House CHANGE OF USE FROM DWELLINGHOUSE TO NURSERY 94 IANEKSH~~E 2 Tryst Rod AT HEATH PARK, 37 VICTORIA PLACE, AIRDRIE. .,Y.?,.._..- .. COLNCIL CUMBEFU‘IAULD G67 1 J W Jc LOCATION OF OBJECTORS bpoduajhomlic Ordn- Suwaymappirqwdh a ~pim,rsimddaCrntdl~dhrMai~urly’. Telephone01236 616210 Fax. 01236616232 SIaIrnF/ rn~.@Clav”scpyn#lt LhiutbdsediqDhicPm inh,~~Crwn swn~l This copy has been produced specifically for Pianning and Building Cmtrd purpcses only. d m~laadlopnrsmtrcnas#v~Ipocesdirgs OS Licence LA 03041L No further copies may be made alterations to the front garden area required to provide adequate parking provision will drastically alter the appearance and character of the property. It is considered that the extent of these changes are too significant for a traditional villa located within the Conservation Area and ultimately constitute the complete commercialisation of the property. This is contrary to design guidance on nurseries and would be detrimental to the overall residential character of the area. To permit planning permission in this instance could encourage similar proposals, the cumulative effect being the erosion of the aesthetic quality and character of the Conservation Area.

RECOMMENDATION

Refuse for the following reasons:

1) That the proposed development would conflict with Design Guidance on Nurseries contained in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 by virtue that it would amount to the total commercialisation of the site with no remaining residential use and this will be to the detriment of the established residential character of the area. 2) That the proposed development would conflict with the spirit and intentions of policy ENVl5 Conservation Areas and policy ENVl6 Conservation Area Improvements contained in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 by virtue that the wholesale change of use of the property and the construction of the paved and delineated parking area within the front garden ground will have a detrimental impact on the visual appearance and character of the dwellinghouse and Conservation Area as a whole.

List of Background Papers

- Application forms and accompanying plans received 12' July 2001. - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991. - Internal consultation response from Transportation Section dated 27 November 2001, - Internal consultation response from Protective Services Division dated 3 September 2001. - Internal Consultation response from Early Years Service dated 7 September 2001, - Internal Consultation response from Countryside and Landscape Manager dated 19 September 2001. - Letter of objection from A.D. Baird, Bute House (Upper), Victoria Place, Airdrie received 24 July 2001. - Letter of objection from Martin McMahon, Bute House, Victoria Place, Airdrie received 24 July 2001.

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 8 12374 and ask for Gordon Liddell.

RO 100860 APPLICATION NO. C/01/00860/FUL

REPORT

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 This application relates to the change of use of a large 2-storey detached Victorian villa to a children’s nursery at 37 Victoria Place, Airdrie. An existing grassed strip and drive (currently finished with chips) to front of the property would be replaced with an entirely paved area with 20 off-street car parking spaces clearly delineated throughout. It is proposed to finish the existing grassed area with ‘grass Crete’ to allow 8 car parking spaces. Grass Crete consists of a grid style concrete surface allowing grass growth throughout the spaces.

1.2 The existing property occupies a relatively large site within a predominately residential area on the south side of Victoria Place. There is a rear extension to the building providing a purpose built nursery and this is currently in operation. Victoria Place bounds the property to the north, adjoining properties to the east and west and school grounds to the rear. Further dwellinghouses are located opposite on Victoria Place. The property is set amongst garden substantial garden grounds, The site is contained by a stone boundary wall with a 1.8 metre high mature hedge along the frontage to Victoria Place. Vehicular access to the site is available at two points on Victoria Place either side of the frontage.

1.3 The site is located within the Victoria and Town Centre Conservation Area with reference given to policies ENV15 and ENV16 in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The site is also zoned HG9 Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas and should be assessed in terms of the Design Guidance on Nurseries.

2. CONSULTATIONS

2.1 The Department of Education’s Early Years Service have confirmed that the total number of children which would be registered would be 44 with a staff requirement of 15. The number of staff is dictated by the age profile and numbers of children likely to attend the nursery.

2.2 The Transportation Section have no objections to the proposal provided that the proposed parking area to the front of the property is entirely paved with parking spaces clearly delineated. The area to be paved should be constructed of a bound material in order to achieve permanent delineation with ‘grass-Crete’ not considered an acceptable alternative. The existing drop off facility should also be removed as it will render the adjacent parking bays unusable due to waiting vehicles. It is highlighted that the existing drop off zone is operating over capacity and causing obstruction of the existing public footway. The parking requirement for the current application is 15 spaces with a further 10 required for the existing nursery operation. While the applicant has proposed to incorporate 20 spaces the Transportation Section are prepared to accept a shortfall of 5 from an operational viewpoint.

2.4 Protective Services Division have no objections to the development.

2.5 The Countryside and Landscape Manager has no objection to the proposal and considers that the introduction of parking within the grounds should not be visually intrusive providing that the existing hedge to the front of the property is retained.

3. OBJECTIONS

3.1 Two letters of objection were received from residents of Bute House (flatted villa) located opposite on Victoria Place. The objections are summarised as follows;

Increase in numbers of cars associated with the nursery will contribute to existing problems of on-street parking and blocking of neighbouring private drives. Existing on-street parking problems occur particularly between the hours of 0800 - 0900 and 1600 - 1700;

RO 100 860 e Victoria Place is relatively narrow, heavily used by industrial traffic and also forms part of a bus route; e Current off-street parking provision appears to be inadequate to address current usage of the facility; e Victoria Place is not a suitable site for a private nursery in terms of road safety; e Increase in numbers of children will adversely affect the amenity of the opposite property in terms of noise levels.

4. ASSESSMENT

4.1 This application should be assessed in terms of the Local Plan and other material considerations. In this instance the development relates to the change of use of an existing dwellinghouse to form a children’s nursery. The application site is located in an area zoned ENV 15/3 (Victoria and Town Centre Conservation Area). It is stated in the Local Plan that Council will seek to ensure that developments do not adversely affect the Conservation Areas.

4.2 Policy ENV 16/E (Conservation Area Improvements) goes further in stating - ‘In determining applications for development within Conservation Areas, the Council will pay regard to the height, scale, materials, rooflines, building lines, detailing, colour, overall character of the proposals, and character of surrounding buildings which it is desirable to enhance and maintain. ’

4.3 The application site is also located in an area zoned HG9 Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas. Policy HG9 states that developments clearly of an ancillary nature (including nursery schools) may be permitted subject to the development also satisfying considerations such as amenity. With an existing nursery operating from the site the principle of such use has been established at this location. The determining factors relating to this application are therefore based on the impact that the proposal will have on the amenity and character of the surrounding area, especially as the application site forms part of an established residential area and is located within a Conservation Area.

4.4 To aid the Council is assessing nursery proposals the current local plan offers design guidance on nursery development. New nurseries are generally accepted within residential areas where the principle use of the property remains as a residence. In this instance the proposal involves to entire change of use of a large detached villa to a children’s nursery in addition to an existing purpose built nursery within the rear garden ground of the property. Rather than retaining a primary residential use, 100% of the original property will therefore be utilised for nursery provision conflicting with part D of the relevant design guidance.

4.5 37 Victoria Place is located in a predominantly residential area of high aesthetic appeal and character. The surrounding area comprises architecturally valuable two storey detached Victorian villa’s set amongst substantial garden ground. Design guidance refers to the fact that nurseries should not have an adverse effect on the amenity of the adjacent residents, or area in general, with regard to noise, disturbance and visual intrusion. It is also stressed that houses should not lose their residential character through features such as inappropriate signs or poor extensions related to the nursery use. In the case of the latter it is considered the property will lose its residential character through the wholesale change of use. While no signs or extensions are included as part of this application in order to accommodate appropriate parking provisions the entire front garden area is to be given over to paving or hard surfacing and the delineation of 20 parking spaces. This contrasts with the majority of surrounding properties, which in the main part have retained their original spacious and landscaped front garden areas and frontages. The entire surfacing of the front garden area in this instance will result in a stark contrast to surrounding properties strengthening the view that the development will result in the loss of residential character and the commercialisation of the property to an extent that is to the detriment of the character of the area. While the Countryside and Landscape Manager suggests that the introduction of parking within the grounds should not be virtually intrusive (providing the existing hedge is retained) there is no reference to the Conservation Area status of the site and the aesthetic value of the dwellinghouse and surrounding properties. While such changes may be generally acceptable in areas of less character, it is considered that the parlung area will be apparent from Victoria

RO 100860 Place and ultimately detrimental to the character of the dwellinghouse. This is particularly in light of the Conservation Area status and aesthetic quality of the area.

4.6 The combination of factors discussed above does not accord with the spirit and intentions of policy requiring the retention of a residential use and it is considered that wholesale loss of residential use will be detrimental to the residential character of the area. This loss is considered particularly significant in light of the aesthetic quality of the streetscape and Conservation Area designation of the site. Council should be wary of encouraging the complete change of use of such properties particularly in Conservation Areas where there is a responsibility to pay regard to the overall character of proposals, and character of surrounding buildings which it is desirable to maintain and enhance. To this end it is considered that the proposal conflicts with policies ENV15 and ENV16.

4.7 As noted in paragraph 2.2, the Transportation Section have no objection to the proposal subject to the inclusion of planning conditions on any consent should Council be of a mind to grant permission. Of most note, the Transportation Section require that the access and internal parking areas are entirely paved with spaces delineated throughout. While the applicant has suggested the use ‘grass-Crete’ to replace the existing grassed area to the front as a way of reducing the visual impact of development this is not considered an acceptable alternative. It is also noted that the existing drop off facility should be removed as it renders the adjacent parking bays unusable due to the potential of waiting vehicles. It is highlighted that the existing drop off zone is operating over capacity and causing obstruction of the existing public footway.

4.8 In relation to the first four reasons of objection it is acknowledged that the proposal will result in an increase in the numbers of cars associated with the property. Nonetheless subject to the upgrading of the existing parking and access arrangements the Transportation Section are satisfied that the site can accommodate additional car levels. It is considered that the impact of the intensification of the nursery use is not significant enough to merit refusal of the proposal on grounds of highway safety. There is an existing nursery element at the location and the current width of Victoria Place and existing traffic levels and types (industrial and bus route) are not considered material in recommending the proposal for refusal.

4.9 The increase in potential noise nuisance is not considered significant enough to merit refusal of the application. There is an existing nursery element at this location and proposed play areas are located generally to the side and rear of the property. Taking into account the location of the existing play area, any additional perceived noise nuisance would come from effectively the same source. Although numbers of children playing outside at one time may increase to an degree it is considered that this will not result in a significant difference to the existing situation. On balance it is considered that this does not offer sufficient grounds for refusal. No further objections have been received on this matter

5. CONCLUSION

5.1 In light of all of the above it is considered that the combination of the entire use of the building as a nursery, the presence of the existing purpose built nursery within the rear garden ground and alterations to the front garden area required to provide adequate parking provision will drastically alter the appearance and character of the property. The extent of these changes are considered to be too significant for a traditional villa located within the Conservation Area and ultimately constitute the complete commercialisation of the property. This is contrary to design guidance on nurseries, relevant policy relating to the protection and enhancement of the Conservation Area and would be detrimental to the overall residential character of the area. To permit planning permission in this instance could encourage similar proposals, the cumulative effect being the erosion of the aesthetic quality and character of the Conservation Area. Accordingly, I must recommend that planning permission is refused for the attached reasons.

R0100860 Application No. C/O U009 19/LBC Date registered 1 August 2001 APPLICANT JOHN C DALZIEL (PROPERTIES) LTD., DALZIEL HOUSE, 257 MAIN STREET, BELLSHILL, ML4 1AJ

Agent DEVELOPMENT DEMOLITION OF 'C' LISTED FLATS AND SHOPS LOCATION 77-83H HIGH STREET AIRDRIE LANARKSHIRE ML6 ODX

Ward No. 41 Grid Reference 275864665620

File Reference

Site History

Development Plan Under the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is covered by Policies ECON 13/4 (Improvement of Commercial Sites) and HG3/8(New Private Sector Housing)

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Conditions (Historic Scotland (Informal Consultation) No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours No Response

Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS Listed Building Consent is being sought for the demolition of a vacant 'C' Category Listed Buildings addressed at Nos. 77-83H High Street, Airdrie. The building is of a traditional red sandstone finish, two storey in height (incorporating a pend close) and formerly occupied by two shop units (fronting onto High Street) and two small flats on the ground floor with three further flats on the upper floor, A number of outbuildings are located at the rear part of the site through the pend close.

It is Council Policy to resist the demolition of Listed Buildings unless where considered absolutely necessary. The applicant has submitted a letter from a Chartered Engineer on the condition of the building in which it is claimed that the building is in a dangerous condition and liable to collapse. A Dangerous Building Notice has also been served on the property by the council requiring immediate action to make the building safe. In support of his submission the applicant has also submitted a financial appraisal that concluded the refurbishment of this Listed Building, taken in isolation from the redevelopment of the adjoining lands would be a financially unviable option. Historic Scotland has also indicated that the future of the Listed Building should not be assessed in isolation from the development potential of the surrounding site.

This proposal is related to a proposed comprehensive new build project, which the applicant has, in discussion with this Authority, been progressing for a considerable period of time. The demolition of this building is considered necessary by the Transportation Manager to accommodate an acceptable vehicular access point

(with required visibility splays etc.) off High Street as part of any comprehensive development proposals incorporating the lands on the south side of High Street between Wellwynd and Bell Street, Airdrie.

Having regard to the condition of the Listed Building, the informal comments of Historic Scotland and the impact of any demolition on the comprehensive redevelopment of the surrounding lands I consider that in these circumstances demolition is justified. I therefore recommend that Listed Building Consent is granted subject to the attached conditions. In addition the details of the existing building require to be recorded before demolition by the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland.

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 on completion of the works hereby permitted all materials associated with the approved works shall be removed from site and the site shall thereafter be maintained in a neat and tidy condition to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

NOTE TO COMMITTEE

Should Committee be minded to grant this matter then the proposal needs to be referred to the Scottish Ministers (Historic Scotland) for consideration.

List of Background Papers

- Application forms and accompanying plans received on 23 July 2001 - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991. - NPPG18: Planning & The Historic Environment - Consultation Response from Historic Scotland dated 6 November 2001

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812383 and ask for Ian Johnston.

C:\TEMP\RO 100919.doc APPLICATION NO. C/01/00919iLBC

REPORT

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 The application is for consent to demolish a Listed Building addressed as Nos. 77-83H High Street, Airdrie. The site is located to the north of Airdrie Town Centre and directly adjacent to the Victoria and Town Centre Conservation Area.

1.2 The subject building is a Grade ‘C’ Listed Building which was constructed around 1911 and is of a two storey ‘Glasgow style’ tenement design with former retail units on the ground floor and bakery, stable and service block to the rear. The building is located on the southern footway of High Street from where velucular access to the rear area was, until recently, taken through a pend close centrally located on the frontage elevation.

1.3 The building has been vacant for a number of years and has been the subject of extensive vandalisation which has resulted in substantial damage being caused both internally and externally to the fabric of the building. This proposal seeks to demolish the entire building including all existing structures to the rear in advance of the submission of a further detailed planning application for the comprehensive redevelopment of the surrounding areas.

2. CONSULTATION

2.1 With the exception of informal correspondence with Historic Scotland there were no external consultees involved in the consideration of this application.

3. REPRESENTATIONS

3.1 No representations were received in respect of this proposal following the formal neighbour notification and public advertisement exercise.

4. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

4.1 In terms of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the property is located within an area covered by the following specific policies: HG 3/8 - New private Sector Housing - High Street, Airdrie ECON 13/4 - Improvement of IndustrialKommercial Sites - Airdrie Town Centre

4.2 The building is also included within the ‘List of Buildings of Special Architectural or Historic Interest’ - item No. 24 - Category ‘C’ (5).

5. ASSESSMENT

5.1 Applications such as this require to be assessed against not only the local development plan but any other relevant supplementary guidance available at either Regional or National level. The adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 clearly presumes against the loss of any Listed Building except where absolutely necessary and NPPG 18 (Planning & The Historic Environment) stipulates that the primary consideration in determining applications for Listed Building Consent is the desirability of preserving the building, its setting, and any features of special architectural or historic interest. The NPPG goes on to state that consideration of applications for the demolition of a listed building should be based upon the following: . Importance of the building . Condition of the building The adequacy of efforts made to retain the building in use . The extent to which the community would benefit from redevelopment All applications will need to be supported by a report on the condition of the building along with a feasibility study, which explores the viability of retaining the building in active use. 5.2 The Listed Building is of a traditional 7 bay ‘Glasgow style’ tenement block with shops previously on the ground floor and a former bakery, stables and service block to the rear. Over the years the original shopfronts have been substantially altered, modern window frames of various designs have replaced the original timber sash and case finish and much of the rear bakery, stables and service block have either been demolished or are in a state of disrepair. The rear stairways accessing the upper floors have been removed and the rear landing is close to failure. The building is also set in isolation between two vacant areas of ground with Local Authority flatted accommodation to the rear. A large petrol filling station is located opposite the Listed Building on High Street.

Whilst in its day this Listed Building was considered an important and attractive traditional style tenemental building which was adjoined by similar style structures along a principal Town Centre thoroughfare, the situation at present is that the building is semi-derelict, and located in an isolated position within a large untidy site and its importance to the community is negligible through both its current condition and its location.

5.3 The applicant submitted with his application a supporting document from a firm of Chartered Engineers which claimed that it was their opinion that the property is in a dangerous condition and liable to collapse. A Dangerous Building Notice served on the owner of the property required the taking down of dangerous outbuildings and landing to the rear of the main building in addition to other associated works including removaymaking safe, slates, guttering, masonry, chimneys and wall to the west and rear of the main building.

A visual assessment of the condition of the Listed Building by Historic Scotland’s own engineer questioned the reputed dangerous condition of the building , but accepted that some elements such as the first floor and rear landing access are close to failure, rot has become established and the requirements of the Dangerous Building Notice should therefore be pursued.

5.4 The building has lain vacant for a number of years and was formerly occupied by two small shops on the ground floor, two single bedroom flats on the ground floor and three flats on the upper floor. The applicant has advised that the retail elements have lain vacant due to lack of demand for such small sized units and only periodic occupation of the flatted accommodation, again due to lack of demand has prevented the entire building from being vacant for a greater period of time.

5.5 The Listed Building is centrally located within a larger area of untidy ground between Wellwynd and Bell Street, Airdrie which this Authority has identified through the Local Plan as a development opportunity site. The land is partly held in the ownership of North Lanarkshire Council and partly in the ownership of Mr. J Dalziel. Previous committee decisions (initiated by the former Monklands District Council) approved in principle the disposal of the Council’s interests to Mr. Dalziel to secure a Comprehensive Development Scheme for the entire site and while to date no such disposal programme has been initiated, detailed discussions have for some time been undertaken between this department and Mr. Dalziel’s agents to establish a scheme acceptable to both parties.

5.6 Following these ongoing discussions it has been established that to accommodate any comprehensive development and to achieve the required standard of visibility splays etc. as specified by the Transportation Manager then vehicular access to the site can only be taken off High Street at a point where the Listed Building is currently located. No other point on High Street or Wellwynd would provide the necessary minimum standard of sightlines etc. and therefore I consider that community would best be served through the comprehensive development of this large untidy site and demolition of the listed building. Taken on its own the refurbishment of the Listed Building would effectively remove any opportunity for the comprehensive development of the surrounding lands and it is unlikely that these would be developed in a piecemeal fashion as they have lain vacant for a considerable time without any interest being shown by other parties.

It is relevant to note that while discussions are ongoing between the council and Mr. Dalziel to establish an acceptable scheme for the private residential development of the larger site, interest has also been shown by a Housing Association in developing the site. While these discussions are only tentative at this stage there is clear evidence of interest being shown in developing the larger site in a comprehensive manner.

C :\TEMP\ROI0091 9.doc 5.7 The applicants submission was accompanied by a financial appraisal based on two possible scenarios i.e. rehrbishment of the Listed Building only, assuming no income from the remaining part of the land due to anticipated marketing difficulties or Demolition of Listed Building and Comprehensive redevelopment of larger Site (including acquired council interests). The figures supplied, which are not disputed, show a significant shortfall in profit for any refurbishment proposal while the anticipated profit in any Redevelopment Scheme would be an acceptable return.. Based on these figures, although only indicative it is unlikely that any developer would show interest in the sole refurbishment of the Listed Building.

6. CONCLUSION

6.1 While it is both Council and National Policy to resist proposals for the demolition of Listed Buildings except where absolutely necessary, consideration of any such proposal should be based primarily on the importance and condition of the building, efforts made to retain effective use of the building and the extent to which the community would benefit from any redevelopment proposals affecting the building. While it is not argued that in its day the building on High Street represented a fine example of early 20* Century ‘Glasgow style’ tenemental architecture the building has over the years lost much of its individual characteristics and now represents a semi-dilapidated and isolated structure which is not only both visually unsightly and a potential danger to the general public but is also seen as a major constraint to the comprehensive redevelopment of the surrounding area.

Having taken all the foregoing into consideration I consider that the community would best be served by the demolition of thls redundant Grade ‘C’ Listed Building which would allow for the comprehensive redevelopment of the surrounding lands in a manner acceptable to this Authority. I therefore recommend that the application is approved subject to the attached conditions.

C:\TEMP\RO 100919.doc Application No. C/01/00964/FUL Date registered 8 August 2001 APPLICANT 186K LTD, THE SPECTRUM, QUEENS RD, READING, RG14BQ

Agent Commpro Telecommunications, Unit 4 Wentworth Business Park, Tankersley, Barnsley, S75 3DP DEVELOPMENT INSTALLATION OF THREE CONTAINERS WITHIN ENCLOSED COMPOUND (IN RETROSPECT) LOCATION BRITISH GAS PLC, MOLLINSBURN ROAD, GLENMAVIS, AIRDRIE LANARKSHIRE

Ward No. 45 Grid Reference 274205 668459

File Reference CIPL/298000/000012/0OO/IJ/LR

Site History

Development Plan Under the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the site is covered by the following Policies:

GB1 : Restrict Development in Countryside CUU1 : Health & Safety Notification Area

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Health & Safety Executive Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours No Response

Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS Retrospective planning consent is being sought for the formation of a telecommunications compound on land adjacent to the existing Glenmavis Gas Storage Depot at Mollinsburn Road, Glenmavis. The compound forms part of a national ‘fibre’ Telecommunications network and accommodates a ‘refreshing installation’ which are necessary at distances of 85km apart to ‘refresh’ the information carried along the fibre optics and make it suitable for commercial use. The equipment is housed in three high security metal constructed containers (3m x 6.4 m x 3.3m) enclosed within a 20 metre square compound bounded by a 2.1 metre high palisade fence with barbed wire above. The compound is of a loose gravel surface with a small internal parking area and two CCTV Security cameras mounted on a 4 metre high pole. Vehicular access to the compound is taken directly off the access road to the Gas Storage Depot site from a 3.5 metre wide driveway with 4 metre wide gates. The site is well screened from Mollinsburn Road.

A recent change in legislation taken together with the fact that the installation is currently still under construction requires that planning permission is now necessary for this proposal. The principle and details of the proposal have already been considered acceptable by this department through previous correspondence with the

C:\TEMP\RO 100964.doc

applicant and only a recent change in circumstances has resulted in the proposal now requiring formal planning approval. Site works have been implemented in accordance with the submitted details to an acceptable standard and as such I therefore recommend that planning permission is granted subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION

Grant, subject to the following condition:-

1. That the development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the plans hereby approved and no change to the details contained within the approved plans shall take place without the prior written approval of the planning authority.

Reason: To define the permission.

List of Background Papers

- Application forms and accompanying plans received on 8 October 200 1. - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991. - Consultation Response from Health and Safety Executive dated 23 October 2001.

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812382 and ask for Ian Johnston.

C:\TEMPRO100964.doc Application No. C/01/01184/MIN Date registered 17 September 200 1 APPLICANT GM MINING LTD. DRUMSHANGIE OCCS, GREENGAIRS ROAD, GREENGAIRS ML6 7TY

Agent Mason Evans Partnership Ltd. The Clydeway Skypark, 8 Elliot Place, Glasgow G3 8EP DEVELOPMENT EXTRACTION OF COAL BY OPENCAST METHODS IN ADVANCE OF APPROVED LANDFILL OPERATIONS WITH ANCILLARY ROAD CROSSING POINT

LOCATION SITE OF FORMER PARK PIT OPENCAST COAL SITE, DRUMSHANGIE OCCS, AIRDRIEHILL ROAD, GREENGAIRS, AIRDRIE

Ward No. 46 Grid Reference 279246668665

File Reference CIPLIGWG900ICLWLR

Site History Planning permission M/86/150 Opencast Coal Workings Granted 1987 and partly worked but never properly restored Planning permission M/86/458 Landfill Operations. Currently being implemented by Shanks Waste Solutions Planning permission M/9 U557 Proposed Opencast and Landfill Operations - Refused permission. Planning permission M/9 1/571 -Opencast operations currently being operated by GM Mining. This permission has subsequently been amended and altered by various planning permissions. Development Plan Monklands District Local Plan 1991 - Policy Min 1 (Mineral Extraction)

Contrary to No Development Plan

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection West of Scotland Water Transco, Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response

Newspaper 5 letters of objection Advertisement

COMMENTS Planning permission is sought for further opencast operations within an area which is within the current approved planning boundary of the Drumshangie opencast coal site, The application site was partly worked in the late 1980s by a company which went into receivership and the site remains unrestored. Irrespective of the outcome of this planning application, permission exists for the site to be used for landfill purposes as it is also within the approved Greengairs landfill site currently being operated by Shanks Waste Solutions. Due to the fbture permitted use of the site, the short-term restoration proposals for the site would be to create a shaped hollow to accommodate landfill material in the future.

R0101184.doc

The key concern of most of the 5 objectors is the possible impact of the workings on the adjoining site of the Stanrigg Mining Disaster where 19 miners were killed in a deep mine in 1918 but only 8 bodies were recovered. This is clearly a very sensitive issue, but the operator has been able to convince me that the new workings will be sited well away from the site of the disaster.

The site is remote from residential properties and cannot be seen clearly from surrounding public areas. The operations would last one year and would run concurrently with the Drumshangie opencast operation. I am satisfied that the proposals are acceptable and in accordance with relevant opencast policy guidance. Accordingly, I recommend that planning permission should be granted subject to the satisfactory conclusion on matters relating to the Section 75 Agreement and Bond of Caution which will ensure the proper restoration of the site. Further details can be found within the attached report.

RECOMMENDATION

Grant subject to the following conditions:

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

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

2. That the operations and works hereby authorised shall be discontinued, any buildings and machinery removed, and all works for the full restoration of the site shall be carried out by the 3 1st December 2005.

Reason: To ensure the reinstatement of the site within a satisfactory timescale in the interests of amenity, and to accord with the restrictions placed on the Drumshangie Opencast Coal Site as set out in planning permission ref. no. C/98/01569/MIN.

3. That the works hereby authorised shall be completed in full within 1 year of the start date of operations (or any other time to be agreed in advance by the Planning Authority) and the start date shall be notified to the Planning Authority in advance of any works commencing on site.

Reason: To define the permission in accordance with submitted details, and in the interests of the amenity of the area.

4. That no lateral excavation works shall take place along the boundary marked GREEN on approved plans other than minor regrading works along the top edge of the slope as shown on plan entitled "Cross-Section of Site in Relation to Stanrigg Disaster Area" dated 26/11/2001, and before any works take place, the extent of the proposed works in this area shall be marked out on site to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To define the permission and to protect the site of the Stanrigg Mining Disaster.

5. That, notwithstanding the details submitted as part of this application, within 3 months of the start date of this development, as defined in condition no. (3) above, the applicant shall submit and obtain written approval of the Planning Authority for full details of the restoration of this part of the

ROlOl184.doc site to prior to the permitted landfill exercise taking place, and the details shall include, but not be limited to, the following:-

a) a description of the restoration proposals in the form of a method statement covering all works.

b) a detailed site layout plan including all existing site features to be retained and all proposed works

c) a timetablehchedule of all works.

d) details of reinstatement of any settlement ponds, drains and water courses disturbed by works on site, accompanied by appropriate plans.

f) Proposed site contours to accord with details contained within plan no. 06183.S001a (Drawing 1 - Park Pit Landfill Proposal) or any other ground levels as agreed in advance by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To define the permission in accordance with submitted details.

6. That within 3 months of the start date of this development, full details of site aftercare provisions to be in place between the time of site restoration and the commencement of approved landfill operations shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To define the permission and to ensure the long term management and care of the site in the interests of amenity.

7. That following the completion of all operations approved by this permission, the aftercare scheme as agreed in condition (6)above shall be implemented.

Reason: To define the permission and to ensure the long term management and care of the site in the interests of amenity.

8. That all overburden material from the site shall be stored within the application site or used for infill purposes elsewhere within the Drumshangie opencast site, and in particular no overburden material shall be stored above ground.

Reason: To define the permission in the interests of the amenity of the area.

9. That before the development hereby approved commences, stock proof fencing and warning signs shall be erected around the boundaries of the part of the site to which this permission relates and shall be maintained in a secure state to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority until the restoration of this land is completed.

Reason: In the interests of public safety.

10. That throughout the period of working, restoration and aftercare, the applicants shall protect and maintain or divert any ditch, stream, watercourse or culvert passing through the site so as not to impair the flow nor render less effective drainage onto and from adjoining land.

Reason: In the interests of water management and to ensure adequate precautions are taken to prevent pollution of natural watercourses.

ROlOl184.doc 11. That notwithstanding the generality of condition no. (10) above, before any works commence on site, the applicant shall submit full details of measures to be undertaken to ensure that adjoining peat bog do not suffer any additional de-watering as a result of the approved works being implemented.

Reason: In the interests of water management and to ensure the protection of adjoining peat bogs in the interests of amenity and nature conservation.

12. That excavation and backfill operations within the site shall be restricted to the following times:

(a) 7am to 9pm Mondays to Fridays

(b) 7am to 4pm on Saturdays

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of nearby residents.

13. That with the exception of works of an emergency nature or essential maintenance including the servicing and testing of plant and equipment, no work shall take place on Sundays.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of nearby residents.

14. That all blasting operations shall accord with the following:

(a) no blasting operations shall be carried out outwith 10.00am to 12.00noon and 2.00pm to 4.00pm on Monday to Friday inclusive, and outwith 10.00am and 12.00noon on Saturday, and no blasting shall take place on Sunday.

(b) that blasting shall only be carried out after suitable, audible and visual warnings have been given and that, prior to the commencement of operations on the site, the occupiers of all the properties around the site shall be notified of the nature of the warning.

(c) that the peak particle velocity of every blast shall be measured at the nearest noise sensitive property and shall not exceed l0dsecin the transverse, longitudinal or vertical plane, that a permanent record of every blast shall be kept and be available, at all reasonable times, for inspection by the Local Planning Authority and also that the said Authority shall be given 24 hours notice of blasting programmes and the approximate location of each blast.

(d) that no blasting shall be carried out within 300m of any property without the Planning Authority being advised, in writing, of the intention to blast and the Maximum Instantaneous Charge to be used, and that such a blast shall not be carried out until the consent of the said Authority has been given.

(e) that no blasting shall be carried out during a temperature inversion.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of adjacent residents to enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control.

15. All plant, machinery and vehicles used on site shall be effectively silenced at all times in accordance with manufacturers' recommendations and insofar as is reasonably practical, the operator will ensure that the best practice methodologies in terms of noise as set out in PAN 50 are adopted,

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of nearby residential properties.

16. That noise levels from the site shall not exceed the following levels at any noise sensitive building:

ROlOl184.doc a) 65dBA Leq (lhour) between the hours of 0700 and 1900 on weekdays (Monday to Friday inclusive) and 0700 and 1600 on Saturdays for the purpose of the excavation of subsoil and minerals at a depth of less than 8m from the surface.

b) 55dBA Leq (1 hour) between the hours of 0700 and 2100 on weekdays (Monday to Friday inclusive) and 0700 and 1600 on Saturdays. For the purpose of the excavation of subsoil and minerals at a depth of more than 8m from the surface.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of nearby residents.

That environmental noise monitoring equipment shall be provided for continuous site use and shall be situated in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Authority, and that a permanent record of all environmental noise monitoring shall be kept on the site and be available for inspection by the said Authority at all reasonable times.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of adjacent residents and to enable the Planning Authority to monitor the site.

That the site will be operated in such a manner as to minimise the transmission of airborne particulate from site operations and to prevent dust from migrating from the site. In this regard, insofar as is reasonably practical, the operator will ensure that best practice methodologies set out in PAN 50 are adopted.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of nearby residential properties,

That a dust monitoring and sampling programme shall be carried out as part of the site operations, that the sampling shall take place at positions to be agreed with the Planning Authority, and that the results of all analyses shall be kept on site and made available, at all reasonable times, to the said Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenity of nearby residents.

That any adverse increase in dust levels affecting land or residents in the vicinity due to site operations shall cause the operation(s) responsible for the increase to be suspended until such times as agreed dust suppression measures have been implemented.

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

That vehicle access and egress to and from the site shall be via the existing opencast site as shown on approved plans, and no direct access shall be taken to or from the part of the site to which this permission relates onto the public road unless by the prior written agreement of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of road safety and to protect the amenity of the area.

That prior to the operation of the road crossing point, a traffic management method statement for the operation of the road crossing point shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for its prior approval and thereafter implemented in full for the duration of its operation, and this method statement shall include details of the following:

ROlOl184.doc (a) type and location of traffic signals

(b) wording and location of appropriate advanced warning signs

(c) type and location of flood lighting to be used during the hours of darkness

Reason: In the interests of road safety.

23. That the roadway at the crossing point shall be cleaned manually every 30 minutes and cleaned by a machine or motorised brush twice a day, or any other frequency to be agreed in advance by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and road safety.

NOTE TO COMMITTEE

The applicant has agreed to enter into an agreement in terms of Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 in respect of site restoration and aftercare and has also agreed to provide a Bond of Caution in respect of the same. The planning permission should not be issued until these matters have been concluded.

List of Background Papers

Planning application and accompanying plans and report dated 17 September 2001 Planning permission M9 1571 as amended Letters from Transco dated 1 and 8 October 2001 Letters of objection from WJ Walker, Drumgray Farm, dated 1 and 22 October 2001 Letter from the Coal Authority dated 5 October 2001 Letter of objection from Friends of the Earth dated 5 October 2001 Letter of objection from Stand Village Residents Association dated 3 October 2001 Memorandum from Service Manager Transportation and Roads dated 20 November 200 1 Letter from West of Scotland Water dated 15 October 2001 Letter of objection fromPlains Community Council dated 17 October 2001 Letter from The Health and Safety Executive dated 15 October 2001 Letter from SEPA dated 29 October 2001 Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage dated 10 October 2001 Letter of objection from Greengairs Community Council dated 1 November 2001

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812379 and ask for Mr Lindsay Kellock.

R010 1184.doc APPLICATION NO. C/01/01184/MIN

REPORT

1. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

1.1 The application site comprises the site of a partially worked opencast coal site which is sandwiched between current opencast operations by GM Mining at Drumshangie, and the current landfill operations at the Shanks Waste Solutions site at Greengairs. Planning permission M/86/150 for opencast coal workings was granted to the Balmoral Coal Group in 1987 following the submission of a Bond of Caution to the value of f80,OOO. Works commenced shortly afterwards but the company went into liquidation following legal action against it by the Coal Authority. This action was as a result of the company undertaking extraction works outwith the approved boundary, and in particular towards an area which was the site of a mining disaster in 1918 where 19 miners were killed in a deep mine but only 8 bodies were recovered. This planning permission required the site to be completed by 1993 and therefore does not allow for the resumption of opencast operations without further planning permission.

1.2 In 1988, planning permission was granted for landfill operations at Greengairs (ref. no. M/86/458) and this extends over the application site. This facility is currently being operated by Shanks Waste Solutions Ltd and under the current phasing programme, the application site is due to be the basis of landfill operations in around 5-6 years, albeit that the operator does not at present have control of the site. A bond of caution also protects this permission.

1.3 In 1992, and following the sale of the site to the Park Pit Company, planning application ref. no. M/9 U557 (resumption of opencast coal extraction followed by landfill operations). The application site was the same as that covered by planning permission M86/150 and was rehsed permission for 4 reasons, including the potential impact on the site of the Stanrigg mining disaster.

1.4 In 1993, planning permission was granted to British Coal for opencast operations at Drumshangie (ref. no. M/91/571 as amended). GM Mining Ltd is currently operating this site. The application site now under consideration was included within the site boundary of the planning permission, although the permission did not allow for coal extraction in this particular area. The application site is covered by another Bond of Caution relating to the above planning permission.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL.

2.1 As noted above, the site comprises an unrestored opencast coal site which consists of a large void extending over the entire 16.25 hectare site. There appears to be little or no overburden or soils associated with the workings. At the bottom of the void are 3 large ponds, To the west are recent excavations at Drumshangie opencast site which are awaiting restoration. To the south are areas of raised peat bog and to the north and east are areas of the ‘Shanks’ landfill site which will be used for infill in the coming years. The site is remote from housing areas, being 2km from Wattston and 1.3km from Plains. The closest individual property is Ballochney Farm, some 750m to the south.

2.2 The applicant wishes to extract coal from the site using opencast methods. This would be worked as part of the larger Drumshangie operations and therefore would not contain site offices etc. Access to the site would be over a new road crossing point, details of which can be found within planning application report C/01/01350/MIN which is also being considered at this meeting. The site would yield 175,000 tonnes of coal over a 1 year period, including restoration. The applicant has indicated that the site would be started as soon as possible (planning permission permitting) and that it would be complete long before the end of 2005, this being the expiry date for coal extraction at Drumshangie. The site would be restored to a shaped hollow in anticipation of the permitted landfill operations.

2.3 Following pre-application discussions with the applicant, it was decided that the planning application did not require to be accompanied by a full Environmental Assessment. This decision was made with reference to the relevant regulations, the size and nature of the site and the proposals, and the sensitivity of surrounding land uses.

ROlOl184.doc 3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

3.1 The site is identified within the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 as a mineral extraction opportunity in policy MINl (Mineral Extraction). This policy accepts the principle of opencast operations subject to several criteria, including the need to be a minimum distance from of 250 metres from Greengairs and Wattston. Other relevant policy guidance is contained within the Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995 and Government Guidance including NPPG 16 Opencast Coal and Related Minerals, amongst others.

4. CONSULTATIONS

4.1 The Head of Protective Services has no objections subject to normal restrictions on working which already apply to the rest of the Drumshangie site.

4.2 The Coal Authority, West of Scotland Water, Scottish Natural Heritage and SEPA has no objections to the proposal. Transco have noted the presence of a high-pressure pipeline below part of the access road, but they have no objections in principle.

4.3 The Director of Community Services has no objections subject to measures to prevent the de-watering of the adjoining raised peat bog. If approved this matter can be addressed in the form of planning conditions.

4.4 The Transportation Manager has no objection in principle subject to measures to ensure the crossing point operates properly.

5. REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 I have received 5 letters of objection to the proposal. These are from one local resident, three local residents’ groups (Greengairs Community Council, Plains Community Council and Stand Village Residents Association) and one national interest group (Friends of the Earth). The points raised are summarised as follows:

Development should not proceed, as it will affect the site of the Stanrigg mining disaster (This was the main concern for most of the objectors).

Proposal would interfere with the phased restoration of the site.

The cumulation of this and other existing opencast and landfill operations is unacceptable to nearby communities.

The existing operations are the cause of dust, traffic and other amenity problems to local communities

There is no demonstrable need for the coal.

The local area already has a despoiled landscape and the proposal should be refused in the interests of regeneration

The site already has permission for landfill operations and this proposal may delay the regeneration of the site.

There is insufficient material within the Drumshangie site to allow for restoration.

6. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSIONS

6.1 The application site is contained entirely within the boundary of an operational opencast coal site, and therefore for this reason alone, the proposal must be considered to acceptable in principle without any further reference to the development plan or other policy guidance. The application must therefore be assessed primarily on matter of detail and the key issues are discussed below.

R0101184.doc 6.2 The main concern of objectors is the possible impact of the workings on the Stanrigg Mining Disaster area. This is clearly a very sensitive issue for local people, particularly as there are many relatives of the dead still living in the area. In the original submission, the applicant provided information aimed at proving that the area of the disaster would not be affected. This included a copy of the original report into the disaster carried out by the Chief Inspector of Mines in 1919. However, in response to the concerns of the objectors, Merinformation was requested. Based on this information, I am now satisfied that the proposed workings will not extend any further into the exclusion area of the disaster. The only works near the area would be minor surface works on the edge of the existing void to ensure slope stability and prevent the de-watering of the raised peat bog above the Stanrigg site. These works would be well away from the resting-place of the dead who are some 50 metres below ground.

6.3 The site is barely visible from surrounding public areas and at 750 metres from nearest houses, potential adverse impacts of noise, dust or vibration are highly unlikely. The site will operate concurrently with the existing operations at Drumshangie and should have no impact on the phased restoration scheme at the site. Although the existing coal processing yard at the western side of the Drumshangie site will accommodate additional coal from the application site, the anticipated impact on the amenity of the surrounding area in terms of noise and dust is expected to be minimal. The removal of the coal should have no impact on the ability of G.M Mining to achieve the long term restoration of the site, including the achievement of the required ground levels.

6.4 The long-term restoration of the site will be achieved after the future permitted landfill operations are implemented. In the short term, the proposed site restoration will be designed purely to accommodate these future workings. The main benefit of these works will therefore be an enhancement of safety through the removal of steep and potentially unstable slopes and removal of the ponds.

6.5 The proposal is in accordance with the detailed assessment criteria as set out within local plan policy MIN1, which requires a set back distance of 250 metres from Wattston and Greengairs, while NPPG 16 Opencast Coal and Other Minerals presumes in favour of a 500 metre set back.

7. CONCLUSIONS

7.1 In weighing up the proposal, particular weight should be given to current condition of the site, its permitted use for landfill operations, the fact that it is within the boundary of a permitted and operational opencast site and its proximity to residential property. The applicant has also addressed the issue of the Stanrigg Mining Disaster. Accordingly, I would recommend that planning permission should be granted subject to the attached conditions. Before any permission is issued, I would recommend that the existing Section 75 Agreement and Restoration Bond are re-assessed to ensure that they comply with the new requirements.

R0101184.doc Application No. C/01/01192/FUL Date registered 27th September 2001 APPLICANT DUNDAS ESTATES AND DEVELOPMENT CO LTD, CARFUDEN SAWMILLS, BO'NESS, , EH5 1 9SQ

Agent Walter Wood Associates, Station Masters Office, South Queensferry, EH30 9JP

DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT COMPRISING 14 NO FLATS AND 12 NO HOUSES AND FORMATION OF VEHICULAR ACCESS LOCATION GLEN HOTEL 63 MAIN STREET CHAPELHALL AIRDRIE LANARKSHIRE ML6 8SB

Ward No. 51 Grid Reference 278226 663059

File Reference C/PL/CHM03 0063000DBIKH

Site History Planning Consent C/99/01659/FUL was granted on 12 April 2000 for Erection Of Residential Development (33 Units). Planning consent 96/216 was granted on 9 August 1996 for Environmental Improvements To Car Park and Formation of Deck Terrace. Planning consent 951207 was granted on 26 May 1995 for Erection of Single Storey Lean-To Extension to Tropical Garden House to Accommodate Toilets

Development Plan The site is zoned ECON8 General Urban Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991

Contrary to No Development Plan

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection West of Scotland Water, Transco Conditions The Coal Authority No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours No Response

Newspaper Not required Advertisement

COMMENTS This application relates to the erection of 14 flats (2 & 3 storey) and 12 houses (semi-detached & terrace) on the site of the former Glen Hotel, Chapelhall. The land is zoned ECON8 General Urban Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The site has lain vacant since the demolition of the hotel following a fire. Although planning permission was granted on 12 April 2000 for the erection of a residential development of 33units the site is now to be developed by Cube Housing Association. The different layout has not raised any objection following consultation and normal neigbour notification procedures. The Coal Authority indicated that the site is within the likely zone of influence of shallow coal workings and appropriate technical advice should be taken before construction works on site begin. Subject to the attached conditions I consider that the proposed development will provide a suitable infill development to the benefit of both visual and residential amenity.

C:\TEMP\ROl 01 192.doc

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, including any modifications as may be required.

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

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, including any modifications as may be required.

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

4. 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 Planning Authority to consider these aspects.

5. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection Of:- (a) the proposed footpaths shaded GREEN on the approved plans; (b) the proposed parking areas hatched GREEN on the approved plans; (c) the proposed external lighting provided for the area(s) hatched GREEN on the approved plans; (d) the proposed grassed, planted and landscaped areas on the approved plans; (e) the proposed boundary fences and walls shown on the approved plans.

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

6. That prior to the occupation of the last four dwellinghouses within the development hereby permitted, all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition four 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: To ensure the provision of landscaped open space in the interest of residential amenity.

C:\TEMP\RO 101192.doc 7. That before completion of the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance schemed approved under the terms of condition five above shall be in operation.

Reason: To ensure the ongoing maintenance of the private footpaths, parking areas and means of enclosure in the interest of pedestrian and vehicular safety and residential amenity

8. That no dwellinghouse shall be occupied until the access roads and footways leading thereto from the existing public road have been constructed to base course level.

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

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

Reason: To ensure continuity in the development of the Estate.

List of Background Papers

- Application Form and Plans received 27 September 2001 and 21 November 2001 - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 - Consultation response from Transo received 10 October 2001 - Consultation response from West of Scotland Water received 17 October 2001 - Consultation response from Protective Services Manager received 22 October 200 1 - Consultation response from The Coal Authority received 15 October 2001 - Consultation response from Transportation Manager received 3 1 October 2001 and 27 November 2001

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812372 and ask for Mr. Baxter

C:\TEMP\RO 10 1 192.doc Application No. C/01/01198/FUL Date registered 6th September 2001 APPLICANT ONE 2 ONE PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS, IMPERIAL PLACE, MAXWELL ROAD, BOREWOOD, HERTS, WD6 1EA

Agent APT, 1 Holiston Street, Kinning Park, Glasgow G5 8RS DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF 1OM HIGH TELECOMMUNICATIONS MAST AND ASSOCIATED GROUND WORKS LOCATION LAND SOUTH OF 112 TOWNHEAD ROAD, DRUMPELLIER COUNTRY PARK COATBRIDGE LANARKSHIRE

Ward No. 31 Grid Reference 271432 666142

File Reference C/PL/CTT8 12 112000/DB/KH

Site History No previous applications

Contrary to Development Plan The site is zoned GB 1 Restrict Development in Greenbelt in the Monklands District Local Plan 199 1

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours Two

Newspaper One from Councilor James McKinlay Advertisement

COMMENTS This application relates to the erection of a lOmetre high monopole telecommunications mast and cabinet on the footpath to the south side of the road opposite 112 Townhead Road, Coatbridge. Policy TELl Telecommununications Developments in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 identifies the criteria by which such developments are asssessed. Two letters were received from neighbours and one from the Councillor McKinlay details of which are contained in the attached report. A Declaration of Conformity with ICNIRP Public Exposure Guidelines was included along with a supporting statement that addressed the criteria identified in policy TELl and any concern related to health. The Roads and Transportation Manager has expressed concern at the siting of the mast near a road junction, blind summit and bend. He has suggested the need for a layby to ensure that service vehicles do not result in a traffic hazard. The mast is only tested twice yearly involving a visit to the small cabinet beside the mast. As there is a parking are across the road I consider that the request for an additional lay-by at this site would not be a reasonable condition to apply. Although the mast will result in an additional element of street furniture it is designed to look like a lighting column and has the backdrop of an existing tree belt. I do not consider that the proposal would therefore significantly impact on the visual amenity of the area.

C:\TEMP\RO 10 1198.doc Pla)ing Fields

OBJECTOR OUTWITH PLAN AREA CLLR. JAMES KINL LAY />;

Department of Plmniw and Environment Drectorate Supprt Uflt ERECTION OF 10M HIGH TELECOMMUNICATIONSMAST NORTH - ,,., LANARKSHIRE Sute 501, Flemmg House AND ASSOCIATED GROUND WORKS 2 2 Tryst Roaj COLNClL - CUMBEWAULD AT LAND SOUTH OF 112 TOWNHEAD ROAD, G67 1 J W DRUMPELLIER COUNTRY PARK, COATBRIDGE. W~Od~Ldhornlhadnss.Su~~”~~~~~ah ~~prminiCcnnf~C~cnPdlardharMal~urtyr LOCATION OF OBJECTORS a SI,-V mcwn wrigli Telephone01236 616210 F~X012% 616232 JC om- LhUhsnssdrcpmducUm nfrn(le=C~rwnmwiigll This mpy has been produced specificallyfor Plannlng and Bulldlng Control purposes only md m~lead1opl0~101cldvll podlw OS Licence LA 09041~ No further copies may be made RECOMMENDATION

Grant, subject to the following condition:-

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) Act1 1997

List of Background Papers

- Application forms and accompanying plans received on 6th September 2001 - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991. - Letter of objection received from Walter R Thorn, "Parkview", 110 Townhead Road, Coatbridge, ML5 2HU on 11 September 2001 - Letter of objection received from Mr. William Rice, 112 Townhead Road, , Coatbridge, ML5 2HU on 10 September 2001 - Email objection from Councilor James McKinlay received on 25 October 2001. - Consultation response from Roads and Transportation Manager received on 19 October 2001

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812372 and ask for Mr. Baxter

C:\TEMP\RO10 11 98 .doc APPLICATION NO. C/01/01198/FUL

REPORT

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 This application relates to the erection of a lOmetre high monopole telecommunications mast and cabinet on the footpath to the south side of the road opposite 112 Townhead Road, Coatbridge.

1.2 The site is zoned GB1 Restrict Development in Greenbelt, LI1/1 High Quality Landscape, TO6 Develop Drumpellier Country Park for Tourism, LRll Improve Public Open Space and Cull5 Landfill Gas Monitoring Zone in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. Policy TELl Telecommunications Developments identifies the criteria by which such developments are assessed.

1.3 A Declaration of Conformity with ICNIRP Public Exposure Guidelines was supplied with the planning application therefore health concerns do not require to be addressed.

1.4 The applicant also included a supporting statement that referred to:

a) The site setting and the proposed development; b) Planning Policy; c) Consideration of alternatives; d) Assessment of need; and e) Health and Safety.

2 CONSULTATION

2.1 The Roads and Transportation Manager has indicated that the proposed site lies in close proximity to the crest of a hill, over which there is poor forward visibility. There is also a junction on the opposite side of the road. He therefore has concern with regard to road safety for this site, as there is no safe area for vehicles to park adjacent to the site during servicing. It is therefore recommended that a lay-by should be constructed. The construction of the lay-by would be subject to a construction consent and would require work in land out with the control of the applicant.

3 OBJECTIONS

3.1 There were two letters received from neighbours and one from the Councillor McKinlay that refer to the following; a) The site is part of land that was gifted to the Council for recreational use and as such should not be used for a commercial use; b) The site is in Council ownership and therefore subject to the moratorium on the erection of masts on its land; c) The siting of the mast near the edge of the road could lead to a distraction to drivers within an area where minor accidents already occur due to the combination of bend, blind crest and junction with Tantallon Drive; d) The servicing of the site may contribute to the existing road safety issues; e) There are potential health hazards from such installations; and The proposed mast would affect the value of the property.

4 ASSESSMENT

4.1 In assessing this application the relevant policy TELl Telecommunications Developments states that: “The Council will encourage telecommunication operators to discuss at the earliest possible stage any forthcoming proposals for telecommunications developments in order to reconcile so far as possible technical requirements and environmental interests. Any planning applications will be considered with regard to national policy, against the following criteria. a) economic benefit; b) specific locational need; and c) Environmental impact. 4.2 The proposed mast was the subject of a prior notification before the recent legislative changes. At that time it was noted that the site was on the footpath and therefore its construction was within the public highway. The Council moratorium did not therefore apply.

4.3 The mast site was chosen for the raised level of the ground in relation to the surrounding area along with the existing tree belt adjacent to the site. This choice of location has enabled the height of the mast to be only 10m thereby reducing its visual impact while retaining the required coverage.

4.4 Although the mast will result in an additional element of street furniture near the junction with Tantallon Road it is not considered likely to result in a distraction to road users as it is similar in design to a lighting column.

4.5 The concern about the servicing of the site expressed in both the letters of objection and by the Roads and Transportation Manager are noted. The applicant has however indicated that following construction, that would require appropriate road narrowing for a temporary period, the site would only be visited twice a year for checks to the cabinet and only on the instance of a complete failure of the antennae would they require to be replaced. If a failure was to occur then appropriate road narrowing and site protection would be employed. There is a lay-by on the other side of Loanhead Road near to the site and any vehicles used by service personnel could be parked there during the normal servicing visits. I consider that the provision of an additional lay-by would not therefore be a reasonable condition to apply.

4.6 In terms of the siting of the mast within a Greenbelt location identified for recreational use I do not consider that this installation will significantly impact on the visual amenity or recreational activity.

5 CONCLUSION

5.1 I consider that the proposal meets the criteria as set out in policy TELl Telecommunications Developments relative to economic benefit, specific locational need and environmental impact and should not significantly impact on either amenity or traffic safety. I therefore recommend that the development is allowed to proceed.

C:\TEMP\RO10 1198.doc Application No. C/01/01207/FUL Date registered 04 October 2001 APPLICANT MR ROBERT SHAW, 57 BALMORAL AVENUE, GLENMAVIS

Agent DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF CONSERVATORY

LOCATION 57 BALMORAL AVENUE, GLENMAVIS

Ward No. 45 Grid Reference 275787668088

File Reference C/PL/GMB09057/GL/LR

Site History No relevant site history

Development Plan The application site is zoned policy HG9 Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours One letter of objection

Newspaper Advertisement Not Required

COMMENTS This application relates to the erection of a conservatory on the rear elevation of 57 Balmoral Avenue, Glenmavis. The proposed conservatory has an area of 7 square metres extending 1.57 metres from the rear building line along the common property boundary with 59 Balmoral Avenue. The conservatory extends a further 0.98 metres offset from the boundary allowing a hipped front to the roof. The maximum ridge height is 3.3 metres. 57 Balmoral Avenue is a two storey semi-detached dwellinghouse. The rear elevation of number 57 and 59 is north west facing and the site is generally flat. There is currently a 1.5 metre timber fence along the common property boundary.

The site is zoned HG9 Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas. In this area extensions, including conservatories are considered acceptable in principle, subject to the proposal also meeting the relevant design guidance. Following neighbour notification one letter of objection was received. The letter of objection was from Mr and Mrs Wilson, 59 Balmoral Avenue. The grounds of objection raised were that: The conservatory fire wall would over-shadow their property and cause the view from their patio doors to be considerably obscured and that they have concern over the intended drainageiguttering system as all existing rainwater down-pipes for the building are on their property.

In assessing this particular proposal, it is considered that the relevant determining factors are whether the conservatory accords with local plan policy and design guidance and whether the conservatory would have a detrimental impact on neighbours particularly in view of the points of objection mentioned. In terms of policy and design guidance the principle of such development is accepted. Furthermore, the proposed conservatory is considered to remain in keeping with the visual appearance of the property and will not detract from appearance of the surrounding area. There is sufficient remaining garden ground for a development of this scale. In terms of the relationship the proposal will have with number 59 Balmoral Avenue it is acknowledged that the fire wall extends 1.57m along the common property boundary and that there are patio doors in close proximity to the development. Nonetheless, the development has been assessed against the Building Research Establishment Report “Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight : A Guide to Good Practice” and it is considered that the proposal will not significantly adversely effect the sunlight and daylight available to number 59 to an extent that would merit refusal of the application. The elevation is north west facing limiting levels of sunlight at present.

It should also be noted that had it not been for the proximity of the existing garage the proposal would have been deemed permitted development, allowing a potentially more obtrusive extension. Loss of view is not considered to be a valid planning reason for refusal. In relation to the intended drainagelguttering system this would have to accord with the relevant building regulations as part of the building warrant. It is recommended that an advisory note be attached to any permission highlighting this matter and that any new gutters or pipes should not encroach on the neighbouring property.

Given the design, size and location of the conservatory and its relationship with adjacent properties I do not consider that it detracts from the amenity of the objector’s house to an extent which merits the refusal of planning permission.

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.

List of Background Papers

- Application Form and Plans dated 19 September 200 1 - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 - Letter from Mr and Mrs Wilson, 59 Balmoral Avenue, Glenmavis

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812373 and ask for Gordon Liddell. Application No. C/O1/01268/FUL Date registered 28 September 2001 APPLICANT MR & MRS R ALLISON, 39 WILLOW CRESCENT, COATBRIDGE

Agent DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF GARDEN WALL (IN RETROSPECT) LOCATION 39 WILLOW CRESCENT, COATBRIDGE

Ward No. 40 Grid Reference 273006663855

File Reference CiPLICTW55503 1OOOO/IJ/KH

Site History None

Development Plan Under the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the site is covered by the following policy:

Policy HG9: Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours One

Newspaper Advertisement Not Required

COMMENTS Planning Permission is being sought (in retrospect) for the erection of a garden wall around the application property at the junction of Willow CrescentBarrodield Street, Coatbridge. The wall is of a stone block construction which is stepped at a number of points to a maximum height of 1.25 metres. One letter of objection was received as a result of neighbour notification, details of which are included within the attached report. The main considerations in dealing with the applications of this nature are the design of the proposal and its acceptability in terms of pedestriadvehicular safety around the Willow Crescent/Barrodield Street junction. The Transportation Manager has offered no objection to the proposal and the design and finish of the wall is visually acceptable. Whilst noting the concerns of the objector I consider the proposal acceptable at this location and therefore I recommend that the application is approved subject to the attached conditions.

RECOMMENDATION

Grant, subject to the following condition:-

1. That the development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the plans hereby approved and no change to the design or finish shall take place without the prior written approval of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To define the permission.

C:\TEMP\RO 101268.doc

2. That before the development hereby approved is completed, details of the proposed additional rear boundary treatment 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.

List of Background Papers

- Application forms and accompanying plans received on 28 September 2001. - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 199 1. - Letter of Representation received from Mr. Peter Bannan, 75 Barrowfield Street,Coatbridge on 23 October 2001. - Consultation response from Transportation Manager dated 28 September 2001. - Undated letter from applicant.

Any person wishmg to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812382 and ask for Ian Johnston.

C:\TEMP\RO 10 1268.doc APPLICATION NO. C/01/01268/FUL

REPORT

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 The applicant is seeking retrospective planning permission for the erection of sections of boundary wall around the garden area of the dwellinghouse at No. 39 Willow Crescent, Coatbridge.

1.2 The application property is a ground floor residential property located within a “four in a block type” building which fronts directly onto Willow Crescent near its junction with Barrowfield Street, Coatbridge. The front and side garden areas of the subject property front onto both these roadways while the applicant also holds ownership of a small rear garden area.

1.3 The proposals, being in retrospect, seeks to legitimise the recent erection of sections of wall around the garden ground of the application property. Four sections of wall, extending to 14.5 metres in length, are located adjacent to the public footway on Willow Crescent and Barrowfield Street while two firther sections, 6.5 metres and 1.5 metres are positioned to the front and rear of the property respectively. The wall itself is constructed in interlinking stone blocks stepped at various points to heights between 0.85 metres and 1.25 metres.

2. PLANNING POLICIES

2.1 In terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area covered by the following specific policy : HG9 Housing Policy for Existing residential Areas.

3. CONSULTATIONS

3.1 The Transportation Manager has offered no objection to the application as the wall is outwith the junction visibility requirements of 4.5 metres by 60 metres.

4. REPRESENTATIONS

4.1 One letter of representation was received as a result of the neighbour procedures and the grounds of objection can be fairly summerised as follows: (i) The wall is in excess of the height allowed by the Council (ii) The vision of vehicle drivers may be impaired by the height of the wall at its junction of Willow Crescent and Barrowfield Street. (iii) The use of a brick construction is different to everything else in the street (Willow Crescent). (iv) The line of the wall erected within the rear garden does not correspond with the applicants ownership with the result that a small section of the applicants ground is left on the objectors side of the wall. In addition the finishing of that part of the wall is unsatisfactory. (v) The mono-blocking being laid down in the rear garden area is not referred to in the planning application and could cause drainage problems into the objectors adjoining garden ground which is at a lower level.

5. ASSESSMENT

5.1 In assessing this particular proposal, albeit in retrospect, it is considered that the determining factors are whether the wall is acceptable in terms of design, material, location and scale. The proposal requires also to be considered in terms of any potential detrimental impact on adjoining neighbours in view of the objection mentioned previously.

5.2 The main elements of the wall are located around the prominent junction of Willow Crescent and Barrowfield Street and while the wall is at a height (ranging between 0.85 metres and 1.25 metres) that requires the benefit of planning permission it is considered to be neither over dominant in terms of height nor likely to adversely impact on vehicular movement around this junction (by not affecting the sightlines at that junction) as confirmed by the Transportation Manager.

C:\TEMP\RO 10 1268.doc 5.3 Whilst the wall construction i.e. stone block is not common to the surrounding area where hedgerows are prevalent the material is of a good quality and standard which will, by being laid in a stepped manner to reflect the ground contours, produce a structure which will enhance both the applicants curtilage and also the surrounding streetscape.

5.4 The applicant has been advised of the concern raised in respect of the exclusion of a small section of land, reputedly in his ownership, from within the boundaries enclosed by the proposed walls and he has advised that this small area of land will also be enclosed in an agreed manner to prevent any further maintenance problems. The condition of the side of the wall overlooking the neighbouring objector’s property will be to a standard similar to the main sections of wall and acceptance to this Authority.

5.5 It has been acknowledged that some mono-blocking of the small rear garden area has been undertaken by the applicant in association with the erection of the surrounding wall. Whilst not indicated as such on the planning application submission these surface works are considered to be of an acceptable standard and of such a minor nature that can be deemed as ancillary to the main works on site i.e. construction of wall. The date there have been no drainage problems between the applicants rear garden area and the adjoining objector’s land which lies at a slight lower level. Whilst it is doubtful that any drainage problem is likely as a result of the surface works (mono-blocking) the applicant has been made aware of this concern and advised to monitor the situation.

6. CONSLUSION

6.1 In summary, it is concluded that the wall is acceptable in terms of design, material, location and scale and while the concerns of the objector are noted I do not consider that there are any amenity issues that would weigh against the granting of planning permission. I therefore recommend that planning permission is granted subject to conditions.

C:\TEMP\RO 10 1268.doc Application No. CI011012881FUL Date registered 15th October 2001 APPLICANT HERON PROPERTY LTD., 2 ST. PATRICKS STREET, DRAPERSTOWN, MAGHERAFELT, NORTHERN IRELAND BT45 7AL

Agent James Barr, 226 West George Street, GLASGOW G2 2LN DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF 3 NO. INDUSTRIALIWAREHOUSE UNITS LOCATION SITE ADJACENT TO AND SOUTH OF BLOCKS 1-3 (WEST OF DALRYMPLE DRIVE) DUNDWAN INDUSTRIAL ESTATE COATBRIDGE

Ward No. 40 Grid Reference 272887 664083

File Reference CIPLICTD700IDBIKH

Site History

Development Plan The site is zoned ECON2 Existing General Industrial Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Contrary to No Development Plan

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Transco, The Coal Authority, West of Scotland Water Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours 2 letters of objection

Newspaper Not Required Advertisement

COMMENTS This application relates to the erection of two 516sq.m. industrial units and one 1086sq.m. semi-detached industrial unit with associated yardspace, parking, access and landscaping on land off Dundyvan Way, Dundyvan Industrial Estate, Coatbridge. The site is flanked on two sides by a residential development and is zoned ECON2 Existing General Industrial Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. Two letters of objection were received details of which are referred to in the attached report. The proposed development is in accordance with the development plan and subject to the proposed conditions should not significantly affect the amenity of the adjoining residential area.

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.

To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects.

C:\TEMP\ROl 01288.doc . Produced by Department of Plmnirg and Environment PLANNIN G AP PLICAT10 N C/Ol /O1288/F U L Directorate SuDmrt Unit ERECTION OF 3 NO. INDUSTRIAUWAREHOUSE UNITS SITE ADJACENT TO AND SOUTH OF BLOCKS 1-3 (WEST OF DALRYMPLE DRIVE) DUNDWAN INDUSTRIAL ESTATE COATBRID GE Telephone a236 616210 Fax. 01236 616232 * Location of Objectors This mpy has been produced specifically for Pbnnlng and Building Control purposes only OS Licence Le, 03041L NO further copies may be made 3. That the permission hereby granted shall relate to the use of the units and yardspace solely for uses included within Classes 4 and 6 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997.

Reason: To define the uses in the interest of residential amenity.

4. 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 Planning Authority to consider these aspects.

5. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of the proposed footpaths, parking areas, external lighting, fences to be erected along the boundaries, grassed, planted and landscaped areas shown on the approved plans.

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

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

Reason: To ensure that the buildings are set in a landscaped setting in the interest of visual amenity.

7. That before completion of the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance schemed approved under the terms of condition 5 shall be in operation.

Reason: To ensure appropriate maintenance in the interest of visual amenity and traffic and pedestrian safety.

8. That before the development hereby permitted is completed or 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: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities within the site.

9. That before the development hereby permitted is completed or brought into use, a 2 metre wide footway shall be constructed within the area hatched GREEN 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: To ensure satisfactory pedestrian access facilities to the site.

10. That during the construction of the units hereby permitted the works shall be restricted to between the hours of 8am and 7pm Monday to Friday and 9am to noon Saturday. No works should be undertaken on Sundays.

Reason: To reduce potential noise generation in the interest of residential amenity,

C:\TEMPROl 01288.doc 1 1. That any ventilation systems fitted to the units hereby permitted shall not exceed Noise Rating Curve 35 between the hours of 0700 and 2200 hours and Noise Rating curve 25 at all other times when assessed at any dwelling or noise sensitive property with closed windows.

Reason: To ensure that noise from such systems does not adversely impact on noise levels to the detriment of residential amenity.

List of Background Papers

Application forms and accompanying plans received on 8 October 2001,9 November 2001 and 28 November 200 1 Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 199 1. Letter of objection from William Lawrie, 5 Dalrymple Drive, Coatbridge received on 1 October 2001 Letter of objection from J McNealis, 15 Doune Park Way, Coatbridge received on 9 October 2001 Consultation response from The Coal Authority received on 29 October 2001 Consultation response from Transco received on 24 October 2001 Consultation response from West of Scotland Water received on 2 November 2001 Consultation response from Protective Services Manager received on 3 1 October 2001 Consultation response from Transportation Manager received on 25 October 2001 and ?

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812372 and ask for Mr. Baxter

C:\TEMP\RO 10 1288.doc APPLICATION NO. C/01/01288/FUL

REPORT

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 This application relates to the erection of 2 no. 516sq.m. industrial units and 1 no. 1086sq.m. semi- detached industrial unit with associated yard space, parking, access and landscaping on land off Dundyvan Way, Dundyvan Industrial Estate, Coatbridge.

1.2 The site is flanked on the north and east by industrial premises and on the other two sides by a residential development. The land is currently flat grassed land with shrub and tree planting on its periphery.

1.3 The site is zoned ECON2 Existing General Industrial Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 199 1.

2. CONSULTATION

2.1 The Coal Authority has indicated no objection to the proposal although there has been some shallow working withm the area and recommends appropriate technical advice is sought before construction work begins.

2.2 West of Scotland Water has indicated no objections to the proposal although a Sustainable Urban Drainage System may be considered appropriate.

2.3 Transco has no objections to the proposal.

2.4 The Transportation Manager following changes to the proposed access and maneouvering areas has no objections subject to conditions?

2.5 The Protective Services Manager has indicated no objection subject to restrictions on hours of construction and the noise levels from any ventilation equipment that may be installed.

3. OBJECTIONS

3.1 Two letters of objection received for the proposal that referred to the following: a) loss of residential amenity; b) noise from the factory units and the roads; c) overshadowing; d) increased pollution; and e) loss of security.

4. ASSESSMENT

4.1 As the site is zoned for industrial purposes the provision of industrial units is in line with the development plan.

4.2 In this instance since the plan was adopted a residential development has been erected around the south eastern boundary of the site. The letters of objection therefore relate to any loss of residential amenity that is enjoyed by the residents of this estate.

4.3 When the residential units were erected a tree belt was included along the boundary to reduce both the visual and noise impact of any fbture development. The Protective Services Manager has not indicated any anticipated problems with noise complaint other than that associated with construction works and of ventilation units that may be use on the buildings. Conditions are proposed to address these issues.

4.4 The proposed units will be 7.5 and 8.5 metres high are to be sited a minimum of 23 metres from the nearest house. The existing dwellinghouses should not therefore be affected by loss of daylight or significantly affected by loss of sunlight. 4.5 Although the letter of objection does not define what type of pollution is anticipated it is indicated that the proposed units will be used for light industriallwarehouse purposes and as such should not therefore be a source of air pollution or smells. A condition is however proposed to specifically exclude general industrial uses to ensure that such noise and pollution issues are minimised.

4.6 One letter of objection refers to the loss of security arising from the proposed development I consider that the opposite may well be the case as the open ground to the rear of the housing will be largely enclosed and the site more closely supervised by the new units tenants.

5. CONCLUSION

5.1 In conclusion I consider that the proposed use is in line with the local plan policies, should provide additional employment opportunities and subject to the attached conditions should ensure no significant loss of local residential amenity. Application No. c/o1/0 1334/FUL Date registered 10 October 200 1 APPLICANT OAKMALL PROPERTIES, 15 BENHAR ROAD, , ML7 5EN

Agent Paul Edney Partnership, The Roundel, Hillfoot Farm, Dollar, FK14 7PL

DEVELOPMENT ALTERATIONS TO LISTED BUILDING AS PART OF CHANGE OF USE OF RESIDENTIAL HOME TO FLATTED RESIDENTIAL ACCOMMODATION (7 IN TOTAL) INCLUDING THE ERECTION OF 4 FLATTED D WELLINGHOUSES LOCATION KENILWORTH HOUSE, 5 1 BLAIRHILL STREET, COATBRIDGE

Ward No. 32 Grid Reference 272454 665376

File Reference CiPLICTB48605 1OOO/IJ/KH

Site History The site was the subject of a disposal exercise by this Authority and following a tendering exercise which was based on an agreed Developer Brief, the Policy and Resources Committee agreed to dispose of the site to Oakmall Properties subject to conditions at the meeting of 26 June 2001.

Development Plan In terms of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 199 1 the site is within an area covered by the following policies:

HG9 Existing Residential Area ENV 1911 Conservation Area Policy

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection Transco, The Coal Authority, NLC Protective Services No Objection Conditions Historic Scotland (Informal Consultation) No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours No Response

Newspaper Advertisement One

COMMENTS Planning Permission is being sought for the refurbishment and change of use of a former Residential Home (Kenilworth House) to accommodate 7 flatted residential properties together with the erection of 4 flatted dwellinghouses in the grounds on the home. The proposal will involve substantial internal alterations to the existing building (Grade B Listed) with minimal external works together with the erection of a stand alone two storey building within the adjoining garden grounds to accommodate 4 flatted units. Both structures will be served from Blairhill Street by means of the upgrading of the existing single vehicular access at the road frontage. One letter of objection was received as a result of the public advertisement exercise, details of which are included within the attached report. The main considerations in dealing with this form of application are the effects of any works on the integrity of the Listed Building together with the design and finish of the new build. Historic Scotland have welcomed the proposals affecting the Listed Building and the works proposed on the new build comply with the requirement of the Development Brief in terms of high standard of design and material. \/- 1 'roduced by kpartment of Plmnirg and Environment PLANNING APPLICATION NO 01/01334/FUL 4 *I. >rectorate Supprt Uflt ALTERATIONS LISTED BUILDING AS PART OF CHANGE NOR! - TO -3 LANEKSHEE jute 501, Fleming House OF USE OF RESIDENTIAL HOME TO FLATTED RESIDENTIAL !Tryst Road .? ?.. COL NCI L XMBERNAULD ACCOMMODATION (7 IN TOTAL) INCLUDING THE ERECTION 371 JW OF 4 FLATrED DWELLINGHOUSES. Fq~drrdhornlh Ordnsresuweyrnqpngwth hSMIrnVPmi~im omoad mcrwnh Cmtdl-d SCpYil@l hi Malsarvll reiephone 01236 616210 Fax 012% 616232 AT KENNILWORTH HOUSE, 51 BLAlRHlLL STREET. COATBRIDGE Ullutb#aadrapmductm nhingBCiaun scpv @I This copy has been produced specifically for Planning and Building Control purpcses only 4rnayleadloplos(ruUm mc8viposddin)r 35 Licmce LA c9041L NO further copies may be made Whilst noting the concerns of the objector I consider the proposal acceptable and therefore I recommend that the application is approved subject to the attached conditions.

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 shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the plans hereby approved and no change to the design or external finishes shall take place without the prior written approval of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To define the permission.

3. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing materials to be used on all external walls and roofs of the proposed new building 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.

4. That the facing materials to be used for the external walls,windows and roof of the proposed dormer extension on the main building shall match in colour and texture those of the existing building.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to preserve the character of the Listed Building.

5. That no trees within the application site shall be lopped, topped or felled and no shrubs or hedges, shall be removed from the application site, without the approval in writing of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of amenity of the building and the Conservation Area.

6. That before the development hereby approved starts, details of a scheme, which provides sufficient space within the curtilage of the application site for: 1. the existing vehicular access to serve both parts of the site with an improved minimum width of 4.5 metres to allow two vehicles to pass. 2. the access into the site to meet the footway at right angles. 3. a 2.0 metre wide footway to be constructed adjacent to the access road along its entire length. 4. pedestrian crossing points (dropped kerb) to1 be provided where the footway required under (3) above crosses the access road. 5. a 6.0 metre aisle to be provided beside the parking areas.

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

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

7. A bin store shall be provided at the Blairhill Street frontage and a detailed drawing showing the bin store location shall be submitted to and approved in writing, including any modifications as may be required by the Planning Authority, prior to the start of these works.

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

C:\TEMP\ROlO 1334.doc 8. 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 enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects.

9. 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 Planning Authority to consider these aspects.

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

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to preserve the character of the Listed Building.

11. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection OE- (a) the proposed footpaths referred to in Condition 6 above; (b) the proposed parking areas referred to in Condition 6 above; (c) the proposed grassed, planted and landscaped areas as referred to in Condition 9 above;

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

12. That before completion of the development hereby permitted, the woodland management and maintenance scheme, approved under the terms of condition above, shall be in operation.

Reason: To define the permission.

13. That before the last of the new build dwelling units hereby approved is occupied, Kenilworth House shall be fully refurbished in accordance with the approved plans and all roads, footways and parking areas shall be completed to final wearing course all to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the future of the building and in the interests of amenity of the building and Conservation Area.

List of Background Papers

- Application forms and accompanying plans received on 10 October 200 1 - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 - Consultation response from The Coal Authority received 23 October 2001 - Consultation response from Protective Services received 26 October 2001 - Consultation response from Transco received 22 October 2001 - Letter of objection dated 19 October 2001 Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812382 and ask for Ian Johnston.

C :\TEMP\ROl 01334.doc APPLICATION NO. C/01/01334/FUL

REPORT

1. SITE AND LOCATION

1.1 The application site is located on the western footpath of Blairhill Street, Coatbridge within an area of predominantly residential nature and west of Coatbridge Town Centre. The site is positioned at a prominent road frontage location with private residential properties to the north, south and west with local authority housing to the east on the opposite footway of Blairhill Street. The site also falls within the boundaries of the Blairhill and Dunbeth Conservation Area.

1.2 The northerly part of the site currently accommodates a substantial red coloured brick finished building which until recently was used as a Residential Home. The building is category “B” Listed and contains a number of attractive external features. The interior of the building has suffered from vandalism and deterioration over the years since its vacation.

1.3 The southerly part of the site presently forms part of the amenity garden area of the house itself

2. THE APPLICATIONS

2.1 The application involves the refurbishment of the existing redundant Listed Building to provide accommodation in the form of 7 flatted dwellinghouses together with the erection of a further 4 flatted dwellinghouses within a single block within the adjoining garden ground of the Listed Building.

2.2 Kenilworth House will be internally refurbished to provide 3 flatted units on the ground floor each with 2 bedrooms (one with en-suite), kitchen, loungeidining room and bathroom. Each flat will be accessed from a central main entrance hall which will also access the upper floors. On the first floor 2 flatted units will be provided each with 2 bedrooms (one with en-suite), kitchen, bathroom and large lounge/dining room. The second floor will provide a further 2 flatted units each with 2 bedrooms, kitchen, bathroom and lounge. External alterations to the building will be minimal and will include the removal of an external stairway on the side elevation and an increase in height of an existing dormer on the rear elevation of the building all windows will be timber sash and case to reflect the original style of the building.

2.3 The new build will comprise of a single structure, two storey in height and fronting onto Blairhill Street. Internally the building will comprise of 2 units on the ground floor and 2 further units on the upper floor each accommodating 3 bedroom (one with en-suite), bathroom, kitchen, lounge and hallway. Externally the building will be finished in render with facing brick base and slate alternative tiles. Windows will be timber framed sash and case similar to Kenilworth House.

2.4 Access to both parts of the site will be taken from a single point on Blairhill Street with all parking requirements contained wholly within the site. The existing access will be upgraded to meet the necessary standard.

3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

3.1 Under the terms of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area covered by the following policies:

HG9 : Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas ENV15/1 : Conservation Area (Dunbeth & Blairhill)

3.2 The building on site (Kenilworth House) is a Grade B Listed Building and as such Policy ENV17 (Protect Listed Buildings) of the local plan would be relevant to this application.

C:\TEMP\RO101 334.doc 4. DEVELOPMENT BRIEF

4.1 A Development Brief was previously prepared by the Council for the re-development of this site and that Brief formed the basis for a Tendering exercise which resulted in the present applicant, Oakmall Development being selected (Policy & Resources Committee of 26 June 2001) to take forward their development proposals on the basis of their submission and against the requirements of the Development Brief.

4.2 The Development Brief highlighted the unique architectural design of Kenilworth House and the opportunities for developing the adjoining land in a sympathetic manner. The brief outlined the Councils intentions for the site and offered design considerations to be taken into account in the preparation of any scheme.

5. COSULTATIONS

5.1 The Transportation manager has been in direct discussion with the applicant in respect of this proposal and an acceptable scheme for accessing the site (a single access point) has been agreed and incorporated within the submission.

5.2 There have been no objections received from any of the consultees formally notified of this application.

6. REPRESENTATIONS

6.1 A single letter of objection was received in respect of this proposal. The main points raised in that letter are as follows:

- the development is out of character with the area as there are no flatted dwellings in any of the surrounding homes. - the increase in traffic in the area would increase noise levels. - the proposal would have a detrimental affect in the surrounding properties.

7. ASSESSMENT

7.1 Applications of this nature require to be assessed against both the terms of the Local Plan including the Councils own design guidance on this type of proposal and also the aims and provisions of the Development Brief prepared by the Council for this particular site.

7.2 The proposal generally accords with the terms of Local Plan Policy HG9 in that the re-introduction of Kenilworth House for residential purposes is considered appropriate to the area and the siting, design and layout of the new build element accords with the Councils design guidance on infill housing proposals.

7.3 The Development Brief prepared as part of the tendering process for the disposal of this site included specific design criteria that required to be incorporated within any development proposals. The Brief highlighted the existing attractive nature of the external appearance of Kenilworth House and required the retention (and improvement where necessary) of the external fabric of that Grade B Listed Building. The brief also required the new build element to be a single block construction of a design and external finish to complement both Kenilworth House and the surrounding environment. The current submission is based primarily on a previous proposal prepared by the applicant and subsequently selected by the Council (Policy and Resources Committee 26 June 2001) as the preferred bid in a tendering process carried out earlier this year. The submission in its present form accords with the requirements of the Development Brief both in terms of refurbishment of Kenilworth House and also the siting, design and use of appropriate materials in the new build. It is also relevant to note that In their informal comments Historic Scotland welcome the proposals affecting Kenilworth House and have offered no adverse comment on the new build proposals.

7.4 While the Development Brief initially indicated the provision of separate vehicular accesses to the application site to serve Kenilworth House and the new build the Transportation Manager has accepted a single access located along the Blairhill Street frontage to serve both parts of the site. The current

C:\TEMP\RO101 334.doc submission incorporates a single access in the form of an upgrade of the existing access to the specifications required by the Transportation Manager.

7.5 Having regard to the objectors concerns it should be highlighted that Kenilworth House previously operated as a Residential Home and the proposed usage of both Kenilworth House and the new build are broadly of a similar nature (i.e. multiple occupancy) as that previous established use. The Listed Building will be the subject of minimal external alterations as part of this proposal and this in itself will have no adverse visual impact on the surrounding environment.

The new build element will be set within the substantial side garden grounds of the Listed Building and the positioning, scale, design and use of a high standard of external materials will, I feel, enhance the immediate surrounding and will neither overshadow or be detrimental to either the adjoining properties or indeed the area in general.

It is accepted that the proposal will generate a higher level of traffic generation around the site and this will inevitably result in slightly higher levels of noise at specific periods of the day. It is not anticipated however that either the traffic generation or noise levels will be excessive or detrimental to the surrounding properties given that the application site is set a distance apart from the majority of nearby properties.

The point raised in respect of the local authority both disposing of the application site (including Kenilworth House) and determining the application is not an issue as this proposal shall be considered wholly on its own individuaI merits and against the requirements to both the Local Plan and the relevant Development Brief. As the proposal affects a Listed Building then should the Council be minded to grant the proposal then in accordance with legislation the Listed Building application, would require to be referred to the Scottish Ministers (Historic Scotland) for consideration.

8. CONCLUSION

8.1 The current submission is the result of a Tendering exercise promoted by this authority to secure the disposal of Kenilworth House and its adjoining garden grounds for development purposes. The proposals accord with the design requirements set down in the Development Brief prepared as part of that exercise in terms of both the retentiodrefurbishment of Kenilworth House and the provision of a high standard of design for the adjacent new build element. While the objectors concerns are noted I feel that these in themselves do not merit the refusal of this planning application.

8.2 The development proposal also accords with the terms of the Local Plan Policy HG9 and the associated Design Guidance on Infill Housing in siting, design, scale and external finishing. It is therefore recommended that planning permission is granted subject to conditions.

C:\TEMP\RO 10 1334.doc Application No. C/01/01335/LBC Date registered 10 October 200 1 APPLICANT OAKMALL PROPERTIES, 15 BENHAR ROAD, SHOTTS, ML7 5EN

Agent Paul Edney Partnership, The Roundel, Hillfoot Fa- Dollar,

DEVELOPMENT ALTERATIONS TO LISTED BUILDING AS PART OF CHANGE OF USE OF RESIDENTIAL HOME TO FLATTED RESIDENTIAL ACCOMMODATION (7 IN TOTAL) LOCATION KENNILWORTH 5 1 BLAIRHILL STREET COATBRIDGE

Ward No. 32 Grid Reference 272454.665376

File Reference C/PL/CTB48605 10000/IJ/LR

Site History

Development Plan The Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 identifies the site within the following policy area:

H69: Existing Residential area ENV15/1: Conservation Area

Contrary to No Development Plan

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Historic Scotland, (Informal Consultation), Architectural Heritage Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours No response

Newspaper Advertisement One

COMMENTS Listed Building Consent is being sought for the internal refkrbishment and external alterations to the former Residential Home addressed as Kenilworth House, 51 Blairhill Street, Coatbridge. This proposal is related to a redevelopment project including new build by the same applicant, details of which are expanded upon and assessed under Planning Application No. C/01/01334/FUL. Kenilworth House is a Grade B Listed Building of red brick exterior and Old English Late 19* Century Style which is architecturally unique. The building has lain vacant for a number of years with the result that the interior has been substantially gutted and all architecturally important fixtures removed or vandalised.

The applicant is seeking to comprehensively refurbish the interior of the building to accommodate seven flatted units on three levels with each unit comprising of two bedrooms, bathroom, kitchen and lounge. The buildings central staircase will be retained and upgraded to access all units. Following discussions with Historic Scotland the applicant also proposes to retain the original plan of the ground floor dining room and remove all suspended ceilings within the principal rooms on the ground and first floor. Externally the red brick finish will be retained and repointed where necessary, all windows will be replaced in wooden framed sash and case, a small rear stairway will be removed and a rear dormer will be enlarged to achieve TD uce y ."I *I. klartmir?t of Plannirg and Environment PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01/01335/LBC NORM Directorate Suppsrt Urit ALTERATIONS TO LISTED BUILDING AS PART OF CHANGE +' Sute 501, Fleming House ,,:idi" LANARKSHIRE 2Tryst Rod OF USE OF RESIDENTIAL HOME TO FLATTED RESIDENTIAL ,:.,Y*.,COLNCiL - CUMBEPNAULD ACCOMMODATION (7 IN TOTAL) G67 1 JW Wpcdrsd homlh Ordnexe Suweymappw wXh AT KENNILWORTH HOUSE, 51 BLAlRHlLL STREET, COATBRIDGE Uw pmi~slmd h Contdia d hi Mejasly'i Telephone 01236 616210 Fax. 01236 616232 SPImIy msc ecrw,3cwyr,*t LhMbdsed rqmduchm imhhlcgr Crwn scpyn@l This mpy has been produced specifically for Pbnning and Building Cmtrd purposes only. 4mwleadlopmi-um crs~vIIpocd~dl~g. OS Licence LA 09041L No further copies may be made the proposed upper floor accommodation level. Historic Scotland have welcomed these proposals.

Whilst an objection has been received against of the introduction of a flatted use into an established residential area and the reputed increase in traffic and noise levels as a result of the proposal it is relevant to note that Kenilworth House is a former Residential House which catered in its day for multiple occupancy and the current proposal is broadly of a similar nature although in a more permanent manner. Having regard to this and to the fact that Kenilworth House is set a distance away from the majority of nearby properties. It is not considered that either traffic generation or noise levels will be significantly increased to a level detrimental to the amenity of the surrounding properties.

Taking all relevant matters into consideration, I am satisfied that the proposals are of a standard appropriate to this architecturally important Listed Building and its re- introduction to an acceptable productive use is welcomed. I therefore recommend that Listed Building Consent is granted.

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 shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the plans hereby approved and no change to the design or external finishes shall take place without the prior written approval of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To define the permission.

3. That the facing materials to be used for the external walls, windows and roof of the proposed rear dormer extension area shall match in material, texture and colour those presently on the existing main building.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to preserve the character of the Listed Building.

NOTE TO COMMITTEE

Committee should note that if they are minded to grant the proposal it needs to be referred to the Scottish Ministers (Historic Scotland) for consideration.

List of Background Papers

- Application forms and accompanying plans received on 10 October 2001 - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991. - Consultation Response from Historic Scotland dated 2 November 2001 - Consultation Response from Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland dated 24 October 2001 - Letter of objection dated 19 October 2001

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812382 and ask for Ian Johnston.

C:\TEMP\RO 10 1335.doc Application No. C/01/0 1350MIN Date registered 16 October 200 1 APPLICANT GM MINING LTD. DRUMSHANGIE OCCS, GREENGAIRS ROAD, GREENGAIRS ML6 7TY

Agent Mason Evans Partnership Ltd. The Clydeway Skypark, 8 Elliot Place, Glasgow G3 8EP DEVELOPMENT FORMATION OF ROAD CROSSING POINT

LOCATION DRUMSHANGIE OPENCAST COAL SITE, AIRDRIEHILL ROAD, GREENGAIRS AIRDRIE.

Ward No. 46 Grid Reference 279246 668665

File Reference

Site History Planning permission granted 1993 for opencast coal workings (ref no. M/91/571) and subsequently amended

Development Plan Monklands District Local Plan 1991 - Policy MINl for Mineral Extraction

Contrary to No Development Plan

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Transco, West of Scotland Water

Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response

Newspaper Advertisement No response

COMMENTS Through an anomaly within the planning permission at the Drumshangie opencast coal site, GM Mining have found themselves without proper access to achieve the restoration of two phases of workings. The two phases were worked at a time when access was possible without the need for formal road crossing points i.e. following the collapse of Darngavel Road The background to the road collapse is extensive and has been well documented at several meetings of the Planning and Environment Committee. Now that the road has been reconstructed, access to the two phases has been effectively cut off, and this application is designed to rectify the situation.

The new crossing point would be sited on Arbuckle Road on a badly surfaced and rarely used stretch of road. The facility would incorporate traffic signals to protect the safety of other road users and the Transportation Section is satisfied with the detail of the proposals.

The application will rectify the delay in restoration works at this part of the site. To ensure that the overall restoration programme is put back on track, any permission should be conditional on a specific timescale for the completion of the outstanding

R010 1350.doc 7omcea ~y 2eprtment d Rannng and Ewimnment 3iredotate Support Unit PLANNING APPLl CAT10 N NO. 01/01350/M IN Lite 501, Fleming House FORMATION OF ROAD CROSSING POINT ?TrystRoad XMBERNAULD AT SITE OF FORMER PARK PIT, DRUMSHANGIE OPENCAST, 371.N AlRDRlEHlLL ROAD GREENGAIRS, AIRDRIE. relephone 01236616210 Fax. 01236616232 'his copy has been pcducedspecificalyfor Manningand Building ConW purposes only. 3s Licence LA 09041L Nofurthercmiesmavbemade works. In particular, the operator has agreed to have the crossing point in operation no later than mid-January 2002, the completion of backfilling in phase 2a no later than the end of April 2002 and the backfilling of 4 (standalone) no later than the end of June 2002.

It should be noted that the timescale for the completion of backfilling of phase 2a is of utmost importance due to its proximity to the reconstructed section of Darngavel Road. The need to restore this area is important not only in the interests of amenity, but also to ensure the long-term stability of the new road. The latter is the basis of on-going monitoring by qualified staff within the Council and those acting on behalf of GM Mining.

Members will note the presence of another report within the agenda relating to Wher opencast operations at Drumshangie (ref. no. C/01/01184/MIN) and this would incorporate the same crossing point as proposed by this application.

In conclusion, this application seeks to ensure the on-going restoration programme at the Drumshangie opencast coal site, and I would recommend that permission is granted to ensure that the necessary works can be undertaken as a matter of urgency.

RECOMMENDATION

Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1. That the proposed road crossing point and all works relating to it, including the formation of adjoining haul roads, shall be in place and capable of operation no later than 18 January 2002.

Reason: In accordance with submitted details and to allow for restoration works to commence as soon as possible.

2. That the phasing of restoration works for phases 2(a) and 4 (standalone) shall comply with the following:

(a) Backfilling of phase 2(a) to be complete by 30 April 2002 or any other date to be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority

(b) Backfilling of phase 4 (standalone) to be complete by 30 June 2002 or any other date to be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority

(c) Full restoration of phases 2 (a) and 4 (standalone) including replacement of soils and implementation of agreed planting scheme to be complete no later than 30 April 2003.

Reason: To ensure the proper restoration of the area in the interests of amenity and to ensure the structural stability of Darngavel Road.

3. That prior to the operation of the road crossing point, a traffic management method statement for the operation of the road crossing point shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for its prior approval and thereafter implemented in full for the duration of its operation, and this method statement shall include details of the following:

(a) type and location of traffic signals

(b) wording and location of appropriate advanced warning signs (c) type and location of flood lighting to be used during the hours of darkness

R010 1350.doc Reason: In the interests of road safety.

4. That the roadway at the crossing point shall be cleaned manually every 30 minutes and cleaned by a machine or motorised brush twice a day, or any other frequency to be agreed in advance by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and road safety.

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812379 and ask for Lindsay Kellock.

R0101350.doc Application No. C/O 1/01366iFUL Date registered 15th October 2001 APPLICANT MR MCCLUCKIE, 11 DYKEHEAD CRESCENT, AIRDRIE ML6 6PU

Agent Mr A McGuire, 12 Longdale Avenue, Giffhock G446 6AG DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF 2 STOREY SIDE EXTENSION TO DWELLINGHOUSE LOCATION 11 DYKEHEAD CRESCENT AIRDRIE LANARKSHIRE ML6 6PU

Ward No. 45 Grid Reference 275996 666745

File Reference C/PL/AID920011000/DB/LR

Site History Panning Consent 99100802iFUL for Erection of Conservatory to Rear of Dwellinghouses granted 14 July 1999

Development Plan The site is zoned HG9 Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991

Contrary to No Development Plan

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours 1 letter of objection

Newspaper Not Required Advertisement

COMMENTS This application relates to an extension over an integral garage to form a bedroom and balcony area at 11 Dykehead Crescent, Airdrie. The site is zoned HG9 in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. It is also assessed against the Design Guidance on House Extensions included within the Local Plan. One letter of objection was received from a neighbour details of which are referred to in the attached report. The proposal will not result in a terrace affect and is sympathetically designed as part of the house I therefore consider that it is in accordance with the guidance contained in the Local Plan and will not significantly affect the residential amenity of adjoining residents.

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: To ensure the continuity of development in the interest of visual amenity.

C:\TEMP\RO 10 1366.doc

List of Background Papers

- Application forms and accompanying plans received on 15th October 2001 - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991. - Consultation response from Roads and Transportation Manager received 3 1 October 2001

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 8 12372 and ask for Mr. Baxter

C:\TEMPRO 101366.doc APPLICATION NO. C/01/01366/FUL

REPORT

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 This application relates to an extension over an integral garage to form a bedroom and balcony area at 11 Dykehead Crescent, Airdrie.

1.2 The site is zoned HG9 Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. It should also be assessed against the Design Guidance on House Extensions included within the Local Plan.

2. CONSULTATION

2.1 The Transportation Manager has no objections to the proposal.

3. OBJECTIONS

3.1 One letter of objection was received from a neighbour related to the potential shadowing and loss of view that the extension would result in. The letter also referred to the proximity of the extension to the side boundary and the potential loss of privacy in the lounge window from the proposed balcony.

4. ASSESSMENT

4.1 In assessing this application the design guidance contained within the Local Plan and consideration of the reasons for objection need to be addressed.

4.2 In this instance the proposed extension is designed in sympathy with the original building and subject to the use of materials to match the existing house will not detract from the appearance of the property.

4.3 The design guidance indicates that: “side extensions which would be built hard onto a boundary may not be allowed if it would result in an unbroken terrace appearance on the street. Therefore it is generally preferable to set extensions off a joint boundary by around 900mm to allow access to rear gardens and to allow maintenance of the side wall without having to enter the neighbouring property.”

4.4 The extension would not result in a terraced appearance to the street scene due to the adjoining property being set back from No. 16. The proposed extension is less than that the preferred 900mm to the side boundary of the plot it as set out in the guidance, however, access to the rear of the property can still be achieved and the building is to be constructed of facing brick that requires little maintenance.

4.5 The objection refers to the loss of view and rightly notes that this is not a material consideration. The letter raises concern about the loss of daylight from the proposed extension. The Building Research Establishment has produced a method of determining the impact of proposed extensions on the levels of daylight that a room achieves. Having assessed the proposal on this basis there would not be significant reduction in the daylight levels on the living or bedroom windows as a result of the proposed extension.

4.6 The letter also expresses concern about the proximity of the extension to the boundary and as a result access would be required to build and maintain the extension. The applicant is aware of this issue and has indicated that the facing brick wall can be constructed within the boundary using had over wall technique. As the wall will be of facing brick the only maintenance would be to eaves detailing and a dry verge system can be employed that can be accessed from the roof.

4.7 The balcony is to be sited in line with the corner of the objector’s house and does not therefore affect the privacy of the lounge window on the front elevation. The side garden will however be affected although the presence of leylandii hedging would partially screen the potential overlooking. I therefore consider that this will not substantially affect the privacy of the adjoining residents.

C:\TEMP\RO 10 1366.doc 5. CONCLUSION

5.1 In conclusion I consider that the proposed extension is in accordance with the guidance contained in the Local Plan and should not significantly affect the residential amenity of adjoining residents. I therefore propose the extension be granted subject to the attached conditions. Application No. C/Ol/O 1397iFUL Date registered 15th October 2001 APPLICANT ONE 2 ONE PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS LTD., IMPERIAL PLACE, MAXWELL ROAD, BOREHAMWOOD, HERTS WD6 1EA

Agent APT Marconi, 1 Houston Street, Kinning Park, Glasgow G5 8RS DEVELOPMENT INSTALLATION OF 14.45M HIGH TELECOMMUNICATIONS MAST AND ASSOCIATED APPARATUS AND COMPOUND LOCATION BRAEFOOT FARM AIRDRIE ROAD CALDERCRUIX AIRDRIE LANARKSHIRE ML6 8PA

Ward No. 46 Grid Reference 281137 667437

File Reference CIPLICCA240IDBILR

Site History No previous applications

Development Plan The site is within an area zoned GB1 and LI1/2 in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Contrary to No Development Plan

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Radiocommunications Agency Conditions SNH No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours No response

Newspaper Not required Advertisement

COMMENTS This application is for a 14.45m high telecommunications monopole and associated equipment cabinet and compound on land to the north of Braefoot Farm, Caldercruix. The mast would be sited adjacent to a rock outcrop to reduce the visual impact of the proposal from the north. SNH has indicated that planting of a hedgerow mix will reduce the visual impact of the compound and cabinet with the mast painted grey to reduce its appearance when viewed from the east and west along the A89. The site is within an area zoned GB1 and LI1/2 in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The development is also assessed in tern of TELl Telecommunications Developments. No objections were received following neighbour notification and normal consultation procedure. The application was accompanied with the certification that ICNIRP levels would be adhered to and a supporting statement addressing the requirements of policy TELl . Subject to the attached conditions addressing the concerns related to screening and vehicular access I consider that the proposal does not conflict with the requirements of the Local Plan and should not adversely impact on the surrounding environment.

C:\TEMP\ROlO 1397.doc m uce y ~,",,m",o,tpimn,rg and ~~~~~~~~t PLANNING APPLICATION C/01/01397/FUL NOR= - Dredorate Supprt Unt INSTALLATION OF 14 45M HIGH TELECOMMUNICATIONS MAST e Sute 501 Fkming House 1;: LANSKSHAE .?Tryst Rod AND ASSOCIATED APPARATUS AND COMPOUND COLNCIL CVMBERNAULD BRAEFOOT FARM AlRDRlE ROAD CALDERCRUIX G67 1 JW bpddhomfh~chn;.Suwwm.ppqwlh A pmwim dhCmltdtof hrMp." te Telephone01236616210 Fax 01238 616232 Not to scale sbilan/ mc. mcian ccpvimt Unulhodsed rglo&slon \n6\~eaCran cwwht Ths mpy has been produced specificaly for Pbnning and Bulldtng Control purposes only vd ms"ludfopro,r"ba WelYll pos..d

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 the colour of finishes to be used on all apparatus 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.

3. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping for the area shaded GREEN on the approved plans 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, 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; and (c) details of the phasing of these works.

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

4. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of the area shaded GREEN on the approved plans.

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

5. That within one year of the erection of the mast hereby permitted, all planting, seeding, turfing 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: To ensure the provision of screening to the compound in the interest of visual amenity.

6. That before completion of the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance schemed approved under the terms of condition 4 shall be in operation.

Reason: To ensure the management and maintenance of the screen planting to the compound in the interest of visual amenity.

7. That before the mast hereby permitted is completed a turning facility shall be provided adjacent to the site compound to allow vehicles that service the installation to enter and leave the site in forward gear.

Reason: In the interest of traffic safety.

8. That before the mast hereby permitted is brought into use the existing farm access onto the A89 shall be improved to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Its should be: a) 6 metres wide over the first 15 metre length from the edge of the A89 with any gates 15m back from the public road; b) fully paved with a drainage facility across its width.

C:\TEMP\RO101 397.doc Reason: To enable vehicles to pass on the access and ensure that water or loose material is not carried onto the A89 in the interest of traffic safety.

9. That before the development hereby permitted starts a report of survey shall be submitted to the Planning Authority by a suitably qualified person following survey of the area to ascertain if there are any habitats of species that receive statutory protection. The report should include details of what measures will be employed to ensure that any such habitats are not adversely affected by the proposed development.

Reason: To ensure the identification and protection of any endangered species.

List of Background Papers

- Application forms and accompanying plans received on 15th October 2001 - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991. - Consultation response from Radiocommunications Agency received on 7 November 200 1 - Consultation response from SNH received on 16 November 200 1 - Consultation response from Roads and Transportation Manager received 20 November 2001

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Coatbridge 812372 and ask for Mr Baxter. Application No. S/OO/O 1002lAMD Date registered 6t'' September 2000 APPLICANT GEORGE WILSON(STONEH0USE) LTD, LOCHPARK, GREEN STREET, STONEHOUSE, ML9 3LP Agent DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION OF 47 DWELLINGHOUSES LOCATION LAND TO REAR OF 1-1 1 WISHAW LOW ROAD, CLELAND

Ward No. 19 Grid Reference 279942657916

File Reference S/PL/B/4/25( 57)/DA/JF

Site History June 1999 - Permission granted (on appeal) for residential development

Development Plan Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan - Existing and Proposed Area for Development Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft - Policy HSG 2 (Private Housing Development Opportunities)

Contrary to Development Plan Yes

CONSULTATIONS Objection Councillor Jaines Martin No Objection SEPA, West of Scotland Water Conditions Coal Authority, NLC Community Services No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours 3 letters of objection Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS The applicant seeks planning permission for the construction of 47 dwellinghouses on land to the rear of 1- 1 1 Wishaw High Road, Cleland. This application is an amendment to a previous permission granted on appeal by the Scottish Executive. The main difference is that access is now proposed from Station Road and not the junction of Wishaw High RoadIWishaw Low RoadIMain Street. In view of the previous appeal decision this site is no longer regarded as defendable Green Belt and it is recommended that planning permission be granted. The applicant has agreed to enter into a Section 75 Agreement over the provision of off-site road improvements.

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 One objector not shown on plan he-__-

CONSTRUCTION OF 47 DWELLINGHOUSES Pmduced by Dapaltmnl of Planning and Envlronmenl ( AMENDMENT TO LAYOUT ) Southern Division 303 Braodon Street MOTHERWELLMLI IRS LAND AT REAR OF 1 - 11 WISHAW HIGH ROAD, CLELAND. Repmduced tmm Ita Mnancs SUNBYmappi~W Wh the prm,DSiOn Of 1hE Ca"trnllc, Of tar h!a,esys 1:2500 St~tlmryolfcsQCmvmmWwhl Telephone 01698 3021W Fax 01698 302101 Unauthonasd reP8pmdudlon ~nhwCM mpywhl Location of Objectors and may lead 10 prnDeCUtl0no( ON pmedlmy os Llcsnce LA MKulL * Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town aiid Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

2. That, notwithstanding the provisions of the Building Standards (Scotland) Regulations 1990, and before the development starts, a certificate from a recognised firm of chartered engineers, duly signed by a Chartered Engineer or Chartered Geologist of Geotechiiical Adviser Status (ICE, SISG 1993) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming the mineral stability of the site. This certificate shall be based on a professionally supervised and regulated rotary drilling programme.

Reason: To ensure the mineral stability of the proposed site in the interests of prospective occupiers (Note: A copy of the required Certificate is available from the Divisional Office).

3. 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.

4. That before the development hereby permitted starts, there shall have been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, section and contour drawings showing the existing topography of the site, with proposed changes to ground levels and proposed levels of buildings. These shall be adhered to in the course of the development unless the Planning Authority allows, in writing, any variation.

Reason: Due to the need to regrade existing artificial slopes and to ensure that dwellinghouses facing existing dwellinghouses on Wishaw High Road would not be at such high levels as to give rise to significant overlooking.

5. That before the development hereby permitted starts, details of surface water drainage, particularly along the site boundaries, shall have been submitted to, approved by and implemented to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To avert the possibility of water run-off damaging neighbouring properties, particularly houses and gardens at I-1 1 Wishaw High Road.

6. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping, including boundary treatment, shall be submitted to, aiid 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: In the interests of amenity and in consideration of the desirability of tree plantinghetention on the new edge of the settlement.

7. That within one year of the occupation of the last 1Odwellinghouses 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 Gabove, 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: To ensure that the required landscaping does not fail to be established through damage or neglect.

8. That the proposals for landscaping shall include arrangements for transplantation by competent persons and at an appropriate season of samples of tlie rarer plants within the site, to locations either within or outwith the site the identification of the plant colony or colonies shall be agreed with the planning authority before earth-moving begins at the site.

Reason: In view of the existence of a small area of less common plants on tlie site.

9. That a route for continuous and safe passage on foot or by bicycle (including during construction on the site) along the approximate line of the former railway between the eastern and western tips of the site, connecting with the railway path in the open space northeast of the site and consistent with possible future similar use of the continuation of the former railway toward , shall be provided.

Reason: To allow for the diversion of the right of way.

10. That the more remote sections of footpath shown on the approved plans shall be finished in a hard sealed surface before occupation of the adjacent dwellinghouses.

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian safety.

11. 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 ensure that boundary features are of acceptable quality.

12. That before any of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted, situated on a site upon which a fence or wall is to be erected, are occupied, the fence, or wall, as approved under the terms of condition 1 1above, shall be erected.

Reason: To ensure the provision of boundary features.

13. 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, iiicluding any modifications as may be required.

Reason: In order to ensure that materials are visually acceptable in a local context.

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

Reason: To ensure that the play area is of acceptable quality.

15. That before occupation of the last 10 dwellingliouses within the development hereby permitted, all the works required for the provision of the equiped play area and, included in the scheme approved under the terms of condition 14 above, shall be completed.

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

16. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of-

(a) the proposed footpaths shaded RED on the approved plans; (b) the proposed play areas hatched GREEN on the approved plans;

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider maintenance proposals in the interests of visual amenity.

17. That before completion of the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance schemed approved under the terms of condition 16 shall be in operation.

Reason: To ensure maintenance of the sites identified in condition 16 above.

18. That before the development hereby permitted starts, details of all roads. footpaths, footways and manoeuvring areas shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. No dwellinghouse shall be occupied before the road and footway serving it have been completed to sealed basecourse level and all roads, footpaths, footways and manoeuvring areas shall be completed to sealed final wearing course level before occupation of the last dwellinghouse in the development.

Reason: To ensure that access to dwellings and through the site is at all times to an appropriate standard of surface. 19. That notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992, any garages built within the curtilage of any of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted shall be finished in materials which match those used 011 the existing dwellinghouse.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

20. That the integral garage shall not be altered for use as a habitable room without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.

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

21. That before each of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted is occupied, the first 2 metres of the driveway beyond the limit of the adjoining road, shall be surfaced in an impervious material, to be approved by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To prevent deleterious material being carried onto the road.

NOTES TO COMMITTEE

1. The applicant has agreed to enter into an agreement in terms of Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 in respect of off site roadworks. The planning consent should not be issued until these matters have been concluded.

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans, received on 06/09/00 Letters from applicant, dated 16/10/00, 16/01/01 and 27/11/01 Letter from Coal Authority, dated 15/09/00 Letter from SEPA dated 11/09/00 Letter from West of Scotland Water, dated 15/09/00 Memos from NLC Community Services, dated 08/11/00 and 14/11/00 Letter from Iain Logan, 11 Station Road, Cleland Letter from John Smith, 7 Wishaw High Road, Clelaiid Letter from Councillor Martin, dated 26/09/00

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302090 and ask for Mr Ashman. APPLICATION No. S/OO/O 1002/AMD

REPORT

1. APPLICATION AND SITE

1.1 This application is in respect of the construction of 47 dwellinghouses on land to the rear of 1- 1 1 Wishaw High Road, Cleland. Forty one of these are detached dwellings, the remainder are semi-detached. They range in size from 4 to 7 apartment dwellings and would be built around a loop road with a small cul-de-sac. One centrally located play area is shown on the plans. Access to the site would be taken from Station Road.

1.2 The application site, which covers approximately 3 hectares, is located on the south western fringe of Cleland Village. To the south there are six dwellinghouses fronting onto Wishaw High Road, to the west is a public car park and a mix of dwellinghouses and a landscaped verge, and to the east a field. Station Road, from which it is proposed to take access is located to the north, The boundaries of the site are well defined with a mix of screen fencing and planting adjacent to residences and a high hedge along the boundary with the field.

1.3 A former railway line dissects the site in an east-west direction and provides part of the Right of Way which runs through the site. This path forms a dividing line between the levels on the site. The northern half is relatively flat although gently sloping down from Main Street. To the south the site slopes down towards the houses fronting onto Wishaw High Road.

1.4 The site is predominantly rough grassland with naturalised scrub thickets containing mature trees and shrubs. The north-eastern extremity of the site contains more mature trees and there is a belt of ornamental planting around the Council car park.

1.5 It should be noted that this application has taken a considerable length of time to place before Committee as the matter of access into the site has been a contentious issue requiring several months of investigation and the submission of trial schemes. The applicant has agreed to enter into a Section 75 Agreement over the provision of the required off-site road improvements.

2. CONSULTATIONS

2.1 Consultations were carried out with various bodies and their replies are detailed below.

2.2 Coal Authority - it is pointed out that there are records of a mine entry within 20 metres of the site. The usual precautionary advice is also provided.

2.3 SEPA - no objection to the proposed development.

2.4 West of Scotland Water - no objection and connections to sewerage and water supplies would cause no problems.

2.5 NLC Community Services - request that landscaped buffers be retained on the fringes of the developinent and the Right of Way running through the site be reinstated and landscaped.

3. OBJECTIONS

3.1 Three objections have been received to the proposed development. Two of these are from notified neighbours, one from Councillor Jim Martin. One of the notified neighbours has raised objections on the grounds that some conditions on the previous consent have not been complied with. He also refers to problems likely to be generated if access is taken from Station Road rather than the proposed original access, via a new roundabout, at the junction of Wishaw Low Road, Wishaw High Road and Main Street, Cleland. He anticipates the main problem would be congestion at the existing mini-roundabout at the top of Station Road, adversely affecting traffic safety. He would prefer to see the original proposed access pursued as it would help to slow traffic on Wishaw High Road, adjacent to his property.

3.2 The second objector does not object to the proposed dwellinghouses but the use of Station Road as a means of access. He shares similar concerns to the first objector, particularly the safety of pedestrians in the vicinity of the roundabout, including children. He considers the size and location of the roundabout inappropriate for the anticipated traffic; the size of Station Road is also regarded as inappropriate, demonstrated by the lack of use of the road by dustcarts and delivery vehicles; and he also objects to the potential disturbance to his amenity (his is one of only a small number of properties served by Station Road).

3.3 Councillor Martin shares the concern of these other objectors, with particular emphasis on safety, both during the construction stage and thereafter. He considers that the reason for the amendment to the access arrangements is financial and that this should not be considered when it comprises safety. In subsequent meetings with the applicant, the Councillor has asked that the applicant consider the provision of traffic lights at the junction of Station Road, Main Street and Omoa Road.

4. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

4.1 The development plan consists of the Strathclyde Structure Plan and the Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan. The Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft is also a relevant material consideration. However, there are no strategic issues raised by this proposal, and both “local plans” identify the site for development purposes. In this instance, there are no development plan issues to be addressed.

5. COMMENTS

5.1 I have to advise Committee that the reason the applicant is not prepared to implement the existing permission on the site, granted on appeal by the Scottish Executive, is the cost of diverting services under the footway at the junction of Wishaw Low Road/Wishaw High Road/Main Street.

5.2 As there are no development plan issues to be addressed and there are no objections in principle to the residential development of the site, determination of the application falls to the question of whether or not Station Road and the associated roundabout junction caii be regarded as suitable in their present form or can be brought up to a suitable standard.

5.3 As discussions have progressed it has become clear that acceptable improvements caii be carried out to Station Road and the adjacent mini-roundabout to allow clear access to the site, albeit that the access originally proposed would have been more satisfactory. At the time of writing, at the request of Councillor Martin, an investigation was being carried out by the applicant into the possibility of traffic lights being installed instead of a mini-roundabout. No conclusion had been reached, although the applicant requested that the application be placed before the Coininittee as he is willing to enter into a Section 75 Agreement for whatever type of off-site roadworks are required.

5.4 However, the comments of the objectors have to be taken into consideration before a recommendation can be made. The question of congestion at the Station Road junction has not been raised as an issue by my transportation staff. There would obviously be an increase in traffic, particularly at peak hours. However, expected traffic flows do not indicate that traffic congestion would be a problem. The implementation ofjunction improvements, prior to the dwellinghouse being occupied should help to address any concerns over the existing roads layout and associated safety concerns. I note the other concerns regarding the size of the roundabout and manoeuvring of commercial vehicles. However, either the size or position of the roundabout, or the kerbs adjacent to it will be adjusted to allow better access. Furthermore, the roads within the site will be designed to allow such vehicles to enter and leave in forward gear. Finally on the technical aspects, schemes submitted to date indicate that Station Road can be adjusted to bring it up to a suitable standard. Currently the road is substandard and, therefore, this would be a positive benefit of the proposal.

5.5 Lastly, I note one objectors’ concerns regarding disruption to amenity. Presently Station Road is a cul-de-sac and, therefore, there is no volume of traffic passing his property. Inevitability, there will be some disturbance to amenity with the introduction of this “through-route” to the application site. However, as the development is for 47 dwellinghouses, with little possibility of a further development beyond this, I do not consider that, in a village centre location, disruption to amenity will be excessively untoward.

6. CONCLUSION

6.1 It is unfortunate that the applicant is not willing to implement the original planning permission for this site. However, it is considered that junction improvements can be made and road and footway geometry adjusted to ensure that the traffic impact of the proposed development is adequately addressed. As there is no objection in principle to the residential development of the site, it is recommended that planning permission be granted. Application No. S/O 1/00 1 8O/OUT Date registered 2"d of March 200 1 APPLICANT SPECIAL PROJECT SERVICES, HOPE STREET, Agent Seven Design Group, 25 Road, Hamilton, ML3 OAS

DEVELOPMENT PHASED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT COMPRISING COMMERCIAL, OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL USES LOCATION LAND NORTH WEST OF , A725, BELLSHILL, LANARKSHIRE

Ward No. 25 Grid Reference 272105658894

File Reference S/PL/B/07/100(92)/CMcI

Site History No relevant site history.

Development Plan The site is zoned as GB I in the Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995, Strategic Policy l(e) in the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 (Deposit Version) and ENV 6 Greenbelt in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 200 1)

Contrary to Development Plan Yes

CONSULTATIONS

Objection Couiicil, Scottish Natural Heritage, Scottish Executive RNMMD, NLC Coinmunity Services No Objection West of Scotland Archaeological Service, Coal Authority Conditions Railtrack, West of Scotland Water, BT, Transco, Scottish Power No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No response Newspaper Advertisement No response

COMMENTS This application relates to a proposed phased mixed-use development coinprising commercial, office and residential uses (in outline) on land adjacent to Strathclyde Country Park in Bellshill. The site is designated as green belt and is zoned as GB1 in tlie Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995, Strategic policy 1 (e) in the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 (Deposit Version) and ENV 6 in the Southern Area local Plan Finalised Draft 1998 (Modified June 200 1). The proposed developinent must be assessed against the provisions of tlie approved developinent plan and other material considerations. Circular 24/1985 indicates that there should be a general presumption against development on tlie greenbelt except in very special circumstances. The Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995 requires that proposals for development within the Greenbelt must be justified against the following criteria: economic benefit; locational need; infrastructure implications; and environmental impact. It is considered that there is insufficient justification for setting aside the relevant National Guidance, Structure and Local Plan policies

in this case. In addition the development will also have a detrimental impact on the Transportation Network with increased traffic volumes impacting on the local and strategic road network. It is therefore recommended that the Planning Permission be refused.

RECOMMENDATION

Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. The proposed development is contrary to Policy GB1 and GB 1A in the Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995 and ENV 6 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 200 1) in that it fails to demonstrate specific locational need and an acceptable environmental impact.

2. The proposed development is contrary to Strategic Policies 9 & 10 of the Glasgow & Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 (Deposit Version) in that it fails to demonstrate specific locational needs and environmental benefit.

3. That the proposed development is contrary to National Policy contained in Circular 24/1985, development in the Countryside and Greenbelt in that there is insufficient justification in terms of exceptional circumstances to support the development of this greenbelt site.

4. That the proposed development is contrary to National Policy contained in NPPG 8 Town Centres and Retailing, and NPPG 17 Transportation and Planning in that the applicant has failed to justify a development outwith the urban area that is predominantly dependant on cars for transport to and from the site.

5. That the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on both the local and strategic road network as a result of the increased traffic volume generated by the development and the inadequacy of the access points to the site.

6. That notwithstanding the existence of the house and associated stable building within the site, the development of a large complex of commercial, office and residential buildings is considered unacceptable in terms of visual impact in this prominent greenbelt location

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.

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans dated March 200 1 Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995 Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 (Deposit Version) Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 2001) Letter to agent requesting further information dated the 4'h of April and the 26'h of July 2001, Letter from agent providing additional information dated 25* of April 2001 Consultation response from British Telecom dated 15'h of March 2001 Consultation response from Scottish Power dated 19" of March 2001 Consultation response from West of Scotland Water dated 19th of March 2001 Consultation response from Transco dated 24thof March 2001 Consultation response from Coal Authority dated 2"d of April 2001 Consultation response from NLC Community Services dated 11" of April 2001 Consultation response from West of Scotland Archaeological Service dated 1sth of April 200 1 Consultation response from Scottish Natural Heritage dated 19'h of April 2001 Consultation response from Service Manager ,Planning and Building Control dated 23rdof April 2001 Consultation responses from Scottish Executive RNMMD dated 25th of June 2001 Letter of objection from the Head of Planning & Building Control, South Lanarkshire Council dated 18th of June 200 1. Letter from the agent submitting a Transportation Scoping Study Report prepared by JMP Consultants Ltd., dated September 2001. Consultation responses from NLC Traffic & Transportation Team Leader dated 26thof June and the 29" of October 2001

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone 01698 302125 and ask for Craig McIntyre. APPLICATION NUMBER SI0 1/00180/OUT

REPORT

1 APPLICATION AND SITE

1.1 This application relates to a phased mixed use commercial, office and residential development on land adjacent to Strathclyde Country Park in Bellshill.

1.2 The site is bounded to the west by the A725, to the north by the West Coast Main Rail line, and to the east and south by Strathclyde Country Park and covers an area of approximately 15.3 hectares. It is a greenfield site consisting of grazing land with built development limited to a two-storey dwelling and associated single storey stables block.

1.3 The application plans although in outline show an indicative layout. There are three potential access points into the site from the west via the A725, from the north via a bridge over the rail line onto Mary Rae Road or from the south via the Strathclyde Country Park road network. The residential element of the scheme is located in the north of the site adjacent to the rail line, the commercial element is in the south of the site adjacent to Strathclyde Country Park and the office development is in the west of the site adjacent to the A725.

1.4 Following requests for further information a supporting letter was received from the agent which clarified the development ratio of the site as follows :

1. Proposed site area of residential component 10.25 ha with approximately 150 residential units, 2. Proposed site area of commercial component 5.05 ha, 3. Approximate floorspace of commercial buildings 12,000 sqm. 4. Proposed use classes, Class 3 offices and Class 4 business.

1.5 The applicant also submitted a Transportation Scoping Study Report from JMP Consultants Ltd. following a request for additional information from the Scottish Executive RNMMD as trunk Roads Authority.

2. PLANNING POLICY

2.1 In considering this significant application it is necessary to take into account both National Policy and Development Plan considerations together with any other material considerations. With regard to the former these include national policy Guidelines (NPPG’s) and the relevant Regional and Local Development Plans.

2.2 National Policy

National Policy Circular 24/1985 development in the Countryside and green Belts indicates that: “There should be a general presumption against any intrusion into designated green belts; in particular, approval should not be given, except in very special circumstances, for the construction of new buildings and the extension or change of use of existing buildings, for purposes other than agriculture, horticulture, woodland management and recreation, or establishments and institutions standing in extensive grounds or other uses appropriate to the rural character of the area.”

NPPG 8 (Revised 1998) Town Centres and Retailing Para. 76 Commercial Leisure Schemes indicates that where appropriate sites can be found in or on the edge of town centres, these should be the preferred location. Where this is not possible, such development should be located on sites that can be reached easily by means other than the car, and are well served by regular public transport services, not only during the working day, but also during the evening.

Developers should demonstrate why they could not develop individual elements of the larger scheme in more central locations, in some cases sub-dividing the proposals.

NPPG 17 Transportation and Planning Para. 26 in relation to residential development and Para.32 in respect to Offices and other Town Centre uses state that such uses should be sited where there is a choice of transport and should not be dependent predominantly on access by car.

2.3 Regional Policy

Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995 Policy GB 1 Greenbelt states that the spread of built up areas and the encroachment of development into the countryside, within a ‘greenbelt’ around the conurbation shall not accord with the Regional Development Strategy.

Policy GB 1A states that proposals for development within the greenbelt shall require to be justified against the following criteria:

a) economic benefit b) specific locational need c) infrastructure implications d) environmental impact.

Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan Finalised Draft 2000 Strategic Policy 9 “assessment of Development Proposals” sets out the criteria to assess if a development accords with the Structure Plan. Strategic Policy 10 “Departures From The Structure Plan” sets out the criteria by which departures from the Structure Plan are assessed. These are similar to the existing requirements of the 1995 Structure Plan GB 1 and GB 1A policies.

2.4 Local Plan Policy

The Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft 1998 (Modified June 2001) Policy ENV 6 seeks to safeguard the character and function of the greenbelt through the presumption against development or change of use other than that directly associated with and required for agriculture, forestry, the generation of power from renewable sources, outdoor leisure and recreation, telecommunication or other appropriate rural uses.

3. CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

3.1 Railtrack, BT, Scottish Power, Transco, and West of Scotland Water have no objections subject to conditions.

3.2 NLC Community Services Strathclyde Country Park Manager is of the view that the application site is a necessary buffer between Strathclyde Country Park and the housing to the north and that the increased traffic in non-park facilities is not desirable. The Landscape Services Manager who believes that the proposed development will introduce an intrusive and foreign land use that would destroy the character of the surrounding area and have an adverse impact on Strathclyde Country Park echoes this view. The Landscape Services Manager is of the view that the rail line is a defensible boundary to the green belt and the setting of the Park. The Conservation and Greening Manager is of the view that while the site does not include areas of remarkable habitat it does have conservation significance as it bounds and compliments wildlife corridors through the provision of cover and foraging land for badgers.

3.3 NLC Transportation Team Leader is of the view that the proposed development will introduce a level of additional traffic onto the existing road network that is unacceptable. The access to the north is via an existing residential road which is contrary to the Council‘s guidelines that under no circumstances should a significant coininercial area be accessed via a residential area. The access from the south is from a private road and is therefore contrary to the Council’s guidelines, the road is in the control of the Department of Community Services and as such they would be responsible for costs associated with the increased maintenance of the road due to the additional traffic. While the access onto the A725 is the responsibility of the Scottish Executive as Trunk Roads Authority the proposal will result in a large number of the projected movements from the site utilising either Raith Interchange or Belziehill roundabout both of which are recognised pinch points 011 the Strategic Road Network. On the basis of the information supplied to date by the applicant the Transportation Team Manager recommends that the application be refused.

3.4 Dougal Ballie Associates (DBA) acting on behalf of the Scottish Executive Road Network Management and Maintenance Division (RNMMD) as Trunk Roads Authority requested a Transportation Scoping Study from the applicant in June 2001. The applicant submitted a Transportation Scopiiig Study prepared by JMP Consultants Limited in September 200 1 . DBA have considered the Scoping Study and have requested further information froin the applicants’ consultants. The consultants have failed to provide this information at this time therefore no view can be taken on the level of impact on the Strategic Road network at this time.

3.5 South Lanarkshire Council has objected to the application as it runs contrary to a number of development plan policies and development at this location would set an undesirable precedent. The development of the site would be contrary to the approved Structure and Local Plan policies which seek to protect the green belt. SLC regard the site as an important green belt wedge, which safeguards against the coalescence of the settlement of Bellshill with Bothwell/Hamilton. The development of greenfield land for housing is also contrary to the Structure Plan. The proposed office development is also contrary to the Structure Plan, which requires offices to be located within or adjacent to Strategic Business Centres. SLC are also concerned at the impact on the transportation network as the additional volume of traffic generated by the development will place stress on the Raith Interchange which would have implications for traffic movement in SLC.

3.6 Scottish Natural Heritage object to the application on a number of grounds but the main reason is that it is located within the green belt which should be protected from such development. SNH are also of the view that there is no need for the residential element of the application as the existing Housing Land Supply in the housing market area is sufficient. The application will have a detrimental impact on the rural character of the area and a negative impact on the setting of Strathclyde Country Park. SNH are also concerned at the possible adverse effects on the local wildlife in particular badgers, which are protected under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992.

4. OBSERVATIONS ON OBJECTIONS

4.1 The issues raised by South Lanarkshire Council and Scottish Natural Heritage are valid and echo the concerns of the internal consultations that the application is contrary to the Development Plan. 5. ASSESSMENT

5.1 Development of this type in the greenbelt must be assessed against national planning guidance and the provisions of the approved development plan for the area, i.e. the Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995, The Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 and the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft 1998 (Modified June 2001).

5.2 Circular 24/1985 would indicate that there is a presumption against such development within the greenbelt except in special circumstances. The applicant has failed to provide supporting information to suggest that the proposal is unique or of a quality to make it a special case.

5.3 The proposal to locate commercial, office and residential land uses on a greenbelt site at the edge of the urban area is at odds with NPPG 8 (revised 1998) Town Centres and Retailing that indicates in para. 12 ;

“Planning Authorities and developers should adopt a sequential approach to selecting sites for new retail, commercial leisure developments and other key town centre uses. First preference should be for town centre sites, where sites or buildings suitable for conversion are available, followed by edge of centre sites in locations that are or can be made easily accessible by a choice of means of transport,”

The additional information provided by the applicants agent does not include details of current demand /supply for each element of the application proposal either on their own or as a whole, the catchment area for these facilities and why this greenbelt site has been chosen. In the absence of sufficient analysis it is considered that the applicant has failed to provide adequate justification for setting aside the relevant structure and local plan policies.

5.4 Structure Plan Policies GB1 and GB 1A provide a set of criteria against which the proposal should be considered. The applicant has failed to provide supporting information to enable an assessment of the proposal against the economic benefit, specific locational need, infrastructure or environmental impact criteria. The submission of an application of this scale and nature without supporting information is unusual.

5.5 The Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 (GCVJSP) is also a material consideration. Part of the Strategic Vision within the GCVJSP is to achieve an improved quality of life and environment. The Guiding principles of Sustainable Development in the GCVJSP Area highlight the importance of focussing new development in existing communities in order to improve the quality of settlements as places to live, promote the development of a more inclusive society and maximise the use of existing services and infrastructure. The provision of extensive commercial, retail and residential development is therefore considered contrary to the aims of the strategy articulated within the GCVJSP and in particular the provisions set out at Policies 9 and 10.

5.6 Having considered the Development Plan the other material considerations are the impact on the transportation network and the impact on the operation and setting of Strathclyde Country Park.

5.7 The Transportation Manager and the Scottish Executive RNMMD are concerned about the developments impact on the Local and Strategic Road Networks. The Transportation Manager is of the view that the access to the north and south is contrary to the Council’s guidelines, which would mean that the only acceptable access is to the west onto the A725. The decision as to whether the access onto the A725 is acceptable rests with the Scottish Executive RNMMD whose consultants are still in negotiation with the applicant’s consultants. However, it should be noted that the Raith Interchange is at or near capacity and as such is a recognised pinch point in the strategic road network.

6. CONCLUSION

6.1 In conclusion I consider that in assessing this application in terms of national policy and the development plan the applicant has failed to provide adequate justification with respect to locational need and environmental impact to merit development on this prominent greenbelt site. I therefore recommend the application for refusal. Application No. S/O 1/00827/OUT Date registered 20 July 2001 APPLICANT ROBERT AND JOHN JOHNSTON, HERDSHILL FARM, NEWMAINS, WISHAW Agent Mr S Cook, 12 Beveridge Terrace, Bellshill DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF DWELLINGHOUSE LOCATION HERDSHILL FARM, BOGSIDE, NEWMAINS

Ward No. 16 Grid Reference 282687 654342

File Reference S/PL/B/3/83 (S)/JL/AH

Site History Planning permission granted in 1964 for a new dwelling but permission not implemented

Development Plan Greenbelt on NLC Southern Area Local Plan - Finalised Draft (Modified June 200 1)

Contrary to Development Plan Yes

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Conditions The Coal Authority, West of Scotland Water, SEPA No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS The applicant seeks outline current for the erection of a dwellinghouse at Herdshill Farm, Newmains. This dwellinghouse is required to enable the existing farmer to retire and live by the farm and also, when required, assist his son in running the farm. The site is in the Greenbelt and as no full time agricultural justification has been made I consider, for the reasons detailed in the attached report, that permission should be refused. Coininittee may wish to note that the applicant’s agent has requested the opportunity to present his case if the Committee are minded to refuse the application.

RECOMMENDATION Refuse, on the following grounds:-

1. The proposal is contrary to policy ENV 6 of the Finalised Draft of the Southern Area Local Plan no agricultural justification has been made for the erection of a further dwelling within the Greenbelt. Produced by PLANNING APPLICATION S / 01 / 00827 / OUT Departmen1of Planning and Envimnment No. LANARKSHIRE SDvthern DIVIBOB 303 Brandon Street MOTHERWELL ML1 1RS ERECTION OF DWELLINGHOUSE ( OUTLINE ) Repmducedfm the Mdnana Survey ma~ingHlth Telephone016983021W FBX 01698302101 A the permission of the Controller01 her Majesty s 1 1500 Slatlonely GibQ Crow' copyright os Llce"ce LAOWlL HERDSHILL FARM, WISHAW. Unauthod repmdudim iohngn Crown mpynght and mav lead I0 ~rosewhonor avil moceedi~s 2. That the provision of a further dwelling served from this access will lead to an increase in braking and turning manoeuvres along a de-restricted unlit length of the A73 to the detriment of road safety.

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans dated 20/7/0 1 Letters dated 22/8/01,27/9/01 and 10/11/01 from Stanley C Cook, 12 Beveridge Terrace, , Bellshill NLC Southern Area Local Plan - Finalised Draft (Modified June 200 1) Letter dated 6/8/01 from The Coal Authority Letter dated 14/8/01 from West of Scotland Water Letter dated 14/8/01 from SEPA

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302142 and ask for Mr Lennon. APPLICATION NO. S/O1/00827/OUT

REPORT

1. PROPOSAL AND SITE

1.1 The applicant seeks outline planning permission for a new dwelling immediately adjacent to Herdshill Farm. The farm is located on the west side of the A73 to the south of Newmains and north of the small community of Bogside. The proposed dwelling will be located immediately adjacent to the existing farm and as such will be relatively obscured from the A73 by both the farm building and the adjoining large property at Herdshill. The applicant has indicated his desire to construct a bungalow on this site.

2. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

2.1 The site is within the designated Greenbelt on both the Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan and the more up to date Finalised Draft of the Southern Area Local Plan.

3. CONSULTATIONS

3.1 The application was advertised as Development Contrary to the Development Plan and no representations received.

3.2 Consultations were undertaken with the Coal Authority, West of Scotland Water and SEPA. Subject to conditions none of these consultees had any objections to the proposal.

3.3 NLC Transportation Team Manager noted that the access to the proposed development site presently serves a guest house, a farm and a field access. The provision of a further dwelling served from this access will lead to an increase in braking and turning manoeuvres along a de- restricted unlit length of the A73, which also has no footway along its west side, to the detriment of road safety. In addition visibility splays from the existing access are substandard.

4. OBSERVATIONS

4.1 In considering this application account must be taken of the relevant Development Plan policies together with any other material considerations pertinent to the site and application. With respect to the Development Plan the site is within the Greenbelt and the most relevant policy consideration is that set out in policy ENV 6 of the Finalised Draft of the Southern Area Local Plan, as approved by Committee in June 2001. This policy indicates that there will be a presumption against development in the Greenbelt unless it can be directly associated with and required for agriculture or other appropriate rural uses.

4.2 In submitting this application the agent has indicated that Herdshill Farm is presently occupied by Mr Johnston’s parents who have run the farm for 45 years. Due to their age and physical health they are now unable to run the farm and accordingly wish their son to run the farm and occupy the farmhouse, while they retire to a bungalow adjacent to the farm. This would enable them to live an independent life, assist when necessary on the farm, and to continue to live in the country rather than within an urban area. The agent has indicated that they are prepared to accept a condition limiting the occupancy of the proposed bungalow to a relative of the occupant of the farmhouse in order to give the Planning Authority greater control. It should be noted that at present Mr Johnston resides in Allanton, approximately 3 miles from the farm.

4.3 While I have considerable sympathy with the circumstances and desires of Mr Johnston Senior, I must note that there is no justification for a further full time employee on the farm and accordingly there is no agricultural justification for a further dwelling both with the farm and within this Greenbelt area. Thus, notwithstanding the applicant’s circumstances, I do not consider that they are sufficient to justify over-turning agreed national and local policies which preclude the granting of permission in such circumstances.

4.4 In addition I consider the views of the Transportation Team Manager to be a material consideration in respect of the proposed access arrangements. Accordingly I have recommended the application for refusal. Application No. S/O 1/00902/FUL Date registered 25 July 2001 APPLICANT TRAVELEX UK PLC, 65 KINGSWAY, Agent Format Shopfitting Ltd., 9 Ivyarch Road, Worthing, West Sussex DEVELOPMENT INSTALLATION OF FREE STANDING A.T.M. LOCATION McDONALD’S RESTAURANT, GLASGOW ROAD, WISHAW

Ward No. 7 Grid Reference 278868655235

File Reference S/PL/B/10/17( lOl)/DRM/AH

Site History Site developed for a mix of retail and leisure uses.

Development Plan Secondary, Village and Neighbourhood Commercial Area on Finalised Draft of Southern Area Local Plan

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement Not Required

COMMENTS This application relates to the erection of a free standing A.T.M. at the entrance to the car park at McDonald’s Restaurant on the access road within the Soinerfield car park. While not adjacent to the public road (A72 1) the proposed structure is located immediately adjacent to the very tight and busy entrance into the McDonald’s restaurant car park and in the opinion of both the Transportation Manager and myself this will potentially lead to the obstruction of traffic to the detriment of road safety. While alternative locations for the A.T.M. have been suggested the applicant will only consider this location and therefore I must recoininend the application for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION

Refuse for the reason that the siting and use of the stand alone ATM would lead to cars parking on the main access road resulting in the obstruction of traffic flow and inadequate visibility from the existing access to the detriment of road safety.

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans Finalised Draft of Southern Area Local Plan NLC Transportation Teain Manager dated 29/8/0 1

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302 1 15 and ask for David Millar. Application No. SI0 1100974lFUL Date registered 8 August 2001 APPLICANT SCOTTISH MIDLAND CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. (SCOTMID), 92 FOUNTAINBRIDGE, EDINBURGH EH3 9QA Agent Ian McLeod, Chartered Architect, 2 Kidston Drive, , E84 8QA DEVELOPMENT ALTERATIONS AND EXTENSION TO SHOP LOCATION SCOTMID CO-OP, 2 CARFIN STREET, NEW STEVENSTON

Ward No. 5 Grid Reference 276167059459

File Reference S/PL/B/5/3 OIJLIAH

Site History No site history

Development Plan Secondary, Village and Neighbourhood Commercial Areas on NLC Southern Area Local Plan - Finalised Draft (Modified June 2001)

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours One letter of objection Newspaper Advertisement Not Required

COMMENTS The applicant seeks consent for alterations and extension to the Scotinid Co-op shop at 2 Carfin Street, New Stevenston. The extension ineasures some 108 mz,is single storey and is to be located at the south eastern corner of the existing Scotmid store. The extension is to be utilised as a stockroom, frozen food area, a dairy chill and a bakery. A new loading bay is to be formed at the extension, with direct access into the stock area. An additional 9 parking bays are to be formed as part of the scheme, as the servicing arrangements have changed. The current service arrangements entail entering the site from Street and exiting via Carfin Street. The new servicing arrangements entail the creation of a layby on Carfin Street, the re-alignment of part of a junction on Carfin Street to allow service vehicles to manoeuvre in and out of the Scotmid site without causing an obstruction on the public highway. One letter of objection was received from a notified neighbour. His concerns and my comments thereon are as follows:- Planning Application No. S/01/00974/FUL Produced by OepaltmentSouthern D~v~a~on of Pllnnlng end Environment Alterations & Extensions to Shop 303 Brandon SIreel MOTHERWELL 2 Carfin Street, Motherwell meReproduced PBrmISSIon from Of thevie Contmlleioforanance herMBjeStY5~~PPI~Q wlth MLl 1RS A Survey Slalionery Ofhce mciown copflight Telephone 01688 302100 Fa 01898 302101 1:1250 Unduthonsed repmdusl~onmfnnpes Cmwn mpmght Location of Objector and rPayle8dto DrOIBCUtlon Or ClVil proceedlnll OS Licence LA 08MlL * There is no proposals for a wall to be constructed around the perimeter, therefore the coiistant iioise from deliveries will be heard all day.

Coininent There is no wall at present and as there will be no increase in service vehicles as a result of the extension. I do not see the need for a wall to be constructed. A condition has been imposed to coiistruct a 2 metre high close boarded fence which should help screen the site to a degree.

0 Where are the bins to be located as there is no access to the rear for cleansing vehicles to empty them?

Comment The bins are to be located adjacent to the repositioned bottle bank and re-cycling bins which are to be located to the rear of the proposed extension, they will be accessed from the car park to the rear.

0 How are the delivery vehicles to gain access to the proposed loading bay? Are they to reverse back up a one way street causing even more congestion on an already heavily congested street?

Colnmellt After lengthy consultation with the Transportation Section, it was agreed that a layby be formed on the large hardstanding area between Carfin Street and the supermarket and that the current access out of the small shopping area be re-aligned to accommodate the manoeuvres required for the safe ingress and egress to the loading area.

0 Where are the delivery vehicles to queue while waiting to unload when the loading bay is already in use? coInlnentAs stated earlier, a layby is to be created to the front of the supermarket which will accommodate a delivery vehicle if there is one at the site already.

In conclusioii, I am of the view that the extension and associated works will greatly enhance the future use of the store by creating additional customer parking, more shop space and a better servicing arrangement where there is no conflict between customers and service delivery vehicles. In consideration of the foregoing, I hereby recommend that plaiining coiisent is granted, subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION Grant, subject to the following coiiditioiis:-

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 Couiitry Plaiiniiig (Scotland) Act 1997. 2. That before the development hereby permitted is brought into use, a 2 metre high, close boarded, timber screen fence shall be erected along tlie boundaries marked A-B on the approved plans.

Reason: To ensure adequate boundary treatment.

3. That tlie facing materials to be used for the external walls and roof shall match in colour and texture those of the existing adjoining building.

Reason: To ensure that materials complement the existing building.

4. That before the development hereby permitted starts, details of the replacement landscaping for tlie area that is to be removed as part of this consent (shaded GREEN) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by tlie Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure adequate replacement landscaping.

5. That prior to tlie extension hereby permitted being brought into use, the replacement landscaping, as approved under condition no. 4 above shall be completed and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the completion of the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: To ensure implementation of adequate landscaping.

6. That before development hereby permitted starts, proof of acquisition of the area of ground required for the access iinproveinents shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the applicant can demonstrate control of the application site.

7. That before the extension hereby permitted is brought into use, the proposed alterations to form the layby and manoeuvring area to the front of the supermarket and the car parking to the rear shall be completed, as per the approved plans and to tlie satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate servicing arrangements. List of Background Papers

Application form and plans dated 8/8/0 1 Letter froin Agent dated 3/10/0 1 Letter froin Agent dated 8/11/01 NLC Southern Area Local Plan - Finalised Draft (Modified June 2001) Letter dated 13/8/01 from Mr Hugh McClymont, 20 Carfin Street, New Stevenston

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302 142 and ask for Mr Lennon. Application No. S/O 1/0 1023/OUT Date registered 10 August 200 1 APPLICANT NLC HOUSING AND PROPERTY SERVICES, FLEMING HOUSE, CUMBERNAULD G67 1JW Agent DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (IN OUTLINE) LOCATION PHILIP MURRAY ROAD, BELLSHILL

Ward No. 24 Grid Reference 271830 660740

File Reference S/PL/B/7/27(4 1)/AM/AH

Site History No relevant history

Development Plan Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 2001) - Established Industrial and Business Area

Contrary to Development Plan Yes

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection BT, Transco, Coal Authority, West of Scotland Water, Scottish Power Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS This application is for residential development of the site formerly occupied by the DLO at Philip Murray Road, Bellshill. The buildings currently remain and are presently vacant and it is proposed to demolish them and market the site either for industrial or residential use. The site amounts to about 4 hectares which, if developed for housing, would allow for the construction of over 100 houses. I recommend that consent be granted for residential development subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION Grant, subject to the following conditions:-

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

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. $& NORTH I. ~ & &pawRdcedby of Ranning and hironnent Planning Application No. S/01/01023/OUT LAiARKSHEE %hem Uvinan MUF,CIL 303 Bratr!€i. sbeet ?* wmwm Residential Development (In Outline) hnl IFS Fepdrndfrorntk OrmawSuneymappngvlnn 'bs prmsim d'bs CmWlerd krWqs Telephme 01838 M21W Fa 01698302101 Yat mr/ mca CClMWlqlt Philip Murray Road, Bellshill lh#lhln~drqmdicbmrh naeCiorm -911 ffi LicencelAWMlL m3myleedtopmYcuUmmaMl podrn 2. That within three years of the date of this permission, an application for approval of the reserved matters, specified in condition 3 below, shall be made to the Planniiig Authority.

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

3 That before development starts, a further planning application shall be submitted to the Planning Authority in respect of the following reserved matters:- (a) the siting, design and external appearance of all buildings and other structures; (b) the means of access to the site; (c) the layout of the site, including all roads, footways, and parking areas; (d) the provision of equipped play areas; (e) the provision of public open space; (f) the details of, and timetable for, the hard and soft landscaping of the site; (g) details for management and maintenance of the areas identified in (d),(e) and (f, above; (h) the design and location of all boundary walls and fences; (i) the provision for loading and unloading of all goods vehicles; (i) the phasing of the development; (k) the provision of drainage works; (1) the disposal of sewage; (m) details of existing trees, shrubs and hedgerows to be retained; (n) details of existing and proposed site levels. (0) a noise study of the site.

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

4. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a report describing the soil and ground conditions prevailing over the application site (including details of the nature, concentration and distribution of any contaminants), shall be submitted to the Planning Authority and the works required in order to remove or render harmless these contaminants, having regard to the proposed use of the site, shall be agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, and development shall not be commenced until these works have been completed.

Reason: In order to protect the amenity of future residents.

5. That notwithstanding condition 3 above, all access to the site shall be taken from Philip Murray Road by way of a new access road formed of a roundabout and at least the first 70 metres of the new access road from Philip Murray Road shall be built to distributor road standard with no individual frontage access.

Reason: To ensure proper planning of the area in the interests of road safety.

6. That notwithstanding condition 3 above no individual house accesses shall be taken from Philip Murray Road or New Edinburgh Road.

Reason: To maintain the status of Philip Murray Road as a through road in the interests of traffic safety. 7. That, notwithstanding condition 3 above, the existing access onto Philip Murray Road shall be closed and the junction reinstated to the satisfaction of the Plaiiiiiiig Authority.

Reason: To reduce the number of junctions onto Philip Murray Road in the interests of road safety.

8. That the site shall be designed to allow for road access through to the land immediately to the east of the application site.

Reason: To allow for future development of this site to an appropriate standard.

NOTE TO COMMITTEE

1. If granted this application will require to be referred to the Scottish Ministers given the Council’s financial interest in the site and as it constitutes Developinent Contrary to the Development Plan.

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans dated 10 August 200 1 Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 200 1) - Established Industrial and Business Area Letter dated 29 August 200 1 from Transco Letter dated 4 September 2001 from BT Letter dated 3 September 2001 from Scottish Power Letter dated 3 1 August 2001 from West of Scotland Water Letter dated 3 1 August 200 1 from The Coal Authority

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 3 02093 and ask for Alistair Maclean. REPORT

1. PROPOSAL AND SITE

1.1 This is an outline application for residential development on a site amounting to approximately 4 hectares which belongs to North Lanarkshire Council and was formerly occupied by the DLO. A large building remains on the site, however, this is vacant and tenders are presently being considered for its demolition.

1.2 It is proposed that the site will be marketed after the buildings are demolished. The marketing would be on the basis of either for industrial/business use or for residential use. As the site is zoned as established business or industry, no separate consent is required for that use.

1.3 While the area is predominantly industrial a number of non-industrial uses have been established in the area in recent years. On New Edinburgh Road a number of single house plots have been built and these form the southern boundary of the site. The northern boundary of the site is formed by the Darrows Estate, a development comprising a number of small businesses, and Capo’s Hotel. To the east is the remainder of the depots used by the Department of Community Services, while to the west, across Philip Murray Road, is a mixture of residential, offices and engineering businesses.

1.4 The surrounding wider area is of mixed land uses. The large Righead Industrial Estate predominates to the north of Old Edinburgh Road. To the west, beyond the properties fronting Philip Murray Road is the housing area of Fallside. To the south is a mixture of housing, Bothwellpark Cemetery and a small commercial development adjacent to the Bellshill by-pass.

2. LOCAL PLAN POLICIES

2.1 The Bellshill and Mossend Plan is the adopted local plan for the area in which the site is zoned for Industrial purposes. The more up-to-date Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft, modified in June 2001, also allocates the area as an Established Industrial and Business Area. There are issues raised by the Draft Local Plan which require to be considered such as the availability of alternative Industrial Land and whether an additional site of this size is required within the Housing Market Area at this time.

2.2 The take up of industrial land within this area over the last ten to twenty years has been healthy, so much so that there is very little land remaining at the nearby Righead and Bellshill Industrial Estates. Business Park likewise has very few undeveloped sites and Strathclyde Business Park is geared towards business use rather than distribution or general industry. There are however several available industrial sites in the area, including sites at Newhouse and Reema Road, Bellshill, as well as Dunalastair and , all of which contain large sites and thus in overall terms there is an adequate supply of industrial land within this relevant market area.

2.3 With regard to residential sites, again there is adequate land for housing development within the market area although only a limited number of sites within the area between the M73 and the A725 Bellshill By Pass. Past developments have shown that there is a healthy demand for housing in the area. 3. OBSERVATIONS

3.1 The major service providers were consulted aiid raised no objections to the proposal aiid foresaw no problems in providing services to the area. The Coal Authority state that there has been past coal workings in the area but ground movement should by now have ceased. There have been no objections from neighbours to this application.

3.2 Philip Murray Road is a busy road serving industrial, office and residential properties and acts as a through road between New Edinburgh Road and Old Edinburgh Road. Any developer wishing to develop a site of this size would require to improve the access arrangements. The Transportatioii Manager has suggested a roundabout juiiction be constructed to improve access to this development site. It would be beneficial if this was located in a position where a fourth leg of the roundabout could serve as an access to the Design Services offices aiid Main Tool Company’s premises as this would reduce the number of single accesses and thereby improve road safety.

3.3 In the longer term it is possible that the site to the east, also in Council ownership, may become redundant and sold off for similar uses. If both areas are developed for housing it is important that the development of this site is designed in such a manner so as to allow for a road through to the site to the east. This can be covered by conditions and incorporated in the brief for the disposal of the site.

4. RECOMMENDATION

4.1 While the Local plan policies indicate that the site is zoned for industrial purposes it should be noted that there is a sufficient supply of industrial land to meet anticipated demand. In addition if the site is marketed for industrial purposes then no specific consent would be required in principle for an industrial user to take the site. However both the strategic and local plan policies encourage the redevelopment of brown field sites and in this respect the sites redevelopment for residential purposes would be acceptable and would accord with the gradually emerging residential nature of the part of the area lying to the south of the Old Edinburgh Road. Thus in conclusion I consider that an alternative use for this site for residential purposes is acceptable and would accord with the strategic thrust of the relevant Development Plans. Application No. s/o 1/o 1045EUL Date registered 28 August 2001 APPLICANT GEORGE WILSON (STONEHOUSE) LTD., LOCHPARK, GREEN STREET, STONEHOUSE, ML9 3LP Agent DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF 23 DWELLINGHOUSES LOCATION BELLSHILL ATHLETIC FOOTBALL CLUB, LAND EAST OF 13 BOWLING GREEN STREET, BELLSHILL

Ward No. 30 Grid Reference 274018660408

File Reference S/PL/B/7/46( 108)/JD/AH

Site History

Development Plan Bellshill & Mossend Local Plan:- Areas where no significant land use changes are envisaged Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 200 1):- Established Leisure Facility

Contrary to Development Plan Yes

CONSULTATIONS

Objection Sportscotland No Objection NLC Community Services, Scottish Environment Protection Agency, Coal Authority Conditions West of Scotland Water, Transco No Reply Scottish Power

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours 2 letters of objection Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS Detailed planning permission is sought for the erection of 23 dwellinghouses on the grounds of Bellshill Athletic Football Club. The site is zoned as an established leisure facility on the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 2001), and as such the application was advertised in the local press as development contrary. Whilst no objections were received following advertisement, 2 letters of objection were received in response to neighbour notification procedures. In addition, Sportscotland have raised an objection to the proposal on the grounds that it would cause a deficit in local sports provision.

However, Bellshill Athletic Football Club have instigated proposals for the development of a replacement pitch as a component part of a wider leisure and housing development submission in outline (Application No. S/O 1/014 19/OUT), and whilst this application would result in the loss of Football Ground

PLANNING APPLICATION No. S / 01 / 01045 / FUL

ERECTION OF 23 DWELLINGHOUSES Prcduced by LANARKSHIRE Dsprtmnt of Planning and Environment WkmDivision 303 Brandon street BELLSHILL ATHLETIC FOOTBALL CLUB, MOTHERWELL MLl 1RS LAND EAST OF 13 BOWLING GREEN STREET,BELLSHILL. Reprmucadlmm lhe G-dnsnce Swey rnaPPlMJwlh 1A: 1 250 Telephone 01698 3021W Fax 01698 302101 ;tgz;wg2f~c~~;;~ ww Unaulhmsa rsprcdYCtmn infnnga U~wnmpynghl Location of Objector and myIW 10 pwcy1m O( ~VIIminar os Licence LA OWlL * a football pitch, it would cause no detriment to public sports provision, as the pitch is privately run and exclusively utilised by Bellshill Juniors.

It is considered that the proposal is acceptable for the reasons outlined in the accompanying report and as such, it is recommended that planning permission be granted.

If granted this application will have to be referred to the Scottish Ministers in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 1997.

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 any of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted and shaded BLUE on the approved plans are occupied, a 2 metre high wall shall be erected along the boundary marked RED on the approved plans and, prior to the wall being erected, samples of the facing materials to be used shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required.

Reason: To ensure that all boundary treatments are appropriate, in the interests of residential amenity.

3. That before any of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted, situated on a site upon which a fence or wall is to be erected, are occupied, the fence, or wall, as approved under the terms of condition 2 above, shall be erected.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

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 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 enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail, 6. That within one year of the occupation of the last five dwellinghouses within the development hereby permitted, all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 5 above, shall be completed; and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased within two years of the completion of the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

7. That the use of the garages hereby permitted shall be restricted to private use incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse on the site and no commercial activity shall be carried out, in, or fkom, the garages.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

8. That the integral garages shall not be altered for use as a habitable room without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.

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

9. That no dwellinghouse 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 the provision of satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access facilities.

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

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

11. That before any of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted are occupied, 2 car parking spaces shall be provided within the curtilage of each plot and the first 2 metres of this access, beyond the limit of the adjoining road, shall be surfaced in an impervious material, to be approved by the Planning Authority.

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

12. That prior to the occupation of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted on plots 7-1 1, the installation of the rubble drain infrastructure as indicated on the approved plans shall be completed.

Reason: To ensure the gardens of properties on James Hamilton Drive are not flooded by run off from the embankment. 13. That before any of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted and shaded YELLOW on the approved plans are occupied, a 2 metre high close boarded screen fence shall be erected along the boundaries marked GREEN on the approved plans.

Reason: To ensure that all boundary treatments are appropriate, in the interests of residential amenity.

14. That before any of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted, situated on a site upon which a fence or wall is to be erected, are occupied, the fence, or wall, as approved under the terms of condition 13 above, shall be erected.

Reason: To ensure that all boundary treatments are appropriate, in the interests of residential amenity.

NOTE TO COMMITTEE

1. 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.

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans dated 28 August 2001 Revised plans dated 5 November 2001 Bellshill and Mossend Local Plan Southern Area Local Pan Finalised Draft (Modified June 2001) Letter dated 5 September 2001 from Transco Letter dated 12 September 2001 from The Coal Authority Letter dated 13 September 2001 from West of Scotland Water Memo dated 10 October 2001 from NLC community Services Letter dated 26 October 2001 from Sportscotland Letter dated 29 October 2001 from Scottish Environment Protection Agency Letter of objection dated 6 September 2001 from William Higgins, 12 James Hamilton Drive, Bellshill Letter of objection dated 10 September 2001 from Mr and Mrs Watt, 14 James Hamilton Drive, Bellshill

Any person wish to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302 137 and ask for Joanne Delaney. APPLICATION NO. S/Ol/O 1045DUL

REPORT

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 This application relates to the construction of 23 dwellinghouses on the grounds of Bellshill Athletic Football Club at Bowling Green Street, Bellshill.

1.2 The site covers an area of approximately 1.33 hectares and lies within a mixed use area. It is bounded to the north and west by residential properties, to the east by industrial premises, and to the south, business premises.

1.3 The site is relatively level and the applicant has confirmed that the ground level will match the existing pitch level following the removal of the terracing. The site currently rests approximately 4 metres above adjoining residential properties at James Hamilton Drive at the northern end of the site, however the actual difference in ground level measured from the pitch, will result in approximately a 3 metre difference following the removal of terracing.

1.4 The proposal comprises the erection of 10 detached dwellings, 10 semi-detached dwellings and 3 terraced dwellings, all of which are two-storey and afford 2 dedicated parking spaces. The development also comprises a further 6 visitor parking spaces. A singular access leading south and eastward from Bowling Green Street affords entry to the development which is terminated by a roundel at the northern end of the site.

2. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

2.1 The site is zoned as an established leisure facility in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 2001), and as such, the proposal is contrary to Local Plan policy and has been appropriately advertised in the Bellshill Speaker. The relevant local plan policies are L1 ‘Established Leisure Facilities’ and HSG 10 “Assessing Applications for Housing Development”. Policy Ll seeks to protect and enhance existing leisure facilities and resist the loss of leisure facilities where a shortfall in provision for that locality will result. Whilst the proposal will undoubtedly result in the loss of a football pitch, the ground is privately run and exclusively utilised by Bellshill Juniors, such that there will be no public deficit in local sports provision. The private deficit in the loss of this pitch will be felt solely by Bellshill Juniors and the search for a replacement pitch will rest entirely at the discretion of the Club. However, it should be noted that this application for residential development by George Wilson (Stonehouse) Ltd. is merely speculative at this stage, as ownership of the site has been retained by Bellshill Juniors Football Club until such time as replacement provision has been addressed. It should also be noted that proposals for a replacement pitch have already been instigated by the club through the submission of an outline application for a wider scheme (No. S/O 1/0141 9/OUT) which is currently pending consideration.

2.2 Policy HSG 10 provides a list of criteria against which planning applications for new housing developments should be assessed. Such criteria include provision of access and parking, density and mix of housing, as well as due consideration to design and layout of the development. It is considered that the proposal accords with this policy and a more detailed explanation is addressed in my planning observations.

3. CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

3.1 No objections were received from NLC Community Services, Scottish Environment Protection Agency and the Coal Authority, whilst no reply was received from Scottish Power. 3.2 West of Scotland Water and Transco have no objection in principle to the development, but advise that contact be made to ensure satisfactory servicing of the site.

3.3 Sportscotland raised an objection to the proposal on the grounds that it would cause a deficit in local sports provision, however as detailed above, the proposal would solely affect Bellshill Juniors and is not deemed in itself, to justify refusal.

3.4 No objections were received following advertisement, however 2 letters of objection were received in response to neighbour notification procedures. The concerns raised, along with my comments are detailed as follows:-

(a) Loss of privacy due to the proximity of the new houses and the elevated ground level of the site.

Comment: The Council’s open space policy stipulates that a minimum window to window distance of 20 metres be retained to ensure that residents may enjoy an acceptable level of privacy. The window to window distance in this instance is 29 metres and therefore causes no detriment to the privacy currently enjoyed by existing residents. Whilst the site ground level is elevated above that of the objectors, it is argued that overlooking is already evident at this location and does not justify refusal of planning permission.

(b) Provision of play facilities.

Comment: The provision of play equipment is only required in housing developments of 30 houses or more and therefore it is not considered appropriate to seek such a provision within this small site.

(c) Increased Traffic.

Comment: It is accepted that the development will generate increased traffic, however the Transportation and Traffic team leader is satisfied that sufficient parking and access has been provided within the site. In addition, it is considered that the existing road network can cope with the additional traffic without recourse to junction upgrading.

(d) Drainage problems.

Comment: The difference in ground levels between the site and adjoining residential properties at James Hamilton Drive at the northern end of the site, raises the possibility of potential drainage problems. Whilst it can be argued that residents may experience drainage problems at present, the reduction in differing ground levels resulting from the removal of terracing, coupled with the siting of drainage infrastructure at the common boundary of the site and James Hamilton Drive, should reduce the likelihood of drainage problems resulting from the development.

(e) Nuisance during construction.

Comment: Disturbance is to be anticipated as a result of building works and is not a material consideration. Therefore nuisance during construction cannot be taken into account.

4. OBSERVATIONS

4.1 The proposal is considered acceptable in terms of Local Plan policies Ll and HSGlO. Whilst the site lies within an area of mixed use, it is adjoined by an established housing estate of similar style and density. 4.2 It is considered that the grounds of objection are not sufficient to justify refusal of consent or have been addressed as part of the planning application. It is Merconsidered that the impact of the development on the site and surrounding locality will be within acceptable limits. Therefore in this context, the application should be assessed in terms of the merits of the proposed layout and site architecture in accord with policy HSG 10.

4.3 It is considered that the proposed layout is acceptable and that individual plot ratios in terms of garden sizes and suitable provision for vehicular accommodation are acceptable. Furthermore, the layout complies with current Council standards for space provision within new housing development.

4.4 The siting, design, scale and mix of the proposed house types are also considered to be acceptable and appropriate to this location and its relationship with the adjoining residential estate.

5. CONCLUSION

5.1 It is considered, for the reasons outlined above, that the proposal will have an acceptable impact on the site and surrounding area. This application is therefore recommended for approval.

5.2 If the Committee is minded to accept this recommendation, the application will require to be referred to the Scottish Ministers in accordance with the appropriate procedures. Application No. S/O 1/O 1047/FUL Date registered 12t”September 2001 APPLICANT HUTCHISON 3G UK LTD, C/O AGENT Agent James Barr Consultants, 226 West George Street, Glasgow, G2 2LN DEVELOPMENT INSTALLATION OF 20 METRES HIGH LATTICE MAST WITH 3 ANTENNAE AND 3 MICROWAVE DISHES AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT LOCATION MS MOTORWAY SERVICE AREA, HARTHILL

Ward No. 20 Grid Reference 289964664797

File Reference S/PL/B/7/8 1(65)/DA/JF

Site History No significant site history

Development Plan Northern and Southern Areas Part Development Plan - Agricultural Land Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft - Policy ENVS (Countryside Around Towns) and CS6 (Telecommunications Development)

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection Councillor Cefferty No Objection Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement Not Required

COMMENTS The applicant seeks planning permission to erect a 20 metre high lattice mast to support telecoininunications equipment including 3 antennae and 3 microwave dishes. There would also be the associated equipment cabins and fencing. The site is located on amenity open ground 011 the southern edge of the Harthill Services Area. The Local Member, Councillor Cefferty, has objected to the proposal. My comments and observations are detailed in the attached report. It is recommended that planning permission be granted.

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.

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans, received on 12/09/0 1 Letter from Applicant, dated 24/08/0 1 Declaration of conformity with ICNIRP Public Exposure Guidelines, dated 17/08/0 1 Northern and Southern Areas Part Development Plan Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft, (Modified June 2001) National Planning Policy Guideline No. 19 : Radio Telecoininunications Letter from Councillor Cefferty, dated 01/10/01

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302090 and ask for Mr Ashman. APPLICATION No. S/O 1/0 1047/FUL

REPORT

1. APPLICATION AND SITE

1.1 The applicant seeks planning permission to erect a 20 metres high lattice mast to support telecommunications equipment including 3 antennae and 3 microwave dishes. The proposal also includes an equipment cabin, ancillary electrical equipment and 2.1 metre high chainlink fencing.

1.2 The application site is on a grass verge partly planted with trees, located on the southern edge of the Harthill motorway services area. Ground to the north of the site mainly constitutes a car park associated with the services area. The ground falls away to the south of the application site leading down towards the How Burn. On the opposite side of the How Burn is housing located on Howburn Road. The nearest houses are approximately 80 metres distant from the application site, although the mast will be clearly visible to occupiers of these dwellinghouses as it extends approximately 8 metres above the tree canopy.

1.3 The applicant has submitted a full supporting statement for the proposal. It is pointed out that this location was selected to avoid being intrusive to public areas. It is pointed out that the adjacent buildings within the service area have been used for the siting of equipment but that all the available sites have been used. The proposal is part of the applicant’s requirement to provide a network for the third generation of telecommunications services. The supporting statement also seeks to justify the proposal against national planning policy, the development plan and health and safety considerations.

2. CONSULTATIONS

2.1 The local member, Councillor Cefferty, has objected to the proposed development on the following grounds:-

0 The mast is too close to a residential area and, on this basis, health concerns are a consideration. Local amenity will be adversely affected as the mast will tower above the existing trees.

3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

3.1 The development plan consists of the Strathclyde Structure Plan and the Northern and Southern Areas Part Development Plan (the adopted local plan for the area). There are no strategic issues involved in this application and, therefore, the local plan is of most relevance.

3.2 However due to the age of the adopted local plan (it was published in 1965), the current finalised draft of the North Lanarkshire Council Southern Area Local Plan is of more relevance. This plan includes the site within an area allocated as “Countryside Around Towns” (Policy ENV 8). There is also a policy (Policy CS6) on the subject of telecommunciations development.

3.3 Policy ENV 8, although designed to promote and protect the countryside does specifically allow for telecommunications development in the countryside. Policy CS6 indicates the Council will adopt a precautionary approach towards new telecommunications developments, seeking to locate them primarily in industrial and commercial area. It also sets out criteria for assessment of applications. 4. COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS

4.1 As members will be aware, telecommunications developments have been the source of considerable public concern in recent years, particularly when sited within or near to residential areas. This concern has been addressed by the Council through the imposition of a moratoriuni regarding the installation of telecommunications equipment on Council owned land and buildings, and the adoption of a precautionary approach in assessing proposals for development on other land.

4.2 This precautionary approach is reflected in policy CS6 of the most recent local plan, referred to above. This approach has to be balanced against the need for the licensed telecoinmunications companies to develop a workable network, particularly for the introduction of third generation, not only in the interests of these companies fulfilling their licence requirements but in the Council’s interests in maintaining an economically competitive environment in the interests of its residents.

4.3 A further factor to be considered is the new planning guidance issued by the Scottish Executive on the subject of telecommunications developments. This has coincided with the introduction of new regulations which effectively tighten controls on development by the telecommunications industry.

4.4 The proposed development is to be sited within a motorway service station area. A precedent has been set for telecommunications developments in this area, albeit that most equipment was erected under the previously operating permitted development rights. However, this equipment was placed on buildings as opposed to a new free standing mast. The proposal offers some advantages in that it is located within a “commercial” area, in accordance with local plan policy, but it impinges upon a residential area. It is the latter aspect of the proposal which concerns Councillor Cefferty.

4.5 With respect to the Councillor’s objections, the first of these is addressed by recent planning guidance issued by the Scottish Executive. Paragraphs 53-55 of National Plaiining Policy Guideline No. 19: Radio Telecommunications, make it clear that radiofrequency (RF) emissions are controlled by other legislation and authorities (the DTI, the Radiocommunications Agency and the Health and Safety Executive) and, therefore, RF emissioiis (as a health concern) are not a material consideration. The Councillor’s associated concern that the mast is “too close to a residential area” has to be regarded as subjective. As pointed out earlier, the nearest dwellinghouse is approximately 80 metres distant and sits on low ground in relation to the proposed mast. In relation to other developments elsewhere within the I do not regard this distance as being too close.

4.6 The Councillor’s second objection relates to the height of the mast and its impact on visual amenity. Inevitability, any mast is going to impact on visual amenity. A mast of 20 metres height is obviously going to be visible from some distance away. However, I have been advised by the applicant that this height is necessary to ensure a reasonably clear line of site between antennae and that a reduction in height will not secure the efficient functioning of the network. On matters like these, the advice of the Scottish Executive is that it is not for planning authorities to question such technical matters.

5. CONCLUSION

5.1 The proposed mast is to be located outwith a residential area, albeit that it will be visible from some dwellinghouses. Although it would be preferable from a visual amenity point of view that the overall height of the mast be reduced I am not in a position to argue with the technical requirements of the applicant. On balance, therefore, notwithstanding the Local Member’s objection, it is recommended that planning permission be granted. Application No. S/O1/01070/FUL Date registered 3 1 August 2001 APPLICANT CROWN CASTLE INTERNATIONAL Agent Stoppard Howes, The Fountain Business Centre, Ellis Street, Coatbridge DEVELOPMENT INSTALLATION OF 3 NO. 600 MM MICROWAVE DISHES AND ANCILLARY DEVELOPMENT LOCATION TELEPHONE EXCHANGE, MASON STREET, MOTHERWELL

Ward No. 11 Grid Reference 275 134 656785

File Reference SIPLIBII 211 O(622)lWLSlAH

Site History No significant site history

Development Plan Statutory Undertaker ( of Motherwell & Wishaw Development Plan) Secondary Coininercial Area (Finalised Draft Southern Area Local Plan)

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Radio Communications Agency Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement Not Required

COMMENTS This application seeks planning permission to erect three 600 in pole mounted microwave dishes on the roof of the telephone exchange in Mason Street, Motherwell, together with an equipment cabin. The site is located in central Motherwell, and is in a predominantly commercial area; however, there are some residential properties nearby.

There are existing telecommunications antennae already on the building, erected under permitted development rights, and the applicants will be erecting further antennae which do not require permission.

There will be little visual impact, given that the dishes will be positioned on top of a three storey building, and while there are some residential properties in the area, the locality is generally commercial in nature. I therefore recommend that permission be granted.

RECOMMENDATION Grant, subject to the following conditions:- Planning Application No. S/01/0107O/FUL Producedty G~pSflme"10: Plannlog and Environment Soulnem Division Installation of 3 No. 600mm Microwave Dishes 303 Brandon Sfreel MOTHERWELL and Ancillary Development ML1 1RS A Telephone 01698 302100 isx 016S8 302101 1 1250 Telephone Exchange, Mason Street, Motherwell OS L~cencB.A 09W'i 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.

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans Letter dated 27/8/0 1 from Stoppard Howes Letter dated 3/9/0 1 from Stoppard Howes Burgh of Motherwell & Wishaw Development Plan Finalised Draft Southern Area Local Plan (Modified June 200 1) Memo dated 26/9/0 1 froin Protective Services Letter dated 19/9/0 1 froin Radio Coininunications Agency

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302088 and ask for Les Stevenson. Application No. SI0 110 1073lFUL Date registered 3 lStAugust 2001 APPLICANT MRS ELIZABETH HAYES, 76 LAIGHMUIR STREET, UDDINGSTON G71 7JY Agent DEVELOPMENT SITING OF SNACK BAR LOCATION IMEX MOTHERWELL BUSINESS CENTRE, DALZIEL STREET, MOTHERWELL

Ward No. 2 Grid Reference 275643 657131

File Reference S/PL/B112112(61 )lWLS/AH

Site History No significant planning history

Development Plan Business Use (Burgh of Motherwell & Wishaw Development Plan) Industrial (Finalised Draft Southern Area Local Plan)

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection West of Scotland Water Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement One letter of ob,xtion (-. om Department a Education)

COMMENTS This application seeks planning permission for the siting of a snack bar within the yard area attached to the Imex Business Centre at Dalziel Street in Motherwell.

One objection was received, from the Education Department, on the grounds of (1) the uptake of school meals would be undermined (2) the promotion of healthy eating will be less effective (3) there will be safety concerns and potential for indiscipline among pupils from two nearby primary schools, and (4) there will be coinplaints from the adjacent neighbourhood about misbehaviour and litter. Of these points, the first two are not valid planning considerations, and cannot be used as the basis for a decision; I also consider that while the other two points relate in some way to safety and amenity issues, the scale of the proposal is not likely to adversely affect the local area.

The Transportation Team Manager also recommended refusal, on the basis that the proposal might encourage on-street parking or impede service vehicles. ProdYCeebY Planning Application No. S/01/01073/FUL D~pmlmenl01 Piaoning and Envlronmeni Southern DIVISIO~ Siting of Snack Bar 303 Scandon Street MOTHERWELL Motherwell Business Centre, Dalziel Street, Motherwell ML1 1RS Reproduced from the Ordnance Sulyey mapplnp wlth A me ~errn~sWnOf the COntrOllerof her MWW Telephone01698302100 FBX 01698902101 I: I250 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ coDx,oht maylead I0 PloSBCYIDn or Clvll DiocBsdlnDS OS Licence LAOSMIL One Objector, not plotted and Nevertheless, I consider that the nature and scale of the proposal is such that it will be unlikely to create any substantial problems. In recognition of the concerns expressed regarding the traffic situation, I propose that a temporary consent for 1 year be granted so that the impact of the development can be assessed.

RECOMMENDATION Grant, subject to the following conditions:-

1. That the permission hereby granted is for a temporary period only and shall expire on 12 December 2002.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to assess the effect of the proposal.

2. That at all times when the snack bar hereby approved is in operation, a litter bin shall be provided adjacent to the snack bar.

Reason: To prevent litter, in the interests of the amenity of the area.

List of Background Papers

Application forms and plans Burgh of Motherwell & Wisliaw Developinent Plan Finalised Draft Southern Area Local Plan (Modified June 2001) Memo from Local Plans Team Leader dated 7/9/0 1 Memo from Area Manager SW/Protective Services dated 11/9/01 Memo from Transportation Team Manager dated 25/9/0 1 Letter from West of Scotland Water dated 26/9/0 1 Letter from Imex Spaces Limited dated 7/9/0 1 Letter from NLC Head of Education Provision dated 28/9/0 1

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302088 and ask for Les Stevenson. Application No. S/O 1/0 1089/OUT Date registered 3rd September 200 1 APPLICANT CARMYLE INVESTMENTS LIMITED, 15 CARMYLE AVENUE, TOLLCROSS, GLASGOW, G32 8HL Agent The John Russell Partnership, Wilson Road Garage, Wilson Road, Newhouse, Motherwell, ML 15NB DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF DWELLINGHOUSE (PLOT 1) LOCATION LAND EAST OF 2 ALPINE GROVE, UDDINGSTON

Ward No. 22 Grid Reference 269730 661254

File Reference S/PL/B/9/3 2( 99)/JL/JF

Site History April 1995 - Planning perinission granted for erection of three dwellinghouses January 1994 - Planning perinissioii refused for erection of dwelliiighouse and garage for business use. Aii appeal was lodged by tlie applicant but was dismissed by the then Secretary of State. November 199 1-Planning permission granted for development of 3 house plots April 199 1 - Planning permission granted for temporary use of site for storage of plant, material and site office. May 1989 - As above May 1986 - As above

Development Plan Uddingston Tannochside Town Map - Major Public Open space Residential on Southern Area Local Plan - Finalised Draft

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection The Coal Authority Conditions West of Scotland Water No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours One letter of objection Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS The applicants seek outline planning consent for tlie erection of a dwellinghouse at land east of 2 Alpine Grove, Uddingston. It should be noted that this application is one of five current applications by the same applicant, all of which are in outline and are for the erection of a single dwellinghouse. All plots are to be accessed off the private road known as Alpine Grove via a 5.5 metre wide road with footpaths either side. The applications have drawn one objection from a notified neighbour. I have

examined this application in association with the adjoining 4 plots in order to assess the cumulative impact of the proposals. While the site has had planning permission for 3 dwellings I consider that the cumulative impact of the 5 applications would result in the over-development of this area and would produce a built form out of keeping with the adjacent area.

My Department’s Divisional Trailsportation Manager has also recommended refusal for all the applications. Details of these objections may be found in the accompanying report.

RECOMMENDATION

Refuse, for the following reasons;-

1. That the proposed development, in concert with the adjacent proposals for other residential developments, constitutes overdevelopment of the site.

2. That the proposed development, in concert with the adjacent proposals for other residential developments, falls below the density standard as set by the existing adjacent dwellings on Alpine Grove.

3. That the proposed development, in concert with the adjacent proposals for other residential developments, would cause an increase in traffic manoeuvres at the existing crossroads created by Alpine Grove and Holmbrae Road, thereby creating further potential vehicle conflicts, to the detriment of road safety.

List of Background Papers

Application Form and Plan dated 03/09/0 1 Letter dated 091 10/0 1 from The Coal Authority Letter dated 10/10/0 1 from West of Scotland Water Letter received 05/10/01 from Mrs Mary Pender, 6 Alpine Grove, Uddingston

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302 142 and ask for Jim Lennon. APPLICATION No. S/O 1/0 1089/OUT

REPORT

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 The application relates to the erection of a dwellinghouse (Plot l), in outline at land east of 2 Alpine Grove, Uddingston. The application also includes the forinatioii of a new access road.

1.2 The site in question is a vacant, former coalyard and extends to some 0.66 acres. It is bounded by dwellinghouses to the west, public open space to the north on tlie opposite side of New Edinburgh Road, private and public open space to tlie east and private open space with the M74 beyond to the south.

1.3 Although not within the applicant’s ownership, it should be noted that the privately maintained Alpine Grove roadway is in an extremely poor state, and that there is only a 1 metre wide footway leading from New Edinburgh Road to the entrance of the application site.

1.4 It should be noted that this application is one of five current applications by tlie applicant, all of which have been put forward to this current Committee. All applications are in outline and are for the erection of a single dwellinghouse. All dwellinghouses are to be accessed via a new, 5.5 metre wide private road, with connection to Alpine Grove, which is an unadopted road.

2. BACKGROUND

2.1 As can be seen from tlie site history section on the first page, tlie site has a fairly complex history, the most recent consent being granted in 1995 for the erection of three dwellinghouses in outline.

2.2 As part of the previous outline coiisent, any reserved matters application was required to demonstrate how three dwellinghouses could be accommodated on the applications site given the constraints e.g. the minimuin distance exclusion zone criteria of West of Scotland Water from the sewer running through the site, and an assessment of tlie iinplicatioiis for tlie stability of the adjacent footways should the embankments be disturbed.

3. CONSULTATIONS AND OBJECTIONS

3.1 The Coal Authority had no objections to the application.

3.2 West of Scotland have indicated that there are existing public sewers within tlie site boundary that could restrict development. They should be contacted prior to the erection of any buildings.

3.3 The Divisional Transportation Team Manager object on the basis that tlie existing access froin Alpine Grove forms a cross-roads with Holmbrae Road. Any increase in traffic manoeuvres at this locatioii would increase potential vehicle conflicts and therefore any future development at this location would have a detrimental effect on the already problematic location.

3.4 One letter of objection was received from a notified neighbour. Her concern is that during severe wet weather, Alpine Grove floods, badly. The drainage incorporated within tlie private road is obviously substandard and could not accommodate another connection into it. 4. OBSERVATIONS

4.1 There is obviously a surface water run off problem at Alpine Grove, this is caused by the fact that it is very low lying ground and, during prolonged periods of heavy rainfall, the water runs down Holmbrae Road, across New Edinburgh Road and down to the low ground of Alpine Grove. There is obviously inadequate drainage on Alpine Grove to disperse such a high volume of water, however, development of the current application would not, in my opinion, exacerbate the problem.

4.2 It is accepted that the site is suitable for residential development, however, due to the constraints on the site, a large part of the site is unbuildable. A public sewer traverses the site from east to west and there are severe level differences on the northern boundary and on the eastern boundary.

4.3 The development site, in it’s entirety i.e. the five house plots, should be considered together, when making a decision 011 each individual house plot. The houses immediately adjacent to the proposed site set the standards as far as the established landform is concerned. The current proposals for five house plots, in no way reflect the density of the adjacent dwellinghouses on Alpine Grove and beyond. Although the rear garden of the current application site is almost the same depth as the existing Alpine Grove houses, the Alpine Grove houses more than compensate for this with their substantial larger front gardens.

4.4 None of the five plots have the required 10 metre rear garden depth as stipulated in the Council’s adopted open space standards. The three plots that back onto New Edinburgh Road (Plotsl, 2 and 3) have a useable rear garden depth of approximately 7 metres due to a retaining wall which was built a number of years ago as the New Edinburgh Road is situated considerably higher up than the development site. On the eastern side there is a considerable slope up to Old Mill Road, this is also not considered to be useable garden ground due to the gradients involved.

4.5 The Divisional Transportation Team Manager’s comments are obviously of concern as they are of the opinion that any increase in traffic manoeuvres at this location would increase potential vehicle conflict as the existing Alpine Grove access forms a cross-roads with Holmbrae Road.

4.6 The applicant was given the opportunity to reduce the scale of the development in line with comments made during pre-application discussions, however, he was unwilling to alter his plans.

5. CONCLUSION

5.1 In conclusion, I am of the view that planning consent should be refused for the erection of a dwellinghouse at Plot 1. I am also of the opinion that all five planning applications that have been put forward to this Committee, by the same applicant, should be refused consent as the cumulative effect of all five applications would have a negative impact on the established landform density and the appearance of development facing onto the M74.

5.2 The Council acknowledge, through the Local Plan, that the site has residential potential and has allocated it as such, however, the current proposals are, in my opinion, overdevelopment of the site when considered along with the existing dwellinghouses in Alpine Grove and beyond, This, together with the lack of adequate rear gardens, the form that the development would take in comparison with the existing standard in this area and the detrimental effect that firther increased traffic would have on the Alpine Grovemew Edinburgh Road/Holmbrae Road junction all lead me to the conclusion that planning consent should be refused for not only Plot 1, but for the other four house plots which form part of this overall development site. Application No. S/O1/01091/OUT Date registered 3'd September 2001 APPLICANT CARMYLE INVESTMENTS LIMITED, 15 CARMYLE AVENUE, TOLLCROSS, GLASGOW, G32 8HL Agent The John Russell Partnership, Wilson Road Garage, Wilson Road, Newhouse, Motherwell, MLl5NB DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF DWELLINGHOUSE (PLOT 2) LOCATION LAND EAST OF 2 ALPINE GROVE, UDDINGSTON

Ward No. 22 Grid Reference 269730661254

File Reference S/PL/B/9/32(99)/JL/JF

Site History April 1995 - Planning permission granted for erection of three dwellinghouses January 1994 - Planning permission refused for erection of dwellinghouse and garage for business use. An appeal was lodged by the applicant but was dismissed by the then Secretary of State. November 1991 -Planning permission granted for development of 3 house plots April 199 1 - Planning permission granted for temporary use of site for storage of plant, material and site office. May 1989 - As above May 1986 - As above

Development Plan Uddingston Tannochside Town Map - Major Public Open space Residential on Southern Area Local Plan - Finalised Draft

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection The Coal Authority Conditions West of Scotland Water No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours One letter of objection Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS This application relates to the second plot within the overall development site as detailed in Application No. S/O1/01089/OUT. My comments in respect of this plot are the same as the comments made in the above mentioned application, therefore, for the same reasons, I also recommend refusal. Planning Application No. S/Ol/Ol091/0UT Produced by Depirtment Of Plsnnlnq and Env.ronTsnt Erection of Dwellinghouse (Plot 2) Southern DIVlEIon 303 Brandan Slreet MOTHERWELL Repmducsd the Ordnance mapping with MLI 1RS from SuNey Land East of 2 Alpine Grove, Uddingston, Glasgow the p~rmiEEion01 the Controller of herMe;eilUs A CODbWht StEtlOnBTy OfllCe BCiOWn Telephone 01696 302100 Fdi 0i698 302101 1:1250 UnaYmonIed Ieplod"st,o" ,"frilgei crown COPVG*t and may lead to prosBcut~onor SIW proceedlnps OS LlCBnCB LA 09WlL * Location of Objector RECOMMENDATION

Refuse, for the following reasons;-

1. That the proposed development, in concert with the adjacent proposals for other residential developments, constitutes overdevelopment of the site.

2. That the proposed development, in concert with the adjacent proposals for other residential developments, falls below the density standard as set by the existing adjacent dwellings on Alpine Grove.

3. That the proposed development, in concert with the adjacent proposals for other residential developments, would cause an increase in traffic manoeuvres at the existing crossroads created by Alpine Grove and Holmbrae Road, thereby creating further potential vehicle conflicts, to the detriment of road safety.

List of Background Papers

Application Form and Plan dated 03/09/01 Letter dated 09/10/01 from The Coal Authority Letter dated 10/10/01 from West of Scotland Water Letter received 05/10/0 1 from Mrs Mary Pender, 6 Alpine Grove, Uddingston

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302142 and ask for Jim Lennon. Application No. S/O 1/0 1092/OUT Date registered 3rdSeptember 200 1 APPLICANT CARMYLE INVESTMENTS LIMITED, 15 CARMYLE AVENUE, TOLLCROSS, GLASGOW, G32 8HL Agent The John Russell Partnership, Wilson Road Garage, Wilson Road, Newhouse, Motherwell, ML15NB DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF DWELLINGHOUSE (PLOT 3) LOCATION LAND EAST OF 2 ALPINE GROVE, UDDINGSTON

Ward No. 22 Grid Reference 269730661254

File Reference S/PL/B/9/32( 99)/JL/JF

Site History April 1995 - Planning permission granted for erection of three dwellinghouses January 1994 - Planning permission refused for erection of dwellinghouse and garage for business use. An appeal was lodged by the applicant but was dismissed by the then Secretary of State. November 1991-Planning permission granted for development of 3 house plots April 199 1 - Planning permission granted for temporary use of site for storage of plant, material and site office. May 1989 - As above May 1986 - As above

Development Plan Uddingston Tannochside Town Map - Major Public Open space Residential on Southern Area Local Plan - Finalised Draft

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection The Coal Authority Conditions West of Scotland Water No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours One letter of objection Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS This application relates to the third plot within the overall development site, as detailed in Application No. S/01/01089/OUT. My comments in respect of this plot are the same as the comments made in the above mentioned application, therefore, for the same reasons, I also recommend refusal.

RECOMMENDATION

Refuse, for the following reasons;-

1. That the proposed development, in concert with the adjacent proposals for other residential developments, constitutes overdevelopment of the site.

2. That the proposed development, in concert with the adjacent proposals for other residential developments, falls below the density standard as set by the existing adjacent dwellings on Alpine Grove.

3. That the proposed development, in concert with the adjacent proposals for other residential developments, would cause an increase in traffic manoeuvres at the existing crossroads created by Alpine Grove and Holmbrae Road, thereby creating further potential vehicle conflicts, to the detriment of road safety.

List of Background Papers

Application Form and Plan dated 03/09/0 1 Letter dated 09/10/01 from The Coal Authority Letter dated 10/10/01 from West of Scotland Water Letter received 05/10/01 from Mrs Mary Pender, 6 Alpine Grove, Uddingston

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302142 and ask for Jim Lemon. Application No. S/O1/01093/OUT Date registered 31d September 2001 APPLICANT CARMYLE INVESTMENTS LIMITED, 15 CARMYLE AVENUE, TOLLCROSS, GLASGOW, G32 8HL Agent The John Russell Partnership, Wilson Road Garage, Wilson Road, Newhouse, Motherwell, ML15NB DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF DWELLINGHOUSE (PLOT 4) LOCATION LAND EAST OF 2 ALPINE GROVE, UDDINGSTON

Ward No. 22 Grid Reference 269730661254

File Reference S/PL/B/9/32(99)/JL/JF

Site History April 1995 - Planning permission granted for erection of three dwellinghouses January 1994 - Planning permission refused for erection of dwellinghouse and garage for business use. An appeal was lodged by the applicant but was dismissed by the then Secretary of State. November 1991-Planning permission granted for development of 3 house plots April 1991 - Planning permission granted for temporary use of site for storage of plant, material and site office. May 1989 - As above May 1986 - As above

Development Plan Uddingston Tannochside Town Map - Major Public Open space Residential on Southern Area Local Plan - Finalised Draft

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection The Coal Authority Conditions West of Scotland Water No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours One letter of objection Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS This application relates to the fourth plot within the overall development site, as detailed in Application No. S/O1/01089/OUT. My comments in respect of this plot are the same as the comments made in the above mentioned application, therefore, for the same reasons, I also recommend refusal.

RECOMMENDATION

Refuse, for the following reasons;-

1. That the proposed development, in concert with the adjacent proposals for other residential developments, constitutes overdevelopment of the site.

2. That the proposed development, in concert with the adjacent proposals for other residential developments, falls below the density standard as set by the existing adjacent dwellings on Alpine Grove.

3. That the proposed development, in concert with the adjacent proposals for other residential developments, would cause an increase in traffic manoeuvres at the existing crossroads created by Alpine Grove and Holmbrae Road, thereby creating further potential vehicle conflicts, to the detriment of road safety.

List of Background Papers

Application Form and Plan dated 03/09/01 Letter dated 09/10/0 1 from The Coal Authority Letter dated 10/10/01 from West of Scotland Water Letter received 05/10/01 from Mrs Mary Pender, 6 Alpine Grove, Uddingston

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302142 and ask for Jim Lennon. Application No. S/O 1/O 1094/OUT Date registered 3rdSeptember 200 1 APPLICANT CARMYLE INVESTMENTS LIMITED, 15 CARMYLE AVENUE, TOLLCROSS, GLASGOW, G32 8HL Agent The John Russell Partnership, Wilson Road Garage, Wilson Road, Newhouse, Motherwell, MLl5NB DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF DWELLINGHOUSE (PLOT 5) LOCATION LAND EAST OF 2 ALPINE GROVE, UDDINGSTON

Ward No. 22 Grid Reference 269730661254

File Reference S/PL/B/9/32(99)/JL/JF

Site History April 1995 - Planning permission granted for erection of three dwellinghouses January 1994 - Planning permission refused for erection of dwellinghouse and garage for business use. An appeal was lodged by the applicant but was dismissed by the then Secretary of State. November 199 1-Planning permission granted for development of 3 house plots April 199 1 - Planning permission granted for temporary use of site for storage of plant, material and site office. May 1989 - As above May 1986 - As above

Development Plan Uddingston Tannochside Town Map - Major Public Open space Residential on Southern Area Local Plan - Finalised Draft

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection The Coal Authority Conditions West of Scotland Water No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours One letter of objection Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS This application relates to the fifth plot within the overall development site, as detailed in Application No. S/01/01089/OUT. My comments in respect of this plot are the same as the comments made in the above mentioned application, therefore, for the same reasons, I also recommend refusal.

RECOMMENDATION

Refuse, for the following reasons;-

1. That the proposed development, in concert with the adjacent proposals for other residential developments, constitutes overdevelopment of the site.

2. That the proposed development, in concert with the adjacent proposals for other residential developments, falls below the density standard as set by the existing adjacent dwellings on Alpine Grove.

3. That the proposed development, in concert with the adjacent proposals for other residential developments, would cause an increase in traffic manoeuvres at the existing crossroads created by Alpine Grove and Holmbrae Road, thereby creating further potential vehicle conflicts, to the detriment of road safety.

List of Background Papers

Application Form and Plan dated 03/09/01 Letter dated 09/10/0 1 from The Coal Authority Letter dated 10/10/01 from West of Scotland Water Letter received 05/10/01 fi-om Mrs Mary Pender, 6 Alpine Grove, Uddingston

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302142 and ask for Jim Lennon. Application No. S/O 1/0 1 126/FUL Date registered 10 September 200 1 APPLICANT COLIN NAILEN, 25 EAST AVENUE, VIEWPARK, G7 1 6LG Agent DEVELOPMENT CHANGE OF USE OF VACANT SITE TO CAR BREAKERS LOCATION 21 MEADOW ROAD, MOTHERWELL

Ward No. 11 Grid Reference 275985 656355

File Reference S/PL/B/12/26(2 1 l)/WLS/AH

Site History No significant planning history

Development Plan Industrial: Burgh of Motherwell & Wishaw Development Plan Industrial: Finalised Draft Southern Area Local Plan

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection SEPA, West of Scotland Water Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS This application seeks consent for the change of use of an area of vacant ground at Meadow Road, Motherwell to a car breakers yard. The site is located in an industrial area, and backs on to the ; other uses in the area include a civic amenity site and other car breakers. There are no objections to this proposal.

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 is brought into use, the vehicular access into the site shall be formed as a 5.5 metre wide footway crossing with a 7.5 metre length of dropped kerb on the channel line.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory vehicular access to the site.

3. That before the development hereby permitted is brought into use, a 2 metre wide footway shall be constructed along the full frontage of the site, in accordance with the specifications of the Roads Authority and as described in the Roads Guidelines published by the said Roads Authority.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory pedestrian provision in the vicinity of the site.

4. That a visibility splay of 2.5 metres by 60 metres, measured from the road channel, shall be provided on both sides of the vehicular access and before the development hereby permitted is brought into use everything exceeding 1.05 metres in height above the road channel level shall be removed from the sight line areas and, thereafter, nothing exceeding 1.05 metres in height above road channel level shall be planted, placed, erected, or allowed to grow, within these sight line areas.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory visibility for vehicles leaving the site.

5. That the first 15 metres length of the access within the development, shall be surfaced in an impervious material across its whole width.

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian and vehicular safety and to prevent deleterious material being carried out onto the highway.

6. That a minimum of six car parking spaces shall be provided within the site.

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

7. That no waste products such as oil or petrol shall be discharged into the sewer system, and shall be stored within the areas shown on the approved plans and disposed of off-site.

Reason: To accord with the requirements of West of Scotland Water.

8. That before the development hereby permitted is brought into use, a 1.8; metre high screen fence shall be erected along the boundaries marked GREEN; on the approved plans.

Reason: In order to screen the proposed use from the public road.

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans Burgh of Motherwell & Wishaw Development Plan Finalised Draft Southern Area Local Plan (Modified June 200 1) Memo from Team Leader (Pollution Control) Protective Services dated 27/9/0 1 Memo from Team Leader Local Plans dated 2/10/0 1 Memo from Landscape Services Manager dated 20/9/0 1 Letter from West of Scotland Water dated 26/9/0 1 Memo from Transportation Team Manager dated 26/9/0 1 Fax from SEPA dated 21/11/01

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 3 02088 and ask for Les Stevenson. Application No. S/01/01181/FUL Date registered 18 September 2001 APPLICANT PETER F McCLOSKEY, 2 SPRIG WAY, HARTHILL, ML7 5wR Agent DEVELOPMENT PARTIAL CHANGE OF USE OF SITE TO CONSTRUCT GARDEN SHEDS FOR COMMERCIAL SALE LOCATION 2 SPRIG WAY, HARTHILL

Ward No. 20 Grid Reference 290240664407

File Reference S/PL/J3/17/77/GL/AH

Site History (1) Permission granted in 1983 for use of basement of adjacent property for egg packing business. (2) Permission granted in 1985 for extension to dwellinghouse. (3) Permission granted in 1994 for extension to dwellinghouse for egg packing and distribution business.

Development Plan Urban Area on the Northern & Southern Area Part Development Plan Secondary Village & Neighbourhood, Commercial Area on the Finalised Draft Southern Area Local Plan Modified 2001

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours 4 objections Newspaper Advertisement No Required

COMMENTS The applicant is seeking permission, in retrospect, to allow the construction, display and sale of wooden garden sheds in the parking and yard area associated with his dwellinghouse and egg packing business at 2 Sprig Way, Harthill. There have been a number of objections and complaints relating to the nature of the operations, the noise created and the implications of increased traffic movement on a private road. Having considered the relevant matters it is my opinion that this use is not acceptable in a predominantly residential area and it is my recommendation that permission is refused. Full details of my considerations are contained in the attached report.

RECOMMENDATION Refuse for the reasons that:- PLANNING APPLICATION No. S I01 I01 181 / FUL

PdbY PARTIAL CHANGE OF USE OF SITE TO CONSTRUCT Depa~mmtolPlanningandEnvlrMmen( SouvRm DNIM 303 Brand00 Skel 2 SPRIG WAY, HARTHILL. MOTHERWELL Rapmdued fratha hdnanm Survey mappngW ML1 IRS me permlDSD" Of lha ~Irnlle,Of har Ma,ssys A Slatimery mca 0 Cmm, sDpyI!ghl 11250 Telephm 01698 3021M Fax 01698 202101 Location of Objectors. Unauhnsed reprcdcdoo mhwa U- mpymlhl and my lead 10 pmrXutlm LI cI"I1 FfmgllW OS LA m1L * ben- 1. The proposed development would be detrimental to the amenity of the area due to the potential for noise and dust pollution.

2. There is insufficient parking and turning facilities available within the site to the detriment of road and pedestrian safety.

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans registered 18/9/0 1 Northern and Southern Area Development Plan Finalised Drafi Southern Area Local Plan Modified 2001 Letter from Mr & Mrs Paterson 4 Sprig Way, Harthill Letter from Mr Sheridan 100 West Main Street, Harthill Letter from Mr McKee 106 West Main Street, Harthill Letter from Mr Bennett 1 16 West Main Street, Harthill

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302104 and ask for Mr Laing. APPLICATION NO. S/01/01181/FUL

REPORT

1. APPLICATION SITE & PROPOSAL

1.1 The application site is the yard and parking area associated with the two storey dwellinghouse at 2 Sprig Way, Harthill. The yard also serves the basement level of the house at 116 West Main Street, Harthill, which was formerly used by the applicant for his egg packing business before he extended his dwellinghouse to accommodate the business and provides rear access to 1 16 West Main Street and the Royal Bank of Scotland on West Main Street.

1.2 To the south of the site is the dwellinghouse at 116 West Main Street, and a bank, to the east a public house, to the west lies Sprig Way and an area of open space, while to the north lie two dwellinghouses. The site lies below the level of West Main Street and is accessed, along with the two dwellinghouses to the north, from Sprig Way which is a private road with no formal turning facilities.

1.3 While the applicants egg packing business is still operating there is insufficient work to keep the applicant and his employees in full time employment. The applicant has, therefore, started a business constructing, displaying and selling garden sheds. This requires the delivery of wood, the fabrication of wooden panels to form the huts and the construction and display of the huts, which are subsequently de-constructed and delivered to customers.

2. OBJECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS

2.1 Four objections have been received from neighbouring proprietors relating to the proposal. The objections can be summarised as follows,

(1) concerns over access, traffic and parking due to the nature of deliveries to the site and the visiting members of the public (2) the loss of privacy due to the yard being used for the display of huts to the public (3) the level of noise and disturbance caused by the fabrication and construction activities including sawing, hammering and dust creation.

2.2 My comments on these objections are as follows.

The site currently takes bulk deliveries of eggs and then despatches the sorted eggs for onward sale. The proposed additional use entails the delivery of raw materials in the form of wood, the visiting of the site by members of the public and thereafter the delivery of the pre-fabricated huts to customers. The applicant would require an additional 5 car parking places and a turning area which in addition to existing domestic usage, the parking for the egg sorting facility and the fabrication and display area for the huts is not achievable in the space available. This will lead to vehicles reversing onto Sprig Way and parking on the private road which acts as a link to the public footpath to Bank Road. The yard area used for the display of the huts directly overlooks 4 Sprig Way and is in a slightly elevated postion. It is likely therefore that customers would be visible from the neighbouring house and vice versa. A suitable screen fence or planting would minimise such occurrences. The nature of the proposed use is such that there will be a significant level of noise and intrusion as wood is sawn by hand and mechanically. The fabrication of the huts will also result in significant noise from the hammering of nails into the wood to create the sides, floors and roofs of the huts. There will also be a level of sawdust produced during these works which could in windy conditions blow into neighbouring properties. It should be noted that there is a condition on the applicants existing egg business requiring all machinery to be suitable for use in a residential area.

3. CONCLUSIONS

3.1 It is clear that the economic situation that the applicant has found himself in, with relation to his existing business, in such that he requires to diversify to create enough work for himself and his employees. This application must, however, be judged on its own merits and its suitability for the site and its surroundings. The site lies within the urban area on the adopted development plan and is zoned as a village, neighbourhood commercial area on the Finalised Draft Local Plan. The nature of the surroundings is, however, predominantly residential and despite the zoning and the existing partial use of the site for a commercial enterprise the new enterprise is a significant departure from the zoning and use, being a construction activity involving attendant noise and disturbance.

3.2 The second stage of the planning assessment requires consideration of any measures which may reduce the adverse impact of the proposed development. Carrying out the operations indoors may reduce the level of noise perceived but there is no scope to set up a workshop and the resultant effect may be minimal. The same could be said for dust where operating in an enclosed space would require mechanical ventilation. There would also appear to be little possibility of providing the required number of vehicle parking spaces (nine for all the uses on the site), a vehicle turning area and display area for the huts within the site.

3.3 In light of my comments above it is my conclusion that this proposal by reason of its potential for noise intrusion and dust creation, and the lack of sufficient parking and turning facilities is not an acceptable use for this site and, therefore, recommend refusal of this application. Application No. S/01/01191/OUT Date registered 14 September 2001 APPLICANT T YOUNG LIMITED ENGINEERS, WISHAW LOW ROAD, CLELAND, ML1 5QU Agent Mr A P Andrews, “Highbank”, Lanark Road, Crossford, ML8 5RE DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (IN OUTLINE) LOCATION LAND TO WEST OF SUNNYSIDE NURSERY, WISHAW HIGH ROAD, CLELAND

Ward No. 19 Grid Reference 279896-657661

File Reference

Site History No significant site history on most of the site. Portion of site on Wishaw Low Road used as a factory.

Development Plan Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan - Green Belt Zone and Existing and Proposed Area for Industrial Development Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft - Policy ENV6 (Green Belt) and IND 8 (Established Industrial and Business Area)

Contrary to Development Plan Yes

CONSULTATIONS

Objection Scottish Natural Heritage, NLC Community Services No Objection Transco Conditions Coal Authority, West of Scotland Water, West of Scotland Archaeology Service No Reply SEPA, BT, Scottish Power, CSCT

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours 4 letters of objection Newspaper Advertisement 1 letter of objection

COMMENTS The applicant seeks planning permission for residential development, in outline, on three parcels on land on the south eastern fringes of Cleland. Indicative plans show 84 house plots, with associated play areas, structured tree planting/landscaping and a 0.5 hectare area for housing association units. The greater part of the site lies within the Green Belt. 5 letters of objection have been received including one fiom the local member, Councillor James Martin. My comments and observations are detailed in the attached report and it is recommended that planning permission be refused. Should Committee be minded to grant consent, the proposal would have to be referred to the Scottish Ministers on the basis that the proposal is contrary to the development plan. I PLANNING APPLlCATl0.N No. S / 01 I01191 / OUT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ( IN OUTLINE ) Produced by LANARKSHIRE Deparfmenlof Planningand Environment Swthern Divlslm LAND WEST OF SUNNYSIDE NURSERY, 303 randa an Street MOTHERWELL MLl 1RS WISHAW HIGH ROAD, CLELAND. Repmduccd fmm the Wnanco Swey mappc9 mvI A the prm~~slonof the Contmlier of her MSieoNs Fan 1:3500 Statlmwmce Qcmwnmpynght Telephone01698 3021W 01688 302101 unau~lons~dreprduaim mfnngp, crmmpynghl Location of Objector andmaylesdlopmPewtlOn~UVll~ngs os LImmLA 08MlL * > RECOMMENDATION Refuse, on the grounds that:-

1. the proposed development is contrary to Policy GB1 of the Strathclyde Structure Plan, land use zoning of the Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan and Policy ENV 6 of the Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft, in that the bulk of the development would constitute unacceptable development in the Green Belt;

2. the proposed development is contrary to Policy GBlA of the Strathclyde Structure Plan and Policy HSG 12 of the Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft, in that insufficient justification has been provided for the release of those parts of the site located within the Green Belt;

3. the proposed development is contrary to Policies RES 1 and RES 1A of the Strathclyde Stmcture Plan, in that the proposed development would mainly be on a "greenfield" site and that insufficient justification has been given for the addition of those "greenfield" parts of the site to the "greenfield" housing land supply.

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.

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans, dated 14/9/01 Letter from applicant, dated 20/8/01 Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft, (modified June 2001) Letter from Transco, dated 1/10/0 1 Letter from Coal Authority, dated 3/10/01 Letter from West of Scotland Water, dated 10/10/0 I Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage, dated 12/10/01 Memo from NLC Community Services, dated 22/10/01 Letter from West of Scotland Archaeology Service, dated 2/11/01 Letter from Mr & Mrs J Moore, 8 Logan Gardens, Cleland, dated 2 1/9/0 1 Letter from R S & J B Baigrie, 10 Logan Gardens, Cleland, dated 22/9/01 Letter from Mr & Mrs T Dick, 6 Logan Gardens, Cleland, dated 23/9/01 Letter from Mr & Mrs D Nimmo, 5 1 Wishaw High Road, Cleland, dated 4/10/01 Letter from Councillor James Martin, dated 25/10/01

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302090 and ask for Mr Ashman. APPLICATION NO. S/O 1/O 1 191/OUT

REPORT

1. APPLICATION AND SITE

1.1 The applicant seeks planning permission for residential development in outline, on three distinct areas of ground adjacent to the south eastern part of Cleland. Site A is located south of Wishaw High Road covering an area of 11 hectares. Site B is located to the north of Wishaw High Road, between postal numbers 1 1 and 5 1, and extends to 2 hectares. Site C is much smaller and constitutes the grounds of the applicant’s existing business premises. It is located off Wishaw Low Road and covers 0.4 hectares.

1.2 The submitted plans show a plotted housing layout incorporating 84 separate plots, associated play areas and structured tree planting/landscaping. A 0.5 hectare area of ground is reserved in site B for Housing Association units.

1.3 The applicant has submitted a full supporting statement with the application. It is pointed out that due to growth of the business and the increasingly residential nature of the location (with associated complaints of noise), relocation of the business is sought. As relocation and re- tooling of the factory will incur substantial costs, it can only be carried out if the proposed package as a whole is implemented. It is pointed out that the proposal would remove complaints regarding noise and traffic movements; the proposed housing would help to stem out migration from the local area; new woodland would help to maintain a woodland green belt between the site and ; the Housing Association land will help address the shortage of amenityhpecial needs housing and all woodland planting will help to strengthen habitats for plant and animal life. It is recognised that part of the site is green belt but it is stated that “Appendix H of the draft local plan” allows for development in special circumstances and that this constitutes such a circumstance.

1.4 As noted above, the application site is spread across three separate pockets of land. The largest of these constitutes rough grazing land including some colonised overburden from previous mineral workings. The nature of some of the vegetation suggests the water table is quite high. Overhead power lines cross the site. There is a general west to east fall across the site. There is a thin line of trees around the site boundaries with a hedge forming the boundary to Wishaw High Road. The area is still used for grazing. The second largest area of ground, to the north of Wishaw High Road constitutes a grassed field also still used for grazing. The field is bounded on three sides by trees and hawthorn bushes and along the road frontage by hedging. The smallest section of the site is occupied by the applicant’s factory, surrounded on three sides by housing, including the Knowenoble Farm plotted development. There is a field to the rear in separate ownership.

1.5 Overall, the proposed development would constitute a south eastwards extension to Cleland.

2. CONSULTATIONS

2.1 A range of consultation responses have been received in respect of the proposed development. Transco have indicated that although they have equipment in the vicinity, they have no objections to the proposal.

2.2 The Coal Authority has indicated that there is a record of mineworkings within the site and that investigation and possible remedial action would be required to stabilise the ground. 2.3 West of Scotland Water advise that water and sewerage connections could be made. However a 15 inch diameter trunk water main crosses part of the site. It is also considered that the development may benefit from a Sustainable Urban Drainage System (SUDS) approach.

2.4 Scottish Natural Heritage object to the proposed development as it would result in the loss of a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) and a potential Local Nature Reserve (LNR). It is also pointed out that there would be a loss of areas of badger foraging and potentially the disturbance or destruction of badger setts.

2.5 NLC Community Services have no objection to the redevelopment of site C (the current factory premises) but object to development of the larger sites A and B as it would involve the removal of part of a SINC and would have a negative impact on the adjacent woodland areas owned by North Lanarkshire Council, and other woodland.

2.6 The West of Scotland Archaeology Service recommends that, should planning permission be granted, prior archaeological evaluation of the area should be allowed.

2.7 No replies were received from the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, British Telecom, Scottish Power and Central Scotland Countryside Trust.

3. OBJECTIONS

3.1 Five objections have been received to the proposed development, three from notified neighbours, one from a response to the newspaper advertisement, and one from Councillor James Martin, the Local Member.

3.2 Grounds of objection are similar to all those who have made representations and may be summarised as follows:

disturbance to wildlife and natural habitats in the green belt, especially badgers, deer and foxes contrary to green belt zoning in the local plan proposal would constitute ribbon development loss of definition of an established community access onto Wishaw Low Road would compromise traffic safety due to increased volumes and manoeuvring of traffic inadequate footway provision along Wishaw High Road it would create an imbalance in the size of the village other inner village sites are available contrary to Local Agenda 2 1 there is no justification for this extra housing over and above existing and committed proposals.

3.3 Councillor James Martin objects to the proposed development on the following grounds, viz:-

the greater part of the development would be an incursion into the Green Belt it is contrary to the local plan there is an over provision of housing in the East Motherwell area, up to and including the year 2006.

4. DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONSIDERATIONS

4.1 The development plan for this site consists of the Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995, as modified, and the County of Lanark Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan, 1964. The most relevant up to date Local Plan is the North Lanarkshire Council Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft (Modified June 2001). Both of the latter plans allocate the bulk of the application site as green belt and, on this basis, there are relevant Structure Plan policies in respect of this site.

4.2 The specific policies of the Structure Plan area as follows:-

Policy GB 1

The spread of built up areas and the encroachment of development into the countryside within a “Green Belt” around the Conurbation and AyrPrestwicWTroon, as indicated on the Key Diagram, shall not accord with the Regional Development Strategy.

Policy GB 1A

Proposals for development within the Green Belt shall require to be justified against the following criteria; (a) economic benefit (b) specific locational need (c) infrastructure implications, and (d) environmental impact.

The following Structure Plan policies are also relevant.

Policy RES 1

The Regional Development Strategy requires that preference shall be given to residential development on “brown field” infill or redevelopment sites within urban areas (excluding zoned and other valued and functional open space), rather than “greenfield” sites.

Policy RES 1A

Proposals to extend the “greenfield” supply of land for residential development shall require to be justified against the following criteria.

(a) clear evidence of a shortfall in effective housing land supply in the relevant housing market area (b) the evidence of need for social or rented housing established in the relevant local authority’s approved housing plan (c) accessibility to the public transport network and town centres (d) infrastructure implications, and (e) impact on environmental quality and policy for the Green Belt, Greening the Conurbation, or the Countryside Around Towns.

4.3 The Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan technically constitutes part of the development plan, irrespective of its age. Most of the site is allocated as “Green Belt Zone” although the applicant’s industrial site is allocated as an existing and proposed area for industrial development.

4.4 The Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft, presents a more relevant and contemporary land use assessment. Most of the application site is within an area covered by Policy ENV6 (Green Belt), which states:

“The Council will safeguard the character and function of the Green Belt, as defined on the Proposal Map, within which there will be a presumption against development or change of use other than that directly associated with and required for agriculture, forestry, the generation of power from renewable sources, outdoor leisure and recreation, telecommunications of other appropriate rural uses.

Mineral extraction may also be acceptable where proposals accord with other relevant policies within this Plan.

Proposals to extend established industrial and business uses will be acceptable only where the development would not result in an adverse effect on the character and function of the Green Belt”.

Policy HSG 12 (Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside) is also of relevant. It states (extract):

“In determining applications for new houses the Council will take account of the following criteria, amongst others:- 1) new houses, which do not form replacement dwellings, will only be permitted where there is a proven operational need in accordance with Policies ENV 6 Green Belt and ENV 8 Countryside Around Towns, 2) the visual prominence of the site, 3) the compatibility of the design to a rural location, 4) the incorporation of traditional design features and external finishing materials, and 5) the provision made for vehicular access and site drainage.

5. COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS

5.1 Determination of this application has to be made in relation to the development plan for the site, in accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The development plan for the site clearly indicates that the bulk of it is zoned as Green Belt and, therefore, residential development would not accord with the plan. However, the relevant policies covering departure from the development plan require to be assessed in order to determine whether or not there are material considerations which would indicate that development may be permitted.

5.2 Policy GBlA of the Structure Plan provides four criteria against which potential departures are to be assessed, as noted above. Little in the way of economic benefit would be provided with the exception of short term construction work. There is no specific need for housing greenfield release at this site, given other house building opportunities identified by the local plan within Cleland and adjacent villages. Any additional need would be assessed via a review of the local plan which will take into account demand figures within the relevant housing market area. A review was completed early this year and no need for additional release was identified. In terms of infrastructure implications, consultees have indicated that these could be met, although utilities running through the site could prove problematic. Environmental impact may be looked at in terms of natural and built environment. Impact on the natural environment will be considerable and significant, as identified by the objectors, Scottish Natural Heritage and NLC Community Services. In view of the conservation interests, particularly in respect of badger protection and the loss of other natural habitats, it is considered that the proposed development would have an unacceptable detrimental impact. Impact on the built environment would also be substantial as any type of housing will increase the built up area on the fringes of the village and reduce the width of the Green Belt between Wishaw and Cleland.

5.3 Review of the above criteria suggests that, overall, there is no specific need to release this site from Green Belt use at this time. 5.4 A similar assessment of the relevant Structure Plan Policy, Policy RES1 A, indicates no justification to extend the greenfield supply of land for residential land at this location. There is no clear evidence of a shortfall in the effect housing land supply in this market area, nor has the applicant provided any substantial evidence of this. Indeed some sites identified for residential development in the Cleland area in the local plan have yet to be the subject of a planning application. There may be a need for some social housing in the area but it does not necessitate the removal of land from the Green Belt. The remaining issues are either not relevant or have been covered above.

5.5 Therefore, on the basis that there is no justification for development in the Green Belt or an extension to the “greenfield” supply of land for residential development, the proposal is contrary to policies GBl, GB1A, RES 1 and RES 1A of the Strathclyde Structure Plan. It follows that it is also contrary to the Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan, on the basis of the application site being within a “Green Belt Zone”. It is also contrary to Policy ENV6 of the Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft.

5.6 Finally, in respect of local plan policy, and in view of the above discussion, it is considered that the proposed development generally fails the criteria in policy HSG12 of the Southern Area Local Plan.

5.7 The above assessment of the proposal in relation to the development plan largely addresses the objections raised by individuals. The disturbance to and loss of wildlife areas, especially SINCs is noted as unacceptable and the need to ensure Cleland and Wishaw maintain separate identities by resisting proposals which would constitute “ribbon development” has already been addressed. Although I share the objectors’ concerns over traffic and pedestrian safety, based on the proposed layout, alterations to the layout could be made to accommodate most of my concerns. However, these are issues incidental to the principle of the release of the bulk of the application site from the Green Belt.

5.8 It has to be stated that the development of site C (the existing factory premises) may be permissible on the grounds that this is brownfield land within the built up area of Cleland. However, the applicant has indicated that he wishes his proposal to be assessed as a whole and I do not, therefore, consider that there is merit in recommending a partial consent be granted when I regard the bulk of the proposal to be unacceptable. I do acknowledge that the applicant wishes to relocate his business and that while there is some merit in such a move I do not consider it sufficient to justify departing from agreed national and development plan policies.

6. CONCLUSION

6.1 In conclusion, I consider that the proposed development is contrary to the Green Belt and housing policies of both the development plan and the emerging local plan and, on this basis, recommend that planning permission be refused. Committee may wish to note that should they disagree with my recommendation, referral to the Scottish Ministers will be required in that the proposal is development contrary to the development plan. Application No. SI0 110 1249lFUL Date registered 23rdOctober 2001 APPLICANT MR DAVID McKENDRICK, 28 CLARK STREET, NEWMAINS, WISHAW Agent DTA Chartered Architects, Elizabeth Court, 4 Stuart Street, DEVELOPMENT CHANGE OF USE OF OPEN SPACE TO GARDEN GROUND AND ERECTION OF TWO STOREY SIDE AND SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION LOCATION 28 CLARK STREET, NEWMAINS, WISHAW

Ward No. 16 Grid Reference 281897656440

File Reference SIPLIB13I6 6(90)lRTlJF

Site History None

Development Plan Under the Terms of the Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised, Draft, As Modified June 2001 the application site is located within an area covered by policy :- HSG8 - Established Housing Area

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement Not Required

COMMENTS This application seeks planning permission to change the use of open space to garden ground and erect a two storey side and single storey rear extension to the dwellinghouse at 28 Clark Street, Wishaw. No objections have been received in connection with the proposal and for reasons contained in my report it is recoininended that planning permission is granted.

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 ,____._._.__....._-_------___...__-.---,

Football Ground

Produced by Planning Application No. S/O 1/O 1249/FU L N panme men: of ~iann~n~and ~nvironmen: Somein Dwimn Change of Use of Open Space to Garden Ground and Erection of 303MOTHERWELL Bianaon sirsit Two Storey Side and Single Storey Rear Extension to Dwellinghouse ML1 1RS A Qeproduced$he permI55Ion from of thethe ContlollerOidnance ofSurreynappirg nerl*;a)rstVi nil Telephone 01696 302100 FBx OX98 302101 1 1250 Sia:ionery Office OCrawn copynpht 28 Clark Street, Newmains UO~II:RO~ISBC reproduction ,nfrlnpes crown copmht os LICB~CBLA OQM'1 and '.dylBdC !O DTOSBCUtlon Or CIW DrOCeedIngi 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 dwellinghouse.

Reason: In the interest of the visual amenity of the dwellinghouse and surrounding area.

3 That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of the boundary fence 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: In the interest of the visual amenity of the dwellinghouse and surrounding area.

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft, As Modified June 200 1

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302 128 and ask for Rosaleen Toal. APPLICATION No. S/O 1/O 1249/FUL

REPORT

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 The application site comprises of an end terraced dwellinghouse and an adjacent area of open space.

1.2 The applicant is seeking planning permission for a change of use of the open space into garden ground and the erection of a two storey side and single storey rear extension to the dwellinghouse.

1.3 As advised the proposal will involve the incorporation of an area of open space into the garden ground. This will involve the removal of an existing footpath which joins a rear footpath which runs the full length of the terrace block and gives access to all the rear gardens in the terraced block. The footpath also gives access to the park which lies at the rear of these dwellinghouses. The loss of this particular footpath is not considered an issue as an alternative footpath is available at the opposite end of the terraced block for access to both the rear gardens and the park. There are also alternative paths through the street which also give access to the park.

1.4 The extensions to the dwellinghouse will provide the applicant with two additional bed roonis on the upper floor with a larger kitchen, lounge area, shower room and utility room on the bottom floor.

2. ASSESSMENT

2.1 On detailed assessment of the application it is considered that the proposals are acceptable on the site in term of the change of use, design, scale and materials. Indeed, the dwellinghouse, as extended, would integrate suitably within the location without having any adverse effect of ain en i ty .

3. CONCLUSION

3.1 Taking the above into account it is recoininended that permission is granted subject to the attached conditions. Application No. S/O1/01256/FUL Date registered 10 October 2001 APPLICANT ORANGE PCS LTD., ST JAMES COURT, GREAT PARK ROAD, ALMONDSBURY PARK, BRSITOL Agent Knight Frank, Sutherland House, 149 St. Vincent Street, Glasgow DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF 15 METRES HIGH TELECOMMUNICATIONS MAST WITH ASSOCIATED MICROWAVE DISHES, ANTENNAE, EQUIPMENT CABINS AND FENCING LOCATION MILLBANK CARAVANS, NETHERTON ROAD, WISHAW

Ward No. 15 Grid Reference 278785 654379

File Reference S/PL/B/10/13( 191)/DA/AH

Site History February 1998 - Planning permission granted for part change of use from caravan sales to allow the erection of 4 workshop units.

Development Plan Burgh of Motherwell & Wishaw Development Plan - Unzoned Land Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft - Policy IND8 (Established Industrial and Business Area); Policy CS6 (Telecommunications Development)

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours 1 letter of objection Newspaper Advertisement Not Required

COMMENTS The applicant seeks planning permission to erect a 15 metre high lattice tower with 6 antennae, 4 microwave dishes, associated equipment cabins and security fencing, all within the grounds of Millbank Caravans, Netherton Road, Wisliaw. The applicant has provided a suppoifing statement and a certificate confirming that emissions will comply with the International Commission of Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) Standards. A notified adjacent business has objected to the proposed development. My comments and observations are detailed in the attached report. Notwithstanding the submitted objection, it is recommended that planning permission be granted.

RECOMMENDATION Grant subject to the following conditions:- ERECTION OF 15 METRE HIGH TELECOMMUNICATIONS MAST Produced by WITH ASSOCIATED MICROWAVE DISHES, ANTENNAE, LANARKSHIRE SouthernDepaRmt DiviMOn of Plannmg and Envuonmenl EQUIPMENT CABINS AND FENCING 303 Brandon Street MOTHERWELL MLI 1RS MILLBANK CARAVANS, NETHERTON ROAD, WISHAW. ~p~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-h A Stalims~lMfice OC- mpynghl Telephone 01698 3021W Fax 01698 302101 1: 1250 unaumonred reprcdwhon mfnngas Crmmpynght os Lloence LA OWlL * Location of Objectors and may lead to pro98cu11on01 avll PmOaedlWS 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.

List of Background Papers

Application forin and plans dated 9/10/0 1 Supporting Statement froin applicant, dated 1/9/0 1 Declaration of conformity with ICNIRP Public Exposure Guidelines, dated 25/9/0 1 Burgh of Motherwell & Wishaw Development Plan Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft, Modified June 200 1 Letter from Powerwall Systems Ltd., 4 Netherton Road, Wishaw dated 5/10/01

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302090 and ask for Mr Ashman APPLICATION NO. S/O 1/0 1256/FUL

REPORT

1. APPLICATION AND SITE

1.1 The applicant seeks planning permission to erect a 15 metre high lattice tower to support 6 antennae and 4 microwave dishes. There will also be associated equipment cabins and security fencing. In a supporting statement accompanying the application, the applicant states that tlie installation is required mainly to provide a good level of coverage to the residential area of Netherton. The topography of the area has meant that existing installations provide an inadequate level of coverage in this area. It is pointed out that there were no other sites wliicli gave the necessary level of coverage and that the application site was chosen as it is an industrial area which provided the least visual impact on the local area.

1.2 The applicant has also provided a Certificate confirming that the installation will comply with ICNIRP standards.

1.3 The application site is contained within the yard area associated with Millbank Caravans, Netherton Road, Wishaw. The site forms part of the eastern edge of the Netherton Industrial Estate. However, there is residential development to the north on the opposite side of tlie railway line (the nearest house is approximately 50 metres from the application site). The local plan also identifies land adjacent to tlie existing dwellinghouses for resideiitial development. It is difficult to say how much, if any, of the installation will be seen by residents as ground to the north of the railway line lies low in relation to the application site. There are also some intervening trees and bushes.

2. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

2.1 The development plan, in this instance, consists of the Strathclyde Structure Plan and the Burgh of Motherwell & Wishaw Development Plan (BMWDP). There are no strategic issues associated with this application and, therefore, it is regarded as a local planning matter. At the time the BMWDP was drawn up, mobile phones had not been invented and, therefore, it is considered that the North Lanarkshire Council Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft (Modified June 200 I), as a material consideration, provides a more contemporary context for assessment of tlie proposal.

2.2 Policy IND 8 indicates that established industrial and business areas will be retained as such by controlling the type of development to be located within them. The current proposal does not challenge this policy. Policy CS6, specifically on telecommunications development provides rigorous criteria to assess such proposals. The policy is long and not reproduced in full here. However, it explains that proposals will be assessed using a precautionary approach and resisted in “sensitive” areas. The policy encourages site sharing and sets detailed criteria for the assessment of proposals. It also indicates that the policy is designed to locate such developments primarily in industrial and commercial areas.

3. OBJECTION

3.1 A notified neighbouring business has objected to the proposed development on three main grounds, viz:-

0 workers have expressed concerns over possible health implications from emissions from the equipment 0 possible interference with electronic equipment 0 future development proposals by the objector within the “fall area” of the tower

4. COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS

4.1 Proposals for telecominunications developments continue to be among the most controversial that are placed before Committee for consideration, largely due to concerns on tlie potential impact on tlie health of the population. Studies carried out to date have found that emissions even at ground level close to such towers are well below the ICNIRP minimum safety standards and no casual link from masts to cancers has been established. Nevertheless, strictly speaking, health issues are not part of the planning consideration of the merits of a proposed telecommunications development. Paragraphs 53-55 of the National Planning Policy Guideline No. 19: Radio Telecommunications, produced by the Scottish Executive, make it clear that radiofrequency (RF) emissions are controlled by other legislation and authorities (the DTI, the Radiocommunications Agency and tlie Health and Safety Executive) and, therefore, RF emissions (as a health concern) are not a material consideration.

4.2 Therefore, whilst I note the objector’s comments on the health issue and acknowledge that research continues into this, I have to consider that it is not a material consideration relevant to the planning merits of the proposal. I also have to note that the applicant has submitted the required ICNIRP certificate confirming that the installation will conform to recognised safety standards.

4.3 With regard to comments concerning possible interference with electronic equipment, this again is not a valid material consideration in strict planning terms. Regulation of radiofrequencies and checks for interference is covered by other legislation enforced by the Radiocommunications Agency. This Agency was regularly consulted by the Council on earlier telecommunications applications but the Agency requested no further consultations as it was satisfied regarding the adequacy of the relevant legislation and the standards to which equipment is manufactured. Electronic interference is, therefore, unlikely to be problematic.

4.4 The objector’s third ground of objection relates to a fear over the stability of the mast and possible implications for future development within tlie “fall area”. The materiality of this objection is also questionable. Quality of workmanship and suitability of the structure for supporting the equipment, which would seem to be at tlie heart of this objection, are also covered by other legislation, enforced by the Health and Safety Executive. I am not aware of any circumstances where one of these types of lattice towers has collapsed but, in any case, do not regard an objection on these grounds to be material to consideration of the application.

4.5 Therefore, although I can understand the objector’s concerns, none of these are strictly relevant in planning terms and do not impact upon my consideration of the merits of the proposal.

4.6 Although 15 metres in height, the mast will be located within an area of tall buildings. The building adjacent to it, for example is approximately 13 metres in height. I do not consider that it will be too incongruous in a local context. Furthermore, it will be located within an industrial estate, in support of Council policy on this matter. I am a little concerned over how visible the upper levels of the mast will be to residents on the opposite side of the railway. However, the applicant has provided, in my opinion, a convincing case as to the necessity to locate the equipment in this area to ensure adequate coverage, in term of the licence requirements. This will ensure benefits for mobile phone users in the immediate area whicli, in my judgement, outweighs the slight concerns I have over the visibility of the upper parts of the mast.

4.7 In conclusion, I therefore recommend that, notwithstanding the received objection, planning permission be granted. Application No. S/O 1/O 127 1/FUL Date registered 25 September 200 1 APPLICANT MR J TOWNSLEY, NEWARK GATEWOOD, MILLWOOD ROAD, ALLANTON Agent Lowland Planning Associates, Woodmuir House, Breich, West Calder EH55 8JW DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF A DWELLINGHOUSE LOCATION 22 CHAPEL ROAD, BOGSIDE, WISHAW

Ward No. 16 Grid Reference 283142 654072

File Reference S/PL/B/3/94(3 8)/DRM/AH

Site History Planning application ref. no. S/OO/O 1038/FUL refused by the Scottish Ministers on 23'd August 200 1

Development Plan Zoned as Green Belt on Finalised Draft of the Southern Area Local Plan

Contrary to Development Plan Yes

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Transco, British Telecom Conditions West of Scotland Water, Coal Authority No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS This application relates to the erection of a two storey dwellinghouse on land to the east of the A73 at Bogside to the south of Newmains. A similar application on the same site was refused in August 200 1 by the Scottish Ministers. The reason for this identical application and the back history to the site are detailed in my attached report. With respect to this earlier application, I did recommend that the application be refused although for various reasons as detailed in the attached report the Committee resolved to grant the application. I still consider that this proposal should be refused but Committee should be aware of their previous decision and reasons as detailed in paragraph 3.2 of the attached report.

RECOMMENDATION Refuse, on the following grounds:- Planning Application No. S/Ol/Ol271/FUL N Erection of Dwellinghouse 303 Brandan street MOTHERWELL Ml1 1RS A Telephone 01698 302100 Fa 01698302101 Land South West of 71 Chapel Road, Wishaw 1:2500 os Licence LA090411 1. The proposal is contrary to policy ENV 6 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft, which maintains a presumption against developments in the Green Belt, other than those directly associated with the needs of agriculture, forestry, outdoor leisure and recreation or other appropriate Green Belt uses.

2. The proposal is contrary to Policy GB1 of the Strathclyde Structure Plan, which seeks to limit the spread of built up areas and the encroachment of development into the countryside and cannot be justified against the criteria listed in Policy GBlA.

3. The proposal is contrary to policy RES 1 of the Strathclyde Structure Plan, which requires preference to be given to residential developinent on brownfill, infill or redevelopment sites within urban areas, rather than greenfield sites.

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.

List of Background Papers

Application plan and form NLC Southern Area Local Plan (Finalised Draft) dated June 200 1 Strathclyde Structure Plan 1995

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 3021 15 and ask for David Millar. APPLICATION NO. S/O 1/O 127 1/FUL

REPORT

1. APPLICATION SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 This application relates to the erection of a 2 storey dwellinghouse on land on the east side of the A73 to the south of Newmains and north of the small settlement of Bogside. The site, which is a triangular shaped area of land, lies on the east side of Chapel Road and borders onto the recently renovated railway line to the west. This railway line is used by H J Banks to remove coal from the nearby Watsonhead opencast site which is located fLirther to the east and north east of the site.

1.2 The proposed access to the dwellinghouse is via Chapel Road which is a deregulated private access which serves an existing dwellinghouse at Glenallen Cottage as well as providing an access onto the A73 for certain categories of vehicles using the H J Banks opencast site.

2. SITE HISTORY

2.1 In 1967 planning permission was reftised for the renovation of a derelict cottage at this site (Ref. No. 67/99S).

2.2 In 1973 and 1975 planning permission was refused for the erection of a dwellinghouse on land on the opposite site of Chapel Road at Prospecthill, on the grounds that the development would be contrary to the policies of the Greenbelt. (Ref. P/73/S66 and MW/75/72).

2.3 In December 1976 planning permission was refused by Motherwell District Council for the Change of Use of 2 plots of land to a haulage contractors yard aiid depot and use of Glenallen Cottage as an office. (Ref. No. 3 17/76). The grounds for refusal were that the development would be contrary to the policies aimed at safeguarding the Greenbelt.

2.4 In April 1991 planning for the Change of Use of vacant ground at the current application site to a plot for the siting of a mobile home aiid caravan (Ref. No. 33/9 1) was refused by the former Motherwell District Council. The grounds for refusal were that the development would constitute an inappropriate form of development in the Greenbelt aiid that the proposed means of access to the site, would represent a hazard to public safety.

2.5 In June 1991, as Enforcement Notice was served by the former Motherwell District Council, requiring the removal of a mobile home from the site. The Notice was appealed in July 1991 and the appeal was dismissed by the Secretary of State in January 1992.

2.6 Since 1993, various visits by travelling people, have been made to the application site and it has on occasions been used as a temporary stopping place by travelling people.

3. APPLICATION S/OO/O 103WFUL

3.1 In August 2000 the applicant submitted an identical application (ref. S/OO/O 1038/FUL) for a dwellinghouse on this site. In November 2000 I submitted a report to the Coinmittee in which I recommended that the applicatioii be refused on the following grounds, viz:

1. “The proposal is contrary to policy ENV 6 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft, which maintains a presumption against developments in the Greenbelt, other than those directly associated with the needs of agriculture, forestry, outdoor leisure and recreation or other appropriate greenbelt uses. 2. The proposal is Contrary to Policy GBI of tlie Strathclyde Structure Plan, which seeks to limit the spread of built up areas and the encroachment of development into the countryside and cannot be justified against the criteria listed in Policy GBlA.

3. The proposal is contrary to policy RES 1 of tlie Strathclyde Structure Plan, which requires preference to be given to residential development on brownfield, infill or redevelopment sites within urban areas, rather than greenfield sites.

4. The proposed means of access to the site via a 3.3 metre wide private access road, with no usable passing places would constitute a hazard to public safety.

5. That the proposal would constitute a hazard to the safety of users of the public highway in that it would lead to an increase in traffic using the junction of Chapel Road with the A73, where adequate sight lines cannot be achieved, owing to tlie vertical alignment of the public road and the position of the bridge parapet, immediately to its north.

6. That the proposal would set an undesirable precedent, in that it could result in the release of further land on Chapel Road, which is within the designated Greenbelt for inappropriate uses. The development of such land would further exacerbate the problems associated with inadequate vehicular access arrangements at this location, to the detriment of public safety.”

3.2 Following consideration of this report the Committee decided to visit the site and hold a Hearing. This was held on the 13 December 2000 and following a discussion the Coininittee resolved to grant the application. This resolution reflected the Committee’s views that while being within the Greenbelt the site was located immediately adjacent to the former coinmuiiity of Chapel Square and that a house formerly existed on the site until the late 1960’s. The Committee therefore considered that as residential development had existed both on and around tlie site this should out-weigh its formal zoning as Greenbelt. The Committee noted the existence of tlie cottage immediately adjacent to the site together with the Scottish Ministers acceptance of another dwelling at a site nearby on the edge of Bogside. The Committee noted that services could be made easily available and felt that the issue of the access to the site from the A73 was not sufficient to justify refusing the application. Finally tlie Committee noted the site’s past history as an unofficial stopping place for Travelling People and the applicant’s own long connection with both the site and the local community. For these reasons tlie Committee were minded to grant planning permission.

3.3 In view of tlie site’s zoning as Greenbelt and the proposal being contrary to tlie approved Development Plan the applicatioii was referred to the Scottish Ministers. The Scottish Ministers decided in January 2001 to call in the application for deterinination. The Ministers decided, with the agreement of both parties, that the application would be determined on the basis of written submissions and a site inspection. These were both duly undertaken, with the site visit being held in June 200 1.

3.4 On the 23rdAugust 2001 the Scottish Ministers accepted their Reporters recoininendation and refused to grant planning permission. In making this recommendation the Reporter noted that the issues to be determined were whether the proposal was consistent with tlie development plan policy and, if not, whether an exception to the provisions of the plan could be justified by other material considerations. The Reporter concluded that the proposal was contrary to and would conflict with the policies of tlie structure plan and would not comply with the finalised local plan. The Reporter noted not only the other recently approved developments in the area, the site’s history, and the applicant’s association with the area but concluded that “I am sympathetic to the applicant’s personal circumstances, but I do not consider that they are justification enough for a development which would be contrary to long established greenbelt policy. I also believe that if permission was granted for a house on this site it would be used as a precedent to allow further development in the greenbelt in this area”. The Scottish Ministers agreed with the recommendation that there were no material considerations which justified setting aside agreed policies and therefore refused to grant planning permission.

3.5 It should be noted in the Reporter’s decision letter that the reason’s for refusal relating to the means of access from the A73 were not supported and in the Minister’s view did not justify refusing the application on these grounds.

4. CONSULTATIONS

4.1 The application was advertised and no representations received.

4.2 Given the recent application for this site no new consultations were undertaken with the statutory services as the previous application responses had indicated that there were no objections to the proposal from a service point of view.

5. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

5.1 The site is zoned as Green Belt in the Finalised Draft of the Southern Area Local Plan and within the approved Structure Plan.

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENT

6.1 In submitting this application the applicant’s agent has indicated that if the Committee were once again minded to grant permission and the Scottish Ministers called in the application, the applicant would ask for the proposal to be determined by a Public Inquiry as this would, in their view, be the only means by which a favourable decision could be reached. It should be noted, however, that no new information or supporting evidence has been submitted to indicate why the Scottish Ministers should change their views since their previous decision.

6.2 In my opinion I still consider that the relevant issue relating to this application to be the Development Plan and the site’s zoning as Green Belt. I still consider that there is insufficient justification to grant this application contrary to these approved policies. I do, however, note that the Ministers did not support the refusal 011 transportation grounds and accordingly this does not form a basis of my recommendation.

6.3 The Committee may wish to consider not only my recommendation and that of the Scottish Ministers but also their previous views as expressed in para. 3.2 of this report. The applicant’s agent has requested that a Hearing take place only if the Committee are not minded to grant planning permission. Application No. SI0 110 128 11FUL Date registered 20 September 200 1 APPLICANT ONE 2 ONE PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS, IMPERIAL PLACE, MAXWELL ROAD, BOREHAMWOOD WD6 1EA Agent APT, 1 Houston Street, Glasgow G5 8RS DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF 14.4 METRE HIGH TELECOMMUNICATIONS MAST WITH ASSOCIATED ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT LOCATION LAND SOUTH OF AIRBLES CEMETERY ENTRANCE, AIRBLES ROAD, MOTHERWELL

Ward No. 1 Grid Reference 274544656221

File Reference S/PL/B/2/1IBIWLSIAH

Site History No significant planning history

Development Plan Unzoiied (Burgh of Motherwell & Wishaw Development Plan) Protected Open Space (Finalised Draft Southern Area Local Plan)

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Radio Communications Agency; Coininunity Services Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement Not Required

COMMENTS This application seeks planning permission for the erection of a 14.4 metre high tower with one antenna and one microwave dish, on the footway outside Airbles Cemetery in Motherwell. In addition, a small equipment cabin is also proposed.

Such a proposal would, until recently, have been permitted development. However, I am of the opinion that its location immediately adjacent to a sensitive use such as a cemetery is inappropriate, and I recommend that permission be refused.

Further details are contained in the accompanying report.

RECOMMENDATION Refuse for the reason that the proposed mast would be located in a visually sensitive area, adjacent to a cemetery and in a relatively open area, to the detriment of the visual amenity of the area.

List of Background Papers

Application plan, form and accompanying statement Southern Area Local Plan Letter of 29/10/0 1 from Radiocommuiiications Agency Memo of 8/11/01 from Department of Coininunity Services

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302088 and ask for Les Stevenson. APPLICATION NO. S/O 1/0128 1/FUL

REPORT

1. PROPOSAL AND SITE

1.1 This application seeks perinission for the erection of a 14.4 metre high single telecommunications mast, to hold one anteiina and one dish; in addition, there would be a small equipment cabinet, located beside the mast.

1.2 The application site lies within the public footway on Airbles Road, Motherwell. The site adjoins a strip of amenity open space, adjacent to Airbles Cemetery, and is at a bus lay-by. On the other side of Airbles Road is the Bank of Scotland Call Centre, which is within the Enterprise Zone. Airbles Road is a busy dual carriageway.

2. CONCLUSION

2.1 The Radio Cominunications Agency had no observations to make

2.2 The Council’s Community Services Department had no objections, but made coininents regarding its visibility within the road corridor.

2.3 Within the Planning and Environment Department, internal consultations with Protective Services and Transportation raised no objections.

3. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

3.1 The Finalised Draft Southern Area Local Plan (Modified June 200 1) contains an extensive policy (CS6) on Telecominunications Development. That policy states that, in determining applications, the Council will consider, amongst other things, “the nature of the locality and the proximity of the site to sensitive areas and uses” and “the design and visual impact of the proposed apparatus”.

3.2 The Scottish Executive’s guidance on NPPG 19 ‘Radio Telecorninunications’ notes that “There can be a degree of public concern about the siting and design of mobile phone base stations”, and accepts that these are material considerations. The Planning Advice Note on the subject (PAN 62) considers public open space to be a visually sensitive location, where positive steps to conceal or disguise equipment may be necessary.

4. CONCLUSIONS

4.1 This proposal involves a slender, but relatively tall telecommunications mast in a prominent open site; as such, it is in a ‘visually sensitive’ location. In addition, its location adjacent to a cemetery increases the sensitivity of the site. As such, I do not consider that it adequately meets the requirements of either the draft Local Plan or the Scottish Executive’s guidance and so I recommend that permission be refused. Application No. S/O 1/0 1332/FUL Date registered 9 October 2001 APPLICANT BT CELLNET, 260 BATH ROAD, SLOUGH, BERKSHIRE SL14DX Agent Nigel Moore - Spectrasite Transco, Room 120 Ouseburn Building, Albion Row, East Quayside, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE6 1LL DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF 15 METRE HIGH TELECOMMUNICATIONS MAST WITH 6 ANTENNA, 2 MICROWAVE DISHES AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT AND FENCING LOCATION CLELAND TIMBER SUPPLIES, NORTH AND SOUTH ROAD, CLELAND

Ward No. 19 Grid Reference 281410657929

File Reference S/PL/B/4/3 5(20)/DA/AH

Site History June 1996 - Planning permission granted for part change of use of timber yard to building supplies yard.

Development Plan Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan - Green Belt Zone Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft - Policy ENV 6 (Green Belt) Policy CS6 (Telecommunications Development)

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection Councillor James Martin No Objection Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement Not Required

COMMENTS The applicant seeks planning permission to erect a 15 metres high lattice tower with 6 antennae, 2 microwave dishes and associated equipment cabins and fencing at the Cleland Timber Supplies Yard, North and South Road, Cleland. The applicant has provided a supporting statement and a certificate confirming that emissions will comply with the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) Standards. Councillor James Martin has submitted an objection to the proposed development. My comments and observations are detailed in the attached report. Notwithstanding the Councillor’s objections, it is recommended that planning permission be granted.

RECOMMENDATION Grant, subject to the following conditions:- PLANNING APPLICATION No. S I01 I 0101332 I FUL 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.

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans, received on 9/10/01 Letters from Applicant, dated 5/10/0 1 and 12/11/0 1 Declaration of Conformity with ICNIRP Public Exposure Guidelines, dated 5/10/0 1 Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft, Modified June 2001 Letter from Councillor James Martin, dated 25/10/01

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302090 and ask for Mr Ashman. APPLICATION NO. S/O1/01332/FUL

REPORT

1. APPLICATION AND SITE

1.1 The applicant seeks planning permission to erect a 15 metre high lattice tower to support 6 antennae and 2 microwave dishes. There will also be associated equipment cabins and security fencing. In a supporting statement accompanying the application, the applicant states that the installation is required to provide signal coverage along tlie A73 and to serve the residential areas of North Newmains and Coltness. Currently, BT Cellnet do not have coverage in this area, It is stated that there is no other structure within the vicinity capable of supporting the antennae, It is pointed out that the tower will be capable of supporting other telecommunications equipment and operators in tlie future, thus reducing the cumulative visual impact that can be caused by several masts.

1.2 The applicant has also provided a certificate confirming that the installation will comply with the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) standards. Further support information from the applicant demonstrates cell coverage indicating the need to site the installation at this location.

1.3 Tlie application site forms part of the Cleland Timber Fencing Supplies yard, located off North and South Road, Cleland. It lies a few metres from tlie A73 road, although the yard largely cannot be seen from the A73. Tlie yard contains a range of buildings, storage areas and lighting columns and, to all intents and purposes, is an industrial site. The yard is largely surrounded by a range of bushes, trees and scrub with farming land beyond the immediate vicinity. It should be noted that there is a 12 metre high inonopole supporting Vodafone equipment in the immediate vicinity of the yard.

2. CONSULTATIONS/OBJECTIONS

2.1 The only consultation was with the Local Member, Councillor James Martin, who has objected to tlie proposed development on the following grounds, viz:-

0 there are still major concerns regarding the health risks surrounding these installations

0 proximity to dwellinghouses impact on visual amenity.

3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

3.1 The development plan, in this instance, consists of the Strathclyde Structure Plan and the Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan (CIAPDP). There are no strategic issues associated with this application and, therefore, it is regarded as a local planning matter. At the time the CIAPDP was drawn up, mobile phones had not been invented and, therefore, it is considered that the North Lanarkshire Council Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft (Modified June 200 l), as a material consideration, provides a more contemporary context for assessment of the proposal. 3.2 Policy ENV 6 (Green Belt) of this plan allows for telecommunications development within the Green Belt, although Policy CS6 (Telecommunications Development) provides rigorous criteria to assess such proposals. Tlie latter policy is long and not reproduced in full here. However, it explains that proposals will be assessed using a precautionary approach and resisted in “sensitive” areas. The policy encourages site sharing and sets detailed criteria for the assessment of proposals.

4. CONSIDERATIONS AND ASSESSMENT

4.1 Proposals for telecommunications development continue to be among the most controversial that are placed before Committee for consideration, largely due to coiicerns on tlie potential impact on the health of tlie population. Strictly speaking, health issues are not part of the planning consideration of the merits of a proposed telecommunications development. Indeed, recent guidance from the Scottish Executive, under paragraphs 53-55 of National Planning Policy Guideline no. 19: Radio Telecommunications, makes it clear that radiofrequency (RF) emissions are controlled by other legislation and authorities (the DTI, the Radiocominunicatioiis Agency aiid the Health and Safety Executive) and, therefore, RF emissions (as a health concern) are not a material consideration.

4.2 Therefore, whilst I note tlie Councillor’s comments on the health issue aiid acknowledge that research continues into this, I have to consider that it is not a material consideration relevant to planning. I also have to note that the applicant has submitted tlie required ICNIRP certificate confirming that the installation will conform to recognised safety standards.

4.3 With respect to the objection regarding proximity to dwellinghouses, I note that tlie application site is in a relatively isolated location with respect to dwellings. Tlie nearest dwellings are nearly 400 metres distant, with the exception of an isolated lodge house. I do note that the finalised draft local plan ideiitifies a site 250 metres distant as suitable for residential development, although no plaiining permission has been granted to date. Compared with other telecommunications proposals which have either received planning permission or have been carried out under previous permitted development rights, I do not consider that the distance between the proposed development aiid existing dwellinghouses is untoward.

4.4 Impact on visual amenity is always a subjective matter and the perception of it will vary depending upon the individual. Although some dwellinghouses in Bellside may see the mast in distant views, those most likely to see it will be drivers and their passengers along the A73. As equipment and the mast supporting the equipment have to be a certain height above ground level for efficient functioning it is inevitable that there will be some visual impact on amenity. As the telecom~nuiiicationsindustry develops, especially with tlie development of third generation equipment, the appearance of such equipment along road corridors will become coininon place and, therefore, some impact 011 visual amenity will be expected. In this particular case, I acknowledge that whilst there will be some impact on visual amenity, there are three factors which lead me to conclude that it will be an acceptable impact.

4.5 Firstly, the mast is to be designed in such a manner that it will be available for site sharing, thus supporting one aspect of the Council’s telecommunications policy. Secondly, there is an existing Vodafone inonopole in tlie immediate vicinity of tlie application site. On this basis 1 consider that a precedent has been established which could severely compromise any Council case for refusal on tlie grounds of visual amenity. Thirdly, as already noted, the application site is not within a residential area, although it will serve two such areas. I consider it preferable that such a mast be located remote from dwellings, if at all possible, to minimise visual intrusion for a greater percentage of the local population. 5. CONCLUSION

5.1 In reviewing all the factors relating to this application, and bearing in mind that telecommunications operators are obliged by their licences to provide adequate coverage, I consider that the applicant has made a reasonable attempt to locate the equipment in an area which will provide coverage whilst minimising visual intrusion of both the equipment and that of possible other future providers. Therefore, notwithstanding the objections of the local member, it is recoininended that planning permission be granted. Application No. SI0 1I0 13521FUL Date registered 1 lthOctober 2001 APPLICANT BT CELLNET LTD, MOTHERWELL TE, MASON STREET, MOTHERWELL, ML1 1YE

Agent Kingfisher Estates Ltd, 350A Lanark Road West, Edinburgh EH14 5RR DEVELOPMENT INSTALLATION OF 15 METRE TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT LOCATION WOODHEAD FARM, UDDINGSTON

Ward No. 21 Grid Reference 268895 662936

File Reference S/PL/B/9/72( 14)lAMlLG

Site History No relevant history

Development Plan Uddingston-Taiiiiochside Town Map - Agriculture LandIGreen Belt Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 2001) - Policy CS6 Telecommunications Development - Green Belt

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Conditions No Reply Scottish Executive Roads Department, Amey Highways

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement Not Required

COMMENTS This application is for the erection of a 15 metre high telecoinrnuiiications mast with associated equipment both on the mast and at ground level. The site is located in farinlaiid to the west of the M73 near to . There have been no objections to the proposed development. I recommend that permission be granted.

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 Plaiiiiing (Scotland) Act 1997. i 2. That in the event that equipment becomes obsolete or redundant it must be removed and the site reinstated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority within two months.

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

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans, received on 11/10/01 Declaration of Conformity with ICNIRP Public Exposure Guidelines, dated 26/09/0 1 Statement and Plan of the Telecom mast network and reasons for choosing site. Uddingston - Tannochside Local Plan Adopted 1973 Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft, Modified June 2001

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302093 and ask for Mr Maclean. APPLICATION NO. S/Ol/O1352/FUL

REPORT

PROPOSAL AND SITE

The applicant seeks planning permission to erect a 15 metres high lattice mast to support telecommunications equipment including 6 antennae and 2 microwave dishes. The proposal also includes an equipment cabin, ancillary electrical equipment and 1.8 metre high chainlink fencing.

The application site is to the west of the M73 between the M74 and M8 junctions. It is likely that only the top of the mast will be visible from the M73 but given the clutter of existing road signs and the existing electricity transmission lines nearby it is unlikely to be noticed as the land drops towards the at this location.

The access to the site is off the road past Calderpark Golf Course which is a private road. The nearest house is around 150 metres distant and this house is in the same ownership as the land on which the mast is proposed to be erected. Other than Woodhead Farm, there are no other houses within 500 metres of the site.

OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

A precautionary approach is reflected in policy CS6 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft, Modified June 2001 with regard to location of masts. This approach has to be balanced against the need for the licensed telecommunications companies to develop a workable network, not only in the interests of these companies fulfilling their licence requirements but in the Council’s interests in maintaining an economically competitive environment in the interests of its residents.

This location is totally unobtrusive to public areas being over 300 metres along a private road and will not be intrusive within the landscape. The applicants have provided the requisite International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) Declaration and supporting statements. The proposal is generally in accord with Local Plan Policy CS6.

I recommend that permission be granted subject to conditions. Application No. S/O 1/O 1364/FUL Date registered 10 October 200 1 APPLICANT MOSSHILL CREDIT UNION, 23 UNITAS ROAD, MOSSEND ML4 2QH Agent D Stewart Toy, 29 High Street, Lanark, ML11 7LU DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF TWO STOREY OFFICE BUILDING LOCATION LAND SOUTH EAST OF 3 1-36 GREENMOSS PLACE, BELLSHILL

Ward No. 26 Grid Reference 274078660193

File Reference S/PL/B/7/52( 94)/JD/AH

Site History

Development Plan Bellsliill and Mossend Local Plan - Zoned as Established Housing Area Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 200 1) - Zoned as Protected Open Space

Contrary to Development Plan Yes

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Coal Authority, British Telecom Conditions West of Scotland Water, Transco No Reply Scottish Power

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS Detailed planning permission is sought for the erection of a new two storey office building to allow tlie relocation of Mosshill Credit Union from their current location within Mossend Shopping Centre. The Mosseiid Development Strategy, given Coininittee approval 011 10 May 2000, recommended that a new site be identified upon which a new shopping development could be accoinmodated which would eventually allow the demolition of the existing shopping centre and release the ground for housing development. Whilst discussions are still ongoing on this matter the applicant has chosen a site which will allow autonomy from a private landlord and which is suitable to accoininodate a new purpose built facility for tlie carrying out of their banking operations. No objections have been received in relation to this proposal and for the reasons contained in my accompanying report, I hereby recoininend that planning permission be granted.

RECOMMENDATION Grant, subject to tlie 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 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 inay be required.

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

3. That before the development hereby permitted is completed, all the fences, or walls, as approved under the terms of condition 2 above, shall be erected.

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

4. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing materials to be used on all external walls and roofs shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as inay be required.

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

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; (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 developinent

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

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

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

7. That before the development hereby permitted is completed, all the parking and manoeuvring areas shown on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained, surfaced in a material which the Planning Authority has approved in writing before the start of surfacing work and clearly marked out, and shall, thereafter, be maintained as parking and manoeuvring areas. Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities within the site

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans dated 10 October 200 1 Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 200 1) Bellshill and Mossend Local Plan Letter dated 25 October 2001 from Transco Letter dated 27 October 2001 from The Coal Authority Letter dated 30 October 2001 from British Telecom Letter dated 3 1 October 2001 from West of Scotland Water

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302 137 and ask for Joanne Delaney. APPLICATION NO. S/O1/01364/FUL

REPORT

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 This application relates to the construction of a new purpose-built two storey office building to accommodate Mosshill Credit Union. The building extends to 240 sq. metres in total floor area aiid incorporates the business area on the ground floor consisting of reception, tellers counters and interview rooms with ancillary facilities, whilst tlie administrative accommodation is met on the upper floor consisting of office space, file store aiid boardroom.

1.2 The site is currently a flat grassed area of amenity open space at Greeiimoss Place, Bellshill and is zoned as Protected Open Space on tlie development plan. The site is adjoined by two storey residential properties to the south and west, by Mosseiid Shopping Centre to the east and will lie adjacent to the new group practice surgery and pharmacy given plaiiiiiiig perinissioii at the meeting of 14 November 2001. This new surgery will occupy the current amenity open space located directly north of the application site.

1.3 Vehicular access to the site will be taken via a new mini roundabout which formed aii integral component of the aforementioned surgery aiid pharmacy development located at Greeiiiiioss Place, which leads to the car park located in recess from the existing hammerhead turning facility.

2. CONSULTATIONS

2.1 No objections were received from tlie Coal Authority and British Telecom, whilst no reply was received from Scottish Power.

2.2 West of Scotland Water aiid Transco have no objections in principle to the development, but advise that contact be made to ensure satisfactory servicing of tlie site.

2.3 The application was advertised in the local press as Development Contrary to the development plans, and no objections were received in relation to this proposal. In addition, none of the neighbouring proprietors objected followiiig the statutory neighbour iiotificatioii process.

3. PLANNING ASSESSMENT

3.1 The proposed re-development of Mosseiid Shopping Centre as recoininended by the Mossend Developmelit Strategy has sought to heighten tlie desire of the applicaiit to seek out a new site which affords the opportunity to realise autonomous ownership aiid to develop a building which exactly addresses their operational requirements.

3.2 Mosshill Credit Uiiioii perceive a need to remain within Mosseiid and they have identified one of tlie few remaining areas of amenity open space upon which to build tliejr new offices. Whilst the site is identified as Protected Open Space 011 tlie Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 200 l), the release of its counterpart frontiiig Main Street for development as the new practice surgery and pharmacy, has marginalised this site and has significantly reduced the value of its protected status. Furthermore, the Plaiiniiig & Eiiviroiiineiit Committee declared this land surplus to their operational requirements on 17 January 2001, thereby releasing it for development. 3.3 The traffic and transportation team leader is satisfied that access and parking requirements can be met within the site aiid the siting aiid design of the building is deemed to complement the adjoining buildings aiid overall amenity of the area.

4. CONCLUSIONS

4.1 This development is deemed acceptable in terms of design aiid scale aiid will play an aggregate role in the holistic regeneration of this area of Mossend. For these reasons, it is recommended that planning permission be granted. Application No. S/O1/01372/FUL Date registered 15 October 200 1 APPLICANT CARRICK CARE HOMES, 39 VICTORIA ROAD, BARRHEAD G78 1NQ Agent Young & Gault, 28 Spiers Wharf, Glasgow G4 9TB DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF RESIDENTIAL CARE HOME LOCATION 620-644 OLD EDINBURGH ROAD, UDDINGSTON

Ward No. 22 Grid Reference 271010661117

File Reference S/PL/B/9/67(6 7)/AM/AH

Site History An open-air market operated on the site during the 1980s and early 1990s. Outline consent granted for the erection of 14 flats in 1987, however, this has now lapsed.

Development Plan Southern Area Local Plan - Private Housing Development Uddingston-Tannochside Town Map - Establishments with Large Grounds.

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Transco, West of Scotland Water, Coal Authority Conditions No Reply Scottish Power, BT

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement Not Required

COMMENTS This application is for the construction of a nursing home on a site on Old Edinburgh Road. The site has lain vacant for many years being used during the 1980s for an open-air market. One vacant building is currently on the site, formerly a Surgery, which will be demolished. There are a number of trees along the site frontage, some of which will be retained, with new trees being planted to replace those which it is proposed to remove. The development will have its own access, car parking and private landscaping and is in accord with Local Plan policies. I therefore recommend that consent be granted subject to conditions. Football Ground RECOMMENDATION Grant, subject to the following conditions:-

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

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

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 before the development hereby permitted is occupied, any fences or walls, as approved under the terms of condition 2 above, shall be erected.

Reason: To ensure proper implementation of the boundary treatment.

4. 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.

Reason: To enable tlie Planniiig Authority to consider these aspects in detail.

5. That within one year of the occupation of 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 4 above, shall be completed and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the completion of the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: To ensure proper implementation of the landscaping scheme.

6. That no trees within the application site shall be lopped, topped, felled, or otherwise affected, without the approval in writing of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To maintain the contribution of existing trees to the landscape quality of the area.

7. That before the development hereby permitted starts, tree protection measures in accordance with British Standard BS 5837 shall be erected along the drip line of the trees, as shown on the approved plans, and shall not be removed without the approval in writing of the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure appropriate protection for the trees which are to remain on the site.

8. That, notwithstanding condition 4 above, before the development is brought into use, two trees shall be planted between the building aiid Old Edinburgh Road at the locations shown on the approved plans and these trees shall be deciduous trees to a standard to be agreed with the Planning Authority.

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

9. That before the development hereby permitted is completed, 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 aiid manoeuvring areas.

Reason: To ensure the proposed trees will contribute to the landscape quality of the area.

10. That before the development hereby permitted is completed, the new vehicular access shall be constructed with a dropped kerb access and a 6 metres wide road.

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

11. That a visibility splay of 4.5 metres by 90 metres, measured from the road channel, shall be provided on both sides of the vehicular access aiid before the development hereby permitted is completed, everything exceeding 1.05 metres in height above the road channel level shall be removed from the sight line areas and, thereafter, nothing exceeding 1.05 metres in height above road channel level shall be planted, placed, erected, or allowed to grow, within these sight line areas.

Reason: To enable drivers leaving the site to have a clear view over a length of road sufficient to allow safe exit.

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans dated 12 October 200 1

Uddingston-Tannochside Town Map 1973 Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 200 1) - Private Housing Development Letter dated 23 October 2001 from Transco Letter dated 26 October 200 1 from The Coal Authority Letter dated 3 1 October 2001 from West of Scotland Water Letter dated 14 November 200 1 from Scottish Power APPLICATION NO. S/O 1/O 1372/FUL

REPORT

1. PROPOSAL AND SITE

1.1 This is an application for the construction of a nursing home on a site at 620-644 Old Edinburgh Road, Uddingston. The building will be two-storey constructed of red brick with cast stone panels on the Old Edinburgh Road frontage and cast stone features on the east and west elevations. The pitched roof will be finished in grey tiles and windows will be of stained timber. The building will be shaped in the form of an ‘H’ so that all residents will have an outward view either into internal landscaped areas, onto Old Edinburgh Road or to the south, towards the football ground. Each of the four ‘wings’ will contain ten en suite bedrooms on each floor making a total of 80 single rooms while the central part of the building will house lounges, dining areas and staff facilities. There is no sleeping accommodation for staff.

1.2 The site amounts to approximately 0.5 hectare and is currently vacant. There is one building on the site which has been vacant for some time and was formerly a surgery. The site has a frontage of about 75-80 metres onto Old Edinburgh Road and slopes in a southerly direction across the site. The depth of the site amounts to about 60 metres and it is roughly rectangular in shape. There are a seven mature trees along the frontage of the site and there are some scrub trees within the site.

1.3 To the north of the site, on Old Edinburgh Road, are two storey flatted residential properties. To the west is a Bookmakers, a taxi office and small workshop. To the south is United Football Club’s ground. To the east of the site is the access and parking for the football ground beyond which is the rear gardens of houses on West Avenue.

1.4 During the 1980s the site was used for an open-air market but this use ceased and the site lias remained unused for about the last ten years. Outline consent was granted in 1987 for the erection of 14 flats but this was not pursued and the consent has now lapsed.

2. OBSERVATIONS

2.1 The approved local plan is the Uddingston - Taniiochside Town Map approved in 197 1 on which the site is zoned as ‘establishments with large grounds’. The Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft Modified June 2001 allocates the site for Private Housing Development. It is considered that this proposed development is in accord with Local Plan Policies.

2.2 The major service providers were consulted and raised no objections to the proposal and foresaw no problems in providing services to the area. The Coal Authority state that there lias been past coal workings in the area but ground movement should by now have ceased. There have been no objections from neighbours to this application.

2.3 Areas of the site are used informally by taxis to access the adjacent taxi office to the rear of 608 Old Edinburgh Road but this has its own access to the west of the building and future vehicle access will require to be from this access. Use is also made of the site on an informal basis for the parking of cars during matches at the adjacent Thorniewood United Football Club ground. The football club will retain its own access and parking area which, with proper management and marking, could contain a substantial number of cars.

2.4 The existing site is fronted by seven mature trees which, at first site, form an impressive grouping of mature specimens along the frontage of the site, however, on closer inspection the trees, as individuals, are less impressive. They consist of one clump of four trees adjacent to the proposed entrance and three others along the frontage. Within the clump of four trees one is a beech of good quality and worthy of retention, the others comprise two sycamores which have varying problems and one further beech which is in reasonable condition but too close to the footprint of the proposed development. Of the remainder, one oak is in poor condition and has been subjected to fire damage, while the other two are a beech and an oak which are good specimens worthy of retention. The developer proposes to remove three of the group of four trees and the fire damaged oak and to replace these with two trees along the frontage as well as trees and soft landscaping within the site. The frontage proposals will give a better spread of trees and help to soften the frontage of the building while the internal landscaping proposals are acceptable, subject to details which I propose should be subject to a condition.

2.5 Much of the existing development in the area is two storey in height and this proposal will sit well within the street scene. The use of feature panels and other architectural features will add to the development. The development meets the Council’s vehicle circulation and parking standards.

2.6 Concern has been expressed in the past about vehicles parking on this busy stretch of Old Edinburgh Road. In considering this application I have ensured that the proposals meet the Council’s agreed parking standards for staff, visitors and delivery vehicles. In addition the main entrance is located on the west side of the building away from the Old Edinburgh Road frontage, thus reducing further the potential to park on Old Edinburgh Road.

3. RECOMMENDATION

3.1 The site is presently vacant and in an unkempt condition although it is informally used by taxis and occasional parking for the adjacent football ground. The adjacent users have alternative facilities, the proposal is in accord with the local plan and the development of this site would be an improvement in overall terms. I recommend that consent be granted subject to conditions. Application No. s/o 1/01377EUL Date registered 15 October 200 1 APPLICANT BT CELLNET LTD., 260 BATH ROAD, SLOUGH, SL14DS Agent Walker Frazer & Steele, 125 Buchanan Street, Glasgow G1 2JF DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS BASE STATION LOCATION GDS SERVICES LTD., BOTHWELL PARK ROAD, BELLSHILL

Ward No. 24 Grid Reference 271585 660334

File Reference S/PL/B/9/117(125)/JL/AH

Site History Permission granted in 1982 for erection of compound for the storage and retail sale of LPG in cylinders and use of garage for storage and sale of LPG accessories. Permission granted in 1982 for erection of an office unit. Permission granted in 1981 for erection of plant and storage tanks to hold LPG (temporary consent until 1984). Permission granted in 1979 for an extension to the office. Permission granted in 1975 for day unit for dogs and offices. Outline permission granted in 1974 for the erection of a day unit for dogs and a small office

Development Plan Major Private Open Space on UddingstodTannochside Town Map Establish Community Facilities on Southern Area Local Plan - Finalised Draft (Modified June 2001) - Policy CS6 (Telecommunications Development)

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours One letter of objection from 6 householders Newspaper Advertisement Not Required

COMMENTS The applicant seeks planning consent to erect a 15 metre high lattice mast to support telecommunications equipment including 3 GSM and 6 UMTS antennaes and 2 microwave dishes. There would also be the associated equipment cabins and fencing. The site is located within an industrial yard and the mast is located approximately 70 metres away from the nearest dwellinghouse. One letter of objection was received containing 8 signatures from 6 neighbour notified households. My comments and observations are detailed in the attached report. It is recommended that planning permission be granted.

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.

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans dated 15/10/0 1 NLC Southern Area Local Plan - Finalised Draft (modified June 2001) One letter of objection dated 26/10/01 from 22,29,31,33,35 and 37 Thomson Drive, Bellshill.

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302 142 and ask for Jim Lennon. APPLICATION NO. S/O1/0 1377FUL

REPORT

1. APPLICATION AND SITE

1.1 The applicant seeks consent to erect a 15 metre high lattice mast to support telecommunications equipment including 3 GSM and 6 UTMS antennaes and 2 microwave dishes. The proposal also includes the erection of associated equipment cabins and fencing.

1.2 The application site is within an established commercial yard and has a fairly long history of commercial use going back to the mid 1970s. It is bounded to the north by a commercial depot with residential dwellings beyond, a cemetery to the east, the local railway line to the south and greenbelt to the west. The nearest houses are approximately 70 metres away from the application site, although the mast will be situated slightly lower than the houses and situated behind a building. The mast will however, be visible from the houses. The applicant has submitted a full supporting statement for the proposal.

2. OBJECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS

2.1 One letter of objection was received with 8 signatures from 6 neighbour notified households. They listed 6 points of objection, namely noise at the back of the houses, it will be an eyesore, height of the mast, not good for the environment, problems with selling houses in the future and health worries for themselves and their families.

2.2 My comments on the objections are as follows:- - There is no noise from a telecom mast that is of concern and there is a commercial building between the houses and the mast. - The mast is to be situated sufficiently far enough away and behind a building so as not to be too intrusive. - The mast is to be 15 metres high, which is the lowest height a mast at this location can be to work properly. - The applicant has submitted a full supporting statement stating that the mast complies with all required guidance. - With regard to the 'masts' effect on the selling of houses in the future, this is not a valid planning consideration. - The Scottish Executive have issued recent guidance making it clear that radiofrequency (RF) emissions are controlled by other legislation and authorities (the DTI, the Radiocommunications Agency and the Health and Safety Executive) and, therefore, RF emissions (as a health concern) are not a material consideration for the Planning Authority.

3. CONCLUSIONS

3.1 In conclusion, it is my opinion that the site is acceptable for a development of this nature. It is situated off the public highway, there is existing landscaping and buildings to screen it to a degree and it is located within an existing commerciallindustrial location. There is an obvious concern attached to telecommunication masts, however they are required, not only in the interests of companies fulfilling their license requirements, but in the Council's interests in maintaining an economically competitive environment in the interests of its residents. I therefore recommend that given the location of the site, planning consent is granted. Application No. S/O 1/O 1382/AMD Date registered 19 October 200 1 APPLICANT VIEWPARK SPORT & FITNESS CLUB, BURNHEAD STREET, VIEWPARK Agent Bernard Smith, 9 Aberlady Street, Cleland, ML1 5RJ DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF SPORT AND FITNESS CLUB WITH CHANGING ROOMS LOCATION BURNHEAD STREET, VIEWPARK

Ward No. 23 Grid Reference 271499-661482

File Reference S/PL/B/9/10 1/JL/AH

Site History Planning consent was granted on 26/4/01 for the erection of a sport and fitness club at land adjacent to the current application site (ref. no. S/01/00113/FUL)

Development Plan Protected Open Space on Southern Area Local Plan - Finalised Draft

Contrary to Development Plan Yes

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection Transco, The Coal Authority Conditions No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS The applicant seeks planning consent for an amendment to the original, approved consent, for the erection of a Health and Fitness Club at land north of the Community Centre, Burnhead Street, Viewpark. The original application was for the erection of a health and fitness club within the existing car park area to the east of the Community Centre. This site is no longer the preferred site. The preferred site is now the grassed area between the rear of the Community Centre and the football pitches. This site allows for a larger pavilion, which will now incorporate North Lanarkshire Council changing room facilities for the adjacent football pitches. No objections have been received from notified neighbours or the consultees and the design and layout of the proposed structure meets with my approval, I therefore recommend that planning consent is granted for this amendment.

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 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 inay be required.

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

3. That before the development hereby permitted is brought into use, all the fences, or walls, as approved under the terms of condition 2 above, shall be erected.

Reason: To ensure adequate boundary treatment.

4. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing inaterials 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 inay be required.

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

List of Background Papers

Application form and plans dated 19/10/01 Southern Area Local Plan - Finalised Draft (modified June 2001) Letter dated 29/10/0 1 from Transco Letter dated 30/10/0 1 from The Coal Authority

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302 142 and ask for Mr Lennon. Application No. S/O 110 1385RUL Date registered 18 October 2001 APPLICANT W.S. MILLAR & SON, NEWLANDS FARM, UDDINGSTON, G77 5PL Agent Jim Frew, 39 Common Green, Strathaven, MLlO 6AQ DEVELOPMENT ERECTION OF BUNGALOW LOCATION NEWLANDS FARM, UDDINGSTON, G715PL

Ward No. 21 Grid Reference 269427662865

File Reference S/PL/B/9/72( 15)/JD/LG

Site History Outline planning permission for Residential Development, Formation of Landscape Framework and Forming Access, Refused 10 February 1997, Application no: S/96/00267/OUT

Development Plan UddingstodTannochside Town Map - zoned Greenbelt and Agricultural Land Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 2001) - zoned as Greenbelt

Contrary to Development Plan Yes

CONSULTATIONS

Objection No Objection NLC Community Services, The Coal Authority, British Telecom Conditions West of Scotland Water, Transco No Reply Scottish Power, Scottish Environment Protection Agency

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours No Response Newspaper Advertisement No Response

COMMENTS Detailed planning permission is sought for the erection of a bungalow at Newlands Farm, Uddingston. The site is zoned as Greenbelt and Agricultural land on the development plans and as such was duly advertised as development contrary in the local press. No objections have been raised in relation to this proposal and the applicant has demonstrated an agricultural need for the additional dwellinghouse at this location. For the reasons contained in my accompanying report, I hereby recommend that planning permission be granted.

RECOMMENDATION

Grant subject to the following conditions:- Produced by PLANNING APPLICATION No. S I01 I01385 I FUL N oepaltment of ~lann~ngend Environment soumern Division 303 Brandon Street MOTHERWELL ERECTION OF BUNGALOW MLl 1RS Telephone 01808 302100 FBX.01698 302101 NEWLANDS FARM, UDDINGSTON. 1:5000 OS Ucsnse LA 09041L 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 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 before the development hereby permitted is completed, all the fences, or walls, as approved under the terms of condition 2 above, shall be erected.

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

4. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing materials to be used on all external walls and roofs shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required.

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

5. That the occupation of the dwellinghouse hereby permitted shall be limited to a person employed full time locally in agriculture, as defined in Section 277 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, or forestry, or a dependant of such a person, residing with him, or her, or the widow or widower, of such a person.

Reason: To accord with the approved Green Belt policy

6. That before the dwellinghouse hereby permitted is occupied 2 car parking spaces shall be provided within the curtilage of the plot and outwith the public road or footway, and thereafter be maintained as parking spaces.

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

Application form and plans dated 18 October 2001 UddingstodTannochside Town Map Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 2001) Letter dated 5 November 200 1 from Transco Letter dated 7 November 2001 from The Coal Authority Letter dated 9 November 2001 from British Telecom Letter dated 15 November 2001 from West of Scotland Water Memo dated 21 November 2001 from NLC Community Services

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302 137 and ask for Joanne Delaney. APPLICATION NO. S/O 1/01385FUL

REPORT

1. SITE AND PROPOSAL

1.1 The application site forms part of the agricultural land at Newlands Farm. The site covers an area of approximately 0.28 acres and will accommodate a detached 3 bedroom bungalow with ancillary car parking and garden ground.

1.2 The farm is managed as a family dairy unit. The unit is currently serviced by one dwellinghouse but the applicant is seeking consent for a second house to enable one of his sons to be resident on the farm and assist with the management of the farm and its stock.

1.3 A supporting statement submitted by the Scottish Agriculture College advocated an agricultural justification for the new dwelling on the basis that 2 people working full-time in agriculture, were required at Newlands Farm to address the level of cover required. Until recently Mr Millar’s sons have lived in the main farmhouse with the family and they have provided the required continuity of livestock supervision cover. As they are now at the stage of setting up their own households, it is necessary that an additional house be provided at the farm in order to maintain the required level of cover.

2. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

2.1 The site is zoned as Green Belt in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified June 2001). The relevant local plan policies for assessing this application are ENV6 - “Green Belt” and HSG 12 “Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside”. Planning advice Note No.36 also provides useful advice on the attention which should be paid to assessing applications for houses in a rural location.

2.2 Policy ENV6 states that within the greenbelt there will be a presumption against new development unless it is demonstrated that it is required for agricultural, forestry or other appropriate rural uses. The information contained in the Agricultural Labour Requirement report from SAC provides an agricultural justification for the new dwelling and therefore accords with this policy.

2.3 Policy HSG12 and Planning Advice Note no. 36 provide a list of criteria upon which to assess new housing in the greenbelt. In this regard the proposal is considered to take cognisance of its rural location in terms of orientation, scale and design of the dwelling.

3. CONCLUSION

3.1 No objections were received following advertisement, neighbour notification and statutory consultation. In addition, the utility companies have confirmed that the site can be serviced.

3.2 The proposal is held to be complementary to local plan policy in terms of its agricultural justification and aesthetics of design. Furthermore, the proposal accords with Council open space policy in terms of garden ground and car parking provision. Subject to approval of suitable finishing materials for the dwellinghouse, the proposal will complement the existing form steading and fit comfortably within the landscape.

3.3 It is for these reasons that I recommend that planning permission be granted.