North Lanarkshire Council
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT
Planning Applications for consideration of Planning and Environment Committee
Committee Date : 30fhNovember 2005
Ordnance Survey maps reproduced from Ordnance Survey with permission of HMSO Crown Copyright reserved APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 30 NOVEMBER 2005
Page Application No. Applicant DevelopmentlLocus Recommendation No.
20 C/03/0187 1/MI N William Tracey Non Compliance with Time Limit Grant Limited Condition of Planning Permission M92121 (To Extend Operation Until 2008) Pinwhinnie - Development Site at Raebog Road Glenmavis Airdrie, Lanarkshire
26 C/04/00022/FUL Mr G Brodie Erection of Double Garage at Refuse 32 Aitkenhead Avenue, Coatbridge
29 C/05/01363/FU L Mr D McKee Erection of 2 Dwellinghouses at Grant East Row Cottage, Chisholm Street, Coatbridge
34 C/05/01458/FUL Redrow Homes Change of Use from Footpath to Refuse (Scotland) Ltd Garden Ground - Footpath Between 31 & 33 Moorcroft Drive Airdrie
39 C/05/01465/FUL Orange PCS Ltd Erection of 15m Monopole and Grant Installation of Telecommunications Equipment and Erection of Fence and Planting Screen - Land at Drumpellier Cricket Club Drumpellier Avenue, Coatbridge
44 Hutchison 3G Extension of Existing 15 Metre Grant UK Ltd Telecommunications Lattice Tower to 20 Metres Incorporating 6 Antennas and 2 Microwave Dishes with Ancillary Equipment Cabinets - Land on North East Side of Langmuir Road South Of Railway Line, Langmuir Road, Bargeddie
47 C/05/0150 1/FU L Mr J Thomson Erection of Dwellinghouse - Refuse 27 Main Street, Plains, Airdrie
52 C/05/01560/AMD Mr & Mrs Brown Erection of Dog Kennels - Grant Land at Riggend Farm, Stirling Road Riggend Airdrie
58 C/05/01618/FUL Mr I Mohammed Subdivision of Existing General Grant Store to Form Two Commercial Outlets One Being Class 3 (Hot Food Takeaway) - 234 Glenmavis Road Glenmavis Ai rdrie
65 C/05/01638/0UT John Sinnett Erection of Dwellinghouse (In Grant Outline) Land east of 26 lnvervale Avenue Airdrie APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 30 NOVEMBER 2005
Page Application No. Applicant DevelopmentlLocus Recommendation No.
71 C/05/01672/AMD Mr G Stronge Amendment to Planning Grant Permission C05/00902/FUL (Erection of Conservatory) to Include Decking and Fencing - 12 Drumshangie Place Airdrie
76 C/05/01689/0UT Mrs Mary Duff Erection of Dwellinghouse (In Refuse (P) Outline) - Land east of Junction of Ballochney Road with Arbuckle Road, Plains
82 C/05/0 17 1610UT Mr Matthew Erection of Flatted Development Grant Lees (in outline) - 35-39 Main Street, Chapelhall, Airdrie
87 SI0 110 1609/FU L Mr James Change of Use of Farm Grant Young Outbuildings to Two Dwellinghouses - Farm Steading at Hill Of Murdostoun Cleland Motherwell Lanarkshire
94 S/05/01316/FUL Turnberry Erection of 34 Dwellinghouses Grant (P) Homes Ltd and Associated Access Roads - Land at Holm Gardens Bellshill Lanarkshire
S/05/01564/FUL Be1haven Erection of Timber Decking and Grant Breweries (Pubs 1.8 Metre High Fence to Form Site Visit and Hearing Division) Ltd Outside Smoking Area - Requested Girdwoods Bar 180 Hill Street No papers issued Wishaw Lanarkshire
101 S/05/01579/OUT Mr Grant Mackin Erection of Dwellinghouse - Grant 189 Merry Street Motherwell Lanarkshire
106 S/05/01609/FUL Pars Properties Change of Use from Class 1 to Grant Ltd Class 3 and/or Hot Food Takeaway - 2 Market Place Uddingston
C/05/01689/OUT - if granted, refer to Scottish Ministers (Contrary to Policy) S/05/01316/FUL - if granted, Section 69 Agreement Required (Financial contribution to upgrade play facilities) Application No: C/03/01871/MIN
Date Registered: 15th December 2003
Applicant: William Tracey Ltd Clo Agent
Agent Bruce & Partners (Edinburgh) 18 Walker Street Edinburgh EH3 7LP
Development: Non Compliance with Time Limit Condition of Planning Permission M92121 (To Extend Operation Until December 2008)
Location: Pinwhinnie Development Site RaebogRoad Glenmavis Ai rd rie Lanarkshire
Ward: 45 New Monklands West Councillor Sophia Coyle
Grid Reference: 275730668250
File Reference: C/PL/GMR0721GQIEL
Site History: C/86/311 Open cast extraction of combustible material from former domestic tip and restoration of land. Granted 1986.
C/92/00120 Open cast extraction of combustible material from former domestic tip and restoration of land. Granted December 1992.
C/93/00047 Outline planning application for formation of golf course. Granted April 1993.
Development Plan: Under the Adopted Monklands Local Plan 1991, the application site is covered by policy GBI (Greenbelt)
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: Scottish Environment Protection Agency (No objections)
Representations: 3 representation letters
Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 24th December 2003 Planning Application No. C/03/01871/FUL
?mucadby Non Compliance with Time Limit Condition of NomLma*:n,re cainci, PlBn",ng 8"d li",rmmn: UBpsdnisn: Planning Permission M92121 (To Extend Operation Until December 2008) FleI%ngHiodre lirislioed C"n:erM"lC GC'>"w 'e 0'216t16210 llXCIil6 61611i Pinwhinnie Development Site, Raebog Road, Glenmavis, Airdrie Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-
1. That, for the avoidance of doubt, the development hereby granted permission shall be discontinued and all buildings and machinery removed not later than 15 December 2008
Reason: To make it clear that this development is time limited as per the originally permitted development.
2. That, notwithstanding the details submitted as part of this application, within 3 months of the date of this permission, or such other date as may be agreed with the Planning Authority, the applicant shall submit and obtain written approval of the Planning Authority of full details of the progressive restoration of the site and the details shall include the following:-
a) a description of the restoration proposals in the form of a method statement covering all works, and of how these comply with the licensing regimes administered by SEPA.
b) a detailed site layout plan including all existing site features to be retained and all proposed planting works (including species types and nos).
c) an indicative timetable/schedule of all works. d) proposed site contours
e) after care details of the restored areas including timescale f) public access/footpath networks
Reason: In order that the restoration of the site is undertaken to a high standard that satisfies and secures landscape, amenity and conservation interests.
3. That all restoration shall be implemented in full and in accordance with the details approved under condition 2 above, including programming.
Reason: In order that the restoration of the site is undertaken to a high standard which satisfies and secures landscape, amenity and conservation interests.
4. That there shall be no importation of any materials onto the site other than earth and top soil required for site restoration and reinstatement.
Reason: In order that the restoration of the site is undertaken to a high standard which satisfies and secures landscape, amenity and conservation interests.
5. That suitable wheel cleaning facilities shall be in place and operational at all times
Reason: In the interests of amenity and road safety. 6. That extraction operations shall only take place from Monday to Friday, 7 a.m. until 8 p.m. and Saturday 8.00 a.m. until 1.00 p.m., or such other hours as may be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: To reflect the originally permitted development and to ensure there are no adverse noise impacts.
7. That within 6 months of the date of the approval required under condition 2 of this permission, a report compiled by a suitably qualified independent party shall be submitted to the Planning Authority showing the progress that has been made with the development and the progress in complying with the details approved under condition 2, and thereafter, at intervals to be agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, conditions compliance reports, prepared by an independent person, shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for information.
Reason: To assess compliance with conditions and establish an on going monitoring regime in respect of restoration.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 15th December 2003
Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 11 February 2004
Letter from John Hook,Raebog House, 257 Stirling Road, Airdrie, ML6 7SP received 14th January 2004. Letter from Biggat Baillie Solicitors,Dalmore House, 310 St Vincent Street, Glasgow, G2 5QR received 15th January 2004. Letter from Owner/Occupier,Stand Farm, Airdrie, ML6 7FP received 28th June 2004.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Gerard Quinn at 01236 812381. APPLICATION NO. C/03/01871/MIN
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.I The proposal is for the continuation of the recovery of carbon, (and progressive restoration operations) at Pinwhinnie Glenmavis. The site, which extends to 31 hectares, and contains a remaining 60,000 tonnes (approx) of carbon has been operational since planning permission was originally granted in 1986, and extended in 1992. At the current rate of extraction, ( 20,000 tonnes per year) it is expected that the remaining material will be extracted in full, and the site restored, by December 2008.
1.2 The application has submitted a full supporting written statement and in this respect the development would continue in accordance generally with the methods of working previously approved. The site would be restored to a mixture of grassland and woodland
1.3 The applicant has made it clear that the inability to have completed within the previously approved timescales was purely a market situation over which the operator has had little control. In the past, the main market had been from Norway, but the weakening of sterling against the Norwegian Kroner made such exports uncompetitive against Chinese supply markets. However, the Chinese supply market has now been serving a new demand for steel making in its own country, and Sterling has again strengthened to the point where the export of Pinwhinnie material to Scandinavia is now again possible.
2. Development Plan
2.1 Under the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan, the site is zoned under policy GBI( greenbelt). There are no strategic issues with the proposal.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 No Consultees have offered any objections to the proposal.
3.2 Objections have been raised by two residents on the grounds of noise, dust and quality of restoration. Another objection has come in from the owner of the adjacent former Laverocknowe quarry. This objection is on the grounds that the operator will not complete the development, and that the Council has shown an unwillingness to consider redevelopment of the quarry and to look at the planning future of the wider area as a whole.
4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 As far as the develop-ment plan position is concerned, it is considered that the proposal, as time extended, would be ultimately beneficial to this part of the green belt, by the rehabilitation of an area previously despoiled by waste disposal. Whilst it is appreciated that it would not be desirable for the site to operate indefinitely, it is considered reasonable to give the operator the opportunity to complete the development and the environmental benefits that would come with it, given the clear upturn in the market for the material concerned. 4.2 The amenity issues raised by the two objectors are noted. However, the operation, in practice, has not given rise to significant complaints or problems relative to noise or dust to an extent that would justify suspension of the operations, and the loss of the longer term environmental benefits of the development from good restoration.
4.3 As for the objection from Laverocknowe quarry, it cannot be assumed to that the operator does not intend to complete the development. All evidence on site shows that the operator is now making steady progress towards completion at the end of 2008. The current Local Plan review covers the wider vision for the general area, and it is considered that the current extension would have no significant influence on this process.
4.4 It is considered therefore that the development, as time extended, would be acceptable from a planning viewpoint and therefore that planning permission should be granted subject to conditions. Application No: C/04/00022/FUL
Date Registered: 9th January 2004
Applicant : Mr G Brodie 32 Aitkenhead Avenue Coatbridge ML5 5SH
Development: Erection of Double Garage
Location: 32 Aitkenhead Avenue Coatbridge Lanarkshire ML5 5SH
Ward: 37 Kirkwood Councillor James Smith JP
Grid Reference: 270933663737
File Reference: CIPLICTA330032lLMIEL
Site History:
Development Plan: The site is covered by policy HG9 (Existing Residential Area) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations:
Representations: None received
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
Comments: c
The development for which planning permission is sought is for the erection of a double garage. The application site is a semi-detached property located within an established housing area. It is proposed that the garage would be located in the rear garden and would cover an area of approximately 52 metres square, and would leave approximately 2.8 metres from the rear building line available as garden ground. The site is designated as HG9 (Existing Housing) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. As the application raises no strategic issues, it can be assessed in terms of the local plan.
The Transportation Section’s response has indicated no objection to the application, however, concerns were raised about the ability of vehicles to manoeuvre into the garage from the driveway.
Through the Local Plan the Council seeks to encourage the adoption of standards of design and layout most beneficial to the surrounding environment. The current garden area has a length of 11metres and the proposal would reduce this to approximately 2.8 metres. The Council’s approved Developers Guide to Open Space “Space Around Dwellings” specifically requires that new developments should have an adequate area for the dwelling and private garden ground, should not adversely affect the character of the area, this principle can also be used as a guide to existing properties wishing to develop within the curtilage of their property. In terms of the guidance the proposal would mean a rear garden length is well short of the recommended minimum requirement of 10 metres. In effect this reduction would not leave sufficient useable garden ground appropriate for the size of house. :i /; ~
Planning Application No C/04/00022/FUL
Erection of Double Garage
32 Aitkenhead Avenue Coatbridge The applicant has been informed of the situation and indicated that amended plans would be submitted. However, despite numerous reminders to the applicant no further plans have been received. In light of this it is felt that the application requires to be determined in its current form. Therefore I consider that the development is contrary to the development plan in terms of the design guidance for rear extension in the Monklands District Local Plan and that there are no material planning considerations that would merit departing from those polices. I therefore recommend that planning permission be refused for the following reasons.
Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-
1. That the proposed garage would not allow a sufficient standard of amenity garden ground to remain within the site and would therefore be contrary to the Council's Design Guidance on "Open Space - Space Around Dwellings'' which is agreed Council policy.
2. That the proposed garage is contrary to the Development Control Design Guidance "House Extensions" associated with Policy HG9 Existing Housing in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 in that the garage would not leave sufficient garden ground appropriate for the size of house.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 9th January 2004
Draft memo from Transportation Section received 15 March 2004.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Leigh Menzies at 01236 812372. Application No: C1051013631FUL
Date Registered: 18th August 2005
Applicant : Mr D. McKee Greenfield House Molliesburn Road Airdrie
Agent D. Stewart Toy 29A High Street Lanark ML11 7LU
Development: Demolition of Dwellinghouse to Facilitate the Erection of TWO Dwellinghouses
Location: East Row Cottage Chisholm Street Coatbridge Lanarkshire ML5 2AU
Ward: 33 North Central And Glenboig Councillor Mary Clark
Grid Reference: 273721 665987
File Reference: C/PLICTC41600011J/EL
Site History:
Development Plan: The site is covered by policy HG9: Existing Residential Area in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations:
Representations: 2 Letters of objection (1 Letter with 4 signatures)
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-
1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started within five years of the date of this permission
Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. Not toSmle 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 the development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the amended plans (ref:1762/1 Rev.A) hereby approved and no change to the design or layout shall take place without the prior written approval of the Planning Authority.
Reason: To define the permission.
4. That before either of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted are occupied, a private vehicular access, or driveway, of at least 6 metres in width, as shown on the approved plans, shall be provided 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 satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access facilities to the dwellings.
5. That before either of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted are occupied 2 car parking spaces shall be provided within the curtilage of each 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.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 11 th August 2005
Memo from Transportation received 15th September 2005
Letter from R. Elliot,18 Greenside Street, Coatbridge, ML5 2AX received 29th August 2005. Letter from J. Docherty,20 Greenside Street, Coatbridge, ML5 2AX received 29th August 2005. Letter from J. Pau1,22 Greenside Street, Coatbridge, ML5 2AX received 29th August 2005. Letter from D. Paterson,24 Greenside Street, Coatbridge, ML5 2AX received 29th August 2005. Letter from Mr McGoldrick,C/o C. Campbell, 18 Chisholm Street, Coatbridge, ML5 2AU received 1st September 2005.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr lan Johnston at 01236 812382. APPLICATION NO. C1051013631FUL
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.I The application site is rectangular in shape and is located within the Burnbank area of Coatbridge adjacent to the junction of Chisholm Street and Greenside Street. The surrounding uses are all residential and the site currently contains a single storey detached dwellinghouse that accesses directly onto Chisholm Street opposite Alston Avenue.
1.2 The proposal is for the erection of 2 detached dwellinghouses which will be served by a single vehicular driveway onto Chisholm Street at a point slightly north of the existing access. The dwellings will be identical in design and will be 2 storey in height with traditional pitched roof construction, externally finished in render with concrete roof tiles. Internally each new build will accommodate a Hall, Living Room, Kitchen, Dining Room, WC, and Integral Garage on the ground floor. On the upper floor 4 Bedrooms, Bathroom and Lounge will be provided.
1.3 To accommodate the development the existing dwellinghouse on site will require to be demolished.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The site is covered by policy HG9: Existing Residential Area in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991, The proposal raises no strategic issues.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 The Transportation Section has offered no objection to this proposal subject to conditions although they had registered their preference for the site access to be located towards the northern boundary of the site.
3.2 Following the standard neighbour notification procedures 2 letters of objection were received against this proposal. One of the letters contained 4 signatures. The main points of objection are as follows: a) Any 2 storey dwellings would overshadow the rear of the properties in Greenside Street.
b) The existing hedge and trees along the eastern boundary of the site are not maintained by the applicant and protrude into the adjacent public footpath with the result that some of the slabs are breaking up to create a danger to pedestrians. These trees are approximately 15 feet high and overshadow the footpath and half of the rear gardens of the properties in Greenside Street.
c) The proposed new driveway would be alongside the Patio and Play Area of the adjacent property.
4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 This application requires to be considered against the development plan as required by Section 25 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In terms of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area covered by policy HG9: Existing Residential Areas and is bounded on all elevations by existing residential properties. Taken also that the site is currently occupied by a residential property then in policy terms the proposal is compliant with the development plan.
4.2 In terms of design it should firstly be noted that the surrounding properties to the east, west and south of the application site are all 2 storey in height while the properties directly to the north are 3 storey flats. Taken the rising contours of the land on Chisholm Street then the introduction of a 2 storey development within the application site would fit in well with the rising pattern of roof lines along Chisholm Street between Burnbank Street and Greenside Street. The proposed setting of the buildings within the site are also compliant with the design guidance on “lnfill Housing” and the Developer’s Guide to “Open Space around Dwellings” and the external materials are in sympathy with the surrounding properties. In respect of Plot 2 the proposal is not considered as “backland” in terms of the design guidance as the positioning of the building within that plot provides both for a prominent elevation frontage onto Greenside Street (to the north) while also allowing for the communal driveway to access the integral garage on the buildings main (southern) elevation. The Transportation Section had initially recommended that the driveway location be re-positioned to the north of the site although they have accepted a slight repositioning of the existing driveway in an improved form.
4.3 In respect of the objections received I would offer the following comment:
a) it should firstly be noted that the proposed dwelling (plot 2) nearest the properties on Greenside Street will be positioned in excess of 14 metres from the rear wall of those properties and no windows over habitable rooms are proposed on the eastern gable of the new build. As such there will be no privacy conflict between properties and taken that the new build will be in excess of 6 metres from the rear fence of the adjacent properties (on Greenside Street) then -there should be no overshadowing issue. b) It is the intention of the applicant to remove the existing hedge and fencing along the eastern boundary of the application. Any damage caused to the adjacent public footpath by the hedgekrees is a matter to be addressed by the appropriate department and not relevant to the consideration of this application. c) The proposed driveway is required to replace an existing driveway and the slight re- positioning (to the north) to a standard required by the Transportation Section will improve both vehicular and pedestrian safety at the point of access into the development site.
4.4 Having regard to the foregoing I consider the proposal to be acceptable both in terms of compliance with policy and standard of design and layout within the site. I do not consider that the points of objection merit the refusal of this application and therefore I recommend that planning permission be granted subject to the attached conditions. Application No: C/05/01458/FUL
Date Registered: 5th September 2005
Applicant: Redrow Homes (Scotland) Ltd 3 Central Park Avenue Larbert FK5 4RX
Development: Change of Use from Footpath to Garden Ground
Location: Footpath Between 31 & 33 Moorcroft Drive Airdrie Lanarkshire ML6 8ES
Ward: 44 Clarkston Councillor Campbell Cameron
Grid Reference: 278549 66521 7
File Reference: C/PL/AIM73531/CM/EL
Site History:
Development Plan: Under the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area covered by Policy HG9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas)
Contrary to Development Plan: Yes
Consultations:
Representations: 5 letters of Representation
Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 14th September 2005
Recommendation:
Refuse, for the reason that the footpath currently provides an essential pedestrian link, not only in the immediate Moorcroft DriveIStaffa Drive area but also forms part of a network of footpaths which provides an important pedestrian thoroughfare through the outlying housing estate. Its closure would result in an unacceptable detour of some 320 m for pedestrians walking to Caldervale High School and also result in a break in the wider footpath network. Its closure would be detrimental to the amenity of the surrounding and outlying residential area. As such the proposal is considered to be contrary to Policy HG9(A) of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991.
Background Papers:
Application form, plans, letters of support and Support Statement received 1st September 2005
Memo from Transportation Section received 16th November 2005 Letter from Councillor Campbell Cameron received 31st October 2005
Letter from Mr & Mrs Easton,20 Moorfield Crescent, Airdrie, ML6 8ET received 29th September 2005. Letter from I. McLeod,38 Moorfield Crescent, Airdrie, ML6 8ET received 27th September 2005. Letter from L. Turnbull,66 Moorcroft Drive, Airdrie, ML6 8ES received 27th September 2005. Letter from V. Mahoney,75 Moorcroft Drive, Airdrie, ML6 8ES received 27th September 2005. Letter from S.Robison,38 Craigdhu Avenue, Airdrie, ML6 8EN received 28th September 2005. Letter from S.Robison,38 Craigdhu Avenue, Airdrie, ML6 8EN received 6th October 2005.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Colin Marshall at 01236 812376. APPLICATION NO. C1051014581FUL
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.I Planning permission is being sought for the closure of a public footpath between 31 and 33 Moorcroft Drive, Airdrie. The footpath provides a link between Staffa Drive and Moorcroft Drive and was provided as part of an approved housing development constructed in 1994.
1.2 The proposals would involve the closure of the footpath, removal of the footpath surface, grass verges, and street lighting column, erection of timber screen fencing and kerb edging. The ground would also be incorporated into the garden curtilage of 31 Moorcroft Drive.
1.3 The application details included 14 letters of support from local residents, The Director of Housing and Property Services (who advised that Cllr Morris is also supportive) and Strathclyde Police.
1.4 A supporting statement was also included with the application details. In summary this suggests that other desire routes have been established and this footpath is no longer essential and that other alternatives are available. The elderly and infirm have the advantage of the “Dial a Bus Service”. The statement also suggested removal of the footpath would offer the following benefits: 0 Increased amenity for adjacent residents due to its closure and removal of pedestrians. 0 Removal of residents maintenance responsibilities for the footpath. Removal of anti-social behaviour. 0 Reduction in maintenance costs to NLC following full adoption of the footpath and increased security for adjacent residents.
2. Development Plan
2.1 Under the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area covered by Policy HG9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas)
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 The Transportation Section recommended the application be refused planning permission. It was considered that the footpath serves as important pedestrian link from not only the Moorcroft Drive area but also from Craigvale Crescent and potentially from West Drive to Towers Road and Caldervale High School. Should the footpath be closed, the alternative route for pedestrians using the footpath en-route to Caldervale High School would be at least 320m longer. Street lighting columns also illuminate the footpath.
3.2 There were 5 letters of objection received in regards to the proposals. These can be fairly summarised as follows.
The footpath provides an important link for children walking to school and for gaining access to bus stops in Towers Road.
0 Anti-social behaviour should not be used as a reason to justify the footpath’s closure. The police should deal with such incidents.
0 The footpath’s closure would be inconvenient, resulting in significant detours via the busy, traffic-accident prone, Towers Road, Petersburn Road junction. It would also increase walking distances for children going to school. This would be detrimental to pedestrian safety, particularly school children and harm residential amenity of the area.
0 The footpath provides useful pedestrian links to other parts of the housing estate.
Access to the bus stop at Staffa Drive would be lost and this would be a particular disadvantage to older disabled residents.
0 If the footpath is closed, the alternative route is not acceptable, as this would be approximately 5 times the current walking distance.
4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 Under the terms of Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, Planning Authorities are required that in determining planning application proposals, where regard is to be had to the Development Plan, determination should be in accordance with this Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this instance there are no strategic issues, therefore the application details require to be determined under the terms of Policy HG9 of the local plan and any other material consideration.
4.2 Under the terms of Policy HG9 there is a presumption against development which is likely to adversely affect the amenity of the area or is not clearly of a nature ancillary to housing. The main issue to be determined in this case, is whether or not the footpath closure could take place with no detriment to residential amenity.
4.3 The Support Statement provided with the application details suggests that there would be advantages gained by the residents living near the footpath and that its closure could be achieved with little affect on other residents. These are noted in paragraph 1.4 above. In addition it is noted that the proposals are supported by the Police, Cllr Morris (Assistant Convenor of the Housing and Property Services Committee) and The Director of Housing and Property Services. The Police advised that they had received 19 reports of youth related incidents and that the closure of this lane would not be detrimental to the policing plan in this area.
4.4 The Transportation Section has recommended that the proposals be refused planning permission, as the loss of this particular footpath would result in significant detours of over 300m for pedestrians that currently make use of the footpath. It is noted that this footpath provides a footpath link from the housing estate to the local school and also forms part of a longer thoroughfare through the estate. There are no other viable alternative routes, which offer similar walking distances.
4.5 The objectors also raised significant concerns over the closure of the footpath and these can be sustained in this instance.
4.6 On balance it is considered that the small advantages gained by a few residents do not outweigh the disadvantages that would be created by the proposed closure of this footpath. The reported incidents of anti-social behaviour in the area are unfortunate. However as noted by one of the objectors, such incidents are a matter for the police to address and should not be used as a reason to justify the closure of a well used footpath. It is therefore considered that the proposals would be detrimental to the amenity of the surrounding residential area, as the closure would result in a significant detour for the majority of residents in the area. The closure would also result in the break in continuity of a pedestrian thoroughfare which leads from Towers Road through the estate to the public open space area to the west of the estate. The proposals are considered to be contrary to the terms of Policy HG9 of the local plan and it is therefore recommended that planning permission be refused. Application No: CIO 510 1465/F UL
Date Registered: 2nd September 2005
Applicant: Orange PCS Ltd 6 Masterton Way Tannochside Park Glasgow G71 5PT
Development: Erection of 15m Monopole and Installation of Telecommunications Equipment and Erection of Fence and Planting Screen
Location: Land At Drumpellier Cricket Club Drumpellier Avenue Coatbridge Lanarks hi re ML5 IJP
Ward: 32 Blairpark Councillor William Shields
Grid Reference: 271 839 664761
File Reference: CIPLICTD476ICMVEL
Site History: 01/013081FUL Installation of 14.9metre high Telecommunications Monopole and Associated Equipment Cabinet - Granted on the 23.01.2002 03/01 1821FUL Erection of 15m High Telecommunications Mast and Associated Equipment Cabinet and Compound - Granted on the 17.09.2003 03/018551FUL Erection of 17.5m High Telecommunications Monopole and Associated Cabinets and Compound - Granted on the 16.02.2004 05IOO7501FUL Erection of 15m Telecommunication Mast with 6 Antennas, 2 Dishes and Ancillary Equipment Cabinets - Granted on the 27.06.2005
Development Plan: The application site is located in an area covered by policy GBI (Restrict Development in the Green Belt).
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: West of Scotland Archaeology Service (Conditions)
Representations: None
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
The applicant is seeking planning permission for the erection of a 15 metre monopole, installation of telecommunication equipment and erection of fence and planting screen. This site is located within the grounds of Drumpellier Cricket Club, Drumpellier Avenue, Coatbridge.
It is proposed that the telecommunication monopole will be of timber construction to reduce its visual impact and will incorporate 3 antennas, 2 dishes and 3 associated cabinets. The site is adjacent to a group of trees that either screen or provide a backdrop to the mast depending on viewpoint. There are four other timber monopole masts on the site that for technical reasons cannot be shared without redevelopment to an existing mast which would require to be at least 22 metres in height. This would be substantially more visually intrusive than the existing proposal. The proposed fence and associated cabinets are to be painted green to reduce the impact on the visual amenity. Following discussions, amended drawings were received on the 3rd November 2005 to show the telecommunication monopole moved approximately 13 metres west of the original application site. The necessary neighbour notification was completed on the 2"dof November 2005.
The site is zoned as GBI (Green Belt Area) and policy TELI (Telecommunications Developments) of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991. There are no strategic implications. There were no objections received following neighbour notification and consultation procedures. However, Education have requested that the proximity to the local school and the possible impact on school intake is taken in to consideration. The proposed mast is located approximately 300 metres from the nearest school building. Efforts have been made by the applicant to distance the monopole from the school as much as possible and this in planning terms is acceptable. West of Scotland Archaeology Service have advised that because of the uncertainty over whether archaeological remains will be disturbed during construction the most appropriate way in which the archaeological issue can be addressed is through the attachment of an archaeological watching brief condition to the planning permission. This is addressed in condition No 9.
Policy TELI contained in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 indicates that any telecommunications developments will be considered with regard to national policy and against; economic benefit, specific locational need and environmental impact. It is unlikely that there would be a significant negative or positive impact in regard to economic benefit that can be measured. It will be of general benefit to the community to have full coverage of their existing radio network. As for specific locational need several sites were investigated and site-share in this case was chosen to provide the appropriate network coverage. It is considered that the proposal meets the criteria stipulated in policy TEL 1 and should not significantly impact on the amenity of the area.
In considering environmental impact, the proposed installation will not have a significant visual impact, as there are similar antennas on the existing tower. Therefore, this overrides normal GBI considerations as it is considered that the environmental impact is acceptable. As for related health impact the proposal is in accordance with all relevant national planning policy and the applicant has submitted the ICNIRP compliance certificate.
The proposed development is in accordance with local plan policy and national policy guidance in PAN 62 and NPPG 19 Radio Telecommunications.
It is therefore recommended 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. In the event that the equipment hereby approved becomes redundant it shall be removed and the site reinstated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority within one month of the equipment becoming redundant.
Reason: To ensure restoration of the site to a satisfactory standard.
3. That 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: To enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control in the interest of amenity.
4. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping for the area within the RED boundary 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) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; and (b) details of the phasing of these works.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
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 area within the RED boundary on the approved plans.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
6. That within one year of the' erection of the mast hereby permitted, all planting and seeding 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 the provision of screening to the compound in the interest of visual amenity of the adjacent residential properties.
7. That immediately on completion of the details approved under condition 4 above, the management and maintenance scheme approved under the terms of condition 5 shall be in operation.
Reason: To ensure the management and maintenance of the screen planting to the compound in the interest of visual amenity of the adjacent residential properties.
8. 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 adequate tree protection measures during the installation of the development hereby permitted in the interest of amenity. 9. That the developer shall secure the implementation of an archaeological watching brief, to be carried out by an archaeological organisation acceptable to the Planning Authority, during all ground disturbance. The retained archaeological organisation shall be afforded access at all reasonable times and allowed to record and recover items of interest and finds. A method statement for the watching brief shall be submitted by the applicant, agreed by the West of Scotland Archaeology Service, and approved by the Planning Authority prior to commencement of the watching brief. The name of the archaeological organisation retained by the developer shall be given to the Planning Authority and to the West of Scotland Archaeology Service in writing not less than 14 days before development commences.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
10. That the fence and cabinets approved shall be painted dark green from the BS4800 colour range.
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity of the surrounding area.
Background Papers :
Application form and plans received 2nd September 2005
Letter from West of Scotland Archaeology Service received 13'h October 2005 Memo from Education 16'h September 2005
Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 National Planning Policy Guidance 19 Radio Telecommunication, July 2001 Planning Advice Note 62 Radio Telecommunication, September 2001
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Miss Charmaine Mills at 01236 812375. Application No: C/05/01488/FUL
Date Registered: 11th October 2005
Applicant: Hutchison 3G UK Ltd 123 St Vincent Street Glasgow G2 5EA
Agent Jonathon Scales Of Partick Farfan Associates Ltd Unit 12 Adelphi Centre 12 Commercial Road Glasgow G5 OPQ
Development: Extension of Existing 15 Metre Telecommunications Lattice Tower to 20 Metres Incorporating 6 Antennas and 2 Microwave Dishes with Ancillary Equipment Cabinets.
Location: Land On North East Side Of Langmuir Road South Of Railway Line Langmui r Road Bargeddie Glasgow
Ward: 36 Bargeddie And Langloan Councillor Andrew Burns
Grid Reference: 270394 663971
File Reference: C/PL/BALl80000/SM/EL
Site History: 01/00200/ADV Erection of 3M x 12M Illuminated Hoarding - Granted - 12 April 2004 01/00955/FUL Installation of Telecommunications Apparatus - Granted 21 November 2001.
Development Plan: The site is zoned as ECON2 (Existing General Industrial Areas) and assessed against TEL 1 (Telecommunications Development) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations:
Representations: none
Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 19th October 2005 Planning Application No. C/05/01488/FUL
Extension of Existing 15 Metre Telecommunications Lattice Tower to 20 Metres Incorporating 6 Antennas and 2 Microwave Dishes with ancillary Equipment Cabinets -ninr,i .D.IYI.lllm"m,X. I,,*, i,i*IIol _,sll,llll,IlpDl~*lmrO,~DI_I.(~~ *I*DUel*Wlor"/rll Dn 11111.11.. conl..,., 0,HI, "*,lOI mnnno -6 lX,CnllnDOrnS" PY.rP.UII. SClrriOX,,*l VIYIIrnLII FwmomU. l/l.so.! ~O?dYl#W~"rm%iarmar,L,.r6m" CYrnrnlYI 811,.V, ~~,~~,~~:~.,~,~.~~,~~~~"~*,ww>**m, Land on North East Side of Langmuir Road, ~rtum.~*:ame,,nL>,>m 20,. 1.0lzlllbim South of Railway Line, Langmuir Road, Bargeddie NottoScale Comments:
This application seeks permission to extend the existing 15 metre lattice tower to 20 metres incorporating 3 Antenna, 2 microwave dishes antenna and an ancillary equipment cabinet. Planning permission (C/01/00955/FUL) was granted on 21" December 2001for the erection of the existing mast. The site is in an area zoned as ECON 2 (Existing General Industrial Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.
The application is assessed in terms of Policy TELI Telecommunications Development that requires economic benefit, specific locational need and environmental impact to be considered. The applicant has supplied a supporting statement that indicates the need for a mast within this area to meet a shortfall in coverage, which will be of general benefit to business, and domestic users in the area.
The extension to the existing tower is required to enable mast sharing to take place. The extension and additional antenna are considered to be minor development to the existing mast and it is felt that they would have less visual or environmental impact on the area than a new separate ground based mast. In this location the design and height of the mast will not detract from the existing visual amenity or character of the surrounding industrial area.
The required ICNIRP Declaration has been supplied stating that the proposal is in compliance with the international safety standards for electro-magnetic radiation emissions. The proposed development is in accordance with local plan policy and national policy guidance in PAN 62 and NPPG 19 Radio Telecommunications.
No objections were received following the normal neighbour notification and consultation procedure. I consider that the proposed design and size of the equipment meets the criteria stipulated in policy TEL 1 and will not significantly impact on the amenity of the area. There are no strategic implications. Accordingly it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the appropriate 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. In event that the equipment hereby approved becomes redundant it shall be removed and the site reinstated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority within one month of the equipment becoming redundant.
Reason: To ensure restoration of the site to a satisfactory standard
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 2nd September 2005 Monklands District Local Plan 1991
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Susan Miller at 01236 812374. Application No: C/05/01501/FUL
Date Registered: 27th September 2005
Applicant: Mr J Thomson 27 Main Street Plains M L6
Agent W Banks 153 Dundyvan Road Coatbridge ML5 4AG
Development: Erection of Dwellinghouse
Location: 27 Main Street Plains Airdrie Lanarkshire ML6 7JE
Ward: 46 Plains And Caldercruix Councillor Thomas Morgan
Grid Reference: 279338666700
File Reference: PLM75002700/CMl/EL
Site History: 05/00059/FUL Erection of Single Storey Dwellinghouse - Refused I3TH May 2005
Development Plan: The site is covered by policy HG9 (Existing Residential Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: British Gas (No Objections) Scottish Power (No Objections)
Representations: 1 Letter of Representation
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-
1. Refuse for the reason that the proposed dwellinghouse is contrary to the provisions of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 approved Design Guidance on "lnfill Housing" in that the proposal represents a backland development which would be detrimental to the amenity of the area. Erection of Dwellinghouse LI 27 Main Street Plains, Airdrie Representation Made from Councillor Morgan Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 6th September 2005
Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991
Letter from British Gas received 1gth October 2005 Letter from Scottish Power received 1Oth October 2005 Letter from Cllr Morgan received 13'h October 2005
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Miss Charmaine Mills at 01236 812375. APPLICATION NO. C1051015011FUL
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1 .I The application site measures 15 metres (wide) by 32 metres (long) and currently forms part of the rear garden ground of a detached property at 27 Main Street, Plains. The site is located on the north side of Main Street, is a gradually sloping grassed area and is currently maintained as amenity garden ground of no.27 Main Street. The existing dwellinghouse has a large front garden, which fronts onto Main Street and is located within an area of mixed land uses including residential, industrial and commercial.
1.2 This proposal seeks to erect a dwellinghouse within the rear garden area of the existing detached property. The application site would be accessed from the driveway that currently serves the existing property. The dwellinghouse is proposed to be a single storey property, of traditional pitched roof design and externally finished in render with grey concrete roof tiles. Internally the dwelling will accommodate a Lounge, Dining area, Kitchen, and two bedrooms.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The site is covered by policy HG9 (Existing Residential Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The proposal raises no strategic issues.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 Following the standard neighbour notification procedures no objections were received against this proposal.
3.2 One letter has been received in favour of the proposal from Councillor Thomas Morgan. The grounds for support are as follows:
i. This is a resubmission of planning application C/05/00059/FUL with significant alterations. It is thought that these amendments will enhance the opportunity for this application to be granted planning permission.
ii. While the application is contrary to the local plan in terms of backland development other similar developments have been granted planning permission and these developments should be taken into consideration when the application is being assessed.
3.3 None of the statutory consultees offered any objections to the proposal.
4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 In terms of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within a policy HG9 area which seeks to protect such areas by opposing development that adversely affects the amenity of the established housing. The proposed dwellinghouse does not comply with the Design Guidance contained in the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan and referred to in approved design guidance on “Infill housing”. This provides detailed guidance on building a house within the curtilage of another dwellinghouse. 4.2 The guidance states that “In general, the ‘backland’ development of plots without a road frontage will not be acceptable’. With regard to the layout of the application site, the proposed dwellinghouse would be positioned within the rear part of the site behind the building line of the existing detached property and would share a vehicular driveway onto Main Street. The proposal is clearly defined as “backland” development in terms of the design guidance since the new build would have no clear road frontage and would be positioned to the rear of the front building line of the forward most house on the original plot.
4.3 The applicant did submit a similar planning application (C/05/00059/FUL) on the 31“ January 2005 which was subsequently refused planning permission on the 13th May 2005 following a Site Visit and Hearing at the Planning and Environment Committee. The difference with the current application is that the front elevation is now facing west as opposed to east and the proposed dwellinghouse is 1 metre from the boundary line to the east as opposed to 4 metres.
4.4 In relation to the letter of support received from Councillor Morgan I would offer the following com ments :
i. Although there has been a variation in the position and elevation to the previous proposal (C/05/00059/FUL) the proposal is still contrary to the development plan and therefore is not acceptable in planning terms. ii. Each planning application is judged on its own merits. Whilst it is proper for the Planning Authority to be consistent in its consideration of planning applications of a similar nature, it is clear that in this instance that the proposal is contrary to the Council’s guidance on such matters and that the application has no merits which suggest that this guidance should be overturned. The decisions made on planning permissions elsewhere are not considered material in assessing this application as it is entirely at variance with local plan guidance.
4.5 The proposed changes from the previously refused planning application C/05/00059/FUL do not significantly alter the proposal to a level at which it is acceptable in policy terms. I therefore consider the proposal to be unacceptable in that it is “backland” development and therefore contrary to the provisions as set out in the approved Design Guidance on “lnfill Housing” contained in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. I therefore recommend that planning permission be refused for the stated reason. Application No: C/05/01560/AMD
Date Registered: 10th October 2005
Applicant: Mr & Mrs Brown Riggend Farm, Stirling Road Rigg e nd Airdrie Lanar ksh i re ML6 7SS
Agent Ash Architectural Chartered Architects 6 Balgonie Drive Paisley PA2 6HH
Development: Erection of Dog Kennels (In Outline)
Location: Land At Riggend Farm, Stirling Road Riggend Airdrie Lanarkshire ML6 7SS
Ward: 45 New Monklands West Councillor Sophia iyle
Grid Reference: 276567669763
File Reference: CIPLIAIS7281CMIEL
Site History: 02/00048/FUL Erection of 15M Timber Monopole with Two Antenna, Two Microwave Dishes and Associated Equipment Cabinets and Compound 04/01992/OUT Erection of Dwellinghouse and Kennels (In Outline) Refused following Appeal
Development Plan: Under the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area covered by policy GBI (Restrict Development in Green Belt)
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Comments) Scottish Water (No Objection) British Gas (No Objection) Scottish Power (No Objection) Representations: None
Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 19 October 2005
Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-
1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started, either within 5 years of the date of this permission, or within 2 years of the date of which the last of the reserved matters are approved, whichever is the later.
Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.
2. That before development starts, a further planning application shall be submitted to the Planning Authority in respect of the following reserved matters:- (a) the siting, design and external appearance of all buildings and other structures; (b) the means of access to the site including vehicular passing places and junction improvements; (c) the layout of the site, including all roads, footways, and parking areas; (d) the provision of a noise impact assessment on existing dwellinghouses in the surrounding area (e) the design and location of all boundary walls and fences; (f) the provision of drainage works; (9) details of existing trees, shrubs and hedgerows to be retained; (h) details of the vehicular access closure on Stirling Road (i) details of the landscaping of the site including associated maintenance of these works
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
3. That within three years of the date of this permission, an application for approval of the reserved matters, specified in condition 2 above, shall be made to the Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of amenity
4. That notwithstanding the terms of condition 2 above, the existing vehicular access from Stirling Road (A73) shall be permanently closed off to all vehicular traffic to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Full details of the means of closure of this access shall be submitted as a reserved matter.
Reason: In the interests of traffic safety and to enable these aspects to be considered in detail.
5. That notwithstanding the terms of condition 2 above, the following alterations to the access road from Old Biggar Road shall be included in the detailed layout plan. a) Two inter-visible passing places shall be provided at 70 m centres on alternative sides of the access from Old Biggar Road. The passing places shall measure 11 m in length and 3 m wide with 45O entrance and exit splays. b) The corner radii at the junction with Old Biggar Road shall be a minimum of 10.5m c) The first 15 metres of the access shall be surfaced in an impervious material to be approved by the Planning Authority d) Any gate shall be set back a minimum distance of 8 m from the junction with Old Bigger Road
Reason: In the interests of traffic safety and to enable these aspects to be considered in detail. 6. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a report describing the soil and ground conditions prevailing over the application site (including details of the nature, concentration and distribution of any contaminants), shall be submitted to the Planning Authority and the works required in order to remove or render harmless these contaminants, having regard to the proposed use of the site, shall be agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, and development shall not be commenced until these works have been completed.
Reason: To ensure the site is free of contamination
7. That due to the nature of the development the kennels hereby approved shall be supervised solely by residents of Riggend Farm,
Reason: As Riggend Farm is the only suitable premises that can effectively supervise the kennels with no detriment to residential amenity
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 12th September 2005
Memo from the Transportation Section received 14th November 2005 Letter from Head of Protective Services Section received 11th November 2005 Letter from Scottish Environment Prptection Agency received 10th November 2005 Letter from Scottish Water received 3rd November 2005 Letter from British Gas received 20th October 2005 Letter from Scottish Power received 8th November 2005
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Colin Marshall at 01236 812376 APPLICATION NO. C/05/01560/AMD
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.I Planning permission is being sought in outline for the erection of dog kennels at the former Riggend Farm, Stirling Road; Riggend, Airdrie. This application is an amendment to a previous outline application for the erection of a house and dog kennels at the farm (refer to planning application C/04/01992/OUT, which was refused planning permission following an appeal to the Scottish Ministers). Outline planning permission for the kennels is now being sought.
1.2 The farm buildings sit to the eastern side of the Stirling Road (A73) and has vehicular access from both Stirling Road and Old Biggar Road.
1.3 Indicative plans were submitted to demonstrate how the site would be developed. A single storey block of 20 kennels with an integrated reception area, w.c and kit room would be constructed to the south of the existing steading within a small compound measuring 38m x 30m. The kennel block (20mx5m) would be finished in plain render with metal sheeting roof with small fenced dog runs to the front and rear of each kennel. A total of 6 car parking spaces would be provided for visitors and employees. An existing access from Stirling Road would be closed off in the interests of traffic safety and an alternative access from Old Biggar Road would be upgraded by providing a 10m corner radii and improved surface. Two inter visible passing places would also be provided along the access track.
2. Develo pmen t PIan
2.1 Under the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area covered by policy GBI (Restrict Development in Green Belt)
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 There were no objections from external consultees. However SEPA advised that a suitable drainage scheme would need their approval. The Transportation Section initially expressed concerns over the continued use of the current access off the A73. However it was recommended that provided this access is closed and improvements are made to the alternative access from Old Bigger Road they would have no objections.
3.2 The Protective Services Section advised that as the proposed site is located within 250 m of a closed landfill site, a full site investigation would be required to determine levels of contamination at the site. It was also recommended that a noise impact assessment be carried out due to the close proximity of residential housing.
4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 The outline proposals require to be assessed under the terms of the development plan and any other material considerations. In this regard the terms of policy GBI of the local plan would be re1eva nt . 4.2 Within areas designated as green belt no development is permitted except for:-
a) New houses for full time workers in connection with forestry or agriculture b) Non-residential developments in connection with forestry or agriculture c) Uses requiring a rural location: (i) to avoid nuisance to neighbours (e.g. animal boarding kennels) (ii) since they need large areas of open space (e.g. riding stables or golf courses) d) Areas identified as having substantial development potential: 0) Drumpellier Country Park for Leisure and Recreation (ii) Luggie Water for Business Use (iii) South Chapelhall for a Hotel
4.3 In this instance the proposed dog kennels would accord with part c of the green belt policy. Therefore the proposals would be acceptable in principle and accord with the terms of policy GBI.
4.4 In terms of the indicative site layout the following assessment can made. The proposals would involve minor road improvement works including the closure of an access off a busy main road along with improvements to an alternative access. The Transportation Section initially had concerns over the increased use of the existing access off Stirling Road however as noted above this access would be closed off to all traffic. The Transportation Section recommended various access improvements and it is considered these could be addressed as reserved matters. The proposed access and parking provisions are satisfactory. The indicative layout and design of the kennels are also considered to be acceptable in terms of their scale and visual impact. The development would also be located close to the other farm buildings and would not appear remote or isolated.
4.5 SEPA had no objections but advised that a drainage system would need to meet their requirements. Such provision would also be covered as a reserved matter.
4.6 Protective Services have requested additional information relating to potential ground contamination and noise issues and these could be included as a reserved matters.
4.7 Following consideration of the above, the outline proposals are considered to be in line with the terms of the development plan and the indicative site layout, building design, site access, parking and access provisions demonstrate the site could be developed in an acceptable manner. It is therefore recommended that outline planning permission be granted subject to reserved matters noted above. Application No: C/05/01618/FUL
Date Registered: 28th September 2005
Applicant: Mr I Mohammed 234 Glenmavis Road Glenmavis Ai rd rie Lanarkshire ML6 ONQ
Agent H.R Cartwright 39 Craigson Place Airdrie ML6 8PH
Development: Subdivision of Existing General Store to Form Two Commercial Outlets One Class 3 (Hot Food Takeaway) and One Class 1
Location: 234 Glenmavis Road Glen mavis Airdrie Lanarkshire ML6 ONQ
Ward: 45 New Monklands West Councillor Sophia Coyle
Grid Reference: 2751 31 667483
File Reference: C/PL/GMG615234/CM/EL
Site History:
Development Plan: Under the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area covered by Policy ECON 8 (General Urban Area)
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations:
Representations: Two Letters of Representation including Petition
Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 12 October 2005
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. NOttoScde 2. That the facing materials to be used for the external alterations shall match the colour and texture of the existing building
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity
3. That before the hot food take-away shop hereby permitted is brought into use, full details of an external fluelfiltration and ventilation system shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: To demonstrate that there would be no harm to residential amenity due to cooking smells.
4. That before the hot food takeaway shop is brought into use the following additional parking/pedestrian safety facilities shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority:
a) 2 off street staff car parking spaces shall be provided within the service area located to the south elevation of the building b) The existing dropped kerb shaded red on the plans hereby approved shall be removed and the footpath kerb reinstated. c) That a footpath protection barrier shall be provided to the north of the existing lay-by.
Reason: To ensure there are adequate parking and pedestrian safety facilities at the locus
5 That the hours of opening of the premises for which planning permission has been granted shall be restricted to the following arrangements
a) Shop Unit 1 from 8.30 to 16.30 each day b) Hot Food Take Away Shop Unit 2 from 16.30 to 23.30 each day
Reason: To ensure there are adequate parking facilities for each use.
6. That before the development hereby permitted starts a scheme of landscaping and boundary treatment for the area shaded green on the plans hereby approved, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and it shall include:
(a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, grass seeding and turfing; (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number and variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; (c) details of replacement fencing (d) details of the maintenance of these works.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects.
7. That within one year of the occupation of the either shop hereby permitted, all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 6 above, shall be completed and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the completion of the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 28th September 2005
Memo from Transportation Section received 22'h NovEmber 2005 Memos from Protective Services Section received 13 and 16th October 2005
Letter from Owner/Occupier, 130 Coatbridge Road, Glenmavis, Airdrie, ML6 ONL received 17th October 2005. Letter and Petition from D Chan, 106 Coatbridge Road, Glenmavis received on 14'h November 2005
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Colin Marshall at 01 236 81 2376. APPLICATION NO. C/05/01618/FUL
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1 .I Planning permission is being sought for the subdivision of a vacant shop unit to form a Class 1 shop and a Class 3 shop (Hot Food Takeaway) at 234 Glenmavis Road, Glenmavis. The single storey property faces onto Glenmavis Road and is bounded to the north by a post office and flats, and to the east and south by other dwellinghouses. There is a lay-by to the front of the shopfront that can accommodate 3 cars.
1.2 The proposals would involve the sub-division of the vacant premises to provide a smaller shop unit with floor area of some 90mZand hot food take-away with floor area of 108m2. Internally the proposed Class 1 shop unit would have a sales area, office, two w.c.'s and staff room. The proposed hot food take-away would have a sales area, kitchen, food preparationlstorage area, W.C. and office. Externally a new shop front would be provided with two separate entrances and new shop windows to the front elevation. Two new doorways would be created to the side and rear elevations. An extractor flue would be installed to the rear elevation of the proposed hot food take-away unit.
1.3 The requested opening hours are as follows; the shop (unit 1) to open from 8.30am to 6.00pm and the hot food take away (unit 2) to open from 12.00 midday to 2.00pm and from 4.00pm to 11.30pm each day.
2. Development Plan
2.1 Under the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area covered by Policy ECON 8 (General Urban Area). Policy COM 10 Hot Food ShopslRestaurants would also be relevant. There are no strategic issues.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 The Protective Services Section had no objection to the proposals provided the proposed hot food take-away complies with the requirements of the food safety regulations and that it can be demonstrated that an adequate flue extractionlventilation and filtration system can be installed before the hot food shop is brought into use. This would be required to prevent cooking smells originating from this single storey building giving rise to a statutory nuisance within the two storey bordering properties.
3.2 The Transportation Section advised that a total of 7 car parking spaces would be required for both shops however only 3 lay-by parking spaces are currently available at the site. It was recommended that the area to the south of the building should be used for staff parking (2 vehicles) and that an existing dropped kerb to the north of the building be re-instated to a full kerb edge. In addition that a pedestrian safety barrier be installed to the north of the lay-by, all in the interests of public safety. It was also suggested that the opening hours of the two shops be restricted to minimise demand for the limited parking spaces at the locus. 3.3 There were two letters of representation and a petition with 98 signatories. The terms of objection can be fairly summarised as follows:
0 There is no need for another hot food take away in Glenmavis, as there is insufficient demand and this would be detrimental to business. There are two empty shops in the village and this reflects the lack of market demand. This view was supported by the 98 petition signatories. 0 The proposed hot food takeaway would result in increased noise and nuisance due to the late opening hours.
4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 The proposals require to be considered under the terms of the development plan and any other material considerations.
4.2 As noted above there are no strategic planning issues and the terms of policies ECON 8 and COM 10 of the local plan are relevant.
4.3 Under the terms of ECON8 (General Urban Areas), the principle of a mixture of different uses is acceptable in such areas provided there are no adverse environmental affects. In this instance the sub-division of an existing shop to include a hot food take away within this area may be considered to be acceptable provided there would be no significant harm to residential amenity or be detrimental to traffic safety at the locus.
4.4 As noted above, the Protective Services Section had no objection subject to an effective flue system being installed. The proposals would include an extractionlfiltration flue to the rear of the building to deal with cooking smells. With specific regards to this aspect it is noted that there are two storey flats located to the north of the site above the adjacent Post Office. However it is considered that smell nuisance may not be significant, as the flats are approximately 30 metres from the position of the flue. There is also a two-storey dwellinghouse located to the south west of the proposed flue position however this is about 20 metres away and is unlikely to be significantly affected as the house is upwind of the flue. As such cooking smells are unlikely to affect residential amenity provided an effective flue and filtration system is provided.
4.5 With regards to the parking requirements, the Transportation Section has advised that 7 car- parking spaces would be required and as only 3 lay-by spaces are currently available there would be a shortfall in the parking requirements. It was noted that the shop premises have an access to a service area to the south elevation of the property. Although this is generally unused and gated it would be possible to provide at least 2 off-street car parking spaces in this area for use by staff. Therefore a total of 5 spaces could be provided at the locus. In addition, to ensure the parking facilities are sufficient, it is considered that a planning condition which restricted the opening hours of both the shop and hot food take away may be acceptable. This would ensure that both shops are not open at the same time thereby reducing the demand for the parking at the shops. It is therefore considered that a total of 5 car parking spaces (3 lay-by spaces and 2 staff spaces at the service area) along with a restriction in the opening hours would be acceptable.
4.6 The proposed alteration works to the shop premises are considered to be acceptable, as matching materials would be used in the construction stage. 4.7 Turning to the terms of objection the following comments can be made:
Issues over commercial need for a rival outlet and competition are not material to the consideration of a planning application. Conversely a petition with 98 signatories may suggest there is a market for another hot food take-away shop in the village. Late opening hours may increase activity levels, which may result in noise and perhaps some nuisance. However the premises are located in an area of mixed uses and is close to a road junction and opposite a new commercial development in the village where activity levels are generally higher than a residential area. As such the addition of a hot food take away would not significantly increase noise levels at the locus.
4.8 Taking all of these points together, the proposals are considered to be in line with the terms of Policy ECON 8. Whilst the proposed hot food take away is considered to be a bad neighbour use it has been demonstrated that it would not adversely harm the current levels of amenity at this locus. Whilst there is a shortfall in the off street parking provision for both the shop and take away, the restriction in opening hours would minimise the demand for parking spaces to an acceptable level. There would be no significant smell nuisance as an adequate flue and filtration system can be provided. The above noted terms of objection cannot be sustained in this instance. As such it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions. Application No: C/05/01638/OUT
Date Registered: 17th October 2005
Applicant: John Sinnett 4 Balloch Road Ai rd rie ML6 8NU
Development: Erection of Dwellinghouse (In Outline)
Location: Land East Of 26 lnvervale Avenue Ai rdrie Lanarkshire
Ward: 52 Salsburgh Councillor David Fagan
Grid Reference: 279005664823
File Reference: CIPLIAI 147026/CM/EL
Site History: 04/01 147/OUT Erection of 3 No. Dwellinghouses (In outline) Withdrawn
Development Plan: Zoned as HG3 (Private Housing Site) in the Local Plan
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: Leisure Services (Comments)
Rep resentat io ns : One letter of Representation
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-
1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started, either within 5 years of the date of this permission, or within 2 years,.of the date of which the last of the reserved matters are approved, whichever is the later.
Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.
2. That before development starts, a further planning application shall be submitted to the Planning Authority in respect of the following reserved matters:- (a) the siting, design and external appearance of all buildings and other structures; (b) the means of access to the site; (c) the layout of the site, including all roads, footways, and parking areas; (d) the design and location of all boundary walls and fences; (e) the provision of drainage works including a SUDS scheme; (f) the disposal of sewage; (9) details of existing trees, shrubs and hedgerows to be retained; (h) details of existing and proposed site levels.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
3. That within three years of the date of this permission, an application for approval of the reserved matters, specified in condition 2 above, shall be made to the Planning Authority.
Reason: To 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: ensure the site is suitable for a residential development in terms of any ground contamination
5. That notwithstanding the terms of condition 2 the reserved matters details shall include the following: (a) road carriageway shall be widened to 5.5 m over the frontage of the site (b) a road verge of 2.0m shall be provided along the frontage of the site (c) the detailed layout shall accord with the Council’s open space standards around dwellings
Reason: To define the terms of the permission.
6. For the avoidance of doubt the area hatched green on the plan hereby approved shall not be developed for housing purposes but shall remain open for public access.
Reason: To define the terms of the permission. Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 3rd October 2005
Memo from Transportation Section received 16th November 2005 Memo from Protective Services Section received 7th November 2005 Memo from Community Services received 9th November 2005
Letter from Mr & Mrs C. Taylor, 35 Ardfern Road, Airdrie, ML6 8NN received 14th October 2005.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Colin Marshall at 01236 812376. APPLICATION NO. C/05/01638/0UT
REPORT
I. Description of Site and Proposal
1 .I Planning permission is being sought in outline for the erection of a dwellinghouse on land adjacent to 26 lnvervale Avenue, Airdrie.
1.2 The application site relates to part of an area of public open space located between lnvervale Avenue and Ardfern Road housing areas. The site extends to some 35m x 25m, faces onto lnvervale Avenue and is bounded by existing two storey houses to the west, north and east of the site.
1.3 An indicative layout plan shows a two storey dwellinghouse and detached garage would be constructed to the eastern half of the site.
2.
2.1 Under the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application sire is located within an area covered by Policy HG3 (New Private Sector Housing Site)
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 The Transportation Section had no objection to the proposals subject to conditions requiring the widening of the roadway to 5.5 metres and provision of a 2.0 metre service verge. In addition further details were requested regarding driveway arrangements.
3.2 The Protective Services Section had no objection but requested that before any works start on a site a full site investigation report be carried out to determine any contaminants on site and any remediation proposals.
3.3 The Community Services Landscape Manager had no objection but advised the site forms part of an area of open space which has been planted up with native woodland. There is an rough footpath trail which leads through the site to the North Calder Water and this appears to be used by local residents. The proposals do not appear to affect this route however part of the tree planting area would be removed if the development were to proceed. An adjacent hedgerow should be retained and more landscape details would be required at the detailed planning stage.
3.4 A letter of objection was received in regard to the proposals. The material terms of objection can be fairly summarised as follows:
0 The proposed house would overshadow the objectors property 0 The development would exacerbate drainage issues to the properties to the south 0 Privacy and security be reduced as trees would be removed 0 Children’s safety would be compromised as a result 4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 The proposals require to be assessed under the terms of the development plan and any other material considerations. In this instance there are no strategic issues and the relevant policy HG3 would be relevant. As this area is now an established housing area, the terms of Policy HG9 should also be considered.
4.2 The proposals would involve the erection of a dwellinghouse on a gap site located within an established housing area. As such the proposals are in principle in line with the terms of Policies HG3 and HG9 provided there would be no adverse impact on amenity and that the proposals meet the terms of the Councils design guidance on Housing lnfill proposals.
4.3 In this regard the site layout plan shows that the site would be of an adequate size to support a two storey dwellinghouse and enable part of the site to be kept open to allow access to the open space area to the rear. The indicative 4 bedroom house type is overlarge in terms of its depth, as only a 5 metre depth of rear garden would be available if this particular house type was constructed. However it should be possible to ensure the Councils space around dwellings standards are achieved as a reserved matter particularly as there would be a large side garden area. It would also be possible to provide a house type similar to those in the surrounding area. There would be no obvious adverse affects on surrounding properties through loss of garden, privacy or sunlight. The Transportation Section had no objection provided the road is widened and provided with a 2m wide service strip. Protective Services had no objection provided any ground contamination problems are resolved before works commence on site. Community Services had no objection provided a pedestrian link to the North Calder Water is retained. All of these issues can be covered as reserved matters.
4.4 Turning to the terms of objection the following comments can be made.
The objectors property would not be overshadowed as this is located some 30 metres to the south of the development site The proposed development would require an approved drainage system and this would reduce surface water run off at the locus. Although some small bushes and trees would be removed from the site, existing privacy and security levels would not be adversely affected. Whilst all construction works may prove hazardous to the public, such site operations need to be supervised and meet health and safety regulations. In addition construction works would be over a temporary period. As such the proposals are unlikely to represent a significant safety concern to existing residents.
4.5 The terms of objection cannot be sustained. 4.6 The proposals are considered to be acceptable in principle subject to the above noted reserved matters. It is therefore recommended that outline planning permission be granted. Application No: C/05/01672/AMD
Date Registered: 7th October 2005
Applicant: Mr G Stronge 12 Drumshangie Place Aird rie ML6 6TF
Agent Mr Phi1 Dobbin 36 Craigvale Crescent Airdrie ML6 8EP
Development: Amendment to Planning Permission C1051009021FUL (Erection of Conservatory) to Include Decking and Fencing
Location: 12 Drumshangie Place Airdrie ML6 6TF
Ward: 42 Academy Councillor James McGuigan JP
Grid Reference: 276203666606
File Reference: CIPLIAID50300 1 2ISMIEL
Site History: U5/00902/FUL Erection of Conservatory to Rear of Dwellinghouse
The property is designated as HG9 (Housing Policy for Existing Development Plan: Residential Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: Not required
Representations: 1 representation letter
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
Recommendation: Grant Planning Application No. C/05/01672/AMD
Amendment to Planning Permission C/05/00902/FUL (Erection of Conservatory) to Include Decking and Fencing ii NottoScale Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 7th October 2005 Monklands District Local Plan 1991
Letter from Mrs L Brand, 1 16 Rochsoles Drive, Airdrie, ML6 9QL received 7'h October 2005.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Susan Miller at 01 236 81 2374. APPLICATION NO. C1051016721AMD
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1 .I This planning application seeks retrospective consent for the amendment of permission C/05/00902/FUL granted on 27'h June 2005 for the erection of a conservatory to include raised decking and fencing within the rear garden. The application site is an end-terraced property set within an existing residential area designated as HG9 in the Monklands District Local Plan.
2. Developmen t Plan
2.1 The property is designated as HG9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. There are no strategic implications.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 No consultations were undertaken.
3.2 One letter of representation was received from a neighbour at 116 Rochsoles Drive, Airdrie. The main points of which are as follows:
(i) The fence is too high and is blocking sunlight. (ii) The decking has not been boxed in and weeds are growing through. (iii) The appearance of the fence is terrible and they will now have to spend a lot of money on their own garden. (iv) All that can be seen from the property is fencing.
4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 In assessing this application the local plan policy HG9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas) is relevant. This seeks to protect such areas by opposing development that adversely affects the amenity of the established housing. Planning applications of this nature are considered primarily on the basis of design, suitability of location and any likely impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties.
4.2 In relation to the grounds of objection these are addressed as follows:
(i) Planning permission .is required as the boundary fence running the perimeter of the application site exceeds 2 metres in parts. The fencing running along the western boundary of the application site defines the rear boundary of 116 Rochsoles Drive. In terms of sunlight/daylight current guidance on this requires that this be taken into account where there is to be the construction of any building or extension, by assessing available light to existing habitable rooms. In this instance, the proposed fence would not fail these standard tests and the fence would cause no adverse impact on the sunlight/daylight to the windows on the rear elevation on No.116 Rochsoles Drive.
Whilst the new section of fencing will marginally increase the amount of overshadowing to the rearmost section of garden it is not considered to be significantly more than the existing fence. The increase in rear garden area affected does not merit the refusal of this application. (ii) Any vegetation extending into neighbouring gardens is a legal issue, over which this department has no remit and therefore requires to be resolved between the proprietors.
(iii) There is an existing 1.8 metre high vertical slat fence that defines the western boundary of the application site. The applicant has erected raised decking in his garden and as a result has raised a section of the fence between the rear elevation and rear boundary using two close board panels. This type of fencing is commonplace within domestic gardens and whilst having two types of fencing is not ideal the applicant could have erected close board fence on his ground up to 2 metres in height under permitted development. Although different in style the close board panels are of the same colour as the existing fence and are considered suitable for rear garden fencing. In this case the difference between the fences is not considered to constitute such an adverse affect on the visual or residential amenity as to merit a refusal.
(iv) As discussed above due to the raised nature of the decking the additional fence is over 2 metres in height and therefore requires planning permission. The section of fence itself adds approximately 46 cm to the height of the boundary fence to the rear of 116 Rochsoles Drive. It is accepted that the new fencing will affect the outlook from the rear elevation of 116 Rochsoles Drive which looks towards the rear garden area of the application site and the neighbouring properties along Drumshangie Place. However the provision of the higher fence section will act as a screen and protect No. 116 from any adverse overlooking which may have been caused by the section of raised decking to the rear of No.12.
4.3 Taking all the foregoing into account the style, positioning and height of the fence and decking is considered acceptable in this location and, whilst the points of representation have been into account, no reason has been found to uphold the points raised or to request amendments to the proposals. The proposal is considered to be acceptable and would not be detrimental to the amenity or character of the surrounding residential area. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted. Application No: C/05/0 168910 UT
Date Registered: 11th October 2005
Applicant: Mrs Mary Duff 11 Springwells Crescent Airdrie ML6 6EB
Development: Erection of Dwellinghouse (In Outline)
Location: Land East Of Junction Of Bal lochney Road With Arbuckle Road Plains Airdrie Lanarkshire
Ward: 46 Plains And Caldercruix Councillor Thomas Morgan
Grid Reference: 27961 7 667503
File Reference: C/PL/PLA630/LM/EL
Site History: C/80/823/OUT Erection of Dwellinghouse Refused on 25 July 1980
Development Plan: The site is covered by policies GBI (Restrict Development in Green Belt) and HGI0 (Residential Development outwith Residential Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.
Contrary to Development Plan: Yes
Consultations: Scottish Environment Protection Agency (No response) Scottish Water (No objection) Scottish Power (No objection)
Representations: 1 Letter of Representation
Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 19th October 2005
Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-
1. That the proposed dwellinghouse is contrary to policy GBI Restrict Development in the Greenbelt of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 as it is not required for someone employed in agriculture or forestry or in association with a use that requires a rural location.
2. That the proposed dwellinghouse is contrary to the Development Control Design Guidance, associated with Policy GBI, New Houses in the Countryside in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 in that there is no substantial building on site complete, up to wallhead height.
3. The proposed dwellinghouse would be accessed from a de-restricted length of Ballochney Road with no footways or street lighting, and the use of the site would result in an increase in braking and turning manoeuvres at an access with substandard visibility splays, all to the detriment of road safety. /
Ford
163r
Fai
Planning Application No. C/05/01689/OUT
Erection of Dwellinghouse (In Outline)
-...... Land East of Junction of Ballochney Road with Arbuckle Road, Plains, Airdrie * Representation 4. That the proposed dwellinghouse is contrary to the Development Control Design Guidance, associated with Policy HGIO, Residential Development outwith Residential Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 in that a satisfactory access to the site cannot be achieved.
Note to Committee
If granted, this application will have to be notified to the Scottish Ministers in accordance with the Town & Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 1997 because the proposed development constitutes a significant departure from the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 11th October 2005
Memo from Pollution Control Section received 11November 2005 Letter from Scottish Water received 3rd November 2005 Letter from Scottish Power received 3rd November 2005
Letter from Maclay, Murray & Spens, 151 St Vincent Street, Glasgow, G2 5NJ, received 27 October 2005.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Leigh Menzies at 01236 812372. APPLICATION NO. C/05/01689/0UT
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.I This application is for the erection of a dwellinghouse (in outline) on land to the east of the junction of Arbuckle Road and Ballochney Road, Plains. The site is presently overgrown containing a small number of trees. The applicant has indicated that the foundations are still present although currently there is no longer any structure above ground level and this is the justification for a dwellinghouse on the site.
1.2 The application is for a dwellinghouse (in outline). As the application is in outline no detailed proposals have been submitted in terms of site layout, house type etc as these matters would be considered at the reserved matters stage, should this application be successful. Notwithstanding the above indicative details have been submitted indicating that the proposed house would consist of a 1% storey dwelling with detached garage and site access would be taken from Arbuckle Road at the south west corner of the site. There has been no justification submitted in support of the application relative to a business requiring a rural location.
1.3 A previous planning application, for a dwellinghouse submitted in 1980, was also refused planning permission on the following grounds:
0 The proposal was contrary to the development plan as it would constitute residential development in the green belt 0 The proposal was not supported by a use requiring a rural location 0 If permitted the proposal would be likely to encourage further similar applications
2. Development Plan
3.1 The site is zoned GBI Restrict Development in the Greenbelt in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The proposal is also assessed against the Design Guidance on lnfill Housing development associated with policy HGI0 Residential Development outwith Residential Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.
3.2 The Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 is part of the Development Plan. Although the proposed development may not be of strategic significance (in that it has no cross boundary impact) Strategic Policy 9 (Assessment of Development Proposals) is relevant in the consideration of this application.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 Scottish Water and Scottish Power have both indicated that there are no objections to the proposal.
3.2 The Transportation Section has indicated that they would recommend that the application be refused as the proposed development would take access from a de-restricted length of road where there is no footway provision or street lighting. In addition it was also indicated that the required sightlines of 2.5m x 21 5m may not be achievable in either direction.
3.3 The Pollution Control Section has requested that a site investigation be carried out in order to assess the risk posed by the presence of possible pollutants and where appropriate remediation proposals. 3.4 Following the standard neighbour notification procedure 1 letter of representation was received from solicitors acting on behalf of an adjacent landowner, Mr Gillespie. The objection was based on the fact that Mr Gillespie claims that he owns the land to which the planning application refers.
4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 Policy GBI in the Monklands District Local Plan states that no development will be permitted except for; new houses for full time workers in Agriculture or Forestry; non residential developments in connection with Agriculture or Forestry and Uses requiring a rural location. There has been no justification submitted in support of the application relative to a business requiring a rural location. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy GBI.
4.2 The supporting statement submitted by the applicant traces back, using historical maps, the fact that there has been a house in this location since at least 1845 with the site being cleared in sometime in the 1970’s. The Development Control Design Guidance associated with new houses in the countryside should, relative to this situation, requires that the following criteria be substantially satisfied in order to be considered favourably:
0 The building should be inherently worthy of preservation 0 The building should be substantially complete, up to wallhead level
The proposal under consideration does not satisfy either criterion outlined above.
4.3 In assessing the application in relation to the structure plan it does not accord with Strategic Policy 9 (Assessment of Development Proposals) in that it fails the following criteria:
a) B(ii)b : Safeguarding the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green belt b) B(v) : Avoid isolated and sporadic development in the Green Belt and the wider countryside c) C(i) : Infrastructure to make development acceptable.
4.4 Departures from the Structure Plan are given further opportunity to demonstrate appropriateness in Strategic Policy 10 (Departures from the Structure Plan). However the proposal still fails to prove itself as acceptable when assessed against the criteria. In particular, the appellant has not demonstrated specific locational need (Criterion AV) and the development will not allow for the significant restoration of vacant or derelict land for restoration purposes (B(iii)b).
4.5 Policy HGIO (Residential Development Outwith Residential Areas) applies housing policy within the rural context. This policy states that development will not be permitted outwith residential areas unless it occurs in identified housing sites in the Local Plan, is a minor development in a Secondary Core Area, General Urban Area or is justified under policy GBI. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy HGIO. Notwithstanding the above, the associated design guidance also requires that the site have an adequate vehicular access provided. For the reasons outlined in the following paragraphs 4.6 this could not be achieved.
4.6 The Transportation Section comments, have indicated a recommendation for refusal on road safety grounds as it is unlikely that a suitable access can be provided for the site. The road onto which access would taken is de-restricted with no footways or street lighting and unable to provide the required sightlines to enter and exit safely. The proposal is therefore considered contrary to the design guidance and therefore policy HGIO. 4.7 In relation to the objection to the development based on ownership of the application this type of issue may not necessarily prevent permission being granted for a development that would otherwise be considered acceptable in planning terms. In terms of policy, if a development is considered acceptable in planning terms the onus is on the applicant to ensure that it can be carried out in accordance with the approved plans ensuring that any conditions of the consent can be met. This would involve gaining any consent to build on or alter land not under their ownership and carrying out the relevant owner notification as part of the application process. Both parties involved in the dispute over the ownership have been asked to clarify the situation. However this process could be lengthy and in the interests of expediency this application has been put to the committee for determination based on the policies contained within the development plan.
4.8 In conclusion therefore I consider that the development is contrary to the terms of development plan and that there are no material considerations that would merit departing from those policies. While the proposal is not of a scale in itself to be of strategic importance it is considered contrary to the aims of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan which seeks to control sporadic and isolated development in the Greenbelt. I therefore recommend that planning permission be refused for the following reasons. Should the Committee be minded to approve the proposal it will be referred to the Scottish Ministers for consideration. Application No: C/05/01716/0UT
Date Registered: 17th October 2005
Applicant: Mr Matthew Lees 71 Asher Road Chapelhall ML6 8TA
Development: Erection of Flatted Development (In Outline)
Location: 35 -39 Main Street Chapelhall Ai rd rie Lanarkshire
Ward: 51 Chapelhall Councillor Thomas Curley
Grid Reference: 278149 6631 51
File Reference: C/PL/CHM750000/1J/EL
Site History:
Development Plan: The site is covered by policies ECON 8: General Urban Areas and HG9: Existing Residential Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: Scottish Water (No objections) British Gas (No objections)
Representations: 2 Letters of Representation
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-
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 an equipped play area; (e) the details of, and timetable for, the hard and soft landscaping of the site; (f) details for management and maintenance of the areas identified in (c),(d) and (e) above; (9) the design and location of all boundary walls and fences; (h) the provision of drainage works; (i) the disposal of sewage; (j) details of existing trees, shrubs and hedgerows to be retained; (k) details of existing and proposed site levels.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail. Planning Application C/05/01716/OUT
Erection of Flatted Development (In Outline)
35-39 Main Street, Chapelhall, Airdrie * Representatives NottoScale V' 2. That within three years of the date of this permission, an application for approval of the reserved matters, specified in condition 1 above, shall be made to the Planning Authority.
Reason:To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.
3. That the development hereby permitted shall be started, either within 5 years of the date of this permission, or within 2 years of the date of which the last of the reserved matters are approved, whichever is the later.
Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.
4. That no part of the development hereby permitted shall exceed 2 storeys in height and the new build will be of traditional double pitched roof design.
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
5. The vehicular access to the application site shall be taken only from the southern part of the site at a point to be agreed with the Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access facilities.
6. That the reserved matters application referred to in condition (1) above shall include, full details of the location and design of the surface water drainage scheme to be installed within the application site for the approval of the Planning Authority, and for the avoidance of doubt the scheme requires to be approved by Scottish Water and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency in terms of their principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these details and to safeguard the amenity of the area, to prevent groundwater pollution and to ensure that the proposed drainage system complies with the latest SEPA guidance.
Background Papers :
Application form and plans received 14th October 2005
Memo from Transportation received 14'h November 2005 Letter from British Gas received 28'h October 2005
Letter from R Kelly, 32 Main Street, Chapelhall, Airdrie, Lanarkshire, ML6 8SA received 31 st October 2005. Letter from Mr & Mrs A Simpson, 42 Elm Drive, Chapelhall, Airdrie, Lanarkshire, ML6 8GA received 4'h November 2005
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr lan Johnston at 01236 812382. APPLICATION NO. C/05/01716/0UT
REPORT
I. Description of Site and Proposal
1 .I The application site measures 0.355 hectares, is rectangular in shape and fronts onto Main Street, Chapelhall to the north west of its junction with Lauchope Street. This site, addressed as 35-39 Main Street, is predominantly flat and is made up of a grassed area (north), Public House with rear parking (central) and a Van Hire Yard with offices and car wash (south). The surrounding uses are predominantly residential with public roads fronting the site to the west and south and open grassed areas bounding the site to the north.
1.2 The proposal, in outline, is seeking permission for the erection of a flatted residential development. Being in outline there have been no detailed site layout proposals submitted as these matters would be considered at a subsequent “reserved matters” stage should this present submission be considered favourably. The applicant has indicated that he would propose to develop the site to accommodate a 3 storey development with a mixed size of apartments and a single point of vehicular access from the existing road that forms the site’s southern boundary. To accommodate the development the existing public house building and adjacent offices will require to be demolished.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The site is covered by policy ECON 8: General Urban Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The proposal raises no strategic issues.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 Following the standard neighbour notification procedures 2 letters of objection were received against this proposal. The main points of objection are that the development would overshadow existing properties and would spoil the view enjoyed for over 15 years. Reference is also made about any impact of development on an existing 12 foot high brick built boundary wall and how close any new build would be to that boundary.
3.2 The Public Utilities have offered no objection to the proposal.
3.3 The Transportation Section has offered no objection to the proposal.
4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 This application requires to be considered against the Development Plan as required under Section 25 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
4.2 In terms of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area covered by policies HG9: Existing Residential Areas and ECON 8 General Urban Areas and is bounded by predominantly residential properties. The general pattern of development along Main Street is primarily residential comprising single, 2 and 3 storey buildings and therefore the continuation of that residential theme, as proposed by this development is compliant with the development plan and acceptable in land use terms. The development of the site would also result in the removal of an untidy yard area that is located at a prominent road junction with traffic light control. 4.3 Having regard to the objections received I would comment that it is often an inevitable consequence of new development that there is a loss of open outlook by adjacent occupiers although this would only become a material consideration where the new build potentially affects the amenity of those existing properties in respect of privacy conflict, loss of daylighting etc. Being in outline there are no detailed site layout proposals submitted at this time and therefore these matters including potential daylighting/sunlighting issues and impact on existing boundary walls will be considered at any subsequent “reserved matters” submission should the present application be considered favourably.
4.4 It is noted that the submission proposes a 3 storey residential development although no specific details have been provided on possible site layout, building desigdheights etc. Taken the predominance of 2 storey buildings around the site then the introduction of a 3 storey development is considered inappropriate and over-dominant at this particular location in Chapelhall. A restriction on the height of any new build is therefore considered suitable at this outline stage. The Transportation Section has offered no objection to the proposal subject to sole vehicular access being taken from the southern part of the site.
4.5 In terms of compliance with the development plan the proposal is considered acceptable and while the points of objection are noted I do not consider that these merit refusal of the application at this outline stage. I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to the recomrnended conditions. Application No: SI0 110 1609/FU L
Date Registered: 4th September 2002
Applicant: Mr James Young Hill Of Murdostoun Farm Cleland Motherwell MLI 5LP
Agent Manson Associates 2 Park Gardens Lane Glasgow G3 7YL
Development: Change of Use of Farm Outbuildings to Two Dwellinghouses
Location: Farm Steading At Hill Of Murdostoun Cleland Motherwell Lanarkshire
Ward: 18 Dykehead Councillor James Robertson
Grid Reference: 282087658532
File Reference: 4/40 (1 1)
Site History: No relevant history
Development Plan: The application is not of strategic significance.
The site is zoned as Green Belt on the Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan 1964. In the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) it is also zoned as Green Belt and Policies ENV6 and HSGl2 apply.
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: SEPA Com ments Scottish Water Comments British Gas No Objection Scottish Power Comments
Representations: None
Newspaper Advertisement: 18th September 2002
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 the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997
That prior to any works commencing on site, the applicant must confirm in writing to the Planning Authority that the drainage arrangements to be provided are to the satisfaction of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA).
Reason: To prevent groundwater or surface water contamination in the interests of environmental and amenity protection.
3. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: To allow the Planning Authority to retain effective control over this matter and to protect the rural character of the area.
4. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of all external materials to be used in construction, including gable window and porch walls, roofs, windows, doors, gutters and downpipes, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to preserve the character of these rural buildings and the wider area.
5. That notwithstanding condition 4 above, all new wall sections, including the porch gable wall, all 1/2 gable windows and the inner courtyard wall shall be finished with stone to match the existing building, a sample of which shall first be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. All roof works shall be finished in natural slate, a sample of which shall also first be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: In order to preserve the integrity of the farm buildings in the interests of visual amenity and to ensure compliance with design policy.
6. That the porch door hereby approved is that detailed in drawing A submitted on 08.11.2205 and not that detailed on the main elevational drawings.
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of the rural character of the building.
7. That notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992, no development shall take place within the curtilage of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted, other than that expressly authorised by this permission.
Reason: To allow the Planning Authority to retain effective control over future development of the building in order to preserve the rural character of the area.
8. That before development starts, details of the surface finishes to all parking, manoeuvring and driveway areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: To allow the Planning Authority further control over this matter
9. That before the development hereby permitted is brought into use, all the parking and manoeuvring areas shown on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained, surfaced in a material which the Planning Authority has approved in writing before the start of surfacing work, and shall, thereafter, be maintained as parking and manoeuvring areas. The first 15 metres of the access shall be paved and the remainder of the proposed driveway shall be surfaced in a material to reflect the site's rural setting.
Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities within the site, to prevent deleterious material from being taken on to the public road and in the interests of the rural character of the site.
10. That a visibility splay of 2.5 metres by 120 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: In the interests of road safety.
11. That before the development hereby permitted is brought into use, a 2 metre wide service verge shall be provided along the frontage of the application site onto Shawstonfoot Road.
Reason: To ensure future provision of a 2 metre wide footway is not compromised.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 3rd December 2001
Memo from NLC Traffic and Transportation Team Leader received 24th October 2005 Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 3rd October 2002 Letter from Scottish Water received 1st October 2002 Letter from British Gas received 24th September 2002 Letter from Scottish Power received 16th September 2002
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Gordon Liddell at 01 698 3021 28. APPLICATION NO. S/01/01609/FUL
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.I This proposal is to convert a U-shaped grouping of farm outbuildings to two self contained dwellinghouses with associated garden ground and parking at Hill of Murdostoun Farm, Cleland. The buildings in question are stone built, have slate roofs and are traditional in character. These would appear to date from the original farm complex. The application site consists of the main grouping of steading buildings at the farm with the specific section to be converted to the west of the farmhouse. The configuration of the buildings is such that they form a courtyard.
1.2 Vehicular access is to be taken from the existing farm access with a separate drive to the new dwellinghouses wrapping round to the rear of the complex. This partially follows an existing access route that would appear to have evolved through the workings of the farm. The conversion utilises the existing building footprint with a porch extension on the west elevation. The farm is situated some 800 metres outside the settlement boundary along Shawstonfoot Road and is set amongst fields. The nearest neighbouring property is a bungalow some 90 metres to the west.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The site is zoned as Green Belt on the Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan 1964.
2.2 In the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) it is also zoned as Green Belt and Policies ENVG and HSG12 apply.
3. Consultations
3.1 My Transportation Team Leader has no objections subject to the provision of adequate visibility from the access, the provision of a 2 metre wide service verge and appropriate surfacing.
3.2 Of the external consultees, Scottish Water have noted that foul drainage by septic tank to SEPA’s requirements will be needed.
3.3 Scottish Power advise of the position of their apparatus in the vicinity of the application site. TRANSCO have no objections.
4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 The first key issue in the consideration of this application is its assessment against national and relevant Development Plan policies on the Green Belt.
4.2 The site is zoned as Green Belt in the adopted Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan 1964. The up-to-date policy position however is that set out in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001/2004). Policy ENVG of the Southern Area Local Plan applies and states that the Council will safeguard the character and function of the Green Belt, and indicates that there will be a presumption against development other than that required for agriculture or appropriate other rural uses. Its associated text goes on to set out the purposes for Green Belt land locally, including: Controlling the growth of built-up areas. Preventing neighbouring settlements from merging. Preserving the character of settlements including their setting.
4.3 Notwithstanding the broad Green Belt issues pertaining to the application site, Southern Area Local Plan Policy HSG12 on Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside, does state that the conversion of existing buildings to residential use will be considered favourably where they are worthy of preservation, are substantially complete, and do not result in a significant increase in floorspace. In effect, this allows for limited residential development through appropriate conversion proposals where the purposes of the Green Belt are not adversely affected. Further support for this form of development is found in National Guidance, PAN 36 “Siting and Design of New Housing in the Countryside”. This states that planning authorities should look sympathetically at proposals for sensitive re-use, conversion or rehabilitation of traditional buildings which are structurally sound and largely intact, can be accessed safely and readily provided with water and drainage.
4.4 The current application building is traditional in character both in terms of construction and materials. With stone walls and slate roof sections the building ties closely with the character of the farmhouse and clearly forms a long-standing part of the farm complex. On the whole the building is substantially complete although there has been a section of the roof collapse in the inner courtyard. This collapsed area is not readily visible from public viewpoints. Given the nature and character of the existing buildings I consider that the principle of conversion in this instance is acceptable and takes support from local plan policy HSG12 and the national guidance detailed in PAN 36. I acknowledge the degree of roof collapse that has occurred but given the limited extent that this has on the building’s appearance from public viewpoints and the overall rural architectural value of the steadings, I also see this application as an opportunity to facilitate their longevity. Attention should however be given to the specific detail to ensure that the proposed changes remain sympathetic and do not interfere with the purposes of the Green Belt within which the application site lies.
4.5 The proposed alterations to the building are to allow two 1-1/2 storey dwellinghouses. It is noted that the scheme has been largely scaled down from initial submissions (which proposed to make the building 2 storey with extensive glazing) and makes use of the existing building footprint with a secondary porch extension on the west elevation. A mix of half dormer and standard windows are proposed for new openings on the main public elevations however these are now of a scale that are appropriate to the building and location. The half dormer windows also replicate a dormer feature on part of the original building. The porch extension is also on the prominent west elevation. While I would not normally wish to see any significant change to prominent elevations, the applicant has confirmed that the main gable of the porch is to be clad with reclaimed stone to match the overall building and I would acknowledge that this will reduce its impact. The applicant has also reduced the scale of the porch from earlier submissions. Through strict control over the materials to be used generally throughout the development (dormer walls, roof and windows) I consider that the appearance of the conversion from the public road will be acceptable.
4.6 Due to the collapse of a section of the roof within the courtyard, this has to be rebuilt. It is proposed to increase the ridge height by approximately 500mm. I would also note however that the percentage increase in ridge height is greater on the south elevation roof section where it is proposed to increase the ridge by 900mm in order to match the west wing. The applicant proposes to utilise slate on all roof sections and a step in height is proposed adjacent to the farmhouse, effectively keeping a buffer between the two properties. While attempts have been made to have the applicant reduce the ridge height further to reflect the existing situation, this has not transpired. The converted building will however remain secondary to the dwellinghouse and this increase in height is not therefore considered to offer sufficient reason to refuse the proposal in this instance. The use of slate will ensure that any impact on the character of the existing appearance is minimal. It is noted that the applicant has taken on board many other changes suggested by the Council.
4.7 Treatment on the north facing and courtyard elevations are similarly considered acceptable, none of which are visible from public viewpoints. It is noted that the wall head within the courtyard is also raised by 1 metre, however this is entirely hidden from the adjacent public road and will not impact of the character of the farm.
4.8 Adequate garden ground is achieved for both plots.
4.9 My Transportation Team Leader has no objection to the proposals, which utilise the existing farm access. It was initially proposed to form a dedicated access through an adjoining field however the applicant could not achieve the appropriate visibility. The driveway to the proposed dwellinghouses extend around the rear of the farm complex. This forms a relatively extensive route however I would note that this desire line has already been substantially formed through the other farm uses. I recommend that a condition be attached ensuring appropriate surfacing is utilised given the rural location. All other Transportation comments can be satisfied via planning conditions and the required land is within the control of the applicant.
4.10 Turning to consultation responses I would also advise that these can be appropriately covered by conditions and advisory notes. No other objections have been received.
4.11 Having due consideration to all issues surrounding this proposal I consider that the development constitutes the sympathetic conversion of an existing farm building of traditional character that is worthy of preservation and substantially complete. The applicant has significantly modified and reduced the initial proposals so that the conversion proposals better reflect the existing character of the farm. Due a limited section of the roof collapsing, this has to be rebuilt and an increase in height is proposed. This is considered acceptable in this instance as it’s impact on the overall building is not significant and the application will facilitate the longevity of these traditional farm buildings. On balance I consider that the proposals are acceptable from a design perspective do not therefore adversely impact on the purposes of the green belt. I recommend that permission be granted subject to conditions, particularly tight controls over materials and future development within the plots. Application No: S/05/01316IFUL
Date Registered: 1st August 2005
Applicant: Turnberry Homes Ltd 18 Allerdyce Drive Great Western Retail Park Glasgow G15 6RX
Agent Ark Architecture and Design 14 Royal Terrace Glasgow G3 7NY
Development: Erection of 34 Dwellinghouses and Associated Access Roads
Location: Land At Holm Gardens Bellshill Lanarkshire
Ward: 26: Mossend West And Thorndean - Councillor Joseph Gorman
Grid Reference: 274063 65971 5
File Reference: SIPLIB17198
Site History: The site was previously covered with 30 Council-owned properties and a children's playground.
The site is zoned as H2 (Established Housing Areas) in the Bellshill Development Plan: and Mossend Local Plan 1985. The Finalised Draft Southern Area Local Plan (Modified 2001 and 2004) also zones the site as being HSG8 (Established Housing Areas).
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: Geotechnical Team Leader (No comments) NLC Housing Department (No objections) Head of Property (No objections) Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Comments) Scottish Water (Objections) British Gas (No objections) Scottish Power (No objections)
Representations: 'I letter of representation received
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required North LBnarks.bm Comcll PLANNING APPLICATION No / 01316 / FUL Rwproducd bmhe Ordnawe Svvsy mappiw wm Plannlna and Ewironmnl S I05 he ~ermisilonolIheContrd1eroih~Maie~L)i~ t4adquams StatmaryOfim GCrmsopywht Sute 501 Fbmng Houba 2Tryrl Rod ERECTION OF 34 DWELLINGHOUSES AND ASSOCIATED ~~~~~~5~~~~FX;~~~~~'~' CUMBERNAULD ACCESS ROADS G67 1 JW
Tekphone 01236 616210 LAND AT HOLM GARDENS, BELLSHILL @hire Fax 01236 516232 Cdtlndl OS Licncs 100023368 2004 Site Area = 1 19 ha 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.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
3. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
4. That before the residential development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping, including boundary treatment, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include:- (a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, grass seeding and turfing; (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, and measures for their protection in the course of development; and (d) details of the phasing of these works.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
5. That before the residential 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 parking areas shown on the approved plans; (b) the proposed external lighting to be provided for the site; (c) the proposed grassed, planted and landscaped areas agreed under the terms of condition 4 above; and (d) the proposed fences to be erected as agreed under the terms of condition 3 above.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
6. That within one year of the occupation of the tenth last dwellinghouse within the development hereby permitted, all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 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 the implementation of the landscaping scheme in the interest of amenity.
7. That before completion of the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance scheme approved under the terms of condition 5 shall be in operation. Reason: To ensure ongoing maintenance in the interest of traffic safety and amenity.
8. 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 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 satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access facilities to the dwellings.
10. That before the development hereby permitted starts, details of the design and location of traffic calming shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Planning Authority.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
11. That before the development hereby approved commences, full details of the location and design of the surface water drainage scheme to be installed within the application site shall be submitted to and for the approval of the Planning Authority, and for the avoidance of doubt the scheme requires to be approved by the Scottish Water and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency in terms of their principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these details and to safeguard the amenity of the area, to prevent groundwater pollution and to ensure that the proposed drainage system complies with the latest SEPA guidance.
12. That before the residential development hereby permitted is completed, the surface water drainage scheme approved under the terms of Condition (11) above shall be installed, and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of water quality and the environment.
13. That before the development hereby permitted starts, the applicant shall provide written confirmation to the Planning Authority that all the requirements of Scottish Water, as specified in their letter dated 21st September 2005, have been fully met in respect of providing the necessary site drainage infrastructure to serve the development.
Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory site drainage arrangements.
14. That the development hereby granted planning permission shall not commence until the necessary “Stopping Up Order” has been promoted and successfully concluded in respect of the footways shown on approved plans.
Reason: To accord with the terms of Sections 207 and 209 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 1st August 2005
Letter from J Keegans and M Hamilton, 34 Holm Gardens, Bellshill
Memo from Transportation Manager received 2!jth August 2005 Email from NLC Housing Department received 1Oth October 2005 Email from Head of Property received gth September 2005 Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 25thAugust 2005 Letter from Scottish Water received 27th September 2005 Letter from British Gas received 11th August 2005 Letter from Scottish Power received gthSeptember 2005
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Miss Lesley Ward at 01698 302142. APPLICATION NO. S10510131 61FUL
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.I This application seeks permission for the erection of 34 dwellinghouses on land at Holm Gardens, Bellshill. The proposed dwellinghouses will be a mixture of semi-detached (14 units in total) and terraced housing (20 units in total), and will be constructed with facing brick and render. This site is Council-owned and was previously covered with approximately 30 properties and play area, which have now been cleared. The site is currently being sold by the Council to the developer.
1.2 The site is relatively flat and comprises a mixture of grassland and a concreted area where the former play area was sited at the southern end of the site. There is an existing access road into the site from Holm Gardens; and a public footpath bisects the site and links Burnside Avenue to the north with Thorndean Avenue to the south.
1.3 The development will necessitate the relocation of a section of public footway, and before any works start, the Council must promote and conclude the Stopping-Up procedure.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The site is zoned as H2 (Established Housing Areas) in the Bellshill and Mossend Local Plan 1985. The Finalised Draft Southern Area Local Plan (Modified 2001 and 2004) also zones the site as being HSG8 (Established Housing Areas).
2.1 It is considered that the application raises no strategic issues as the proposal involves the redevelopment of a previously residential site. The proposal can therefore be assessed in terms of the local plan policies.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 Following consultation with the statutory consultees one objection was received from Scottish Water due to the constraint issues on the wastewater network system in the area. However, this issue can be resolved if the applicant can demonstrate that the development will not have an impact on Scottish Water’s assets, or that suitable infrastructure can be put in place to support the development. This is dealt with by a condition of the consent and is the responsibility of the applicant to address the issue.
3.2 The Transportation Section initially recommended refusal of the application as the original plans show a roundel with two access roads leading from it. This layout would not receive Roads Construction Consent and after discussion with the applicant, amended plans were received showing a speed bend at the point of the previous roundel. The removal of this roundel, however, resulted in the loss of 2 visitor parking bays, and revised plans showing the provision of 2 addition visitor bays within the landscaped area of the speed bend, were sought.
3.3 Following the standard neighbour notification procedure one letter of representation was received from a neighbour at 34 Holm Gardens. This property is currently in Council ownership and the occupiers sought an extension to their garden ground to allow the installation of a driveway. Due to the location of the property in relation to the application site, this would be facilitated by the Council withdrawing a section of land from the sale to the developer. Although this is not a relevant Planning consideration, the Housing and Property Services sections were contacted in order to address the issue. At present, the sale of the land has not yet been concluded and this issue has not been resolved. 4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 It should be noted that the application raises no strategic issues and therefore only needs to be assessed against the Local Plan and other material considerations.
4.2 In assessing this proposal it is necessary to consider that the site is zoned as H2 (Established Housing Areas) in the Bellshill and Mossend Local Plan 1985. The Finalised Draft Southern Area Local Plan (Modified 2001 and 2004) also zones the site as being HSG8 (Established Housing Areas). In this case the proposal is not contrary to local plan policy, therefore the main issue in the determination of this application is the impact on the character of the surrounding area and the amenity of the neighbouring residential properties. A relevant local plan policy in relation to this proposal is Housing Policy HSG 11 of the Southern Area Local Plan (Modified 2001 and 2004) which requires account to be taken of the impact of the proposal on the character and amenity of the surrounding area, the scale of the development, the means of access and parking provision. These elements have been taken into consideration and the proposed residential layout is considered to be acceptable. There is a suitable mix of housing types and the density and scale of the layout is considered to be in keeping with the character of the surrounding area. The proposed dwellings shall be constructed with facing brick, render and interlocking roof tiles, details of which have to be agreed. The proposed dwellings meet the Council's Open Space Guideline in general, however a minimum 10 metre rear garden depth is not met in some of the plots. Nevertheless, there is sufficient space at the side of the dwellings for a suitable private garden area. The road layout is considered to be acceptable. In addition, it was agreed by the Planning and Environment Committee on the 22nd that the site would not require a play area on the condition that a contribution is made to existing play equipment provision at Milnwood Park, situated approximately 250 metres to the north of the site.
4.3 The application site is located in close proximity to residential properties, and any impact upon residential amenity would be marginal, as the site was previously a residential area and there will be no increase in noise or disturbance. It is further considered that the conditions of this permission would ensure that the development does not adversely affect the amenity of the neighbouring properties, and it will enhance the character of the area.
4.4 Currently, the site does not contribute to any aesthetic merit of the surrounding area and the redevelopment of the land to a suitable standard would be of benefit to the adjacent community.
4.5 In relation to the points of representation from an adjoining neighbour, it should be noted that the letter does not raise any material Planning considerations and therefore cannot be taken into account when determining this application.
4.6 Overall, the proposed use of land for residential purposes would integrate satisfactorily with the existing adjoining residential area. There are no reasons for upholding any points of representation and it is therefore recommended that Planning Permission be granted subject to conditions.
NOTE TO COMMITTEE
Should planning permission be granted, a Stopping Up Order will be required for the relocation of the public footway bisecting the site.
If the committee are minded to grant consent the decision notice will not be issued until a Section 69 Agreement is signed between the Council and developer with regard to the financial contribution of the Milnwood Park. Application No: SI0510157910UT
Date Registered: 21 st September 2005
Applicant: Mr Grant Mackin 189 Merry Street Motherwell Lanarkshire MLI ILN
Agent Block Architects Limited 18 Cairnryan Crescent Blantyre G72 OJJ
Development: Erection of Dwellinghouse
Location: 189 Merry Street Motherwell Lanarkshire MLI ILN
Ward: 2 Calder Valley Councillor Annita McAuley
Grid Reference: 275565657393
File Reference: SIPLIBII 3/1
Site History: 433I88 Change of Use from Dwelling to Office Approved 27.09.88 155I84 Erection of Dwelling Refused 04.07.84 130I85 Erection of Dwelling Recommended for approval, Consent not granted as Section 50 Agreement not completed 9611 0490IOUT Erection of Dwellinghouse Approved 23.12.96
Development Plan: Policy HSG 8 Established Residential Area in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) Policy HSG 11 lnfill Residential Development is also applicable Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: Leisure Services (No Observations) Scottish Environment Protection Agency ( No Objections) Scottish Power (No Objections)
Representations: 2 Letters of Representation
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-
1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started, either within 5 years of the date of this permission, or within 2 years of the date of which the last of the reserved matters are approved, whichever is the later. Reason:To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.
2. That before development starts, a further planning application shall be submitted to the Planning Authority in respect of the following reserved matters:- (a) the siting, design and external appearance of the dwelling and any domestic garage; (b) the means of access to the site; (c) the layout of the plot, including footways, and parking areas; (d) the design and location of all boundary walls and fences; (e) the provision of drainage works; (f) the disposal of sewage; (9) details of existing and proposed site levels.
Reason:To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
3. That no part of the dwellinghouse hereby permitted shall exceed 2 storeys in height and the dwellinghouse shall have a traditional double pitched roof.
Reason:To ensure that the height of the dwelling is appropriate to the context of surrounding buildings within the streetscape.
4. That the dwelling hereby approved, shall occupy a footprint no greater than that illustrated on the approved layout plan and a vehicular driveway of 3 metres width shall be formed along the south- western boundary, including the provision of a turning facility, of the plot to serve the proposed vehicular access. Additionally, the proposed new driveway for 189 Merry Street shall include an in-plot turning facility.
Reason:To ensure that the proposed dwelling is of an acceptable size and that there is adequate provision of in plot parking and a turning area in the interests of road safety and residential amenity.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 21st September 2005 Letter from John And Elizabeth Dunn,l2 Calderview , Motherwell received 17th October 2005. Letter from E Duncan, Flat B, 193 Merry Street, Motherwell containing 9 signature petition from residents within flatted development to north of site Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) Memo from Transportation Manager received 20thOctober 2005 Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 14'h November 2005 Letter from Scottish Power received 10th October 2005
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mrs Marlaine Lavery at 01698 302102. PLANNING APPLICATION NO.S/05/01579/0UT
ERECTION OF DWELLINGHOUSE
189 MERRY STREET, MOTHERWELL
JC ReDresentation APPLICATION NO. S/05/01579/OUT
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.I This application seeks consent in outline for the erection of a dwelling within the eastern garden area of 189 Merry Street, Motherwell, a one and a half storey detached sandstone dwelling. The proposed site has an area of approximately 315 square metres and is currently in an unsightly state of dereliction. It is bounded to the north by Calderview, a terraced residential development, to the east by the communal carpark of a 3 storey flatted development, to the west by the dwelling at 189 Merry street and to the south by Merry Street itself.
1.2 At present, the existing vehicular access to 189 Merry Street lies at the front of the application site accessing Merry Street. The applicant proposes to remove this access and provide two new access points adjacent to one another, one to serve the existing dwelling and one to serve the proposed dwelling.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The site is zoned within an Established Residential Area, Policy HSG 8, in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). This policy seeks to protect the established character of existing and new housing areas by opposing development which is incompatible with a residential setting or adversely affects the amenity of the Established Housing Areas.
2.2 Policy HSG 11 is also directly relevant to the assessment of this proposal as it deals with infill development within residential areas. This policy takes into account the overall impact of the proposal on the character and amenity of the surrounding area, the dimensions of the site and associated garden ground, garden space, privacy, sunlight, scale, materials, general design and provision of access and parking provision.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 No objections have been received from SEPA, Scottish Power as a result of the consultation process. The Transportation Team Leader of me Department has recommended that the application be refused as the proposal would result in an additional access onto Merry Street in the interests of road safety.
3.2 Two letters of objection have been received as a result of neighbour notification. The first is from residents of 12 Calderview to the north of the site objecting to the lack of detail contained within the application. The second letter is from a resident within the flatted development to the east of the application site containing Nine signatures from residents within the block. The objection is on the grounds that the applicant has damaged an existing brick wall along the mutual boundary of the site and the flatted development during site preparation works.
4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 As summarised earlier, the site has previously had the benefit of Planning Permission for the erection of a dwelling. Furthermore, the principle of residential is not in question as the site is zoned within an Established Residential Area in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). 4.2 Additionally, it is considered that the plot can be developed to a satisfactory standard in terms of amount of private garden area (125 square metres), with no detrimental affect on either 189 Merry Street, the dwellings .in Calderview or the flatted dwellings to the north in terms of privacy/overlooking or sunlighting/daylighting. It is recognised that the plot does not have the minimum 10 metre rear garden depth which is a Council standard for new residential development. However, this infill development is considered to be a justifiable exception to this standard. This is because the application site slopes downwards towards Merry Street and is on lower lying ground than the dwellings in Calderview. Additionally, a minimum window to window distance of 9 metres, can be achieved, which is well within recognised standards in relation to the relative window angles of the proposed dwelling and that of 11 Calderview. It is considered that a detailed scheme can be worked up which would comply with the terms of Policy HSG 11 (Infill Housing Development) in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004).
4.3 In terms of the points of objection, firstly, the lack of detail is because the application is in outline, for the principle of the proposed dwelling and is therefore not valid in the circumstances. The second objection relates to alleged damage to a boundary wall, which is not a material planning consideration, but a private legal matter.
4.4 I have noted the comments of my Transportation Team Leader regarding the formation of the additional access onto Merry Street. However, I do not consider the addition of one further access to be significant in this case, subject to the satisfactory formation of turning facilities for both the proposed and resultant house plots. Furthermore, I consider that the development of this unsightly gap site will be of benefit to surrounding residential amenity and the visual amenity of the streetscape. It is therefore considered that this proposal is acceptable and as such, this application is recommended for approval subject to the imposition of the appropriate conditions. Application No: S1051016091FUL
Date Registered: 5th October 2005 Applicant: Pars Properties Ltd 8-12 Glentanar Road Glasgow G22 7XS Development: Change of Use from Class 1 to Class 3 and/or Hot Food Takeaway
Location: 2 Market Place Uddingston G715AL
Ward: 23 Viewpark Councillor James McCabe JP
Grid Reference: 271 379 661 402
File Reference: SIPLIBI9I105
Development Plan: Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004)
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: Head of Protective Services (com ments) Head of Traffic and Transportation (no objection)
Representations: One letter of objection and one petition with 10 signatures.
Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 27th October 2005
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. Prior to the implementation of this permission full details of any external flue for the extraction of cooking fumes shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority, and prior to the building being brought into use, the flue shall be installed as per the approved details.
Reason: To allow the Planning Authority further control over this matter in the interest of amenity.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 21st September 2005
Memo from Transportation Manager received 20th October 2005 Memo from Head Of Protective Services received 3rd November 2005 Letter from Mrs A Chisholm, Tea Cosy, Unit 2, 4 Market Place, Viewpark, Uddingston, received 28th October 2005. Petition with 10 signatures, received 4'h November 2005.
Any person wishing to inspect these,documents should contact Mr Kevin Treadwell at 01698 302102. --- earn One Representation Located Outwith Map Area
$5 v- $>>> \s,> \$ \I \I Lt
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. S/05/01609/FUL
CHANGE OF USE FROM CLASS 1 TO CLASS 3 AND/OR HOT FOOD TAKE AWAY
2 MARKET PLACE, UDDINGSTON * Representation APPLICATION NO. S/05/01609/FUL
REPORT
Description of Site and Proposal
1 .I This application relates to the change of use from a vacant Class 1 unit to a hot food takeaway andlor a Class 3 (Food and Drink e.g. a restaurant, cafe or snack bar) unit at 2 Market Place, Uddingston. The application premises is a single storey shop unit that forms part of a row of 3 shop units and is situated between Market Street and Market Road. The unit faces on to Market Place, which is a pedestrianised square, and is adjacent to Burnhead Street. The site lies within an area of primarily commercial uses including a pharmacy, a Post Office, a bookmaker, and a sit-inflakeaway cafe. To the west of the application site lie residential properties.
1.2 The proposal relates to the change of use of the existing premises only, and no alterations to the external of the building are proposed under the terms of this application.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The site is covered by Policy RTL 6 (Secondary, Village and Neighbourhood Commercial Areas) and RTL 11 (Bad Neighbour Developments) in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). The development raises no strategic issues.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 Following the standard neighbour notification and public advertisement of this proposal one letter of representation and a petition with 10 signatures were received against the proposal. The letter is from a property in the vicinity of the application site, and the petition is signed by residents of Market Road, Market Place and the nearby Chestnut Crescent and Oak Place. The points of representation are summarised as follows:
(a) The proposal has the potential to result in a shop opening which could compete with the objectors community orientated cafe. (b) Granting the application may result in “undesirables” affecting the general amenity of in the area. (c) Young people will congregate and cause a social nuisance.
3.2 The Protective Services Section had no objection to the proposal subject to the provision of a suitable extractor flue and compliance with environmental regulations.
3.3 The Transportation Section also indicated that there were no objections to the proposal given the local centre location.
4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 In assessing the merits of the proposal regard must be taken of the Development Plan and other material considerations. The application property is located within an area zoned as a secondary, village or neighbourhood commercial areas where shops, offices and other appropriate uses would be supported, subject to satisfying Policy RTLI 1. The proposed uses are both within the supported uses as dictated by Policy RTL6. The proposed change of use satisfies the terms of policy RTL6 as a satisfactory flue can be agreed by way of a planning condition. The proposal is therefore considered acceptable under the terms of the local plan policies. 4.2 The concerns raised by the objectors are addresses as follows:
0 Issues over competition are not a material consideration and can therefore not be taken into account when determining this planning application. 0 The area is comprised of a mix of uses and is designated as a secondary, village or neighbourhood commercial area in the Local Plan. The concerns raised by the objectors are noted in respect of adverse effect on amenity including the possible increase in noise and disturbance, and the congregation of youths. However, as the site is situated in an area where local shops are present (Scotmid adjacent is open between 7am and 9pm Monday to Friday and the adjoining Costcutter is open 7am to 5:30pm Monday to Friday, 7am to 7:30pm on Saturday and 8am to 3pm on Sundays), I do not consider that this proposal will have a significant impact on the existing levels of amenity currently enjoyed in the area.
4.3 The Protective Services Section had no objection to the proposals subject to conditions and in particular a satisfactory flue being provided. The Transportation Section also indicated that they had no objection. It should be noted that there are several off street car parking spaces in the immediate vicinity and I therefore consider the lack of dedicated parking facilities would not be a significant detriment to the area.
4.4 In terms of the proposals’ impact on the residential amenity of the area, it should be noted that Market Street separates the application site and the nearest residential property. Furthermore, the distance from gable to gable is approximately 20 metres, which, in conjunction with the proposed conditions, will not result in the residential properties amenity being significantly affected to merit refusing the application. The residential properties are located on Burnhead Road which is the main road linking Laburnum Road with Old Edinburgh Road, via Elmbank Avenue and as such activity levels and noise levels are already fairly high. Various community facilities are located to the north of the application site adjacent to Burnhead Road. Taking these factors together it is considered that any increase in public activity as a result of the proposal is unlikely to be significantly detrimental to current levels of residential amenity.
4.5 Having regard to the foregoing I consider the proposal to be compliant with the development plan in terms of land use and in conclusion, the points of representation have been considered and no reason found to uphold the points raised or to request amendments to the proposals. The proposal is considered to be acceptable and is in keeping with the surrounding area. The application raises no strategic issues and accords with the policies of the local plan. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the appropriate conditions.