North Lan arkshire Council

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT

Planning Applications for consideration of the Planning and Environment Committee

Committee Date: 9 June 2004

Ordnance Survey maps reproduced from Ordnance Survey with permission of HMSO Crown Copyright reserved APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 9 JUNE 2004

Page No. Application No. Applicant DevelopmentlLocus Recommendation

14 N/04/00329/FUL Mr C Ross Change of Use from Meeting Hall, Refuse Offices and Flat to Four Residential Flats 16 Edward Street Kilsyth

19 N/04/00488/FUL Mr R Shields Extension to a Dwellinghouse Grant 37 Grangeneuk Gardens Balloch, Cumbernauld

23 N/04/00550/FUL Mr David Gordon Erection of Residential Refuse (P) Development with Associated Landscaping, Parking, Infrastructure and Replacement Sports Provision Woodneuk Avenue / Junction M73 Gartcosh

37 N/04/00561/FUL Mr J Gibblin Extension to a Block of Flats Grant 7 Woodneuk Road Gartcosh

42 N/04/00630/FUL Mr & Mrs Burns Erection of a Conservatory Grant 24 Thorniecroft Place Condorrat

47 N/04/00631/FUL Mr Norman Norrie Alterations and Extension to a Grant Dwellinghouse 7 Nairn Way Westerwood, Cumbernauld

52 C/03/00844/FUL Mr Peter Campbell Erection of Residential Grant (P) Accommodation in association with Goat Breeding Business Land Adjacent to Garden Wood & to the North of Airdrie Road Caldercruix

58 C/04/00046/0UT Mr B Collum Erection of Dwellinghouse (in Refuse outline) on land west of 24 Arthur Avenue, Airdrie

63 C/04/00095/FUL Mr & Mrs Carraghar Erection of Front Porch, Two Grant Storey and Single Storey Rear Extension at 135 Old Monkland Road Coatbridge

68 C1041001 OOlFUL Persimmon Homes Erection of 18 Dwellinghouses on Grant (West Scotland) Ltd land at the Former Tinsley Wire Site, Souterhouse Road, Coatbridge

76 C/04/00157/FUL F. Gray Erection of Two Dwellinghouses Refuse on land south of 16-20 Quarry Road, Airdrie APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 9 JUNE 2004

Page No. Application No. Applicant DevelopmentlLocus Recommendation

81 C/04/00194/OUT Mr James Greenaway Redevelopment of GaragelScrap Grant Yard for Residential Development at Forrestfield Garage 105 Airdrie Road Caldercruix

90 C/04/00404/FUL A i3 D Stores Change of Use of Shop to Hot Grant Food Takeaway at 224 Main Street, Caldercruix

95 C/04/00445/FUL James Smith Change of Use from Open Space Grant to Private Garden Ground at 16 Stonehaven Crescent Airdrie

100 C/04/00449/FUL Mr Peter Ross Erection of Extension to form Refuse Glazed Stair Enclosure at 16 Academy Street Coatbridge ML5 3AU

106 C/04/00468/FUL MM 02 (UK) Limited Erection of 10m high Grant Telecommunications Monopole and 2 associated cabinets on land SW of junction of Bankhead Avenue with Viewfield Road Coatbridge

110 C/04/00557/FUL Mr and Mrs McKenzie Rear extension to dwellinghouse Grant at 55 Drummore Avenue Carnbroe Coatbridge

115 C/04/00589/FUL Mr B Docherty Erection of Two Storey and Single Grant Storey Rear Extension at 52 Woodlands Drive Coatbridge

120 C/04/00616IFUL Mr Koon Yau Chan Change of Use from General Refuse Store to Hot Food Take Away at 4 Centre Street Glenboig

126 C/04/00625/FUL James Forsyth Erection of Vehicle Repair Shed Grant Coatbridge Ltd (in Retrospect) on land south of Kirkstyle, Woodside Street, Coatbridge

129 02 (UK) Ltd Erection of 15m High Grant Telecommunication Monopole and Associated Cabinets at land south of 6 South Caldeen Road Calder Street Coatbridge

133 C/04/00742/FUL The Segton Bar Extension to Public House at Grant 22 Sunnyside Road, Coatbridge

137 S/03/01814/FUL Barley Bank Ltd Construction Of 24 Hour Grant (P) Operational Class 5 Industrial Warehouse For Commercial Vehicle Servicing And Repairs With Ancillary Commercial Vehicle Sales Area and Parking Land East Of Bairdsland View Bellshill APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 9 JUNE 2004

Page No. Application No. Applicant DevelopmentlLocus Recommendation

145 S/04/001 30/0 UT Mr & Mrs K Morrison Residential Development Refuse (P) Land At 19 - 23 Maryville View Uddingston

155 S/04/00269/FUL Mr & Mrs Freeman Two-Storey Side and Rear Grant Extension to Dwellinghouse 17 McCallum Gardens Bellshill ML4 2SR

160 S/O4/00300/FUL Mitchells & Butlers Conversion of Existing Play Barn Refuse Retail Ltd. Attached to Public House and Erection of New Extension to Form Twenty-Eight Bedroom Ancillary Hotel Strathclyde Park Inn Strathclyde Park Hamilton Road Motherwell

165 S/04/00391/FUL Mr & Mrs Guilley Erection Of Conservatory Grant 11 Triton Place Bellshill ML4 1JN

170 S1041004221FUL 02 (UK) Ltd Installation of 6 Additional Grant Antennae, 2 Transmission Dishes and Associated Ground Based Equipment Land At Braidhurst Industrial Estate Newhut Road Motherwell

175 S/04/00423/FUL Alex McClair Change of Use from Industry to Grant Swimming Studio Unit 19 Motherwell Business Centre Coursington Road Motherwell MLI 1PW

180 S/04/00432/OUT Mr & Mrs R Martin Residential Development Refuse (P) Land At Roundknowe Farm Lodge Roundknowe Road Uddingston

192 S/04/00446/FUL Mr Niall Tutton 3 Metre Extension in Height to Refuse Existing Structure and Installation of 3 Dual Polar Antenna Dishes and 2 Equipment Cabinets Land West Of Horsley Brae Wishaw

198 S/04/00448/FUL George Wimpey West Residential Development Grant (P) Scotland Ltd Comprising 14 Dwellinghouses and Partial Amendment to the Site Layout Previously Granted (No S/02/01603/FUL) Affecting 12 Dwellinghouses Land East Of Hattonrigg Road Bellshill APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 9 JUNE 2004

Page No. Application No. Applicant DevelopmentlLocus Recommendation

207 S/04/0047O/FUL SMS Construction Residential Development of 8 No Grant Flats, 8 No Detached Dwellinghouses, 2 Serviced Plots and Formation of Access Road Former Benhar Primary School West Benhar Road Harthill Shotts ML7 5PB

212 S/04/00473/FUL Roman Road Hall Refurbishment and Extension to Grant Church Hall Roman Road Hall 14 Roman Road Motherwell

21 5 S/04/00486/FUL James Duncan Change of Use from Shop (Class Refuse 1) to Hot Food Shop 115 High Street Newarthill Motherwell MLI 5JH

220 S/04/00679/FUL 02 (UK) Ltd Installation of 12.5 Metre High Refuse Telecommunications Mast & Associated Ground Equipment Land South West Of The Loanhead Road Junction, A723, Carfin Motherwell

225 S/04/00713/FUL Vodafone Ltd Erection of 17.4 Metre High Grant Telecommunications Mast and Associated Ground Equipment 5 Hunter Street Bellshill ML4 1RN

(P) N1041005501FUL If approved, refer to the Scottish Ministers. (P) C/03/00844/FUL If granted, requires a Section 75 Agreement (P) S/03/01814/FUL If granted, requires a Section 75 Agreement (P) S/04/00130/FUL If granted, refer to Scottish Ministers (P) S/04/00432/FUL If granted, refer to Scottish Ministers (P) S/04/00448/FUL If granted, refer to Scottish Ministers Application No: N1041003291FUL

Date Registered: 10th March 2004

Applicant: Mr C Ross Meadowbank House Wyndford Road Banknock FK4 IUD

Develop ment : Change of Use from Meeting Hall, Offices and Flat to Four Residential Flats

Location: 16 Edward Street, Kilsyth

Ward: 66: Banton and Kilsyth East Councillor Tom Barrie

Grid Reference: 271 909 6781 79

File Reference: N/04/00329/F UL

Site History:

Development Plan: The property is covered by residential policies in the Kilsyth Local Plan.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: 1 Representation Letter

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

The application is for the change of use from meeting hall, offices and flat to four residential flats at 16 Edward Street, Kilsyth. The building was occupied until recently by the Salvation Army.

The key issue in the consideration of this application relates to the lack of dedicated off-street parking for the residents of the proposed flats. The applicant has argued that the proposal will allow the effective reuse of an existing building and, by removing the hall use, will stop high on-street parking levels during meetings, concerts etc.

Notwithstanding the above, it is considered that day to day parking associated with the four flats will lead to unacceptable on street parking pressure to the detriment of road safety. The lack of curtilage parking is contrary to North Lanarkshire Council's current roads guidelines.

It is recommended that planning permission be refused. The Committee should note that the applicant has requested a site visit and a hearing prior to the determination of the application. g Hall 18 EdwdStrict Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. In the interests of road safety in that the lack of any curtilage parking for the occupants of the proposed residential units means that there will be an unacceptable increased level of daily on- street parking on Edward Street and surrounding roads.

2. The proposed development is contrary to North Lanarkshire Council Roads Guidelines in that no curtilage parking is proposed for the occupants of the proposed residential units.

3. That should planning permission be granted for this development a precedent may be set which would make it difficult for the planning authority to refuse similar applications with no curtilage parking.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 10th March 2004

Letter from Mr Colin McMenemy,l3 William Wilson Court, Kilsyth, G65 9PD received 23rd March 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr. Dean at 01236 616459. APPLICATION NO. N/04/00329/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.1 This application is for the change of use from a meetin hall, offices and flat to four residential flats at 16 Edward Street, Kilsyth. The building, which was used until recently by the Salvation Army, consists of a two storey front section which contains the existing flat and offices and a single storey rear section which contains the hall. There is no associated land outwith the building and, as such, no off-street parking or garden areas are proposed.

1.2 It is proposed that an upper and lower flat, both with three bedrooms, be formed in the front part of the building adjacent to Edward Street, and that two flats be formed in the hall section, one with three and one with two bedrooms. The building is within a residential area and is about 200 metres from Kilsyth Town Centre.

2. Develo pment Plan

2.1 Under the terms of the Kilsyth Local Plan 1999 the site is covered by the following relevant policies :-

HG2 - Within areas identified for primarily residential uses there will be a presumption against the loss of houses to other uses and any developments which could be detrimental to residential amenity.

HG3 - New residential development and alterations/extensions to existing residential properties will be in keeping with the scale and character of the surrounding area. In particular the site must provide a satisfactory living environment by accommodating a reasonable sized dwelling house, landscaping and acceptable garden area and with no detrimental effect on existing residential amenity. New residential developments should provide roads and off street parking to meet roads department guidelines.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 My Transportation Section has concerns over the lack of dedicated off-street parking for the proposed development.

3.2 One letter of representation has been submitted from a local resident. No objection to the basic form of development was raised, but concern was expressed that there would be additional traffic parked on an already busy street and it was suggested that there be dedicated off-street parking.

4. PIan ni na Assessment and Co ncl us i o ns

4.1 Planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless there are material considerations which dictate otherwise. The proposed development is in a residentially zoned area but, if deemed to be new residential development, does not accord with Local Plan Policy HG3 which requires compliance with North Lanarkshire Council’s roads guidelines on parking and other roads matters. 4.2 It is noted that the proposed development will have the following benefits :-

The cessation of the hall use will remove the regular associated high level of parking during meetings, concerts etc.

The proposal will allow the retention and reuse of an existing building which contributes to the local streetscape to some extent.

4.3 The main issue in the determination of this planning application is whether or not the lack of dedicated off-street car parking for the four flats is a sufficient reason to refuse permission. In normal circumstances, new residential development (including flats) should be self sufficient in car parking for the convenience of prospective occupiers and in the interests of the amenity and safety of existing residents and road users. The availability of dedicated amenity open space, while important, is arguably not as significant.

4.4 In this case, Edward Street is already subject to a high level of on-street parking due to the presence of 15 x 1960’s Council built flats with no off-street parking. As such the proposed development will exacerbate an existing parking problem to the detriment of road and pedestrian safety. The applicant has declined to convert only the frontage building to two flats and to demolish the rear section of building to allow some parking and garden space. He has pointed out that such a proposal would not be economical and that he does not control land between the rear area and the public road. He has also pointed out the high parking requirement for the existing hall.

4.5 The lack of proposed off-street parking means that the development does not comply with North Lanarkshire Council roads guidelines and (if deemed to be a new residential development) is contrary to the Kilsyth Local Plan in relation to parking. A grant of permission will set a precedent for development with no associated parking.

4.6 Taking account of the above factors, it is recommended that planning permission be refused.

4.7 Finally, please note that the applicant has requested that the Committee carry out a site visit and a hearing prior to their determining this planning application. Application No: N/04/00488/FU L

Date Registered: 31'' March 2004

Applicant : Mr R Shields 37 Grangeneuk Gardens Cumbernauld G68 9BA

Development: Extension to a Dwellinghouse

Location: 37 Grangeneuk Gardens, Balloch, Cumbernauld

Ward: 55: Balloch East and Ravenswood Councillor Elizabeth Gemmell

Grid Reference: 2741 34.674399.

File Reference: N/04/00488/FUL

Site History: None

Development Plan: The site is covered by residential policies in the Cumbernauld Local Plan, 1993

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: 1 Representation Letter

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

This application is for the construction of a two-storey side extension and a single storey rear extension at the dwellinghouse at 37 Grangeneuk Gardens, Balloch, Cumbernauld. One letter of representation has been received, the points of which are outlined in the accompanying background report. Notwithstanding the objection, it is recommended that planning permission be granted.

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

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

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

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 31st March 2004

Memo from Traffic and Transportation Team Leader received 26th April 2004

Letter from Mrs Marion Gray,35 Grangeneuk Gardens, Balloch, Cumbernauld, G68 received 14th April 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mrs. Devlin at 01236 616463 APPLICATION NO. N1041004881FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I This application is for the construction of a two-storey side extension and a single storey rear extension at the property at 37 Grangeneuk Gardens, Balloch, Cumbernauld. The property is semi-detached and is set within an existing residential area. The side extension will provide a garage and utility room at ground floor level and a master bedroom with en-suite facilities at first floor level. The rear extension will provide a sun room/family room.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site is covered by residential policies in the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993, and raises no strategic issues.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 My Transportation Section was initially concerned about the proposal, as there was only a 4 metre long driveway proposed at the front of the garage. However, amended plans have been submitted illustrating a driveway length of 6 metres, which is acceptable.

3.2 One letter of representation has been received from the neighbour at 35 Grangeneuk Gardens, the main points of which are summarised as follows:-

+ The proposed two-storey extension would be close to their property resulting in overshadowing of the kitchen and bathroom as No. 35 is single storey.

Comment : While the proposal will be 3 metres closer to the neighbouring property, there would be a distance of 6.5 metres between the two buildings. The proposed side extension will have a minimal impact on sunlight in the latter part of the day, however it is not serious enough to warrant refusal of the application. It should also be noted that the bathroom is not classed as a habitable room.

+ It is claimed that the boundary line indicated on the plans is incorrect. This being the case the extension would not be the required 1 metre from the boundary, but closer.

Comment : The position of the common boundary is a legal matter between both parties. It should be noted that it is common practice to build up to a boundary line.

4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 Planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case, the proposal is not contrary to the development plan and the main issue is the impact of the proposed two storey extension on the neighbouring proprietor.

4.2 It is considered that the design and scale of the proposed extension is acceptable. Notwithstanding the objections raised by the neighbour at 35 Grangeneuk Gardens, and discussed in section 3 above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted. Application No: N/04/00550/FU L

Date Registered: 13th April 2004

Applicant: Mr David Gordon Clo Montagu Evans 302 St Vincent Street Glasgow

Agent Montagu Evans 302 St Vincent Street Glasgow

Development: Erection of Residential Development with Associated Landscaping, Parking, Infrastructure and Replacement Sports Provision

Location: Woodneuk Avenue I Junction M73, Gartcosh

Ward: 68: Moodiesburn West and Gartcosh Councillor Joseph Shaw

Grid Reference: 270331 668351

File Reference: N/04/00550/FU L

Site History: TP/92/363: Residential development granted 22ndMarch 1993 NL/TP/95/105: Construction of 62 dwellings granted 22ndAugust 1995 N/00/01382/OUT: Roadside Services withdra~n25'~September 2001 N/O1/01679/OUT : Roadside Facilities granted 8 August 2002

Development Plan: Strategic Policy 1, Strategic Policy 2, Strategic Policy 4, Strategic Policy 5, Strategic Policy 9 and Strategic Policy 10 of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000

Policies E.PR02 (Greenbelt) and E.PRO6 (area unaffected by specific proposals) in the Strathkelvin Southern Area Local Plan adopted May 1983

Policies LRI (Leisure and Recreation), HG1/9 (New Housing Sites) and HG3 (Established Residential Area) of the Northern Corridor Local Plan, Finalised Draft, October 2000

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: Scottish Executive Trunk Roads (Comments) Scottish Natural Heritage (Conditions) S.E.P.A.(West) (No response) Scottish Water (Objection) British Gas Transco (No objection) Scottish Power (Conditions) SportScotland (Objection)

Representations: 3 Representation Letters

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 21 st April 2004

Comments:

This planning application is for a residential development comprising 51 dwellings adjacent to, and accessed from, the new junction on the M73. Although this junction was formed primarily to serve the Gartcosh Industrial Park it has in turn increased the attractiveness of Gartcosh as a location for development. This application, and the previous planning permission for roadside facilities on the same site (N/O1/01679/OUT granted 8 August 2002) are testament to this. The applicant advises that despite attempts over a six month period to attract developer interest in the site, no interest has been shown. Prospective operators rejected the site because there are already a number of similar facilities in the area and the site does not meet the operators' criteria in terms of location, demographics and/or volume of passing traffic. This fact has prompted the applicant to seek planning permission for residential development on the site.

As before, the proposed development includes the replacement of the Social Club's football pitch. It is proposed that a new pitch be provided on ground to the rear of the Social Club Building. The one difference this time around is that the replacement provision does not include a training pitch.

A total of three letters of objection have been received (including a letter from Gartcosh Community Council) and the matters raised are covered in the accompanying report.

Planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case, the proposed development is contrary to national planning policy and the development plan and, as there are considered to be no material planning considerations that justify a departure from the development plan, it is recommended that planning permission be refused.

Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. The proposed development is contrary to National Planning Policy Guidance covering economic development, sustainable development, the identification of land for housing, guiding housing development to suitable locations, fitting new housing development into the landscape, the protection of countryside from development, planning for sport and recreation and the protection of open space.

2. The proposed development is contrary to the provisions of The Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan, 2000 in particular, Strategic Policy 1 (Strategic Development Locations); Strategic Policy 2 (Long Term Potential for Development), Strategic Policy 4 (Strategic Transportation Network), Strategic Policy 5 (Competitive Economic Framework), Strategic Policy 9 (Assessment of Development Proposals) and Strategic Policy 10 (Departures from the Structure Plan). Furthermore, with regard to the scales of development identified in the structure plan, the proposed development represents a significant departure from the structure plan.

3. The residential element of the proposed development is contrary to the provisions of the adopted Strathkelvin Southern Area Local Plan, 1983, in particular, Policy E.PR02 (Greenbelt) and Policy LRI (Leisure and Recreation) of NLC's Northern Corridor Local Plan, Finalised Draft October 2000 and, as there is currently no immediate need to release the land for housing, there is insufficient justification for setting aside the provisions of the adopted or emerging local plan.

4. That there is currently no immediate need to release further housing land within the Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Moodiesburn Housing Market Area and, even if there were, the development as proposed is unacceptable in planning and roads terms. Furthermore, if this site were to be developed for housing, such a development may prejudice or limit the potential development of Gartcosh Industrial Park. If granted, this application will require to be referred 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 13th April 2004

Memo from Gartcosh Community Council received 11th May 2004 Letter from Scottish Executive Trunk Roads received 5th May 2004 Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 19th May 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received 4th May 2004 Letter from British Gas Transco received 21st April 2004 Letters from Scottish Power (Power Systems) received lgth& 21" April 2004 Letter from SportScotland received 19th May 2004

Letter from Alex C Collins, 34 Manor Road, Gartcosh, G69 8AN received 21st April 2004. Letter from Lesley E Harradine, 51 Lochside, Gartcosh, Glasgow, G69 8DH received 29th March 2004. Letter from Mr Bryan Johnston,Secretary, Gartcosh Community Council, Griffin Lodge, Gartcosh, G69 8AY, received 12th May 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Graeme Lee at 01236 616474. APPLICATION NO. N1041005501FUL

REPORT

1. DescriDtion of Site and ProDosal

1 .I The application site lies on the eastern edge of the village of Gartcosh. The application site is in two parts, to the north and south of Woodneuk Avenue. To the north, the site relates to the existing Social Club Football Pitch, and to the south, the land to the side and rear of the Social Club Pavilion. Existing residential properties are located all along the western boundary of the application site. There are further residential properties to the north of the site i.e. beyond the existing football pitch. These properties are separated from the site by Johnston Road and an area of open agricultural ground. The new M73 junction slip roads and roundabout define the western boundary of the Social Club part of the site and the southern boundary of the residential part of the site. Agricultural land lies to the east and north of the proposed residential part of the site.

1.2 The development involves the construction of 51 dwellings and the replacement of the Social Club’s football pitch. It is proposed that a new football pitch be provided on ground to the rear of the Social Club Building.

2. Planning History

2.1 In August 2002 members will recall that planning permission was granted for the Development of Roadside Facilities (Incorporating Hotel, Drive Through Restaurant, Pub / Restaurant and 24 Hour Petrol Filling Station) and Replacement Sports Provision on the same site. This scheme proposed that the replacement sports provision comprised of a replacement football pitch and the formation of a multi-purpose training pitch.

2.2 The applicant advises that despite attempts over a six month period to attract developer interest in the site, no interest has been shown. Prospective operators rejected the site because there are already a number of similar facilities in the area and the site does not meet the operators’ criteria in terms of location, demographics and/or volume of passing traffic. This fact has prompted the applicant to seek planning permission for residential development on the site.

2.3 Members will recall that, despite being contrary to the development plan, it was recommended that the Roadside Facilities development be granted planning permission. This was because it was considered that the development would provide facilities for more than just road users. Due to the location of the site, it was considered that the Roadside Facilities would compliment the Gartcosh Industrial Area but also be of benefit to the local residents.

2.4 Strathkelvin District Council approved planning permission for 62 dwellings on the land to the rear of the Social Club and adjacent to Eastgate. This planning permission was granted on 22 August 1995 and has now lapsed. Nevertheless, and in recognition of this approval, NLCs’ Northern Corridor Local Plan identifies part of the land for residential use. The works to form the new junction have significantly reduced the size of the site and the local plan allocates the site for a total of 16 dwellings.

3. National Plannina Guidance

3.1 Given the nature of the proposed development there are a number of national planning policy documents that are of relevance. These documents are summarised below.

3.2 SPPI (The Planning System) sets out Scottish Executive policy on nationally important land use and planning matters. SPPl advises that the purpose of the planning system is to guide the future development and use of land in cities, towns and rural areas in the long term public interest (para.4) and to guide change through an efficient and effective process that respects the rights of the individual while acting in the interest of the wider community (para.5).

3.3 The document also reiterates the requirement that planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The following advice is given on the proper procedure to be followed in deciding a planning application:

identify any provisions of the development plan which are relevant to the decision; interpret them carefully, looking at the aims and objectives of the plan as well as detailed wording of policies; consider whether or not the proposal accords with the development plan; identify and consider relevant material considerations, for and against the proposal; and assess whether these considerations warrant a departure from the development plan.

The weight to be attached to any relevant material consideration is for the judgement of the decision-maker.

3.4 It also states that the Scottish Executive is committed to integrating the principles of sustainable development and that the Scottish Ministers expect the planning system to support and inform this wider policy agenda (para.6). It also advises that planning should encourage sustainable development by promoting the use of previously developed land and minimising greenfield development and by protecting and enhancing areas for recreation and natural heritage (para.7).

3.5 The proposed development is contrary to the Development Plan.

3.6 SPPP (Economic Development) sets out Scottish Executive policy on Economic Development. This document advises that the planning system should provide strong support for economic development and that development plans should maintain a supply of sites offering a choice of size, location and environmental amenity. Also that national and other significant sites should be safeguarded.

3.7 Given that there is currently no immediate need for further housing land release, it is considered that the greater priority should be given to attracting economic development to the Gartcosh Area. It is considered that the proposed housing development has the potential to prejudice or limit the development of Gartcosh Industrial Park.

3.8 SPP3 (Planning for Housing) sets out Scottish Executive policy on Housing matters. This document advises that a key aim of planning is to provide well-located, high quality new housing. In meeting the requirements of housing markets across Scotland, planning authorities and housing providers should work closely together to:

Create quality residential environments Guide new housing developments to the right places 0 Deliver housing land

3.9 Of particular relevance in this instance is the advice contained in paras. 45 and 46 which state that:

‘Extensions to existing settlements need careful planning. The landscape settings of existing towns and villages must be respected, and building types, designs and materials should also respect local architectural styles. Attention should be given not only to the visual impact within a village or town, but also to its appearance from outside, for example from major roads, public transport routes or other vantage points’ ‘Development plans should specify how the character and setting of a settlement is to be protected, guide new development to suitable sites and in some cases provide for the phased release of land.’

3.10 It is considered that, as there is no current need to release further housing land, the acceptability or otherwise of housing on such a prominent and visible location on the edge of the settlement is a matter which would be best considered as part of the GartlochlGartcosh Study and the North Lanarkshire Local Plan process. Notwithstanding the local plan process, the proximity of the proposed dwellings to the M73 and, in particular, the new junction formed to serve Gartcosh Industrial Park means that the proposed site is not considered to be wholly suitable as a housing site. Once the Industrial Park is developed, all traffic arriving from the south and leaving to the north will utilise the roundabout and slip roads adjacent to the proposed housing development. It is more than likely that businesses in the Industrial Park will operate on a 24 hour basis. In the Structure Plan, Gartcosh Industrial Park is identified as being a key major renewal site where investment should be given priority. Accordingly, the Industrial Park should be safeguarded from any development adjacent to it that may prejudice the ability to attract industrial development to the site. It should be noted that The Scottish Executive Trunk Road Authority has advised that the traffic impacts of the proposed residential development on the trunk road have to be fully assessed. Given that policy objections to the proposed development (in particular the fact that there is currently no need to release further land for housing) the applicant has not been asked to undertake a Traffic Assessment Report. Therefore, it is not possible to assess whether the development will have an adverse effect on the operation of the new junction. Scottish Water also object to the proposed development unless the applicant bears the costs of improving the local sewer network.

3.11 Advice on the implementation of the policies contained within SPP3 is provided by PAN38 (Housing Land), which advises of the requirement to undertake an annual audit of housing land. The PAN also describes the process under which new housing sites should be brought forward.

3.12 There is currently no need to release additional housing land within this housing market area. Accordingly, the residential element of the proposed development is contrary to the advice contained in PAN38

3.13 PAN44 (Fitting New Housing Development into the Landscape) supports the guidance contained in SPP3 relative to landscape setting and visual impact by advising that:

‘Lack of integration with the landscape is particularly noticeable on the edges of our small and medium sized towns. Many new housing developments have been planned and carried out without evident regard to existing urban form and the local landscape, or to the wider visual impact particularly when seen from road and rail approaches. Insensitive development can undermine the special environmental quality of towns and their setting in the countryside’ (para.9)

3.14 As stated above, the residential element of the proposed development is highly visible and in a prominent position on the edge of Gartcosh. Furthermore, the proposed residential development will have a significant visual impact. The proposed development does not propose any mitigation measures that would reduce the impact of the development and, as such, it is considered that the proposed development is contrary to the advice contained in PAN44. In addition, the development as proposed does not represent a coherent extension to the settlement. 3.15 NPPGll (Sport, Physical Recreation and Open Space) states that the Scottish Executive's objectives for the planning system is to seek to protect and enhance the land and water resources required for the nation's sport and physical recreation. The following guidance is of particular relevance:-

3.16 It is considered that, despite the fact that the proposed development includes a replacement football pitch to the rear of the existing Social Club building, the proposed level of compensation is not acceptable i.e. the scheme will result in the loss of one pitch and the loss of an informal training area to the rear of the Social Club. Unlike the previous scheme, a multi-purpose training pitch is no longer included. SportScotland object to the proposed development for this reason. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposed residential development is contrary to the advice contained in NPPG11.

3.17 PAN65 (Planning and Open Space) supports the guidance contained within NPPGll and advises that the credibility of the planning system can be significantly undermined when policies on the protection and provision of open space are set aside, without sound and clear justification.

3.18 It is considered that, as there is no current need for the release of further housing land, that the proposed development does not justify setting aside the zoning of the housing part of the site as Greenbelt in the adopted Strathkelvin Southern Area Local Plan or as Leisure and Recreation land in the finalised draft of North Lanarkshire Council's Northern Corridor Local Plan. Accordingly the proposed development is contrary to the advice in PAN65

4. Development Plan

4.1 The development plan is comprised of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan, 2000 and the Strathkelvin Southern Area Local Plan, 1983.

4.2 The relevant policies are detailed below but can be summarised as follows. The relevant policies from the structure plan are Strategic Policy 1 (Strategic Development Locations); Strategic Policy 2 (Long Term Potential for Development); Strategic Policy 4 (Strategic Transportation Network); Strategic Policy 5 ((Competitive Economic Framework); Strategic Policy 6 (Quality of Life and Health of Communities); Strategic Policy 9 (Assessment of Development Proposals) and Strategic Policy 10 (Departures from the Structure Plan). The site is covered by Policies E.PR02 (Greenbelt) and E.PRO6 (area unaffected by specific proposals) in the Strathkelvin Southern Area Local Plan.

4.3 Strategic Policy 1 (Schedule l(b)) of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan identifies the former steel works at Gartcosh as a Major Urban Renewal site. The status of this site as a key industrial location is expanded upon in Strategic Policy 5 (see below). It is considered that this site should be safeguarded from any development which may restrict its future ability to deliver economic development and regeneration to this part of Lanarkshire. It is considered that the proposed housing development may prevent Gartcosh Industrial Park from fulfilling this function.

4.4 It is considered that the proposed development is contrary to Strategic Policy 1

4.5 Strategic Policy 2 identifies the GartcoshlGartloch as being an area which, due to the new motorway junction and the potential regeneration of the former steelworks site, has development potential in the longer term. The Gartcosh/Gartloch area is currently being assessed for potential strategic environmental renewal and the development of housing, business/industrial use to contribute to the requirement for development land post 2006. This is based on the Guiding Principles of Sustainable Development and the criteria in Strategic Policy 9. The structure plan advises that any major development in this area would require to be brought forward through an alteration to the structure plan and be reflected in local plans. The application is therefore premature in relation to this ongoing assessment.

4.6 It is considered that the proposed development is contrary to Strategic Policy 2

4.7 Strategic Policy 4 identifies Gartcosh as being a potential location for a Motorway Services Area. The logical location for such a use would be close to the new junction and it was for this reason that the preceding outline planning permission was granted for Roadside Facilities. The applicant advises that the site was marketed for a period of 6 months, responses from potential developers (all dated in the early part of 2003) are provided as evidence that the site is not suitable for such a facility. Having not been party to the marketing exercise, it is difficult to assess how actively the site was marketed. Also, it is considered that a 6 month marketing exercise in not overly long. In any event, the release of the land for a roadside services was viewed as being a special case, and the fact that the site may not be suitable for this use does not mean that the site should now be considered for residential development. Especially given the local plan zoning of the site.

4.8 It is considered that the development is contrary to Strategic Policy 4

4.9 Strategic Policy 5 identifies Gartcosh as Strategic Industrial and Business Location; A Core Economic Development Area and A Nationally Safeguarded Inward Investment Location. The thrust of this policy is to ensure the economic competitiveness of the plan area that such locations are developed and are safeguarded. For reasons already stated above, it is considered that, unlike the previous roadside services proposal, the development of the application site for housing could prejudice the development of Gartcosh Industrial Park.

4.10 It is considered that the development is contrary to Strategic Policy 5

4.1 1 Strategic Policy 6 states that the quality of life and health of communities will be supported by providing housing opportunities to meet the requirement for a continuing 5-year effective owner occupied land supply, with choice in terms of size and type of housing in each housing market area. Although there is an adequate supply of effective housing land to meet locally generated demands the Structure Plan recognises a need for additional land supply to satisfy mobile demand within and between Housing Market Areas. In order to meet this mobile demand Schedule 6 (b)(ii) sets a requirement for an additional 3,300 units to be provided throughout the Structure Plan area pre 2006, and 2,350 post 2006. With regards to the Cumbernauld, Moodiesburn and Kilsyth sub-market area Schedule G(b)(ii) specifically identifies a requirement for 400 units pre 2006 and a further 400 post 2006 all to meet this mobile demand.

4.12 The residential element of this application is not required to contribute to Schedule 6(b)(ii), nor is the site included in Schedule 6(d) which relates to Environmental Improvement. Furthermore, the mobile demand pre 2006 is being met through the Interim Housing Land Supply process and this site has not been included in that process. Beyond 2006, any further housing land that may require to be released to meet mobile demand will be dealt with through the local plan process.

4.13 The proposed development is contrary to Strategic Policy 6.

4.14 Strategic Policy 9 identifies a set of criteria that development proposals require to satisfy, and any proposal which fails to meet these criteria will be regarded as a departure from the development plan then requiring to be justified against the criteria in Strategic Policy 10.

4.15 The development exceeds the thresholds for greenfield housing developments set out in Schedule 9 (10 or more units outwith the Established Urban Expansion Areas and the additional housing requirements identified in Schedule 6(b)(ii)). Given the current position in relation to the housing supply within the relevant housing market area the case for the development cannot be established. The proposed development does not satisfy Criteria A of Strategic Policy 9 (Updated supply and demand estimates, Evidence of shortfall in existing and planned supply of land for Housing, Requirements for affordable or Social Housing, qualitative deficiencies in existing retail provision, specific locational need).

4.16 In addition, the location of the development is appropriate in terms of the need to promote urban regeneration by giving preference to the use of brownfield urban land rather than greenfield land or open space. The proposed development may also prejudice the development of the Industrial Park. The proposed development does not satisfy Criteria B of Strategic Policy 9.

4.17 Any proposal that fails to meet the relevant criteria in Strategic Policy 9 will be regarded as a departure from the Development Plan.

4.18 Thereafter, with regards to this particular proposal, consideration should be given under Strategic Policy 10 to the appropriateness of the development having regard to a range of criteria and any other material considerations. It is not considered that a case can be made for the development under the terms of the relevant parts of Criteria A:

4.19 Similarly, when the development is considered against the Criteria B (Economic Benefit, Social Benefit and Environmental Benefit) it is not considered that a sufficient case can be made for setting aside the development plan.

4.20 Having regard to the scales of development identified in Schedule 9, the proposed development is a significant departure from the structure plan.

4.21 Policy E.PR02 zones the residential part of the application site as being Greenbelt. The remainder of the site is zoned as E.PRO6 that covers areas which are unaffected by specific proposals. It is considered that the housing element of the proposed development is contrary to the provisions of the adopted local plan.

4.22 It should be noted that North Lanarkshire Council has produced a replacement local plan (The Northern Corridor Local Plan, Finalised Draft, October 2000). In this plan, the zonings have altered; the residential part of the site is now zoned for leisure and recreation (Policy LRI) and, to reflect a 1995 planning permission for housing to the rear of the Social Club, the new plan identifies a housing site (Policy HG1/9) for 16 dwellings (the new junction reduced the size of the potential site for housing). The remainder of the site is zoned as being within an established residential area (Policy HG3). The Finalised Draft Local Plan is a material consideration in the determination of this planning application.

4.23 In conclusion, the proposed development is contrary to the development plan. As indicated above the scale of the development is such that the development must be regarded as a significant departure from the development plan.

5. Consultations

5.1 Scottish Natural Heritage - has no objection subject to the inclusion of a number of planning conditions covering, inter alia, structural landscaping, replacement of felled trees, badger and bat surveying, public footpaths, ecological mitigation.

5.2 Scottish Executive (Road Network Management and Maintenance Division) - has been unable to respond because the application is not supported by a Traffic Assessment Report (TAR). Without this report it is not possible to assess the impact of this development on the trunk road and any mitigation measures which may be required. 5.3 Sportscotland - object to the proposed development because the level of replacement football provision is not considered to be adequate (the development no longer includes a multi-purpose training pitch). If the housing development were to proceed, then this would generate increased pressure and demand for recreational facilities. No justification has been given for the reduced level of replacement provision.

5.4 Scottish Water - object to the proposed development on the basis that their existing infrastructure cannot cope with the proposed development. This objection would be removed if the applicant bears the cost of the increase in capacity that would be required to accommodate their development and the applicant promotes a scheme that does not compromise the quality and quantity of the discharge from the existing system.

5.5 Scottish Power and Transco - have no objections.

5.6 My Traffic and Transportation Section - advise that since the development site does not adjoidabut any of the existing or proposed public roads, the ideal location for the access to any residential development would be on to Johnston Road (B804)/Blades Court, to form part of the existing residential areas of Gartcosh. The access on to the roundabout is inappropriate for residential development, as the site would be segregated from Gartcosh, and would adversely affect road safety with potential conflict between pedestrians and vehicles on the adjacent distributor road/motorway interchange. Various other conditions are recommended in relation to access, visibility splays and parking standards (for both the housing element of the development and the upgraded sports pitch).

6. Rewesentations

6.1 A total of three letters of representation have been received, the matters raised and comments are detailed below.

6.2 Gartcosh Community Council objects on the basis that the site is currently zoned for Sports and Recreational use and that further housing development in Gartcosh is excessive and unnecessary.

Comment: At present, it is true that there is no need to release this land for residential purposes. The site is not identified in the Interim Housing Land Statement. Therefore, there is no need for this site to meet the mobile demand identified in the Structure Plan pre 2006. Furthermore, within the Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Moodiesburn Housing Market Area, the most up to date and published housing figures detail the roll forward to 2008. This recognises the minimum requirement for a 5 year effective supply and shows that there is a surplus of 2118 dwellings at 2008 i.e. at the moment there is no need for further housing land release.

In the longer term, the site may be considered as part of the Gartcosh/Gartloch Study and this study will inform the North Lanarkshire Local Plan process. However, as detailed above there are some doubts regarding the suitability of this site for residential purposes.

6.3 The occupier of 34 Manor Road objects to the proposed development for the following reasons:

Development will change the residential amenity of his property by overshadowing The village nature and quiet enjoyment of Gartcosh will be damaged by the proposed development in terms of excess traffic on roadways which were never designed to bear such volumes as will result from the development His allotment (adjacent to Eastgate) has been included in the plan without his permission and the development will impact upon the natural environment and wildlife in the area. Comment: The objector’s property does not directly face on to or front the application site. The part of the application site adjacent to Eastgate is to be used for the replacement football pitch. It is not considered that this use will overshadow the applicant’s property or any of those on Eastgate. My Traffic and Transportation Section has objected to the proposed access point but has no road safety objections to the development should the access be relocated. It is not clear at this stage whether the replacement football pitch will require the removal of the allotment.

6.4 The occupier of 51 Lochside objects for the following reasons:

0 The site is poorly drained and the surrounding area does not cope well with high levels of surface water. Any improvements to the drainage on the site may mean that adjacent gardens become more prone to flooding.

Comment: The drainage of the site and management of surface water is a matter which could be covered by planning conditions.

0 Existing mains water pressure drops at times of peak demand additional houses will exacerbate this problem.

Comment: Scottish Water have not objected to the development in terms of water supply issues.

0 The loss of an area of open space that is zoned as greenbelt in the adopted local plan is a reduction in the local amenities 0 The proposed development will increase demand for recreational use. The proposed development does not include any play provision 0 The Social Club is a private club, the replacement pitch will not be available to local children

Comment: In terms of NLC’s Northern Corridor Local Plan the zoning of the site has been changed to Leisure and Recreation. Policy LR1 of this plan states that there is a presumption against development adversely affecting existing open spaces. Also, it should not be forgotten that, playing fields are valued by those who live next to them as an amenity in their own right i.e. they should not be viewed solely as providing a space for active recreation. In this case, it is not considered that there is sufficient justification for setting aside the development plan, in particular, there is no current need to release more land for housing.

SportScotland has similar concerns, in their view the proposed level of replacement provision is insufficient. The existing pitch is privately owned and the proposed relocation does not alter this fact.

It is accepted that the proposed housing layout does not include any play provision. This is contrary to Council Policy and, had the principle of residential development been considered to be acceptable, then this matter would have been pursued with the applicant. Similarly, changes to the general layout would also have been pursued.

Disturbance and noise during construction and long term increase in noise

Comment: it is true that, if the development were to proceed then, in the short term, local residents would experience an increase in noise and general disturbance. In the longer term, there may well be an increase in general noise levels. However, it is not considered that noise is so significant an issue as would justify refusing planning permission.

0 In view of increased traffic volumes that will result from this development, traffic calming should be introduced on Woodneuk Road. Comment: My Traffic and Transportation Section has recommended that the access position be relocated but otherwise has no objections to the proposed development.

7. PIann i n R Assessment and Co nc Ius i o ns

7.1 Sections 25 and 37(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 require that planning decisions be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. SPP 3 reiterates this requirement. In this instance, it has been demonstrated (see section 4 above) that the proposed development is contrary to the development plan. Indeed, when assessed against the scales of development identified in the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan, the proposed development is a significant departure from the structure plan. Therefore, for planning permission to be granted in this instance there has to be material planning considerations which justify a departure from the development plan.

7.2 In this case, the applicant advises that the proposed development does accord with national, strategic and local planning policy and, as such, the proposed development should be granted planning permission. The applicant argues that the site history (the previous planning approval for Roadside Facilities) demonstrates that that the site is capable of accommodating development. Also, that the proposed use will have a lesser impact on the surrounding area in terms of traffic and noise.

7.3 It is considered that the Policy Issues raised by this development have been covered at some length in sections 3 and 4 above, however, it is worth summarising the main points again:

There is no current need for further housing land to be released Any future potential that this site may have for housing needs to be addressed as part of the wider GartcoshlGartloch Study and the North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The use of the site for Roadside Facilities was supported because it was considered that such a development would compliment the Gartcosh Industrial Park and would also be of benefit to the local residents. The Gartcosh Industrial Park is of strategic importance and as such, it is considered that it should be safeguarded from developments that may impose limitations on the future development of the Park. A housing development at this location, gaining access from a motorway junction, is inappropriate in planning and roads terms. The residential element of the proposed development is highly visible and in a prominent position on the edge of Gartcosh and as such is likely to have a significant visual impact. The proposed development does not propose any mitigation measures that would reduce the impact of the development. The level of replacement sports provision is insufficient Given the fundamental policy objections to housing development on this site, key planning issues have not been addressed by the applicant, Namely, roads and junction capacities, suitability of the proposed access, the housing layout, landscaping and screening and play provision.

7.4 The applicant also states that the proposed residential development should be viewed as replacing a planning permission granted in 1995 by Strathkelvin District Council for the land to the rear of the Social Club (adjacent to Eastgate). This planning permission has since lapsed, but the site is included in NLC’s Northern Corridor Local Plan for residential use. The original approval was for 62 dwellings however, the new road junction has significantly reduced the size of the site the local plan allocates the site for 16 dwellings. Even if this housing site were to be removed from the local plan, the most recent figures show that there is a surplus of 2118 dwellings at 2008 i.e. at the moment there is no need for further housing land release. In any event, any proposal to develop the existing football pitch means that replacement football pitches have to be provided. Both this application, and the previous roadside services application, propose replacement pitches on the land to the rear of the Social Club. Therefore, if the existing pitch is developed, then the requirement for a replacement pitch will mean that (despite the local plan) any subsequent planning application for housing on the land to the rear of the Social Club would be resisted.

7.5 In conclusion, it is considered that, in this instance, there is insufficient justification to set aside the provisions of the development plan. The applicant's justifications have been considered and, when taken individually or cumulatively, do not represent sufficient justification to depart from the development plan. It has been demonstrated that the proposed development is contrary to the development plan. Indeed, when assessed against the scales of development identified in the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan, the proposed development is a significant departure from the structure plan. Therefore, given that there are considered to be no material planning considerations that justify a departure from the development plan, it is recommended that planning permission be refused.

7.6 If granted, this application will require to be referred 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. Application No: N/04/00561/FUL

Date Registered: 22nd April 2004

Applicant : Mr J Gibblin 5 Beech Grove Gartcosh G69 8JB

Development: Extension to a Block of Flats

Location: 7 Woodneuk Road, Gartcosh

Ward: 68: Moodiesburn West and Gartcosh Councillor Joseph Shaw

Grid Reference: 269890668084

File Reference: N/04/00561/FUL

Site History: N/96/00278/FUL: Demolition of Existing Church Hall and Erection of 4 flats, granted 16 April 1997

Development Plan: The site is covered by Residential Policy HG3 in the Northern Corridor Local Plan (Finalised Draft) 2000

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: 1 Representation Letter

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

This planning application seeks permission for a two-storey extension to a block of 4 flats at 7 Woodneuk Road, Gartcosh. One letter of objection has been received from the neighbour, the points of which are outlined in the accompanying background report. Notwithstanding the objections, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the attached conditions.

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

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

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the application site and the surrounding area.

3. That before the extension hereby permitted is completed, one additional off-street parking space shall be provided within the curtilage of the application site, to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority .

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

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 14th April 2004

Memo from Traffic &Transportation Team Leader received 18th May 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received Ilth May 2004

Letter from Mr Graham McKirdy, 9 Woodneuk Road, Gartcosh, G69 8AG received 23rd April 2004 Letter from J McCulloch, 70A Lochend Road, Gartcosh, G69 8AQ received 1 May 2004

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Heather Gebbie at 01236 616466. APPLICATION NO. N/04/00561/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I This application seeks consent for the construction of a two-storey side extension to a block of four flats at 7 Woodneuk Road, Gartcosh. The property in question is set in a cul-de-sac in an existing residential area. Dwellings bound the property to the north and east, Lochend Road lies to the west and Woodneuk Road to the south.

1.2 The proposed extension intends to provide additional accommodation for two of the four flats within the existing property. The proposal will result in a bedroom and family room created at ground floor level and two bedrooms at first floor level. The extension will use materials that will match those of the existing property. Matching roof tiles, buff facing brick and white marble chips on a white background will be used.

2. Develo pment Plan

2.1 The site is zoned within an Established Housing Area, Policy HG3 in the Northern Corridor Local Plan (Finalised Draft) 2000. This policy seeks to protect the existing levels of residential amenity. Another relevant policy is HG5, which relates to house extensions. This assesses the design, scale and positioning of extensions, the effect on existing garden ground, parking provision and daylight levels. The proposal is in accordance with the development plan and raises no strategic issues.

3. Consu I ta t io ns and Representations

3.1 My Transportation Team has no objections to the proposal subject to the provision of additional car parking.

3.2 Scottish Water has no objections subject to the provision of a separate drainage system of foul and surface water sewers.

3.3 One letter of representation has been received from the neighbouring proprietor at 9 Woodneuk Road in relation to this application. The grounds of the representation are as follows:

There is insufficient parking provision for an increase in size of the existing building.

Comment: There is sufficient space at the front of the property to provide an additional parking space and, given that the proposed extension is not removing any existing parking provision, it is acceptable from a planning viewpoint.

' Residents park at the junction of Lochend Road and Woodneuk Road, reducing visibility for drivers and oncoming traffic.

' Residents park vans on the footpath between the objector's property at No.9, and the application site. The objector considers this to reduce visibility when entering Woodneuk Road and therefore endangers the safety of children.

Comment: The above points are noted, however there is adequate parking provision for the existing property. The residents may not utilise these parking spaces and park their vehicles on Woodneuk Road. This matter is not a material planning consideration in determining the acceptability of the application. If there is concern about indiscriminate parking at Woodneuk/Lochend junction then complaints should be made to the Police. 3.4 A letter was received from the proprietor at No.70A Lochend Road with concerns about his boundary wall with the application site. He is concerned that an extension could place further strain on the existing wall. The proprietor has been informed that this is a Building Control matter and it is not considered to be a material planning consideration.

4. Plan n inq Assess ment and COncl us ions

4.1 Planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case, the proposal is not contrary to the development plan and the main issue raised by the neighbouring proprietor is the impact on parking provision and access.

4.2 It is considered that the design and scale of the proposed extension is acceptable from a planning viewpoint. Notwithstanding the objections raised by the neighbour, and discussed in Section 3 above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to a condition requiring the provision of an additional parking space. Application No: N/04/00630/F UL

Date Registered: 21 st April 2004

Applicant : Mr & Mrs Burns 24 Thorniecroft Place Condorrat Cumbernauld

Agent Mr K Calderon 19 East Greenlees Drive Cam buslang G72 8TY

Development : Erection of a Conservatory

Location: 24 Thorniecroft Place, Condorrat

Ward: 62: Condorrat Central Councillor Gerard McElroy

Grid Reference: 274354.672857.

File Reference: N/04/00630/F U L

Site History: None

Development Plan: The site is covered by residential policy HG4 in the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: 1 Representation Letter

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

The applicant seeks permission for the erection of a rear conservatory to dwellinghouse at 24 Thorniecroft Place, Condorrat. One letter of representation has been received from the neighbour at 22 Thorniecroft Place, the points of which are outlined in the accompanying background report. Notwithstanding the objection, it is 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. That the facing materials to be used for the external walls and roof shall match in colour and texture those of the existing adjoining building.

Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity of the application site and the surrounding area.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 21 st April 2004

Memo from Traffic and Transportation Team Leader received 18 May 2004.

Letter from Mr & Mrs Griffin, 22 Thorniecroft Place, Condorrat, Cumbernauld, G67 4JU received 29th April 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Heather Gebbie at 01236 616466. APPLICATION NO. N1041006301FUL

REPORT

1. Proposal

1.I The application site is a semi-detached dwellinghouse bounded by houses to the side and front with an area of open space to the rear.

1.2 The applicant is seeking planning permission to erect a conservatory at the rear of the house. The conservatory will project 4.04 metres from the rear building line, and will measure 3.3 metres in width and 4.2 metres in height. In addition, a firewall will adjoin the conservatory and this is proposed to be located on the edge of the common boundary at 3.3 metres in height and 4.04 metres in length. The firewall will project to the eaves of the house. The conservatory will be finished with a polycarbonate pitched roof and white pvc frames to match the house and the facing brick and roughcast will match those existing.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site lies within an area covered by the Residential Policy HG4 of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993. This policy seeks to protect the residential amenity of the established area. The proposal is in accordance with the development plan and raises no strategic issues.

3. Representations

3.1 One letter of objection has been received from the adjoining neighbour at No.22 Thorniecroft Place, in relation to this application. The grounds of the objection and my comments thereon are as follows:- . The design of the conservatory has a detrimental effect on the appearance and amenity of the objector’s property.

Comment : The design and scale of the conservatory is considered acceptable in relation to the semi-detached house. . The height of the proposed conservatory will have a detrimental effect on the daylight levels on the rear patio and dining room.

Comment : Having carried out the Building Research Establishment sunlight and daylight tests, it is concluded that that sunlight levels at the rear of No.22 and daylight levels in the dining room will be well within the limits of acceptability following the construction of the conservatory. . The security of the objector’s house will be compromised by the firewall concealing the patio doors. . The high wall will reduce the efficiency of the objector’s existing gas boiler flue which would create a build-up of flue gases at the rear patio area.

Comment : While appreciating the concerns of the objector, this issue is not a material planning consideration. It should be noted that fire walls are common features of conservatories at the rear of semi-detached houses, and are required under the Building Regulations unless the conservatory is located at least one metre from the common boundary. . The proposal would greatly restrict the current view from the rear of No.22 Thorniecroft Place.

Comment : It is agreed that there will be certain level of impact on the view currently enjoyed, however, there is no entitlement to a view under the planning regulations.

The submitted plans do not show No.22’~extension, which requires to be taken into consideration for calculating the sunlight and daylight levels at the objector’s property.

Comment : The above situation was taken into consideration, and as described above the resultant daylight and sunlight levels are acceptable.

4. PIann i nQ Assessment and Co nc Ius i o ns

4.1 Planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case, the proposal is not contrary to the development plan and the main issue is the impact of the proposed conservatory on the neighbouring property.

4.2 On detailed assessment of the application, it is considered that the design, scale and materials of the proposed conservatory are acceptable from a planning viewpoint. Notwithstanding the objection received from the neighbour at 22 Thorniecroft Place, and discussed in Section 3 above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted. Application No: N/04/00631/FUL

Date Registered: 22nd April 2004

Applicant: Mr Norman Norrie 7 Nairn Way Westerwood Cumbernauld G68 OHX

Agent Homecad 2 Cumbernauld Business Park Wardpark Road Cum bernauld G67 3JZ

Development: Alterations and Extension to a Dwellinghouse

Location: 7 Nairn Way, Westerwood, Cumbernauld

Ward: 57: Westerwood, Carrickstone and Dullatur Councillor Gordon Murray

Grid Reference: 276024.676081.

File Reference: N/04/00631/FUL

Site History: None

Development Plan: The property is covered by residential policies in the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: 1 Representation Letter

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

This application is in respect of to a two-storey side extension, a two-storey front extension and a rear conservatory at a detached dwellinghouse at 7 Nairn Way, Westerwood, Cumbernauld. One letter of representation was received from a neighbouring proprietor, and the points raised have been detailed in the attached report. Following assessment of the proposals against the development plan and all other material considerations, including effects on neighbouring properties, it is 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. That the facing materials to be used for the external walls and roof shall match in colour and texture those of the existing adjoining building.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the application site and the surrounding area

3. That before the extensions hereby permitted are completed, three off street parking spaces shall be provided within the site, to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 22nd April 2004

Memo from Traffic & Transportation Team Leader received 24'h May 2004.

Letter from Mr Ken Harkness, 8 Nairn Way, Westerwood, Cumbernauld, G68 OHX received 14th May 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Heather Gebbie at 01236 616466. APPLICATION NO. N/04/00631/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.1 This application is for a two-storey side extension, two-storey front extension and rear conservatory at 7 Nairn Way, Westerwood, Cumbernauld. The property is set within a cul-de- sac in an existing residential area.

1.2 The two-storey side extension will provide a garage at ground floor level and a bedroom at first floor level. A further two-storey extension is proposed at the front of the house. This will project the property 5 metres from the front building line to extend the existing livingroom at ground floor level and bedroom at first floor level. The proposed extension will be finished with facing brick and roof tiles to match those of the existing building. The dormer window at first floor level, front windows and conservatory will match the style of the existing windows.

2. Develo pment Plan

2.1 The site lies within an area zoned as Residential and covered by Policy HG5F in the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993. The proposal is in accordance with the Development Plan and raises no strategic issues.

3. Consu I ta tions and Remesen tations

3.1 My Transportation Section has no objection subject to a condition related to access and parking provision.

3.2 One letter of representation has been received from the neighbouring proprietor at 8 Nairn Way in relation to this application. The representation has been made on the following grounds:

The design and scale of the proposed extension utilises the full ridgeline of the roof of the existing property. The objectors consider that this will over-dominate their own single storey property therefore having a detrimental impact on the immediate and surrounding environment.

Comment: The design and scale of the proposed extension is considered acceptable. The applicant‘s house is set forward of the objector’s property and the proposed side extension will be 5 metres from the objector’s house. It is considered that the extension will not have a significant impact that would be sufficient to justify refusal of this application.

. The objectors are concerned about the disruption to their own property and within the shared access during construction.

Comment: It is conceded that, as with any development, there may be disruption during the construction of the extension, however, this would be temporary and should not be material in deciding the acceptability of the proposed extension. . The original layout of the cul-de-sac would be adversely affected by the proposed extension.

Comment: It is concluded that there will be no significant effect on the original layout of the CUI- de-sac. As previously stated, the design and scale of the proposed extension is acceptable. The proposed front extension to the applicant's house will set the building forward of the neighbouring property, No.6. However I consider this not to significantly impact on the existing random building line of the cul-de-sac.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 Planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case, the proposal is not contrary to the development plan and the main issue is the impact of the proposed extension on the neighbouring properties.

4.2 It is considered that the design and scale of the proposed extension is acceptable from a planning viewpoint. Notwithstanding the objections raised by the neighbour at No.8 Nairn Way, and discussed in Section 3 above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions. Application No: C/03/00844/F UL

Date Registered: 20th June 2003

Applicant : Mr Peter Campbell 49 Douglas Street Ai rd rie M16 9JS

Agent Project Management & Design 5 Meikle Crescent Airdrie ML6 7UQ

Develop ment : Erection of Residential Accommodation in Association with Goat Breeding Business

Location: Land Adjacent To Garden Wood & To The North Of Airdrie Road Caldercruix Airdrie Lanarkshire

Ward: 52: Salsburgh Councillor David Fagan

Grid Reference: 284604 668293

File Reference: C/PL/CCA240/DB/EL

Site History: Planning permission C/00/00885/OUT for Siting of Temporary Residential Accommodation and Shelter for the Establishment of a Goat Breeding Business (In Outline) granted 16'h February 2001 Planning permission C/O1/00892/REM for Siting of Temporary Residential Accommodation & Goats Shelter in Association with Goat Breeding Business granted on 10th September 2001

Development Plan: The site is covered by countryside policies contained in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: Scottish Executive Environmental Rural Affairs Department. (No objection) Scottish Water (Commen ts) British Gas Transco (No objections) Scottish Power (No objections) The Coal Authority (Comments) NLC Community Services (Comments) S.E.P .A.(West) (Comments)

Representations: 1 Letter of Representation

Newspaper Advertisement: 24 March 2004

Comments:

This application is for the erection of a dwellinghouse in association with a goat breeding business on land adjacent to Garden Wood, north of Airdrie Road, Caldercriux. The site is zoned GB2 in the ...... I-

Planning Application No. C/03/00844/FUL

R0duc.d by L&%kshire Uannlno and Envlronm.nt Erection of Temporary Residential Accommodation in Association Councll Hmad ~rters tW"' Swt.801. FI.ming WYS. with Goat Breeding Business ZTrystRcaI CUMBERNAULD E67 1JW R.srod"s.d ,rem I". 0,lnmC. 8"h.W mspn,"l w,n 11236 616210 F.X. nine 816212 Land Adjacent to Garden Wood 8, North of Airdrie Road, Not to ;;,;;";;;;";I ~c~oy&m,b::'M.l"lY'. ""aYlhon&.d r.pnd"r,,on lnlrlnllv crown wpyr,gn, 35 Llans.LAO8041L Caldercruix, Aird rie and mw..dIopm..E"lm orcl",, Pioc.sdl"~~ Monklands District Local Plan 1991. Planning permission was granted for temporary residential accommodation on 14 February 2001 (00/00885/OUT) and the reserved matters were issued on 7 September 2001 (01/00892/REM). The applicant has since established the business and is now seeking a permanent house. NLC Finance has confirmed that the business is viable. The Transportation Section has recommended refusal (details of which are included in the attached report) but applicant has agreed to provide access improvements to offsett these concerns. The design of the building has been altered to meet the guidance set out in Planning Advice Note 36 (Siting and Design of New Housing in the Countryside) and subject to the use of appropriate materials should fit well into this area of high quality landscape. I recommend approval subject to the satisfactory conclusion of a Section 75 Agreement restricting the occupation of the dwellinghouse to someone employed in full time agricultural occupation and linking the associated land to the angora goat breeding business.

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.

3. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required.

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

4. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a woodland management and maintenance scheme, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include:- (a) proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of the trees, shrubs and hedges, including details of the timing and phasing of all such works; (b) details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted, and the phasing of such works.

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

5. That before completion of the development hereby permitted, the woodland management and maintenance scheme, approved under the terms of condition 4 above, shall be in operation.

Reason: To ensure the implementation of the woodland management scheme in the interest of visual amenity. 6. That before the development hereby permitted is completed or occupied, all the parking and manoeuvring areas shown on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained, surfaced in a material which the Planning Authority has approved in writing before the start of surfacing work and clearly marked out, and shall, thereafter, be maintained as parking and manoeuvring areas.

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

7. That prior to the start of the development hereby permitted the passing places to be provided along the access from Airdrie Road (A89) details of the proposed works shall be submitted for approval and shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access facilities to the dwellinghouse and goat breeding business.

8. That the occupation of the residential accommodation hereby permitted shall be limited to a person employed full time in connection with the Goat Breeding Business, or a dependant of such a person, residing with him, or her, or the widow or widower, of such a person.

Reason: To accord with the approved policy for new houses within ‘Countryside Around Towns’.

NOTE TO COMMITTEE

If granted, the planning permission will not be issued until an Agreement under Section 75 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 has been concluded with the applicant in respect of restricting the occupancy of the residential accommodation to a person employed full time on the agricultural holding and preventing the separate sale of the house from the Angora Goat Breeding Business.

Background Papers:

Application form, plans and business plan received 11th June 2003, 28 October 2003, 13 January 2004, 11 February 2004,12 March 2003 and 11 May 2004 Monklands District Local Plan 1991

Letter from Scottish Executive Environmental Rural Affairs Department received 7th July 2003 Letter from Scottish Water received 11th July 2003 and 14th November 2003 Letter from British Gas Transco received 26th June 2003 Letter from Scottish Power received 27th June 2003 Letter from The Coal Authority received 27th June 2003 Memo from Transportation Section received 14th August 2003 and 12th December 2003 Memo from NLC Community Services received 27th November 2003 Letter from S.E.P.A.(West) received 7th November 2003 Memo from NLC Finance received 3rd March 2004 Letter from James Forsyth, Gate Lodge, Forrestfield, by Caldercruix ML6 8NY

Letter to applicant dated 27 June 2003, 17 July 2003, 6 August 2003, 19 August 2003, 29 October 2003 and 16 December 2003

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact David Baxter at 01236 812372. AP P L ICAT I0N N0. C/03/00844/F U L

REPORT

1. Descriotion of Site and Prooosal

1.I The application site is situated on the north of Airdrie Road, Caldercruix and directly to the south of Shield Wood. The site includes a semi-wooded area known as Garden Wood together with an adjacent small rectangular field area. The application site is 1ha with an additional grazing area available to the south within Garden Wood.

1.2 The proposal relates to the erection of residential accommodation in association with an angora goats breeding business. There is presently a residential caravan and shelters to house the animals on site. The caravan has been occupied since summer 2001. The 3.4 acres shown as grazing land on the location plan does not form part of the application however it is leased for that purpose. There is also an informal arrangement where a further 41 acres of land to the south and west is available for grazing.

1.3 The applicant has also supplied details of 8 proposed passing places that can be formed to improve the vehicular access arrangements.

2. Develooment Plan

2.1 The site is zoned GB 2 Restrict Development in Countryside Around Towns. Isolated developments in the "Countryside Around Towns" shall not generally accord with the Local Plan unless there is a specific locational need. Proposals for development within the area shall require to be justified against the following criteria: a) economic benefit; b) specific locational need; c) infrastructure implications; d) environmental impact.

2.2 The site is also within an 'High Quality Landscape' (as identified within the Local Plan) and policy LI1/1 which states that the Council will promote the protection and improvement of the landscape by methods appropriate to the quality of the existing landscape.

3. COnsu I tat io ns and Representations

3.1 One letter of objection was received from an adjoining landowner following neighbour notification and advertisement in the local press. The letter indicates concern at the increase in traffic that could occur on the access road.

3.2 The following consultees have no objection to the proposal: SEPA, Scottish Water, Transco, Scottish Power Scottish Executive Environmental Rural Affairs Department and NLC Department of Finance.

3.3 The Transportation Manager has recommended refusal on the grounds that: a) The access leading to the proposed site from the A89 is approximately 1,200m long, some 3m wide, un-surfaced and has no passing places along its length. b) The access is also sub-standard in terms of vertical and horizontal geometry which reduces forward visibility in places to 10m. c) A narrow railway underbridge which will not permit two vehicles to pass exists immediately at the junction of the access with the A89. d) It is also considered that the proposal will increase braking and turning manoeuvres along an unlit derestricted length of the A89 to the detriment of road safety. Should the application be granted then conditions in respect of parking provision, visibility splays and access improvements including the introduction of passing places are suggested.

4. PIan ni n q Assessment and COn c Iu s ion s

4.1 The planning application under consideration is for a house in association with the establishment of an Angora Goat Breeding business. A detailed Business Plan has also been submitted that seeks to justify the viability of the ongoing business operation and the requirement for a residential presence at the site.

4.2 Applications of this nature require primarily to be assessed against the provisions and terms of the relevant development plans. The application site is located within an area designated as "Countryside Around Towns" in the Monklands District Local Plan I991 which indicates a presumption against development unless justified under 'specific locational need'. The proposal therefore requires to be assessed in terms of its economic benefit, specific locational need, infrastructure implications and environmental impact.

4.3 Having regard to these criteria NLC Finance has indicated that the business plan indicates that the applicant has a good knowledge of the requirements and likely costs of setting up and running such a business and would provide an employee more than the minimum wage.

4.4 There is no indication that the use of the temporary accommodation has in the last couple of years resulted in any road safety issues. As the current access is substandard it will be substantially improved by the introduction of passing places and the other proposed conditions. The other utility companies have no objection to the proposal and therefore I do not consider that the development would have any significant impact on the infrastructure of the area.

4.5 With sympathetic use of materials and some screen planting I consider that the development would fit well in its setting and could ensure little environmental impact on its surroundings.

4.6 In terms of specific locational need the applicant has demonstrated over the past two years that there is a requirement for full time supervision to allow adequate supervisory care of the livestock throughout the cycle of mating, breeding and especially kidding. The applicant has also indicated that there are no dwellings or buildings suitable for conversion in the vicinity of the application site that are currently available for his purposes.

4.7 In conclusion, I have assessed the matter in relation to the terms of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. In so doing I consider that the applicant has demonstrated the requirement for a house in association with the angora goat breeding business. Although there is an objection from the Transportation Section and a local resident, I consider that the proposed access improvements should mitigate some of their concerns and the low level of traffic generated by the development should not affect road safety significantly. I therefore propose that the application be granted subject to the attached conditions and following the satisfactory conclusion of a Section 75 Agreement restricting the dwellinghouse to full time agricultural occupation and linking the house and associated land to the angora goat breeding business. Application No: C/04/00046/OUT

Date Registered: 16th January 2004

Applicant : Mr B Collum "Roha1 I io n Woodburn Avenue Aird rie ML6 9DT

Agent R.L. Waugh 2 Dixon Place College Milton East Kilbride G74 5JF

Development : Erection of Dwellinghouse (In Outline)

Location: Land West Of 24 Arthur Avenue Airdrie Lanarkshire

Ward: 47: North Cairnhill And Coatdyke Councillor Peter Sullivan

Grid Reference: 275958664948

File Reference: C/PL/AIA8250024000/1J/EL

Site History:

Development Plan: The site is covered by Policies HG9 (Existing Residential Areas); ENVl5/3 (Conservation Area - Victoria & Town Centre) and ENV16 (Conservation Area Improvements) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: Scottish Water (No response) British Gas Transco (No objections) Scottish Power (No objections) The Coal Authority (No response) S.E.P.A.( W est) (No objections)

Representations: 2 Representation Letters

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 21.4 January 2004

Comments:

Permission is being sought in outline for the erection of a single dwellinghouse on land to the west of 24 Arthur Avenue, Airdrie. The site measures 0.04 hectares and is made up of an area of flat open grassed land that fronts directly onto Arthur Avenue along the southern boundary of the site. The site itself is located within the Victoria & Town Centre Conservation Area and bounded by residential properties, many of which are set within substantial amenity garden grounds.

Being in outline there have been no details submitted as any details would be considered at a subsequent "reserved matters" application stage should this present submission be approved. It is anticipated that any proposed building would front towards Arthur Avenue with vehicular access taken directly from that road. Two letters of representation were received against this proposal, the contents of which will be detailed in the accompanying report.

In terms of the Local Plan the application site is located within the designated Conservation Area where, under policy ENV16 the Council requires to have regard to height, scale, materials, roof lines, building lines, character of surrounding buildings etc. when considering applications for development. Taken also that this application requires to be considered against the Design Guidance on "lnfill Housing" and "Open Space" then I consider the proposal to be unacceptable for the reasons that the size of site does not allow for a development which will reflect well against the surrounding properties in terms of retained "space around dwellings" and that access into the site would have a sub-standard visibility splay. I therefore recommend that permission be refused for the stated reasons.

Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. That the proposed dwellinghouse would not have the required standard of amenity garden ground within the site and would therefore be contrary to the Council's Design Guidance on "Open Space - Space around Dwellings".

2. The proposed dwellinghouse would not meet the Design Guidance on "Conservation" contained in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 in particular it would contravene Policy ENV 16 (e) in that due to the restricted size of the building plot could not be of a suitable design to preserve and enhance the Victoria & Town Centre Conservation Area.

3. That the proposed dwellinghouse would have unsatisfactory access arrangements onto Arthur Avenue due to inadequate visibility to the left and would therefore be contrary to the terms of the Design Guidance on "lnfill Housing" as contained in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 16th January 2004

Monklands District Local Plan 1991 Letter from British Gas Transco received 26th January 2004 Letter from Scottish Power received 27th January 2004 Memo from Transportation Section received 20th April 2004 Letter from S.E.P.A.(West) received 26th February 2004

Letter from G. Taylor, 24 Arthur Avenue, Airdrie, ML6 9EZ received 27th January 2003. Letter from S. White, 27 Arthur Avenue, Airdrie, ML6 9EZ received 30th January 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact lan Johnston at 01236 812382. APPLICATION NO. C/04/00046/0UT

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The application site comprises of 0.04 hectares of flat open grassed land that fronts onto Arthur Avenue, Airdrie directly to the west of number 24. The site is located to the south of Airdrie Town Centre and within the Victoria & Town Centre Conservation Area. The surrounding properties are all residential in nature and the application site formerly formed part of the rear garden ground of “Rohallion” , Woodburn Avenue, Airdrie.

1.2 The proposal, in outline at this stage, seeks to erect a single dwellinghouse on the application site. No details have been submitted as any details would be considered at a subsequent “reserved matters” application stage should this present proposal be approved. Access to the site will be taken directly off Arthur Avenue and it is assumed that the dwellinghouse would front onto Arthur Avenue.

2. Development Plan

2.1 In terms of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the site is located within an area covered by Policies HG9: Existing Residential Areas; ENVl5/3: Conservation Areas (Victoria & Town Centre) and ENV 16(e): Conservation Area Improvements. The proposal raises no strategic issues.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Following the standard neighbour notification and public advertisement procedures 2 letters of objection were received against the proposal, the main points of which are as follows: a) the proposed point of vehicular access into the site is at a bend and is hazardous for anyone entering or leaving the site; b) the site is only capable of accommodating a single vehicle which could result in other vehicles associated with the development parking on the road at a bend; c) lack of detailed information on possible design and height of dwelling proposed; d) potential loss of privacy, light and increased noise if building is erected too close to rear boundary of site; e) potentially out of character with surrounding properties which are all over 100 years old.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 Planning applications require to be assessed primarily against the provisions of the development plan unless material considerations dictate otherwise.

4.2 The adopted Monklands District Local Pan 1991 identifies the site within a predominantly residential area (policy HG9), within the Victoria & Town Centre Conservation Area (policy ENVl5/3) and also within an area affected by Conservation Area Improvement policy ENV 16(e). Through the Local Plan the Council seeks to encourage developers to adopt standards of design and layout most beneficial to the surrounding environment and which satisfy road safety infrastructure requirements. The approved Design Guidance on “lnfill Housing” and “Open Space” specifically requires that new developments should have an adequate area for the dwelling and private garden ground, should not adversely affect the character or amenity of an established (Conservation) area or surrounding properties and should have satisfactory vehicle access and parking arrangements. 4.3 Although the current submission is only in outline at this stage, the dimensions of the application site are restricted to such an extent that I do not consider the site capable of accommodating both a dwellinghouse (of moderate proportions) while also allowing for a satisfactory level of front and rear garden areas to reflect favourably against both the surrounding properties and the Design Guidance on “lnfill Housing”. The Transportation Section also considers the proposal unacceptable on the grounds of road safety in that even if the vehicular access to the site were located towards the easternmost boundary the achievable visibility splays to the west would be sub-standard.

4.4 Having regard to the foregoing I consider the proposal to be unacceptable for the reasons that it does not satisfy the required criteria set down in the Design Guidance on “lnfill Housing” and “Open Space - Space around dwellings” in respect of available levels of amenity garden ground and satisfactory vehicle access arrangements. Taken together these deficiencies would result in a development which would, if implemented, detrimentally affect the character and general amenity of this established Conservation Area location. The points raised by the objector’s are considered valid reasons for considering refusal. It is therefore recommended that permission be refused for the reasons stated. Application No: C/04/00095/F UL

Date Registered: 26th January 2004

Applicant : Mr & Mrs Carraghar 135 Old Monkland Road Coatbridge ML5 5EX

Development : Erection of Front Porch, Two Storey and Single Storey Rear Extension.

Location: 135 Old Monkland Road Coatbridge Lanarkshire ML5 5EX

Ward: 38: Kirkshaws Councillor John Gordon

Grid Reference: 271 957.663459.

File Reference: C/PL/CT0495135/LM/EL

Site History:

Development Plan: The property is covered by residential policies in the Monklands District Local Plan.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: 4 Representation Letters

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

Planning permission is sought for the erection of front porch, two storey and single storey rear extension at 135 Old Monkland Road, Coatbridge, which is a mid-terraced property. Four letters of representation were received from neighbouring properties. The points raised have been considered in the attached report. Following assessment of the proposals against the development plan and all other material considerations, including effects on neighbouring properties, it is recommended that planning permission is granted.

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

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

Reason: In the interests of amenity of the building and the surrounding area. Planning Application No. C/04/00095/FUL

R0duc.d by Erection of Front Porch, Two Storey and Single Storey ''aw Ccuncll Amning and Ewironmnl L%rkshire nI..dqUrL" Rear Extension Sub 501 FIemlng nous. 2TRIIRcad CUMIERNAUD w7 li, R.pcdu.dlrmmtk Ordnarre Sunwmappl~rlh 1Jw 4* 01236616210 Fox 01236616132 135 Old Monkland Road Coatbridge Not 10 Scale &K;GC."2c::,"R:;yZ'"'"N' Lhaufbni.drqmdula lnh1w- Crwwn ~cwrlphl 0 Llc.ns.LA0904IL * Representations nd m'Yl"dtoPm*~"m ~OI",,~O~d,~ Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 26th January 2004 Monklands District Local Plan 1991 Letter from Mr & Mrs J Paterson, 133 Old Monkland Road, Coatbridge, ML5 5EX received 2nd February 2004. Letter from Mr & Mrs J McLaughlan, 137 Old Monkland Road, Coatbridge, ML5 5EX received 31st January 2004. Letter from Linda & John Paterson, 133 Old Monkland Road, Coatbridge, ML5 5EX received 2nd June 2004. Letter from James & Maureen McLaughlan, 137 Old Monkland Road, Coatbridge, ML5 5EX received 2nd June 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Leigh Menzies at 01236 812375. APPLICATION NO. C1041000951FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The development for which planning permission is sought is for the construction of a front porch, two storey and single storey rear extension at 135 Old Monkland Road, Coatbridge. It is proposed that the ground floor of the extension will be approximately 4 metres deep, 6.7 metres long and would accommodate a sitting room, utility room and WC. In terms of the upper floor it would also protrude approximately 4 metres from the existing building but would be 5.7 metres in length, to accommodate an additional bedroom and en-suite. The proposed 2-storey structure would have a pitched roof 6.7 metres in height, approximately 0.9 metres below that of the main roof and would be at 90 degrees from the main apex. The single storey element, located at the east, would be a mono pitched roof 3.3 metres at its highest part. The front porch is of typical design and is proportion with the front elevation.

1.2 The dwellinghouse is located within an established residential area, and fronts onto Old Monkland Road.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site lies within an area zoned residential within the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The development raises no strategic issues.

3. Co nsuI tat ions and Representations

3.1 Two letters of representation have been received from the neighbours at 133 Old Monkland Road situated to the east of the application site and 137 Old Monkland Road, located to the west. The grounds of objection are as follows:

(0 loss of daylightkunlight (ii) loss of view (iii) lack of privacy during construction period due to shared access (iv) difficulty of future sale of objector’s property

3.2 Two additional letters of objection were received from the neighbours at 133 and 137 Old Monkland Road in response to the amended plans. The grounds for objection are as follows:

(a) loss of daylight (b) the incorporation of a single storey to the east is not sufficient to alleviate daylight issues (c) the single storey element was not mirrored on the west elevation (d) concerns over rights of access through no.137 and erection of scaffolding in the garden of both objectors’ properties Old Monkland Road (e) concerns for the safety of children and visitors to the objector’s property (f) concern over times of construction due to the applicant proposing to self build (9) loss of property value

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The site is contained within a residential area. In assessing this application the local plan policy for existing residential housing areas is relevant. This seeks to protect such areas by opposing development that adversely affects the amenity of established housing. In assessing the proposals in detail it is considered acceptable in terms of the design and scale, would integrate satisfactorily with the existing dwellinghouse, and would cause no adverse amenity effects in relation to privacy and residual garden ground.

4.2 In relation to the initial grounds of objection, I would address each as follows:

The original submission was for a two-storey rear extension that extended the entire length of the existing property and protruded 5 metres from the existing property. After discussions the applicant agreed to reduced the depth of the extension to 4 metres and to reduce the most easterly part of the extension to single storey to address the issues of daylight and sunlight, particularly with reference to the occupants of 133 Old Monkland Road. On examining the resubmission it was concluded that the degree of detriment to the objector’s property is alleviated by its southern orientation and is insufficient to warrant refusal. In terms of planning legislation there is no right to the protection of a particular view. The access to the rear of the property is via a shared access with the occupant at 137 Old Monkland Road. Any disruption during the construction process would be temporary and in terms of planning this matter cannot be addressed as part of the application and is a matter to be resolved by the applicant. Any perceived difficulty in the future sale of the neighbouring property is not a material planning consideration.

4.3 With respect to the additional letters of objection, I would address each as follows:

(a) This point has been answered in 4.2 (i) above (b) With respect to the property at no.133 it is felt that the overall detriment, in terms of reduction in sunlight and daylight, would have a minimal adverse impact on the objector’s property due to its orientation. The relevant tests have been undertaken and prove this to be the case. (c) In terms of daylight to no.137 on examining the resubmission it was concluded that the degree of detriment to the objector’s property is alleviated by its southern orientation and is insufficient to warrant refusal (d) Addressed in point 4.2(iii) above (e) This point is an issue that requires to be resolved by the applicant. (f) The construction times over the development period is not a material consideration in terms of the merits of the proposal (9) Addressed in point 4.2(iv)

4.4 In conclusion I have considered the points of objection raised to the rear extension but find no reason to uphold them as it is not considered that the degree of detriment to the objector’s property is sufficient to warrant refusal. The front porch is acceptable and meets the design guidance of the local plan in scale and design. I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to appropriate conditions. Application No: C/04/001 OO/FUL

Date Registered: 26th January 2004

Applicant : Persimmon Homes (West Scotland) Ltd 77 Bothwell Road Hamilton ML3 ODW

Development: Erection of 18 Dwellinghouses

Location : Former Tinsley Wire Site Souterhouse Road Coatbridge Lanarkshire

Ward: 40: Old Monkland Councillor Thomas Maginnis

Grid Reference: 272450664100

File Reference: C/PI/CTB207000/1J/EL

Site History: C/01/0142O/FUL Erection of 235 dwellings Approved 1Oth Sept.2002

Development Plan: The site is covered by Policies ECON 2 (Existing General Industrial Area) and ECON3/8 (Allocated General Industrial Area) in the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: S.E.P.A.(West) (No objections) Scottish Water (No objections) British Gas Transco (No objections) Scottish Power (No response) The Coal Authority (No objections) British Telecom (No objections)

Representations: 3 Representation Letters

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 4th February 2004

Comments:

Permission is being sought for the erection of 18 dwellinghouses on land within and adjacent to the "Strawberry Fields" private housing development at Souterhouse Road, Coatbridge. The application site comprises two physically detached areas of ground, the northern of which currently contains industrial premises while the southern area is made up of open grass land which has been designated for a children's play area for the larger development.

The proposal involves the erection of 14 dwellinghouses within the northern area and a further 4 within the southern area. Access to the northern area will be taken via a road link from the existing development (although not to date provided) while the southern area will be accessed directly off Doune Park Way. The new build will all be two storeys in height and a mix of detached and semi-detached units. Planning Application No C/04/00100/FUL R0dus.d by rks hire Aanninp and Elxlronmnt Erection of 18 Dwellinghouses C0""dl H..dqLU".,S Jut. 501 Rmlng Hous. 2 Try.! Rmd CUMBERNAUID Former Tinsley Wire Site, Souterhouse Road Coatbridge 057 Im R.CDdYT*( DOrnlb 011"1"5(1 s"w.lmsPP"pw'h P" as m Cmtrdlorol nsrhla,",". 01236 616210 Fax 01238616232 n. d m. Representations Not to Scale Slallons" onr. OCrmncoW,o", * *sYl"On..dr.PDIWc10" lnhnlu crwn Fowrlhl C6 Llans.LA06041L Site Area 8.1HA and mq,.*diS pm.ru, D" *I 5 1,pr*ird ,w While in terms of the Local Plan the proposal is technically contrary to the land use designation (ECON 2 and ECON 3/8) the redevelopment of this former industrial area is now established through the granting of planning permission for the larger site. The current proposal is wholly complementary to the Strawberry Fields development and will remove both an existing unsightly industrial presence from the area and a play area proposal which was not popular with adjacent residents. The design and layout proposed are acceptable and while 3 letters of representation have been received against the proposal, I do not consider that the points raised merit the refusal of this application. Having regard to the foregoing I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to the attached conditions.

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

2. That the development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the amended plans (Drawing ref: SL-830/001rev.S) 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.

3. That driveways shall be paved for a minimum of 2 metres behind the rear of the footway.

Reason: To prevent deleterious material being carried out onto the highway.

4. That before any dwellinghouse hereby permitted is 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.

5. 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.

6. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing materials to be used on all external walls and roofs shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects. 7. 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 continuity in the development of the adjoining Estate.

8. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping, for the area hatched green on the approved plans, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required, and it shall include:- (a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, grass seeding and turfing; (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development

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

9. That prior to the occupation of the last two dwellinghouses within the development hereby permitted, all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 8; above, shall be completed; and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased within two years of the completion of the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: In the interests of amenity.

10. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of:- (a) the proposed footpath indicated on the approved plans; (b) the proposed grassed, planted and landscaped areas hatched green on the approved plans;

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

11. That prior to the completion of the landscaping scheme approved under the terms of condition 8 above, the management and maintenance scheme approved under condition 10 shall be in operation.

Reason: In the interests of amenity. Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 26th January 2004 Monklands District Local Plan 1991 Letter from S.E.P.A.(West) received 11th March 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received 13th February 2004 Letter from British Gas Transco received 4th February 2004 Letter from The Coal Authority received 5th February 2004 Letter from British Telecom received 18th February 2004 Memo from Transportation Section received 23rd February 2004

Letter from Stuart Gray,62 Doune Park Way, Coatbridge, ML5 4EQ received 1I th February 2004. Letter from P Leckie,64 Dounepark Way, Coatbridge, ML5 4EQ received 10th March 2004. Letter from D Kearney,66 Dounepark Way, Coatbridge, ML5 4EQ received 10th March 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact lan Johnston at 01236 812382. APPLICATION NO. C1041001OOlFUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The application site is located in the Dundyvan area of Coatbridge directly adjacent to the "Strawberry Fields" private housing development. The site is made up of two detached areas of ground, the northern of which currently operates as an industrial business while the southern area is made up of open grass land that has been reserved to provide a children's play area in association with the adjacent ongoing private housing estate.

1.2 The proposal seeks to erect 14 dwellinghouses within the northern area and a further 4 erected within the southern area. Access to the northern area will be taken from a roadway previously approved (although not to date provided) to serve the adjoining Strawberry Fields development while the southern area will be accessed directly off Doune Park Way. The new build will all be two storeys in height and a mix of detached and semi-detached units of a similar style and external finish as the adjacent new housing. An existing public footpath through the southern site will be retained although slightly repositioned within the site.

2. Develo Dment PIan

2.1 In terms of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the site is covered by the following specific policies: ECON 2: Existing General Industrial Areas ECON 3: Allocated General Industrial Areas

2.2 This proposal raises no strategic issues.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Following the standard neighbour notification procedures three letters of objection were received against the proposal. The main points of objection are: a) the new route of the public path (in the southern part of the site) is directly behind the rear fence of existing properties (3 objectors) and this will create a security problem with youths congregating, causing annoyance etc. along the enclosed lane; b) increased pedestrian traffic around Doune Park Way which may increase potential for accidents; c) increased noise during construction; d) loss of existing tree cover; e) drainage problems with sloping site.

3.2 None of the statutory consultees offered any objection to the proposal while SEPA recommended that the required SUDS scheme tie in with the SUDS scheme for the adjoining Strawberry Fields development.

3.3 The Transportation Manager offered no objection to the proposal subject to conditions. 4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 This application requires to be considered against both the provisions of the development plan and also any other matters that are considered relevant to this specific proposal. In terms of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within a larger area designated for Industrial purposes (Policies ECON 2 and ECON 3). The industrial designation is however primarily a reflection on the previous industrial usage of the surrounding land most of which, with the exception of Dundyvan Industrial Estate, subsequently lapsed into disuse and abandonment. The majority of this former industrial land was the subject of a major site decontamination and stabilisation project carried out in 1995 by the Lanarkshire Development Agency in partnership with the relevant land owners under the auspices of a "Derelict Land Reclamation Scheme" and as a pre-requisite for the future re-development of the site. In line with the LDAs preferred after use of the site Persimmon Homes Ltd. were subsequently granted planning permission (ref: C/01/0142O/FUL) by decision notice dated 13'h September 2002 for the erection of 235 private dwellinghouses. That development is currently under construction and in terms of the planning permission (C/01/0142O/FUL) a small play area was to be provided on the site (southern part) now being proposed for 4 additional dwellings. The area now proposed for the additional 14 dwellings should have been included in the original application but land acquisition difficulties prohibited its inclusion.

4.2 The proposal will be integrated with the original development, and it will also be sympathetic, in land use terms, to the existing established residential uses to the east (Doune Park Way) and the west (Kirkwood Place) of the site. NLC Community Services have acknowledged that the siting of a play area in a semi-secluded location is not ideal and they have no objection to the substitution of the play area with the 4 dwellings as now proposed. The removal of the existing industrial nature of the northern part of the application site, to be replaces by 14 new dwellings would significantly improve the environmental appearance of the area.

4.3 In respect of the specific points of objection received my comments are as follows:

following receipt of the objection letters the applicant re-visited the proposals and amended the submission to re-position the public footpath towards the western boundary of the southern part of the application site. This amendment will, I consider, remove the concerns of the objectors in relation to the potential security issue adjacent to their properties. the issue in respect of potential injury around Doune Park Way relates more specifically to the surrounding Strawberry Fields development and the Transportation Section is satisfied that the design of the existing (Doune Park Way) and proposed internal roads are/will be constructed to a standard which will minimise potential pedestrian/vehicle conflict. It is inevitable that there will be a certain level of inconvenience caused during construction works, including noise, although this will only be temporary for a relatively short period of time. the development of the southern part of the site will unfortunately require the loss of a small number of treedshrubs although the environment of that area which is currently poor and will be enhanced by the introduction of the new housing proposals. Scottish Water is satisfied that the proposals will not raise any drainage problems and the repositioning of the path will take away any concerns over this matter by the objectors. 4.4 It is relevant to note that due to the building constraints (stability) within the adjoining Strawberry Fields site, the developable area of land had been substantially reduced and in order to retain the viability of that development in terms of house numbers, the majority of the housing plots did not meet the minimum side garden widths required under the “Developer’s Guide to Open Space” approved in June 1999. In other respects however, in terms of front and rear gardens the standards were achieved and in respect of the general layout of the Strawberry Fields site the density of housing proposed is common to nearby similar urban location. The current proposal mirrors the general standards applied to the adjoining Strawberry Fields development and is also considered acceptable in both design and general layout terms. Having regard to this I therefore recommend that permission be granted subject to the attached conditions. Application No: C/04/00157/FUL

Date Registered: 6th February 2004

Applicant: F. Gray 189 Stirling Road Airdrie ML6 7SP

Development: Erection of 2 No. Single Storey Dwellinghouses

Location: Land South Of 16-20 Quarry Road Airdrie Lanarkshire

Ward: 43: Airdrie Central Councillor James Logue

Grid Reference: 276045666042

File Reference: C/PL/AIQ166000/IJ/EL

Site History: 841 23 Erection of two dwellinghouses (in outline) Refused June 1984 Dismissed on Appeal 3rdFebruary 1986 851 03 Erection of two dwellinghouses (outline) Refused May 1985

Development Plan: The site is covered by Policy LRI 1:Improve Public Open Spaces in the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: Scottish Water (No objections) Scottish Power (No objections) Transco (No objections) NLC Community Services (Comments)

Representations: None Received

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 14th April 2004

Comments: Permission is being sought for the erection of two detached dwellinghouses on land to the south of 16- 20 Quarry Road, Airdrie. The application site presently comprises an area of flat, open, grassed land that is located on the south side of Quarry Road between similar large open grassed areas to the east and west. A culverted section of burn bounds the site to the south and a private section of Quarry Road forms the northern boundary of the site.

The proposal seeks permission for the erection of two identical single storey 3 bedroom detached dwellinghouses fronting onto Quarry Road. The new build will incorporate a hipped roof design. External finishes will be render and grey coloured concrete roof tiles. The dwellings to be positioned in a mirrored fashion separated by adjoining elongated driveways with a one and a half metre wide footpath at the site frontage on Quarry Road.

The application site is located within an area designated in the adopted Local Plan for the improvement of Public Open Space (Policy LR 11) in association with the open, grassed lands immediately to the east and west of the application site.

At this time there are no development proposals affecting either adjacent parcels of open space land and therefore there is no justification in policy terms for the release of the application site for the proposed purpose. The concerns of the Transportation Section are also noted in respect of the site being accessed from a private section of road with no footway and while this private road currently serves a number of other residential properties along Quarry Road the applicant has not demonstrated that he has control of sufficient land to upgrade the road to the standards required by the Transportation Section. Having regard to the foregoing I therefore recommend that permission be refused for the following reasons.

Recommendation: Refuse for the following Reasons:-

1. That the proposed dwellinghouses would result in the loss of an area of maintained open space and as such would be contrary to Policy LRI 1 as contained in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 which seeks to protect existing public open space from inappropriate development.

2. That the proposed dwellinghouses would have unsatisfactory access arrangements onto a private section of Quarry Road with sub-standard width, horizontal and vertical geometry, no turning facilities at its termination or footways along its length and would therefore be contrary to the terms of the Design Guidance on “lnfill Housing” as contained in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 6th February 2004 Monklands District Local Plan 1991 Memo from Transportation Section received 5th April 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received lothMay 2004 Letter from Scottish Power received 04‘h May 2004 Letter from Transco received 28‘h April 2004 Memo from Community Services received 26‘h April 2004

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact lan Johnston at 01236 812382. APP L KATI0 N N0. C/04/00 157/F U L

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1 .I The application site measures 0.17 hectares and comprises of a flat, open grassed area of ground on the south side of Quarry Road, Airdrie. The site is located north of Airdrie Town Centre and is set between similar elongated areas of open grassed land. A culverted section of burn set within a semi-wooded area of sharply sloping ground forms the southern boundary of the site. The surrounding area is predominantly residential in nature.

1.2 The proposal seeks permission for the erection of two identical single storey detached dwellinghouses which would front towards Quarry Road and would each accommodate 3 bedrooms (one with en-suite), kitchen, bathroom, utility room, hall and large lounge. The new build will be of a hipped roof design with external finishes being dry dash render and grey coloured redland stonewold roof tiles. The layout of the site will allow for the dwellings to be positioned in a mirrored fashion separated by adjoining elongated driveways which both access indicative domestic garages. The proposals also indicate the provision of a one and a half metre wide footpath at the site frontage on Quarry Road. No details have been provided on boundary treatment.

2. DeveloDment Plan

2.1 In terms of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the site is covered by Policy LRI 1: Improve Public Open Space. The proposal raises no strategic issues.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 As a result of the standard neighbour notification and public advertisement procedures no representations were received against this proposal.

3.2 None of the statutory consultees offered any objections to this proposal.

3.3 The Transportation Section has recommended against this proposal on the grounds that the development site is to be served from a private section of road (Quarry Road) which is sub- standard with no turning facilities at its termination or footways along its length. This private length of Quarry Road is unsuitable to accommodate any further increase in traffic. NLC Community Services (Landscape Services Manager) is concerned that the development of the application site would isolate the retained open grassed area to the east (in Council ownership) and that area would then become a maintenance liability to the Council.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 This application requires to be considered against the provisions of the development plan unless material considerations dictate otherwise. In terms of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area (under Policy LR11) where the Council will seek to protect existing public open space from inappropriate development. The site currently forms part of an elongated stretch of open grassed land along the southern side of Quarry Road that is currently being maintained for general recreational amenity purposes in association with the surrounding predominantly residential properties. 4.2 A similar previous proposal (ref:P84123) for the erection of two dwellinghouses on this same site was refused permission by decision notice dated 1’‘ June 1984 and subsequently dismissed on appeal by the then Secretary of State. In the decision letter dated 3rd February 1986 the Reporter concluded “that the reasons given for refusal of outline planning permission are soundly based and, specifically, that the large area of landscaped open space created at Quarry Road should not be eroded by building development. It is also relevant to note that a more recent planning application (ref: C1021009741FUL) for the erection of a Medical Centre on the land immediately to the west of the current application site was refused permission by this Council and subsequently dismissed on appeal by the Scottish Ministers. Having regard to the foregoing I therefore consider that the proposal under consideration is unacceptable as it would severely erode the existing large area of open, amenity grassed land along Quarry Road and as such would be contrary to the provisions of the development plan.

4.3 The application site is accessed off a private section of Quarry Road and the applicant does not have sufficient ground within his control to upgrade the section of that road to standards acceptable to the Transportation Manager. Taken that this sub-standard private section of road already 9 other properties then I accept the Transportation Managers concerns that the current sub-standard arrangements should not be exacerbated by the introduction of two further properties which would be accessed directly from that road. Having regard to this the proposal is at odds with the Local Plan Design Guidance on “lnfill Housing” as the proposed vehicle access arrangements into the site are not satisfactory.

4.4 Taking all the above matters into consideration I consider the proposal to be unacceptable as it is contrary to Local Plan policy LRll which seeks to protect areas of open space from inappropriate development and is at odds with the approved Design Guidance on “lnfill Housing” in respect of the sub-standard access arrangements into the site from Quarry Road. I therefore recommend that permission be refused for the attached reasons. Application No: C/04/00194/0UT

Date Registered: 16th February 2004

Applicant : Mr James Greenaway Luckhill Cottage Easter Moffat Plains ML6 8NY

Agent GSG Architects Ltd 26 Blantyre Gardens Cumbernauld G68 9NJ

Development : Redevelopment of GaragelScrap Yard for Residential Development

Location: Forrestfield Garage 105 Airdrie Road Caldercruix Airdrie Lanarkshire

Ward: 46: Plains And Caldercruix Councillor Thomas Morgan

Grid Reference: 285528667109

File Reference: C/PL/CCA240 1051CMIEL

Site History: 90223 Erection of Vehicle Test Centre Granted August 1990 84102 Use of Land as Scrap Yard Granted July 1984

Under the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 Development Plan: the application site is located within an area covered by the following policies GB 2 Restrict Development in Countryside Around Towns LR 7/1 Develop Network of Long Distance Paths TR1/3 (Support Rail Transport)

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: S.E.P.A.(West) (No objection) Scottish Water (No objection) Scottish Water (No objection) British Gas Transco (No objection) Scottish Power (No objection) The Coal Authority (No objection) Sustrans (No response) Scottish Executive Development Department (No objection)

Representations: 2 Representation Letters

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 25th February 2004

Comments:

Planning permission is being sought in outline to redevelop a former garagekcrap yard for residential development at Forrestfield Garage, 105 Airdrie Road, Airdrie. This site is located within the small linear settlement of Forrestfield that sits on the north side of the A89 Airdrie to Bathgate Road. The proposals would involve the removal of the existing garage building and involve the decontamination of the site for housing purposes. The developer has submitted an indicative layout plan that demonstrates that an adoptable standard access road can be provided to service the site. No details of the proposed house design were provided.

There are no strategic planning issues. The proposals require to be assessed under the terms of the policies contained in the local plan and any other material considerations. The site is located within an area zoned as GB2 (Restrict Development in Countryside Around Towns). This policy generally restricts isolated development in remote rural areas. However this site is not isolated as it is grouped within the Forrestfield settlement area. The garagekcrap yard is now closed and the redevelopment of the site for housing would assist in the environmental improvement of the former scrap yard. The proposals would also offer additional housing opportunities in this settlement and remove a bad neighbour use, which would improve the residential amenity of the adjacent cottages. As such, it is considered that the redevelopment of this site for housing purposes is in principle an acceptable departure from the terms of the development plan.

There were no adverse comments from consultees and the terms of objection can not be sustained as noted in the main report. The Transportation Section raised road safety concerns and requested that the site be accessed via an adoptable road with appropriate visibility spays. These specific requirements would also be controlled through planning conditions should permission be granted.

Taking into account the terms of the development plan and other material considerations, as discussed fully in the main report, the proposals are considered to be acceptable and it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the following reserved matters.

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

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 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 details of, and timetable for, the hard and soft landscaping of the site; (e) details for management and maintenance of the areas identified in (c) and (d) above; (f) the design and location of all boundary walls and fences; (9) the provision of drainage works; (h) the disposal of sewage; (i) details of existing trees, shrubs and hedgerows to be retained; (j)details of existing and proposed site levels: (k) details of any sound or vibrations barriers required under the terms of condition 8 below

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

4. That before 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 that any contaminants found at the site are removed or rendered harmless

5. That the detailed design and siting of any dwellinghouse on the site shall take cognisance of the rural location, with particular regard being paid to scale, massing, roof pitch, fenestration and materials; and shall be in accordance with the provisions of Planning Advice Note No. 36.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity of the surrounding rural area

6. That no part of the development hereby permitted shall exceed one and a half storeys in height and the dwellinghouses shall all have traditional double pitched roofs.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity of the surrounding rural area

7. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a report shall be submitted to the Planning Authority which assesses the likely noise and vibration impact from the proposed railway on the proposed development site. The report shall be prepared in accordance with the Scottish Office Development Department Circular 10/99 and guidance within Planning Advice Note (PAN 56) "Planning and Noise" 1999 and the development proposals shall incorporate any site layoutlbuilding design recommendations as noted in the Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment.

Reason: To ensure appropriate remedial measures are introduced to the proposed site layout to ensure there is no adverse impact on residential amenity 8. That the detailed site layout shall include the following road design requirements.

a) That junction spacing of 150m to be achieved along Airdrie Road. b) That visibility splays of 4.5m x 215m be provided from the proposed access road in both directions along Airdrie Road. c) That a new adoptable access road shall be provided, designed and constructed in accordance with the former Strathclyde Regional Council's Design Guidance for Development Roads 1986. d) Driveways shall be 5m wide x 6m long and be fully paved over the first 2 m and served via a dropped kerb footway crossing. e) A minimum of 2 in curtilage parking spaces be provided.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access facilities to the dwellings and in the interests of traffic safety.

9. That before the development starts, it shall be clearly demonstrated to the Planning Authority that the applicant has control over the land within the visibility splays required under condition 8 (b) above.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access facilities to the dwellings and in the interests of traffic safety.

10. That surface water from the proposed development be treated in accordance with the principles of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland, published by ClRA March 2000.

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

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 16th February 2004 Monklands District Local Plan 1991 Memo from Transportation Section received 24th May 2004 Memo from Protective Services received 19th March 2004 Letter from S.E.P.A.(West) received 20th April 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received 1st March 2004 Letter from British Gas Transco received 26th February 2004 Letter from Scottish Power received 1st March 2004 Letter from The Coal Authority received 27th February 2004 Letter from Scottish Executive Development Department received 5th March 2004

Letter from Mrs Garrett,Arthleen Cottage, Forrestfield, Airdrie, ML6 8NY received 20th February 2004. Letter from Mrs Yvonne Smith,"Conville", 4 Forrestfield Row, Forrestfield, Airdrie Road, ML6 8NY received 27th February 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Colin Marshall at 01236 812376. APPLICATION NO. C10410019410UT

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I Planning permission is being sought in outline to redevelop a former garagelscrap yard for residential development at Forrestfield Garage, 105 Airdrie Road, Airdrie.

1.2 This site is located within the small linear settlement of Forrestfield that sits on the north side of the A89 Airdrie to Bathgate Road. The site measures some 70 x 40 metres and was formerly in use as a commercial garage1scrap yard but is now vacant. The site is bounded by the A89 to the south and by a disused railway solumkycle track to the north. To the west of the site there is a row of terraced cottages that face onto the A89 and to the east lies open rough grazing land.

1.3 The proposals would involve the removal of the existing garage and involve the decontamination of the site for housing purposes. The developer has submitted an indicative layout plan that demonstrates that an adoptable standard access road can be provided to serve up to 6 houses. No details of the proposed house design were provided.

2. Develo pment Plan

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

GB 2 Restrict Development in Countryside Around Towns LR 711 Develop Network of Long Distance Paths TR113 (Support Rail Transport)

2.2 There are no strategic planning issues

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 The Transportation Section initially recommended that planning permission be refused on traffic safety grounds as the proposed development would need to take an access from an unlit de- restricted length of Airdrie Road with substandard pedestrian facilities where additional traffic volumes would lead to increased braking and turning manoeuvres. However the Transportation Section also considered that should planning permission be granted it should be conditional that the following standard road design criteria be specified.

That junction spacing of 150m to be achieved along Airdrie Road. That visibility splays of 4.5m x 215m be provided from the proposed access road in both directions along Airdrie Road. That a new adoptable access road shall be provided, designed and constructed in accordance with the former Strathclyde Regional Council's Design Guidance for Development Roads 1986. Driveways shall be 5m wide x 6m long and be fully paved over the first 2 m and served via a dropped kerb footway crossing. A minimum of 2 in curtilage parking spaces be provided. The Transportation Section also advised that a draft feasibility study has been carried by the Scottish Executive with regard to the reopening of the Airdrie to Bathgate Rail Link. They have advised that it is unlikely that proposed rail link would deviate from the existing railway solum at this locus and as such the proposed housing site would not be affected by any rail link re- alignment proposals.

3.2 The Scottish Executive advised that the reopening of a railway link between Airdrie and Bathgate is under consideration and that an engineering report on the feasibility of the proposed re-instatement of this line is under consideration. The Executive would wish to ensure that this proposal would not hinder the re-instatement of the line and the Executive has asked that the developer be made aware of the proposed railway link and should take this into account when designing the houses should planning permission be granted. The recent advice from the Transportation Section noted in paragraph 3.1 above notes that the proposed rail link would not deviate from the existing railway solum at this locus.

3.3 The Scottish Environment Protection Agency SEPA has no objection to the proposal but advised there may be ground contamination issues due to the previous use. As such it has been suggested that the developer as described in Planning Advice Note 33 undertake an appropriate risk assessment. SEPA have also stated that the developer provides full details of the arrangements for the disposal of foul drainage at the detailed planning stage. The Agency have also requested that surface water from the proposed development be treated in accordance with the principles of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland, published by ClRA March 2000.

3.4 The Protective Services Section advised that all construction works should conform to current industry standards (BS-5228). The developer should also be required to undertake a comprehensive site investigation of potential ground contamination in accordance with the British Standard Code of Practice BS 10175: “The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites.” This report should also include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages with a Detailed Remediation Strategy. Any remediation work required should be completed and verification provided by the developer to the Council’s satisfaction. The developer should ensure that the best practical means of suppressing dust emissions beyond the site boundaries.

3.5 Scottish Water have advised that there are no known sewers in the vicinity to which a connection may be made and that drainage would need to be treated by septic tank or other suitable treatment to the satisfaction of SEPA. Scottish Water has advised that there are no public water supplies in the immediate vicinity and the developer should contact them to discuss how a water supply may be obtained.

3.6 The Coal Authority, Scottish Power and Transco have no objection to the proposals.

3.7 Two letters of representation were received from neighbours and the terms of objection can be fairly summarised as follows.

That part of the site is not owned by the developer That the development shall need to be served by a septic tank facility as there is no public sewerage system. That the existing surface water system is incapable of coping with the proposed development. There is insufficient visitor parking facilities and as such visitors may park on the A89 which would be detrimental to road safety. The proposals would result in a lack of privacy to the cottages located to the west of the site. The development would result in an increase in noise levels at the site. 4. PI ann i nu Assessment and Co nc Ius i o ns

4.1 The proposals require to be assessed under the terms of the development plan and any other material considerations.

4.2 The proposed development has no strategic implications due to the limited scale of the proposed residential development.

4.3 Under the terms of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the proposed site is zoned as GB2 (Restrict Development in Countryside Around Towns). The policy states that isolated developments in the GB2 areas shall not generally accord with the Local Plan unless there is a specific locational need. In addition, proposals for development within GB2 areas require to be justified against the following criteria.

0 economic benefit 0 specific locational need 0 infrastructure implications 0 environmental impact

4.4 The site is in close proximity to zoning LR711 (Develop Network of Long Distance Paths) and TR1/3 (Support Rail Transport). Under these policies the Council seek to protect former railway lines, canals and other routes from inappropriate development.

4.5 In principle the proposed residential development is contrary to the terms of policy GB2 of the development plan as there is no locational need for the houses in this area and no economic benefit. However a new housing development at this location would not be in isolation as it is grouped within the Forrestfield settlement area. In addition, the commercial garage and scrap yard are now closed and the redevelopment of the site for housing purposes would assist in the environmental improvement of the former scrap yard by removing any possible contaminants from the site. The proposals would also result in the removal of a potential bad neighbour use to the benefit of residential amenity of the adjacent cottages. The proposals would also offer additional housing opportunities in this small rural settlement. As such, in consideration of these mitigating factors the redevelopment of this site for housing purposes would be an acceptable departure from the terms of the development plan. Careful consideration would need to be given to the density, scale and design of houses however. In this regard a satisfactory layout and house design would be considered as reserved matters via appropriate conditions.

4.6 There were no adverse comments from the external consultees and it is noted that the proposals are unlikely to affect the proposed re-establishment of the Airdrie to Bathgate rail link. The developer has been made aware of these particular proposals and it would be a condition of any planning permission that the house types and site layout be designed to minimise any impact from the rail link.

4.7 The Transportation Section considered the proposal could be detrimental to road safety however were willing to agree to the development of the site provided the above noted conditions are applied to any planning permission granted for the development.

4.8 Turning to the terms of objection the following comments can be made on each of the points.

Disputes over the ownership of ground are not material to the consideration of a planning application. However any developer would be legally obliged to ensure that all title to land affected by proposals are secured before a development can proceed. SEPA had no objection to the proposal and the developer will need to discuss a satisfactory foul water drainage design (septic tanks) with the Agency. SEPA had no objection to the proposal and the developer will be required to agree a satisfactory surface water drainage design with the Agency. It would be a condition of any grant of planning permission that the surface water drainage system is designed in accordance with the principles of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland, published by ClRA March 2000. The Transportation Section had no objection subject to conditions being imposed on any grant of planning permission. As noted above this would include a requirement to provided satisfactory parking facilities for the development. The indicative layout plans indicate that the proposed houses could be positioned within the site to prevent any loss of privacy to the adjacent cottages. The proposed residential development of this site would not result in any unacceptable increases in noise levels that may be detrimental to residential amenity.

4.9 Following consideration of the above material considerations and having regard to the terms of the development plan it is concluded that the proposed redevelopment of the former garagekcrap yard for housing purposes is acceptable. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted in outline subject to the above noted reserved matters. Application No: C1041004041FUL

Date Registered: 10th May 2004

Applicant: A & D Stores 228 Main Street Caldercruix Airdrie ML6 7RA

Agent W.D. Blair Associates Ltd. Staff Cottage 6 Fauldhouse Road Longridge West Lothian W H47 8AQ

Development : Change of Use of Shop to Hot Food Takeaway

Location: 224 Main Street Caldercruix Airdrie Lanarkshire

Ward: 46: Plains And Caldercruix Councillor Thomas Morgan

Grid Reference: 282380667840

File Reference: C/PL/CCM030228/1J/EL

Site History: P84290 Change of Use to Taxi Office Approved Sept. 1984

Development Plan: The site is covered by Policy HGS:(Existing Residential Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: S. E. P .A.(W es t) (No response) Scottish Water (No objections) British Gas Transco (No objections) Scottish Power (No objections) The Coal Authority (No objections)

Representations: 1 Representation Letters

Newspaper Advertisement: 19 May 2004

Comments:

Permission is being sought for the change of use of a vacant shop unit to a hot food carry out at 224 Main Street, Caldercruix. The property is a central unit within a block of three commercial premises formerly known as the "co-operative building" which is of single storey pitched roof construction and located at the eastern edge of Main Street adjacent to a Sheltered Housing complex.

The subjects are currently used in part for storage purposes in association with the adjoining "A & D Stores" licensed grocers. The proposal seeks to utilise the main part of the unit as a hot food carry out facility while retaining a small enclosed area as a store for the adjoining licensed grocers. Access to the retained storage area will be from the grocer's shop. The carry out area will incorporate a customer waiting area, servery and rear kitchenlfood preparation area with adjacent toilet. Frontage alterations will comprise of a large display window with roller shutters over and a new entrance doorway. An external flue will be sited on the rear elevation of the property and the existing rear door will have a roller shutter over it.

In terms of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within a predominantly residential area (under Policy HG9) where the existing residential character should be maintained and where 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 existing three commercial properties at 224-228 Main Street are long established. A hot food carry out is also considered acceptable within this small commercial row of properties which currently includes a Chinese carry out within the adjoining unit. A single objection has been received against this proposal, although this does not raise any issue which would merit the refusal of the application. I recommend that planning permission be granted subject to the attached conditions.

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

2. That the permission hereby granted relates to a change of use only and, notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992, no alterations shall be made to the external appearance of the building other than those approved as part of this permission.

Reason: To define the permission.

3. That before the development hereby approved is brought into use details of the ventilation system, including the external flue 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.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 16th March 2004 Monklands District Local Plan 1991 Memo from Transportation Section received 21 st May 2004 Letter from British Gas Transco received 17'h May 2004 Letter from Scottish Power received 1gth May 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received 27th May 2004

Letter from John & Lorraine Woods,Mega-Bites, 5 Dunbreck Avenue, Caldercruix, Airdrie, ML6 7PE received 15th April 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact lan Johnston at 01236 812382. APPLICATION NO. C1041004041FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1 .I The application property is a single storey commercial unit that is centrally located within a block of three units formerly known as the “co-operative building”. The premises are located on the south side of Main Street at the eastern edge of the village and directly adjacent to a sheltered housing complex. The lands to the north are predominantly of a residential nature while the lands to the rear of the premises are undeveloped and overgrown.

1.2 The proposal seeks to utilise the main part of the unit as a hot food carry out facility while retaining a small enclosed area as a store for the adjoining licensed grocers. Access to the retained storage area will be retained as existing internally from the adjoining unit. The carry out area will incorporate a customer waiting area, servery and rear kitchen/food preparation area with adjacent toilet. Frontage alterations will comprise of a large display window with roller shutters over and a new entrance doorway. An external flue will be sited on the rear elevation of the property and the existing rear door will have a roller shutter over it.

2. Development Plan

2.1 In terms of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the site is covered by Policy HG9: Existing Residential Areas.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Following the statutory neighbour notification procedures one letter of objection was received against this proposal. The main points of objection are detailed as follows:

(a) the objector currently operates a carry out shop in the village (on Dunbreck Avenue) and a further similar use would inevitably result in the existing premises closing as the village cannot accommodate two such similar uses. (b) the existing carry out shop has limited operating hours of 8 am till 5 pm to safeguard the amenity of the surrounding residential area and the proposal should have similar restrictions if approved. (c) the numbering of the application premises is incorrect and there is a history of changes to the adjacent units without any prior permission being given by the Council.

3.2 None of the statutory consultees on this application have offered any objection to this proposal.

3.3 The Transportation Section has objected to the proposal on the grounds that the proposal does not seek to provide dedicated parking spaces and this could encourage greater volumes of traffic to parklwait within the vicinity of a junction to the detriment of road safety. 4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 In terms of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within a predominantly residential area (under Policy HG9) where the existing residential character should be maintained and where 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 proposal raises no strategic issues. The existing three commercial properties at 224-228 Main Street have been present at that location for a considerable number of years, being the former co-operative building, and these retail units are now established as both ancillary and complementary to the surrounding predominantly residential area. Taken that a hot food carry out has operated from an adjoining unit with the benefit of planning permission then, as there is no reason to take a contrary view on this present similar proposal, and for the sake of consistency, this application must also be considered acceptable at this location.

4.2 The issues raised by the objector are noted although it should firstly be stated that market competition is not a material planning consideration and would not, on its own, merit the refusal of this application. Whereas the objector is concerned about the viability of their business (on Dunbreck Avenue) as "there is not enough revenue in this small village to keep two hot food takeaways in business which are less than 200 metres" it is relevant to note that the premises adjacent to the application unit on Main Street has operated as a hot food outlet (Chinese Take away) without presumably affecting the viability of the objectors business and it is debatable whether a further takeaway facility will affect the operations of those existing hot food outlets. As regards limited hours of operation of the objectors premises (in Dunbreck Avenue) the submission put forward to the Council as part of the planning application (C/00/00856/FUL) for that unit specifically sought restricted hours of operation between 8 am and 5 pm. The permission given to the takeaway unit adjoining the application property (P84315) did not restrict the hours of operation and I consider that it would be inappropriate to impose a restriction on opening hours (as per Dunbreck Avenue) of the application premises as the site is on the periphery of the village and no objections to the proposal have been received from the adjacent residents. The issues relating to the numbering of the properties and the reputed history of changes to the three commercial premises are being investigated while these matters do not affect the processing of this current proposal although they may affect its implementation.

4.3 While the concerns raised by the Transportation Section are noted the premises currently holds a commercial permission and has in the past operated as an independent unit (officehaxi office/retail) without creating any reported adverse parking problems on the Main Street roadway fronting the premises. Taken also that the section of roadway around the application site is of a good width with a low/moderate flow of traffic movement along it, especially in the evening hours when the application premises will operate at its maximum, then added to the fact that this section of road does not have any parking restrictions and that the adjoining unit (nearer the junction) has operated as a takeaway facility (again without any reported parking problems) then I consider it inappropriate to recommend against this proposal on road safety grounds.

4.4 Taking all the foregoing matters into consideration I consider the proposal to be acceptable in both policy and locational terms and therefore I recommend that planning permission be granted subject to the attached conditions. Application No:

Date Registered: 20th April 2004

Applicant: James Smith 16 Stonehaven Crescent Airdrie Lanarkshire ML6 9TF

Agent Hugh Murray Sweethill House 79 Bore Road Airdrie ML6 6HX

Development: Change of Use from Open Space to Private Garden Ground (in Retrospect)

Location: 16 Stonehaven Crescent Airdrie Lanarkshire ML6 9TF

Ward: 50: Calderbank Councillor Patrick Donnelly

Grid Reference: 27541 0 664194

File Reference: C/PL/AI S7700 16/L M/EL

Site History:

Development Plan: The property is covered by residential policies in the Monklands District Local Plan.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: 1 Representation Letter

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

Planning permission is sought for the change of use of open space to garden ground (in retrospect) at 16 Stonehaven Crescent, which is a semi-detached property. One letter of representation was received from a neighbouring property. The points raised have been considered in the attached report. Following assessment of the proposals against the development plan and all other material considerations, including effects on road safety, it is recommended that planning permission is granted.

Recommendation: Grant. Planning Application No. C/04/00445/FUL Change of Use from Open Space to Private Garden Ground rlcshire Councll 16 Stonehaven Crescent Airdrie A mwdh~mlk~ldn.~.~ua.ym.pplqrih Representation Not to Scale ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~M~'~~~ * Lh~~~m~ed~~~duobmCrwn rwr8ght 1dnw.r Site Area 0.024 HA wd m."lrdloP.,r"ba Irr,*,lpoc..d,q. Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 23rdMarch 2004 Monklands District Local Plan 1991 Memo from Transportation Section received 24THMay 2004

Letter from G. Millar, 35 Stonehaven Crescent, Airdrie, ML6 9TF received 2gth March 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Leigh Menzies at 01236 812375. APPLICATION NO. C/04/00445/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and ProDosal

1.I The development for which planning permission is sought is a change of use of open space to garden ground at 16 Stonehaven Crescent, Airdrie. The area concerned is in a corner location, originally intended as general amenity space and runs along the side of the public highway for approximately 11.5 metres.

1.2 The area of land concerned and the adjacent property are located within an established residential area, and front onto Stonehaven Crescent.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site is designated within the Monklands District Local Plan 1991, as a residential area where amenity is to be protected (Policy HG9). As the application rises no strategic issues, it can be assessed in terms of the local plan policy.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 The transportation section was consulted. The response stated that there was no objection so long as any boundary treatment was no greater than 1.05 metres in height, this can be dealt with through condition. In addition that no access is taken from the area concerned, this does make up part of the current proposal, should this be considered by the applicant in the future, an application for planning permission would not be required

3.2 One letter of representation was received from the neighbouring property 35 Stonehaven Crescent. The objections are on the following grounds: - (0 road safety, land concerned is within a visibility splay (ii) intention that the entire area should be open plan (iii) fencing is around the entire front garden (iv) development is contrary to structure and local plans (v) fencing is of unsuitable appearance (vi) no reason why the area requires to be fenced

4. Planninq Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 Local plan policy HG9 is the relevant policy in assessing the proposals. This seeks to safeguard against development that adversely affects the amenity of established housing areas. The proposals are considered to be acceptable in terms of the appearance and scale and would integrate satisfactorily with the surrounding area, without causing any adverse amenity. 4.2 In relation to the grounds of objection, these are addressed as follows:

(i) As regards road safety the transportation section response has been summarised in paragraph 3.1 (ii) The approval of the original planning application placed no restrictive condition in relation to the retention of open space within the development. Any open space policy promoted by the house builder requires to be pursued through them directly (iii) The fencing located around the front garden is not the subject of this planning application as it is less than 1 metre in height, in terms of the planning legislation this is permitted development (iv) In terms of the structure plan see paragraph 2.1. The local plan requires that any development should not adversely affect the amenity of the area, it is felt that on this occasion the change of use proposed is not unsuitable in this circumstance. (v) The type of fencing used is not the subject of this planning application as it is permitted development (vi) In terms of this particular development the reason for the applicant wanting to incorporate the land, under their ownership, into their garden area, in this instance does not require justification as it has no adverse effect on the amenity of the area

4.3 In conclusion, having considered all of the points of objection raised, no reason is found to uphold them. It is recommended that planning permission is granted. Application No: C/04/00449/FUL

Date Registered: 29 March 2004

Applicant : Peter Ross The Mint 16 Academy Street Coatbridge ML5 3AU

Agent Lawrie Orr 70 Dryesdale Street Alloa FK10 1JA

Developmen t : Erection of Extension to Form Glazed Stair Enclosure

Location: 16 Academy Street Coatbridge Lanarkshire ML5 3AU

Ward: 34: Coatbridge Central Councillor Thomas Nolan

Grid Reference: 2731 96.6651 96.

File Reference: C/PL/CTAl20/DB/EL

Site History: Repositioning/Erection of Side/Rear Ventilation Ducting C/01/00867/FUL granted 2gthOctober 2001 Erection of Conservatory C/98/01480/FUL granted 17'h March 1999 Erection of Rear Extension and Change of Use of Upper Floor to Bar/Restaurant/Function Area C10210171 O/FUL granted 1gth March 2003

Development Plan: This area is covered by retail policies contained in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The site is also within a Conservation Area.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: The Scottish Civic Trust (Objection) Historic Scotland (No response)

Representations: None Received

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 07.04.2004

Comments:

This application is for an extension to the 'Mint' public house and restaurant, 16 Academy Street, Coatbridge. The building is within the Blairhill and Dunbeth Conservation Area and has already been extended both to the front and rear. The extension comprises a steel framed glass structure enclosing a new stairwell, and it would be prominently sited on the front of the building. The structure would obscure existing features of the building and is of a design which would not marry well with the character and appearance of the building and wider conservation Area. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be contrary to policies ENV15 and ENV16 that are designed to protect and enhance the character of the area and accordingly it is recommended that planning permission should be refused. Further details can be found within the attached report.

Recommendation: Refuse for the reason that the proposed glazed staircase enclosure is of a style and appearance, and of a position on the building which would detract from the visual amenity and character of the adjoining buildings and hence upon the Blairhill and Dunbeth Conservation Area and therefore is contrary to policies ENV 15 (Conservation Areas) and ENV16 (Conservation Area Improvements) and associated design guidance contained within the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 29 March 2004 and 5 April 2004 Monklands District Local Plan 1991 Letter from Scottish Civic Trust dated 27'h May 2004

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact David Baxter at 01236 812372. APPLICATION NO. C1041004491FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I This application site is the ‘Mint’ public house and restaurant which is a traditional two-storey stone and slate villa at 16 Academy Street, Coatbridge. Although it has been extended both to the front (a conservatory) and rear in recent years, the building still retains much of its original character. It is proposed to construct a stairwell comprising a two-storey glazed enclosure on the front of the building. This would measure 4.0 metres wide by 4.4 metres deep by 8.0 meters in height. Part of the building is set back 4.4 metres from the main frontage and the new structure would occupy this area. The structure would require the blocking off one upper floor window on the side (north) elevation, the conversion of a window on the west (front) elevation to a doorway and the blocking off of a further window on the side elevation (south) of the adjoining building. As originally submitted, the glazed structure was to be of a frameless glass design, but this was later changed by the applicant to incorporate metal frames for cost reasons.

1.2 The premises are currently used as a public houselrestaurant, with a vacant office and hairdressing salon on the first floor. Planning permission was granted in 2003 for the construction of a rear extension (now built) and the change of use of the upper floor to a function suite (C/02/0171O/FUL). Access to the upper floor was to be through the construction on a new internal stairwell. The purpose of this application is to provide a separate access to the function suite (rather than alter the internal layout of the existing bar area) thus maximising the space available.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The Monklands District Local Plan 1991 identifies the site as being part of the Blairhill and Dunbeth Conservation Area where Policy ENVI511 (Conservation Areas) applies. This states that the Council will seek to ensure that any new developments do not adversely affect the Conservation Areas. The associated Design Guidance on Conservation contained in the Local Plan states that: “the purpose of Conservation Areas is not to forbid changes, but to protect a valuable heritage by ensuring that the unique character of these areas. All extension designs should aim at reproducing the original character and appearance of the building.. .” Furthermore, it states that, “the general principle when altering or extending buildings in

Conservation Areas is to retain or match external materials and architectural features. ”

2.2 Policy ENV 16 (Conservation Area Improvements) states that in determining applications for development within the Conservation Areas, the Council will pay regard to height, scale, materials, rooflines, building lines, detailing, colour, overall character of the proposals and its surroundings which it is desirable to protect and maintain and enhance.

2.3 The site is zoned as part of the Coatbridge Town Centre Secondary Retail Core Area (Policy COM 4).

2.4 National Government policy and advice on conservation areas is principally outlined in the Memorandum of Guidance on Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas, 1998. Within this guidance, planning authorities are reminded of their statutory duties under Section 64 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1997, to have regard to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the appearance of Conservation Areas. 3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Following advertisement in the local press and neighbour notification no letters of objection were received.

3.2 The Scottish Civic Trust objects strongly to the proposal and has made the following comments:

The Trust objected in the past to the conservatory and now considers the proposed further obscuring of the principal facade of this building with a glass case to be objectionable.

Glass has reflective qualities that make it more opaque than transparent in the majority of daylight conditions. The majority of the time such an addition would appear solid. It could therefore not be considered that this proposed addition would have a minimal impact on the building.

The proposal would throw the symmetry of the main elevation which would undermine the architectural integrity and form that has survived to date.

This further addition would compromise this building to too great an extent and undermine rather than enhance the Conservation Area within which it sits.

3.3 Historic Scotland has not responded to requests for comments.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 In assessing this proposal the main considerations is considered to be the impact of the structure on the appearance and character of the building and the wider Conservation Area, and hence its compliance with Local Plan Policy and associated design guidance.

4 .2 Good quality modern design within the Conservation Area can be made to be acceptable, and extensions which merely mimic the detailing of adjoining buildings need not always be the only solution. However, in this instance there are factors which lead me to believe that the proposed development would cause more harm than good to the appearance and character of the building and the Conservation Area. Window features and detailing make an important contribution to the character of the area, but the proposal would result in 3 windows being either blocked off or being concealed. Also, natural and painted stonework is an important feature of the Conservation Area, yet the proposal would obscure large sections of stonework of both the application site and the adjoining building. The glazed stairwell (unlike the adjoining conservatory) is not a traditional feature within the Conservation Area, and whilst a modern contrasting design may be appropriate in some circumstances, in visual terms the proposed structure is sited in such a way that the end result may be more towards visually jarring rather than a pleasing contrast. This discord would be heightened by the use of the metal frame (the decision by the applicant to move from the frameless design to the metal frame is considered to be a retrograde step) and also by the fact that the glazed design would allow views into the structure (comprising a spiral stairwell supported on tubular steel supports) which I believe would harm the appearance of the building. To add weight to all of these concerns is the fact that the structure is sited prominently on the front of the building and on well used thoroughfare within the conservation area.

4.3 Based upon the above assessment of the proposed development, it is held that the structure would harm the appearance and character of the existing adjoining buildings and also the visual amenity and character of the Conservation Area, and is therefore contrary to the terms of policies Env 15 and 16 of the Local Plan as well as the Council’s design guidance for development within Conservation Areas. Accordingly, I must recommend that planning permission should be refused for the reason noted above. No: C/04/00468/F UL

Date Registered: 30th March 2004

Applicant: MM 02 (UK) Limited Craig House Mason Street Motherwell MLI IYE

Agent Pentland Chartered Surveyors Canal Court 40 Craiglockhart Avenue Edinburgh EH14 ILT

Development: Erection of 1Om High Telecommunications Monopole and 2 Associated Cabinets

Location: Land South West Of Junction Of Bankhead Avenue With Viewfield Road Coatbridge Lanarkshire

Ward: 37: Kirkwood Councillor James Smith JP

Grid Reference: 271201 663551

File Reference: C/PL/CTV81 OILWIEL

Site History:

Development Plan: The site is covered by industrial policy ECON 2 and policy TELl in the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: The Radio Communications Agency (no response)

Representations: None Received

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

This application is for the erection of a 10metre high telecommunication monopole and two associated cabinets at Viewfield Road, Coatbridge. The base station is required to provide the area with radio service for 2G and 3G technology. The site is zoned as ECON2 (Existing General Industrial areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The application is assessed in terms of policy TELI Telecommunications Developments that lists criteria of economic benefit, specific locational need and environmental impact to be considered. The application was accompanied with a supporting statement and ICNIRP certificate of compliance. There are no strategic implications raised.

The proposed design meets the requirements of policy TEL 1 and should not significantly impact on the amenity of the area. The visual impact of and suitability of the site for such a development is considered acceptable and in accordance with policy TELl, It is therefore recommended that planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions. Works

Planning Application No. C/O4/00468/FUL 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 commences, an off-street servicing facility for maintenance vehicles shall be provided, with a dropped kerb arrangement, and shall be paved for the first 4 metres.

Reason: In the interests of road safety to prevent on-street parking, and to prevent any deleterious material from being deposited on to the public road.

3. That for the avoidance of doubt, the proposed mast shall be located at least 2.5 metres back from the carriageway edge.

Reason: In the interests of road safety to allow adequate visibility at the junction of Viewfield Park and Viewfield Road.

4. 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 30th March 2004 Monklands District Local Plan 1991

Memo from Transportation Section received 20th April 2004

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact David Baxter at 01236 812372. APPLICATION NO. C/04/00468/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and ProDosal

1.I This application relates to the erection of a 10 metre high telecommunications monopole and two associated equipment cabinets on Viewpark Road, Coatbridge. The area is predominantly industrial but is adjacent to a residential area. The monopole is proposed to resemble existing streetlights in order to reduce its visual impact.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site is zoned as ECON 2 (Existing General Industrial areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The application is assessed in terms of policy TELl Telecommunications Developments that lists criteria of economy benefit, specific located need and environmental impact to be considered.

3. Consu Itat ions and Rep resentat ions

3.1 Consultation was carried out with The Radio Communications Agency and as yet there has been no response.

3.2 The Transportation Section has indicated that the monopole should be relocated so that it does not interrupt visibility splays. They have also stated that there should be parking provision for service vehicles in order to prevent on-street parking in the vicinity. These issues are addressed in the proposed conditions.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 Policy TELl 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.

4.2 The applicant has supplied information that indicates the need for a mast within this area to meet a shortfall in coverage. Several sites were investigated including mast sharing before this was put forward. The mast is also proposed to resemble a street lighting column in order to minimise the visual impact.

4.3 After receiving assurance regarding the fact that the previous consent (reference number C/01/01472/FUL), for the erection of a similar monopole on the industrial land to the rear, will not be carried out, there will be a restricted number of masts in the vicinity.

4.4 I consider that the proposed design meets the criteria as stipulated in policy TEL 1 and should not significantly impact on the amenity of the area. Application No: C/04/00557/FUL

Date Registered: 15th April 2004

Ap p Ii ca nt : Mr & Mrs J McKenzie 55 Drummore Avenue Carnbroe Coatbridge Lanarkshire

Development : Rear Extension To Dwellinghouse

Location: 55 Drummore Avenue Carnbroe Coatbridge Lanarkshire

Ward: 35: Sikeside And Carnbroe Councillor John Cassidy

Grid Reference: 274495663089

File Reference: C/PL/CHD455055/LW/EL

Site History:

Development Plan: The property is covered by residential policies in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: 1 Representation Letter

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

This application relates to a single storey rear extension to a detached dwellinghouse at 55 Drummore Avenue, Carnbroe, Coatbridge. One letter of representation was received from a neighbouring property, the points raised have been detailed in the attached report. Following assessment of the proposals against the development plan and all other material considerations, including effects on neighbouring properties, it is recommended that planning permission is granted subject to conditions.

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

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

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

Background Papers:

Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991

Application form and plans received 13th April 2004

Letter from S Boyd,l2 Claremount View, Carnbroe, Coatbridge, ML5 4GA received 4th May 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Lesley Ward at 01236 812374. APPLICATION NO. C1041005571FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The proposed development is a single storey rear extension to a semi-detached dwellinghouse at 55 Drummore Avenue, Carnbroe, Coatbridge. The extension will project approximately 3.3 metres from the rear of the existing house, will be approximately 8.4 metres wide and approximately 3.8 metres in height. The materials are proposed to match the existing house

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site lies within an area zoned as Residential, covered by Policy HG9 (Existing Housing) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991, The development raises no strategic issues.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 One letter of representation has been received from a neighbour at 12 Claremount View, situated to the west (rear) of the application site. The main grounds of objection are as follows:

(i) Subsidence due to the lack of a retaining wall (ii) Overshadowing (iii) Privacy issues

4. Plannincl Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The site is situated within a residential area. In assessing this application the local plan policy HG9 for existing residential areas is relevant. This seeks to protect such areas by opposing development that adversely affects the amenity of the established housing. In assessing the proposal in detail it is considered to be acceptable in terms of the design and scale, would integrate satisfactorily with the existing dwellinghouse and would cause no adverse amenity effects in relation to privacy, parking and residual garden ground.

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

(i) The application site is at a higher level than the objector’s property and the boundary problems caused by different ground levels is a matter to be resolved with the developer and/or both affected residents. However, the proposed extension is outwith the affected area since the distance from the rear of the extension to the drop in ground level is approximately 8 metres. (ii) The proposal will be over 10 metres from the rear boundary of the application site, and since it is less than 4 metres in height, there will be no overshadowing issues regarding properties to the rear. (iii) Although the windows of the extension look out to the rear, there is some 10 metres between the extension and the rear boundary so overlooking into neighbours’ property will be minimal since the minimal privacy distance of 18 metres between facing windows is achieved. 4.3 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 scale and design of the proposal is considered to be acceptable and is in keeping with the surrounding residential 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. Application No: C/04/00589/FUL

Date Registered: 19th April 2004

Applicant: Mr B Docherty 52 Woodlands Drive Coatbridge Lanarkshire ML5 ILB

Development: Erection of Two Storey and Single Storey Rear Extension and Construction of Timber Decking

Location: 52 Woodlands Drive Coatbridge Lanarkshire ML5 1LB

Ward: 32: Blairpark Councillor William Shields

Grid Reference: 271887.665302.

File Reference: C/PL/CTW 7950521LMIEL

Site History:

Development Plan: The property is covered by residential policies in the Monklands District Local Plan.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: 1 Representation Letter

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

Planning permission is sought for the erection of a two storey and single storey rear extension at 52 Woodlands Drive, Coatbridge, which is a semi-detached property. One letter of representation was received from a neighbouring property. The points raised have been considered in the attached report. Following assessment of the proposals against the development plan and all other material considerations, including effects on neighbouring properties, it is recommended that planning permission is granted.

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

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

Reason: In the interests of amenity of the building and the surrounding area. I Planning Application No. C/04/00589/FUL I Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 19th April 2004

Letter from Mr J W Donaldson, 50 Woodlands Drive, Coatbridge, Lanarkshire, ML5 1 LB, received 30th April 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Leigh Menzies at 01236 812375 APPLICATION NO. C/04/00589/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The development for which planning permission is sought is for the erection of a two storey and single storey rear extension and construction of timber decking to the rear of 52 Woodlands Drive, Coatbridge. It is proposed that the ground floor of the extension will be approximately 5 metres deep, 7.5 metres long and would accommodate a family room and utility room. In terms of the upper floor it would also protrude 5 metres from the existing building but would be approximately 4.5 metres in length located away from the adjoining property, to accommodate an additional bedroom and en-suite. The proposed 2-storey structure would have a pitched roof 7 metres in height, approximately 0.5 metres below that of the main roof and would be at 90 degrees from the main apex. The single storey element, located at the east, would be a mono pitched roof 4.4 metres at its highest part.

1.2 The dwellinghouse is located within an established residential area, and fronts onto Woodlands Drive.

2. DeveloDment Plan

2.1 The site lies within an area zoned residential within the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The development raises no strategic issues.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 One letter of representation has been received from the neighbour at 50 Woodlands Drive situated to the east of the application site. The main grounds of objection are as follows:

(i) over development of the site and incompatible with the surrounding area (ii) loss of evening sunlight, compounded by location of mature trees to rear of site (iii) height of single storey extension (iv) existing garage does not appear on block plan (v) maintenance of proposed extension (vi) drainage (vii) effects on future re-sale of objector’s property

3.2 The local member Cllr Sheilds has also contacted this office has indicated that he will be requesting that a site visit be carried out before the Planning Committee undertakes its decision.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The site is contained within a residential area. In assessing this application the local plan policy for existing residential housing areas is relevant. This seeks to protect such areas by opposing development that adversely affects the amenity of established housing. In assessing the proposal in detail it is considered acceptable and would cause no adverse amenity effects in relation to privacy, parking and residual garden ground. 4.2 In relation to the grounds of objection, I would address each as follows:

In relation to over development, the proposal allows for the retention of a garden length of approximately 10 metres, which is in line with current policy. In addition the two storey element does not extend the full length of the existing property. In terms of the incompatibility of the extension to the surrounding area there is no definitive house type within the surrounding area with a number of different designs and sizes for the proposal to be compared with.

It is felt that the overall detriment, in terms of reduction in sunlight and daylight, would have a minimal adverse impact on the objector’s property due to its orientation. The relevant tests have been undertaken and prove this to be the case.

In this instance the height of the single storey extension, close to the boundary with the objector’s property, is not felt to be excessive, although it is approximately 4.4 metres at its highest point it is 2.8 metres at its lowest.

The existing garage has been omitted from the block plan, but is contained within the location plan. However the existence of this structure does not affect the overall development of the site and does not detrimentally reduce the available rear garden area.

This matter cannot be addressed as part of a planning application and is a matter to be resolved by the applicant.

This matter cannot be addressed as part of a planning application and is a matter to be resolved through the Building Control process.

Any perceived difficulty in the future sale of the neighbouring property is not a material planning consideration.

4.3 In conclusion I have considered the points of objection raised but find no reason to uphold them as it is not considered that the degree of detriment to the objector’s property is sufficient to warrant refusal. I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to appropriate conditions. Application No: ClO4/00616/FUL

Date Registered: 20th April 2004

Applicant: Mr Koon Yau Chan 34 Glen Dochart Drive Cumbernauld G68 OFJ

Agent

Development : Change of Use of General Store to Hot Food Take-away

Location: 4 Centre Street, Glenboig

Ward: 33: Calderbank Councillor Mary Clark

Grid Reference: 271462 668940.2

File Reference: CIPLIG BC3524lC M/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 HG 9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas) Policy COM 10 (Hot Food ShopslRestaurants also applies

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: None

Representations: 20 Representation Letters

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 28 April 2004

Comments:

Planning permission is being sought for the change of use of a vacant single storey general store to Hot Food Take-Away at 4 Centre Street, Glenboig. The existing shop premises form part of a small group of ancillary shopslhealth centre on the east side of Centre Street where the surrounding area is predominantly residential. The Transportation Section have recommended that planning permission be refused on road safety grounds as there are no customer parking facilities at the locus. The Protective Services Section have advised that the proposals would result in a smell nuisance as it would be difficult to dissipate smells from the adjacent residential properties as they are higher than the single story shop. There are 20 letters of objection to the proposals.

Following consideration of the above it is concluded in the main report that the proposal is unacceptable as it is considered to be an inappropriate development within a residential area. There would be significant harm to the residential amenity of the area due to cooking smells, increased activity and noise levels late at night. Inadequate parking arrangements would also result in a reduction in traffic and pedestrian safety at the locus. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be refused. Planning Application N 0.C/04/006 16/F UL Recommendation: Refuse for the following reasons:-

1. That the hot food take away shop would be detrimental to residential amenity due to cooking smells from a low level extractor flue. As such the proposal would be contrary to the terms of policies HG9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas) and COM 10 (Hot Food Shops/Restaurants) of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

2. That the hot food takeaway shop would adversely affect residential amenity due to increased activity and noise levels from customers during late opening hours. As such the proposal would be contrary to the terms of policy HG9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas) of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

3. That the hot food take away shop would have no off street parking provision to support the additional business activity and this would be detrimental to traffic and pedestrian safety at the locus. As a result residential amenity would be reduced and this would be contrary to the terms of policy HG 9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas) of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 20 April 2004

Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991

Memo from Transportation Section received 21 May 2004 Memo from Protective Services Section received 26 May 2004

Letter from Henry Gaffney,5 Carmichael Path, Glenboig, ML5 2SA received 27th April 2004. Letter from Janette Cameron,2 Carmichael Path, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from W Johnston,6 Carmichael Path, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from J Cunningham,8 Carmichael Path, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from Patricia Foley,lO Carmichael Path, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from Mrs C McLay,9 Carmichael Path, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from Catherine Murphy,51 The Oval, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from Margaret McCann,51 The Oval, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from John & Agnes Bisse11,125 The Oval, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from Mr & Mrs J Mitchell,l27 The Oval, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from Mr & Mrs McGuinness,l28 The Oval, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from John Clezy,l26 The Oval, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from Mrs Mary Beattie,l17 The Oval, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from Val Allan,45 The Oval, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from Thomas And Linda Rogan,47 The Oval, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from Marion Bryce,4 Carmichael Path, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from T Lennon,29 The Oval, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from Mrs Mary McGeachie,37 The Oval, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from Robert And Helen Walker,l34 The Oval, Glenboig received 29th April 2004. Letter from Patrick McKeown,l Carmichael Path, Glenboig, ML5 2SA received 17th May 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Colin Marshall at 01236 812376. APPLICATION NO. C1041004921FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I Planning permission is being sought for the change of use of a general store to Hot Food Take- Away at 4 Centre Street, Glenboig.

1.2 The existing single storey shop premises are located within a small group of ancillary shops and local health centre located to the east of Centre Street, Glenboig. The surrounding area is predominantly residential in nature and most houses are two storeys in height.

1.3 The proposals would involve the change of use of a vacant class 1 shop to form a Hot Food Take-Away. Internally a public waiting area, servery, food preparation area and w.c would be provided. No details of an external flue were provided.

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 HG 9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas). Policy COM 10 (Hot Food ShopslRestaurants also applies. There are no strategic issues.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 The Transportation Section have recommended that planning permission be refused on road safety grounds as there are no customer parking facilities at the locus and as such traffic and pedestrian safety would be compromised.

3.2 The Protective Services Section (Pollution Control) advised that the property is located in close proximity to residential properties and regard should be given to the likelihood of smell complaints arising from the proposed hot food business. It was recommended that the catering operation be provided with an extract filtration system and external flue, which should terminate at least 1 metre above the eaves of any neighbouring property liable to be affected by smells generated from the proposed site.

3.3 There were 20 letters of objection to the proposals. The material terms of objection can be fairly summarised as follows. 0 That the proposals would be detrimental to road safety there are no off street parking or servicing facilities. 0 That the proposals are not ancillary to a residential area 0 That the proposals would result in increased activity and noise levels during late opening hours, which would be detrimental to residential amenity. 0 The proposals would lead to increased litter in and around this area of Glenboig. 0 The proposal would lead to smell nuisance to adjacent residential properties. 0 The proposals would lead to increases in anti-social behaviour and loitering. 0 There are sufficient hot food takeaway facilities in the village. 4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The proposal requires to be assessed under the terms of the policies of the current development plan and any other material considerations. There are no strategic issues relating to the proposals.

4.2 As noted above the application site is located within an area covered by policy HG 9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas). Under this policy there is a presumption against development that is likely to adversely affect the amenity of a housing area or where the development is not clearly of a nature ancillary to housing. Developments of an ancillary nature would include nursery schools, corner shops and local health facilities. Whilst corner shops (Class 1 uses) are considered acceptable in principle, hot food take-away shops (Sui Generis use) must always be considered on their own merits depending on their location relative to residential properties and neighbourhoods. It is considered in this case that the proposal does not accord with policy HG9.

4.3 Under Policy Com 10 hot food shops require to be adequately ventilated to ensure there would be no smell nuisance from cooking odours. The consultation response from the Protective Services Section has noted that the proposed hot food shop flue would need to be 1.0 metre higher than the roof eaves of the adjacent houses. No details of a flue were submitted however it is unlikely that an appropriate flue design could be provided to prevent smells from affecting the surrounding two storey dwellinghouses. As such residential amenity would be adversely affected.

4.4 The Transportation Section has recommended that the application be refused on traffic safety grounds. This type of use would require 5 no. off-street car parking spaces and there is no scope within the vicinity to provide additional spaces. The existing parking arrangements are already deficient as adjacent streets have high levels of on street parking. The existing shop at 2 Centre Street closes at 8 pm and the existing on street parking problem would be exacerbated when both shops would be open at the same time. Hot food shops are generally open between 4.30 p.m. and midnight. It is therefore concurred that the proposed use would lead to additional parking problems that would be detrimental to traffic and pedestrian safety.

4.5 Turning to the issues raised by the objectors, the following comments can be made.

As noted above it is agreed the proposal would cause traffic safety problems at the locus due to the lack of off-street parking and servicing facilities The proposals are not ancillary to a residential area. It is agreed that the later opening hours of a hot food shop would result in increased activity in the area, over and above the current activity levels generated by the existing adjacent shop. As such residential amenity would be reduced. There site has a rear storage area and it may be possible to provide adequate litter bins and appropriate storage area. Protective Services have stated that the proposed flue extractor vent should be higher than the eaves of the adjacent houses. It is unlikely that a satisfactory flue design could be provided to prevent cooking smells from affecting adjacent dwellinghouses. As such it is agreed the proposed use would create a cooking smell nuisance to the detriment of residential amenity. Incidents of anti-social behaviour are generally matters for the Police but it is a fact here that the proposed late hours opening is likely to generate noise and activity problems late in the evening. The need for a Hot Food Takeaway is not a material planning consideration.

4.6 Following consideration of the above it is concluded that the proposal is unacceptable as it is considered to be an inappropriate development within a residential area. There would be significant harm to the residential amenity of the area due to cooking smells, increased activity and noise levels late at night, inadequate parking arrangements which would result in a reduction in traffic and pedestrian traffic safety at the locus. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be refused. Application No: C/04/00625/FUL

Date Registered: 21st April 2004

Applicant: James Forsyth Coatbridge Ltd Kirkstyle Woodside Street Coatbridge ML5 5AJ

Agent IFT Partnership Ltd Fountain Business Centre Ellis Street Coatbridge ML5 3AA

Development: Erection of Vehicle Repair Shed (In Retrospect)

Location: Land South Of Kirkstyle, Old Monkland Woodside Street Coat bridge Lanarkshire

Ward: 38: Kirkshaws Councillor John Gordon

Grid Reference: 271810 663148

File Reference: C/PL/CTW900000/1J/EL

Site History: There have been many applications for additions and alterations to these premises over the years of operation. The main one which was significant was C/O1/01 OOl/FUL Erection of warehouse and part demolition of Depot (in retrospect) Refused April 2002 - Granted on Appeal Jan.2003

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: Scottish Executive - Roads Network (No response) S.E.P.A.(West) (No response) Scottish Water (No objections) British Gas Transco (No objections) Scottish Power (No objections)

Representations: None Received

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

Retrospective planning permission is being sought for the erection of a vehicle repair shed within the yard area of Forsyth's Fruiterers, Woodside Street, Coatbridge. The application site is located to the south of Kirkstyle Cottages, on the east side of Woodside Street and directly north of the A8 Baillieston to Newhouse Dual Carriageway. Roduced by Planning Application No. C/04/00625/FUL Rannlnpand Ewlronmnl H..dqmth,. Suit. 501, Flsmmg House 2TwsIRc.d CUMBWNAULD Erection of Vehicle Repair Shed (In Retrospect) OB7 IJW ReprMucd fhrn

The shed is of a galvanised steel (zinc finish) construction in a half arch design to replicate the "Anderson Shelter" style. External dimensions are 12 metres x 9.7 metres to an upper height of 6 metres. A double doorway fronts the building (towards the north) while a single door is sited on the rear (southern) elevation.

The applicant has a history of implementing works on site without seeking the necessary approvals from the authority. While this is not satisfactory, the department will pursue applications which are required and continue to advise the applicant and his agent of the need to comply with legislation.

Although the application site is located within an area designated primarily for residential purposes in the Local Plan (Policy HG9), the surrounding uses are a mixture of residential and industrial with Old Monkland Cemetery to the northwest of the application site and the A8 dual carriageway directly to the south. The proposal raises no strategic issues. The shed has been positioned in an open yard area within the southern part of the existing Fruiterer's site and is being used for the repair and maintenance of the vehicles (delivery lorries etc.) associated with that on-going commercial operation (Fruit and Vegetable storage & supply). No objections against the proposal were received following the standard neighbour notification procedures and the Transportation Section is satisfied that the presence of this structure does not adversely affect the movement of vehicles within the yard area. Having regard to the foregoing I consider the proposal to be acceptable as the structure itself is not unattractive, its presence within the yard area does not adversely affect the on-going operations of the yard which is frequently occupied by heavy vehicles and the use of the building (vehicle repair) is directly associated with the current established operations on site. I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted.

Recommendation: Grant:-

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 21 st April 2004 Monklands District Local Plan 1991 Memo from Transportation Section received 18th May 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received 12th May 2004 Letter from British Gas Transco received 4th May 2004 Letter from Scottish Power received fithMAY 2004

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact lan Johnston at 01236 812382. Application No: C/04/00693/FUL

Date Registered: 30th April 2004

Applicant: 02 (UK) Ltd 260 Bath Road Slough SL1 4DX

Agent Walker Fraser And Steele 125 Buchanan Street Glasgow G1 2JF

Development: Erection of 15m High Telecommunication Monopole and Associated Cabinets

Location: Land South Of 6 South Caldeen Road Calder Street Coatbridge Lanarkshire

Ward: 39: Shawhead Councillor James Brooks JP

Grid Reference: 274044664073

File Reference: CTC080006/LW/EL

Site History:

Development Plan: The site is covered by industrial policy ECON 2 and policy TELl in the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991. Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: None Received

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

This application is for the erection of a 15metre high telecommunication monopole and associated cabinets at Calder Street, Coatbridge. The base station is required to provide the area with radio service for new 3G technology. The site is zoned as a Simplified Planning Zone and covered by industrial policies in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The application is assessed in terms of policy TELl Telecommunications Developments that lists criteria of economy benefit, specific located need and environmental impact to be considered. The application was accompanied with a supporting statement and ICNIRP certificate of compliance. There are no strategic implications raised.

There is one other similar monopole mast to the west of the site that cannot be shared. Although the proposal introduces a further mast to this area I consider that the proposed design meets the requirements of policy TEL 1 and should not significantly impact on the amenity of the area. The visual impact of and suitability of the site for such a development is considered acceptable and in accordance with policy TELI. It is therefore recommended that planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions. Rodus.dby Planning Application No C/04/00693/FUL HeadqunmnRanning and Ewirmmnl Erection of 15M High Telecommunication Monopole & Associated Jull.501, FbmingHous. 2 Tryst Rmd Cabinets CUMBERNAULD 087 rw 0123B616210 Fmx 01238816232 Land South of 6 Caldeen Road, Caider Street, Coatbridge CS Li~nc.LA08041L 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:

Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991

Application form and plans received 30th April 2004

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact David Baxter at 01236 812372. APPLICATION NO. C/04/00693/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I This application relates to the erection of a 15 metre high telecommunications monopole and two associated equipment cabinets on Calder Street, Coatbridge. The area is predominantly industrial and the site is to the west of a similar monopole that cannot be shared. The monopole is proposed to resemble existing streetlights in order to reduce its visual impact.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site is zoned as a Simplified Planning Zone in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The application is assessed in terms of policy TELI Telecommunications Developments that lists criteria of economy benefit, specific located need and environmental impact to be considered.

3. Consultations and ReDresentations

3.1 Consultations were carried out with the Roads and Transportation Department, and as yet there has been no response.

4. Planninq Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 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.

4.2 The applicant has supplied information that indicates the need for a mast within this area to meet a shortfall in coverage. Several sites were investigated including mast sharing before this was put forward. The mast is also proposed to resemble a street lighting column in order to minimise the visual impact.

4.3 There is a similar existing mast to the west of the site. This proposal therefore is to provide an additional mast to the east of the existing mast. Although the proposal introduces a further mast to this area I consider that the proposed design meets the criteria as stipulated in policy TEL 1 and should not significantly impact on the amenity of the area. Application No: C/04/00742/FUL

Date Registered: 10th May 2004

Applicant: The Segton Bar 22 Sunnyside Road Coatbridge Lanarkshire

Agent David Jarvie 27 Aytoun Road Pollokshields Glasgow G41 5HW

Developmen t : Extension to Public House

Location: 22 Sunnyside Road Coatbridge Lanarkshire

Ward: 34: Coatbridge Central Councillor Thomas Nolan

Grid Reference: 273057665191

File Reference: C/PL/CTC87100022/1J/EL

Site History: C/03/01285/FUL Change of Use of Flats to Function Room Approved October 2003

Development Plan: The site is covered by Policies ECON 9:(Secondary Core Area) and ENV 511 :(Conservation Area) in the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: Scottish Water (No objections) British Gas Transco (No objections) Scottish Power (No objections) British Telecom (No objections)

Representations: None Received

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 19th May 2004

Comments:

Permission is being sought for an upper floor extension to the licensed premises addressed as the "Segton Bar", 22 Sunnyside Road, Coatbridge. The premises are located at the western edge of Coatbridge Town Centre and front directly onto Sunnyside Road from where pedestrian access is currently taken into the ground floor public bar area of the building. The upper floor area, which is the subject of this application, is currently used as a licensed function area and is accessed internally from the ground floor public bar area. Planning Application No. C/04/00742/FUL

Extension to Public House 22 Sunnyside Road Coatbridge The surrounding uses are predominantly commercial in nature and a large rear servicing/public car park is located directly to the east of the application site. The site is also within the Blairhill and Dunbeth Conservation Area.

The proposal seeks to extend towards the rear boundary of the premises (9.9 metres from main building) at a height of two storeys to increase the floor area of the upper floor function room while also refurbishing the kitchen area, extending the bar area and providing ladies and disabled toilets. A new single doorway will be sited on the extended rear elevation and this will be utilised solely for emergency purposes (fire exit). At ground floor level the extended area will solely comprise of under building (due to site levels) to facilitate the upper floor provision. Externally the new build will be finished in render and slates to match the main building.

The general nature of the proposal i.e. licensed use, is prominent within the surrounding area (5 other public houses along Sunnyside Road). The proposed extension will complement the existing function room area on the upper floor and will remain tied to the existing ground floor public house (Segton Bar) which has operated at this location for many years. The use is in accordance with the ECON 9 zoning which accepts a mixture of industrial and commercial uses. It raises no strategic issues. While this proposal may, on occasions, result in an intensification of pedestrian movement around the premises especially in the evening hours (to accommodate functions within the premises) the surrounding area is predominantly commercial in nature and can easily sustain any additional pedestrian movement without adversely affecting the overall amenity of the area itself. In addition, the availability of the adjacent large public car park to the east of the application site can satisfy any additional demands for customer parking. No objections against the proposal have been received as a result of the formal neighbour notification and public advertisement procedures. Having regard to this I consider the proposal acceptable and recommend that the application be granted subject to the attached conditions.

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 the facing materials to be used for the external walls and roof shall match in colour and texture those of the existing adjoining building.

Reason: In the interests of amenity of the building and the Conservation Area.

That the premises shall be used as a function room and for no other purposes (including any other purpose in Class Il:(Assembly & Leisure) of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997.

Reason: To define the permission. Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 10th May 200

Letter from British Gas Transco received 14thMay 2004 Letter from Scottish Power received 1gth May 2004 Letter from British Telecom received 24th May 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received 2fjth May 2004 Memo from Environmental Services Section received 27'h My 2004

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact lan Johnston at 01236 812382. Application No: S/03/0 18 14/FU L

Date Registered: 5th December 2003

Applicant : Barley Bank Ltd., Mossend Railhead Reema Road, Bellshill

Agent RPS Consultants Ltd. 7 Clairmont Gardens Glasgow

Development: Construction of 24 Hour Operational Class 5 Industrial Warehouse For Commercial Vehicle Servicing And Repairs With Ancillary Commercial Vehicle Sales Area and Parking

Location: Land East Of Bairdsland View Bellshill Lanarkshire

Ward: 30: Hattonrigg Councillor Harry Curran

Grid Reference: 293946660766

File Reference: S/PL/B/7/82 (209)IJD

Site History:

Development Plan: Bellshill & Mossend Local Plan - zoned mainly for small industrial use, partly as a refuse tip and partly as Hattonrigg Urban Park.

Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) zoned as an Established Industrial Area.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: S.E.P.A.( West) (no objection) Scottish Water (no objection) British Gas Transco (no objection) Scottish Power (no objection) The Coal Authority (no objection) NLC Community Services (comments)

Representations: None Received

Newspaper Advertisement: 18th December 2003

Comments:

Planning consent is sought for the construction of a 24 hour operational industrial warehouse for commercial vehicle servicing and repairs on land east of Bairdsland View, Bellshill. The proposal also involves the formation of an ancillary commercial vehicle sales area and parking. Given the level and type of traffic generated by the development, road improvement works will be required on Bairdsland View. These involve the upgrading of a mini-roundabout to a 32 metre ICD (inscribed circle diameter) roundabout. However this roundabout will also serve the potential incremental development of land to the west of the site in order that future cumulative traffic generation and circulation does not become problematic in this area. Thus, it is considered that the applicant should not be burdened with the full CONSTRUCTION OF 24 HOUR OPERATIONAL CLASS 5 INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLE Rdwdby SERVICING AND REPAIRS, WITH ANCILLARY Panning and Ewinnmnl Madrlmnm COMMERCIALVEHICLE SALES, AND PARKING ~ri.ioi.f*mhg mwe ZTMRmd CYMBWMULD LAND EAST OF BAIRDSLANDVIEW, BELLSHiLL. P.vMT.l

The site is zoned for industrial development and will bring a currently vacant site into productive use and create 25 jobs for the local workforce all to the benefit of the area. No objections have been received, I therefore recommend that planning consent be granted.

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

2. That before the development hereby permitted starts, 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 suitability of the site for the proposed development.

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 details.

4. That before the development hereby permitted is completed all the fences, or walls, as approved under the terms of condition 3 above, shall be erected.

Reason: in the interests of security and visual amenity of the site.

5. Notwithstanding condition 3 above, further details shall be submitted on the construction and finishing materials of the acoustic fence to be located on the western boundary of the site.

Reason: To enable the Planing Authority to consider these details in the interests of confirming noise attenuation on the site and the visual amenity of the site.

6. That before the development hereby permitted is operational, the noise mitigation measures proposed for the site and the proposed building, as specified in Section 5.2 of the report by RPS Consultants Ltd dated 1 December 2003, shall be implemented in full and that a letter from a professionally qualified source shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that these works have been satisfactorily carried out.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of residents in the adjacent Wimpey estate. That notwithstanding condition 6 above, prior to the commencement of development, a formal management plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, detailing the night time arrangements for noise mitigation.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these details in the interests of the amenity of residents in the Wimpey estate.

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

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these details

That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping for the areas hatched GREEN on the approved plans, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development, 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; and c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these details in the interests of the visual amenity of the site.

Notwithstanding condition 9 above, no trees shall be lopped, topped or felled and no shrubs or hedges, shall be removed from the eastern boundary of the application site, without the approval in writing of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To retain the benefits of the landscaped area as a wildlife corridor and to ensure the structural integrity of the bunding to the former landfill site.

That within one year of the occupation of the warehouse hereby permitted, all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 9 above, shall be completed and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the completion of the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

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

That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of the existing and proposed grassed, planted and landscaped areas hatched GREEN on the approved plans.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these details in the interests of the visual amenity of the site. 13. That within one year of the occupation of the warehouse hereby permitted, the management and maintenance scheme approved under the terms of condition 12 shall be in operation.

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

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

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

15. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design of the 32 metre ICD (inscribed circle diameter) roundabout, including land required to be set aside to enable the physical construction of the roundabout, and details of traffic flows which shall determine the financial contribution toward the construction of the roundabout, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory access arrangements to the site are secured at this time in order to enable vehicle circulation and manoeuvring at a future date as more land becomes developable.

Note to Committee

If granted, the planning permission will not be issued until an Agreement under Section 75 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 has been concluded with the applicant in respect of the submission of all relevant details for the construction of a 32 metre ICD (inscribed circle diameter) roundabout adjacent to the site including an agreed financial contribution.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 13th November 2003

Memo from NLC Transportation Section received 13th January 2004 Memo from NLC Protective Services received 30th January 2004 Letter from S.E.P.A.(West) received 15th January 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received 22nd December 2003 Letter from British Gas Transco received 16th December 2003 Letter from Scottish Power received 23rd December 2003 Letter from The Coal Authority received 18th December 2003 Memo from NLC Community Services received 23rd January 2004

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Joanne Delaney at 01698 302137. APPLICATION NO. S1031018141FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The application site is land east of Bairdsland View, Bellshill. The site is mainly level and comprises rough scrubland with perimeter planting on the eastern boundary of the site which forms a bunded landscape screen to a former landfill site. The site is adjoined to the north and west by a Wimpey housing estate currently under construction, to the east by the former landfill site, to the south by a transport depot, and to the south west by a small garden centre and waste re-cycling centre.

1.2 The applicants seek consent for the construction of a 24 hour operational industrial warehouse for commercial vehicle servicing and repairs. The warehouse measures 2264 square metres in floor area and will accommodate an 8-bay vehicle workshop and office facilities. Externally, the site will also accommodate vehicle washing bays, a commercial vehicle parking and display area, and general car parking area. Access to the site will be taken via a new junction from Bairdsland View and entrance to the site will be controlled from a gatehouse.

1.3 The site will be occupied by Scot Truck Ltd who are relocating from their current site in Hillington and propose to operate the site as a main dealer premises for Renault Trucks with additional services for forklift vehicles. The relocation coupled with the increase in size of business affords the creation of 25 jobs which it is anticipated would be filled by the local workforce. The proposed use of the site primarily relates to the provision of a service facility for the road haulage industry and as such, the nature of the industry dictates that the site be operational 24- hours a day to meet their requirements. This enables the cleaning, repair, MOT and road testing of vehicles in preparation for their collection the same day or early next morning. The site will provide servicing for vehicles ranging from small transits up to HGVs and it is estimated that 100 vehicles (including staff and customers) would be entering and leaving the site per day.

1.4 Given the site’s proximity to the Wimpey residential estate, the noise sensitive nature of this receptor has been considered in relation to the likely levels which will emanate from the use of the site on a 24 hour basis. A study concluded that the warehouse would require careful design, layout and construction measures to reduce noise at the source. The formation of a 6 metre high acoustic bund on the northern boundary of the site and 4 metre high acoustic fence on the western boundary should secure an acceptable level of noise emanating from movements in the service yard such that it does not create a disturbance to residents, particularly during the night.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of the local plan policies. The site is split between 3 zonings on the adopted Bellshill & Mossend Local Plan. The majority of the site is allocated for small scale industrial uses, whilst the north east corner falls within the former Shanks & McEwan refuse tip, and the northern wedge falls within the former Hattonrigg Urban Park.

2.2 The emerging Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) perpetuates the predominant industrial zoning and designates the site as an Established Industrial and Business Area. Policy IND9 lists the criteria which should be considered when assessing applications for industrial development. Among these are the consideration to be accorded to the character of the area; design elements such as building height, materials and positioning; provisions made for landscaping, screening; and provisions made for servicing, access, vehicle circulation, manoeuvring and parking. 3. Consultations and Rewesentations

3.1 The utility bodies confirmed that they can service the site and no adverse comments were received from The Coal Authority. SEPA confirmed that the SUDS (Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems) proposals for the site were acceptable.

3.2 NLC Community Services raised no objection to the proposal but requested that the existing planting on the eastern boundary of the site be retained as it provided a wildlife corridor.

3.3 NLC Protective Services Section advised that a comprehensive site investigation report should be submitted to confirm the existence of any contaminants. This is required in light of the close proximity of the site to the former landfill site and historical association of the area with mining and mineral railways. They also commented on the findings of the noise survey and concluded that the predicted noise levels should not give rise to complaints. However, the success in attaining such noise levels would be heavily dependent upon the management of the night time operational aspects of the site. Thus, they have requested that a condition be imposed requiring the submission of a formal management plan which addresses the concerns posed by night time working. Finally, they advised that a Note should be placed on the consent restricting the level of noise during construction periods.

3.4 NLC Transportation Section raised concerns over the access arrangements to the site. They considered that the mini-roundabout immediately adjacent to the site would be incapable of safely accommodating the vehicular traffic generated by this development and the potential traffic which may be generated incrementally in the future by the development of adjacent vacant land. They therefore advised that the mini-roundabout should be replaced with a 32 metre ICD (inscribed circle diameter) roundabout which would provide direct access to the site and would dispense with the need for a new junction. The size and configuration of the roundabout dictates that land would be required both within the application site and on NLC land located directly west of the site.

3.5 No objections were raised following the press advertisement or neighbour notification procedures.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of the local plan policies. The adopted Bellshill & Mossend Local Plan zones the majority of the site for industrial uses and thus the proposal accords with this component of the Plan. The remaining portions of the site form part of the Hattonrigg Urban Park and former Shanks McEwan refuse tip zonings. Both these zonings have been superseded by subsequent events - the refuse tip becoming redundant several years ago, whilst the Urban Park has been lost to the Wimpey residential development. The emerging Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (modified 2001 and 2004) provides contemporary policy advice which takes cognisance of past land use changes. This Plan zones the entire site for industrial and business uses and thereby consolidates a substantial area of land south and west of the site under the industrial designation. I am therefore satisfied that the proposal complies with the current auspices of the Development Plan and is acceptable in principle.

4.2 The detailed elements of the proposal are considered in terms of the requirements of policy IND9. Firstly, it is considered that whilst the design of the building is rudimentary, it serves the practical purpose for which it is intended and will mainly be viewed in association with the adjacent transport depot of similar design and scale. Furthermore, the site will be largely screened from the residential estate through the formation of an acoustic bund on the northern boundary, (by the applicant) and through the formation of woodland planting on the north and west boundaries, (by Wimpey). Lastly, noise mitigation measures will be enforced in order that the proposal does not conflict with the adjacent residential land use in operational terms. The siting of an industrial building in this location is therefore considered acceptable and will not diminish the segregated character of the differing adjoining land uses.

4.3 However, concerns have been raised with respect to the access arrangements for the site. As noted in paragraph 3.4 above, the Council's Transportation Section have advised that a 32 metre ICD roundabout would be required to accommodate the vehicular traffic generated by this development and the potential traffic which may be generated incrementally in the future by the development of adjacent vacant land. The roundabout would require to be offset from the current location of the mini-roundabout and re-configured further north west, such that the greatest land take would occur on Council owned land, with a smaller portion being required within the application site. It is envisaged that one arm of the roundabout would provide direct access to the site and dispense with the need for a new junction. The Director of Housing and Property Services has raised no objections to the encroachment on Council land for the purposes of accommodating the roundabout.

4.4 Given that others may benefit in the future from the provision of the roundabout, it is considered that the applicant should not be burdened with the full cost of providing the roundabout, but should pay a contribution relative to the traffic generated by their site. The applicant has agreed to this proposition and will provide details of traffic flows to establish a base criteria for calculating their contribution. They will also provide engineering drawings to confirm the land take required to enable the physical construction of the roundabout. The submission of these details will be secured through a Section 75 Agreement.

4.5 In addition, given the absence of knowledge on potential future developments west of the site, it is not proposed to require the roundabout to be constructed at this stage, owing to the lack of funds to make up the remaining sum. However, the financial contribution from the applicant would require to be secured at this stage in order that it would be readily available at a future date, should it be necessary. To this end, it is proposed to seek a Bond with a term of 10 years. If the roundabout is constructed within this timescale, the funds would be utilised, alternatively, if the roundabout was not constructed, the applicant would re-coup this money at the end of the term. This timescale enables the Planning Authority a comfortable period in which to negotiate the receipt of further funds from developments west of the site, should there be any forthcoming. In the meantime, the applicant would access their site via a new junction onto Bairdsland View as originally proposed.

4.6 In conclusion, I consider that the development accords with the local plan policies and will seek to bring a prominent area of vacant land into productive use, and create 25 jobs for the local workforce all to the benefit of the area. 1 therefore recommend that planning consent be granted. Application No: S/04/00130/0UT

Date Registered: 13th February 2004

Applicant: Mr & Mrs K Morrison 19-23 Maryville View Uddingston

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

Development: Residential Development

Location: Land At 19 - 23 Maryville View Uddingston Glasgow

Ward: 21 : Tannochside Councillor David Saunders

Grid Reference: 268763662254

File Reference:

Site History: Application P158/1180 - Use of land as a residential caravan site together with the erection of toilet accommodation, granted 13 November 1959.

Application 280/93/OUT - Erection of Dwellinghouse and Extension of caravan park, granted 26 August 1993.

Application No. S10310086310UT - Erection of dwellinghouse, granted 22 October 2003.

Development Plan: Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 - zoned as Green Belt;

Uddingston - Tannochside Town Map 1973 - zoned as Agricultural Land and Green Belt; and

Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) - zoned as Green Belt.

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: Amey Highways Ltd (comments) Scottish Natural Heritage (no objection) West Of Scotland Archaeology Service (comments) S.E. P.A.(West) (no objection) Scottish Water (objection) Health And Safety Executive (no objection) British Gas Transco (comments) Scottish Power (no objection) NLC Community Services (comments) NLC Education (comments)

Representations: None Received

Newspaper Advertisement: 25th February 2004 I PLANNING APPLICATION No. S / 04 / 00130 / OUT Comments:

Outline consent is sought for residential development of a 1.13 hectare area of land at 19-23 Maryville View, Uddingston. An indicative layout submitted by the applicants proposes the erection of 16 detached houses. The site is zoned as Green Belt on the Development Plan and as such there is a general presumption against development unless it is associated with agriculture, forestry, outdoor leisure and recreation, telecommunications, the generation of power from renewable resources or other appropriate rural uses.

The development fulfils none of these criteria, thus there is no justification for this development which constitutes a significant departure from the structure plan.

A similar proposal of larger scale is also under consideration at this meeting (no. S/04/00432/OUT) for residential development within the Green Belt on an adjacent site opposite the M731M74 motorway at Roundknowe Farm Lodge. Both sites play a cumulatively important role in retaining the identity of North Lanarkshire and specifically Uddingston as a distinct settlement from Glasgow. If these applications were granted, they would set a dangerous precedent and would make it difficult to resist similar proposals which could establish a coalescence with Glasgow. I therefore recommend that planning permission be refused. It should be noted that the applicant's agent has asked for a Site Visit and Hearing in respect of this application.

Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. The proposal is contrary to the aims of Strategic Policy 9 - Assessment of Development Proposals of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000, which seeks to promote urban regeneration by safeguarding the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Green Belt, through directing development, where a need has been established, to appropriate locations. The proposal fails to meet several of the criteria set down in this policy. As such the development would not be appropriate in terms of the requirement to safeguard the Green Belt and would introduce isolated and sporadic development of significant scale (as detailed in Schedule 9) in the Green Belt.

2. The proposal is contrary to Strategic Policy 10 of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000, as the applicant has not demonstrated that the development is a justifiable departure from the Plan, in terms of criteria Aii, AV, Bii and Biii of Strategic Policy 10, as the applicant has failed to satisfactorily demonstrate that the proposal fulfils a short fall in housing land supply or a specific locational need; or would result in social and environmental benefits to the area, which would outweigh the inappropriateness of the development in the Green Belt location.

3. The proposal is contrary to Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004), policies ENV5 and ENV6 which seek to safeguard the character and function of the Green Belt. The development would constitute isolated and sporadic development in the Green Belt and would introduce development which would be out of keeping with the spacious natural aspects of the Green Belt to the detriment of its character and amenity.

4. The proposal is contrary to the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004), policies HSGI and HSG12 as it constitutes predominantly, the development of greenfield land as opposed to brownfield land and fails to demonstrate an operational need for housing within the Green Belt area.

5. The proposal is contrary to Government guidance SPP3 and NPPG14 which both seek to protect and enhance environmental assets such as the Green Belt where there is no proven need for development which may outweigh this protection. The applicants have failed to demonstrate a shortfall in housing land supply or a specific locational need for housing in the Green Belt, or that the development would result in social and environmental benefits to the area. NOTE TO COMMITTEE

0 If granted, this application will have to be notified to the Scottish Ministers in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 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 30th January 2004

Letter from Amey Highways Ltd received 18th March 2004 Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 5th March 2004 Letter from West Of Scotland Archaeology Service received 6th April 2004 Letter from S.E.P.A.(West) received 19th March 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received 11th March 2004 Letter from Health And Safety Executive received 10th May 2004 Letter from British Gas Transco received 2nd March 2004 Letter from Scottish Power received 8th March 2004 Memo from NLC Transportation Section received 2nd March 2004 Memo from NLC Protective Services received 3rd March 2004 Memo from NLC Community Services received 24th March 2004 Memo from NLC Education received 17th March 2004

Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 Uddingston-Tannochside Town Map 1973 Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) SPP3 - ‘Planning for housing’ NPPG14 - ’Natural Heritage’ NPPG5 - ‘Archaeology and Planning’

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Joanne Delaney at 01 698 3021 37. APPLICATION NO. S/04/00130/OUT

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The application site is land at 19-23 Maryville View, Uddingston which extends to approximately 1.13 hectares and runs in a southerly direction from Maryville View down toward but stopping short of, Glasgow Road. The majority of the site is level with the exception of the southern most third, which drops dramatically toward Glasgow Road. The site lies within the Green Belt on the western outer limits of the Council’s southern area. It is set against a spacious and natural backdrop created through the mature planting evident in all directions which is characteristic of Green Belt areas. Such planting also affords noise protection from the nearby M73 & M74 motorways located west of the site.

1.2 The planting emphasises the rural nature of the area, however due to breakages, the site is afforded visual prominence when viewed from the east on Old Edinburgh Road, at this point known locally as the ‘big S’. Similarly, due to differing ground levels, the site is also highly visible from the south on Glasgow Road where the dramatic incline of the southern most wedge of the site is clearly conveyed.

1.3 The site is bounded to the north by Newlands Farm, to the east by two dwellinghouses at nos. 25 & 27 Maryville View, to the south by open space adjoining Glasgow Road and beyond by the M74 motorway, and to the west by the M73 motorway.

? .4 The site itself is partly run as a caravan park, accommodating 13 caravans where the applicants have verbally advised that their clientele utilise the units on a long term residential basis. The caravans are located approximately within the centre of the site, while the remainder accommodates two houses, a large garage and rough open space. The applicant lives at 19 Maryville View which is located immediately south of the caravan park and is presented in a well maintained condition. The second house at no. 21 Maryville View, is located at the north west corner of the site and is in a derelict condition. Immediately east of this lies a large garage which is used for storage purposes. Rough open space is located sporadically through the caravan park and northern part of the site and is highly concentrated on the southern most third of the site which slopes steeply. There are two vehicular accesses to the site from Maryville View, one exclusively for the applicants’ home and the other for the caravan site.

1.5 Outline consent for one house was renewed last year (no. S/03/00863/OUT) following the lapsing of the previous consent (no. 280/93 (Outline)). The house was to be located immediately north of the caravan park and would be built for the applicants‘ son thereby allowing him to remain on site.

1.6 This current application seeks outline consent for residential development of the whole site. The applicants who live at No. 19, have submitted an indicative layout which proposes the erection of 16 detached houses taking access from Maryville View, The site would be cleared of all buildings including the applicants’ home and caravan park to make way for comprehensive re- development.

2. DeveloDmen t Plan

2.1 The application raises issues of a strategic and local nature and therefore must be considered in terms of both the Structure Plan and Local Plans for the area. The site is zoned as Green Belt and the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 (GCVJSP) Development Strategy places the protection and enhancement of natural and built heritage and environmental resources as a prerequisite, The Guiding Principles of the Plan therefore explicitly recognises the importance of environmental resources, particularly in terms of a general presumption in favour of safeguarding the quality and extent of identified environmental resources. Strategic Policies 1 & 7 of the GCVJSP require the continued designation and safeguarding of the Green Belt within which there is a presumption against the spread of built up areas and the encroachment of development into the countryside. Local Plans should define the detailed boundaries and policies to safeguard the Green Belt. Another aim central to the Plan is the improvement in the quality of life and health of local communities. Within this, among other concerns, Strategic Policy 6 identifies the need to secure sufficient housing and sufficient variety of house type and affordability to meet future housing requirements for a continuing 5 year effective land supply within housing market areas. Preference is accorded to the development of brownfield land as opposed to greenfield land to achieve these aims and to accord with the overall environmental thrust of the Plan. However, development must be assessed against the criteria set out in Strategic Policy 9 and any development failing to meet these criteria requires to be justified against the criteria in Strategic Policy 10. Among these of most note, are the assessment of the development against its contribution to promoting urban regeneration; avoiding isolated and sporadic development in the Green Belt and the wider countryside; and the assessment of the proposal against the effective housing land supply for the market area and the establishment of a clear shortfall.

2.2 The adopted Local Plan for the area is the Uddingston-Tannochside Town Map 1973 which zones the site as Agricultural Land within the Green Belt. The emerging Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) provides contemporary policy guidance and similarly zones the site as Green Belt. Policy ENV6 'Green Belt' indicates that there will be a general presumption against development in the Green Belt other than that directly associated with agriculture, forestry, generation of power from renewable resources, outdoor leisure and recreation, telecommunications or other appropriate rural uses. This policy also identifies Green Belt corridors stretching along the M73 and M74 Motorways as being of particular importance for reasons of landscape quality and for preventing the coalescence of settlements. Policy ENV5 'Assessment of Environmental Impact' provides a list of criteria that the Council will assess an application against. Criteria 1-3 are particularly relevant to this application and consider the suitability of the proposal on the character of the area in which it is set; the landscape and visual impact of the proposal; and the extent of traffic generation, noise, dust, pollution, flooding risk and interference. Policy HSGI 'Housing Strategy' indicates that the Council will direct new residential development toward brownfield sites within built up areas in preference to the release of land in greenfield locations. Finally, Policy HSG12 'Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside' provides a list of criteria which the Council will take into account in determining applications of this nature. Consideration is given to proven operational need for dwellings in this area; the visual prominence of the site; the compatibility of the design to a rural location; the incorporation of traditional design features and finishing materials; and provision for vehicular access and site drainage.

2.3 Scottish Planning Policy SPP3 'Planning for Housing' advocates a review of Green Belt boundaries but only in circumstances where there is a demonstrable requirement for additional housing in an area. The general principles are that planning has an essential role in achieving the Government's policies for housing while protecting and enhancing environmental quality.

2.4 National Planning Policy Guideline NPPG 5 'Archaeology and Planning' sets out policy context and guidelines which seek to encourage the preservation of heritage sites and landscapes of archaeological and historic interest. The primary policy objective is that such sites should be preserved wherever feasible and that, where this proves not to be possible, procedures should be put in place to ensure proper recording. It states that the preservation of ancient monuments and their setting is a material consideration in determining planning applications and appeals, whether a monument is scheduled or not.

2.5 Similarly, National Planning Policy Guideline NPPG 14 'Natural Heritage' advocates measures to conserve and enhance natural heritage assets.

3. Consultations and Rewesentations

3.1 No objections were received from the utility bodies with the exception of Scottish Water. They objected to the proposal on the grounds of providing infrastructure to allow the development to drain into the public sewerage system. This is due to the cost of providing such infrastructure being outwith Scottish Water's 'reasonable cost' obligations. However, they confirmed that they would withdraw their objection if the applicant bore the cost of the increase in capacity of existing infrastructure and/or promoted a scheme which did not compromise the quality and quantity of discharge in terms which were satisfactory to them.

3.2 SEPA, and NLC's Geotechnical Section expressed no objection to the development provided surface water would be treated in accordance with the principles of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland, and that foul drainage be connected to the public sewer. SEPA also advised that provision should be made for the storage of waste for recycling, composting etc. both within individual properties and the development as a whole.

3.3 Scottish Natural Heritage raised no objections to the proposals provided certain conditions were attached to any planning permission. These included the requirement for a wildlife survey to determine whether there were any statutorily protected species within the site; the retention of existing trees and the formation of a new shelterbelt or hedgerow around the site.

3.4 West of Scotland Archaeology Service commented that there may be remains of a Roman Road at the northern end of the site and as such, a suspensive condition should be placed on any consent requiring the location and recording of this information prior to development.

3.5 The Scottish Executive Road Network Management and Maintenance Division confirmed they had no objections to the proposal provided a suitable barrier was provided adjacent to the motorway to minimise the risk of pedestrians or animals gaining access to the motorway.

3.6 The Health & Safety Executive were consulted due to the site's proximity to a high pressure gas pipeline. They confirmed that the site was located sufficiently far away as not to raise any issues.

3.7 NLC Transportation Section raised no objections to the proposal but advised on access, turning and parking arrangements for the site which would require amendments to the submitted proposals.

3.8 NLC Protective Services made no comments on the proposal. However, NLC's Geotechnical Section advised that a comprehensive site investigation should be undertaken to assess any potential risks arising from previous site uses. In addition, the mineral stability of the site should also be assessed.

3.9 NLC Education advised that Aitkenhead Primary School was operating close to capacity and that should the development proceed, some children may require to be transported to neighbouring schools with available accommodation. They advised that secondary schools had sufficient accommodation to cope with the projected pupil increase.

3.10 NLC Community Services raised concerns over the visual prominence of the site from Glasgow Road and the potential loss of mature trees and hedgerows which create a rural setting within what is generally a green field. They commented that total development of the site for housing would be detrimental to the overall setting and rural aspect of this part of Uddingston. They did state however, that limited development located just north of the applicants' existing home at no. 19 would probably be less visually intrusive with the assistance of adequate tree planting.

3.1 1 No objections were received following neighbour notification procedures and the press advertisement. However, the applicant's agent has requested a Site Visit and Hearing.

4 PIann in FI Assessment and COn cl us i o ns

4.1 The application raises issues of a strategic and local nature and therefore must be considered in terms of both the Structure Plan and Local Plans for the area. The aims of the Structure Plan which are most relevant to the consideration of this application are the safeguarding and enhancement of environmental resources as advocated in Strategic Policies 1 & 7; and the improvement in the quality of life and health of local communities through the provision of an effective housing land supply in terms of choice, size and type of housing in each housing market area, as advocated in Strategic Policy 6. The realisation of one aim must not be at the expense of another as each aim is complementary and interrelated. The Plan requires that developments must be assessed against the criteria listed in Strategic Policies 9 and 10.

4.2 Firstly, the current operational aspects of the site will be assessed in relation to the proposal. The site lies within the Green Belt where there is a presumption against residential development. The site is occupied by a caravan park, 2 houses and outline consent has been renewed for a further third house. Taken together, approximately half the site would be in use. The caravan site has been operational since the 1960s. Such sites are commonly associated with the leisure and tourism industry where accommodation would normally be provided on a seasonal basis only. They therefore constitute in principle, an acceptable use in the Green Belt where they are commonly found. The applicants have verbally advised that the caravans are now leased on a longer term basis than purely seasonal, a system which operates outwith the control of the Planning Laws. However, regardless of the time period involved in the leasing of the caravans, they cannot be considered anything other than temporary accommodation, as it is inherent in their physical construction that they will prevail for a shorter period than a dwelling in comparative terms. I do not therefore consider that the operational aspects of the caravan park represent the establishment of a residential use comparable to that of fixed dwellings which would render the principle of residential development on this Green Belt site acceptable. With regard to the 2 existing dwellings, it is considered that a residential use has been established in these areas. However, the principle of residential re-development even in these isolated areas is only acceptable where the dwellings are of poor quality. The house at no. 21 is derelict, but the applicants' dwelling at no. 19 is in a good state of repair. Turning to the issuing of outline consent for a further third dwelling, the Council exercised a consistency of approach last year by granting permission and thus allowing the renewal of the consent which had lapsed. The house was to be occupied by the applicants' son thereby enabling him to remain on site. It was considered that the siting of one additional house on this Green Belt site would not adversely effect its character and function and it would be viewed in association with a small residential pocket of 3 houses which had developed incrementally. It was considered that the granting of permission for one house would not set a precedent for allowing more houses. Overall, I consider that the derelict dwelling and proposed third dwelling represent the only areas of the site which are acceptable in principle, for residential development. In these circumstances, the comprehensive redevelopment of the site is considered contrary to Strategic Policy 1 of the Structure Plan which seeks to safeguard the Green Belt.

4.3 Secondly, the proposal is assessed against the housing land supply to demonstrate whether there is a proven need for housing in this area. The application site lies within the Motherwell Sub-Market Housing Area (SMA) and within the Eastern Conurbation Housing Market Area (HMA). The Structure Plan states that there is an adequate supply of effective housing land to meet locally generated demands within each of the SMAs. However, the Plan anticipates a shortfall in effective land supply within the Conurbation HMAs of approximately 3,300 houses, but states that the shortfall will mainly be met by the Central Conurbation HMA. The Eastern Conurbation, of which the site forms part, will contribute to the provision of only 350 houses of the shortfall, none of which have been allocated to the Motherwell SMA. Furthermore, the site has not been included in North Lanarkshire's Interim Housing Land Statement. In these circumstances, the Structure Plan does not identify a shortfall in housing land in this area and there is thus, no demonstrable or proven operational need for housing within the Green Belt or a requirement to review the Green Belt boundary. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to the Structure Plan in terms of Strategic Policy 6(b), Policy 9 (A)(ii) and is unjustified in terms of Policy 10 (A)(ii). For these reasons, the proposal is also contrary to Local Plan policy HSG12(1) and SPP3.

4.4 Thirdly, the layout for the site submitted by the applicants to assist discussion, whilst indicative only, does not constitute a layout which would afford the development of high quality detached houses but is rather, in keeping with layouts associated with mainstream volume housebuilders. In turn, the proposal, would not assist the Council in the provision of sites which offer differing ranges of size, style or design of houses and is again, contrary to Strategic Policy 6(b), Local Plan Policies HSGl 8. HSG12(3) and SPP3.

4.5 Fourthly, it is considered that the proposal will have a detrimental effect on the function of the Green Belt area. The protection and enhancement of the Green Belt is accorded utmost importance in the Development Plan and other planning policy guidance unless there is a strong justification for its development. Paragraphs 4.2 - 4.4 above have already demonstrated that in these circumstances there is no such justification. The Green Belt designation, among other things, seeks to control the growth of built up areas and support the process of urban renewal; or prevent neighbouring towns from merging and control sporadic and isolated development; and preserve the special character of towns, including their landscape setting. The site has been defined as Green Belt on the adopted Local Plan - The Uddingston-Tannochside Town Map since 1973 and continues to be defined as such on the emerging Local Plan, the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). The Green Belt has been defended on several occasions along the M73 Corridor where applications have been refused for development. The Green Belt area within which the site is located acts as a visual and physical ‘book end’ to the settlement of Uddingston. Beyond this to the west, the Green Belt continues into the City of Glasgow area which prevents the settlements of Uddingston and Broomhouse from merging. Residential development in this area would therefore constitute isolated and sporadic development in the Green Belt in contravention of Strategic Policy 9(B)(v), Local Plan policy ENVG and NPPG14. Approval of this application and its neighbour at Roundknowe Farm Lodge would significantly prejudice the continued effectiveness and integrity of the Green Belt and would make it difficult to resist further development of similar pockets of land which could eventually result in the coalescence of Broomhouse and Uddingston.

4.6 Fifthly, it is considered that the proposal will have a detrimental effect on the character and amenity of the Green Belt. The site currently presents an attractive established natural frontage to Old Edinburgh Road and Glasgow Road through the existence of mature trees and bushes. The layout submitted does not convey whether any of this planting would be retained, however a condition could be imposed to control this matter. A condition could also easily be imposed requesting the planting of further appropriate species to fill breakages in the screen barrier to Old Edinburgh Road and thereby retain the natural views currently enjoyed from this visual aspect. However, the indicative location of the south most plots dictates that the visual intrusion of dwellings within this rural setting would be highly prominent from Glasgow Road given the vast difference in ground levels such that screen planting would be redundant in this area. Thus the strategic visual character of the site will be highly undermined. Even at a local level, the site will be visually transformed on approach from Maryville View. Whilst there is currently a large garage and derelict dwelling close to the entrance to the site, these simply punctuate the vast areas of open space characterised by rough scrubland and planting which largely shield the caravan site and applicants‘ home located further south. Admittedly, the site entrance would benefit from some weed control and a general tidy up, nevertheless even the unkempt nature of the site is somewhat visually subsumed within the natural backdrop within which it forms part. The dense, regimented land form presented by the indicative layout will therefore remove the spacious open and natural aspects of the site which are currently enjoyed in complement with the surrounding area and which are characteristic of the Green Belt. The proposal is therefore considered to have an adverse impact on the character and amenity of the Green Belt in contravention of Strategic Policy 9(B)(ii)(b) and 1O(B)(iii)(a), Local Plan Policy ENV5(1,2) & ENVG and NPPG14.

4.7 Finally, turning to the concerns raised by statutory consultees, these have mostly been dealt with above. However, there are some outstanding matters which require to be addressed which represent more detailed aspects of the development. These deal with traffic and access; public safety; flooding, pollution, contamination and potential archaeological remains. The main objective of outline consent is to establish the principle of development. If this is agreed, then the more complex detailed aspects of a proposal which are required to render a development acceptable, must be resolved during the negotiation of a reserved matters application. The outstanding matters noted above fall into this latter category, and whilst it is beneficial to be forewarned of potential issues, I am satisfied that these issues need not be addressed in the negotiation of this outline application, but nevertheless note their content. Had there been a favourable recommendation, these issues would have been pursued further at this stage simply as a precursor to expedite determination of the reserved matters application and some issues may have been accorded appropriate weight through the imposition of planning conditions.

4.8 The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, Section 25 requires the application to be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In conclusion, it is considered that the development constitutes a significant departure from the development plan and if approved, would significantly prejudice the continued effectiveness and integrity of the Green Belt. It would also make it difficult to resist further development of similar pockets of land in this area. I therefore recommend that this application be refused. Application No: S104/00269/FUL

Date Registered: 26th February 2004

Applicant: Mr & Mrs Freeman 17 McCallum Gardens Bellshill Lanarkshire ML4 2SR

Agent John S Angus Associates Raymond Angus The Building Design Centre 125 Muir Street Hamilton

Development: Two-Storey Side and Rear Extension to Dwellinghouse

Location: 17 McCallum Gardens Bellshill Lanarkshire ML4 2SR

Ward: 25: Orbiston Councillor Richard Lyle

Grid Reference: 273005.658888

File Reference: SIP LIBl71891LR

Site History: No relevant site history

Development Plan: The site lies within an area covered by residential policies in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004).

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: 2 Representation Letters

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

This planning application seeks planning permission for the erection of a two storey side and rear extension to a semi-detached dwellinghouse. Two letters of representation have been received from neighbouring properties in connection with the proposal, details of which are outlined in my report. Having taken into account all material considerations, including the letters of representation, I recommend that consent be granted subject to the attached conditions.

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started within five years of the date of this permission PLANNING APPLICATION NO: S/04/00269/FUL Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

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

Reason: To ensure that the extension matches the external appearance of the existing adjoining dwellinghouse.

3. That the first 2 metres of the existing driveway shall be surfaced across its full width.

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

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 20th February 2004

Memo from NLC Transportation Section received 2"d March 2004

Letter from Mr Peter Craig, 13 McCallum Gardens, Bellshill, ML4 2SR received 26th January 2004. Letter from Mr & Mrs Pick, 15 McCallum Gardens, Bellshill, ML4 2SR received 2nd March 2004.

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

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Lorna Ramsey at 01698 302136. APPLICATION NO. S/04/00269/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The application site is a semi-detached dwellinghouse bounded by dwellinghouses to the front and sides and open space to the rear.

1.2 The applicant is seeking planning permission for the erection of a two storey side and rear extension to the dwellinghouse. The extension as proposed will run the full width of the site projecting 4 metres from the rear building line, and measuring 7.5 metres in width and 6.6 metres in height.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The application raises no strategic issues and therefore the Development Plan is established through the Local Plan.

2.2 Within the Southern Area Local Plan the site is within an Established Housing Area and is covered by Policy HSG 8 which seeks to protect the established character of the existing housing areas.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 NLC Transportation Section have no objections provided that:

e a minimum of 6 metres should be provided from the rear of the footway on McCallum Gardens to the garage; and e the first 2 metres (minimum) of the existing driveway should be surfaced across its full width.

3.2 Two letters of representation have been received from neighbouring properties in relation to this application. The representations are on the following grounds:

Rear part of extension would over-shadow and block out sunlight to the internal rooms and back gardens of adjoining properties. Extension would block the open views to the west enjoyed by neighbouring properties. Value of neighbouring properties reduced due to the impact of the extension upon them. Development would reduce garden space to an unacceptable level resulting in over- development of the site. Sets an undesirable precedent that could encourage similar applications, therefore having a detrimental impact on the appearance and amenity of the area. Due to the size, scale and design of the proposal it would be out of character with the surrounding houses, and would be an obtrusive form of development in respect of the existing streetscape. No permission has been sought to erect scaffolding in the neighbouring property’s garden. The proposal would intensify vehicular use of a substandard access to the detriment of traffic and public safety as the vehicles owned by the applicants could no longer be parked in the driveway and are too large to be kept in the proposed garage. Off-street parking would therefore create an unsafe situation as the house is on a bend in the road. 4. Planninq Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 In assessing this application it is necessary to ensure that the proposed development does not adversely affect the amenity of the area or its established character.

4.2 On the grounds of the objection received, the following response is made in connection with the points noted in paragraph 3.2 above: -

It is considered that the shading from the proposed extension is minimal and will not have an adverse effect on the neighbouring properties. The sunlight and daylight test was carried out to assess the impact on neighbouring properties. The results showed that although the extension will reduce both the sunlight and daylight to the kitchen windows of the properties on either side of the application site, they will still receive more than the minimum standards recommended. This is not a material planning consideration. This is not a material planning consideration. With the extension, the property will still have a garden measuring over 9 metres in length and a total area of approximately 70 square metres. This is an acceptable amount of garden space and it is considered that the proposal would not be over- development of the site. Each application must be assessed on its own merits and therefore future developments in the area, which may or may not take place, cannot influence the decision-making process. As only the side extension will be seen from the road, and as the extension as a whole is acceptable in terms of design and scale then it is considered that the extension will not have a detrimental impact on the appearance or on amenity of the area. Although the extension is large, its scale and design is in keeping with that of the original house and adequate garden ground will be retained at the rear of the dwelling. As mentioned in point (v) above, only the side part of the extension will be seen fully from the road and as it is set back slightly from the front building line and has a lower roof line than the original house it is considered that the extension will not have a detrimental impact on the streetscape This is a private matter between the applicant and their neighbour and therefore is not a material planning consideration. The proposal includes a garage and driveway of sufficient size to provide 2 off-street parking spaces. As the applicant has submitted amended drawings to increase the length of the driveway to the necessary 6 metres, and as the Transportation Section have no objections to the proposal then it is considered that there is no issue with road safety. The design of the proposal meets the necessary parking requirements and therefore the type of vehicle owned by the applicant is not a consideration.

4.3 In conclusion I consider the design, scale and material to be acceptable and do not consider that the objections raised via the representations are sufficient to justify refusing the proposal. Taking the above into account it is recommended that permission is granted subject to the attached conditions. Application No: S/O4/00300/FUL

Date Registered: 9th March 2004

Applicant : Mitchells & Butlers Retail Ltd. Clo Agent

Agent The JTS Partnership F.A.O. Mr N Davey Barnard House The Drive, Great Warley Brentwood Essex, CM13 3DJ

Development : Conversion of Existing Play Barn Attached to Public House and Erection of New Extension to Form Twenty-Eight Bedroom Ancillary Hotel

Location: Strathclyde Park Inn Strathclyde Park Hamilton Road Motherwell Lanarkshire

Ward: 25: Orbiston Councillor Richard Lyle

Grid Reference: 271 542 658431

File Reference: SlPLIBI7ll OOlPW

Site History: Planning Application 65/95 Erection of Restaurant and Provision of Landscaping and Carparking - Approved 25.05.95

Development Plan: Zoned within the Greenbelt (Policy ENV 6) in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) Policy L 8 (Strathclyde Country Park) also relevant

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: Scottish Executive Development (No Objections) Department Trunk Roads Amey Highways Ltd (No Response) S.E.P.A.(West) (No Response) Scottish Water (No Objections) British Gas Transco (No Objections) Scottish Power (No Objections) The Coal Authority (No Objections) Strathclyde Fire Brigade (No Response) Scottish Natural Heritage (No Objections)

Representations: None Received

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 17th March 2004

Comments:

This application seeks permission for the conversion of an existing 'play barn' and erection of a two- PLANNING APPLICATION NO: S/O4/0030OFUL

CONVERSION OF EXISTING PLAY BARN ATTACHED TO PUBLIC HOUSE AND Reduced by Fbnningmd Ewimnmnt ERECTION OF NEW EXTENSION TO FORM H..dqu".n PI".IO< hmnl bus. TWENTY-EIGHT BEDROOM ANCILLARY I TW* Red WMBWMUW F.PgY* nomlh Orerr. JYh? memm wIh M2368182<0G81

No objections have been received as a result of neighbour notification. However, the Councils Director of Community Services has expressed concern over the prominent nature of the proposed building adjacent to the planted buffer with the interchange. Scottish Natural Heritage has also expressed concern over the 'urbanisation' of the park inherent in the proposal.

It is considered that the prominence of the building could be overcome by changes to the proposed design. However, the proposal is considered to be unacceptable in terms of parking, with only 97 spaces available when 141 would be required. There is no scope to provide additional spaces or to reduce the size of the development to relate to existing spaces as the current parking provision is sub- standard. It is therefore recommended that this application is refused on road safety grounds at it would lead to a 50% underprovision of carparking.

Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reason:-

1. That the existing parking provision on the site would be 44 spaces short of what is required by council standards for the restauranffpublic house and the proposed ancillary 28 bedroom hotel and as such, parking provision would be sub-standard and unsatisfactory, contrary to Policy TR 13 in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) and would encourage informal roadside parking to the detriment of road safety and the amenity of the Country Park.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 3rd March 2004

Letters from agent, JTS Partnership dated 2nd March 2004 and 20th April 2004 Letter from S.E.P.A. (West) received 26'h April 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received 7th April 2004 Letter from British Gas Transco received 17th March 2004 Letter from Scottish Power received 17th March 2004 Letter from The Coal Authority received 19th March 2004 Letter from Strathclyde Fire Brigade received Memo from NLC Community Services received 24th March 2004 Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 5th April 2004

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

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Paul Williams at 01698 302091. APPLICATION NO. S/O4/00300/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I This application seeks consent for the erection of an extension and conversion of the existing childrens' play facility to form a 28 bedroom hotel ancillary to the existing licensed restaurant use.

1.2 The application site lies at the northwestern corner of Strathclyde Country Park and lies adjacent to the Raith Interchange and south-bound slipway from the A725 onto the M74. It consists of the existing internal childrens' soft play facility and the external grassed play garden where the applicant intends to build the proposed extension.

1.3 The proposed extension is formed over 2 storeys and has a traditional dual pitched roof and elevational detailing to match the existing building. The applicant intends to provide 21 double/family or twin rooms within the proposed extension and 5 double/family rooms and 2 disabled rooms within that part of the building currently taken up with the internal soft play area.

2. DeveloDment Plan

2.1 The site is zoned within the Greenbelt (Policy ENV 6) in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). This policy seeks to safeguard the character and function of the Green Belt by presuming against development which is not directly associated with or required for agriculture, forestry, the generation of power from renewable resources, outdoor leisure and recreation, telecommunications or other appropriate rural uses. Policy TR 13 Assessing the Transport Implications of Development is also relevant in the assessment of the application.

2.2 Policy L 8 also specifically relates to Strathclyde Country Park. It states that the Council will continue to maintain and further enhance facilities within the park consistent with the Park Development Strategy and other relevant policies in the local plan. It further states that the provision of new facilities will require to have particular regard to the following policies :-

e L 2 Leisure Development ENV 6 Green Belt ENV 13 Biodiversity e ENV 14 Nature Conservation Sites (not relevant in this case)

2.3 The Park Development Strategy, which is formally adopted by the Council, seeks to promote outdoor recreation, nature conservation, historical awareness and venue promotion. It does recognise the existing commercial activities present within the park, which occupy less than 2.5% of the total 450 Hectares within the site. The strategy states that significant opportunities for the provision of additional facilities remain in the park provided that they do not adversely affect the essential character and environment of the site.

3. Consultations and Rewesentations

3.1 No objections have been received as a result of the neighbour notification and consultation process.

3.2 The Council's Director of Community Services has expressed concern about the visual impact that the proposed extension could have on this part of the park and its relationship to the adjacent interchange and the prominent entrance to the park. Concerns have also been expressed on the impact of the proposal on local biodiversity.

3.3 Furthermore, the Transportation Team Leader of my department has recommended that the application be refused on road safety grounds as the resultant licenced restaurantlhotel business would require a minimum of 141 car spaces and only 97 exist with no proposals to increase parking provision.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 It is considered that the principle of the proposed development is acceptable in the context of the existing business and site and in terms of the Park Development Strategy and the other related local plan policies. This is because the application site is self contained and as such, the proposed extension does not take up existing open parkland.

4.2 It is considered that the concerns over the prominence and design of the extension could be met with appropriate amended design. In this regard, the applicant has submitted a revised design which is more in-keeping with the existing building and attempts to resolve these issues. Similarly, concerns over biodiversity could be alleviated by conditioning tree retention where possible.

4.3 However, the overriding issue relating to the proposal is considered to be the underprovision of parking spaces in terms of current council standards. The applicant has proposed no additional parking provision for the site but has submitted a supporting letter stating that the 'play barn' use and the proposed use would generate similar levels of parking and that the existing parking provision is adequate, However, it is considered that the proposed hotel use will generate significantly more traffic than the previous 'play barn' use. It is considered that the 'play barn' use operated as a complementary facility to the restaurant. However, it is considered that the hotel will generate traffic which is distinct from and in addition to the existing levels of restaurant generated traffic.

4.4 Policy TR 13 assesses the traffic implications of development in terms of traffic generation, parking provision and the scope to integrate the development with public transport. It is considered that the site is primarily accessed by car with little scope for public transport integration. Furthermore, it is considered that the proposal will generate significant levels of additional traffic with inadequate parking provision. As such, the proposal is considered to be contrary to the aims of Policy TR 13.

4.5 If approved, the development would result in a 50% underprovision of parking within the site in terms of council standards. It is considered that this underprovision would lead to informal roadside parking to the detriment of road safety and the amenity of the park. This is considered particularly critical given the site's proximity at the entrance to the Park and close to the busy Raith Interchange. The application is therefore recommended for refusal. Application No: S/04/0039 1/FUL

Date Registered: 15th March 2004

Applicant : Mr & Mrs Guilley 11 Triton Place Bellshill ML4 IJN

Agent James Baird Associates 153 Union Street Larkhall ML9 1EB

Development: Erection Of Conservatory

Location: 11 Triton Place Bellshill Lanarkshire ML4 1JN

Ward: 28: Mossend East And New Stevenston North Councillor Kevin McKeown

Grid Reference: 275523.660261.

File Reference: SIP LIB/5/7411LR

Site History: No relevant site history

Development Plan: The site lies within an area covered by residential policies in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004).

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: 1 Representation Letter from 2 neighbours

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

This planning application seeks retrospective planning permission for the erection of a rear conservatory extension to a detached dwellinghouse. One joint letter of representation has been received from two of the neighbouring properties in connection with the proposal, details of which are outlined in my report. Having taken into account all material considerations including the letter of representation, I recommend that consent be granted.

Recommendation: Grant PLANNING APPLICATION NO: S/04/00391/FUL

ERECTION OF CONSERVATORY

11 TRITON PLACE, BELLSHILL * Representatim Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 15th March 2004

Letter from M H & J McK Lennox,l2 Orion Place, and P McLoskey, 10 Orion Place, Bellshill, ML4 1JJ received 18th March 2004.

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

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Lorna Ramsey at 01 698 3021 36 AP P LICAT10 N N0. S/04/00391IF U L

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The application site is a detached dwellinghouse bounded by dwellinghouses on all sides.

1.2 The applicant is seeking retrospective planning permission for the erection of a rear conservatory extension. The conservatory projects 5.5 metres from the rear building line, and will measure 6.7 metres in width and 3.5 metres in height. The extension is finished with facing brick on the base wall to match the existing dwelling.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The application raises no strategic issues and therefore the Development Plan is established through the Local Plan.

2.2 Within the Southern Area Local Plan the site is within an Established Housing Area and is covered by Policy HSG 8 which seeks to protect the established character of the existing housing areas.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 One letter of representation has been received from two of the adjoining properties in relation to this application. The representations are on the following grounds: 3.2 (i) That the notification was dated 26th February 2004, and it was received after the 14 day period of legally acceptable objections had expired.

(ii) That the conservatory has already been built, and that “no previous communication was received.. . about planning intentions”.

(iii) That the size of the conservatory is not in-keeping with the surrounding houses and their conservatories.

(iv) That the conservatory is located underneath two upstairs windows which, in the event of a fire, would mean that those escaping from these upstairs windows would have to jump onto the glass roof of the conservatory.

(v) Views of the conservatory are unavoidable, particularly from number 10 Orion Place whose direct view is of the conservatory and two huts.

(vi) Concerns over style and colour of conservatory not being in keeping with surrounding properties. Views of the conservatory from surrounding properties could affect their resale value.

(vii) That the property concerned is already a large dwelling.

4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 On detailed assessment of the application it is considered that the material considerations are its impact on the amenity of the surrounding area and the established character of the area. 4.2 On the grounds of the objections received, the following response is made:-

The concern relating to timescale, while understandable has not been an issue as the objectors have been able to make representations to the application on a number of occasions.

Although it is unfortunate that the conservatory was built prior to planning permission being granted, the applicants have since made an application in retrospect which is being assessed in the usual manner.

The property concerned is a large detached dwelling that is bigger than most of the surrounding houses, and it is located on a larger than average plot in comparison to those around it. Even with the extension sufficient garden ground will be maintained to the rear. It is therefore considered that the conservatory is in-keeping with the scale of the property and the site upon which it sits.

This is not a planning consideration, but will be assessed as part of the Building Warrant application.

Although the conservatory can be seen by some of adjoining properties, it is considered that over-looking will not be an issue as there is some screening around the boundary of the property and there remains 19 metres between the existing development and the new conservatory.

The style of the conservatory is considered to be in-keeping with the style of the attached dwelling, and although the colour of the frame does not match exactly that of the existing dwelling this is not an adequate reason for refusal. As the conservatory is located to the rear of the property and only a very small part of it can be seen from the road I would not expect the visual impact of the conservatory to adversely affect the property values of neighbouring houses.

(vii) It is agreed that the property concerned is already a large dwelling, but as mentioned in point (iii) above, it is considered that the conservatory sits comfortably within the large site and is in-keeping with the scale of the original house.

4.3 While the concerns of the neighbours relating to the size and appearance of the development are understandable they do not merit refusing the application. The proposed conservatory is considered acceptable in terms of design, scale and materials and will fit in with the existing character of the area. I therefore recommend that permission be granted. Application No: SIO4100422IFU L

Date Registered: 22nd March 2004

Applicant : 02 (UK) Ltd. 260 Bath Road Slough SL1 4DX

Agent Graeme F Smart Walker Fraser & Steele 125 Buchanan Street G1 2JF

Development: Installation of 6 Additional Antennas, 2 Transmission Dishes and Associated Ground Based Equipment

Location: Land At Braidhurst Industrial Estate Newhut Road Motherwell Lanarkshire

Ward: 3: Forgewood Councillor Patrick Connelly

Grid Reference: 274762657957

File Reference: SIPLIBII 311 6/PW

Site History: SIO2IOO342IFUL Erection of 25 metre Tower, 15 Antennas and 8 dishes on behalf of Orange, Hutchison and BT Cellnet

Development Plan: The site is zoned within Operational Railway Land in both the Motherwell and Wishaw Development Plan 1953 and the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004)

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: The Radio Communications Agency (No Response)

Representations: 1 Representation Letter

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

This application seeks consent for the installation of six additional antennas and two additional transmission dishes on behalf of 02 UK Ltd onto an existing telecommunications tower including associated ground based equipment at Newhut Road, Motherwell. The site is located to the southwest corner of the EWS Railway compound. The immediate surrounding area is predominately industrialIcommerciaI, with housing to the adjacent south, fronting Bellshill Road. The nearest school building is approximately 240 metres to the north. The existing tower is 25 metres high and accommodates 15 antennas and 7 microwave dishes, all of which received Planning Permission on the 5th of June 2002. These antennas and dishes are operated by three different users, namely Orange, Hutchison and BT Cellnet. This current proposal is therefore intended to expand an existing site share facility as recommended by government guidance. A letter of objection has been received from Forgewood Community Council on Health grounds, proximity to Braidhurst Secondary School, visual PLANNING APPLICATION NO: S/04/00422/FUL amenity and detrimental effect on house prices. However, the proposal is considered to be acceptable for the reasons contained in the accompanying report and as such, is recommended for approval subject to the application of 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 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 the reinstatement of the site to a satisfactory standard.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 22nd March 2004

Letter from Walker Fraser Steele, application agents dated 18th March 2004 enclosing the I.C.N.R.P. Declaration. Letter from Forgewood Community Council, 10 Talisman Crescent, Woodville Rise, Motherwell, ML1 3YB received 8th April 2004.

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

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Paul Williams at 01698 302091. APPLICATION NO. S1041004221FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and ProDosal

1.I This application seeks consent for the installation of 6 antennas and 2 transmission dishes on an existing 25 metre high lattice telecommunications tower at English Welsh and Scottish railway yard, Newhut Road Motherwell.

1.2 The site is located to the south west corner of the EWS Railway compound, adjacent to Caledonian House and associated car parking area. To the north west of the site is Braidhurst Industrial Estate. The immediate surrounding area is predominately industriallcommercial, with housing to the adjacent south, fronting Bellshill Road. This housing comprises a small block of flats. The main housing area is located approximately 110 metres to the northwest, the nearest school building is approximately 240 metres to the north, with the playing fields approximately 80 metres away.

1.3 The existing tower currently accommodates 15 antennas and 7 microwave dishes, all of which received Planning Permission on the 5th of June 2002. These antennas and dishes are operated by three different users, namely Orange, Hutchison and BT Cellnet.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site is zoned within Operational Railway Land in both the Motherwell and Wishaw Development Plan 1953 and the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004).

2.2 The most relevant Policy relating to the proposal is Policy CS 6 within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). This policy states that the Council will take a precautionary approach to telecommunications development and will seek to locate them in industrial or commercial areas away from residential or other sensitive uses.

2.3 The policy also requires the submission of an I.C.N.R.P. (International Commission on Non- Ionising Radiation Protection) Declaration, which states that a proposal is within internationally recognised limits in terms of radio wave emissions and public health. The policy also states that such proposals within the vicinity of schools will be rigorously assessed by the Council in terms of their effects on the surrounding area and its inhabitants and in the light of other possible sites. It further states that the Council will encourage mast sharing and site sharing amongst telecommunications operators where it represents the best environmental solution.

3. Con su Itat ions and Representations

3.1 A letter of objection has been received from Forgewood Community Council on Health grounds, proximity to Braidhurst Secondary School, visual amenity and detrimental effect on house prices.

3.2 Ofcom, the advisory body for such developments has offered no observations on the proposal. 4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The application has to be assessed in the light of Policy CS 6, National Planning Policy Guideline 19 on Telecommunications Development (N.P.P.G.19) and Planning Advise Note 62, (PAN 62) which deals with the visual impact of such proposals.

4.2 It is considered that the proposal will have no impact in visual terms, as the proposal is to install equipment on an existing 25 metre high tower that already accommodates 15 antennas and 7 dishes.

4.3 Policy CS 6 states that a precautionary approach should be taken which would include an alternative sites survey and an I.C.N.I.R.P. Declaration stating that the proposal is within accepted international limits in terms of public health. Planning Permission for the mast in question was granted on the 5th of June 2002 as the proposal at the time included site sharing by three separate operators. This is in accordance with policy CS 6, which encourages site sharing. It is therefore considered that the principle of site sharing within the site has already been established and overrides the necessity for an alternative site survey.

4.4 It is therefore considered that the application complies with policy CS 6 in the relevant local plan as well as N.P.P.G. 19 and Pan 62. This is because it is considered that visual impact will be insignificant and the necessary I.C.N.I.R.P. Declaration regarding levels of emissions has been provided.

4.5 The objection from Forgewood Community Council in terms visual impact and health grounds is therefore not considered to be significantly material to the consideration of the application. The objection on the grounds of reducing property values is not a material planning consideration.

4.6 This application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the application of the appropriate conditions. Application No: S/04/00423/FUL

Date Registered: 23rd March 2004

Applicant : Alex McClair 87 Drygate Street Larkhall M L9

Agent W.H. Dickie 77 Hamilton Road Motherwell MLI 3YG

Development: Change of Use from Industry to Swimming Studio

Location: Unit 19 Motherwell Business Centre Coursington Road Motherwell Lanarkshire MLI 1 PW

Ward: 2: Calder Valley Councillor An nita McAuley

Grid Reference: 275619.657122.

File Reference: S/PL/B/l2/12/PW

Site History: Non Relevant

Development Plan: Zoned within Policy IND 8 Established Industrial Area and Policy L 2 Leisure Development is also relevant on the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004).

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: Director Of Education (No Response) S.E.P.A.(West) (No Response) Scottish Water (No Objection) SportScotland (Com ments)

Representations: None Received

Newspaper Advertisement: 1st April 2004

Comments:

This application seeks consent for the change of use from Industry to Swimming Studio at Unit 19, Motherwell Business Centre, Coursington Road, Motherwell. The applicant proposes to convert the unit which comprises half of a steel portal frame shed for use as a private swimming studio to teach children who are beginning to learn to swim. The other half of the shed is occupied by an automotive mechanic's business, all other surrounding uses are industrial/commerciaI reflecting the Industrial zoning of the site. It is considered that the proposed use although leisure in nature, is a quasi-business use and therefore broadly complies with the local plan zoning which seeks to attract industrial, storage and distribution and business uses to the location in order to safeguard the vitality and viability of the business centre. Additionally, there are some concerns in terms of pedestrian road safety as the proposal will attract pedestrian access movement through a confined and busy industrial/commerciaI parking and access yard. However, other similar uses operate within the site and it is therefore PLANNING APPLICATION No. S / 04 / 00423 / FUL rkshire CHANGE OF USE FROM INDUSTRY TO ccuntll SWIMMING STUDIO A 'uwlr., lrrrnlt. 0rbl.T. S"w*m~pwrl" n F."",",W I m CWnYdlld t.iU,llll UNIT 19. MOTHERWELL BUSINESS CENTRE, SUav m,o. .C,P".W4l"*hl ih.Yb.l.dlg.d"IYin IrnIW., SrP" iW'CD0, COURSINGTON ROAD.MOTHERWELL. d m*l-dIo~D.~"YW WCIlll C"dlnr considered that the application should be granted a temporary consent of two years in order for the operation of the use to be monitored. This application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the following conditions.

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1. That the permission hereby granted is for a temporary period only and shall expire 2 years from the date of his consent.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control in that the impact of the proposal especially in respect of pedestrian movements can be monitored and assessed during the duration of the period of the consent.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 23rd March 2004

Letter from applicant enclosing technical information received 12th May 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received 13th April 2004 Letter from SportScotland received 26th April 2004

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

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Paul Williams at 01698 302091. APPLICATION NO. S/04/00423/FUL

REPORT

1. DescriDtion of Site and Proposal

1.I This application seeks consent for the Change of Use of an industrial unit to a private swimming studio intended for the use of children beginning to learn to swim at Unit 19, Motherwell Business Park, Coursington Road, Motherwell.

1.2 The application site is an industrial unit which forms part of a steel portal framed and clad building which is also shared by an automotive mechanic’s business in a separate unit. The site is surrounded by numerous industrial or commercial uses and is accessed from Coursington Road. To the north of the site across Coursington Road lies a public carpark and the presbytery of Motherwell Cathedral.

1.3 The applicant intends to convert the unit internally by providing a 5.5 metre diameter beginners training tank and changing and toilet facilities. The applicant has also provided for information purposes, details of the proposed hours of operation, staffing and technical details regarding the heating, filtering and disinfecting of the water involved. The proposed hours of operation are noon to 9.30pm Monday to Friday and noon to 4pm at weekends. The applicant envisages a level of 3 staff and approximately 6 customers at any one session. The unit has no dedicated parking spaces within the yard of the business centre and there is no separate access footway within the yard, which is wholly made up of vehicular access, manoeuvring and parking hardstanding.

2. Develo Dment Plan

2.1 The site is zoned within Policy IND 8, an Established Industrial Area in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). This policy states that the Council will seek to retain the existing character of Established Industrial and Business Areas by safeguarding existing uses and supporting the development of General Industrial, Distribution, storage or Class 4 Business Uses where appropriate.

3. Co nsuI tations and ReDresen tat ions

3.1 No objections have been received as a result of Neighbour Notification or from the advertisement in the Motherwell Times.

3.2 No objections have been received from Scottish Water and SportsScotland. However, the Transportation Team Leader of my Department has recommended that the application be refused. This recommendation is based on the fact that there is no footpath link within the yard, which would lead to children walking in a busy industrial yard to the detriment of their safety. Additionally, there is no possibility of providing the three dedicated parking spaces required in terms of Council standards.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The application should be assessed in the light of Policies IND 8, IND 10 and L 2 in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004), along with any material considerations. It is considered that the proposed use is broadly compliant with Policy IND 8 as the proposal although leisure in nature, is considered to be a quasi-business use and therefore falls within one of the preferred categories of business stipulated within the policy. 4.2 Policies L 2 and IND 10,relating to leisure development and non-industrial development within industrial areas set out inter-related criteria for assessment. The proposal is considered to be broadly compliant with both Policies L 2 and IND 10.

4.3 Some concern has been expressed in road safety terms, as the proposal will lead to children and possible adult accompaniment walking through an industrial parking area with no separate footpath and with no prospect of the three required dedicated parking spaces. The applicant has pointed to the fact that Unit 5 is currently occupied by a martial arts school and Unit 28 by a gymnasium. Furthermore, there is a public car park directly opposite the application site.

4.4 In these circumstances and in the context of the Local Plan, it is considered appropriate to recommend this application for approval for a temporary period of two years in order to allow the proposed use to be monitored. Application No: S/04/00432/0UT

Date Registered: 22nd March 2004

Applicant: Mr & Mrs R Martin Roundknowe Farm Lodge Roundknowe Road Uddingston Glasgow

Agent J & E Shepard 18 Castle Street Dumfries DGI IDR

Development: Residential Development in Outline

Location: Land At Roundknowe Farm Lodge Roundknowe Road Uddingston Glasgow

Ward: 21 : Tannochside Councillor David Saunders

Grid Reference: 268382662244

File Reference: SIPLIB/9171IJD

Site History: Erection of dwellinghouse - Refused 3 October 1990, application 199/90 Outline. Appeal Dismissed 1 October 1991.

Erection of dwellinghouse - Refused 1 June 1994, application 142/94 Outline. Appeal Dismissed 18 May 1995.

Residential development in outline - Refused 29 July 2003, application S/03/00091/OUT.

Development Plan: Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 - zoned as Green Belt;

Uddingston - Tanonchside Town Map 1973 - zoned as Agricultural Land and Green Belt; and

Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) - zoned as Green Belt.

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: Amey Highways Ltd (comments) Scottish Natural Heritage (comments) S. E.P.A. (West) (commen ts) Scottish Water (comments) British Gas Transco (comments) Scottish Power (no objection) PLANNING APPLICATION No. S / 04 / 00432 / OUT RESlDENTiAL DEVELOPMENT ( IN OUTLINE ) L:%hkshire &I*,"' COUltll LAND AT ROUNDKNOWE FARM LODGE,

ROUNDKNOWE ROAD, UDDINGSTON. IUC~UI,,~mlhOrblrr.S"*rimqp'.rlh V.p"la,mdV.Con"dlrd tsrk,.,,?', EvllaN mc. 5SW"~WsllIlhl Representations Site Area = 3.58 ha. UI.Ym"l.dr9"dui"a ,*himscmn I9x'Iphl * I ~^41~*1."~.~,,1,-~1,",,1"11,11 The Coal Authority (no objection) Central Scotland Forest Trust (no objection) NLC Community Services (comments) NLC Education (comments)

Representations: 3 Representation Letters

Newspaper Advertisement: 1st April 2004

Comments:

Outline consent is sought for residential development of approx. 3.5 hectares of land at Roundknowe Farm, Roundknowe Road, Uddingston. A similar application was refused last year (no. S/03/00091/0UT) for an indicative layout of 61 detached houses. This current application proposes the development of 55 houses within the same site area. The site is zoned as Green Belt on the Development Plan and as such there is a general presumption against development unless it is associated with agriculture, forestry, outdoor leisure and recreation, telecommunications, the generation of power from renewable resources or other appropriate rural uses.

The development fulfils none of these criteria, but the applicants have contended in these 2 applications its general acceptability in terms of its assistance in addressing a deficit in housing land supply as defined in the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 and the fact that the site contributes little to the Green Belt. Whilst the structure plan notes a deficit in housing land, it does not require a contribution from the Motherwell sub market area of which the site forms part. There is therefore, no justification for this development which constitutes a significant departure from the structure plan. Furthermore, it is contended that the site plays an important integral role of the Green Belt by separating North Lanarkshire from Glasgow.

A similar proposal of albeit a lesser scale is also under consideration at this meeting (no. S/04/00130/0UT) for residential development within the Green Belt on an adjacent site opposite the M73/M74 motorway at 19-23 Maryville View. Both sites play a cumulatively important role in retaining the identity of North Lanarkshire and specifically Uddingston as a distinct settlement from Glasgow. If these applications were granted, they would set a dangerous precedent and would make it difficult to resist similar proposals which could establish a coalescence with Glasgow. I therefore recommend that planning permission be refused.

It should be noted that the applicants have requested that a site visit and hearing be undertaken before this application is determined.

Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. The proposal is contrary to the aims of Strategic Policy 9 - Assessment of Development Proposals of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000, which seeks to promote urban regeneration by safeguarding the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Green Belt, through directing development, where a need has been established, to appropriate locations. The proposal fails to meet several of the criteria set down in this policy. As such the development would not be appropriate in terms of the requirement to safeguard the Green Belt and would introduce isolated and sporadic development of significant scale (as detailed in Schedule 9) in the Green Belt.

2. The proposal is contrary to Strategic Policy 10 of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000, as the applicant has not demonstrated that the development is a justifiable departure from the plan, in terms of criteria Aii, AV, Bii and Biii of Strategic Policy 10, as the applicant has failed to satisfactorily demonstrate that the proposal fulfils a short fall in housing land supply or a specific locational need; or would result in social and environmental benefits to the area, which would outweigh the inappropriateness of the development in the Green Belt location.

3. The proposal is contrary to Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004), policies ENV5 and ENV6 which seek to safeguard the character and function of the Green Belt. The development would constitute isolated and sporadic development in the Green Belt which would undermine its effectiveness and integrity in separating the settlements of Uddingston and Broomhouse and would introduce development which would be out of keeping with the spacious natural aspects of the Green Belt to the detriment of its character and amenity.

4. The proposal is contrary to the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004), policies HSGI and HSG12 as it constitutes predominantly, the development of greenfield land as opposed to brownfield land and fails to demonstrate an operational need for housing within the Green Belt area.

5. The proposal is contrary to Government guidance SPP3 and NPPG14 which both seek to protect and enhance environmental assets such as the Green Belt where there is no proven need for development which may outweigh this protection. The applicants have failed to demonstrate a shortfall in housing land supply or a specific locational need for housing in the Green Belt, or that the development would result in social and environmental benefits to the area.

6. The proposed development would be detrimental to road and pedestrian safety in that a satisfactory road and footpaths cannot be provided along Roundknowe Road between the site and Hamilton Road.

NOTE TO COMMITTEE

If granted, this application will have to be notified to the Scottish Ministers in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 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 22nd March 2004

Letters from agent dated 22nd January 2003, 24th January 2003, 14th February 2003, 5th March 2003, 16th May 2003,28th May 2003, 10th June 2003 and 12th March 2004

Memo from NLC Transportation Section received 6th April 2004 Memo from NLC Geotechnical Team received 6th April 2004 Memo from NLC Protective Services received 27th April 2004 Letter from Amey Highways Ltd received 20th April 2004 Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 8th April 2004 Letter from S.E.P.A. (West) received 16th April 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received 7th April 2004 Letter from British Gas Transco received 2nd April 2004 Letter from Scottish Power received 2nd April 2004 Letter from The Coal Authority received 5th April 2004 Letter from Central Scotland Forest Trust received 23rd April 2004 Memo from NLC Community Services received 30th April 2004 Memo from NLC Education received 7th April 2004 The Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) Uddingston Tannochside Town Map 1973 Glasgow City Plan Finalised Draft 2001 S.P.P.3: Planning for Housing NPPG5: Archaeology and Planning NPPGl4: Natural Heritage PAN 42: Archaeology

Letter from Seamus McGuigan, Calderbraes Golf Club, Roundknowe Road, Uddingston received 14th April 2004. Letter from Margaret A Miller (Secretary), Uddingston Community Council, 7 Brooklands Avenue, Uddingston, G71 7AT received 21st April 2004. Letter from Grant Downie, Roundknowe Farm, Roundknowe Road, Uddingston, G71 7TS received 21 st May 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Joanne Delaney at 01698 302137. APPLICATION NO. S10410043210UT

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.1 Outline consent is sought for residential development on land adjacent to Roundknowe Lodge Farm, Roundknowe Road, Uddingston. The applicants, who live at Roundknowe Lodge Farm, have submitted an indicative layout which proposes the erection of 55 detached houses taking access from Roundknowe Road.

1.2 The application site extends to approximately 3.5 hectares and is predominantly an expanse of open space with a small area used as a paddock which lies to the east of Roundknowe Lodge Farm. The site is concealed from view on the main approach route from Glasgow Road to the south of the site, by the existence of mature trees and bushes formed on the perimeter. It is also slightly screened from Roundknowe Road at the north of the site, again due to thick planting on the perimeter, but also due to the difference in ground levels directly between the road and the site as the site steadily rises to approximately 5 metres above the road level. The site does however, gently slope from north to south. On leaving Glasgow Road and crossing the North Calder Water the trees adjacent to the Roundknowe and Glasgow Roads and Motorway verges emphasise the rural nature of the area.

1.3 Historic maps dating from 1860 show the site as predominantly greenfield land and forestry with the exception of a slender piece of land which dissected the site on a southeast-northwest axis and was occupied by the former Hamilton & Bothwell railway line which was operational between 1898 and 1971.

1.4 The site lies within the Green Belt on the western outer limits of the Council's southern area. It is set against an enviable spacious and natural backdrop created through the mature planting evident in all directions which is characteristic of Green Belt areas. It is adjoined to the north by Calderbraes Golf Club; to the east by open space and the M73; to the south by Glasgow Road and the M73/M74; and to the west by Roundknowe Farm and beyond that by the complementary Green Belt area of the City of Glasgow.

1.5 A similar application was refused last year (no. S/03/00091/OUT) for the development of 61 houses. Given that the site lies within the Green Belt, the applicants last year submitted information in support of residential development at this location and this has been re-iterated for the current application. Such information was provided taking cognisance of the guidance given in the Development Plan and Scottish Planning Policies and can be summarised as follows:-

0 The site, being former brownfield, will contribute, as a windfall site, to the housing requirement as indicated in the current structure plan, of which there is a need for additional housing land within this area given the contesting of the Ravenscraig site by Housebuilders, and will assist the Council in ensuring the provision of effective sites; 0 The site contributes to the aims expressed in Scottish Planning Policy SPP3 - Planning for Housing as the site is an appropriate location for the provision of high quality detached houses and will assist the Council in providing a range of house styles and quality within their housing market area; 0 SPP3 also indicates that in areas where there is a demonstrable requirement for additional housing, Green Belt boundaries will need to be reviewed. Sites which no longer contribute significantly to the purpose of the Green Belt and which can be readily accessed by a range of transport may be released for housing. The applicants contend that this small area would not undermine the Green Belt's overall effectiveness and integrity and contend that the site does not contribute significantly to the Green Belt; 0 The immediately adjoining Zoological Gardens to the west of the site are being decreased in size and surplus land developed for residential use. The open space around Broomhouse has been identified for 200 acres of residential development and this residential wedge is stretching toward the site at some speed. The applicants contend that the application site in association with this adjoining existing urban area of Glasgow would also be better put to residential use and the site could be absorbed without loss of amenity, character or identity given that the existing planting around the site would be retained and complemented by new ancillary landscaping; 0 The site is free from problems of slope, aspect, flood risk and vehicular access difficulties; and There is no evidence of any archaeological assets within the site which justifies the imposition of a suspensive condition requiring the submission of a site investigation report as advocated by the West of Scotland Archaeology Service.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The application raises issues of a strategic and local nature and therefore must be considered in terms of both the Structure Plan and Local Plans for the area. The site is zoned as Green Belt and the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 (GCVJSP) Development Strategy places the protection and enhancement of natural and built heritage and environmental resources as a prerequisite. The Guiding Principles of the Plan therefore explicitly recognises the importance of environmental resources, particularly in terms of a general presumption in favour of safeguarding the quality and extent of identified environmental resources. Strategic Policies 1 & 7 of the GCVJSP require the continued designation and safeguarding of the Green Belt within which there is a presumption against the spread of built up areas and the encroachment of development into the countryside. Local Plans should define the detailed boundaries and policies to safeguard the Green Belt. Another aim central to the Plan is the improvement in the quality of life and health of local communities. Within this, among other concerns, Strategic Policy 6 identifies the need to secure sufficient housing and sufficient variety of house type and affordability to meet future housing requirements for a continuing 5 year effective land supply within housing market areas. Preference is accorded to the development of brownfield land as opposed to greenfield land to achieve these aims and to accord with the overall environmental thrust of the Plan. However, development must be assessed against the criteria set out in Strategic Policy 9 and any development failing to meet these criteria requires to be justified against the criteria in Strategic Policy 10. Among these of most note, are the assessment of the development against its contribution to promoting urban regeneration; avoiding isolated and sporadic development in the Green Belt and the wider countryside; and the assessment of the proposal against the effective housing land supply for the market area and the establishment of a clear shortfall.

2.2 The adopted Local Plan for the area is the Uddingston-Tannochside Town Map 1973 which zones the site as Agricultural Land within the Green Belt. The emerging Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) provides contemporary policy guidance and similarly zones the site as Green Belt. Policy ENV6 ‘Green Belt’ indicates that there will be a general presumption against development in the Green Belt other than that directly associated with agriculture, forestry, generation of power from renewable resources, outdoor leisure and recreation, telecommunications or other appropriate rural uses. This policy also identifies Green Belt corridors stretching along the M73 and M74 Motorways as being of particular importance for reasons of landscape quality and for preventing the coalescence of settlements. Policy ENV5 ‘Assessment of Environmental Impact‘ provides a list of criteria that the Council will assess an application against. Criteria 1-3 are particularly relevant to this application and consider the suitability of the proposal on the character of the area in which it is set; the landscape and visual impact of the proposal; and the extent of traffic generation, noise, dust, pollution, flooding risk and interference. Policy HSGI ‘Housing Strategy‘ indicates that the Council will direct new residential development toward brownfield sites within built up areas in preference to the release of land in greenfield locations. Finally, Policy HSG12 ’Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside’ provides a list of criteria which the Council will take into account in determining applications of this nature. Consideration is given to proven operational need for dwellings in this area; the visual prominence of the site; the compatibility of the design to a rural location; the incorporation of traditional design features and finishing materials; and provision for vehicular access and site drainage.

2.3 Scottish Planning Policy SPP3 ’Planning for Housing’ advocates a review of Green Belt boundaries but only in circumstances where there is a demonstrable requirement for additional housing in an area. The general principles are that planning has an essential role in achieving the Government’s policies for housing while protecting and enhancing environmental quality.

2 .4 National Planning Policy Guideline NPPG 5 ‘Archaeology and Planning’ sets out policy context and guidelines which seek to encourage the preservation of heritage sites and landscapes of archaeological and historic interest. The primary policy objective is that such sites should be preserved wherever feasible and that, where this proves not to be possible, procedures should be put in place to ensure proper recording. It states that the preservation of ancient monuments and their setting is a material consideration in determining planning applications and appeals, whether a monument is scheduled or not.

2.5 Similarly, National Planning Policy Guideline NPPG 14 ‘Natural Heritage‘ advocates measures to conserve and enhance natural heritage assets.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 No objections were received from the utility bodies, and no adverse comments were raised by the Coal Authority.

3.2 SEPA, Scottish Water and NLC‘s Geotechnical Section expressed no objection to the development provided surface water would be treated in accordance with the principles of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland, and that foul drainage be connected to the public sewer. SEPA also commented that the previous land use as a railway line may have resulted in land contamination and this matter should be addressed via further research. Finally, they stated that provision should be made for the storage of waste for recycling, composting etc. both within individual properties and the development as a whole.

3.3 Scottish Natural Heritage raised no objections to the proposals provided certain conditions were attached to any planning permission. These included the requirement for a wildlife survey to determine whether there were any statutorily protected species within the site; the retention of existing trees and the formation of a new shelterbelt or hedgerow around the site. Similarly, the Central Scotland Forest Trust raised no objections.

3.4 The Scottish Executive Road Network Management and Maintenance Division confirmed they had no objections to the proposal provided a suitable barrier was provided adjacent to the motorway to minimise the risk of pedestrians or animals gaining access to the motorway.

3.5 NLC Transportation Section objected to the proposal on the grounds that the site access visibility was substandard; there were no footways on Roundknowe Road and limited scope for their construction which could lead pedestrians to walk on an unlit road to the detriment of their safety; and that the proposed layout in its current form would not receive Roads Construction Consent.

3.6 NLC Protective Services commented that a comprehensive site investigation would require to be undertaken to assess any potential risks arising from previous site uses. Given the proximity to the M73 and Glasgow Road, a traffic noise survey would also require to be carried out to assess the impact of noise on the development. Finally, they advised that a Note should be placed on any consent restricting the production of noise during construction periods.

3.7 NLC Education advised that Aitkenhead Primary School was operating close to capacity and that should the development proceed, some children may require to be transported to neighbouring schools with available accommodation. They advised that secondary schools had sufficient accommodation to cope with the projected pupil increase.

3.8 NLC Community Services raised concerns over development in the Green Belt and that it could set an unfortunate precedent for allowing Green Belt land opposite the M73 to the east to be developed for housing. They also commented that the density of the layout would be incompatible with the character of the area. They commented that there was little conservation value on the site but requested that trees and shrubs be retained wherever possible and enhanced with further native planting.

3.9 Three letters of objection were received following neighbour notification procedures and the press advertisement. These were received from the adjacent Calderbraes Golf Club, Roundknowe Farm and Uddingston Community Council. The Golf Club and Roundknowe Farm concerns can be summarised as follows:-

Housing development is contrary to the Green Belt designation; The density of the development would result in a severe loss of the visual amenity of the site which has a sense of open space and rural feel and would create noise pollution; The development would have a detrimental effect on the attractive semi-rural setting of the golf course; Roundknowe Road cannot support increased traffic from the housing development; Substandard access of Roundknowe Road from Glasgow Road which could require works to a category B listed bridge; Improvements required to the golf course's boundary in the interests of public safety as a result of the increased levels of through traffic generated by the introduction of substantial built development at this location; and The development could overwhelm existing substandard drainage infrastructure and lead to more frequent flooding and cause a pollution incident to the Calder Water.

The Community Council were concerned that the proposal could have an adverse impact on the South Lanarkshire area and raised the following issues:-

* The proposal would contribute to traffic congestion in Uddingston both with usage of the Main Street facilities and the train station. In addition, some children from the site would be accommodated in Uddingston Grammar and thus the 'school run' would also contribute to congestion and parking around the School to the detriment of safety; and The development may add to the problems already encountered with respect to sewerage capacity.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The aims of the Structure Plan which are most relevant to the consideration of this application are the safeguarding and enhancement of environmental resources as advocated in Strategic Policies I& 7; and the improvement in the quality of life and health of local communities through the provision of an effective housing land supply in terms of choice, size and type of housing in each housing market area, as advocated in Strategic Policy 6. The realisation of one aim must not be at the expense of another as each aim is complementary and interrelated. The Plan requires that developments must be assessed against the criteria listed in Strategic Policies 9 and 10. 4.2 The applicants have contended in supporting statements that the development is acceptable in Development Plan terms on several counts, these will be considered in turn. Firstly, they contend that the site, being brownfield land, will contribute in a small way toward reducing the shortfall of effective housing land in this area as identified in the Structure Plan. I would make the following comments:-

* The application site lies within the Motherwell Sub-Market Housing Area (SMA) and within the Eastern Conurbation Housing Market Area (HMA). The Structure Plan states that there is an adequate supply of effective housing land to meet locally generated demands within each of the SMAs. However, the Plan anticipates a shortfall in effective land supply within the Conurbation HMAs of approximately 3,300 houses, but states that the shortfall will mainly be met by the Central Conurbation HMA. The Eastern Conurbation, of which the site forms part, will contribute to the provision of only 350 houses of the shortfall, none of which have been allocated to the Motherwell SMA. Furthermore, the site has not been included in North Lanarkshire's Interim Housing Land Statement.

4.3 In these circumstances, the Structure Plan does not identify a shortfall in housing land in this area and there is thus, no demonstrable or proven operational need for housing within the Green Belt or a requirement to review the Green Belt boundary. In addition, Committee approval has been given for the Ravenscraig development and a decision to grant this application could in effect undermine that support. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to the Structure Plan in terms of Strategic Policy 6(b), Policy 9 (A)(ii) and is unjustified in terms of Policy 10 (A)(ii). For these reasons, the proposal is also contrary to Local Plan policy HSG12(1) and SPP3. Furthermore, the applicants contend that the site is brownfield land and accords with Development Plan objectives to direct housing development to brownfield locations in the interests of sustainability and urban regeneration. It is contended that the site does not constitute brownfield land in accordance with the definition contained in SPP3, with the exception of the relatively small area of land formerly occupied by the railway siding. Historic maps show that the majority of the site has never been developed and is therefore largely greenfield land. The recycling of brownfield land for housing and the implementation of a strong Green Belt policy have underpinned the wider urban regeneration process and this momentum requires to be continued. The proposal is therefore contrary to Strategic Policy 9(B)(ii), Local Plan Policy HSGI and SPP3.

4.4 Secondly, the applicants contend that the development accords with SPP3 in terms of its location and assistance in offering a range of house styles, size and design. The layout for the site submitted by the applicants to assist discussion, whilst indicative only, does not constitute a layout which would afford the development of high quality detached houses as indicated in the applicants supporting statement, but is rather, in keeping with layouts associated with mainstream volume housebuilders. In turn, the proposal, would not assist the Council in the provision of sites which offer differing ranges of size, style or design of houses and is again, contrary to Strategic Policy 6(b), Local Plan Policies HSGl & HSG12(3) and SPP3.

4.5 Thirdly, the applicants contend that the development will not have an adverse effect on the overall effectiveness or integrity of the Green Belt as the site contributes very little to this. Furthermore, they consider the proposal to be acceptable when considered in association with the expanding urban area of Glasgow City to the west of the site, which would easily absorb the site with little effect on the amenity, character or identity of the area. The protection and enhancement of the Green Belt is accorded utmost importance in the Development Plan and other planning policy guidance unless there is a strong justification for its development. Paragraph 4.2 above has already demonstrated that in these circumstances there is no such justification. Nevertheless, consideration must also be given to the impact the development will have on the Green Belt. The Green Belt designation, among other things, seeks to control the growth of built up areas and support the process of urban renewal; or prevent neighbouring towns from merging and control sporadic and isolated development; and preserve the special character of towns, including their landscape setting. 4.6 The site has been defined as Green Belt on the adopted Local Plan - The Uddingston- Tannochside Town Map since 1973 and continues to be defined as such on the emerging Local Plan, the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). The Green Belt has been defended on several occasions along the M73 Corridor where applications have been refused for development. The Green Belt area within which the site is located acts as a visual and physical 'book end' to the settlement of Uddingston. Beyond this to the west, the Green Belt continues into the City of Glasgow area which prevents the settlements of Uddingston and Broomhouse from merging. The applicants' claims that the site has a clearer relationship with the land use zonings within the Glasgow City Council administrative area rather than North Lanarkshire is therefore unfounded. The Glasgow City Plan 2001 zones the land immediately adjoining North Lanarkshire Council's boundary as Green Belt. Glasgow City Council have taken the opportunity to define an exact boundary to the urban area of Broomhouse. This is remote from the application site and therefore the site does not have a physical relationship with the urban area of Broomhouse. The City Plan Proposals maps clearly indicate that the Green Belt release for residential development lies to the north west of Broomhouse and the northern end of the zoo, whilst the application site is located to the south east. There has been speculation over the development potential of the zoo given that it is now closed. Miller Homes have lodged an application for 225 houses on land at the northern end of the zoo subject of greenfield release on the local plan, but the remainder of the site continues to be zoned as Green Belt. Therefore, the application site continues to be located almost in the centre of this Green Belt area and is literally, central to the effectiveness and integrity of the Green Belt in providing a setting for the urban areas of both North Lanarkshire and Glasgow. Residential development in this area would therefore constitute isolated and sporadic development in the Green Belt in contravention of Strategic Policy 9(B)(v), Local Plan policy ENVG and NPPG14. Additionally, the site is separated from the zoo by the North Calder Water which is in a fairly deep valley in this location.

4.7 With regard to the character and amenity of the Green Belt, the site would not be easily absorbed by the urban area of Glasgow given its distant proximity and would therefore have an impact. In its favour, the site is currently shielded from view on the strategic access route on Glasgow Road by the dense planting of mature trees and bushes along its perimeter. The applicants have intimated that these would be retained to continue their role as a physical and visual defence from the Glasgow Road dual carriageway and would therefore have little impact on the character and amenity. However, at a local level, the site can be more readily viewed from Roundknowe Road, where it would be accessed, and even with the retention of perimeter planting, residential infill development would detract from the spacious open and natural aspects of the site which are currently enjoyed in complement with the surrounding area and which are characteristic of the Green Belt. The proposal is therefore considered to have an adverse impact on the character and amenity of the Green Belt in contravention of Strategic Policy 9(B)(ii)(b) and lO(B)(iii)(a), Local Plan Policy ENV5(1,2) & ENVG and NPPG14.

4.8 Fourthly, the applicants contend that the site is free from problems of slope, aspect, flood risk and vehicular access difficulties. These aspects do not, however, in themselves, justify development, particularly given the strategic dimension of the site's location.

4.9 Finally, the applicants contended that there was no evidence of any archaeological assets within the site which justifies the imposition of a suspensive condition requiring the submission of a site investigation report as advocated by the West of Scotland Archaeology Service last year. This organisation made no response to their consultation in terms of this current application, nevertheless it is considered that their previous comments should stand, given the importance accredited to such matters in national guidance. The applicants have made little attempt to demonstrate that there are no heritage assets in this regard within the site as only a desktop study of historical maps has been undertaken. Archaeological assets are accorded national protection and NPPG 5 'Archaeology and Planning' and PAN 42 'Archaeology' make it clear that it is the responsibility of the applicant to assess the archaeological implications of development proposals. Given the likelihood of a recommendation of refusal, the Department did not pursue the submission of further information in this regard from the developer but contends that if Committee is minded to grant, that a suspensive condition be imposed to safeguard this important issue.

4.10 With regard to concerns raised by statutory consultees and notified neighbours, these have mostly been dealt with above. However, there are some outstanding matters which require to be addressed which represent more detailed aspects of the development. These deal with noise, traffic and access; public safety; flooding, pollution and contamination. The main objective of outline consent is to establish the principle of development. If this is agreed, then the more complex technical aspects of a proposal which are required to render a development acceptable, must be resolved during the negotiation of a reserved matters application. The outstanding matters noted above fall into this latter category, and whilst it is beneficial to be forewarned of potential issues, I am satisfied that these issues need not be addressed in the negotiation of this outline application, but nevertheless note their content. Had there been a favourable recommendation, these issues would have been pursued further at this stage simply as a precursor to expedite determination of the reserved matters application and some issues may have been accorded appropriate weight through the imposition of planning conditions.

4.1 1 The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, Section 25 requires the application to be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In conclusion, it is considered that the development constitutes a significant departure from the development plan and that no material considerations that would justify the departure have materialised during the assessment of the proposal. Furthermore, the applicant has not satisfactorily demonstrated that the proposal would not result in a significant adverse effect on the environment or that there are any other justifications for a departure from the development plan and other relevant policy documents for the area. Therefore, taking into account the Development Plan and other material considerations, including representations, I see no reason to alter my recommendation from that last year and therefore recommend that this application be refused. Application No: S/04100446/FUL

Date Registered: 13th April 2004

Applicant: Mr Niall Tutton NTL Crawley Court Winchester so21 2QA

Development: 3 Metre Extension in Height to Existing Structure and Installation of 3 Dual Polar Antenna Dishes and 2 Equipment Cabinets

Location: Land West Of Horsley Brae Wishaw Lanarkshire

Ward: 15: Garrion Councillor John Pentland

Grid Reference: 279929 652518

File Reference: S/PL/B 2/48 116

Site History: Existing mast erected under the previous provisions of the General Permitted Development Order prior to legislative changes.

Development Plan: The site is zoned as an Area of Great Landscape Value in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004).

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: Scottish Natural Heritage (No Objection)

Representations: None Received

Newspaper Advertisement: 28th April 2004

Comments:

This application seeks consent for a 3 metre extension in height to the existing lattice structure and the installation of 3 dual polar antenna dishes and 2 equipment cabinets at Land West of Horseley Brae, Overtown. The proposal is to create an additional radio installation at the site for mast share, to provide coverage of a new telephone network for Overtown and the surrounding area. The proposed design and colouring of the equipment will be in keeping with the existing equipment and the existing access arrangements to the site would be utilised.

No letters of representation have been received following the neighbour notification and advertisement process. Although the proposal complies with accepted practice in relation to Public Health and Safety, it is considered that the proposal is contrary to Policies CS6 and ENVI 5 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) and to National Planning Guidance in respect of its visual impact. It is therefore recommended that this application be refused. PLANNING APPLICATION NO: S/C4/OW46/FUL

3 METRE EXTENSION IN HEIGHTTO EXISTING STRUCTURE & INSTALLATION OF 3 DUAL POLAR ANTENNA DISHES & 2 EQUIPMENT CABINETS a LAND WEST OF HORSLEY BRAE, WISHAW Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. The proposal is contrary to the aims of Policy ENVI 5 Area of Great Landscape Value in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) because of the incremental additions to the mast and site which would have a detrimental impact on the character and quality of the environment.

2. The proposal will have an adverse impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding area and is therefore considered to be contrary to the advice given in NPPG19, PAN62, and Policy CS6 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004).

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 22nd March 2004

Memo from NLC Community Services received 13th May 2004 Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 29th April 2004

National Planning Policy Guidance 19 Radio Telecommunications, July 2000 Planning Advice Note PAN3 Radio Communications, July 2001 Policy CS6 Telecommunications Development in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004).

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Murray Reid at 01698 302102. APPLICATION NO. S1041004461FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The application seeks consent for a 3 metre extension in height to the existing lattice structure and the installation of 3 dual polar antenna dishes and 2 equipment cabinets at land west of Horseley Brae, Overtown. The application site is situated at a prominent location to the West of the A71 and is located within close proximity of housing to the north east of the site. The nearest residential property is approximately 128 metres from the site.

1.2 The applicants, NTL, propose to create an additional radio installation at the site for '3', with whom they have agreed to mast share at the location, to provide coverage of their new 3rd Generation UMTS telephone network for Overtown and the surrounding area. They have considered alternative sites and various options for the positioning of the proposed equipment on the existing structure. They have advised that none of the other sites are suitable for their proposals without alterations and increases in the height of the equipment at those locations. In terms of the existing equipment at the application site they have advised that it is necessary to extend the existing 15 metre high tower by 3 metres. This is in order to maximise coverage and the quality of the signal whilst minimising the interference from the existing antenna and the tree belt situated to the South. The height of the proposed structure is required to provide adequate coverage to the A72. The lower height of 10 metres would cause signal attenuation due to near by trees. Mounting the existing antenna above the other existing operator's antenna will gain enough clearance to ensure quality coverage of the valley below. The applicants have provided the necessary ICNIRP declaration confirming that the proposal is within public health standards.

1.3 The existing equipment on the site was erected as Permitted Development prior too the change in control of telecommunications apparatus which came into effect after the 23rdJuly 2001. It should also be noted that following the erection of this equipment letters of objection were received from neighbouring residential properties.

2. Deve Io pme nt PIan

2.1 The site is zoned as an Area of Great Landscape Value in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) to which Policy ENV15 applies. This policy seeks to resist any proposals which would have a significant adverse effect on the character and quality of the environment. Policy CS6 Telecommunications Development is also applicable. That policy indicates that the Council will adopt a precautionary approach to new telecommunications developments and will seek to locate them primarily in industrial and commercial areas which are not densely populated or contain sensitive uses such as residential areas, schools, nurseries or hospitals.

2.2 The policy also states that applicants should provide evidence that they have done an alternative site search, demonstrate how the proposal fits into the wider network and make an ICNIRP declaration, which states that the proposal is within acceptable safety limits in terms of non-ionising radiation.

3. Co nsu Itat ions and Representations 3.1 In terms of consultation responses no objections have been received. No letters of representation were received following the neighbour notification procedure.

3.2 Scottish Natural Heritage have commented that given the existing structures present on site, any local natural heritage interests are unlikely to be threatened further by this proposal and that a sensitive approach to the design and colouring of the extension and associated equipment is encouraged.

3.3 NLC Community Services comments that had a planning application been required for the existing structure they would have objected due to the significant negative impact it has on the rolling farmland character of the landscape. Although the changes proposed will have no significant impact on appearance from the adjacent road and housing, they object to planning consent being approved on the basis that they would not have agreed to the existing installation.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 This application must be assessed against government policy set out in NPPG 19 Radio Telecommunications and against the relevant development plan policies, Policy CS6 of the development plan on Telecommunication Developments and ENV 15 on Areas of Great Landscape Value.

4.2 In accordance with National Planning Policy Guidance 19 (NPPG19) on Radio Telecommunications and Policy CS6 in the emerging Local Plan, the applicant has provided information on how the proposal would fit into the existing network, details of the alternative sites that have been investigated and the necessary ICNIRP declaration which proves that the proposal is within international accepted limits in terms of radiation and public safety. This effectively means that concerns regarding effects on public health cannot be considered as a material consideration.

4.3 With regard National Planning Policy Guidance 19 (NPPGI 9) on Radio Telecommunications and Policy CS6 in the emerging Local Plan, the applicant has provided information on how the proposal would fit into the existing network and details of their consideration of alternative sites and site sharing. The existing Orange tower at Overtown Road, Overtown was rejected because of the low lying ground and due to the proximity to housing. A new site at the caravan and camping centre at Wishaw Road, Waterloo was rejected because a new 15 metre tower would be required to provide sufficient coverage and due to the proximity to housing. The existing Vodafone tower at Garrionhaugh further down the Horseley Brae was rejected as the valley side would cause shadowing to the north and an additional installation would be required to provide sufficient coverage to the A72. The Vodafone monopole at the side of the Hutchison bus garage on Castlehill Road was considered to provide good coverage to the A72 but little coverage north of Castlehill Road without a more substantial and higher lattice structure to accommodate the antennae.

4.4 The Council’s precautionary approach to telecommunications proposals and a requirement for rigorous assessment if in the vicinity of sensitive areas such as schools and residential areas, is set out in the Southern Area Local Plan Policy CS6. This requires information about how the proposal fits into operator’s’ networks and how the site was selected to be submitted by the applicant, also for the visual impact of the apparatus to be minimised in areas including those of great landscape value. It states the Council will encourage mast and site sharing where this represents the best environment solution. Finally, Policy CS6 states that when determining telecommunications applications, the Council will consider:

a) the nature of the locality and proximity to sensitive uses such as housing; b) design and visual impact issues, and in particular its effect on environmentally sensitive issues such as Areas of Great Landscape Value.; c) the extent to which more suitable alternative sites exits; and d) the scope to share existing facilities.

4.5 With regard to the location and proximity to sensitive uses, it is considered that the proposed is contrary to Policy CS6 because of its visual impact on the adjacent residential area. The existing structure was constructed as permitted development prior to the changes in planning control. In terms of the local plan policy this location would now be considered unsuitable for such a development. The proposal to increase the height of and add additional telecommunications equipment to the mast and on the ground are considered to be contrary to the aims of the local plan policy and to be unacceptable at this location. The development would adversely affect the amenity of the nearby residential area and concerns have previously been raised by residents about the siting of the existing mast.

4.6 The proposal is located within the Clyde Valley Area of Great Landscape Value where Policy ENVl5 seeks to protect and enhance by restricting any proposal which would have a significant adverse effect on the character and quality of the environment. Although SNH have no objections to the development I consider it to be an undesirable addition to the prominent hill top location which forms a gateway to the village and Clyde valley. NLC Community Services department also object to planning consent being approved as discussed above in paragraph 3.3. Furthermore, the applicant has submitted no details of proposed landscaping and screen planting. It is considered that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding area and would, therefore, be contrary to the aims of policy ENVI 5. I am also concerned that approval of the development may lead to incremental additions to this mast and site which would cause further deterioration of the landscape of this significant location.

4.7 In conclusion I recommend this application for refusal as it would adversely affect the amenity of the nearby residential area and is contrary to policy CS6, and will have a detrimental effect on the landscape setting of this part of the AGLV contrary to the aims of policy ENV 15 of the Southern Area Local Plan finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). Application No: S/04/00448/FUL

Date Registered: 30th March 2004

Applicant: George Wimpey West Scotland Ltd Trident House Renfrew Road Paisley PA3 4EF

Development : Residential Development Comprising 14 Dwellinghouses and Partial Amendment to the Site Layout Previously Granted (No S/02/01603/FUL) Affecting 12 Dwellinghouses

Location: Land East Of Hattonrigg Road Bellshill Lanarkshire

Ward: 30: Hattonrigg Councillor Harry Curran

Grid Reference: 273899660881

File Reference: S/PL/BF/7/82 (21 I)

Site History:

Development Plan: Bellshill and Mossend Local Plan - zoned as an Urban Park and partly as a refuse tip.

Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) - zoned as Established Industrial and Business Areas and Partly Protected Open Space.

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: Scottish Natural Heritage (comments) Scottish Water (no objection) Scottish Power (no objection)

Representations: IRepresentation Letter

Newspaper Advertisement: 8 April 2004

Comments:

Planning consent is sought by George Wimpey for the construction of 14 additional dwellings to their existing housing estate located east of Hattonrigg Road, Bellshill. The development necessitates the alteration of the existing road layout to enable the formation of a through road to serve the additional dwellings and thereby relocates the existing roundel further east at the termination of the new site boundary. The new road layout also necessitates the re-configuration of 12 dwellings within the existing site and the re-location of the play area. The dwellings proposed offer the same range of house types as those currently under construction which are all 4 bedroom detached dwellings.

The application site plays host to a range of natural heritage assets and whilst some will require to be removed to make way for the development, existing planting will be retained around the perimeter of the site to retain the natural visual presence of the site. Extensive surveys will require to be undertaken on the site to ensure its acceptability for residential development given the surrounding industrial land I PLANNING APPLICATION No. S / 04 / 00448 / FUL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT COMPRISING 14 DWELLINGHOUSES AND PARTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE SITE LAYOUT PERVIOUSLY GRANTED ( No S / 02 / 01603 / FUL )AFFECTING Nmth Rducdby Lanarkshire Rannnl and EDirDnmn, 12 DWELLINGHOUSES h.dlY"." SiJ" (ounill 9111. I,hrnhl MU*. 2WdR-d CUMBWWUULD LAND EAST OF HATTONRIGG ROAD, BELLSHILL F.yrc4u.l rrornlhmnrr. LlnnmYiPRwl" 012%067 IN 116210 Far OiDB 61812 A w. em/.,/m d w. Crn"*I.d h *,-W. PlW.OomC. ecr-n- m, cs LkmC.LAODOIIL Representation Site Area 1 20 ha UIUhrUdrgaduNrn *"rglcw"-L, * Mm*rdloPm.c""mmr*i voc.dw use, former landfill site and the potential for flooding.

One letter of objection has been received in connection with this application. Notwithstanding this, I believe that the proposal will afford additional housing opportunities and will retain the established visual character of the area, I hereby recommend that planning consent be granted for the reasons given in my accompanying report.

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, 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 suitability of the site for residential development.

3. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a report describing the level of gas within the ground and the implications for gas migration from the nearby former landfill site off Reema Road shall be submitted to the Planning Authority and the works required to mitigate both existing and future gas migration having regard to the site's future use for residential development shall be agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, and development on the affected areas shall not commence until the agreed works have been implemented.

Reason: To safeguard the health of future residents.

4. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a report from a professionally qualified source detailing noise levels from adjoining land uses shall be submitted to the Planning Authority, and that any measures required to mitigate noise shall be implemented in full within a timescale agreed by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the suitability of the site for residential development.

5. That before the development hereby permitted starts, all measures required to mitigate the potential for flooding posed by the Shirrel Burn and its tributory shall be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority and that these measures shall be implemented in accordance with a timescale to be agreed with the Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard future residents from potential flooding threats.

6. That before the development hereby permitted starts, the scheme proposed for drainage within the site shall be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority and shall be designed to comply with the principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems and that this system shall be implemented in accordance with a timescale to be agreed with the Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area and to ensure that the proposed drainage system complies with the latest SEPA guidance. 7. No development shall begin until a wildlife/badger/bat/water vole protection scheme is submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage. This shall include a survey by a suitably qualified person to record the location, number, species of wildlife and setts, nest, roosts etc and proposed protection/mitigation measures and thereafter any protectionlmitigation measures shall be implemented in accordance with a timetable to be specified by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To minimise risk to protected species and to ensure legal compliance with the requirements of the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

8. That no trees located outwith and adjacent to the perimeter of the site, as shown shaded in GREEN on the approved plans, shall be lopped, topped felled or otherwise affected and no shrubs or hedges shall be removed, and that before the development herby permitted starts, tree protection measures in accordance with British Standard BS 5837 shall be erected along the drip line of the trees to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

9. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping, including boundary treatment, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, 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, and (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these details in the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

10. That within one year of the occupation of the last 5 dwellinghouses within the development hereby permitted, all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 9 above, shall be completed; and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased within two years of the completion of the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: In the interests of amenity.

11. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of:- (a) the proposed play areas hatched BLUE on the approved plans; (b) the proposed grassed, planted and landscaped areas on the approved plans;

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these details in the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

12. That before completion of the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance scheme approved under the terms of condition 11 shall be in operation.

Reason: In the interests of amenity. 13. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme for the provision of 1 play area within the site, hatched BLUE on the approved plans, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and this shall include:- (a) details of the type and location of play equipment, seating and litter bins to be situated within the play area; (b) details of the surface treatment of the play area, including the location and type of safety surface to be installed, and (c) details of the fences to be erected around the play area.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these details in the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

14. That before occupation of the last 5 dwellinghouses within the development hereby permitted, all the works required for the provision of equipped play area and, included in the scheme approved under the terms of condition 13 above, shall be completed.

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

15. 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 details in the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

16. That before any of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted, situated on a site upon which a fence or wall is to be erected, are occupied, the fence, or wall, as approved under the terms of condition 15 above, shall be erected.

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

17. Notwithstanding condition 15 above, before any dwellinghouse is occupied on which a 1.8 metre high close boarded fence is to be erected as shown marked PURPLE on the approved plan the said fence is to be erected to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future residents.

18. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing materials to be used on all external walls and roofs shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these details in the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

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

Reason: To ensure adequate parking facilities within the curtilage of the dwellinghouse.

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

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

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

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

That before any dwellinghouse hereby permitted is occupied 2 car parking spaces shall be provided within the curtilage of the plot and outwith the public road or footway, and thereafter be maintained as parking spaces.

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

That before the development hereby permitted is completed, a 2 metre wide footpath shall be formed along the route shown on the approved plans to a specification to be approved by the Planning Authority .

Reason: To facilitate further informal walks which will link with the existing footpath network through the adjacent residential and leisure sites.

NOTE TO COMMITTEE

If granted, this application will have to be notified to the Scottish Ministers in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 1997 because of the Council’s interest in the site and the proposal is contrary to the Development Plan.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 18th March 2004

Memo from NLC Transportation Section received 15th May 2004 Memo from NLC Geotechnical Team received 5th May 2004 Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 29th April 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received 30th April 2004 Letter from Scottish Power received 23rd April 2004

Letter from John Devlin, 287 Hattonrigg Road, Bellshill, ML4 1LY received 4th May 2004.

Bellshill & Mossend Local Plan Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004)

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Joanne Delaney at 01698 302137. APPLICATION NO. S1041004481FUL

REPORT

Description of Site and ProDosal

The application site is land east of Hattonrigg Road, Bellshill. The applicants previously received planning consent (No. S/02/01603/FUL) on 19 February 2003 for residential development comprising 88 detached dwellinghouses on land directly west of the application site. A long running dispute over the closure of footpaths was finally resolved in December last year and the site is now partially completed.

The applicants now propose to extend the site and form an additional 14 dwellings on land to the east of the existing site. The development necessitates the alteration of the existing road layout to enable the formation of a through road to serve the additional dwellings and thereby relocates the existing roundel further east at the termination of the new site boundary. The new road layout also necessitates the re-configuration of 12 dwellings still to be constructed within the existing site and the re-location of the play area. The dwellings proposed offer the same range of house types as those currently under construction which are all 4 bedroom detached homes. The site layout affords the retention of a riparian corridor to the Shirrel Burn and retention of existing mature planting around the perimeter of the site in order that its natural visual presence is not lost. Finally, following discussion with some local people, it is proposed to construct a new footpath on Council land which will link up with the existing footpath network which traverses the existing housing site and adjacent leisure site occupied by Bellshill Athletic Football Club. This footpath will circumvent part of the application site and together with the proposed footpaths within the estate will eventually link Clay Crescent with Bairdsland View.

The application site is currently owned by the Council and is mainly level with dense planting comprising mature trees and bushes. The site is bounded to the north and east by the Shirrel Burn and its tributary, to the south by the former landfill site and proposed industrial warehouse (application no. S/03/01814/FUL) by Barley Bank Ltd, also under consideration at this meeting, and to the west by the existing housing estate. Due to the natural boundary of the Shirrel Burn, manmade bunding of the former landfill, and proposed acoustic bunding to the industrial development, the site has now effectively become landlocked. Thus, the only means of access to the site is via the internal road network of the adjacent housing estate under construction.

Given the surrounding land uses, thorough assessments will require to be undertaken to assess the suitability of the site for residential development in terms of the potential risks of contamination, noise and flooding.

DeveloDment Plan

This application raises no issues of a strategic nature and can therefore be assessed in terms of the local plan policies. The adopted Bellshill and Mossend Local Plan zones the site mainly as part of Hattonrigg Urban Park and partly as the former Shanks & McEwan Refuse tip.

The emerging local plan, the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) mainly zones the site as Established Industrial and Business Areas, whilst a small wedge on the eastern edge of the site is zoned as Protected Open Space. Policy HSGIO applies criteria against which new housing developments should be assessed. Such criteria includes provision of access and parking, density and mix of housing as well as due consideration to design and layout of the development.

3. Co nsuI ta t ions and Representations 3.1 The utility bodies raised no objections to the development and confirmed that they can service the site.

3.2 Scottish Water and NLC Geotechnical Section have requested further information to determine the acceptability of the proposal in terms of flooding and drainage. Discussions are ongoing, however it is adequate to cover these matters through the imposition of planning conditions which prevents development commencing until these matters are resolved.

3.3 Likewise, details relating to contamination and noise have been submitted and the necessary consultations undertaken. Discussions are also ongoing and these issues will be controlled through the imposition of planning conditions which again, prevent development commencing until these matters are resolved

3.4 Scottish Natural Heritage raised no objections to the development provided certain conditions were attached to any planning permission. These included the requirement for a wildlife survey to determine whether there were any statutorily protected species within the site; the retention of a riparian zone to the Shirrel Burn and the formation of a new shelterbelt or hedgerow around the site.

3.5 NLC's Transportation Section expressed no objections to the proposal but requested amendments to the site layout to take cognisance of visibility, traffic calming and parking requirements relative to this type of development.

3.6 One letter of objection was received from a local resident. The concerns raised can be summarised as follows:-

* The existing development has led to a loss of environment and amenity and the current application would only worsen matters; The Council appears to be looking out for the interests of the developers over that of local people in allowing developments on this land; and The building of houses on this land poses a danger to the health & safety of existing and future residents given the past industrial uses of the adjacent landfill site.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of the local plan policies and other material considerations. The development is contrary to the zonings on both the adopted and emerging local plans. However, the Urban Park and refuse tip zonings on the adopted plan have largely been superseded by subsequent events. The park has been significantly reduced through the granting of permission for the existing housing site, whilst the refuse tip became redundant several years ago. Turning to the emerging plan, the land is mainly zoned for industrial purposes with only a small area zoned as protected open space. Whilst the use of the land for industry would complement the adjacent proposed industrial land use to the south and east, practical difficulties would ensue in achieving vehicular access to the site. As mentioned in paragraph 1.3 above, the site can only be accessed via the road network within the housing estate. I consider that the introduction of industrial traffic through a residential area would be highly unacceptable and would cause severe detriment to the residential amenity of the area. Finally, with respect to the area zoned as Protected Open Space this forms only a small portion of a wedge of Protected Open Space along Shirrel Burn. The largest area is on the north side of the Burn and is unaffected by this proposal. In these circumstances, it is considered that further residential development constitutes the most acceptable form of development adjacent to an existing housing estate.

4.2 The proposal was assessed against Policy HSGIO of the emerging local plan and was considered to comply in terms of layout, density, scale, general design and associated private garden ground.

4.3 With regard to the concerns raised by the objector, it is acknowledged that some planting will require to be removed to make way for the development, however, it is considered that the retention of planting around the perimeter of the site will retain the natural visual presence and amenity of the site. Furthermore, the additional footpath will afford the benefit of a further pedestrian link within the area in complement with the network through the existing housing and leisure sites. Mitigation measures will be implemented on the site and controlled through planning conditions to address problems of past contamination, noise and potential flooding thereby rendering residential development on the site acceptable in terms of health and safety. Finally, I do not consider that by recommending this application for approval the Council are favouring one party over another but consider that it represents an acceptable form of development for the site and will afford additional housing opportunities for the benefit of the wider Bellshill community.

4.4 Having taken all matters into account, I consider the development acceptable. I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted. If Committee are minded to do so, the application will require to be notified to the Scottish Ministers in accordance with procedures on such matters. Application No: S104/00470/FUL

Date Registered: 30th March 2004

Applicant : SMS Construction Quarry Road Shotts ML7 4AF

Agent Mr R Hamilton Dalziel Design Partnership 136 Coursington Road Motherwell MLI 1PW

Development: Residential Development of 8 No Flats, 8 No Detached Dwellinghouses, 2 Serviced Plots and Formation of Access Road

Location: Former Benhar Primary School, West Benhar Road, Harthill, Shotts, Lanarkshire, ML7 5PB

Ward: 20: Benhar Councillor Charles Cefferty

Grid Reference: 289638.664054.

File Reference: SIPLIBFII 71221FM

Site History: The application site is the former Benhar Primary School.

Development Plan: The site is zoned as a Private Housing Development Opportunity in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004).

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: NLC Community Services (Comments) NLC Housing And Property Services (Comments) S.E.P.A.(West) (No Objections) Scottish Water (No Objections) British Gas Transco (No Objections) Scottish Power (No objections) The Coal Authority (No Objections)

Representations: None Received

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

This applications seeks full permission for the formation of two self build plots, the erection of eight flatted dwellings and eight detached dwellinghouses with parking and access road taken from Covenanter Road, Shotts.

The application site is the former Benhar Primary School extending to 6.510 square metres (1.605 PLANNING APPLICATION No. AS / 04 / 00470/FUL RESIDENTIAL DEVELPOPMENT OF EIGHT FLATS, RdYS.d by EIGHT DWELLINGHOUSES, SERVICED PLOTS +%rkSh,re Rmnmi and En, ronmnt TWO A *P CcuncU tb.dqY".n AND FORMATION OF ACCESS ROAD 4 9111.Y)< fmmngtbw. 2 rwn Rmd CUMBWWULD FORMER BENHAR PRIMARY SCHOOL, WEST WWUd,,~m,hOrb..r..Xlrrqm~p.*,n m218e16210ffi? IN F.. oimmm v. Pm..m d m Cmlm rd hiMi3V. BENHAR ROAD, HARTHILL, SHOTTS BI*nVOW. OCIc,"*lnCW~sht 'n.Ybl..d gahirm idnml cw. OWrign OI Lb"..LA000(1L Site Area = 0 63 ha Y.lm* opms~""m~o",~o~ed~ acres) or thereby. The site is bounded by dwellings to the east, west and south and by the former school canteen that has recently been sold to Eastfield and Harthill Flute Orchestra. The site has been the subject of a development brief in which the Council agreed to sell the former school site for residential development. The site is identified as a Private Housing Development Opportunity in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004).

The applicant proposes to form two self build plots fronting onto Covenanter Road, eight flatted dwellings two storey's in height and eight detached dwellinghouses. Three types of detached dwellings have been proposed for the site, a 2-bedroom bungalow and two types of two storey four-bedroom dwellings. The proposal complies with the Council's guidelines on Open Space and, subject to conditions, to the roads guidelines. The proposed dwellings are to be finished in facing brick with a dry dash render and the roof is to be finished with concrete interlocking rooftiles, colours of which are to be agreed. Details of the boundary treatments have been submitted with the application and in general these are acceptable, however it is proposed to attach a condition requiring a 1.8 metre high timber fence to be erected in lieu of the steel palisade fence on the south and south eastern boundary of the application site. The proposal accords with the Development Brief for the site.

There have been no letters of representation received in relation to the application following the neighbour notification procedure and there have been no adverse comments with regards to the consultations received in connection with the application. It is therefore recommended that the application be approved subject to conditions. If permission is granted then it will be necessary to Stop Up a footpath that currently crosses the site.

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 development starts on Plot 1 and Plot 2, 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 plots, including parking for two cars and a turning area; (d) the design and location of all boundary walls and fences;

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 for Plots 1 and 2, specified in condition (2) above, shall be made to the Planning Authority.

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

4. That, notwithstanding the provisions of the Building Standards (Scotland) Regulations 1990, and before the development starts, a certificate from a recognised firm of chartered engineers, duly signed by a Chartered Engineer or Chartered Geologist of Geotechnical Adviser Status (ICE, SlSG 1993) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming the mineral stability of the site. This certificate shall be based on a professionally supervised and regulated rotary drilling programme. Reason: To ensure the mineral stability of the site, in the interests or prospective residents.

5. 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.

6. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing materials to be used on all external walls and roofs shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority .

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

7. Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans a 1.8 metre high timber screen fence shall be erected along the boundaries marked in BROWN on the approved plans.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future residents.

8. That before any of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted, situated on a site upon which a fence or wall is to be erected, are occupied, the fence, or wall as shown on the approved plans and as required by condition (7) above, shall be erected.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

9. That no dwellinghouse shall be occupied until the access roads and footways leading thereto from the existing public road have been constructed to base course level.

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

10. That no dwellinghouse hereby permitted shall be occupied until the road and footpath adjacent to it have been constructed to base course 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.

11. 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.

12. That before the individual driveways hereby permitted are brought into use, the driveway for the first 2 metres, measured from the heel of the footway, shall be paved to prevent deleterious material being carried onto the public road and footway. Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities within the site.

13. That no integral garage shall be altered for use as a room without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.

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

14. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping, including boundary treatment, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include:- (a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, grass seeding and turfing; (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development (d) details of the phasing of these works.

Reason: To allow the Planning Authority to assess these aspects in the interests of residential amenity.

15. That before occupation of the last 3 residential units within the development hereby permitted the landscaping scheme approved under the terms of condition 14 above shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the residential amenity.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 30th March 2004

Memo from NLC Transportation Section received 17th May 2004 Memo from NLC Protective Services received 27th April 2004 Memo from NLC Community Services received 22nd April 2004 Memo from NLC Housing and Property Services received 14th April 2004 Letter from S.E.P.A. (West) received 12th May 2004 Letter from Scottish Water received 15th April 2004 Letter from British Gas Transco received 8th April 2004 Letter from Scottish Power received 8th April 2004 Letter from The Coal Authority received 7th April 2004

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

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Fraser Miller at 01 698 302087. Application No: S/04/00473/FUL

Date Registered: 30th March 2004

Applicant : Roman Road Hall 14 Roman Road Motherwell Lanarkshire

Agent Mr David Pollard 28 Dalbeatie Braes Chapelhall ML6 8GQ

Development: Refurbishment and Extension to Church Hall

Location: Roman Road Hall 14 Roman Road Motherwell Lanarkshire

Ward: 2: Calder Valley Councillor Annita McAuley

Grid Reference: 275421 657353

File Reference: SIPLIBII 3/2/MT

Site History: No relevant history

Development Plan: The site lies within an area zoned as Secondary, Village and Neighbourhood Commercial Areas within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004).

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: 1 Representation Letter

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

This application seeks permission for the erection of an extension to a church hall on Roman Road, Motherwell. The church hall is located to the rear of commercial properties on Merry Street and is surrounded by residential properties on Roman Road and a sheltered housing complex called Glenview Court on the adjacent Millburn Street. The applicant proposes to erect a single storey L-shaped extension onto the north western and north eastern elevations. This will provide four extra meeting rooms. The design of the proposed extension is considered to be acceptable.

The site is covered by policy RTL 6 "secondary, Village and Neighbourhood Commercial Areas in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). It is considered that the development is in accordance with these policies.

One letter of objection has been received been received from a resident of Glenview Court. He is concerned that construction of the extension will create noise and nuisance that will be detrimental to PLANNING APPLICATION NO: S/04/00473/FUL

REFURBISHMENT & EXTENSION TO CHURCH HALL

ROMAN ROAD HALL, 14 ROMAN ROAD, MOTHERWELL * Representation his health. It is my opinion that the nuisance created by such works is generally short lived and inherent in the development process and it is unlikely to be to such an extent that it will be detrimental to Mr Martin's health. As such it does not justify the refusal of this application.

My Transportation Section is concerned that the existing car park is sub-standard and that not enough spaces can be provided for the activity generated at the site. It is conceded that this is so, but this has historically been the case. Given the built up nature of the surrounding area the applicant would be unable to increase the number of car parking spaces. Therefore, my Transportation Section have recommended changes to the existing car park and access. These will form the basis of a planning condition.

It is my opinion that the proposed extension is acceptable, and despite the concerns of the objector it is recommended that planning permission be granted.

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

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

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the surrounding area.

3. That before the development starts, details of a scheme for the existing car park, showing:

a) the provision of a turning area b) the position of parking bays c) the widening of the existing access to 5 metres d) the reinstatement of the footway across the access e) the installation of a dropped kerb footway crossover

shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and thereafter implemented in accordance with this approved plan and maintained as a car park.

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

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 30th March 2004

Memo from NLC Transportation Section received 29th April 2004 Letter from Mr Martin, 110 Glenview Court, Motherwell received 23rd April 2004.

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

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mark Thomson at 01 689 3021 36. Application No: S/04/00486/FUL

Date Registered: 6th April 2004

Applicant: James Duncan 62 Birds Field Street Burnbank Hamilton ML3 ONP

Development: Change of Use from Shop (Class 1) to Hot Food Shop

Location: 115 High Street Newarthill Motherwell Lanarkshire MLI 5JH

Ward: 29: Newarthill Councillor John Lafferty

Grid Reference: 278503.659607.

File Reference:

Site History: No relevant site history

Development Plan: The site is covered by Secondary, Village and Neighbourhood Commercial policies in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised (Modified 2001 and 2004). The development is also covered by Policy RTLI 1 (Bad Neighbour Developments) within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised (Modified 2001 and 2004). This policy sets out the criteria for assessing applications as hot food shop.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: 1 Representation Letter and 1 petition with 4 signatures

Newspaper Advertisement: 22 April 2004

Comments:

This application seeks planning permission for a change of use of vacant shop to hot food shop at 115 High Street, Newarthill. One letter of objection and one petition containing 4 signatures have been received in connection with the proposal and the comments are detailed in my accompanying report. For reasons contained in my report it is recommended that planning permission is refused.

Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. That the proposed hot food shop would encourage on-street parking at High Street in the vicinity of pedestrian crossing resulting in congestion at a busy location all to the detriment pedestrian and of road safety.

2. That the proposed hot food shop would be liable to give rise to the generation of fumes, noise and general disturbance outwith normal business hours to the detriment of the amenity of the adjacent residents. As such the proposal would be contrary to Policy RTll of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). \'..--_..I-.*. \>,:\; \ <,$,,, Newarthill in '. !

PLANNING APPLICATION NO: S/04100486/FUL

CHANGE OF USE FROM SHOP (CLASS 1) TO HOT FOOD SHOP (CLASS 2) 115 HIGH STREET, NEWARTHILL d * Representation Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 31st March 2004

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

Memo from NLC Transportation Section received 20th May 2004 Memo from NLC Head Of Protective Services received 11th May 2004

Letter from Y Zaazad,Chanda Cottage, 3 Woodilee Road, Newarthill received 6th May 2004. Petition containing 4 signatures from Salis Fast Food, 63 Carfin Road, Newarthill received 6th May 2004.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Rosaleen Toal at 01698 302104. AP P L ICAT1 0 N N0. S/04/00486/F U L

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I The application site is situated within High Street, Newarthill. The property is part of a row of shops with one dwellinghouse between. The dwellinghouse joins the application on the east side. There is also housing located to the rear and directly across from the site.

1.2 The applicant is seeking planning permission to change the use of the shop to a hot food take away shop.

2. Develop ment Plan

2.1 The application raises no strategic issues and therefore the Development Plan is established through the Local Plan.

2.2 The application site is located in an area covered by policy RTL6 (Secondary, Village and Neighbourhood Commercial Areas) within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). In addition Policy RTLll (Bad Neighbour Developments) also within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised (Modified 2001 and 2004) sets out the criteria for assessing such applications as hot food shop.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Consultation took place with both NLC Transportation Section and Protective Services.

3.2 The Transportation Section have recommended refusal in the interest of road and pedestrian safety as the granting of this application, by the nature of the “hot food” business, will increase the number of vehicles in the vicinity of the pedestrian crossing.

3.3 Protective Services have no objections to the proposal subject to the development complying with health and safety legislation and that the ventilation system does not exceed Noise Rating Curve NR35 between the hours of 7 am and 8 pm and Noise Rating Curve NR25 at all other times.

3.4 One letter and one petition containing four signatures have been received in connection with the proposal. The main points of objection are on the following grounds:

a) The application site is beside a pedestrian crossing where there has already been a fatality. b) An additional hot food shop close to a pedestrian crossing, on a busy road will add to the congestion at this location. c) The village already has an abundance of fast food shops.

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.

4.2 The site lies within an area covered by Policy RTL 6 (Secondary, Village and Neighbourhood Commercial) within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised (Modified 2001 and 2004) which will support changes of use to hot food shops where they do not adversely affect the character and amenity of the relevant area. In addition In addition Policy RTLll (Bad Neighbour Developments) also within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised (Modified 2001 and 2004) sets out the criteria for assessing such applications as hot food shops as follows:

1) the impact upon the character and amenity of the adjoining area 2) the resulting mix of retail and non retail uses 3) detailed design considerations 4) provisions for vehicular access, servicing, parking and the impact on pedestrian safety and traffic circulation

4.3 In assessing this particular proposal, it is considered that the relevant determining factors are whether the hot food shop is acceptable in terms of location, traffic safety and effect on adjoining neighbours. The application site is located in close proximity to a pedestrian crossing and adjacent to traffic restrictions prohibit waiting and loading in the vicinity of the site from 8am to 6 pm Monday to Saturday. It is therefore considered that the proposal would result in increased numbers of vehicles (including services vehicles) braking, parking, accelerating and generally manoeuvring in the vicinity of the pedestrian crossing. As such the proposal would be detrimental to pedestrian and road safety.

4.4 The application site is also adjoining a residential dwellinghouse with additional residential properties being situated to the rear and directly across the road. It is therefore considered that the amenity of the residents will be affected by the proposal as the development would give rise to the generation of fumes, noise and general disturbance outwith normal business hours to the detriment of the surrounding properties.

4.5 It should be noted that the objector’s concerns about the abundance of fast food shops in the area is not a material consideration in this application given the spread of such establishments along the length of the High Street.

4.6 In view of the above I consider the proposed development to be contrary to policy RTI 1 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001and 2004). I would therefore recommend that permission be refused. Application No: S/04/00679/FUL

Date Registered: 21 st April 2004

Applicant : 02 (UK) Ltd Clo Agent

Agent Stappard Howes Mr Jodie Kane 122 Dundyvan Road Coatbridge ML5 IDE

Development: Installation of 12.5 Metre High Telecommunications Mast & Associated Ground Equipment

Location: Land South West Of The Loanhead Road Junction, A723, Carfin Motherwell Lanarkshire

Ward: 28: Mossend East And New Stevenston North Councillor Kevin McKeown

Grid Reference: 276921 659223

File Reference: SIPLl51281RT

Site History: Planning permission granted 5 January 2004 for the dualling of the Holytown to Carfin Link Road and Junction to A8, Motherwell

Development Plan: The site is covered by Policy TR6 (Ravenscraig Access Improvements) and the development is covered by Policy CS6 (Telecommunications Development) both within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004).

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: NLC Education Department (objection)

Representations: None Received

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

This planning application seeks permission for the erection of a 12.5 metre high telecommunications mast and associated ground equipment on land to the south west of the Loanhead Road Junction, A723, Carfin.

The applicant is proposing to site the proposed mast on land, which has recently received planning permission for the dualling of the A723 (planning reference no S/02/00064/OUT). Furthermore, there would appear to be no suitable arrangement for vehicles while either constructing the mast or for future maintenance work. My Transportation Section has therefore recommended that the application be refused as the mast would represent a road traffic hazard. One objection has been received from NLC Department of Education and I recommend that permission is refused. PLANNING APPLICATION No S / 04 / 00679 / FUL

INSTALLATION OF 12 5 METRE TELECOMMUNICATIONS MAST AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT p.mu.dIbrn n orblrr. SWlrnDm% Ilh ~236~16~10FIX O~BBIQ~~ LAND SOUTH WEST OF THE LOANHEAD ROAD 05 Lm.ns.UOBO11L JUNCTION WITH A723. CARFIN, MOTHERWELL. Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. That the telecommunications mast will impede the development of the A723 Carfin to Holytown Link Road to Dual Carriageway and as such it would be contrary to Policy TR6 (Ravenscraig Access Improvements) within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004).

2. That the telecommunications mast would appear to have no suitable arrangement for vehicles either constructing the mast and equipment, or for servicing the same. The development would therefore represent a danger in terms of road safety as a development of this nature, close to a roundabout would encourage vehicles to stop on, or mount the grass verge of the carriageway.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 21 st April 2004 Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004) Memo from NLC Transportation Section 6th May 2004 Memo from NLC Department of Education received 13 May 2004

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Rosaleen Toal at 01 698 3021 04. APPLICATION NO. S1041006791FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and ProDosal

1.I The applicant 02 (UK) Ltd seeks planning permission for the erection of 12 .5 metre high telecommunications mast and associated ground equipment on land south west of the Loanhead Road Junction, A723, Carfin. The applicant has also provided details of alternative site search, the necessary ICNIRP declaration confirming that the proposal is within public health standards and have stated that the proposed mast would fill a gap in their current coverage.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The application site is covered by Policy TR6 (Ravenscraig Access Improvements) within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). Within this policy the Council will seek to initiate and support improvements to the public transport and road networks which are required in association with the redevelopment of the former Ravenscraig site including the upgrading of the Carfin-Holytown Link Road to Dual Carriageway.

2.2 The development is covered by Policy CS6 (Telecommunications Development) also within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). This policy seeks that the Council will take a precautionary approach to such developments. It seeks to keep such developments away from residential areas, schools, nurseries and hospitals and locate them in industrial and commercial areas.

2.3 The policy also states that applicants should provide evidence that they have done an alternative site search, demonstrate how the proposal fits into the wider network and make an ICNIRP declaration, which states that the proposal is within acceptable safety limits in terms of non- ionising radiation.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 The Transportation Section have recommended that the application is refused as the application site is close to a roundabout which is due to be significantly enlarged for the dualling of the A723. Furthermore they have also advised that there would appear to be no suitable arrangement for vehicles either constructing the mast and equipment, or for servicing the same.

3.2 One representation has been received in connection with the proposal from NLC Education Department. The main concerns raised is the perception of the school community, however uninformed, is that these installations may present a danger and therefore affect parents' decisions on the appropriateness of schools.

4. PIann i ncl Assessment and Co nc Iu s io ns

4.1 In accordance with Nation Planning Policy Guidance 19 (NPPG19) on Radio Telecommunications and Policy CS6 in the emerging Local Plan, the applicant has provided information on how the proposal would fit into the existing network and the necessary ICNIRP declaration which proves that the proposal is within international accepted limits in terms of radiation and public safety. This effectively means that concerns regarding effects on public health cannot be considered as a material consideration. 4.2 With regard to road traffic issues the proposed development lies within the land take boundary for the Carfin to Holytown Dual Carriageway roadworks, as such the development would impede the development of the A723 Carfin to Holytown Link Road to Dual Carriageway and as such it would be contrary to Policy TR6 (Ravenscraig Access Improvements) within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004).

4.3 Furthermore there would appear to be no suitable arrangement for vehicles either constructing the mast and equipment, or for servicing the same. The development would therefore represent a danger in terms of road safety as a development of this nature, close to a roundabout would encourage vehicles to stop on, or mount the grass verge of the carriageway. As such the proposal would be a road safety hazard.

4.4 Taking the above into account I recommend that permission is refused for these reasons. Application No: S/04/00713/FUL

Date Registered: 29th April 2004

Applicant: Vodafone Ltd clo Agent

Agent Mono Consultants Ltd Ginny Hall 48 St Vincent Street Glasgow G2 5TS

Development : Erection of 17.4 Metre High Telecommunications Mast and Associated Ground Equipment

Location: 5 Hunter Street Bellshill Lanarkshire ML4 IRN

Ward: 30: Hattonrigg Councillor Harry Curran

Grid Reference: 273358660122

File Reference: S/PL/l7/48(5)/RT

Site History: No relevant site history

Development Plan: The proposed development is covered by Policy CS6 (Telecommunications Development) within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004).

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: Councillor Harry Curran (objection) NLC Education Department (objection) Community Council (objection) Representations: 2 Representation Letters

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Comments:

This planning application seeks planning permission for the erection of a 17.4 metre high telecommunications mast in the form of a monopole and associated ground equipment on land to the rear of 5 Hunter Street, Bellshill. The applicant Vodafone has submitted the necessary ICNIRP declaration confirming that the proposal is within accepted public health standards.

Three objections have been received in connection with the proposal. These are from the Local Member, the Education Department and Bellshill Community Council. However, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of location and visual impact. This application is therefore considered to be acceptable and as such, is recommended for approval subject to the attached conditions.

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started within five years of the date of this permission. I PLANNiNG APPLICATION NO: S/04/00713/FUL Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

2. That in the event that the equipment becomes redundant it must be removed and the site reinstated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority within one month of the equipment becoming redundant.

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

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 22nd April 2004

Memo from NLC Transportation Section received 19th May 2004 Memo from NLC Education Department received 20 May 2004 Letter from Bellshill Community Council received 24 May 2004 Letter from Councillor Harry Curran, PO Box 14, Civic Centre, Motherwell, MLI IT\ I received 17th F 2004.

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

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Rosaleen Toal at 01698 3021 04. APPLICATION NO. S/04/00713/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1 .I The applicant Vodafone seeks planning permission for the erection of a 17.4 metre high telecommunications mast and associated ground equipment on land between the rear of 5 Hunter Street and the Cultural Centre in Bellshill. The proposed mast takes the form of a single mono pole with 6 antennae and 2 dishes on top. The applicant has also provided details of alternative site search, the necessary ICNIRP declaration confirming that the proposal is within public health standards and have stated that the proposed mast would fill a gap in their current coverage.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The development is covered by Policy CS6 (Telecommunications Development) within the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). This policy seeks that the Council will take a precautionary approach to such developments. It also seeks to keep such developments away from residential areas, schools, nurseries and hospitals and locate them in industrial and commercial areas

2.2 The policy also states that applicants should provide evidence that they have done an alternative site search, demonstrate how the proposal fits into the wider network and make an ICNIRP declaration, which states that the proposal is within acceptable safety limits in terms of non-ionising radiation.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 The Transportation Section has no objections to the proposal.

3.2 Three letters of representation have been received in connection with the proposal. These are from the Local Member Councillor Harry Curran, NLC Education Department and Bellshill Community Council. The main grounds of the Councillors objection is that the mast will be too close to the town centre and nearby housing. The Community Council has also objected to the proposal on the location of the mast and NLC Education Department advised that the perception of the school community, however uninformed, is that these installations may present a danger and therefore affect parents’ decisions on the appropriateness of schools.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 In accordance with Nation Planning Policy Guidance 19 (NPPG19) on Radio Telecommunications and Policy CS6 in the emerging Local Plan, the applicant has provided information on how the proposal would fit into the existing network and the necessary ICNIRP declaration which proves that the proposal is within international accepted limits in terms of radiation and public safety. This effectively means that concerns regarding effects on public health cannot be considered as a material consideration.

4.2 With regard to the objections on the location of the mast. It should be noted that the mast is proposed to the rear of a plumbing workshop which lies within the designated Town Centre area as detailed in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001 and 2004). Therefore when assessed against policy CS6 (Telecommunications Development) it is considered that this location is acceptable as this policy seeks that the Council will take a precautionary approach to such developments and keep such developments away from residential areas, schools, nurseries and hospitals and locate them in industrial and commercial areas.

4.3 Furthermore, the proposed mast is approx. least 90 metres from the nearest dwellinghouse and is approx. 190 metres away from Belvidere Primary School and 150 metres from Bellshill Academy. The applicant has provided the necessary ICNIRP declaration, which proves that the proposal is within internationally accepted limits in terms of radiation and public safety. The site’s location between the Cultural Centre and the Hunter Street premises does, in my opinion, mean that the site is in visual terrrls considered acceptable for the siting of the mast. It is thus considered that the proposal complies with the relevant National Planning Guidance and the relevant Local Plan policy.

4.4 Taking the above into account I would recommended that permission is granted subject to the attached conditions.