North L anarkshire Council

PI an n ing Ap p Iicat ion s for conside rat ion of Planning and Transportation Committee

Committee Date : 25'h February 2010

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

1 APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

25th February 2010

No. Application No Applicant DevelopmentlSite Recommendation

6 N/09/00675/F UL Shore Energy Commercial, Industrial and Municipal Grant Limited Waste Material Recovery and Request for Site Renewable Energy Facility Visit and comprising Main Processing Building Hearing and Office Block Land At Former Shanks & McEwan Site 251 Glasgow And Edinburgh Road Coatbridge

61 N/09/0137O/FUL Transform Conversion of Playing Field to Grant Schools Synthetic Sports Pitch Including Fencing and Floodlighting St Andrew's High School 9 Old Monkland Road Old Monkland Coatbridge

67 N/09/0139O/FUL Mr Graeme Bell Construction of Two Dwellinghouses Refuse 4 Drumgray Lane Greengairs Airdrie

73 N/10/00004/FUL Vodafone Limited Installation of a 21m Lattice Grant Telecommunications Tower with Associated Apparatus Site At The Kingfisher Dowanfield Road Seafar Cum bernauld

78 NI10/00008/FUL Greengairs Proposed Extension to Community Grant Community Centre to Form Sports Hall With Council Ancillary Changing Facilities Greengairs Community Centre Greengairs Road Greengairs

84 C/09/01261/FUL The Scottish Erection of 2 Semi Detached Grant (P) Veterans Garden Dwellinghouses at 149 -1 51 City Association Aitchison Street Airdrie

2 92 Mr Peter Hilly Formation of Beer Garden, External Grant Dining Area and Installation of Retractable Canopy Cover Dining Area (In Retrospect) at 54 Main Street, Glenboig, Coatbridge

98 North Lanarkshire Extension of Railway Station Car Grant Council Park (131 Spaces) including Formation of New Access and Roundabout at Sunnyside Station Sunnyside Road Coatbridge

109 S/08/01514/FUL The Albert Trust Erection of 55 Dwellinghouses Grant (P) Land Adjacent To 117 Newarthill Road Carfin

123 S/09/00633/FUL Mr John Clark Erection of a Funeral Home with Grant Parking and Access Land At Reema Road Bellshill

133 S/09/01 1 OO/AM D Cala Substitution of House Types & Grant Management Erection of Four Additional Detached Units (Amendment to 07/01534IFUL) Motherwell College Dalzell Drive Motherwell

143 S/O9/0 11 50/AM D Dundas Estates & Amendment from 8 Townhouses to Grant Development CO 10 Flatted Dwellings and Ltd repositioning of block 3 Traction House Tinkers Lane Motherwell

151 5/09/01 185lFUL North Lanarkshire Construction of 20 Dwellinghouses Grant Council Former Cambusnethan Primary School Thrashbush Road Cambusnethan Wishaw

161 Mr & Mrs William Erection of a Detached Grant (P) Dunbar Dwellinghouse East Fairybank Farm 9 Bothwellshields Road Newhouse

3 169 S/09/01287/FUL Mr Mohammed Change of Use from Existing Vacant Grant Hamidsha Retail Premises to Hot Food Takeaway Unit 2 lnnerleithen Drive Coltness Wishaw

176 S/09/01381/FUL Greenhill Country Formation of Two Residential Plots Grant Estates Greenhill Farm Greenhill Road Hareshaw Motherwell

187 S/09/01422/FUL James Muirhead Erection of Dwellinghouse and Grant Alterations to No 18 Hirst Road to Form Two Dwellinghouses 18 Hirst Road Harthill

195 S/09/01442/AMD Bett Homes Amendment to Planning Consent Grant (P) S/05/02114/FUL - Additional 8 Flatted Dwellings to Increase Units from 52 to 60 and Alterations to Car Park Motherwell Bridge Logans Road Motherwell

204 S/09/01463/FUL North Lanarkshire Installation of Additional Windows, Grant Council Doors, and Ventilation Grilles on the Ground Floor, Replacement of Curtain Walling on the First Floor, Formation of Roof Level Plantroom & Formation of New Dormer to Fly Tower Civic Centre Windmillhill Street Motherwell

21 0 SI10/00039/MSC Eurocentral Erection of Two Industrial Units with Grant Partnership Ltd Ancillary Office Space and Associated Access Roads, Car Parking & Service Yard Areas Plot F Condor Glen Eurocentral Holytown

4 C/09/01261/FUL: If planning permission granted, decision notice should not be issued until Section 75 Agreement concluded to restrict the occupation of the proposed and adjoining houses.

S/08/01514/FUL: If planning permission is granted, decision notice should not be issued until Section 69 Agreement is Concluded and financial contribution is made towards off site Play Provision S/O9/0 281/FUL: If planning permission is granted, decision notice should not be issued until Section75 Agreement is concluded regarding occupancy restriction S/09/0 4421FUL: If planning permission is granted, decision notice should not be issued until Section 69 Agreement is concluded & financial contribution is made towards off site Play Provision

5 Application No: Proposed Development:

N/09/00675/FUL Commercial, Industrial and Municipal Waste Material Recovery and Renewable Energy Facility comprising Main Processing Building and Office Block

Site Address:

Land At Former Shanks & McEwan Site 251 Glasgow And Edinburgh Road Coatbridge ML5 4UG

Date Registered :

22ndJune2009

Applicant: Agent: Shore Energy Ltd Golder Associates (UK) Ltd c/o 'Findony' 2nd Floor East, Sirius Building Muckhart Road The Clocktower Dunning South Gyle Crescent Pethshire Edinburgh PH2 ORA Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Major No

Ward: Representations: 010 Coatbridge South 4298 representations received. James Brooks, lan Ferrie, John Higgins,

Recommendation: Grant Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification: The proposals are considered acceptable as they accord with ;;e terms of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 incorporating the 4 alteration 2008 and the Monklands District Local Plan 1991, the National Waste Strategy (NWS) and Area Waste Plan (AWP) where it has been adequately demonstrated that the proposals are acceptable in terms of need, comply with the proximity principle and offer the best practicable environmental option (BPEO) for dealing with the identified waste streams. There was no objection from statutory consultees including the Scottish Government, SEPA, SNH, Scottish Transport, and Scottish Water or from other organisations such as SWT and RSPB. There was no objection from the respective NLC Services requested to comment on the application. The accompanying ES demonstrates that environmental impacts from the development would not be significant and it is agreed that the suggested mitigation measures can be controlled through appropriate conditions.

Despite the significant volume of representation received in regards to the application, it has been determined that the material terms of objections cannot be sustained. The proposals accord with the terms of the development plan and are acceptable when assessed against the NWS, AWP and other material considerations noted in the main report.

6 *z.zk.r---d"T W09/006751FUL CY.,DIIT :r-!*d ~~~~~wL.~ Mr J on G awey k:T=*:zr.='*m ..,*.ILand at Former Shanks & McEwan Site 251 Glasgow and Edinburgh Road Coatbridge Commercial, Industrial and Municipal Waste Materiai Recovety and Renewable Energf Facility comprising Main Processing Building and Office Block

7 Proposed Conditions:-

1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started within three 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 hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

3. That within 4 weeks of completion of all building works on site, of the development hereby permitted, a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, to monitor the development, to enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control.

4. That the development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved details submitted as part of the application and no change to those details shall be made without prior written approval of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To clarify the details on which this approval of permission is founded.

5. That unless otherwise agreed with the Planning Authority in consultation with SEPA, the amount of residual municipal waste treated in the energy from waste plant in any 12 month period shall not exceed 25% of the total municipal waste arisings from the potential feeder local authorities identified in the Environmental Statement produced in support of the development hereby approved.

Reason: To ensure the operation of the development accords with Scottish Government waste policy in respect of municipal waste streams.

6. That unless otherwise agreed with the Planning Authority in consultation with SEPA, only residual waste (i.e. waste remaining after all practicable and reasonable efforts have been made to extract recyclable and, where appropriate, compostable material) shall be treated in the energy from waste part of the development hereby approved.

Reason: In order to ensure that only residual waste is treated in the energy from waste plant in accordance with SEPAs Thermal Treatment of Waste Guidelines 2009 and Scottish Government waste policy.

7. That prior to the acceptance of any waste materials into the site, the Materials Recycling Facility must be fully operational. This facility shall be implemented in accordance with the approved plans prior to the operation of the development hereby approved and all waste going into the Energy from Waste plant shall, where appropriate, first be pre treated and sorted in the Materials Recycling Facility.

Reason: To ensure the operation of the development accords with Scottish Government waste policy and accords with the principles of sustainable waste management.

8 8. That prior to the acceptance of waste materials at the site, the development hereby permitted shall be designed and constructed to enable the export of electricity to the national grid in accordance with the approved plans.

Reason: To ensure that the plant is capable of exporting electricity to the national grid in accordance with Scottish Government policy and SEPAs thermal treatment guidelines on maximising energy recovery from such facilities.

9. That prior to the acceptance of waste materials at the site, the developer shall carry out ambient atmospheric monitoring in the locality of the proposed development. The monitoring shall include data on background levels of oxides of nitrogen and particulate material in the PMIO and PM2.5 size ranges in the area. The location, methodology, and survey period shall be agreed in writing by SEPA in consultation with the Planning Authority in advance of monitoring being undertaken.

Reason: To enable SEPA and the Planning Authority to ascertain pre-operational air quality data at the locus, to ensure that relevant air quality standards can be met during the operation of the development in the interests of amenity.

10. That unless otherwise agreed in writing and before works start, the developer shall submit for approval a site traffic management plan that shall be designed to ensure that noise emitted from waste delivery vehicles is minimised. In particular this shall include provisions to ensure that waste delivery vehicles can enter and leave the waste processing building in a forward gear.

Reason: To minimise noise impacts from the operation of the waste management facility in the interests of amenity.

11. That before any development commences on site, details of a Site Waste Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority in consultation with SEPA and implemented thereafter in accordance with the approved details during the construction of the development.

Reason: To ensure best practice is adopted in dealing with waste during the construction phase of the development in accordance with Scottish Government policy.

12. That no development shall commence on site until a full site specific construction method statement (CMS) is submitted and approved by the Planning Authority, in consultation with SEPA. The CMS shall incorporate detailed pollution avoidance and mitigation measures for all construction elements potentially capable of giving rise to pollution including issues relating to the construction of the building, impacts on hydrogeology and disposal of contaminated land. Specifically the statement shall address the following and the construction of the development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed details:

0 How contaminated land will be dealt with; treated and disposed of as necessary 0 Details of how disturbance to groundwater will be minimised, including any de- watering proposals 0 Details of the storage of construction fuels, materials, raw materials and by- production 0 Temporary SUDS measures 0 Dust mitigation methods.

Reason: To protect the water environment from any damage arising from the construction and operation of this facility.

9 13. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the requirements of the publication titled 'Drainage Assessment : A Guide for Scotland, and any other advice subsequently published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) or the Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party (SUDSWP). The post-development surface water discharges shall ensure that the rate and quantity of run-off to any watercourse are no greater than the pre-development run-off for any storm return period unless it can be demonstrated that a higher discharge is necessary to protect or improve any aquatic habitat at or near the site. SUDS shall still be provided even where discharges are proposed to public sewers notwithstanding any conditions imposed by Scottish Water. If the area of ground illustrated for the SUDS is inadequate for the purpose, a revised layout drawing for this part of the proposed development shall be submitted to and for the approval of the Planning Authority prior to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the said Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater.

14 That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 13 shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Within three months of the construction of the SUDS, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in drainage works) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved plans.

Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater.

15. That prior to the start of development, a Travel Plan, that sets out proposals for reducing dependency on the private car shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with Transport Scotland-Trunk Road Network Management Directorate. The Travel Plan shall identify measures to be implemented; the system of management, monitoring, review and reporting; and the duration of the plan and shall generally be in accordance with the Travel Plan Framework prepared by Arup and dated June 2009 as submitted with the application.

Reason: To ensure the operation of the development accords with the requirements of SPP (Consolidated) and PAN 75 Planning for Transport.

16. That prior to the start of development, a barrier shall be erected along the site's boundary with the A8 Trunk Road. Full details of its design and location along with a schedule of maintenance shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, in consultation with Transport Scotland-Trunk Road Network Management Directorate.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety at the locus.

17. That notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (Scotland) Regulations 1984, no advertisements shall be permitted adjacent to the A8 Trunk Road.

Reason: To ensure that there is no distraction to drivers on the trunk road network in the interests of road safety.

10 18. That prior to the start of development full details of any lighting proposed within the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Authority. The design of the lights shall incorporate downward reflectors in accordance with the biodiversity enhancement measures required under the terms of condition 19.

Reason: To ensure that there will be no distraction or dazzle to drivers on the A8 trunk road in the interests of road safety at the locus.

19 That prior to the start of works the Best Practice Measures for Wildlife and the Biodiversity Enhancement Measures detailed in Annex G (Ecology) of the Environmental Statement are fully implemented. These shall include the following mitigation measures:

Best Practice Measures

0 a further survey for Otters undertaken prior to the commencement of works on the new discharge into the Calder Water if more than 12 months have elapsed since the date of the last survey on 13'h March 2009. On completion of this survey, a full assessment of the potential impacts of the proposed works on otters shall be undertaken including detailed mitigation measures to avoid, reduce or mitigate any predicted negative impacts.

Biodiversity Enhancement Measures

0 A programme to install bat boxes on the edge of the adjacent North Calder Water SlNC woodland; 0 Landscaping using native plant species 0 Creation and maintenance of species rich grassland areas, and 0 Downward reflectors to be installed on any artificial lighting to minimise impacts on bats and other wildlife.

Reason: In the interests of nature conservation within the site and surrounding area.

20. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping incorporating biodiversity enhancement measures and native tree planting shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, in consultation with SNH and NLC Ecology and it shall include:-

(a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, boundary treatment, wild grass seeding and turfing; (b) a scheme of native tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development (d) a detailed timetable for all landscaping works which shall provide for these works being carried out contemporaneously with the development of the site. (e) a management and maintenance scheme for these works

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail in consultation with SNH and NLC Greenspace (Biodiversity)

21. That all works included in the scheme of landscaping and native tree planting, approved under the terms of condition 20 above, shatl be completed in accordance with the approved timetable, and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the full occupation of the development hereby permitted, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

11 Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the site, to mitigate adverse effects on views of the development from outlying residential areas and to benefit local biodiversity.

22 That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175 : 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required.

Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future employees and visitors to the waste management facility.

23 That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 22, shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the Remediation Strategy.

Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future employees and visitors to the waste management facility.

24. That before the development hereby permitted is brought into use a revised parking and manoeuvring plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the revised parking plan shall demonstrate that a minimum of 50 on-site parking spaces can be provided at the site and all the parking and manoeuvring areas thereby approved 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.

25. That for the duration of the construction works one or more Site Notices, printed on durable material, shall be displayed in a prominent place at or in the vicinity of the development such that it is readily visible to the public; the Notice must accord with Schedule 7 of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006 and must give details of the approved development, its address, details of the planning permission and information on where further information about the development can be obtained.

Reason To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006, to monitor the development, to enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control.

Backnround Papers:

Representation Letters

Refer to Appendix A for list of names and addresses -this appendix is not part of this report but is available for viewing at the following locations:

12 Online on the Council's e-planning page - by entering reference 09100675 in the search field at the following web address httDs://eDlannina.northlan.aov.uk/Online/ Reception Desk at the Civic Centre, Motherwell Floor 3 Reception, Fleming House, 2 Tryst Road, Cumbernauld G67 1JW

Refer to Appendix B for comments and responses

Consultation Responses:

Letter from BT received 6'h July 2009. Letter from Scottish Water received 1Oth July 2009. Letter from SP Energy Networks received 13'h Juk 2009. Letters from The Scottish Government received 6 July and 17'h July 2009. Letters from Scottish Wildlife Trust received 21 July and 2ndSeptember 2009. E-Mail from RSPB received 14'h July 2009. Letter from Scotland Gas Networks received 17'h July 2009. Letter from Historic Scotland received 27'h July 2009. Memos from Protective Services received on 28'h July and 6'h October 2009. Letter from Health and Safety Executive received on 30thJuly 2009. Letter from JMP Consultants Ltd (Term Consultants to Transport Scotland-Trunk Road Network Management Directorate TS-TRNMD) received on 30 July 2009. Letter received from Scottish Natural Heritage received 31 July 2009. Letter from SPT received 6'h August 2009. Letter from Transport Scotland (TRNMD) received 24thAugust 2009. Memo from Conservation and Greening received 20thAugust 2009. Memo from Traffic and Transportation received 30thSeptember 2009. Letters from SEPA received 2gthOctober, !jthand lgihNovember 2009

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Colin Marshall on 01236 616459

Report Date:

15th February 201 0

13 Executive Summarv

1. Site and Proposal

1.1 Planning permission is being sought for a Commercial, Industrial and Municipal Waste Material Recovery and Renewable Energy Facility at the former Shanks & McEwan Site, 251 Glasgow And Edinburgh Road, Coatbridge (A80).

2. Representations

2.1 A total of 4298 representations were received in respect of the planning application.

3. Assessment Summary

3.1 Section 25 of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 1997 requires where making any determination under the Planning Act, regard is to be had to the development plan, and the determination shall be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The assessment is ordered as follows:

Development Plan 0 Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 incorporating the 4'h alteration 2008 0 Monklands District Local Plan 1991 (adopted 1995)

Material Considerations 0 Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan National Planning Policy and Guidance Environmental impacts identified in the Environmental Statement ES including: - Landscape and Visual Impacts - Air Quality - Land Quality - Hydrology and Flood Risk - Traffic - Noise - Ecology 0 Consultations 0 Representations

4. Development Plan

4.1 The site is not specifically identified in the structure plan although under the terms of Strategic Policy 9 a satisfactory case for the need for waste management facilities is required in terms of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Area Waste Plan. In addition Strategic Policy 9 requires a detailed assessment of the proposed development in terms of specific locational criteria and that the impact of the development on existing infrastructure is acceptable.

4.2 Under the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the proposed site is subject to multiple zoning as listed as follows:

0 ECON 2 Existing General Industrial Areas ECON 517 Rehabilitation of Industrial Sites-Carnbroe (South) 0 WDR 1 Landfill and Refuse Disposal 0 CUI6 Safety Restraint Areas-Landfill Gas

4.2 Whilst the proposed site area only extends to some 3.6ha (and as such under the 10 hectare threshold identified in the structure plan), it is considered that due to the regional function and operational requirements of the proposed waste management facility (in sourcing waste over a 30 mile radius of the site), the proposals are considered to be of strategic significance and as such, the proposals are required to

14 be assessed against the terms of Strategic Policy 9 including the AWP and other related policies. The application site is also zoned for industrial purposes in the current local plan.

4.3 The proposed development has been assessed against the Structure Plan and found to be in accordance with Strategic Policy 9 and therefore the Structure Plan. With regards to the local plan the site is allocated as an Existing General Industrial Area the proposed development is considered to be an industrial process. As such the proposed development is considered to be in accordance with the development plan

5. Material Considerations

5.1 North Lanarkshire Local Plan Finalised Draft - The relevant policies in the emerging state there is no general presumption in support of waste development. However such proposals need to be assessed under local environmental impact considerations, including the nature of the proposed working, impact on local communities, potential for long-term improvements to site appearance, site access and affect on traffic safety. There also has to be a demonstration of need for the facility. It is considered that the proposals would meet the terms of the above criteria as these issues have been addressed in the supporting ES information and there was no outstanding objection from consultation responses subject to conditions. As such it can be concluded that the proposals accord with the relevant policies of the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

5.2 National Planninq Policv & Guidance - Following an assessment of the proposals it is considered that they would accord with the main aims and principles of national policy and guidance on waste management development.

5.3 Consultations - There are no outstanding objections from any statutory consultees, subject to conditions.

5.4 Environmental Statement - The proposed development is supported by an Environmental Statement that carefully assesses all of the impacts of the proposed development and where appropriate recommends mitigation measures. These can be covered by planning conditions.

6. Representations

6.1 Objections: The material terms of objections can be categorised under the following subject matters and a brief summary of the comments on each objection topic are included as follows: (a more detailed summary of the terms of objection with comments are considered in Appendix €3 attached to this report).

0 Pollution and Air Quality SEPA and Protective Services had no objections to the proposals following consideration of the assessment on air quality impact information contained in the Environmental Statement. It was concluded that the proposals would not have a significant impact on air quality due to the operation of the proposed waste management facility. 0 Lack of Need, Contrary to Development Plan, NWS, AWP and National Policy Following an assessment of the applicants supporting information it has been determined that the proposals are acceptable in terms of a need for the facility and is in accordance with the development plan, National Waste Strategy, Area Waste Plan and National Policy on waste management proposals. 0 Odour As all of the waste management processes would be contained within a large building that would be subject to negative air pressures and filters, odour emissions would be adequately controlled. SEPA advised that adequate controls over such problems would be controlled via their PPC permit regulations.

15 Noise Noise impacts were not considered to be significant. Vehicle movements would be restricted to daytime operation restrictions imposed by a planning condition. Vehicles delivering waste would enter the building and doors would close automatically before waste is tipped at the MRF sorting hall. Plant operations would be over a 24 hour period however these would be contained within the building. Traffic Impact The ES acknowledges that traffic levels would increase as a result of the development however their impact would not be significant. Transport Scotland supported this conclusion and it was noted that not all waste delivery vehicles visiting the site would need to make use of the Shawhead interchange. In mitigation of potential, yet minor impacts, the operator has agreed to introduce an operational management plan that would encourage contracted waste delivery companies to avoid routes through residential and designated AQM areas. Health Hazard and Proximity to Residential Areas The ES specifically considered the likely impact of air borne particulates on sensitive receptors including local residential areas and schools. It was concluded there would be no significant impact on human health. SEPA and Protective Services had no objection in this regard subject to conditions. Ecology and Wildlife Impacts The ES has demonstrated that there would be no significant impact of natural heritage interests including protected species. Scottish Natural Heritage agreed with the conclusions of the ES and had no objection subject to conditions relating to standard protection measures for adjacent habitats and species including otters, bats and breeding birds. The proposals would introduce some biodiversity improvement measures that would be welcomed by the Scottish Wildlife Trust and SNH. Waste Types The facility would be able to deal with municipal, industrial and commercial waste streams. The developer has confirmed that the proposed pyrolysis technology can deal with industrial waste but is not suitable for dealing with chemical, medical, toxic or hazardous waste. Moreover the type of materials dealt with at the plant would be controlled by SEPA via the PPC permit regulations. Site Selection and Proximity to Residential Areas The application site was considered the most suitable for a development of this nature in terms of its size, long term commercial availability, appropriate industrial zoning, avoidance of green belt, immediate access to the primary road network, proximity to sensitive receptors, avoidance of conflicts with other existing on site uses (Eurocentral), and have minimal visuaMandscape impact. The ES considered a comprehensive range of environmental impacts on sensitive receptors at and around the site, including the predicted impact on adjacent residential areas and concluded that such impacts would not be significant. Where some minor concerns were identified, mitigation measures are proposed to enable the development to be considered acceptable. Lack of Public Consultation The developer voluntarily held a public meeting and exhibition before the proposals were submitted and had previously distributed some 4,000 leaflets to local residents. The developer also attended a public meeting hosted by a local residents group. Other Matters The proposed pyrolysis process does not involve the incineration of waste despite the numerous claims made by objectors to the proposal. Whilst there was no specific emission data available for the proposed pyrolysis plant, the emission rates were assessed on an allowable worst case scenario basis and the ES considered data to be in compliance with the WID emissions limits set for such plants. SEPA were content that appropriate data would be provided during the PPC permit application. Any perceived loss of property value is not material to the consideration of a planning application. The previous year’s accidental fire at the tyre recycling depot had an unfortunate and detrimental impact on local residents

16 due to emissions from the fire. Whilst concern over such an incident is understandable this event has no relevance to the current proposals. The developer may seek grant assistance for potential job creation. Some minor errors were noted in the supporting information in terms of the vehicle trip numbers however these were overstated rather than underestimated and would not have resulted in any alterations to the impacts covered in the ES.

6 .2 Support: Two letters of support were also received. A letter of support was received from Scottish Enterprise who highlighted the economic importance of the proposed waste management facility and considered that the proposal represented an important sustainable alternative to landfill for waste arising from the commercial and industrial sector in the Lanarkshire region. Scottish Enterprise also considered the proposed facility would benefit Lanarkshire’s economic performance.

6.3 Further supporting comments were submitted via the e-planning portal which in summary offers the following material points of consideration:

0 The proposed Pyrolysis plant is not an incinerator (as generally considered by most objectors) as it does not include a combustion process but can be defined as the thermal decomposition of organic material through the absence of oxygen. 0 Pyrolysis techniques produce a fraction of the waste of an incinerator. 0 It is not a new untried technology (as suggested by others) but has been around for some time. Pyrolysis is 80% heat efficient; meaning 80% of the heat produced can be recovered and reusedlput to some other use. This technology should be embraced and is a better alternative than sending waste to landfill

6.4 Despite the significant volume of representation received in regards to the application, the points of objection have been carefully assessed. It has been determined that the objections cannot be sustained and do not raise sufficient reason or concerns that would justify a recommendation that planning permission should be refused. Specific amenity concerns can be addressed and controlled via conditions.

7. Conclusion

7.1 It has been concluded that the proposals accord with the terms of the development plan and are acceptable when assessed against the NWS, AWP and other material considerations noted in the main report. The proposals are considered to be acceptable and it is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

17 APPLICATION N0. C/09/00675/FU L

REPORT

1. Site Description and Location

1.1 Planning permission is being sought for a Commercial, Industrial and Municipal Waste Material Recovery and Renewable Energy Facility at the former Shanks & McEwan Site, 251 Glasgow And Edinburgh Road, Coatbridge (A80).

1.2 The application site extends to some 3.6 ha in area and is bounded to the south by the A8 duel carriageway, which forms the main arterial road linking Glasgow to Edinburgh where it merges with the M8 at Newhouse some 3 km east of the site. To the immediate east, the site is bounded by a narrow linear woodland feature which runs parallel with the main Motherwell-Coatbridge railway line. To the north and west of the application site there is an area of scrubland that was previously part of the former Shanks and McEwan landfill site, which bounds the North Calder Water. Shawhead Industrial Estate and residential area are located 490m to the northwest. The residential area of Carnbroe is situated some 200m northeast of the site beyond the railway line and woodland area. (Refer to location plan).

1.3 The site is currently occupied by a tyre recycling business (Envirotyre) and vehicle courier service (Courier Connections) and access to the site is via an existing priority road junction off the east bound A8 dual carriageway. It generally consists of hard standing, exposed made ground and supports limited vegetation.

1.4 The landform of the surrounding countryside is undulating with woodland on a mound north-east of the site offering some screening from much of the Carnbroe housing area. The transport corridors of the A8 and railway offer strong linear features in the local landscape and the North Calder Water (designated a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) by the Council) provides a green corridor valley feature between the site and the Shawhead industrial estate and outlying housing areas.

2. Proposed Development

2.1 The proposed development would involve the construction of a merchant operated (commercially open to all potential users) waste materials recovery and renewable energy generation facility for the treatment of non-hazardous waste from municipal, commercial and industrial waste stream sources. The proposed facility would be accommodated within one building and comprise 2 distinct sequential processes described in summary as follows.

0 Materials recovery and fuel preparation. This first stage would mechanically treat municipal, commercial and industrial waste to extract recyclable material from the waste streams and reduce mass by driving off moisture, using state- of-the-art mechanical and heat treatment (MHT) technologies.

0 Pyrolysis and power generation with waste heat recovery. The second stage of the plant is the renewable energy system. The pyrolysis process involves the thermal degradation of organic waste in the absence of free oxygen by the indirect application of heat to produce a combustible gas which, after suitable cleaning, is used as a fuel in an internal combustion engine (ICE) coupled to a generator, which then produces electric power. Heat energy, recovered from the ICE and other parts of the energy plant, is used as a heat source for the mechanical and heat treatment (MHT) stage of the process, which offers a sustainable energy production source.

2.2 The materials recovery element would have a capacity to process up to a maximum of 160,000 te (metric ton) per annum of non-hazardous (non special) commercial, industrial and municipal solid waste (MSW). Based on typical municipal waste

18 analysis data it is estimated that 20% (32,000 te) of all wastes would be recovered for recycling, and approximately 23% (36,800 te) of waste would consist of water, which would be evaporated or recycled, Approximately, up to 46% (73,600 te) would be converted to a refined biofuel, which would be further processed and utilised in the pyrolysis facility and an estimated 11% (17,600 te) of the remaining residual waste would need to be sent to a landfill site. However the actual process outputs would be determined by the composition of the inputs, therefore these figures are indicative and the processes shall ensure that landfill residue is minimised.

2.3 The renewable energy facility (pyrolysis process) would have the capacity to process 80,000 te per annum of refined biofuel, non-hazardous sludges and wastes that do not require pre-processing, and non-waste biomass. This facility would comprise 2 x 40,000 te per annum pyrolysis plants and gas engines. Based on a typical waste input analysis it is anticipated that the annual feed to the pyrolysis would comprise approximately:

73,600 te refined biofuel from the materials and fuel preparation facility; and 6,400 te waste and non waste biomass received directly into the pyrolysis units.

These proportions would be subject to the composition of materials received. Wastes that may be accepted at the renewable energy facility may include:

0 Refined biofuel from the material recovery process 0 Pre-processed refined biofuels imported to the site (potentially up to 20,000 te per annum to cover for variations in the quantity of bio-mass fuel) and; 0 Non-hazardous (non-special) sludges

2.4 All waste processing would be undertaken within one large building that would also accommodate a waste water treatment plant for the treatment of process water and an electricity substation. The processes as describe above would require the provisions of 2 chimney stacks, each 27m in height positioned near to the centre of the east and west elevations of the building. The footprint of the building would cover approximately 17,lOOmZ and would be industrial in character. The main building would extend to some 18m in height to roof eaves and the roof design would incorporate a shallow curve to minimise its overall height. An ancillary two storey office and entrylexit weighbridge control office, with respective footprints of 150m2 and 18m2are also proposed. The colour of the external metal cladding finishes on the main and supporting buildings would be grey and blue.

2.5 The building would accommodate a waste reception area on the north elevation, homogenising store, waste processing area, recyclate separation and fuel preparation area to the southern end of the building. Two energy generation and heat recovery plant areas would be situated adjacent to the processing plant area. On the west elevation there would be a waste water treatment plant, bio-filter plant and sub- station which would be lower in height to the main building but with similar external design characteristics.The proposed facility would operate on the following basis.

2.6 Materials Recovery and Fuel Preparation: Waste delivered to the recovery facility would enter the purpose built building through mechanically operated doors, which would close automatically after vehicle entry at its northern elevation. The atmosphere within the building would be maintained at negative pressure, and air vented via the process of bio-filter to control odorous emissions. The supporting Environmental Statement (ES) advises that there are no undesirable emissions to atmosphere at this stage of the plant process as odour and dust are controlled by active air management systems (within the building) before being passed through a bio-filter to atmosphere. Waste materials would be tipped in a reception area and fed into a screen using a mechanical shovel. All bulky items then caught by the screen would be assessed, and materials such as concrete and rubble would be segregated for re-use off site. Some items may also be rejected and placed with the residual waste (waste that cannot be further recycled, reused or composted) destined for

1'9 landfill. Wastes that would be suitable for further processing would be crushed or shredded and mixed into the process feed which would be collected in a homogenising feed store. This feedstock of processed waste would be subject to a range of mechanical and physical separation processes. For example, plastics, ferrous and non ferrous metals would be sorted using conventional equipment such as magnetic separators and optical sorters. The unrefined biomass fuel may also contain glass, ceramics, grit and stones. Further processing by a density separator would then remove unwanted fuel contaminants that would then result in a highly refined biomass fuel.

2.7 Thermal Treatment and Renewable Energy Generation: The refined biofuel from the initial preparation process would be fed directly into the pyrolysis process, or first blended with imported biomass prior to the thermal treatment. Pyrolysis, as noted above is the treatment of material in a controlled atmosphere in the absence of oxygen. Typically the process requires temperatures of between 500-900°C to break down molecular bonds. This process produces char and synthetic gas (syngas). The char would be recycled and possibly utilised as a soil conditioner for off-site use. The syngas would be collected in two Zoom3 storage tanks on site to provide heat for the pyrolysis units and to produce renewable electricity. The facility would generate a maximum output of 10 MW of electricity per annum subject to the composition of the received waste. 3 MW would be utilised by the facility and an anticipated maximum excess power of 7 MW of electrical power being exported to the national grid via one of several potential connection points close to the site. This would provide enough power to meet the annual demands of some 11,000 households. The supporting ES information advises the only emissions to atmosphere from the pyrolysis process are via the exhaust stack on the gas engine, which is required by law to meet the very stringent requirements of the Waste Incineration* Directive (WID) legislation considered by SEPA under the Pollution, Prevention and Control (Scotland) Regulations 2003 (PPC).

*The PPC regulations state that “whilst pyrolysis is not the incineration of waste, its control and regulation does fall under this SEPA Directive.”

2.8 Heat Recovery: Heat recovered from the gas engines would be transported via a system of internal pipe-work and used as a heat source in the mechanical and heat treatment process (MHT). It is estimated that approximately 143 MW of heat would be reused in the MHT process pre annum.

2.9 Residual Wastes: Residual wastes such as bulky material, gas bottles and large pieces of waste such as tree stumps or concrete blocks, or waste that cannot be recycled would be taken from the site for disposal as appropriate.

2.10 Process Outputs: Predicted solid process outputs for export from the site would include:

32,000te recyclates; 0 17,600te residual waste from the materials mechanical heat treatment process to landfill; 0 8,000te char from the pyrolysis and renewable energy plant.

This would result in a total of 57,600te of exported materials from the site

2.11 Drainage: Clean surface water runoff would be collected and discharged via a drainage pond to the North Calder Water. The drainage pond would be designed in accordance with the principles of SUDS criteria and shall be able to accommodate flood event equivalent to a 1 in 30 year return period. Process water discharges would be cleaned

2.12 Hours of Operation: It is proposed that the MHT process and renewable energy generation facilities would operate 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. Deliveries and

20 removal of recyclable and residual waste destined for landfill would occur during 0700-1900 hours Monday to Friday, and 0700-1300 hrs Saturday. Deliveries and/or export of materials would only occur outside these times in exceptional circumstances with the express permission of North Lanarkshire Council.

2.13 Employment: The applicant anticipates that there would be up to 50 full time jobs created by the proposed development with perhaps 4 teams of 5 staff operating on a shift rota basis to provide the required 24/7 operational requirements. In addition up to 30 staff may be employed for the core hours during Monday to Friday.

2.14 Traffic Generation: All waste material would be delivered to and removed from the site by road with all vehicles entering and leaving the site directly from the A8. As the A8 is dual carriageway, most vehicles would be obliged to pass under or through the Shawhead interchange, which is situated to the west of the site. The anticipated vehicle movements during the operational phase of the proposed development are as follows:

Daily Vehicle Movements (return journeys)

Day Staff Waste Deliveries Waste Removal Total

Mon-Fri 90 122 42 254 Sat. 40 ao 38 I58 Sun. 30 0 a 38

As noted above there would be two weighbridges on the site, one each for vehicles entering and leaving the site with associated control office. All waste delivery and removal vehicles would cross each weighbridge with loads recorded in accordance with SEPAs regulations.

2.15 The developer is to consider setting up a Liaison Group arranged with community representatives. This is to encourage dialogue and confidence over both the management and regulation of the waste management facility. It would be proposed that a representative from SEPA would be invited to such meetings.

3. Amlicant's Sumortinn Information

3.1 In accordance with the requirements of The Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999, the applicant has prepared an Environmental Statement (ES) to accompany the planning application for the development proposal. The submitted ES that accompanies this application includes assessments on the following topics:

0 Need for the scheme in terms of: National Waste Strategy (NWS); Area Waste Plan (AWP); Municipal/Commercial/lndustrial Waste Arisings; Waste Management Capaci ty within the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Area; Other Waste Management Facilities and Mass Balance (assessment of the proposals contribution to a sustainable waste management network for Scotland taking into account its strategic location for handling waste from surrounding areas and ability to utilise the plant as a renewable energy resource) Alternatives: Site Selection Existing Environment: The site and its surroundings Overview of the Proposed Development Best Practicable Environmental Option. Planning Policy Assessment Key Findings: Landscape and Visual Amenity; Air Quality; Hydrology and Flood Risk; Traffic; Noise; Ecology. 0 The ES also included a list of Technical Annexes that provided further details information on Landscape and Visual Amenity; Air Quality; Land Quality;

21 Hydrology & Flood Risk; Traffic; Noise and Ecology. 0 The ES Volume 2 includes Graphics and photomontages which cross relate to the above topics where required. 0 The ES Volume 3 includes consultation responses from the Scoping Exercise. 0 The ES also includes details of the applicant's pre-application public consultation exercise, which included an exhibition and public meeting. This was undertaken voluntarily as the application was submitted before the revised planning regulations requiring the statutory !re-application consultation PAC for major applications came into force on 3' August 2009. The applicant issued an updated public consultation brochure to all of the individuals who had already commented on the proposals.

3.3 The application is also supported by a Planning Supporting Statement, Transportation Statement and Travel Plan Framework, Habitat Survey (Update) 2009, Consultatio; (Update) November 2009. A copy letter from Shore Energy Ltd to SEPA 4 November 2009 was also included in support of the planning application. This offered further clarification of Need; Compliance with Area Waste Plan (AWP); Waste volumes capable of treatment by thermal process and Compliance with Scottish Government's 25% cap on MSW)

3.4 The applicant also submitted an Independent Review of Emissions Impacts, which provides further details of the Pyrolysis technique to underline that it does not involve an incineration process.

4. Site Historv

4.1 The application site forms part of a larger area that has historically been 2fbject to a variety of former industrial type uses including railway sidings (late 19 century), tramways (early to mid 20thcentury) and a slag works (mid 20th century). The site was also encompassed within the former Shanks and McEwan landfill operation, which ceased during the early 1970s. It is understood that waste materials deposited in this area comprised a mix of industrial, commercial and domestic wastes; however records are unavailable to confirm this. The former landfill site was subject to some basic restoration works that including tree planting, however the trees were felled in 2007. As noted above, the application site is currently occupied by a tyre recycling business (Envirotyre) and vehicle courier service (Courier Connections). The former landfill area, located north of the application site is currently vacant land and has a semi-derelict appearance. This area was subject to previous planning applications 07/02078/OUT and 09/00428/OUT, where planning permission for industrial and distribution was sought. However both these applications were refused planning permission. The most recent planning applications are listed as follows.

0 02/00597/FUL Erection of 20M High Telecommunications Mast and Associated Cabinet and Compound (Granted July 2002) 0 02/00963/FUL Formation of New Access to A8 Trunk Road (Granted August 2002) 0 07/00643/FUL Change of Use of General Industrial Area to Waste Transfer Station for Storage and Processing of Car Waste (Retrospective) (Granted August 2007) 0 07/02078/OUT Class 5 (General Industry) and Class 6 (Storage and Distribution) Development (In Outline) and Associated Works (Refused May 2008) 09/00428/OUT Class 5 (General Industry) and Class 6 (Storage and Distribution) Development in Outline (Refused June 2009 and now subject to an ongoing appeal to Scottish Ministers).

5. Development Plan

5.1 The proposals are considered to be of strategic significance and require to be assessed against the following structure plan Dolicies.

22 Structure Plan

5.2 Under the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 incorporating the Forth Alteration 2008 the proposals require to be assessed under Strategic Policy 9 (Assessment of Development Proposals) and other related strategic policies. Strategic Policy 10 would apply in the case of a departure (to be established or otherwise through Strategic Policy 9).

5.3 The Structure Plan recognises the aims of the Area Waste Plan (AWP) for Glasgow and Clyde Valley (2003). Strategic Policy 9A requires that waste management developments which exceeds the thresholds set out in Schedule 9 has been established in terms of SP9A(vi), its relationship to the requirements for waste management facilities as set out in the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Area Waste Plan 2003. (GCVAWP)

5.4 Strategic Policy 9B sets out that the location of the development is appropriate in terms of the need to: (i) safeguard and avoid the diversion or displacement Of investment from locations identified in SP6; (ii)(a) promote Urban Regeneration by giving preference to the use of brownfield urban land rather than greenfield land or open space;(vi) promote sustainable transport by: (vi)(b) the application criteria for sustainable locational choices as set out in Schedule 3(a)(ii); (vii) implement the waste management hierarchy as defined in the National Waste Strategy and priorities indentified in the Area Waste Plan; (viii) avoid the risk of flooding from all sources throughout the relevant water and drainage catchment area and safeguard the storage capacity of the functional flood plain; (ix) avoid negative impact on Health and Safety; and (x) contribute to the implementation of the Air Quality Strategy.

5.5 Strategic Policy 9C states that appropriate provision has been made by the developer for: (i) the infrastructure or facilities required to make the development acceptable; (ii) the implementation or facilities required to make the development acceptable; (iv) the provision of sustainable urban drainage systems in accord with the relevant drainage strategy or assessment; and (vi) arrangements for the maintenance of measures under criteria 9C(i) to (iv) noted above.

5.6 Strategic Policy 6 (Quality of Life and Health of Local Communities) would be supported by: (d) improving or not being detrimental to Airdrie and Coatbridge as Environmental Improvement Priorities as listed in Schedule 6(d) and (9 promotes the provision of an integrated system of waste management facilities.

5.8 If the proposal fails to meet the criteria in SP9 it should be regarded as a departure and assessed against the relevant criteria of Strategic Policy 10.

Local Plan

5.9 Under the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the proposed site is subject to multiple zoning as listed as follows:

0 ECON 2 Existing General Industrial Areas 0 ECON 5/7 Rehabilitation of Industrial Sites-Carnbroe (South) 0 WDR 1 Landfill and Refuse Disposal 0 CUI15 Safety Restraint Areas-Landfill Gas.

5.10 The application site is zoned ECON 2 as an Existing General Industrial Area and confirms that under this policy the Council would prefer to ensure the industrial character of such areas are retained by; (1) allowing the continuation of industrial use where existing industrial premises and or land in these areas are redeveloped, unless this is proved to be impracticable due to poor ground stability, unsuitability of buildings, or of there are major benefits to the community from a change of use; (2) supporting the viability of existing industrial premises by allowing, in accordance with

23 planning regulations, the subdivision of vacant factories to accommodate smaller industrial firms; and (3) by ensuring only wholesale or distribution outlets and not retail outlets operate in existing industrial premises.

5.11 Policy ECON 5/7 confirms that land covered by this zoning, (which partially covers the application site) is also industrial land, albeit that it may require ground rehabilitationworks before it can be brought into such use.

5.12 Policy WDRI is not considered relevant in this instance as the proposals do not involve any landfill activity at the proposed site.

5.13 Policy CUI15 identifies that the proposed development lies within a Landfill Gas Area. Under this policy no development would be permitted within 250m of either operational or completed land-fill sites unless it can be demonstrated that the site poses no risk in this regard.

Material Considerations

5.1 5 National Policy and Guidance: These provide statements of Scottish Government policy on nationally important land use and other planning matters, supported where appropriate by a locational framework. NPF’s and SPP’s identify key priorities for the planning system.

National Planning Framework (NPF) 2004 National Planning Framework for Scotland 2 (NPF 2) 2008 National Waste Strategy 2003 Scottish Planning Policy and PAN 63 - Waste Management Planning 2002 are relevant PAN 51 Planning, Environmental Protection and Regulation 2006 PAN 56 Planning and Noise 1999

5.16 Both the National Planning Framework and the National Planning Framework 2 identify that the restoration of vacant and derelict land, including landfill sites offers important strategic opportunities for improving the environment and increasing biodiversity through the development of green networks and the expansion of urban, amenity and community. NPF 2 sets out targets to increase recycling or composting, reduction in landfill waste, sets a 25% cap on energy from waste plants at national and local level and requires such plants to achieve high energy recovery rates. It also seeks a revision of the NWS and would set targets for the amount of commercial and industrial waste sent to landfill. NPF2 also advises that planning authorities should facilitate a network of waste management installations to assist these targets to be met, taking opportunities to derive energy from waste and develop local heat networks where possible. NPF2 also states that other types of waste management plants should include recycling and composting , anaerobic digestion plants and relevant considerations should include the proximity principle, the transport network and the relationship of intermediate transfer and treatment installations to tertiary waste management installations. It recognises the advances in technology and accepts that modern treatment and transfer stations are contained facilities, which can easily be sited on industrial estates and where possible located close to the population centres they serve and new facilities should link with tertiary waste management installations in a “hub and spoke” arrangement.

5.17 The National Waste Strategy Scotland, (NWS) as published by SEPA in 1999, together with the Area Waste Plan 2003 (AWP) and the Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO) for the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Waste Strategy Area (GCVWSA), are material considerations, which relate closely to the policy context. The relevant national policy on how these should affect the land use planning system is expressed through Scottish Planning Policy. This policy guidance is also complemented by PAN 63 (Waste Management Planning)

24 5.18 The National Waste Strategy: Scotland established key principles which were included within the GCVAWP 2003. These are:

0 The Waste Hierarchy 0 The Proximity Principle and Self-sufficiency 0 The Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO)

The GCVAWP 2003 sets out an indicative list of waste management facilities for the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan Area in relation to the Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO). In this respect the following combination of indicative facilities were consider to offer the BPEO for the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Area.

0 2 Mixed-Waste Processing Facilities-combined capacity- 125,000te 0 4 Material Recovery Facilities-combined capacity-225,OOOte 0 4 Composting Facilities-combined capacity 95,000te

5.19 The GCVAWP 2003 acknowledges that the above noted facilities are indicative only as it was realised that contractual and/or operational arrangements may require a variable combination of a small number of large or numerous small-scale facilities. Moreover the requirements for these facilities were based on municipal waste only, and as such there is no allowance for the processing of industrial and commercial waste streams.

The AWP identifies that other appropriate waste-recovery technologies may have to be integrated into this framework after 2010 to enable landfill diversion targets to 2013 and 2020 to be achieved, including processes such as thermal treatment, anaerobic digestion, additional production of refuse-derived fuel, autoclaving, and other emerging waste-treatment technologies. The AWP envisages that by 2020, the 96% reliance landfill disposal (indentified in 1998) would be reduced to only 25%. In tonnage terms this represents approximately 650,000 tonnes of biodegradable waste being diverted from landfill across the waste strategy area by 2020.

5.20 PAN 63 (Waste Management Planning 2002) advises there may be significant planning, operational and economic advantages when waste management facilities are located close to where the waste arises. The Self Sufficiency and Proximity Principle is reinforced by stating that structure plan areas should seek to provide facilities to develop a waste management network to handle local waste but also states that the transportation of waste between Area Waste Plans may be considered sustainable only if a local waste facility in an neighbouring AWP is nearer to the waste source than the nearest waste facility located within the exporting Waste Plan Area.

5.21 The Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2009 (FDNNLP) designates the area as EDI 1 AI (Existing Industrial and Business Area) and EDI 2 A (promoting Economic Development and Infrastructure Industrial and Business Sites.

5.22 EDI AI supports the continuing character of existing industrial and business areas, where appropriate by considering criteria listed under this policy. However as this proposed waste management facility can be regarded as an industrial use and therefore no assessment is required against the criteria.

5.23 EDI 2 A signifies that this section of land has been zoned as industrial use.

5.24 In addition, the FDNNLP requires that all proposed developments are assessed against the following policies:

DSP 1 Amount of Development sets out that any proposed development that does not form part of the Established Industrial Land Supply 2008 and that cannot be

25 justified by demand assessment are considered as Development Plan departures and require to be justified in terms of both need and benefit under Structure Plan Strategic Policy 10.

DSP 2 Location of Development sets out that planning permission for new developments may be granted if they are consistent with the policy's locational criteria.

DSP 3 Impact of Development sets out that development proposals out-with any requirements for Traffic, Retail or Environmental Impact Assessments require assessment in terms of their impact on social or environmental infrastructure of the community. The nature of this particular development requires stringent assessment in this regard. The ES was submitted to report on the significance of the environmental impacts on the surrounding established residential areas, local SlNC and effect of potential pollution from the plant to the wider area.

DSP 4 Quality of Development sets out criteria that should form part of any Development Management Assessment. This seeks to ensure that development would only be permitted where high standards of site planning and sustainable design are achieved.

6. Consultations

6.1 SEPA had no objections subject to conditions covering:

e the need to meet the Scottish Government's target on thermal treatment of municipal waste; e the requirement to separate and identify all residual waste; e the need to meet the Scottish Government's waste policy and principles of sustainable waste management; e SEPA's Thermal Treatment Guidelines; e additional ambient air quality monitoring to ensure the development meets SEPA's PPC regulations and local AQMA standards; additional noise prevention measures; Site Waste Management requirements; Surface Water Drainage and Construction Method Statement. SUDS scheme

6.2 Transport Scotland-Trunk Road Network Management Directorate had no objection to the proposed development subject conditions covering:

e A requirement by the developer to submit a Travel Plan that sets out proposals to reduce dependency on the private car in accordance with Scottish Government policy; e Further details of a barrier that would prevent encroachment of the A8 Trunk Road; A restriction in any advertising adjacent to the A8 Trunk Road; Further details of any proposed lighting columns at the site

6.3 JMP Consultants Limited (Term Consultants to Transport Scotland Trunk Road Network Management Directorate TS-TRNMD), assessed the submitted Transportation Assessment, which forms part of the ES on behalf of TS-TRNMD. They considered the identified impacts from the additional vehicle trip generation, air quality, and noise and vibration from road traffic and concluded that from an environmental standpoint the percentage increase in traffic generation as a result of the development is likely to cause only minimum increases in the amount of traffic that currently use the trunk road network.

6.4 Scottish Water had no objection but recommended that a totally separate drainage

26 system should be provided with the surface water discharging to a suitable outlet that should be subject to a sustainable urban drainage system (SUDS).

6.5 Scottish Power Energy Networks advised that a substation and underground cables were located within the development site. As the developer had yet to contact SP they had no option but to object. This objection may be considered as a holding objection until the developer makes contact with SP.

6.6 Scotland Gas Networks advised there were no gas mains within the vicinity of the site.

6.7 Historic Scotland (HS) undertook an appraisal of the submitted ES in terms of their own remit and concluded that there are unlikely to be any significant impacts on the historic environment assets of national importance. Consequently HS had no objection but did suggest the Council’s Conservation and Archaeology Services should advise on the likely impacts and mitigation proposed for any unscheduled or unrecorded archaeology.

6.8 Health and Safety Executive had no comments on the ES.

6.9 The Scottish Government (Climate Change Division) had no objection and noted from the ES that appropriate mitigation measures would be introduced to minimise potential noise and air quality impacts during the construction and operation of the plant.

6.10 Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) has no objection to the proposed development subject to a list of conditions covering the following aspects:

ensuring that the best practice measures for protecting otters and bats and enhancing their respective habitats as suggested in the ES are implemented including provision of bat nesting boxes, introduction of native plant species, creation of rich grassland areas and ensuring that site lighting columns are fitted with downward reflectors; 0 ensuring that development impacts on breeding birds are minimised through compliance with the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). 0 Ensure that the mitigation measures to address landscape and visual impact measures as indicated in the ES are implemented;

6.1 1 Strathclyde Partnership for Transport (SPT) had no comments.

6.13 The Scottish Wildlife Trust had no objection to the proposals and welcomed the Best Practice Measures for Wildlife and for Biodiversity Enhancement as noted in Annex G Ecology of the ES. SWT’s main concern is the possible pollution of the North Calder Water either during construction or in periods of unusually heavy rainfall, but note that all works must comply with SEPA’s PPC guidelines and trust that this would ensure adequate protection of this watercourse though the incorporation of a SUDS pond. It was suggested that the SUDS pond be designed to enable it to make a positive contribution to biodiversity by making this as large as practicable to enable margins to be planted with appropriate native species to give cover for insects and birds.

6.14 BT had no objection.

6.15 The RSPB had no comment.

6.16 Traffic and Transportation had no objection to the proposals subject to a condition requiring the developer to provide adequate parking facilities at the site and further details that demonstrate that all waste delivery vehicles would have sufficient turning facilities within the site and waste tipping hall.

27 6.17 Greenspace (Ecology and Landscape) advised that whilst there were no nature conservation designations on the site it was adjacent to a SINC. Earlier concerns that there was no adequate phase 1 survey available were resolved by the developer who undertook an up to date Habitat Survey Report and submitted this in support of the proposals. NLC Greenspace had no objections subject to a condition requiring that before the development starts, a landscape scheme shall be submitted for the approval of the planning authority in consultation with NLC Greenspace and the landscape specification should meet both visual impact issues and offer improvement to local biodiversity.

6.18 Protective Services had no objection to the proposals subject to conditions covering the following aspects;

0 Site investigation survey 0 Further ambient air quality monitoring

6.19 Geotechnical had no objections subject to a condition requiring that a detailed site drainage scheme be provided that included provision for SUDS

7 ReDresentations

7.1 A total of 4298 representations were received in respect of the planning application. The majority of these consisted of 8 different pro-forma type letters with separate signatories which raised objections to the proposals. Most of these pro-forma type objections were submitted by local resident group MRAPP (Monklands Residents Against Pyrolysis Plant). A letter of objection was received from Monklands Glen Community Council which although not counter signed by other individuals advises that it represents the views of 500 households and residents in the South Airdrie area. It was noted that 152 of the pro-forma objections had no address or the address was illegible and as such could not be formally acknowledged. Other representations consisted of individual letters, emails and comments made on line via the e-planning portal. Some representations were duplicates (9) of previously submitted objections. A letter of objection was also received from Elaine Smith MSP. All of the material terms of objection have been fairly summarised under topic headings noted in Appendix B to this report.

7.2 However there were 2 representations submitted in support of the proposals.

A letter of support was received from Scottish Enterprise who highlighted the economic importance of the proposed waste management facility and considered the proposals represented an important landfill diversion sink for waste arisings from the commercial and industrial sector in the Lanarkshire region. Scottish Enterprise also considered the proposed facility would benefit Lanarkshire’s economic performance in terms of:

Support Summary

0 Productivity: reduced waste management and transportation costs due to local companies making use of the facility; 0 Competitiveness: assist corporate responsibility of businesses in meeting their zero landfill ambitions and assist them to offer greener products and services. Businesses seeking to manage their carbon contribution or “footprint” can make reductions by diverting waste from landfill to local based waste treatment facilities by reducing the distance waste has to travel. Renewables: provision of low carbon recovered material streams, and renewable electricity and heat. Economic opportunity: f50M investment in the local economy with 50 new jobs and wider supply chain opportunities.

Further supporting comments were submitted via the e-planning portal which in

28 summary offers the following material points of consideration:

The proposed Pyrolysis plant is not an incinerator (as generally considered by most objectors) as it does not include a combustion process but can be defined as the thermal decomposition of organic material through the absence of oxygen. Pyrolysis techniques produce a fraction of the waste of an incinerator. It is not a new untried technology (as suggested by others) but has been around for some time. Pyrolysis is 80% heat efficient; meaning 80% of the heat produced can be recovered and reused/put to some other use. This technology should be embraced and is a better alternative than sending waste to landfill.

7.3 The material terms of objections can be categorised under the following subject matters.

Objection Summary

Pollution and Air Quality Lack of Need, Contrary to Development Plan, NWS, AWP and National Policy Odour Noise Traffic Impact Health Hazard and Proximity to Residential Areas Ecology and Wildlife Impacts Waste Types Site Selection and Proximity to Residential Areas Lack of Public Consultation Other Matters

A more detailed summary of the terms of objection is provided in paragraph 14 and details of the objections are attached as Appendix B. Planning Assessment

Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 provides that where, in making any determination under the Planning Act, regard is to be had to the development plan, and the determination shall be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The development plan for the area comprises the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 (Approved 2008) and the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 (adopted 1995).

The Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000

8.0 Under the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 incorporating the fourth alteration 2008, the proposals require to be assessed under Strategic Policy 9 (Assessment of Development Proposals) and other related strategic policies. Strategic Policy 10 would apply in the case of a departure (to be established or otherwise through Strategic Policy 9). The criteria referred to in SP9 and SPlO are complementary, and the fulfilment of one criterion does not over-ride the need to satisfy the others.

8.1 Strategic Policy 9A of the 2000 Structure Plan recognises the aims of the Area Waste Plan (AWP) for Glasgow and Clyde Valley Area 2003. Under the terms of SP9A(vi), waste management proposals exceeding the 10 hectare threshold indicated in Schedule 9 would be considered to be of strategic significance and a satisfactory case for the development would need to be established in terms of its relationship to the requirements for waste management facilities set out in the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Area Waste Plan. Whilst the proposed site area only

29 extends to some 3.6ha, it is considered that due to the regional function and operational requirements of the proposed waste management facility (in SOUrCing waste over a 30 mile radius of the site), the proposals are considered to be of strategic significance and as such, need to be assessed against the AWP. The application included information to demonstrate that the development would accord with the aims of the AWP and this was considered in detail by SEPA through the consultation process.

8.2 As noted above SEPA initially objected to the proposals as they considered that the developer had not provided sufficient information to justify a need for the proposed waste treatment plant under the terms of the NWS and AWP. The outstanding need issues raised by SEPA (refer to paragraph 6.1 above) were subsequently addressed by the developer and SEPA formally withdrew their objection subject to the conditions as noted above. As such it is considered that the proposals accord with the terms of SPSA(iv) in terms of its potential to accord with the AWP.

8.3 Strategic Policy 9B sets out that the relative location of the development is appropriate in terms of the need to:

(i) Safeguard and avoid the diversion or displacement of investment from the development locations indentified in Strategic Policy 1, 5, 6 and 8. (ii)(a) Promote Urban Regeneration by giving preference to the use of brownfield urban land rather than Greenfield land or open space. (vi)(b) Promote sustainable transport by the application of criteria for sustainable locational choices as set out in Schedule 3(a)(ii). (vii) Implement the waste management hierarchy as defined in the National Waste Strategy and priorities indentified in the Area Waste Plan. (viii) Avoid the risk of flooding from all sources throughout the relevant water and drainage catchment area and safeguarding the storage capacity of the functional flood plain. (ix) Avoid negative impact upon Health and Safety (x) Contribute to the implementation of the Air Quality Strategy

8.4 With regards to SPSB(i) above it can be noted that the proposals involve the development of a waste management facility at an existing partially derelict industrial site located south of Coatbridge.

0 South Coatbridge is listed as a priority urban renewal area under Schedule l(b) of Strategic Policy 1 ( Strategic Development Locations) where the aim is to encourage urban renewal in such areas. 0 The AirdrieKoatbridge area is also identified in Schedule 5 as a core economic development area under Strategic Policy 5 (Competitive Economic Framework). Under the terms of Strategic Policy 6 (Quality of Life and Health of Local Communities) the proposed development has the potential to provide local employment opportunities within Airdrie and Coatbridge, which are both indentified in Schedule 6(a) as preferred areas for further industrial and business development. Strategic Policy 6 also promotes the provision of an integrated system of waste management facilities. SP8 (Sustainable Development of Natural Resources) sets out a framework for the sustainable development of minerals, forestry and woodland, agriculture, renewable energy, use of water resources and environment related tourism. The proposed waste management facility is not located within an area that would contrain the sustainable development of such resources.

It is considered the proposals would not be contrary to SPSB(i) as the proposed development would not displace, but possibly result in, an investment in the potential development locations noted under SPI, 5, and 6. Moreover the proposals would accord with SP6 as the development has the potential to contribute to an integrated system of waste management facilities as noted by SEPA. The proposals would not restrict the sustainable development of natural resources and as such complies with

30 SP8 in this respect.

8.5 The proposals would involve the redevelopment of an existing industrial site, which is considered to be partially derelict. As such the proposals would result in an element of Urban Renewal and would not significantly encroach or impact on Greenfield land or open space. As such the proposals are considered to be in accordance with S PSB( ii)( a).

8.6 Under SPSB(vi)(b) the location of a new development needs to be appropriate in terms of promoting sustainable transport by the application of criteria for sustainable locational choices as set out in Schedule 3(a)(ii) where new waste management facilities should consider where possible, dedicated haul roads provided by the developer or use of rail transport. Generally, SP3 (Strategic Management of Travel Demands) seeks to promote the sustainable development of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan area through the selection of sustainable locations for development that reflect their purpose and function and relative transportation needs. Schedule 3(a)(i) sets out a hierarchy of preference of accessibility for bulk goods and freight movement as follows:

0 Directly from railhead or port 0 Short road haul to rail head or port 0 Trunk Road Network

As noted above, the site is already accessed directly on to the A8 trunk road and the developer proposes to continue to use the existing access. It is considered that developing a rail link from the adjacent railway would now be impracticable given the relatively small site area and the large building footprint. The developer has provided estimates of the additional volumes of traffic that would access the site from the A8 trunk road as a result of the development and these were considered relatively insignificant and acceptable to Transport Scotland. It is therefore considered that the location of the site is sustainable as the continued use of the existing access directly onto the A8 trunk road network would be acceptable under the Hierarchy of Accessibility noted in Schedule SP3(a)(i).

8.7 SPSB(vii) requires that the location of the development is appropriate in terms of the need to implement the waste management hierarchy as defined in the National Waste Strategy (Prevention-Reuse-Recycling-Other Recovery-Disposal) As noted above SEPA had no objection to the proposal in terms of its compliance with NWS, and AWP, and considered the proposal offers a BPEO and would comply with the proximity principle. SEPA consider that the proposal has the potential to help deliver sustainable waste management in North Lanarkshire and surrounding areas given its scale, location relative to transport networks and its potential to assist in a move away from landfill and towards energy recovery. As such it is considered the proposed location of the waste management facility is appropriate in terms of the need to implement the waste management hierarchy as defined in the National Waste Strategy and assist in meeting the priorities of the GCV Area Waste Plan. As such the proposals fully accord with SPSB(vii).

8.8 SPSB(viii) requires that the location of the development is appropriate in terms of the need to avoid flooding. The ES included a study of the proposals impact on the area. The FRA indicated that pluvial flooding (from rainfall) is the only source of flooding that may affect the site or areas off-site. The FRA identified that the increase in surface water run off from the site as a result of the development would, in the absence of mitigation, increase the risk of flooding from surface water runoff on the North Calder Water. The potential significance was considered to be moderate and the report advised that mitigation measures would be required to reduce this impact. The mitigation measures would include the provision of a SUDS scheme.

8.9 Whilst Geotechnical agreed with the submitted FRA that the existing site was at low flood risk, it was considered that the developer should have submitted a drainage

31 plan to demonstrate that a SUDS design, consistent with an industrial development could be provided. It is noted that the site is served by an existing attenuation pond and this would be adapted or redesigned by the developer to provide an appropriate SUDS scheme in agreement with Scottish Water and SEPA. It is therefore considered that a SUDS scheme of an acceptable design could be accommodated within the site and that this provision may be covered by a condition of any planning permission. The location of the proposed development is therefore considered acceptable under SPSB(viii) as appropriate attenuation measures could be provided at the site to avoid the risk of flooding.

8.10 Under the terms of policy SPSB(ix) the location of the development needs to be appropriate to avoid negative impacts on Health and Safety issues associated with the construction and operation of the proposed development. As noted above the Health and Safety Executive had no comments to offer on the Environmental Statement and Protective Services had no objection subject to further site investigations works being undertaken as it was considered the information submitted with the ES was not site specific. This could be covered by a condition of any planning permission. It is therefore considered that the location of the development would be appropriate in terms of SPSB(ix).

8.11 Under the terms of SPSB(x) the location of the development needs to be appropriate in terms of the need to contribute to the implementation of the national Air Quality Strategy (AQS). It is noted that there were no objections from SEPA or Protective Services in respect of potential impacts of the development on air quality. SEPA considered that the proposed waste management facility would be capable of meeting their PPC permit requirements but would require the developer to undertake further monitoring in the area to support any subsequent PPC application to SEPA. Protective Services considered the proposals would not impact on the designated AQMA at Whifflet or Chapelhall. As such it is considered that the location of the development would not compromise the aims of the AQS or SPSB(x).

8.12 Under the terms of SP9C appropriate provision needs to be made by the developer for:

Infrastructure: The proposals involve a redevelopment of an exiting industrial estate that is already adequately serviced. (ii) Transport: The proposed development would use existing access arrangements and the developer is to submit and implement a green transport plan. (iii) The development would have no significant impact on environmental resources as it is already in use for industrial purposes. The proposals include a SUDS provision ICT connection is not applicable Appropriate maintenance measures would be provided for i-iv above There are no archaeological resources at this former landfill site. Community Growth Area requirements are not applicable The buildings would be designed to meet energy conservation requirements

8.13 It can be concluded that the proposals accord with the terms of policy SP9A,B and C of the Structure Plan

Monklands District Local Plan 1991

9.0 As the proposals would involve the redevelopment of an existing semi-derelict industrial site it is considered that the proposals are entirely consistent with the terms of policy ECON 2 Existing General Industrial Areas and ECON 517 Rehabilitation of Industrial Sites-Carnbroe (South) as detailed at paragraphs 5.9 to 5.1 1 above.

9.1 With regards to policy Cull 5 Landfill Gas : The ES Annex C Land Quality provides a detailed assessment on potential ground condition issues and acknowledges that

32 previous uses of the site (including the former landfill operations) would require further ground investigations before construction works started at the site. The ES advises that appropriate Environmental Management Plan including method statements would need to be employed to assure Health and Safety plans are assured during the course of such investigation works. Such measures are controlled via environmental regulations and it is considered that safety at the site would not be compromised if these are adhered to. Protective Services had no objection to the proposals in this regard subject to conditions. As such it is considered that appropriate site investigations measures would be required before any development took place and such measures would render potential contaminants and potential sources of residual landfill gases inert and safe to enable the development to proceed.

9.2 It can be concluded that the proposals accord with the development plan policies noted above.

Material Considerations

10.0 Material considerations not already covered by development plan policy must be assessed to establish whether they outweigh the development plan. These would include:

0 The Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2008 (FDNLLP): 0 National Policy and Planning Advice Notes, in particular those relative to waste management development. 0 Environmental impacts including: Landscape and Visual Impact; Air Quality; Land Quality; Hydrology and Flood Risk; Traffic; Noise and Ecology issues which were all subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment as reported in the Environmental Statement; 0 Consultation Responses 0 Representations

10.1 The Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2008 (FDNLLP): designates the area as EDI AI Existing Industrial and Business Areas and EDI 2 Promoting Economic Development and Infrastructure Industrial and Business Sites.

EDI 1 AI and 2A: This proposed waste management facility is considered as an industrial use and therefore no assessment is required against the criteria.

All development proposals are subject to assessment against Strategic Policies DSP 1, DSP 2, DSP 3 and DSP 4 as follows:

DSP 1 - Amount of Development: As this proposal relates to a site that forms part of the Established Industrial Land Supply it would accord in principle to this policy.

DSP 2 - Location of Development: This policy sets out that planning permission for new devetopments may be granted if they are consistent with the policy’s locational criteria. In this respect the proposed development meets the criteria as it involves the reuse of existing industrial land.

DSP 3 - Impact of Development: This policy sets out the development proposals, out- with any specific requirements for Environmental Impact Assessments require to be assessed in terms of their impact on economic, social and environmental infrastructure of the community. The proposals were subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment and the significance of the identified impacts was included in the accompanied Environmental Statement.

DSP 4 - Quality of Development: An appraisal is required to be carried out of the existing character and features of the site and its setting including; identity, connections, landscape, biodiversity, heritage or amenity valve.

33 10.2 These policies state there is no general presumption in support of waste development but such proposals would need to be assessed under local environmental considerations, the nature of the proposed working, restoration and aftercare (this aspect is not relevant in this instance), impact on local communities, potential for long-term improvements to site appearance, site access and affect on traffic safety, demonstration of need for the facility and potential use of alternatives to road transport. It is considered that the proposals would meet the terms of the above criteria as these issues have been addressed in the supporting ES information and there was no outstanding objection from SEPA, Transport Scotland, Scottish Government, Health and Safety Executive, SNH, SWT, RSPB, Scottish Water, Scottish Power, Protective Services, Geotechnical, Greenspace (Ecology) and Landscape subject to the respective conditions suggested by each party as noted above. As such it can be concluded that the proposals accord with the relevant policies of the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

11.O Scottish Planning Policy (Consolidated - Waste Management Section) SPP: In terms of assessing waste management proposals, current national planning policy is expressed through SPP complemented by PAN 63 (Waste Management and Planning) covering good practice in policy making through the development plan system and decision making through the development management process system. The SPP supports a wide range of waste management technologies and applies policy direction to specific waste streams or installations. The SPP supports installations which include the thermal treatment of waste as a renewable energy source which comply within the relevant PCC permit requirements issued by SEPA. The SPP advises that Modern waste management infrastructure is designed and regulated to high standards and is similar to other industrial processes. Locations which are appropriate for industrial or storage and distribution uses are therefore also appropriate for many waste management installations. The SPP advises that buffer zones of 250 metres may be appropriate for operations involving thermal treatment but this should be assessed in a site by site basis. In terms of development management process the SPP states that consideration should focus on the proposals ability in delivering appropriate infrastructure to meet Business Waste Framework Objectives, and the requirements of Area Waste Plans. With the regulation of such facilities resting with SEPA consideration of applications for waste management facilities should focus on whether the development itself is acceptable rather than on control of the processes or waste streams involved, consider only the aspects of operations enforceable under planning control to minimise impacts on the environment, transport network and local communities, and secure decommissioning or restoration to agreed standards.

11.I It is considered that the proposals would accord with the main aims and principles of the above noted national policy and guidance on waste management development. The proposals are considered to concur with the terms of the development plan, and with the NWS and AWP. SEPA are content that the supporting information provided by the developer adequately demonstrates need for the facility; its compliance with the AWP; and that the waste volumes capable of treatment by the thermal process would comply with the Scottish Government's 25% cap on MSW. The energy from waste facility will also help divert waste from landfill and thereby reduce greenhouse gas emissions from landfill. In addition the proposed facility would also create a new source of energy therefore reducing its own energy demands to operate the plant. The plant is also capable of feeding excess electric power to the National Grid via underground connections. Given these factors the proposals are considered to be in line with the requirements of Scottish Planning Policy and PAN 63.

Environmental Statement

12.0 Landscape and Visual Impacts: The ES provides a report which assesses the anticipated impacts landscape and visual impacts.

34 12.1 The ES acknowledged that the proposals would have a slightly adverse impact on visual amenity as the new large scale building would increase the prominence of industrial development on the site and this be viewed by a number of high sensitivity visual receptors including viewpoints from some residential areas situated to the north of the site. The ES notes that the suggested planting mitigation measures would take several years to establish and become effective but over the longer term this would help to soften the appearance of the building in the landscape and effectively screen lower elevations of the building and activities on site.

12.2 SNH advised they were content with the conclusions of the landscape and visual assessment of the proposed development and had no objection to the proposals on the grounds of its landscape and visual impact subject to a condition requiring that the mitigation measures suggested in the ES are fully implemented. SNH also considered such additional planting works would be in line with recommendation 18 of the Strategic Planning Study Technical Report TR/NLC/Ol- A8/M8 Corridor which suggests measures to introduce high quality landscape in this area including landscape improvements linked to planning permissions to contribute to the protection and enhancement of the Green Network and should also provide landscape and habitat enhancement for nature conservation.

12.3 Greenspace (Ecology and Landscape) had similar views to SNH and recommended that any IandscapingAree planting works should incorporate plant speciedhabitats that would enhance biodiversity. It is also considered that whilst the proposals would introduce a large industrial building to this site, its impact would be acceptable subject to the mitigation planting works which would over time further reduce the building’s impact and assist in the improvement of the A8/M8 corridor as noted by SNH.

12.4 Taking these factors and comments into account, it is considered that whilst the proposed building would be fairly prominent, its visual impact would not be unacceptable at this industrial site. There was no objection from SNH or NLC Greenspace provided the suggested landscape mitigation measures are implemented at the site. Moreover, the existing site is characterised by its semi-derelict appearance where there are existing industrial buildings and large tracts of unused or damaged hardstanding on the site. The proposals would remove all of the old industrial buildings and areas of remaining hard standing and replace these with a modern industrial unit with associated peripheral landscaping works that would over time reduce its impact. Additional planting works may also provide improvements to the edge of the A8 corridor as noted by SNH. The proposals are therefore considered acceptable it terms of its visual impact.

12.5 Air Qualify: Most waste management facilities can have an impact on air quality in terms of emissions of process particulates, dust and odour and need to include appropriate design elements to minimise emissions to atmosphere within acceptable limits. It is considered that the ES has included a reasonable and acceptable assessment of the likely or predicted effects of the proposed development on local air quality and its scope, methodology and findings are summarised and assessed as follows.

12.6 In terms of the study methodology, the ES considered a study area measuring 3km x 3km centred on the proposed development site. A number of sensitive receptors were identified in the study area including residential, schools and a local hotel, and these were explicitly included in the assessment. Two of the Council’s designated AQMAs, Whifflet, Chapelhall were also included in the ES study area. The ES examined in detail the predicted impacts on air quality from the operational process, ground level pollutant concentrations, road traffic, and odour emission and construction dust. Whilst the ES had no specific emission data for the pyrolysis plant (as the final technology selection is subject to commercial negotiation) emission rates were conservatively assumed to be based in compliance with the Waste Incineration Directive (WID) emission limits. (As noted previously, whilst pyrolysis is not the incineration of waste, its regulation falls under this directive and would be thoroughly

35 assessed by SEPA during the PPC permit process). The ES recommended that mitigation measures be introduced by the developer to ensure that all site-traffic would enter the site from the adjacent trunk road network (A8) with and that site vehicle traffic management measures be introduced by the developer to avoid routes which pass through the indentified AQMAs and other sensitive receptor areas. The ES also identifies that impacts from the construction phase may be mitigated by following good practice under the terms of a construction method statement to minimise and control levels of dust from the construction process.

12.7 The ES concludes that whilst the proposed development would give rise to some atmospheric emissions from both the operational process activities and from road traffic associated with the development, these potential increases in emissions would not be significant as a result of the development and that there would be no breach of air quality objectives or environmental assessment levels. Furthermore, the ES advised that appropriate controls would be put in place to ensure that process emissions would need to comply with prescribed limits set through SEPA’s PPC permit regulations. In addition no significant adverse impacts on human health were reported in the ES. Overall the ES concludes that no significant adverse impacts are predicted as a result of the development and advises that these findings are in line with Government studies into the environment and health effects of waste management developments.

12.8 As noted above that SEPA had no objection to the proposals subject to conditions. They considered the proposals are capable in principle of meeting their PPC regulatory regimes subject to the outcome of ambient atmospheric monitoring to demonstrate the development would meet their Waste Incineration Directive (WID) technical requirements. As noted, the developer would be required to undertake monitoring over a sufficient period agreed by SEPA to provide reasonable reassurance that relevant air quality standards can be met. The location and methodology of the monitoring would be agreed with SEPA in advance of it being undertaken. It is considered this technical requirement could be covered by a planning condition.

12.9 In addition Protective Services had no objection to the proposals and concurred with the conclusions of the ES Annex 6 Air Quality that the AQMAs of Chapelhall and Whifflet would not be affected as a result of the waste management facility going ahead.

12.10 It should also be noted that the all of the waste management process operations would be accommodated within one large building. The atmosphere within the building would be maintained at negative pressure, and air vented via the process of bio-filter to control odorous emissions. The supporting Environmental Statement (ES) advises that there are no undesirable emissions to atmosphere at this stage of the plant process as odour and dust are controlled by active air management systems (within the building) before being passed through a bio-filter to atmosphere. The ES acknowledges that atmospheric emissions would be generated by both the mechanical and heat treatment (MHT) technologies and the pyrolysis processes via the two stacks. The principle emissions would be combustion gases from the gas engines however a number of other pollutants may be generated depending on the waste material processed. However as previously noted all emissions from the plant would be controlled under SEPA’s PPC permit regulations and the plant would need to comply with WID emission limits also assessed, monitored and controlled by SEPA.

12.11 Taking all of these matters into account it can be concluded the proposed development would have no significant impact on local air quality standards subject to the proposed development’s compliance with SEPA’s PPC regulations.

12.12 Land Quality: The ES includes an assessment on Land Quality where an intrusive investigation undertaken immediately north and west of the site identified the

36 presence of domestic and industrial waste from the previous landfill operations however the full extent of land filling beneath the application site is uncertain. AS such it is considered that appropriate further ground investigation works would need to be considered and this aspect could be covered by a condition of any planning permission. 12.13 The ES assessment considered traffic generation, distribution, waste management facility generated trips (including staff visits), waste imports and exports, hours of operation, trip generation. A comparison of existing and proposed traffic levels (including operational and construction) was also considered. The ES concluded that the traffic volumes associated with the proposed waste management facility were minimal when compared by the existing industrial uses at the site. The impact and mitigation of the effects of the traffic are discussed within the Air Quality assessment section of the ES. Notwithstanding this assessment, the developer has recently advised that their operational site management plans would require that all contracted waste delivery vehicles should use the primary road network.

12.14 The TS considered the impact of development in terms of its scale, access arrangements, pedestrian and cycle accessibility, public transport accessibility, bus and rail travel, vehicular access, and parking provision. The TS assessed the proposal against national and local transport policies, including the then SPPI 7- Planning for Transport, PAN 75: Planning for Transport, and North Lanarkshire Transport Strategy. The TS provided an assessment of traffic impact which included observed traffic conditions of the existing industrial uses at the site and compared these against estimates of generated trips due to the proposed waste management facility. Staff trips and waste input and outputs were also taken into account, along with the hours of operation. The TS acknowledged that the existing accessibility for non-motorised vehicles to enter and leave the site is restricted but notes that the developer is to implement a Travel Plan, despite this not being a formal requirement for this development. This would encourage non-car modes of travel including a shuttle bus that would connect with key transport interchanges such as Coatbridge Sunnyside train station etc. This and other facilities would accommodate access to the site by means other than the private car and in accordance with current transport planning policies. The TS also concludes that the net increased traffic associated with the redevelopment of this existing industrial site will result in a negligible increase in the A8(T) traffic volumes and as such there is no significant traffic impact.

12.15 A Travel Plan Framework (TPF) was also provided in support of the planning application. The TPF identifies the measures and facilities that the developer, as the single operator of the facility to encourage non-car access and reduce the development’s potential reliance on single occupancy car trips generated by the development. The TPF acknowledges that the site is not easily accessed by other transport modes such as cycling or walking from existing bus routes. The TPF envisages that a dedicated shuttle bus service would be provided by the developer to enable visitors and staff to access the site other than by private vehicle. The bus would link up with the existing bus and train networks. The promotion off public transport services, in-house car sharing and the general promotion of the health and environmental benefits of walking, cycling would also be encouraged through staff management measures. The Travel Plan adoption would then be continually monitored to determine its effectiveness and value with additional measures considered to encourage staff to adhere to its targets of reducing dependency on single occupancy car travel.

12.16 As noted in the consultation responses, there was no objection from Transport Scotland, JMP Consultants Limited (Term Consultants to Transport Scotland Trunk Road Network Management Directorate TS-TRNMD), or from the Traffic and Transportation Section subject to conditions.

12.17 It is therefore considered that the proposed development would not result in any significant increase in traffic volumes on the trunk or local road network as a result of

37 the development and that adequate measures would be implemented by the developer to encourage alternative travel modes to and from the site via a Travel Plan Framework as required by a condition of any planning permission. The developer’s intention to encourage contracted waste delivery vehicles to use the primary road network can be noted and it is considered such management provisions would further minimise such impacts on residential areas and traffic routes which pass through the designated AQMAs noted above. However this would be a voluntary undertaking by the developer as it could not be effectively controlled by a planning condition.

12.18 Noise: The ES included an assessment on noise impact from the development. (Refer to Volume 1 Annex F of the ES). A noise impact assessment of a proposed development of an adjacent site was carried out in July 2008 and as part of this development falls within the application site, this previous assessment was considered relevant in terms of baseline noise data collected at that time. Ambient noise readings within the locality were also measured and these are considered to be suitably recent to be representative of the ambient noise climate. The ES recognises the policy context of such studies under the terms of PAN 56: Planning and Noise, the emerging policies of the FDNNLP on waste development, SEPAs Horizontal Guidance for Noise, British Standards 4142 for assessment of industrial noise affecting mixed residential areas and BS 5228 which relates to noise and vibration control during construction.

12.19 The ES concluded that the noise environment at the nearest sensitive receptors is currently dominated by road traffic using the A8. The ES predicts that operational rated noise levels at the nearest receptors would be at least equivalent to the lowest existing background noise levels at the locus and that noise management via the application of Best Available Techniques (BAT) also controlled and agreed with SEPA would be adopted by the developer to minimise operational noise levels from the facility. The BAT would include:

0 The selection of inherently quiet plant where appropriate 0 Ancillary plant equipment would be positioned to cause minimal noise disturbance and acoustic enclosures provided for all fixed plant where appropriate. 0 All vehicles and plant would be fitted with effective exhaust silencers and maintained in good working order. 0 Operators of waste delivery vehicles (out with the control of the developer) would be encouraged to use vehicles with modern reversing alarms which are directional and short range in nature. It is envisaged that this type of alarm would become a standard fitment as waste vehicle fleets are modernised. 0 Machinedplant in intermittent use would be shut down in intervening periods between operations or throttled down to a minimum.

12.20 It is noted that the ES assessed the worst case operational noise levels and concluded that these would be compliant with the relevant guidance and associated Standards, as most of the sources would be enclosed within the purpose built building. Other on site sources of noise such as waste delivery vehicles and their reversing alert systems are expected to be insignificant in the existing noise environment.

As noted above, SEPA and Protective Services had no objection to the proposals in terms of potential noise nuisance from the proposed waste management facility. Given the factors, it is considered that noise impacts from the plant operations would be within acceptable levels.

12.21 Ecology: The ES also provided a detailed assessment of potential ecological impacts resulting from the redevelopment of this existing industrial site. (Refer to Annex G and G-I of the ES). The report included desk and field studies, Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Otter, Bat, and Badger Surveys, Assessment of other protected species

38 breeding bird assessment and a non-breeding bird survey. These studies were supplemented by the submission of a further Phase I Habitat Survey October 2009 to cover a part of the site where the installation of a surface water pipe is proposed. This was requested by the Greening Section during the course of the consideration of the planning application as this part of the site boundary connects directly with the North Calder Water and valley. The report recognises the importance of ensuring the proposed development would not infringe current legislation and national policy guidance which set out to protect natural heritage interests as noted in the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004, Conservation (Natural Habitats,&c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended)(Habitat Regulations), NPPG 14 Natural Heritage, Planning Advice Note 60: Planning for National Heritage. The report also included assessment under the terms of the respective natural heritage protection policies in the current development plan and emerging local plan. The report also identified opportunities for biodiversity enhancement as part of the proposed design and layout of the site including a program to install bat boxes, native tree planting areas to serve both biodiversity and screening functions and areas Of natural grassland where possible. Downward reflectors over any lighting columns are also suggested. The report concludes that due to the existing industrial uses, the site supports very limited vegetation. It is of a very low importance and rarity for nature conservation in that the site is not of international, national, regional, or local nature conservation value. As such it was considered that significant adverse effects to biodiversity within the development site and surrounding brownfield habitat (former landfill area to the north) and SlNC would not occur as a result of the proposed development, provided best practice measures for wildlife are followed during construction and operational phases. The recent habitat survey covering the surface water drainage link area had no locally or nationally rare or protected species or grassland habitat of high conservation value. It was recommended that in developing this strip of land, best practice measures should be adopted to minimise direct disturbance to the vegetation, particularly the woodland areas and tree felling should be kept to a minimum with no mature trees being felled.

12.22 SNH had no objection to the proposals subject to conditions noted at paragraph 6.1 1 above. The Greening Section (Ecology and Landscape) had no objections subject to condition noted at paragraph 6.17 above. The Scottish Wildlife Trust (SWT) had no objection and welcomed the biodiversity enhancement measures proposed by the developer. The RSPB had no comment to offer.

12.23 Given the conclusions noted in the ES and the responses from SNH, Greening Section, and SWT it is considered that the proposals would have no significant impact on ecological receptors at the site or on the surrounding area. It is considered that the proposed biodiversity enhancement measures proposed by the developer would offer some improvements to the local ecological resources and that the development would have no significant impact on the adjacent SlNC (North Calder Water).

Consultations

13.0 (i) SEPA had no objections subject to conditions identified in paragraph 6.1. Where appropriate these matters have been included as recommended conditions. SEPA considers the proposals accord with the National Waste Strategy, National Waste Plan and Area Waste Plan. SEPA also advised that the proposals are capable in principle of meeting their PPC regulatory regimes subject to the outcome of ambient atmospheric monitoring to demonstrate the development meets Waste Incineration Directive (WID) technical requirements. This requirement could be covered by a condition of any planning permission. (ii) Transport Scotland-Trunk Road Network Management Directorate had no objections subject to conditions requiring the approval of a Travel Plan and provision of an improved barrier along the site boundary with the A8 Trunk Road. These requirements could be covered by a condition of any planning permission.

39 Scottish Water had no objection subject to a condition that a new drainage system be agreed with them and that this should include a SUDS scheme. This can be covered by a condition of any planning permission. Scottish Power Energy Networks advised their objection would be removed provided the developer contacts them in respect of any connections to SP plant infrastructure. This is covered in standard advisory noted issued with any planning permission. Scottish Natural Heritage had no objection subject to conditions to ensure that adverse impacts on otters, bats and breeding birds are minimised. In addition a condition requiring additional screen planting along the northern boundary of the site is requested. These matters can be covered by conditions RSPB offered no comment Traffic and Transportation had no objection subject to conditions requiring adequate car parking provisions and demonstration that all waste delivery vehicles have sufficient turning facilities within the site and building. This can be covered by condition of any planning permission. Greenspace (Ecology and Landscape) had no objection subject to conditions requiring additional planting scheme along the northern boundary of the site and that this scheme incorporates biodiversity enhancement measures. This can be covered by a planning condition. Protective Services had no objection subject to conditions requiring a detailed ground contamination survey and additional air quality monitoring as suggested by SEPA. There was no objection to the proposal from Waste Strategy. It is considered the outstanding matters over ground conditions and additional air quality monitoring can be covered by conditions of any planning permission. Geotechnical had no objection subject to conditions requiring further details of a site drainage scheme with an appropriate SUDS scheme and attenuation measures to minimise flooding events. It is considered this requirement can be covered by a condition of any planning permission.

Representations

14.0 The material terms of objection have been summarised and comments on each point of objection are provided in Appendix E? attached to the main report. However the matters raised by the objectors along with a brief response can be summarised under the following headings:

Points of objection: Pollution and Air Quality

Comment: These matters have been considered in the ES and have been the subject of detailed assessment by SEPA and the Council’s own Pollution Control Section. It is considered that the via controls imposed by SEPA via their license regime and proposed planning conditions the proposed facility will be designed and will operate in such a way as to minimise impacts on pollution and air quality.

Points of objection: Lack of Need, Contrary to Development Plan, NWS, AWP and National Policy

Comment: These matters have been assessed as part of the ES and supporting information supplied by the applicant. In addition to my assessment of these matters, SEPA and the Council’s own Pollution Control Section have considered and offered comments. It is considered that the proposed development complies with development plan and national policy and that a case for the need for the development has been made in terms of the NWS & AWP.

Points of objection: Odour

Comment: The ES assessed the odour impacts from the operational processes and

40 concluded these would not be significant and within acceptable limits. All process operations would take place within the proposed building with odours being controlled by negative air pressures within the building with air circulating in the building being filtered before release to the external atmosphere.

Points of objection: Noise

Comment: The ES assessed the noise impacts from the operational processes and concluded these would not be significant and within acceptable limits. All process operations would take place within the proposed building with noise levels being mitigated as a result.

Points of objection: Traffic Impact

Comment: The ES provided a detailed assessment of traffic impacts associated with the development and concluded that the development could be accommodated within the trunk road network. It is considered that the traffic impacts are within acceptable limits. My assessment of this aspect of the development has been supported by the Trunk Road Authority and the Council’s own Traffic and Transportation Section.

Points of objection: Health Hazard and Proximity to Residential Areas

Comment: The ES provided a detailed assessment of potential impacts from potential pollutants from the process and from increased traffic levels. It concluded there would be no significant impacts on sensitive receptors including local residential areas and schools. SEPA and Protective Services had no objection to the proposals in this regard.

Points of objection: Ecology and Wildlife Impacts

Comment: The ES considered potential impacts of the proposed development on ecology and wildlife in the local area and concluded that such impacts would be not be significant. The ES recommended that various biodiversity measures be introduced and it is considered these can be covered by conditions. My assessment of these aspects has been supported by SNH, SWT and the Council’s own Greening Section.

Points of Objection: Waste Types

Comment: The ES advises that the pyrolysis facility would be able to deal with municipal, industrial and commercial waste streams. The proposed technology would be capable of dealing with industrial waste but is not suitable for dealing with medical, toxic or hazardous waste. Overall, the type of materials dealt with at the plant would be controlled via the PPC permit. The ES advises that no chemical products would be processed at the site.

Points of Objection: Site Selection and Proximity to Residential Areas

Comment: The developer advised that application site was selected as it was the most suitable for a development of this nature in terms of its size, long term commercial availability, appropriate industrial zoning, avoidance of green belt, immediate access to the primary road network, proximity to sensitive receptors, avoidance of conflicts with other existing uses (Eurocentral), visual/landscape impact. The ES considered a comprehensive range of potential environmental impacts on sensitive receptors at and around the site, including adjacent residential areas and concluded that such impacts would not be significant. Where there are some minor concerns, mitigation measures are proposed to enable the development to be considered acceptable. It is considered that the site is appropriate for this type of facility and it has been concluded that environmental impacts would not be significant

41 as a result of the development. My assessment in this regard is supported through the responses offered by SEPA, SNH, Transport Scotland and the Council’s own Protective Services, Transportation, and Greening Sections, who raised no objection to the proposals subject to conditions.

Points of Objection: Lack of Public Consultation

Comment: The developer undertook a voluntary public consultation exercise that included the distribution of 4,000 leaflets to local residents and held a public exhibition before the application was submitted. The developer also attended a public meeting with members of local residents association. Given the volume of public objection to the proposals, it is clear that local residents are fully aware of the details of the proposals.

Points of Objection: Other Matters

Comment: As noted previously, the proposed pyrolysis process does not involve the incineration of waste. Whilst there was no specific emission data available for the pyrolysis plant, the emission rates were conservatively assumed and were considered by the ES to be in compliance with the WID emissions limits. SEPA were content that such data would be provided during the PPC permit application. Any perceived loss of property value is not material to the consideration of a planning application. The unfortunate impact caused by the previous accidental fire at the tyre recycling depot is not relevant to this planning application. The developer may seek grant assistance for potential job creation. Some minor errors were noted in the supporting information in terms of the vehicle trip numbers however these were overstated rather than underestimated and would not have resulted in any alterations to the impacts covered in the ES.

14.2 Despite the significant volume of representation received in regards to the application, it has been concluded that the material terms of objections cannot be sustained and do not raise sufficient reasons to justify a recommendation that the proposals be refused planning permission.

14.3 In contrast to the significant volume of objection noted in Appendix B there were two letters of support for the proposals as noted at paragraph 7.2 above. Following consideration of these comments, it is generally agreed that this waste management facility would offer a range of economic benefits as suggested by Scottish Enterprise in terms of productivity, competitiveness, use of renewable energy resources, investment and employment opportunities.

14.4 With regard to the other supporting comments, it is agreed that a pyrolysis plant is not an incinerator but as noted above its regulation and control would fall under the WID Directive Regulations which also covers incinerators. It is also agreed that the proposed pyrolysis process would offer benefits in terms of its efficiency and ability to reduce the volumes of waste going to landfill. SEPA also considered that the proposed waste management facility has the potential to assist in dealing effectively with commercial, industrial and municipal waste streams under the terms of the NWS and AWP requirements. These supporting comments noted at paragraph 7.2 above are in line with the planning assessment,

Conclusions

15.0 The proposals are considered acceptable as they accord with the terms of tht Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 incorporating the 4 alteration 2008 and the Monklands District Local Plan 1991, the National Waste Strategy and Area Waste Plan where it has been adequately demonstrated that the proposals are acceptable in terms of need, comply with the proximity principle and offer the best practicable environmental option (BPEO) for dealing with the identified waste streams. There was no objection from statutory consultees including the

42 Scottish Government, SEPA, SNH, Scottish Transport, and Scottish Water or from other organisations such as SWT and RSPB. There was no objection from the respective NLC Services requested to comment on the application. The accompanying ES demonstrates that environmental impacts from the development would not be significant and it is agreed that the suggested mitigation measures can be controlled through appropriate conditions.

15.1 Despite the significant volume of representation received in regards to the application, the points of objection have been carefully assessed. It has been determined that the objections cannot be sustained and do not raise sufficient reason or concerns that would justify a recommendation that planning permission should be refused.

15.2 It has been concluded that the proposals accord with the terms of the development plan and are acceptable when assessed against the NWS, AWP and other material considerations noted in the main report. The proposals are considered to be acceptable and it is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

15.3 There has been a request for a site visit and hearing from the developer and from local residents group MRAPP.

43 Appendix 6: Terms of Objection and Response

Key: Point of objection noted in bold Response to objection noted in plain text.

A Pollution/Air Quality Issues

1. Air quality is already confirmed as poor in this area.

An Air Quality Assessment is included in Annex B of the Environmental Statement. The ES concluded that the cumulative levels of emissions from the plant and increased traffic levels at sensitive locations as a result of the development would be well below the Air Quality Strategy objectives or environmental assessment level guidelines. As noted above Protective Services had no objection to the proposal in terms of its likely impact on air quality. It is therefore considered that whilst air quality is relatively poor given the designated AQMA, the proposed development would not have a significant impact on existing air quality levels.

2. There will be unacceptable health risks from air-borne particles emitting from the chimney stacks on not only local neighbourhoods but also to the outlying areas and in particular to young children in schools and nurseries which are located close to the site. The ES provided a full assessment on emissions from the proposed facility and considered such an impact on sensitive receptors such as residential areas and schools. The ES concluded that whilst there would be air-borne particulates emitted from the two stacks these would be within acceptable standards, subject to filtering processes and controlled by SEPA regulatory controls and monitoring as required as part of the PPC permit. SEPA had no objection to the proposals as they considered the proposed facility would be capable of meeting their PPC permit requirements. It is considered the proposals would not have a detrimental impact on local air quality.

3. Due to the variety and origins of waste that would be dealt with at the site, the applicant cannot give accurate or safe predictions of these emissions. Airborne dioxins could have serious cumulative implications for families in Monklands, where there are very high asthma rates.

The ES considered a full range of emission particulates in accordance with environmental assessment guidelines for such proposals. As noted at comment at AI above the ES concluded that air quality would not be unacceptably compromised as a result of the proposed development. As noted previously, SEPA and Protective Services had no objection in terms of air quality issues and did not raise objections over the ES study methodology. 4. The increased level of traffic will also raise vehicle emissions in an area, which has poor air quality, which has already been identified as an area for improvement.

As noted in the main report, there would be a slight increase in the number of vehicles entering and leaving the site although this % increase was considered insignificant in terms of its impact on existing air quality standards. Air quality “hot spots” have been identified by the Council at Whifflet and Chapelhall, however it was considered by Protective Services that the proposed facility would not have an impact on these designated

44 AQMAs. The developer has advised they would introduce an operational traffic management plan that would encourage contracted waste delivery vehicles to avoid such areas.

5. The proposed commercial (for-profit) operation is not clean or green. Burning (or heating) of waste causes pollution and is not a solution to meeting landfill targets.

The proposed waste management facility would need to operate on a commercially viable basis. However as it includes a materials recovery facility, which would be self sustaining in terms of producing renewable energy as part of the process and feed excess electrical power to the national grid, it is considered to be ”green” in terms of its function and purpose. AS noted above the pyrolysis process offers a reasonable and acceptable method of dealing with commercial, industrial and municipal waste streams that may otherwise have been sent to landfill sites, which are considered a less favourable method of disposing of waste. Some emissions would be produced by the process however these would be at acceptable levels and subject to SEPAs PPC regulatory controls.

6. The local community would support eco-friendly solutions for waste but Shore Energy’s proposals are commercially driven and their proposals are not green or clean. Support for this plant gives the wrong message to our children.

Refer to comment at A5 above. The proposals embrace a technology which offers a best practicable environmental option (BPEO) for dealing with the identified waste streams and is in line with Government policy on waste management.

7. The site has been identified as an Air Quality “hot spot” by North Lanarkshire Council and the proposal will only increase air and noise pollution.

The application site is not included within the designated AQMA at Whifflet, which is located about 1km from the site boundary. The ES concluded that the development would not result in a significant increase in noise levels as most of the mechanical processes would take place within the proposed building.

8. The site is only 400m from the nearest houses in Carnbroe and the proposals will lead to increases in smell, noise and a reduction in air quality.

The ES considered odour, noise and air quality impacts on all sensitive receptors including residential areas and local schools and concluded these would impacts not be significant and adequately controlled. All processes would take place within the large building which would operate at negative air pressure and all emissions subject to filter processes to standards required by SEPAs PPC permit regulations.

9. The use of this industrial site should be restricted to a storageldistribution as this would have less environmental impact on the area. The sorting and storage of waste would be unsightly, cause unpleasant smells, vermin and danger of pollution through accidental fires. The waste management plant will constantly discharge fumes to the atmosphere to the detriment of air quality for residents in surrounding housing areas, which include schools, care homes and sheltered housing areas. The proposals will generate HGV movements through Greenend, Sikeside and Carnbroe. The pyrolysis plant may be

45 capable of dealing with plasma waste products and it is therefore possible hospital waste may be processed. If approved, would additional waste streams be controlled? Refusal of this application does not render the site incapable of beneficial use. Given an improved economic situation the site could be used for other uses.

The site is zoned as an industrial site and forms part of the industrial land supply and as noted the proposal is not considered contrary to the terms of the development plan and need not be restricted to a storage/distribution depot. In any event distribution depots (depending on their scale) could incur far higher traffic movements. The sorting of waste would take place from within the large building where vehicles delivering waste would enter and doorways would then close automatically. Unpleasant smells would be contained within the building by negative air pressure and subject to filtering before emitted to atmosphere. All waste sorting would take place within the building therefore vermin infestation is unlikely. The plant would be designed and constructed to meet current building standards in terms of fire prevention measures. As noted above emissions from the plant would be within acceptable limits with no significant impact on sensitive receptors. Additional traffic would be generated however most of this would gain access to the site via principle road network. The developer has advised that they would introduce an operational management plan as a best practice to encourage contracted waste delivery vehicles to avoid secondary road networks and areas subject to the AQMA designations where appropriate. The proposed pyrolysis plant is a technology that is not suitable for dealing with medical, toxic or hazardous wastes and the developer would be restricted to the waste types approved by SEPA via their PPC permit regulations. As noted previously the site is zoned for general industrial use and it is considered that the site is capable of supporting other industrial based land uses.

10. The developer is suspected of not including a sufficient level of information in respect of possible emissions from the proposed waste management plant. Such plants should be located well away from housing areas.

The proposed pyrolysis process does offer a renewable energy resource as described above. Pyrolysis is not another term for incineration where combustion takes place in the presence of oxygen. Pyrolysis takes place in an air starved environment so that burning does not take place. The ES has demonstrated that emissions would be within acceptable standards controlled and regulated by SEPA. The ES also concludes that there would be no significant impacts on health as a result of the development and the findings of the assessment are consistent with Government Studies into the environmental and health impacts of waste management developments.

11. The applicants have tried to promote this development as a Renewable Source of Energy but it is considered this incinerator is likely to cause additional air pollution which can cause serious harm to respiratory systems.

The proposed pyrolysis process does offer a renewable energy resource as described above. Pyrolysis is not another term for incineration where combustion takes place in the presence of oxygen. Pyrolysis takes place in an air starved environment so that burning does not take place. The ES has demonstrated that emissions would be within acceptable standards controlled and regulated by SEPA. The ES also concludes that there would be no significant impacts on health as a result of the development and the findings of the assessment are consistent with Government Studies into the environmental and health impacts of waste management developments.

46 12. This proposal must be rejected because the potential noise, pollution and health concerns far outweigh any economic benefits for the area.

Scottish Enterprise has supported the proposals on its economic benefits to the local and larger economy and it is considered the proposals would offer some contribution to the economy. The ES concludes that impacts on noise, air quality and general health standards would not be significant and are acceptable. Given these factors the proposals are considered to be beneficial to the local economy with no significant impact on the environmental issues as reported.

13. As a resident from Orchid Grove I request that the planning for the proposed incinerator does not go ahead as the value of our homes has dropped enough without having a dark stinking cloud hanging over us and more importantly our 2 kids which will be inhaling the toxic fumes every day of their life at home and eventually when they start school.

The proposed waste management facility would not emit "dark stinking clouds of smoke" or cause any significant impact on air quality in the area or on sensitive receptors such as residential areas and schools. As noted it is considered the plant would be adequately designed to meet SEPAs PPC permit regulations that control such operations.

14. I live in the area into which particulate pollution can be expected to fall from the proposed incinerator's 27m stack. This was made obvious by the recent tyre fire on the site where the smoke travelled to my garden and beyond. These and other unseen pollutants can easily concentrate to dangerous levels.

The accidental fire at the tyre recycling depot clearly resulted in significant smoke and pollution which fell on adjacent housing areas. It is considered the emissions from this fire are not comparable with the proposed waste management facility. The ES demonstrates that emissions would be within acceptable standards as required via SEPAs PPC permit regulations.

15. There is no way of measuring a cumulative effect of this pollution especially if it's added to the already high levels of bad air quality in this area.

The ES has addressed cumulative impacts via an environmental impact assessment, In the case of each of the range of pollutants considered, the cumulative levels of pollution that are predicted to occur at sensitive receptors are all well below Air Quality Strategy objectives or environmental assessment level guidelines. (Section 4.1.2) These limits are fully explained within the Air Quality Assessment. In most cases the emissions from the facility were assessed to be at a level that is below the background level air quality. This is due to the controls proposed for the facility.

16. In a House of Lords enquiry on 14th April 1999, Environment Minister Michael Meacher said, "Incinerator plants are the source of serious toxic pollutants: dioxins; furans; acid gases; particulates; heavy metals; and they all need to be treated very seriously. There must be absolute prioritisation given to human health requirements and protection of the environment. I repeat the emissions from incinerator processes are extremely toxic. Some of the emissions are carcinogenic. We must use every reasonable instrument to eliminate them altogether." I therefore object to such a plant being placed so close to residential housing, schools and other area of high or sensitive population.

.- 47 Whilst the statement offered by a former Environment Minister can be noted, this refers to incineration plants and was issued more than 10 years ago. As noted the proposal does not involve incineration of waste materials.

17. It strikes me as ludicrous that an incinerator should be placed beside one of the most busy stretches of the M8, smoke billowing across the carriageway surely is a hazard. To suggest as has been done at the public meeting that the public would not see the smoke is quite frankly ridiculous. If the smoke from chimneys could not be hidden during World War Two then how does Carnbroe suddenly differ?

As previously noted the proposed waste management facility does not involve incineration and although the some emissions will be released to atmosphere these would be subject to filter controls and within acceptable standards controlled SEPA under their PPC permit regulations.

18. The health and safety assurances offered in support of the facility are not proven as the ES refers to parameters such as “no significant adverse effects are predicted, and unlikely. Even small health risks are unacceptable.

The ES acknowledges that there would be some impacts as a result of the proposed development. Current Air Quality Strategy and Objectives allow for a permissible amount pollutants from such developments and provided such objectives are reached they are deemed to be compliant with industry standards on Air Quality. The ES concludes that the impact on health would not be significant and in line with AQS.

5 Lack of Need, Contrary to Development Plan, NWS, AWP and National Policy Issues

1. There is no local need for a plant of this type or size-the community should employ the preferred options of reduce, re-use and recycle before resorting to Pyrolysis (incineration). This proposal does not address or promote waste minimisation.

The proposed development is to provide a regional waste management facility and its main purpose is to process industrial, commercial and industrial waste streams that may be sourced within a 30 mile radius of the site as well as locally sources waste streams. It therefore offers a facility that has the capacity to deal with waste at a regional scale and could (depending on waste procurement contracts) deal with locally sourced waste. The National Waste Strategy advocates the principles of a waste hierarchy where the order of preference for managing waste proceeds through: Prevention>Reuse>Recycling>Other Recovery>Disposal. It is considered that the facility fits within this hierarchy as it offers other recovery facilities through the MRF process and disposal facilities for residual waste that could not be prevented, reused or recycled by other means. As noted above SEPA considered the proposals was in accordance with the terms of the NWS, and AWand agreed that a need for such a facility had been demonstrated.

2. The proposed commercial (for-profit) operation is not clean or green. Burning (or heating) of waste causes pollution and is not a solution to meeting landfill targets.

48 The proposed waste management facility offers a sustainable method of dealing with waste and would assist in reducing the volumes of waste currently sent to landfill as agreed by SEPA. As noted in the ES the impacts on air quality would not be significant and within regulations controlled under SEPAs PCC permit regulations.

3. Municipal and Commercial waste, sourced from 13 local authority areas will be processed here and odours, vermin and noise will result and the health of Monklands residents will suffer.

As noted above the proposed waste management facility has a capacity to source commercial, industrial and municipal waste from up to a 30 mile radius of the site. No waste disposal contracts have yet been agreed but municipal waste could be sourced from other local authority areas. The ES advises that impacts on air quality, odours and noise would not be significant. All of the waste tipping and sorting processes would take place within a building and no raw waste would be stored outside. As such vermin infestation is unlikely.

4. Pyrolysis incineration does not promote reduce, reuse or recycle hierarchy, which are keys to good waste management. The plant would leave residual waste that would require to be landfilled.

As noted above the proposed waste management facility fits within the waste management hierarchy as it offers other recovery facilities through the MRF process and disposal facilities for residual waste that could not be prevented, reused or recycled by other means. It is accepted that some residual waste such as bulky materials, gas bottles and large pieces of waste such as tree stumps or concrete blocks, or waste which cannot be recycled will be transported to a landfill site, however the volumes would be significantly less as a result of the facility. The Pyrolysis process produces char and syngas. The char material, derived from the superheated waste would be recycled and can be used as a soil conditioner for off-site uselsale.

5. This is not a local solution. Monklands would become a dumping ground for the waste from 14 other local authorities, which would be transported to the plant on a round the clock basis.

It is clear that the proposed development offers a regional rather than a local solution to dealing with large quantities of waste sourced from up to 30 mile radius of the site. Whilst the facility would process waste over a 24 hour, 7 days per week period, actual deliveries and removal of recyclable and residual waste destined for landfill would occur during 0700-1900 hours Monday to Friday, and 0700-1 300 hrs Saturdays.

6. Monklands will be burdened with a disproportionate number of waste management sites. This proposed waste management plant does not address or promote waste reduction.

Whilst there are a number of other existing and proposed waste management facilities in the Monklands Area they vary in terms of their size and function but all contribute to the integrated network of facilities needed to deal with the volumes of waste streams from industrial, commercial and municipal sources. The need for new facilities which adopt new sustainable technologies is encouraged by the Scottish Government's policy aims to move away from a reliance on landfill sites. SEPA considered that the need for a further waste management facility was acceptable and had no objection to the proposals as the developer was able to demonstrate there was a need for a facility of this type and capacity to meet the waste volumes of the AWP area.

49 7. Similar waste management plants have been approved in Greengairs and Bargeddie, so why the necessity for an already well sewed area?

A similar position can be adopted in regards to the existing facilities at Bargeddie, and the consented but not yet developed EfW incinerator proposed at Drumshangie. The Bargeddie facility treats mixed source segregated recycled material and inert waste. The proposed pyrolysis facility does not look to treat either of those waste types. Whilst the proposed ENV is an incinerator capable of dealing with 300,000 te of all waste types per annum (if developed), the Scottish Government has imposed a 25% limit on the proportion of municipal waste collected by Local Authorities that can be incinerated as they wish to encourage other more sustainable Waste management technologies. The developer has advised that nationally, local authority recycling is currently running at 34% average, leaving over 40% still to be dealt with (assuming 25% of this volume is incinerated). North Lanarkshire has a higher than average recycling rate, but is land filling around 140,000te of municipal waste each year. Glasgow has a below average recycling rate of 20% but is land filling almost 300,000te of municipal waste each year. Clearly there is a substantial quantity of municipal waste that requires to be disposed of despite successes by Local Authorities promoting reduction, reuse and recycle policies. Moreover, the Scottish Government's target is to eventually reduce municipal landfill to 5% and as a result more waste treatment facilities will be required. In addition to municipal waste streams, the proposed pyrolysis facility would be able to accept commercial and industrial wastes. Details demonstrating the need for the pyrolysis facility have been agreed by SEPA. The need assessment did take into account other waste management facilities (including the consented EfW plant at Drumshangie/Greengairs capacity) and still demonstrates a need for the proposed pyrolysis facility. The need for new facilities is also consistent with Scottish Government Policy to move waste away from landfills.

8. The Scottish Parliament declared in June 2009 that "there should be no necessity for any large scale waste to energy plants to be built in Scotland and that re-use, reducing waste creation and recycling are the best way forward".

It is assumed this declaration was made when the Scottish Government released its emerging Zero Waste Plan for Scotland for public consultation. The Scottish Government is developing a new Zero Waste Plan for Scotland which is expected to be published this year. It is anticipated this will provide direction and guidance on key waste management issues which will set targets on prevention, reuse, recycling and composition, and set targets on energy from waste and landfill. This notwithstanding, the proposed pyrolysis facility may be considered as a medium scaled facility with a capacity of 160,000 te when compared with the much larger scale EfW Incinerator proposed at Drumshangie with its 300,000te capacity.

9. The proposals are contrary to the Structure Plan and Local Plan, National Waste Strategy, Area Waste Plan and National Policy on waste management proposals.

The proposals are not contrary to the Structure Plan or Local Plan as assessed above. The proposals are also considered to be consistent with the aims of the National Waste Strategy, Area Waste Plan and current National Policy on waste management development.

50 C Odour Issues

1. The operation of the development would lead to unacceptable levels of noise, odours and increased vermin as food waste would be processed at this plant.

As noted above the ES assessed potential noise, and odour impacts from the operational processes and concluded these would not be significant and within acceptable limits. All process operations would take place within the proposed building which would abate such noise emissions. Odours would be minimal due to negative air pressures within the building with vents filtered before release to the external atmosphere. Whilst the building would be accessed by large vehicles, doors would close automatically which would keep noise levels to acceptable levels. Vermin would be unlikely as no waste materials would be stored externally.

2. A fire at this site in 2008 caused dreadful odours and debris for days and as such I object to the proposed incinerator.

The proposal does not involve incineration as noted previously. The accidental fire at the tyre processing plant did cause significant levels of smoke, debris and pollution, however the proposed pyrolysis process will not result in similar emissions.

3. Waste products being incinerated at this plant will expel nasty and toxic fumes into the air around Carnbroe.

The ES examined a full scope of particulates that may be released to atmosphere via the stacks associated with the development. It was however concluded that satisfactory controls would be provided to ensure that air quality standards would not be compromised. As noted SEPA had no objection as they considered the proposed development is capable of meeting their PPC permit regulations.

4. Local residents near Shore’s plant in Liverpool have made complaints. Further to this the prevailing wind direction in the area of this proposed site is south westerly; all pollutants from this incinerator will be blown across the residential area of Carnbroe.

In response to this particular objection the developer offered the following comment: “The plant in Huyton, (Liverpool) is not run by Shore but by Orchid Environmental. We understand that there were a number of objections to odour in the early period of operation but that these have been substantially reduced by alterations to the building and adjustments to the process. In Carnbroe if we receive consent, we will be developing a new building and it will be properly insulated to minimise the opportunity for odour escape. Furthermore, we will ensure that all the improvements to the process achieved by Orchid and more are incorporated into our process, so that the opportunity for odour escape is minimised”. It is considered that the building would be of an appropriate design to ensure any odour emissions from the facility are appropriately controlled. The ES included data to demonstrate predicted annual mean concentrations and the short term maximum l-hour mean concentrations of various particulates that may be expected to be emitted from the facility. Whilst the data acknowledges that some particulates may fall over existing residential areas, the annual mean and short term maximum predicted levels would not be significant even when considered against the most stringent of benchmarks used for assessing such data. For example PM2.5 (ultra-fine particles) have not yet been formally adopted into national legislation ie The Air Quality (Scotland) Regulations and are not

5-1 currently considered in the Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) framework but have been considered in the ES. As concluded by the ES, whilst the proposed development would give rise to atmospheric emissions from both process activities and road traffic associated with the development, the assessment of the significance of these emissions, in line with appropriate guidance, indicates that no exceedences of air quality objectives or environmental assessment levels would occur as a result of the development. Neither SEPA or Protective Services raised any objection in respect of air quality impacts.

D Noise Issues

1. Noise from reversing vehicles (including audio-warnings) and a 24 hour day site operation will be a nuisance for homes nearest to the site.

The noise from reversing vehicles (including audio warnings) was considered in the ES however this aspect was not considered to be significant. Waste delivery vehicles would only operate during normal working hours as noted and not over a 24 hour period as suggested. Delivery vehicles would also enter the building and doors would close automatically, Audible warnings would eventually be replaced as waste delivery fleets are renewed.

2. Noise from vehicles and site operation etc. as it might be 24hrs-7days a week.

As noted previously whilst the plant's processing facilities would operate continually over a 24 hour period, 7 days a week, these operations would be situated within a building. No waste delivery vehicles would operate outwith the agreed periods for delivery.

E Traffic Impact Issues

1. Waste deliveries from a 30 mile radius will increase traffic volumes at the Shawhead junction, which are already heavy.

The proposal will generate addition traffic however this is not considered to be by a significant amount. Transport Scotland had no objection to the proposals as the % increase in traffic using the A8 would not be significant in terms of the number of vehicles using the A8. Not all delivery vehicles would need to use the Shawhead junction, which would also lessen the perceived impact.

2. The proposals would lead to large vehicles travelling through Carnbroe village to the detriment of road and health safety.

The TS demonstrates that waste delivery vehicles would generally make use of the principle road network. The developer has agreed to introduce a operational management plan that would encourage contracted waste delivery companies to avoid routes through residential areas and avoidance of the designated AQMAs.

3. There would be further increases in traffic volumes on the A8, in addition to the potential extra traffic generated by an approved office development at Eurocentral, which is located K mile from the application site.

As noted above transport Scotland had no objection to the proposals in terms of the additional vehicles using the A8 as the increase would not be significant.

52 4. The M81A8 is too busy especially during rush hour.

As per 3 above.

5. Transportation of waste, with its noise, pollution and emissions will increase as a result of this plant.

As noted in the ES, the development would result in increased traffic and associated noise and emission levels, however these would not be to any significant level when measured against current background levels.

6. There are no associated proposals to upgrade the existing access to the site. This is short sighted and dangerous.

There are no proposals to upgrade the current access arrangements to the site from the A8. These are considered acceptable for the continued use of the site and are acceptable for the proposed use. As noted there was no objection on this matter from Transport Scotland.

F Health Hazard and Proximity Issues

1. The proposed plant is too near residential areas, where there are 4 schools and nurseries in the immediate area. Wind-borne pollution from the process is known to cause serious health problems.

The ES has examined the issues relating to wind-borne pollution from the proposed plant operation and from additional traffic generation. It was concluded that there would be no significant impact on sensitive receptors including residential areas and schools. As such it is considered that the proposed plant would be located far enough away from such receptors as no significant impacts are predicted.

2. Pollutants from this plant are known to be harmful to health, especially young children. There are no known safe levels of dioxins and furans, and experts refer to “tolerable” and “acceptable” levels. A waste management plant in Corby was proven to cause birth defects.

A health impact assessment is included in Section 5 of Annex B of the Environmental Statement. This assesses the potential for impacts on human health from process activities and from road traffic. It concludes that there will be no significant impacts on human health as a result of the development and that the findings of the assessment are consistent with Government Studies into the environmental and health impacts of waste management.

3. The possibility of fire breaking out in this area would have an unacceptable impact on not only Coatbridge, Airdrie, but outlying areas, including possible traffic disruption of the busy M8.

There is no reason to believe that the buildings and processes will be any more susceptible to fire than any other industrial operation. In the unlikely event that there is a fire there is no reason to believe that there will be any greater disruption than would normally be the case with fires.

4. The cumulative effect could cause major health problems in years to come. Monklands already has a reputation for ill health and we should be improving health standards, not adding to the problems.

As noted previously the proposed waste management plant does not include an incineration process and cannot be compared with the impact caused by the accidental fire at the tyre recycling depot. As with most buildings of this

53 scale it would need to comply with the building standards regulations on fire prevention before it is brought into operation.

5. The proposal will lead to increased noise levels during the 8.00am to 10.00pm working hours.

Cumulative impacts on air quality were considered in the ES in terms of the emissions from the processes and additional traffic generation. It was concluded there will be no significant impacts on human health as a result of the development and that the findings of the assessment are consistent with Government Studies into the environmental and health impacts of waste management.

6. I wish to object to this proposal not least because I have not been provided with any facts or information on the health risks such an operation might have on residents.

The ES was available for public inspection either in hard copy available in Council offices or via the Council’s e-planning portal. With some 4300 representations received in regards to the proposals it is clear that this information was readily available. The ES as previously noted reported that there would be no significant impacts on health as a result of the development.

G Ecology and Wildlife Issues

1. There would be a loss of amenity to the community and there would be harm to wildlife in this area including protected species such as otters, kingfishers, badgers, bats, deer, foxes and buzzards, which is unacceptable. The destruction of these species and habitats will send the wrong message to children.

The ES has demonstrated that there would be no significant impact of natural heritage interests including protected species. Scottish Natural Heritage agreed with the conclusions of the ES and had no objection subject to conditions relating to standard protection measures for adjacent habitats and species including otters, bats and breeding birds. The proposals would introduce some biodiversity improvement measures that would be welcomed by the Scottish Wlldlife Trust.

2. The flora and fauna of the area will suffer as will farming activities in the district and the North Calder Water and Woodhall Lochan will be exposed to pollution.

The ES Annex G and G.l provided an assessment of impacts on local ecology and concludes that emissions from the proposed plant would have no significant impact on sensitive receptors including the outlying SlNC provided best practice measures for wildlife are followed during construction and operational phases.

H Waste Type Issues

1. Reading up on some of the chemicals that will be processed the site will be a major accident waiting to happen, most of the chemicals ar highly volatile in other words Coatbridge could turn into the new Hiroshima disaster.

No chemicals would be processed at the site. It is assumed the objector has misunderstood the content of the ES where a list of potential pollutants was included as part of the assessment on air quality. As noted above the impact

.- 54 on air quality was not considered to be significant.

2. This proposal is unnecessary and will discourage recycling; something that North Lanarkshire does well.

The proposal does not discourage recycling indeed it increases levels of recycling by extracting difficult materials out of residual waste streams and making them available for recycling. As noted above the SEPA consider that the developer has demonstrated a need for the facility under the terms of the AWP which promotes an integrated network of waste management facilities.

3. I understand that it‘s not just domestic waste they will be burning.

The facility would be able to deal with municipal, industrial and commercial waste streams. The process would not involve incineration as suggested.

4. When I spoke to the representatives from Shore Energy at the public meeting in Shawhead and asked where the waste would come from to be recycled and incinerated -pyrolysis is just a softer term for burning and incinerating,they told me that the waste would be brought in by truck from all over the country and perhaps even England.

Pyrolysis is not another term for incineration. Combustion takes place in the presence of oxygen whereas pyrolysis takes place in an air starved environment so that burning does not take place. It is a different and much cleaner process. The developer has not at any stage suggested that waste would be brought from England.

5. What‘s to stop Shore from expanding into medical, toxic or industrial waste?

The proposed technology can deal with industrial waste but is not suitable for dealing with medical, toxic or hazardous waste. The type of materials dealt with at the plant would be controlled via the PPC permit or by planning condition if appropriate.

I Site Selection/Proximity to Residential Areas.

1. The proposed plant would be too near homes, not just Carnbroe and Shawhead

The ES has considered a comprehensive range of environmental impacts on sensitive receptors at and around the site, including adjacent residential areas and concluded that such impacts would not be significant, Where there are some minor concerns over such impacts the ES recommends that mitigation measures are introduced as part of the proposals to enable the development to be considered acceptable. As noted above there was no objection from SEPA, SNH, Transport Scotland or Protective Services in regards to these conclusions. The proposals are also consistent with the terms of the development plan as the site is zoned for industry and the accords with the NWS and AWP as advised by SEPA. The site is located more than 250m from the residential area of Shawhead and 200m from the southern edge of Carnbroe. Whilst the current local plan generally suggests that a 250m “buffer zone” be maintained between residential areas and waste disposal/recycling sites, exceptions can be considered acceptable where it has been demonstrated that such waste management proposals would be beneficial to amenity, safety and the environment. (Refer Policies MIN 1 Mineral Extraction and WDR 1 Landfill and Refuse Disposal). Taking these matters into account it is considered that the site is situated far enough away from residential areas as there would be no significant environmental impact

55 on them and the proposals would offer an acceptable and sustainable method for dealing with the targeted waste streams.

2. The owners of Eurocentral were unwilling to sell or lease a site to Shore Energy as they considered such a bad neighbour use was unacceptable in this industrial park. Why then should a bad neighbour development be acceptable to the families of Carnbroe and Shawhead?

The developer advised that the Eurocentral development accommodates almost entirely Class 6 developments and is focussed on distribution uses, plus a printing press, a hotel and developing offices. This site marketing focus adopted by Eurocentral precluded agreement to allow a "bad neighbour" waste management facility within the Eurocentral campus. The term "bad neighbour development" stems from the current planning regulations, where development proposals that may potentially have wider impacts on amenity require to be advertised in the local press. This proposed development has been subject to appropriate advertising as required by the planning and EIA regulations and it has been concluded in the ES that the potential environmental impacts associated with this "bad neighbour development" are not significant and would not be detrimental to the amenity of outlying residential areas. Therefore this site is considered appropriate for a development of this type.

3. There are many industrial sites that are not close to rural housing areas that are better suited for a waste management plant.

The ES provided an assessment on site selection criteria and advises that a range of alternative sites were considered. This included Faskine, Eurocentral, Prologis, Dunalastair, Newhouse and the former Shanks and McEwan site. The application site was considered the most suitable for a development of this nature in terms of its size, long term commercial availability, appropriate industrial zoning, avoidance of green belt, immediate access to the primary road network, proximity to sensitive receptors, avoidance of conflicts with other existing uses (Eurocentral), visual/landscape impact.

4. I am also extremely concerned that NLC is considering this application when owners from the Eurocentral area "are unwilling to either sell or lease sites to Shore for their proposed use, which they consider to be a 'bad neighbour', development" (ref: Shore energy). On this basis I would propose that this bad neighbour development would be wholly unacceptable to be sited next to a residential area, if it's not suited to a commercial area then it is certainly unac ceptable to the families of Shawhead and Carnbroe.

Refer to comment 1.2 above.

5. When Shore considered all the sites available, one of the main elements was that it should not be near to residential areas. Why then did they choose Carnbroe and Shawhead?

Refer to comment 1.3 above.

56 J Public Consultation 1. Shore Energy had no public meetings in Carnbroe to inform us, and the called "A Greener future for Carnbroe" leaflet was not distributed to every home and lots of people didn't receive it.

This objection is considered to be inaccurate as is demonstrated by the narrative in Volume 1 Section 2.3 of the Environmental Statement on Public Consultation. The developer has advised that 4,000 leaflets were distributed inviting local people to the exhibitions on the 13th and 14th May 2009. In addition the developer attended a public meeting at the request of Gerald Somers the Chairperson of Greenend & Sikeside Tenant and Residents Association and Chairperson of Coatbridge Federation of Tenants & Residents. This was held on 28th May 2009 and was attended by 36 residents and two Councillors. As is evident by the volume of representation received in regards to the proposal it is clear that local residents are fully aware of the details of the proposal.

K Other Matters

1. This proposal will undoubtedly affect the value of our homes.

Issues over perceived loss of property values are not material to the consideration of any planning application.

2. The fire that happened 2yrs ago to which tyres got burnt was an absolute nightmare for the residents of Carnbroe let alone an incinerator getting put right on our door step.

It is noted that local residents were affected by the accidental fire at the tyre recycling depot, however as noted above the proposed development would not involve any incineration process and it would be erroneous to compare the previous impacts of the tyre depot fire with the proposed development.

3. Burning waste is not the solution and North Lanarkshire should be well aware that it would be wrong to bring yet another incinerator into our area.

The proposed development does not include an incinerator.

4. This proposed plant is not a recycle plant, it is an incinerator by another name.

As described above and in detail in the planning application, the plant would take waste, mechanically process it to remove recyclate and moisture and then will turn the residue into a gas to be passed through gas engines to make renewable energy. It is not an incinerator.

5. I would ask if Shore Energy is receiving any grantslmoneylassistance for this plant from NLC, Scot Govt, European Community?

The developer has advised that no grants have been received at this stage, however if planning permission is granted they would be pursuing grant assistance that may be available for job creation in particular.

6. If Shore Energy have supplied over 80 docs, to support their application-are each and every one of these being challenged by experts? Where is the published infol research which shows that without a doubt, such plants are without danger to health?

57 The proposals were subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment which enabled an Environmental Statement to be submitted along with the planning application. It is considered that the ES offers a competent assessment of the impacts in accordance with the Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999. This information has been considered by SEPA, Transport Scotland, SNH and Protective Services, who raised no issues in respect of methodology used in assessing the impacts. Such assessments are considered as a best practice of informing and allowing Planning Authorities to consider the significance of such impacts before determining such proposals.

7. I believe that it is contrary to the spirit of North Lanarkshire Council’s local area waste plan and the National Waste Strategy in general to consider such a proposal.

North Lanarkshire falls within the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Area Waste Plan area. The AWP envisages a mixed waste processing facilities (the first stage of the proposed process) and anticipates that technologies “such as thermal treatment, anaerobic digestion, additional production of refuse-derived fuel, autoclaving, and other emerging waste-treatment technologies” will be required post 2010 to allow 2013 targets to be achieved. The proposal as noted includes the production of fuel and thermal treatment as prescribed. SEPA considered these aspects of the proposal and considered they complied with the NWS, NWP and AWP.

8. Lack of Environmental Impact Assessment.

The planning application was accompanied by an Environmental Statement which was prepared in accordance with the EIA regulations.

9. There are several fundamental flaws, burning plastics, tyres and other discarded goods is not included in promote waste reduction first and foremeost, followed by reuse and recycling policy, as stipulated in North Lanarkshire Council’s sustainable solutions to waste management, neither is it clean energy.

The proposal does not involve the burning of plastics, tyres and other discarded goods. The proposed plant may accept such waste but these would be subject to the MRF and pyrolysis process, which as noted does not involve burning or incineration. The thermal treatment of biomass by pyrolysis is confirmed renewable energy process under the Scottish Renewables Order.

10. I draw your attention. to the recent release 11 June 09 GREENS WIN HOLYROOD VOTE AGAINST “LANDFILL IN THE SKY” -announcement from Jas Mackenzie, Media & Comms, Scot Parliament, Edin Tel: 0131 348 6360, Mobile 0799 933 074 - a full transcript of the recent successful amendment is avail (passed by 65 votes to 54) “there should be no necessity for any large-scale waste-to-energy plants to be built in Scotland + that reuse, reducing waste creation and recycling are best way forward.”

This statement relates to the emerging Zero Waste Plan (ZWP) that underwent its public consultation process last November and is expected to be approved this year. As previously noted, the Zero Waste Plan intends to limit the number of large scale energy from waste incinerator developments and the developer has advised this is why the current proposals involve a pyrolysis process solution. This is not a proposal for an incinerator. The technology takes residual waste (that is waste after the householder has

58 extracted whatever they can at home) and then mechanically sorts that waste to remove residual recyclable material, such as plastic bottles, metals, inert materials such as glass, grit, stones and ceramics and to remove, clean and recycle water from the waste. What is left is mixed biodegradable waste - particularly food - and some micro-contaminants. This final residue is taken and turned into renewable energy in the form of a syngas by the pyrolysis process, thereby saving fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas. The developer considers this process would also be in line with the emerging ZWP.

1I. There are several inconsistenciesin relation to the supporting information. Or example the information on vehicle trips suggests the facility would accept far more waste than the maximum proposed capacity of 160,000 te pre annum.

The developer has accepted that these vehicle trip tables submitted as part of the TS overstate the number of vehicles likely to be visiting the site. However as part of the agreed scope of the assessment, the developers were asked to estimate hourly movements of vehicles to the site by Transport Scotland. As the developer did not know the custom and practices Of potential customers, including the capacity of such vehicles, these hourly estimates also include an element of contingency to ensure that peaks can be assessed and handled by the facility. Even at these higher figures, Transport Scotland has already assessed the impact of the proposal on the adjacent A8 and has considered that impact to be minimal and acceptable. Notwithstanding this, the planning application is made for handling up to 160,000te of waste and up to 20,000te of additional biomass. Should planning permission be granted, a planning condition would effectively limit the site capacity to these figures, therefore any ‘over delivery’ would be dealt with as a potential breach of the permission. Tonnages of waste entering the site are also the subject of returns to SEPA as part of the PCC permit regime and are therefore verifiable and enforceable by the Planning Authority.

12. There was no data provided on actual pyrolysis technology proposed at this site.

As noted above, no specific emission data for the pyrolysis plant were available since the final technology selection is subject to commercial negotiation, therefore the emission rates were conservatively assumed to be based in compliance with the WID emissions limits. The ES includes relevant emissions data for the plant in Table B.2. The ES advises that in reality the emissions from the bio-filter stack will be process air only and emissions are considered in terms of oderous emissions only and were assessed as falling within acceptable limits of the WID limits.

13. The ES is inadequate as it fails to rely on a flawed model for justification of need as noted by the NLC Waste Strategy response of 2gthJuly 2009.

The developer provided additional information to SEPA in terms of demonstrating a need for the facility under the terms of the AWP. SEPA as noted above withdrew their initial objection to the proposals.

14. Lack of benefit as it appears to need more energy to run it as it produces.

The proposals included information on a Heat and Power Plan that was considered acceptable to SEPA as they require such facilities to demonstrate they would be energy efficient under the requirements of the PPC permit regulations.

59 Whilst a significant number of objections have been received, having assessed and given the content of these due consideration, they do not raise sufficient reason to recommend that the application be refused.

60 Application No: Proposed Development:

N/09/0137O/FUL Conversion of Playing Field to Synthetic Sports Pitch Including Fencing and Floodlighting

Site Address:

St Andrew's High School 9 Old Monkland Road Old Monkland Coatbridge

Date Registered: 7th December 2009

Applicant: Agent: Transform Schools Aedas C/o Edinburgh Road Floor 9 Springhill No 1 Cadogan Square Shotts Cadogan Street ML7 5DT Glasgow G2 7HF

Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application No

Ward: Representations:

010 Coatbridge South 1 letter of representation received. James Brooks, lan Ferrie, John Higgins

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

The proposed sports pitch complies with the Development Plan and will not have any undue adverse impact on the wider area.

Proposed Conditions:-

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

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

2. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- L(9O)Ol Rev A, L(90)02 Rev A and D(94)Ol.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

61 Planning Application No. N I09 I01370 I FUL This map is reproduced from Produced by Ordnance SUNW material North Lanarkshire Council vhh the permlrsion of Conversion of Playing Field to Synthetic Sports Pitch Environmental Services OrdnanceSurfeyon behali Including Fencing and Floodlighting Calziel Building, d the Controlier of Her MaJest$s 7 Scott Street, Stationery Oftice 0 Crow Motherwell, mpyrylht Unauthorised St Andrew's High School, 9 Old Monkland Road, reprodudion infringes Crow ML1 1SX mpyright and may lead to Old Monkland, Coatbridge prosecutnn or cwil proceedings telO1698 274274 Nolth LanarkshireCouncil fa 01698 403053 * Remesentation

62 3. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

4. That within 4 weeks of the development becoming occupied, a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

5. That before any development hereby permitted starts, a noise impact assessment following the methodology contained in British Standard BS4142:1997 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The assessment shall identify any required mitigation measures, which may include restrictions on opening hours. All mitigation measures shall be in place before the pitch comes into use and be retained thereafter to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the residential amenity of nearby houses is protected.

Backaround PaPers:

Representation Letters

Letter from Mr Charles Fawcett, 6, Woodlands Drive, Coatbridge ML5 1LE, received 8'h January 2010

Consultation Responses: Letter from SportScotland received on 6'h January 2010 Memo from Protective Services received on 7'h January 2010

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Gordon Liddell at 01236 812379

Report Date:

15th February 2010

63 APPLICATION NO. N/09/01370/FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.1 The application is for the development of a synthetic sports pitch (with associated fencing and floodlighting) within part of St Andrews High School, Old Monklands Road, Coatbridge. The north of the School campus is bounded by Old Monklands Road, the rear grounds of a small private housing estate and Coathill Hospital. A large housing area bounds the school to the west while industrial uses are located beyond the southern and western boundaries. The proposed pitch is located within the School grounds at the south eastern corner. This area is located closest to the adjacent industrial land although there are some residential properties at Wood hall Avenue a short distance to the south west.

1.1 In terms of the wider area, the pitch is more remotely located, bounded by existing sports pitches, car parking and the main School building. The site is generally flat, grassed and currently in use as an unlit playing field. It is noted that the School campus already provides some synthetic pitches for dual community use.

2. Proposed Develoment

2.1 The proposed development is to replace the existing grassed playing field with a synthetic pitch and associated fencing and floodlighting. The pitch size is marginally larger, with 5 metre high ball-stop fencing proposed behind each end, 3 metre high side fencing and six 15 metre high floodlighting columns.

2.2 The artificial pitch increases the amount of dual community-use pitches operating within the School and in particular introduces an evening and weekend community use to this part of the School grounds.

3. Site Historv

3.1 Planning applications 03/00437/OUT and 04/00986/FUL (for the Erection of Secondary School, Community Centre, Sports Complex and Floodlit, Multi-purpose Synthetic Pitches for Dual Use with the Community) were approved by the Council in July 2003 and August 2004. The original School development has since been completed and is now in use.

4. Development Plan

4.1 The proposed development raises no strategic issues and this application will therefore be considered in relation to policies within the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. Policy EDUCI (Protect and Improve Schools) applies in this case with the policy seeking to protect and improve schools and actively encouraging dual community use. 5. Consultations

5.1 A summary of comments from consultees is as follows:

SportScotland have no objection to the application. Protective Services have required that a noise assessment be carried out to establish the impact of the evening and weekend community use on the nearest residents. Guidance is also given in respect to lighting from floodlights and on construction impact.

6. Representations

6.1 Following neighbour notification and advertisement of the application one letter of representation was received from a member of the community, who also represents a local rugby initiative. The main point of objection relates to the loss of rugby provision 64 in south Coatbridge by displacement of the only local pitch

7. Planninn Assessment

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

7.2 Development Plan: Monklands District Local Plan 1997: This section of the site is covered bv Policv EDUCI. This policy aims to protect and improve schools and actively ekourages the dual-use of playing fields. This application therefore fully complies with those aims and with this policy. As detailed in paragraph 3.1 above, the wider School was subject to re-development proposals in 2003 and 2004. By involving the amalgamation of two different school sites and an area of open space, these applications had wider policy implications including protected open space and sports pitch provision. Those matters were however assessed at that time with the applications subsequently approved and the new School development implemented.

7.3 Other Material Considerations: Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The site is designated as HCFlA (Protecting Residential Amenity and Community Facilties). This policy seeks to protect community facilities and residential amenity. The emerging local plan raises no new policy considerations in addition to those discussed above and, as such, the proposal complies with the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

7.4 Residential Amenity: With the adjacent land uses to the east and south being industrial in nature, and the wider school campus and community sports pitches being located to the north, the main consideration in this application is the amenity of the nearby housing at Woodhall Avenue, particularly as a result of the introduction of an additional evening and weekend use. From a visual perspective, the site is separated from the housing by an additional grassed pitch. With the backdrop of the School and industrial area beyond, the fencing and lighting columns are not considered to be out of place or to result in an unacceptable visual impact. In respect to potential adverse impact as a result of evening and weekend use, guidance has been provided by the Council's Protective Services on potential lighting issues and this matter can be addressed through an advisory note in the decision notice and through separate appropriate legislation. In respect to noise, a condition is attached requiring the submission of a noise impact assessment, identifying any required mitigation measures and their subsequent implementation. It is therefore concluded that while the application complies 'in principle' with the land-use policy applicable to the site, the development can also be introduced to the local area with an acceptable impact on residential amenity.

7.5 Consultations; In respect to Traffic and Transportation issues it is noted that the School already operates a dual education/ community use with appropriate parking for activities outwith School hours. Provision of an additional pitch and the displacing of an existing grass pitch is not considered to result in any further transportation issues. It is noted that the School campus benefits from 228 car parking spaces. Relevant comments from Protective Services on construction impact can also be addressed through an advisory note to the applicant as part of the decision notice.

7.6 SportScotland have been consulted in respect to displacement of an existing grass playing field. They have noted that the proposal will bring the first pitch with a 3G synthetic surface to the area, complimenting the existing synthetic pitch provision within the campus. With the replacement of grass it is noted that the capacity of the pitch will be increased. SportScotland note that the 'North Lanarkshire Sports Pitches Strategy and Action Plan' indicates that the Coatbridge area requires an additional 3 artificial pitches to cope with anticipated demand. Although a full sized grass pitch will be removed it is considered that the proposed synthetic pitch should help address this demand. They conclude by encouraging community use outwith School hours.

Representations,: One letter of objection has been received from a member of the

65 Community, also representing a local rugby initiative.

Point of Objection: Concerns are raised in respect to the loss of rugby pitch provision and it is noted that this proposal results in the loss of the only rugby pitch in the area.

Comment: The applicant has confirmed that rugby provision will remain post development within the site on an adjacent grass pitch. Moreover, it is acknowledged that SportScotland have no objection to the application.

8. Conclusions

8.1 It is considered that the proposed sports pitch complies with the Development Plan and will not have any undue adverse impact on the wider area. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

66 Application No: Proposed Development:

N/09/0139O/FUL Construction of Two Dwellinghouses Site Address:

4 Drumgray Lane Wattston By Airdrie ML6 7UH

Date Registered:

Applicant: Agent: Mr Graeme Bell John Russell Partnership C/o agent. Anderson House Dundyvan Road Coatbrdige ML5 ID6

Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application Yes

Ward: Representations: 007 Airdrie North 3 letters of representation received. Campbell Cameron, Sophia Coyle, James McGuigan, Thomas Morgan,

Recommendation: Refuse

Reasoned Justification: It is considered that the proposed layout would be to the detriment of the established layout and character of the area through being over-development and backland development. In this respect the proposal is contrary to the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 and to the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

67 I I I

68 Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. The proposal would be over-development and backland development and would have a detrimental impact on the amenity and character of the existing built environment; in this respect the proposal would be contrary to the Monklands District Local Plan (policies HG9 (Existing Housing Areas) and GB2 (Restrict Development in Countryside Around Towns)) and the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan (policies HCFI A ( Protecting Residential Amenity and Community Facilities) and DSP4 (Quality of Development)).

2. The proposed development would set an undesirable precedent for other similar over- development and backland developments to the detriment of the residential amenity of the area.

Backaround Papers:

Representation Letters

Letter from Miss Allison Bergin, 8 Drumgray Lane, Wattston, Nr Airdrie ML6 7UH, received 28'h January 2010. Letter from Mr W J Walker, Drumgray Farm, Drumgray Lane, Wattston received IdhJanuary 2010 Letter from Mr Martin Downie, 2 Drumgray Lane, Wattston, Airdrie ML6 7UH received January 201 0.

Consultation Responses:

British Gas letter received on the 20thJanuary 2010 Scottish Power letter received on the 2"dFebruary 2010

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Gordon Arthur at 01236 616475

Report Date:

16thFebruary 2009

69 APPLICATION NO. N/09/01390/FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.I This application is for the construction of two dwellinghouses in the rear garden area of 4 Drumgray Lane, Wattston. The northern boundary of the site forms the urban edge of this part of Wattston. Drumgray Lane currently consists of three detached properties fronting onto the Lane, with the application site being the mid property. The site will be subdivided into two plots to the rear of the dwellinghouse measuring 481 metres square and 585 metres square. Mature landscaping runs along the perimeter of the site and contains a number of mature trees.

2. Proposed Development

2.1 The application is for the construction of two detached dwellinghouses. They will be two storeys in height and have 4 bedrooms. Both dwellinghouses will be positioned in tandem within the rear garden area of 4 Drumgray Lane and will be accessed via the driveway of 4 Drumgray Lane.

3. Site History

3.1 The following previous application is relevant to the current proposal

0 02/00997/FUL Erection of 1112 storey dwelling house granted 14'h November 2002.

4. DeveloDment Plan

4.1 There are no strategic implications and this application will therefore be considered in relation to Local Plan policies within the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. Policy HG9 (Existing Housing Areas) and GB2 (Restrict Development in Countryside Around Towns) apply in this case.

5. Consultations

5.1 A summary of comments from consultees is as follows:

Scottish Power stated that they have no objection to the proposal. Scottish Gas provided comment that they have no apparatus in the vicinity of this site.

6.

Following the standard neighbour notification process three letters of representation were received.

Points of objection relate to traffic congestion, substandard access (road width), poor junction visibility, over use of the access lane, loss of sunlight/ daylight to neighbouring property, overlooking ,damage to a private lane from construction traffic, drainage and the development plan.

7. Planning Assessment

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

7.2 Develoment Plan - Monkland District Local Plan 1997: In policy terms the site is split between policies HG9 (Existing Housing Areas) and GB2 (Restrict Development in

70 Countryside Around Towns). The GB2 designation is, however, considered to be of diminished relevance as the site is an existing garden located within the residential area of Wattston where policy HG9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas) protects the residential amenity of the area. This particular application represents an infill development in the rear garden area of an existing dwellinghouse. The layout does not provide frontage onto Drumgray Lane for both proposed dwellinghouses and would result in both sharing with the existing dwellinghouse the same driveway access which joins an existing substandard lane. Whilst each of the two proposed plots meets the minimum requirements of current design guidance in terms of area, their configuration and constraints are such that the proposal would constitute an inappropriate backland layout and over-development of the site. The proposed dwellinghouses will appear as constrained development in a rear garden area rather than being part of the planned Wattston settlement. In this respect this layout pays no regard to the surrounding built form, resulting in both plots being out of character with the surrounding area. Permitting this form of layout would set an undesirable precedent for inappropriate backland development. In this respect the application is considered contrary to the development plan when assessed against policy HG9.

7.3 Other Material Considerations - Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The site is designated as HCF 1 A (Protecting Residential Amenity and Community Facilities). This policy seeks to protect existing residential amenity. Design policy DSP 4 (Quality of Development) seeks to promote appropriate and high quality layout and design. It is considered that the proposal does not integrate successfully with its surroundings thereby causing disamenity to the character of the local area. The proposal is considered to have an inappropriate layout (as discussed in paragraph 7.2.) and as a consequence is contrary to the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan

7.4 Design Guidance on lnfill Development (Monklands District Local Plan): The proposal does not take account of the pattern of buildings in this part of Wattston. Drumgray Lane is characterised by a number of detached dwelling houses with substantial gardens with direct road frontages. Although located within the defined settlement boundary of Wattston, the general environment at this location is characterised by existing low density development with larger garden sizes and the presence of established trees and vegetation. Drumgray Lane at this location has a narrow substandard tarmac surface with no associated footway or street lighting, thus contributing to the area’s semi rural character. The application site has an edge of settlement character which would be lost through the proposed development. The proposed backland layout does not continue the linear form of development already established on the east side of Drumgray Lane and is therefore out of character with the area. Design Guidance in the Monklands District Local Plan on infill housing states that “in general the backland development of plots without a road frontage will not be acceptable”. The proposal is, therefore, contrary to the above Design Guidance and to good layout practice.

7.5 Consultations: No substantive issues have been raised by consultees.

7.6 Representations: Three objection letters were received. The points of objection can be summarised as follows:

Point of Objection: The development will result in additional traffic using the lane leading to traffic congestion with a more intense volume of traffic. There will be a reduction in road safety specifically where the lane meets Greengairs Road. The development will result in construction traffic using the lane leading to damage to the surface and leading to a reduction in safety for lane users. Lack of footway provision on Drumgray Lane will result in a decrease in pedestrian safety.

Comment: The lane is substandard and the introduction of additional traffic has, as a consequence, the potential to result in some reduction in road safety at the junction with Greengairs Road. This is not, however, an overriding concern. With respect to

71 construction traffic the contractor has a responsibility to work in a safe manner. Similarly any damage to a private road during construction would be a matter to be resolved between the land owners and the developer. Lack of footway provision is noted but the low number of pedestrians and vehicles means that there would not be an overriding safety issue.

Point of Objection: The applicant has no control over Drumgray Lane.

Comment: The access to the proposed development is via Drumgray Lane. Ownership of Drumgray Lane has no bearing on the planning merits of the proposal.

Point of Objection: There is a threshold of only five houses that can be built along Drumgray Lane.

Comment: There are no specific planning restrictions on house numbers accessed from Drumgray Lane. Each planning application is assessed on its own merits.

Point of Objection: The proposal will result in neighbouring gardens being overlooked, resulting in a loss of privacy.

Comment: Due to the orientation of the proposed dwellinghouses windows will face towards the rear garden and rear elevation of 2 Drumgray Lane. Window to window distances will exceed the guideline minimum distance of 18 metres. In general terms it is often the case that there is some overlooking of gardens by neighbouring properties. Although it is not considered that there will be any unacceptable loss of privacy to the occupants of 2 Drumgray Lane it is accepted that the proposal will represent an unwelcome reduction in privacy in what is currently a semi rural location.

Point of Objection: The proposal will result in a loss of sunlight to neighbouring dwellings.

Comment: The proposal is a minimum of 25 metres from existing properties. This distance means that the development will not to result in significant loss of sunlight or daylight.

Point of Objection: The proposed site will drain onto neighbouring sites due to a difference in levels.

Comment: The applicant has indicated that he intends to connect his drains to the public network thus directing drainage to existing infrastructure and not onto neighbouring land. As there will be no change to existing ground levels there should be no change to garden drainage characteristics.

Point of Objection: The original map zone specified that an outline boundary existed for one more house. This has now been allocated.

Comment: The local plan zoning does not specify numbers of houses but rather whether any proposal is acceptable in principle.

8. Conclusion

8.1 It is considered that the proposed layout would be to the detriment of the established layout and character of the area through being over-development and backland development. In this respect the proposal is contrary to the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 and to the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. It is recommended that the application be refused.

72 Application No: Proposed Development:

N/10/00004/FUL Installation of a 21 m Lattice Telecommunications Mast with Associated Apparatus

Site Address: Site At The Kingfisher Dowanfield Road Seafar Cumbernauld G67 ILA

Date Registered:

14th January 2010

Applicant: Agent: Vod afone Limited Mono Consultants Haldane Square Alan Osborne 1 Brucefield Industrial Estate 48 St Vincent Street Livingston Glasgow G54 9DS G2 5TS

Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application No

Ward: Representations: 003 Cumbernauld South: No letters of representation received. Councillors Danny Carrigan, William Goldie, William Homer and Gerald McElroy.

Recommendation:

Reasoned Justification:

It is considered that the proposal is acceptable in that it will not detract from the amenity of the application site or the surrounding area.

73 Produced by IS map IS reproduced from dnance Sulvey material PLANNING APPLICATION No. 10/00004/FUL North Lanarkshire Council h the permission of Planning and Environment Department, dnanceSulveyon behalf the Controller of Her Majeshl's Installation of a 21 m Lattice Telecommunications itionery Office 0 Crown Tower with Associated Apparatus pyright Unauthorired xoduction infringes Crown pyrlght and may lead to Site At The Kingfisher, Dowanfield Road, Seafar Kecution or cwll proceedings ,ith Lanarkshire Council tal 01698 274274r 0023396 2W8 fax 01698 403053

74 Proposed Conditions:-

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

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

2. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- 64290-001, 64290-002, 64290-003 and 64290-004.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

3. That in the event that the telecommunications equipment, supporting structure or the apparatus within the site becomes redundant it must be removed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority within one month of becoming redundant. If the site ceases to be used for telecommunications transmission, it must be reinstated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority within six months of cessation.

Reason: To minimise the level of visual intrusion and to ensure the reinstatement of the site to a satisfactory standard.

4. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

5. That within 4 weeks of completion of all approved works on site a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006, to monitor the development, to enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control.

Backa round Pa Ders :

Representation Letters

No letters of representation have been received to date.

Consultation Responses:

None.

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Kevin Divin at 01236 618124

Report Date:

8'h February 201 0

75 APPLICATION NO. NI101000041FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.1 The proposed telecommunications mast application site lies immediately behind ‘The Kingfisher’ public house within the car park of the premises. Located to the north, east and south of the application site is a large wooded area. Beyond the wooded area to the north is a residential area with the nearest dwelling being approximately 57 metres away. Located to the west beyond the public house is an area of open space. The application site is within an established residential area.

2. Proposed DeveloDment

2.1 This application seeks detailed planning permission for the installation of a 21 metre high lattice telecommunications mast with associated apparatus at The Kingfisher, Dowanfield Road, Seafar, Cumbernauld. The mast will be shared by 02 and Vodafone.

3. Applicant’s Supportha Information

3.1 The applicant has supplied a supporting statement that indicates the need for a mast within this area to meet a shortfall in coverage. It is stated that the mast will be of general benefit to business, and domestic users in the area. An ICNIRP compliance certificate was also submitted confirming that the proposed telecommunications installation meets the current public health guidelines.

4. Development Plan

4.1 The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of Local Plan policies.

4.2 In the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993, the site lies within an area covered by Policy HG 4 (Residential Amenity) which states that developments should not be detrimental to local residential amenity. There is no specific telecoms policy in the local plan.

5. Consultations

5.1 None.

6. Representations

6.1 No letters of representation have been received in relation to this application.

7. Planninq Assessment

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

7.2 Development Plan - Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993: Policy HG4 (Residential Amenity) applies in this case and states that proposals should not detract from local residential amenity. There are no specific telecoms policies in the Cumbernauld Local Plan. Accordingly the proposed development must be considered on its merits in terms of the local environment. The site location and acceptable design of the proposal make this type of development environmentally acceptable and in accordance with Policy HG4. Impact on amenity is covered in 7.5 below.

76 7.3 Other Material Considerations - Finalised Draft Norfh Lanarkshire Local Plan: The site is zoned as HCF 1 (Protecting Residential Areas) in which there is a presumption against developments detrimental to residential amenity in primarily residential areas. Policy EDI 9 (Assessing Utilities Development) is also relevant to the assessment of the application. This policy states the telecommunication installations would only be acceptable provided that there are no alternative sites; it is unable to share with any existing facilities and the development is sited and designed so as to minimise its visual and environmental impact. Supplementary information has been provided on site selection including the disadvantages of alternative sites. In this context the proposal is considered to be acceptable. The proposed telecommunications installation will have little impact on the character of the residential area given its discrete lattice design set against the wooded backdrop to the north, east and south. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with policies HCF 1 and EDI 9 of the Finial Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

7.4 National Telecommunications Policies: Planning Advice Note 62 (Radio Telecommunications) states that radio telecommunications have an important role to play in supporting the further social and economic development of Scotland. TO ensure acceptability of such developments high standards of design and location should be sought. Scottish Planning Policy (Consolidated - Communications Infrastructure Section) supports telecommunications development where it has been demonstrated that careful consideration of all siting and design options has been undertaken and where possible environmental effects are minimised. The intention is that the telecommunications equipment should become an accepted and unobtrusive feature of urban and rural areas where careful siting and design can reduce visual intrusion and play a part in allaying public concerns. Mast sharing is encouraged. It is considered that the proposal complies with these policies.

7.5 Effect on Local Amenity: It is considered that the proposal is not detrimental to the residential amenity of the local area. Due to its lattice design the proposal is considered to be acceptable as its design helps the mast blend into the wooded backdrop thus reducing the visual impact of the proposal. The proposed site is situated an adequate distance of approximately 57 metres from the nearest dwellinghouse.

7.6 Applicant’s Supporting Information: It is considered that the applicant has satisfied the criteria set out in both SPP (Consolidated) and PAN 62 in that consideration and assessment has been undertaken in the siting and design of the telecommunications mast and associated apparatus in order to achieve acceptability and minimal impact. The mast will be shared by 02 and Vodafone. A certificate of Declaration of Conformity with International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) Public Exposure Guidelines has been provided by the applicant. It is considered therefore that the impact of the proposed development on nearby residential areas is acceptable.

8. Conclusion

8.1 It is considered that the proposal will not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the surrounding area nor will it have an unacceptable impact on local residents. It is noted that the proposed equipment is considered to reasonably blend into its wooded backdrop and is not of an overly obtrusive appearance. It is accepted that this site represents the best option for the siting of the equipment and will contribute to improving mobile phone coverage in the surrounding area. It is noted that no objections to the proposal have been received from local residents

8.2 Having taken account of all relevant matters it is considered that the proposal is acceptable both for the application site and for the general area. It is recommended that planning permission be granted for the erection of the telecommunications mast at Dowanfield Road, Seafar, Cumbernauld.

77 Application No: Proposed Development:

NI10/00008/FUL Extension to Community Centre to Form Sports Hall with Ancillary Changing Facilities

Site Address:

Greengairs Community Centre Greengairs Road Greengai rs

Date Registered:

6th January 2010

Applicant: Agent: Greengairs Community Council Ball Hall Ltd C/o Maria Donovan Clo Daniel Connal Partnership 101 Greengairs Road 780 The Crescent Wattston Colchester Business Park Airdrie Essex ML6 7SY CO4 9YQ

Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application No

Ward: 7: Airdrie North Representations: Councillors Campbell Cameron, Sophia Coyle, No letter of representation received. James McGuigan & Thomas Morgan.

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

The extension to Greengairs Community Centre will result in the provision of additional sports facilities within an established urban area and will benefit residents of Greengairs and the surrounding area. Although the sports hall is a large and basic structure, it is noted that a similar extension was approved in 2009 and that there will be significant community benefit.

Proposed Conditions:-

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

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

2. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- BH/ML6/0 1/04, BH/ML6/02/02, BH/ML6/03/00, BH/M L6/04/03, BH/M L6/05/03 and BH/ML6/06/02.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

78 ~~

Ths map 1s reproduced from PMNNING APPLICATION No. 10/00008/FUL Produced by Ordnance SuNey material Norlh LanarkshireCouncil mth the permwon of Planning and Environment Deparlment, OrdnanceSuwey on behaf Proposed Extension to Community Centre to olthe Controller of Her Mapstys Form Sports Hall With Ancillary Changing Stationery Oftice 0 Cram urpyrlght Unauthorised Facilities reprodudion infringes Crow copyright and may lead to prow~utionor cwil proceedings Greengairs Community Centre,GreengairsRoad, North Lanarkshire Council Greengairs telO1698 274274v 100023396 2W8 Site alte 0.24 ha. fax 01698 403053

79 3. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

4. That within 4 weeks of completion of all building works on site, of the development hereby permitted, a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, to monitor the development, to enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control.

5. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing materials (including colour) to be used on all external walls and roofs shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved under the terms of this condition.

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

6. 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. Thereafter all fences and walls approved under the terms of this condition shall be erected before the extension is brought into use.

Reason: To ensure appropriate boundary treatment for the site.

7. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping 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, boundary treatment, grass seeding and turfing; (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development (d) a detailed timetable for all landscaping works which shall provide for these works being carried out contemporaneously with the development of the site.

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the site and to secure appropriate boundary treatment between the site and the nearby Site of Importance for Nature Conservation.

8. That all works included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 7 above, shall be completed in accordance with the approved timetable, and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the full occupation of the development hereby permitted, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the site and to secure appropriate boundary treatment between the site and the nearby Site of Importance for Nature Conservation.

9. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the requirements of the publication titled 'Drainage Assessment : A Guide for Scotland' and any other advice subsequently published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) or the

80 Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party (SUDSWP). The post- development surface water discharges shall ensure that the rate and quantity of run-off to any watercourse are no greater than the pre-development run-off for any storm return period. SUDS shall still be provided even where discharges are proposed to public sewers notwithstanding any conditions imposed by Scottish Water.

Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater.

10. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 9 shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Within three months of the construction of the SUDS, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in drainage works) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved plans.

Reason: To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution.

Backqround Paoers:

Consultation Responses:

Memo from Protective Services received 8 February 201 0

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect this document should contact Erin Goldie on 01236 616464

Report Date:

15 February 2010

81 APPLICATION NO. N/10/00008/FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.I This application is for an extension to a community centre in Greengairs. The community centre is accessed from Greengairs Road and has 15 in curtilage parking spaces, 2 of which are disabled bays. The proposal will result in the loss of a small play area associated with the community centre that is currently located to the rear of the building. It should be noted that there is a designated peatland SlNC (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation) beyond the rear boundary of the application site.

2. Proposed Development

2.1 The applicant proposes to construct an extension measuring approximately 872 square metres in footprint to the side and rear of Greengairs Community Centre in order to provide a sports hall and changing facilities for users. The sports hall is basic in design with profiled metal walls and roof.

3. Site History

3.1 The following planning permission is relevant to the proposal.

N/09/00309/FUL: construction of a sports hall building with ancillary changing facilities and the construction of a multi-use sports pitch including fencing and floodlighting. Granted on 5 June 2009.

4. Development Plan

4.1 There are no strategic implications and this application can therefore be considered in relation to Local Plan policies within the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The site is covered by ECON 8 (General Urban Areas) where the principal of a mixture of uses is in general acceptable.

5. Consultations

5.1 Consultees are as follows:

Protective Services notes shortcomings with previously submitted site investigation information.

6. Plannina Assessment

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

6.2 DeveloDment Plan - Monklands District Local Plan 1991: The proposal is considered to comply with General Urban policy ECON 8 in that this is an extension to an existing community centre that will enhance facilities in the area.

6.3 Other Material Considerations- Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan: The site is within the general urban area where policy HCFIA (Protecting Residential Amenity and Community Facilities) applies. For reasons covered in 6.2 above it is considered that the proposal complies with this community facilities policy. Design policy DSP4 (Quality of Development) is also of relevance. Due to the limitations of the design it is considered that this policy is not fully complied with. Quality of building design and residential amenity are addressed in 6.5 and 6.6 below.

82 6.4 2009 Planning Permission (09/00309/FUL) -The extension being considered through the current planning application has a similar design and materials to the 2009 approval but has a smaller footprint and different positioning. The 2009 permission is still live and could be implemented. The previously approved sports pitch does not, however, form part of the current proposal.

6.5 Building Design- It is noted that the sports hall element of the proposal is a large and basic structure. It is, however, set back from the public road, is located to the rear of existing Community Centre and does not exceed the height of the existing building. It will however be visible from Greengairs Road. The proposed materials do not reflect the smooth roughcast finish of the Community Centre. The profiled metal cladding however is not an unusual finish for a sports facility. A similar scheme was approved as part of the 2009 permission. For these reasons the design and the finishing material are deemed acceptable in this case.

6.6 ResidentialAmenity The western building line of the main extension is only 19 metres from the front of the houses on Annandale. It is considered that the development will have some adverse effects on the amenity that Annandale residents currently enjoy but not to such an extent that permission should be refused.

6.7 SlNC - A designated SlNC site is located beyond the rear boundary of the site. A representative for the Countryside and Landscape Manager confirmed that there are no known protected species on the application site.

6.8 Consulfations- Protective Services has raised concerns with respect to potential contamination on site and so a note has been attached for the attention of the applicant advising them to contact Protective Services for advice.

6.9 Traffic & Transportation did not object to the 2009 permission subject to eight additional parking spaces being provided. It should be noted that it is likely that less additional spaces would be required for the current application as no outdoor football facility is proposed. The applicant was, however, asked to investigate if additional parking could be achieved but due to land ownership constraints no further parking can be accommodated within the site. It is considered that on balance, the inability to provide eight additional spaces is not reason enough to justify refusal of an additional community facility.

6.10 It should be noted that there were no objections to the 2009 permission by Learning and Leisure Services or Countryside and Landscaping.

7. Conclusion

7.1 The extension to Greengairs Community Centre complies with policy ECON 8 of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 in that it will result in the provision of additional sports facilities within an established urban area and will benefit residents of Greengairs and the surrounding area. Although the sports hall is a large and basic structure, it is noted that a similar extension was approved in 2009 and that there will be significant community benefit.

7.2 Having considered the planning history of the site and the merits of this case, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

83 Application No: Proposed Development:

C/09/01261/FU L Erection of 2 Semi Detached Dwellinghouses

Site Address:

149 -1 51 Aitchison Street Airdrie ML6 ODG

Date Registered:

16th November 2009

Applicant: Agent: The Scottish Veterans Garden City Association Andrew Forgan Architectural New Haig House, 29 Cluny Drive Logie Green Road, Edinburgh Edinburgh, EH10 6DT EH7 4HQ

Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Yes

Ward: Representations: 008 Airdrie Central 3 letters of representation received. George Devine, James Logue, David Stocks,

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

While the proposal does not meet the guidance on backland development as contained within the ‘Design Guidance for lnfill Housing’ in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991, the way in which the new houses and the existing adjoining houses are integrated into one unit in terms of ownership, control, occupation, design and layout means that the guidance is not felt to be wholly applicable. Furthermore, given the location, layout and character of the surrounding area, it is felt that the new development would not impact unduly on surrounding properties in terms of privacy or overshadowing or on the character of the conservation area.

Legal Agreement:

The planning permission is subject to a Legal Agreement under the terms of Section 75 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 restricting the occupation of the proposed and adjoining dwellinghouses to a person or persons associated with the Scottish War Veterans’ Association.

84 I I I 85 Proposed Conditions:-

1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started within three 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 hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved details submitted as part of the application and no change to those details shall be made without prior written approval of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

3. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

4. That within 4 weeks of completion of all building works on site, of the development hereby permitted, a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Authority. Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006, to monitor the development, to enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control.

5. That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175: 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required.

Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

6. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 5, shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the Remediation Strategy.

86 Backaround Papers:

Representation Letters

Letter from Ms Eileen Lang, 153 Aitchison Street, Airdrie received Letter from Mr Anthony Kerr, 6 Gushet Houses, Aitchison Street, Airdrie received Letter from Mr Lang, 153 Aitchison Street, Airdrie received

Consultation Responses:

British Gas SP Energy Networks

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr lan Johnston at 01236 81 2382

Report Date:

15th February 201 0

87 APPLICATION NO. C1091012611FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.I The application site is predominantly rectangular in shape and currently contains 2 single storey semi-detached dwellinghouses (nos. 149-151 Aitchison Street) with large rear garden areas. The site is bounded to the north by Aitchison Street onto which the existing properties take vehicular access, to the east by a narrow pedestrian lane, and to the south and west by the curtilage of a residential property addressed as 153 Aitchison Street. The surrounding area is predominantly residential in nature while the Ebenezer Church is located directly to the east of the application site.

1.2 The application site is also located within the Victoria & Town Centre Conservation Area.

2. Proposed Development

2.1 The proposal is for the erection of 2 semi-detached dwellinghouses within the existing rear garden area. The new build will be of single storey with traditional pitched roof design, “T shaped in layout and positioned in a northlsouth direction. Internally each unit will accommodate a LivinglDining area with adjoining kitchen, Bathroom, Store and Hallway. One unit will provide 3 bedrooms while the other will provide 2 bedrooms.

2.2 A new vehicular driveway will be located at the eastern edge of the site to serve the new build and the existing property at 149 Aitchison Street while the existing property at 151 Aitchison Street will retain its existing vehicular driveway at the western edge of the site.

2.3 A communal landscaped garden area will be sited at the south western part of the site for use by all 4 properties. 3. Applicant’s Sumortinn Information

3.1 The applicant, the Scottish Veterans’ Garden City Association, provides rented housing for disabled ex service persons and currently rents out the existing semi detached dwellinghouses at 149-151 Aitchison Street. The Association are presently increasing their housing stock with a view to building additional houses throughout Scotland with full wheelchair access.

4. Site History

4.1 None relevant.

5. Development Plan

5.1 The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed under Local Plan policies.

5.2 The site is designated HG9 (Existing Residential Areas) and ENV 15/3 (Conservation Area) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

88 6. Consultations

6.1 A summary of comments from consultees is as follows:

Transportation Section: No response received. Scottish Gas: Notes position of Apparatus Pollution Control: Recommends a site investigation to determine the presence or otherwise of contamination in site.

7. Representations

7.1 Following standard neighbour notification procedures and public advertisement 3 letters of representation were received, one from a resident of flats to the west and the other 2 from residents of the house to the south. The relevant points of objection can be summaries as “backland development”, overdevelopment, visual disamenity to the site and the conservation area, impact on natural day-lighting to adjacent property, adverse traffIc/road safety impact on Aitchison Street, impact on drainage and impact on property values.

8. Planning Assessment

8.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires the application to be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise including the emerging North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

8.2 AdoDted Local Plan: The site is zoned as HG9 - Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. This policy states that developments clearly of an ancillary nature may be permitted subject to the development satisfying considerations such as residential amenity. Development of new housing is, in principle, generally acceptable providing it conforms to the relevant Design Guidance outlined by the Council and does not adversely affect the amenity of the area. In terms of positioning of the building within the development site the approved “Design Guidance on lnfill Housing” specifically presumes against ”backland development” where the new plot does not have a clear road frontage as is the case here. The intention of the design guidance is partly to protect the amenity of future residents of the new development and also those living in the existing houses in whose gardens the new houses will be built. In this instance, it is clear that there are circumstances which are particular to this proposal, in that the new and exiting houses will remain in the one ownership and are designed for tenants with specific needs, who would benefit from a smaller than average garden space, which would be managed as a communal space by the applicant. The development has been designed and laid out to ensure that the new and existing houses within the site have reasonable outlook from their living room windows. In looking at the site as one unit the impact of the development on the amenity of the site itself is considered to be acceptable.

8.3 In terms of the impact of the development on the wider area, the above noted design guidance and local plan Policy ENV16 (Improve Conservation Areas) are both relevant. The intention of the design guidance (in terms of the wider impacts of backland development) is to prevent development of a style and character not normally found in this area (i.e. developments without street frontages). In addition, policy ENV 16 states that in determining applications the Council will pay regard to the height, scale, materials, roof lines, building lines, detailing, colour, overall character of the proposals and character of surrounding buildings which it is desirable to maintain and enhance. In this instance, it is considered that the application site and immediate area is not characteristic of the quality and layout of the other parts of the conservation area, and that the proposed development would not impact unduly on the amenity or character of the wider area. The integration into the area is further

89 assisted by the design and appearance of the new houses which will match the existing houses on the site.

8.4 Assessing the affect on residential amenity is also important with specific reference to sunlight, daylight and privacy. While the property directly to the south of the site (where two of the objectors live) adjoins the southern boundary, and the new development will be sited around 2 meters from that house, it is considered that their amenity would not be impacted upon unduly. In particular, it is noted that there is a change in levels between the 2 sites (the house to the south is lower and their north facing windows already look onto a retaining wall) therefore the development of the new houses is not expected to reduce daylight or outlook significantly. With regards to privacy the positioning of the new building will allow for the maximisation of outlook and view from the dwellinghouses for residents often with restricted mobility and all windows are located at ground floor level with no habitable windows overlooking neighbouring plots. The main windows on the east and west elevations are located a significant distance from the boundaries of neighbouring plots and are in excess of 18 metres from neighbouring windows.

8.5 While the proposed layout departs from the Transportation Section standards in terms of access widths and dedicated curtilage parking bay standards the physical constraints of the site prohibits the normal standard requirement of a 5.5 metre wide access with 2 metre wide footway. A reduced standard of access is proposed together with a reduced level of dedicated in site parking bays taken the claimed low car ownership rate of Association residents.

8.6 Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan: The Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan is a material consideration but does not alter the policy position covering this proposal.

8.7 Other Material Considerations: In support of this proposal the applicant has submitted a supporting statement confirming that the proposed residential provision is required specifically for ex-servicemen and woman and will be adapted specifically to meet the physical requirements of the residents in line with the internal setting out of the existing adjacent semi-detached property which currently operates on the same basis i.e. rented accommodation by the Association. The applicant is agreeable to entering into a legal agreement (Section 75) with the Council to ensure the restricted use of the development (rented association) and to prevent the disposal of either unit for general residential use.

8.8 Consultations: The advice of Protective Services is noted and a relevant planning condition is recommended in respect of establishing ground conditions/contamination. No response to the proposal has been received from the Transportation Section although they were party to pre-application discussions with the applicant.

8.9 The points raised by representations but not dealt with above include: 0 The layout is purposely built for specialised former service personnel which specific physical constraints and will include wheelchair access. 0 The inclusion of communal garden area is required for ease of maintenance for residents with mobility constraints although the reserved area for amenity purposes provides a sufficient standard for residents. 0 The provision of satisfactory site drainage facilities with connection to the public sewer would be a requirement of any subsequent building warrant application. 0 Property values are not a relevant planning consideration.

90 9 Conclusions

9.1 Having regard to the development plan the proposal must be judged contrary to the guidance within the local plan. However, there are circumstances relating to the ownership, control, design and layout of the development which means that the amenity of the site and the amenity and character of the wider area will be within acceptable limits. The objections are noted but do not raise overarching reasons why the application should be refused, the application is therefore recommended to be granted subject to the attached conditions and subject to the conclusion of a Section 75 Agreement to restrict the occupation of the dwellinghouses to a person or persons associated with the Scottish War Veterans Association and to prevent the dwellinghouses from being sold off for general public use.

91 Application No: Proposed Development:

C/1O/OOO 12/FUL Formation of Beer Garden, External Dining Area and Installation of Retractable Canopy Cover Dining Area (In Retrospect) Site Address:

54 Main Street Glenboig Coatbridge North Lanarkshire ML5 2QT

Date Registered:

8th January 2010

Applicant: Agent: Mr Peter Hilly NIA Goalinfo Ltd Tla Big Shop Public House 54 Main Street Glenboig ML5 2QY

Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local No

Ward: Representations: 6 Coatbridge North And Glenboig 4 letters of representation received. Councillors Clarke, McWilliarns, Shields and Sullivan

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

The outdoor seating area and beer garden would accord with the development plan policy for this area. The design of the canopy over the seated area is considered acceptable and would not impact on the visual amenity of the area. The outdoor seating area is considered acceptable in terms of residential amenity in that it is not causing a significant noise or privacy issue. Given the dining area’s relatively small size this would not lead to a significant increase in the demand for parking. No additional dedicated parking would be required given the property’s location in the commercial centre of the village and overall the development would not harm the amenity of the area considerably.

92

Proposed Conditions:-

None

Backnround Papers:

Representation Letters

Letter from M & H Campbell, 57 Main Street, Glenboig, ML5 2RD received Letter from H. Healy, 53 Main Street, Glenboig, ML5 2RD received Letter from S. Harty, 45A Main Street, Glenboig, ML5 2QT received Letter from Mr A Miller - Chairman, Glenboig Community Council, 73 Main Street, Glenboig received

Consultation Responses:

Environmental Health (including Pollution Control)

Contact information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr William Shand at 01236 812231

Report Date:

10th February 2010

94 APPLICATION NO. C/10/00012/FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.1 Planning permission is sought for an outdoor seating area with retractable canopy and a beer garden which has been formed at the Big Shop public house, 54 Main Street, Glenboig. The building is a single storey public house situated within the commercial centre of Glenboig and is attached to other commercial premises to the east. The building fronts directly onto the street and has no dedicated parking.

2. Proposed DeveloDment

2.1 The development is retrospective in nature and includes an area of outdoor seating on the North West corner of the building. This is designated by an area of timber decking to which the seating is placed and is covered and enclosed by a retractable canopy. There is also a beer garden formed to the west of the dining area. The applicant has stated that this has been in place for a considerable length of time but has no evidence for when it was installed and so has included it within this application.

3. Site Historv

3.1 An application for a part change of use of the building to a separate hot food takeaway was refused on 5 March 2007. This was refused due to there being no dedicated off street car parking proposed for a new separate business.

4. Development Plan

4.1 The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of the Local Plan.

4.2 The site is designated as ECON 8 (General Urban Areas) within the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

5. Consultations

5.1 A summary of comments from consultees is as follows:

Protective Services: had no objection to the proposal.

Traffic and Transportation: did not comment on the application.

6. Representations

6.1 Following the standard neighbour notification process and an advert in the local press 4 letters of representation were received, one of which was received from the Glenboig Community Council. The points of objection were that the lack of parking for patrons of the dining area and the road safety issues subsequently created from on street parking, noise from a non sound proofed structure and the proposal being contrary to the local and structure plan policies. Comments were also made regarding neighbour notification and public notification.

7. Planning Assessment

7.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires that the application be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. As the development is of no strategic importance the relevant development plan would only be the Adopted Monklands District Local

95 Plan 1991,

7.2 Development Plan: Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991: This site is designated as ECON 8 which states that within these areas a mixture of uses will be accepted, subject to there being no change of use or intensification of use likely to create adverse environmental effects. This policy is not specifically relevant for this type of development and therefore it is considered that the proposal would not contradict the aims of this policy, subject to the development not adversely affecting the amenity of the area.

7.3 Other Material Considerations: Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan: The site is designated as RTC 1 C (Neighbourhood and Local Centres) which allows for the provision of Class 1, 2, 3, 9 and 10 uses. Given that this application involves the expansion of an existing use it is considered that this policy is of little relevance and therefore this application would not be contrary to this policy.

7.4 Policy RTC 3 A (Bad Neighbour Development) is also of relevance and this states that planning permission will only be granted for potential Bad Neighbour developments where it can be demonstrated by the applicant that amenity would not be adversely affected. Assessments of proposals will also take account of the cumulative impact of such development. This proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of impact on the amenity of the surrounding area, with a detailed consideration of the main aspects in the following sections. Consequently, this development is considered to accord with the policies as set out within the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

7.5 The design of the canopy is considered acceptable and does not harm the visual amenity of the surrounding area. The canopy, dining area and beer garden are all significantly screened by fencing with only a small portion of the canopy being visible from lnchneuk Road. The general layout of the site is also considered acceptable with the canopy and dining area integrating well with the existing building and the beer garden being enclosed to the rear of the property. In terms of design, layout and visual amenity the development is considered acceptable.

7.6 A significant consideration for this proposal particularly in reference to policy RTC 3 A (Bad Neighbour Development) is the impact on the surrounding properties in terms of noise and privacy. There are some residential properties to the rear of the site and also some located along Main Street which potentially might be affected by the proposal. In terms of privacy, the dining area and beer garden are greatly secluded from the surrounding properties with the only properties within visible distance being at a significantly higher level and therefore there would be no privacy concerns. In terms of noise nuisance, it is considered again that it would be the properties to the rear of the site that would most likely be affected by this development. This is due to the fact that the dining area and beer garden are to the rear of the property and therefore screened from Main Street by the building and that it is a considerable distance from the residential properties on Main Street. These properties are also in the commercial centre of the village where a degree of noise is anticipated. Having consideration for the noise impact to the properties to the north at Rockbank Crescent it is noted that the development is approximately 20 metres from the end of the rear garden of the closest dwelling (14 Rockbank Crescent) and 30 metres from the actual dwellinghouse. This development has been in place for more than a year and Protective Services have indicated that they have received no noise complaints to date. This is reinforced by no objections being expressed by the neighbours to the north or by Protective Services. Given the above, it is considered that the development would not adversely affect the amenity of the area in terms of privacy and noise sufficiently to merit the refusal of planning permission.

7.7 The site does not presently have any dedicated off street car parking although the footprint of the building has been increased in area. Given the relatively small size of the dining area it is considered that this would not lead to a significant increase in

96 demand for parking. Regardless of this, the property is located within the commercial centre of the village and therefore is within walking distance of a significant proportion of properties. With it being in the village centre it is also accessible by public transport links. Due to this, it is considered that the provision of the dining area and beer garden would not lead to a significant increase in demand for parking given the dining areas size and the premises location within the village.

7.8 In relation to the grounds of objection, the following comments can noted:

0 Section 8.2 of this report indicates that the application is not contrary to both the structure plan and local plan. 0 The traffic, parking and access issues are considered in section 8.7. 0 The noise impact from the development is considered in section 8.6. 0 Confusion with regards to neighbour notification arose from the applicant carrying out neighbour notification in accordance with what have now become out of date regulations. Thereafter, neighbour notification was carried out by the Planning Authority in accordance with the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006 following the registration of the application to all relevant notifiable neighbours.

8. Conclusions

8.1 Having regard to the foregoing, it is therefore considered that the development does not contradict the development plan policy for this area. The development is also considered acceptable in terms of design and layout and would not adversely affect the amenity of the area significantly in terms of privacy, noise and parking. The points of objection do not provide any significant material considerations that would warrant the refusal of the application and therefore it is recommend that the application is approved.

97 Application No: Proposed Development:

C/10/00059/FUL Extension of Railway Station Car Park (131 Spaces) including Formation of New Access and Roundabout

Site Address:

Sunnyside Station Sunnyside Road Coatbridge North Lanarkshire ML5 3HR

Date Registered:

26th January 201 0

Applicant: Agent: North Lanarkshire Council AECOM Fleming House 1 Tanfield 2 Tryst Road Edinburgh Cumbernauld EH3 5DA G67 1JW

Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local No

Ward: Representations: 6 Coatbridge North And Glenboig 3 letters of representation received from Anthony Clarke, Martin McWilliams, William 2 objectors. Shields, Peter Sullivan

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification: The proposal would provide improved: 0 car parking capacity through the addition of up to 60 spaces at Sunnyside Station; 0 intermodal connections through the provision of a bus layby; and 0 junction and access arrangements through the provision of a new roundabout and vehicular access This would be to the benefit of commuters and local residents without unreasonable deterioration of visual amenity, in terms of the partial removal of a landscape area, or of road safety, in terms of the altered road and footway arrangements, in line with the general criteria for protecting existing residential areas as set out in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

98 Planning Application No C/10100059/FUL km*s-c"Lr"LL.4 Extension of Railway Station Car Park (1 31 Spaces] including L.b.l.W.* ..,..I.,l.CI m Formation of New Access and Roundabout

L --a"- =&.=-pW.ll-lrl r.*l,LCLd* Ib.,-.L".lxiL- ~d.*.CI-"~LC.", Sunnyside Station, Sunnyside Road, Coatbridge ._.VI *. ,--I....-.-.+* = * Representations tbtm Scale 99 Proposed Conditions:-

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

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

2. That the development hereby approved shall not commence until the necessary footpath closure has been confirmed and the statutory procedures in Schedule 16 of the Town & Country (Scotland) Act 1997 have been completed.

Reason: To allow for the necessary statutory procedures to be carried out.

3. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and shall include:-

(a) a scheme of tree planting, incorporating the details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted. (b) details of any hard landscaping, boundary treatment, grass seeding and turfing. (c) a detailed timetable for all landscaping works which shall provide for these works to be carried out contemporaneously with the development of the site.

For the avoidance of doubt and unless as is otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority the details submitted for part (a) and (b) should match in design and materials with the Council's tree planting scheme on Church Street.

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

4. That all works included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of Condition 3 above, shall be completed in accordance with the approved timetable, and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the full occupation of the development hereby permitted, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: To ensure the appropriate implementation and of the landscaping works and provide appropriate contingencies for those trees or shrubs that do not survive the initial planting in the interests of enhancing the visual attractiveness and minimising the long-term impact on visual amenity of the site.

5. That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175 : 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required.

Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

6. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 5, shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the Remediation Strategy.

100 Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

7. That before developments starts, full details of the location and design of the surface water drainage scheme to be installed within the application site shall be submitted to and for the approval of the Planning Authority, and for the avoidance of doubt the scheme shall comply with the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency's (SEPA) principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS).

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

8. That the drainage scheme approved in terms of condition 7 above shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Following its completion, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in drainage work) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the scheme has been constructed in accordance with the approved deatils.

Reason: To ensure the proper implementation of this requirement.

9. That BEFORE the new vehicular access onto Sunnyside Road is brought into public use the proposed mini roundabout at the junction of Gartsherrie Road and Sunnyside Road shall be completed and functional to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure appropriate traffic circulation at the junction prior to the opening of the new access.

10. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

11. That within 4 weeks of completion of all building works on site, of the development hereby permitted, a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006, to monitor the development, to enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control.

101 Background PaDers:

Representation Letters

Letter from Mr Edmund Doody, 80A Sunnyside Road, Coatbridge ML5 3HP, ML5 3HP, received 30thJanuary 2010 E-mail from Mr Edmund Doody, 80A Sunnyside Road, Coatbridge ML5 3HP, ML5 3HP, received 3rd February 2010 Letter from Mrs Molly McDonald, 2G Crichton Street, Town Centre, Coatbridge received !jth February 2010.

Consultation Responses:

Traffic & Transportation memo received 1Ith February 2010

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Christopher McNey at 01236812375

Report Date:

15th February 201 0

102 APPLICATION NO. C/10/00059/FUL

REPORT

1. Site DescriDtion

1.I The application site consists of the existing car park at Coatbridge Sunnyside Station, the landscaped area to the south between the car park and Sunnyside Road, the area of land surrounding the Shimla Cottage restaurant to the east, and the access and junction at Gartsherrie/Sunnyside Road, Coatbridge (see location plan).

1.2 The existing car park currently consists of spaces for approximately 70 cars and is accessed from Gartsherrie Road to the west. The station building is located to the north of the application site and is a grade ‘B’ listed building. A snack van occupies part of the car park near the entrance and there is an area of parking designated for, and adjacent to, the Shimla Cottage restaurant to the west.

1.3 The landscaped area mainly consists of grass with some trees and a small flower bed. A public footpath cuts east-west across the landscaped area following a pedestrian desire line from the bridge at Gartsherrie Road to Crichton Street.

2. ProDosed DeveloDment

2.1 The application seeks permission to form an extension to Sunnyside Station car park. The proposal would create a total of 131 spaces, including 4 staff spaces and 8 disabled spaces as well as the formation of a new access to Sunnyside Road, a new roundabout at the junction of Gartsherrie/Sunnyside Road, and a new bus layby.

2.2 The proposal would also involve the removal of a public footpath, trees, planting, and other landscaping as well as the reorganisation and resurfacing of the existing car park including the closure of the existing vehicular access.

2.3 The applicant has submitted a phased proposal detailing actions aimed at minimising the impact on commuters and nearby residents by maximising car parking provision and access throughout the development process. In summary the main phases would be: (i) Formation of car park within landscape area (ii) Re-surfacing of existing car park (iii) Formation of new access and roundabout

3. ADDlicant’s SuDPortina Information

3.1 The application is supported by the submission of a design statement and plans showing the phasing of the proposed works.

4. Site Histow

4.1 Sunnyside Station is a key commuter hub within Coatbridge and particularly because of its proximity to the town centre. The existing car park is busy and is regularly oversubscribed.

4.2 The station will form part of the new Glasgow-Edinburgh rail link following completion of the Airdrie-Bathgate project and it is projected that commuter numbers (including car users) are likely to rise along the entire route increasing demand for existing intermodal services.

103 4 .3 There have been several recent applications for the site mostly relating to alterations to the listed station building but also regarding the siting of a mobile snack van within the car park. The snack van was authorised in 2002 for a two year period following an appeal decision. The snack van is therefore currently unauthorised and will require planning permission should the operator wish to re-locate into the new car park.

5. Development Plan

5.1 The development plan is the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 incorporating the Forth Alteration 2009 and the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 including Finalised First Alterations A,B and C 1996.

5.2 The application raises no strategic concerns and it can therefore be assessed in terms of the Local Plan policy.

5.3 The site is within an area zoned as an existing residential area in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. It will therefore be considered in relation Policies HG9 - Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas, TR1/3 - Support Rail Transport - Airdrie-Bathgate Line, TR119 - Support Rail Transport - All Stations, ENV17 - Protect Listed Buildings, and FOR2 - Encourage Tree Planting Schemes. The North Lanarkshire Council agreed standards for Car Parking Provision and policies TR9 - Car Parking and Road Standards, TRIO - To Encourage Off Street Parking Provision are also of relevance.

6. Consultations

6.1 Transportation responded and offered no objections subject to conditions relating to the following aspects of the proposal: 0 Compliance with Road Standards for Design of mini roundabout, parking bays, junctions, and bus layby. 0 the re-orientation of the pedestrian footpath link from the proposed bus layby to the station away from points of vehicle-pedestrian conflict.

6.2 No comments were received from the other consultees.

7.

7.1 3 letters of representation were received. One from Ms McDonald, 2G Crichton Street, Coatbridge and two from Mr Doody, 80A Sunnyside Road, Coatbridge. The comments were generally supportive of the proposal to increase the car parking provision but concerns were forwarded regarding: 0 Outlook and Loss of Trees 0 Traffic and Safety of Pedestrians

8. Plannina Assessment

8.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires that the application be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case

8.2 DeveloDment Plan - Structure Plan - Glasgow and fhe Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 incorporating the Forth Alteration 2009: Whilst the proposal is not in itself of strategic importance, it is noted that it would be supportive of the wider Airdrie- Bathgate rail link project defined in Strategic Policy 3.

104 .3 DeveloDment Plan - Adopted Local Plan - Monklands District Local Plan 1991 including finalised First Alterations A,B & C 7996: The site is covered by policy HG9 - Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas with relevant sub-sections covering the following matters: There will be a presumption against development which is likely to adversely affect the residential amenity of the area; Developments clearly of an ancillary nature to a residential area may be permitted subject to the development being satisfactory in terms of such matters as amenity, other local plan policies and proven need.

8.4 It is considered that the principle of extending the existing car park would not in itself be detrimental to the character or amenity of the residential area subject to concerns regarding the visual impact and functionality of the extension (in terms of accessibility) since the use is established and demand already exists. The proposal is therefore considered as an effort to allay existing residential concerns regarding parking outwith the existing car park as well as concerns about the inadequacy of the existing junction and access to handle the existing traffic levels in the context of projected increases in passenger numbers at the station.

8.5 As noted above the visual impact of the development must be considered in terms of its impact on amenity. In this case the removal of the established landscape area and particularly the trees is of concern. The proposal to remove all the trees is undesirable given their contribution to the streetscape, and this is a view shared by the objectors who note that they provide a valuable visual and acoustic screen from the industrial buildings and railway to the north of Sunnyside Road. It is considered that while the benefit of additional car parking provision would be direct and measurable the impact of landscaping and particularly trees should not be underestimated. It is also noted that a recent Council-initiated street improvement scheme, including the planting of street trees, has been completed on Church Street on the south side of Sunnyside Road and an opportunity therefore exists to integrate the proposed development into the existing streetscape. It is therefore considered prudent to attach a condition requiring the submission of landscaping plans, including the planting of trees of a similar size, species, and age to those on Church Street, to match with the existing improvement scheme. In this way the visual impact of the proposal could be assessed to ensure that it would be softened and better integrated with the existing streetscape while maximising the direct benefit provided by additional car park spaces.

8.6 It is noted that the proposal would require the stopping-up of a public footpath. While the footpath clearly follows a frequently used desire line for pedestrians from the bridge on Gartsherrie Road to Crichton Street its removal would not significantly inconvenience pedestrians because there is a suitable alternative footpath that follows the roadside to the south. A condition should be attached requiring the formal stopping-up of the footpath to be confirmed before any works commence.

8.7 While the primary aim of the proposal is to increase car parking provision, cognisance must be given to the hierarchy of access (walking/cycling/public transport/private transport). It is considered that suitable provision has been made to promote walking, cycling, and public transport through the positioning and orientation of footpaths, existing provision of cycle stands, and addition of a bus lay-by. Although there are no formal pedestrian crossing points being provided as part of the scheme, pedestrian desire lines will be reflected in dropped kerbs in appropriate locations.

8.8 Given the above considerations relating to the principle of the development, and the visual and functional impact of the proposal on residential amenity, it is concluded that the proposal would be in accordance with policy HG9 subject to conditions relating to landscaping and pedestrian crossing points.

105 8.9 Policies TR1/3 and TR1/9 highlight the Council's general support for the maintenance and extension of rail transport, in particular, the re-opening of the Airdrie-Bathgate line and improvements to existing stations, including Coatbridge Sunnyside Station. It is considered that the proposal accords with policies TR1/3 and TR1/9.

8.10 Policy TR9 and TRIO outline the Council's position regarding road standards and parking in particular that reduced sightline and road width standards may be used where a desirable redevelopment scheme might otherwise be prevented. In this case the general arrangement and in particular the car parking length (4.8 metres as opposed to the standard 5 metres) is considered acceptable because of the additional car park provision (in terms of overall numbers) and improvements to the junction and access. It is considered these benefits would outweigh the problems of a non-standardised scheme. It is considered that the proposal is generally in accord with policies TR9 and TRIO.

8.11 Policy ENV17 - Protect Listed Buildings is of relevance and states the Council will seek to protect all existing listed buildings. The proposals include the retention of the adjacent station building without any change to its external or internal appearance.

8.12 Due to the proximity of the site to the listed station building and its functional association with it the proposal has the potential to affect the setting of a listed building. Weight is added to this viewpoint given that the removal of trees and re- surfacing works would alter the public views of the station from Sunnyside Road and Gartsherrie Road. It is considered important for the proposal to suitably integrate with the appearance and function of the listed building. As noted in paragraphs 8.5-8.7 above through condition it is considered that the proposal would satisfactorily meet the concerns about visual and functional amenity and it is considered that it would therefore accord with policy ENV17 in terms of the protection of the nearby listed building and its setting.

8.13 Policy FOR2 - Encourage Tree Planting Schemes states that the Council will encourage tree planting in verges and pavements through landscaping conditions. It is of particular relevance given the proposed removal of mature trees from the existing landscaped area. Through the imposition of conditions the proposal would accord with policy FOR2.

8.14 It is considered that the proposal generally accords with the policies HG9 - Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas, TR1/3 - Support Rail Transport - Airdrie- Bathgate Line, TR1/9 - Support Rail Transport - All Stations, ENV17 - Protect Listed Buildings, TR9 - Car Parking and Road Standards, TRIO - To Encourage Off Street Parking Provision and FOR2 - Encourage Tree Planting Schemes of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The proposal must therefore be approved unless material considerations can be demonstrated that would outweigh the development plan. 8.15 Other Material Considerations - Emerging Local Plan - Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan: is a material consideration and in particular the four Development Strategy Policies (DSP1-4) and Policy HCF 1 - Protecting Residential Areas and Community Facilities which are relevant.

8.16 In summary policies DSP 1-4 require the assessment of:

(i) DSPl -Amount of Development (ii) DSP 2 - Location of Development (iii) DSP 3 - Impact of Development (iv) DSP4 - Quality of Development

8.17 DSPI- Amount of Development The proposal is not of a strategic significance but it is considered to be relative in scale to the current and projected demand for services at the station in accordance with Policy DSPI.

106 8.18 DSP2 - Location of Development The proposal would be consistent with the locational criteria of Urban Regeneration and Accessibility in terms of the utilisation of brownfield urban land, and the support of the hierarchy of accessibility (walking/cycling/public transportlprivate transport) it is considered to accord with Policy DSP2. 8.19 DSP3 - Impact of Development The impact of the development on the community is emphasised by Policy DSP3 which states that where developments would have an adverse impact on the economic, social, or environmental infrastructure of the community they will only be granted if planning conditions or legal agreements can mitigate those impacts. There is no set means to assess the impact of development on the community but it is considered that this can be generalised into three sub-sections: 0 First, the impact on the wider area at the regional, semi-regional scale. This would include consideration of the transport network, long-distance intermodal commuters, and any other economic, social, or environmental impact that would be felt by the wider community; 0 Second, the temporary affects of the phased works on the community; 0 Third, the impact on the site and immediate environs in line with the criteria set out by Policy DSP4.

8.20 In terms of the likely economic, social, and environmental impact there is little to suggest that the proposal would adversely affect these aspects, indeed it is considered likely that the improved access, to the rail and bus networks, and to the station car park itself would add to the attractiveness of Sunnyside Station and Coatbridge, as an intermodal hub along the future Glasgow-Edinburgh rail line promoting economic and social choice and opportunity.

8.21 It is recognised that the phasing of the development is likely to disrupt commuters and residents while works are undertaken, particularly during the construction of the new roundabout and access but the proposal demonstrates an intention to moderate the impact of a full closure by ensuring a reduced provision while works are undertaken. It is considered that although this may impact on other stations along the Glasgow-Drumgelloch line in terms of commuter demand, on balance the adverse impact in the short-term would be outweighed by the permanent benefit on the network of an improved arrangement at Sunnyside Station. In this regard the proposal would therefore accord with policy DSP3 subject to the criteria set out in DSP4 in terms of the impact on the site and immediate environs.

8.22 DSP4 - Quality of Development Policy DSP4 states that development will only be permitted where high standards of sustainable design are achieved. In particular, this policy requires the submission of appropriate site appraisals and other information with a view to providing distinct, safe, accessible, sustainable and integrated places. It is considered that the proposal generally satisfies the principles behind policy DSP4 in that it would not adversely affect the character or historic features of the area, particularly with reference to the listed station building. It also generally satisfies the requirements for a safe, convenient, accessible and integrated place. In terms of sustainability, the promotion of intermodal transport hubs generally satisfies this requirement. With regards to the provision of landscaped open space areas, the proposal satisfies this requirement as the designated land is considered to be adequate for the planting of trees and shrubs. In summary the proposal is considered to be of an adequate standard and generally in accordance with policy DSP4. 8.23 HCFI A - Protecting Residential Amenity and Community Facilities There is a presumption against developments detrimental to residential amenity. Developments of an ancillary nature may be acceptable subject to impact on residential amenity and provision of servicing and parking. As noted in paragraph 8.8 it is considered that residential amenity would not be significantly adversely affected by the development the proposal therefore accords with policy HCFI A.

107 8.24 In summary, it is considered that the proposal generally accords with policies DSPl-4 and HCFI A of the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

8.25 Other Material Considerations - Consultation Responses - Transportation: The comments from Transportation are noted, in particular the points concerning the mini roundabout, car parking bays, visibility splays, and bus layby. It is also noted that there is scope for alterations to these features to be controlled through the attachment of planning conditions but it is considered that this control would be unnecessary given the other legislative obligations relating to road construction. It is recognised that a balance must be sought between road safety, road standards, and amenity, particularly given the potential for new landscaping to affect these aspects. It is also recognised that for the proposed landscaped area to form a meaningful addition to the streetscape it must be maximised in terms of size, variety, and content and it is considered that a judgement of road safety should therefore form part of the assessment of subsequent landscape proposals.

8.26 The recommendation that the proposed direct footpath between the bus layby and station building be re-orientated to reduce conflict with cars is noted but given the hierarchy of access and the likelihood that commuters will follow the desire line across the car park regardless of alternative routes, it is considered that a dedicated path would provide a means to highlight to drivers that pedestrians will be focussed at the conflict point and therefore pay particular heed. With regards to the proposed stopping-up of the existing public footpath the Transportation section offered no objections.

8.27 Other Material Considerations - Representations - The concerns raised by the objectors regarding the visual and functional impact have been assessed above. It is noted that the objectors posed questions about why alternative proposals, in terms of design, and particularly the retention of trees and access positioning. While it is accepted that there may be scope for alternative schemes the current proposal must be assessed on its own merits. No other concerns were raised.

8.28 Other Material Considerations - Insufficient detail - drainage, ground conditions, wildlife: Matters which are of relevance but can not be assessed due to the omission of details include drainage arrangements, ground conditions, and wildlife protection measures. While these aspects are identified as important parts of the scheme it is considered that, in this case, they can be dealt with by condition or through informatives under separate legislation and they therefore do not raise significant concern.

8.29 On balance it is concluded that the material considerations noted above do not provide sufficient weight to outweigh the policies of the development plan.

9. Conclusions

9.1 In conclusion, it is considered that the proposal is in accordance with the development plan in that it would service an identified demand for additional car park spaces at Sunnyside Station while also improving the inter-modal potential and accessibility of the site without a significant loss to residential amenity. It is unfortunate that the proposal would remove all the existing trees but given the benefits noted above and the potential of minimising the visual impact through new planting to integrate with the existing street improvement schemes around the town centre their loss would not carry enough weight to override the aforementioned benefits. There are no other overarching material considerations that would outweigh the development plan and it is therefore recommended that planning permission be approved.

108 Application No: Proposed Development:

S/08/01514/FUL Erection of 55 Dwellinghouses Site Address:

Land Adjacent To 117 Newarthill Road Carfin MLI 5AL

Date Registered:

3rd November 2008

Applicant: Agent: The Albert Trust DTA Chartered Architects Ltd C/o Agent 9 Montgomery Street The Village East Kilbride G74 4JS

Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Committee Yes

Ward: Representations: 017 Motherwell North No letter(s) of representation received. Annita McAuley, Helen McKenna, Peter Nolan and Gordon Stewart.

Recommendation:

Reasoned Justification: The proposal constitutes a departure from the development plan, however, it is considered that justification exists for departing from the approved zoning of the site for protected open space and site of importance for nature conservation and that the proposed residential development is acceptable when considered against the relevant policies L 3, ENV 14, HSG 7, HSG 9 and TR 13 of the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 and Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

Legal Agreement: If granted, planning permission should not be issued until an Agreement under Section 69 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 has been concluded with the applicant with respect to a financial contribution due to the lack of play area provision.

109 Produced by PLANNING APPLICATION No. 0~01514/FUL North Lanarkshire Council Emironmental Servics, Erection of 55 Dwellinghouses Land adjacent to 11 7 Newarthill Road, Carfin, Mothemell Site area 2.5 ha. te I0 1B388 27427 110 fax 01BB8 4mos3 Proposed Conditions:-

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

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

2. That with the exception of conditions (18 and (22) below or except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:-

900 L (0-) 01 L (2-) 02 Rev E L (2-)03 L (2-) 04 L (2-) 05 Rev A L (2-) 06 L (2-) 07 Rev A L (2-) 08 L (2-) 02 Rev C L (2-)09 L (2-) 10 Rev A

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

3. That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175 : 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required.

Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

4. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 3 above shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a Chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the approved Remediation Strategy.

Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

5. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and for the approved in writing by

111 the Planning Authority. Surface SUDS shall incorporate one or more attenuation ponds landscaped for wildlife, with approved wetlandlpond seed mixeslplant species (except Typha) of which full details shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved under the terms of this condition.

For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the requirements of the publication titled 'Drainage Assessment : A Guide for Scotland' and any other advice subsequently published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) or the Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party (SUDSWP). The post- development surface water discharges shall ensure that the rate and quantity of run-off to any watercourse are no greater than the pre-development run-off for any storm return period unless it can be demonstrated that a higher discharge is necessary to protect or improve the aquatic habitat. SUDS shall still be provided even where discharges are proposed to public sewers notwithstanding any conditions imposed by Scottish Water. If the area of ground illustrated is inadequate for the purpose, a revised layout drawing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority prior to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the said Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site.

6. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 5 above; shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Within three months of the construction of the SUDS, and before the last house within the development is occupied, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in drainage works) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved plans.

Reason: To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site.

7. That before any development commences on site written certification from a chartered engineer that the site is not at risk from flooding shall be provided to the Planning Authority, alternatively should investigations show that the site may be at risk of flooding then a scheme of mitigation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before any works commence on site. The said mitigation works shall be certified as complete by as chartered engineer before any house within the development is occupied,

Reason: To safeguard the application site from any potential risk from flooding.

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

Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory site infrastructure.

9. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping, 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 (which shall be of native species); (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be

112 retained, (d) a scheme of tree planting for garden ground relating to each plot, around the flatted blocks and for the areas of communal open space at the site frontage on either side of the site access. (e) a timetable for the implementation of these works to be implemented contemporaneously with the development.

For the avoidance of doubt, the landscaping details shall include the SUDS area being located between plots 11 and 12 with the area set aside for SUDS at the western end of the site should instead become "open space" landscaped to benefit biodiversity. Plot 29 should have a native species-rich hedge planted along its northern boundary adjacent to the railway to link the species-rich scrub at the western end to habitat to the east. This hedge should continue all along the backs of the gardens from plot 28 to plot 13, where it should widen out into a several metre wide strip of species-rich scrub. The existing pond should be excavated to at least 2.5m deep in the centre and for at least a 10 x 10 m area - this will minimise the potential for reed mace to choke the pond again in the long-term. Excavation should be from as few locations as possible to minimise tracking so should be done with a plant with a long-reach arm, with arisings removed by dumper for use elsewhere. The marshy fringes of the pond may also require some modification, and if necessary a shallow apron to the pond may be excavated and lined with clay to retain water along the northern periphery of the development. The pond margins should be planted up with a range of semi-emergent aquatic plants/seeds, with flowering species prevalent to add amenity value. Amphibian hibernacula should also be created adjacent to the pond. All mechanical works round the pond should be minimised as far as possible, and should not be done between March and August. These works shall be undertaken under the supervision and guidance of an ecological clerk of works to ensure that the swamplmarsh is not destroyed during development.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and in consideration of the desirability of tree planting/retentionon the new edge of the settlement and in the interests of the nature conservation value of the site.

10. That the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 9 above, shall be implemented in accordance with the approved timetable and shall be completed prior to the occupation of the last dwellinghouse/flat within the development hereby permitted. Any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased within two years of the completion of the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: To ensure that the required landscaping does not fail to be established through damage or neglect.

11. That before the development hereby permitted starts, finalised section and contour drawings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, showing the existing topography of the site, with proposed changes to ground levels and proposed levels of buildings. These shall be adhered to in the course of the development unless the Planning Authority gives prior approval, in writing, of any variation.

Reason: In order that the Planning Authority can retain effective control over this matter in the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

12. 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 and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved under the terms of this condition.

Reason: In order to ensure that materials are visually acceptable in a local context.

13. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance

113 scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of:-

(a) the proposed footpaths, (b) the proposed SUDS treatment area and access, (c) the proposed parking areas, (d) the proposed grassed, planted and landscaped areas, and (e) the proposed fences to be erected along the boundaries, (f) the entrance feature and walls outlined in conditions 14, 15, and 16. (9) the proposed lighting for the parking areas

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

14. That before completion of the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance schemed approved under the terms of condition 13 above shall be in operation.

Reason: To ensure maintenance of the sites identified in condition 13 above.

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 ensure that boundary features are of acceptable quality.

16. That before any of the dwellingslflats 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. That notwithstanding conditions 15 and 16 above before work commences on site details of a site entrance feature and front boundary wall or walllrailing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development on site and shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority before the last house within the development is occupied.

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

18. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a site investigation report providing full details of the area highlighted by a cross hatched pattern on the approved plans as the zone of influence for the mine shaft shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Should the investigation indicate that the zone of influence affects the road or footways within the site then these shall require to be repositioned out with the affected area and an amended planning application shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail and to ensure that the future public roads and footways within the site are adequately protected.

19. That any mitigating measures identified by the mine shaft investigation required in terms of Condition 18 above shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Before any house within the development is occupied a certificate (signed by a Chartered Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any mitigating measures have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the approved mine shaft investigation.

Reason: To ensure that the mine shaft is safely mitigated in the interests of the

114 amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

20. That a visibility splay of 4.5 metres by 90 metres, measured from the road channel, shall be provided on both sides of the vehicular access and before the development hereby permitted is brought into use everything exceeding 1.05 metres in height above the road channel level shall be removed from the sight line areas and, thereafter, nothing exceeding 1.05 metres in height above road channel level shall be planted, placed, erected, or allowed to grow, within these sight line areas.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

21. That no development shall commence on site until the developer has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority that they have control over all the land required at the junctions of the new access road and Newarthill Road, sufficient to meet the visibility splay requirements of condition (20) above.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

22. That notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans the vehicular access onto Newarthill Road shall have corner radii of 10.5 metres. BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, revised plans of the vehicular access shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved under the terms of this condition.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

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

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

24. That before the last of the dwellingdflats hereby permitted is occupied, all roads, footpaths, footways and manoeuvring areas shall be completed to sealed final wearing course

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

25. That before each of the dwellings/flats hereby permitted are occupied, all of the associated parking and turning areas shown on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained and surfaced in a material which the Planning Authority has approved in writing before the start of surfacing work and clearly marked out. These areas shall thereafter be retained as such to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities.

26. That before the development hereby permitted is commenced, full details of the design and location of the proposed bin stores shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority which shall be repositioned to the Council’s satisfaction.

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

27. That before the occupation of the first flatted property in each block of the development hereby permitted, the bin stores associated with that block and approved under the terms of condition 26 above shall be built to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate bin storage facilities.

115 28. That should 6 months or more elapse between the timing of the initial ecological survey dated December 2008 hereby approved, and development commencing, a further survey shall be undertaken on the site to determine the presence of any statutorily protected species, particularly for bats, and badgers, the said survey shall thereafter be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before any development commences on the site. As a result of the study, should any remediation measures be required for the relocation of any protected species, this shall be implemented in accordance with a timetable agreed in writing with the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage before works commence on the site.

Reason: To ensure compliance with The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2007 and the Protection of Badgers Act 1992.

29. That notwithstanding the requirements of condition (28) above, before any development commences on site a further report confirming the presence or not of bats in the eastern boundary wall shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason : To ensure compliance with The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2007 and the Protection of Badgers Act 1992.

30. Notwithstanding condition 15 and 16 above, that before the development hereby permitted starts, permanent protective fencing shall be erected around areas of open space, dwellinghouseslflats and wildlife corridor before any excavations or any other works start on site, of which full details of the type and location shall be submitted to and approved in writing by and shall not be removed without the prior approval in writing of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the existing tree cover and in the interests of the nature conservation value of the site

31. That before the development hereby permitted starts, tree protection measures in accordance with British Standard BS 5837 shall be erected along the drip line of the trees, of which full details of the type and a plan of the proposed position of fencing for the protection of the trees that are to be retained on the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by and shall not be removed without the prior approval in writing of the Planning Authority. Nothing shall be stored, disposed of, or placed, nor fires lit, in any area fenced in accordance with this condition and the ground levels within these areas shall not be driven across by vehicles, altered, nor any excavation made (including addition/removal of topsoil/subsoil) without the prior approval in writing of the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, no excavation of any kind, including those for foundations or statutory services, should be carried out where damage to roots may occur, except where agreed in advance by the Planning Authority and not within the tree protected areas. In particular, trenches for services shall be located as far away from trees as possible and aligned to minimise the extent of disturbance. Excavations to more than one side of a tree will not be permitted and hand digging should be utilised in circumstances where roots may be exposed.

Reason: To protect the existing tree cover and in the interests of the nature conservation value of the site

32. That no trees within the application site shall be lopped, topped or felled and no shrubs or hedges, shall be removed from the application site, without the prior approval in writing of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the nature conservation value of the site.

33. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

116 Reason: To monitor the development, to enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control.

34. That within 4 weeks of the development becoming occupied, a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

NOTE TO COMMITTEE:

If granted, the planning permission will not be issued until an agreement under Section 69 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 has been concluded between the applicant and the Council with respect to a financial contribution due to the lack of play area provision.

117 Background PaDers:

Representation Letters

No letters of representation to date.

Consultation Responses:

Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 5th August 2009 Letter from Scottish Power received 19th November 2008 Letter from Scottish Gas Networks received 7th November 2008 Letter from Scottish Water received 28th July 2009 Letter from Strathclyde Police received 4th December 2008 Letter from Network Rail received 14th November 2008 Letter from Strathclyde Fire & Rescue received 23rd December 2008 Email from Scottish Natural Heritage received 4th September 2009

Memo from Protective Services received 10th November 2008 and 1st May 2009 Memo from Conservation and Greening received 10th November 2008, 1st May 2009 and 8th September 2009. Memo from Transportation dated 10th February 2010 Memo from Geotechnical dated 1st September 2009 Memo from Play Services dated 7th September 2009

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Kevin Divin at 01236 618124

Report Date:

8'h February 2009

118 APPLICATION NO. S/08/01514/FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.I The application site is triangular in shape and measures approximately 2.5 hectares in area. The site currently consists of open rough grassed area and scattered wooded clusters. The site is bounded to the north by a railway line beyond which is a modern residential development. Located directly east is a pair of detached residential properties and Carfin Pilgrimage Centre. To the south is the Our Lady and St Francis primary school and associated buildings. To the south west lies a railway line beyond which is a residential development currently under construction.

2. Proposed Development

2.1 The application seeks full planning permission for the erection of fifty-five residential units consisting of twelve 2-bed cottage flats and forty-three 3-bed semi-detached dwellings all of which will be two storey in height. Vehicular access to the site is proposed off Newarthill Road.

3. Applicant’s Supportinn Information

3.1 The applicant has provided a Drainage Assessment, an Ecological Assessment, and a Noise & Vibration Survey for the site.

4. Site Historv

4.1 On the 2!jth February 2007, a planning application for erection of 38 Dwellings and formation of mini roundabout was withdrawn (Ref S/06/02099/FUL).

5. Development Plan

5.1 The site is zoned as L 3 (Protected Open Space), ENV 14 (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation) and HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.

5.2 The site is also zoned as NBE 1 A3a (Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation) and HCF 1A (Protecting Housing and Community Facilitates Resources) in the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan (FDNLLP).

6. Consultations

6.1 The following consultees had no objections to the proposed development: Scottish Power, Scottish Gas Networks and Strathclyde Fire & Rescue.

6.2 A summary of comments from the remaining consultees are as follows:

i. SEPA have no objections to the proposed development subject to conditions relating to the submission of SUDS drainage proposals for the site. II. Scottish Water have offered no objections to the proposed development and have indicated that Balmore water treatment works and Daldowie waste water treatment works currently has sufficient capacity to service the development. Surface water drainage should be provided in accordance with a Sustainable Urban Drainage System (SUDS). iii. Strathclyde Police have made comments relating to access to the site for construction traffic and householders. They also queried whether it is the intention of the developer to improve the road layout or introduce a roundabout in order to ease congestion. iv. Network Rail have objected on the grounds that part of the application site

119 falls under the ownership of Network Rail. V. Strathclyde Fire & Rescue have acknowledged that the position of 1 fire hydrant, 1 terminal and size of water main are acceptable for fire fighting purposes. vi. Protective Services have accepted the findings of the noise report and have offered no objections to the proposed development subject to conditions relating to the requirement for a site investigation report. vii. Transportation have offered no objections to the application. Conditions are required relating to the geometry of the vehicular access; to ensure that the developer can demonstrate control over the required visibility splays and requiring further details of the full zone of influence of the mine shaft, to ensure that it does not encroach upon the access or footways within the site. viii. Geotechnical has stated that insufficient information has been submitted on drainage and flooding matters in order to determine this application. ix. Conservation & Greening have reservations concerning whether development should be permitted on this site given its SlNC status. They suggested that the wetland be turned into a pond as part of the SUDS system and a habitat corridor be retained and supplemented with additional planting along the northern boundary of the site. They have requested that best practice measures be implemented with regards to biodiversity and for the inclusion of native wildflowers and shrubs as part of the landscaping proposals for the site. It is recommended that provision be made for nesting swifts as part of the proposals. In addition, they have requested that SUDS be implemented within the development. X. Play Services have commented that the play provision proposed is inadequate in relation to the size of the proposed residential development and have requested that a financial contribution is provided by the applicant in order to upgrade a local public play area in Carfin to make up for the lack of provision. Within the Carfin area the play areas that have been identified that require to be upgraded are Leven Terrace play area and Bernadette Crescentrraylor Avenue play area.

7.

7.1 Following the standard neighbour notification process and newspaper advertisement no objections were received.

a. Planning Assessment

8.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The application raises no strategic issues; it can be assessed in terms of the local plan policy.

8.2 The site is zoned as L 3 (Protected Open Space), ENV 14 (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation) and HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan. Policies HSG 9 (Assessing Applications for Housing Development) and TR 13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) are also relevant.

8.3 Policy L 3 seeks to protect these areas by resisting proposals which would adversely affect such spaces. Development may be permitted where suitable compensatory open space can be provided. The application site is an area of informal open space with the boundaries well defined between two railway lines with public access limited because of this. For these reasons and the fact that the site is sloping scrubland, the site has never been intensively used for active recreation as it is impractical as well as not easily accessible, with only one way in and the same way out which even then is not clearly defined and user friendly. Therefore the site is more passive in nature and its loss to development is not significant in land use terms. The principle of residential development is considered to be acceptable in terms of policy L 3 because of the self contained nature of the site, its limited use and also in the context of

120 surrounding land use which is predominantly residential. Therefore residential development on the site would be in keeping with the immediate area. A significant Part of the site is to be retained for ecological reasons to be detailed below. Although the proposal is contrary to the local plan designation for the reasons outlined above it can be justified as an acceptable departure.

8.4 Policy ENV 14 also applies and states that the Council will not permit development proposals, which would adversely affect Sites of Special Scientific Interest or Wildlife Corridors. The ecological assessment undertaken states that the site provides habitats for wildlife in a local context but it limited by the railway lines and busy road on its boundaries. It concludes that no protected species are present. Although Conservation & Greening have reservations concerning whether development should be permitted on this site given its SlNC status, they do not oppose the development subject to conditions to secure that the wetland be turned into a pond as part of the SUDS, that a habitat corridor be retained along the northern boundary and additional requirements, as described in paragraph 6.2 above. Therefore although the application is contrary to Policy ENV 14, subject to the conditions proposed the development is considered to be acceptable.

8.5 A small part of the application site immediately adjacent to Newarthill Road is covered by policy HSG 7 (Established Housing Area) in which the Council will seek to protect the character of residential areas by opposing development which is incompatible. In principle residential development on this site would be compatible with the surrounding area. Any proposed residential development would have to be assessed against policy HSG 9 (Assessing Applications for Housing Development). This policy sets out the criteria against which new housing proposals will be assessed including: impact of the development on the existing built and natural environment; density; layout and mix of housing; detailed design elements; provisions made for landscaping and open space and provision made for roads, access and parking. The consideration of the development in land use terms and relating to impact on the natural environment has been considered against policies L3, ENV 14 and HSG 7 above. In terms of the impact on surrounding residential properties the layout and design of the proposed development are considered acceptable and would compliment the wider existing surrounding properties in terms of scale, style and finish. The proposed development would result in no loss of privacy, sunlightldaylight to surrounding properties and satisfactorily meets current open space standards as detailed in the Council’s “Developers Guide to Open Space”. The transportation issues are considered below. Therefore, it is considered that the proposed residential development complies with policies HSG 7 and 9.

8.6 In assessing the transport implications of the development, Policy TR 13 applies. This policy requires assessment of the proposal against various criteria including: the level of traffic generated and its impact on road traffic circulation and road safety; and provisions made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. Transportation has no objections to the proposals subject to conditions relating to visibility, access and further detail concerning a mine shaft. Subject to the recommended conditions the proposals are considered to be in accordance with policy TR 13.

8.7 A material consideration in the assessment of the application is the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan (FDNLLP). The site is zoned as NBE 1 A3a (Site of Importance for Nature Conversation) and HCF 1A (Protecting Housing and Community Facilitates Resources). With regard to policy NBE 1 A3a, it proposes to safeguard the sites of importance for natural heritage and biodiversity where planning permission will only be granted for proposals that can be demonstrated that no adverse impact will occur. As discussed in detail in paragraph 8.4 above it is considered that development of this site can be justified, the proposal is therefore considered to comply with Policy NBE 1 A3a. Policy HCFIA states that there will be a presumption against developments detrimental to the residential amenity of primarily residential areas. The proposed development is considered acceptable and will not have a detrimental impact on the residential amenity of the area given that it will

121 extend the existing residential area and result in the development of a gap site on Newarthill Road. The proposals are therefore considered to accord with policy HCFIA.

8.8 With regards to matters raised in consultation responses, that have not yet been addressed, it is proposed to attach suitable planning conditions in relation to the submission of a Site Investigation Report. In response to the drainagelflooding issues raised by Geotechnical, Scottish Water and SEPA in this case it is considered acceptable that conditions be imposed to address the issues raised. In response to the comments raised by Conservation and Greening, detailed conditions are recommended to secure the works required to mitigate against any ecological damage and to secure supplementary planting. Conditions are also proposed relating to the matters raised by Transportation. As Play Services have commented that proposal does not provide a play area of Sufficient size the applicant has agreed to contribute f23,500 through a section 69 legal agreement in order to provide a financial contribution to help fund the improvement of local public play areas.

9. Conclusions

9.1 It is recognised that the proposal is not in accordance with the zoning of the site for policies L 3 and ENV 14 in the adopted Local Plan however, I am satisfied that justification exists for departing from the approved zoning of the site given the nature of the development and the minor impact on local wildlife. The site is located within the urban settlement and the proposed development can be accommodated within the residential area without detriment to the surrounding properties and taking the provisions of the development plan and all other material considerations into account, it is recommended that permission be granted subject to conditions.

122 Application No: Proposed Development:

S/09/00633/FUL Erection of a Funeral Home with Parking and Access Site Address:

Land At Reema Road Bellshill North Lanarkshire ML4 IRL

Date Registered:

13th July 2009

Applicant: Agent: Mr John Clark Mr Gerard McGowan John Clark Funeral Services 25 Balgray Road 1-7 Unthank Road Newton Mearns Bellshill G77 6PB ML4 IDD Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Yes Local application

Ward: Representations: 015 Mossend And Holytown None received. Councillors: James Coyle, Paul Delaney, Kevin McKeown.

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification: The proposed development meets the criteria set out in the relevant policies contained within the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 and the North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The proposed development is acceptable in terms of its impact upon the surrounding area.

123 Pmduced by PLANNING APPLICATION S I 09 I00633 I FUL NDh Lanarkshire Counul huimnmental Seruices. Erection of a Funeral Home with Parking and Access

Land At Reema Road, Bellshill A telO1898 274274v &x 01898 403053

124 Proposed Conditions:-

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

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

2. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006

3. That within 4 weeks of the development hereby permitted being occupied or brought into use a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

4. That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, an additional noise report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. This report shall assess the potential for the development herby approved to be the subject of noise pollution from adjacent industrial premises/sites and from road traffic. For the avoidance of doubt the report must contain readings for industrial noise and road traffic noise in accordance with PAN 56 (Planning and Noise). Depending on the findings of the report, noise mitigation measures may be required. Any significant changes to the approved site layout or to the building may require an amended planning application.

Reason: To mitigate any potential adverse impact on the development in relation to surrounding industrial and road traffic noise and in order to not sterilise adjacent industrial land.

5. That any noise mitigation identified by the report required in terms of Condition 19 above shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a suitably qualified acoustic consultant) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any noise mitigation measures have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the Report.

Reason: To mitigate any noise pollution from the surrounding industrial area.

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 enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail

7. That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175: 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required

Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of

125 the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

8. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 7 shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Before the development hereby approved is brought into use a certificate (signed by a Chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the Remediation Strategy.

Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

9. That before the funeral home is brought into use:

(i) Vehicular access shall be formed via a 5.5 metre wide dropped kerb for the parking court and 3 metres wide for the garage access.

(ii) That a visibility splay of 2.5 metres by 60 metres, measured from the road channel, shall be provided to the left of the car park access on to Bairdsland view and nothing exceeding 1.05 metres in height above road channel level shall be planted, placed, erected, or allowed to grow, within these sight line areas.

(iii) That all of the associated parking and turning areas shown on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained and surfaced in a material which the Planning. Authority has approved in writing before the start of surfacing work and clearly marked out. These areas shall thereafter be retained as such to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

10. 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 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, and; (d) A timetable for the implementation of these works contemporaneously with the development.

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

11. That all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 10 above, shall be completed contemporaneously with the development and in accordance with the approved timetable and no later than prior to the development hereby permitted being brought into use; and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the occupation of the last flat within the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: To ensure proper implementation of the landscaping scheme.

12. That BEFORE any works start on site, the applicant must confirm in writing to the Planning Authority that the foul drainage can be connected to the public sewer in accordance with the requirements of Scottish Water. The surface water must be treated in accordance with the principles of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland published by ClRlA in March 2000.

126 Reason: To prevent groundwater or surface water contamination in the interests of environmental and amenity protection.

13. That BEFORE any works start on site, the applicant must confirm in writing to the Planning Authority that the drainage arrangements to be provided are to the satisfaction of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA). Drainage from the following sources must be connected to the public foul sewer in accordance with the requirements of Scottish Water:-

a) Domestic sewage; b) Any trade effluent and c) Drainage from workshop floors and other surfaces which may be prone to contamination.

If surface water arising from non-high risk areas on the site cannot be taken to the public sewer, then the surface water must be treated in accordance with the principles of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland published by ClRlA in March 2000.

Reason: To prevent groundwater or surface water contamination in the interests of environmental and amenity protection.

14. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 13 shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Within three months of the construction of the SUDS, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in drainage works) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved plans.

Reason: To safeguard any adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future users.

15. That except as may be otherwise agreed in writing by the planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the plans stamped approved as part of this permission.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

16. Noise associated with the completed development shall not give rise to a noise level, assessed with the windows open, within any dwelling or noise sensitive buildings in excess of the equivalent to Noise Rating Curve (N.R.C.) 35 between 07.00 hours and 22.00 hours and N.R.C. 25 at all other times.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

17. That prior to the commencement of operations on site, the applicant, in consultation with the Health and Safety Executive, must provide further details of any proposed external extraction flue for the embalming room, including details of the colour and finish, and these must be approved in writing by the Planning Authority before the flue is installed.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

18. That the extractor flue as approved under condition 17 above shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to the opening of the Funeral Parlour.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

19. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and

127 location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

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

20. That before the funeral home hereby permitted, is occupied, the fences, or walls, as approved under the terms of condition 19 above, shall be erected.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

21. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a flood risk assessment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in response to the potential for flooding posed by Shirrel Burn and its tributary located directly north of the site.

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

22. That any flood mitigation identified by the report required in terms of condition 21 above shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the building. A certificate (signed by a suitably qualified engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any flood mitigation measures have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the report. Should flood mitigation affect the approved site layout then an amended planning application will be required.

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

23. That the use of the buildingkite hereby approved shall be restricted only to use as a Funeral Parlour and shall not be used for any other use within Class one of the Town & Country Planning (Use Classes (Scotland) Order 1997.

Reason: In order to protect the nature of this locality for business and industry.

24. That BEFORE the Funeral Home hereby permitted is occupied, the footpath hatched ORANGE on the approved plans shall be completed to final wearing course to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian safety

128 Background PaDers:

Representation Letters

None received.

Consultation Responses:

Letter from Scottish Water (West Region) received 4'h August 2009 Letter from British Gas received 27'h July 2009 Letter from SP Energy Networks received 2gthJuly 2009.

Memo from Protective Services 4'h August 2009 Memo from Transportation 3'' August 2009

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Graham Smith at 01698 27 41 04

Report Date:

1Oth February 2010

129 APPLICATION NO. S1091006331FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.1 The site is 0.24 hectares of vacant open space at the terminus of an existing turning area at Bairdslaw View and lies within a mixed use area where dwellings lie to the north, west and east, Bellshill Athletic Athletic Football Club to the north, the Council Re-Cycling Centre to the southeast and vacant ground to the south.

2. Proposed Development

2.1 The application seeks permission for a funeral directors. The proposal contains a mortuary, a room for conducting funeral services and an integral garage and parking area accessing onto Bairdslaw View.

3. Applicant’s Supporting Information

3.1 A Noise Impact Assessment was submitted with respect to the impact of the development on the residential properties to the west.

4. Site Historv

4.1 None relevant.

5. Development Plan

5.1 The application site is located within an area designated as Policy lNDl (Industrial & Business Development Opportunities) of the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.

5.2 The North Lanarkshire Local Plan identifies the site as ED1 2A (Industrial and Business sites and DSAP 4 (Local Area Regeneration Priorities).

6. Consultations

6.1 A summary of comments from the consultees are as follows:

I. Scottish Water has no objections but advised that there may be a requirement for the developer to carry out work to both the water and waste water networks to ensure, no loss of service to existing customers. The site is located sufficiently distant from the main sewer such that development is not compromised.

It. Scotland Gas Networks and Scottish Power have no objections subject to the applicant having due regard for their existing apparatus.

Ill. Transportation has no objection subject to conditions in terms of visibility splays and parking and has advised that the access road (Bairdsland View) is private in terms of current roads legislation and requires construction consent before development begins.

IV. Protective Services has advised that a site investigation report is required with regard to potential ground contamination. Following the submission of a noise assessment which detailed noise emissions from the proposal affecting residential properties they requested further details which addressed noise pollution from surrounding industrial properties which would affect the proposal. They confirmed noise limits with which the proposal must comply and that air conditioning plant should be suitably isolated from the building.

130 7. Rewesentations

7.1 Following neighbour notification and newspaper advertisement no objections were received.

8. Plannina Assessment

8.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The proposal raises no strategic issues and, as such requires to be assessed against Local Plan Policies. In this instance the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 is relevant, with the site being zoned as lNDl (Industrial & Business Opportunities). Policies lNDl0 (Assessing Other Developments on Industrial and Business Land) and TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) are also relevant to this proposal.

AdoDted Local Plan:

8.2 Policy lNDl seeks to promote designated areas for industry and business. Funeral directors normally fall under class one of the Use Classes order, however, this proposal goes beyond the scale normally associated with traditional town centre retail areas. It is considered acceptable to locate the proposal at a site specifically designated for business and industry due to the 24hr availability of the service as well as the propensity to give rise to parking issues at peak times. As the proposal seeks permission for medium size business, the development is considered to be in accordance with Policy IND 1,

8.3 Policy IND 10 considers applications for non industrial development within established industrial and business areas. This policy is relevant as under the current use classes order, an undertaker falls within Class 1 as described in paragraph 7.3 and for similar reasons it is considered that this proposal would not undermine the attractiveness of the location for industry and business. There is potential for this development to be affected by noise from adjacent industrial businesses/sites or from road traffic. In order not to prejudice the activities of such businesses or the use of adjacent sites conditions are proposed to secure further noise assessment and any required mitigation works. Subject to such conditions the proposal is not considered to have an adverse impact on the character and amenity of the surrounding industrial area and accords with policy IND 10.

8.4 Policy TR 13 sets out criteria relating to road and pedestrian safety, parking and servicing. The foregoing is considered acceptable and Transportation have no objection therefore the proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policy TR 13.

North Lanarkshire Local Plan:

8.5 The Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan is also material consideration, however, the zoning and policy position remain unaltered from the adopted plan. In addition, this plan identifies the site as a local regeneration priority, which the proposal supports and will remove an area of land which has been vacant for a considerable time and subject of fly tipping in the past.

Consultations:

8.6 With regard to the request from Protective Services for further information on noise levels, a condition is proposed requiring an additional survey to be submitted and approved along with any necessary mitigation incorporated into the design. The existing noise survey concludes that nearby residential amenity would not be adversely affected by the proposal, nevertheless a condition is recommended to control noise levels to suitable limits in any case. Further conditions are

131 recommended seeking submission of a Site Investigation and details of any ventilation equipment for the Embalming Room.

8.7 With regards the consultation response received Scottish Water all matters relating to drainage infrastructure may be addressed through planning conditions. Due to the close proximity of the Shirrel Burn tributary, a condition is also recommended to consider the potential for flooding of the site.

9 Conclusions

9.1 In conclusion it is considered that the proposed development is acceptable in terms of its design and impact on the amenity and character of the surrounding area and complies with the relevant policies contained with the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 and North Lanarkshire Local Plan. In addition, mixed uses of residential, leisure, commercial and industrial have co-existed together for a number of years, and with suitable mitigation if proven necessary, will continue to operate suitably without detriment to each other. As such the application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the above conditions.

132 Application No: Proposed Development:

S/09/01100/AMD Substitution of House Types, & Erection of Four Additional Detached Units (Amendment to 07/01 534/FUL) Site Address:

Motherwell College Dalzell Drive Motherwell ML12DD

Date Registered:

10th December 2009

Applicant: Agent: Cala Management NIA Cairnlee House Callendar Business Park Callendar Road Falkirk FK1 1XE Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application No

Ward: Representations: 18 Motherwell south east and Ravenscraig: No letters of representation received. Councillors Kaye Harmon, Thomas Lunny, Linsey McKay and Alan Valentine

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

The proposed amendment meets the criteria set out in policies L3, HSG9 and TR13 of the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 and the relevant policies of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan. There will be no detrimental amenity issues for surrounding dwellings and the proposal will make a positive contribution to the wider area.

133 VN Proposed Conditions:-

1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started not later than 1 IthMarch 2014.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

2. That except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawings-

PDI (House Types:- A125S, A271CF, A291C, 973901516), PDI Rev6 (House Types;- A165X, A17S, AISFE, A1951C, A19M, A195SE, A225X, A25S),PDI Rev C (House Types;- A16S, A23S, A24FE, A241C, A24SE, A185S, MIICF), PDI Rev D (House Type Al4S), LPOOl, PDSA 002

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

3. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

4. That within 4 weeks of the last dwelling or flat within the development hereby permitted being occupied a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

5. 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 and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved under the terms of this condition. Notwithstanding this requirement the roofs of the houses/flats shall be finished in dark grey or brown tiles.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail and in order to minimise the visual impact of the development.

6. That before each of the dwellinghouses and flats hereby permitted is occupied, all of the associated parking and turning areas shown on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained and surfaced in a material which the Planning Authority has approved in writing before the start of surfacing work and clearly marked out. These areas shall thereafter be retained as such to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities.

7. That before the first house within the development hereby permitted is occupied, the means of vehicular and pedestrian access to the site from Dalzell Drive shall be constructed in accordance with the approved plans.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access facilities to the dwellings. a. That no dwellinghouse hereby permitted shall be occupied until the road and footpath adjacent to it have been constructed to basecourse standard and the road and footpath shall be maintained thereafter to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority during the construction phase.

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

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

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

10. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls with particular reference to the proposed retaining walls and 1.8 metre high Anstone Wall to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

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

11. Notwithstanding the terms of condition 10 above, before the any of the dwellings hereby permitted are occupied, the 1.8 metre high Anstone Wall as annotated on approved plan no. PDSA 002 Rev. A. shall be erected along those parts of the boundary lined in orange on the approved plan.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of both existing and future residents.

12. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping 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, boundary treatment, grass seeding and turfing, with particular reference to relative site levels between the western boundary of the site and the eastern boundaries of dwellings in Woodlands Road. (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; in particular this should include a scheme for tree planting along the site frontage and between the blocks of flats; (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development; (d) a detailed schedule for all landscaping works which shall provide for these works being carried out contemporaneously with the development of the site and completed before the last house/flat is occupied.

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

13. 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 any communal areas, including landscaping and play areas.

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

14. That all works included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 12 above, shall be completed in accordance with the approved schedule, and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the occupation of the last house within the development hereby permitted, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: To ensure the implementation of the landscaping scheme in the interest of amenity.

15. That BEFORE occupation of the last house within the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance scheme approved under the terms of condition 13; shall be in operation.

136 Reason: To ensure ongoing maintenance in the interest of traffic safety and amenity.

16. That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175: 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required.

Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

17. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 16, shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a Chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the Remediation Strategy.

Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

18. That PRIOR to any works commencing on site, the applicant must confirm in writing to the Planning Authority that the foul drainage can be connected to the public sewer in accordance with the requirements of Scottish Water and that Scottish Water will adopt the surface water system including the attenuation tank. The surface water must be treated in accordance with the principles of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland published by ClRlA in March 2000. Furthermore, the applicant shall submit a written assurance from Scottish Water to demonstrate that the additional flow arising from this development will not cause or contribute to the premature operation of consented storm overflows.

Reason: To prevent groundwater or surface water contamination in the interests of environmental and amenity protection and in the interests of flood prevention.

19. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved under the terms of Condition 18 ; shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as reasonably practicable. Within three months of the construction of the SUDS, and before the last house within the site is occupied, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in drainage works) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that all SUDS and conventional drainage serving the site has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved drawings and written details.

Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with SUDS best practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site.

20. That prior to the occupation of any dwellinghouse within the site, all necessary repair works to the culvert and downstream watercourse in Dalzell Park, to which all surface waterflows from the site will be directed, shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the culverted watercourse is in an acceptable condition to deal with the expected waterflows.

21. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full before and after cross sections and site levels shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall be constructed in accordance with the

137 plans approved under the terms of this condition unless otherwise agreed in writing beforehand by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and the proper planning of this area by ensuring that ground levels are appropriate for the site and the general area.

22. Further updated ecological surveys regarding bats and badgers shall be undertaken on the site to determine the presence of any bats and badgers. The said surveys shall thereafter be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before any development commences on the site. As a result of the studies, should any remediation measures be required, these shall be implemented in accordance with a timetable agreed in writing with the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage before works commence on the site.

Reason: To ensure compliance with The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2007.

23. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme for the provision of a play area within the site as indicated 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(s); (b) details of the surface treatment of the play area(s), including the location and type of safety surface to be installed; (c) details of the fences, gates and animal grids to be provided around the play area(s), and

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

24. That BEFORE occupation of the 10th last dwellinghouselflat within the development hereby permitted, all works required for the provision of the equipped play area and, included in the scheme approved under the terms of condition 23, shall be completed.

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

25. That before the 1'' dwellinghouse within the development hereby permitted is occupied a directional sign shall be erected to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority at the junction of the access road and Dalzell Drive at the location indicated on the approved plans. Details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and the development carried out as approved.

Reason: In order to effectively guide traffic down to the Dalzell House Estate.

26. That before commencement of work on site, the applicant shall provide written confirmation from Scottish Power confirming that they have withdrawn their objection on the basis that the required cable diversion works will be carried out to the satisfaction of Scottish Power.

Reason: To ensure that the required cable diversion works are carried out to the satisfaction of Scottish Power.

27. That details of the proposed gateway access feature into the site shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Planning Authority prior to the commencement of work on site and the said entrance features shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the first dwelling.

Reason: In the interests of road safety.

28. That no trees within or overhanging the site shall be lopped, topped or felled and no shrubs or hedges, shall be removed, without the approval in writing by the Planning

138 Authority.

Reason: In the interests of nature conservation and visual amenity of the surrounding green belt area.

29. That before the development hereby permitted starts tree protection measures in accordance with British Standards BS 5837 shall be erected along the drip line of the trees within or overhanging the site and shall not be removed without the approval in writing of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the area of woodland within the site.

139 Backaround Papers:

Representation Letters

None received

Consultation Responses:

Memo from Transportation received 16thFebruary 2010

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Graham Smith at 01698 2741 04

Report Date:

1st February 201 0

140 APPLICATION NO. SlO9101 IOOlAMD

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.I The site is the former Motherwell College on Dalzell Drive and is bounded to the east by Our Lady’s High School, to the south by Dalzell Park Estate, to the west by Woodlands Road, an established residential area and to the north by Fir Park School and Fir Park football stadium. All existing college buildings on the site are in the process of demolition whilst most of the existing tree belts on the northern and eastern boundaries will be retained.

2. Proposed Development

2.1 This application seeks an amendment to the house types and layout approved in application 07/01534/FUL incorporating an additional 4 dwellinghouses. The applicant has reduced the size of the detached dwellings following an increased demand for smaller house types. There are no changes proposed to the internal loop road, flatted dwellings at the north of the site, central play area and drainage as approved previously.

3. Applicant’s Supportina Information

3.1 No supporting information was received.

4. Site History

4.1 Planning permission was granted for 228 Residential Dwellings (128 Detached Units and 100 Flatted Dwellings) with Associated Roads, Car Parking and Landscaping (07/01534/FUL) on 12‘hMarch 2009.

5. Development Plan

5.1 In terms of the Southern Area Local Plan 2008, the site is covered by Policies CS 2 (Established Community Facilities) and Policy L3 (Protected Open Space).

5.2 The Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Plan identifies the site as HCF 1 B1 (Community Facilities).

6.

6.1 Transportation raised no objections to the proposal

7. Representations

7.1 There were no letters of representation received following the press advert and neighbour notification.

8. Planning Assessment

8.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. This application is not of strategic significance and should therefore be assessed against the policies contained in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008. The site is zoned as Policy CS2 (Established Community Facilities) and policies L3 (Protected Open Space), HSG 9 (Assessing Applications for Housing Development) and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) are also relevant to this application.

141 AdoDted Local Plan

8.2 The eastern edge of the site is covered by Policy L 3, which reflects the existing treebelt along this boundary. The retention of the treebelt is inherent in the proposal with the exception of a small percentage of tree loss to facilitate access to the site, and the loss of the south eastern edge to provide garden ground for 3 relocated houses and as such, the proposal is considered to be broadly compliant with this policy.

8.3 Policy CS 2 seeks to safeguard existing community facilities. In this regard, because the College are moving to a new campus with the Ravenscraig site, this proposal by default will not result in the loss of this community facility which is being relocated nearby. In this regard, the proposal is not considered to be contrary to policy CS 2. In addition residential development has already been accepted on this site by virtue of consent 07/0 1534/FUL.

8.4 Policy HSG 9 assesses the impact of the development on the surrounding area and all issues relating to the design of the proposal, In this regard, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of the proposed layout and general design and complies with the Council’s open space standards, in terms of garden dimensions, open space and play area provision. The landscaping and design details are in keeping with what had been approved previously and the proposal is considered to represent a good quality residential development with minimal and acceptable impact on the character and setting of the wider area. It is therefore considered that the proposal complies with policy HSG 9.

8.5 Policy TR 13 sets criteria relating to road and pedestrian safety, parking and servicing. The proposal meets parking requirements and the road layout remains unaltered. As indicated above in paragraph 6.1, Transportation has raised no objections to the amended proposal. The proposal is therefore held to comply with policy TR13.

Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan:

8.6 The Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan similarly zones the site for the former college community facility. However, acceptance of a departure from this zoning has already been justified in paragraph 8.3 above.

9. Conclusions

9.1 With regard to all material considerations, it is considered that the proposed residential development is acceptable in terms of the aforementioned policies in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 and Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. It is considered that the proposed amendment is acceptable in terms of design and impact on the amenity and character of the surrounding area and that it will improve the character and amenity of the site which has begun to take on a derelict appearance under commencement of demolition. As such the application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the above conditions.

142 Application No: Proposed Development:

09/01 1501AMD Amendment to 07/01086/AMD from 8 Townhouses to 10 Flatted Dwellings and repositioning of block 3 Site Address:

Traction House Tinkers Lane Motherwell MLI 3BJ

Date Registered:

23rd October 2009

Applicant: Agent: Dundas Estates & Development CO Ltd Ratcliff e Groves Partnership Mr Bruce Dunlop Alan Muir Carriden Sawmills 135 Buchanan Street Bo'ness Glasgow EH51 9SQ G2 1JA West Lothian Application Level: Local Application Contrary to Development Plan: No

Ward: Representations: 016 Motherwell West 4 letters of representation received. Councillors:- Paul Kelly, Michael Ross, Annette Valentine,

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

The proposed amendment meets the criteria set out in the relevant policies contained within the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 and the North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The proposed development is acceptable in terms of its impact upon the surrounding residential area.

143 4 Letters of Representations AiRBLES ROAD * received in total. 1 online comment received from unknown addressee. n Produced by his map is reproduced from lrdnanca Survey material PLANNING APPLICATION No. S 109 I01 150 1 AMD North Lanarkshire Council vith the wrnussim of I I L, I rianriiiiyaiiuF,___:__- -..-I.... Environment Department. lrdnance Survey on behalf Amendment from 8 Townhouses to 10 Flatted Dwellings rf the Controller of Her jtationery Mfice 0 Crown and Repositionlng of Block 3 apyright Unauthorlred rbhire epradudion infringes Crm colmdl npyright and may lead to Traction House, Tinkers Lane, Motherwell ,rosecution or civd proceedings qorth Lanarkshire Council a 100023396 2008 * Representation Site area = 0.16 ha fax 01698 403053

144 Proposed Conditions:-

1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started no later than 8'h March 2012.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

2. That except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawings: 8434(PL) 301A, 8434( PL)302, 8434(PL)303, 8434(PL)304, 8434(PL)305, 8434(PL)306

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

3. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

4. That within 4 weeks of the last flat within the development hereby permitted being occupied a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

5. That the amendments hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved details submitted as part of the application and no change to those details shall be made without prior written approval of the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the conditions attached to planning permission S/07/01086/AMD for the wider residential development site still apply to this site with particular reference to Condition 5, 7 and 8 which relate to road markings and visibility splays and 12 that requires the access road and footways to be finalised and surfaced.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

6. That before any of the flats hereby permitted are occupied, all of the associated parking and turning areas shown on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained and surfaced in a material which the Planning. Authority has approved in writing before the start of surfacing work and clearly marked out. These areas shall thereafter be retained as such to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities.

7. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

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

8. That before any of the flats hereby permitted are occupied, the fence, or wall, as approved under the terms of Condition 7 above, shall be erected.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

9. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of all external materials to be used in construction, including walls, roofs, windows, doors, gutters and downpipes, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

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

145 10. That all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting (drawing no’s 61 83 L(PL)OO18, dated 17.08.06 of Planning Consent Reference S/06/01454/REM), shall be completed contemporaneously with the development and in accordance with a timetable to be approved in writing by the Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, final completion of which shall be no later than prior to the occupation of the last flat of the development hereby permitted; 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 the management and maintenance scheme submitted with landscaping scheme detailed in condition 10 above, shall be implemented in accordance with a timetable to be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority under the terms condition 15 above.

Reason: To ensure proper maintenance of the area and the protection of existing trees.

12. That prior to any of the residential units hereby approved being occupied, written confirmation shall be submitted to the Planning Authority from a suitably qualified person that the recommendations of the noise report by Robin Mackenzie Partnership, submitted in respect of the application, dated 29th August 2006, have been implemented in full. Thereafter these measures must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect future residents from unsatisfactory levels of noise.

13. That no works of any description shall be commenced on the application site, until written confirmation is provided by the Planning Authority that the proposed surface water drainage system submitted with the application S/06/01454/REM (drawing numbers CL(52) 01 rev A and CD(52)Ol) is acceptable. For the avoidance of doubt the surface water drainage scheme must comply with the principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) in terms of the relevant ClRlA Manual, other advice published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) and with all requirements of Scottish Water. If any change to the site layout is required as a result of assessment of this scheme, an amended planning application shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority PRIOR to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the said Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater, and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site respectively.

14. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 13 above shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development and before the last flat is occupied, the SUDS scheme shall be completed and a certificate (signed by a responsible Civil Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved plans.

Reason: To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents.

146 Backnround PaDers:

Representation Letters

1 Letter and 1 online comment from Mr & Mrs Kenneth & Marion Bryce, 6 Malcolm Street, Motherwell, North Lanarkshire, MLI 3HY received l!jth and 18'h November 2009.

Letter from Mrs M Cross, 4 Malcolm Street, Motherwell, North Lanarkshire, MLI 3HY received 18'h November 2009.

Online comment from M Weir received gth December 2009

Consultation Responses:

Memo from Transportation received 12'h November 2009 Memo from Protective Services received 18'h November 2009

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Graham Smith at 01698 2741 04

Report Date:

5'h February 2010

147 APPLICATION NO. S/09/0115O/FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.1 The site is the former Traction House and is bound by established residential dwellings to the east and south, recently constructed dwellings to the west and the derelict remains of the former Traction House to the north.

2. Proposed Development

2.1 The application seeks an amendment to substitute the house types of building 3 from 8 Townhouses to 10 flatted dwellings and to reposition the building 2 metres east. The repositioning allows an extra landscaped strip to be added at the front elevation and two bin stores at either end of the shared parking spaces. No changes are proposed to the access as approved previously.

3. Applicants Supportina Information

3.1 No supporting information submitted.

4. Site Historv

4.1 Residential Development of 132 flatted dwellings and I0townhouses granted on 20th March 2006 (ref: 04/01671/OUT)

4.2 Erection of 141 Apartments and 8 Townhouses granted gth March 2007 (ref: 06/014541REM).

4.3 Erection of 141 Apartments and 8 Townhouses granted 13'h March 2008 (ref: S/07/01086/AMD). Construction is under way for the remaining blocks.

5. Development Plan

5.1 In terms of the Southern Area Local Plan 2008, the site is covered by Policy HSG 2 (Private Housing Development).

5.2 The Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Plan identifies the site as HCF 2 AI (Sites for Short Term Housing Development).

6. Consultations

6.1 The following consultees had no objection to the proposed development:

0 Transportation 0 Protective Services

7. Representations

7.1 Following the standard neighbour notification process and newspaper advertisement 2 letters of representation and 2 online comments were received from 3 residents of the established housing to the east and south. The objections can be summarised as follows:

I. The patio style living room windows with balconies will overlook the rear elevation of the objector's properties and rear garden ground resulting in a loss of privacy. 11. The bin stores have been constructed in close proximity to the established

148 housing resulting in increased disturbance and potential vermin issues.

8. Planning Assessment

8.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The proposal raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed against Local Plan Policies. In this instance the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 is relevant, with the site being zoned as HSG2 (Private Housing Development). Policies HSG 9 (Assessing Applications for Housing Development) and TR 13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) are also relevant to this proposal.

Adopted Local Plan:

8.2 Policy HSG2 (Private Housing Development) supports the designation of appropriate residential developments and permission exists for residential developments at this site therefore the principle of housing on this site has been established as acceptable subject to meeting the requirements of HSG 9 (Assessing Applications for Housing Development).

8.3 Policy HSG 9 assesses the impact of the development on the surrounding area and all issues relating to the design of the proposal, In this regard, it is considered that the layout, height, access and design details are in keeping with what had been approved previously. The repositioning allows for a landscaped strip to the front of the flats which will improve the visual amenity and provide a buffer between the parking. This application originally contained balconies on the rear elevation and following negotiations the applicant repositioned these to the front elevation to reduce the impact on the general amenity of the established housing to the rear. The window to window distances achieve minimum standards and the proposal is not considered to result in any adverse overlooking. The distance between buildings and orientation also ensures that there will be no unreasonable impact in regard to loss of light.

8.4 Policy TR 13 sets criteria relating to road and pedestrian safety, parking and servicing. Transportation have raised no objections to the proposal. The access arrangements are unaltered and parking levels increased sufficiently for the additional units. It is therefore considered that the application complies with policy TR13.

Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan

8.5 A material consideration is the North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The zoning and policy position remain unaltered therefore the proposal is in compliance with the North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

Representations

8.6 In relation to the points of objection my comments are as follows:

I. As discussed in paragraph 8.4 the balconies and living room windows have been removed from the rear elevation. Window to window distances are such that the proposal will not result in adverse overlooking. II. The bin stores that the objector refers to have already been constructed and are outwith the application site. These form part of the adjacent site, for which planning permission exists, and are not a material consideration in this application.

9. Conclusions

9.1 In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed amendment is acceptable in terms of design and impact on the amenity and character of the surrounding area and complies with the relevant policies contained with the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.

149 Notwithstanding the objections received, it is considered that the proposal will not result in any detrimental amenity issues for surrounding existing dwellings and that the proposal will improve the character and amenity of a derelict site in Motherwell. This application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the imposition of the appropriate conditions.

150 Application No: Proposed Development:

S/09/01185/FUL Construction of 20 Dwellinghouses

Site Address:

Former Cambusnethan Primary School Thrashbush Road Cambusnethan Wishaw

Date Registered:

15th October 2009

Applicant: Agent: North Lanarkshire Council Mast Architects Windmillhill Street 51 St Vincent Crescent Motherwell Glasgow ML1 1AB G3 8NQ

Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application No

Ward: Representations: 019 Murdostoun Two letters of representation received. Robert McKendrick, James Martin, Nicky Shevlin, John Taggart,

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

The proposed development is considered acceptable in terms of the development plan and meets the criteria set out in the relevant policies of the Southern Area Local Plan and the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The proposal can be accommodated without detriment to the surrounding area.

151 Produced by Ordnance Survey material N North Lanarkshire Council mth the permission of Planning and Environment Department Ordnance Survey on behaf Construction of 20 Dwellinghouses of the Controller of Her MaJeShl'S Stationery Office 0 Crom mpyright Unauthorised Former Cambusnethan Primary School, rbhire reproduction infringes Crown COunQ mpyright and may lead to Thrashbush Road, Cambusnethan, Wishaw prosecution or CNIIproceedings telOl698 274274 North Lanarbhire Council Representation Site area = 0.69 ha. fax 01698 403053 100023396 2W8 * 152 Proposed Conditions:-

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

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

2. That except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers; A(91/)180, A(91)181, A(91)182, A(91)183, L(20)001, L(20)OOl Rev A, L(20)002, L(20)009, L(20)010, L(20)011, L(20)012, L(20)013, L(20)020, L(20)021, L(20)022, L(20)023, L(20)024, L(20)030 Rev A, L(20)031 Rev A, L(20)032 Rev A, L(20)033 Rev A, L(20)034 Rev A and L(20)lOO Rev C.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

3. That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175 : 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required.

Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

4. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 3 above shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a Chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the last dwellinghouse, confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the approved Remediation Strategy.

Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

5. 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: In the interests of amenity by ensuring that the external materials are appropriate for the site and the general area.

6. That before any of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted are occupied, the fences and walls detailed on drawing numbers A(91)180, A(91)181, A(91)182 and A(91)183, shall be erected.

Reason: In the interests of amenity by ensuring that walls and fences are built prior to the occupation of the dwellinghouses.

7. That before the development hereby permitted commences, 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 within the site and in particular the western and northern sections of the site as

153 highlighted green; and measures for their protection in the course of development (d) the provision of buffer landscaping along the southern boundary; (e) the use of landscaping species which match and compliment the existing boundary landscaping on the site and on adjacent land ; (9 management and maintenance proposals; and (9) A timetable for the implementation of the works contemporaneously with the development.

Reason: In the interests of amenity by ensuring that landscaping is appropriate for the site and for the general area.

8. That prior to the occupation of the last dwellinghouse within the development hereby permitted all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of Condition 7 above, shall be completed; and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased within two years of the completion of the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: In the interests of amenity by ensuring that landscaping is appropriate for the site and for the general area.

9. That before the completion of the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance scheme approved under the terms of Condition 7 shall be in operation.

Reason: In the interests of amenity by ensuring that landscaping is appropriate for the site and for the general area.

10. That before any of the dwellinghouses are occupied, the means of vehicular access to the site to be created on Mossneuk Park, shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate access facilities to the site.

11. That before any of the dwellinghouses are occupied the related communal 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.

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

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

13. That before the last of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted is completed or occupied, whichever is the earliest, all roads and footways shall be completed to final wearing course .

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

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

154 Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory site drainage arrangements.

15. That prior to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) in terms of the relevant ClRlA Manual and other advice published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA). If the area of ground illustrated on the approved plan for the notional SUDS is inadequate for the purpose, a revised layout drawing for this part of the proposed development shall be submitted to and approved in unity by the Planning Authority prior to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the said Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater, and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site respectively.

16. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 15 shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Within 3 months of the construction of the SUDS and before the last dwellinghouse within the site is occupied, a certificate (signed by a chartered Civil Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved plans.

Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater, and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site respectively.

17. That before any development commences on site written certification from a chartered engineer that the site is not at risk from flooding shall be provided to the Planning Authority, alternatively should investigations show that the site may be at risk of flooding then a scheme of mitigation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before any works commence on site. The said mitigation works shall be certified as complete by as chartered engineer before any house within the development is occupied.

Reason: To safeguard the application site from any potential risk from flooding.

18. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

19. That within 4 weeks of the last dwellinghouse within the development becoming occupied, a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To monitor the development, to enable the Planning Authority to retain effective contro I.

155 Backaround Papers:

Representation Letters

Letter from Mr James Jones, 21, Mossneuk Park, Cambusnethan, ML2 8LR,received 28th October 2009. Letter from Mr & Mrs P O'Hare, 19 Thrashbush Road, Cambusnethan, Wshaw, North Lanarkshire, ML2 8LL received 6th November 2009.

Consultation Responses:

Memo from Transportation received 21" October 2009 Memo from Protective Services received 28thOctober 2009 Memo from Geotechnical received 26'h October 2009 Letter from Scottish Water received 20thJanuary 2010 Letter from SEPA received 21'' October 2009

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Fraser Miller at 01698 2741 19

Report Date:

8'h February 2010

156 APPLICATION NO. S/09/01185/FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.1 The application site is the former Cambusnethan Primary School, on the corner of Cambusnethan Street and Thrashbush Road. The site is approximately 1.5 acres (0.6hectares)and is bound by single storey and two storey residential dwellings to the north, east and west and by a wooded area with a graveyard beyond to the south. The site is relatively flat and has a stone wall around its western and northern perimeter and a metal fence on its eastern and southern boundary.

2. Proposed Development

2.1 The application seeks planning permission for the erection of a residential development comprising 20 dwellings constructed around the perimeter of the site with a centrally located parking area. The proposed housing mix is to comprise of three single storey terraced blocks (10 units), two semi-detached single storey dwellings (2 units) and two semi-detached cottage flat blocks two storeys in height (8 units). Vehicular access to the site is to be taken from Mossneuk Park into a central parking courtyard with provision for 29 spaces. The design of the dwellings is contemporary in nature and the proposed materials to be utilised consist of interlocking rooftiles, facing brick, timber cladding and UPVC windows and doors.

3. Applicant’s Supportincr Information

3.1 In support of the application, calculations for the Sewer Design and calculations for Storm Events have been submitted for consideration.

4. Site Historv

4.1 The application site was the former Cambusnethan Primary School and the site has been vacant following its demolition in 2008.

5. Development Plan

5.1 The site is identified as a residential development opportunity in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.

6. Consultations

6.1 A summary of comments from the consultees are as follows: i. Transportation have raised no objections to the application, however they have commented that the pedestrian links from the front doors onto Thrashbush Road and Cambusnethan Street require to be removed as this may encourage on street parking at these locations. ii. Protective Services has no objections to the proposed development subject to the submission of a Site Investigation Report to ensure the site is free of any contaminants. iii. Geotechnical have advised that they are unaware of any incidences of flooding in the vicinity and have requested that a detailed drainage strategy and details on SUDS be submitted. In addition they have advised that Scottish Waters approval of the finalised scheme requires to be submitted. iv. Scottish Water have advised that there is sufficient capacity to serve the development through the Daer Water Treatment Works and the Carbarns Waste Water Treatment Works. In addition they have advised that surface water requires to be treated in accordance with Sustainable Urban Drainage Principles.

157 v. SEPA have advised that the nature of the application is such that conditions can be utilised to ensure that site drainage is treated in accords with CIRIAs C697 manual on SUDS and that foul drainage be dealt with accordingly.

7. Representations

7.1 Two letters of representation have been received following the neighbour notification procedures. The objections are on the grounds that:

a. There have been problems with drainage in the school playground that give cause for concern. A cut off drain was installed by the Council as recent as 2008 in an attempt to alleviate the drainage problems. b. Overshadowing caused by the two storey unit to the rear of 19 Thrashbush Road. In addition there are concerns regarding the over looking of 21 Mossneuk Park. c. Concerned over the proximity of the dwellings to the objectors property at 19 Thrashbush Road. d. Concerns of over capacity over the drainage infrastructure. Furthermore, there are concerns that the dwellings are to be built over a main sewer that may lead to damage to the objector’s property. e. Concerns over the pedestrian links to the front of the houses and that this could lead to on street parking on Thrashbush Road. f. Concerns over the replacement fencing proposed adjoining the objector‘s boundaries and concerns over who will maintain the fence and the timescales for its erection and subsequent repair should it become damaged.

8. Planninn Assessment

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

Adopted Local Plan:

8.2 It should be noted that the application raises no strategic issues. This application must therefore be assessed against the relevant development plan policies, which are Southern Area Local Plan 2008. PO licies HSG2 (Housing Development Opportunities), HSGS (Assessing Applications for Housing Development) and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) are relevant, together with other material considerations.

8.3 The application site is identified as a Housing Development Opportunity, in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008. Policy HSG2 applies and states that the Council will actively support and promote the release of sites identified in Schedule HSG2 for housing development. Taking into account that the proposed development is residential in nature, coupled with the predominantly surrounding residential land uses, it is considered that the proposed development is acceptable in principle, subject to its detailed assessment against policies HSGS and TR13.

8.4 Local Plan Policy HSGS details criteria against which new housing sites will be assessed. These include: impact on the existing built and natural environment; risk of flooding; design and layout; landscaping, open space and play areas and provision of roads, access and parking. On assessing the detailed proposals against the relevant policy and guidance, in overall terms it is considered that the proposed development will not adversely affect the character or the environment of the site. Environmental conditions and drainage/flooding issues are addressed in paragraph 8.7 below. Full details have been provided for the site and it is considered that the design and layout of the proposed development is acceptable and generally meets the Council’s Open Space Standards. The rear garden dimensions measure 9 metres from the rear wall

158 to the boundary wall/fence, rather than the I0 metres normally required, however given the width of the proposed rear gardens, the overall area achieved complies with Council standards. With the exception of the two blocks of cottage flats, the site is to be single storey and it is considered that there will be no issues of overlooking or adverse affects on privacy and amenity as the rear gardens face into the site, onto the communal parking area and onto the generous garden ground associated with the dwellings on Cambusnethan Street and Mossneuk Park. In the assessment of the two storey cottage flat blocks, there will be no adverse impacts with regards to over looking, amenity or overshadowing as the blocks align with the adjacent existing dwellings at right angles. Furthermore, the gable of the cottage flat block faces 19 Thrashbush Road and is situated 13 metres from the back wall to the gable wall. It is considered that sunlight will not be affected to the rear windows of this property, given that the roof is to be pitched and is further reduced in height over the access stairs to the first floor. Furthermore no habitable rooms are to be located on the gable of this block. In terms of communal space, it is proposed to have two communal areas of ground within the site that are to be maintained by the applicant on the south western and eastern corners of the site. The original stone wall is to be maintained on the northern and western perimeter of the site, however a section will be required to be removed to form the access to the site. In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed layout is acceptable and the design of the site results in a development that will integrate within the existing street pattern with no adverse affect on the privacy or amenity of adjacent dwellings. Transportation and landscaping issues are addressed in paragraphs 8.5 and 8.7 below.

8.5 Policy TR13 states that the Council will take account of criteria including: the impact of the development on road traffic circulationlroad safety and the provision made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. Transportation have raised no objections to the development, however concern has been raised about the proposed pedestrian access from Thrashbush Road and Cambusnethan Street to the dwellings fronting these roads. It is however, considered that traffic is unlikely to stop on Cambusnethan Street at this location due to distance from the road to the proposed dwellings across the grass verge and the proximity to the roundabout on Cambusnethan Street. In relation to dwellings fronting Thrashbush Road, it is also considered inappropriate to discourage pedestrian access from the fronts of dwellinghouses in this location as the development seeks to create a frontage to the public road. Adequate parking is provided within the parking courtyard to cater for the development which is considered to be a more attractive parking solution that on street parking in this locale. It is therefore considered that the proposals are acceptable in terms of the transportation requirements of policies HSG9 and TR13.

Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan

8.6 A material consideration is the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan, however, the zoning and policy position remains unaltered from the Adopted Plan.

Consultations

8.7 With regards to the remaining consultation responses, a site investigation will require to be submitted and it is proposed to attach a planning condition to cover this matter. Conditions are proposed to address the issue relating to the provision of landscaping. In response to the drainage issues raised by Geotechnical, it is considered appropriate that a condition be imposed requiring the submission of the finalised drainage proposals as the site falls outwith the SEPA Flood Maps areas of risk, given the previous use of the site and the minor nature of the further information required. In addition, it is proposed to condition that written confirmation from Scottish Water be received confirming that their requirements have been met, prior to the start of works on site.

159 Representations

8.8 In response to the objections received I would advise that: a&d. Finalised drainage details require to be submitted as detailed in paragraph 8.7 above, and for the avoidance of doubt the finalised details are considered appropriate to secure by means of planning conditions.

b. As detailed in paragraph 8.4 above, it is considered that there will be a minimal impact on adjacent dwellings in relation to overshadowing, privacy and amenity. Furthermore the 18 metre window to window distance has been maintained throughout the site. c. The distance of 13 metres from the wall of the objectors property and the gable wall of the proposed dwelling is acceptable and exceeds the Councils Space Around dwellings in this context. e. The pedestrian links to the front doors of the houses fronting Thrashbush Road and Cambusnethan Street has been assessed in paragraph 8.5 above. f. The proposed 1.8 metre high timber fence to be erected around the rear garden of no 19 Thrashbush Road is considered more in keeping with a residential area as opposed to the existing metal fence erected when the site was used as a school. All fences are required to be erected prior to the occupation of the last dwellinghouse and issues regarding maintenance would be a legal matter between the objector and the applicant.

9. Conclusions

9.1 In conclusion, having due regard to the provisions of the Development Plan, the application proposals are considered to be acceptable and to comply with Policies HSG2 and HSG9. Although not strictly in accordance with Policy TR13, it is considered that on balance the proposals meet the aims of Policy TR13. The requirements of consultees can be suitably met through the imposition of conditions and it is considered that the proposals will represent a good quality development which will acceptably relate to surrounding land uses. I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

160 Application No: Proposed Development:

S/09/01281/FUL Erection of a Detached Dwellinghouse Site Address:

East Fairybank Farm 9 Bothwellshields Road Newhouse

Date Registered:

9th November 2009

Applicant: Agent: Mr & Mrs William Dunbar Stanley C Cook M.R.T.P.1 9 Fairybank Farm I2 Beveridge Terrace Bothwellshields Road Mossend Newhouse Bellshill Motherwell ML4 2RJ MLI 5UB

Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application No

Ward: Representations: 012 Fortissat No letter of representation received. Charles Cefferty, Malcolm McMillan, James Robertson.

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

The proposed application meets the criteria set out in the relevant policies contained within the adopted Monklands District Local Plan and of the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The proposed development can be accommodated within the Green Belt without detriment to the surrounding rural area.

Legal Agreement A legal agreement is required between the applicant and North Lanarkshire Council restricting the occupancy of the dwelling to that of a full time worker associated with the horse breeding business.

161

Proposed Conditions:-

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

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

2. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers;- 951/01A; 951/02A; and 951/03A

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

3. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

4. That the occupation of the dwellinghouse hereby permitted shall be limited to a person employed full time in horse breeding within the holding at Branchalburn Farm, 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 policy ENV 6 Green Belt Policy.

5. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing materials to be used on all external walls, dormer faces, sides and roofs shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved under the terms of this condition. Notwithstanding this requirement the facing materials shall include a stone or synthetic stone base, neutral coloured render with smooth banding or stonework around windowldoor openings and dark grey slate or slate effect roof.

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

6. 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. Thereafter any walls or fences erected shall be implemented as per the approved details.

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

7. That PRIOR to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice, such as BS 10175: The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites, or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required as part of the above report.

Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity of future residents.

8. That prior to the first occupation of the dwellinghouse hereby approved, any remediation works identified by the site investigation report required in terms of Condition 7 above shall be completed and a certificate (signed by a Chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the

163 Remediation Strategy.

Reason: To ensure the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity of future residents.

9. That PRIOR to the commencement of development, the applicant shall provide written confirmation to the Planning Authority that all the requirements of Scottish Water can be fully met to demonstrate that the development will not have an impact on their assets, and that suitable infrastructure can be put in place to support the development.

Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory drainage arrangements.

10. That BEFORE to any works start on site, the applicant must confirm in writing to the Planning Authority that the drainage arrangements to be provided are to the satisfaction of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA). The preferred method for the disposal of septic tank effluent is the provision of a sub soil soakaway system. The septic tank and soakaway must be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements set out in The Scottish Building Standards : Technical Handbook : Domestic issued in May 2009.

Reason: To prevent groundwater or surface water contamination in the interests of environmental and amenity protection.

11. That before the dwellinghouse hereby approved is occupied the associated parking and manoeuvring area as shown on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained, surfaced in a material which the Planning Authority has approved in writing before the start of surfacing work and clearly marked out, and shall, thereafter, be maintained as parking and manoeuvring areas.

Reason: In order that vehicles can enter and leave the site in forward gear and to ensure adequate parking provision.

12. That within 4 weeks of the development hereby permitted being occupied a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

13. Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved the temporary accommodation approved under application S/07/01235/FUL shall be removed within 3 months of the occupation of the new permanent dwellinghouse unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority .

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

164 Backaround Papers:

Memo from Pollution Control received 5'h February 2010 E-mail from Finance received 1 lthJanuary 2010

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Edward McLennaghan at 01698 2741 13

Report Date:

26th January 2010

165 APPLICATION NO. S/09/01281/FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.1 The application site extends to 7.28 Hectares (18 Acres) is set in a rural location to the east of Chapelhall and north of the M8 Glasgow to Edinburgh Motorway. The site is accessed off Bothwellshields Road and is bounded by open fields on all sides with the nearest residential property being “Bothwellshields Cottage” which is located to the east of the application site.

2. Proposed DeveloDment

2.1 The application seeks planning permission for the erection of a permanent detached dwellinghouse. The proposed dwelling would be 8.3m high and have a floor space of approximately 340m2 and include an attached double garage. The dwelling would incorporate stone quoins, neutral coloured render and dark grey slate or slate effect roof tiles and be sited adjacent to the existing temporary residential accommodation which shall be removed from site within 3 months of occupation of the dwelling.

3. Applicant’s Supportincr Information

3.1 The applicant has submitted a statement of the accounts for the period 30th June 2008 - 30th August 2009, a Business Statement with Cash Flow and Account Projections for the 3 years to 2012 to demonstrate that the business is viable and sustainable.

3.2 A Labour Requirement report by the Scottish Agricultural College was also submitted and this concluded that the business involved the management and care of breeding Clydesdale Horses which requires regular supervision. Based on the “Standard Labour Requirement Data” the calculated labour requirement is 1.4 labour units based on one person engaged full time in horse breeding and associated activity at East Fairybank Farm.

3.3 The applicant has submitted an updated protected species survey which has indicated no change as per the previous report as there are no protected species located on site.

4. Site History

4.1 Previous relevant planning application relating to this site is as follows:-

S/07/01235/FUL - The Erection of a Stable Block, Siting of a Temporary Mobile Home and Construction of Associated Access - Granted 16thApril 2008.

5. Development Plan

5.1 The development part of the application site is zoned as GBI (Restrict Development in Green Belt (Inner)) in the Monklands District Adopted Local Plan (1991).

166 6. Consultations

6.1 A summary of comments from the consultees are as follows:

1. Transportation were consulted on this application however no response has been received. It is anticipated that their recommendation would not alter from that of the previous application and be one of refusal due to the location of the access on a derestricted road which may result in an increased level of traffic to the detriment to road safety. II. The Council’s Finance Section confirmed that they could not comment on the reasonableness of the figures in the accounts submitted or the viability of the proposed business for the proposed development. However, they did confirm that the accounts appear to be accurately prepared. iii. Protective Services have no objection to the proposed development subject to the requirement for a Site Investigation Report to ensure the site is free of any contaminants. iv. Scottish Water in they’re previous consultation confirmed they had no objections to the application, however they confirmed that this does not guarantee a connection to their infrastructure. They also advised that there are water pressure issues in the vicinity. Also the developer must ensure that this development will not have any detrimental impact on water services and the developer will be required, as part of any network upgrading work, to provide a solution to prevent further impact.

7. Representations

7.1 Following the standard neighbour notification process and newspaper advertisement no letters of representation have been received. a. Plannina Assessment

8.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The application raises no strategic issues; and should therefore be considered against the relevant planning policies of the Local Plan in terms of compliance with Green Belt policy.

Ador>ted Local Plan:

8.2 The application site is located within the designated Green Belt in terms of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 where, under Policy GB1, there is a presumption against any development not directly associated with Green Belt uses. The policy does allow for new housing for full time workers in connection with forestry or agriculture.

8.3 By decision notice dated 16‘h April 2008 planning permission S/07/01235/FUL was granted, on this same site for the erection of a “temporary mobile home” in association with a small holding” at East Fairybank. That proposal included the erection of a temporary dwelling as part of a new Clydesdale Horse breeding business primarily for security and full time supervision of the animals. The residential element of that proposed development was supported by the Scottish Agricultural College and the applicant agreed to a condition tying the proposed temporary dwelling to the new commercial enterprise (horse breading). Planning permission was subsequently issued with a condition on the consent notice (no.3) limiting the presence on site of the temporary residential accommodation for 3 years.

8.4 The current application is for the erection of a permanent dwellinghouse for use by one worker in association with the horse breeding business primarily in line with the previous planning permission. The applicant has confirmed that the horse breeding

167 business is in operation as per the previous details submitted from the Scottish Agricultural College. As before the labour requirement of 1.4 units, justify a full time horse breeding workerlpresence on site. A financial statement sukmitted by the apllicant has indicated account details for the operating period of 30 June 2008 to 30 August 2009 and projections for the continued viability of the business for the 3 year period until 2012. The applicant is agreeable to restricting the new dwellinghouse to a person employed in the East Fairybank holding in a similar fashion to the requirement of the outline planning permission. The proposed development is therefore considered to accord with policy GB 1.

8.5 In terms of design, site layout and external treatment the proposed new permanent dwelling is considered acceptable. The proposed siting of the dwellinghouse is in line with the location identified in the original outline consent and the proposed dwelling will utilise the existing access which currently services the horse breeding business and temporary accommodation. The dwellinghouse requires to be tied directly to the horse breeding operations at East Fairybank, this can be achieved through a Section 75 Agreement. It is therefore considered that the proposed development accords with local plan policy.

Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan:

8.6 A material consideration is the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan, however, the zoning and policy position remains unaltered from the Adopted Plan.

Consultations:

8.7 With regard to the consultation responses from Transportation and Protective Services all issues can be addressed by the imposition of appropriate conditions.

9. Conclusions

9.1 The proposed application is considered acceptable in terms of the development plan and meets the criteria set out in the relevant policies contained within the adopted Monklands District Local Plan and the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The design and location of the proposed development is such that it does not adversely alter the character or function of the Green Belt. Having regard to the foregoing I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to the stated conditions and a Section 75 Agreement.

168 Application No: Proposed Development:

S1091012871FUL Change of Use from Existing Vacant Retail Premises to Hot Food Takeaway Site Address:

Unit 2 lnnerleithen Drive Coltness Wishaw ML2 8SA

Date Registered:

27th November 2009

Applicant: Agent: Mr Mohammed Hamidsha Richard Moss 2 lnnerleithen Drive 6 Dome Park Way Coltness Coatbridge Wishaw ML5 4EQ ML2 8SA

Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application No

Ward: Representations: 019 Murdostoun 2 letters of representation received. Robert McKendrick, James Martin, Nicky Shevlin, John Taggart,

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

The proposed application is considered acceptable in terms of the criteria set out in the relevant policies contained within the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 and the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The proposed development is unlikely to significantly adversely affect the surrounding residential area.

169 Produced by brth Lanarkshire Counal 6,vimnmental Seruices

II01608 274274 - fax 01688 403053 Proposed Conditions:.

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

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

2. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing;- Location Plan.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

3. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

4. The design, installation and operation of any air condition / ventilation or other plant for the proposed development and any other noise associated with the completed development shall be such as will not give rise to a noise level assessed with the windows open, within any dwelling or noise sensitive building in excess of the equivalent to Noise Rating Curve (NRC) 35 between 07.00 hours and 20.00 hours and NRC 25 at all other times.

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

5. That prior to the commencement of operations on site, the applicant must provide further details of the proposed external extraction flue, including details of the colour and finish, and these must be approved in writing by the Planning Authority before the flue is installed.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity

6. That the extractor flue as approved under condition 5 above shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to the opening of the takeaway.

Reason: To ensure that the premises are provided with an adequate ventilation/extraction system, as required in the interests of residential amenity

7. That within 4 weeks of the development hereby permitted being occupied or brought into use a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority

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

171 Backnround PaDers:

Representation Letters

Letter from Mr Patrick Loughrin, 25 Larchfield Crescent, Wishaw ML2 8TY, ML2 8TY received 12th January 2010. Letter from Coltness Community Council, Carrick Hall, Carrick Crescent, ML2 7JP

Consultation Responses:

Memo from Transportation received 31st December 2009. Memo from Protective Services received 12'h January 2009.

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Edward McLennaghan at 01698 2741 13

Report Date:

9th February 2010

I72 APPLICATION NO. S1091012871FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.1 The application site is a vacant shop unit located at unit 2 lnnerleithen Drive, Coltness, Wlshaw. The unit is located within a row of 6 commercial premises of which only two appear to be currently in operation as a shop and a hot food takeaway. The block of units is bounded by residential dwellings to the north and west, open space to the south and a parking area to the east.

2. Proposed Development

2.1 The application seeks planning permission for the change of use of an existing vacant shop unit to a hot food takeaway.

3. Development Plan

3.1 The site is covered by Policy HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.

4. Consultations

The following consultees have no objections to the proposed development:

Transportation

4.2 A summary of comments from the remaining consultees are as follows:

i. Protective Services have no objections to the proposed development subject to cooking odours from the premises being controlled, and noise levels associated with any plant or ventilation from the completed development being within recommended guidelines.

5. Representations

5.1 Following the standard neighbour notification process and newspaper advertisement 2 letters of representation have been received, one letter from a local resident and another from Coltness Community Council. The main points of which are as follows:

i. Concerns regarding the proximity of the extraction flue which would only be 5 to 6 metres from the objectors property and the subsequent odours emanating from the flue which would have a detrimental affect on residential amenity.

ii. Concerns regarding anti social behaviour of youths in the area who loiter at the existing hot food takeaway premises and concern that an additional hot food take- away will lead to further problems.

iii. Concern regarding the need for an additional hot food takeaway as there is one already and the belief that the unit would better serve the community for a purpose on a daily basis rather than a nightly one.

173 6. Planninn Assessment

6.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The application raises no strategic issues; it can be assessed in terms of the local plan policy. The site is zoned as Policy HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008. Policies RTLI 1 (Bad Neighbour Developments), RTL I (Retail Development) and TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) are relevant to this proposal.

Adopted Local Plan:

6.2 Policy HSG 7 indicates that the Council will seek to protect the established character of existing and new housing areas by opposing development which is incompatible with residential setting or adversely affects amenity. Policy RTL 1 seeks to direct retail uses to the town centre, village, neighbourhood and secondary commercial areas where the use is considered compatible and would not adversely affect the existing shopping area. Although not zoned as Policy RTL 6 (Secondary, Village and Neighbourhood Areas), the existing commercial nature of the small row of units is relevant to this proposal. The established uses of the units within the block include a hot food takeaway. Given that there is an existing hot food takeaway within the block it is considered that the principle of this proposal for a second such unit is acceptable. The site is relatively isolated between an area of open space to the south and a parking area to both the front and rear with the nearest residential dwelling to the north located approximately 18m away from the unit. The car park to the east and west of the site, the open nature of the frontage and the existing units either side acts as a cushion and contains the unit limiting its impact on the amenity of the area. Therefore the proposed development is considered to be supportable in terms of policies HSG 7, RTL 1, and RTL 6.

6.3 Policy RTLll “Bad Neighbour Developments” also seeks to locate such developments within Town Centres andlor Secondary Village or Neighbourhood Commercial Areas. Proposals are assessed on their potential impact on the character of the surrounding environment. In relation to Policy RTLI 1, while the site is not within a town centre or ‘defined’ shopping area, it is considered that relevant material considerations include the existence of a hot food takeaway at this location. As indicated above, the location of the hot food takeaway is considered to be acceptable and is not located immediately adjacent to residential properties but amongst a row of commercial premises. As indicated in 6.2 above the nearest residential dwellinghouses are located approximately 18 metres away, albeit that these are on the other side of the existing retail unit in operation. At this distance, I consider that there would be no unreasonable increase in fumes, noise or general disturbance from the proposed hot food takeaway on the residential character and amenity of the area over and above what presently exists. A planning condition is recommended in relation to air conditioning/ventilation plant and the proposed extraction methods to ensure that there are no adverse impacts on the neighbouring properties. I consider that the proposal complies with the spirit and intentions of Policy RTLI 1.

6.4 Policy TR13 Assessing the Transport Implications of Development indicates that the Council will consider various transportation criteria through the assessment of planning applications. This includes the level of traffic generated and its impact on the environment, the impact of the proposal on road traffic circulation and road safety, provisions made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. Transportation raised no objections to this proposal as adequate off street parking exists in the parking area to the front of the premises and thus the proposals would not cause congestion problems at this location. It is therefore considered that the proposal complies with Policy TR13.

I74 Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan:

6.5 A material consideration in the assessment of the application is the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan (FDNLLP). Policy HCFIA states that there will be a presumption against developments detrimental to the residential amenity of primarily residential areas. As detailed in paragraph 8.2 to 8.4, the proposed development is considered acceptable and will not have a significant detrimental impact on the amenity of the surrounding area. The proposals are therefore considered to accord with policy HCFIA.

Consultations:

6.6 With regard to the consultation responses from Transportation and Protective Services all issues can be addressed by the imposition of appropriate conditions.

Rewesentations:

6.7 In terms of points of objection, I would comment as follows:-

i. The location of the flue is considered to be of sufficient distance away from the nearest residential property that it will have a minimal impact on residential amenity. A condition requiring details of the extraction flue and means for addressing odours emanating from the premises are considered to further address these matters. Furthermore any issue regarding odours emanating from the premises are not subject to assessment by the Planning Authority and would be dealt with through Environmental Health Legislation.

ii. Anti social behaviour associated with the patrons of the premises is a matter for the local police. Increased noise and disturbance is unlikely to be significant as a result of an added hot food takeaway within the block.

iii. The need for the use or the possibility of an alternative use is not a material to the consideration of this application.

7. Conclusions

7.1 In conclusion, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of policies HSG 7, RTL 1, RTL 11, and TR 13 given the setting of the application within a commercial block already containing such a use. It is considered that the proposed hot food takeaway can be accommodated without significant detriment to the surrounding residential area. The proposal is in accordance with Local Plan Policy and in view of local plan policy and all other material considerations, it is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

175 Application No: Proposed Development:

S/O9/0I 38 1IF U L Formation of Two Residential Plots

Site Address:

Greenhill Farm Greenhill Road Hareshaw Motherwell MLI 5NF

Date Registered:

9th December 2009

Applicant: Agent: Greenhill Country Estates D Stewart Toy Ms Marjory Donald 29 High Street Plot 415 Lanark Greenhill Road MLll 7LU Hareshaw MLI 5NF

Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application Yes

Ward: Representations: 012 Fortissat No letter of representation received. Charles Cefferty, Malcolm McMillan, James Robertson.

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

Whilst not in accordance with the Southern Area Local Plan 2008, the principle of the proposed development accords with Policies DSPI, DSP2, DSP4, HCFI and HCF2 of the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan as the application site has been fully publicised and no objections have been received in relation to the housing zoning of this area and considerable material weight can therefore be associated with the finalised draft Local Plan. In terms of the acceptability of the design, scale and layout, these matters can be sufficiently dealt with through the imposition of suitable planning conditions. Furthermore it is considered that there would be no significant adverse impact upon the character and amenity of the surrounding area.

176 \

,--'...! i2 '.--..I \ PLANNING APPLICATION No. 09/01381/FUL m8r mp isriinCu~ldrlim ad"8"CP SUWmnai "Mhir P""""l adnanci 5uw01 1ekU **e CCnmller (If Her Mwwr SacouwCmro Oh Formation of Two Residential Plots LIP~Q~~UnaMlonsrd RPrnl"ll0" llnnpDI mn mm~htndrra,lrmdtr pmswoonNomLamm"nCsun0l I,CMI prmredmgr Greenhill Farm, Greenhill Road, Hareshaw, 1000B388 1008 Motherwell

177 Proposed Conditions:-

1. That before development starts, a further planning application shall be submitted to the Planning Authority in respect of the following matters for the relevant plots(s):- (a) the siting, design, external appearance and configuration of the dwellinghouses; (b) the means of access to each plot; (b) the design and location of all boundary walls, retaining walls and fences; (c) details of existing and proposed plot site levels; (d) the provision of drainage works.

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

2. That the development hereby permitted shall be started, either within 3 years of the date of this permission, or within 2 years of the date of which the last of the matters specified in condition 1 above are approved, whichever is the later.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

3. That the total number of dwellinghouses within the site shall be not more than 2.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control, in order to protect the amenity and character of the area..

4. That prior to the submission of the matters specified in condition (1) a development brief shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The development brief shall cover the following matters:-

(a) Plot layout, dwellinghouse design, external materials, boundary treatments, parking provision, driveway specifications and communal matters; (b) In particular the development brief shall specify that front gardens shall be a minimum depth of 8 metres following the building line established by the line coloured BROWN on the approved plans, rear gardens shall be a minimum depth of 15 metres, there shall be a minimum width of 2.5 metres from gable walls to the boundaries (including integral garages); (c) The dwellinghouses shall not exceed one storey in height (but may include attic accommodation) and the dwellinghouses shall all have traditional double pitched roofs, the roof line shall for the majority of its length be parallel with the adjacent road; (d) Roof tiles shall be flat profiled, grey or black in colour, the use of facing brick shall be restricted to the base course and decorative features only, and external walls shall be finished in a white or off white render. (e) In curtilage parking shall be provided at the rate of 2 spaces for 2 bedroom dwellinghouses, 3 spaces for 3 and 4 bedroom dwellinghouses and 4 spaces for 5 bedroom dwellinghouses. (9 Turning facilities are to be provided within the curtilage of each plot; and (9) That all driveways shall meet the road at right angles.

Dwellinghouses on the application site shall comply with the terms of the approved development brief.

Reason: To define the permission and to ensure that dwellinghouses are appropriate for the plots and for the general area.

5. That notwithstanding condition (1) above, no walls or fences shall be erected along the front boundary of the any plot without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the existing trees are not damaged in any way.

178 6. That notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992 any walls or fences which shall be erected beyond the rear of the dwellinghouses, hereby approved in principle, shall not exceed 1.O metre in height without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the development is sympathetic to its rural setting, in the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

7. That notwithstanding the requirements of condition (4) above, 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 aspects in detail.

8. That within six months of the occupation of each dwellinghouse, a hawthorn hedge shall be planted along the rear boundary line of the plot upon which the house is erected and thereafter retained to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the development is sympathetic to its rural setting, in the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

9. That none of the trees, partly or wholly within the area marked GREEN on the approved plan, shall be lopped, topped, felled, or otherwise affected, without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area.

10. That no excavations or trenches, for the laying of services or for any other purpose, shall be dug within the area of ground which lies below the canopy of any of the trees which are, partly or wholly, within the area marked GREEN on the approved plans.

Reason: To ensure that there is no damage to the existing trees.

11. That no works of any kind including tree works shall commence on site until a further Bat Survey and Breeding Bird Survey, is submitted and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. As a result of the above studies, should any remediation measures be required for the protection or relocation of any protected species, this shall be implemented in accordance with a timetable agreed in writing with the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage before works commence on the site.

Reason: In the interests of local nature conservation and compliance with European legislation.

12. That before any of the dwelling houses hereby permitted are occupied everything exceeding 1.05 metres in height above road channel level, excluding the trees to be retained, shall be removed from the sight line areas approved and, thereafter, nothing exceeding 1.05 metres in height above road channel level shall be planted, placed, erected, or allowed to grow, within these sight line areas.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

13. That before each house is occupied, the associated driveway shall be completed and the first 2 metres of this access, beyond the limit of the adjoining road, shall be surfaced in an impervious material.

Reason: To prevent deleterious material from being carried onto the public road, in the interests of traffic safety.

14. That before any application is made for individual dwellinghouses in accordance with

I79 condition (1) above or before any development commences on the site, whichever is the earlier, 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 proposes 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.

15. That on completion of any remedial works identified by the site investigation required under the terms of Condition (14) and before any dwellinghouse within the site is occupied, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any such remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the submitted details.

Reason: To ensure the site is free of contamination.

16. That before any application is made for individual dwellinghouses in accordance with condition (1) above or before any development commences on the site, whichever is the earlier, full details of the location and design of the surface water drainage scheme to be installed within the application site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and for the avoidance of doubt the scheme requires to comply with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems and with any requirements of Scottish Water. The scheme shall be designed to ensure the post development run off equates to no more than current greenfield rates. Thereafter, before any of the dwellings are occupied, written confirmation, from a chartered qualified engineer, shall be submitted to the Planning Authority, confirming that the drainage system has been installed in accordance with the approved scheme. Any change to the site layout as a result of this scheme will require an amended planning application.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area, to prevent groundwater pollution and to ensure that the proposed drainage system complies with the latest SEPA guidance and Scottish Water requirements.

17. That before any application is made for individual dwellinghouses in accordance with condition (1) above or before any development commences on the site, whichever is the earlier, the applicant shall provide written confirmation to the Planning Authority that a) all the requirements of Scottish Water have been fully met to demonstrate that the development will not have an impact on their assets, and that suitable infrastructure can be put in place to support the development and b) that the drainage proposals are acceptable to the Scottish Environment Protection Agency.

Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory drainage arrangements.

18. That before the development hereby permitted starts, tree protection measures in accordance with BS 5837 shall be erected along the drip line of the trees on the western and southern boundaries of the site, and shall not be removed without the approval in writing of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To maintain the contribution of existing trees to the landscape quality of the area and to ensure that the trees on the southern, western and northern boundaries are protected during the construction works.

19. That prior to the submission of any of the matters specified by conditions application(s) a scheme of detailed tree surgery works including the proposed timetable for the works, shall be submitted to, and approved by the Planning Authority and shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority, prior to the occupation of any the dwellinghouses. For the avoidance of doubt the detailed tree surgery works must relate

180 to those trees which are partly or wholly within the area marked GREEN on the approved plans.

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area and in the interests of public safety.

20. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

21. That within 4 weeks of the last house within the development becoming occupied, a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To monitor the development, to enable the Planning Authority to retain effective contro I.

22. That except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the stamped approved drawings.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

181 Background PaDers:

Consultation Responses:

Memo from Transportation received 22ndOctober 2009 Memo from Conservation and Greening received 22"d December 2009 and 20thJanuary 2010 Memo from Protective Services received 30th December 2009 Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 14th December 2009.

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Fraser Miller at 01698 2741 19

Report Date:

gthFebruary 201 0

182 APPLICATION NO. S/09/01381/FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.1 The application site is a vacant area of land, south east of 27 Greenhill Road, Hareshaw. The site is bound by an access track to Greenhill Farm to the north west with dwellings beyond, Greenhill farm to the north east and by open agricultural land to the south and south east. The site gently slopes down from north east to the south west. Contour levels have been submitted with the application, however there is a slight error with the contours, as they had been prepared prior to first plot being reduced in height in 2005/6. The majority of the dwellings within the local vicinity are single storey with attic accommodation, no higher than 7.5 metres in height. A number of mature trees are located on the southern boundary of the site.

2. Proposed Development

2.1 Detailed planning permission is sought for the formation of two housing plots on the site. The plots are to be linear in nature, fronting onto Greenhill Road. In addition to the plot boundaries, the applicant has submitted existing and proposed site levels and a contoured plan of the site, showing current site levels.

3. Applicant’s Supportinn Information

3.1 A Protected Species survey carried out by Wild Surveys Ltd has been submitted in support of the application. The survey of the trees for the presence of bats confirms that there is no evidence of bats and that the trees are not a favoured location by bats.

4. Site Histow

0 05/01 16810UT Construction of Four Dwellinghouses on land south west of Greenhill Farm refused 14‘h September 2005. 0 07/00771/0UT Co7:truction of 4 Dwellinghouses on land south west of Greenhill Farm withdrawn 19 July 2007. 0 08/00201/OUT Construction of Dwellinghouse (In Outline) on land south west of Greenhill Farm refused 1st May 2008. 0 08/00788/OUT Erection of Four Dwellinghouse on land south west of Greenhill Farm withdrawn 2gthJuly 2009.

5. DeveloDment Plan

5.1 The site is identified as land forming part of the ‘Green Belt’ in the Southern Area Plan to which policy ENV6 applies.

6. Consultations

6.1 A summary of comments from consultees are as follows:

i. Transportation have no objections subject to conditions relating to access, visibility and the provision of adequate parking and turning facilities and a 2 metre wide footway along the site frontage. ii. SEPA have advised that the nature of the application is such that conditions can be utilised to ensure that site drainage is treated in accords with CIRIA’s C697 manual on SUDS and that foul drainage be dealt with accordingly. iii. Protective services have requested that a Site Investigation Report be submitted prior to the start of works on site.

183 iv. Conservation and Greening have requested that a breeding bird and bat survey be carried out prior to works starting on any of the trees. In addition they have requested that Surface Water be treated by means of a Sustainable Urban Drainage Scheme. v. Scottish Water have not responded to the consultation request.

7. Representations

7.1 No letters of representation were received following the neighbour notification and press advertisement procedures.

8. Plannina Assessment

8.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The application is not of strategic significance and therefore only requires to be assessed against the relevant Local Plan for this area.

Adouted Local Plan

8.2 The site is zoned Green Belt in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 to which Policy ENVG applies. Policy ENVG presumes against any development that will affect the character and function of the Green Belt, other than that directly associated with an appropriate rural use. The application is therefore contrary to Policy ENVG of the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 as no acceptable rural justification has been provided.

Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan

8.3 The Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan (FDNLLP) is a material consideration in the assessment of this application and zones the area as HCFIA Protecting Residential Areas and Community Facilities. It should also be noted that this site is proposed to be released from the green belt as part of the green belt review undertaken as part of the FDNLLP. No adverse comments were received during the Finalised Draft Local Plan Stage and therefore significant weight can be attached to the allocation of the site within the village envelope. Policy HCFIA, states that there is a presumption against developments detrimental to residential amenity in primarily residential areas. Residential dwellings adjoin the site to the north west and in assessing the application, it is considered that a residential development on the site, would not adversely affect the amenity enjoyed by the existing adjacent dwellings.

8.4 Policy DSP 1 Amount of Development is relevant to this proposals with specific reference to Criteria B Potential Additions to Planned Land Supplies. Additions to housing land supplies greater than 10 dwellings on Greenfield sites are required to be justified by demand assessments. In this instance the proposed number of dwellings is lower than the threshold and as such the proposals are considered to comply with Policy DSP 1. Policy DSP 2 Location of Development is relevant to this proposal with specific reference to Criteria B: Potential additions to planned land supplies. Applications for planning permission for new development require to satisfy the Plan’s locational criteria. As outlined above the site is zoned as HCF 1. Policy HCFIA is applicable and the principle of the development is acceptable subject to its detailed assessment and therefore complies with Policy DSP 2.

8.5 Policy DSP 4 Quality of Development states that development will be permitted where sustainable design standards and site planning are achieved. In particular, proposals will need to demonstrate that: an appraisal has been carried out on the existing character and features of the site and a high quality development is achieved with design principles which lead to the creation of a distinct, successful places

184 addressing siting, overall layout, density, form, scale, height, massing, proportion, detailing, materials and open space issues. Developments are also required to integrate successfully into the local area avoiding harm to the neighbouring amenity, avoiding adverse impact on adjacent properties through over looking, loss of privacy or amenity, overshadowing, noise or disturbance. The provision of roads, access and parking also requires to be assessed by Policy DSP4. The development is linear in nature, fronting onto Greenhill Road and is bound by dwellings to the north west. It is considered appropriate to utilise planning conditions to set the building line for the plotted dwellings so that the building line would project no further than the dwellings on the northern side of Greenhill Road. The sectional plan submitted gives an indication as to the proposed ground levels of the site, relative to the road, the details submitted demonstrate that there is the ability to integrate the dwellings within the landscape. No details have been submitted in relation to building heights, however it is considered appropriate in this instance, given the rural location of the site, to restrict building heights, materials and window detailing through the imposition of suitable planning conditions, as per previous consents for the village. The applicant seeks to maintain the trees fronting the site, and it is considered appropriate to secure the future of the trees through the imposition of planning conditions. It is considered that a residential development would be in keeping with the development pattern of Hareshaw and the character of this area of Greenhill Road. Following assessment of the plot dimensions, each plot is shown to substantially exceed the Council’s minimum open space standards around dwellings in relation to useable garden ground. In order to bring all matters together and prior to the submission of the matters specified by conditions application(s), it is proposed to secure the submission of a design brief for the plotted site, to ensure that the Council’s guidelines and design requirements are satisfactorily addressed. In the assessment of the transportation implications of the development, individual accesses from Greenhill Road are proposed for each plot. Transportation have raised no objections subject to conditions relating to the provision of a footway along the site frontage, visibility splays, driveway gradients and on site parking. I am satisfied that the required standards can be achieved and compliance with these requirements will be met through the imposition of suitable planning conditions. Furthermore these issues will be considered in more detail with the required matters specified by conditions application(s). It is therefore considered that the proposals are acceptable in terms of the transportation requirements of policy DSP 4.

Consultations

8.6 In response to the comments received from SEPA foul drainage is to be connected to the public sewer and surface water is proposed to be treated in accordance with SUDS. In accordance with SEPA guidelines, it is considered appropriate to secure the submission of finalised details through planning conditions. In addition, it is proposed to attach the standard planning conditions relating to the submission of full details of Scottish Water‘s approval of the proposed drainage connections.

8.7 In response to the comments received by Protective Services, a planning condition is proposed requiring the submission of a site investigation report.

8.8 In response to the comments received by Greenspace Services, a condition is proposed requiring further Breeding Bird and Bat Survey prior to any tree works being commenced on site.

9. Conclusions

In conclusion, this planning application for two detailed house plot has to be assessed against the relevant policies of the Development Plan unless there are material considerations which indicate otherwise. In this instance, justification exists for departing from the approved zoning of the site as Green Belt within the Southern Area Local Plan (2008). The proposed development will contribute to the rounding off the settlement boundary of Hareshaw, as identified in the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan, which has been

185 publicised and no representations have been received. Following detailed assessment of the application, it is considered that the proposed development is acceptable when considered against the relevant policies of the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. In terms of the proposed layout and detailed design elements, the proposed conditions can direct the development in a satisfactory manner. It is therefore recommend that the application be granted subject to conditions.

186 Application No: Proposed Development:

S1091014221FUL Erection of Dwellinghouse and Alterations to No 18 Hirst Road to Form Two Dwellinghouses

Site Address:

18 Hirst Road Harthill ML7 5TL

Date Registered:

12th January 2010

Applicant: Agent: James Muirhead Mr W H Dickie 40 Balbardie Avenue 77 Hamilton Road Bathgate Motherwell EH48 4AL MLI 3DG

Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application No

Ward: Representations: 012 Fortissat No letters of representation received. Charles Cefferty, Malcolm McMillan, James Robertson,

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

The proposed development meets the criteria set out in the relevant policies of the Southern Area Local Plan and the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The proposal can be accommodated without detriment to the surrounding area.

187 188 Proposed Conditions:-

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

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

2. That except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the stamped approved drawings.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

3. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing materials to be used on all external walls and roofs shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved under the terms of this condition. For the avoidance of doubt roof tiles shall be flat profiled, grey in colour; the use of facing brick shall be restricted to the base course and decorative features only; and external walls shall be finished in white or off white render and the external walls and roof of the dormers shall be finished in tiles to match the roof of the existing dwellinghouses.

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

4. That before any house hereby permitted is occupied the associated parking and turning 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. For the avoidance of the front boundary wall of the existing house fronting onto Hirst Road shall be reduced by 2.5 metres at both ends to form the turning areas to the dwellings, prior to the occupation of the dwellings.

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

5. That a visibility splay of 2.5 metres by 215 metres, measured from the road channel, shall be provided on both sides of the vehicular accesses onto Hirst Road and before either house hereby permitted is occupied, everything exceeding 1.05 metres in height above the road channel level shall be removed from the sight line areas and, thereafter, nothing exceeding 1.05 metres in height above road channel level shall be planted, placed, erected, or allowed to grow, within these sight line areas.

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

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

Reason: To ensure that boundary features are of acceptable quality.

7. That before each house hereby approved is occupied, the fences, or walls, as approved under the terms of condition 6 above, shall be erected.

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

8. That BEFORE to any works start on site, the applicant must confirm in writing to the Planning Authority that the drainage arrangements to be provided are to the satisfaction of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA). For the avoidance of doubt a sub soil soakaway system will not be able to be utilised given the on site constraints and a Biodisc arrangement should be investigated.

189 Reason: To prevent groundwater or surface water contamination in the interests of environmental and amenity protection.

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

Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory site drainage arrangements.

10. That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175 : 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required.

Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

11. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 10 above shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a Chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the approved Remediation Strategy.

Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

12. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

13. That within 4 weeks of the last house within the development becoming occupied, a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

190 Background PaDers:

Consultation Responses:

Memo from Transportation received 21" January 2010. Memo from Protective Services received 26thJanuary 2010.

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Fraser Miller at 01698 2741 19

Report Date:

gth February 2010

191 APPLICATION NO. S1091014221FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.I The site is a detached dwelling and garden ground which is located between Hirst Road and Lynallan Road. The dwelling fronts onto Hirst Road and is in a semi rural setting with residential properties either side, the M8 Motorway to the north, and Tams Loup Quarry to the south. The property has a rear garden measuring approximately 30m by 21m (630 square metres in area) and appears to be poorly maintained.

2. Proposed Development

2.1 The application proposes the subdivision of the existing dwelling into two separate dwellings in addition to a single storey rear extension and for the formation of front and rear dormer windows. It is proposed to demolish the existing single storey extension and replace it with an extension projecting 2.5 metres from the rear wall running the width of the building. Two dormer windows are proposed on the front of the building and an additional two are proposed on the rear. The application also proposes the erection of a single storey dwellinghouse with roof accommodation in the substantially sized rear garden area, 8 metres in height with a floorspace of 100 square metres. The proposed new dwelling would be accessed off Lynallan Road and is of a fairly traditional design.

3. Applicant's Supportinn Information

3.1 No additional information has been submitted by the applicant in support of the application.

4. Site History

0 07/01517/FUL - Conversion of existing building into 3 separate dwellings, loft conversion and 2 storey rear extension withdrawn 3'' July 2008. e 08/00927/FUL - Subdivision and extension of dwellinghouse into three dwellings and erection of detached dwellinghouse refused 14'h August 2008.

5. Development Plan

5.1 The site is identified as land forming part of the Rural Investment Area (ENV8) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.

6. Consultations

6.1 A summary of comments from the consultees are as follows:

i. Transportation have recommended that the application be refused as the properties accessing onto Hirst Road have no facilities for a turning area to ensure that vehicles enter and exit in a forward gear, which would result in vehicles reversing onto this derestricted road to the detriment of road safety. ii. Protective Services has no objections to the proposed development subject to the submission of a Site Investigation for the site to ensure the site is free of any contaminants. iii. SEPA have not responded to the consultation request, however SEPAs standard advice is that the nature of the application is such that conditions can be utilised to ensure that site drainage is treated in accordance with CIRIAs C697 manual on SUDS and that foul drainage be dealt with accordingly. iv. Scottish Water have not responded to the consultation request.

192 7. Representations

7.1 No letters of representation received.

8. Plannina Assessment

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

AdoDted Local Plan:

8.2 It should be noted that the application raises no strategic issues. The application must therefore be assessed against the relevant development plan policies, which are the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 Policies ENV8 (Rural Investment Areas), HSGIO (Infill Housing Development) and TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development), together with other material considerations.

8.3 Policy ENV8 presumes against any development that will affect the character and function of the Rural Investment Area, other than that directly associated with an appropriate rural use. Although the site has a Rural Investment Area designation, its loss to development will not have a detrimental impact on the character and function of the wider Rural Investment Area as the surrounding area is part of a small cluster of residential properties and the application site is currently the rear garden ground of an existing dwelling situated between existing houses along both Hirst Road and Llynallan Road.

8.4 Policy HSGIO (Infill Housing Development) details criteria against which new housing sites will be assessed. These include: the impact of the proposals on the character and amenity of the surrounding area; site dimensions and garden ground; privacy and sunlight received by surrounding properties; scale, materials, roof heightlpitch and window patterns, and access and parking arrangements. It is considered that the proposed new dwelling, accessed off Llynallan Road has been sensitively located so as to minimise its impact against the original dwellinghouse and the adjoining dwellings. The difference in levels between the front of the site and the rear of the site, allows for a natural progression, softening the impact of the development. In relation to the impact of the dwellings on the existing house, it is considered that the proposed use of a retaining wall to reduce the height of the land allows for a reduction in a potential conflict. In addition, the dormer windows on the rear of the houses have been located so as to ensure that a window to window distance of 18 metres is achieved. Furthermore, the dormer windows proposed to the rear of the existing dwelling are to be utilised as bathrooms and, as such, would be finished with opaque glazing. There are no windows proposed on the gable elevation that would give rise to concerns in connection with privacy and amenity. Provision is made for useable garden ground to the rear and side of the dwellings that complies with the Council’s Guidelines on Open Space around Dwellings. The proposed driveway for this dwelling also makes accommodation for the provision of adequate off street parking and for the provision of a vehicle turning area. No details have been provided in terms of boundary treatments however, it is proposed to secure the submission of a scheme of boundary treatments through the imposition of a planning condition. The proposed pallet of materials, comprising of smooth profiled tiles, cast stone and render are consistent with the area and, as such, raise no concerns. In assessing the proposed subdivision of the existing dwelling at 18 Hirst Road, it is noted that this property was historically two separate dwellings. The proposed dormers are considered appropriate, as they are of a fairly traditional design in keeping with the building. In terms of the proposed subdivision, it is proposed to utilise the previous two separate access points. Furthermore, 2 off street parking spaces are proposed to the side of the dwellings and a turning area is to be provided within the front garden ground of each dwelling. Albeit that the rear gardens do not have a depth of 10 metres, a garden depth of 9 metres has been achieved, with an overall area in excess of the

193 Council’s standards. Roads, access and parking are also considered under Policy TR13 in more detail below. In light of the above, the proposal is held to comply with policy HSGI 0.

8.5 Policy TR13 states that the Council will take account of criteria relating to the impact of the development upon the road network and road safety and the provision made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. Transportation have raised objections on the grounds that, through the proposed subdivision of 18 Hirst Road, road safety at this location would be affected as a turning area could not be accommodated within the site. However, taking into account the existing access and historical access points, I am satisfied that each proposed dwelling can provide a suitable turning area and off street parking provision allowing cars to enter the road in a forward gear, within the side garden and front garden, following the removal of a section of the existing front boundary wall. The requirements can be secured through the use of conditions and it is therefore considered that the proposals are acceptable in terms of the transportation requirements of policies HSGlO and TR13.

Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan:

8.6 A material consideration is the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan, however, the zoning and policy position remains unaltered from the Adopted Plan.

Consultations:

8.7 With regards to the remaining consultation responses, a site investigation report requires to be submitted, a planning condition is imposed to cover this matter. In addition, it is proposed to attach a condition requiring the submission of the finalised drainage proposals as the site falls outwith the SEPA Flood Maps areas. In addition, it is proposed to attach the standard planning conditions relating to the submission of full details of Scottish Waters approval of the proposed drainage connections prior to the start of works on site.

9. Conclusions

9.1 In conclusion, having due regard to the provisions of the Development Plan, the application proposals are considered to be acceptable and to comply with Policies HSG7, HSGlO and TR13. The requirements of consultees can be suitably met through the imposition of conditions and it is considered that the proposals will satisfactorily relate to surrounding land uses, I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

194 Application No: Proposed Development:

S/09/01442/AMD Amendment to Planning Permission S/05/021 14/FUL - Additional 8 Flatted Dwellings to Increase Units from 52 to 60 and Alterations to Car Park

Site Address:

Motherwell Bridge Logans Road North Motherwell

Date Registered:

13th January 201 0

Applicant: Agent: Bett Homes NIA Argyll Court Castle Business Park Stirling FK9 4TT Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application No

Ward: Representations: 016 Motherwell West No letters of representation received. Councillors Paul Kelly, Michael Ross & Annette Valentine

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

The proposed application meets the criteria set out in the relevant policies contained within the Southern Area Local Plan and the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The proposed development can be accommodated within the site without detriment to the surrounding residential properties.

195 Planning Application No. S I09 101442 I AMD Pmduoed by krth Lanarkshire Caunal hwmnmental Senices Amendment to Planning Permission S1051021 IUFUL - Ea1 ziel Building, Additional 8 Flatted Dwellings to Increase Units from 7 smn Street, 52 to 60 and Alterationsto Car Park Motherwell, ML1 1SX

Motherwell Bridge, Logans Road, Motherwell tel01898 274274 Cx 01698 403053

196 Proposed Conditions:-

1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started not later than 20th June 201 1.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

2. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

3. That within 4 weeks of completion of all building works on site, of the development hereby permitted, a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006, to monitor the development, to enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control.

4. That the amendments hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved details submitted as part of the application and no change to those details shall be made without prior written approval of the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the conditions attached to planning permission S/05/02114/FUL for the wider residential development site still apply to this site with particular reference to Condition 5 which requires the completion of the play areas prior to the occupation of the 5'h last flatted dwelling and Condition 24 which requires the construction of traffic calming measures on Kirkland Street.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

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.

Reason: To ensure that all boundaries are appropriately treated in the interests of residential amenity.

6. That before any of the flatted 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 5 above, shall be erected.

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

7. That before any of the flats hereby permitted are occupied, all 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 in the interests of residential amenity and road safety.

8. That the details shown on the elevation drawing no's. MB-3-03-01 and MB-4&5-03-01 are specifically not approved and BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a detailed scheme of building finishes and architectural features to be used on all external walls and roofs including windows, doors, gutters and downpipes shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the dwellings hereby approved are appropriately finished in the interests of residential amenity.

197 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; (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained within the site and in particular the western and northern sections Of the site as highlighted green; and measures for their protection in the course of development (d) the provision of buffer landscaping along the southern boundary; (e) the use of landscaping species which match and compliment the existing boundary landscaping on the site and on adjacent land ; (f) management and maintenance proposals; and (9) A timetable for the implementation of the works contemporaneously with the development. (h) no landscaping above 1 metre in height shall be proposed within the visibility splay shown on approved drawing no APTRMlMBlOI rev D.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory level of landscaping in the interests of residential amenity and to maintain the visibility splay in the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

10. The scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 9 above, shall be completed in accordance with the approved timetable and before the last flat within the development hereby permitted is occupied and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the completion of the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: To ensure that the development is adequately landscaped in the interests of residential amenity.

11. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme, covering all the planting and landscaped areas on the approved plans, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of the trees and shrubs including details of the timing and phasing of all such works and of access arrangements thereto.

Reason: To ensure that the area of existing trees and shrubs identified for retention will be appropriately protected and maintained in the interests of residential amenity.

12. That before the occupation of the last flatted dwelling within the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance scheme approved under the terms of condition 11 shall be in operation.

Reason: To ensure the long term care of these areas in the interests of residential amenity.

13. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the requirements of the publication titled ‘Drainage Assessment: A Guide for Scotland and any other advice subsequently published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) or the

198 Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party (SUDSWP). The post- development surface water discharges shall ensure that the rate and quantity of run-off to any watercourse are no greater than the pre-development run-off for any storm return period unless it can be demonstrated that a higher discharge is necessary to protect or improve the aquatic habitat. SUDS shall still be provided even where discharges are proposed to public sewers notwithstanding any conditions imposed by Scottish Water.

Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site.

14. That the SUDS compliant drainage scheme approved in terms of condition 13 above shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Within three months of the construction of the SUDS, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in drainage works) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved plans.

Reason: To ensure that there is satisfactory drainage and water provision.

15. That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175 : 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required.

Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

16. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 15 above shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a Chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority prioir to the occupation of any of the flats hereby permitted confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the Remediation Strategy.

Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

17. That before the last flatted dwelling hereby permitted is occupied, all roads and footpaths shall be constructed to final wearing course.

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

18. That construction traffic for the development shall enter and leave the site solely from Logans Road and from no other access point.

Reason: In the interests of road safety and the residential amenity.

19. That before the development hereby permitted starts, details of the proposed bin storage areas, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and these bin storage areas shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to the occupation of any of the flatted dwellings hereby approved.

Reason: In the interests of road safety and residential amenity.

199 20. That prior to the commencement of work on site, details of the proposed site office/construction compound and all associated security boundary fencing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of road safety.

21. That before the development starts, the applicant shall provide written confirmation to the Planning Authority that all the requirements of Scottish Water and SEPA stated in their letters dated 13th and 25th January 2006, have been fully met in respect of providing the necessary site drainage infrastructure and water supply to serve the development.

Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory site drainage arrangements.

22. That prior to the occupation of any flatted dwelling hereby permitted, details of the proposed maintenance arrangements for the water tower facing onto Logans Road shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and that the approved scheme of maintenance shall be in operation prior to the occupation of the 5th last flatted dwellinghouse within the site.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

200 Backuround Papers:

Consultation Responses:

Memo from Transportation received 28'h January 2010

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Miss Heather Gebbie at 01698274112

Report Date:

16th February 2010

201 APPLICATION NO. S/09/01442/AMD

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.I The application site is currently the only vacant part remaining within the wider residential development under construction at land formerly occupied by Motherwell Bridgeworks, Logans Road, Motherwell. The site is bounded by a railway line to the east, Logans Road to the north and northwest and Motherwell Bridgeworks to the southwest. A water tower associated with the adjacent industrial buildings lies within the northern part of the site. The adjacent approved housing has been constructed to the south of the site, a majority of which are now complete and occupied. However the applicant did not pursue construction of the flatted blocks due to the economic climate.

2. ProDosed Development

2.1 This application seeks planning permission for an amendment to planning consent S/05/02114/FUL for an additional 8 flatted dwellings and alterations to the car park. The applicant proposes to increase the number of flatted dwellings from 52 to 60 and alter the associated car park to accommodate an additional 4 parking spaces. The approved residential scheme comprised of four separate flatted blocks facing onto Logans Road. The additional flatted dwellings will be accommodated in Blocks 3 and 4 which lie within the eastern part of the site. The footprint and height of the flatted blocks remain unaltered, with the only alterations proposed including additional windows and elevational treatments. Minor elevational changes are proposed for Block 1. The internal layout of the blocks 3 and 4 has been amended to reduce the size of the approved flatted dwellings thus increasing the overall number of units. The applicant proposes to use materials to match the newly constructed housing to the south of the site such as white render, facing brick and grey roof tiles.

3. Applicant's Supportinn Information

3.1 The applicant has provided no supporting information in relation to the proposed development.

4. Site Histow

4.1 A planning application Ref. S05/02114/FUL was granted on 21" June 2006 for the erection of 141 dwellings and flatted dwellings and associated works. This application formed part of the wider residential development at Motherwell Bridgeworks where planning application Ref S/04/01753/AMD is alsqhof relevance. This application was granted planning permission for 79 dwellings on 9 February 2005.

5. Development Plan

5.1 The site is zoned as Policy HSG 2 (Private Housing Development) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.

5.2 The site is covered by Policy HCF2 AI (Short Term Housing Development) in the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

6. Consultations

Transportation have no objections to the proposed development.

202 7. Representations

7.1 No letters of representation have been received in relation to this application.

8. Plannina Assessment

In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The application raises no strategic issues; it can be assessed in terms of the local plan policy. The site is zoned as Policy HSG 2 (Private Housing Development) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008. Policies HSGS (Assessing Applications for Housing Development) and TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) are also relevant to this application.

Adopted Local Plan:

As permission has previously been granted for residential development at this site, the principle of the residential development has therefore been established, and the details of the proposal are all that require to be assessed. As such the proposal accords with Policy HSG2.

Policy HSG 9 (Assessing Applications for Housing Development) takes design and amenity issues into account. The proposed alterations to the two flatted blocks include revised window and roof designs. The proposed changes are considered acceptable and the appearance and material finish of the blocks will complement the design and character of the wider housing development to the south of the site. While there will be some additional windows inserted on each of the revised blocks, the position of the buildings remain unchanged and there will be no significant impact on privacy levels or overlooking on the adjacent dwellings. As all flatted blocks will be of the same footprint and height, it is considered that the increase in the number of flatted dwellings can be suitably accommodated within the site. The applicant proposes an additional four parking spaces which can also be accommodated within the existing parking courts, with a sufficient amount of amenity space provided for the properties. Matters relating to parking and access levels will be discussed at Paragraph 8.4 below. Taking the above into account, it is considered that the proposed amendments comply with Policy HSGS.

Policy TR13 requires consideration of the impact of the development upon the road network and road safety. Transportation have raised no objections to the proposal and as such, the proposal complies with Policy TR13.

Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan:

With regard to the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan, the application site is zoned as Policy HCF2 AI (Sites for Short Term Housing Development). This policy supports residential development at this location and as such, the proposal accords with the emerging local plan.

9. Conclusions

With regard to all material considerations, it is considered that the proposed increase in flatted dwellings and alterations to the car park are acceptable in terms of the aforementioned policies in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 and Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. It is considered that the proposal will not result in any detrimental amenity issues for surrounding existing dwellings to the south. This application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the imposition of the appropriate conditions.

203 Application No: Proposed Development:

S/09/01463/FUL Installation of Additional Windows, Doors, and Ventilation Grilles on the Ground Floor, Replacement of Curtain Walling on the First Floor, Formation of Roof Level Plantroom & Formation of New Dormer to Fly Tower Site Address:

Civic Centre, Windmillhill Street, Motherwell, MLI 1TW

Date Registered:

31st December 2009

Applicant: Agent: North Lanarkshire Council North Lanarkshire Council Learning & Leisure Design Services Municipal Buildings Philip Murray Road Kildonan Street Bellshill Coatbridge ML4 3PA ML5 3LF Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application No

Ward: Representations: 018 Motherwell South East And No letter(s) of representation received. Ravenscraig Kaye Harmon, Thomas Lunny, Linsey McKay, Alan Valentine

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification: The proposed alterations are acceptable in principle and are appropriate in design and scale, thereby complying with Policy CS2 Established Community Facilities of the Southern Area Local Plan (2008).

204 PLANNING APPLICATION No. SI09 I 01 463 I FUL Installation of Additional Windows, Doors, and Ventilation mhwh-mdhm OV,.)*IC*UWl41 Grilles on the Ground Floor, Replacement of Curtain Walling Z%!ZEE"W# drrwrrr.ulw* on the First Floor, Formation of Roof Level Plantroom & Formation *1rnqw*ec- zz%k%',%m of New Dormer to Fly Tower z3rziEA *r HLSIb.bU+II *us .w Civic Theatre, Windmillhill Street, Mothetwell

205 Proposed Conditions:-

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

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

2. That, except for the terms of condition (5) below or as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawings stamped approved as part of this permission.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

3. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

4. That within 4 weeks of completion of all building works on site, of the development hereby permitted, a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

5. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing materials and colour finish to be used on the dormer, plant room, doors and ventilation grilles shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning authority and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved under the terms of this condition.

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

6. That noise associated with the plant room equipment and any other noise associated with the development shall not give rise to a noise level within any nearby dwelling (assessed with windows open) or other noise sensitive building in excess of the equivalent to Noise Rating Curve NRC 35 between 0700 hours and 2000 hours and Noise Rating Curve NRC 25 at all other times.

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

206 Backnround PaDers: No letters of representation received Consultation Responses:

Memo from Protective Services received 1 February 2010

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mrs Joanne Delaney at 01698 274111.

Report date:

2 February 2010

207 APPLICATION NO. S1091014631FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.1 The Civic Centre presents two principal frontages owing to its location on the corner of Windmillhill Street and Airbles Road and strikes an imposing feature on the streetscape due to its substantial scale. It is of modern design and constructed from concrete and glazing. Two buildings exist on the site, an administration wing to the east and civic theatrekoncert hall to the west, which are interconnected by external stairways which address the sloping topography running downward from east to west. The site lies within a mixed use area where commercial and residential properties are located within the nearby vicinity.

2. Proposed Development

2.1 Permission is sought to make various alterations to the concert hall building solely. Internal accommodation changes dictate a necessity to install additional windows, doors and ventilation grilles on the ground floor, replacement curtain walling on the first floor, and formation of a replacement dormer on the flytower. Lastly, a new plant room is proposed on the roof.

3. Applicant’s Supportinn Information

3.1 None.

4. Site History

4.1 97/10495/NlD Erection of Disabled Access Lift and Additional External Fire Escape Stair, approved September 1997.

4.2 09/00753/FUL Installation of a Passenger Lift, approved 27 January 2010.

5. Development Plan

5.1 The site is designated as Policy CS 2 (Established Community Facilities) within the Southern Area Local Plan (2008). The site is designated RTClA (Town Centres) and SBC EDI 1 B1 (Strategic Locations for Business and Industry) on the emerging North Lanarkshire Local Plan Finalised Draft 2009.

6. Consultations

6.1 Protective Services recommended a condition to control noise from the roof level plant room, albeit they consider that noise is unlikely to be a nuisance given the adequate distance to nearby dwellings.

7. Representations

7.1 No letters of representation received

8. Planninn Assessment

8.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The application raises no strategic issues and requires to be assessed against the relevant local plan policies.

8.2 Development Plan: Policy CS 2 of the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 seeks to protect and improve established community facilities within North Lanarkshire. The

208 supporting texts states that the Council will encourage the improvement of the quality of Council operated facilities through a programme of upgrading and refurbishment. The scale and design of the proposed alterations are considered complementary to the existing building. Furthermore, the replacement dormer is positioned low on the fly tower and is smaller in size, whilst the roof level plant room is positioned in sufficient recess from the building edge such that neither would appear visually intrusive and would form discrete additions to the building. Finishing materials will be suitably controlled by the recommended imposition of condition. Collectively, the proposals would provide upgraded facilities to the civic building and are therefore held to comply with Policy CS 2.

8.3 The Finalised North Lanarkshire Local Plan is a material consideration in the assessment of this application. Policy RTC 1A seeks to protect the network of centres as the continuing focus of retail, leisure, civic and community uses. Policy EDI 1 I31 seeks to support the continuing industrial and business character of existing industrial and business areas. The proposed alterations are considered complementary to the building and will serve to enhance facilities thereby retaining the character and focus of the area for business developments in compliance with policies RTC 1A and EDI 1 61.

8.4 Consultations: A condition is recommended to control noise from the roof level plant room taking cognisance of Protective Services’ response.

9. Conclusions

9.1 In conclusion, the proposed alterations are in accordance with Policy CS2 of the Southern Area Local Plan (2008) and are acceptable in terms of design and scale. On this basis the proposal is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

209 Application No: Proposed Development:

SI101000391MSC Erection of two industrial units for class 5 and 6 with ancillary office space and associated access roads, car parking & service yard areas

Site Address:

Plot F Condor Glen Eurocentral Holytown

Date Registered: 22nd January 201 0

Applicant: Agent: Eurocentral Partnership Ltd Bradford Robertson Architects C/o Muse Developments Fortune House Anchorage 1 74 Waterloo Street Anchorage Quay Glasgow Salford Quays Manchester M50 3YJ Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Major Application No

Ward: Representations: 015 Mossend And Holytown No letters of representation received. James Coyle, Paul Delaney, Kevin McKeown,

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification: The proposed development meets the criteria set out in the relevant policies contained within the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 and the North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The proposed development is acceptable in terms of its impact upon the surrounding area.

210 I I I I I

..

c PLANNING APPLICATION 101000391MSC Produced by brth Lanarkshire Council Planning and bvimnment kpartmnt, Erect ion of Two Distri butiorVlndustri a I Facilities Mth Associated Access Roads, Car Parking & Service Yard Areas hbtherwell. ML1 1SX Plot F, Condor Glen, Eurocentral, Hobtown &I 016 98 274274 hx 0 1 BQ8 403 053 21 1 Proposed Conditions:-

1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started no later than 2!jth February 2013.

Reason: To accord with the outline permission.

2. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

3. That within 4 weeks of the development hereby permitted being occupied or brought into use a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

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

4. That except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the plans marked: SKI00 Rev B, SKI01 Rev B, SKI02 Rev A, SKI03 Rev A, SK200 Rev A, SK201 Rev B, SK202 Rev B, SK203 Rev A

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

5. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a plan showing a revised junction arrangement between Condor Glen and Brittan Way be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the junction arrangement will be in accordance with Strathclyde Department of Roads ‘Guidelines for Development Roads’ 1986.

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

6. That BEFORE the development is brought into use, the junction arrangement approved under the terms of Condition 5 above shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

7. 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 aspects in detail.

8. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

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

9. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted is operational, all the fences, or walls, as approved under the terms of Condition 8 above, shall be erected.

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area and security for the site.

10. That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, unless

212 otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175: 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required

Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

11. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 10 shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Before the development hereby approved is brought into use a certificate (signed by a Chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the Remediation Strategy.

Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

12. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping, including boundary treatment, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and it shall include: - (a) Details of 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, and; (d) A timetable for the implementation of these works contemporaneously with the development.

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

13. That all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 12 above, shall be completed contemporaneously with the development and in accordance with the timetable and no later than prior to the development hereby permitted being brought into use; and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the occupation of the last flat within the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: To ensure proper implementation of the landscaping scheme.

14. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of: - (a) The proposed parking areas and footpaths. (b) The proposed grassed planted and landscaped areas.

Reason: To ensure proper maintenance of the area.

15. That BEFORE the development is brought into use; the maintenance and management scheme approved under the terms of Condition (14) shall be in operation.

Reason: To ensure proper maintenance of the area

16. That BEFORE any works start on site, the applicant must confirm in writing to the

213 Planning Authority that the foul drainage can be connected to the public sewer in accordance with the requirements of Scottish Water. The surface water must be treated in accordance with the principles of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland published by ClRlA in March 2000.

Reason: To prevent groundwater or surface water contamination in the interests of environmental and amenity protection.

17. That PRIOR to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said authority. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the requirements of the publication titled ‘Drainage Assesment: A guide for Scotland’ and any other advice subsequently published by the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) or the Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party (SUDSWP). Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater.

18. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 17 above shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Before the last of the properties hereby permitted are occupied, a certificate (signed by a chartered Civil Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS scheme has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved plans.

Reason: To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the interests of the amenity of existing and future residents.

19. That notwithstanding the requirements of conditions 16, 17 & 18 above, PRIOR to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, the following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority: (a) Drawing 2594/0100 to be submitted in AI size to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. (b) A copy of calculations to demonstrate peak runoff value of 19 I/s as the equivalent 2 year Greenfield value for this site, in accordance with the relevant design parameters. (c) Identification of a suitable treatment-train, in accordance with the SUDS manual, including full design details, suitable treatment stages and revised attenuation designed in accordance with the relevant SEPA guidance. (d) Additional Micro Drainage calculations including sensitivity testing output for a full range of storm events (both summer and winter)

Should the information required result in any amendments to the layout hereby approved revised plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority before any development commences.

Reason: To protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater, and in the interests of the amenity of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site respectively.

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

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian and vehicular safety and to prevent deleterious material being carried out on the highway.

214 21. That the use of the development hereby permitted will be restricted to class 5 and 6 with ancillary office space and parking provision will be as follows:

a. class 5 will provide 1no. space per 100m2 gross floor area, b. class 6 will provide 0.5 spaces per 100m2 gross floor area c. ancillary office accommodation will provide 2no. spaces per 100m2 of gross floor area.

Reason: To define the permission and ensure the provision of adequate parking.

215 Backaround PaDers:

Representation Letters

None received

Consultation Responses:

Transportation Geotechn ical

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Graham Smith at 01698 2741 04

Report Date:

10th February 201 0

216 APPLICATION NO. SI101000391MSC

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.1 The site is 4 hectares of vacant open space on the southern section of Eurocentral at the terminus of the existing turning areas of Brittan Way and Condor Glen. The site is flat and set 4 metres below Brittan Way and bounded by established industrial buildings to the north, east and southwest with vacant industrial land to the west and open space to the south and west.

2. Proposed Development

2.1 This application seeks approval for matters specified in conditions relating to consent ref: 522191 (Outine) for the erection of two speculative distributionhdustrial units with ancillary office space, associated landscaping, parking and access onto Condor Glen and Brittan Way. The northern unit would comprise of 5,788 square metres of warehouse 237 square metres office space. The southern unit would be 8,214 square metres warehouse and 138 square metres office. Both units would be 17 metres in height from the apex of the pitched roofs and would be serviced at the rear to Condor Glen for oversized vehicles and staff parking at the front entrance accessing onto Brittan Way. The front elevation onto Brittan Way would contain a glazed feature canopy over the main entrance doors and materials on other elevations would consist of cladding on all sides with loading bays on the rear elevation. The proposal would also extend Condor Glen introducing a hammerhead junction arrangement with Brittan Way.

3. Applicant’s Supporting Information

3.1 The applicant carried out Pre Application Consultation with the community and submitted a design and access statement in support of their application.

4. Site Historv

4.1 522191 (outline) Mixed development of distribution, industrial, business and ancillary uses incorporating the Scottish Euro Freight Rail Terminal, Newhouse West Granted 28thOctober 1992.

5. Development Plan

5.1 The application site is located within an area designated as Policy INDl (Industrial & Business Development Opportunities) of the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.

5.2 The North Lanarkshire Local Plan identifies the site as ED 14 (Promoting sites for Industrial and Business Development).

6. Consultations

6.1 A summary of comments from the consultees are as follows:

I. Transportation have commented that the amount of developments now being accessed from Condor Glen justify the provision of a second means of access and have therefore recommended the extension of Condor Glen towards Brittan Way and construction of a roundabout. They also requested the applicant demonstrate visibility splays and made recommendations on junction spacing and radii. Parking provision and internal manoeuvrability.

7. Representations

217 7.1 Following the pre application consultation, neighbour notification and the newspaper advertisement no objections were received.

8. Plannina Assessment

8.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The proposal raises no strategic issues and, as such requires to be assessed against Local Plan Policies. In this instance the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 is relevant, with the site being zoned as INDl (Industrial & Business Opportunities). Policies IND 9 (Assessing Applications for Industrial and Business Development) and TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) are also relevant to this proposal.

AdoDted Local Plan

8.2 Policy IND 1 seeks to promote designated areas for industry and business. As this application is in relation to the determination of matters specified in conditions in respect of the relevant Outline application the principle of the development has therefore been established, and the details of the proposal are all that requires to be assessed. As such the proposal accords with Policies IND 1.

8.3 Policy IND9 (Assessing Applications for Industrial and Business Development) assesses the suitability of the proposal to the surrounding industrial area and lists criteria relating to design, landscaping, fencing and transportation requirements. The buildings would be similar in design, scale and proportion to other units within Eurocentral and would be in keeping with the character of the surrounding area. The office space is considered to be sufficiently ancillary to the main industrial use. The modern glass frontage facing onto Brittan Way and modern materials will improve the visual landscape at this location. A bus service within Eurocentral commenced operations in January making this site more accessible to public transport and the proposal involves linking Condor Glen with Brittan Way which will provide beneficial linkage for neighbouring sites. Limited open space is proposed around the edges of the site and a condition is proposed for appropriate landscaping to improve the visual impact. Matters relating to transportation are discussed at paragraph 8.5 below. Taking account of the above, it is considered that the proposal complies with Policy IND9.

8.4 Policy TR 13 sets out criteria relating to road and pedestrian safety, parking and servicing. In line with Transportation’s recommendation the proposal was amended to link Condor Glen and Brittan Way albeit the roundabout was replaced with a hammerhead arrangement. A condition is proposed for further details of the road layout to be submitted for approval to ensure that this is satisfactory. The proposal contains parking provision in line with requirements for distribution warehouse development and proposed office space and a condition is proposed that should the building be used for industry or increased office space required the parking provision will require to be increased accordingly. The proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policy TR 13 subject to appropriate conditions.

North Lanarkshire Local Plan:

8.5 The Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan is also material consideration however the zoning and policy position remain unaltered from the adopted plan, therefore the proposal is considered to be in accordance with the emerging Local Plan.

Consultations:

8.6 With regard to the request from Transportation for a Roundabout the applicant has provided an alternative hammerhead and as mentioned above in paragraph 8.4 a

218 condition is recommended to ensure this is satisfactory. A condition is also proposed to ensure parking provision is adequately provided should the units be used for industrial purposes in the future.

8.7 With regard to remaining consultation responses in relation to drainage and flooding matters, the Geotechnical Section consider the drainage details to be incomplete however the scheme is considered acceptable in principle. As such, it is recommended that a suitable condition is imposed requiring the submission of further drainage details prior to commencement of the proposal however this condition permits the units to be commenced whilst drainage details are agreed in relation to the parking and SUDS areas within the site.

9 Conclusions

9.1 In conclusion it is considered that the proposed development is acceptable in terms of its design and impact on the amenity and character of the surrounding area and complies with the relevant policies contained with the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 and North Lanarkshire Local Plan. As such the application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the above conditions.

219