North Lanarkshire
Council
Planning Applications for consideration of Planning Committee
Committee Date: 30-01-2020
Ordnance Survey maps reproduced from Ordnance Survey with permission of HMSO Crown Copyright reserved
APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING COMMITTEE
30th January 2020
Page Application No Applicant Development/Site Recommendation No
8-14 19/00002/FUL Peter D Construction of a Road Link Grant Stirling Ltd/I D Between the A8 and Existing M8 Meiklam Trust Overbridge Mossend Rail Head Reema Road Industrial Estate Reema Road Bellshill ML4 1RR
15-20 19/00671/FUL Mr William Two Bungalows Grant Fraser Brownieside Cottage Brownieside Road Plains ML6 8NP
21-27 19/00754/FUL Mrs Ghufura Change of Use to Hot Food Refuse Arif Takeaway 214 Main Street Holytown Motherwell ML1 4TP
28-38 19/01096/S42 FCC Reclamation and Restoration Grant (P) Environment Operations by the Importation of (UK) Limited Non-Hazardous Waste Materials (Section 42 Application for a Reduction in the Scale and Extent of Previously Approved Landfill Operations, with Resultant Changes to Conditions of Previous Permissions 07/00924/MIN and 18/01479/AMD) Greengairs Landfill Site Meikle Drumgray Road Greengairs
39-49 19/01107/FUL Star Properties Part Change Of Use From Class 5 Grant Ltd (Industrial) to Include Class 1 (Retail), 3 (Food and Drink) , Class 6 (Business with Trade Counter) and Class 2 (Financial and Professional services). Site At: Philip Murray Road Bellshill ML4 3HL
50-55 19/01187/FUL NLC New Two storey houses and cottage Grant Supply flats (31 units) Site at Northburn Place Airdrie
56-61 19/01260/FUL Mr Andrew Use of land for vehicle storage and Refuse Storry repairs, vehicle sales and for the siting of 12 containers for self storage
Brucefield Farm
Allanton Road Allanton Shotts ML7 5DF
62-70 19/01517/FUL John Stewart Continued Use of Land as Two Grant Mobile Home Pitches The Pines Telegraph Road Longriggend
(P)
19/01096/S42 - If minded to grant, permission not to be issued until an amendment to the existing legal agreement is concluded, in order to ensure site restoration.
Application No: Proposed Development:
19/00002/FUL Construction of a Road Link Between the A8 and Existing M8 Overbridge
Site Address:
Mossend Rail Head Reema Road Industrial Estate Reema Road Bellshill ML4 1RR
Date Registered:
15th January 2019
Applicant: Agent: Peter D Stirling Ltd/I D Meiklam Trust Albert Muckley Mossend Railhead 111 McDonald Road Reema Road Edinburgh Bellshill EH7 4NW ML4 1RR
Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application Yes
Ward: Representations: 15 Bellshill 1 representation received. Colin Cameron, Angela Campbell, Harry Curran, Jordan Linden,
Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions
Reasoned Justification: The proposal represents an acceptable infrastructure development associated with the Mossend International Rail Park and upgrade of the M8 Motorway and is justifiable in Green Belt policy terms due to the specific locational need in this context.
Reproduced by permission of Planning Application: 19/00002/FUL the Ordnance Survey on Name (of applicant): Peter D Stirling Ltd/I behalf of HMSO. © Crown Copyright and database right D Meiklam Trust 2009. All rights reserved. Site Address: Mossend Rail Head Ordnance Survey Licence Reema Road Industrial Estate number 100023396. Reema Road Bellshill North Lanarkshire ML4 1RR Development: Construction of a Road Link Between the A8 and Existing M8 Overbridge
Proposed Conditions:-
1. That the development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings numbered - 50309/101 Rev E dated 25.10.18. and 50309/501 rev B dated 12.12.18.
Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval is founded
2. That before commencement of work on site, the applicant must apply for and obtain a European Protected Species Licence from Scottish Natural Heritage for all related development works affecting the identified bat habitat within the application site. Furthermore, the applicant shall provide written confirmation to the Planning Authority that this licence has been obtained prior to commencement of works on site.
Reason: In order to comply with the relevant European Protected Species legislation.
3. That prior to commencement of works on site, an intrusive site investigation survey as recommended in the Geological and Mining Risk Assessment Report produced by Johnson Poole and Bloomer Ltd dated May 2019 shall be carried out and detailed findings including required remedial works shall be submitted in both hard copy and electronic format for the written approval of the Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the environmental amenity of the area.
4. That any mitigation works identified as part of the Site Investigation in condition 3 above shall be carried out and verified by a suitably qualified environmental engineer to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to construction work commencing on site.
Reason: In the interests of the environmental amenity of the area.
5. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping for all landscaped areas and all boundary treatments shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, grass seeding turfing and boundary treatments/fencing etc.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects.
6. 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 the landscaping and boundary treatments identified in condition 5 above.
Reason: To ensure the maintenance of the landscaping scheme in the interest of amenity.
7. 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 the said Authority and shall be certified by a chartered civil engineer as complying with the most recent SEPA SUDS guidance.
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.
8. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 11 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 CIRIA 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.
9. The proposed A8 Roundabout shall be constructed generally in accordance with Ironside Farrar Drawing No. 50309/516 "A8 Roundabout Plan, Horizontal Geometry" and Ironside Farrar Drawing No. 50309/517 "A8 Roundabout Profile, Vertical Geometry" to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority, in consultation with Transport Scotland.
Reason: To ensure that the nature of the design of the proposed junction meets current design standards and implementation will not adversely affect the safe and efficient operation of the trunk road network.
10. There shall be no connections to the trunk road drainage system permitted from the access roads on the north and south sides of the proposed roundabout outwith the extents of trunk road adoption.
Reason: To ensure that the efficiency of the existing drainage network is not affected
11. Details of the lighting within the site shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority, after consultation with Transport Scotland, as the Trunk Roads Authority.
Reason: To ensure that there will be no distraction or dazzle to drivers on the trunk road and that the safety of the traffic on the trunk road will not be diminished
12. Prior to commencement of development, details of landscape planting and fencing along the boundaries with the trunk road shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority, in consultation with Transport Scotland
Reason: To minimise the risk of pedestrians and vehicles gaining uncontrolled access to the trunk road with the consequential risk of accidents, and also to provide appropriate environmental screening.
Background Papers:
Consultation Responses:
Transport Scotland received 29th January 2019 and 17th January 2020 The Coal Authority received 13th June 2019 Environmental Health (including Pollution Control) received 10th April 2019 NLC Greenspace received 19th July 2019
Contact Information:
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Paul Williams at 01236 632500
Report Date: 17th January 2020
APPLICATION NO. 19/00002/FUL
REPORT
1. Site Description
1.1 The site lies to the north of Bellshill and Mossend and to the south of Carnbroe and straddles the new M8 motorway and the A8 trunk road to the north. The site covers an area of 18.9 Hectares and is made up of former farmland which has been bisected by the construction of the new M8 motorway with a mixture of maintained fields with boundaries defined by hedgerows and mature treelines over a relatively flat landscape.
2. Proposed Development
2.1 This application is for the construction of a link road and roundabout between the A8 and the existing M8 Overbridge in order to provide access to the Mossend International Rail Link.
3. Applicant’s Supporting Information
3.1 The applicant (Peter D Stirling Ltd/Meiklam Trust represented by Ironside Farrar) has referred to the planning permission in principle granted by appeal for the railfreight park (see below) and makes the point that the proposed road link and roundabout is required as part of the fulfilment of the PPP to provide the necessary link from the soon to be developed Mossend International Railfreight Park (MIRP) and the A8 and to advance enabling works and in support of the marketing of the site.
4. Site History
4.1 Members will recall that planning permission in principle for the expansion of Mossend railheads with additional sidings, the development of the Mossend International Railfreight Park and associated class 4, 5 and 6 uses including access to the A8 trunk road (13/02079/PPP) was refused by the council on the 22nd of September 2014. The developer then appealed this decision. The appeal was recalled by Scottish Ministers who overturned the original recommendation of the reporter and allowed the appeal, granting planning permission in principle subject to conditions in December 2014.
4.2 The Scottish Ministers’ decision was subsequently challenged and quashed in a Court of Session challenge made by the council and the appeal was subsequently referred back to the DPEA in December 206 for re-consideration. This appeal was allowed in October 2017. Condition 9 of this appeal consent stated that – unless otherwise agreed in writing by the planning authority in consultation with Transport Scotland, construction of the new roundabout connection onto the A8, generally in accordance with Dougall Baillie Associates Drawing Number 11097/100/200, shall only be permitted to commence following the M8-M73-M74Motorway Improvement Scheme becoming fully operational, Reason: To ensure that the nature of the design of the proposed junction meets current design standards and that implementation will not adversely affect the safe and efficient operation of the trunk road network.
4.3 This application currently under consideration has been submitted as a result of this condition.
5. Development Plan
5.1 Green Belt policy NBE3 A. Also ED1 2 B – Transport Development as the site traverses recently completed new section of M8 motorway.
6. Consultations
6.1 Transport Scotland had initially expressed concerns regarding the sub-standard nature of the design in relation to not providing an access spur to the site north of the roundabout and also the length of the Stopping Sight Distance along the western carriageway which only achieved 215 metres as opposed to the standard of 295 metres. The applicant submitted a ‘Departures from Standard’ application to Transport Scotland which has subsequently been approved subject to Transport Scotland suspensive conditions relating to drainage, lighting and boundary treatment/fencing.
6.2 The Coal Authority had initially objected to the proposal as the site lies within a High Risk Development Area. This objection has subsequently been withdrawn as a result of the Geological and Mining Risk Assessment dated May 2019 by Johnson Poole and Bloomer Ltd which recommended intrusive site investigation works and the implementation of any required remedial works prior to commencement of construction works on site, which can be imposed by the application of the appropriate suspensive planning conditions.
6.3 Scottish Natural Heritage have no objections to the proposal provided that the developer applies for and obtains a Bat Licence or BLIMP (Bat Low Impact Licence) which is required for works which will effect non breeding or hibernation roosts prior to commencement of construction works (which is the case here). A suspensive planning condition can be applied in this case.
6.4 NLC Greenspace advised that a Preliminary Environmental Appraisal (PEA) was required. This process then led to the requirement for a BLIMP.
7. Representations
7.1 A total of 4 representations were originally received all outwith the deadline of the 7th of February 2019 to respond to the advert placed in the Motherwell Times of the 23rd January 2019. An objection was made by Cardross Asset Management Ltd on behalf of Rossco Properties, the owner of the site to the north of the proposed roundabout (the formers Shanks site, Edinburgh Road, Carnbroe). The objection was on the grounds that the proposed roundabout design did not allow for a link spur into their site which would effectively blight their site. A further representation came from Monkland Glen Community Council and this and other points of objection can be summarised as follows:-
Loss of Green Belt land Impact on natural habitats – particularly in relation to loss of Beech and Oak trees used for bat roosts Increased traffic
7.2 The objection made on behalf of Rossco Properties was withdrawn on the 17th of January 2020 as a result of the redesign of the roundabout with a spur link into their site, the design of which has been approved by Transport Scotland subject to detailed conditions being applied to any subsequent planning permission.
8. Planning Assessment
8.1 Under the terms of Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, Planning Authorities are required that in determining planning application proposals, where regard is to be had to the Development Plan, determination should be in accordance with this Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this instance there are no strategic implications and the application will therefore be considered in relation to Local Plan Policy. Therefore the proposal requires to be determined under the terms of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan and any other material considerations.
8.2 The site is zoned within the Green Belt NBE3 A in the North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The site also straddles Transport Development policy ED1 2B which relates to the now completed new M8 motorway.
8.3 Whilst the proposal is contrary to the Development Plan in terms of Green Belt policy, it considered that it represents a justifiable exception in the light of the planning history outlined above. It is further considered that there is a specific locational need for the proposed access link road and roundabout in the context of the planning permission in principle granted for the MIRP.
8.4 In terms of the points of objection, a revised layout has been submitted, the design of which allows for an access spur from the proposed roundabout to the site to the north. It is agreed that the proposal will result in an impact on the natural environment and loss of Greenbelt land and increase in traffic, however all within acceptable limits either through the application of conditions or through the required approval of Transport Scotland. It is further considered that the impact on the local environment can be mitigated by the implementation of conditions relating to the applicant obtaining a Bat Low Impact Licence (BLIMP) from Scottish Natural Heritage prior to commencement of works on site. Other condition can be applied relating to assessing coal mining risk
9. Conclusions
9.1 It is therefore considered that the proposal is acceptable in the context of the recent planning history the approval of Transport Scotland and the application of appropriate mitigating conditions. This application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the application of the appropriate conditions.
Application No: Proposed Development:
19/00671/FUL Two Bungalows
Site Address:
Brownieside Cottage Brownieside Road Plains ML6 8NP
Date Registered:
11th June 2019
Applicant: Agent: Mr William Fraser Lesley-Anne Smith 13 Selkirk Way The Old School Business Centre Carnbroe 40 Rochsolloch Road Coatbridge Airdrie ML5 4TN ML6 9BG
Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application Yes
Ward: Representations: 08 Airdrie North 0 letter(s) of representation received. Alan Beveridge, Sophia Coyle, David Cullen, Thomas Morgan,
Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions
Reasoned Justification:
The development proposal represents an acceptable exception to rural investment area policy, given the site development history and the locational characteristics of the site. The proposed development adequately meets the impact criteria set out in the relevant policies contained within the North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2012.
Reproduced by permission of Planning Application: 19/00671/FUL the Ordnance Survey on Name (of applicant): Mr William Fraser behalf of HMSO. © Crown Copyright and database right Site Address: Brownieside Cottage 2009. All rights reserved. Brownieside Road Ordnance Survey Licence Plains number 100023396. North Lanarkshire ML6 8NP Development: Two Bungalows
Proposed Conditions:-
1. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with revised drawings numbered: 1840/PL01, 1840/PL02 Revision C, 1840/PL03 Revision A, 1840/PL04 Revision B, 1840/PL05 Revision B, 1840/PL06 and 1840/PL07
Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.
2. 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.
3. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation report required in terms of Condition (2) above shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to the first occupation of the houses hereby approved. Before any of the dwellinghouses are occupied 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 the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity of future residents.
4. That prior to the commencement of development a scheme of intrusive site investigations shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and any required remedial works identified in the report of findings shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority before any of the dwellings hereby permitted shall be occupied.
Reason: In the interests of public safety and residential amenity.
5. That, before any of the dwellings hereby permitted shall be occupied, the identified glazing and ventilation measures and the construction of the acoustic barrier detailed in WSP Acoustic Assessment, (project reference 70064337-001) dated October 2019 shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Before any of the dwellinghouses are occupied, a certificate (signed by a suitably qualified Acoustic Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that works have been carried out in accordance with the WSP Acoustic Assessment, (project reference 70064337-001).
Reason: In the interests of amenity.
6. 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, including the period during construction, shall be submitted to the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must be carried out in consultation with SEPA and self- certified by a suitably qualified professional as complying with the principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) in terms of the relevant CIRIA Manual and other advice published by SEPA. Within three months of completion of the surface water drainage scheme, the developer shall submit to the planning authority written confirmation, approved by a suitably qualified professional, that the scheme has been implemented in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure that the site surface water drainage scheme complies with relevant guidance.
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 all hard landscaping, boundary treatment, grass seeding and turfing. (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting within the site incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted. For the avoidance of doubt, this shall take be developed taking account of local species and biodiversity interests and should seek to enhance the
biodiversity of the site.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail, to ensure high quality visual amenity and to further the conservation of biodiversity.
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: To ensure the implementation of the landscaping scheme in the interest of amenity.
9. That before the development hereby permitted starts, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, full details of the design and finish materials to be used in the construction of the access, footway to Brownieside Road, parking courtyard and turning area, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of amenity and design by ensuring that the materials are appropriate for the site.
10. That no dwellinghouse hereby permitted shall be occupied until the full details of the design and finish materials to be used in the construction of the access, footway to Brownieside Road, parking courtyard and turning area approved by the Planning Authority in terms of condition 9 are implemented in full to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority and shall be maintained thereafter to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interest of pedestrian and road safety.
11. That should no development commence before July 2020 then an updated protected species survey shall be provided for the written approval of the Planning Authority before any development starts on site.
Reason: In the interests of protecting nature conservation interests.
Background Papers:
Consultation Responses:
The Coal Authority Network Rail Environmental Health (including Pollution Control) Traffic & Transportation NLC Greenspace
Contact Information:
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Patricia Beaton at 01236 632500
Report Date:
15th January 2020
APPLICATION NO. 19/00671/FUL
REPORT
1. Site Description
1.1 The application site comprises an area of vacant land with an area of approximately 2,500 square metres. It is bounded to the north by the reinstated railway line, to the east by open space, to the west by open countryside and Brownieside Cottage/Garden Centre to the south. The site is relatively flat and level and is covered in rough grassland. It is generally triangular and was historically occupied by a detached single storey traditional cottage with associated stables.
2. Proposed Development
2.1 Planning permission is sought for two single storey bungalows. The proposal includes four off road car parking spaces per dwelling and vehicular access being taken from the bend on Brownieside Road serving the two detached dwellings.
3. Applicant’s Supporting Information
3.1 The applicant submitted a written statement in support of the application arguing that the proposed development complies with Local Plan policy and will remove an unattractive vacant site and would have a positive impact on the area.
4. Site History
4.1 Planning Permission in Principle was approved at Planning Committee on 13th December 2017 for residential use for one dwellinghouse.
5. Development Plan
5.1 The application site is zoned as NBE 3 B – Rural Investment Area (where up to 4 housing units are acceptable at a recognised cluster) in the North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2012. DSP1-4 (Amount, Location, Impact and Quality of Development) also apply.
6. Consultations
6.1 The Coal Authority has expressed no objections, provided that conditions are imposed regarding intrusive site investigations and implementation of remedial works.
6.2 Network Rail has expressed no objections, provided that conditions are imposed regarding surface water drainage and the implementation of a scheme for landscaping.
6.3 The council’s Protective Services has expressed no objections subject to a comprehensive site investigation being carried out and any identified remediation measures prior to development commencing on site and also that the identified glazing and ventilation measures and the construction of the acoustic barrier within the associated Acoustics Assessment are carried out as part of the construction.
6.4 The council’s Roads Development Service has expressed no objection subject to the imposition of conditions relating to access specification, visibility splays, footway and parking provision.
6.5 The council’s Greenspace Service has expressed no objection subject to the imposition of a condition and an informative relating to protected species and landscaping.
7. Representations
7.1 Following the standard neighbour notification procedures and press advert, no representations were received.
8. Planning Assessment
8.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 states that a planning application
should be assessed against the relevant Development plan policies unless material consideration indicate otherwise. In this case, the proposal is not of strategic significance and as such, should be assessed in terms of the relevant local plan policies.
8.2 The site is zoned as NBE 3 B – Rural Investment Area (where up to 4 housing units are acceptable at a recognised cluster) in the North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2012. Although the site is not a recognised cluster, it is considered that the proposal represents a justifiable exception to this policy due to the historical context of the site. The site was previously occupied by a house and associated stables which were demolished as a consequence of the railway re-instatement works. The site also sits between established development to its north and south sides. In effect, it forms a wedge which, if developed in the way proposed, would complement the existing urban envelope within the Plains village. Given these site characteristics and the recent development history within the site, it is considered that the proposed development can take place while safeguarding the integrity of the countryside and rural nature of the wider rural investment area. It is therefore considered that this re- instatement of residential development represents a justifiable exception to the Rural Investment Area policy.
8.3 The North Lanarkshire Local Plan also requires all proposed developments to be assessed against policies DSP1 (Amount of Development), DSP 2 (Location of Development), DSP3 (Impact of development) and DSP4 (Quality of Development). Given the limited scale and nature of the development it is considered that the proposal raises no issues with regard to policies DSP1-3.
8.4 Policy DSP 4 Quality Development states that development will only be permitted when an appraisal has been carried out of the existing character and features of the site and its setting, including landscape, biodiversity, heritage or amenity value and where high standards of site planning and sustainable design are achieved. Developments are required to integrate successfully into the local and wider area in terms of the suitability of the site and its setting avoiding any adverse impact on residential amenity and taking account of any transportation issues.
8.5 It is considered that the two dwellinghouses proposed integrate satisfactorily with surrounding land uses as the design and layout of the development has been designed to fit within the site itself and sits back in its own context sufficiently away for existing properties not to cause any significant impacts on them.
8.6 It is acknowledged that the applicant has made efforts to improve the design of the proposal throughout the application process, with amendments to site access, layout and design being undertaken to ensure that importantly there is no unacceptable adverse impact on neighbouring properties.
8.7 In terms of the consultation responses it is considered that the consultee comments and recommendations can be covered by the application of appropriate conditions.
9. Conclusions
9.1 Taking the above into account it is considered that the proposed development is acceptable and that the proposal is a justifiable exception to policy NBE3 B and accords with policies DSP1-3 of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2012.
9.2 In terms of policy DSP4 it is considered that design and layout of the development integrates satisfactorily with surrounding land uses and would not have a significant adverse impact on neighbouring properties.
9.3 It is therefore recommended that planning permission for two bungalows be granted subject to conditions.
Application No: Proposed Development:
19/00754/FUL Change of Use to Hot Food Takeaway
Site Address:
214 Main Street Holytown Motherwell ML1 4TP
Date Registered:
8th November 2019
Applicant: Agent: Mrs Ghufura Arif William Watt 7 Leander Crescent Friels Solicitors Limited Bellshill 5 Bank Street ML4 1JA Coatbridge ML5 1AN
Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application No
Ward: Representations: 16 Mossend And Holytown 11 letter(s) of representation received. David Baird, Frank McNally, Jim Reddin,
Recommendation: Refuse
Reasoned Justification: The proposed development is considered to be unacceptable in terms of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan in that it would lead to additional disturbance and activity in an area with residential dwellinghouses in close proximity to the detriment of their residential amenity.
Reproduced by permission of Planning Application: 19/00754/FUL the Ordnance Survey on Name (of applicant): Mrs Ghufura Arif behalf of HMSO. © Crown Copyright and database right Site Address: 214 Main Street 2009. All rights reserved. Holytown Ordnance Survey Licence Motherwell number 100023396. ML1 4TP Development: Change of Use to Hot Food Takeaway
Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reason:-
1. The proposal does not comply with Policies RTC 1, RTC3B and DSP4 of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan as the proposed change of use would introduce issues relating to odour, noise, activity and general disturbance to such a degree that the amenity of surrounding residential properties would be unacceptably adversely affected. In addition there is a lack of suitable or available parking to serve the proposed use and as such the proposal would adversely impact on road and pedestrian safety.
Background Papers:
Consultation Responses:
Environmental Health (including Pollution Control)
Contact Information:
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mrs Susan Hunt at 01236 632500
Report Date:
17th January 2020
APPLICATION NO. 19/00754/FUL
REPORT
1. Site Description
1.1 The application site is a vacant ground floor retail unit occupying within a terraced row of housing fronting onto Main Street, Holytown. The buildings are of traditional single storey design with three having dormer windows at first floor level (including the application site). The retail unit has a historic flat roof rear extension. The upper floor is occupied by a residential dwellinghouse in separate ownership. The wider area is predominantly residential with school, social club and former pub nearby.
2. Proposed Development
2.1 Permission is sought to change the use of an existing retail unit from Class 1 (Shops/Retail) to a Hot Food Takeaway (Sui-Generis).
3. Applicant’s Supporting Information
3.1 The applicant has not provided any additional supporting information.
4. Site History
4.1 The site has operated as a newsagents/convenience shop for more than 10 years and has recently only opened seasonally to sell fireworks.
5. Development Plan
5.1 Sections 25(1) (a) and 37(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 require that this application be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
5.2 The proposal raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of the Local Development Plan.
5.3 The application site is covered by Policy RTC 1 C Neighbourhood and Local Centres. Policies RTC 3B (Bad Neighbour development) and DSP 4 (Quality of development) are also relevant.
6. Consultations
6.1 NLC Traffic and Transportation was consulted but did not offer a response.
6.2 NLC Protective Services were consulted and recommend refusal due to the location of the proposed flue which is likely to give rise to odour nuisance to nearby residents.
7. Representations
7.1 Following standard neighbour notification procedures 12 letter(s) of representation were received. It is noted that 3 of these letters were received after the deadline for comments. These late objections do not raise any other matters than those already submitted by the deadline. The objections raised can be fairly summarised as follows:
Noise and Disturbance Increased Footfall Lack of Parking Provision resulting in on street parking and causing congestion Lack of Loading facilities for deliveries resulting in congestion Light Pollution Odour Nuisance Hygiene – Lack of waste bins for customers and lack of space to accommodate commercial waste bins Need – there are already 5 Hotfood Takeaways on Main Street therefore an additional one is
not needed Privacy – specifically relating to the adjoining residential property at 216 Main Street and their associated rear garden ground. Access to and from the rear of the application site.
8. Planning Assessment
8.1 Sections 25(1) (a) and 37(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 require that this application be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
8.2 Development Plan: North Lanarkshire Local Plan (NLLP): The application site is covered by Policy RTC 1 C Neighbourhood and Local Centres which supports use classes 1, 2, 3, 9 and 10 subject to subject to assessment. Policies RTC 3B (Bad Neighbour development) covers Hot Food Takeaway uses and states that permission will only be granted where it can be demonstrated that amenity would not be adversely affected. DSP 4 (Quality of development) are also relevant.
8.3 Policy RTC 1 C Neighbourhood and Local Centres supports a range of uses; however, this does not include Hot Food Takeaways which are considered Sui Generis. Whilst it is acknowledged that town and neighbourhood centres are arguably the most appropriate locations for hot food takeaways each application must be assessed on its own merits and any assessment must be based on each specific location and its surrounding uses. In this instance, whilst located within the boundary of the neighbourhood centre, the unit is remote from other commercial and retail units (with most concentrated further east along Main Street) and the surrounding uses are predominantly residential with dwellings adjoining either side and on the upper floor. As such residential amenity weighs heavily in the assessment of this application and is assessed below. In terms of policy it is considered that RTC1C offers no support to the proposal.
8.4 Policy RTC 3B (Bad Neighbour Development) outlines that planning permission will only be granted in circumstances where it can be demonstrated by the applicant that amenity would not be adversely affected. In this instance it is considered that the proposed change from shop to hot food takeaway will have a detrimental impact on the surrounding residential amenity in terms of odour, associated noise and disturbance from the likely increased traffic movements, increased evening opening hours and increase in patrons visiting the premises later in the evening than the existing established use. The proposals are therefore considered not to comply with policies RTC 3B as noted above.
8.5 The NLLP also requires developments be assessed against policies DSP1 (Amount of Development), DSP2 (Location of Development), DSP3 (Impact of Development) and DSP4 (Quality of Development). Given the scale and nature of the development DSP1, DSP2 and DSP3 are not relevant in this instance.
8.6 Policy DSP4 is of relevance which seeks a high quality of development ensuring that proposals are well designed and safeguard the amenity of neighbouring properties, taking account of transportation issues. As noted above the proposed development is considered to have a detrimental impact on the surrounding residential amenity in terms of associated odour, noise and disturbance from the likely increased traffic movements, increased evening opening hours and increase in patrons visiting the premises later in the evening than the existing established use. In terms of traffic and transportation there are concerns regarding the increase in disturbance associated with additional vehicular traffic associated with the use (especially late at night) and lack of dedicated parking provision which is likely to result in on street parking immediately outside the unit and in surrounding streets. It is therefore considered that the proposed development will not integrate successfully into the local area or avoid harm to the neighbouring amenity as it would not relate well to the existing context, which is predominantly residential, by introducing issues relating to odour, noise, disturbance all contributing to an unacceptable loss of amenity which is contrary to the requirements of policy DSP4.
8.7 The matters raised in the letters of representation area addressed in turn below.
8.8 Noise/Disturbance & Increased Footfall It is acknowledged that the unit is currently vacant (with the exception of the occasional sale of fireworks in recent years) and the unit could re-open as a newsagents/convenience store which would inevitably increase footfall in the area. That said, generally Hot Food Takeaway have a higher level of footfall than convenience shops and the footfall is concentrated in the evenings and weekend. Given the close proximity of residential dwellings (particularly those immediately adjacent and directly above), it is considered that the intensification of likely footfall and associated vehicle movements, particularly in the evenings and weekends, would introduce unacceptable noise and disturbance to the detriment of surrounding residential amenity. As such, this objection is upheld and it is considered that the application should be the refused on this basis.
8.9 Lack of Parking Provision It is acknowledged that no dedicated parking is proposed to support this application and that there is no way of achieving parking within the boundary of the application site. It follows that this would result in both staff and customers parking on-street outside the unit and on surrounding streets. It is accepted that the unit has been used for retail purposes and as such the lack of parking would exist should the unit reopen. That said, it is also acknowledged that Hot Food Takeaway uses generally generate a much higher level of short stay parking at peak hours which would exacerbate the lack of any dedicated parking. It is noted from objections that residents park on-street along Main Road (particularly in the evenings) and that the hot food takeaway would add the congestion . 8.10 Lack of Loading Facilities Again it is acknowledged that there is no dedicated loading facility for this unit and nothing further is proposed within the application site. It is likely that this would result in loading taking place at the front of the unit on Main Street. However, as an existing retail unit, it is likely that this is how deliveries would have been dropped off in the past.
8.11 Light Pollution I note the comments about the large window and lights being on later into the evening and concerns about the brightness of any illuminated signage. It is acknowledged that lights within the shop unit would be visible from the street during opening times; however, it is not considered that this would be so significant to merit the refusal of the application on this basis. In terms of potential illuminated signage this would require to be assessed as part of a future advertisement consent application where the level of illumination could be controlled so as not to cause nuisance to surrounding residential properties.
8.12 Odour Nuisance The plans submitted show a flue terminating from the rear single storey flat roof extension. Protective Services have reviewed the plan and consider that the location and height of the flue is likely to give rise to odour issues at surrounding residential properties, particularly those at first floor level. It is therefore recommended that the application be refuse on this basis.
8.13 Hygiene The objections relate to the lack of on street bin provision in the surrounding area. It is considered that a planning condition requiring the provision of bins outside the unit could reasonably be applied to address this concern. In terms of the comments regarding the lack of space for commercial waste bins this is something that the applicant would require to provide to support their business.
8.14 Need Policy RTC3B seeks to ensure that issues of cumulative impact do not occur. In this instance the unit is sufficiently remote from the other hot food takeaways on Main Street that this would not be a concern in this case.
8.15 Privacy Specific concerns have been raised in relation to the privacy of the rear garden area associated with 216 Main Street. It is acknowledged that there are windows and a door that face and open out towards the rear garden area with no intervening boundary treatment. However, as these openings already exist, any other occupier moving into the unit could reasonably expect to open them.
8.16 Access Specific concerns relating to access to the rear of the application site have been raised. This is a legal matter which relates to title deeds and right of access of each property which falls outwith the remit of this planning application.
9. Conclusions
9.1 Overall, it is considered that the proposed development would not integrate successfully into the local area or avoid harm to neighbouring residential amenity as it would introduce issues of odour, noise and general disturbance. This would result in the unacceptable loss of amenity to those residing in nearby residential properties. For these reasons it is considered that the proposed development is contrary to policies RTC1C, RTC 3B and DSP4 of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2012. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be refused.
Application No: Proposed Development:
19/01096/S42 Reclamation and Restoration Operations by the Importation of Non-Hazardous Waste Materials (Section 42 Application for a Reduction in the Scale and Extent of Previously Approved Landfill Operations, with Resultant Changes to Conditions of Previous Permissions 07/00924/MIN and 18/01479/AMD)
Site Address:
Greengairs Landfill Site Meikle Drumgray Road Greengairs
Date Registered: 27th August 2019
Applicant: Agent: FCC Environment (UK) Limited Axis Ground Floor West Camellia House 900 Pavilion Drive 76 Water Lane Northampton Business Park Wilmslow Northampton Cheshire NN4 7RG SK9 5BB
Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Major Application No
Ward: Representations: 08 Airdrie North 1 letter of representation received. Alan Beveridge, Sophia Coyle, David Cullen, Thomas Morgan,
Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions
Reasoned Justification:
The proposal involves changes to a previously approved landfill site which would reduce the extent of the landfill operations in line with the national policy to minimise the use of landfill. The proposed changes to the phasing and restoration schemes are appropriate, and the proposal is therefore consistent with Clydeplan Policy 11 and North Lanarkshire Local Plan Policies EDI1A and EDI3C.
Legal Agreement:
If granted, the planning permission should not be issued until an amendment to the existing planning obligation made under section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 with the developer in respect of site restoration and aftercare has been formally amended to reflect the terms of this planning application.
Reproduced by Planning Application: 19/01096/S42 permission of the Name (of applicant): FCC Environment Ordnance Survey on (UK) Limited behalf of HMSO. © Site Address: Greengairs Landfill Site Crown Copyright and Meikle Drumgray Road database right 2009. All Greengairs rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Development: Reclamation and Licence number Restoration Operations by the 100023396. Importation of Non-Hazardous Waste Materials (Section 42 Application for a Reduction in the Scale and Extent of Previously Approved Landfill Operations, with Resultant Changes to Conditions of Previous Permissions 07/00924/MIN and 18/01479/AMD)
Proposed Conditions:-
1. That this permission shall be for a temporary period and will cease on 22nd May 2038, or whenever the infill capacity (contained in phases 1 to 10 of the approved New Cell Restoration Phasing plan) is completed, whichever period is the lesser and notification of the date that landfill operations are expected to cease shall be provided to and agreed with the planning authority 6 months prior to cessation. All landfill tipping shall cease and the site shall be fully restored in accordance with the approved restoration plan, (as approved under the terms of condition 9) within 2 years from the date agreed for the cessation of landfill operations (or within such other period as may be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority), in accordance with the specification set out in the environmental statement, all to the written satisfaction of the Planning Authority. No importation or deposition of waste may be undertaken within the approved site as detailed following the agreed date of cessation of this permission, except for restoration materials comprising inert soils.
Reason: To define the scope and extent of the development hereby permitted and to ensure the site is appropriately restored in accordance with the approved landscape plan.
2. That within 6 months of the date of this permission, a 5 year aftercare scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority; for the avoidance of doubt the scheme shall include:-
i) the steps necessary to bring the land to a standard that accords with the phased restoration proposals; the full details of cultivation techniques to be used, the fertilisation methods, the soil sampling and analysis procedures, the watering and drainage methods, the weed control systems and any other treatment proposed for the land. ii) The submission of a written annual report to the planning authority. iii) A timetable for the implementation of these works.
Reason: To ensure the satisfactory reinstatement of the site
3. That the approved aftercare scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved timetable unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the satisfactory reinstatement of the site
4. That, notwithstanding the terms of Condition 1, details of all operations, buildings, and machinery required specifically for the SEPA aftercare period and a timetable for their removal and full restoration shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority in consultation with SEPA, 6 months prior to the cessation of landfill tipping within the site. Full details of a public access plan during the aftercare period shall also be submitted.
Reason: To allow the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
5. That the infilling shall be phased and controlled in such a manner as to ensure that no more than three cells are being worked at any time, one cell to comprise infilling and two cells to comprise restoration and landscaping. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the planning authority, the developer shall ensure that the cells marked 1 to 10 on the approved plan are worked progressively in that sequence.
Reason: To ensure the progressive restoration of the site in the interests of amenity.
6. The maximum quantity of waste that can be disposed of at the site in any one year shall not exceed 600,000 tonnes, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority in consultation with SEPA. The operator shall confirm that the agreed level of waste input is not exceeded by submitting annual reports on waste acceptance at the site to the Planning Authority. The report shall also include a yearly report on the progress of the phased restoration proposals, including details of the current operational areas and areas still to be worked.
Reason: To define and quantify the terms of the permission and allow the Planning Authority to consider the progress of site operations in the interests of amenity.
7. That landfilling operations shall only take place Monday to Friday 0730 hours until 1930 hours, and Saturday 07:30 hours to 13:00 hours and not at all on Sundays, except for essential plant maintenance unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. Engineering works and general site
maintenance shall only take place Monday to Saturday 07:30 hours until 19:30 hours and Sunday 08:00 hours to 19:00 hours unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt no HGV's shall access the site or road sweepers be in operation during the extended hours associated with the engineering works and general site maintenance (13:00 hours to 19:30 hours on a Saturday and 08:00 hours to 19:00 hours on a Sunday) unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of controlling the operations on the site in the interests of amenity.
8. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Planning Authority, the private access road to the site shall be closed, the road surface removed and the land reinstated to provide a footpath/cycle route to the satisfaction of the local Planning Authority within six months of the completed aftercare period of the site as stipulated by Condition 4 or within six months of the date to which the road is required to be retained as a condition of the SEPA PPC Permit (whichever is the later of these two dates).
Reason: To ensure the site is restored in an appropriate manner in the interests of amenity and to enhance public access provision in the area.
9. That, notwithstanding the approved restoration plan as part of this application, within 6 months of the date of this permission, or such other date as may be agreed with the Planning Authority, the applicant shall submit and obtain written approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with SEPA, full details of the progressive restoration of the site and the details shall include the following: a) Full restoration proposals in the form of a method statement covering all works, b) An indicative time table/schedule of all works
Reason: To allow the Planning Authority to consider these matters
10. That the waste material received and handled on site shall be non-hazardous controlled wastes only. (For the avoidance of doubt, within this scope of acceptable materials, the actual characteristics of all substances received and how they are processed shall be controlled by SEPA as statutory waste regulator).
Reason: To further define the permission in terms of the type of waste material permitted at the site
11. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Planning Authority, the site shall continue to be operated in accordance with the traffic management plan (TMP) which was approved under condition 11 of previous planning permission 09/00924/MIN, including implementation of the agreed measures to minimise site traffic noise and to undertake periodic maintenance works for the road.
Reason: In the interests of residential amenity and road safety
12. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Planning Authority, all of the noise mitigation measures approved as part of condition 12 of previous planning permission 09/00924/MIN shall be maintained throughout the operation of the site.
Reason: In the interests of residential amenity
13. That a sign stating ‘Private Road’ at the entrance to the private bypass and notice giving the name, address and telephone number of the site operator at the site entrance shall be maintained for the lifespan of this consent.
Reason: To prevent the unauthorised use of the private road and to offer appropriate contact details of the site operator
14. That prior to the work relating to the re-routing of watercourses within the site, the relevant watercourses shall be surveyed for the presence of otters and water voles together with any water bodies and the findings detailing necessary mitigations shall be submitted to for approval to the Planning Authority in consultation with SNH and where necessary appropriate licenses shall be obtained. Reason: In the interests of maintaining, protecting and enhancing the ecological interests within the site.
15. That prior to commencement of landfill operations within cell 10 (or such other cell as may have been agreed by the Planning Authority to be the final phase of the site), a review of the final restoration proposals for the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Such
review shall have regard to whether the approved restoration plans can be improved upon, in particular in terms of the provision of additional woodland planting at the south-western corner of the site in order to help the landfill mound to integrate into the local landscape. Any amendments to the restoration scheme so approved shall thereafter be implemented as part of the restoration of the site.
Reason: The restoration scheme approved as part of this permission has only limited woodland planting in this area as it is intended to be consistent with landscaping for approved and proposed energy developments on the site. In the event of such developments not going ahead it may be desirable to provide additional woodland. The condition will allow this to be reconsidered at a date closer to implementation of the restoration work when the status of other developments on the site is known.
16. That the clearance of any areas of scrub and dense ground vegetation should take place out with bird the breeding season, March to August, unless otherwise agreed with the Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the safeguarding of all bird species populations and habitats found within the site
17. An independent Ecological Clerk of Works acceptable to the Planning Authority, in consultation with SNH shall continue to be employed on an ongoing basis to monitor ongoing and post-construction restoration having particular regard to the Habitat Management Plan as stipulated under Condition 18.
Reason: To ensure that all mitigation and restoration measures and habitat enhancement works are fully implemented in accordance with legislation and regulations covering such works
18. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Planning Authority, the site shall continue to be operated in accordance with the ecological management plan which was approved as part of condition 18 of previous planning permission 09/00924/MIN.
Reason: In the interests of maintaining and protecting the ecological interest of the site.
19. For the avoidance of doubt the alternative surface water route featuring a culvert (as shown in plan WR7568/SW/103) shall only be implemented in the event of it being necessitated by the construction of the proposed Drumgray Energy Recovery Centre (or any other development which may have been approved and constructed which requires such culvert). In other circumstances the surface water route in this part of the site shall be as shown on plan WR7568/SWL/01B rev 6 (or such alternative plan as may be approved in writing by the Planning Authority).
Reason: To confirm the status of the alternative proposal and avoid the construction of unnecessary culverts.
Background Papers:
Consultation Responses: NLC Landscape, received 28 November 2019 NLC Protective Services, received 3 September 2019 NLC Traffic & Transportation, received 8 January 2020 Cadent Gas, received 13 September 2019 National Grid, received 30 September 2019 Scottish Environment Protection Agency, received 8 October and 29 November 2019 Scottish Natural Heritage, received 23 October and 21 November 2019
Contact Information: Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Keith Bathgate on 01236 632500.
Report Date: 16th January 2020
APPLICATION NO. 19/01096/S42
REPORT
1. Site Description
1.1 The application relates to the Greengairs Landfill Site, which occupies over 300ha of countryside land approximately 1km south of Greengairs and 1.5km north of Plains. The landfill site is accessed from the corner of Meikle Drumgray Road and Darngavel Road, and the existing site buildings are located close to this entrance near the north-west corner of the site. Landfilling is progressing sequentially from north to south, the northern parts of the site having been completed and largely restored. The surrounding land is mainly restored opencast or peat extraction land, with limited agricultural activity, and the closest residential properties to the site are the two farm houses at Meikle Drumgray Farm approximately 0.5km from the site entrance. The application site boundary also includes a detached 1km stretch of old railway line which is used as a private haulage road enabling lorries travelling to and from the site to bypass the village of Wattston (as required by the current planning conditions).
2. Proposed Development
2.1 The application seeks to reduce the size of the approved landfill site in response to declining volumes of landfill material. As part of the Scottish Government’s Zero Waste Plan, in addition to further efforts to reduce waste and increase recycling, it is intended to divert as much of the residual biodegradable waste as possible from landfill to energy recovery use. To achieve this the Scottish Government has announced a forthcoming ban on the landfilling of biodegradable municipal waste (the “Landfill Ban”). Although the Landfill Ban will not ban landfill altogether it will restrict landfilling of waste to residual material which is neither biodegradable, recyclable nor reusable for energy recovery, and therefore it will greatly reduce the amount of waste which can be disposed of by this method throughout Scotland. The reduction in the amount of landfill is likely to result in the closure of some landfill sites and reduced rates of landfilling at others, including Greengairs. As a result, the applicant anticipates that by the time the planning permission for the site expires in 2038 only 3 million cubic metres of the currently available 11 million cubic metre landfill void capacity will have been used.
2.2 A brief planning history of the site is contained in section 4 below. The current planning permission allows up to 600,000 tonnes per annum (tpa) of landfill until May 2038, although the actual rate of landfill operations has averaged only 500,000tpa over the last three years. The landfill site is therefore already being developed at a slower rate than its current permission allows, and it is anticipated that once the Landfill Ban comes into effect in 2025 the amount of landfill taking place at the site will fall to around 130,000tpa. In consequence, less than 30% of the outstanding void capacity will actually be needed by 2038. This has various consequences for compliance with the terms of the current planning permission, because the approved phasing and restoration schemes are based on the whole of the approved landfill void being infilled by that date. The current application is intended to resolve these conflicts by agreeing amended phasing, restoration and landscaping schemes which reflect the significantly reduced extent of landfill operations which will take place up to 2038.
2.3 Whilst the purpose of the present application is ultimately to reduce the size of the landfill site and agree a new restoration scheme for the altered landform, it takes the form of a ‘section 42’ application seeking a new planning permission for the landfill site with revised conditions. Some of the existing conditions specifically require compliance with the previous phasing and restoration plans, whilst others have been overtaken by events. The applicant is therefore seeking a new permission with conditions similar to the present conditions (of permission 07/00924/MIN as amended by 18/01479/AMD) but with the following changes:
Condition 1 (duration of time-limited consent and requirement for restoration) cross-references the previous phasing scheme and would therefore be updated to reflect the new scheme; Condition 5 (phasing of landfilling and restoration work) requires that development take place in accordance with the previous phasing scheme and would therefore be updated; Condition 8 (private access road restoration) requires that the private access road be removed and converted to a foot/cycle path as part of the restoration works, however this conflicts with SEPA PPC permit requirements that the road remain in place until the permit is surrendered, which would be much further into the future;
Conditions 9, 11, 12, 17 and 18 included requirements for the submission and approval of various details, most of which were subsequently approved or have been revised as part of the present application. These conditions therefore require to be re-worded to require ongoing compliance with the previously approved details; Condition 15 (revised restoration plan) required some revisions to the original restoration proposals. These have been superseded by the new restoration plans submitted as part of this application, so the original condition 15 can be deleted; and Condition 19 (legal agreement with third party landowner) specified that the landfill phases outwith the applicant’s ownership could not commence until a section 75 obligation had been entered into by the relevant landowner. The reduction in the proposed size of the landfill site means that these phases are no longer to be developed and the site is now wholly within the applicant’s ownership. This condition can therefore also be deleted.
2.4 The physical and operational changes arising from the revised phasing and restoration proposals can be summarised as follows:
The outstanding landfill capacity of the site would be reduced from 11 million cubic metres to 3 million cubic metres; The actual volume of landfill being deposited on the site would be reduced from its present level of 400,000tpa to around 220,000tpa in the short term, and to around 130,000tpa after 2025; Some parts of the previously approved landfill area would no longer be used, and the overall footprint of the landfill area would therefore be reduced by around 35%; The phasing of the landfill operations would be altered because some of the previously approved landfill cells would not now be used; The restoration scheme for the site would be amended to reflect the reduced extent of the landfill operation. Some undeveloped parts of the site would no longer require significant restoration, whereas other areas would have a lower pre-settlement landform due to the reduced amount of landfill material and the fact that it will no longer include biodegradable waste. (Ground levels at restored landfill sites lower over time as the waste settles, but removing biodegradable material will reduce the settlement rate, so pre-settlement levels need to be lower to achieve the same final ground levels). The duration of the temporary planning permission for the landfill operation would remain unchanged (still expiring in 2038);
The tonnages referred to above relate only to the landfill operation. The site will also receive around 35,000tpa of incinerator bottom ash for processing, which is covered by a separate planning permission.
3. Applicant’s Supporting Information
3.1 In addition to the amended drawings and restoration details, the applicant has provided a planning statement detailing the history of the site, the background to the current application, and an explanation of the proposed changes. A drainage report and a landscape and visual impact appraisal have been provided as appendices to the planning statement. A letter from the applicant explains amendments to during the course of the application which were made as a result of the Scottish Government’s September 2019 announcement of a delay to the implementation of the Landfill Ban from 2021 to 2025.
3.2 The proposal was screened under the Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations (19/00783/EIASCR). Whereas the original planning permission to which this section 42 application relates was subject to an environmental impact assessment (EIA), this application seeks to reduce the extent of the previously approved landfill operations, and the current proposal is not considered to be EIA development.
3.3 Whilst there is no statutory requirement for pre-application consultation for section 42 applications, the applicant included information about this proposal in their consultations with the communities of Greengairs, Plains and Stand for the separate energy recovery centre application.
4. Site History
4.1 The site has a long history of coal mining and quarrying activity, with opencast coal extraction having continued into the 1980s. Subsequently there have been a succession of planning permissions for
landfill and related waste management activities, of which the most relevant were as follows:
M86/458 Reclamation by Landfilling of Abandoned Coal Workings (granted 1988, allowing landfill of up to 1.3m tonnes per annum for 20 years); 07/00924/MIN Continued Reclamation and Restoration Operations by the Importation of Non- Hazardous Waste Materials (granted 2008, allowing up to 600,000 tonnes per annum for 30 years) 18/01479/AMD (Section 42) Vary Condition 7 of Planning Permission 07/00924/MIN to Extend Hours of Operation of Engineering Works (granted 2018)
The current planning permission for landfill operations will expire on 22 May 2038, with conditions requiring that the site be restored by 2045. The site is also subject to a section 75 planning obligation covering restoration works.
4.2 In addition to the landfill operations there are also several other approved or proposed waste management and energy facilities on the Greengairs site. These comprise: Permission for a mechanical and biological treatment / in-vessel composting (MBT/IVC) facility (approved by decisions 09/00849/FUL, 13/01247/AMD and 18/01752/AMD, most recently in January 2019). This permission is permanent and a statutory commencement has occurred; Permission for an ancillary waste processing and transfer facility (decision 14/01522/FUL, December 2018); Permission for an ancillary soil, aggregate and ash recycling facility and associated waste storage areas (decision 14/01523/FUL, December 2018); Permission for nine wind turbines located around the site (decisions 07/00172/FUL and 19/00707/AMD, most recently in August 2019); and A current application for an energy recovery centre and associated works in the south-western corner of the site. That application (19/01284/FUL) remains under consideration and will be brought before the Committee for determination in due course.
The current application does not impact upon any of the previously approved proposals. The proposed energy recovery centre would be built on a part of the site which is affected by the proposed changes to the extent of the landfill site (i.e. a part of the site which would not now be landfilled), however the energy recovery centre application is not directly related to the present application and it will be considered on its own merits. It is likely that the approved scheme of nine wind turbines would require to be amended as a result of the current application and other recent permissions/proposals at the site, but that is a matter for a future separate application.
5. Development Plan
Clydeplan Strategic Development Plan 2017 5.1 The landfill site is of a ‘strategic scale’ (as defined in Schedule 14). Although this proposal is seeking to reduce the scale of a previously approved development, all applications which are of a strategic scale are required to be assessed using the approach outlined in diagram 10. Specific policy on waste management development is contained in Policy 11 (Zero Waste).
North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2012 5.2 The application site lies within the defined Rural Investment Area where Policy NBE3B applies. Specific policies covering waste management development are Policies EDI1A and EDI3C, together with further guidance in Supplementary Planning Guidance SPG10 (Waste Development). The application site is not actually designated as an existing waste management site on the local plan map, but this is understood to be a drafting error as the site is a long-established major waste management facility. Policies DSP1 to DSP4 provide general assessment criteria applicable to all planning applications, although as there is no planned land supply for waste management facilities only DSP3 and DSP4 are directly relevant to this proposal.
6. Consultations
6.1 North Lanarkshire Council Landscape, Protective Services, and Traffic and Transportation all have no objection to the proposal.
6.2 SEPA has no objection to the proposal, but notes that changes to the restoration scheme will require approval from SEPA under the Pollution Prevention and Control Regulations. The applicant is aware
of these requirements, which are separate from the planning process.
6.3 Scottish Natural Heritage has no objection to the proposal as it will not affect nationally designated natural heritage sites. Advice has been provided in relation to the protection of small areas of high quality peatland within the site which could be affected by restoration work.
6.4 The National Grid has submitted a holding objection based on uncertainty about whether the development could affect a Cadent Gas pipeline which passes close to the site. However the pipeline is outwith the site and not close to the landfill area. The National Grid have been advised of this but no further comments have been received.
6.5 The Coal Authority did not respond to consultation, however due to the nature of the proposal it is not considered that there would be any coal legacy risk issues.
7. Representations
7.1 One representation has been received, which expresses no view on the proposal but suggests that the application drawings do not show the correct ownership boundary adjacent to houses on Greengairs Road.
8. Planning Assessment
Development Plan Policies
8.1 Under section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 applications shall be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The statutory Development Plan, comprises the Clydeplan SDP 2017 and the North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2012 (NLLP).
Clydeplan Strategic Development Plan 2017 8.2 Whilst the application is technically of a ‘strategic scale’ as defined in Diagram 14, this relates to the landfill site as a whole rather than to the proposed changes, which would reduce the scale of the development relative to what was previously approved. Furthermore, the proposal is consistent with Policy 11 (Waste Management) as it would reduce the amount of landfill in accordance with the national Zero Waste Plan and the forthcoming Landfill Ban. It is therefore considered that the proposal would not raise any strategic issues and that it would comply with all relevant Clydeplan policies.
North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2012 8.3 The site is within the Rural Investment Area where Policy NBE3B seeks to protect the character of the countryside by limiting development to certain categories and circumstances, which include the generation of power from renewable sources. The assessment include:
positive economic benefits; minimisation of adverse environmental impacts; no undue infrastructure implications; specific locational need; suitable scale and form for location; landscape assessment and suitable landscape buffer/enhancements; and compliance with other relevant policies and environmental designations
The proposal would reduce the scale of a previously approved landfill site and would therefore reduce its impacts upon the environment and local infrastructure, whilst supporting national waste reduction policies. There is no requirement to demonstrate a specific locational need as the landfill site is already approved and operational. The proposed changes to the restoration scheme are considered to be acceptable in terms of landscape and environmental attributes. The proposal is therefore consistent with policy NBE3B.
8.4 Policy EDI1A supports the continuing industrial/business character of existing waste management facilities. Proposals for ancillary development and new uses will be assessed against specified criteria, including specific locational requirements, economic benefits and sustainable travel. Policy EDI3C supports waste management facilities where these are located on existing or previous waste
management facilities, support the relevant national and EU waste policies and regulations, and have appropriate regard for sustainable transport and re-use of excess heat and power. Further guidance on waste development is contained in Supplementary Planning Guidance SPG10. As the proposal relates to an existing waste management site and would reduce the scale of an existing waste management facility in line with national commitments to reduce the amount of waste sent to landfill, the proposal would be consistent with these policies and guidance.
8.5 Policy DSP3 requires that the development have an appropriate impact on local infrastructure and community facilities, which in this case would primarily apply to traffic and drainage arrangements. Policy DSP4 sets out criteria for assessing the quality of development, including (amongst others):
appropriate design; addressing energy, resources and waste issues; mitigation of any air quality, noise or pollution impacts;
As the proposal would reduce the extent of the landfilling operation and reduce the quantity of waste brought to the site for landfill the proposal would reduce the environmental and infrastructural impacts of the development, relative to its current permission. The removal of biodegradable waste from the landfill material is also an environmental benefit. It is therefore considered that the revised restoration scheme is acceptable and that the proposal would therefore comply with policies DSP3 and DSP4.
Material Considerations
European and National Policy 8.6 The proposed changes have been prompted by the forthcoming Landfill Ban, and they are in accordance with the terms and aims of the EU Waste Framework Directive, the Scottish Government’s Zero Waste Plan, National Planning Framework 3 and Scottish Planning Policy. All of these policies seek to minimise the amount of waste which is disposed of via landfill sites, and the reduction in the size of this site is consistent with this objective.
Changes to Phasing and Restoration Schemes 8.7 The northern part of the landfill site has already been infilled and has already been restored or partially restored in accordance with the previously approved restoration scheme, with the final landform comprising a low hill 235m AOD in height (pre-settlement) with its summit location to the east of the site operations area. Currently landfilling is taking place to the south of this, where the current permission allows for the creation of a second hill with a summit 240m AOD in height approximately 300m south of the existing summit. The formation of this second hill would have included the infilling of an existing water-filled opencast void which is outwith the applicant’s ownership at the south-eastern corner to the site. However, due to the anticipated reduction in the amount of landfill it is now proposed to curtail the formation of this second hill by omitting the southern and western phases of infilling involved in its creation. As a result, the proposed final landform would still feature a second hill, but its summit would be lower (233m AOD) and centres slightly further to the north than that previously approved. The revised hill would also be of more regular shape with steeper sides, and it would be formed entirely within the land owned by the applicant so it would no longer involve infilling of the flooded void. The heights quoted above are pre-settlement, and over time the two hills would settle to 222m and 228m AOD
8.8 The site lies within an area of undulating plateau moorland, which is the predominant landscape type in north-east North Lanarkshire. The Council’s Local Landscape Character Assessment Background Report (2017) summarises this as a large scale, open and exposed upland landscape which is generally sparsely populated but interspersed with industrial relics such as colliery bings and quarries. It has some value as an upland landscape, however the large scale nature of the landscape and the predominance of former industrial features results in a low sensitivity to certain development types. The original landform at the application site has been subject to massive changes as a result of opencasting, so any restoration scheme for the site should aim to replicate a natural undulating landform. The proposed changes would result in the restoration work having a smaller footprint than previously proposed, meaning that some man-made landscape features (notably the water-filled void outwith the applicant’s ownership) would not be restored, however this arises from the reduction in landfill material which is generally to be welcomed. The revised contours for the restored southern hill would be less natural than that previously approved, having steeper sides and ‘squared off’ corners, although this would be disguised somewhat by the proposed landscaping, the lower overall height of the hill and the fact that this location is not particular
prominent in the local landscape. The shape of the hill would also ‘soften’ over time as the landfill settles. On balance, it is considered that the proposed new restoration scheme would still provide an appropriate landform which would be in keeping with the surrounding undulating countryside.
8.9 In addition to the revised finished landform the restoration scheme includes changes to the restored vegetation / landscaping. As with the previous scheme, the majority of the southern hill would be restored as semi-improved grassland, but relative to the previous scheme there would be less new woodland planting around the edges of the landfill mound. This change reflects the fact that there is now planning permission for nine wind turbines on the site, which would be incompatible with substantial tree-planting in their immediate vicinity. The landscaping is also intended to be compatible with that for the proposed energy recovery centre, which would also be in the south-west corner of the site (and which is incompatible with some of the approved wind turbines). It is considered that the proposed restoration scheme is acceptable in principle in view of the extant planning permission for the wind farm, but that in the event of the wind farm not going ahead a larger amount of woodland planting might be appropriate. A condition is proposed (the replacement condition 15 above) which would require a review of the restoration scheme as the landfill approaches completion, which would allow this point to be reconsidered once it is known whether these other developments have gone ahead.
8.10 The proposal includes two options for the treatment of the drainage channel linking a new attenuation lagoon (to serve the southern section of the restored landfill) with the West Loch, including a partially culverted option in the event of a separate application for an energy recovery centre being approved (paragraph 4.2 refers). A condition is proposed (the replacement condition 19 above) clarifying this position and requiring that the non-culvert option is used in the event of the energy recovery centre not being built.
Consultations 8.11 There were no objections to the application from any of the consultees, with the exception of a holding objection from the National Grid seeking additional information about the relationship to a nearby gas pipeline. The pipeline concerned is outwith the application site and the proposed reduction in the extent of the landfill operation would mean that there were no landfill cells close to the pipeline. Discussions with the National Grid were ongoing at the time of writing but it is considered likely that the objection will be resolved.
8.12 SEPA and Scottish Natural Heritage have provided guidance on restoration issues which has been passed to the applicant. It is considered that the matters raised are addressed by existing conditions which would be carried forward in the new permission.
Representation 8.13 Only one representation has been received and it is not relevant to the proposal. The representation refers to a boundary dispute at the northern edge of the site, well away from any of the physical changes proposed in this application. The application boundary is identical to that used on the previous applications for the landfill site, and the applicant advises that this boundary reflects their legal title. Ownership disputes are not a material planning consideration.
9. Conclusions
9.1 Following consideration of the above it is concluded that the proposed changes to the phasing and restoration schemes and the resultant revised wording of conditions to reflect these changes are acceptable as they would be consistent with the policies of the development plan and with national waste management policies which seek to reduce the use of landfill, and they would reduce the environmental impacts of the landfill site. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions, and to amendment of the existing section 75 obligation to reflect the new permission and revisions to the approved restoration scheme for the site.
Application No: Proposed Development:
19/01107/FUL Part Change Of Use From Class 5 (Industrial) to Include Class 1 (Retail), 3 (Food and Drink), Class 6 (distribution with Trade Counter) and Class 2 (Financial and Professional Services).
Site Address:
Site At: Philip Murray Road Viewpark Uddingston Bellshill ML4 3HL
Date Registered:
30th August 2019
Applicant: Agent: Star Properties Ltd Douglas Fotheringham Radleigh House 2 Clairmont Gardens 1 Golf Road Glasgow Clarkston G3 7LW Glasgow G76 7HU
Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application Yes
Ward: Representations: 15 Bellshill 1 letter of representation received (6 Colin Cameron, Angela Campbell, Harry Curran, others were received out of time Jordan Linden, including from Councillor Angela Campbell)
Recommendation:
Approve subject to Condition
Reasoned Justification:
The proposal is considered to comply with the North Lanarkshire Local Plan in that the proposal supports the continuing character of the surrounding industrial area. There are no other material considerations that would merit refusal of this application.
Reproduced by permission of the Ordnance Survey on Planning Application: 19/01107/FUL behalf of HMSO. © Crown Copyright and database right Name (of applicant): Star Properties Ltd 2009. All rights reserved. Site Address: Site At: Philip Murray Road Ordnance Survey Licence Viewpark, Uddingston Bellshill number 100023396.
Development: Part Change Of Use From Class 5 (Industrial) to Include Class 1 (Retail), 3 (Food and Drink) , Class 6 (Business with Trade Counter) and Class 2 (Financial and Professional services)
Proposed Conditions:-
1. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers: - O/S LAN 15985 Location Plan, 5824/10/01, 5824/10/01, 5824/10/02, 5824/10/03 , 5824-20-01 B, 5824-20-02 B and 5824-20-04 A.
Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.
2. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing materials to be used on all external walls and roofs of the units 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: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects, in order to ensure that materials are visually acceptable in a local context.
3. That prior to any works commencing on site, details of the floor layout and the external extraction system to serve the class 3 unit (shown on approved plan) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the information on the systems shall include, and accord with the requirements of NLC Protective Services as detailed in informative 1 attached to this permission.
Reason: To ensure that the premises are provided with an adequate ventilation/extraction system in the interests of surrounding amenity.
4. That the external extraction system, as approved under condition 3 above, shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to Class 3 Restaurant first coming into use.
Reason: To ensure that the premises are provided with an adequate ventilation/extraction system in the interests of surrounding amenity.
5. All mechanical ventilation and/or air conditioning plant shall be suitably isolated from the structure of the building. Fan units positioned in a ducted system shall be isolated from the ducting by means of flexible connections.
Reason: In the interests of public amenity
6. Noise associated with the completed development (from ventilation systems including any extract ventilation systems, refrigeration/air conditioning plant) shall not give rise to a noise level within the nearest noise sensitive property (when assessed with a '-10dB' attenuation for an openable window) in excess of the equivalent of Noise Rating Curve (NRC) 35(1) between 07:00 hours and 22:00 hours and NRC 25(1) at all other times.
(1) The Noise Rating Curve values are contained within Table B.1 of Annex B of British Standard BS8233:2014.
Reason: To ensure that the noise associated with the ventilation system will be within acceptable limits in the interests of residential amenity.
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, and that before the any of the units hereby approved are operational, the associated fences/walls approved under this condition shall be erected and maintained to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail
8. That before the development hereby permitted starts, details of the design, location and construction of the proposed refuse storage and collection areas be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The bin storage areas will be formed in accordance with the approved details before the first unit is occupied.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
9. That before the units hereby approved are operational, the associated parking and manoeuvring area as 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, 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.
10. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of:-
(a) the proposed footpaths; (b) the proposed parking areas; (c) the proposed external lighting; (d) the proposed grassed, planted and landscaped areas; (e) the proposed fences to be erected along the boundaries
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
11. That BEFORE development hereby permitted becomes operational, the management and maintenance scheme approved under the terms of condition 10 shall be in operation.
Reason: To ensure ongoing maintenance in the interests of visual amenity.
12. That before the development hereby permitted starts, details of the design, location and construction of the proposed vehicular and pedestrian accesses, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt this shall include,
1) Improvement of the existing accesses for commercial use, to a minimum width requirement of 7.3m and
2) Minimum corner radii of 10.5m.
3) Visibility splay requirements for the internal car park junctions with the shared access should be maintained at 4.5m and 60.0m.
4) Provision of a continuous footway to be provided on both sides of the access with adequate footpath links to all premises.
Reason: To ensure appropriate design standards and In the interest of Road Safety
13. That unless as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, before any unit hereby approved is occupied the vehicular and pedestrian access improvements required by Condition 12 above shall be implemented in full.
Reason: In the interest of Road Safety
14. That the development hereby approved shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans and thereafter:
a) Notwithstanding the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992 no change of use, amalgamation or sub-division of any of the units formed as a result of this development shall take place without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority; b) That no more than 20% of the internal floor area of units marked trade counter on the approved drawing shall be used in connection with trade sales; and c) For the avoidance of doubt there shall be no direct sales to the public from any of the trade counter units within the development hereby approved.
Reason: In the interests of the proper planning of the area and to ensure that trade sales remain ancillary to the principle use of the units.
15. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a noise assessment report based on BS4142,
shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. This request shall incorporate a report on identified mitigation measures which should be implemented prior to the occupation of the first unit.
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of residential properties in the area
16. That unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority no unit within the development hereby approved shall operate 24 hours per day and deliveries to the site shall be restricted to 0800 to 2200 daily Monday to Saturday only, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the adjoining residential area.
17. The restaurant hereby permitted shall operate no later than 23.00 hours, unless the planning authority has given prior written approval for a variation.
Reason: To protect neighbouring residents from noise and disturbance, particularly in the late evening.
18. That notwithstanding the development hereby approved in terms of condition 1 no approval is hereby given for the proposed signage and any new signage would be subject to separate advertisement consent.
Reason: To define the permission.
Background Papers:
Consultation Responses:
Traffic & Transportation memorandum received 18th September 2019 Pollution Control memorandum 23rd October 2019
Contact Information:
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Gordon Arthur at 01236 632500
Report Date:
17th January 2020
APPLICATION NO. 19/01107/FUL
REPORT
1. Site Description
1.1 The site which is industrial in nature contains a single storey north light factory with a built footprint of 1490 square metres. The site overall covers an area of 4700 square metres and is regular in shape. To the north the site is separated from Old Edinburgh Road beyond a landscaped boundary strip. Beyond lies Righead industrial estate. Immediately to the west lies the Fallside residential area. A more recent residential development lies to the west. The South of the site is bounded by Council offices (former design service) currently vacant and awaiting redevelopment. It should be noted that his adjoining site is subject to a current planning application for residential development ref 19/00992/FUL.
2. Proposed Development
2.1 The application proposes a mixed use development in the main introducing retail and office into an existing factory building with a floor area ground floor 1490 square metres. The applicant also envisages some largely cosmetic changes to the building enclosing the existing roof lights to their existing height. The building currently falls within Class 5 (Industrial) and the applicant proposes to subdivide the building to introduce a mix of uses as set out in paragraph 2.2. There is an existing associated access formation, yard and parking arrangement that will be increased with the proposed demolition of part of the building.
2. 2 The planning application is speculative at present and no end users have been identified for the new units to be formed within the building should planning permission be obtained. However following negotiations the applicant has settled on the subdivision of the building into 10 units and proposes total floor areas for each Use Class as follows:
Class 1 Shops – 412 sq.m (3 units of 138, 137 & 137 sq. m) Class 3 Food and Drink – 140 sq.m. (1 unit) Class 6 with Trade Counter – 273 sq.m. (2 units of 135 & 138 sq. m) Class 2 Office 266 sq.m. (2 units of 130 & 136 sq. m) Class 5 remaining (general industrial) extant use – 273 sq.m. (2 units of 138 & 135 sq. m)
3. Applicant’s Supporting Information
3.1 The applicant has submitted a supporting statement on the reasoning behind the proposal.
4. Site History
4.1 There is no recent planning history for the site however the adjoining site is subject to the following application.
19/00992/FUL Planning application Residential Development Comprising Flatted Block of 24 Flats, 16 Cottage Flats, 4 Terraced and 4 Semi-Detached Houses under consideration.
5. Development Plan
5.1 North Lanarkshire Local Plan The site is zoned as EDI 2A (Industrial and Business Sites) in the adopted North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2012. Policy DSP 4 (Quality of Development) is relevant along with Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) 14 (Industrial and Business Development).
6. Consultations
6.1 The consultation responses are summarised below:-
NLC Protective services has no objection to the proposal and provided comments on construction noise, hours of construction, burning of waste materials, external lighting, noise and site investigation requirements. In particular:
In order to consider noise impact from the development a noise impact assessment is recommended in terms of BS4142:2014 for noise producing equipment and deliveries.
An Air Quality Impact Assessment (AQIA) was also recommended.
Detailed guidance on noise associated with the external plant was also provided.
Some of these matters are more appropriately covered by informatives on the planning permission. Conditions are recommended in relation to the following matters, noise from plant; delivery times; requirement for noise impact assessment; operational hours. The building is not being extended so a site investigation is not considered necessary and in relation to an AQIA given the size of the unit and that it could be reoccupied at any point without planning permission it is not accepted that this development will be likely to significantly increase traffic such that an AQIA would be required.
NLC Traffic & Transportation Initially recommended that planning permission be refused unless comments on parking and access could be addressed. The applicant made changes to the proposal to address the comments on parking in particular. Part of the building is to be demolished to make way for more parking, the type and range of uses for each of the units has also been altered. By doing this the applicant has been able to provide sufficient parking for the proposed development.
Roads also comment that the applicant has proposed to utilise the two existing vehicular accesses associated with the site including the shared access taken directly from the roundabout located at the junction of Philip Murray Road/Kent Road.
They comment that the existing accesses are sub-standard for commercial use, both are just under 6.0m in width as opposed to the minimum width requirement of 7.3m. The minimum corner radii for a commercial access is 10.5m, the existing corner radii at the shared surface access is around 7.5m. They go on to advise that the internal junctions between car park entrance/exits and the access are also sub-standard and require to be modified to the minimum specifications outlined above. They also comment that the visibility splay requirements for the internal car park junctions with the shared access are 4.5m and 60.0m, will require existing fences and proposed parking/servicing arrangements to be amended and that a continuous footway to be provided on both sides of the access with adequate footpath links to all premises.
They conclude by advising that nothing should be constructed, placed, planted or parked within the visibility splays and provide parking levels based on guidance.
They comment that the application should be deferred and that there appears to be sufficient space available within the site to address all of the above.
Planning conditions are recommended to cover access and pedestrian access improvements and to ensure that the parking and manoeuvring areas are in place before the units are brought into use.
7. Representations a. Following the standard neighbour notification process and press advertisement 7 letters of representation have been received from local residents including one from a local member (Angela Campbell Convener of Youth, Equalities & Empowerment). That said, only one communication was received within the statutory time prescribed for representation. The comments received within the
21 day period are summarised as follows:-
The proposal will result in additional noise, inadequate parking, excessive traffic on Philip Murray Road, loss of privacy due to use of additional glazed storey and over shadowing.
8. Planning Assessment a. The application proposes a mixed use development in the main introducing retail and office into an existing factory building with a floor area ground floor 1490 square metres. The applicant also envisages some largely cosmetic changes to the building enclosing the existing roof lights to their existing height. The building currently falls within Class 5 (Industrial) and the applicant proposes to subdivide the building to introduce a mix of uses as set out in paragraph 2.2. b. 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.
North Lanarkshire Local Plan
8.3 The site is designated under policy EDI 1A (Industrial and Business Sites) in the North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2012. Policy DSP 4 (Quality of Development) is relevant along with Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) 14 (Industrial and Business Development).
8.4 Policies EDI 1A, and SPG 14 support industrial and business area and seek to protect the business character of the area where appropriate against incompatible uses. The development proposed covers a number of non-conforming uses with this policy and guidance and on balance is contrary to the principle policy. That said the proposal has the potential to positively contribute to the commercial character of the wider business area while also providing facilities for the surrounding industrial and residential area. The site is lies adjacent to residential dwellings where residential amenity is the overriding consideration, the proposal is therefore subject to further assessment against policies relative to their proposed use, below.
8.5 Turning to development strategy policies assessment against policies DSP 1 (Amount of Development), DSP 2 (Location of Development), DSP 3 (Impact of Development) and DSP 4 (Quality of Development) should be considered in turn.
8.6 Policy DSP1 B (potential additions to planned land supplies is considered against use classes which include the following uses within the development ,retailing(class 1), office (Class 2) and business (Class 4). Given that the floor areas proposed for each use class falls well below the threshold set out locational criteria, with the Class 6 element also falling within an industrial business area, the proposal may be said to comply with this policy assessing strategic land supply. It is therefore not reasonable to conclude that where relevant the proposal does not represent an addition to the planned land supply, as, such Policy DSP2 Location of Development has no consequence in this assessment. Similarly, as no additional demands have been placed on community facilities or infrastructure DSP3 impact of development has no relevance in this assessment.
8.7 With regards to each the elements of the proposed scheme these are assessed in turn agint the relevant principle policies. Following that the development will be assessed against policy DSP4 (Quality of Development) which considers the quality of development in terms of siting, layout design and materials. This is discussed in detail below at para 8.15.
Class 5. Industrial – proposed for 2 units
8.8 The existing use of the building falls into this class and this use accords with policy EDI 1A (Industrial and Business Sites)
Class 6. Distribution (trade counter) – proposed for 2 units
8.9 As previously noted the site is zoned under Policy EDI 1A which seeks to support the continuing industrial and business character of existing industrial and business areas. As such, the re-use of the site for business and industrial purposes accords with these policies and guidance in principle. The detailed aspects of the proposals are considered under Policy DSP4 (Quality of Development). It is worth noting that a change of use from the existing class 5 general industrial use to Class 6 is permissible for a floor area up to 235 sqm under the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Scotland Order 1992 (as amended). The current floor area proposed within class 6 is 235 sqm marginally beyond that requiring planning assessment. The Trade counter element is discussed below.
8.10 Trade counter uses are in essence a Class 6 Use (storage and distribution) which is an appropriate use in an industrial area. The trade counter element is ancillary to the predominant use and as such floor area given over to this element may be restricted by planning condition usually around 10 to 20% of the floor area ensuring it remains ancillary. Again the applicant has not provided this detail on the floor area layout but this may be restricted by planning condition should members be minded to approve.
Class 1 Retail – proposed for 3 units
8.11 In considering retail and Town centres it should be noted that Policy RTC1 seeks to protect the North Lanarkshire Centre Network as the focus for retail, civic, leisure and community uses. This site however lies beyond the designated town centre so requires to be assessed against Policy RTC3 (Assessing Retail and Commercial Development). This policy indicates that where proposals for convenience floor space over 1000 sq m gross or comparison/commercial leisure floor space over 2000 sq m applications should be considered against detailed assessment criteria including a retail impact assessment. However in this instance the floor area given over to (Class 1 retail) being 445 metres square falls well short of 1,000 sq m where Policy RTC 3 (A) would apply. The proposed level of retail development in this proposal is therefore considered acceptable when measured against Policy RTC 3 (A) by virtue of scale being appropriate to the location. The applicant has endeavoured to demonstrate that the proposal would have no significant negative impact on town centre retailing in submitting.
8.12 Location and impact of the proposal, the applicant is not required to submit a supporting retail statement demonstrating the suitability of the proposals location in terms of the sequential approach by virtue of the scale of this element of the proposal. The applicant in his supporting statement considers that the site can attract retail investment in difficult market conditions, that there is no preferable site to accommodate the proposal, and that the net impact upon the wider area is expected to be positive as the location will serve as a functioning part of the district retail mix and support facilities in the wider industrial area. It is therefore considered that in retail terms, of the proposals location and impact the location of 412 sqm of class 1 shop is in principle acceptable at this location, subject to assessment criteria under policy DSP4. It is agreed that the location of this site has the dual benefit of being able to provide a range of uses that will serve both the surrounding residential uses and also provide ancillary supporting uses that will benefit the industrial estate to the north.
Class 3. Food and drink – proposed for 1 unit
8.13 The food and drink class, groups together a range of uses where food or drink is sold for consumption on the premises - for example restaurants, cafes and snack bars. Class 3, which reflects the breaking down of the traditional boundaries between different types of premises,
enables the catering trade to adapt to changing trends and demands with greater speed and certainty in premises where the potential environmental nuisances such as smell, traffic and parking have already been accepted (this is not a town centre site). It is a designated industrial site (Class 5) which vacant, now finds itself adjacent to residential properties and a proposed residential development (application under consideration), again the applicant was unable to confirm the detail associated with this use class i.e. the internal layout and extraction flue arrangement or a robust justification on why he considers this type of proposal appropriate at this industrial location.
8.14 In the interest of clarity and in referring to the applicant’s revised drawing establishments selling hot food for consumption off the premises are no longer included in Class 3 and are classed as sui generis. This is because hot food take-away shops raise somewhat different environmental issues, such as litter, noise, longer opening hours and extra traffic and pedestrian activity, from those raised by other Class 3 uses. This does not mean that a restaurant whose trade is primarily in-house dining but which has a minor take-away cannot be in Class 3 again it is a matter of fact and degree and members may wish to note that the applicant has not clarified his position on this. Where take-away is a minor component of the business and will not affect environmental amenity it may be treated as de minimus, i.e. as not requiring planning consent but again we do not have this detail.
Class 2 (office) – proposed for 2 units
8.15 The application proposes changing part of the existing building to Class 2 (Financial and Professional services). This class covers a range of uses from opticians, estate and employment agencies, driving instruction, lawyers, accountants, betting shops, health centres and surgeries. These type of uses can be located in town centres but equally do not pose any undue concern in planning terms were they to be located at this site.
8.16 Policy DSP4 (Quality of Development) requires a high quality of development by ensuring proposals integrate well into the surrounding area by taking into account various considerations such as the impact of the use on the amenity of surrounding properties, design, any environmental issues and also any transportation implications. The site itself is adjacent to residential properties (and a proposed residential site) and the proposed changes to the building are in some respects perhaps preferable to the existing industrial use that exists on the site. The building could be reoccupied at any point without the need for planning permission and this could have significant impact on residential amenity. Subject to the recommended conditions on operational hours, servicing restrictions and noise from external plant it is considered that the amenity impacts of the proposed changes of use can be mitigated to acceptable levels. The size of the units proposed is such that it is unlikely that the site will be subject to significant levels of HGV traffic with it being anticipated that much of the servicing will be carried out by small commercial vehicles and vans. The proposed elevational changes are not considered to present any adverse loss of amenity in terms of privacy, overshadowing or significant potential disturbance as a result of the development. In terms of parking the applicant, following comments on parking levels amended the application to taking cognisance of current guidelines and it is considered that there is an appropriate level of parking for each use proposed. No objections were raised by the relevant consultees and the design changes proposed are considered significantly onerous in considering the character of the surrounding area thereby complying with policy DSP4.
Other material considerations
8.17 In referring to the section above on planning history members may wish to note that the former NLC (Design Services Building) now vacant is currently the subject of a planning application for residential development,(19/00992/FUL) Planning application Residential Development Comprising Flatted Block of 24 Flats, 16 Cottage Flats, 4 Terraced and 4 Semi-Detached Houses. This residential development currently proposes to share the existing access to Philip Murray
Road running east west along this applications site boundary with this proposal. Members may wish to note that all access to the former main tool building are existing and currently serving a general industrial use notwithstanding this application to introduce retail and office space. As such, it may be stated that it would be for the residential development if approved to first consider, identify and ameliorate any noise impact or traffic conflict arising from the adjacent existing industrial development. The reduction in general industrial use may therefore also be regarded as a diminishment in terms of the current use and thereby potentially preferable in amenity terms for residential properties and there accepted relationship to the existing industrial use, should members be minded to approve the application.
9. Conclusions
9.1 In conclusion it is considered that the proposed development is acceptable in according with the principle land use policy in this case supports this type of ancillary development where there is a relationship to the wider industrial area. The proposed design that is acceptable and can be accommodated within the site without detriment to the surrounding area subject to planning conditions. As such the proposal may be said to accord with the relevant policies of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan and it is recommended that planning permission be granted.
Application No: Proposed Development:
19/01187/FUL Two storey houses and cottage flats (31 units)
Site Address:
Site At Northburn Place Airdrie
Date Registered:
26th September 2019
Applicant: Agent: Enterprise and Housing New Supply Coltart Earley 2 Tryst Road 559 Sauchiehall Street Cumbernauld Glasgow G67 1JW G3 7PQ
Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application Yes
Ward: Representations: 08 Airdrie North 1 letter(s) of representation received. Alan Beveridge, Sophia Coyle, David Cullen, Thomas Morgan,
Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions
Reasoned Justification:
The proposed residential development on this site is considered acceptable in terms of the development plan and meets the criteria set out in the relevant policies of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The proposal can be accommodated without detriment to the surrounding area.
Reproduced by permission of Planning Application: 19/01187/FUL the Ordnance Survey on Name (of applicant): Enterprise and behalf of HMSO. © Crown Copyright and database right Housing New Supply 2009. All rights reserved. Site Address: Site At Ordnance Survey Licence Northburn Place number 100023396. Airdrie Development: Two storey houses and cottage flats (31 units)
Proposed Conditions:-
1. That except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- L(20)200, L(21)001 Rev A, L(21)002 Rev B, L(21)003 Rev B, L(21)004 Rev A, L(21)005 Rev B, L(21)006 Rev A, L(21)007 Rev A, L(90)001 Rev A, L(90)002 Rev C, L(91)001 Rev A and L(90)200 Rev A.
Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.
2. 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 Planning Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with the British Standard Code of Practice BS 10175: 2011 "The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites". The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages, carried out in accordance with the Environment Agency publication, Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination CLR11, and be submitted in both hard copy and electronic format. Depending on the results of this 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 of the site.
3. That any remediation works identified by the report agreed in terms of Condition 2 above shall be carried out in accordance with an implementation timetable. This timetable shall be agreed in writing with the Planning Authority before any works start on site. No individual dwelling or flat shall be occupied until a certificate (signed by a chartered Environmental Engineer) has been submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the agreed Remediation Strategy.
Reason: To ensure that any remediation identified has been implemented in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.
4. That before any works of any description start on the application site, a scheme of intrusive site investigations which is adequate to properly assess the ground conditions and the potential risks posed to the development as a result of coal mining legacy issues on the site, shall be carried out. A report of the findings, including the submission of a layout plan which plots the calculated zones of influence for the mine entries on site, arising from the intrusive site investigations and a scheme of proposed remedial works (if required) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the mineral stability of the site is appropriate in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.
5. Should any remedial works be required as a result of the investigation detailed in condition 4 above, they shall be undertaken before building commences to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority and before any of the development hereby permitted becomes occupied, 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 remedial works as approved have been undertaken in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.
6. 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 the said Authority and shall be certified by a chartered civil engineer as complying with the most recent SEPA SUDS guidance.
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.
7. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 6 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 CIRIA 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.
8. 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.
Background Papers:
Consultation Responses:
Environmental Health (including Pollution Control) received 16.10.2019 The Coal Authority received 9.10.2019 and 26.11.2019 Roads and Transportation received 8.1.2020 Education received 9.10.2019 Scottish Water received 1.10.2019 NLC Greenspace received 6.1.2020 Sport Scotland received 8.10.2019 Play Services Manager received 7.10.2019 Scottish Power Environmental Planning – No response
Contact Information:
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Lisa Smith at 01236 632500
Report Date:
10th January 2020
APPLICATION NO. 19/01187/FUL
REPORT
1. Site Description
1.1 The site is located east of Stirling Road and north of Black Street in Airdrie. Previous housing on the south east section of the site consisted of 3 storey flats with a section of this demolished some time ago and remaining flats being demolished at the time of the site visit. The site sits within an established residential area and sits between two areas of existing housing and community facilities in the form of open space and a minor part of a playing field which is adjacent to the site. West of the site sits a school and community centre. A series of footpaths surround the site to provide access to the surrounding area and a local convenience shop. The site slopes downwards south east to north west.
2. Proposed Development
2.1 The proposed development is a combination of 11 two storey houses and 20 two storey flats with 3 flats designed for wheelchair use. In-curtilage parking, visitor parking and a new road layout are also proposed.
3. Site History
3.1 None.
4. Development Plan
4.1 In the adopted North Lanarkshire Local Plan, the application site is located within an existing residential area designated as Policy HCF 1A – protecting residential amenity -residential areas and HCF 1 B1 - protecting residential amenity – community facilities. Policy DSP 4 Quality of Development is also relevant.
5. Consultations
5.1 Roads and Transportation have asked for the determination of the application to be deferred and have made comments around visibility splays, an existing footpath network, speed bends, chicanes and driveways. However, since these comments were made a revised site layout drawing has been submitted which addresses the majority of the points raised, whilst comments around driveways can be dealt with as part of a road construction consent.
5.2 Protective Services have advised that site investigations will be required to identify and agree the implementation of remedial measures in respect of contamination that may be present within the proposed development site. Other points raised by them around noise and construction impacts will be listed as informatives on any decision notice issued.
5.3 Education have confirmed that there is no requirement for a developer contribution for this development.
5.4 Play services require a contribution of £10500.00 for the development proposed and the applicant and play services will liaise with each other in this respect.
5.5 Scottish Water have no objection with the applicant required to contact them on issues relevant to their infrastructure and the proposed development.
5.6 Sports Scotland have confirmed that the playing field involved in the proposed development is below the threshold for them to comment.
5.7 Coal Authority were consulted for the original and new layout and have confirmed that a planning condition be applied for site investigations and the identifications and implementation of any required remediation works.
6. Representations
6.1 1 letter of objection has been received from one individual who states that it is on behalf of neighbours living from 8 to 30 Northburn Avenue. The objection states that the original neighbour notification was not received, that the new development will make it difficult for residents of 8 -30 Northburn Avenue to park and that the new road layout will increase traffic in Northburn Avenue with a preference for the existing dead end at Northburn Avenue to remain.
7. Planning Assessment
7.1 In accordance with Section 25 of 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 can be assessed in terms of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan. In this plan the site is primarily designated as Policy HCF 1A – protecting residential amenity - residential areas and a small area covered by HCF 1 B1 protecting residential amenity – community facilities. Policy DSP 4 Quality of Development is also relevant.
7.2 Policy HCF 1A states a presumption against detrimental development in terms of residential amenity and Policy DSP 4 sets out requirements for a high quality of development in terms of form, scale, height, proportion and materials; integrating successfully into the local area; avoiding harm to residential amenity and avoiding adverse impact on existing properties through overlooking, loss of privacy or amenity and overshadowing and subject to satisfactory access and parking arrangements.
7.3 Policy HCF 1 B1 sets out that the council will maintain community well-being in residential areas by protecting designated community facilities. It also sets out that playing fields and sports pitches should not be redeveloped except for a set list of criteria.
7.4 The proposed developed is replacement low rise housing for three storey flats that previously were located at the site and thus will improve residential amenity by creating new social housing for the area. External materials proposed are considered acceptable. The site slopes downwards south east to north west with proposed houses in the north west sitting at a lower level than those located south east facing onto Northburn Avenue. Retaining walls will be required to the rear of properties at the lower level of the development resulting in higher than normal overall boundary treatments between these houses. However, garden depths and the natural slope of the ground within garden areas are considered to mitigate against impacts whilst allowing an acceptable level of privacy for an urban setting.
7.5 In-curtilage and visitor parking proposed meets the council standards for parking. In addition due to the layout of the proposed development there will also be on street parking available.
7.6 A sports play field which currently exists adjacent to the site will be affected on a peripheral edge, however this meets relevant criteria of policy HCF 1 B1 in that a minor part of the playing field is affected which will not affect its use and potential for sport and training.
7.7 In assessing the development against the objection submitted, the following points are made; - Three notifiable neighbours advised that original neighbour notifications were not received, however, a further neighbour notification was issued following a change in a layout of the proposed development. - In terms of parking, the proposed development meets council standards for in-curtilage parking and visitor parking and in addition the proposed road layout will provide on street parking. - In terms of the road layout generating more traffic, the new road layout will provide access for the existing and replacement housing proposed only and does not provide a through route or short cut to another area. As such, traffic is not anticipated to be any higher than is expected for any standard residential street.
7.8 On this basis it is considered that the proposed development is in accord with policies HCF 1A, HCF 1 B1 and DSP4.
8. Conclusions
8.1 The proposed development is considered to be compliant with local plan policies. There are no other material considerations that, when fully assessed, suggest the proposal should be refused permission. Therefore, it is concluded that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions.
Application No: Proposed Development:
19/01260/FUL Use of land for vehicle storage and repairs, vehicle sales and for the siting of 12 containers for self storage
Site Address:
Brucefield Farm Allanton Road Allanton Shotts ML7 5DF
Date Registered:
2nd October 2019
Applicant: Agent: Mr Andrew Storry Tommy Cochrane Brucefield Farm TMC Planning Allanton Road 37 Dyfrig Street Allanton Shotts Shotts ML7 4DQ ML7 5DF
Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application Yes
Ward: Representations: 13 Fortissat 0 letter(s) of representation received. Thomas Cochrane, Martin McCulloch, Kenneth Stevenson, Clare Quigley,
Recommendation: Refuse
Reasoned Justification:
The proposed development is not considered to be acceptable in terms of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan in that it represents an inappropriate development in the rural investment area that fails to integrate into the countryside location. It is also considered that the proposed newly formed access taken from Allanton Road would be an unsafe access.
Reproduced by permission of Planning Application: 19/01260/FUL the Ordnance Survey on Name (of applicant): Mr Andrew Storry behalf of HMSO. © Crown Copyright and database right Site Address: Brucefield Farm 2009. All rights reserved. Allanton Road Ordnance Survey Licence Allanton number 100023396. Shotts ML7 5DF Development: Use of land for vehicle storage and repairs, vehicle sales and for the siting of 12 containers for self storage
Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-
1. The proposal is contrary to policy NBE 3B (Rural Investment Area) and associated Supplementary Planning Guidance Note SPG 08 of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan as it constitutes inappropriate development in the Rural Investment Area in that it fails to integrate into the countryside location and that is not served by adequate roads and access provision that ensures the use can take place without risks to road safety and damage to amenity.
2. The proposal is contrary to policy DSP4 of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan on amenity grounds by failing to integrate suitably to the countryside location, and on infrastructure grounds by failing to provide adequate roads infrastructure to serve the development.
Background Papers:
Consultation Responses:
Traffic & Transportation received 4th December 2019
Contact Information:
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Stewart MacCallum at 01236 632500
Report Date:
9th January 2020
APPLICATION NO. 19/01260/FUL
REPORT
1. Site Description
1.1 The application site is currently part of the main courtyard of Brucefield Farm which is located at Allanton Road, Allanton, Shotts. The site is bounded by fields and associated farm dwellings to the east. Within the area that the proposal would be located are two large farm sheds along the southern and part of the western boundary. The application site measures approximately 0.5 Ha and is a chipped surface. The site slopes downward from south to north but it is not majorly significant within the site. There is a more defined slope from the main courtyard area along the access road to Allanton Road.
1.2 The site is generally well screened as much of the surrounding area consists of undulating fields/farmland owned by the applicant. The site has mature trees along the eastern, southern and western boundaries. There are further trees and the topography of the land screens this from the north and north western elevation of the site boundary. The established access is currently taken from the north east via an existing private road off Allanton Road (shared with 3 houses), however the proposal proposes access from a recently constructed access onto Allanton Road to the north- west.
2. Proposed Development
2.1 Planning permission is sought for the use of land for vehicle storage and repairs, vehicle sales and for the siting of 12 containers for self storage.
2.2 Vehicular access would be taken from an recently constructed private access from Allanton Road to the north/north west of the site. The internal layout comprises of existing workshop farm buildings with an area highlighted for approximately 24 spaces for second hand vehicle sales, 12 storage containers, ancillary sales portacabin and 6 parking spaces.
2.3 Vehicle repairs would be undertaken from the workshops with the vehicles then been sold from the site. The proposal would look to have the sale of vehicles of the 4x4 type vehicles from the site with the aim of marketing to the farming community. The proposal also includes the use of the site for self storage with the 12 individual storage containers. These are metal shipping type containers and would be available for private storage.
3. Applicant’s Supporting Information
3.1 The applicant submitted a supporting statement in support of the development. It is suggested that the means of vehicular access is safe and appropriate for eh scale and nature of development proposed. It is also noted that the proposal is expected to create three full time jobs with a view to employing local staff and would help retain people in the local area.
3.2 The statement also gives reference to the documentation of both PAN 73 and NPF with regard to the supporting of rural diversification. While this documentation is acknowledged, it is considered that the existing relevant local plan policies take this into account and are sufficient in assessing any development proposals upon their own merit.
4. Site History
4.1 A similar application (19/00295/FUL) had been submitted earlier in 2019 for the use of land for vehicle storage and repairs and siting of 12 containers for self storage. This application was refused by delegated powers on 29th September 2019 for the following reasons:-
1. The proposal is contrary to policy NBE 3B (Rural Investment Area) and associated Supplementary Planning Guidance Note SPG 08 of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan as it constitutes inappropriate development in the Rural Investment Area in that it fails to integrate suitably to the countryside location and that is not served by adequate roads and access provision that ensures the use can take place without risks to road safety and damage to amenity.
2. The proposal is contrary to policy DSP4 of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan on amenity grounds by failing to integrate suitably into the countryside location, and on infrastructure grounds by failing to provide adequate roads infrastructure to serve the development.
4.2 It is noted that the key difference between the earlier planning application and the one under consideration is the means of access
5. Development Plan
5.1 The application site is covered by Policy NB3 (Rural Investment Area) and related SPG 08- Assessing Development in the Rural Investment Area in the North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2012.
5.2 The application site is also covered by Policy NBE 1 2b Inventory of Garden/Designated Landscapes in Scotland.
5.3 Development Strategy Policy (DSP) 4 is also relevant to the proposal.
6. Consultations
6.1 A summary of the comments received are as follows:
i) NLC Roads Development Team The Roads Development Team raise concerns that the proposed development seeks to serve the site from a newly formed single carriageway access road taking access from Allanton Road and does not form part of the adopted road network so there are no footways, street lighting or passing places. The nature of commercial /HGV traffic likely to be generated by the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on road safety. The new entrance is considered to be a grossly sub-standard junction arrangement as the visibility splays and use of the access is considered to have a detrimental impact on road safety.
7. Representations
7.1 Following the standard neighbour notification and press advertisement processes, no representations were received.
8. Planning Assessment
8.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires that planning decisions are made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
8.2 This proposal raises no issues of a strategic nature and can therefore be assessed in terms of relevant North Lanarkshire Local Plan (NLLP) policies. The site is covered by local plan planning policy NB3 (Rural Investment Area) and related SPG 08- Assessing Development in the Rural Investment Area. It is also covered by Policy NBE 1 2b Inventory of Garden/Designated Landscapes in Scotland. The North Lanarkshire Local Plan also requires proposed developments to be assessed against DSP policies, in this instance, due to the scale and nature of the development, the proposal will only require to be assessed against DSP 4.
8.3 The main issues to consider in the assessment of the application is the compatibility of the proposal with current local plan policy, impact of the development on the site in regard to acceptable developments in the Rural Investment Area and the enhancement of an existing cluster and acceptableness of impact in terms of design, scale, access and countryside integration.
8.4 The proposal is located within an area covered by Policy NBE 3B (Rural Investment Area) that provides protection from inappropriate development, albeit that there are circumstances where limited development is acceptable. The assessment criteria includes acceptableness of impact in terms of design, scale, access and countryside integration. It is an existing working farm that seeks to have diversification to allow potential secondary incomes. The proposal whilst it may be considered is business in nature, fails to satisfy sufficiently the impact assessment of the Rural Investment Area policy. Indeed the nature of the use, which will involve the collection and storage
and sale of a significant number of vehicles on a commercial basis, would be inappropriate to the rural location. As such it would not satisfy the requirement of policy for development to integrate acceptably into the countryside. Given the types of vehicles expected to visit and the concerns expressed by the roads development service over the manoeuvring and access issues, the proposal would also pose problems in terms of there being insufficient existing infrastructure to support the intended use. Part C of SPG 8 also has regard to access and car parking. It advises that access should avoid widening existing access onto roads and that cars, vehicles and other modern requirements (steel containers) can detract from the appearance of farm yards causing them to look suburban, around which new development may be formed. On all these counts, and as the proposal does not have a specific locational requirement, the application is contrary to policy NBE 3B (Rural Investment Area). The benefit in terms of farm diversification and benefit to the local community is noted but this would be limited in nature and outweighed by the negative impacts noted above. It is therefore considered the proposed development would be inappropriate at this particular site.
8.5 DSP 4 (Quality of Development) is similar to the assessment under the RIA policy and the proposed development is likely not to be appropriate with regard to the existing character and features of the site and be detrimental to this. With regard to the criteria identified, there are likely to be issues regarding convenient access into the site and the proposal is unlikely to integrate successfully into the local area avoiding harm to the neighbouring amenity and the countryside location. For the reasons covered above the proposal would fail against the amenity and infrastructure requirements of policy DSP 4. Furthermore, as regards amenity and design, the development would introduce more common suburban uses into what is an existing farm site, in an area that would make it out of character with it`s more rural setting and will therefore not fit or integrate with this countryside location. It is considered that there will be significant adverse impacts on the amenity of the area given the urban nature of the development and detrimental visual impacts as a result of essential roads infrastructure requirements. In light of all of the above, it is considered that the proposal is an inappropriate and commercial use at this location and should be refused with regard to policy DSP4.
8.6 Policy NBE 1 2b Inventory of Garden/Designated Landscapes in Scotland. This is a consideration due to where the site is located. However in this particular instance the proposal is largely within the existing operational farm area which is already developed so there would be no impact in relation to this particular policy and does not conflict with this.
9. Conclusions
9.1 The proposed development is considered contrary to policies NBE 3B, associated Supplementary Planning Guidance Note SPG 08 and DSP4 of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan in that the proposed change of use represents an inappropriate development in the rural investment area that fails to integrate into the countryside location and also on road safety and amenity grounds by failing to provide adequate roads infrastructure to serve the development grounds by failing to provide adequate roads infrastructure to serve the development. As there are no other material considerations that would weigh, or indicate in support of the proposal despite these policy conflicts, it is recommended that it be refused
Application No: Proposed Development:
19/01517/FUL Continued Use of Land as Two Mobile Home Pitches
Site Address:
The Pines Telegraph Road Longriggend
Date Registered: 5th December 2019
Applicant: Agent: John Stewart N/A The Pines Telegraph Road Longriggend ML6 7RR
Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application Yes
Ward: Representations: 08 Airdrie North None Alan Beveridge, Sophia Coyle, David Cullen, Thomas Morgan
Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions
Reasoned Justification:
Although the development is contrary to NLLP policy NBE3B, it is considered that the principle of the site’s development as an extension to Longriggend has been established by a previous appeal decision and the fact that permission for a market garden/joinery business has been legally commenced. Use of the site as two residential plots is compatible with the prevailing pattern of development in the street, and whilst the proposal involves temporary buildings it is considered that an appropriate appearance for the site can be adequately maintained by the retention of existing landscape and some additional planting.
Reproduced by permission of Planning Application: 19/01517/FUL the Ordnance Survey on Name (of applicant): John Stewart behalf of HMSO. © Crown Copyright and database right Site Address: The Pines 2009. All rights reserved. Telegraph Road Ordnance Survey Licence Longriggend number 100023396. Development: Continued Use of Land as Two Mobile Home Pitches
Proposed Conditions:-
1 Planning permission is granted for the use of the site as not more than two residential mobile home plots. No further plots shall be formed on the site and no additional mobile homes or caravans shall be placed on the site unless this is subject to a specific grant of planning permission, with the exceptions that touring caravans belonging to the residents of the site may be parked on the site and short-term visits by family/friends’ caravans are also allowed.
Reason: In order to maintain control over the number of dwellings on the site, in the interests of amenity.
2. Within three months of the date of this permission (or such other period as may be agreed in writing with the planning authority) a scheme of screen planting along the southern boundary of the site shall be agreed with the planning authority and implemented on the site. Such planting shall thereafter be retained, with replacement planting in the event of any trees/bushed dying or becoming diseased. The existing line of planting along the inside of the front boundary fence shall similarly be retained and maintained.
Reason: In order to ensure that the site is appropriately screened and provides a suitably attractive edge to the village, in the interests of visual amenity.
3. Within three months of the date of this permission (or such other period as may be agreed in writing with the planning authority) a report from a suitably qualified person providing full details of the design of the foul drainage systems shall be submitted for the written approval of the planning authority. The drainage design shall accord with one of the following options, and in the event that the existing drainage arrangements on the site do not comply, the report shall include proposals for the suitable upgrading of the system and a timescale for implementation. The approved arrangements shall thereafter be implemented as approved. a) a soakaway without overflow, supported by a site investigation which complies with Section 3.9 of the Building Standards Technical Handbook demonstrating the feasibility of such a system given the ground conditions on the site; b) a mound soakaway, supported by a site investigation of the aforementioned nature; or c) in the event a site investigation of the aforementioned nature demonstrates that neither of the above options is feasible, a drainage system incorporating additional secondary treatment features consistent with Section 3.9 of the Handbook
Reason: In order to ensure that the site has appropriate means of foul drainage, in the interests of public health and to prevent pollution of local watercourses.
4. Notwithstanding the terms of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992 (and any subsequent Orders amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order), no additional or replacement buildings (including mobile buildings, shipping containers etc.) shall be formed or placed on the site without the prior written approval of the planning authority.
Reason: In order to control the siting and design of any further buildings, in the interests of visual amenity.
Background Papers:
Consultation Responses:
Environmental Health (including Pollution Control), response dated 16 December 2019 Traffic & Transportation, response dated 19 December 2019 SEPA, response dated 10 January 2020 Scottish Water, response dated 17 December 2019 The Coal Authority, response dated 18 December 2019
Contact Information:
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Keith Bathgate on 01236 632500.
Report Date:
16th January 2020
APPLICATION NO. 19/01517/FUL
REPORT
1. Site Description
1.1 The site is on the east side of Telegraph Road on the southern edge of Longriggend, bordered by peatland to the south, forestry to the east (rear), Longriggend Village Hall beyond trees to the north, and by a separate caravan site to the west (opposite). The site contains two mobile home plots served by a single shared access, with each plot containing one mobile home and various ancillary outbuildings and touring caravans. Most of the ground within the plots has been surfaced in loose stone for parking, but the shared access is surfaced in block paving and there are landscaping strips around the edge of the site. Three groups of mature coniferous trees have been retained within one of the plots, and ornamental fir trees have been planted behind the fence along the site frontage. The front boundary along Telegraph Road has a low timber fence behind the road verge, while the access is flanked by reconstituted stone ornamental walls as an entrance feature.
2. Proposed Development
2.1 The two mobile homes previously had temporary planning permission subject to a requirement that they were to be occupied in conjunction with a market garden and a joinery business for which permission had also been granted. The temporary permission for the mobile homes has recently expired and the present application therefore seeks to retain the mobile homes on a permanent basis, without any requirement that their occupancy be linked to the previously approved business uses (which have never become established). No new works are proposed at the site.
3. Applicant’s Supporting Information
3.1 In addition to the application form and plans the applicant has submitted a letter explaining the background to their application. The applicants are members of the travelling community but are approaching retirement age and have some health issues so they do not wish to keep moving around. They have lived on the site happily for ten years, occupying one of the plots themselves while the other plot is occupied by their son’s family. The outbuildings on the site include some small sheds containing washing facilities and a larger double garage used to house a pair of vintage lorries which the applicant keeps as a hobby. The touring caravans at the site are for personal use, including a vintage caravan which is also being restored as a hobby. The family run a roofing business so work vehicles are parked at the site overnight.
4. Site History
4.1 The application site was developed as two mobile home plots in around 2009. Prior to that date the site was a small forestry plantation, although historic mapping shows a building on the southern end of the site during the late 1800s. Planning applications and enforcement cases relevant to the site are as follows:
10/00121/UNAWKS Creation of access and area of hardstanding, unauthorised siting of two residential caravans and one touring caravan and associated structures in the greenbelt (enforcement case, closed following approval of 12/01364/FUL) 12/01020/PPP Construction of 2 dwellinghouses (in principle) and retention on site of 2 residential caravans during construction (withdrawn) 12/01364/FUL Change of use of vacant land to market garden business with joiners workshop & potting shed and two associated temporary residential properties (granted on appeal August 2013) 16/01661/FUL Renewal of consent (12/01364/FUL) for a market garden, joiners workshop and two associated temporary residential properties (granted 12 October 2016)
4.2 Currently the site has planning permission for a market garden, joinery etc. business as allowed by appeal decision 12/01364/FUL. Whilst these businesses were never completed the permission was commenced and therefore remains in force in perpetuity. However the two temporary dwellings were only granted on a temporary basis and such permission expired in October 2019.
5. Development Plan
5.1 The proposal is not of a strategic scale and does not raise any issues which would conflict with the Clydeplan Strategic Development Plan 2017.
5.2 The site is within the defined Rural Investment Area where North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2012 (NLLP) policy NBE3B applies. More detailed guidance on development within the Rural Investment Area is contained in Supplementary Planning Guidance SPG08. NLLP policies DSP1 to DSP4 contain general policies applicable to the assessment of all development proposals.
6. Consultations
6.1 North Lanarkshire Council Traffic and Transportation note that the site is outwith the Longriggend 30mph limit and does not have street lighting or a footpath. This may lead to pedestrians walking on the road, or to requests for infrastructure improvements. Visibility splays of 2.4m by 215m would be required for an access onto an unrestricted section of road, whereas only around 2.4m by 110m appears to be available within the applicant’s ownership.
6.2 Scottish Water advises that the site has access to a public water supply, but there is no public sewer in the vicinity.
6.3 SEPA have submitted a holding objection based on a lack of information about the specification of the drainage system.
6.4 The Coal Authority notes that the site is within the defined Development High Risk area as there are known to be legacy coal workings at shallow depth. However, given the nature of the development as existing mobile home pitches they consider that a coal mining risk assessment would not be necessary in this case, and they have no objection to the application.
6.5 North Lanarkshire Council Protective Services have no comment on the application.
7. Representations
7.1 No representations have been received.
8. Planning Assessment
North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2012 8.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 indicates that applications should be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
8.2 The application site lies within the Rural Investment Area as defined in the 2012 NLLP, where policy NBE3B seeks to protect the character of the countryside and promote appropriate development by restricting the types of development which will be allowed. The types of development which are in principle acceptable are:
Proposals necessary for agriculture, forestry or horticulture; Telecommunications, renewable energy, opencast coal extraction or other appropriate rural uses; Limited extension or alteration of existing buildings; Outdoor recreation, education or tourism where compatible with the rural setting; Housing developments of up to 4 units subject to adherence with SPG08 criteria; or Small-scale business, industry or tourism uses demonstrating economic benefits
The proposal does not fall within any of these categories, as although it is a housing development it does not accord with the criteria set out in SPG08 (q.v.). Previous permissions on the site involved horticultural and small scale business uses, which would have been consistent with the policy but such uses are no longer proposed. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy NBE3B.
8.3 Policy DSP1 indicates that the Council will maintain an appropriate housing land supply, whilst policy DSP2 indicates that proposals for additions to planned land supplies may be granted if they are consistent with specified locational criteria, notably re-using urban brownfield land and maintaining clearly defined urban/rural boundaries. In this case the site is not part of the housing land supply,
and it does not fully accord with the DSP2 criteria. The site is brownfield to the extent that it has been used for mobile home pitches for around ten years, albeit only with temporary permissions, and a ‘commenced’ planning permission is in place for limited commercial use (market garden and joinery). The site is on the edge of the Longriggend settlement boundary but it is outwith the defined settlement, and as such its development could be regarded as weakening the defined urban/rural boundary. However, planning permission for the development of the site for the aforementioned business purposes was granted on appeal in 2013 (i.e. after the adoption of the NLLP 2012), which amounts to a de-facto acceptance of an extension to the settlement boundary. On balance, it is considered that the proposal does not conflict with the objectives of policies DSP1 or DSP2.
8.4 Policy DSP3 indicates that where development would place additional demands on community facilities or infrastructure which would necessitate new or improved facilities, the developer will be required to contribute towards the costs. In this case the proposal involves only two small dwellings and it would not create significant new demands on community facilities or infrastructure, so the proposal is consistent with this policy.
8.5 Policy DSP4 requires all development to have a high standard of site planning and sustainable design, demonstrating appropriate regard to urban and landscape design, safety, inclusivity, accessibility, efficiency, environmental and amenity impacts, and compliance with relevant standards, amongst other considerations. As discussed below, the proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of its design, layout and access, and it is therefore consistent with DSP4.
Supplementary Planning Guidance 8.6 SPG08 (Assessing Development in the Rural Investment Area) expands on the assessment criteria of policy NBE3B. In particular, it details the circumstances where small scale housing development of up to 4 units may be acceptable in the RIA. Amongst various other requirements, such development should enhance an existing cluster of development, which are defined as small and close groupings of residential and associated buildings, typically a farm complex. Additions to clusters should be within the cluster rather than expanding it. The proposal does not meet these criteria because the Longriggend is not a ‘cluster’ and the provision for small-scale housing development does not cover expansion of settlements.
Principle of Development 8.7 Planning permission has previously been granted on appeal for development of the site for small- scale business / horticultural use with ancillary temporary dwellings, which was judged by the Reporter to be consistent with the Rural Investment Area policy. That permission has been commenced but never completed, meaning that the permission for the business development remains in perpetuity. However as the businesses have not actually been established the mobile homes can no longer be viewed as being ancillary to one of the appropriate uses listed in policy NBE3B. Nevertheless, the mobile homes have been present on the site for approximately ten years, and as the application site is immediately to the south of Longriggend village and benefits from a part-implemented planning permission for business use, it has in effect already been approved as extension to the urban area. Refusing planning permission for the retention of the mobile homes would not result in the site being restored to rural land because the permission for business uses would remain.
8.8 Under the circumstances it is considered that the principle of developing the site has been established, and whilst the proposed use is now largely residential (other than some parking of vehicles and storage of materials associated with the residents’ business) it is considered that this is an acceptable use for the site. The rest of Telegraph Road is almost wholly residential and the site is easily large enough to accommodate two house plots in keeping with the predominant pattern of development in the vicinity.
8.9 The development consists of mobile homes rather than permanent houses, but in principle the impacts of two dwellings are similar whatever form the buildings take. It is often the Council’s practice to grant planning permission for temporary buildings for a temporary basis only, so as to ensure that derelict buildings are removed, however in this instance it is considered that the use of the site as two dwelling plots can be approved on a permanent basis, and conditions can be attached requiring that any changes to the buildings on the site be subject to planning applications, so as to maintain control over the development. Conditions can also specify that the site should not contain more than two dwellings, so as to prevent uncontrolled intensification of the use. Occasional short-term occupation of touring caravans by visiting family is however reasonable, so the conditions should allow for this.
8.10 The site is reasonably tidy and well laid out. Most of the buildings are positioned towards the rear of the plots, while the wall/fence along the frontage is neat and the ornamental firs which have been planted will provide additional screening. The retention of some mature trees as landscaping within one of the plots is to be welcomed. The garage building containing the vintage lorries is positioned towards the front of the site and its position is not ideal, but it benefits from some screening by existing trees and its prominence will be further reduced as the adjacent fir trees grow. The site would benefit from some additional planting on its southern boundary as the site is at the entrance to the village, and this could be required by a condition.
8.11 There is a separate caravan site on the opposite side of Telegraph Road (known as ‘Peatside’), but this is a more recent development and its ownership and occupancy are understood to be unrelated to the application site. The Peatside site differs from the application site in that it is entirely unauthorised, there being no current planning permission for any development on that site. That site is being investigated separately as an enforcement case. Problems arising from the Peatside development are not relevant to the consideration of this application, and the approval of this application would not prejudice the Council’s position in relation to Peatside, as the planning issues there are somewhat different.
Roads 8.12 The Council’s Roads Service has noted that there is no footpath or street lighting on this part of Telegraph Road and have expressed concern that the development may lead to pressure for the Council to provide this. At present there is a footpath along the west side of Telegraph Road but it ends 90m north of the application site, and there are five existing houses plus the village hall which do not have footpath access. Some of these buildings (notably the village hall) are long-established. The nearest street light is in front of the village hall 45m north of the site. It is recognised that the piecemeal extension of villages without providing footpaths and street can eventually lead to unsatisfactory situations where there are long stretches of built frontage without proper urban infrastructure. However, in this instance it is not considered reasonable to require provision of a footpath on the site frontage as any such footpath would be relatively short and would not connect to any exiting footpath. Furthermore, due to the nature of the development as two mobile home plots it is not considered reasonable to require the developer to provide the substantial permanent infrastructure which would be appropriate for permanent houses or for a more intensive development. If the site were to be developed for other purposes in the future the need for a footpath and street lighting could be reconsidered at that stage, as there is sufficient verge at the front of the site to allow these to be formed.
8.13 The Roads Service also draws attention to the fact that the site is outwith the village’s 30mph limit, and recommends that visibility splays of 2.4m by 215m be provided at the access, in accordance with the standard for a 60mph road, whereas only 2.4m by 110m is within the applicant’s control. However, any such splay to the north would extend almost as far as the junction of Telegraph Road and Main Street (which is 240m north of the access), and it would seem disproportionate to require such a long visibility splay when the 30mph limit starts only 53m north of the site entrance and within the visibility splay which the applicant controls. To the south of the site there is unrestricted visibility as far as a summit on the road around 235m south of the access, notwithstanding that the preferred 2.4m x 215m splay is not wholly within the applicant’s ownership. Whilst the existing site access may not have been constructed in accordance with the Council’s normal design standards (in terms of surfacing material and radius kerbs) it is a wide access with good visibility in both directions. The existing access has been in place for some years and its retention was implicitly approved by the granting of permission 16/01661/FUL. It is therefore considered that the access and road infrastructure arrangements are acceptable.
Drainage 8.14 The site is large and is predominantly surfaced in loose stones and grass, allowing for surface water to drain within the site. Foul drainage is by way of an existing septic tank and soakaway, as is the norm in Longriggend due to the absence of public sewerage, although many such systems are older and probably do not meet current design standards. SEPA has submitted a holding objection to the present application due to lack of information about the specification of the foul drainage. The peat soil in this area provides poor ground conditions for drainage and achieving an appropriate foul drainage solution can be challenging. Normally new soakaways within such areas should either be constructed without an overflow or should be of the mound soakaway type, subject to the feasibility of these solutions being demonstrated. Where such a solution is not achievable, additional secondary treatment is normally required.
8.15 The applicant has advised that the septic tank at the site is shared by the two dwellings and that a contract is in place with Scottish Water to empty the tank as required. These arrangements were accepted at the time of permission 16/01661/FUL. The applicant has been asked to provide further information about the design of the soakaway, and this was awaited at the time of writing. However, under the circumstances it is considered that the matter can be adequately controlled by a condition.
9. Conclusions
9.1 Whilst the use of this site as two residential plots is contrary to the Rural Investment Area policy, the principle of developing the site has been established by a previous appeal decision and although the previously approved horticultural/business uses have not taken place it is considered reasonable to allow the two mobile homes to remain. The site is a logical extension to Longriggend and its use as two domestic plots is in keeping with the local pattern of development. The two mobile homes have been in place for a decade and the site is reasonably tidy and well laid out, and whilst the site is beyond the village’s 30mph limit it is considered that the access arrangements are safe and that it would not be reasonable to require a footpath or street lighting. Subject to some modest additional planting and to conditions controlling future changes at the site it is considered that a permanent permission for the two plots can be granted.