2

North Lanarkshire Council

Planning Applications for consideration of Planning and Transportation Committee

Committee Date : IStApril 2008

Ordnance Survey maps reproduced from Ordnance Survey with permission of HMSO Crown Copyright reserved APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE 1'' April 2008

Page Application No. Applicant DevelopmenULocus Recommendation No 4 N/08/00046/OUT Mr. & Mrs. Airlie Construction of a Refuse (P) Dwellinghouse 201 Lochend Road Gartcosh

9 N/08/00254/FUL Mr. & Mrs. W. Construction of a Refuse (P) Dunbar Dwellinghouse Gavell Farm Gavell Road Queenzieburn

14 C/07/01126/AMD AMG Properties Ltd Residential Development Grant Comprising 20 Dwellinghouses, Access Road and Landscaping at Land West of 70 Main Street Longriggend Airdrie

24 C/07/01427/REM Barratt West Erection of 81 Grant (P) Scotland Dwellinghouses at Archers Request for Site of Airdrie, Carlisle Road, Visit Airdrie

33 C/07/02007/FUL Gladman Construction of Ten Two Grant Storey Business Units at Hagmill Road, Shawhead, Coatbridge

40 C/08/00145/FUL Orange PCS Ltd Erection of a 20m Mast and Grant Associated Telecommunications Equipment at Land At Upper Mill Street Industrial Estate, Upper Mill Street, Airdrie

45 C/08/00186/FUL Barracuda Group Part Change of Use of Bingo Grant Limited Hall to Public House and Restaurant Including Removal of and Part Re- instatement of Single Storey Extension at 2 - 10 Hallcraig Street, Airdrie

50 C/08/00219/AMD Link Group Erection of 18 Grant Dwellinghouses on Vacant Land at Scarhill Street & Kirkshaws Road, Coatbridge 55 S/08/00044/FUL c/o Charles Chiu Two Storey Rear Extension Grant 7 Forbes Drive, Motherwell

60 S/08/00088/FUL Mr James Mitchell Erection of One and a Half Grant Storey Dwellinghouse and Detached Double Garage Crestwood, Greenfield Crescent. Wishaw

69 S/08/00156/FUL Thomas Nailen Erection of a Dwellinghouse Grant (P) Land South Of Stewart Quadrant, Holytown

76 S/08/00234/FUL Song Zhou Change of Use of Retail Grant Shop to Hot Food Takeaway 216 Main Street, Bellshill

82 S/08/00249/FUL Mr & Mrs McNee Increase the Height of Rear Refuse Roof and Creation of Flat on Request for Site First Floor Visit & Hearing 64 West Main Street, Harthill, Shotts

88 S/08/00274/FUL Fred Davis Construction of Two Refuse (P) Dwellinghouses Land Adjacent To Heathfield, Wishaw Road, Wishaw

(P)

N/08/00046/0UT: If granted, refer to Scottish Ministers (Development in Green Belt) N/08/00254/FUL: If granted, refer to Scottish Ministers (Development in Green Belt) C/07/01427/REM: If granted, Section 69 Agreement required S/08/00156/FUL: If granted, refer to Scottish Ministers (Loss of Open Space) S/08/00274/FUL: If granted, refer to Scottish Ministers (Development in Green Belt) Application No: N/08/00046/OUT

Date Registered: 17 January 2008

Applicant: Mr & Mrs Airlie 201 Lochend Road Gartcosh G69 8BE

Agent JFS Architects LLP 5 Viewfield Place Stirling FK8 1NQ

Development: Construction of a Dwellinghouse

Location: 201 Lochend Road Gartcosh North Lanarkshire G69 8BE

Ward: 5 - Strathkelvin : Councillors Hogg, McGlinchey, Shaw & Wallace

Grid Reference: 269578668904

File Reference: N/08/00046/OUT

Site History: No relevant site history

Development Plan: The Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan. Strategic Policy 1 applies.

Northern Corridor Local Plan, 2005. Policy ENV 5 applies.

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: Scottish Water (No comments) West of Scotland Archaeology Service (No objections)

Representations: None.

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 27th February 2008

Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. In the interests of the proper planning of the area in that the proposed dwellinghouse would constitute inappropriate new development in the Green Belt and as such would be contrary to Scottish Planning Policy 3 : Planning for Housing, Scottish Planning Policy 21 : Green Belts, the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 (Strategic Policy 1) and Policy ENV 5 of the Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005.

2. That should planning permission be granted for this development, a precedent may be set which would make it difficult for the Planning Authority to refuse other similar applications. JOHNSTON LOCH NOTE TO COMMITTEE: If granted, this application will have to be notified to the Scottish Ministers in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 2007 because the proposed development falls within an area of land designated as Green Belt.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 15 January 2008

Letter from West of Scotland Archaeology Service received 2gth February 2008.

Northern Corridor Local Plan, 2005 Glasgow & the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000.

SPP 3 : Planning for Housing SPP 21 : Green Belts

E-mail of representation received 6 February 2008, from Councillor McGlinchey

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Erin Louise Deeley at 01236 616464.

Date: 20thMarch 2008 APPLICATION NO. N/08/00046/0UT

REPORT

1. DescriPtion of Site and ProDosal

1.1 The application site is located within the west facing garden ground of Lochend House, Gartcosh. The site is accessed by a long un-surfaced driveway of Lochend Road to the east. To the north east of the site is the approved Dawn Homes residential development for 35 dwellings (N/06/00342/FUL). Immediately south of the site is an area designated as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation. Also south of the site and approximately 90 metres away is Lochend Nursery and associated public tea room, beyond which is Johnston Loch.

1.2 The outline planning application proposes to establish the principal of a single house with a detached garage, garden ground and parking in the garden ground of Lochend House, Gartcosh.

2. DeveloPment PlanlNational Plannina Policv

2.1 The application site lies within the Green Belt and planning policies relevant to the consideration of the proposed development can be summarised as follows :-

I.Scottish Planning Policy 3 : Planning for Housing

The key themes are promoting development in brown field sites rather than green field locations and seeking to maintain the effectiveness of existing Green Belts and safeguarding the character and amenity of the countryside.

2. Scottish Planning Policy 21 : Green Belts

The three main purposes of the Green Belt are :- 1. To maintain the identity of towns by establishing a clear definition of their physical boundaries and preventing coalescence 2. To provide countryside for recreation or institutional purposes of various kinds 3. To maintain the landscape setting of towns.

3. Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000

Strategic Policy 1- Strategic Development Locations : The Metropolitan Development Strategy requires the continued designation and safeguarding of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Belt within which there is a presumption against the spread of built up areas and the encroachment of development into the countryside. Local Plans shall define the detailed boundaries and policies to safeguard the Green Belt.

4. Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005

Policy ENV 5 : There will be a presumption against new residential development in the Green Belt unless it is shown to be necessary in the direct interests of agriculture, forestry and horticulture or other uses appropriate only to a rural area.

Policy ENV 13 : There will be a general presumption against developments that could adversely affect Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation. 3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Scottish Water has not yet responded to their consultation. Should the Committee decide to approve the proposal, then any requirements from Scottish Water can be attached as a condition recommendation to the Scottish Ministers (see para.4.6 below).

3.2 West of Scotland Archaeology Service has no objection to this application.

3.3 My Traffic and Transportation Section have no objections to an additional house being served off the access driveway to Lochend House subject to junction site lines being improved.

3.4 One letter of representation was submitted by Councillor McGlinchey. The Councillor’s comments can be summarised as follows:

“I would like to formally object to the construction of a dwellinghouse on the application site as it in an environmentally sensitive location and is zoned as Green Belt in the Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005”

Comment : Beyond the southern boundary of the site is a designated Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). If the application was approved, a condition could be attached requiring that no construction vehicles or materials shall infringe on the SINC. The site is located within the Green Belt where there is a presumption against residential development.

4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 In terms of Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning applications must be determined in accordance with the relevant development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

4.2 In this case, Strategic Policy 1 of the Structure Plan and Policy ENV5 of the Local Plan do not support the proposed dwellinghouse at Lochend House. No justification has been submitted by the applicants to support a departure from the above policies.

4.3 The approved Dawn Homes residential development currently under construction to the north east of Lochend House has a definite southern boundary line, established by extensive vegetation. The boundary differentiates between the residential setting to the north and the adjacent Green Belt in which Lochend House is located. Approving this application would potentially set a precedent making it difficult for the Council to resist similar proposals in a Green Belt setting.

4.4 In the draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan (NLLP), the area within which the application site is located and the surrounding vicinity is a proposed ‘urban expansion area.’ Until the NLLP has been adopted, any application for residential development in the Green Belt is premature. Given that the SINC is adjacent to the application site, it is unlikely that future development would be approved in close proximity to Lochend House. Having considered the merits of this planning application, it is recommended that permission be refused.

4.5 In terms of the Town and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 2007, if the Committee does not accept my recommendation that permission should be refused, the application will have to be notified to the Scottish Ministers since the application site lies within the Green Belt. Application No: N/08/00254/FUL

Date Registered: 25th February 2008

Applicant: Mr & Mrs William Dunbar The Gavell Steading Queenzieburn Kilsyt h

Agent ADR (Design) Ltd The Nurseries 5 Tak-Ma-Doon Road Kilsyth

Development: Construction of a Dwellinghouse

Location: Gavell Farm Gavell Road Queenzieburn North Lanarkshire

Ward: 1 Kilsyth: Councillors Griffin, Jones and Key

Grid Reference: 269601 677139

File Reference: N/08/00254/FUL

Site History: None

Development Plan: Policy GB3 of the Kilsyth Local Plan 1999

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Consultations: Scottish Water (No Objection) West of Scotland Archaeology Service (No Response)

Representations: None.

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 5th March 2008

Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. In the interests of the proper planning of the area in that residential development would constitute inappropriate new development in the Green Belt and as such would be contrary to Scottish Planning Policy 3 : Planning for Housing, Scottish Planning Policy 21 : Green Belts, the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 (Strategic Policy 1) and the Kilsyth Local Plan 1999 (Green Belt Policy GB3).

2. That should planning permission be granted for this development a precedent may be set which would make it difficult for the Planning Authority to refuse other similar applications. Construction af a ~w~llin~h~u~ NOTE TO COMMITTEE: If granted, this application will have to be notified to the Scottish Ministers in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 2007 because the proposed development falls within an area of land designated as Green Belt.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 25th February 2008

Letter from Scottish Water received 1Oth March 2008

Kilsyth Local Plan 1999 Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000

SPP 3 : Planning for Housing SPP 21 : 21 Green Belts

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mrs Kirsten Devlin at 01236 616463.

DATE: 20th March 2008 APPLICATION NO. N/08/00254/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.1 This application is for the construction of a detached 1 % storey house on land to the east of the house at Gavell Farm, Gavell Road, Queenzieburn. The application site is primarily on land associated with the existing house, and which probably formed part of the original farm steading. A caravan and a number of outbuildings for geese are located on the site.

1.2 The proposed development will create a new separate access off Gavell Road, with the house being positioned to face the road. The house will sit in a considerable sized plot and would be set back 26 metres from the road, and would have a rear garden depth of 23 metres.

2. Development Plan/ National Planning Policy

2.1 The application site lies within the Green Belt and policies relevant to the consideration of the proposed development can be summarised as follows :-

I. Scottish Planning Policy 3 : Planning for Housing.

Key themes are promoting development in brown field rather that green field locations and seeking to maintain the effectiveness of existing Green Belts and safeguarding the character and amenity of the countryside.

2. Scottish Planning Policy 21 : Green Belts.

The three main purposes of the Green Belt are : 1. To maintain the identity of towns by establishing a clear definition of their physical boundaries and preventing coalescence; 2. To provide countryside for recreation or institutional purposes of various kinds; and 3. To maintain the landscape settings of towns.

3. Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000.

Strategic Policy 1 - Strategic Development Locations : The Metropolitan Development Strategy requires the continued designation and safeguarding of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Belt within which there is a presumption against the spread of built up areas and the encroachment of development into the countryside. Local Plans shall define the detailed boundaries and policies to safeguard the Green Belt.

4. Kilsyth Local Plan 1999.

This site is covered by Policy GB2 (Green Belts) of the Local Plan which seeks to ensure that there is a presumption against new development in the Green Belt unless required for agriculture, forestry, horticulture, nature conservation, appropriate countryside recreation and tourism dependant upon a countryside location and other development such as telecommunications development, which can be shown to require to be located within the Green Belt. Policy GB3 states that there is a presumption against residential development in the Green Belt. 3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Neither Scottish Water nor the West of Scotland Archaeology Service has any objection to the proposal, and my Traffic & Transportation Section has no objection subject to conditions.

4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 Under Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the relevant development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case, Strategic Policy 1 of the Structure Plan and Policies GB2 and GB3 of the Kilsyth Local Plan do not support the proposed development and no justification has been provided by the applicant to warrant a departure from established Green Belt policy.

4.2 This proposed house could be regarded as detrimental to the character of the Green Belt and its approval could set a precedent that would make it difficult to refuse similar planning applications. Notwithstanding the sympathetic design of the proposed house, it is recommended that planning permission be refused.

4.3 In terms of the Town & Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 2007, if the Committee does not accept my recommendation that permission should be refused, the application will have to be notified to the Scottish Ministers since the application site lies within the Green Belt. Application No: C/07/01 1 26/AM D

Date Registered: 28th June 2007

Applicant: AMG Properties Ltd Hill Street Balley money Antrim

Agent Elevation Architectural Design Works 11 Cairnfore Avenue Troon KAlO 7JL

Development: Residential Development Comprising 20 Dwellinghouses, Access Road and Landscaping

Location: Land West Of 70 Main Street Longriggend Airdrie

Ward: 007 Airdrie North Cllrs Cameron, McGuigan, S. Coyle & Morgan

Grid Reference: 282148670061

File Reference: C/PL/CCM03070/CM/LR

Site History: 0 C104/01633/FUL Erection of 12 Dwellinghouses Granted 1'' Nov 2005

Development Plan: Zoned as ECON 8 (General Urban Area) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: NLC Learning and Leisure (No Objection) Scottish Environment Protection Agency (No Objection) Scottish Water (No Objection) British Gas (No Objection) Scottish Power (No Objection) Central Scotland Forest Trust (No Response) The Woodland Trust Scotland (No Response)

Representations: 10 letters of representation received

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Recommendation: Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

2. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- PL-02 Revision C, DR-01 Revision A, , HT-A-01 Revision A, HT-B-01 Revision A, HT-C-01 Revision A and HT-E-01

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

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

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

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

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

5. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, the drainage scheme must comply with the requirements of the publication titled 'Drainage Assessment: A Guide for Scotland' and any other advice subsequently published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) or the Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party (SUDSWP). SUDS shall still be provided even where discharges are proposed to public sewers notwithstanding any conditions imposed by Scottish Water.

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

6. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 5 shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Within three months of the construction of the SUDS, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in drainage works) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved plans. Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site.

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. For the avoidance of doubt a 3 metre high close boarded screen fence shall be erected along the site boundary marked orange on the approved drawing PL-02 Revision C Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.

8. That before any of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted, situated on a site upon which a fence or wall is to be erected, are occupied, the fence, or wall, as approved under the terms of condition 7 above, shall be erected.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

9. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of all external materials to be used in construction, including walls, roofs, windows, doors, gutters and downpipes, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

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

10. That prior to any works starting on site, the developer shall confirm in writing to the Planning Authority that the drainage arrangements to be provided are to the satisfaction of the SEPA.

Reason: To prevent groundwater or surface water contamination in the interests of environmental and amenity protection.

11. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping, including boundary treatment, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required, and it shall include:- (a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, grass seeding and turfing; (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development (d) details of the phasing of these works. (e) the landscaping design shall incorporate tree and plant species that will encourage habitats through the use of complimentary species found in the surrounding rural areas. (9 the landscape works shall include a tree planting scheme for the area hatched green on the approved plan PL2-02 Revision C. (9) details of the pedestrian link to the adjacent woodland area

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in the interests of maintaining and enhancing the biodiversity of the site.

12. That within one year of the occupation of the last 2 dwellinghouses within the development hereby permitted, all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 11 above, shall be completed; and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased within two years of the completion of the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area. 13. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of:- (a) the proposed pedestrian link shaded red on the approved plans; (b) the proposed SUDS Scheme as shown on the approved plans; (c) the proposed sewerage treatment facility as shown on the approved plans; (d) the proposed drainage wayleave areas as shown on the approved plans; (e) the proposed tree planting area shown hatched green on the approved plans; (9 the proposed 3 metre high screen fencing shown orange on the approved plans

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

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

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

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

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

16. That before completion of the development hereby permitted, the woodland management and maintenance scheme, approved under the terms of condition 15 above, shall be in operation.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and biodiversity

17. That before any dwellinghouse hereby permitted is occupied 2 car parking spaces shall be provided within the curtilage of its plot and outwith the public road or footway, and thereafter be maintained as parking spaces.

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

18. That before any of the dwellinghouses hereby approved are brought into use, the pedestrian link to the adjacent woodland as shown in red on the approved plans shall be completed.

Reason: To ensure the established public access route is maintained

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 28th June 2007 Amended plans received lothMarch 2008.

Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 7th November 2007 Letter from Scottish Water received 20th July 2007 Letter from British Gas received 26th July 2007

Memo from Transportation received 26th September 2007 Memo from Geotechnical Team Leader received 10th September 2007 Memo from Head of Protective Services received 19th July 2007 Memo from NLC Landscape Services Section received 11th July 2007 Memo from NLC Learning and Leisure received 23rd July 2007

Letters from Mr And Mrs D Hillis, 72 Main Street, Longriggend, By Airdrie, ML6 7RS received 4th July 2007and 2"d October 2007 Letters from D Ferguson, 34 Main Street, Longriggend , Airdrie, ML6 7RS received 10th July and 15'h October 2007. Letters from Michel Lareman & Suren Putter-Lareman, 41 Main Street, Longriggend, ML6 7RS received 17th July, 16'h October 2007 and Ilthmarch 2008 Letters from 6 G Haulage Ltd, 25 Main Street, Longriggend, Airdrie, ML6 7RS received 1Ith July and 12'h October 2007. Letter from Colin Morgan, 43 Main Street, Longriggend, Airdrie, North Lanarkshire, ML6 7RS received 16th October 2007.

Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Colin Marshall at 01236 812376.

Dated 13'h March 2008 APPLICATION NO. C1071011261AMD

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.1 Planning permission is being sought for the erection of 20 dwellinghouses at a former coal yard site located to the west of 70 Main Street, Longriggend. The site is located on the south side of Main Street and extends to some 0.98ha. The site is bounded to the north by a HGV yard and existing houses and to the west, east and south by a new tree plantation maintained and managed by The Scottish Woodlands Trust.

1.2 The proposals would involve the erection of a mix of house types of the following description:-

Type A 3 bed 1 % storey 5 units height 6.64m Type B 3 bed semi-detached 2 storey 12 units height 7.94m Type C 4 bed detached 2 storey 2 units height 7.94m Type E 3 bed semi-detached 2 storey 1 unit height 7.94m

1.3 All of the proposed dwellinghouses would have their own garden areas with three of the plots provided with detached ancillary garages. The development would also include the provision of a new access road from Main Street and be constructed to adoptable standard. Three of the proposed 1% storey dwellinghouses would face onto and take access from Main Street. The other dwellinghouses would take access from the new roadway which would form two cul-de- sacs. Each dwelling would have driveways with provision for 2 parked cars.

1.4 The proposed houses would be finished in a mix of stone and render to external walls with grey coloured tiles to double pitched roofs. There would be a mix of 3 and 4 bedrooms with lounge, kitchen and dining areas to each house type.

1.5 The proposals also include a drainage layout for foul and surface water and include a SUDS pond. The proposals also include a tree plantingAandscapedarea to the east of the site and this area would accommodate the SUDS provision and water treatment infrastructure.

1.6 An existing public access route to the tree plantation area located to the south of the site would be maintained by a link footpath provided between plots 13 and 14.

1.7 The application details also included a Noise Impact Assessment to demonstrate there would be no significant noise nuisance from the adjacent HGV yard. Part of the mitigation measures would include the provision of a 3 metre high close boarded fence between this part of the site and the HGV yard.

1.8 In November 2005 planning permission was granted for the redevelopment of this site for 12 dwellinghouses. (Refer to planning permission C/04/01633/FUL).

2. DeveloPment Plan

2.1 Under the terms of the Adopted Monkland District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within an area covered by policy Econ 8 (General Urban Area). There are no strategic issues.

3. Consultations and Representations 3.1 The Transportation Section initially objected to the proposals on road safety grounds as the required standard visibility splays of 9.0 x 90m in both directions along Main Street could not be provided as the required ground is out-with the applicant's control. It was noted that the maximum visibility that could be provided onto Main Street was 4.5m x 20m to the left of the proposed junction and 4.4m x 35m to the right. Notwithstanding this, the Transportation Section also advised that should planning permission be granted that conditions should be imposed to ensure the footpath along the front of the site should be 2.0 metres in width and that the proposed road access be constructed to the standard radius requirement of 10.5m. In addition it was requested that the proposals should include traffic calming elements and there was a need to consider further alterations to the proposed layout to meet the standard road design requirements. These included minor revisions to the proposed road geometry, turning areas, provision of a pedestrian guardrail at the woodland footpath link, driveway and visitor parking positioning. Amended plans were submitted by the applicant and apart from the junction visibility splay (which cannot be improved) the other roads design issues have been addressed or can be covered by condition.

3.2 NLC Landscape Services Section had no comments but expected to receive full landscape plans for their assessment.

3.3 Scottish Water had no objection to the proposal.

3.4 SEPA had no objection as an appropriate drainage system had been agreed with the developer.

3.5 The Geotechnical Team advised that a SUDS scheme be introduced for the site and that SEPA and Scottish Water should be consulted on an appropriate drainage scheme.

3.6 Scottish Power had no objection to the proposal.

3.7 Transco had no objection

3.8 The Protective Services Section have no objection provided that a comprehensive Phase 1 Site Investigation is carried out to ensure all potential risks arising from the previous industrial uses have been addressed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. They were satisfied with the recommended mitigation measures noted in the Noise Impact Assessment

3.9 There were 11 letters of representation received in regards to the proposals. The material terms of objection can be fairly summarised as follows:

That the proposed housing layout and house types does not fit in with the character of the village That the proposed cul-de-sac roadway is not appropriate That the proposals will lead to additional traffic and on-street parking to the detriment of traffic safety on Main Street There is no public transport links to the village and residents would be car dependant The proposed development will require a new sewerage system The site would be over developed. A total of 8 houses would be more appropriate There is insufficient parking provision The site is contaminated from previous industrial use Longriggend has poor infrastructure provision, the development would add additional pressure on its resources The surrounding area cannot cope with additional septic tanks outflows and may be detrimental to flora and fauna The development would be detrimental to wildlife There would be a loss of outlook to the southwest Security would be compromised 0 There would be a loss of market value for existing houses should this development proceed 0 There are no existing community services in this village 0 There are no facilities for children in the village, this will lead to incidents of anti-social behaviour 0 The proposed development would lead to noise complains from the new residents due to the existing HGV yard. 0 The development will have result in a loss of sunlight and daylight to adjacent properties. 0 The site development would affect current drainage connections. 0 Access to the woodland area needs to be maintained.

4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions

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

4.2 As noted above the application site is located within an area zoned as a General Urban Area (Econ 8) in the local plan where the principle of a mixture of uses is acceptable. Taking into account the previous use of the site, its context with Longriggend and the general urban zoning, the principle of residential use would be acceptable and supported under policy Econ 8. In addition planning permission was previously granted for the redevelopment of this site for housing purposes.

4.3 The proposed layout generally accords with the Council’s design guidance on new housing areas. Whilst part of the required visibility splay falls out-with the application site boundary it is considered that the actual visibility along this part of Main Street is reasonable. The proposed access road would be constructed to adoptable standards with appropriate corner radii, road and pavement widths. Each plot is large enough to accommodate sufficient off street parking spaces and adequate visitor parking would also be provided.

4.4 The proposed dwellinghouses are typical of a type found in a rural village and each is set within acceptable garden areas. They are of a similar type and height to existing houses in the village. The building line along Main Street would be retained and the cul-de-sac layout is not considered to be inappropriate in terms of the streetscape of this linear settlement. Plot sizes are acceptable, privacy levels would not be compromised and security would be acceptable provided adequate fencing is provided for each plot. A 3 metre high close boarded fence would be erected between the HGV yard and plots 16 and 17 to meet the requirements of Protective Services. The layout also incorporates a SUDS scheme beside the proposed access road to enable servicing and a footpath link through the site is to be provided to the outlying tree plantation area currently managed by Central Scotland Forest Trust CSFT who had previously had no objection.

4.5 There were no objections from external consultees and SEPA and Scottish Water are satisfied that an appropriate drainage system can be provided.

4.6 Turning to the terms of objection the following comments can be made.

0 Longriggend is a remote linear shaped settlement, where residential development has taken place along either side of the road. This site was formerly used as a coal yard and due to its size may allow a development of a further 20 houses. The site is encompassed within the designated village limit and its redevelopment is not considered to be unacceptable in principle or in its detail. The 1% and 2 storey house type designs are considered to be compatible with the existing houses in Longriggend. The provision of a new roadway to adoptable standards has enabled the site to be developed for 20 houses and is considered to be acceptable. The development would increase the number of vehicles in the village however adequate off street parking facilities would be provided therefore the development would not necessarily lead to on street parking on Main Street. 0 There are no regular bus routes via Longriggend however it is understood that a dial a bus service is available. It may be the case that with the additional residents there may be more demand and a regular service may return to the benefit of the village. Both SEPA and Scottish Water had no objection to the proposals and it is assumed that a satisfactory drainage system can be provided. 0 The site is capable of supporting 20 houses. There is adequate parking provision within the site for 20 houses Protective Services have noted the site may be contaminated and it would be a condition of any planning permission that adequate measures are taken to address identified contamination issues. There were no objections from the utility companies and Scottish Water and SEPA had no objection therefore it is likely the development can be serviced to acceptable standards. As above. 0 The proposals also include a tree planting area to the east of the site. In addition each plot would be landscaped with fencing and hedgerows. As such additional habitats would be created to the benefit of flora and fauna and the general biodiversity of the site and surrounding area. As above The site was formerly used as a coal yard and then recently cleared of all buildings and coal storage. The outlook would have been restricted and relatively poor during its operation. The proposal would involve the erection of both 1% and 2 storey dwelling houses set within large garden areas and this would represent an improvement over the current outlook of the semi-derelict site. Site security would be adequate following provision of boundarykcreen fences Perceived losses to the market value of existing houses is subjective and is not material to the consideration of a planning application. Community facilities in the village are limited however the development is not of a size that would require a developer to provide such facilities as part of the development. As above although it is noted that a children’s play park is located at the end of Main Street. Incidents of anti-social behaviour are a matter for the Police. The Protective Services Section accepted the mitigation measures suggested in the submitted Noise Impact Assessment and the provision of the 3 metre high close boarded fence is acceptable. There would be no significant loss of sunlight or daylight to adjacent properties 0 The developer would be legally obliged to take current drainage arrangements into account and this has been included in the submitted drainage design. (drawing no DR1-01 Rev A) The proposals indicate that a footpath link to the woodland would be provided.

Following consideration of the terms of objection it can be concluded that they cannot be sustained in this instance.

4.7 The proposals accord with the terms of the development plan and meet the terms of the Councils Design Guidance on new Housing Areas. The proposed development is acceptable and raised no significant objections from the above noted consultation responses. While the points of objection are noted it is considered that these cannot be sustained to a degree where they would merit the refusal of this application. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions. Application No: C/07/01427/REM

Date Registered: 20th August 2007

Applicant: Barratt West Scotland Mayfield House 7 Maggiewoods Loan Falkirk FKI 5SJ

Agent Wilson And Wilson Arnot Grange Maggiewoods Loan Falkirk FK1 5SG

Development: Erection of 81 Dwellinghouses and Non Compliance with Condition 5 of Planning Permission C/06/00802/OUT (Restrict Height to 2 Storeys)

Location: Archers Of Airdrie Ltd Carlisle Road Airdrie North Lanarkshire ML6 8AA

Ward: 01 1 Airdrie South Councillors M. Coyle, Curley, Fagan & Higgins

Grid Reference: 277159664378

File Reference: C/PL/AIC2081208000/IJ/EL

Site History: 0 C/06/00802/OUT Erection of Residential Development (In Outline) - Granted 22"d Dec 2006

Development Plan: Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996 - Policy Econ 8: General Urban Areas

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: SEPA (Comments) British Gas (No objections) Scottish Power (No objections)

Representations: 2 letters of representation received.

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required Planning Application No CmfA31427/FUC

Erection of31 DweltingRousw zm- Archers of Airdria Ltd Carlisle Road Airdrie P-=n*ii%iEF*; Site Area 135HA Recommendation: Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1. That the permission hereby permitted shall be started not later than 22ndDecember 201 1.

Reason: To accord with the terms of the outline planning permission ref:C/06/00802/0UT

2. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers BWS 13301H; 10OO-COR-(3)-01/06 & 1000/ROD-(3+)-00/07.

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

3. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

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

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

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

5. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of condition 4 above shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Following the construction of the SUDS, a certificate (signed by a chartered Civil Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved plans.

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

6. Notwithstanding the terms of Condition 4 above, a Flood Risk Assessment shall be submitted to the Planning Authority prior to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, the Flood Risk Assessment must take account of Scottish Planning Policy 7 (SPP 7): Planning & Flooding and Planning Advice Note 69 (PAN 69): Planning & Building Standards Advice on Flooding.

Reason: In order that the Planning Authority might be satisfied that the proposed development will not give rise to flooding within the application site and will not increase the flood risk elsewhere. 7. That any flood mitigation works identified in the Flood Risk Assessment approved in terms of Condition 6 above shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Following the construction of all the flood mitigation works, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in flood mitigation) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the flood mitigation works have been constructed in accordance with the approved plans.

Reason: To ensure that the development site and adjacent land and property will not be subjected to unacceptable flooding in the interests of public safety and amenity.

8. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping, for the areas shown on the approved plans, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include:- (a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, boundary treatment, grass seeding and turfing; (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development, (d) details of the phasing of these works.

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

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

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the site and the general area.

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 shown on the approved plans; (b) the proposed parking areas shown on the approved plans; (c) the proposed grassed, planted and landscaped areas shown on the approved plans; (d) the proposed fences to be erected along the boundaries marked shown on the approved plans.

Reason: To define the use of the land.

11. That BEFORE completion of the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance scheme approved under the terms of condition 10 shall be in operation.

Reason: To define the permission.

12. That, notwithstanding the requirements of condition 3 above, a feature wall shall be erected along the frontage of the site on Carlisle Road, details of which shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, before the development hereby permitted starts.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail. 13. That before any of the dwellinghouses hereby granted are occupied, acoustic barriers shall be provided along the site's western boundaries, details of which shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, before any works start on site.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity and to enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects.

14. That all parking and manoeuvring areas shown on the approved plans shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. .

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

15. That before the development starts, details of the design of the signalised junction upgrading works at Petersburn Road/CarlisleRoad shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, before the development hereby permitted starts. Thereafter, the scheme as agreed shall be operational before the first flatted dwellinghouse is first occupied or any other reasonable agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of road safety and to enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.

16. That before any development starts, additional information in support of the Ground Investigation Report dated October 2007 shall be submitted and agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, and development shall not be commenced until this information has been submitted and approved.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail and to ensure the site is free of contamination.

17. That on completion of any remedial works identified by the ground investigation report, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any such remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the submitted details.

Reason: To ensure the site is free of contamination Note to Committee

If the Committee are minded to grant planning permission the decision notice will not be issued until a Section 69 Agreement is signed between the Council and the developer with regard to a financial contribution of f20,250 for the upgrading of the existing recreational facilities in Airdrie.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 20th August 2007 Planning permission C/06/00802/OUT Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 26th October 2007 Letter from British Gas received 3rd September 2007 Letter from Scottish Power received 28th August 2007

Memo from Local Plans Section received 15th October 2007 Memo from Geotechnical Team Leader received 14th September 2007 Memo from Protective Services Section received 31 st August 2007 E-mail from Councillor Fagan received 3'' September 2007

Letter from David Hodson, Administration Manager, SHB Hire Ltd, 18 Premier Way, Abbey Park Ind Estate, Romsey, Hants, SO51 9DQ received 10th September 2007. Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, 8 & C September 1996

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr lan Johnston at 01236 812382.

Date: 14'h March 2008 APPLICATION NO. C1071014271REM

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.1 The application site measures 1.26 hectares approximately and is located to the south east of Airdrie Town Centre on the west side of the A73 Carlisle Road opposite the junction with Petersburn Road, Airdrie. The site slopes upwards in a northerly direction and is currently utilised as a Car Sales operation i.e. Archers of Airdrie. The lands to the west slope markedly downwards towards Brownsburn Industrial Estate, the lands to the north/northwest are open fields and the lands to the south are open space/lndustriaI premises. The surrounding uses are a mix of Industrial/CommerciaIand Residential.

1.2 The proposal is for the re-development of the application site for residential purposes in the form of 3 blocks of flatted dwellings, each set to a height of three storey with dormers and totalling 81 individual units. The main block shall front directly onto Carlisle Road while the other blocks shall be sited at the less prominent south/southwest parts of the site. A new single access into the site will be taken directly from Carlisle Road opposite its junction with Petersburn Road where a new traffic controlled system will be introduced. All parking associated with the development will be located within the site.

1.3 Due to the physical constraints of the site, which include the presence of a major underground water main running through the site in a north south direction, the positioning of buildings within the site is restricted and the applicant also proposes to make a financial contribution to the Council for the upgrading of recreational amenity facilities within the general area as opposed to the provision of any dedicated in-site play area facilities.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site is covered by policy €CON 8: General Urban Areas in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. There are no strategic implications.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Neither Scottish Power nor Scottish Water offered any objection to this proposal. British Gas have not objected to the proposal subject to the developer demonstrating that the development will not have an impact on their assets, and that suitable infrastructure can be put in place to support the development.

3.2 SEPA highlighted the close proximity of the site to a culverted watercourse and required the submission of detailed survey information to clearly demonstrate that the site is sufficiently above the culvert soffit level of the Brown's Burn not to be at significant risk of flooding. The information subsequently submitted by the applicant directly to SEPA has satisfied them that this development offers no potential flood risk. SEPA also advised that all foul drainage should connected to the public sewer and that surface water should incorporate a SUDS feature to be designed in accordance with current best practice. 3.3 The Transportation Section has commented on the proposed internal road/parking layout (which will remain private) and amendments have been incorporated to take account of their advice. As regards the submitted Transport Assessment while in principle the Transportation Section is confident that the development site can be served by a new traffic signal controlled arrangement around the junction of Carlisle Road and Petersburn Road, the specifics of the proposed signalised junction design is currently being pursued with the applicant. The Learning and Leisure Service (Play Services) has recommended the provision of 1500 sq. metres of play space with at least 500 metres to be equipped play space. The Conservation and Greening Section has offered no objection to the proposal. The Pollution Control Section has reviewed the submitted Site Investigation Report and has requested additional information to support proposals for site remediation.

3.4 Following the standard neighbour notification procedures 1 letter of objection was received in respect of this proposal. The relevant points of objection are as follows: a. the existing Vehicle Hire business on the opposite side of Carlisle Road has operated for a number of years without a restriction on hours of working and without any reported problems of noise from those operations. The introduction of this residential development could potentially give rise to complaints from new residents and this would be unreasonable given that the vehicle hire business has been in operation prior to any new development. b. the introduction of additional traffic onto Carlisle Road as a result of this development would create a potential road safety hazard.

3.5 Councillor David Fagan has registered an objection to this proposal on the ground that the junction of Petersburn Road and Carlisle Road is currently very busy and problematic and the current proposal, in terms of usage of that junction is not safe. The Councillor has requested that a site visit be made prior to determination of the planning application.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 Planning permission C/06/00802/OUTwas granted in December 2006 for the residential development of the application site and the acceptability of a residential use on the site has now been established. Having regard to this then the current “reserved matters” submission requires to be assessed against the appropriate Design Guidance on “New Housing Areas”. The presence of an underground water main with required 20 metre wayleave through the site has severely constrained the layout of the site. Notwithstanding this, the design and external treatment of the proposed new build is to an acceptable standard. While in the absence of any detailed layout proposals the outline permission had stipulated a height restriction of 2 storey on any new build, the proposed height of the flatted units i.e. three storey with dormers is also considered acceptable at both the prominent site frontage (onto Carlisle Road) where the properties on the opposite side of the road are at similar heights and also within the rear part of the site which is slightly lower in level and therefore less prominent. The internal road/parking/servicing layout has been the subject of detailed discussion with the Transportation Section and has been revised to take account of their comments. The internal site layout provides a sufficiently large level of amenity space around the buildings and while the sites constraints make the additional recommended provision of play space impractical the applicant has agreed to contribute a financial sum (81 x f250 totalling f20,250)to the Council to be directed to the upgrading of existing play facilities within the general area. The Transportation Section is also in direct discussion with the applicant to establish an acceptable design for the required junction arrangements at Petersburn Road/Carlisle Road which will incorporate controlled traffic signals and will also form the sole vehicular access into the development site. 4.2 Having regard to the points of objection received I would offer the following comment: a. A Noise Impact Assessment submitted on behalf of the applicant has identified that the proposed residential site is currently dominated by noise arising from local traffic on Carlisle Road and some sporadic industrial noise, of less than “marginal significance” from Industrial uses within Brownsburn Industrial Estate. The introduction of a 1.8 metre high acoustic barrier along the western boundary of the site (with Brownsburn Industrial Estate) will reduce noise levels below the required level set by North Lanarkshire. The Noise Assessment does not highlight any current adverse noise levels from the Vehicle Hire business opposite the site on Carlisle Road and subject to those current levels being constant then no noise issue should arise. b. An updated Transport Statement was submitted by the developer and, following discussions, has sought to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Transportation Section that the application site could be accessed directly from Carlisle Road by means of traffic lights around the junction with Petersburn Road. This will also improve the current congestion problems on Carlisle Road at that junction. The design details of the signalised junction is currently being pursued and a condition on any planning permission will require the submission, and approval of those design details before any works start on site.

4.3 The proposal under consideration is acceptable in policy terms and will replace a visually unattractive commercial use (car sales) with a potentially attractive residential development on a prominent “gateway” site into Airdrie. The design, external treatment and general site layout are of an acceptable standard and the applicant is willing to make a financial contribution to the Council for the upgrading of play facilities within the general area as an alternative to the provision of any in-site play facilities. An Agreement (Section 69) relative to this contribution will require to be concluded before any planning consent is issued. The individual points of representation raised are noted although these do not merit the refusal of this application. Taking all matters into consideration I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to the stated conditions. 4.4 It should be noted that a request has been made for a site visit prior to a decision being made on the application. Application No: C/07/02007/FUL

Date Registered: 13th December 2007

Applicant: Gladman Gladman House Alexandria Way Congleton C hesi re CU12 1LB

Development: Construction of Ten Two Storey Business Units

Location: Missiles & Space Batteries Ltd Hagmill Road Shawhead Coatbridge North Lanarkshire ML5 4UZ

Ward: 10 Coatbridge South Councillors Brooks, Ferrie & Higgins

Grid Reference: 273729662750

File Reference: CPUCTH750000/1J/LR

C/03/00739/OUT Erection of Office Development (Class 4) Site History: Withdrawn C/06/0 1509/OUT Proposed Residential Development Withdrawn

Development Plan: Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996 - Policy ECON 712

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: SEPA (No response) Scottish Water (No objections) British Gas (No objections) Scottish Power (No objections) Transport Scotland (No objections)

Representations: No letters of representation received.

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required N Recommendation: Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

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

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

3. That, notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992, the permission hereby granted shall relate to the use of the buildings solely for a use included within Class 4: Business Use; of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997.

Reason: To define the permission.

4. That before any development starts, a report describing the soil and ground conditions prevailing over the application site (including details of the nature, concentration and distribution of any contaminants), shall be submitted to the Planning Authority and the works required in order to remove or render harmless these contaminants, having regard to the proposed use of the site, shall be agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, and development shall not be commenced until these works have been completed.

Reason: To ensure the site is free of contamination.

5. That on completion of any remedial works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 4, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any such remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the submitted details.

Reason: To ensure the site is free of contamination

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

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

7. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of condition 6 above shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Following the construction of the SUDS, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved plans.

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

8. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, the applicant shall provide written confirmation to the Planning Authority from Scottish Water that all the requirements of Scottish Water have been fully met, and shall demonstrate that the development will not have an adverse 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.

9. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

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

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

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

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

11. That all works included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 10 above, shall be completed in accordance with the approved timetable, and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the full occupation of the development hereby permitted, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the site and the general area.

12. 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 shown on the approved plans; (b) the proposed parking areas shown on the approved plans; (c) the proposed grassed, planted and landscaped areas shown on the approved plans; (d) the proposed fences to be erected along the boundaries as shown on the approved plans.

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

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

Reason: To define the use of the land. 14. That a gate should be positioned on the access road into the site at a point 16m back from the road channel on the south side of Hagmill Road to permit HGVs to enter the site without causing an obstruction to traffic on Hagmill Road and a heel kerb should be laid flush at the back of the footway to delineate private / public areas.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 13th December 2007

Letter from Scottish Water received 22nd January 2008 Letter from British Gas received 17th January 2008 Letter from Scottish Power received 24th December 2007 Letter from Transport Scotland received 25'h March 2008

Memo from Transportation Section received 5th February 2008 Memo from Protective Services Section received 30th January 2008

Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr lan Johnston at 01236 812382.

Date: 20 March 2008 APPLICATION NO. C/07/02007/FUL

REPORT

1. Descrbtion of Site and ProPOsal

1.1 The application site measures 1.57 hectares and is made up of a large rectangular area of vacant, grassed land that slopes downwards towards from Hagmill Road (northern boundary) towards the A8 Glasgow to Edinburgh Dual Carriageway (southern boundary). The site is bounded to the east by the MSA building (Centrum Business Centre) and to the west by open fields and a road linking onto the northern carriageway of the A8 at the Shawhead interchange. The site is located approximately 50 metres to the south of the predominantly residential area of Shawhead, Coatbridge.

1.2 The proposal is for a Business Park development comprising of 5,824 sq. metres of officelbusiness floorspace within 10 two storey blocks with associated car parking. The internal site layout will form a courtyard style with the dedicated parking areas centrally located and the landscaped areas positioned around the edges of the site. The site will be accessed directly from Hagmill Road and the development will provide a range of high quality, flexible office spaces ranging in sizes from 1,000 sq. ft. (about 6-8 employees) upwards.

1.3 The buildings will be modern in design and will be constructed of traditional cavity brickwork with pitched roofs with the external appearance enhanced by features such as architectural glazing, detailing in the brickwork and glazed entrance canopies. Internally the buildings will provide open plan accommodation with vertical circulation and toilet facilities located in the central common parts of the building.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site is covered by Policy Econ 7/2: Office/Business Use/Light Industry in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The proposal raises no strategic issues.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Following the standard neighbour notification procedure no representations were received in respect of this proposal.

3.2 Scottish Power, Scottish Water and British Gas offered no objection to this proposal. SEPA did not respond on this proposal.

3.3 The Transportation Section offered no objection to the internal layout subject to a number of road detail amendments which have been incorporated within an amended layout plan. Having considered the Transport Assessment submitted the Transportation Section has, however raised concerns over the potential impact of this development on the adjacent junctions which are already congested particularly at peak periods. They have recommended that this proposal is premature pending the programmed upgrading of the A8 Dual Carriageway to Motorway status (programmed 201 0-201 2) which should relieve the existing pressures on the surrounding road network. Transport Scotland have offered no objection to this proposal.

3.4 The Protective Services Section requested the submission of a Site Investigation Report, a restriction on the times of use of noise producing works during construction periods and a restriction on any noise generated by any air conditioning/ventilation or other plant required as part of the development. The head of Land Services offered no objection to this proposal. 4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 provides that in making any determination under the Planning Act, regard has to be had to the development plan. In particular, the determination shall be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this instance, the development is not held to be of strategic importance therefore the Structure Plan is not relevant in the assessment of this planning application.

4.2 In terms of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the application site is located within Policy ECON 712 area which allocates the site near Shawhead Interchange for BusinesslOffice Use. Planning permission is being sought for the development of this site to accommodate a number of purpose built buildings (10 in total) which are to be used specifically for Class 4:Business Use and therefore the proposal is compliant with the Local Plan and acceptable in policy terms.

4.3 The design and external treatment of the buildings is considered to be of a high standard and the general laying out of the site, which incorporates a high level of landscaping throughout, is both visually attractive and meets the requirements of the Transportation Section in terms of car parkinglservicing and internal manoeuvring standards. No objections have been received against this proposal following the neighbour notification procedures or from the statutory consultees.

4.4 The Transport Assessment submitted with the application demonstrates that the existing road junctions around the application site suffer from degrees of congestion especially at peak periods with a prime source of that congestion being the junctions serving the adjacent A8 Dual Carriageway. Taken that the upgrading of the A8 to Motorway status is programmed for between 2010 and 2012 and this should improve the efficiency of vehicle movement around the adjacent junctions the Transportation Section are of the view that this current planning application is premature and should be deferred or refused until the adjacent road upgrading works are completed. However, taken that any proposed upgrading works on the A8 are outwith the control of the applicant and will not physically impact on the application site itself (as confirmed by Transport Scotland) then the refusal of this application on prematurity would effectively sterilise all potential development sites around these junctions. Should planning permission be granted then any additional adverse impact on the surrounding road network resulting from vehicle movement associated with the development would be relatively short term pending the programmed upgrading works on the adjacent A8.

4.5 Taking all of the foregoing into consideration I consider that this proposal is acceptable in policy terms and the use is complementary to the adjacent land use (MSA building) to the east. The proposed site has been identified as it provides good transportation links to the major road network and will, through the provision of a mix of available office sizes, provide an opportunity to both local and inward investment businesses. While the concerns of the Transportation Section are noted I do not consider that these merit the refusal of this planning application. I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to the stated conditions. Application No: C/08/00145/FUL

Date Registered: 6th February 2008

Applicant: Orange PCS Ltd 6 Masterton Way Tannochside Park Uddingston Glasgow G71 5PT

Agent John Church Harlequin Ltd C/o Orange PCS Ltd 6 Masterton Way Tannochside Park Uddingston Glasgow G71 5PT

Development: Erection of a 20m Mast and Associated Telecommunications Equipment

Location: Land At Upper Mill Street Industrial Estate Upper Mill Street Town Centre Airdrie North Lanarkshire

Ward: 8 Airdrie Central Councillors Devine, Logue, & Stocks

Grid Reference: 276297665644

File Reference: C/PL/AIU450000000/CMN/EL

Site History: None

Development Plan: The application site is designated as ECON2 Existing General Industrial Areas and assessed against policy TELI Telecommunications Developments of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: None

Representations: 1 letter received (6 signatories)

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required Planning application No ~~~~0~14~~UL Recommendation: Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- 01 REV A, 02 REV A, 03 REV A, 04 REV A

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

In event that the equipment hereby approved becomes redundant it shall be removed and the site reinstated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority within one month of the equipment becoming redundant.

Reason: To ensure the restoration of the site to the satisfactory standard.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 1st February 2008

Letter from Curtis Insulation Ltd & Signatories, Unit 7/8, 29-30 Uppermill Street, Airdrie, ML6 6JJ received 12th February 2008.

Monklands District Local Plan 1991 PAN 62 NPPG 19

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Christopher McNey at 01236 812375.

Date: 13th March 2008 AP PLlCAT10 N N0. C/08/001 451F UL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I Planning permission is being sought for the erection of a 20 metre high mast with 3 antenna , 1 fixed dish and associated ground based equipment, including a 1.8 metre high fence. The proposed 20 metre monopole would be sited an area of poorly maintained scrub to the north of Upper mill Street Industrial Estate, Airdrie.

1.2 Six ground based equipment cabinets and an electric meter cabinet require to be installed and each shall be painted matt grey. The six equipment cabinets would be installed on a 4.85 metre by 2.4 metres concrete base, the entire compound would cover 53.5 square metres (10.7 metres by 5 metres). A 1.2 metres wide footpath from the industrial yard to the site is also proposed.

2. DeveloPment Plan

2.1 The application site is designated as ECON2 Existing General Industrial Areas and assessed against policy TELl Telecommunications Developments of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. This application raises no strategic issues and is therefore assessed in terms of local plan policy.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Following standard neighbour notification procedures 1 letter of objection was received signed by six commercial occupiers of Upper Mill Street Industrial Estate. The main points of objection are summarised below:

a) Noise levels created by construction b) Parking arrangements while construction is underway c) The draw of the mast as an attracter of anti-social behaviour d) The perceived health risk caused by the mast

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of the local plan policies. The proposals require to be assessed against the development plan and any other relevant material considerations.

4.2 The application site is located is located in an area designated as ECON 2 (Existing General Industrial Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 which supports the retention, improvement and continuation of the industrial character of the area.

4.3 Policy TEL 1 (Telecommunications Development) states that any telecommunications developments will be considered with regard to national policy and against economic benefit, specific locational need, and environmental impact. 4.4 The applicant has supplied a supporting statement that indicates the need for a replacement mast for the one located on the roof of 86 Graham Street, Airdrie. 86 Graham Street is due to be demolished and the site redeveloped. In order to maintain coverage levels a new site near to that being lost is required. It is unlikely that there would be a significant negative or positive impact with regard to economic benefit that can be measured. It will be of general benefit to the community to retain full signal coverage.

4.5 The applicant has provided the required site selection survey for possible alternative sites. Several sites within the vicinity were investigated before this location was put forward. The sites that were investigated for mast sharing in the area were all considered unsuitable, as the masts would become more visually intrusive, including one that would likely adversely impact the setting of a listed building, and one being closely surrounded by housing sites.

4.6 In terms of environmental impact it is considered that the proposed monopole design and grey colour will marginally reflect the vertical emphasis and appearance of the existing (-15 metre tall) trees surrounding the industrial estate. It will, however, be considerably taller than the nearby buildings (5 metres). From the open space to the north the visual impact is minimised due to the relief of the topography. It is therefore considered that in general the monopole will not have a significant adverse impact on visual amenity of the surrounding area.

4.7 NPPG 19 provides support for telecommunications development where the applicants have demonstrated careful consideration of all siting and design options, and where the possible environmental effects have been minimised. Should the applicant have taken all these factors into consideration, refusal is unlikely to be warranted. With regards to PAN 62, it should be noted that it is preferred to locate telecommunication equipment in unobtrusive locations. It is considered that the applicant has satisfied the criteria set out in both NPPG 19 and PAN 62.

4.8 In response to the comments raised by the occupiers of the industrial estate regarding the noise and parking impact during construction it should be noted that this would be a temporary situation, and Pollution Control would have powers to control undue noise problems. Wjth regards to the concern that the mast is likely to attract anti-social behaviour to the area, this is not considered a material planning consideration, however, it may be the case that by controlling the site by the erection of fencing the scope for such behaviour would be reduced rather than increased. Finally, with regard to the objectors’ concerns about the health risk of these developments, it is conceded that there is public concern about the possible health risks associated with telecommunications apparatus, however, given that the applicant has provided the necessary ICNIRP certificate, it is considered that concerns over health implications are not sufficient on their own to justify refusal of this planning application.

4.9 In conclusion, it is considered that taking into account the development plan and all material considerations, including national policy and public concerns, planning permission should be granted in this case. The proposed development is in accordance with local plan policy and national policy guidance in PAN62 and NPPG 19 Radio Telecommunications Development and is considered to meet the criteria stipulated in policy TELl. The required ICNIRP Declaration has been supplied stating that the proposal is in compliance with the international safety standards for electro-magnetic radiation emissions. The design of the installation reflects the surrounding trees and will keep the visual impact to a minimum. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted. Application No: C/08/00186/FUL

Date Registered: 20th February 2008

Applicant: Barracuda Group Limited Clo Agent

Agent D2 Planning Limited 1st Floor, 4 Stoke Lane Bristol BS9 3DL

Development: Part Change of Use of Bingo Hall to Public House and Restaurant Including Removal of and Part Re-instatement of Single Storey Extension

Location: 2 - I0Hallcraig Street Town Centre Airdrie North Lanarkshire ML6 6AH

Ward: 008 Airdrie Central Councillors Devine, Logue and Stocks

Grid Reference: 276155665560

File Reference: C/PL/AIH042/LM/LR

Site History: C/08/00185/LBC Part Change of Use of Bingo Hall to Public House and Restaurant Including Removal of and Part Reinstatement of Single Storey Extension: not yet determined

Development Plan: The application site falls within an area designated as ECON 9 (Secondary Core Area) and ENV15 Victoria Conservation Area in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: Scottish Civic Trust Comments Theatres Trust Comments

Representations: 1 letter of representation received.

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 27th February 2008

Recommendation: Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

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

3. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- 1929/07/01, 1927/07/02, 1929/07/03 and 1929/07/04

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

4. Notwithstanding condition 3 above, BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts amended details shall be submitted in respect of the design and materials for the windows denoted as nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 on plan ref 1929/07/04. For the avoidance of doubt these windows should be altered to reflect the style of 'sash and case'. Thereafter, the development shall be implemented in accordance with these revised details.

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

5. For the avoidance of doubt the proposed fascia signs and spot lights denoted on plan ref 1929/07/04 as no.12 are not approved by this permission.

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

6. Notwithstanding condition 3 above, BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts amended details shall be submitted in respect of the roller shutters proposed for the southern elevation. For the avoidance of doubt these shall be of a lattice or open bond form.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity, preserve the character of the Listed Building and to accord with the relevant design guidance in respect of Conservation Areas.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 1 1th February 2008 Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996

Letter from Scottish Civic Trust received 28th February 2008 Letter from Theatres Trust received 13th March 2008 Memo from Protective Services Section received 10th March 2008

Letter from Hugh Black & Sons Ltd., 7-9 Hallcraig Street, Airdrie, ML6 6AH received 19th February 2008.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Leigh Menzies at 01236 812372.

Dated: 13 March 2008 APPLICATION NO. C/08/00186/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.1 Planning permission is being sought for the part change of use of a bingo hall to public house and restaurant including removal and part reinstatement of a single storey extension. The application site is a C(s) listed property which is currently vacant and in a state of disrepair. The property is located within Airdrie Town Centre in a prominent location at the junction of South Bridge Street, Bank Street and Hallcraig Street adjacent to the recent improvements made to the pedestrian areas.

1.2 The application proposes that internally approximately two thirds of the area of the former bingo hall would be converted for use as a public house and restaurant. The 'front' of the property faces a south westerly direction and currently there are two entrances on this elevation. It is proposed that the central entrance be retained and the eastern entrance be converted into three window openings and that this would be mirrored to the west of the entrance which would require the creation of one additional window opening and an enlargement of two existing windows. In addition to this it is proposed that the windows would not be of a sash and case design.

1.3 In addition it is also proposed that a modern single storey extension located within a courtyard space would be partially demolished and reconstructed. This cannot be viewed from any of the surrounding streets as it is completely enclosed by the application site and an adjacent property.

1.4 In terms of the southern elevation it is proposed that two of the windows be replaced and two recessed openings have roller shutters installed.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The application site falls within an area designated as ECON 9 (Secondary Core Area) and ENV15 Victoria Conservation Area in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. There are no strategic implications.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 Following standard neighbour notification procedures and press advertisement 1 letter of representation was received which indicated a concern regarding the possible nuisance at closing time and possible vandalism to surrounding properties.

3.2 In terms of the transportation issues no consultation response has been received from the Transportation Section.

3.3 Protective Services Section provided comments regarding construction practices in addition to the control of noise and odours. The applicant will be informed of these.

3.4 Theatres Trust provided comments in its capacity as the National Advisory Public Body for Theatres. The Theatres Trust indicated that it had no objection in principle to the development however it should be established that the property is surplus to cultural community use. In addition there is possibly a decorative plaster ceiling hidden behind a suspended ceiling and should this be the case it should be preserved. Finally they requested that the applicant provide precise details in connection with the new windows and doors.

3.5 Scottish Civic Trust did not object to the proposed change of use or the internal alterations. They did however comment that the existing ground floor windows on the south west elevation of the building and the 2 left hand bays on the south elevation appear to be the original style of window for the building and that these windows should be retained with any proposed replacement or additional windows matching them in style, materials and opening methods in order to retain the character of the Listed Building.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. This application raises no strategic issues and therefore can be assessed under the terms of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

4.2 This application requires to be assessed against Policy Econ 9 (Secondary Core Area), ENVI5 (Conservation Areas) and ENV16 (Conservation Area Improvements) contained within the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. The associated Design Guidance on Conservation is also relevant.

4.3 The Design Guidance on Conservation ‘encourages the re-use and improvement of vacant listed buildings to ensure their continued survival’. In relation to this development it is noted that over the years there have been unsympathic alterations undertaken to the frontage and it is considered that the proposed alterations, although not a return to the original faqade, strikes an appropriate balance between the ability to provided a usable space within the town centre and the retention of an historical property.

4.4 Notwithstanding the above, the comments of the Civic Trust in respect of the window details must be taken into account and it is considered that the proposed style of windows and roller shutters is inappropriate for a listed building and its location within the conservation area. Therefore appropriate conditions would be placed on any approval to addresses these issues.

4.5 In terms of the partial removal of the modern extension, it is Considered that no features would be lost in its removal and it would have no visual impact on the listed building or the surrounding conservation area.

4.6 In relation to the letter of objection regarding possible vandalism it is considered that this is a town centre location with any number of public houses and restaurants within close proximity which could produce anti-social behaviour, However any possible anti-social element created by a change of use also requires to be considered against the dangers and vandalism that could also be associated with a vacant property.

4.7 With regard to any transportation issues it is considered that, as the application site is located within the town centre and its existing use as a bingo hall, the issues of parking can be dealt with through existing public provision.

4.8 In terms of the comments from the Theatres Trust regarding surplus to the needs of the cultural community it should be noted that planning applications require to be determined on the basis of whether a proposed use is suitable within the building’s context and the vitality and viability of town centres is also a consideration as a vacant building is detrimental to this. With regard to the internal decorative ceiling this is something that will be addressed through the application for Listed Building consent which is currently under consideration. Finally in relation to the windows a condition would be placed on any approval requesting further information, as discussed in paragraph 4.4 above.

4.9 In conclusion, having regard to the foregoing, the proposal is considered to be acceptable under the terms of the Adopted Monklands Local Plan 1991. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions. Application No: C/08/00219/AMD

Date Registered: 15th February 2008

Applicant: Link Group Watling House Callender Business Park Falkirk FKI IXR

Agent FBN Architects 48 Speirs Wharf Port Dundas Glasgow G4 9TH

Development: Erection of 18 Dwellinghouses

Location: Vacant Land North &West Of Junction Of Scarhill Street & Kirkshaws Road Kirkshaws Coatbridge North Lanarkshire

Ward: 010 Coatbridge South Councillors Brooks, Ferrie & Higgins

Grid Reference: 272457 663048

File Reference: C/PL/CTS065/lJ/LR

Site History: 0 C/04/01559/FUL Erection of 19 Dwellinghouses and 104 Sq. m. Dental Surgery Granted 18'h Nov. 2004

Development Plan: Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996 - Policy HG9:Existing Residential Areas

Contrary to Development Plan: No

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

Representations: No letters of representation received.

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Recommendation: Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

2. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers (0)03 Rev. C & (3)lO Rev.B.

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

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

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

4. That before any of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted are occupied, the relevant fences or walls, as approved under the terms of condition 3 above, shall be erected.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

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

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

6. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping, including boundary treatment, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include:- (a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, grass seeding and turfing; (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development (d) details of the maintenance of these works.

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

7. That prior to the occupation of the second last dwellinghouse within the development hereby permitted, all planting, seeding, turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting relative to the housing area, approved under the terms of condition 6 above, shall be completed; and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased within two years of the completion of the development, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: In the interests of amenity. 8. That before completion of the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance scheme approve under the terms of condition 6 shall be in operation.

Reason: In the interests of amenity

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

Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory site drainage arrangements

10 That before the development starts, full details of the location and design of the drainage scheme to be installed shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for written approval, and these shall include full details of the location and design of the surface water drainage scheme, and for the avoidance of doubt the scheme shall comply with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency's principals of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS). If investigations into the provision of such a SUDS scheme prove that it is impractical to implement, this shall be demonstrated to the planning authority in writing.

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

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 15th February 2008

Letter from British Gas received 6th March 2008 Letter from Scottish Power received 27th February 2008 Letter from Scottish Water received 10*hMarch 2008

Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr lan Johnston at 01236 812382.

Date: 20 March 2008 APPLICATION NO. C/08/00219/AMD

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.1 This application is an amendment to a previous planning permission (ref:C/04/01559/FUL) granted in November 2004 for the erection of 19 dwellinghouses and a dentist surgery. In general the layout is similar although the current submission now proposes 18 semi-detached units while the previous consent proposed 16 two storey semi-detached and 3 terraced houses. The dental surgery with adjacent car parking area has now been developed on site.

1.2 The proposals would involve the provision of 18 two storey semi-detached dwellinghouses, all with front and rear garden areas and individual driveways. A new cul-de-sac would be formed off Kirkshaws Road, which would serve plots 3 to 10. All other houses would take individual accesses from either Scarhill Street or Kirkshaws Road. The semi-detached houses would have 3 bedrooms and would be finished in a mix of facing brick and render with pitched tiled roofs. Rear and side garden areas would be screened by 1800 rnm high close boarded timber fences.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site is located within an area covered by policy HG9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas) and an assessment of the proposals under the terms of the Council's Design Guidance on New Housing Areas would be appropriate. There are no strategic planning issues.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 The Transportation Section has offered no objections to this proposal.

3.2 Following the standard neighbour notification procedures no objections were received in respect of this proposal.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The principle of residential development on this site has already been established through the granting of the previous similar planning application C/04/01559/FUL. The proposed layout and detailed design of the houses are similar to the previous permission and are again considered acceptable in terms of garden sizes, plot shape, external finishes and privacy levels. Roads, parking and access arrangements also meet the requirements of the Transportation Section. No objections have been received in respect of this proposal and as such it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions. Application No: S/08/00044/FUL

Date Registered: 4th February 2008

Applicant: The Owner 7 Forbes Drive Motherwell MLI 3UP

Agent Charles Chiu 215 Redwood Lane, Hamilton ML3 8SS

Development: Erection of 1.5 Storey Rear Extension Location: 7 Forbes Drive Motherwell

Ward: 16 Motherwell West: Councillors Kelly, Ross and Valentine

Grid Reference: 273990658604

File Reference:

Site History: No relevant site history

Development Plan: The site is zoned as HSG 8 (Established Housing Areas) on the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005)

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: None

Representations: 1 letter of representation received

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Recommendation: Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

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

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

3. That, except as may otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the drawing numbers:-

* BW-002 BW-003 Plans stamped and dated 11 th 2008.

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

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 4'h February 2008, amended plans received 1lth March 2008

Letter of objection from William Sharpe of 9 Forbes Drive, Motherwell, MLI 3UP received 31'' January 2008

Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005)

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Colin Campbell at 01698 2741 18

Date: 19 March 2008 APPLICATION NO: S1081000441FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I Planning Permission is sought for the erection of a 1.5 storey rear extension at 7 Forbes Drive, Motherwell. The application site is bound by dwellings on all sides apart from the south west, west and north west which is open space.

1.2 The extension would create a lounge and dining area on the ground floor and a bedroom on the upper floor. Originally, the rear extension would have been approximately 6 metres in length, 4.5 metres in width and 5.8 metres in height. However following discussion, the applicant agreed to reduce the length of the extension to 5 metres. The extension will have a pitched roof. The proposal will have a French door to its rear and 3 velux windows on the roof. The proposed extension will be finished in materials to match the existing dwelling.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site is covered by Policy HSG 8 (Established Housing Areas) of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005).

3. Consultations and Representations 3.1 No consultations were required.

3.2 One letter of objection was received from the owners of 9 Forbes Drive, Motherwell. Their objections can be summarised as follows:

(a) The scale of the proposal considering the size of the back garden, will overshadow 9 Forbes Drive and natural light will be affected as the kitchen window is located close to the boundary line between the properties. Also sunlight in the winter will not be directed on the rear of the property until approximately mid afternoon, thus affecting the thawing out process of the building and garden.

(b) The grass garden area close to the boundary line stopped growing and was shaded previously when the last owner of 7 Forbes Drive planted trees along his boundary line. The proposal will cause similar problems. The structure will have a detrimental effect on the quality of environment and enjoyment of the property.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 Planning applications require to be assessed against the Development Plan and other material considerations. The proposal raises no strategic issues in terms of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 and can therefore be assessed against Local Plan Policies. In this instance the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) is relevant, where the site is zoned as HSG 8 (Established Housing Areas).

4.2 Policy HSG 8 seeks to protect the established character of existing housing areas by opposing development that adversely affects their amenity. Applications for extensions in such areas are acceptable subject to meeting the requirements of Policy HSG 13 (House Extensions).

4.3 Policy HSG 13 sets out various criteria for assessing such applications, including the design, size, proportion and position of extensions, the effect on the amount of garden ground retained and the impact on the streetscene. The impact of the proposal on neighbouring properties in relation to privacy, daylight and sunlight is considered, as does parking provision and access.

4.4 Although large in scale the proposed extension has been reduced in site and is now considered acceptable. The design of the extension is such that it will be in keeping with the existing house. The proposal retains a small but acceptable amount of private garden ground. The design including window positions, size and location of the extension are such that it will not adversely affect the privacy of the neighbouring properties. A detailed sunlight/daylight test was taken and passed with 30% Daylight and 40% Sunlight which exceeds the minimum requirement of 27% and 25% respectively. The proposal will therefore comply with policies HSG 8 and HSG 13.

4.5 In relation to the points of objections, I would comment as follows:

(a) Although the extension is large in size and a small amount of garden ground remains, the proposal is deemed acceptable as open space is at the rear of the property and there will be no overlooking issues. As indicated in paragraph 4.4 above the extension passed a detailed sunlight/ daylight test which indicates that there will be no significant detrimental affect on any natural light or sunlight in relation to the neighbouring property at 9 Forbes Drive or any other adjacent dwellings.

(b) In relation to the proposal and its detrimental impact on the natural environment, as stated in paragraph 4.4 above a detailed sunlightldaylight test was taken and passed.

4.6 In conclusion I am satisfied that the design and impact of the proposed development is acceptable from a planning viewpoint and the proposal is therefore in compliance with the development plan. Notwithstanding the objection raised by the neighbours and for the reasons stated above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions. Application No: S/08/00088/FUL

Date Registered: 7th February 2008

Applicant: Mr James Mitchell 14 Dougan Drive Bonkle ML2 9EZ

Agent Block Archiects 18 Haddow Street Hamilton ML3 7HX

Development: Erection of One and a Half Storey Dwellinghouse and Detached Double Garage

Location: Crestwood Greenfield Crescent Wishaw ML2 8NZ

Ward: 19 Murdostoun: Councillors Martin, McKendrick, Shevlin and Taggart

Grid Reference: 280742655970

File Reference: SIP LIB/3/2/GS/G F

Site History: S/06/01968/OUT Formation of Two House Plots, withdrawn 11th January 2007 S/07/00070/OUT Formation of Two House Plots, approved 18th May 2007

Development Plan: The site is covered by Policy ENV 11 (Protected Urban Woodland) in the Southern Area Local Plan (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005)

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: None

Representations: 2 letters of representation received

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Recommendation: Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

2. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- 07-195-GA002, 07-195-ga003, 07- 195-GA004, 07-195-GA005.

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

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

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

4. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

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

5. Notwithstanding the requirements of Condition 4 above, before the dwellinghouse hereby approved is occupied, a 1.8 metre high timber fence shall be erected along the northern and eastern boundaries of the application site.

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

6. 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.

7. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation report required in terms of Condition 6 above shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to the first occupation of the dwellinghouse hereby approved. 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.

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.

9. That notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)(Scotland) Order 1992, no development shall take place within the curtilage of the dwellinghouse hereby permitted, other than expressly authorised by this permission. Reason: To control the amount of amenity garden ground associated with the property.

10. That before the development hereby permitted starts a scheme detailing access improvements shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, the access improvements for the route marked GREEN on the approved plans shall include passing places, road widening and surfacing along the access road leading from Coltness Road to the site entrance at Crestwood, to the satisfaction of the Roads Authority.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

11. That before the dwelling hereby approved is occupied, the scheme approved under the terms of Condition 12 above shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that access improvements are carried out in the interests of road safety.

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

Reason: In the interests of nature conservation and visual amenity of the surrounding area.

13. That before the development starts a certificate from a recognised firm of chartered engineers, duly signed by a Chartered Engineer or Chartered Geologist of Adviser Status (ICE, SlSG 1993) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming the mineral stability of the site. This certificate shall be based on a professionally supervised and regulated rotary drilling programme.

Reason: To ensure the mineral stability of the proposed housing site in the interests of prospective residents.

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

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity and vehicular and pedestrian road safety.

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

Reason: To protect the amenity of the house and the surrounding area.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 23rdJanuary 2008

Amended plans received 12'h March 2008

Letter from Mr And Mrs Smillie, Oakland, Greenfield Crescent, Cambusnethan, ML2 8NZ received 28'h February 2008 Letter from J McDonald, Northmuir Cottage, Greenfield Crescent, Wshaw received 28'h February 2008

Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005)

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Graham Smith at 01698 274104.

Date: 19 March 2008 APPLICATION NO. S1081000881FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I Detailed planning permission is sought for the formation of a one and a half storey detached dwellinghouse and detached double garage at land to the rear of Crestwood, Greenfield Crescent, Wishaw. The application site is located within the rear garden area of an existing single storey detached dwellinghouse, and comprises of grassland with a number of mature trees along the southern and western boundaries, Residential dwellings bound the site to the north, east and south, with mature trees to the west. Outline planning permissi%n exists for 2 house plots including this site which was approved subject to conditions on the 18 May 2007.

1.2 The proposed dwelling will be 13.4 metres wide and 9.5 metres deep, with a front garden depth of 9.6 metres and a rear garden depth of 8.6 metres. Access to the plot would be taken via a shared private road leading from Galloway Avenue, off Coltness Road.

1.3 The Committee should note that the existing dwellinghouse, Crestwood, which lies to the north of the application site was granted planning permission for the erection of an extension to the west and south. This development, which has not been built, would obstruct the proposed access to this dwellinghouse and the adjacent house plot. The owner of Crestwood has confirmed in writing that they will no longer be building this extension.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site is within an area designated as Policy ENV 11 (Protected Urban Woodland) in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005).

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 My Transportation Team Leader has reiterated concerns raised at the outline stage. The access to the site is unsurfaced in width and geometry with no footways or street lighting. Current Roads guidelines require a road to adoptable standards for any access which serves more than 2 dwellings. There is currently no scope to provide a road to adoptable standards and this proposal would result in additional vehicular movements.

3.2 My Protective Services and Geotechnical Team Leaders along with Community Services, Scottish Natural Heritage and Central Scotland Forest Trust were all consulted for the outline application and I recommend that the relevant conditions from this previous consent are attached.

3.3 2 letters of representation have been received by the owners of Northmuir Cottage and Oakland. Their objections can be summarised as follows:

i. There were conditions attached to the Outline Planning Permission which was approved at this site and none of these conditions have been started or completed. This application should not be granted when none of the original conditions have been met. ii, The proposed access arrangements are unsafe. It is unclear how the applicant can satisfy condition 12 of the outline consent relating to access as they do not own the access road that requires to be upgraded. This has road safety implications if the upgrading is not completed to an acceptable level as the increased use will deteriorate an already poor standard road access to the neighbouring properties. iii. The land is not suitable for development due to the flooding risk on the proposed dwellinghouse and objector’s property. The site is presently waterlogged. Also the existing services are currently overburdened and there has been no assurance given that the existing services will cope with an extra dwellinghouse at this site. iv. This application is contrary to council policy ENV 10 (Trees and Woodland Management) and ENV 11 (Protected Urban Woodland) in that developing this site will force several species and wildlife away. V. The proposal will cause damage to a mature chestnut tree in the objector’s garden close to the boundary. The deterioration of this tree will exacerbate the already swamped grassland in the application site and objectors garden. vi. The dwellinghouse will be accessed from three separate roads and this will be extremely dangerous. vii. The outline consent requires a turning circle to be provided yet the proposal does not contain this. viii. There is no assurance that construction traffic will not use the Greenfield Crescent and Forrest Park accesses. Should the builders access the site from these it will raise conflict over ownership and rights of access and increase the danger to the children who play in the open plan front gardens of the objector’s property the access to which at present is relatively quiet. ix. It is unclear what the proposed dwelling’s postal address would be. The existing property is known as Greenfield Crescent yet the access is supposed to taken from Coltness Road. The post is delivered and bins emptied through Greenfield Crescent. It is unclear where the electricity and water services be taken from and where the proposed dwellinghouse be serviced for post and refuse. X. Condition 11 of the outline conditions state that no part of the development should exceed one storey in height. Four dormer windows are proposed therefore the property is effectively a two storey dwellinghouse. xi. This is an example of back land development that was recommended for refusal by the Planning Department at the outline stage and the Traffic and Transportation Team Leader also recommended refusal. xii. The development will reduce the amenity of Greenfield and Oakland resulting in a loss of sunlight, daylight and privacy.

4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 Planning applications require to be assessed against the Development Plan and other material considerations. The application raises no strategic issues in terms of the Structure Plan and can therefore be assessed in terms of local plan policies. In this instance the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) is relevant, where the site is zoned as ENV 11 (Protected Urban Woodland). Policies HSG 11 (Infill Housing Developments) and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implication of Development) are relevant in this case together with the Council’s minimum space standards around dwellings and the conditions attached to the Outline Planning Permission (application reference: S/07/00070/0UT).

4.2 The site is zoned as ENV 11 however outline permission has been granted for a dwellinghouse therefore the principle of residential development has been accepted, subject to the detailed assessment of the proposal.

4.3 In considering applications for infill residential developments on suitable gap sites, Policy HSGI 1 applies. This explains that consideration is to be given to the:

(i) Overall impact of the proposal on the character and amenity of the surrounding area, (ii) Dimensions of the site relative to the proposed development and associated garden ground, (iii) Effect of infill on the garden space, privacy, and sunlight received by surrounding properties, (iv) Consideration given to scale, materials, roof heightlpitch and window patterns, and (v) Provision of vehicular access and parking arrangements.

4.4 It is not considered that this proposal will detract from the established character and amenity of the surrounding residential area. The dwellinghouse achieves the Council’s minimum standards in relation to open space and while there would be overlooking windows to the front and rear the window to window distances are considered to be sufficient enough not to result in a loss of privacy for the neighbouring dwellings or the occupants of the proposed house. The location and orientation of the proposed dwelling would ensure that it would not result in any adverse overshadowing of surrounding houses. The proposal contains a sufficient amount of private garden ground with around 218 square metres. The design of the proposal and size and scale is considered to be acceptable as while the dwellinghouse is single storey with attic accommodation the proposed height of 6.6 metres is considered to be acceptable. Condition 11 of the Outline Permission restricts the height of the dwelling to single storey with attic accommodation and with respect to the height of neighbouring dwellings to the north and east this proposal is acceptable. Provision made for vehicular access and parking arrangements is considered under TR 13.

4.5 Policy TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) sets out criteria relating to matters including the level of traffic generated and its impact on the environment and adjoining land uses, impact of the development on road traffic circulation and road safety and provisions made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. The property contains a double garage and a long driveway with turning area therefore the parking provision and manoeuvring within the site is considered to be acceptable. As indicated in paragraph 3.1 my Transportation Section have raised serious concerns in relation to the proposed access to the site from Galloway Avenue, which leads from Coltness Road, and the current access arrangements which serve the site and neighbouring dwellings. Outline consent was granted for a dwellinghouse at this site using this same access, I therefore recommend that the condition relating to access improvement that was attached to the outline consent is attached to this permission to ensure the access is upgraded to an acceptable standard.

4.6 The proposal is considered to comply with the terms of the outline planning permission and conditions are recommended to cover the additional details required.

4.8 In relation to the points of objections I would comment as follows:

I. Not all of the outline planning permission conditions require to be complied with at this stage. Conditions are recommended to address any relevant matters if planning permission is granted. 11. The proposed access to this site has already been accepted under the outline planning permission. As indicated above a condition is recommended requiring that the applicant undertakes a scheme of access improvements. The ownership of the road is a private legal matter and is not a material planning consideration. iii. The capacity of the existing services to accommodate another dwellinghouse is not a material planning consideration. Flood risk is not a major consideration of this application. iv. Although the site is zoned as ENV 10 in the draft local plan the principle of a dwellinghouse at this site was accepted by the approval of the outline consent. V. The tree in the objector’s garden is not protected and outwith the application site therefore this is not a material consideration. vi. The applicant has confirmed that access will be taken from Coltness Road. vii. The applicant has revised the proposal to include a turning facility to enable cars to enter and leave the site in forward gear. viii. The impact of the construction work is not a material planning consideration. ix. Building Standards would allocate an address for the dwelling. I can confirm that the access would be taken from Greenfield Crescent. x. In relation to height as covered in paragraph 4.4 this is considered to be acceptable and in line with the conditions of the outline consent. xi. I can confirm that this dwelling does not achieve a frontage to a road. Nevertheless the outline consent already exists. xii. With respect to the amenity of the surrounding dwellinghouses as discussed in paragraph 4.5 I do not consider that there will be an adverse impact on this.

4.9 In conclusion I am satisfied that the design and impact of the dwellinghouse is acceptable from a planning viewpoint and that the proposal is therefore in compliance with the terms of the outline consent. Notwithstanding the objections raised by the neighbours and for the reasons stated above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions. Application No: S/08/001561FUL

Date Registered: 5th February 2008

Applicant: Thomas Nailen 1 Sycamore Place Carfin Motherwell

Agent J Kerr McDougall Ltd 13 Canyon Road Netherton Industrial Estate Wishaw ML2 OEG

Development: Erection of a Dwellinghouse

Location: Land South Of Stewart Quadrant Holytown MLI 4TN

Ward: 15 Mossend and Holytown: Councillors Coyle, Delaney and McKeown

Grid Reference: 276943660647

File Reference: S/PL/BF/S/I 2/GA/GF

Site History: No relevant site history

Development Plan: The Site is Designated DC1 (Mixed Use Areas) in the adopted Northern Area Local Plan 1986

The site is designated L3 (Protected Open Space) in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005)

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

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

Representations: No letters of representation received

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 14th February 2008

Recommendation: Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

2. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

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

3. That before the dwellinghouse hereby permitted, is occupied, the fences, or walls, as approved under the terms of condition 2 above, shall be erected.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

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

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

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

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

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

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

7. That before the dwellinghouse hereby permitted is occupied 2 car parking spaces shall be provided within the curtilage of the plot and outwith the public road or footway, and thereafter be maintained as parking spaces.

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

8. That before the dwellinghouse hereby permitted is occupied, a private vehicular access configured as a 3 metre wide dropped kerb footway crossing shall be provided and the first 2 metres of this access, beyond the limit of the adjoining road, shall be surfaced in an impervious material, to be approved by the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure satisfactory access arrangements to the site and to prevent deleterious material being carried onto the road.

9. That except as may be otherwise agreed in writing by the planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers 01,02,03,04 & 05.

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

Note to Committee If granted this application will require to be notified to the Scottish Ministers in accordance with the Town and Country Planning(Notificati0n of Applications)(Scotland) Amendment Direction 2007 as the development would result in the loss of an area identified in the development plan as Protected Open Space.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 5th February 2008

Letter from British Telecom received 2lStFebruary 2008 Letter from British gas received 28th February 2008 Letter from Scottish Water Received 21st February 2008

Memo from Transportation Team Leader received 7th March 2008 Memo from Head of Protective Services received 1lth March 2008

Adopted Northern Area Local Plan 1986 Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) SPP 11 (Open Space and Physical Activity)

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Gordon Arthur at 01698 274103.

Date: 13 March 2008 APPLICATION NO. S1081001561FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I Planning permission is sought for the erection of a single dwellinghouse on land south of Stewart Quadrant and lies at the terminus of a residential CUIde sac.

1.2 The site is currently an area of open space which slopes gently to the south before meeting a boundary stob and wire fence where the ground falls sharply over three metres eventually connecting to a larger area of open space beyond. The site is bound by residential properties to the north east and north west, a screen of mature conifers which bound the car park of a social club to the west and the large area of open space to the south east. The site has been scraped of all vegetation and has some minor fly tipping.

1.3 The proposed dwellinghouse will be two storeys in height with a pitched roof and will accommodate five bedrooms and a double integral garage.

1.4 The site will be accessed via Stewart Quadrant which is currently a private residential CUIde sac currently accessing two residential properties.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The adopted Northern area local Plan 1986 zones the site DCI Mixed Use Areas.

2.2 The site is designated L3 (Protected Open Space) in the Southern Area Local Plan. Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005).

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 None of the utility agencies consulted have any objections to the proposal.

3.2 The Transportation Team Leader raised no objections to the proposal and has advised that access to the site should be via a 3 metre wide dropped kerb footway crossing.

3.3 Protective Services have no objections to the proposal but have advised that; desk top study which includes the site history requires to be provided by the applicant to ascertain if the site has previously been used for any potential contaminative purposes. Depending on the results of this investigation further intrusive ground investigations may be required.

3.4 No representations were received following neighbour notification or following an advert placed in the Bellhill Speaker and Motherwell Times on the 14'h February 2008.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of the local plan policies. The adopted Northern Area Local plan 1986 zones the site as DCI Mixed Use Areas where residential development is accepted subject to there being no overriding highway safety or environmental reasons for refusal. Highway safety is more fully assessed below under policy TR13 while the sites physical attributes as a vacant cleared plot gives rise to no environmental concerns. 4.2 The application site lies within an area designated L3 (Protected Open Space), in the Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005). Policy L3 seeks to protect these areas by resisting proposals which would adversely affect such spaces. While this proposal is contrary to the local plan this would not normally preclude this site from being developed as the site while designated open space is not used in any meaningful way as open space and has become subject to fly tipping and lacks vegetation. The site area has become isolated and enclosed, by being fenced off and is only accessed via the CUIde sac on Stewart Quadrant due to the significant level difference. In addition the configuration of the land pattern at this location dictates that the site is perceived to fall within the urban settlement envelope and is therefore more of anomaly to be associated with the strategic area of open space given their segregation in urban design terms. I therefore consider a departure from the local plan zoning appropriate on this occasion and that more weight should be applied to the other relevant policies pertaining to this form of development. All of these factors combine to diminish the sites appropriateness and subsequent contribution to the adjacent green corridor setting.

4.3 The proposal more reasonably represents infill development and is therefore assessed against policy HSG 11 (Infill Housing Development.) When considering applications for infill residential development on suitable gap sites within the urban area the following are taken into account.

e Overall impact of the proposal on the character and amenity of the surrounding area. e Dimensions of the site relative to the proposed development and associated private garden ground. e Effect of the infill on the garden space, privacy and sunlight received by surrounding properties. 0 Consideration given to scale, materials, roof height /pitch and window patterns. e The provision of vehicular access and parking arrangements.

Given the site's deep recess from the main traffic corridor, it will largely be shielded from view from the north. However as the site is elevated and visually exposed to the south it will be prominent when viewed from the east on the Holytown/Carfin link road. As such the dwelling has been sited on a similar building line to its counterparts adjacent, in order that it does not project further to the rear thereby minimising its visual impact and allowing it to fit comfortably within the established street scene. It is considered that the existing character and amenity of the area will be maintained. The site's larger dimensions afford the opportunity for a larger house than those adjacent however the ratio of house footprint to garden ground is largely the same and complies with the Council's standards on open space, such that it would not appear detrimental to the street scene. The siting of the dwelling, existing mature planting on neighbouring boundaries, positioning of windows results in there being no impact on the neighbours in terms of privacy and sunlight levels. As noted earlier, whilst the dwelling will be slightly larger than the neighbouring properties, the scale and design is largely similar and will form a complementary relationship with adjacent properties. Finishing materials will be covered by a condition if the application is granted. Access and parking arrangements are discussed below under policy TR 13,but otherwise the proposal is held to comply with policy HSGI 1.

4.4 In assessing transportation implications for the development, Policy TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) sets out criteria which include: the level of traffic generated and its impact on the environment and adjoining land uses; impact of the development on road traffic circulation and road safety; and the provisions made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. The Transportation Team Leader raised no objections to the proposal and their comments on access provision can be suitably controlled by condition if the application is granted. It is considered that the development accords with policy TR13.

4.5 In terms of national policy contained in SPP 11 (Open Space and Physical Activity) there is a presumption against development on open spaces that are valued and functional, or capable of being brought into functional use to meet a need identified as the open space strategy. As indicated in paragraph 4.2 above, the site does not fall within such categories of open space. I therefore consider the proposed development of the site does not conflict with the aims of SPP 11.

4.6 Protective Services raised issues of potential contamination on the site and requested that a site investigation be carried out. A condition is recommended requiring the submission of a further site investigation report.

4.7 Taking into consideration all material considerations including the current local plan it is considered that although the proposal constitutes a departure from the local plan, however, the current condition of this site and its dislocation from a wider area of open space support the proposals acceptability and justifies a departure. The proposal accords with policies HSGI 1 and TR13 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) and is consistent with the aims of SPP 11. Overall the proposal is therefore considered acceptable.

4.8 I therefore recommend that planning permission is granted. Application No: S/08/00234/FUL

Date Registered: 26th February 2008

Applicant: Mr Song Zhou 95B Candren Road Paisley PA3 IDL

Development: Change of Use from Retail Shop to Hot Food Takeaway

Location: 216 Main Street, Bellshill, ML4 IAB Ward: 15 Mossend and Holytown: Councillors Coyle, Delaney and McKeown

Grid Reference: 273325660284

File Reference: SIPLIBICCAIGF

Site History: S/96/10538/FUL- Erection of Satellite Dish (Retrospect) Granted 11th November 1996

S/98/00846/ADV- Installation of Illuminated Sign Granted 10th August 1998

S/98/00847/FUL- Installation of ATM Granted 10th August 1998

Development Plan: The site is zoned as RTL 5 Town Centre Areas in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005)

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: No external consultations required

Representations: 2 letters of representation

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 6th March 2008

Recommendation: Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-

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

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

2. That prior to the commencement of operations on site, the applicant must provide further details of the proposed extraction fan, and these must be approved in writing by the Planning Authority before the fan is installed.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider the details in the interest of residential amenity.

3. That the extractor fan as detailed under condition 2 above shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to the opening of the takeaway.

Reason: To ensure the premises are provided with an adequate ventilation/ extraction system, as required in the interest of residential amenity.

4. That noise associated with the air conditioning/ ventilation system or any other plant and any other noise associated with the development shall not give rise to a noise level within any nearby dwelling (assessed with windows open) or other noise sensitive building in excess of the equivalent to Noise Rating Curve NRC 35 between 0700 hours and 2000 hours and Noise Rating Curve NRC 25 at all other times.

Reason: To ensure that the noise associated with the development will be within acceptable limits in the interest of residential amenity.

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

Reason: To define the permission.

6. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:-

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

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 18'h February 2008

Memo from Transportation Team Leader received 12'h March 2008 Memo from Head of Protective Services received 12'h March 2008

Letter from local residents, no address given, received on 28'h February 2008 One petition letter from 21 people received on 28'h February 2008

Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005)

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Colin Campbell at 01698 2741 18.

Date: 12 March 2008 APPLICATION NO. S/08/00234/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.1 Planning permission is sought for the change of use of a retail outlet to a hot food takeaway at 216 Main Street, Bellshill. The shop unit is located within Bellshill Town Centre an existing commercial/retail area and is based on the ground floor of a two storey terraced building. Some of the upper floors of the building form residential flats. Various commercialhetail outlets exist including hot food takeaway outlets, betting shops, post offices and caf6s. To the south of the application site is a large car park.

1.2 The application proposes no major alterations to the internal or external layout of the building but seeks to install an extraction fan ducted at a high level. The proposed internal layout will consist of a waiting area at the front and a kitchen to the rear of the front internal section of the property, with storage to the rear.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site is within an area covered by Policy RTL 5 (Town Centre Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 & 2005).

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 My Transportation Team Leader had no objections to this proposal given the town centre location and large parking area to the rear.

3.2 Protective Services advised on limits to be placed on cooking odours and noise resulting from the ventilation equipment in association with the proposal.

3.3 1 letter of objection from local residents and 1 petition containing 21 signatures have been received following neighbour notification procedures and the press advertisement. The letter of objection can be summarised as follows:

(a) The noise, smell, smoke and grease from the cooking are going to cause health and environmental hazards not only for the residents staying above the premises but also for residents around the premises.

(b) Customers who go to the takeaway are going to park on the Main Street for convenience as the nearest car park is located opposite the library. This will put extra pressure on the heavy traffic flow of the Main Street.

(c) Residents who stay above the flat are parking on the Main Street at night. They are forced to park further away as customers are taking up spaces in front of the premises, causing unnecessary inconvenience.

(d) There are already 9 Chinese takeaways in Bellshill, with 3 on Hamilton Road and 1 on Main Street which are all within 5 minutes walking distance from the proposed site. There are also other hot food takeaways on the Main Street. The number of shops sewing hot food take away is reaching an alarming level. 4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 This application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of Local Plan policies. Policies RTL5, RTLl 1 and TR13 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) apply.

4.2 Policy RTL 5 (Town Centre Areas) supports changes of use to non-retail uses where they reinforce and revitalise Town Centres and where they accord with the provisions of Policy RTL I1 (Bad Neighbour Developments). In addition to the primary retail function, it is recognised that other uses complement retail within town centres thereby widening the shopping experience. In particular, uses such as hot food takeaways heighten the attractiveness of town centres by attracting people into the centre at night when activity decreases, thereby adding to its vitality and viability. However, these uses are tempered by their effect on the character and amenity of the centre. Whilst there are several takeaways currently within the Town Centre they are located sporadically along the Main Street and interspersed predominantly by retail units and commercial outlets of mainly Class 2 financiaVprofessiona1 businesses. As such, the Main Street is still visually perceived by the consumer as a primarily retail centre, where takeaways become absorbed into the backdrop. An opportunity therefore exists for the further inclusion of an additional takeaway, without detriment to the character or amenity of the centre. I therefore consider the proposal to be in accord with policy RTL 5.

4.3 Policy RTLll makes clear that the preferred locations for cafes and hot food takeaways are Town Centre Areas such as the proposed site. This policy also requires assessment of the resulting retailhon-retail mix of uses, design and transportation issues. As noted above, retail remains the primary function within the Town Centre thereby maintaining an appropriate mix of retail and non-retail uses. There would be no significant detriment to the amenity of neighbouring residential properties, as whilst some disturbance is to be expected within town centre areas, nuisance from noise or smells can be suitably controlled by conditions. In terms of design, there are no proposed alterations to the external appearance of the shop unit. The implications for access, servicing and parking are assessed in paragraph 4.4 below, but otherwise the proposal is held to comply with Policy RTLl 1.

4.4 In assessing the transport implications of development, Policy TR13 applies. This policy requires assessment of the proposal against various criteria including, traffic generation and its impact on road traffic circulation and road safety. T he Transportation Team Leader has advised that there are no transportation issues with regard to the hot food takeaway being located at this site. The proposal has a large public car park directly at the rear and it is likely that there will be no detrimental effect on car parking or congestion within the area. The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with the transportation requirements of Policy TR13 and RTLl 1.

4.5 In relation to the points of objection and the petition I would comment as follows.

(a) Conditions are suggested if the application is granted, to control noise and odours resulting from the ventilation system in order that residential amenity is maintained.

(b)&(c) My Transportation Team Leader raised no objections to the proposal. Furthermore, control of on-street parking is a matter dealt with by the Police. In addition, Main Street is a four lane road, such that even where on-street parking occurs, traffic will still flow freely on the outside lane.

(d) The proposed hot food takeaway would not be out of character within the Town centre as this type of proposal is specifically directed to these areas by virtue of policy RTLl 1. The resulting mix of retail and non retail uses is acceptable given that retail remains the predominant land use. 4.6 In conclusion, the proposal would not cause any detrimental effect on the Town Centre given that retail will still be its primary role with the hot food takeaway forming a complementary addition to consumer shopping provision in the area. I consider that the proposed change of use therefore complies with Policies RTL5, RTLI 1 and TR13 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted. Application No: S108100249lFUL

Date Registered: 11th February 2008

Applicant: Mrs M McNee 64 West Main Street Harthill ML7 5QD

Agent Hardie Associates LTD 78 Hopetoun Street Bathgate EH48 4PD

Development: Increase to the Height of Rear Roof and Creation of a Flat

Location: 64 West Main Street Harthill

Ward: 12 Fortissat: Councillors Cefferty, McMillan and Robertson

Grid Reference: 290435664417

File Reference: SIPLIB11 7177lGSIGF

Site History: S/08/00249/FUL Increase the height of rear roof and creation of flat refused 11th October 2007

Development Plan: The site is zoned as RTL 6 (Secondary, Village and Neighbourhood Commercial Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005)

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations: None

Representations: 1 representation received

Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required

Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reason:-

1. That the proposed development is contrary to Policy HSG 11 and TR 13 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) in that the creation of the flat would be detrimental to road safety as adequate off street parking cannot be provided to serve the development.

2. That the proposed development is contrary to Policy HSG 11 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) in that the creation of the flat would not provide any useable garden or amenity ground and that the creation of this flat would be to the detriment of the adjacent residential properties.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 1lth February 2008

Memo from the Transportation Team Leader received 18'h March 2008

Letter from Mr Duncan Ledingham L? Karen Bonnes, 66/68 West Main Street, Harthill, ML7 5QD, receivedlgth February and 12th March 2008

Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005)

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Graham Smith at 01698 274104

Date: 19 March 2008 APPLICATION NO. S1081002491FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.1 This application seeks planning permission for an increase to the height of the rear roof and the creation of a flat at 64 West Main Street, Harthill. The site is a single storey shop unit located on the main street of an established secondary shopping area. The application site is bounded by dwellinghouses to the west and south and north. Located to the east is another commercial property.

1.2 The proposed upper flat comprises of 2 bedrooms, kitchen, sitting room and bathroom. Rooflights would be located on the east, west and southern elevations of the building. The proposed roof would be increased from 4 metres in height to 6.4 metres and would be the same as the existing ridge height of the front of the existing building.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The proposal raises no strategic issues in terms of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 and can therefore be assessed against Local Plan Policies.

2.2 The site is covered by Policy RTL 6 (Secondary, Village and Neighbourhood Commercial Areas) of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005).

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 The Transportation Team Leader recommends refusal of this proposal as the proposal does not provide adequate car parking provision, the shared access to the property is substandard in terms of width and pedestrian provision, and the visibility splays from the access are substandard. Due to site constraints it is impossible to provide an adequate parking layout.

3.2 Two letters of representation were received from the owners of 66/68 West Main Street. Their objections can be summarised as follows:

i. The parking bay in this revised plan will have a detrimental effect on the shared access for the owners of the adjacent house and business at 66 and 68 West Main Street. Manoeuvrability into the parking bay will be difficult and is likely to result in damage to surrounding properties. ii. The position of the parking bay and proposed access will result in a loss of privacy for the objector as their living room window will be directly in front of this. iii. No visitor parking is proposed and as the driveway is shared visitors must park on the street which is already congested. iv. There is no dedicated space for wheelie bins therefore it is likely the bins would have to be placed in the shared access in front of the objector’s living room window. v. There is no sewage facilities for the proposed flat and due to the increased roof area, there would be no where for the excess water to drain to. vi. The proposal would result in a loss of daylight and sunlight received by the objector’s dwelling house. vii. The construction would have a detrimental impact on the access to the objector’s business and this could force the business to close temporarily.

3.2 A supporting statement has been received from Hardie Associates on behalf of the applicant. The points raised can be summarised as follows: i. The proposal has been revised to incorporate one parking bay for the proposed flat. ii. One characteristic of West Main Street is that there is very little amenity space for each of the houses. The ground floor commercial properties tend to use the open space for services rather than garden ground for the upper floor flats. There is a substantial amount of public amenity space to the north west of the site. iii. The development will not have an adverse impact on the amenity of 62 West Main Street as the only window facing this property is a single kitchen window and this could be obscured if required. With regard to the amenity of the dwelling to the west the rear of this house is used as a car sales and repair yard and it is not considered that a residential dwelling would be detrimental to this.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 Planning applications require to be assessed against the Development Plan and other material considerations. In this instance the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) is relevant. The site is zoned as Policy RTL 6 (Secondary, Village and Neighbourhood Areas). Policies HSG 11 (Infill Housing Development) and TR 13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) are also relevant in this case.

4.2 Policy RTL 6 has regard to areas identified as Secondary, Village and Neighbourhood Commercial Areas and the Council will seek to support the provision of other uses which complement the role and function of Secondary, Village and Commercial Areas and improve the environment of such areas. In principle the use of an upper floor for residential purpose is in compliance with this policy.

4.3 Policy HSG 11 requires the Council to take account of the overall impact of the proposal on the character and amenity of the surrounding area, the impact of the proposal on adjacent properties, design issues and the provision of vehicular access and parking arrangements. The proposed increase to the height of the rear of the building to form a flat, is considered to be acceptable in relation to design, scale and the materials as it would tie in with what is already there. However this proposal contains a lack of any external amenity space and this is considered to have an unacceptable impact on the neighbouring dwellings particularly as there is no bin storage. Access and parking is to be considered under policy TR 13.

4.4 Policy TR 13 requires assessment against various criteria relating to traffic generation, road safety, access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. The creation of a flatted property at this location would cause a significant impact as the site has a shared access with 66/68 West Main Street which is 4.2 metres in width and it would not provide suitable parking facilities within the site. One parking bay has been proposed, the dimensions of which are substandard with regard to the council’s minimum length and width also its location in relation to the building and land within the application site is such that it is unusable. The lack of suitable parking at this site and substandard access width would be to the detriment of the area as it would be likely to cause vehicles to park on West Main Street. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to the roads and traffic aspects of HSG 11 and TR 13.

4.5 On the grounds of the objection raised, I would comment as follows:

i. I agree that parking and turning provision for this development is unacceptable. ii. With respect to the position of the parking bay I do not consider that this will result in a loss of privacy for the objector as its unusable. iii. I agree that the lack of parking is likely to result in extra on-street parking to the detriment of road safety on West Main Street. iv. In relation to the lack of open space in the site I agree that this is not acceptable and would adversely effect the neighbouring dwellings. V. The issue of drainage from the increased roof height is not a material planning consideration. vi. The raising of the roof is not likely to result in a significant impact as the development is set back from and is located to the east of the objector’s property. vii. The impact of construction works is not a material planning consideration.

4.6 In relation to the points made in the supporting statement I would comment as follows:-

i. Refer to paragraph 4.5 ii. With regards to the surrounding area I would acknowledge that there are flats with very little amenity space. However each application must be judged on its own individual merits and, as indicated in paragraph 4.5, the proposal site has no useable amenity ground which would be unacceptable as some allocation of ground should be provided. iii. In relation to the impact on 62 West Main Street with regards to privacy as indicated in paragraph 4.5 above I do not consider the impact of this development to be significant.

4.7 In conclusion, it is considered that this proposal is contrary to Policies RTL 6, HSG 11 and TR 13 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005). The proposed creation of a flat is considered to represent an unacceptable form of development by virtue of its lack of off street parking and amenity ground. It is considered that the proposal would adversely affect the road safety at this location. The application is therefore recommended for refusal.

4.8 It should be noted that the objectors have requested that a site visit be conducted prior to a decision being made on the application and that they be given a hearing at the committee. Application No: S/08/00274/FUL

Date Registered: 25th February 2008

Applicant: Fred Davis Heathfield Wishaw Road Wishaw

Agent J Kerr McDougall Ltd 13 Canyon Road Netherton Ind Est Wishaw ML2 OEG

Development: Construction of Two Dwellinghouses

Location: Land Adjacent To Heathfield Wishaw Road Waterloo ML2 8EZ

Ward: 20 Wishaw: Councillors Adamson, Love, McKay and Pentland

Grid Reference: 281 587 653564

File Reference: S/PL/B/2/61 /GO RL/GF

Site History: S/08/00062/OUT - Erection of Dwellinghouse (Adjacent site), Minded to approve by Committee on 21st February 2008 and currently referred to Scottish Ministers S/07/01609/FUL - Erection of Dwellinghouse, Refused 21st December 2007 S/05/00228/FUL - Erection of Dwellinghouse (nearby site), Refused 14th April 2005. Subsequent appeal Dismissed 20th February 2006 S/03/01606/OUT - Erection of Dwellinghouse (nearby site), Refused 17th December 2003. Subsequent appeal Dismissed 16th June 2004. S/03/01369/OUT - 7 Plot Residential Development (in outline), Withdrawn 18th November 2003 S/03/00182/AMD Erection of 1% Storey Detached Dwellinghouse, Granted 16th April 2003 S/02/00179/FUL - Erection of a Detached Dwellinghouse, Granted 23rd July 2002 S/O1/00559/0UT - Demolition of Stables and Erection of Detached Dwellinghouse, Granted 29th September 2001 (against recommendation) S/96/10173/OUT Erection of Dwellinghouse (In Outline) Refused 19th August 1999

Development Plan: The site is zoned as Greenbelt in the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 and the Southern Area Local Plan (Modified 2001,2004 and 2005)

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes ~~~~~n~~~ TO HEATHFIELD, ~~H~WROAD, WATERLOO Consultations: Scottish Water Comments British Gas No Response Scottish Power Comments

Representations: No letters of representation received

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 7th March 2008

Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

That the proposed dwellinghouses are contrary to Strategic Policy 1 of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 and Policies ENV 6 (Green Belt) and HSG 12 (Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside) of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) in that no justification exists in terms of an appropriate rural use for dwellinghouses in this Green Belt location.

That the proposed dwellinghouses are contrary to policies HSG12 (Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside) and HSG 15 (Area of Great Landscape Value) of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) in that their design is not compatible to this rural location and they would result in a detrimental visual impact on an Area of Great Landscape Value.

That the proposal is contrary to Policies HSG 12 (Housing in the Countryside and Green Belt) and TR 13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) in that the development would be detrimental to road safety in that it would cause additional traffic to use the junction with the main Wishaw Road, which is geometrically substandard and lies within a derestricted speed section of the A721. Furthermore, the access arrangements to the site are sub standard in terms of width and the lack of footways and lighting.

NOTE TO COMMITTEE

If granted this application will require to be referred to the Scottish Ministers in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 2007 as the proposed development constitutes a significant departure from the Development Plan.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 25th February 2008

Memo from Transportation Team Leader received 12th March 2008 Memo from Head of Protective Services received 12th March 2008 Letter from Scottish Power on application S/08/0062/OUT received 31 st January 2008 Letter from Scottish Water on application S08/00062/OUT received 4th February 2008

Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Gordon Liddell at 01698 274114.

Date: 19 March 2008 APPLICATION NO. S/08/00274/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.I This application seeks planning permission for the erection of two single storey detached dwellinghouses at land to the east of the residential property, Heathfield, Waterloo, Wishaw. The applicant has highlighted these would be used as ‘showmans chalets’. The proposal involves creating two new house plots between Heathfield, an adjacent yard and a further residential property, Gillyburn House, with the plots fronting a branch off Wishaw Road to the southeast of its junction with the A721. The area of ground is L-Shaped and is 26 metres in width at the front widening to the rear to approximately 42 metres. The land generally declines in level from north to south where it extends to a railway, open fields and the Clyde Valley beyond.

1.2 The proposed dwellings are small two bedroom detached bungalows. Each would have a front garden depth of 10 metres, 6 metres side garden and a rear garden depth of approximately 20 metres. Due to the shape of the plots one of the properties’ would benefit form an extra section of rear garden ground. Each dwellinghouse would also contain a detached double garage in the rear garden with a single dedicated access serving both properties taken from the road to the front.

1.3 It is worth noting that planning permission for a single dwellinghouse on the same site was refused in 2007 and circumstances have not changed.

2. Development Plan

2.1 The site is within the Green Belt in the Central Industrial Area Part Development Plan 1964 and Southern Area Local Plan (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005).

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 My Transportation Section recommended refusal of the application due to the access to the site being substandard with respect to construction, width, pedestrian and turning facilities and street lighting. Also, the junction with the A721 is substandard at a derestricted section and additional traffic using the junction would be detrimental to road safety.

3.2 My Protective Services Section raised no objections to recent applications, however did comment that subject to the approval of this application, measures should be implemented to limit noise levels and dust emission during construction. They also commented that a site investigation report be submitted to ensure the site is free of any contaminants.

3.3 Scottish Power previously raised no objections but noted that subject to the approval of this application, site operators should be aware of the dangers of underground services and overhead lines.

3.4 Scottish Water previously raised no objections but made comments relating to requirements for connection to their infrastructure.

3.5 All these comments remain relevant and up-to-date. 4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 This application requires to be assessed against the Development Plan. The proposal is not of strategic significance with relevant policies being ENV6 (Green Belt) and HSG12 (Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside) in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005. The Central Industrial Area Part Development 1964 also zones the site as Green Belt, but is significantly out of date.

4.2 Strategic Policy 1 of the Structure Plan requires the continued designation and safeguarding of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Green Belt within which there is a presumption against the spread of built up areas and encroachment into the countryside. The Southern Area Local Plan defines physical Green Belt boundaries in this area.

4.3 Policy ENV6 presumes against development that will affect the character and function of the Green Belt, within which there is a presumption against development other than directly associated with an appropriate rural use, Policy HSG12 indicates that new houses will only be permitted where there is a proven operational need in accordance with Policy ENV6. This policy also sets criteria for assessing new housing applications, including visual prominence of the site, design issues, vehicular access and site drainage. While there is a small group of development at this location, the application site lies within and currently contributes positively to the purposes of the Green Belt. The applicant has not provided any supporting information to justify why two new dwellings in the Green Belt in terms of an appropriate rural use should be accepted in this instance. Subsequently, as no such justification exists, the application is considered to be unacceptable and contrary to the primary requirements of policies ENV6 and HSG12 of the Southern Area Local Plan on safeguarding the Green Belt. I also consider that the proposed house-types are contrary to these policies inasmuch as their design is basic and not of the quality normally expected for such a Green Belt location. Had there been adequate justification, an improvement to the house-type design would have been sought. While, I acknowledge that the applicant states that these are showmans chalets, they remain residential units within the Green Belt.

4.4 This site additionally lies within the Clyde Valley Area of Great Landscape Value and as such, policy ENVI5 (Area of Great Landscape Value) gives the area additional protection from proposals, such as the current one, by resisting any development that would have a significant adverse effect on the character and quality of the environment. I consider that this form of unjustified development in the Green Belt, albeit located close to a small group of other buildings, would represent a form of development which would significantly adversely affect its landscape, especially given its special designation within an Area of Great Landscape Value and taking into account the low quality of the house design. I would note that the application site is prominent from the A721 to the north. I also have concerns that by permitting such an unjustified form of development, a dangerous precedent would be set causing a negative impact upon integrity of the Area of Great Landscape Value and wider Green Belt.

4.5 Policies HSG 12 and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) both consider roads and transportation issues. While adequate parking can be provided within the plot, wider negative road safety issues are raised by my Transportation Team Leader, as set out in paragraph 3.1 above. The road safety problems associated with the junction with the A721 and the substandard section of Wishaw Road from which access would be taken are outwith the applicant's control. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy TR 13 and I conclude that the road safety concerns with the proposal to be sufficient to warrant separate reasons for refusal of the application.

4.6 In relation to material considerations it is useful to pay regard to recent applications in the vicinity. I particularly refer to the refusal of planning permission for a single dwellinghouse on the same site in 2007 (S/07/01609/FUL) and note that relevant planning policy has not changed in the intervening period. Planning application S/08/00062/OUT, for the construction of a dwellinghouse (in outline), at the adjacent Haulage Yard at Gillhead was approved by Committee in January 2008 and has since been referred to Scottish Ministers following standard procedures. The circumstances in that case were quire different in that the proposal related to the closure and displacement of an established haulage yard and associated buildings. Both the visual impact and transportation implications of that proposal were considerably less than the established yard, over-riding normal Green Belt policy. There are several further applications and related appeals for residential development in the vicinity which have all been refused due to inadequate Green Belt justification, as is the case in this instance. The applicant’s property is the only dwellinghouse to receive consent in recent years and this was permitted on the basis that it replaced a stable block on the same site.

4.7 In conclusion, taking the provisions of the development plan and all material considerations into account, it is considered that the proposed dwellinghouses have no appropriate justification in terms of their Green belt location, are of an inappropriate design and would have a detrimental impact upon road safety. The application is contrary to policies ENVG, ENV15, HSG12 and TR13 of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) and I therefore recommend that planning permission be refused.