North Lanarkshire Council
Planning Applications for consideration of Planning and Transportation Committee
Committee Date : 7'h May 2009
Ordnance Survey maps reproduced from Ordnance Survey with permission of HMSO Crown Copyright reserved
1 APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE 7'h May 2009
Page Application No. Applicant DevelopmentlLocus Recommendation No 5 N/08/00322/FUL Roberts Construction of 15 Terraced Grant Development Ltd Houses Land To The Rear Of 33 High Barrwood Road Kilsyth
13 N/09/00004/FUL Bellisle Construction of Building (213 Refuse Developments Storeys) Containing Two Request for Ltd Office Units (191 sq m and Site Visit 46 sq m), One Hot Food Shop (46 sq m), a Dental Surgery (129 sq m) and a Children's Nursery (379 sq m) Site At Croy Tavern Nethercroy Road Croy
20 N/09/00258/CAAD Dobbies Garden Application for Certificate of Refuse (In Centres Plc Appropriate Alternative Part) Development in Respect of Issue (In Residential (Use Class 9) Part) Westerwood Garden Centre Eastfield Road Westerwood C umbernau Id
32 N/09/00300/OUT John & Angela Construction of a Grant Smith Dwellinghouse 94 Main Road Condorrat Cumbernauld
39 N/09/00338/FUL S Mahmood Alterations to Shop Front Grant and Installation of Ducting (In Retrospect) Micawber Real Spice Station Buildings South Carbrain Road Carbrain Cumbernauld
44 C/07/017 1UFUL Albert Bartlett & Construction of Single Wind Grant (P) Sons Ltd Turbine (Tower Height 80m, Request for Site Blade Diameter 92.5Mm, Visit & Hearing Total Tip Height 126.25m) at A. Bartlett & Sons at 251 Stirling Road, Airdrie
2 59 C/08/00909/FUL Clyde Valley Demolition of Existing Orrs Grant Housing Department Store and Association Construction of 4 Storey Building Incorporating Class 1 Retail Space (Basement and Ground Floor) and 15 Flats (Upper Floors) at 68 - 78 South Bridge Street, Airdrie
70 C/O9/00239/FUL Mr William Construction of 485sqm Grant Graham Commercial Tool Hire Unit at Corner Of Miller Street & Coatbank Street, Coatbridge
78 C/09/00268/FUL Mr Abdul Two Storey Side Extension Grant Rahman Single Storey Rear Extension and Conversion of Garage at 137 Drummore Avenue
83 Mr and Mrs Mann Use of Site for Office Refuse Containers, Valet Request for Site Containers, Snack Bar and Visit and Hearing Car Wash Facility with Associated Car Parking
89 S/07/01468/OUT The Samuel Residential Development (In Grant Family Outline) Land At 599 - 605 Main Street Bellshill
100 S/08/00772/REM Mr & Mrs M Erection of Detached Grant Dougan Dwellinghouse Request for Site Land At 147 Mill Road Visit & Hearing Allanton
107 S/O8/01646/FUL Tesco Stores Ltd Creation of Car Park Grant Land At 275 Main Street Bellshill
113 S/ 08/01719/FUL Mr & Mrs J Crisp Erection of Single Storey Grant Detached Dwellinghouse with Attic Accommodation and Detached Garage Land At 236 Jerviston Street Jerviston, Motherwell
122 S/09/00101/FUL Mr Scott Construction of Two Storey Grant Passmore Terraced Dwelling House Land At 28 Clark Street, Newmains
129 S/09/00138/FUL Mr K Muir Construction of a Two Storey Refuse Detached Dwellinghouse Request for Site Land At 5 Talbot Terrace Visit and Hearing Uddingston
3 136 S/09/00209/FUL Mr & Mrs Storry Erection of a Replacement Grant Dwellinghouse West Badallan, A71 Edinburgh - Ayr Road Allanton
(P) C/07/01715/FUL - If granted, refer to Scottish Ministers (Objections from BAA and NATS).
4 Application No: N/08/00322/FUL
Date Registered: 6th March 2008
Applicant: Roberts Development Ltd Garrell Road Burnside Industrial Estate Kilsyth G65 9JX
Agent CDP Architects Moorpark House 11 Orton Place Glasgow G512HF
Development: Construction of 15 Terraced Houses
Location : Land To The Rear Of 33 High Barrwood Road Kilsyth G65 OEE
Ward: 1- Kilsyth. Councillors Griffin, Jones & Key
Grid Reference: 272484677823
File Reference: N/08/00322/FU L
Site History: No relevant site history
Development Plan: Kilsyth Local Plan 1999. Policy HGI (Housing Site) applies.
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: Scottish Water (Comments)
Representations: I 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 unless as may otherwise be dictated by any other condition of this consent, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- Agw6152 D: L(--)lO2, Agw6152 D: L (--) 106, Agw6152 D: L (--) 104, Agw6152 D: L (--) 103.
Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded
5 +-*.--
6 3. That before the development hereby permitted is started, revised elevation drawings that reflect the approved layout (drawing number Agw6152 D: L(--)l02) shall be submitted for the approval in writing of the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, a break between plot number 19 and plot number 20 shall be illustrated and plots 16 to 19 and plots 20 to 22 shall demonstrate a continuous building line.
Reason: To reflect the scheme deemed acceptable by the Planning Service.
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 and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved under the terms of this condition.
Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the site and the general area.
5. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, all entrance gates or fences shall open in towards the site. The approved fences and walls for each plot shall be erected in accordance with the approved plans and before the house is occupied.
Reason: To ensure all walls and fences are appropriate for the site and the general area
6. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include:-
(a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, boundary treatment, grass seeding and turfing; (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development (d) a detailed timetable for all landscaping works which shall provide for these works being carried out contemporaneously with the development of the site.
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area.
7. That all works included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 6 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 interests of the visual amenity of the area.
8. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of the proposed grassed, planted, and landscaped areas plus all other communal areas including parking areas, roads and footpaths that will not be adopted by the Council.
Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.
7 9. That BEFORE completion of the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance scheme approved under the terms of condition 8 shall be in operation.
Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.
10. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the existing and proposed levels on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, a scheme shall be submitted that outlines the methodology for creating a level surface. In particular, the means of removing or levelling any of the rock surface if required. Details of the equipment necessary for the carrying out of the works and the proposed hours of working shall be included. Thereafter the levels shall be finished in accordance with the approved plans.
Reason: To ensure that the means of levelling the site does not result in a significant disturbance or nuisance to neighbours in terms of noise and dust emissions and to ensure that the finished site levels do not create a basis for the approved dwellings to create overbearing and overlooking issues with existing properties.
11. That before the development hereby permitted starts, details of the location of the temporary site compound shall be submitted for the approval in writing of the Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the temporary compound is sensitively positioned within the site with particular regard to potential noise from rock processing.
12. That before plots 26 to 29 are occupied; the shared surface access and parking area shall be completed to final wearing course in accordance with the specifications of the Roads Authority.
Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities within the site.
13. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the requirements of the publication titled 'Drainage Assessment : A Guide for Scotland' and any other advice subsequently published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) or the Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party (SUDSWP). The post-development surface water discharges shall ensure that the rate and quantity of run-off to any watercourse are no greater than the pre-development run-off for any storm return period. SUDS shall still be provided even where discharges are proposed to public sewers notwithstanding any conditions imposed by Scottish Water.
Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site.
14. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 13 above shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Within three months of the construction of the SUDS, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in drainage works) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved plans.
Reason: To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site.
8 15. That a visibility splay within land under the control of the applicants shall be provided on both sides of the vehicular access at the High Barrwood Road junction and before the completion of the 15th dwelling, everything exceeding 1.05 metres in height above the road channel level shall be removed from the sight line areas and, thereafter, nothing exceeding 1.05 metres in height above road channel level shall be planted, placed, erected, or allowed to grow within these sight lines.
Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.
16. That the final house shall not be occupied until the footpath connecting the development site with the Dawn Home site to the north as illustrated on drawing number Agw6152 D: L(--)I02 shall be constructed in accordance with the specifications of the Council's Roads Authority and to final wearing course.
Reason: To provide an appropriate pedestrian link between both development sites.
17. That the final house shall not be occupied until the extent of footpath illustrated in front of 'Clonard' linking the development site with Woodside Avenue, as illustrated on drawing Agw6152 D, shall be constructed to the specifications of the Council's Roads Authority.
Reason: To provide an appropriate pedestrian link between both development sites.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 6th March 2008
Letter from Mhari Colquhoun, C/o Dawn Homes Ltd, 220 West George Street, Glasgow, G2 2PG received 18th March 2008.
Kilsyth Local Plan 1999 Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Erin Louise Deeley at 01236 616464.
Date: 29 April 2009
9 APPLICATION NO. N108100322lFUL
REPORT
1. Description of Site and ProPOsal
1 .I This application is for the construction of 15, 2 storey (all 2 bedrooms) dwellings in the form of 3 terraced blocks comprising 7 units, 4 units and 3 units. The 15th dwelling will be attached to the already approved phase I of the development. The application area is a gap site within an established residential locale of Kilsyth, accessed from High Barwood Road.
1.2 The application site is considered to be the second phase of a housing development already approved to the south of the site. A live planning application for 110 dwellings is under consideration at the former Barwood Quarry to the north.
2. DeveloPment Plan
2.1 This application raises no strategic issues and can be assessed in terms of relevant local plan policy.
2.2 The site is covered by policy HGI in the Kilsyth Local Plan 1999 which supports the principal of a housing development. Policy HG3 which seeks to protect residential amenity and provides guidance on appropriate layouts is also relevant.
2.3 The planning status of this site is unchanged by the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 Consultation responses can be summarised as follows:
Scottish Water has no objections.
The Land Services Manager suggests that particular regard should be given to the landscaping of the site and attention should be given to boundary treatments. A condition has been imposed with respect to this.
The Conservation and Greening Manager suggests that swift nesting boxes be installed at the gables of the terraces and that an access path linking the development site to surrounding sites is provided. Conditions have been imposed with respect to the footpath links however a condition relating to the installation of nesting boxes was considered unnecessary.
The Property Services Manager has no objections, however it has been pointed out that the applicant does not own a narrow section of land adjacent to Woodside Avenue. This raised concerns with the initial layout as a proposed pedestrian access to the site traversed through this land. This however has been address and the development does not affect the land in question.
My Geotechnical Team Leader has no objections subject to the standard drainage conditions being imposed.
My Traffic and Transportation Team Leader has no objection to the principal of the development and provides advice in terms of roads specifications that will require to be met in order for the roads construction consent to be issued and parking standards. He advises that a visibility splay
10 of 4.5 metres x 60 metres in both directions be provided at the connection to High Barrwood Road. Many requirements of the Team Leader have been addressed by the latest layout. Outstanding matters such as visibility splays have been addressed by the imposition of conditions.
3.2 One letter of representation has been received from Dawn Homes who have a current application (reference N/07/02040/FUL) with the Council for residential development on the Barrwood Quarry site immediately to the north of the application site. It should be noted that this related to the original layout which has changed considerably since its submission. The points of objection can be summarised as follows:
Several dwellings do not meet the Council’s guidelines for open space around dwellings.
Comment: These matters related to the initial layout and have now been addressed. All 15 dwellings comply with Council standards in terms of open space around dwellings.
No play area has been proposed. The number of dwellings proposed, combined with phase 1 exceeds 30 units, the trigger for a play area to be provided.
Comment: The number of dwellings has since been reduced from 26 to 15. The 15 units combined with phase 1 which comprises 14 units’ results in a total of 29 units and therefore play provision is not required.
The roads design is not satisfactory in terms of NLC standards. In particular, the 26 units would require a roundel or a loop road, neither of which have been provided.
Comment: The road layout has been altered to the satisfaction of the Roads Authority. Furthermore, now only 15 units are proposed to be served as opposed to 26.
Parking provision is inadequate and does not meet Council standards.
Comment: The layout has been altered to accommodate satisfactory in-curtilage parking provision. Plots 26 to 29 that have 1 in-curtilage parking space also have a further space within the adjacent shared surface area. This arrangement has been verbally accepted by my Traffic and Transportation Section.
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, the relevant policies are HGI (New Housing Development Opportunities) and HG3 (Development Control in Housing Areas) of the Kilsyth Local Plan 1999.
4.2 Policy HGI allocates the site for residential use so the development is supported by the local plan. With regards to the layout and compliance with other Council guidelines (open space, parking, garden sizes etc) considerable negotiations have taken place to ensure that the layout complies with policy HG3. (This is expanded on below).
4.3 The site has two main constraints. A footpath traverses through the site. Although this is not a formal right of way, it should be noted that under the terms of the Countryside (Scotland) Act 1967, it would meet the criteria under the years of usage. The footpath has also been identified as an important route under the Council’s Draft Core Path Plan. The applicant has addressed this issue by proposing a new footpath linking Woodside Road and High Barrwood Road with the development site (The Council’s property Section has confirmed that they would be willing to allow a right of access to allow construction of the footpath) and creating a new footpath link
11 that will connect to the Dawn Homes development site to the north. The new footpaths will benefit from natural surveillance by the home owners given the orientation of windows.
4.4 The other constraint is the rock that is embedded within the site. It has been decided that this matter can be dealt with by imposition of a condition. Details of the proposed methodology of removing/ levelling the rock are required for assessment prior to works starting on site. This is required for the Planning Service to understand the ground works required, the impact that this may have on surrounding properties in terms of noise and finished levels and to determine the most appropriate methodology in association with our Pollution Control colleagues.
4.5 The proposed 2 storey properties are considered to be in keeping with the character and style of housing in the surrounding area. A condition has been attached with respect to sample finishing materials being submitted for the assessment of the Planning Service. The criteria requires materials to compliment the locale.
4.6 No’s 23 and 24 Colzium View to the west of the site are single storey properties and have gardens short of current standards. N0.24 has a garden depth measuring between 5 and 7 metres deep. The proposed dwellings that will be to the rear of these properties have garden depths of between 14 to 16 metres, This provides more than 18 metres between properties (The minimum window to window distance), It should be noted that because the proposed dwellings are 2 storeys, and because there will be a boundary fence between the existing and proposed plots, there will be no direct window to window overlooking. The garden sizes for the remainder of the development also meet Council standards in that they meet the 10 metre minimum depth.
4.7 It should be noted that plots 26 to 29 have only 1 in-curtilage parking space, however an additional space per property is provided within the adjacent shared surface area. This is acceptable to my Traffic and Transportation Section as the spaces are in close proximity to the dwellings. The remainder of the properties have 2 in-curtilage spaces, thus meeting Council standards for 2 bedroom properties.
4.8 The applicant submitted drainage design and flooding assessment information for the attention of my Geotechnical Team Leader however this was for the initial layout which included more units. My Geotechnical Team leader has advised that the reduction in units and resulting reduction in impermeable area should place less demand on the drainage proposals and has confirmed that a condition requiring revised drainage proposals is acceptable.
4.9 Phase 1 and phase 2 (the proposed development) combined results in a total of 29 units. Play provision is only required to be achieved when 30 or more units are proposed.
4.10 In summary, the proposed development area is a gap site that is surrounded by established properties to the east, west and south. It has the appearance of a housing site. A layout found to be acceptable to the Planning Service has been achieved and will integrate and harmonize with the surrounding environment.
4.11 Although the Council has an interest in this site, the proposed development accords with the development plan. Accordingly there is no requirement to notify this application to the Scottish Ministers.
4.12 Having considered the development plan and all material planning considerations, I recommend that planning consent be granted subject to conditions.
12 Application No: N/09/00004/FUL
Date Registered: 31 st December 2008
Applicant: Bellisle Developments Ltd Media House 8 Dunnswood Road Cumbernauld G67 3EN
Agent Block Architects Ltd 18 Haddow Street Hamilton ML3 7HX
Development: Construction of Building (213 Storeys) Containing Two Office Units (191 sq m and 46 sq m), One Hot Food Shop (46 sq m), a Dental Surgery (129 sq m) and a Children's Nursery (379 sq m)
Location: Site at Croy Tavern Nethercroy Road C roy G65 9JF
Ward: 1- Kilsyth. Councillors Griffin, Jones and Key.
Grid Reference: 272310676154
File Reference: N/09/00004/FUL
Site History: N/04/00858/OUT Residential Development (incorporating the application site plus land to the north) Refused in July 2004 N/05/00972/OUT Construction of 10 Flats Withdrawn in November 2005
Development Plan: The site is covered by Housing Area (HG3-5) and Village Environmental Appraisal (NE6) policies in the Kilsyth Local Plan 1999
Contrary to Development Plan: Yes
Consultations: Scottish Water (No objections) West of Scotland Archaeology Service (Comments)
Representations: No letters of representation received.
Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 14th January 2009
13 14 Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-
1. The proposed development will adversely affect retail/ commercial office provision in the general area in that the public orientated offices, hot food outlet and potential retail outlets (the office and hot food uses can be converted for retail purposes without requiring planning permission) are not within a recognised retail/ commercial office location and will draw trade away from such locations to their detriment; in this respect the proposal is contrary to a) the Kilsyth Local Plan 1999 in that the offices and hot food outlet are in conflict with policies SC3 and SC4 and paragraph 9.10 which support (subject to caveats) such development in the town centre and the potential retail outlets are in conflict with policy SC2 which supports retail development in existing shopping centres, and b) the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan in that the offices, hot food outlet and potential retail outlets are in conflict with policy DSP2 which opposes development which does not safeguard the viability and vitality of town centres and policy RTCI which protects the designated network of centres and locations.
2. Should planning permission be granted a precedent would be set for developments that adversely affect general retail/ commercial public services provision
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 31st December 2008 Amended plans received gthMarch 2009
Letter from Scottish Water received 23rd January 2009 Letter from West of Scotland Archaeology Service received February 2009
Memo from Head of Protective Services received 12th January 2009
Kilsyth Local Plan 1999 Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Martin Dean at 01236 616466.
Date: 2gthApril 2009
15 APPLICATION NO. N/09/00004/FUL
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.1 The application is for the construction of a building (2/3 storeys) containing two office units (191 sq m and 46 sq m), one hot food shop (46 sq m), a dental surgery (129 sq m) and a children’s nursery (379 sq m) at the closed public house site adjacent to 2 Nethercroy Road, Croy. Access to the offices, hot food shop and dental surgery is via Nethercroy Road and access to the children’s nursery plus the associated parking is via the adjacent social club. 22 parking spaces are shown.
1.2 The building has two legs with that section nearest to Constarry Road and Nethercroy Road being 1% storey and housing an office and hot food outlet on the ground floor and a dental surgery on the upper floor. The other leg backs onto raised land and is 3 storey (incorporating roof space floor area) at the front and 2 storey at the rear with an office on the ground floor and a children’s nursery on the upper floors.
1.3 The 0.13ha site currently contains the vacant Croy Tavern public house.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The proposal raises no strategic issues and can be assessed in terms of the relevant Local Plan policies.
2.2 The site is covered by Housing Area (HG3-5) and Village Environmental Appraisal (NE6) policies in the Kilsyth Local Plan 1999. These policies relate to processing residential applications and to appraising village environments and carrying out appropriate improvements. They are not directly relevant to the application proposal. Policies SC2 and SC3 concern protecting shopping centres and identifying the role of offices and other commercial services in Kilsyth town centre.
2.3 The zoning of the site and the policy position is not altered by the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 Summaries of consultations received are as follows
Scottish Water: No Objections. The developers may need to fund works on existing infrastructure to enable their development to connect. 0 West of Scotland Archaeology Service: The proposal forms a minor additional negative effect on the setting of the Antonine Wall but this is not considered substantive enough to warrant advice for refusal or alteration to the proposal. Head of Protective Services: A site investigation report should be submitted. Comments are provided on noise and hours of construction work. My Traffic and Transportation Team Leader has no objections to the principle of the development but points out that Nethercroy Road is a private and ill defined road and that the development, as currently proposed does little to address this. He recommends the formation of delineating kerbing at the access and at the boundary with the adjacent existing hot food take away outlet. It is pointed out that there is a
16 minor shortfall in parking provision.
3.2 No letters of representation have been received. The applicants have, however, requested that there be a Committee site visit and hearing prior to any decision being reached in order that the Committee can judge the proposal and the existing site in the context of the Antonine Wall World Heritage Area and that the social context of the proposal can be appreciated.
4. Plannins 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.
4.2 Development Plan: The site and proposal are covered by the following policies in the Kilsyth Local Plan1999.
HG3-5: These site specific policies relate to development management for residential developments and are not relevant to the current proposal.
NE6: This site specific policy relates to potential environmental improvements to villages. It is not considered to be relevant to the current proposal.
SC2: This relates to out-of-centre retail development with the requirement that any such development should not adversely affect the viability and vitality of existing centres and should take account of the availability of alternative sites in or adjacent to the town centre. The proposed development is being considered under retail as well as commercial offices policies in that the proposed offices and hot food outlet can be converted to shops without needing planning permission. It is considered that the proposal will potentially take retail trade away from Kilsyth and Cumbernauld town centres and Craigmarloch neighbourhood centre with there being vacant retail units in both town centres. As such the proposal is contrary to this policy. Retail/ commercial offices issues are covered in paragraph 4.4.
SC3 and SC4: These policies cover (amongst other matters) the appropriateness of offices and hot food outlets in Kilsyth town centre (subject to safeguards protecting the retail pre-eminence of the town centre). As the application site is outwith the town centre the proposal is contrary to these policies. Retail/ commercial office issues are covered in paragraph 4.4.
4.3 Other Material Considerations -Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan: It is considered appropriate to regard the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan as a material planning consideration in view of its advanced stage of processing. There is no change in general policy direction through the emerging local plan with the following policies being relevant.
HCF1: This site specific policy allows for some community facilities in residential areas. This includes such examples as children’s nurseries, medical surgeries and retail for local needs. Although the proposed nursery and dentists surgery are acceptable under this policy it is considered that the proposed offices (and potential shops) and hot food unit are excessive for local needs and would serve a wider catchment than the west end of Croy. It is, therefore, considered that the proposal is not supported by this policy.
DSP2: This policy covers the location of development and is relevant in that it specifies that new developments should not detract from the vitality and viability of town centres. It is considered that the proposal will take trade away from Kilsyth and Cumbernauld town centres and as such is contrary to this policy.
RTCI: This policy protects existing retail and commercial public service provision centres as
17 the focus for such activity. As the proposal will take trade away from such existing centres it is considered to be contrary to this policy. Retail/ commercial office issues are covered in paragraph 4.4.
4.4 Retail and Related Issues: Retailing is an important issue for planning and for local residents as can be seen from the various local plan and emerging local plan policies referred to above. There is a need for a hierarchy of retail (with other ancillary outlets) centres in order to provide a range of goods and services within each centre for local residents. This grouping of shops and outlets within recognised centres ensures that shoppers do not have to make a number of separate trips to obtain a variety of goods and services and that shop keepers and other service providers take advantage of linked purchases by shoppers. This grouping of outlets within recognised centres has clear sustainability advantages through the reducing the need for residents to make separate shopping trips.
4.5 The above advantages of a hierarchy of retail centres is greatly diminished through any sporadic creation of competing shopping destinations outwith recognised centres. The proposal is for two offices (Class 2) plus a hot food outlet. The two offices could be for such uses as estate agents or betting offices which are normally found within town centres or neighbourhood retail centres. This is also the case for the hot food outlet. It is also, however, the case that these office and hot food uses could change to shops without needing planning permission (Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992) and, as such, the potential for adversely affecting established centres such as Kilsyth and Cumbernauld town centres and Craigmarloch centre is clear. Any reduction in the role of and facilities within such centres through ad hoc out-of-centre competition will be to the detriment of local residents as Well as to the detriment of the centres themselves. It is noted that both town centres have vacant units and are seen to need support and protection from unacceptable competition. The extent Of proposed office/ hot food/ retail outlets could also jeopardise the existing retail and hot food units in the more accessible centre of Croy.
4.6 It should be noted that single corner shops are an acceptable part of the retail hierarchy. The proposal for three units (plus the children's nursery and the dentist's surgery) goes beyond, however, what would be acceptable as retail provision for the immediate area. It should also be noted that there is an existing adjacent hot food outlet which could be converted or rebuilt as a shop if there was a need to provide a modest retail service for residents in the west end of Croy. The proposal is not, therefore, acceptable as local retail provision but will cater for the wider population. As covered above it is unacceptable as it is outwith the approved hierarchy of shopping centres. The applicants have declined to reduce the scheme to community uses plus one retail/ office unit, as recommended by this Service.
4.7 Design Issues: This is a sensitive but currently run down site at the entrance to Croy and close to the Antonine Wall World Heritage Area. A suitable new development would be welcomed on the site. There were serious concerns over the original design due to the adverse affect of a bland elevation as seen from Constarry Road, the domination of the adjacent single storey cottage and the adverse affect of the inappropriate design on this sensitive site. The applicants have, however, submitted amended plans which satisfactorily address these issues by reducing the ridge heights and introducing design interest into the Constarry Road facing elevation. As such the design is now considered to be acceptable.
4.12 Conclusion: Although a suitable new development would be welcomed in this prominent and sensitive site it is considered that the current proposal is unacceptable. The proposed office, hot food and potential retail uses will adversely affect general retail provision in the area and the proposal is contrary to relevant Local Plan and emerging local plan policies. These disadvantages outweigh the advantage of providing community facilities (dental surgery and children's nursery) to Croy. Taking account of the above it is recommended that planning permission be refused.
18 4.13 It should be noted that there has been a request by the applicants for a site visit and hearing.
19 Application No: N/09/00258/CAAD
Date Registered: 5th March 2009
Applicant: Dobbies Garden Centres Plc Group Headquarters Melville Nursery Lasswade EH18 IAR
Agent Blue Planning & Development Chartered Planning And Development Surveyors Unit 2 Newyearfield Business Park Hawk Brae Livingston EH54 6TW
Development: Application for Certificate of Appropriate Alternative Development in Respect of Residential (Use Class 9)
Location: Westerwood Garden Centre Eastfield Road Westerwood Cumbernauld G68 OEB
Ward: 2 - Cumbernauld North: Councillors Chadha, McCulloch, Murray and O’Brien
Grid Reference: 276720 676602
File Reference: N/09/00258/CAAD
Site History: PA76/041 Alteration to Byre to form Showroom, Tearoom and Workshop: Approved July 1976 PA77/044 Formation of Craft Centre: Approved July 1977 PA87/138 Formation of Garden Centre: Approved October 1987 PA89/041 Change of Use to Restaurant: Approved July 1989 PA94/050 Erection of Public House, Restaurant and Play Area: Refused October 1994 95/00030/LB Alteration to Form New Window Opening: Approved 31.05.1995 N/99/01252/FUL Part Change of Use to Conservatory Show Area Including Construction of Showroom and Sales Office: Approved 17.1 1.1999 N/03/01333/FUL Part Change of Use from Garden Centre to Conservatory Sales Area, Including Construction of Sales Office: Approved 22.10.2003 N/05/0031I/CAAD Application for Certificate of Appropriate Alternative Development in Respect of Use Classes 1, 2, 4, 9 and 11: Approved 8.06.2005 (Subject to no Residential Use)
20 21 Development Plan: The site is covered by an Open Space Policy (EN26) in the adopted Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993
Contrary to Development Plan: Yes
Consultations: None
Representations: 17 letters of representationreceived.
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
Recommendation: Refuse In Part for the Following Reason (1) and Issue In Part subject to the following Conditions (2.13):-
Refuse Certificate of Appropriate Alternative Development for Residential Development (Class 9)
1. That a Certificate of Appropriate Alternative Development be refused for Residential Development (Class 9) as:
A) Residential development would have been deemed to be contrary to Development Plan policies in that
i) it is not within a Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 new housing development allocated site (Cumbernauld Local Plan policy HG l), ii) there is no identified residential land supply requirement for development on the unallocated (for residential purposes) site (Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 (Strategic Policy 9), iii) it is not in a location that is readily accessible by a variety of transport modes, not predominantly private car (Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 (Strategic Policy 9)), iv) it is not an Acceptable Departure from the Structure Plan in that it does not meet the Economic, Social and Environmental Benefit criteria specified in Structure Plan policy 10 (Departures from the Structure Plan), v) it would adversely affect the setting of a listed building (Cumbernauld Local Plan policy EN 2).
B) Residential development would have been considered to be in an unacceptable and unsustainable location in that
i) it is a significant distance from other residential areas, shops and services, ii) it is not easily accessible by walking or cycling, iii) it would adversely affect the setting of the Mainhead Farm listed building.
As a consequence of points i) and ii) above residential development would have been seen as unacceptably encouraging private car trips.
22 Issue Certificate of Appropriate Alternative Development in respect of Classes 1 (Shops), 2 (Financial, Professional and Other Services), 4 (Business) and 11 (Assembly and Leisure) of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997
2. That a Certificate of Appropriate Alternative Development be issued in respect of Classes 1 (Shops), 2 (Financial, Professional and Other Services), 4 (Business) and 11 (Assembly and Leisure) of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997, subject to conditions/ reasons 2-1 3 in that the use of the site for which permission would have been granted would have been within Classes 1 (Shops), 2 (Financial, Professional and Other Services), 4 (Business) and 11 (Assembly and Leisure) of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997 and that the use would have formed an integral part of the approved use of the Mainhead Farm Listed Building. For the avoidance of doubt Class 9 (Houses) would not have been considered an appropriate use.
Reason: In order that appropriate uses reflect the existing garden centre business on the site.
3. That no buildings or other structures would have been constructed within the site.
Reason: In order to preserve the character and setting of the Mainhead Farm Listed Building.
4. That before the development started, full details of the location and design of the surface water drainage scheme to be installed within the application site would have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and for the avoidance of doubt the scheme would have had to comply with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency‘s principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems.
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area and to ensure that the proposed drainage system complies with the latest Scottish Environment Protection Agency guidance.
That before the development started, the applicant would have been required to provide written confirmation to the Planning Authority that all the requirements of Scottish Water had been fully met in respect of providing the necessary drainage infrastructure to serve the development.
Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory site drainage arrangements.
That before the development started, and following a full phased site investigation, a report in accordance with BS 10175 : 2001 “The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites” would have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and for the avoidance of doubt the report would have included a conceptual site model and a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to assess the requirement for remediation measures.
7. That before the development started, any remediation measures identified as necessary as a result of the Report approved under the terms of Condition 6 would have been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider the means of treatment of the ground in the interest of health and safety.
8. That following completion of all works approved under the terms of Condition 7, a Certificate from a suitably qualified person or body would have been submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that all the necessary works had been carried out in full and to a satisfactory standard.
Reason: To ensure the proper treatment of the ground in compliance with Condition 7 in the
23 interests of health and safety.
That before the development started, a scheme of landscaping, including boundary treatments, would have been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it would have included:- (a) details of all earth moulding, hard landscaping, grass seeding and turfing; (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development.
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the site and the surrounding area.
That within one year of the commencement of the use, all works which were included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of Condition 9, would have had to be completed and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which died, were removed, damaged, or became diseased, within two years of the completion of the development, would have had to be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the site and the surrounding area.
That all vehicular and pedestrian access to the site would have been from Eastfield Road via the adjoining Mainhead Farm site and in particular that there should be no vehicular or pedestrian access from the Trunk Road.
Reason: In the interests of road safety and to minimise interference with the free flow of traffic on the Trunk Road.
That an unclimable safety barrier of a type which had been approved in writing by the Planning Authority, would have been provided and maintained by the developer and any subsequent owner of the site along the boundary of the Trunk Road.
Reason: To minimise interference with the free flow of traffic on the Trunk Road, to minimise the risk of pedestrians and animals getting uncontrolled access to the Trunk Road, to maintain safety for both the Trunk Road traffic and to minimise the distraction to drivers on the Trunk Road
That no goods would have been displayed adjacent to the Trunk Road.
Reason: To minimise the distraction to drivers on the Trunk Road.
Background Papers:
Application form, background statement and plans received 5th March 2009
Letter from Dr John F Mathers, 23 Muirfield Road, Westerwood, Cumbernauld, G68 OEX received 30th March 2009. Letter from H M Macindoe, 22 Rosemount, Westerwood, Cumbernauld, G68 received 30th March 2009. Letter from Mrs Anne W Clark, 10 Queen's Drive, Westerwood, Cumbernauld, G68 OHN received 30th March 2009. Letter from Owner/Occupier, 7 Birkdale Wood, Cumbernauld, G68 received 9th April 2009. Letter from Westerwood Community Council, C/o Gordon Wright, Chairman, 2 Muirfield Road, Westerwood, Cumbernauld, G68 OEX received 17th March 2009.
24 Letter from Mr G Wright, 2 Muirfield Road, Westerwood, Cumbernauld, G68 OEX received 17th March 2009. Letter from Mr R & Mrs K Stannard, 13 The Links, Westerwood, Cumbernauld, G68 OEP received 25th March 2009. Letter from T & S Turnbull, 6 Edenside, Cumbernauld, G68 OER received 25th March 2009. Letter from W & M Rodgers, 9 Edenside, Cumbernauld, G68 OER received 25th March 2009. Letter from Bill & Margaret Cunningham, 1 Edenside, Westewood, Cumbernauld, G68 OER received 25th March 2009. Letter from Mr D & Mrs L Wilson, 3 Edenside, Westerwood, Cumbernauld, G68 OER received 25th March 2009. Letter from Mr & Mrs McGill, 16 Dunning Drive, Westerwood, Cumbernauld, G68 OFN received 25th March 2009. Letter from Mr Kenneth Brunton, 14 Edenside, Westerwood, Cumbernauld, G68 OER received 20th March 2009. Letter from M J Hayes, 60 Turnberry Gardens, Westerwood, Cumbernauld, G68 OM received 19th March 2009. Letter from Linda Bellingham, 30 Muirfield Road, Westerwood, Cumbernauld, G68 OEX received 30th March 2009. Letter from Mr Gordon Young, 30 The Links, Westerwood, Cumbernauld, G68 OEP received 27th March 2009. Letter from Mrs Hamilton, 4 Edenside, Westerwood, Cumbernauld, G68 OER received 27th March 2009.
Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Martin Dean at 01236 616466.
Date: 29th April 2009
25 APPLICATION NO. N1091002581CAAD
REPORT
1. Purpose of Application
1.I This is an application for a Certificate of Appropriate Alternative Development (CAAD) under the Land Compensation (Scotland) Act 1963. This type of application is relatively rare, occurring where compulsory purchase of an area of land is proposed, without agreement between the parties as to the value of the land, A party with a legal interest in the land may apply for a CAAD as a means of defining any development value of the land which can be taken into account in assessing the compensation for the land being compulsorily acquired.
1.2 The applicants seek a Certificate in respect of the part of the land in their ownership which is the subject of a Draft Compulsory Purchase Order issued by the Scottish Ministers in December 2004. The Order relates to various parcels of land required for the purpose of upgrading the M80IA80 Glasgow- Stirling Trunk Road between Auchenkilns and Haggs. The CAAD application must be considered as if it were the date on which the Draft Order was published.
2. Description of Site and Proposal
2.1 The application site comprises 0.49 hectares of ground adjacent to the existing A80 and the northbound Old Inns exit from the A80. The site forms part of the curtilage of Mainhead Farm, which is a category B listed building. Mainhead Farm is a traditional stone-built steading which was sensitively converted for use as a garden centre in 1988. The property sits between the A80 and Eastfield Road to the north, with access to the site from Eastfield Road.
2.2 The steading is in the traditional form of a courtyard farm, with the two storey farm dwelling looking away from the farm and across open landscape, in this instance, towards the A80 to the south. The land slopes downwards from the steading towards both the A80 and the slip road, adding to the prominence of the building.
2.3 The application site itself is currently part of this area of open space, with some screen planting along the southern and eastern edges. A small part of the site is currently in use for car parking associated with the garden centre.
2.4 The applicants seek a CAAD for residential purposes (Use Classes 9). No indicative layout plans have been submitted.
2.5 It should be noted that this is a second CAAD application on the site with a certificate having been granted for Classes 1 (Shops), 2 (Financial, Professional and Other Services), 4 (Business) and 11 (Assembly and Leisure) of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997 in June 2005 under application N/05/0031IICAAD. This previous consent specifically excluded residential use on the site.
3. Development Plan
3.1 In terms of the regulations governing the assessment of CAAD applications, the planning circumstances at the date of the publication of the Draft Compulsory Purchase Order must be assumed. In this case the relevant date is the 6th December 2004.
26 3.2 In addition the planning authority must not refuse a certificate solely on the grounds that it would be contrary to the development plan, where the policies have no purpose beyond the scheme for which the compulsory acquisition is being promoted or are policies which are outdated. Broader policies can, however, be taken into account.
3.3 The current development plan, which comprises The Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 and the Cumbernauld Local Plan is therefore of relevance, although not the sole consideration.
3.4 Although the limited size of the application site would mean that any residential development on it would not be of strategic significance it is normal to consider the application site along with adjacent land in the applicants ownership (in order to ensure that the value of land is not artificially reduced due to the limited size of the area covered by a compulsory purchase order). This would potentially mean that residential development would be of a strategic scale and as such the proposal must be assessed against the policies of the Structure Plan as well as the Cumbernauld Local Plan. The Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan is of no relevance as it was not sufficiently advanced at the due date of December 2004.
3.5 Relevant Structure Plan policies are Strategic Policy 9 (Assessment of Development Proposals) and Strategic Policy 10 (Departures from the Structure Plan)
3.6 The site is covered by Policy EN26 (Significant Areas of Open Space, Limited Development Allowed) of the adopted Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993. This policy presumes against development within areas of defined open space except where the development provides for outdoor recreation, nature conservation or landscape protection.
3.7 Mainhead Farm is included within the Statutory List of Buildings of Architectural or Historic Merit, Category B. Pol icy EN2 of the adopted Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 is also of relevance, therefore. This Policy presumes against development which could adversely affect the character, appearance and setting of a Listed Building.
4. Consultations and Representations
4.1 No consultations have been carried out due to the specific CAAD requirement of coming to a theoretical historical view on development potential. Summaries of the consultation responses for the previous CAAD application (N/05/00311/CAAD) on the site are listed below for information purposes.
4.2 The Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland and my Transportation Section had no objections to the proposals.
4.3 Historic Scotland referred to their advice on ‘Development within the Curtilage of Listed Buildings’ and ‘Development Affecting the Setting of Listed Buildings’ within the ‘Memorandum of Guidance on Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas.’ The main thrust of that advice being that development should not interfere with principal views to and from the Listed Building. They consider that any development on the site would be relatively close to the front elevation of the farmhouse and courtyard group. Further to this they remind the Council of the need to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting in determining any application.
4.4 North Lanarkshire Council’s Leisure Services Department commented on the prominence of the Listed Building from the A80 and from large parts of Cumbernauld. They considered that if the farm buildings were surrounded by development their present semi-rural setting and the character of the Listed Building would be greatly devalued.
27 4.5 Scottish Water objected due to the cost of providing sewerage infrastructure to serve the development They indicated that their objection would be withdrawn should the applicant undertake to meet this cost provided that the scheme would not compromise the quality and quantity of discharge from the existing sewerage system.
4.6 The Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) commented on the need to address the restrictions on the existing sewerage infrastructure and that the costs for this would probably be the responsibility of the developer. They also advised that the use of a Sustainable Urban Drainage based system for treatment of surface water arising from the development would be required.
4.7 Transport Scotland commented on the need to avoid direct access to the trunk road, to avoid drainage connecting to the trunk road drainage system, to provide screening to the trunk road and that no goods be displayed adjacent to the trunk road. They also required further details of any lighting to be provided within the site.
4.8 My Pollution Control Section commented on the need for a full phased site investigation being carried out prior to any development taking place, as the application site is part of an old landfill site.
4.9 Seventeen letters of objection have been received from Westerwood Community Council and from local residents. Points of objection plus comments are as follows.
0 The proposal is contrary to the Cumbernauld Local Plan Open Space zoning.
Comments: The proposal is contrary to the Open Space zoning (EN26) of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 which presumes against development unless required for outdoor recreation, nature conservation or landscape protection. It is, however, recognised that the application site is in the curtilage of an existing garden centre business and that the benefits of some form of acceptable low key expansion would be a material consideration which would weigh against the Open Space policy presumption against most forms of development.
Residential and business development at the Dobbies site would cause traffic congestion at the already busy Eastfield Road and Dobbies roundabout. Residential development will overload existing facilities such as the local school and doctor’s surgery. There has been a previous refusal of permission for residential development at the Westerwood Hotel due to inadequate local services.
Comments: Although the application site is relatively small it is generally accepted CAAD practice to consider the developability of the site along with any other adjacent land owned by the applicant. In this respect there is the potential for a significant level of development. A Transport Assessment would establish what, if any, road improvements would be required to accommodate such development although there is no reason to believe that there are any fundamental shortcomings in the local roads infrastructure that would prohibit potential development. It is anticipated that most local services will be able to adapt to take advantage of any increased local population. It is noted that there was a refusal of planning permission (N/01/00502/OUT) in September 2002 for residential (and other) development adjacent to the Westerwood Hotel. Reasons for refusal included open space zoning, loss of local amenity and adverse affect on local roads and infrastructure.
28 5. Planning Assessment and Conclusions
5.1 The CAAD procedure requires that the planning authority certifies the alternative development for which planning permission would have been granted for land if it were not proposed to be acquired by an authority possessing compulsory purchase powers. Under Section 25 of the Land Compensation (Scotland) Act 1963 a negative CAAD decision should not be made solely on development plan grounds. The normal interpretation of this requirement is to ensure that any development plan policies which back the compulsory purchase scheme are not subsequently used to reduce resulting compensation. Account can, therefore, be taken of policies unrelated to the background compulsory purchase scheme. In this case the land is not allocated for the use for which it is being acquired (upgrading of the A80) in the development plan. The applicable Local Plan policies EN26 (Open Space) and EN2 (Listed Buildings) are such broader policies and these should therefore be taken into account.
5.2 Development Plan: Consideration under the CAAD process is given to the development potential of all adjacent land in the applicants ownership rather than just the application site. In this respect there is the theoretical potential for a large residential development in the full Dobbies site and as such the CAAD proposal requires to be considered under the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan as well as the Cumbernauld Local Plan. Relevant Structure Plan policies are as follows.
5.3 Structure Plan Strategic Policy 9 (Assessment of Development Proposals) covers the general evaluation of applications. A potential residential development is considered to be contrary to this policy as there is no housing land supply requirement for such development as specified by Policy 9 Section A (Making a Case for Development) and the detached location for a significant number of proposed residential units does not promote Sustainable Transport as required by Section B (Appropriate Location). The proposal is therefore deemed to be a departure from the Structure Plan. These issues are examined in paragraphs 5.7 and 5.13 below. It is noted that the Structure Plan does not require a housing land supply assessment to be carried out for urban brownfield sites. While there may be an argument that the Garden Centre car park can be defined as urban brownfield it is noted that the majority of the Dobbies land holding consists of previously undeveloped open space.
5.4 Structure Plan Strategic Policy 10 (Departures from the Structure Plan) covers Acceptable Departures from the Structure Plan. It is not considered that the proposal falls into this category as it does not meet the specified Economic, Social and Environmental Benefit criteria.
5.5 With respect to the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 policy EN26 (Open Space) covers the application site and presumes against development except where it provides for outdoor recreation, nature conservation or landscape protection. Clearly the suggested residential development does not meet the terms of this policy.
5.6 Policy EN2 (Listed Buildings) presumes against development which would adversely the character and setting of Listed Buildings. The application site is directly to the front of the B listed Mainhead Farm building. Residential development would adversely affect the setting of the listed building and would, therefore, be contrary to this policy.
5.7 Exploring further the housing land supply issue it is noted that the Structure Plan, as issued in 2000, placed a requirement on the Council to identify appropriate sites to meet a perceived housing shortfall. This requirement was met by the identification in 2002 of four additional housing sites in the relevant Housing Sub-market Area through a process termed the Interim Housing Land Statement (IHLS). There was, therefore, no requirement at the appropriate December 2004 date when considering new residential development to look beyond the sites identified for residential development in the Cumbernauld Local Plan (through policy HGI) and through the IHLS.
29 5.8 Looking beyond the Development Plan the following material considerations need to be considered.
5.9 Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan (NLLP): The applicants have claimed that this should be taken into account as the preparation of the local plan had been formally advertised in February 2004. The NLLP supports their case for a residential alternative use as the Finalised Draft version of the emerging plan has the application site and much of the rest of the Dobbies area zoned for residential development. There was, however, no draft zoning for the application site at the December 2004 due date and, as such, the NLLP was at too early a stage to have any influence on planning decisions. It is, therefore, not relevant to the current CAAD application.
5.10 Adverse Affect on Listed Building/ Potential Residential Conversion of Listed Building: The application site forms part of the curtilage of a category B listed building. The open nature of the area surrounding the building is an important part of the character of the building, which was originally built as a farm. The application site is part of this open area and is positioned directly in front of the front elevation. Any form of building or other structures on the site would therefore have a significant detrimental impact on the character and setting of the listed building. Development outwith the application site but within associated Dobbies land is similarly likely, although to a lesser extent, to have an adverse affect on the listed building. Taking account of the above the application site could not accommodate any form of building. It could, however, potentially provide for parking and open space associated with a suitable adjacent use. This would not be dissimilar from the current situation where the application site supports the use of the building as a garden centre.
5.11 Whilst the site forms part of the existing garden centre use, and has done since 1988, the site has never undergone and form of physical development. Considerations as to the use of the site for enabling development to secure the future of the listed building are not relevant as the CAAD procedures require that this application is assessed as at December 2004, when the Draft Compulsory Purchase Order was issued. At that time the listed building would appear to have been in a good state of repair and was in full use as a garden centre. There would, therefore, have been no justification for any form of enabling development to secure the future of the listed building.
5.12 The applicants have stated that there was discussion with the Planning Service prior to December 2004 about the possible residential conversion of the Mainhead Farm listed building. They argue that this provides a background for positively considering low key residential uses on the application site such as parking or SUDS drainage in connection with a residential conversion and, as such, the issuing of a residential CAAD. It is accepted that the potential residential conversion of listed buildings can be a potential means of ensuring that they have a long term future. Careful consideration requires, however, to be given to such matters as the degree of necessary external alterations, the degree of necessary ancillary works on adjacent land and the suitability of the location for residential purposes. These matters had not been tested through an application and, as such, it is considered inappropriate to assume that they would be satisfactory through the grant of a residential CAAD.
5.1 3 Unsuitable and Unsustainable Residential Location: Any residential development will be in a relatively detached location, over 500m from the nearest village centre facilities at Cumbernauld Village via a relatively unpleasant and intimidating tunnel under the A80. Notwithstanding a bus service on Eastfield Road it is considered that the detached location will mean that for most residents facilities will only be reasonably accessible by car.
5.14 Open Space: It is noted that the application site and land in the ownership of the applicants to the east of the access road is open. Other land in the ownership of the applicants, despite being zoned as Open Space, consists of the garden centre or is used directly in association with
30 it and is not valuable open space. The application site is relatively detached from adjacent open space in that it is mainly located between the garden centre building and the trunk road. It is considered that an appropriate low key use on the application site t hat does not involve buildings would not have a significant detrimental affect on the open amenity of the local area. It is also considered that any residential development could be conditioned to omit the open area to the east of the access road. Although, for reasons detailed elsewhere, it is not considered that residential development would have been deemed suitable at the site it is not considered that the affect on open space is a significant issue.
5.15 Potential Appropriate Alternative Developments: For reasons detailed above it is not considered that residential development as applied for would have been deemed acceptable at the appropriate date of December 2004. It is, however, appropriate to take account of the garden centre use at the site when looking at potential low key uses. To this extent it is considered that the site could be utilised for car parking or amenity open space associated with the conversion / extension of the Mainhead Farm listed building to Class 1 (Retail), Class 2 (Financial Professional and Other Services), Class 4 (Business) or Class 11 (Assembly and Leisure) use. These uses all relate to the retail, business, and tearoom functions of the garden centre and its role as a popular local destination. Such an expansion would comply with Local Plan policy IB6 which supports the suitable expansion of existing business uses outwith defined industrial areas subject to there being no adverse affect on residential amenity.
5.16 Conclusion: In conclusion, it is considered for the purposes of the Certificate of Appropriate Alternative Development that the site could not be satisfactorily used for Class 9 (residential) purposes. Residential development would be contrary to the development plan, would be in an unsuitable location and would adversely affect the setting of the listed building. Subject, however, to conditions, the site could potentially be utilised for car parking or amenity open space associated with the conversion / extension of the Mainhead Farm Listed Building to Class 1 (Retail), Class 2 (Financial Professional and Other Services), Class 4 (Business) or Class 11 (Assembly and Leisure) use. It is therefore recommended that a CAAD be issued in respect of Classes 1, 2,4 and 11 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997, but excluding Class 9 Residential, subject to conditions linking the hypothetical development of the site to the existing garden centre at Mainhead Farm. This accords with the previously issued CMDfor the site (N/05/0031l/CAAD).
31 Application No: N/09/00300/0 UT
Date Registered: 18th March 2009
Applicant: John & Angela Smith 94 Main Road Condorrat Cumbernau Id G67 4AY
Development: Construction of a Dwellinghouse
Location: 94 Main Road Condorrat Cumbernauld G67 4AY
Ward: 3 - Cumbernauld South: Councillors Carrigan, Goldie, Homer & McElroy
Grid Reference: 272784672563
File Reference: N/09/00300/OUT
Site History: 0 N/08/00656/FUL Construction of 3 Houses and Formation of Two New Access Driveways - withdrawn 311 0108
Development Plan: Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993: Housing Policy HG4 Residential Am en ity
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations:
Representations: 3 letters of representation received.
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
Recommendation: Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-
1. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a further planning application shall be submitted to the Planning Authority in respect of the following reserved matters:- (a) the siting, design and external appearance of all buildings and other structures; (b) the means of access to the site; (c) the layout of the site, including all roads, footways, and parking areas; (d) the details of, and timetable for, the hard and soft landscaping of the site. (e) the design and location of all boundary walls and fences; (f) the provision of drainage works; (9) the disposal of sewage; (h) details of existing and proposed site levels.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
32 Constriiction of a C!weIk?ghovse * Represenlatians
33 2. That within three years of the date of this permission, an application for approval of the reserved matters, specified in condition 1 above, shall be made to the Planning Authority.
Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.
3. That the development hereby permitted shall be started, either within five years of the date of this permission, or within two years of the date on which the last of the reserved matters are approved, whichever is the later.
Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.
4. That the total number of new dwellinghouses within the site shall be not more than one.
Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area and to avoid over development of the plot.
5. That notwithstanding the generalities of Condition 1 above, the proposed development shall accord with the following, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority:
the dwelling shall be positioned and orientated such that it faces in a southerly direction onto Main Road and shall not exceed 8 metres in height; the style of the dwelling shall be in keeping with the style of the surrounding properties in particular 94 and 90 Main Road and shall be designed to reflect and complement the local character of the surrounding area in terms of height, scale and building materials; the garden area associated with the dwelling shall take up at least 70% of the plot; the rear garden area shall be at least 10 metres long from the rear of the property to the site boundary; the dwelling shall be positioned in the plot such that a minimum distance of 18 metres is achieved between any rear windows of the new property and existing rear windows of properties on Craigelvan Drive; details of the boundary treatment shall be submitted for approval of the Planning Authority prior to the boundary treatment being erected; existing boundary trees and hedges shall not be removed unless otherwise approved by the planning authority.
Reason: To control the nature of the development in the interests of the residential amenity of the existing adjoining dwellings.
6. That as part of the reserved matters application required under the terms of condition 1 above, the applicant shall confirm in writing to the Planning Authority that the foul drainage can be connected to the public sewer in accordance with the requirements of Scottish Water.
Reason: To prevent groundwater or surface water contamination in the interests of environmental and amenity protection.
7. That as part of the reserved matters application required under the terms of Condition 1 above, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, BEFORE any works start on site, the applicant must confirm in writing to the Planning Authority that the foul drainage can be connected to the public sewer in accordance with the requirements of Scottish Water. The surface water must be treated in accordance with the principles of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland published by ClRlA in March 2000.
Reason: To prevent groundwater or surface water contamination in the interests of environmental and amenity protection.
34 8. That notwithstanding the generalities of Condition 1 above, the existing and proposed dwellinghouse shall have individual driveways and shall have in-curtilage parking and vehicle turning provision to meet North Lanarkshire Council residential guideline standards. Except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the following shall be achieved for the new dwelling:
1, The access to the dwelling from the public road is by means of a 5 metre wide dropped kerb vehicular access leading to a 5 meter wide driveway. 2. Visibility splay of 2.5 metre x 60 metre from the site access on to Main Road to be achieved and maintained, to which nothing is constructed or allowed to grow higher than Imetre in height. 3. Vehicle turning manoeuvrability to be achieved within the site to ensure vehicles enter and exit Main Road in a forward gear. 4. The driveway to be fully paved over the entire width for a minimum length of the first 2 metres into the site from the public road, though preferably the full length. 5. Minimum parking provision based on bedroom number, therefore 1-2 bed = 2 spaces, 3-4 bed= 3spaces,5+ bed=4spaces
Reason: In the interests of road safety by ensuring that access, parking and turning facilities are to an acceptable standard.
9. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the extent of the development site and its boundaries shall be as detailed on the approved plan.
Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 18th March 2009
Letter from J Peebles, 15 Craigelvan Drive, Condorrat, Cumbernauld, G67 4RL received 31st March 2009. Letter from Stuart 8, June Davidson, 19 Craigelvan Drive, Condorrat, Cumbernauld, G67 4RL received 30th March 2009. Letter from John McGrath, 21 Craigelvan Drive, Condorrat, Cumbernauld, G67 4RL received 8thApril 2009.
Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Jennifer Thomson at 01236 616473.
Date: 29th April 2009
35 APPLICATION NO. N/09/00300/0UT
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.1 The proposal involves the construction of a detached house and associated access from Main Road, Condorrat. The proposal is in outline and further design details would be subject to full planning approval.
1.2 The proposed outline development would take place in an area of private land to the rear of 94 Main Road, Condorrat. The majority of the land is currently maintained as garden ground with some areas of shrubs and mature trees to the rear.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of Local Plan policies.
2.2 In the Cumbernauld Local Plan, 1993, the site lies within a defined residential area where housing policy HG4 (Residential Amenity) applies. Policy HG3 (Residential Development) also applies.
2.3 The zoning of the site and policy position is not altered by the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 My Traffic and Transportation section has no objections to the proposed development subject to conditions regarding the formation of a suitable access and ensuring appropriate levels of parking.
3.2 Three letters of representation have been received from residents of the adjacent properties. The objections are as follows:
Should permission be granted, this would set a precedent for other properties to be developed in restricted spaces or back gardens.
Comments: Each planning application is decided on its own merits. The previous application N/08/00656/FUL Construction of 3 Houses and Formation of Two New Access Driveways was withdrawn October 2008. This followed advice from the Planning Service that the 3 houses were unacceptable in that location as this would constitute backland development. The current outline application indicates a potential house position that would have a reasonable frontage to Main Road. Furthermore the land to the rear is extensive and sufficient for a house plot.
0 As there is no firm proposal for the type/ style there is concern that any property would not be in keeping with the style of the existing houses within the village. There is no indication whether a garage would also be erected on site.
Comments: The application is in outline, therefore full details would following at full or reserved matters stage. Recommended planning conditions require that the proposed house be in keeping with the existing area.
0 Any new property would cause overshadowing and deprive existing properties of natural sunlight and infringe on privacy and quality of life.
36 Comments: The distance between the proposed house and existing properties is required by planning condition to be 18 metres minimum to ensure privacy for the proposed and existing dwellings. This combined with the positioning of the surrounding properties will mean that any overshadowing caused by the proposed house will mainly be restricted to its own plot. Also, the objectors properties lie to the north. Although the proposal will result in the loss of open space on this site, the site is currently private garden ground, not public open space and it is not felt that the loss of this environment provides sufficient justification to refuse planning permission.
0 New development and upgrading of the single driveway would lead to increased noise nuisance levels.
Comments: Some temporary noise disturbance during construction is unavoidable. This would not be a reason to withhold a grant of planning permission.
0 The development will result in increased vehicular traffic through an already heavily congested village.
Comments: It is not considered that one additional house taking access onto a main thoroughfare will create unacceptable additional traffic or in any other way compromise road or pedestrian safety. A planning condition requires adequate parking and vehicle turning facilities for the existing and proposed house.
0 Three houses were refused so why is one acceptable? One house will still impact on existing properties in terms of light, noise, pollution, drainage, property value, deterioration in rear views and access from busy main road.
Comments: The previous outline application referred to for 3 houses was withdrawn by the applicants. The impact on light, noise and access have been dealt with above. The impact on views and the value of existing properties are not material planning considerations. The development would not result in pollution as the drainage and connection to foul drainage system would be required to meet with Scottish Water and SEPA approval.
4. Planninn 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. Policies HG3 (Residential Development) and HG4 (Residential Amenity) are relevant. Policy HG4 seeks to protect existing residential amenity from developments which would be detrimental to residential amenity. Policy HG3 seeks to ensure that new residential development is in keeping with the scale and character of the surrounding area 4.2 The proposed development will result in a change of character to part of an open site by allowing an additional property to be constructed. However, I am satisfied that when assessed against both policies it will be possible to achieve a development that will be acceptable and will not result in an overriding loss of amenity or privacy for the residents of any existing adjacent property. Through the imposition of conditions I am satisfied that it will be possible to ensure that the proposed house is in keeping with the existing area; to ensure that the new house will not impact on privacy of any of the existing house to such an extent to justify refusing planning permission and that the proposed house will be positioned and orientated within the site such that it has a direct frontage onto Main Road. This will ensure that the house is not backland development 4.3 It is considered appropriate to regard the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan as a material planning consideration in view of its advanced stage of processing and there being no objections to the policy covering the application site. The application site is covered by emerging local plan policy HCF 1A (Protecting Residential Areas) which presumes against
37 developments detrimental to residential amenity. The proposed development complies with this policy.
4.4 Having taken account of the development plan and all relevant material considerations, and notwithstanding the concerns raised by the neighbouring proprietors it is recommended that outline planning permission be granted for a detached house at land to the rear of 94 Main Road, Condorrat. Application No: N/09/00338/FUL
Date Registered: 27th March 2009
Applicant: S Mahmood Micawber Real Spice Station Buildings South Carbrain Road Cumbernauld G67 2PL
Agent Roger Ferguson Architect 1/1 Canalbank House Seabegs Road Bonnybridge FK4 2BP
Development: Alterations to Shop Front and Installation of Ducting (In Retrospect)
Location: Micawber Real Spice Station Buildings South Carbrain Road Carbrain Cum bernauld G67 2PL
Ward: 3 - Cumbernauld South Councillors Carrigan, Goldie, Homer and McElroy
Grid Reference: 276309673840
File Reference: N/09/00338/FUL
Site History: N/99/01380/FUL Alterations to and Change of Use from Shop to Hot Food Takeaway Approved January 2000
Development Plan: The site is covered by policy HG4 (Residential Amenity) in the Cumbernauld Local Plan, 1993
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
39 40 2. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the plans as stamped approved.
Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 27th March 2009
Letter from Muhammad Ashraf, Clo Macdonalds Solicitors, St Stephen's House, 279 Bath Street, Glasgow, G2 4JL, received 31st March 2009.
Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Jennifer Thomson at 01236 616473.
Date: 29th April 2009
41 APPLICATION NO. N1091003381FUL
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.I This application (in retrospect) is in relation to shopfront alterations and the erection of external flues serving an existing hot food takeaway. The works were necessary following a fire at the property.
1.2 The flues are erected on the gable wall of the Station Buildings off South Carbrain Road facing the railway line and adjacent to the footbridge.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of Local Plan policies.
2.2 In the Cumbernauld Local Plan, 1993, the site lies within a defined residential area where housing policy HG4 (Residential Amenity) applies.
2.3 The zoning of the site and policy position is not altered by the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 A letter of representation has been received from the owner of the adjacent property. The objections are as follows:
0 The flues encroach on the airspace of the adjacent property. It is the intention of the owner to develop the area of ground where the flues are currently located. The chimneys would require to be removed once planning permission was obtained to develop the ground. The existence of the flues will be an obstruction to this development.
Comment: The encroachment of the airspace is a legal matter and does not require to be resolved through the planning process.
4. Planninn 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. Policy HG4 (Residential Amenity) is of relevance in this case. 4.2 Policy HG4 seeks to ensure developments are not detrimental to residential amenity. This work is being carried out as a result of fire damage at an existing hot food takeaway. The proposed shopfront alterations are of an acceptable design and standard. The new ducting is located on the gable of the building which is visible from the railway, however not from South Carbrain Road or the parking area in front of the Station Buildings. Although the flues are of a considerable size, it is felt that the location means they are not excessively prominent. Accordingly, I am satisfied that when assessed against policy HG4 the development is considered to be acceptable. 4.3 It is considered appropriate to regard the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan as a material planning consideration in view of its advanced stage of processing and there being no objections to the policy covering the application site. The application site is covered by emerging local plan policy HCF 1A (Protecting Residential Areas) which presumes against developments detrimental to residential amenity. It is considered that the proposed development
42 accords with this policy
4.5 The objection regarding the positioning of the ducting is a legal matter
4.6 Having taken account of the development plan and all relevant material considerations, and notwithstanding the concerns raised by the neighbouring proprietor it is recommended that planning permission be granted, in retrospect, for the flues and the frontage alterations.
43 Application No: C/07/0171 5IFUL
Date Registered: 7th November 2007 Applicant: Albert Bartlett & Sons Ltd 251 Stirling Road Airdrie ML6 7SP Agent Independent Power Systems Ltd Canada House 272 Field End Road Eastcote, Ruislip Middlesex HA4 9NA Development: Construction of Single Wind Turbine (Tower Height 80m, Blade Diameter 92.5Mm,Total Tip Height 126.25m)
Location: A. Bartlett & Sons 251 Stirling Road Airdrie North Lanarkshire ML6 7SP
Ward: 7 Airdrie North Councillors Cameron, S Coyle, McGuigan & Morgan Grid Reference: 276357668067 File Reference: C/PL/AIS728 100025 1/SM/G L
Site History: C/99/01187/OUT Use Of Greenfield Site For Industrial Process Involving The Storage, Processing And Distribution Of Vegetables And Including The Erection Of Associated Buildings, Parking And Access Roads (In Outline) Granted 14.02.2001 C/O1/00549/REM Erection of Industrial Building and Associated parking, Access/Delivery Arrangement (Reserved Matters of Planning Permission C/99/01187/OUT) Granted 16.10.2001 C/05/00505/FUL Installation of 23.4 Metre Telecommunications Tower with 6no Antenna and Associated Cabinets Granted 09.06.2005 C/06/01362/FUL Erection of 50M High Anemometry Mast Granted 05.10.2006
Development Plan: The application site falls within an area designated as GBI (Restrict Development in the Greenbelt) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996
Contrary to Development Plan: No Consultations: Head Of Protective Services (commen ts) Scottish Natural Heritage (cornmen ts) Scottish Environment Protection Agency (no response) Scottish Water (objection) scott (no objection) Scottish Power (no objection) Scottish Wildlife Trust (no objection) Institute of Environmental Assessment (no objection) Ofcom (com ments) British Telecom (no objection) Wind Farm Enquiries (no objection) Civil Aviation Authority (com ments) BAA (objection) National Air Traffic Services (objection) Representations: 1 letter of representation received Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 28th November 2007
44 Planning Application No GIU711715fFUL Construction of Single Wind Turbine (Tower Height 8Om, Blade Diameter 92.5Mm, Tatal Tip Height 126.25m) 251 Stirling Road airdrie A One RepresentationOutwith Map Area
45 Recommendation: Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-
1. That this planning permission is for a period of 25 years from the date of the commissioning of the development. Written confirmation of the date of the commissioning of the development shall be provided to the Planning Authority within 1 month of the commissioning of the development, and the date of commissioning of the development shall be no later than 5 years from the date of this planning permission. (Note: The definition of “commissioning” is the date on which the wind turbine generator first supplies electricity)
Reason: To define the permission, to ensure that the Planning Authority can retain effective control and in accordance with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.
2. That the operators shall at all times deal with the areas forming the subject of this consent in accordance with the application form, plans as stamped approved, and other supporting information, including the Environmental Report, except as amended by the terms of the approval hereby given and shall omit no part of the approved operations and shall not amend the development without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.
Reason: For clarity and in order that the Planning Authority can retain effective control
3. That prior to the commencement of the development a scheme for mitigating aviation safeguarding issues related to Glasgow Airport radar system shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in agreement with BAA.
Reason: To ensure that the safety of air traffic is not compromised by the development.
4. That in the event that mitigation pursuant to the agreed scheme required under condition 3 above is required to be carried out, the turbine shall not be erected without prior written confirmation from BAA that the scheme is satisfactory and the scheme so approved shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority in agreement with BAA.
Reason: To ensure that the safety of air traffic is not compromised by the development.
5. That before any works commence on site, details of measures to overcome potential shadow flicker problems at New Monkland, ‘Skeoch’ and Raebog Cottage shall be submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Planning Authority; thereafter the approved measures shall be brought into operation and shall continue throughout the operation of the wind turbine except as may be modified in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: In order to overcome potential nuisance at New Monkland, Skeoch and Raebog Cottage through shadow flicker.
6. That before any works commence on site, a survey of television signal reception (the scope of which to be agreed in advance with the Planning Authority) shall be submitted to the planning authority for its written approval.
Reason: To establish a baseline against which to assess the impact of the wind turbine on television reception,
7. That within three months of the approved wind turbine coming into operation a report covering the effect of the wind turbine on local television signal reception shall be submitted to and approved in writing, by the Planning Authority; thereafter any approved measures for overcoming television reception interference shall be brought into operation within three months.
Reason: In order to overcome any television reception interference caused by the wind turbine.
46 8. 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 1I. 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 occupiers.
9. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 8, 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 occupiers.
47 Notes to Committee:
Committee is asked to note that the applicant has requested that a site visit and hearing be carried out prior to any determination being made on this application.
If approved the application will require to be referred to the Scottish Ministers in accordance the Town and Country Planning (Safeguarded Aerodromes, Technical Sites and Military Explosives Storage Areas) (Scotland) Direction 2003 as both BAA and NATS have lodged formal objections. BAA, NATS and the Secretary of State for Defence shall also be notified at this time.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 22nd October 2007 Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 Incorporating Fourth Alteration 2008 Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996
Environmental Report October 2007 Qinetiq Technical Memo: Albert Bartlett Wind Turbine Aviation Assessment February 2009 Qinetiq Technical Memo: Albert Bartlett Wind Turbine Aviation Assessment April 2009 Qinetiq Assessment of impact of proposed WF1646 Airdrie Wind Turbine on communication links September 2008 Qinetiq Assessment of impact of proposed WF1646 Airdrie Wind Turbine on communication links 23rd April 2009 David Wilson Associates Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment July 2008 Additional Supporting Statement received from applicant 19 November 2008 Letter from MacRoberts received 23rd April 2009
Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 20thFebruary 2008 Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 25'h September 2008 Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received 4th June 2008 Letter from Scottish Water received 23rd March 2009 Letter from Scottish Water received 19'h November 2007 Letter from Scottish Power received 5th November 2007 Letter from Scottish Gas Networks received lothDecember 2007 Letter from Scottish Wildlife Trust received 21st February 2008 Letter from Civil Aviation Authority received 9th October 2008 Letter from BAA received 13'h February 2008 Letter from BAA received 4th September 2008 Letter from BAA received 24'h March 2009 Letter from National Air Traffic Services (Safeguarding) Mailbox 27, 400 received 15'h February 2008 Letter from National Air Traffic Services (Safeguarding) Mailbox 27, 400 received 12th August 2008 Letter from R W Stephens, 54 Crathie Drive , Glenmavis , ML6 ONR received 22nd November 2007.
Email from OFCOM received 15 November 2007 Email from The Joint Radio Company Ltd received lgthNovember 2007 Email from CSS Spectrum Management received lgthNovember 2007 Email from CSS Spectrum Management received !jthJanuary 2009
Memo from Head of Protective Services received 28'h November 2007 Memo from Transportation received 6th December 2007 Memo from Land Services received 20thDecember 2007 Memo from Land Services received gthOctober 2008
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Susan Miller at 01236 812374. Date: 28 April 2009
48 APPLICATION NO. C107101715lFUL
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.I Planning permission is being sought for the construction of a single wind turbine at the vegetable packing and distribution factory Albert Bartlett & Sons, 251 Stirling Road, Airdrie. The proposed wind turbine has a hub height of 80m and a blade diameter of 92.5m thus giving a total tip height of 126.25m. No external buildings or plant are proposed in connection with the wind turbine as it will link into the site’s existing electricity substation. The turbine would have a maximum power output of 2 megawatts (MW).
1.2 The location of the proposed wind turbine is currently hard standing to the north of the existing car park. Access to the site will be via the existing entrance to Albert Bartlett from Raebog Road B804.
1.3 The application is supported by an Environmental Supporting Statement covering development details, planning and environmental policies, landscape and visual impacts, ecology, shadow flicker, noise, telecommunications, aviation. Further detailed reports have been submitted by the applicant in respect of Landscape and Visual Impact including photographic visualisations from a number of view points, Telecommunications and Aviation. The applicant had submitted a supporting statement in relation to the application outlining the need for the wind turbine and the implications it has on the operation of the existing business.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The development plan is represented by The Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 Incorporating the Fourth Alteration 2008 and the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. There are no strategic issues as the threshold for considering a wind farm significant is 20 MW and the proposal is for a single turbine with an output of 2 MW. The application can therefore be assessed against the policies contained within the Monklands District Local Plan.
2.2 The Application site is located within the grounds of an established industrial premises which falls within an area designated as GBI (Restrict Development in the Greenbelt) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. Policies LI 1/4 Landscape Improvement and CU 1/3 Gas Safety Zones are also relevant.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 The external consultation responses are summarised below:
3.2 Scottish Natural Heritage: Offered detailed comments on the application in relation to habitat survey and landscape impact. They agreed with the findings of the Habitat Survey and requested further information in respect of landscape and visual impact. They have noted serious concerns about the potential strategic visual impact created by the proposal; however, do not object to the application.
3.3 Scottish Water: Object to the application as the turbine is likely to impact on several telecommunications links at Dalmacoulter base station and will have significant impacts on crucial backhaul links from further radio systems in the Ayrshire, Dumfries and Galloway regions. All of these radio systems send critical telemetry data back to our Operational Control Centre at Glasgow They also provided separate comments advising that the development may involve building over or in such a way obstruct access to an existing public sewer; however, they are not objecting on these grounds. 3.4 Scotland Gas Network: No objection; however, advised that there is a gas main in close proximity to the site.
3.5 Scottish Power: No objection and advised that there was distribution apparatus within the area of the proposals.
49 3.6 OFCOM: Information provided on 3 telecommunication fixed microwave links that may be affected by the proposed turbine.
3.7 Civil Aviation Authority: It is important that Glasgow Airport, NATS and MOD are provided with the opportunity to comment and that any concerns are taken into account.
3.8 BAA on behalf of Glasgow Airport: Object to the application as the turbine would be visible to the radars used by Glasgow Airport likely to cause spurious returns on the radar screens and there would be a cumulative effect that would be produced with other proposals in the area.
3.9 National Air Traffic Services: Objects to the application on safeguarding criteria as the turbine is located within an area where there is insufficient terrain shielding from the Primary Radar Service at Lowther Hill. Due to the large dimension of the turbine and the distance from the radar it is anticipated that the reflected power from the wind turbine will be of adequate value to be detected by the radar and consequently generate false plots. A reduction in the radar’s probability of detection, for real targets, is also expected. They also object on the basis of predicted cumulative impacts of this and other proposed and existing developments.
3.10 The Joint Radio Company: Comments. JRC does not foresee any potential problems based on known information scenarios in relation to radio systems operated by utility companies in support of their regulatory operational requirements.
3.1 1 CSS Spectrum Management: Objects on behalf of Scottish Water as they have UHF Scanning Telemetry masts in close proximity to the proposed turbine.
3.12 The Protective Services team was consulted and accepts the findings of the Noise Impact Assessment that no significant nuisance will be caused. It highlights the need for a desktop study to be carried out which can be dealt with be means of a condition and does not object to the application.
3.13 The Land Services team was consulted and has no objections to the proposal. It is acknowledged that such a large structure will be visually intrusive and no mitigating screen planting would lessen the impact of such a structure. The Visual and Landscape Impact represents a balanced view.
3.14 The Transportation team was consulted and has no objections to the proposal.
3.15 Following press advertisement and standard neighbour notification procedures 1 letter of representation were received.
3.16 The points of concern can be summarised as follows:
1. Environmental photographs - there was no photograph of the proposed turbine which is in close proximity to “Skeoch Cottage”
2. Noise pollution - Inevitably there will be noise generated by its reduction drive gearing. What restraints are the planning authority imposing of the completed turbine?
3. Television and Radio signals - chapter 20 in appendix 9 in the environmental report indicates that those currently using the black hill transmitter in the surrounding area may lose or have their TV signal disrupted.
4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires that the application be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this instance, the development is not of strategic significance and therefore the Structure Plan is not relevant in the assessment of this planning application. There are no policies contained within the Monklands District Local Plan which specifically address wind energy developments; however, there are other relevant policies which are or relevance and these are addressed below.
50 The Monklands District Local Plan 1991
4.2 The principal local plan policy GBI states that no development will be permitted except for new houses for full time workers in connection with forestry or agriculture, non-residential uses developments in connection with forestry or agriculture, uses requiring a rural location (ie to avoid nuisance to neighbours (e.g kennels) or since they need a large area of open space (eg stables or golf courses)) or areas identified as having substantial development potential.
4.3 When considering this policy it must be acknowledged that Albert Bartlett & Sons was granted permission in 2001 and is well established. As the wind turbine is only to serve Albert Bartlett & Sons it can be considered ancillary to the existing industrial use which whilst not an agricultural use as such is closely linked to such operations.
4.4 The Local Plan classifies rural areas into 5 different landscape qualities ranging from ‘high quality’ to ‘devastated’. The site is identified as ‘low quality landscape’. Any applications in these areas will be treated as an opportunity to effect improvements to the landscape and quite apart from normal development control criteria additional tree planting may be required outwith the boundary of the application site. A high priority will be given to the implementation of improvement schemes funded directly or through other agencies. In this case the wind turbine is to be located within the grounds of an existing industrial building compound which is already landscaped and given the height of the turbine it is considered that additional tree planting would not offer much screening as the turbine blades would be readily seen above the tree line.
4.5 Policy CU1/3 Gas Pipeline Safety Zones is also relevant. It states that there will be a general presumption against development within 400m of high pressure pipelines, unless the development is opposed by neither the Heath and Safety Executive nor British Gas and is otherwise in accordance with the plan. Scotland Gas Networks was consulted on this application and does not object, The turbine is outwith the consultation zones for the GlenmavisIAirdrie gas pipeline and outwith the 400m identified above.
4.6 Taking into account the above the proposal can be considered to generally accord with the relevant policies within the local plan and there are no policies which would presume against it. Accordingly, planning permission must be granted unless there are any material considerations which suggest otherwise. Within the context of wind energy developments there are many complex material considerations these are discussed in relation to the development below:
The Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan
4.7 The application site is zoned as NBE 3 A Assessing Development in the Greenbelt in the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan 1991. This policy seeks to protect the character and promote development in the Green Belt and the Rural Investment Area through restricting development to acceptable types. Generation of power from renewable sources is considered an acceptable type of development. The policy then lists impact criteria for assessing acceptable development. The development must be able to show that:
It has a positive economic benefit It has minimised any adverse environmental impacts It does not pose undue infrastructure implications There is a specific locational need It is of a suitable scale and form for the location A landscape assessment and high quality enhancement scheme which reinforces the rural character and provides a buffer to the development has been included.
4.8 EDI 3 (Assessing Economic Development and Infrastructure Proposals) is also relevant. This states under EDI 3 A2 that ‘the Council supports in principle recycling centres, all forms of renewable energy generation and telecommunications subject to Wind Farms meeting criteria in SPG addressing issues of scale, cumulative impact, community benefit and restoration.
51 4.9 The Finalised Draft Local Plan is supported by the Strategic Planning Study Technical Report TR/NLC/05 -Wind Farm Search Area Review. This offers the following guidance.
4.10 The proposed turbine is located in the broad area of search of study and falls within Zone 3 which is considered to have a landscape character of Rolling Farmland - Section B and Fragmented Farmland - Section A) that may have capacity to accommodate Medium Scale of wind farm development identified as a single wind turbine 40-1OOm in height.
4.1 1 It is acknowledged that these zones are only a guide and that any wind turbine developments proposed within them will still be subject to strict assessment of their effects on the environment, infrastructure and communities. Supplementary Planning Guidance will be a key component to any development assessment, This guidance is in the process of being prepared.
4.12 It is concluded that the policies in the Finalised Draft Local Plan support the principle of wind energy development subject to detailed considerations. The issues listed in NBE 3 A are all addressed in the report below with the exception of infrastructure implications. These are considered to be minimal as access to the turbine will be taken from the existing road network and use the existing access to the Albert Bartlett site. The Transportation section has offered no objection. The location of the turbine has been chosen to minimise the under ground cabling required to the existing substation.
National Policies and Guidance
4.13 The Scottish Planning Policy overview replaces the previous SPPl and provides an overview of the land use planning system in Scotland. It sets out the key core principles including:
4.14 ‘There should be a clear focus on the quality of outcomes, with due attention given to considerations of the sustainable use of land, good design and the protection and enhancement of the built and natural environment.
4.15 The proposed turbine. meets the above sustainability objective; however, it can be argued that there is conflict between this and the need to protect and enhance the natural environment. It is considered that the proposal generally accords with the general principle being advocated.
4.16 SPP6 Renewable Energy Developments outlines the Scottish Government’s commitment to increase renewable energy production as a means of addressing the causes of climate change and has set a target of generating 40% of Scotland’s electricity from renewable sources by 2020 and confirmed that this target should not be considered as a cap. The SPP sets out how the planning system should manage the process of encouraging, approving and implementing renewable energy proposals when preparing development plans and determining planning applications outlining issues which should be Considered.
4.17 PAN 45 Renewable Energy Technologies supports SPP6 and provides more detailed advice on the impacts likely to arise from wind energy developments and possible mitigation measures. It states that:
4.18 ‘The siting, layout, and design of wind farms will be conditioned by a number of technical, practical, economic and environmental considerations which seek to balance factors such as wind capture, turbulence, access and power line linkage with the impact on heritage resources and local communities. The characteristics associated with wind farms raise a number of issues that require to be considered, and where appropriate addressed. These include visual impact, cumulative effect, ecology, aviation safety, noise and shadow flicker’.
4.19 This guidance has been used to form the basis of the supporting information submitted as part of the application process. These matters are evaluated in this report.
52 4.20 Albert Bartlett is a family run business which has been based in Airdrie for more than 50 years and is arguably Britain’s biggest vegetable suppliers. The plant in Airdrie houses the headquarters and potato packaging facility. The site has been the subject of a f35million investment package over the last 4 years.
4.21 Customers of Albert Bartlett, which include major supermarket chains, now require them to demonstrate their reduction in non-renewable energy. This pressure is directly linked to the Government‘s drive and commitment to reduce carbon emissions. This requirement is what lead Albert Bartlett’s to submit the application for the turbine.
4.22 The applicant has indicated that the turbine will generate approximately 5,980 Mwh of electricity per annum which is approximately 100% of the factory’s annual electrical consumption. The wind turbine is not being erected as a means of direct income but as a means to off-set the plant’s impact upon the environment and to increase efficiency and competitiveness to secure the future longevity of the business.
4.23 It is considered that the sustainability benefits of the proposed wind turbine to a major local employer and economic impact on the wider community is a significant advantage which must be taken into account and carry a significant weighting when assessing this application against other potentially negative impacts of this proposal.
Landscape and Visual ImPacts
4.24 The nature of wind turbines is such that they must be of a viable height and tend to be in prominent positions to be effective. Landscape and visual impacts are the most noticeable and often most contentious impact of wind farm developments.
4.25 It is acknowledged that the turbine with a hub height of 80m, blade diameter of 92.5m and a total tip height of 126.25m is inevitably going to have a considerable visual impact on both its immediate surroundings and the wider area.
4.26 A Landscape and Visual Impact assessment is contained within the Environmental Report submitted with the application.
4.27 SNH was consulted on this application and requested that a more detailed Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment be carried out as the application site lies within an area designated as ‘plateau farmland’ landscape character type and is adjacent to an area of ‘plateau moorlands’ and therefore has an open landscape character which is predominantly flat, gently sloping or slightly undulating which makes it more sensitive to the development of tall structures.
4.28 A further Landscape Impact Assessment was submitted by the applicant to address the concerns raised by SNH. The assessment looked at the visual impact of the turbine up to 30km away from the site and in particular focused on settlements within 5k and ‘sensitive’ viewpoints including country parks. The key findings of the assessment are outlined below.
4.29 Visual impact created by the proposed turbine can be considered negligible over great distances. This was suggested in PAN45 and the on site study confirmed that over distances greater than 10km the visual impact of the turbine is negligible. Within this radius views are not significant until within 5km and then these views are broken by elements in the landscape and built up towns.
4.30 The visual impact created by the proposed turbine would mainly be to the west and north of the site where there is sufficient open countryside for views to carry. There are few visual receptors of note in these areas and settlements tend to be in more sheltered lower ground giving them a greater degree of screening. Views are limited at the 5km radius and increase to a more noticeable level at 2-3km.
53 4.31 The land to the east is higher and the changes in land form help to screen views. This can be seen in the relatively low visual presence of the Longriggend turbines.
4.32 To the south, the urban areas of northern Airdrie and Glenmavis will be most impacted, these impacts will diminish quickly over distance as physical elements scale within the landscape to help screen.
4.33 There will be cumulative impacts on the localised area of the wind turbine within the 10km radius. This will occur where the turbine may be viewed in conjunction with the turbine at Braidenhill to the west of Glenmavis. These may not be as critical as for a single wind turbine in the landscape as the likelihood will be that these will be viewed as a pair and perceived as part of a single development within the landscape.
4.34 Notwithstandingthe above it is considered that the size of the wind turbine will mean that it will have a major effect on the local landscape and will dominate local views.
4.35 SNH had concerns with the content of the Landscape Impact Assessment and found it to be misleading. They concluded their consultation response by advising that whilst a formal objection is not being made 'North Lanarkshire Council should recognise how seriously this proposal could impact on the quality of the environment for the people living around the development site'.
4.36 NLC Land Services was consulted on the Landscape Impact Assessment. They concluded that the document makes it clear that the turbine will have a significant impact on local landscape and visual impacts whilst its effects on the wider landscape will less obvious. It is considered that the report presents a balanced view of the likely negative impacts on the immediate surroundings of the Albert Bartlett factory and on the wider landscape beyond and this has to be considered in the light of the positive aspect of sustainability and the proposal generating the power need of the facility.
4.37 As part of the planning application process the applicant advised that they had considered alternative positions for the turbine within the larger Albert Bartlett site; however, constraints such as overhead electricity lines, ground conditions, distance from the A73 and the proximity of the existing substation indicated that the proposed turbine location was the most suitable. The applicant also advised that they considered the use of two smaller turbines; however to generate the required level of electricity output and take advantage of wind conditions within the site these would both have to be substantial structures in themselves which would create similar or potentially greater landscape and visual impacts.
4.38 In concluding the likely visual and landscape impacts of the development it is considered that there will be a significant visual and landscape impact; however, this is considered largely acceptable in this instance when balanced against the locational need within the grounds of the Albert Bartlett site and the sustainability merits of the proposal. The cumulative impact would be limited to that of the Braidenhill and Longriggend turbines (and the proposed 9 turbine development at Greengairs, where the Council is minded to grant subject to a legal agreement) which is not considered to be significant and would not warrant the refusal of this application.
Aviation Safety
4.39 The proposed turbine will be visible on air traffic control radars and as such has the potential to be mistaken for an aeroplane and cause confusion and potential aviation safety issues. Both NATS and BAA (as operators of Glasgow Airport) were consulted on the application and have both objected to the proposals. The objections can be summarised as follows:
o The turbine would be visible to the radar at Lowtherhill and Glasgow Airport and are likely to return spurious returns on radar screens.
o The cumulative effect that would be produced with other wind turbine developments in the area.
54 4.40 The applicant commissioned a report by Qinetiq to assess the impact of the proposed turbine on Glasgow Airport and NATS operations. This report concluded that there would be no concern to Glasgow Airport or to any other major airport in the area. It also concluded that any cumulative impact, if any, would be negligible.
4.41 This report was forwarded to both NATS and BAA for comment. BAA has maintained its objection and NATS have not offered further comment therefore their initial objection remains.
4.42 The applicant has since submitted an amended report by Qinetiq taking into account the concerns with the original report raised by BAA including several other wind turbine proposals under consideration.
4.43 This report acknowledges that the turbine will appear on radar screens and argues that, as it is a single turbine, can be easily predicable whether or not clutter is seen on the control display or not. The clutter would never be more than one blip, albeit permanent or intermittent. A single turbine cannot replicate a moving aircraft, and is always easy to determine that the symbol showing is actually the turbine as it never moves from the base location. Should the echo be permanent, it would be even less distracting and obvious than if it were intermittent, and technically it can be removed from the display under certain circumstances even if the anti- clutter facilities and unable to suppress it.
4.44 Cumulative issues were investigated with other wind farms in the area (both operational and those under consideration) and it was found that there were unlikely to create either separate or cumulative impacts due to the line of sight of the radar and the distance and size involved of the other wind farms.
4.45 It is considered that there may be technical solutions would could overcome the radar problem with BAA. In recent wind turbine applications a condition has been attached that requires the developer to confirm to the Council that BAA have agreed to the necessary radar upgrading works before works start on the development. It is considered that for a single wind turbine this condition would be acceptable in this instance.
4.46 In previous correspondence NATS has confirmed that they consider the North Lanarkshire Council area to have the capacity to accommodate 15 turbines without causing significant clutter issues. To date North Lanarkshire Council has approved 2 turbines at Greendykeside, Longriggend and is minded to grant 9 turbines at Greengairs Landfill subject to the conclusion of a s.75agreement giving a total of 11 turbines. An application for a further single turbine at A G Barr in Cumbernauld is due to be presented to the Committee in May with a recommendation for approval but this was without an objection from NATS. The single turbine at Braidenhill does not appear on the radar and therefore does not have to be taken into account. Therefore should the Albert Bartlett turbine be approved the threshold of 15 will not be breached. In light of this information the objection from NATS has been fully considered; however, it can be concluded that it is not necessary to attach any conditions in this regard. -Noise
4.47 A Noise Impact Assessment is contained within the Environmental Statement which supports the application. The assessment found that the turbine will accord with the limits outlined in PAN45 "Renewable Energy Technologies". The Head of Protective Services was consulted and concurs that the noise generated from the proposed turbine is within the acceptable limits outlined in PAN45 and ETSU-R-97.
Shadow Flicker
4.48 Shadow flicker is the name given to the casting of shadows on domestic dwellings by the rotation of the turbine blades on a clear windy day when the turbine is between a particular domestic property and a rising or setting sun and is an issue when the flickering shadow lands on a narrow opening such as a window. The main cause for concern, other than the annoyance of homeowners, is the provocation of headaches and/or epileptic fits when the flicker frequency is sufficiently high.
55 4.49 A shadow flicker assessment was carried out in relation to nearby dwellings at New Monkland, Raebog Cottage and Skeoch Cottage and is contained within the Environmental Statement which supports this application.
4.50 In this assessment it is shown that Raebog Cottage, could in theory be affected for a maximum of 39 hours per year occurring between the hours of 13.10 and 14.50 (with probable length of exposure on the worst day of 19 mins) followed by New Monkland at 18 hours per year occurring between 05.20 and 06.20 (1 1 mins) and Skeoch Cottage 17 hours per year occurring between 10.00 and 11.10 (13 mins). The applicant has drawn from this that shadow flicker is unlikely to be of significant nuisance.
4.51 Should objections be received subsequent to the turbine being constructed there are measures which the applicant can take to minimise the problem, This would involve the fitting of a light meter to the turbine and if the lighting intensity exceeded a set threshold the turbine would shut down during the period when the property is affected by shadow flicker.
4.52 It is considered that any adverse impacts can be mitigated and adequately controlled by condition.
Telecommunications
4.53 It has been identified that the construction and operation of the wind turbine will impact on a number of telecommunication links (29 in total) operated by Scottish Water via their Dalmacoulter site. Scottish Water operates both microwave and scanning telemetry radio systems from Dalmacoulter Water Treatment Works. The radio systems gather telemetry data in the local area and form a stage in a much larger integrated radio network providing a crucial link to and from further radio systems in the Ayrshire, Dumfries and Galloway regions. These radio systems send critical telemetry data back to our Operational Control Centre at Glasgow for monitoring and maintaining the distribution of clean water. Scottish Water therefore objects to the application.
4.54 Assessing any potential impact on Scottish Water’s has proved to be a complex process as Scottish Water and the applicant‘s agent Qinetiq advocate the use of different guideIines/methodologies to assess this aspect with particular conflicting information in relation to exclusion zones.
4.55 Scottish water uses ‘the Telecommunications Association of the UK Water Industry (TAUWI) guidelines whilst the applicant is using the methodology from OFCOM when assessing wind turbine developments.
4.56 The applicant commissioned a report by Qinetiq ‘Assessment of impact of proposed WF 1646 Airdrie wind turbine on communication links. This report discusses the differences in the two methodologies. This report was carried out on a number of assumptions as Scottish Water was reluctant to release the grid references for the links for security reasons.
4.57 The report found that when using the OFCOM approach the proposed wind turbine would not interfere with any existing scanning telemetry or microwave links. However, due to the assumptions made it also recognised that potential uncertainties in the exact location of the links could mean that 2 of the links would be impacted on.
4.58 The report also found that when following the TAUWI guidelines the turbine falls within the 1k exclusion zone around every one of the base-station links. The turbine is located within 300m radius exclusion zones around 6 of these links. Mitigation measures in this instance would require the re-siting of base stations.
4.59 Scottish Water was issued with this report and asked to comment. Scottish water maintains their objection.
56 4.60 The applicant has submitted a further report ‘Assessment of impact of proposed WF1646 Airdrie wind turbine on communication links’ carried out by Qinetiq in response to comments raised by Scottish Water and the provision of accurate end link locations. This report concludes that the turbine will not breach the exclusion zone of any of the links considered when following the OFCOM recommended methodology.
4.61 It is clear from protracted negotiations with both the applicant and Scottish Water that a common consensus will not be achieved when assessing this issue. Scottish Water maintain their objection that the turbine will adversely impact on their telecommunications network and the applicant maintains that they have proved that the turbine will not breach the exclusion zone any of the links and therefore will not cause any adverse impact.
4.62 In concluding this issue it is considered that the applicant has sufficiently demonstrated that the proposed turbine will not significantly adversely impact on the telecommunications links used by Scottish Water. It is therefore recommended that there is no need for a condition be placed on the planning permission to address this objection.
Television Receotion
4.63 The BBC wind farm tool highlights that the construction of the wind turbine is likely to impact on the television reception of those served by the Black hill Transmitter (CH5). It identifies that the turbine is likely to affect 144 for whom there is no alternative off-air service and in addition, there may be affect up to 2520 for whom there may be an alternative off-air service.
4.64 This is expected as a side effect of most wind energy developments. In order to resolve this problem, the developer has agreed to carry out an assessment of TV reception before and after the turbine is constructed and thereafter carryout works designed to remedy the problem. This may include providing set top digital boxes, updating the aerial or re-orientating the aerial and where this is not possible install satellite or cable services.
4.65 It is considered that this is an acceptable solution and can be controlled by a condition attached to any planning permission.
Ecology
4.66 The turbine location is to the north of the application site in a small strip of landscape planting separating the staff car park from the HGV car park both hard surfaced. The habitat survey contained within the environmental statement took both the application site and the rest of the Albert Bartlett site into consideration. This identified that the application site and the construction of the wind turbine will not result in any detrimental habitat loss. The most sensitive area of the wider Albert Bartlett site is located in the South Western pocket and will be unaffected by the proposal. SNH was consulted on the habitat survey, bird and bat surveys and concurred with the findings of the reports. As such there are no anticipated adverse ecological impacts from the proposed development.
Decommissioning
4.67 The expected lifespan of the turbine is 25 years. The applicant has indicated that at the end of this period the turbine will either be refurbished, replaced by a contemporary model or would be completed dismantled and removed. If the latter occurs then the concrete foundations would be capped and left in situ and the buried electrical cable would be sealed and capped.
57 Letter of Remesentation
4.68 Following press advertisement and standard neighbour notification procedures 1 letter of representation was received. The letter raises a number of queries and a letter was sent to the objector addressing the queries and inviting them to view the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment. The points raised are addressed as follows:
1. Environmental photographs - there are no photos of the proposed turbine from the objectors property; however, the landscape impact assessment includes a number of photomontages from different viewpoints which would give an idea of how the turbine would look generally. 2. Noise Pollution - As discussed above a noise impact assessment was carried out and confirms that there will be no adverse impact caused by noise nuisance. 3. Television and Radio signals - As discussed above should any TV reception be adversely impacted the applicant has committed to installing any mitigation measures required.
Conclusions and Recommendation
4.69 As noted above the proposed construction of a single wind turbine with ancillary works is considered to be in accordance with the Development Plan. Due consideration has been given to the points raised in the letter of representation however no reason was found to uphold them. In addition, national guidance offers support for such a development subject to a detailed analysis in each case. In assessing the detail of this particular application it has been found that the development will be largely acceptable (subject to planning conditions) with no significant area s of concern which would merit the refusal of this application. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.
58 Application No: C/08/00909/FUL
Date Registered: 16th June 2008
Applicant: Clyde Valley Housing Association 82-84 Brandon Parade East Motherwell MLI 1LY
Agent FBN Architects 48 Speirs Wharf Port Dundas Glasgow G4 9TH
Development: Demolition of Existing Orrs Department Store and Construction of 4 Storey Building Incorporating Class 1 Retail Space (Basement and Ground Floor) and 15 Flats (Upper Floors)
Location: 68 - 78 South Bridge Street Town Centre Airdrie North Lanarkshire ML6 6JD
Ward: 008 Airdrie Central Cllr Devine, Logue, Stocks
Grid Reference: 276103665550
File Reference:
Site History: C/08/0091 I/CON Demolition of 3 Storey Building (Orr's Department Store) still under consideration
Development Plan: Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: Scottish Civic Trust Comments Historic Scotland Comments West Of Scotland Archaeology Service Comments Architectural Heritage Society Comments
Representations: 3 letters of representation received.
Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 25th June 2008
59 _. =..rsacL= irr Representation Not to Scale Cne RepresentationOutvuth Map Area &%=!3tGamal. We Area 0 07 HA
60 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:
(OP1 (0)02 (0)03 Revision A (0)04 Revision A (0)05 Revision A (0)I 2 (0)21 Revision C (0)22 Revision C (0124 (0)25 (3)03 Revision D
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 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.
5. For the avoidance of doubt the plans hereby approved, in relation to the west elevation and the gable ends of the building, shall be constructed as shown in plan (3)03 Revision D. For the avoidance of doubt this includes the proposed ‘ORRS’ signage on the gable elevations.
Reason: In the interests of amenity of the building and the Conservation Area.
6. That BEFORE the residential units hereby approved are occupied the noise attenuation measures outlined in the submitted report from RPM Acoustic dated 2 September 2008 shall be incorporated into the building and thereafter confirmed by a suitably qualified Chartered Noise Engineer.
Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the site and the existing business users
61 Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 16th June 2008
Letter from Scottish Civic Trust received 30th July 2008 Letter from Historic Scotland received 30th July 2008 Letter from West Of Scotland Archaeology Service received 30th July 2008 Letter from Architectural Heritage Society received 22nd July 2008
Memo from Transportation Section received 22nd July 2008 Memo from Protective Services Section received 22nd January 2009 Memo from Protective Services Section received 27th November 2008
Letter from M Finnigan, 56 South Commonhead Avenue , Airdrie , ML6 6NU received 1st August 2008. Letter from Harper MacLeod, The Ca'd'oro, 45 Gordon Street, Glasgow, G1 3PE received 27th June 2008. Letter from Hughes & McHugh, 10B Anderson Street, Airdrie, ML6 OAA received 5th November 2008
Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996 SPP8 Town Centres and Retailing
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Leigh Menzies at 01236 812372.
Dated: 29 April 2009
62 APPLICATION NO. C1081009091FUL
REPORT
1. DescriDtion of Site and ProDosal
1.I Planning permission is being sought of the demolition of the Orrs Department Store Building which is located within Airdrie town centre fronting onto South Bridge Street. The application site is currently a vacant retail unit which is spread over a basement, ground floor, 2 upper floors and accommodation in the roof space, at a maximum height of 14.1 meters. The building has been vacant since Orr’s Department Stores closed in June 2007. This site is surrounded by commercial properties with some upper floor residential accommodation on the east side of South Bridge Street.
1.2 The proposal is to demolish the current building and erect a new property which would consist of a basement and ground floor provided for retail use, at an area of 426 metres square. In addition it is proposed to provide 15 residential flatted units, for social housing accommodation, over a further 3 storeys and a ‘penthouse’ within the roof space. The flats would consist of 8 two bedroom units and 7 one bedroom units. The proposed overall height of the building would be 15.5 metres, an additional height of 1.4 metres from existing. The incorporation of another level of accommodation has been achieved through a reduction in the ceiling heights. No in curtilage parking has been provided.
1.3 The applicant has advised that the option to refurbish the building was considered and has highlighted the following information:
1 That the rear of the building is landlocked and the entire development would require to be serviced from the frontage of the property. 1 Demolition cost of refurbishment is f250k and full demolition f 100k. 1 Only 9 units could be provided based on the restrictions of the current faGade with a further 3 built within the rear ‘garden’ area. 1 An appraisal of a development concluded that the development on a commercial/ for profit basis was not viable 1 The total cost of development per unit would be f 167K which was considered uneconomic.
1 The submitted proposal would have an overall cost of f103.5K per unit
1.5 Other supporting information provided in relation to the planning application includes a transport assessment which included a survey of the available parking in the town centre. The report indicates that the site is well served by sustainable modes of transport and that although no in curtilage parking is provided the town centre has spare capacity.
1.6 The applicant has provided an assessment regarding potential noise nuisance from the public house which is located to the south west of the site, which found that noise would be an issue. The applicant has provided details of upgraded glazing specifications and attenuated ventilation units which are fan assisted and would allow sufficient ventilation without it being necessary to open the window within the flats.
1.7 Regarding the possible re-use of the building for retail purposes CRGP Roberston have stated that it is their opinion that the building is economically obsolete due to the significant costs required to make the building DDA compliant. In addition in relation to a possible use of the upper floors as possible office use, Airdrie does not have a large office market, although there is demand for modern purpose built space which has been demonstrated by Airdrie Business Centre.
63 1.8 In addition to the above the applicant has also provided a structural report of the building which concluded that the existing building shows no signs of major structural problems which would necessarily preclude redevelopment of the existing shell. However substantial repairs would be required to the fabric of the building, along with localised structural repairs in order to make the building viable.
1.9 Finally the following information has also been provided in connection with the construction process. The applicant has indicated that although the specific contractor has not yet been appointed it is expected that:
. Demolition of the existing building would take 3 months . The construction process is likely to take 18 months = It should be possible to keep South Bridge Street open during the course of the works, however there would require to be short periods of closure for the connection of new services . The footpath and the parking bay immediately along the entire length of the building would require to be hoarded up to allow for works and to provide for a protected pedestrian route, which would mean closure of half of the road. . It is anticipated that surrounding vacant properties would be utilised to provide the required site office and welfare facilities to reduce the impact to the frontage = The recently laid footpaths and street furniture would either be protected or removed during the construction period and be reinstated at the end of the contract.
2. Development Plan
2.1 In terms of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the site is covered by policy COM4 Secondary Retail Core Area, COM 11 - Social, Entertainment and Commercial 'Bad Neighbour' Uses, ECON 13/4 - Improvement of Industrial Sites Airdrie Town Centre, ENVl5/3 Victoria and Airdrie Town Centre Conservation Area and ENV16 Conservation Area Improvements. As the application raises no strategic issues, it can be assessed in terms of the local plan policy.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 The Transportation Section have indicated that the application should be refused and have provided the following comments:
i. The proposed redevelopment of the site results in a reduction of the retail GFA from that which previously existed, no additional parking provision is required in respect of this use. The applicant has provided a Transport Statement which incorrectly refers to a requirement of 15 spaces based on NLC maximum parking standards as opposed to the minimum parking standards which actually apply (23 spaces for the residential units and 5 visitor spaces). ii. The Transport Statement indicates that the site is well served by public transport and local facilities and is placed to reduce reliance on the private car in line with the objectives and principles indicated in paragraph 7 and 35 of SPP17 along with paragraph 24 of PAN 75.The statement however does not indicate that the aim of SPP 17, indicated in paragraph 58, is to constrain parking at the destination of the trip and not at the point of origin as the applicant proposes in this case. iii. No parking provision is proposed for the 15 flats which will also be constructed as part of the proposed redevelopment of the site as opposed to the 28 required i.e. 23 residents and 5 visitor spaces.
64 iv. The statement indicates that there is sufficient capacity within the existing town centre car parks. However it is likely that only those located in East High Street, High Street and Upper Mill Street would be considered by the occupants of the flats suitable for use due to their proximity, none of which are overlooked or have any direct connections. It was also noted within the statement that in the former there were times during the day that no spaces were available in two of these car parks including Upper Mill Street which is indicated as the most suitable for use by residents and only one space in the latter. In any event these car parks are intended for use of shoppers and other visitors to the town centre and not residents.
3.2 Pollution Control Section has provided the following comments:
i. In relation to dust best practicable means shall be adopted to control site generated dust and prevent dust emission beyond the site boundary. If site generated dust is found to be impacting upon propertylresidents out with the site the operation responsible shall be suspended until suitable dust suppression measures are put in place ii. Construction work associated with this development shall conform to BS-5228, Noise from Construction and Open Sites. During the period of construction the operating hours for all noise producing works and ancillary operations which are acceptable to this office are: Monday to Friday: 8am to 7pm Saturday: 8am to Ipm Sundays and Public Holidays: No noise producing works iii. Pollution Control is in general agreement with the findings of the report that there is a potential noise nuisance in the form of the Staging Post BarlBeer Garden. However it doesn't agree with the proposed solution. The standards for internal noise levels at night time should be achieved with windows open. Only in exceptional circumstances should these levels be achieved with windows closed. The suggested alternative of uprated double glazing and acoustically attenuated vents would not be acceptable to this department. iv. If the public house is contacted with a view of agreeing(at the cost of Clyde Valley Housing) to the construction of an acoustic sound lobby to prevent the escape of noise, then further readings would be required to validate that there will not be a nuisance.
3.3 Scottish Civic Trust has indicated that they would prefer to see the retention of the existing building, however the proposed replacement would not adversely harm the character of the conservation area. In addition in terms of the design they recommend a more contemporary form of window surround to prevent the building being an imitation of its predecessor.
3.4 Historic Scotland has provided the following comments:
i. Government policy notes that when considering proposals for demolition within conservation areas it is desirable to retain buildings that make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of conservation areas and in the opinion of Historic Scotland this is the case. ii. Consideration of applications for demolition of un-listed buildings within the conservation area should be based upon the following criteria:
Importance of the building . Condition of the building ' Adequacy of efforts made to retain the building in use . Extent to which the community would benefit from the redevelopment iii. Request that a conditions survey of the building be carried out to determine if the building is beyond use or conversion.
65 3.5 West Of Scotland Archaeology Service has indicated that it will not be requesting any archaeological monitoring of the site due to the existence of a basement which would have compromised the potential for any historical material to be found.
3.6 Architectural Heritage Society has commented that although it is regrettable that the existing building is to be demolished they are pleased that the replacement building reflects the style of the original building. However they have indicated that the additional floor in the main body of the building should be sufficient and would not require the addition of the ‘penthouse’ arrangement.
3.7 Following the standard neighbour notification process and newspaper advertisement 3 letters of representation have been received, the main points contained within the objection letters are as follows:
i. Due to the location of the property within the conservation area the faqade of the building should be retained and any future additions should be the same as the original architectural features. ii. That the residential development is contrary to the development plan : . in that paragraph 5.5 states ‘there is some evidence of under occupation of accommodation above shops’ with emphasis clearly placed on retail developments due to the lack of demand for accommodation above shops and that despite the age of the local plan this is still relevant paragraph 5.6 states ‘with the principle of 800 new houses accepted at South Chapelhall it is desirable to provide additional well located shops, both for %orner shop’ convenience to enhance the existing village centre’
iii. Also in respect of the residential element that is based on the draft local plan, retail developments are clearly the most desirable of uses. In addition the areas identified for new housing developments do not include the application site, with retail and leisure are encouraged in this area. Therefore the proposal is contrary to the draft local plan. iv. In relation to the conflict between uses the objector has cited case law which indicates that the effect on an existing use by a proposed development is a material consideration. In that the potential conflict between the existing public house and the proposed residential units could have a detrimental effect on the public house and the level of amenity of any future residential properties which is also a material consideration. v. An objections has also been received with regard to the possible use of private car park to the rear to gain access to the site both during the construction process and by the ultimate users of the site, as there is currently no physical boundary. The objector has stated that this land is privately owned and there is no right of access. This issue however is not a material planning consideration, notwithstanding this the applicant has indicated that all work will be executed from South Bridge Street and a physical boundary will be erected prior to the commencement of any work. vi. Regarding the levels of noise and dust during construction one of the neighbouring properties has concerns in terms of disruption during the hours of business and the level of dust which could tamper with sensitive equipment.
4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 The proposal requires to be assessed under the terms of the development plan and any other material considerations. In this instance there are no strategic planning issues to address and the proposals required to be assessed under the terms of the relevant local plan policies which are COM4 Secondary Retail Core Area, ENV16 Conservation Area and COMll Social, Entertainment and Commercial ‘Bad Neighbour’ Uses.
66 4.2 Policy COM4 which states shopping and related uses (Classes 1, 2 and 3) are acceptable which supports the proposed ground floor and basement use. In relation to the residential accommodation, which would be situated on the upper floors, although not specifically mentioned in the local plan this use is established elsewhere within the town centre. In addition the development would not be feasible without the upper floor accommodation and the applicant has demonstrated that office accommodation is not viable.
4.3 Notwithstanding the above SPP8 on Town Centres and Retailing indicated that residential uses are a contributor to the vitality and viability of town centres by encouraging a more populated area, which in turn will attract more users, thus contributing to the viability of existing or new commercial uses. However due to the location of the public house to the rear of the property it should also be considered whether the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on an established town centre use.
4.4 Related to the above policy COMll is also relevant in this regard as it highlights the need to protect the amenity of local residents from any ‘adverse effects’. A consideration that must be taken into account is any detrimental effect the proposed development may have on this established town centre businesses which is discussed below.
4.5 ENV 16 Conservation Area Improvements also requires to be Considered. This states that the Council will support the re-use of vacant buildings in Conservation Areas, and will take steps to ensure that vacant premises are brought to the attention of potential users. In addition this states that in general that the Council would oppose the demolition of ‘...any potentially useful buildings which contribute to the character of the Conservation Areas. In any event no approvals will be given for any demolition work prior to the approval by the Council of a satisfactory improvement or redevelopment scheme.’ In this regard it is considered that the applicant has provided adequate supporting information which shows that with its current layout this building would appear not to have any reasonable potential for re-use due to the varying internal levels and the recent requirements ensuring that buildings have adequate access for disabled members of the community.
4.6 In terms of the visual impact on the surrounding area it is considered that the design of the frontage complies with this policy as the proposed features are in keeping with the traditional nature of the town centre and mirror the original building. Therefore the overall effect on the surrounding Conservation Area would be minimal.
4.7 In terms of the conditions requested by the Transportation Section, these are responded to as follows:
i. It is agreed that the development proposes to provide no dedicated parking for the development. However the provision of parking within the site would remove any and all open space provided within the development and would require vehicle access across the pedestrian footpath and layby. It is considered that the only option would be to utilise the surrounding parking within the town centre. In addition in response to the Transportation comments the applicant has provided information based on the 2001 census which indicates that if the travel pattern of car ownership were to be applied to the development based on figures for the surrounding area only 7 spaces would be required. ii. In terms of the issue of SPP17 ‘constraining parking at destination and not point of origin’ this is not disputed, however based on the additional level of parking required and the possible long term benefits of the proposed development it is considered that the town centre would benefit from the proposed uses. iii. As indicated above the applicant has provided information regarding the expected level of parking. Notwithstanding this the public parking provision within the immediate area should be able to accommodate this additional level.
67 iv. The use of public car parks for retail and commercial purposes is accepted, however the long term viability of town centres in general requires the incorporation of different uses and this includes residential.
4.8 Regarding the comments made by Pollution Control in terms of the dust, construction noise and operating hours, these would be advised to the applicant should planning permission be granted. In terms of the noise from the adjacent public house the applicant was advised of the comments received from Pollution Control. They have responded by advising that they are in discussions with the adjacent land owner regarding the possible construction of the sound lobby, however as yet no agreement has been reached. Notwithstanding this the applicant has requested that the development be considered based on the solutions of the upgraded glazing and the attenuated vents and applicant has indicated that the solutions proposed are in use within other towns and cities in Scotland and therefore complies with the requirements of national policy on Town Centres.
4.9 In respect of the above a balance requires to be achieved between the needs of the town centre and any further potential impact on the surrounding area. The redevelopment of this building could add to the long term viability of Airdrie town centre however this should not be at the expense of any current user. Notwithstanding this the applicant has provided a solution that would address the issue of noise from the public house and is attempting to reach an agreement with the owners. It is considered that as suitable noise levels can be achieved, despite the concerns raised, that the impact on the amenity of any future residents would be addressed satisfactorily. A condition would be placed on any approval to ensure that the findings of the noise assessment are implemented into the development.
4.10 The Scottish Civic Trust have indicated that should the building be redeveloped they would prefer to see more contemporary window surrounds. However it is considered that the proposed details are acceptable and would help to maintain the overall character of the area.
4.1 1 Historic Scotland’s comments are addressed as follows:
i. In terms of government policy regarding the demolition in conservation areas that buildings that make a positive contribution to the area, it is agreed that the preference would be for the retention however the supporting information provided shows that this option is not economically viable and therefore it is considered that the building in its current form does not provide a positive contribution to the conservation area and town centre. ii. Regarding the terms of the criteria for demolition of a building in the conservation area these are responded to as follows: . In terms of the importance of the building it is considered that as a former department store with 150 years of service it was well known throughout the area. In respect of this as part of the development the applicant proposes to retain the distinctive ‘ORRS’ signage on the gables of the building to maintain this link to the previous historical use. As indicated the overall structural condition of the building is not in question, however in order to bring the building up to current standards this would require a substantial amount of work to be undertaken. . With reference to the efforts to retain the building in use, this building has been vacant since June 2007 with no formal interest other that the current applicant. It is considered that the applicant has provided sufficient background information regarding the lack of economical viability of the existing building. . In terms of the extent that the community would benefit from the redevelopment this would be responded to based on the proposed accommodation would be for social housing. Again the economic viability for the redevelopment of the site indicates it could not be undertaken for commercial profit and a housing association would have the ability to undertake such a development.
68 iii. Regarding the request for a condition survey this was provided by the applicant and as indicated previously the building is structurally sound however substantial work would require to be undertaken to bring up to a reasonable and usable standard.
4.12 Architectural Heritage Society has indicated that the ‘penthouse’ is not required. However it is considered that the ultimate design of this, which includes the use of slate, would help the economic viability of the scheme while giving the impression of dormer accommodation.
4.13 In relation to the grounds of objection, these are addressed as follows:
i. As previously indicated the preferred option would be to retain the faGade however this has been shown not to be economically viable. It is considered that the details of the proposed design would reflect the surrounding area ii. In terms of the residential element being contrary to the development plans this is responded to as follows: . Regarding paragraph 5.5 and under occupation of accommodation above shops it is considered that the lack of appropriate access in more traditional buildings may contribute to this, however as this is a purpose built development this issue would be addressed With reference to the housing in Chapelhall, the provision of large housing developments within the local plan do not preclude smaller developments within other locations.
iii. Regarding the zoning within the draft local plan it is agreed that retail is the underpinning use of this area, however it also recognises that there should be a provision of a range of different uses. In terms of the location of residential development, again, the provision of large housing developments within the plan area does not preclude smaller developments within other locations. iv. It is agreed that the potential conflict between the existing user and the proposed residential units is a material consideration. This issue, in relation to noise has been addressed elsewhere in the report. v. The issue of right of access at the rear of the property is not a material planning consideration. However the applicant has been made aware of the concerns of the neighbouring property and has indicated that the rear of the development will be fenced off prior to the commencement of work on site. vi. In terms of the issue of construction noise and dust these are matters that would be addressed through legislation administered by the Pollution Control Section. Notwithstanding this, any redevelopment of this site would create some disruption and the long term viability of the town centre is also an issue that requires to Considered.
4.14 In conclusion having regard to the points of objection raised it is considered that they do not raise any issue that would merit refusal of the application. The proposed design of the site is in keeping with the surrounding area and the original structure and would not have any additional visual impact on the surrounding area. In terms of noise it is considered that the applicant has provided a suitable solution and the parking requirements could be adequately accommodated within the town centre context. A redevelopment in this location would provide a long term solution to vacant building which would only detracted from the effort that is being put into improving the environment within Airdrie Town Centre. The application raises no strategic issues and it is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the attached conditions.
69 Application No: C/09/00239/FUL
Date Registered: 23rd March 2009
Applicant: Mr William Graham 15 Weir Street Coatbridge
Agent Mr Richard Moss 6 Doune Park Way Coatbridge ML5 4EQ
Development: Construction of 485sqm Commercial Tool Hire Unit
Location: Corner Of Miller Street & Coatbank Street Coatbridge North Lanarkshire ML5 3SP
Ward: 10 Coatbridge South Councillors Brooks, Ferrie & Higgins Grid Reference: 273668 664456
File Reference: C/PL/CBC512/SM/GL
Site History: 98/00509/FUL Mixed commercial development comprising petrol filling station and restaurant with drive through facility. Granted 18.06.1998 98/01700/AMD Mixed Commercial Development (Amendment To Application No. 98/00509/FUL). Granted 15.04.1999 99/0074O/FUL Erection Of Non Food Retail Unit (405sqm) For Use As Video Hire Store. Refused 14.10.1999 01/0169O/FUL Erection of 405sqm Non-Food Retail Unit. Refused 22.03.2002 08/01537/FUL Construction of 525sqm Commercial Tool Hire Unit. Refused 11.12.2008
Development Plan: The applications site is located in an area Designated as ECON 2 (Existing General Industrial Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: None
Representations: 2 letters of representation received.
Newspaper Advertisement: 1 April 2009
70
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 number Drwg.No.01.Rev.A 02/09
Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.
3. That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175 : 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required.
Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.
4. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 3, shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a responsible Chartered 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), The post-development surface water discharges shall ensure that the rate and quantity of run-off to any watercourse are no greater than the pre-development run-off for any storm return period unless it can be demonstrated that a higher discharge is necessary to protect or improve the aquatic habitat. SUDS shall still be provided even where discharges are proposed to public sewers notwithstanding any conditions imposed by Scottish Water.
Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater.
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 safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution
72 7. That before the development hereby permitted is , all the parking and manoeuvring areas shown on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained, surfaced in a material which the Planning Authority has approved in writing before the start of surfacing work and clearly marked out, and shall, thereafter, be maintained as parking and manoeuvring areas.
Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities within the site.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 3rd March 2009
Letter from Head Of Protective Services received 17th April 2009
Memo from Transportation received 21st April 2009
Letter from Gerry McAllister, 71 Meadow Walk, Victoria Park, Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire, ML5 3PP received 21 st April 2009. Letter from John Craw, 35 Meadow Walk, Coatbridge, ML5 3PP received 16th April 2009.
Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Susan Miller at 01236 812374.
Date: 23 April 2009
73 APPLICATION NO. ClO9lOO239lFUL
REPORT
1. DescriDtion of Site and Proposal
1.2 Planning permission is being sought for the construction of a Commercial Tool Hire unit on vacant land at the junction of Coatbank Street and Miller Street, Coatbridge. The proposed unit would be located towards the east end of a larger site which is occupied by a KFC restaurant and drive through and an Esso petrol filling station with ancillary shop. To the east of the site is an extended landscape buffer zone that separates the site and the outlying Victoria Park residential development.
1.3 The proposed unit measures 26m by 12.5m giving a footprint off 325sq.m. The unit is 6.45m to wallhead height and has a shallow pitched roof 7.35m to the ridge. There would be two roller shutter doors on the South elevation. The building would have open plan storage on the ground floor and staff offices and kitchen on a mezzanine level resulting in a total floor area of 485 sq.m.
1.4 The proposed unit would be clad with render at ground floor level with vertical corrugated sheeting above. A double height facing brick column would highlight the main customer entrance on the West elevation.
1.5 Application C/08/01537/FUL for a similar but larger proposal by the same applicant was considered by committee on the 11 December 2008 and refused for the following reason:
Refuse for the reason thaf fhe proposal would constitute an over development of the site as there would be inadequate parking spaces provided to serve the development and there would be inadequate space within the site to allow private and commercial vehicles, some of which may have trailers attached, to enter and exit the site in a forward gear. In addition the vehicular access is not satisfactory and an existing lay-by facility would be removed. Taken together there would be a significant detriment to traffic and pedestrian safety at the locus.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The application site is located in an area designated as ECON2 (Existing General Industrial Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996. There are no strategic implications.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 The Transportation Team has advised that it has no objections subject to conditions. The conditions relate to minor alterations within the car park layout and providing a sketch that vehicles can enter and exit in a forward gear. The applicant has submitted further drawings addressing these points.
3.2 The Protective Services Team has advised that given the history of the site there may be potential contamination of the land.
74 3.3 Following press advertisement and standard neighbour notification procedure 2 letters of objection were received. The main points of objection can be summarised as follows:
1. Traffic volume - this area is already subject to traffic volume issues. There are current problems in egress from Victoria Park especially at peak times. Victoria Park, the immediately adjacent busy Faraday retail park, B&Q superstore, the Pizza Hut, the Petrol Station and KFC are all served by the same main roundabout on Coatbank street. The new development will generate additional traffic volume and exacerbate this problem. NLC Roads are already aware of a known problem in North/South traffic at the roundabout.
2. Traffic Type - related to the above item is the type of traffic that the new development will generate. Larger and slower moving vehicles e.g. vans with trailers, larger delivery lorries will also make the area more of a problem. The right turn from the development for these types of vehicle (and increased volume) on to Miller Street will cause further problems for egress for the residents of Victoria Park.
3. Traffic Safety - Getting out and in to Victoria Park can be unduly risky. Difficult to get out due to the current traffic volume and people consequently take more risks. Also, cars coming south and approaching the roundabout "overhang" on to the roundabout to give them a better chance of beating the traffic coming around the roundabout. This occasionally prevents safe ingress to Victoria Park and the petrol station. I have witnessed quite a few near misses. The development can only make the general area worse.
4. Pedestrian Safety - the recently installed pedestrian crossings do not enable people to fully get safely North /South. Miller Street does not have a crossing and the increased volume and traffic type will reduce pedestrian safety. This location will also be subject to the right turn issue mentioned above.
5. The vertical alignment of Miller St is sub standard and parking on it would force vehicles onto the opposite side of the road. With forward visibility issues this could present a hazard, and by removing the parking lay-by near the petrol station there will be more vehicles waiting on Miller St. This would obstruct the visibility from the side road onto Miller St and could have an effect on vehicles exiting the KFC or the main road A725 onto Miller St.
6. Business Type - the development type does not tie-in with the immediate vicinity. It does not match the surrounding housing and retail environment. As stated in your notice it may already be contrary to Planning.
7. AestheticNisual Impairment - the structure does not blend with the surroundings. The development structure does not blend with structures in the immediate vicinity.
4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires that the application be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The application is not of strategic significance and therefore only requires to be assessed against the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.
4.2 The site is zoned as ECON 2 (Existing General Industrial Areas) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 which supports the retention of the industrial character of the area, sub division of factory units and the operation of wholesale and distribution outlets. However, there has been a move away from the industrial character of the surrounding area in recent years. The area to the east of the site having been developed as a residential area and there is a hot food restaurant and takeaway (KFC) and petrol filling station adjacent to the application site.
75 4.3 A tool hire business is considered to be a Sui Generis use and therefore the application must be considered on its own merits. The tool hire use, although not clearly falling within a class 5 or 6 use supported by ECON2, is considered to be an acceptable use in these locations and is therefore not considered contrary to the provisions of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991.
4.4 The applicant Elite Tool Hire currently occupies a nearby building on Coatbank Street approximately 150m from the application site. This building also falls within the area designated as ECON2 and the use has been considered acceptable in this location.
4.5 The Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan designates the area as EDI AI Industrial and Business Areas - Existing Industrial and Business Areas, This policy does not conflict with the provisions of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991
4.6 The planning history of this site is a material consideration and shows that there have been three previous applications on this site. Two of these applications relate to Class 1 uses on the site which were both refused at appeal. The most recent application was C/08/01537/FUL submitted in 2008 by the same applicant and agent for a Tool Hire unit. As noted above this was refused on the basis that is was overdevelopement of the site and transportation grounds including access arrangements, parking and turning facilities.
4.7 The applicant has since been in discussions with the Transportation team and redesigned the layout of the site. The building has been relocated to the north of the site and reduced in length by 4m to address the reason for refusing the previous application. As discussed in para 3.1 above the Transportation Team has no objections to this application.
4.8 The design and of the building and proposed material are considered acceptable. Whilst the building will be taller than that of the petrol station and KFC fast food restaurant it is considered acceptable in this pocket of mixed uses. There are a number of other commercial units in the surrounding area including the retail warehouse units within the Faraday Retail Park, the B & Q of similar designs albeit on a much larger scale.
4.9 The points of objection can be addressed as follows:
1. It is acknowledged that a large volume of traffic passes through the roundabout at Coatbank Street particularly north and south bound and that there can be congestion at points during the day. It is also acknowledged that any new development will increase the level of traffic utilising the site, however, it is not considered that traffic levels generated by the development under consideration would have a significant impact on the out-lying road network that may otherwise (without significant mitigation measures being in place) merit the refusal of this application.
2. It is acknowledged that there would be traffic accessing the site and that the type of vehicles may include vans, delivery vehicles and vehicles with trailers. However it is considered that the existing road network can accommodate these vehicles without any upgrading and is therefore not considered a reason to merit the refusal of this application.
3. The safe use of the existing roundabout lies with the drivers and is not a material planning consideration.
4. As noted above it is acknowledged that the development will generate traffic however, this increase is unlikely to significantly impact on pedestrian safety.
5. The transportation team was consulted and has not raised any concerns over vertical alignment or visibility. It should be noted that the existing lay-by parking referred to will remain in situ.
76 6. This is discussed in paragraphs 4.2-4.4 above
7. This is discussed in paragraph 4.8 above
4.10 It should be noted that some of the above concerns were raised when assessing planning application C/08/01537/FUL and no reason was found to uphold them. The Transportation team has been fully consulted on both applications and has not raised any of the points above as issues when assessing the development in relation to traffic safety.
4.11 Taking into account the foregoing, the tool hire development is considered to largely accord with the provisions of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 and would integrate satisfactorily with the existing land uses. Due consideration has been given to the points of objection raised; however no reason has been found to merit the refusal of the application. The application is considered acceptable and it is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to condition.
77 Application No: C/09/00268/FUL
Date Registered: 10th March 2009
Applicant: Mr Abdul Rahman 137 Drummore Avenue Carn broe Coatbridge North Lanarkshire ML5 4AW
Agent Mr Richard Moss 6 Doune Park Way Coatbridge ML5 4EQ
Development: Two Storey Side Extension, Single Storey Rear Extension and Conversion of Garage
Location: 137 Drummore Avenue Carn broe Coatbridge North Lanarkshire ML5 4AW
Ward: 10 Coatbridge South Councillors: Brooks, Ferrie and Higgins
Grid Reference: 274785663081
File Reference: CIPL/CTD455137000/WS/GL
Site History:
Development Plan: Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996 Policy HG3/ 67 (New Private Sector Housing Development) Policy HG9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas)
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: None
Representations: 1 letter of representation received.
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
78 79 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:- 111 1, 211 1, 311 1, 411 1 and 5/11
Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.
3. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the facing materials to be used for the external walls and roof shall match in colour and texture those of the existing adjoining dwelling.
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 10th March 2009
Letter from Mrs Yvonne Dick, 135 Drummore Avenue, Coatbridge, ML5 4AW received 17th March 2009.
Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr William Shand at 01236 812231.
Date: 23 April 2009
80 APPLICATION NO. C1091002681FUL
REPORT
Descriution of Site and ProPOsal
Planning permission is sought for the construction of a two storey side extension, single storey rear extension and a garage conversion at 137 Drummore Avenue, Coatbridge. The property is a detached dwellinghouse located in a predominantly residential area. The applicant’s dwellinghouse is set at the entrance to one of the larger housing estates and faces west in direction. The neighbouring properties to the north are forward of the applicants dwellinghouse by approximately 5 metres. The surrounding properties are similar in height, design and style.
The two storey extension would be attached to the north gable elevation of the dwellinghouse on the area of garden currently used as the driveway. The extension would run the full length of the dwellinghouse and the extension would have the same height as the existing dwelling. The extension would contain a family room and dining room on the ground floor and a bedroom on the first floor. A single storey extension would also be added onto the rear of the two storey extension which would also attach to the existing garage. The existing garage would be converted into a kitchen. The single storey extension would have a pitched roof and maximum height of 3.5 metres. The existing garage is slightly higher than this. No windows have been proposed on any of the elevations facing towards the neighbouring gardens.
Develoument Plan
The relevant development plan is the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991.
The site is designated as HG3 / 67 (New Private Sector Housing Development) with the Adopted Monklands Local Plan 1991. Now that it is an existing housing development it is assessed under policy HG9 (Housing Policy for Existing ResidentialAreas). HG9 (C) states that House extensions will generally be permitted so long as they comply with the Development Control Advice outlined by the District Council.
Consultations and Representations
Following the standard neighbour notification procedure one letter of objection was received. The objection can be summarised as follows:
(a) The extension would block the amount of sunlight reaching the objectors garden.
Planninn Assessment and Conclusions
Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires that the application be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The relevant development plan policy is HG9 (c) within the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991. This states that house extensions will generally be permitted so long as they comply with the Development Control Advice outlined by the District Council. The relevant Development Control Advice is the Monklands District Design Guidance on House Extensions. This states that the extension should not be so large as to overwhelm the existing building and leave little amenity space in the plot. The proposed extension would compliment the existing building and would be of an appropriate scale. There would also be a large area of amenity space left over following the extension of the property. It also states that side extensions are appropriate where there is sufficient side garden and it is preferable that the extension is set off the boundary to allow for access and avoid a terracing effect.
81 In this instance there is sufficient side garden for the extension that is proposed without compromising amenity space or parking, The extension would be set off the boundary by approximately 0.4 metres and although this is not sufficient to allow adequate access it would reduce any potential future terracing affect should the neighbouring property wish to extend. Overall, the proposal would accord with the design guidance and therefore it is considered that it would accord with the Local Plan policy.
4.2 In terms of other material considerations it was found that there would be no significant privacy issue from this development as none of the proposed windows would directly look into any of the neighbouring plots. The 45 degree block plan and elevation sunlight/ daylight tests were not relevant for testing loss of daylight to windows in this application due to the property being set back from the neighbouring dwellinghouse and it being set away from the neighbouring dwellinghouse. As the neighbouring dwellinghouse is exactly north of the applicants property it is considered that there would be no significant overshadowing issues or loss of daylight created by the extension that is not already created by the existing dwellinghouse. The existing dwellinghouse has the potential to reduce some sunlight to the neighbouring ground floor patio windows with it being due south and given the extension would be on the north elevation it is considered that this would not add significantly to this. The extension would reduce the available space for car parking as it would be built on the existing driveway. It is found however that there is sufficient space within the plot to accommodate a two car long or wide parking area. The parking provision for this development would therefore be adequate.
4.3 In relation to the grounds of objection, the following comments can be noted:
(a) It is considered that the extension would not significantly reduce the amount of sunlight/ daylight entering the garden. The extension would be positioned on the north elevation of the existing dwellinghouse and therefore would only slightly increase the daylight/ sunlight loss to the garden given that the dwellinghouse already shades part of the garden. Overall, it is considered that the daylight and sunlight to the garden would not be significantly decreased.
4.4 In conclusions, having regard to the foregoing, the proposed extension would be considered to be acceptable in that it meets the terms of the development plan and creates no significant issues for the neighbouring properties. Due to the positioning of the extension there would be no significant overshadowing or loss of daylight to the garden or neighbouring windows. Adequate parking provision can still be retained within the plot and there are no apparent privacy concerns. It is therefore recommended that the application be approved subject to the attached conditions.
82 Application No:
Date Registered: 16th March 2009 Applicant: Mr & Mrs J. Mann 1 Kippsbyre Farm Glenmavis Airdrie Agent Stanley C Cook MRTPI 12 Beveridge Terrace Mossend Bellshill ML4 2RJ Development: Use of Site for Office Containers, Valet Containers, Snack Bar and Car Wash Facility with Associated Car Parking
Location: Penny Cars Woodhall Street Chapelhall North Lanarkshire ML6 8RR
Ward: 11 Airdrie South Councillors: M Coyle, Curley, Fagan and Love Grid Reference: 277592662123
File Reference: C/PL/CH B558iYhVSIGL
64/1217 Erection of Petrol Service Station (In Outline) (Granted Site History: 02.11.1 964) 69/178 Erection of Petrol Filling station (Granted 14.05.1969) 69/955 Erection of Petrol Filling Station (Amendment to Proposed Petrol Filling Station) (Granted 12.08.1969) 84/00039/FUL Change of Use from Vacant Caravan to Snack Bar (Refused 13.03.1984) 99/00532/FUL Alterations & Extension To Existing Shop (Granted 01.06.1999) 05/01943/FUL (Part A) Demolition of Existing Garage and Private Taxi Call Centre and Erection of New Control Centre for Use of Private Taxi Company including Installation of 15M Radio Mast (Retrospective) and (Part B) Erection of 3 Industrial/CommerciaI Units (Part A approved and Part B Refused 16.03.2006) 07/00437/FUL Erection of Side Extension to Form Ancillary Office Accommodation, Staff Welfare Facilities & Car Valet Bays (Granted 06.06.2007) (Adjacent Penny Cars Site) 08/01493/FUL Use of Land for Car Valet, Car Wash Business with Snack Bar (Withdrawn) 08/01664/AMD Siting of Office Container, Valet Container and Snack Bar for Car Wash Facility (Refused 21.01.2009)
Development Plan: Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996 Contrary to Development Plan: No Consultations: None
Representations: No letters of representation received. Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
83 Warming Application No ~~~~~~U~ M zwzmi!-W”L :%Za - Use of Site for Office Containers,Valet Containers,Snack @erand i-1;.2 Car Wash Facrllty MhAssociated Car Parking zv.s%-a& Notm So& &zxs.=*XL sa-*-: Land at Penny Car%,Modhail Street, Chepelhall
84 Recommendation: Refuse for the Reason that insufficient evidence has been submitted to prove that, on the balance of probability, the office containers, valet containers, snack bar and car wash facility with associated car parking have not been in use continuously over the last 10 years.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 11th March 2009
Monklands District Local Plan 1991, Including Finalised First Alterations A, B & C September 1996
Site Photographs 26.12.2005 and 8.2.2007
Application Plans 05/01943/FUL and 07/00437/FUL
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr William Shand at 01236 812231.
Date: 24 April 2009
85 APPLICATION NO. C1091002991LUC
REPORT
I. Description of Site and Proposal
1.I A certificate of lawfulness application has been made in respect of a site of approximately 1000 sq. m. adjacent to the Penny Cars Taxi Company, Woodhall Street, Chapelhall. The site currently contains a car wash facility and a snack bar with several portacabins, however there is no record of these ever being granted planning permission. It is with respect to these uses and structures that the application for a certificate of lawfulness relates. The site is surfaced in hard standing and bound to the west by countryside and Schering Plough Research Building (aka Organon) to the east. The access to the site is taken from the B799 Classified Road.
1.2 A planning application for the “Siting of Office Container, Valet Container and Snack Bar for Car Wash Facility” was refused on 15 January 2009 by the Planning and Transportation Committee as it did not accord with Structure Plan or Local Plan Policy. The applicant states that the site has accommodated the uses continuously for more than 10 years and therefore cannot be the subject of formal enforcement action. The applicant has provided a supporting statement and additional supporting information. The arguments within the supporting statement are as follow:
(a) The history of the site includes various car and car orientated uses (garage, car repairs, petrol sales, taxi’s, shop and valet facilities) all of which have received the required Planning Permissions. (b) The facility is tidy and well laid out and has been resurfaced, drained and fenced. (c) The facility employs 10 people and given the economic times these jobs provide a livelihood for local people.
1.3 In addition to the supporting statement, the applicant has included a letter from a previous employee of the petrol filling station which occupied this and the adjoining site, an aerial photograph of the site showing its previous uses and a sales particulars for the sale of the filling station.
1.4 The planning history is noted within the front page of this report. It is noted that the site was originally occupied by a petrol filling station. At some point (the exact date is not known) the filling station shop was occupied and used by Penny Cabs as a taxi office. In 2005, the filling station structure was demolished, the site entirely cleared and new taxi offices were built on one half of the site without planning permission, A planning application (in retrospect) was granted for the new taxi offices but at the same time the other half of the site (i.e. the site to which this current application relates) was refused planning permission for industrial and commercial units. This was the basis of an appeal which was later dismissed.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The intention of the application is to demonstrate that the stated uses/ structures have been on site for the last 10 years, therefore the Development Plan is not relevant to the assessment of this application.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 As part of this application no neighbour notification was required and thereby no letters of representation were received.
3.2 No consultations were undertaken as part of this application.
86 4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 The relevant test of the evidence on such matters is the 'balance of probability' not the stricter, criminal burden of proof 'beyond reasonable doubt'. The appropriate legislation is the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, Sections 150 to 152.
4.2 In considering the applicant's comments the following points are made:
4.3 A planning application for the use of a caravan as a snack bar has already been refused on this site on 23 March 1984 while the site was used as a filling station. There is no history of a snack bar ever re-appearing on site until the recent application in 2008.
4.4 The fact that the site is alleged to be in good order, well run, relatively attractive and employs 10 people would not be a matter for determination of a lawful use certificate. This information would be used to determine an application for planning permission and therefore cannot be assessed as part of this application.
4.5 With regards to the supporting documents the following comments can be noted. Firstly, the letter from the previous employee stating that there were two car washes is not substantiated through other evidence. Any car wash on site during the operation of the petrol filling station could have been ancillary to the main use of the site although as noted previously this use was discontinued around 2005. With regards to the aerial photograph, this does show the previous uses of the site as a filling station however the current aerial photograph from a similar provider shows the site at a later date and it this time it is entirely cleared. The report by Messrs DM Hall Surveyors strengthens the Planning Authorities position on this application. The report makes no mention of a car wash, valet centre or snack bar being on site. The surveyor gives a comprehensive evaluation of all facilities on site, however this does not include the facilities being applied for. Therefore a continuous use would be very difficult to justify.
4.6 The main consideration for this application is whether the site has been continuously used for the siting of office containers, valet containers, a snack bar and car wash facility with associated car parking. The main argument from the applicant is that there was a car wash and valet centre on site at the same time as the filling station. It is considered however that any use of the land as a car wash or valet centre was discontinued following the removal of the filling station building and clearing of the site. Two dated sets of site photographs and an aerial photograph after the Penny Cars building was erected in 2005 clearly show that the site adjacent to the Penny Cars building is cleared and free of any car wash or any other of the stated containers/ structures. The appeal report from the Scottish Government (following the refusal of the industriakommercial units in 2005) also notes that the site has been cleared. From the evidence available to the Planning Authority it would appear that the site has been clear of any uses on this site for approximately 3 years. The use of the land for the siting of an office container, valet container, snack bar and car wash facility would therefore requires planning permission and there is no justification for a Lawful Use Certificate. Furthermore, it is noted that these same uses were indeed applied for (and refused) earlier this year. The applicant has not submitted an appeal in respect of this refusal.
87 4.7 In conclusion, having regard to the foregoing it is possible that a car wash may have been present on the site in some form during the site's previous use as a filling station however this would have been ancillary to the filling station and did not alter the land use designation of the site as a whole. Regardless of this, when the filling station was removed around 2005 the full site was cleared and thereby the site suffered from a discontinuous use or a break in the use. Thereby any lawfulness that a car wash, valet centre, snack bar or office had at that time would have been removed. The current car wash, valet containers, office containers and snack bar has therefore been in situ for a short period of time, certainly less then than the 10 years required for a certificate of lawfulness and there is evidence that contradicts the applicant's claim of a continued use of the site for the siting of a valet container, office container, snack bar and car wash facility. Thereby, it is recommended that the application for a Certificate of Lawfulness be refused.
88 Application No: S10710146810UT
Date Registered: 6th September 2007
Applicant: The Samuel Family Clo Agent
Agent ID Partnership - Scotland 95 South Woodside Road Glasgow G20 6NT
Development: Residential Development (In Outline)
Location: Land At 599 - 605 Main Street Bellshill
Ward: 15 Mossend & Holytown: Councillors Coyle, McKeown and Delaney
Grid Reference: 274485660380
File Reference: SIP LIBF/7/50lFM/G F
Site History: No Relevant Site History
Development Plan: The site is identified as an Established Industrial Area (IND8) and Other Commercial Uses (RTLS) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008
Contrary to Development Plan: Yes
Consultations: Scottish Natural Heritage (No Objections) Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Comments) Scottish Water (No Objections) British Gas (No Objections) Scottish Power (No Objections) British Telecom (Noobjections)
Representations: Two letters of representation received
Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 20th September 2007
89 90 Recommendation: Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:-
1. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a further planning application shall be submitted to the Planning Authority in respect of the following reserved matters:- (a) the siting, design and external appearance of all buildings and other structures; (b) the layout of the site, all roads, footways, and parking areas; (c) the details of, and timetable for, the hard and soft landscaping of the site; (d) the provision of public open space; (e) provision of equipped play areas: (9 details for management and maintenance of the areas identified in (c), (d) and (e) above; (9) the phasing of the development; (h) the provision of drainage works; (i) the disposal of sewage; (j) details of existing trees, shrubs and hedgerows to be retained: (k) the design and location of all boundary walls and fences; and (I) details of existing and proposed site levels.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
2. That the development hereby permitted shall be started, either within 5 years of the date of this permission, or within 2 years of the date of which the last of the reserved matters are approved, whichever is the later.
Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.
3. That within three years of the date of this permission, an application for approval of the reserved matters, specified in condition 1 above, shall be made to the Planning Authority.
Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.
4. That the site shall be developed in accordance with the Council's 'Developer's Guide to Open Space' in terms of the minimum space standards and space around dwellings and the provision of play facilities and shall comply with the Council's Guidance on parking provision for residential dwellings on the minimum basis of : Flatted dwellings- 1-2 bedroom- 1.5 spaces, 3-4 bedroom - 2 spaces Houses: 1-2 bedroom dwellings- 2 spaces, 3-4 bedroom dwellings- 3 spaces, 5+ bedroom dwellings- 4 spaces. In addition unallocated parking shall be provided at the rate of 0.3 spaces for lay-bys in pairs and 0.5 spaces in shared surfaces.
Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory amenity space and parking provision for the dwellings.
5. The development shall not exceed three storeys in height.
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area.
6. That notwithstanding the terms of condition 1 above, access to the site shall be via a 10.5m wide radius junction arrangement, located 70m east of the western boundary of the site, constructed to the requirements and specifications of North Lanarkshire Council leading to a 5.5m wide access with two 2m wide footways. Furthermore, visibility splays of 9 metres x 120 metres in both directions shall be achieved and maintained. Nothing shall be placed or allowed to grow over 1.05m in height above carriageway level within visibility splays, prior to the occupation of any dwelling.
Reason: To ensure adequate access and egress to and from the site in the interests of vehicular and pedestrian road safety.
91 7. That notwithstanding the terms of condition 1 above, parking bays shall be 5.0 long x 2.5m wide with a 6.0m aisle.
Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities within the site.
8. Notwithstanding the requirements of Condition 1 above and before any works of any description start on the application site, a further site investigation report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the said Authority and it shall provide a more comprehensive assessment of the environmental risks on site; additional gas monitoring to conform to the guidance within ClRlA C665 a revised gas risk assessment; and a hydrological risk assessment to encompass both ground and surface waters. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
9. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 8 above, shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a Chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the Remediation Strategy.
Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.
10. That the development shall accord with the recommendations contained in the submitted Environmental Noise Assessment dated 17'h January 2008 submitted with the application and before any affected dwellings are occupied a certificate signed by a chartered engineer shall be supplied in writing to the Planning Authority confirming that these works have been completed.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
11. That no earthworks shall commence on site until an updated Protected Species Survey is submitted and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. As a result of the above studies, should any remediation measures be required for the protection or relocation of any protected species, including any Yellow Bird's nest plants found on the site, these shall be implemented in accordance with a timetable agreed in writing with the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage before works commence on the site.
Reason: To allow the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail in the interests of the wildlife habitats within the site.
12. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the requirements of the publication titled 'Drainage Assessment : A Guide for Scotland' and any other advice subsequently published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) or the Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party (SUDSWP). The post-development surface water discharges shall ensure that the rate and quantity of run-off to any watercourse are no greater than the pre-development run-off for any storm return period unless it can be demonstrated that a higher discharge is necessary to protect or improve the aquatic habitat. SUDS shall still be provided even where discharges are proposed to public sewers notwithstanding any conditions imposed by Scottish Water.
92 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.
13. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme required under Condition 12 above shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Within three months of the construction of the SUDS, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in drainage works) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant ClRlA Manual and the approved plans.
Reason: To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site.
14. That before the development hereby permitted starts, the applicant shall provide written confirmation to the Planning Authority that all the requirements of Scottish Water have been fully met in respect of providing the necessary site drainage infrastructure to serve the development.
Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory site drainage arrangements.
15. That, the reserved matters application required under the terms of Condition 1 above shall include a flood risk report from a suitably qualified person and shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt this report shall:
(a) Confirm that the finished floor levels and proposed site levels are appropriate and the site will be at no risk of flooding from a 1 in 200 year flood event. (b) Assess the potential for flooding from intense rainfall or overflowing sewers.
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.
16. That any flood mitigation works required under the terms of Condition 15 above, shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Following the construction of all of 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.
17. That in addition to the details submitted under the terms of Condition 1, the reserved matters application shall include a design statement for the entire site in accordance with PAN 68 and for the avoidance of doubt this shall provide details of the proposed site layout, scale and mix of housing, design details, materials and height of dwellings and landscaping and open space.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
18. That notwithstanding the requirements of Condition 1 above, a high, quality visually attractive frontage and entrance feature shall be proposed at the site entrance at Main Street, details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity of the site.
93 19. That no scrub removal, tree removal and tree works (branch removal, pruning, etc) shall be undertaken within the bird nesting season (March to July inclusive).
Reason: To ensure that the development does not detrimentally affect the local bird population.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 31"August 2007 Amended Plans received 6'h September 2007 Ground Investigation Report, Johnson Poole & Bloomer received SepteFber 2007 Environmental Noise Assessment, Nicol Acoustic Consultancy received 17 January 2008 Water & Sewarage Services Report, AF Utility Consultants Ltd received 14'h March 2008 ExtY;ded Phase 1 Habitat Survey and Bat Roost Potential Assessment, Land Use Consultants received 28 July 2008
Memo from Transportation Team Leader received gth October 2007 Memos from Conservation and Greening received 1!jth October 2007 and 6th November 2008. Memo from Learning and Leisure Services received 1lth October 2007 Memos from Head of Protective Services Received 17'h October 2007 and 6'h May 2008 Memos from Geotechnical Team Leader received 23rdJune and 2"d July 2008
Letters from Scottish Natural Heritage received 3rdApril, 30fhMay, and 20thAugust 2008 Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 12 December 2007 Letter from Scottish Water received 2"d October 2007 Letter from Scottish Power received 20thSeptember 2007 Letter from British Telecom received 27'h September 2007
Letter from W.R.Hall, Building Surveyors, 7 Main Street, Bothwell, Glasgow, G71 8RD received llth September 2007 Letter from Corus Distribution and Building Supplies, Unthank Road, Bellshill, ML4 1DJ, received 14'h September 2007
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Fraser Miller at 01698 2741 19.
Date: 29 April 2009
94 APPLICATION NO. S/07/01468/OUT
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.1 Outline planning permission is sought for a residential development on land at 599 - 605 Main Street, Bellshill. The application site is a former steel fabrication works that has been cleared from the site over the past decade since the previous uses were decommissioned. The site is located on Main Street, to the east of Mossend’s principal retail area. A small shopping parade adjoins the site immediately to the west, whilst the site is bounded to the south by an established grouping of residential properties, the east by a recently constructed 3 storey flatted block, comprising of 26 units and to the north and north east by the established industrial area.
1.2 The application is in outline only and is not accompanied by indicative or detailed plans. It is however envisaged that access to the site will be gained from Main Street. A Ground Investigation Report, Environmental Noise Assessment, a Water & Sewarage Services Report and a Phase 1 Habitat Survey and Bat Roost Potential Assessment have been submitted in support of the application.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The site is identified as an Established Industrial Area (IND8) and Other Commercial Uses (RTL9) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 The Transportation Team Leader has raised objections to the application as the minimum junction spacing of 150 metres cannot be achieved at any point along the frontage of the development. However, they have advised that if the application is to be approved, that conditions should be attached in relation to the proposed junction arrangements, the provision of a footway across the existing access and along the full length of the development frontage and visibility splays.
3.2 SEPA raised no objections to the proposal given that the development will drain foul and surface water to the public sewer but advised that confirmation on acceptance of flows be obtained from Scottish Water. They also commented on separate consents required from them in terms of potential controlled waste disposal,
3.3 Scottish Water have confirmed that they can serve the site in terms of foul drainage and potable water and have provisionally accepted the principle of surface water discharging to their sewer. Technical approval can only be given following the granting of planning permission. The Geo- technical Team Leader similarly advised that confirmation should be sought from Scottish Water that they will accept surface water and support sewer diversions to make way for the development and have requested that conditions be attached to the consent requiring surface water to be treated in accordance with the SUDS manual.
3.4 SNH have confirmed that there are no statutory designated sites for nature conservation or for any other natural heritage interests within the application area. They have also advised that they are content with the methodologies carried out for the Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey and protected species surveys at the site. SNH therefore does not object to the application but advises that all the recommendations as stated in part 4 of the report are implemented.
95 3.5 The Conservation and Greening Section have advised that Yellow Bird's nest plants are located on the site and have requested that no site clearance works be permitted until further investigations are held. In addition Conservation and Greening recommend that conditions be imposed which refer to any planting scheme, the installation of a SUDS scheme to treat any surface water run-off and any potential problem of Japanese Knotweed.
3.6 Protective Services have commented that the Site Investigation report submitted with the application is broadly sufficient to demonstrate the stated levels of risk and adequacy of the remediation approach. They have requested that a more detailed SI be submitted with the reserved matters application. In relation to the submitted noise impact assessment, Protective Services have advised that they are satisfied with the methodology used within the report and the recommendations of the report. They have further recommended that a validation report, detailing that the recommendations have been adhered to is submitted prior to the development being occupied.
3.7 Learning and Leisure Services have commented that there would not be sufficient capacity at a local primary to accommodate additional pupils. However, it has been advised that there is sufficient capacity at Noble Primary School, Bellshill Academy and Cardinal Newman High School. In this regard, the Director of Education has indicated that a two classroom extension would be required to be built at a cost of f400,OOO at St Gerards Primary School.
3.8 Scottish Power and British Telecom have expressed no objections to the proposal.
3.9 Following neighbour notification procedures, two letters of representation were received. One was received from a solicitor on behalf of Strockweld Ltd. Strockweld Ltd is a well-established engineering company located within the industrial estate. The points of objection raised by Strockweld Ltd relate to the establishment of residential accommodation adjacent to a manufacturing industrial estate, contrary to good planning directives; periodic contracts require a 24 hour shift pattern at the premises which could give rise to noise complaints by future residents and the proposals do not accord with the local plan zoning for the site. In addition, concerns are raised over parking on Main Street as a result of the adjacent flatted development and concerns that this proposal will only exacerbate the problem.
3.10 The second letter of objection, received from Corus Distribution relates to their 24 hour three shift pattern, which could lead to noise complaints from future residents, and their concerns over safety risks through the introduction of a residential development in this established industrial area.
4. Planninn 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.
4.2 It should be noted that the application raises no strategic issues. This application must therefore be assessed against the relevant development plan policies, which are the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 Policies INDl (Industrial and Business Land Supply), IND8 (Established Industrial Areas), lNDl0 (Assessing Other Developments on Industrial and Business Land), RTL9 (Other Commercial Uses), HSG9 (Assessing Applications for Housing Development), ENV 3 (Vacant and Derelict Land), ENV4 (Contaminated Land), ENV9 (Flooding) and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development), together with other material considerations.
4.3 Policy INDl states that the Council seeks to maintain a 10 year supply of marketable land for industrial and business development promoting, where possible, the re-use of vacant and derelict urban land. Where industrial and business land is identified as surplus to the area's
96 longer-term requirements, the Council will encourage its allocation to appropriate alternative uses. Policy IND 8 seeks to retain the existing character of such areas and supports their continued use where appropriate. The associated local plan text contained in paragraph 4.55 states that this policy also recognises that there may be circumstances where other uses may be acceptable within Industrial and Business Areas, or where redevelopment of a site for an alternative use may be appropriate. Policy INDIO requires a number of criteria to be considered including the following: the extent to which there is a surplus in the land supply for industry and business; whether there is a specific locational requirement for the proposal; and whether the redevelopment would lead to the re-use of vacant and under-utilised land. There are adequate alternative sites for industry within the area to meet current and projected future demand and in view that the site has remained vacant since 2000, the proposed development will lead to the re-use of vacant and under-utilised land. The applicants have provided evidence that the site has been marketed since becoming vacant and I am satisfied that they have demonstrated that the site has no long-term future as an industrial location. Taking the above into account I therefore consider that the proposed use of the site for residential purposes would be in keeping with Policies INDI, IND8 and INDIO.
4.4 Policy RTL9 states that within these areas, the Council will accept the continuation of such uses. While any changes of use or proposed new uses will be considered in light of the other policies contained within the local plan, particular regard should be given to their potential compatibility with surrounding land uses. In terms of the compatibility of the proposal with surrounding land uses, a noise assessment has been carried out and was found to be acceptable by the Pollution Control Team Leader, subject to conditions. Therefore, the proximity of the development to the industrial area and adjacent public house is acceptable. In addition, the character of the area is a combination of industrial, commercial and residential, with residential properties to the south and east of the site, therefore the principle of residential development on the site is acceptable.
4.5 Local Plan Policy HSG9 details criteria against which new housing sites will be assessed. These include: impact on the existing built and natural environment; risk of flooding; design and layout; landscaping, open space and play areas and provision of roads, access and parking. The site has adjoining residential areas to the west, south and east and it is considered that a residential development would be in keeping with the residential character of the adjacent area. It is considered that the existing character and amenity of the area will be enhanced. The site’s dimensions of 0.95 hectares afford the opportunity for medium scale residential development. The proposal is in outline thus layout and design details will be assessed through a reserved matters application. Conditions are proposed to ensure that any development approved meets the Council’s requirements in terms of design and the impact on the surrounding area. I am therefore satisfied that the development would accord in principle with Policy HSG9.
4.6 Policy ENV 3 encourages the re-use of vacant and derelict land, particularly within urban areas, through new uses as proposed by the current application.
4.7 Policy ENV4 is applicable to this proposal in view of the site’s industrial manufacturing history. This policy requires developers to investigate the site conditions of any land which is known or suspected to be contaminated prior to a development being implemented. In this case, the applicant submitted a Ground Investigation Report, which concluded that the site was suitable for residential purposes subject to the implementation of their recommended remedial measures prior to the commencement of the construction of any dwellings. The Protective Services Section are satisfied with the report’s findings and there are a number of outstanding matters to be resolved, however such matters can be addressed through the submission of further reports and this will be secured by suitable planning conditions. Given that this contaminated site can be suitably remediated, it is considered that the proposal fully complies with the objectives of Policy ENV 4.
4.8 Policy ENV9 seeks that applicants provide a statement where a development is proposed in areas with a history of, or potential for flooding. This statement should identify measures to
97 ameliorate the effects of flooding, both within and outwith the site. The applicants provided a drainage and flood risk assessment, The Geotechnical Team Leader is satisfied with the findings of the drainage and flood risk assessment and notes that the application is in outline only and no information is available in respect of a detailed housing layout. It is recommended that further detailed drainage information requires to be submitted with any reserved matters application. With regard to SEPA, they note that the development will drain foul and surface water to the public sewer and have advised that confirmation on acceptance of flows be obtained from Scottish Water. It is considered that this matter can be suitably addressed at the reserved matters stage and this matter is secured through the imposition of suitable planning conditions. I am therefore content that the proposal accords with Policy ENV9.
4.9 Policy TR13 sets out criteria for the Council to consider when assessing applications for development. These criteria include traffic generation and the impact of the development on road traffic circulation and road safety. The Transportation Team Leader has raised concerns in relation to the proposal on the grounds that the required junction spacing on a road of this type can not be achieved. It has however been recommended by the Transportation Team Leader that the minimum access requirements to the site be via a 10.5m radius junction arrangement located 70m east of the western boundary of the site. Furthermore it is recommended that a junction visibility of 9.0m by 120m is provided in both directions onto the A775 Main Street, and that the Council's residential parking standards are complied with. As the application is in outline, it is recommended that the requirements of the Transportation Team Leader be covered through the imposition of suitable planning conditions. The proposal is therefore considered acceptable when assessed with respect to policies TRI 3 and HSGI 1.
4.10 In terms of Protective Services comments in relation to the noise impact conditions are recommended which ensure that the mitigations measures specified be design into the reserved matters application.
4.1 1 In relation to the comments received from Conservation and Greening, it is proposed to attach a suitable condition for the submission of a further more detailed Protected Species survey and the submission of a landscaping scheme in association with the reserved matters application.
4.12 The request from Learning and Leisure Services for a financial contribution for a two class room extension at St Gerards Primary School is considered to be unreasonable in this instance as a contribution was not requested in respect of the flatted dwellings to the east. In addition the development is likely be flatted dwellings which are less likely to appeal to the family market.
4.13 A material consideration in the assessment of the application is the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan (NLLP). The site is identified as Policy HCFI (Protecting Residential Areas and Community Facilities. The zoning of the site in the Finalised Draft NLLP provides further justification for residential development at this site.
4.14 With regards to the points of objection relating to noise and incompatibility of the proposed use, I would comment that although there are established industrial users within close proximity of the site, the applicant has provided sufficient information to satisfy Pollution Control that any noise issues can be dealt with adequately. In addition, as noted above, the site lies within an area where there is a range of uses, and this is reflected in the policy zoning of the site. Furthermore, the access and parking arrangements are satisfactory. Therefore it is considered that a residential development on this site is suitable and I cannot support the objector's concerns in this respect.
4.15 In conclusion, this outline residential application has to be assessed against the relevant policies of the Development Plan unless there are material considerations which indicate otherwise. In this instance I am satisfied that justification exists for departing from the approved zoning of the site for industrial and commercial purposes. Following detailed assessment of the application, I consider that the proposed development is acceptable when considered against the relevant
98 policies of the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 and Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The proposed development will positively enhance the landscape and visual impact of this site and that the conditions proposed can direct the development in a satisfactory manner. I therefore recommend that the application be granted subject to conditions.
99 Application No: Sl081007721REM
Date Registered: 19th May 2008
Applicant: Mr & Mrs M Dougan 147 Mill Road Allanton Shotts ML7 5DD
Agent Alistair MacFarlane RlBA 84 Buchanan Drive Cam buslang Glasgow G72 8BA
Development: Erection of Detached Dwellinghouse
Location: Land At 147 Mill Road Allanton
Ward: 12 Fortissat: Councillors Cefferty, Robertson and McMillan
Grid Reference: 284582657684
File Reference: SIPLIBFI3126IGMSIGF
Site History: S/04/00781/OUT Erection of a Dwellinghouse (In Outline) Approved 15th July 2005
Development Plan: The site is zoned as HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: None
Representations: Three letters of representation received
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
100 PCANNINO APPLICATION MO SI 08 f 00772 I REM ERECTION OF DETACI-IED DWELLINOHOUSE LAND AT 143 MILL ROAD. ALLAMON, SHOTTS Jit Repeseniaan SLe area = 0 08 ha
101 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, dormer faces, sides and roofs shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved under the terms of this condition. Notwithstanding this requirement the materials shall reflect the colour and texture of those used on the existing adjacent house.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
3. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
4. That 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.
5. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation report required in terms of Condition 4 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.
6. 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.
7. That no trees within the area hatched GREEN on the approved plans shall be lopped, topped or felled and no shrubs or hedges, shall be removed, without the approval in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of nature conservation and visual amenity of the surrounding green belt area.
102 8. That before the development hereby permitted starts tree protection measures in accordance with British Standards BS 5837 shall be erected along the drip line of the trees, as shown on the approved plans, and shall not be removed without the approval in writing of the Planning Authority.
Reason: To protect the area of woodland within the site.
9. That no excavations or trenches, for the laying of services or for any other purpose, shall be dug within the area of ground which lies below the canopy of any of the trees which are, partly or wholly, within the site, as marked GREEN on the approved plans.
Reason: To ensure that there is no damage to the existing trees.
10. That before the dwellinghouse hereby approved is occupied the associated parking and manoeuvring area hatched ORANGE on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained, surfaced in a material which the Planning Authority has approved in writing before the start of surfacing work and clearly marked out, and shall, thereafter, be maintained as parking and manoeuvring areas.
Reason: In order that vehicles can enter and leave the site in forward gear and to ensure adequate parking provision.
11. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the plans stamped approved as part of this permission.
Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 1gth May 2008
Amended plans received 15'h August, 2008, 27'h February 2009
Protected Species Survey received from Wild Surveys August 2008, email received from Wild Surveys 31" March 2009
Memo from Transportation received 7'h July 2008 Two Memos from Conservation and Greening received 23'' June and 17'h November 2008
Letter from Scottish Water received 5'h February 2009
Two Letters from Mr & Mrs G Leckie, 151 Mill Road, Allanton, Shotts, ML7 5DD received 6'h and 26'h June 2008
Two Letters from Mr & Mrs J Ward, 153 Mill Road, Allanton, Shotts, ML7 5DD received 30thMay and 3rd July 2008
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Graham Smith at 01698 274104.
Date: 29 April 2009
103 APPLICATION NO. S1081007721REM
REPORT
Description of Site and Proposal
Planning permission is sought for the erection of a one and a half storey detached dwellinghouse at land at 147 Mill Road, Allanton, The application site is located within the side garden area of an existing two storey dwellinghouse, and comprises of grassland with a number of mature trees on the northern and eastern boundaries. Residential dwellings bound the site to the east, south and west and to the north there is open space and woodland. Outline planning permission exists for a house plot on this site which was approved subject to conditions on the 12'h June 2005.
The proposal is for a one and a half storey dwellinghouse containing 3 bedrooms, a study, lounge, family room, kitchen and garage. The dwelling would be 20.7 metres in width, 13.2 metres in depth and 7.4 metres at the highest point of the pitched roof. The proposal includes dormer windows on the front and rear elevations. The applicant proposes to fell one tree at the front boundary to form an access driveway retaining all the remaining trees.
Development Plan
The Southern Area Local Plan 2008 identifies the site as HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas).
Consultations and Representations
My Transportation Team Leader raised no objections and made comments relating to the access to the dwelling.
My Conservation and Greening Team Leader made comments relating to the retention and protection of the mature trees within the site and requested a protected species survey be undertaken. In addition to the survey further inspection of one of the trees by the applicant's ecologist found no evidence of bats.
Scottish Water raised no objections but make comment relating to requirements for connection to their infrastructure.
Two letters of representation were received from the owners of 153 Mill Road and two were received from 151 Mill Road.
The points of objection raised were:
i. Granting permission for this application would increase the amount of dwellings accessing Mill Road to 12 when originally there were only 4. This application would increase the volume of traffic and construction vehicles using the dirt track access which is not adequate to deal with current levels and is considered to be hazardous to pedestrian safety especially during wet weather. The dirt track would deteriorate further with the additional traffic. ii. The access to the property contains two entry points with impaired visibility and this is likely to increase risk to traffic and pedestrians. At present 153 Mill Road experiences access problems with cars parked in the lane and using the driveway for turning. Access to the proposed dwelling should be shared with the existing dwelling at 147 Mill Road and the position of the garage and dwelling should be revised to accommodate this. iii. Ground levels at the proposed access are such that the development could result in root
104 damage to the mature trees along the northern boundary. iv. 153 Mill Road has experienced drainage problems with the neighbouring septic tank and soakaway at 155 Mill Road and is concerned about further adverse drainage issues. v. Previous developments on Mill Road have involved felling mature trees and while the applicant proposes to retain the existing trees, concerns remain that the proposal will damage them and the surrounding area.
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 in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008. The site is zoned as Policy HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas). Policies HSG 10 (Infill Housing Development) and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications 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/04/00781/OUT).
4.2 Policy HSG 7 states that the council will seek to protect the established character and amenity of existing housing areas. In principle a dwellinghouse at this site is acceptable. Policy HSG 10 states that the Council will take account of the following criteria: overall impact on character and amenity of the surrounding area and adjacent properties, open space provision, detailed design elements, and access/parking facilities. It is not considered that the proposal will detract from the established character and amenity of the surrounding dwellings. It is considered that the design and layout is acceptable. The rear garden depth is short of the minimum 10 metres usually required for this type of proposal however the plot benefits from substantial private garden ground to the side and a deeper front garden. In this instance open space is to the rear of the site with the mature treeline to the front which the applicant proposes to retain the open space and garden ground proposed is considered to be acceptable. One of the trees at the front is diseased and is likely to collapse therefore removal of this is considered to be acceptable however given the remaining trees are in good condition I recommend conditions are attached retaining these. There is an absence of overlooking windows. Access and parking is considered below in paragraph 4.3.
4.3 Policy TR13 sets criteria relating to road and pedestrian safety, parking and servicing. My Transportation Team Leader has no objections subject to conditions over a single access and the grass verge at the front to be retained. The proposal was amended to incorporate a single access which would be taken between two of the existing trees to be retained at the front. Taking access from the front in this instance is considered to be acceptable as properties bound the site on either side.
4.4 A material consideration is the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan, however, the zoning and policy position remains unaltered from the Adopted Plan.
4.5 On the grounds of the objections raised, I would comment as follows:
I. The access from Mill Road to the proposed dwelling at this site has already been accepted under the outline planning permission. The impact of another dwelling using this access is not considered to be significant. II. The proposal now contains a single access driveway and as mentioned in paragraph 4.3 this is considered to be acceptable. Obstruction of the objector’s driveway by vehicles parked in the lane is not a material planning consideration. iii, v The proposal involves felling a tree which is diseased and highly likely to collapse. The applicant proposes to form a driveway outwith the canopy of the remaining healthy trees and I recommend conditions to ensure these are protected. iv. Drainage issues and flood risk are not major considerations to this application.
105 4.6 In conclusion I am satisfied that the dwellinghouse is acceptable from a planning viewpoint and that the proposal is therefore in accordance with policies HSG7, HSGIO and TR13 of the Southern Area Local Plan 2008. Notwithstanding the objections raised by the neighbours and for the reasons stated above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.
4.7 It should be noted that one of the objectors has 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.
106 Application No: S/08/01646/FUL
Date Registered: 28th November 2008
Applicant: Tesco Stores Ltd Clo Agent
Agent Development Planning Partnership LLP The Hatrack 144 St Vincent Street Glasgow G2 5LQ
Development: Creation of Car Park
Location: Land At 275 Main Street Bellshill ML4 IAJ
Ward: 15 Mossend and Holytown: Councillors J Coyle, Delaney and McKeown
Grid Reference: 273488660296
File Reference: SIPLIAMC LIGF
Site History: 355/79 Erection of Supermarket (in Outline) - Granted 6th September 1979 394/81 Erection of Supermarket - Granted 4th November 1981 97/10536/FUL Alteration to Shopfront - Granted 28th October 1997
Development Plan: Southern Area Local Plan 2008 zoned RTL5 Town Centre Areas
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: No external consultations
Representations: One letter of representation received
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
107 Prcduced by ~hlsmsp I$ repmduCedfrom PLANNING APPLICATION No S I08 I01646 I FUL North Lanarkshire Council OrdnanceSuwe" matem Envimnmntal SeNICe6, ufl, me p*lm(5%10"0' ~mnancesurveyooWham OF CAR PARK dtheCannolCidHeiMalertys Smo wry OH= 0 Cmrm copyrghl LmaL*OW& LAND AT 275 MAIN STREET, BELLSHILL ,.Pl~"CbO" nlrlnger Clwn Clprp~md may ~eacm "1 CWll PtOCrndlOBl Site area 33 pmri*mm Representation = 0 ha le101698 274274 ~snhLawkshrr CdmcI * lax 01E38 A 403053 'wO2338f ZWB
108 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 is brought into use all the parking and manoeuvring areas shown on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained, surfaced in the materials shown on the approved plans and clearly marked out, and shall, thereafter, be maintained as parking and manoeuvring areas.
Reason: In the interests of traffic safety.
3. That a visibility splay, measured from the road channel, of 4.5 metres by 60 metres shall be provided to the left of the vehicular access and 4.5 metres by 30 metres to the right of the access (to the junction of Main Street) and before the development hereby permitted is brought into use, everything exceeding 1.05 metres in height above the road channel level shall be removed from the sight line areas and, thereafter, nothing exceeding 1.05 metres in height above road channel level shall be planted, placed, erected, or allowed to grow, within these sight line areas.
Reason: In the interests of traffic safety.
4. That before the development hereby permitted is brought into use, the existing vehicular access shall be closed off and a footway reinstated to the specification of the Roads Authority and all vehicular access to the development site hereby permitted shall be via the new vehicular access which shall be constructed with 6 metre wide radius kerbs.
Reason: In the interests of traffic safety.
5. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- 466402/22, 1004(PFS)001, 1004(PFS)OO2.
Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.
6. That PRIOR to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) in terms of the relevant ClRlA Manual and other advice published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA). If the area of ground illustrated for the SUDS feature is inadequate for the purpose, a revised layout drawing for this part of the proposed development shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority PRIOR to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the said Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater, and in the interests of the amenity of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site respectively.
7. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 6 above shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development and shall be completed before the 1st flat is occupied. Before any of the flatted properties hereby permitted are occupied, a certificate (signed by a chartered Civil Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS scheme has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans.
109 Reason: To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the interests of the amenity of existing and future residents.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received 28'h November 2008; amended plans received Ilth February 2009
Memo from Transportation Manager received 23'' March 2009 Memo from Head of Property received 18'h December 2008 Memo from Geotechnical Team Leader received !jthMarch 2009
Letter from John Devlin, 287 Hattonrigg Road, Bellshill, ML4 1LY received 6'h March 2009
Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000 Southern Area Local Plan 2008
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Alistair Maclean at 01698 274105.
Date: 29 April 2009
110 APPLICATION NO. S/08/01646/FUL
REPORT
1. Descriotion of Site and Proposal
1.I This application is for the formation of a car park on the site of the former Somerfield building. The development will create 71 car parking spaces, including spaces for disabled persons, as well as a pedestrian access for the proposed Tesco store (ref 05/00502/FUL) which will be located to the north of the car park.
1.2 The site contains the building formerly occupied by Somerfield and the small car park to the east of the store. By comparison with much of Bellshill Main Street, this is a modern development, constructed in the early 1980s. The site is flat, is bounded to the north by a service area, to the west by retail properties on Main Street, to the south (across the road) by mixed development, predominantly retail at ground level and to the east by Council Social Work Off ices.
2. Develooment Plan
2.1 The site is zoned as RTL5 Town Centre Areas in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 The Transportation Team Leader has no objections to this development subject to conditions re access and provision of spaces for disabled persons. He also commented that the layout could be improved to create more spaces.
3.2 The Geotechnical Team Leader has noted that there are no incidences of flooding in the vicinity but has indicated that further information will be required to assess the drainage proposals for the site.
3.3 No objections were received from the Head of Property Services. There is a lease issue but that is not a material planning consideration.
3.4 One letter of objection was received from a Bellshill resident. The objection relates to the demolition of the store formerly occupied by Somerfield which will leave a gaping hole in Main Street and also offer an access route to the Tesco store which was frowned upon in the original application as this would impinge on the fabric of Main Street. The Council should refuse permission for the demolition and insist that Tesco refurbish and let out the building to maintain the provision of retail outlets in Bellshill rather than allowing Tesco to include a petrol filling station next to their supermarket.
4. Planninn Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. This application is not of strategic significance and therefore only requires to be assessed against the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.
4.2 The site is zoned as Policy RTL5 (Town Centre Areas). Policy TR13 (Assessing the Transport Implications of Development) is also relevant to the assessment of this application.
111 4.3 Policy RTL5 seeks to protect and enhance the retail and commercial function of town centres by identifying and promoting the town centre development opportunities outlined in Schedule RTLI, among other things. The development of the superstore by Tesco, which was granted permission in December 2006 will involve the removal of a public car park in Emma Jay Road. Alternative provision was to be made off North Road accessed from the same access as the main Tesco car park. Tesco now propose to construct a Filling Station in the site earmarked for the replacement public car park and to form a car park on the site to which this application refers. In additions this car park will be closer to the car park in Emma Jay Road which is now closed. The new car park will provide around 20 additional spaces over the present car park on Emma Jay Road and will be closer to the town centre shopping area. This proposal therefore accords with this policy.
4.4 Under Policy TR13, when determining applications for new development, the Council will consider amongst other things, the level of traffic generated and its impact on the environment and adjoining land uses, the impact of the development on road traffic circulation and road safety, and the provisions made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. The development of a car park on this site will replace a nearby public car park which has recently closed. Parking in Bellshill Town Centre is over-subscribed thus any proposal to boost public parking provision is welcome. This proposal accords with this policy.
4.5 The Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan is a material consideration, however the zoning and policy position remain unchanged.
4.6 Following the Transportation Team Leader’s comments (see paragraph 3.1 above) revised plans were submitted which took account of his comments, increasing the amount of spaces to 71 (formerly 69) and providing 4 spaces for disabled persons.
4.7 It is considered that in this case the issues raised by the Council’s Geotechnical Section can be satisfactorily addressed by conditions.
4.8 With regard to the letter of objection, the demolition of the former Somerfield store does not require planning consent, nevertheless, I do not consider this will leave a “gaping hole” as there is already a sizeable gap in this area between buildings at either side of Emma Jay Road. The pedestrian access route was a requirement of the consent for the superstore. The demolition of the former Somerfield unit and its replacement with a car park is in accord with this condition. The development of the site as a car park will also be a more appropriate replacement for the Emma Jay Road car park being located closer to that car park and will be closer to the town centre shopping area. I do not consider the impact on the Main Street frontage to be unacceptable. The former Somerfield store is a relatively modern building when compared to much of Bellshill Town Centre which is more traditional in form. Conditions will be imposed to ensure landscaping and material finishes to the Tesco store which will address the visual impact. The Council cannot insist that the former Somerfield store is refurbished or retained. Tesco signed a Section 75 agreement that the former Somerfield store could not be used for convenience shopping upon the opening of their new superstore, or December 2009, whichever was the earlier. This agreement would not be contravened if the store was demolished.
4.9 In conclusion, the proposal accords with Policies RTL5 and TR13 of the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 as well as the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. None of the consultees have raised any objections to this proposal, therefore, notwithstanding the objection, I recommend that consent be granted subject to conditions.
112 Application No: S/08/01719/FUL
Date Registered: 16'h January 2009
Applicant: Mr and Mrs J Crisp 13 Snead View Motherwell MLI 5GL
Kanak Bose LTD 80 High Street lnnerleithen EH44 6HF
Development: Erection of One and a Half Storey Detached Dwellinghouse and Detached Garage
Location: Land Adjacent to 236 Jerviston Street, New Stevenson Motherwell MLI 4HT
Ward: 17 Motherwell North: Councillors McAuley, McKenna, Nolan and Stewart
Grid Reference: 276060658799
File Reference: SIPLIBF/5/76/CCAIGF
Site History: e S/07/009961FUL Erection of Dwellinghouse and Garage - Granted on 30th July 2007 e S/04/00261/REM Erection of Dwellinghouse and Garage - Granted 30th April 2004 e S/01/00343/OUT Construction of Dwellinghouse (in Outline) - Granted 5th June 2001
Development Plan: The site is zoned as HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: Scotland Gas Networks (No Objections) Scottish Power (No Objections) Scottish Water (No Objections)
Representations: One letter of representation received
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
113 114 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:- KB 025 01 REV D and Location Plan KB 025 00.
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, dormer faces, sides and roofs shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved under the terms of this condition. Not withstanding these requirements the roof of the house and the face and sides of the dormers shall be finished in dark grey slate or concrete flat profile rooftiles. The external walls of the house shall be finished in light coloured buff brick or render.
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. Any walls or fences shall thereafter be erected in accordance with such approval.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
5. 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 interest of the amenity of future residents.
6. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation report required in terms of Condition 5 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 that the site is free of contamination in the interest of the amenity of future residents.
7. 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.
115 8. That BEFORE any works start on site, the applicant must confirm in writing to the Planning Authority that the foul drainage can be connected to the public sewer in accordance with the requirements of Scottish Water. The surface water must be treated in accordance with the principles of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland published by ClRlA in March 2000.
Reason: To prevent groundwater or surface water contamination in the interests of environmental and amenity protection.
9. Notwithstanding the terms of Condition 4 above, and before the dwellinghouse hereby permitted becomes occupied, a 1.8 metre high close boarded timber fence shall be erected along the boundary marked GREEN and a 1 metre high close boarded timber fence shall be erected along the boundary marked YELLOW on the approved drawing number Location Plan KB 025 00 and shall thereafter be retained at all times to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.
Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.
10. Notwithstanding the requirements of Condition 4 above and before the occupation of the dwellinghouse hereby permitted, the proposed boundary wall along the frontage of the site shall be constructed in materials to match those of the dwellinghouse hereby approved, to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity of the surrounding residential area.
11 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 safeguard the residential amenity of the area.
12. That before the dwellinghouse hereby permitted is occupied, all the parking and manoeuvring areas shown on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained, surfaced in material which the Planning Authority has approved in writing before the start of surfacing work and clearly marked out, and shall, thereafter, be maintained as parking and manoeuvring areas.
Reason: In order to ensure adequate parking facilities within the site.
13. That before the dwellinghouse hereby permitted is occupied, a dropped kerb vehicular access with a maximum width of 3 metres shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the Roads Authority.
Reason: In the interest of traffic and pedestrian safety
14. That the proposed driveway be paved/surfaced for the first 2 metres from the heel of the footway in an impervious material to be approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of road safety and to stop deleterious material being carried onto the public road.
15. 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 that expressly authorised by this permission.
Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the site and the general area.
116 16. 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.
17. That before the development hereby permitted starts, the existing mature oak tree hatched ORANGE on the approved plans, shall be hand cleared to remove all debris material around the base of the tree, and tree protection measures in accordance with British Standard BS 5837:2005 shall be erected along the drip line of the tree, and confirmation in writing shall be provided to this effect to the Planning Authority. These measures shall not be removed without the approval in writing of the Planning Authority.
Reason: In order to protect the mature tree which will be retained.
18. That no excavations or trenches, for the laying of services or for any other purpose, shall be dug within the area of ground which lies below the canopy of any of the trees which are, partly or wholly, within site, as marked BLUE on the approved plans.
Reason: To ensure that there is no damage to the existing tree.
Background Papers:
Apflication form and plans received 16'h January 2009 and amended plans received 20th and 25' March 2009
Letter from Jason Macready & June Gilmour, 236 Jerviston Street, New Stevenson, MLI 4HT, received on 18th August 2008
Memo from Transportation Team Leader received 23rdJanuary 2009 Memo from Head of Land Services (Conservation and Greening Manager) received lgth February 2008 Memos from Head of Protective Services received 14thApril 2009
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Colin Campbell on 01698 27 41 18.
Date: 29 April 2009
117 APPLICATION NO. S/08/01719/FUL
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.I This application seeks planning permission for the erection of a one and a half storey detached dwellinghouse and a detached garage at the land south of 236 Jerviston Street, Motherwell. The application site is a rectangular woodland area measuring approximately 2000 square metres with a line of mature trees along the southern boundary. The proposal site is bounded by a bungalow to the north, a single storey detached dwelling with attic accommodation with a conservatory to the west, open space to the south and other residential properties to the east of the site.
1.2 The proposed dwelling will have a footprint of approximately 200 square metres and will be L shaped in design. The house will measure 23 metres in length, 12 metres in width, and 7.5 metres in height at the highest point of the pitched roof. It should be noted that there are underground mining works within the site, however, the proposed dwellinghouse does not encroach within this area. It is also proposed to erect a detached garage which will be located approximately 3 metres from the front of the proposed dwelling and shall be parallel to the southern boundary of the site. The garage will measure 60 square metres and 6.3 metres in height. This proposed garage shall comprise of a pitched roof and will have a storage room within the attic space above. The dwellinghouse and garage shall be finished in a light coloured buff brick or render material with dark grey rooftiles The proposed dwelling will have a rear garden measuring 10 metres in length and a front garden which will set the dwellinghouse back approximately 40 metres from the adjacent main road. The applicant proposed to form a new access point and this shall be taken via a 3 metre wide dropped kerb arrangement from Jerviston Street.
1.3 The Committee should note that planning permission was granted for a similar proposal on this site (Ref. S/07/00996/FUL) which was granted on 30thJLJJY 2007 and to the plot of land west of the site (ref. S/05/01511/REM) granted 14 December 2005, the latter of which has since been constructed.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The site is zoned as Policy HSG7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 Scottish Power and Scotland Gas Networks have no objections to the proposal.
3.2 Scottish Water have made no response to their consultation.
3.3 The Transportation Section have no objections to the proposed development.
3.4 The Protective Services Section have made comments in relation to the submission of a site investigation report, restrictions on noise from construction works, dust emissions, the treatment of waste materials removed from the site and mining works and lighting within the site.
3.5 The Head of Land Services (Conservation and Greening Manager) has raised no objections to the proposal but commented that any trees around the peripheral of the site which are removed should be replaced with native tree species of local origin on a two for each lost basis. In addition, the applicant should confirm that there is no Japanese knotweed within 7 metres of the proposed development.
118 3.6 There has been one letter of objection received following the neighbour notification procedure. The points raised can be summarised as follows:
a) The position of the house is such that a majority of the frontage appears to be looking onto the adjacent property at 236 Jerviston Street. The objector suggests that the majority of the dwelling should be predominantly face onto Jerviston Street which would be in keeping with the other three properties on the street. The objector states that ample ground available at the rear of the plot to extend the area of the proposed dwelling and reduce the part of house that projects forward thus resulting in the majority of the house facing garden onto Jerviston Street . b) The height of the proposal is deemed excessive and the objector’s property would be affected by the over imposing size of the property and the reduced amount of light that will be received to their dwelling. c) Planning permission has already been granted for an excessively high property at 1 Cobbleton Road which is unsightly when viewed from Jerviston Street. d) The objector emphasises that the properties on Jerviston Street should compliment each other in terms of aesthetics. e) The roof terrace to the rear of the property would affect privacy levels at the objectors rear garden area.
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. The application raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed in terms of the local plan policies in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.
4.2 The site is zoned as Policy HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas). Policies HSG 10 (Infill Housing Development, ENV 10 (Trees and Woodland Management) and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) are also relevant to this development.
4.3 Policy HSG 7 states that the Council will seek to protect the established character and amenity of existing housing areas. Taking account of the site history and the aims of this policy, the principle of a dwellinghouse at this site is acceptable subject to meeting the criteria contained in Policy HSG 10.
4.4 Policy HSG 10 states that the Council will take account of the following criteria: overall impact on character and amenity of the surrounding area and adjacent properties, open space provision, detailed design elements, and accesdparking facilities. In assessing the impact of the proposal on the character and amenity of the surrounding area, it is considered that the proposed development in terms of the overall design, scale, materials and style is acceptable in this residential setting. The site is predominantly bounded by residential dwellings which vary in style, size and material finish. The applicant proposes to construct the proposal in a light coloured buff brick or render material with dark grey rooftiles which will be in keeping with the character of the area. The proposal is considered to be in keeping with the scale and character of the surrounding residential area. A detailed window to window distance test was undertaken in relation to the proposed dormers to the rear of the proposal facing onto the existing sun room at 1 Cobbleton Road and 236 Jerviston Street. The test confirmed that the proposal is within acceptable limits and there shall be no overlooking or privacy issues. Furthermore it should be noted that the previously approved scheme showed the position of the dwellinghouse in the same location and while there was no upper floor of the house at the rear elevation, there was a balcony which would have a similar degree of overlooking as the proposal in question. There will be no privacy or overlooking issues with regards to the other neighbouring
119 properties within the surrounding area. There is no detrimental impact to the amount of daylightkunlight of the surrounding dwellings given the configuration of and sufficient distance between the existing dwellings and this proposal. A detailed sunlightldaylight test was undertaken and passed with regards to the impact of the proposed dwellinghouse in relation to the property at 236 Jerviston Street. In terms of proposed garden ground dimensions of the proposed house, these comply with the Council’s adopted Open Space Guidelines. Access and parking is considered below in paragraph 4.3.
4.5 A further local plan policy of relevance is Policy ENV 10 which state that the Council will seek to resist development proposals which could adversely affect woodland areas, promote the planting of sustainable woodlands at appropriate locations and encourage the sustainable management, of woodlands, where appropriate. As stated above in paragraph 3.5, the Conservation and Greening Manager stated that any trees around the peripheral of the site which are removed should be replaced with native tree species of local origin on a two for each lost basis. The previous application (Ref. S/07/00996/FUL) did not require any trees to be retained within the site, however, a condition is recommended stating that the mature tree to the rear of the site should be retained. An advisory note would be attached to any permission stating that there is the presence of Japanese knotweed within the vicinity of the proposed development.
4.6 In assessing the transportation implications of a development, Policy TR13 is a material consideration and states that the Council will take account of various criteria including the impact of the development on road traffic circulation and road safety and the provision made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. The applicant proposes a 3.5 metre wide driveway with access being taken from Jerviston Street. The applicant has provided details showing a turning area to be located adjacent to the proposed garage which will allow for manoeuvrability within the site allowing vehicles to enter and leave in forward gear. The Transportation Section confirmed they have no objections to this arrangement. A condition has been imposed in order that a dropped kerb vehicular access with a maximum width of 3 metres shall be constructed prior to the occupation of the dwellinghouse. As such, it is therefore considered that the application accords with Policy TR 13.
4.7 A material consideration is the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan, however, the zoning and policy position remains unaltered from the Adopted Plan.
4.8 With regard to the consultation response received from the Protective Services Section, a condition is recommended to ensure the applicant submits a comprehensive site investigation report. In addition, an advisory note would be attached to any permission in relation to construction works, waste materials and lighting with regards to the application site and proposal.
4.9 On the grounds of the objections raised, I would comment as follows:
a) It is considered that the position of the proposed dwelling is acceptable and complies with the Council’s minimum open space guidelines. Furthermore, the streetscape at this location has no uniform building line or spacing and as detailed in paragraph 4.2 above, the surrounding properties vary in size, style and design. Given the confinements and layout of the site it is therefore, considered that the positioning of the proposed dwelling is considered to be acceptable in this case. b) As noted in paragraph 4.2 above, the surrounding properties within the vicinity of the area vary in height and the proposed dwelling is similar in height to the property west of the site at 1 Cobbleton Road. The proposal shall not prevent any loss of light to the objector’s property as a detailed in Paragraph 4.4 above. c) The property at 1 Cobbleton Road was granted planning permission on its own merits and comprised of a plot size similar to the current application site. In this case however, the design of the house is considered to be improved than the originally approved scheme.
120 d) As stated in paragraph 4.2, there are varying designs and styles of properties throughout the area and it is considered that the aesthetics of the proposal shall compliment the neighbouring properties and shall not be of any detrimental effect to the surrounding area. e) The plans were amended to replace the proposed roof terrace with a dormer window. It is considered that the proposed dormer window will not cause any overlooking or privacy issues with regards to the objectors property at 236 Jerviston Street.
4.10 In conclusion, the application complies with Policies HSG 7, HSG 10, ENV 10 and TR 13 of the development plan in terms of the acceptability of the design, scale, layout, access and the impact upon the character and amenity of the neighbouring properties and the proposal generally accords with the Council’s Open Space Guidelines. Notwithstanding the objection received and for the reasons outlined above, I therefore recommend that planning permission is granted subject to conditions.
121 Application No: S/09/00101/FUL
Date Registered: 23rd March 2009
Applicant: Mr Scott Passmore Clo Agent
Agent DTA Chartered Architects Ltd 9 Montgomery Street East Kilbride G74 4JS
Development: Construction of Two Storey Terraced Dwellinghouse
Location: Land At 28 Clark Street Newmains ML2 9DS
Ward: 19 Murdostoun: Councillors Martin, McKendrick, Shevlin and Taggart
Grid Reference: 281897656440
File Reference: SIP L/RMC/GF
Site History: No relevant site history
Development Plan: The site is zoned as HSG7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: Scottish Water (No Response) Scotland Gas Networks (No Objections) Scottish Power (No Objections)
Representations: Three letters of representation received
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
122 Pvduced by PVSNNINO APPLICATION NR SI 09 I UUlOlI F U. twrl Lrr-e Cwnol COMSTWCTION OF A TWO STOREY TERRACED MUNOHOUSE IAND AT 28 CLAM STREET, KWMAINS *( 01698 273174 Rapresentrtlm Sire area = ha * 0 64 *X oiem 403033
123 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 and finish of all external materials to be used, including roof tiles, wall finish, door, window details and gutters and downpipes, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Notwithstanding what is shown on the approved plans, the dwelling hereby approved shall be finished in materials to match the adjoining dwelling at No. 28 Clark Street 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 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 Any walls or fences shall thereafter be erected in accordance with such approval.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
4. Notwithstanding the terms of Condition 3 above and before the dwellinghouse hereby permitted becomes occupied, a 1.8 metre high TIMBER fence shall be erected along the boundary marked ORANGE on the approved plans and shall thereafter be retained at all times to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.
5. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers: L(O-)OI, L(O)OIA, L(2-)02, L(2)03, L(2)04B, L(2)05A, L(2)06A, L(2)07 and L(2)08.
Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.
6 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.
7 That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 6;, 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.
124 8 That BEFORE any works start on site, the applicant must confirm in writing to the Planning Authority that the foul drainage can be connected to the public sewer in accordance with the requirements of Scottish Water. The surface water must be treated in accordance with the principles of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland published by ClRlA in March 2000.
Reason: To prevent groundwater or surface water contamination in the interests of environmental and amenity protection.
Background Papers:
Apflication form and plans received 2ndFebruary 2009 and amended plans received 12'h and 24' February 2009
Letter from Scottish Power received 14'h April 2009 Letter from Scotland Gas Networks received 17'h April 2009 Memo from Transportation Team Leader received 22ndApril 2009 Memo from Head of Protective Services received 8'h April 2009
Letter from R. Coulter, 2 Princess Square, Newmains, ML2 9DP received 2Eith February 2009 Letter from Matthew Mooney, 5 Princess Square, Wishaw, ML2 9DP received February 2009. Letter from Stephen Cassidy, 26 Clark Street, Newmains, received 2ndMarch 2009
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Gary McEwan at 01698 2741 17.
Date 29 April 2009
125 APPLICATION NO. S1091001011FUL
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.1 Planning permission is sought for the construction of a two-storey, terraced dwellinghouse in the side garden of 28 Clark Street, Newmains. The application site is located within an established residential area comprising of terraced dwellings. The site is bounded by residential dwellings to the north and south, an area of public open space to the west and Clark Street to the east, The site comprises of a two storey end terraced dwelling which sits within a large plot. There is associated garden ground to the side and rear of the existing dwelling.
1.2 The proposal involves the subdivision of the garden ground to form an additional house plot to side of the existing house. The plot measures 53l.square metres with the site measuring 11.I metres in width at its widest point at its eastern boundary and 7.7 metres in width at the narrowest point at its western boundary. The proposed dwelling would be 7 metres wide, 10.3 metres long and 7.7 metres high with a front garden depth of 9.6 metres and a rear garden depth of approximately 11.1 metres. The dwelling will be of a design to match the adjoining terraced dwellings and finished in materials to match the existing house.
1.3 A planning application for the change of use of open space to garden ground and the erection of a two storey side and single storey rear extension (Ref: 01/01249/FUl-I; was granted permission at the Planning and Environment Committee on 12 December 2001.
2. DeveloPment Plan
2.1 The site is zoned as Policy HSG7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 Scotland Power and Scotland Gas Networks have no objections to the proposed development.
3.2 The Protective Services Section have commented that the construction hours of noise producing works should be limited and suitable dust measures put in place. Furthermore, they have requested that a site investigation survey should be submitted due to presence of historical mining activities within the locality and any necessary remediation work be completed prior to the commencement of development.
3.3 The Traffic and Transportation Team Leader commented that the applicant would require to provide three in-curtilage parking spaces accessed via a dropped kerb footway arrangement. The driveway should be located along the frontage of the site boundary and should have a visibility splay of 2.5 by 20 metres.
3.4 Three letters of representation have been received in relation to this application following the neighbour notification procedure. The grounds of their representation can be summarised as follows:
a) The boundary fence between No.’s 26 and 28 Clark Street shall be relocated to accommodate the proposed house and the objectors’ title deeds show that the fence is in the correct place and he is unwilling to relocate it. b) The proposal will overshadow the rear and front garden areas and driveway of 26
126 Clark Street. c) The proposal will affect privacy levels at No. 26 Clark Street as a result of the proposed windows on the north elevation of the dwellinghouse. d) The distance between 26 Clark Street and the proposed dwelling will be absolute minimal and would affect the value of 26 Clark Street. e) On-street parking on Clark Street is limited and the proposal will exacerbate this matter further. 9 The owners at No's 1 to 5 Princess Square have not been neighbour notified.
4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions are made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations state otherwise. The proposal raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed against Local Plan Policies.
4.2 The application site is zoned under Policy HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008. Policies HSG 10 (Infill Housing Development) and TR 13 (Assessing the Transportation Implication of Development) are also relevant to this application.
4.3 Policy HSG 7 states that the Council will seek to protect the established character of existing and new housing areas. It is considered that residential development on the site is acceptable in principle, subject to meeting the criteria contained within Policy HSG 10 (Infill Housing Development).
4.4 Policy HSG 10 is also of relevance and this policy assesses applications for infill residential developments by considering the following criteria: the overall impact of the proposal on the character and amenity of the surrounding area, dimensions of the site relative to the proposed development and associated garden ground, effect of infill on the garden space, privacy, and sunlight received by surrounding properties, design including scale, materials, roof heighvpitch and window patterns, and provision of vehicular access and parking arrangements. It is considered that the overall impact of the proposal on the character and amenity of the surrounding area is acceptable given that the design and scale of the house will integrate with the surrounding terraced dwellings. The materials and design of the proposal are similar to those in the surrounding area and the roof height will match existing roof line. The proposed house would be slightly larger in depth and width than the existing houses within the terrace. However as the adjoining houses in the terrace gradually step back from Clark Street and the large adjacent two storey extension at No. 26 Clark Street is similar in design mitigates any impact the current proposal would have on the character of the surrounding area. The dimensions of the site relative to the proposed house and associated garden ground are considered acceptable. The proposal satisfies the minimum space standards for the front and rear gardens depths, however given the small side garden area at No. 26 the proposed 2 metres side garden area is considered acceptable in this case. The area of garden ground of the current property at 28 Clark Street will be considerably reduced by the proposal, however there will be a comparable area of garden ground to that which exists within the other mid-terrace dwellings within the row of terrace houses. The impact on privacy of surrounding properties is considered to be acceptable. There are two windows proposed on the side elevation of the house, however the windows proposed are for a hall window and bathroom window which are not habitable rooms and the bathroom window will have obscured glazing. and will not adversely affect the privacy enjoyed at No. 26 Clark Street. With regards to sunlight and daylight, a test was carried out. The result was that the impact on sunlight and daylight of neighbouring properties was acceptable due to the positioning and orientation of the proposal. Vehicular access and parking arrangements will be dealt with in the following paragraph.
127 4.6 In assessing the transportation implications of a development, Policy TRI 3 is applicable to this proposal and considers various criteria including the impact of the development on road traffic circulation/road safety and the provision made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. The proposal does not include any access arrangements or any off street parking facilities, however the surrounding terrace houses in the area were not built with any provision for any off-street parking facilities. It is noted that several of the houses in the area have converted the front garden areas to provide off-street parking. While the Traffic and Transportation Team Leader has commented that parking facilities are required for 3 vehicles however in-curtilage parking was not an original feature of properties at this location and in planning terms parking provision cannot be insisted upon. It is therefore considered that there will be no adverse impact on vehicular or pedestrian safety from additional traffic at this location. The application therefore complies with the spirit of Policy TR13 and in turn the proposal therefore complies with the criteria contained in Policies HSG 7 and HSG 10.
4.7 A material consideration is the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. Policy HCF 1 Protecting Housing and Community Facilities Resources is relevant to the current application. and states that there is a presumption against developments detrimental to residential amenity in residential areas. The zoning and policy position remains unaltered from the Adopted Plan so therefore the proposal is considered to comply with Policy HCF 1 of the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.
4.8 In terms of the consultation responses received from my Protective Services Section, all relevant planning issues raised may be addressed through the imposition of suitable planning conditions. Matters relating to construction hours and dust measures may be addressed by advisory notes to the applicant.
4.9 On the grounds of the objections raised I would comment as follows:
a) The position of the fence and any matters relating to land ownership are legal matters and not material planning considerations. b) As indicated in paragraph 4.5 above, a sunlightldaylight test was conducted and the results showed that the impact of the proposal would be within acceptable limits. c) The impact on privacy on neighbouring houses was assessed and found to be acceptable as indicated in paragraph 4.5 above. d) The proposed house will be in close proximity to the neighbouring property at No. 26, however the overall garden area of the proposal was assessed and found to be acceptable in terms of Policy HSG 10. The impact of a proposal on property prices is not a material planning consideration to warrant refusal of permission. e) It is noted that on-street parking on Clark Street is limited and that there is no requirement for off-street parking within this residential area. It is considered that the addition of a further dwelling would not adversely affect the current parking arrangement to the detriment of road and pedestrian safety. 9 The applicant was made aware that the neighbour notification procedure had not been carried out correctly and the appropriate neighbours were notified.
4.10 In conclusion I am satisfied that the design and impact of the house is acceptable from a planning viewpoint and that the proposal is in compliance with Policies HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas), HSG 10 (Infill Housing Development) and TR 13 (Assessing the Transportation Implication of Development) of the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 as well as Policy HCF 1 Protecting Housing and Community Facilities Resources of the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.. Notwithstanding the objections received and for the reasons stated above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.
128 Application No:
Date Registered: 11th March 2009
Applicant: Mr K Muir 5 Talbot Terrace Uddingston G71 6ER
Development: Construction of a Two Storey Detached Dwellinghouse
Location: Land At 5 Talbot Terrace Uddingston G71 6ER
Ward: 13 Thorniewood: Councillors Burrows, McCabe and McShannon
Grid Reference: 269440661719
File Reference: S/PL/RMC/G F
S/07/0089O/FUL Erection of Dwellinghouse refused 19th July 2007 Site History: and subsequent appeal (P\PPA\dismissed 7th May 2008
Development Plan: The site is zoned as HSG7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: Scottish Water (No Response) Scottish Gas (Comm en ts) Scottish Power (Comments)
Representations: Eight letters of representation received
Newspaper Advertisement: Not Required
129 Prcduced by PLANNING APPLICATION No S / 09 / 001 38 / FUL Nollh Lanarkshlm COUnUl Enuimnmental SewiceS. CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO STOREY DETACHED N DalltclBuiWlny DWELLINGHOUSE 7 Scolt Slreel LAND AT 5 TALBOT TERRACE Sire UDDINGSTON area = 0 02 ha A :;?;g%+ywe le1 01698 274274 * Representation lax 01698 403053
130 Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reason:-
1. That the proposed development is contrary to Policies HSG7 and HSGIO of the Southern Area Local Plan (2008) in that the restricted size of the site would result in a development that would be out of character with the surrounding area, have substandard garden ground and would adversely affect the amenity and privacy of neighbouring properties.
Background Papers:
Application form and plans received lothFebruary 2009 and amended plans received on 27'h February 2009 and 1 1th March 2009
Letter from Scottish Gas received 27'h March 2009 Letter from Scottish Power received 1st April 2009 Memo from Traffic and Transportation Team Leader received 213'~March 2009
Letter from Mr S McGuigan, 18 Talbot Terrace, Calderbraes, Uddingston, G71 6ER received 12'h March 2009 Letter from Sean McCluskey, 91 Calderbraes Avenue, Uddingston, G71 6EE received 6'h March 2009 and 23rdApril 2009 Letter from Andrew & Sandra Roberston, 1 Talbot Terrace, Uddingston, G71 6ER received 1Oth March 2009 Letter from Michael & Christine Saxton, 16 Talbot Terrace, Uddingston, G71 6ER received 23'' February 2009 Letter from G Bari, 14 Talbot Terrace, Uddingston, G71 7TJ received 2dh February 2009 Letter from James Clark-Dick, 89 Calderbraes Avenue, Uddingston, G71 6EE received 25th March 2009 Letter from Mr & Mrs Quinn, 3 Talbot Terrace, Uddingston, G71 6ER received 2"d March 2009
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Gary McEwan at 01698 2741 17.
Date: 24 April 2009
131 APPLICATION NO. S/09/00138/FUL
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.1 Planning permission is sought for the construction of a two-storey detached dwellinghouse at 5 Talbot Terrace, Uddingston. The site is located within an established residential area comprising of two storey detached and semi-detached dwellings. The application site is bounded by Talbot Terrace to the north and residential dwellings to the west, east and south. It should be noted that the garden ground slopes in a north to south direction towards the dwelling at 91 Calderbraes Avenue to the rear of the site.
1.2 The proposal involves subdividing the existing side garden area associated with the dwelling at 5 Talbot Terrace to form an additional house plot. The plot would measure 225 square metres and would be 11 metres wide and 19 metres long with access taken directly from Talbot Terrace. The proposed dwelling would measure 6.5 metres wide, 8 metres long and 8.3 metres high. A retaining wall would be constructed in the rear garden area to provide useable garden ground for the proposed house. The dwelling would be finished in materials to match the neighbouring dwellings and would have a front garden depth of 5 metres and a rear garden depth of approximately 7 metres.
1.3 The Committee should note that a previous planning application for the erection of a two storey detached dwellinghouse (Ref: S/07/0089O/FUL) at this site was refused on lgthJuly 2007. The applicant subsequently appealed the decision to the Scottish Government Directorziie for Planning and Environmental Appeals Unit. The Reporter dismissed the appeal on the 7 May 2008.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The site is zoned as Policy HSG7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.
3. Consultations and Remesentations
3.1 Scotland Gas Networks and Scottish Power have no objections subject to the applicant undertaking the requisite procedures during construction in order to not affect their apparatus.
3.2 The Transportation Section commented that they have no objections to the proposal subject to conditions. They noted that access should be via a dropped kerb footway crossing arrangement and this should be surfaced to prevent any excess material being carried onto the public road. It is recommended that the access be positioned at the most easterly extent of the site frontage and a visibility splay of 2.5 metres by 20 metres is required. The proposed parking arrangement shown on the plan is not acceptable. The driveway should be 3 metres wide by 10 metres long, or have two 5 metre wide by 6 metres long parking bays to accommodate two vehicles.
3.2 Eight letters of representation have been received in relation to this application following the neighbour notification procedure. The grounds of the representations can be summarised as follows:
a) The proposal represents overdevelopment of a small site. b) The proposal would adversely affect the amenity and character of the area. c) The proposal will be in close proximity to neighbouring properties and impact on privacy levels at No.'s 1 and 3 Talbot Terrace.
132 d) The proposal would have inadequate parking facilities and will lead to increased parking on Talbot Terrace and would further restrict access to the driveways of No.'s 14, 16 and 18 Talbot Terrace. e) A similar application at the application site was refused by the Council and dismissed at appeal. f) The neighbour notification notice was not signed or dated. g) The sunlight and daylight of neighbouring properties would be adversely affected due to the topography of the land, the height of the structure and its proximity to other properties. h) There would be potential for ground slipping on property site and drainage problems could be caused by ground levelling. i) The proposed development and new retaining wall will be oppressive in nature. j) The proposed garden ground fails to meet the Council's minimum open space standards with regards to front and rear garden depths. The front area will be entirely used as parking space, unlike other properties in the area and the useable garden ground to the rear of the dwelling would be severely limited due to the steep gradient at this part of the site. The existing dwellinghouse at No 5 Talbot Terrace would have a substandard garden area if the application is successful. k) The proposal would set a precedent for further similar developments throughout the area in particular the properties Nos. 1 and 3 Talbot Terrace. I) The views across the valley from numbers 14 and 18 Talbot Terrace will be obscured by proposal. m) The proposal is contrary to Policy HSG 10 (Infill Housing Development) of the Southern Area Local Plan 2008. n) The rear elevation of the proposed house will only be approximately 11 metres from the rear elevation of No. 91 Calderbraes Avenue and the Council would usually expect such a distance to be 18 metres. Furthermore there would be nothing to prevent the later inclusion of rear windows by prospective purchasers of the dwellinghouse, which would impact even further on privacy.
4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions
4.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions are made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations state otherwise. The proposal raises no strategic issues and can therefore be assessed against Local Plan Policies.
4.2 The site is zoned as Policies HSG 7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008, Policies HSG 10 (Infill Housing Development) and TR 13 (Assessing the Transportation Implication of Development) are also relevant to this application.
4.3 Policy HSG 7 states that the Council will seek to protect the established character of existing and new housing areas by opposing development which is incompatible with a residential setting. It is considered that the principle of residential development on the site is acceptable subject to meeting the criteria contained in Policy HSG 10. The proposed site is small in size and the plot size of the existing house would be reduced considerably. The proposed development would result in two dwellinghouses with substandard garden ground in an area of Talbot Terrace which currently has established properties within generous plots. The current proposal would subsequently appear incongruous with the surrounding housing. In the appeal decision referred to in paragraph 1.3 above, the Reporter concluded that the existing side garden at No.5 Talbot Terrace was never capable of satisfactorily accommodating a house and in turn is considered that the proposal would have an adverse impact on the character of the surrounding area. As such the proposal therefore does not comply with the spirit of Policy HSG 7.
133 4.4 In considering applications for infill residential developments on suitable gap sites, Policy HSGIO applies. This states that consideration is to be given to the overall impact of the proposal on the character and amenity of the surrounding area, the dimensions of the site relative to the proposed development and associated garden ground, the effect of infill on the garden space, privacy, and sunlight received by surrounding properties, consideration given to scale, materials, roof heightlpitch and window patterns, and provision of vehicular access and parking arrangements. In terms of the design of the house, the proposed size and scale is considered acceptable albeit the house has windows positioned on the side elevations rather than the rear elevation. The dimensions of the site in relation to the proposed development are considered unacceptable in that the plot is relatively small in comparison to other plot sizes within the vicinity. The existing house at 5 Talbot Terrace does not meet the minimum open space requirements in terms of rear garden depth however this is mitigated by the existing side garden ground. Furthermore, there is a relatively small usable garden ground as a result of the gradient of the rear garden area. The proposed dwelling fails to meet the minimum open space standards with regards to front, side and rear garden depths in terms of the Council’s Open Space Standards. Furthermore, the existing dwellinghouse at No. 5 would have a much reduced rear garden area with the useable area also substandard due to the level difference and presence of the retaining wall to the rear. The previous appeal decision also noted that the proposal would result in two intensively utilised rear garden areas whereas only one dwelling used a large and side rear garden area. Whilst there is already a degree of overlooking from the side garden area, this section of the garden slopes downwards towards Calderbraes Avenue. This would affect the neighbouring resident’s ability to utilise their rear garden and as such be detrimental to the amenity of the surrounding residential properties. The proposal increases the amount of overlooking through the formation of a usable elevated garden area in such close proximity. The Reporter concluded that the relationship of the site to No. 91 Calderbraes Avenue was unacceptable due in part to the overlooking from the small rear garden of the new house into the French windows at the rear of the lower property with only 4.6 metres from the French Doors to the retaining wall on the mutual boundary. The proposed window on the rear elevation however is a bathroom window which raises no privacy issues as this would comprise of obscured glazing. There would be windows and French doors on the east elevation, which meet the minimum 18 metre window to window distance, however due to the topography and the height of the proposal there will be overlooking onto the rear garden areas at No. 1 and 3 Talbot Terrace. In relation to sunlight received by the adjoining properties, due to the orientation of the site to the north, there will be no significant loss of sunlight or daylight experienced by the adjoining dwellings. The earthworks and retaining wall required are however likely to be visually dominant on the dwellings on Calderbraes Avenue. With regard to access to the site, and parking provision this is discussed in detail in paragraph 4.5 below.
4.5 A further planning policy of relevance is Policy TR13 which assesses the transportation implications of a development. This policy states that the Council will take account of various criteria including the impact of the development on road traffic circulationlroad safety and the provision made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. The proposal includes a driveway that would accommodate two car parking spaces to the front of the proposed dwelling. As noted in paragraph 3.2 above, the Transportation Section have requested that two parking spaces are accommodated by either 5 metre wide by 6 metre long parking area to the front of the dwelling or alternatively a 3 metre wide by 10 metre long driveway. Due to the location of the proposed dwelling and front garden depth, the parking bays to the front of the house are considered unacceptable however it is considered that there is sufficient width between the house and the eastern boundary to accommodate the 10 metre long driveway. As such, it is considered that the proposal therefore complies with the spirit of Policy TR13.
4.6 A material consideration is the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan (2009). Policy HCF 1 Protecting Housing and Community Facilities Resources is relevant to the current application. and states that there is a presumption against developments detrimental to residential amenity in residential areas. The zoning and policy position remains unaltered from the Adopted Plan so therefore the proposal is considered contrary to Policy HCF 1 of the Finalised North Lanarkshire
134 Local Plan (2009).
4.7 On the grounds of the objections raised I would comment as follows:
a) It is agreed that the proposal would constitute overdevelopment as indicated in paragraphs 4.3 and 4.4. b) It is agreed that the proposal would adversely impact on the character of the area and that it would also impact on privacy by overlooking as indicated in paragraphs 4.4. c) It is agreed that the proposed parking facilities are unacceptable, however the applicant has sufficient space within the site to accommodate a 10 metre long driveway to the side of the property and in turn is unlikely to generate any further on street parking. d) It is agreed that the current application is similar to the application that was refused by the council and dismissed at appeal however each application must be determined on its own merits. e) The applicant confirmed by signing the declaration on the planning application form that the neighbour notification process had been duly completed with all neighbours correctly notified. 9 As noted in paragraph 4.4 due to the northern orientation of the property there will be no issues regarding sunlight or daylight. g) It is agreed that the proposal would be in very close proximity to neighbouring properties to the detriment of their residential amenity and as such the proposal is contrary to Policies HSG 7 and HSG 10. h) The method of construction and stability as well as drainage will be assessed at the Building Warrant stage and are not matters to warrant refusal of planning permission in this case. i) The proposed development and new retaining wall are considered to be visually dominant to the detriment of the amenity of surrounding residents. j) It is agreed that the current proposal fails to meet the Council’s minimum Open Space Standards with regards to the front and rear garden depths as indicated in paragraph 4.4. It is also agreed that the existing dwellinghouse at No. 5 Talbot Terrace fails to meet the Open Space Standards. k) It is agreed that the proposal would set a precedent for further similar developments throughout the area. I) Any perceived impact on view is not a material planning consideration in the determination of this planning application. m) It is agreed that the proposal is contrary to Policy HSGlO for the reasons outlined in paragraph 4.4 above. n) The proposed house will be approximately 11 metres from the rear of No. 91 Calderbraes Avenue. The 18 metre rule applies to window to window distances only and this case there is only a bathroom window proposed on the rear elevation. However should permission be granted a planning condition could be recommended to prevent the insertion of additional windows on this elevation.
4.8 In conclusion, it is considered that the proposal generally complies with Policy TR 13 however it is contrary to Policies HSG7 and HSGlO of the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 and HCF 1 of the Finalised North Lanarkshire Local Plan in that the restricted size of the site would result in a development that would be out of character with the surrounding area, have substandard garden ground sizes and would adversely affect the amenity and privacy of neighbouring properties. In view of the relevant development plan policies, the previous history of the site including the appeal decision, it is recommended that planning permission be refused. The Committee should note that an objector has requested that a site visit and hearing be conducted prior to the determination of this application.
135 Application No: S/09/00209/FUL
Date Registered: 9th March 2009
Applicant: Mr & Mrs Storry West Badallan Farm Shotts Road FauId house EH47 9AG
Agent Robin Hutton R T Hutton 2 Factors Brae Limekilns Fife KYI 1 3HG
Development: Erection of a Replacement Dwellinghouse
Location: West Badallan A71 Edinburgh - Ayr Road Allanton North Lanarkshire EH47 9AD
Ward: 12 Fortissat: Councillors Cefferty, McMillan and Robertson
Grid Reference: 291704 658926
File Reference: SIPLIBFI 7/51(1 )/FM/GF
Site History: S/08/011 IO/FUL - Renovation of and Erection of a Single Storey Extension to Rear of Cottage - Approved 21 st October 2008
Development Plan: The site is identified as Rural Investment Areas (ENV8) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008
Contrary to Development Plan: No
Consultations: None Required
Representations: No letters of representation received
Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised on 19th March 2009
136 137 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:- 05-004 (4b) and 05-004 (5B).
Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this permission is founded.
3. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details and finish of all external materials to be used, including roof tiles, wall finish, door, window details and gutters and downpipes, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the planning authority. For the avoidance of doubt the roof tiles shall be dark grey and flat profiled and walls shall be render with smooth banding around the window openings.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
4. That notwithstanding the windows shown on the approved drawings, the details of the new windows to be installed in the positions shown are specifically not approved, and further detailed 1:20 drawings showing window type and opening details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before the development commences. The windows installed shall comply with the approved scheme.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
5. That before the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.
6. That before the dwellinghouse hereby permitted is occupied, all fences, or walls, as approved under the terms of condition 5 above, shall be erected.
Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.
7. That before the dwellinghouse hereby permitted is occupied, all of the relevant parking and manoeuvring areas shown on the approved plans shall be levelled, properly drained, surfaced in a material which the Planning Authority has approved in writing before the start of surface work and clearly marked out, and shall, thereafter, be maintained as parking and manoeuvring areas.
Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities within the site.
8. That before any works start on site, full details of the septic tank and soakaway system to be installed shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and the applicant shall confirm in writing to the Planning Authority that the drainage arrangements to be provided are to the satisfaction of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA). The septic tank and soakaway must be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements set out in The Scottish Building Standards : Technical Handbook : Domestic issued in May 2005. In terms of the Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations (CAR) 2005, the discharge of treated sewage effluent will require registration with SEPA. Further details on this matter can be found @ www.sepa.org.uk.wfd. Surface water should be excluded from the foul
138 drainage treatment system. In order to reduce the risk of contamination of controlled waters, any soakaway should be located at least 50 metres from any private water supply or other groundwater resource and at least 10 metres from any watercourse or permeable drain. (Note: If poor soil porosity or risk to groundwater resources preclude the use of a soakaway, alternative arrangements will have to be agreed with SEPA. Further advice on the disposal of sewage where no mains drainage is available, is contained within Pollution Prevention Guidance Note 4 which is available on the SEPA website www.sepa.org.uk/guidanceor from any SEPA office).
Reason: To prevent groundwater or surface water contamination in the interests of environmental and amenity protection.
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 application site, including the location of the septic tank and soakaway or on the buildings other than that expressly authorised by this permission.
Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the building and the visual amenity of the surrounding countryside.
Background Papers:
Application form, plans and structural report received 25'h February 2009
Memo from Transportation Team Leader received 6'h April 2009 Memo from Geotechnical Team Leader received 2!jth March 2009 Memo from Conservation and Greening received 30'h March 2009
Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Fraser Miller at 01698 2741 19.
Date: 29 April 2009
139 APPLICATION NO. S/09/00209/FUL
REPORT
1. Description of Site and Proposal
1.I Planning permission is sought for the erection of a replacement dwelling at West Badallan Farm, Shotts. The site is bound by open land to the south and west, West Badallan house to the south east, the farm workshop to the east and a separate dwelling to the north, with open land beyond. The cottage (1 10 square metres) is a single storey building with a natural stone and corrugated sheeting finish and has a traditional Scottish simple rural design. It is proposed to replace it with a single storey dwelling on the same footprint of the original cottage, and extending the footprint of the building through the erection of a build out section to the rear. The build out section will in turn increase the footprint of the unit to approximately 151 square metres. The end result we be a single storey cottage in the form of a T shape, with a sizeable front, rear and side garden well in excess of the Council's minimum standards in relation to open space around dwellings. The proposed single storey dwelling is complemented with a simple design that incorporates a number of rural themes such as modest and well proportioned windows with a vertical emphasis in addition to smooth banding around the windows and a natural slate roof.
1.2 A structural inspection report accompanies the application and concludes that very little of the original dwelling would remain in view of the works required to bring the dwelling into active habitable use.
1.3 A previous consent which sought to refurbish and erect an extension to the dwelling was approved under delegated powers on the 21" October 2008. It is worth noting that the proposed extension was to be located in the exact same position as the proposed build out section that forms part of this application. The applicant has sought to apply for the current proposals following the completion of the structural inspection as detailed above.
2. Development Plan
2.1 The site is zoned as Rural Investment Areas (ENV8) in the Southern Area Local Plan 2008.
3. Consultations and Representations
3.1 The Transportation Team leader has raised no objections to the application, subject to conditions relating to the access and parking provision within the site.
3.2 The Geotechnical Team Leader and Conservation and Greening Manger, have no objections to the proposed development.
3.2 No letters of representation have been received following the neighbour notification and press advertisement procedures.
4. Planning 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.
4.2 The application is not of strategic significance and as such only requires to be assessed against
140 the local plan. Relevant policies within the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 are ENV8 (Rural Investment Area), HSGll (Housing in the Green Belt and Countryside) and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development), together with other material considerations.
4.3 Policy ENV8 is designed to protect the openness and rural amenity of countryside areas by restricting inappropriate new development, Relevant appropriate developments are those related to agriculture, forestry, outdoor leisure and recreation or other appropriate rural uses. In this case the proposal relates to the replacement of an existing dwelling which has fallen into disrepair. The more detailed policy relevant to the consideration of this application is Policy HSGl1, and this is assessed below.
4.4 Policy HSG 11 indicates that the replacement of existing houses will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the existing buildings are of poor quality. Any development shall not result in an increase in the number of units or a significant increase in overall floorspace and shall be located, as nearly as possible, within the existing footprint. It is considered that the proposed replacement dwelling meets all the above criterion given that the existing dwelling is of poor quality, as demonstrated by the Structural Inspection Report. As discussed above, it is proposed to increase the floorspace of the cottage by an additional 50 square metres, it is acknowledged that this is sizeable, however given the generous setting of the site and the sensitive siting of the build out section to the rear of the proposed dwelling, it is considered that no adverse affects will be placed on the resultant new dwelling. Furthermore the proposed use of natural slate, natural stone and smooth render in combination with windows with a vertical emphasis results in a development that complies with the requirements of HSGI 1. I consider that the site also benefits from adequate access and drainage although the transportation issues will be assessed more fully in section 4.5 below. The application is therefore considered to accord with the relevant countryside policies in the Southern Area Local Plan.
4.5 Policy TRI 3 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) requires assessment of roads and transportation issues. The comments of the Transportation Team Leader are noted. It is observed that the existing cottage has provision for 2 off street parking spaces and as such there may be current vehicle movements associated with the existing adjacent dwellings. Although there may be some increased vehicular movements associated with the proposed replacement dwellinghouse, these will be insignificant and the applicant has detailed the provision of 2 off street parking spaces and a turning facility. The access, parking and manoeuvring facilities proposed within the site are considered acceptable and the application is therefore considered to accord with policy TR13.
4.6 A material consideration is the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan, however, the zoning and policy position remains unaltered from the Adopted Plan.
4.7 It is considered that the development is acceptable in terms of local plan policy as the impact of a replacement residential dwelling on the site and surrounding area, as well as the access and transportation implications, can be accommodated without detriment to the surrounding countryside area. Furthermore, justification for a replacement dwelling has been provided demonstrating that the existing dwelling has fallen into disrepair and the new dwelling is to incorporate a traditional rural design and finish appropriate for this countryside location. Therefore, taking into account the local plan and other material considerations, I recommend that this application be approved subject to conditions.
141