ABENDA ITEM No. -.._- 3, --------.

APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

26th July 201 2

Page No

3

10

17

25

39

Application No

1 1 /004 1 7/CON

11/01238/FUL

11/01431/FUL

12/00277/FUL

12/00395/FUL

Applicant Development/Site Recommendation

Mr John Aire Demolition of Victorian Refuse Villa (Conservation Area Consent) 2 Bowling Street Blairhill Coatbridge

Mr & Mrs Flockhart and Log Store (in

Construction of Stables

retrospect) Milncroft Farm House Millcroft Road Cumbernauld

Mr Robett Dow Erection of 2 Dwelling houses Parkhaven Lodge Woodhall Cottage Road Calderbank Ai rd rie

Mr William Ralston 800Kw Wind Turbine

Erection of a Single

(73.25m to hub and 99.7m to tip) with Associated Apparatus and Access Nether Bracco Farm 21 Airdrie Road Caldercruix Airdrie

Grant

Refuse

Grant

Mr David Change of Use from Grant Caskie Public Open Space to

Private Garden Ground at front and rear of property and repositioning of Boundary Fence at rear (in retrospect). 20 Pine Place Abronhill Cumbernauld Glasgow

44 12/00529/FUL Mr Frank Erection of Replacement Walsh Detached Rear Garage

(retrospective) 144 North Road Bellshill

52 12/00652/FUL Mr Gerard Sitting of Mobile Snack Marshal1 Van on Public Road

Site Opposite 7 Grayshill Road Westfield Cum bernauld

Grant

Grant

Application No:

11/00417/CON

Proposed Development:

Demolition of Victorian Villa (Conservation Area Consent)

Site Address:

2 Bowling Street Blairhill Coatbridge ML5 1PP

Date Registered:

20th April 201 1

Applicant: Mr John Aire 2 Bowling Street Blairhill Coatbridge ML5 1PP

Application Level: Local Application

Ward: 006 Coatbridge North And Glenboig Fulton James MacGregor, Julie McAnulty, Michael McPake, William Shields,

Agent: David Leckie Braidenhill Farm Coatbridge Road Glenmavis Airdrie ML6 OPJ

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Representations: 2 letters of representation received.

Recommendation: Refuse

Reasoned Justification:

That the proposed development fails to meet the criteria of the relevant policies of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 which presume against the demolition of any buildings which contribute to the character of the Conservation Area.

Repmduced by permissinn dthcOuchance Survey on khel fdHMSO. @Cmwn Copytiglt and database ti&t 2009. All tights reserved. Ordnance Survey Ljceme number 100023396.

Planning Application No. C/11~304171CON Mr John Aire Demolition o f Victo rian Villa (Conservation Area Consent] 2 Bowling Street, Blairhill, Coatbridge * Representations

Produced by Planning and Development Envir on mental Semi North Lanarkshire C Fleming House 2 Tryst Road Cumbernauld 087 I JW V

Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1. That the proposed development is contrary to policy ENV 16 (F) of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 which presumes against the demolition of any buildings which contribute to the character of the Victoria & Town Centre Conservation Area and policy and HG9 (I) - Design Guidance, as there is insufficient justification for the demolition of this traditional stone building in a protected area.

2. That the proposed development is contrary to Policies NB1 B3a and DSP 3 of the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2009 as it would have an adverse impact on the character of the Victoria & Town Centre Conservation Area as a result of the demolition of this traditional residential building.

3. That the applicant has failed to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority that the structural condition of the building necessitates its demolition.

4. That the proposed development would set an unwanted precedent for further similar redevelopments of existing buildings within the Blairhill & Dunbeth Conservation Area which would lead to the further incremental erosion of its character.

Backaround PaDers:

Representation Letters: Letter from Mrs Margaret Haggarty, 20 Flloyd Street, Coatbridge, ML5 1 PT received 7th May 201 1 Letters from Mr Colin McArthur, 4 Bowling Street, Blairhill, Coatbridge received 3rd May 201 1 and 1 3'h October 201 1

Consultation Responses: Letter from Architectural Heritage Society received on 2gth April 201 1 Letter from Historic Scotland received on 17'h May 201 1. Letter from Scottish Civic Trust received on 1 7th May 201 1.

Contact Information: Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Kevin Divin at 01236 632508

Report Date: 10th July 201 2

APPLICATION NO. 11/00417/CON

REPORT

1.

1.1

2.

2.1

3.

3.1

4.

4.1

5.

5.1

5.2

6.

6.1

Site DescriDtion

The application site comprises of a large detached property and two small outbuildings, a large rectangular garden to the south at 2 Bowling Street, Coatbridge. The existing property is a traditional stone built villa with a slate roof and is located within the Blairhill and Dunbeth Conservation area. The property was previously used as a Residential Institution to combat truancy, but this has since closed and the building has been vacant since, with the windows and doors boarded to prevent vandalism. The site has a boundary consisting of a stone wall on all four sides and large mature trees to the south, east and west, all of which have Tree Preservation Orders. The site is bounded to the north and east by traditional stone and slate buildings. Located to the south is a bowling club while to the west are large modern built residential properties. Vehicular access to the site currently exists on Bowling Street and Flloyd Street to the east.

ProDosed DeveloDment

Conservation Area Consent is being sought for demolition of the existing dwellinghouse in advance of the erection of a new dwellinghouse which would be the subject of a separate planning application.

Amlicant’s Sumortina Information

In support of this application, the applicant has submitted a Design Access Statement, a Structural Survey and a Financial Cost Report to support demolition over repair of the existing property. Plans of an indicative new replacement dwellinghouse were also submitted.

Site History

10/00818/FUL Change of Use from Residential Institution (Class 8) to a Dwellinghouse -Approved 30th August 2010

DeveloDment Plan

The application raises no strategic issues and can be assessed in terms of the local plan policy.

In terms of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 the site is covered by policy HG 9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas) and falls within the Blairhill and Dunbeth Conservation Area (policies ENV 15 (Conservation Area) and ENV 16 (conservation Area Improvements)).

Consultations

A summary of comments from the consultees is as follows:

a. Historic Scotland comments that the existing house makes a contribution to the character of the Conservation Area and therefore there should be a presumption in favour of its repair and retention. They have advised that the case for demolition of the building has not been made. Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland have offered no objection to the proposal as the site is adequate for the development and the design of new build is contextual. Scottish Civic Trust have objected as there is little evidence to suggest that this traditional villa cannot be repaired and reused, therefore, there is lack of

b.

C.

7.

7.1

8.

8.1

8.2

8.3

8.4

8.5

justification for the demolition of the existing building. Representations

Following the standard neighbour notification and public advertisement, 2 letters of representation were received. The relevant points of objection relation to impact on Conservation Area, lack of justification for demolition and disruption caused by demolition.

Plannina Assessment

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

DeveloDment Plan - Monklands District Local Plan 1991: The site is located within an established residential area in Coatbridge on land zoned as HG 9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas). Policies ENV 15 (Conservation Area) and ENV 16 (Conservation Area Improvements) are also relevant. The associated Design Guidance on lnfill and Conservation are also relevant. The primary issues to be considered here are the appropriateness of and compliance with the relevant development plan and the affect the proposal will have on the surrounding area.

Policy HG 9 states that the Council will consider favourably planning applications for the conversion of commercial buildings to residential use, provided that they accord with the associated Design Guidance. The relevant Design Guidance on lnfill Housing states that the Council will presume against the demolition of traditional houses in order to accommodate a new development and that within Conservation Areas stricter design and size standards should be applied. The proposed demolition is therefore considered not to be in accordance with policy HG 9.

The site falls within the Dunbeth & Blairhill Conservation Area where policies ENV 15 (Conservation Area) and ENV 16 (Conservation Area Improvements) apply. Policy ENV 15 (Conservation Area) which adds additional safeguards to control appropriate development. Policy ENV 16 (Conservation Area Improvements) outlines further considerations when assessing developments in the conservation area. Points (E) and (F) are of particular relevance to this application.

(E) The Council will pay regard to the height, scale, materials, roof lines, building lines, detailing, colour, overall character of the surrounding buildings which it is desirable to maintain and enhance.

(F) In cases where Conservation Area Consent is required the Council will generally 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.

A Structural Condition Inspection Report has been provided by the applicant to support the demolition of the existing dwellinghouse. This Report advises that the building and outbuildings have suffered deterioration of the structural elements over the life of the building and left in its current unoccupied and un-maintained condition, the main building will deteriorate further and may eventually lead to instability of parts of the structure. The report suggests a series of possible remedial works to extend the life of the property although the financial implications of these may make the project financially unviable. The Report concludes that consideration should be given to demolition of the building followed by new-build development. It is, however, considered that the Structural Report fails to identify any serious structural problems. Indeed, it is noted that the render and cement pointing are in themselves contributing to the deterioration of the natural stone. Their early removal will reduce the damage. Broadly, this damage is superficial - affecting the surface of the stone. It is not

8.6

8.7

8.8

8.9

identified as causing any structural problems. It is, therefore, not accepted that there is a structural justification to the demolition case and therefore contrary to policies ENV 15 and ENV 16.

The applicant has also submitted a Design Access Statement in support of this application which seeks to justify the design and access principles applied to the form of new build dwellinghouse to be erected following demolition of the existing building. The form of development involves a 2 storey dwelling unit with hexagonal bay window feature to the front elevation. The front elevation would retain the existing stone and cast stone window surrounds with the remaining elevations reverting to rectangular stock blockwork with stooled window cills and heads. The roof would be hipped with traditional slate, stained timber fascias and timber sash windows. The footprint of the new build would be significantly larger than the existing building on site, although positioned at a similar location. In terms of the potential new dwelling, it is considered that this is of poor design, over large and the positioning is not appropriate. The monolithic ridge line, deep (nearly 20m) plan, shallow pitched roof, and excessive number of windows (22 to front (s) elevation; 20 to rear (n) elevation; 18 to west and 19 to east = 79 in all) all contribute to a wholly inappropriate design - which it is considered will harm the character of the area by its mass, scale and detailing. Furthermore, not only does the development move further south, it also moves much closer to both Bowling Street and Flloyd Street. There is no tree surgeons report to confirm that the 5.1 10m/ 5.405m set back will be sufficient to avoid adversely affecting the roots (and health) of the boundary trees. Instead of containing the vehicular access to the north, the proposed layout and southern setting of the house is dominated by a vehicle turning circle and parking to the south. In addition, the removal of two protected trees and established stone wall would detrimentally affect the appearance of the conservation area, while the large hard standing with roundabout within the site is also not appropriate.

With reference to the Financial Cost Statement submitted in support of the proposed demolition, the cost estimate suggests that refurbishment of the 306 sq m property will cost some f 1,098,854 - or f3,591 / sq m (or f 1.65m overall). This is excessively high especially when the Council has recently been able to secure the refurbishment of more derelict properties for under f 1,200 / sq m (which would indicate a still high refurbishment cost of some f367k). It is therefore not accepted that there is a cost justification to the demolition case.

The existing building is unlisted traditional dwelling, well situated within the Conservation Area, resulting in it contributing positively to the character of the Conservation Area and no adequate justification has been provided for its demolition. Taking into account the foregoing it is clear that the application does not accord with the provisions of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 in terms of justification for demolition.

Other Material Considerations - Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan: A material consideration is the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan where the application site is zoned as NBE 1 B3a (Built Environment Local Sites Conservation Areas) which states that, where an existing building contributes positively to the character of the Conservation Area, the presumption against demolition shall apply. With this in mind, the FDNLLP also requires proposed developments to be assessed against policies DSP 1 (Amount of Development), DSP 2 (Location of Development), DSP 3 (Impact of Development) and DSP 4 (Quality of Development). Due to the limited nature of the development, Policies DSP 1 and 2 are not relevant whilst DSP 3 and 4 will inform a Development Management Assessment of the proposed development. Policy DSP 3 refers to the economic, social, or environmental impact of proposals. As discussed in detail above, the existing building adds positively to the character of the Conservation Area and sufficient justification has not been provided for its demolition. With reference to DSP 3, the proposal will result in a detrimental impact on the character of the Conservation Area which is considered to be unacceptable. Detailed indicative drawings were submitted of a proposed house for

the site. The indicative drawings are not considered to be appropriate in this instance as a justification for the demolition of a traditional stone building in the Conservation Area. It is considered, therefore, that the proposal does not comply with the emerging local plan.

8.1 0 Consultations: With respect to the outstanding issue raised by consultation responses that have not been address above, the concern raised by Historic Scotland and the Scottish Civic Trust are noted and reflect the assessment of the proposal above. Concerning the comments made by Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland, it is noted that technically the site is of sufficient size to accommodate the proposed replacement; however, this can not be achieved without detrimentally affecting the character of the Conservation Area.

8.11 Represenfafions: In terms of the objections raised, I would offer the following comments:

Point of Objection: The building has a historical presence, is located within the heart of the Conservation Area and therefore every effort should be made to retain it.

Comment: This is noted and discussed at length in the assessment of the application above.

Point of Objection: The impartiality of the submitted structural report is questioned and taken that numerous presumptions are made within that report, an independent report should be commissioned.

Comment: This is noted and the merits of the supporting information for demolition have been discussed above.

Point of Objection: The method of demolition will cause noise, dust and mess.

Comment: It is understood that with all application decisions that there will be a temporary period of disruption during the works, in this case demolition.

9. Conclusions

9.1 In conclusion, the proposed demolition is unacceptable and is contrary to policies HG 9 (Housing Policy for Existing Residential Areas), ENV 15 (Conservation Area) and ENV 16 (Conservation Area Improvements) of the Monklands District Local Plan, 1991. That the proposed development fails to meet the criteria of the relevant policies of the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 which presume against the demolition of any buildings which contribute to the character of the Conservation Area. Account has been taken of the relevant points of objection which raise material considerations and, when taken together with the above, merit the refusal of this application. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be refused.

Application No:

1 1/01 238/FUL

Proposed Development:

Construction of Stables and Log Store (in retrospect) Site Address:

Milncroft Farm House M i I lcroft Road Cum bernauld North Lanarkshire G67 4AG

Date Registered:

31 st May 201 2

Applicant: Mr & Mrs Flockhart Milncroft Farm House Millcroft Road Cumbernauld North Lanarkshire G67 4AG

Application Level: Local Application

Agent: N/A

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Ward: Representations: 007 Airdrie North Alan Beveridge, Sophia Coyle, Thomas Morgan, Andrew Spowart,

4 letters of representation received.

Recommendation: Approve subject to conditions

Reasoned Justification: The proposal is considered to be acceptable at this particular location. The nature of the site is such that the approval of this application would not set an undesirable precedent for other similar developments in the countryside and the proposal can be accommodated without detriment to the surrounding area, as such, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable in terms of impact and design when considered against the relevant policies of the Monklands District local Plan 1991 and the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

Repwduced ky permission dthe Ohanoe Survey on bahatfofHMS0. @Crown Copyriglt and database tie Ordnenee Surury ticerne number 100023398.

2009. nil tights ~ e w e d .

11/01 23WFUL Mr &Mrs Flockhart Milncroft Farm House Millcroft Road Cumbernauld Construction of Stables and Log Store (in retrospect) Representations

Produced by Planning and Development Envir o nm enta I Se TU i North Lanarkshire C Fleming House 2 Tryst R odd Cumbernauld 067 I J W V

Proposed Conditions:-

1. That the use of the log store and stables hereby permitted shall be restricted to private use incidental to the enjoyment of the applicant’s dwellinghouse and no commercial activity shall be carried out, in, or from, the stables.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity and in order that the Planning Authority can retain effective control of the site.

Backaround PaDers:

Representation Letters

Letter from Mr Noon Douglas, 3 Milncroft Steadings, Millcroft Road, Luggiebank received 15th June 201 2 Letter from Mr & Mrs George & Caroline Watson, 2 Milncroft Steadings, Millcroft Road, Cumbernauld received 19th June 201 2 Letter from Mr & Mrs James & Jane Sharkey, 6 Milncroft Steadings, Millcroft Road, Cumbernauld received 25th June 201 2 Letter from Mr David McColl, 4 Milncroft Steadings, Millcroft Road, Luggiebank rece'ived 3rd July 201 2

Consultation Responses:

Letter received from The Coal Authority on the 1 2'h June 201 2

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Gordon Arthur at 01 236 632524

Report Date:

12th July 201 2

APPLICATION NO. 11/01238/FUL

REPORT

1.

1.1

2.

2.1

4.

4.1

5.

5.1

6.

6.1

7.

7.1

Site Description

The application site is set in a rural location to the south of Cumbernauld and adjacent to north Belstane plantation. Open fields bound the site to the east and west (with Craigside farm beyond to the east) to the north lies the nearest residential property (plot 1) of a residential steading development comprising of 6 dwellings, the boundary of which is coterminous with the same road which accesses the site and belongs to the applicant .

Prooosed Development

The application seeks planning permission, retrospectively, for the construction of a stable block and log store associated with an adjacent dwelling at Milncroft steading. The Stable block measures approximately 54m2 and is 2.8m in height with the log store measuring 24m2 and 2.8m in height. The stable has been finished in unrendered block work and has a mono inclined roof finished with grey roof felt. The log store is constructed in timber with a block work skirt. It has a mono inclined profiled steel roof. The log store and stables will utilise an existing access to the site and the applicant has confirmed that the building will not be used for any commercial purposes. A condition is recommended to cover this matter.

Site Historv

The following previous applications are relevant to the current proposal.

0

0

04/01818/FUL Conversion of Farm Steading to Create 5 New Dwellings application approved 28'h January 2005 06/01 082/FUL Erection of Out Building application approved 1 2th January 2007.

Development Plan

The site lies within an area covered by GB 1 (Green Belt) in the Monklands District Local Plan 1991. Within the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan, the zoning of the site is also policy NBE3 A (Green Belt). The access to the site lies within an area zoned for medium term housing development HCF 28.

Consultations

A summary of comments from consultees is as follows:

a) The Coal Authority has no objection to the proposed development. However, in the interests of public safety, given the potential for unrecorded features in mining areas The Coal Authority would recommend that, should planning permission be granted for this proposal, an Informative Note within the Decision.

Representations

Following the standard neighbour notification process and newspaper advertisement, four letters of representation were received. Points raised include, local plan policy, drainage, ecology, keeping of horses (field capacity), loss of privacy, noise disturbance, increased traffic, business use, parking, hours of operation, lighting, commercial rates, airborne and agricultural pollution.

8.

8.1

8.2

8.3

8.4

8.5

8.6

8.7

Plannina Assessment

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

DeveloDment Plan Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005: Relevant policies are as follows.

Policy GB1 (Green Belt) is intended to protect the Green Belt from inappropriate development. Whilst the construction of stables and outbuildings are normally accepted within a rural location, this is normally only acceptable where the impact is acceptable and where the loss of amenity is limited. It is considered that the construction of stables for the keeping of horses for personal use is not considered contrary to the Green Belt policy as it is an accepted activity in the countryside. In terms of infrastructure implications, the proposal would not have a significant impact in so far as it would not create any capacity problems. Environmental impact is also considered minimal given the limited scale and nature of the proposal. It is therefore considered that the proposal satisfies the terms of the Development Plan.

Effect on Rural Character: Adjoining land uses consist of open farmland and a relatively small steading conversion. It is considered that the rural amenity is not significantly adversely affected by these incidental uses. Screen landscaping (tree plantation) on the site boundary and a dense tree line to the east of the site helps to generally mitigate against the visual impact of the buildings, as such, any potential adverse effect on the existing rural character of the site and the general area is limited.

Other Material Considerations - Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The zoning of the site does not change in this plan and the development is therefore considered to be in accordance with policy NBE3 A (Green Belt).

Building design and impact, The stable block and log store are single storey, are considered acceptable in design in that they are based around a height and massing found to be acceptable in the rural area. No part of the proposal will result in a loss of sunlightldaylight to surrounding buildings, as potentially affected properties lie a substantial distance from the proposed structures. It is considered that there will be no overriding loss of privacy as there are no windows on either building directly facing windows on neighbouring properties and the potential for this site to overlook gardens is lost due to the relative intervening distances. Given the foregoing, it is considered that current amenity levels will not be significantly affected, as such the proposal complies with policy DSP4 (Quality of Development) of the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

Representations: The points of objection raised can be summarised as follows:

Point of Objection: The level of agricultural land in the in the applicants control is not sufficient to support the number of horses proposed.

Comment: The planning application has been submitted in order that the merits of the structures built may be considered. The wider activities highlighted, whilst important, are not material to the assessment of the planning application.

Point of Objection: Have any ecology report been requested.

Comment: This application is retrospective and therefore any relevant ecology is likely to have been lost and any destruction of habitat at this stage may be enforced by Scottish Natural Heritage if needs be.

Point of Objection: The stables are for commercial use, as such, are not compatible with current local plan policy, have no specified hours of operation, will give rise to disturbance to neighbouring dwellings, result in increased traffic generation, has insufficient parking and should attract the payment of commercial rates.

Comment: The applicant has advised the Planning Service that the Stables are for their own use incidental to their dwelling, as such, a planning condition is recommended addressing this matter.

Point of Objection: The installation of artificial lighting will give rise to light pollution and present a hazard to protected species.

Comment: The applicant is not indicating additional lighting on the drawings associated with this application.

Point of Objection: Visitors to the stables may ride past adjacent dwellings giving rise to a loss of privacy.

Comment: The planning service has no control over land ownership and therefore no control over where individuals ride horses beyond the site boundary.

Point of Objection: Keeping horses in an adjacent field and allowing visiting members of the public to ride them is contrary to Green Belt Policy.

Comment: The planning application has been submitted in order that the merits of the structures built may be considered. As the applicant is not proposing to provide a commercial riding centre, it is difficult to envisage a situation where the Planning Authority would restrict the sporadic activity of any individuals riding horses in the countryside. This is therefore not a material planning consideration.

Point of Objection: Is drainage infrastructure sufficient for this proposal as water has recently been flowing to the road over existing hard standing, is a toilet facility proposed.

Comment: Surface water run off results from existing hard standing which would not have required planning permission, as such does not form part of the current assessment. In considering the current proposal, the applicant has indicated on his application that the proposal does not require new or altered water supply or drainage arrangements. No toilet accommodation is proposed.

Point of Objection: Is there the potential for contamination of adjacent land due to water flowing from existing hard standing.

Comment: Proposals of limited magnitude are subject to standing advice issued by SEPA and may be considered under current environmental legislation relating to agricultural regulation.

Point of Objection: The log store is unnecessary because it is located in a smoke control area.

Comment: The application, in part, is for a log store which in itself does not produce smoke. Smoke control areas are regulated by pollution control through existing environmental legislation.

9. Conclusions

9.1 The proposal is considered to be acceptable at this particular location. The confined nature of the site is such that the approval of this application would not set an undesirable precedent for other similar developments in the countryside. The proposed development is therefore recommended for approval subject conditions.

Application No:

11/01431/FUL

Proposed Development:

Erection of 2 Dwellinghouses Site Address:

Parkhaven Lodge Woodhall Cottage Road Calderbank Ai rd rie

Date Registered:

24th February 201 2

Applicant: Mr Robert Dow C/o Agent

Application Level: Local Application

Agent: Knight Frank FAO - Monica Lennon Aurora Building 120 Bothwell Street Glasgow

Contrary to Development Plan: Yes

Ward: Representations: 01 1 Airdrie South Agnes Coyle, Michael Coyle, Thomas Curley, David Fagan,

No letters of representation received.

Recommendation: Refuse

Reasoned Justification:

The proposed development fails to meet the criteria set out in the relevant policies of the Monklands District Local Plan and the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The proposal cannot be accommodated without detriment to the surrounding area.

Reproduced ky permission dtheOhance Suwq on behatofHMSO. QCmwn Copyrigtt and dtabase tifl 2009. All rights resetued. Ordnance Sutuey Liaeme number 100023396.

11fl1431/FUL Mr Robed Dow Parkhaven Lodge, Woodhall Cottage Road, krdr ie Erection o f 2 Dwellinghouses

Produced by Planning and Development

087 I J W V

Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:-

1 The proposed dwellinghouses are contrary to the development plan in that they do not accord with policy GBI (Restrict Development in the Green Belt) in the adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 as the proposed dwellinghouses are not connected with agriculture or forestry and the applicant has failed to demonstrate a specific locational need.

2 The proposed dwellinghouses are contrary to the terms of the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2009 in that they do not accord with policy NBE 3A (Assessing Development in the Green Belt) and DSP 2(Location of Development) and to Supplementary Planning Guidance 07 (Assessing Development in the Green Belt) as the proposed dwellinghouses are not connected with agriculture or forestry and the applicant has failed to demonstrate an overriding specific locational need.

Backaround PaDers:

Consultation Responses:

Memo from Transportation received 20th June 201 2 Memo from Protective Services received 1 2th March 201 2 Letter from Scottish Gas Network received gth March 201 2 Letter from Scottish Water received 1" March 2012 Letter from the The Coal Authority received 25th June 2012

Contact information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Graham Smith at 01236 632493

Report Date:

10th July 201 2

APPLICATION NO. 11/01431/FUL

REPORT

1.

1.1

2.

2.1

3.

3.1

4.

4.1

5.

5.1

5.2

Site DescriPtion

The application site lies within an area of relatively open countryside at Parkhaven Lodge, to the south of Calderbank. The site is square shaped and is located within the curtilage of the dwelling at Parkhaven Lodge which is the last house on this row of three houses located on a private access track west of Woodhall Mill Road. The site consists of hardstanding and currently contains several outbuildings associated with the dwelling which had been used previously for a stables business which is no longer in operation. The site is bounded by agricultural land to the north, south and west with the row of houses to the east

ProDosed DeveloDment

Planning permission is sought for two detached dwellinghouses taking access from the private track serving the existing row of houses off Woodhall Mill Road. Each house would have a footprint of 200 square metres and would be L-Shaped and approximately 8.1 metres in height with dormer windows to the front, rear and both sides and gable feature on the front elevation. The dwellings proposed would have their own associated garden ground, driveways and a detached double garage in the rear garden area. The garages would be 7.5 metres in height from the apex of the pitched roof and would have a footprint of 122 square metres.

Amticant’s Suwortina Information

The agent acting on behalf of the applicant has submitted a planning statement and coal mining report in support of their application. The planning statement acknowledges that the proposal is contrary to the adopted and emerging local plans for the area but concludes that the circumstances are exceptional and that material considerations exist that provide justification for the proposal. They describe the existing outbuildings on site as being derelict and redundant and despite being structurally sound the applicant considers them to be of little aesthetic quality and incapable of conversion. They contend that the proposal incorporates a high standard of design and would be in accordance with wider government policy on sustainable economic growth and housing supply. They conclude that the design of the dwellings would enhance the landscape setting and amenity of neighbouring dwellings.

Site Historv

The following previous applications are of relevance to the current proposal:

0 93/05305/COU use of vacant outbuildings as riding stables with ancillary stores/workshop, erection of dwellinghouse & domestic garage was approved subject to conditions and a legal agreement on 27’h May 1997. 09/01 106/FUL Removal of Planning Condition Restricting Occupation of Dwelling and to release the applicant from the legal agreement.

0

DeveloDment Plan

In terms of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991 , the site is covered by Policy GB1 (Restrict Development in Green Belt).

The Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Plan 2009 identifies the site as NB 3A (Green Belt)

6.

6.1

7.

7.1

a.

8.1

8.2

8.3

8.4

Consultations

A summary of comments from the consultees are as follows: 0 Transportation recommended refusal of the application as the width of the

private access track is such that vehicles are unable to pass one another and that there is also substandard visibility at the junction of the track and the B802. In addition they note that there is no pedestrian facility or street lighting along the length of the access track. Protective Services have recommended the submission of a phase 1 desk study due to the proximity of the site to the former Woodhall Colliery, and, depending on the results of this, a site investigation. The Coal Authority concurred with the findings of the Coal Mining Risk Assessment Report in that further investigation would be required to establish the exact situation regarding coal mining legacy issues and recommend a condition should permission be granted. Scottish Water and Scottish Gas made comments relating to connection to their services.

0

0

0

Representations

Following the press advertisement and neighbour notification no letters of representation have been received.

Plannina Assessment

In accordance with Section 25 of Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The application raises no strategic issues; it can therefore be assessed in terms of the development plan policies. In the Monklands District Local Plan 1991, the site is covered by Policy GBI (Restrict Development in Green Belt). Policy HGIO (Residential Development Outwith Residential Areas) is also relevant along with the Design Guidance for New Houses in the Countryside. In the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan FDNLLP the site is zoned as NBE 3A Assessing Development in the Green Belt with the associated Supplementary Planning Guidance 07 (Development in the Green Belt) also relevant.

Adopted Local Plan

GB1 (Restrict Development in Green Belt) states that within areas designated as Green Belt no development will be permitted except for new houses for full time workers in connection with forestry or agriculture, non-residential developments in connection with forestry and agriculture, uses requiring a rural location (i.e. animal boarding kennels, stables or golf courses) or areas identified as having substantial development potential. When assessing the proposal against the above policy there is no justification for new housing in the Green Belt at this location and in the absence of an operational need the proposal is therefore contrary to GB1.

Policy HGIO states that new build residential development will not be permitted outwith existing residential areas unless it is justified under (amongst other things) policy GB1 as noted above. The applicant has attempted to justify the proposal by highlighting the aesthetic benefits associated with a residential development and contribution to the wider housing supply without detriment to the landscape or residential amenity of neighbouring properties. The justification given does not meet the criteria in Policy HGIO and the proposal is therefore contrary to the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991,

The design guidance for New Houses in the Countryside details the only instance whereby a house would be considered favourably in the green belt when there is no operational need as being when there is an existing building capable of sympathetic

8.5

8.6

8.7

8.8

adaption. In addition, it details that new houses should generally be of traditional design and should have adequate vehicular access. In this instance the outbuildings are of modern construction and are not considered to be worthy of preservation or conversion and the proposal fails to meet the criteria. In relation to design, both houses incorporate multiple dormers with modern features and a double garage and the scale is generally more suburban in character than would normally be expected in a rural area. In this context however, taking account of the adjacent houses, the design is considered to be in keeping with surrounding dwellings in the vicinity and the design is not considered to be a sufficient reason for refusal in this instance.

In relation to Transportation issues, as detailed above, Transportation recommend refusal due to the substandard width of the access track, lack of pedestrian facility and lighting and visibility at the junction of Woodhall Mill Road. While the existing access is substandard, It is considered that the impact of two additional houses at this location would not have a significant impact on traffic movements. On balance the access doesn’t strictly meet Transportation’s requirements, however, it is not considered to be reasonable to include this as a reason for refusal given the scale of the proposed development.

Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan

The application site is zoned as NBE 3A (Assessing Development in the Green Belt) in the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. This policy also requires an appropriate Green Belt justification, and, as detailed above, the proposal does not have one and is contrary to NBE 3A.

The FDNLLP also requires proposed developments to be assessed against policies DSP 1 (Amount of Development), DSP 2 (Location of Development), DSP 3 (Impact of Development) and DSP 4 (Quality of Development). Policy DSP 1 Amount of Development is relevant to this proposal with specific reference to Criterion B Potential Additions to Planned Land Supplies. Additions to housing land supplies greater than 10 dwellings on Greenfield sites are required to be justified by demand assessments. In this instance the proposed number of dwellings is lower than the threshold and as such the proposals are considered to comply with Policy DSP 1. Policy DSP 2 Location of Development is relevant to this proposal with specific reference to Criterion 6: Potential additions to planned land supplies. The site is not identified as being within the village boundaries within the NLLP and it is considered that the proposed location is contrary to the requirements of Policy DSP 2. Policy DSP3 requires developer contributions if improvements are required in the area however, given that the development is for two additional houses, the proposal is not considered to be contrary to DSP3.

Policy DSP 4 Quality of Development states that development will be permitted where sustainable design standards and site planning are achieved. In particular, proposals will need to demonstrate that: an appraisal has been carried out on the existing character and features of the site and a high quality development is achieved with design principles which lead to the creation of a distinct, successful places addressing siting, overall layout, density, form, scale, height, massing, proportion, detailing, materials and open space issues. Developments are also required to integrate successfully into the local area avoiding harm to the neighbouring amenity, avoiding adverse impact on adjacent properties through over looking, loss of privacy or amenity, overshadowing, noise or disturbance. The provision of roads, access and parking also requires to be assessed by Policy DSP4. The development is located out with an area identified for housing in a Green Belt location and no justification has been provided for the dwelling under the requirements of policy NBE 3A, however in relation to design and access, as detailed above, the impact of the proposal is considered to be acceptable and it is therefore broadly acceptable in terms of the requirements of policy DSP 4, however, this does not provide the justification for a dwellinghouse in this Green Belt location. 8

8.9 In addition the proposals are required to be assessed against the criteria outlined in the related SPG 07 “Assessing Development in the Green Belt”. Section I of SPG 07 states that there is a general presumption against granting planning permission for new dwellings in the Green Belt not associated with agriculture or forestry workers. Exceptions to this policy must be justified by evidence of very special circumstances which must be demonstrated by the applicant. As detailed above in paragraphs 8.2 to 8.8, insufficient justification has been submitted with the application to warrant two additional dwellinghouses in this green belt location. It is therefore considered that the application is contrary to SPG 07.

Consultations

8.10 In relation to the consultation responses from the Coal Authority and Protective Services, should the committee be minded to approve the application, it is recommended that conditions are attached requiring further site investigation.

9. Conclusions

9.1 In conclusion, having due regard to the provisions of the Development Plan, the proposed development is considered to be contrary to Policies GB1 and HG10 of the Monklands District Local Plan 1991and Policies NBE 3A and DSP 2 of the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan and Supplementary Planning Guidance SPG 07 in that there is no suitable justification for a dwelling within this Green Belt location. It is therefore recommended that the application be refused.

Application No:

12/00277/FUL

Proposed Development:

Erection of a Single 800Kw Wind Turbine (73.25m to hub and 99.7m to tip) with Associated Apparatus and Access

Site Address:

Nether Bracco Farm 21 Airdrie Road Caldercruix Airdrie North Lanarkshire ML6 8NY

Date Registered:

14th March 201 2

Applicant: Mr William Ralston Nether Bracco farm 21 Airdrie Road Caldercruix ML6 8NY

Application Level : Local Application

Agent: Dale Dunbar Braidenhill Farm Glen m avis Airdrie ML6 OPJ

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Ward: Representations: 7 Airdrie North Councillors Beveridge, S. Coyle, Morgan and Spowart

No letters of representation received.

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

The scale, siting and design of the turbine is considered acceptable and the turbine would not dominate the landscape or affect the visual amenity of the surrounding area to a significant extent. The turbine would be sited a considerable distance from other wind turbines and it is considered that there would not be an unacceptable cumulative impact. Sufficient information has been provided to indicate that the turbine would not adversely affect the amenity of any nearby residential properties, adversely affect any telecommunications or radar operators, or adversely affect the biodiversity of the area.

qeproduced by permission I f Ihe Ordnance Survey on &elf of HMSO 0 Crown w i g h l and dalabese righl B12. All rights reserved. 3rdnance Survey . i m number lOo(m396.

1 , , 1-,

PLANNING APPLICATION 12/00277/FUL

Erection of a Single 800Kw Wind Turbine (73.25m to hub and 99.7m to tip) with Associated Apparatus and Access

Nether Bracco Farm, 21 Airdrie Road, Caldercruix, Airdrie

,+

-1

I t* t

- i* * * Produced by Planning and Development Environmental Services North Lanarkshire Coun Fleming House

Cumbemauld G67 1Jw

N h i m 2 Tryst Road cwndl

Proposed Conditions:-

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

That the development hereby permitted shall be commenced within 3 years of the date of the permission, which shall subsist for a period of 25 years from the first date of generation of electricity from the development to the grid. Written confirmation of the first date of electricity generation shall be provided to the Planning Authority. Within six months of the end of the permission, unless a further planning application is submitted and approved, the wind turbine, ancillary equipment and buildings shall be dismantled and removed from the site and the land restored in accordance with a restoration and after-care scheme to be submitted for the approval of the planning authority no later than 2 years prior to the expiry of the 25 year period.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006, to allow the planning authority to review the circumstances of the temporary permission in the interests of the amenity of the area in the longer term, beyond the 25 year period covered by the permission.

That the development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved drawings and supporting information submitted as part of the application and no change to the approved details (including changes to the make, model or colour) shall be made without prior written approval of the Planning Authority.

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

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

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

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

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

That prior to the commencement of development a Radar Mitigation Scheme to prevent the impairment of the performance of aerodrome navigation aids and/or the efficiency of air traffic control services shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council in consultation with BAA.

Reason: In the interests of aviation safety.

That the turbine shall not be erected until the Radar Mitigation Scheme approved as part of condition 5 above has been implemented and the development shall thereafter be operated fully in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason: In the interests of aviation safety.

That the turbine shall be fitted with 25 candela omni-directional red lighting or infrared lighting with an optimised flash pattern of 60 flashes per minute of 200ms to 500ms duration at the highest practicable point to the satisfaction of the MOD unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority in consultation with the MOD.

Reason: In the interests of aviation safety

That the turbine shall not be brought into operation until the applicant has

demonstrated that they agreed with the Ministry of Defence, NATS and CAA the following information:

- Construction start and end dates of turbine; - The position of the turbine tower in latitude and longitude; - The height of the turbine in metres above ordnance datum and above ground level; and - The proposed methodology for lighting the turbine

Reason: In the interests of aviation safety

9. That BEFORE the turbine hereby permitted is erected on site a baseline television reception study for the area shall be undertaken by a qualified television engineer and submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Details of the potential impact of the turbine to domestic television reception in the area along with necessary mitigation shall also be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any claim by any person for domestic television picture loss or interference at their household within 12 months of the final commissioning of the wind turbine, shall be investigated by a qualified television engineer and the results submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Should any impairment to the television reception be determined by the qualified engineer as attributable to the wind turbine on the basis of the baseline reception study, that impairment shall be mitigated within 28 days of this decision according to the mitigation scheme outlined.

Reason: In order to overcome any television reception interference caused by the wind turbine.

10. That the mitigation specified within table 5.1 of the submitted Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey (dated 5 April 201 2) shall be adhered to throughout this development.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and amendments including the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004

11. That no development shall be undertaken during the breeding bird season (March to August inclusive) unless a breeding bird survey is carried out 48 hours prior to the start of works. Site clearance shall be restricted to safe working distances from any nesting sites that are found (as determined by the ecologist) until the birds have completed nesting. The bird breeding/ nesting survey shall be submitted to the Planning Authority along with an indication of any mitigation used to prevent disturbance from site clearance.

Reason: To comply with the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981

12. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts a Habitat Management Plan (HMP) incorporating habitat enhancements for breeding waders and barn owls shall be prepared by a suitably qualified ecologist and submitted to the Planning Authority for written approval. For the avoidance of doubt any physical habitat enhancement shall be proposed at more than 250m from the turbine.

Reason: To minimise the impact on Breeding Waders and Barn Owls identified on the site.

13. That BEFORE the development starts, the applicant shall appoint an independent Ecological Clerk of Works (ECoW), or other suitably qualified person, acceptable to the Planning Authority. The terms of the appointment shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the terms of the appointment shall be to carry out any additional surveys (if required), assist in the ornithological Habitat Management Plan and monitor ongoing construction.

Reason: To allow the Planning Authority to consider these details and to ensure that all mitigation and construction measures and habitat enhancement works do not impact upon European Protected Species.

14. That noise from the turbine shall not exceed LA90, 10min of 35dB (A) up to wind speeds of 12m/s at 10m in height when measured from any noise sensitive property existing at the date of this permission.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

15. That prior to the delivery of the turbine or any of its components, a Traffic Management Plan shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, this scheme shall include details of the route for each type of vehicle journey, route of abnormal load vehicles to the site from the A8/M8 and detail all identified pinch points, weak bridges, and potential road issues along with swept path analysis and mitigation measures where applicable. Details of any street furniture that may require to be temporarily removed in order to allow abnormal loads to pass must also be provided.

Reason: In the interests of traffic safety.

16. That prior to commencement of the development a Construction Method Statement shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority. The Construction Method Statement shall cover:

- Detailed and scaled map to include the anticipated cable routeing, site storage compound (if applicable), substation (if applicable), on site switch gear (if applicable) and equipment store (if applicable). Details of any change to the layout shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority. - Details of all on site construction, including drainage and pollution prevention, post- construction restoration works including temporary road removal. For the avoidance of doubt these works should accord with the SEPA Pollution Prevention Guidelines.

That the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved Construction Method Statement

Reason: To consider these aspects in detail.

17. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, details of mitigation for potential ice throw shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of public safety.

18. That should 12 months or more elapse after the current original ecological survey (5 April 2012), a further Protected Species Survey shall be undertaken on the site to determine the presence of any statutorily protected species, the said survey shall thereafter be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before any development commences on the site. As a result of the study, should any mitigation measures be required for any protected species, this shall be implemented in accordance with a species protection plan agreed in writing with the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage before works commence on the site.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and amendments including the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004

19. That before the wind turbine hereby permitted is brought into operation the developer shall confirm the proposed shadow flicker mitigation to be used as indicated within shadow flicker assessment submitted as part of the application and the wind turbine

shall continue to operate in conjunction with this mitigation for the duration of the planning permission unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the residential amenity of the area.

20. That should additional shadow flicker issues be identified over the first three years that the wind turbine is in operation then a further assessment with mitigation details shall be submitted to overcome these shadow flicker issues at the affected receptor within 21 days of the Planning Authority notifying the operator and these shall be approved in writing, by the Planning Authority; thereafter the approved measures shall be brought into operation and shall continue through the operation of the wind turbine except as may be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the residential amenity of the area.

21. No development shall take place within the development area until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation which has been submitted by the applicant, agreed by the local Archaeology Service and approved by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of archaeology in accordance with Planning Advice Note (PAN) 42 - Archaeology.

Backaround PaDers:

Consultation Responses:

Email from Rathmell Archaeology Limited received on 4 April 201 2 Letter from BAA Aerodrome Safeguarding received on 3 April 201 2 Memo from Greenspace Development (Ecology and Access) received on 22 May 2012 Letter from Historic Scotland received on 27 March 201 2 Memo from Greenspace Development (Landscape) received on 14 April 201 2,31 May 201 2 and 27 June 2012 Letter from Ministry Of Defence Estates received on 12 April 201 2 Letter from National Air Traffic Services (Safeguarding) received on 2 May 2012 Memo from Protective Services received on 24 April 201 2 Letter from Scottish Rights Of Way And Access Society received on 3 April 201 2 Traffic & Transportation Letter from Royal Soc. for the Protection of Birds received on 28 May 201 2 Letter from Scottish Natural Heritage received on 28 March 2012 Scottish Gas Network National Grid Plant Protection Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received on 30 May 2012 Email from OFCOM received on 21 May 2012 Email from Atkins received on 26 March 201 2 Email from JRC received on 18 April 2012 Email from BT received on 25 May 201 2 Email from Scotland Gas Networks received on 31 May 201 2 Email from Vodafone received on 6 June 2012

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr William Shand at 01236 632499

Report Date:

11 July 201 2

APPLICATION NO. 12/00277/FUL

REPORT

1.

1 . I

2.

2.1

2.2

3.

3.1

4.

4.1

4.2

4.3

Site Description

The application site occupies an area of approximately 0.28 hectares and is located to the south of Hillend Reservoir and 3.3 kilometres north of the M8 Motorway. The nearest settlement is Caldercruix which is located approximately 1.5 kilometres to the north west of the application site. The area is primarily rural in nature although it has a history of mining activity nearby. The site is close to Lilly Loch which is used for fishing and is relatively close to well used Rights of Way. There are also two Scheduled Monuments and several SlNCs within a kilometre of the site.

Proposed Development

Planning permission is being sought for the construction of a single wind turbine. The turbine would have a hub height of 73.25 metres, a rotor diameter of 53 metres and a maximum height to blade tip of 99.7 metres. The total generating capacity of the turbine would be up to a maximum of 800Kw. The elevational plan shows the turbine to be white in colour with green colouring at its base.

The wind turbine would be designed with an operational life of 25 years and at the end of this period the developer would be required to decommission the wind turbine at which time the above ground infrastructure would be removed and the site reinstated. The turbine would be considered as rural diversification of the farm operation as well as providing power to the grid.

Applicant’s Sumortina Information

The applicant has submitted supporting documents in regards to noise, shadow flicker, transportation and ecology. Previously an Environmental Statement (ES) was submitted for the same site for a proposal of 7 wind turbines which was previously withdrawn. This ES has supplied the council with a significant amount of baseline information for this site in terms of background noise, ecology, landscape impact and transport requirements. The applicant’s supporting documents on protected species, noise assessment and shadow flicker supplement the previous work within the ES.

Site Historv

In April 2003 North Lanarkshire Council made a contribution, under the terms of the Environmental Impact Assessment 1999 (Scotland) Regulations, to a scoping exercise to the Scottish Executive in respect of a proposal to construct a 29 Turbine Windfarm development at Nether Bracco Farm. In September 2006 a second scoping exercise was undertaken for 7 turbines on the site.

A subsequent planning application was received in 2008 (ref: 08/00462/FUL) for 7 wind turbines with an accompanying Environmental Statement. The numbers of turbines was reduced to three following adverse consultation responses with these turbines having a height of 59m to hub and 100m tip height. This application was subsequently withdrawn.

An EIA screening request was received in 201 1 (1 1/01252/EIASCR) for the erection of 3 wind turbines. An application (1 1/01261/FUL) for three wind turbines with heights of 53.7m was then received but later withdrawn due again to adverse consultation responses.

5.

5.1

5.2

6.

6.1

6.2

6.3

6.4

6.5

6.6

6.7

6.8

6.9

6.10

Development Plan

The site is within an area zoned as GB2 (Restrict Development within Countryside Around Towns) within the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

The Local Plan (Policy L13) also classifies rural areas into 5 different landscape qualities ranging from ‘high quality’ to ‘devastated’. This site is located within a category 3 “Medium Quality Landscape” area. Policy ENV 18 (Protect Ancient Monuments) would also be of relevance.

Consultations

The following consultees have no objection and no comments to make on the proposed development:-

Atkins on behalf of Scottish Water SNH NATS JRC BT SEPA OFCOM Vodafone Protective Services

Rathmell Archaeology have no objection to the application but suggests that a condition be added requiring an archaeological investigation at the site during the works given the sites proximity to Scheduled Monuments.

Historic Scotland have no objection to the proposal but indicated that the development had the potential to adversely affect the setting of the Drumfin Scheduled Monument and suggested that the turbine be reduced in height to offset this impact.

Scotways have no objections but state that the nearby Rights of Way should remain unobstructed during construction and operation of the turbine.

Ministry of Defence (MOD) have no objections to the proposal but require the turbine to have aviation lighting.

The Royal Society for Protection Birds have no objections but have agreed independently with the developer for contributions towards a raptor monitoring programme to monitor the wind turbines impact on local raptor species. They also ask for this to be included as a condition of any planning permission.

BAA have a concern that the development would cause an adverse impact to the radar operations of Glasgow Airport. Mitigation is possible however and BAA have indicated that they have no objection subject to this mitigation being provided.

The online BBC windfarm tool was used which confirmed that the development may affect 2 dwellings to which there is no alternative off-air service and 3022 homes whom there may be an alternative off-air service.

NLC Transportation were consulted but have not commented on the application

NLC Greenspace Development (Biodiversity and Access) considered the submitted protected species report in conjunction with the information held by the council and concluded that it was important that the mitigation described in the protected species assessment was adhered to, to avoid any adverse impact from the development on bats, reptiles and badgers. Greenspace Development have also requested that alternative habitat be created for breeding waders and Barn Owl whom were shown

to previously frequent the site to reduce the risk to these species from strike or disturbance.

The access officers have also commented on the distance of the turbine from the several informal tracks. They indicate that there are several well used informal tracks in the area and that there should be a separating distance between these and the turbine.

6.1 1 NLC Greenspace Development (Landscape) have commented that the turbine is likely be prominent from some viewpoints but consider the visual impact on the immediate surroundings, the nearest settlements and the wider landscape of North Lanarkshire and consider the potential visual impacts as demonstrated to be acceptable in this instance.

6.12 Scotia Gas Networks have indicated that there is a high pressure pipeline in close proximity to the turbine site and the turbine should be kept at least one and a half times its tower height from the pipeline (approximately 108m).

7. Rewesentat ions

7.1 Following the standard neighbour notification procedure and an advert in the local press no letters of representation were received.

8. Plannina Assessment

8.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended requires that the application be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The application raises no strategic issues and therefore can be determined in accordance with the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991.

8.2 DeveloDment Plan - Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991: The principal local plan policy (Policy GB2 - Restrict Development in Countryside Around Towns) states that isolated developments will generally not be permitted unless they can be justified against criteria of economic benefit, specific locational need, infrastructure implications and environmental impact. On the first point, given that the development provides infrastructure that can add value to the local and wider economy it can be argued that this development may have a small economic value particularly through the development stage but also through the profits received from the development which can be placed back into the local economy. The development is not expected to have any significant adverse economic impacts. On the second point, it is clear that wind turbines will (normally) demonstrate a specific locational need to be sited within an exposed rural location where wind resources are more abundant, close to the electricity grid for the export of electricity and be accessible from the trunk road network with little impact on existing residential properties. On the third point, it seems apparent from the information provided with the application that the development would not have an adverse impact on nearby infrastructure and would have adequate connection to the required grid. On the final point it is acknowledged that the application may have a local environmental impact in terms of visual impact to the local landscape however this would be offset by the wider environmental benefits that the renewable energy provides. The development is therefore considered to accord with this policy.

8.3 Policy L13 (Medium Quality Landscape) states that these areas are unlikely to receive landscape treatment through Council expenditure however every effort should be made to improve the landscape quality. It is considered that given the scale of the development proposed in relation to the landscape type it is unlikely that there would be any significant landscape concern from this development both locally and on a wider scale. Therefore the development can be seen to be compliant with this policy.

8.4 Taken also that the site is close to several Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAM’s) Mid Bracco hut circles and Mid Bracco deserted farmstead and Drumfin deserted settlement (SAM) then policy ENV 18 (Protect Ancient Monuments) is relevant. In broad terms, this policy aims to protect all scheduled Ancient Monuments and sites with heritage value from inappropriate development. Historic Scotland welcome the reduction in turbine numbers from previous applications and note that the turbine is not as close to the Scheduled Monuments as any previously proposed, but consider however that the increase in the turbine height may create a visual impact for the Drumfin Scheduled Monument. The developer has provided an additional viewpoint photomontage to provide context to the likely impact. It is demonstrated from this viewpoint, and taking into account the difficulty to find an appropriate public viewpoint for assessment, that both the turbine and the Scheduled Monument would be difficult to view in the same context. The Scheduled Monument is not easily visible on the ground and would not be considered a significantly utilised feature by the public and therefore would not be considered a sensitive receptor. The topography and vegetation cover in the area also restricts public views of the turbine and Scheduled Monument together and therefore any impact would be difficult to physically view without being in adjacent fields which would be rare and insignificant. For these reasons it is considered that the turbine would not adversely affect the setting of the Scheduled Monuments including Drumfin to an extent that would merit refusal of the application.

8.5 Other Material Considerations - Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan: The application site is zoned as NBE 3A Assessing Development in the Green Belt in the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. This policy seeks to protect the character of the Green Belt through restricting development to acceptable types. Generation of power from renewable sources is considered an acceptable type of development providing the development accords with undernoted criteria:

0

0

0

0

0

0

Have a positive economic benefit. Minimise any adverse environmental impacts. Do not pose undue infrastructure implications. Have a specific locational need. Be of a suitable scale and form for the location. Applications include a landscape assessment.

The development is considered to accord with these criteria. In particular the development would have a positive economic benefit through the generation of energy and the income this supports. It would not pose any undue infrastructure implications given the options available for grid connection. A wind turbine of this nature has a need for a rural location given its scale and potential impacts on residential properties. The potential environmental impacts and the scale and form are considered acceptable and will be discussed further along with the submitted landscape information later in the report. It is therefore considered that the proposed development is acceptable and accords with policy NBE 3A.

8.6 Policy EDI 3 (Assessing Economic Development and Infrastructure Proposals) is also relevant. This states that ‘the Council supports, in principle, all forms of renewable energy generation subject to these meeting the criteria contained in the approved supplementary planning guidance relating to issues of scale, cumulative impact, community benefit and restoration’. The topics for consideration as presented within the relevant guidance (SPG12) are outlined in the following paragraphs but in general it is considered that this development would comply with this policy. Impact policies DSP 3 (Impact of Development) and DSP 4 (Quality of Development) would also be relevant for this application and it is considered that the development would comply with these policies as outlined in the following paragraphs.

8.7 Landscape and Cumulative Impact: Within the SPG12 wind farm areas of search this turbine is located within zone 1 which indicates that this area has the greatest capacity for wind turbines at all scales. This zone already has a significant number of

constructed, approved and proposed turbines. Most of these however are a considerable distance from this site with the closest being a 48m high turbine proposed for Easterton Farm 2.5 km to the north. Following consideration of the submitted photomontages, in conjunction with the comments from Greenspace Development (Landscape), it is considered that this turbine would not cause an unacceptable visual impact. It is acknowledged that the turbine would be visible from both Plains and Caldercruix and would be a prominent feature in the landscape along with the Blackhill Transmitter. The turbine however would not dominate the landscape and its visibility would be highly dependant on climatic conditions. Much of the turbine would be screened by the topography of the area in most directions and therefore the site does benefit from natural screening. It is considered that although the turbine would be large in scale and would be visible from the nearby settlements this would not be sufficient to cause any unreasonable effects. There are several properties on Airdrie Road which would be closer to the turbine than Caldercruix, along with Hillend Reservior. Similar to the impact on the settlements, the turbine would benefit from a rise in topography between these properties and the reservoir. Consequently much of the turbine would be screened thereby reducing the visual impact. For this reason it is considered that the visual impact on the neighbouring properties and Hillend Reservoir would be within acceptable limits. In terms of cumulative impact it is noted that there are very few turbines proposed, approved or constructed in the area that could be viewed in context with this turbine apart from public views from much higher ground. Any such raised landscape would be a considerable distance from the site and the views would be increasingly affected by distance and climatic conditions. Consequently it is considered that this development would not cause a significant adverse cumulative impact.

8.8 Natural Heritage: It has been assessed through consideration of the submitted ecological information that the turbine would not cause any significant adverse impact on protected species, bats or bird species. The turbine is more than 50m from any boundary feature or woodland edge and therefore would have a negligible impact on bats. A protected species assessment has been undertaken which did identify some species of note relatively close to the site however safe working practises and the mitigation proposed in the report would be sufficient to avoid any adverse impact. In terms of ornithology the information held by Greenspace Development on this area from previous applications shows that the wider area has been used by locally important species and to avoid any adverse impact on these, Greenspace Development has requested appropriate habitat improvements to be provided at least 250m from the site in order to reduce conflict between the development and the species. Barn Owls are also known to use the wider area and Greenspace Development have requested that alternative habitat also be provided to reduce any potential impact on this species. The developer has agreed to provide this. It is considered that the turbine would not cause any significant harm to the ecology of the area.

8.9 Noise: The developer has provided a noise assessment which indicates that at the noise at the nearest property (Eastercroft House) which is 500m from the site would have a maximum noise level of 33.7dB(A). This would not exceed the threshold for noise nuisance and therefore it is considered that the development would not cause any significant noise issues for neighbouring properties.

Shadow Flicker; Guidance provided by the Scottish Government indicates that where any property is located within 10 rotor diameters of any proposed wind turbine a shadow flicker assessment would be required. The nearest property is within that limit. The shadow flicker assessment showed that the nearest dwelling would be affected by shadow flicker for approximately 5 hours of the year depending on climatic conditions and other factors. The applicant has provided mitigation options to combat this issue in the form of switching the turbine off when required. As this issue can be adequately mitigated it is considered that shadow flicker would not merit refusal, but a condition should be added should permission be granted agreeing the form of mitigation.

8.10

8.1 1 Distance from Road, Ice Fall and Malfunction: SPG12 stipulates that turbine sites should try to achieve a stand off distance of at least the height of the turbine plus 50% from roads, formal paths and Rights of Way. This turbine would meet this requirement. The access officers have suggested that informal paths in the area also be protected in the same manner however this would unreasonable in the context of this landscape and the numbers of potential users. In terms of ice fall and ice throw it is considered that mitigation should be requested through condition to ensure that the potential impact is reduced for anyone using this area for leisure purposes. This would be in the form of switching the machine when ice is likely to form.

8.12 Aviation, Radar and Electromagnetic Interference: BAA have indicated the development would likely cause interference to their radar operations at Glasgow Airport. The developer must therefore provide mitigation to offset this impact and BAA have indicated that mitigation is available for this area. Therefore any planning permission must contain a condition requiring that the mitigation solution be provided prior to the installation of the turbine. Assessment has indicated that two residential properties may be affected in terms of television reception although it is noted that the impact on television reception has lessened with the roll out of digital television signals. Regardless of this, any planning permission should require the submission of a report clarifying the likely impact, setting out mitigation where necessary. All other relevant consultees had no objection and it is therefore considered that although this turbine may result in some small impacts, mitigation is available.

8.13 Transport Route, Access and Infrastructure: The applicant has submitted a transportation statement which indicates the route of delivery of the turbine and details of the access road and crane hardstanding areas. Two routes have been proposed with one route for the commercial vehicles and delivery of materials which avoids disruption to the main settlements, but includes the need to travel over a weight restricted bridge. Consequently the delivery of the tower and the crane will need to take another route which may be more disruptive as it would involve approximately three trips travelling north along the A73 to Airdrie and then east to the site. The general routes are deemed acceptable and reasonable in terms of disruption given the minimal number of trips required and that the roads can accommodate the vehicle sizes. It is considered however that further specific details on any road upgrades, road furniture removal and traffic management requirements be requested. Minimal upgrades will be required for the site with much of the track from the farm to the site already being suitable. An access track will be formed from the existing track but this will be in a well grazed agricultural field and would cause minimal impact. The required ancillary infrastructure and works such as grid connections and foundations would be unlikely to cause any significant harm to the amenity of the area given the options available to the applicant, and the area that the cable would travel through is not notably sensitive in nature.

8.14 Directorate of Planning and Environmental Appeals (DPEA) Report of Examination on the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan: The DPEA have recently concluded the examination process for the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The policy alterations made in this process would not raise any further material considerations for the determination of this applications.

8.1 5 Scottish Planning Policy: Scottish Planning Policy promotes wind turbine development in appropriate locations and sets out the mechanisms for Planning Authorities to support this. This document is supported by more detailed considerations provided on the Scottish Government website database. The matters specified in the SPP document and website have been considered throughout the report and the development would comply with this guidance.

Consultation responses: As noted in section 6.1 a large number of the consultees have no objections to the proposal. Scotia Gas Networks has indicated that there is a high pressure pipeline close to the site and that the turbine should be at least 108m

8.16

from the pipeline. The applicant has submitted a plan which shows the turbine to be approximately 130m from the pipeline which would therefore meet this requirement. The requirements stipulated by Rathmell (Archaeology) should be included as a condition of any planning permission. In terms of Historic Scotland's concern regarding the potential impact on the Scheduled Monument, this has been covered in section 8.4. Scotways have requested that the Right of Way remain unobstructed during the construction and given the distance between the site and Right of Way there is no reason for obstruction to occur. The MOD have requested that the turbine be fitted with aviation lighting and this should be included as a condition should planning permission be approved. Greenspace Developments comments are covered in section 8.8 and BAAs comments are covered in section. Given the comments received by the BBC online tool it is important that further assessment in terms of television reception is undertaken and mitigation provided if necessary. This should be a condition of any planning permission. RSPB have indicated that the development is unlikely to cause any significant harm to any avian species in the area but are aware of breeding raptors in the wider area. As there is insufficient information on the impact of turbines on raptors they have agreed with the developer for a monetary contribution to be made to a three year monitoring study of the development and have asked that this is conditioned to any planning permission. As this condition would not relate directly to the acceptability of this proposal it is considered that the use of such a condition would not be appropriate of planning legislation, however the agreement between the developer and RSPB is welcomed.

9 Conclusions

9.1 Taking the foregoing into account it is considered that the proposed wind turbine would accord with the terms of the Adopted Monklands District Local Plan 1991 and the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan. The landscape, visual and cumulative impact of the proposed development is considered acceptable and it is considered that the turbine is unlikely to have any significant impact on the ecology in the area. All issues in terms of aviation radar, shadow flicker and television signal can be adequately mitigated and therefore the development would not adversely affect the residential or visual amenity of the area or cause a significant electromagnetic or radar interference. The proposed development is therefore considered acceptable and it is recommended that the application be approved subject to the attached conditions.

Application No:

12/00395/FUL

Proposed Development:

Change of Use from Public Open Space to Private Garden Ground at front and rear of property and repositioning of Boundary Fence at rear (in retrospect). Site Address: 20 Pine Place Abron hill Cumbernauld Glasgow G67 3AU

Date Registered:

14 June 2012

Applicant: Mr David Caskie 20 Pine Place Abronhill Cumbernauld Glasgow G67 3AU Application Level: Local Application

Ward: 004 Abronhill, Kildrum And The Village Stephen Grant, Elizabeth Irvine, Tom Johnston,

Agent: N/A

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Representations: 0 letter(s) of representation received.

Recommendation: Approve

Reasoned Justification:

It is considered that the proposed development accords with the adopted Cumbernauld Local Plan Policy HG4 and the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan in that the proposed change of use will not result in a significant impact on the area’s residential amenity.

iepmduted by permission f the O h a n t e Suney on ehaIfofHMS0. @Crown :opyrigtt and database tifl 012. Allnghb resend. ldnanoe Suruey iteme number 100023396.

Change of Use from Public Open Space to Private Garden Ground at front and rear of property and repositioning of Boundary Fence at rear (in retrospect).

20 Pine Place.Abronhill. Cumbernauld

Planning and Development N Environmental Semi

North Lanarkshire C Fleming H Ouse 2 Tryst Road Cumbernauld A G87 I J W

Backaround PaDers:

Representation Letters None

Consultation Responses: None

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Lisa Smith at 01 236 632522

Report Date:

10th May 2012

APPLICATION NO. 12/00326/FUL

REPORT

1.

2.

2.1

3.

4.

4.1

5.

5.1

6.

6.1

7.

7.1

7.2

Site Description

The application site incorporates one area to the rear and two areas to the front of 20 Pine Place, Abronhill. The application house forms part of a series of two storey terraced properties which are located on terracing accessed by footpaths and a series of stairs. To the south of the application house, terraced 3 storey town houses with rear gardens exist. Within the immediate locale of the application house, the densely built nature of the area incorporates small sections of open space to balance and soften the amount of concrete. The application house historically had no official private garden space but has bounded off areas of land currently owned by North Lanarkshire Council with the applicant purchasing the land.

Proposed Development

The application site is at 20 Pine Place, Abronhill and the proposed development is the change of public open space to private garden ground. The application site is approximately 39 square metres in size and is spread over two separate areas at the front of the house and one area to the rear of the house. The area had already been bounded off by the applicant and the section at the rear has now been reduced to reflect this planning permission.

Site History None.

Development Plan

In the adopted Cumbernauld Local Plan, 1993, the site lies within an area covered by Policy HG4 (Residential Amenity). Under this policy, there is a presumption against development that could be detrimental to residential amenity.

Consultations

The Council’s Property Service confirmed they have no objection to the proposed development.

Representat ions

None.

Plannina Assessment

Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires that planning decisions be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case no strategic issues are raised and the proposal can be assessed against the Local Plan.

Development Plan: Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993: Policy HG4 (Residential Amenity) applies in this case and states that proposals should not detract from local residential amenity. Although the application house was designed not to have front or rear private garden space, times have changed with the original design not delivering on what most now regard as essential with a house - some private garden space. The densely built nature of the area was designed to be softened by small pockets of open space, however, it is considered that due to the small size of the area proposed and a larger area of open space that exists North West of the application house, the impact on residential amenity is negligible.

7.3 Other Material Considerations - Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan (FDNLLP): Policy HCF 1 A (Protecting Residential Amenity) is the same designation as Policy HG 4 above in Para 7.2 and therefore the same comments apply. Policy DSP 3 (Impact of Development) is relevant in this case in respect of the social and environmental infrastructure of a community. Given the comments made in Para 7.2, it is considered that Policy DSP 3 is satisfied, as residential amenity has not been significantly affected. Policy DSP 4 looks at the existing character, features and setting of a site and design principles which will create a distinct successful place. Taking everything into account, it is considered that the application site, due to its size, does not significantly detract from the area’s identity, character or residential amenity. It is therefore considered that the proposed development accords with FDNLLP Policies HCF l A , DSP 3 and DSP 4.

7.4 Representations - None.

a. Conclusions

8.1 It is considered that the proposed garden ground extension does not have a significant negative impact on the residential amenity of the site or the general area. In addition, it is considered that sufficient Open Space will remain and will continue to secure the current residential amenity of the area.

8.2 Having taken account of relevant matters it is considered that the proposed development accords with the adopted Cumbernauld Local Plan and the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan as it does not result in a significant impact on the area’s residential amenity. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted for the change of use from open space to private garden.

Application No:

12/00529/FUL

Proposed Development:

Erection of Replacement Detached Rear Garage (retrospective) Site Address:

144 North Road Bellshill North Lanarkshire ML4 1EX

Date Registered:

1 st June 201 2

Applicant: Mr Frank Walsh 144 North Road Bellshill ML4 1EX

Application Level:

Local Application

Agent: Brian Morrell 17 Cowan Wynd Uddingston G71 6TP

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Ward: Representations: 01 4 Bellshill Harry Curran, Marina Lyle, Harry McGuigan,

Four letters of representation received.

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

The proposed development meets the criteria set out in the residential policies contained within the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 and the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2009. The proposed development is acceptable in terms of its impact upon the property and the surrounding residential area.

Repmduced by permission btheOrchance S u n g on kehaWdHMSO. @Crown CopyrigH and database ti&t

Ordnance Suwey Liceme number 100023396.

a12. Allright5 resewd.

12WO529/FUL Mr Frank WaIsh 144 North Road, Bellshill, ML4 1 E X Replacement and Extension to Existing Gar ag e (R etro sp ect ive)

Produced by

Envir o nm ental Services North Lanarkshire Council Flrming House 2 Tryst Road Cumbernauld G67 I J W

N Planning and Development

A

Proposed Conditions:-

1.

2.

3.

4.

That the development hereby permitted shall be finished in facing materials in accordance with drawing number 6 within six months of the date that planning permission is issued.

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

That except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers 1 , 2, 3, 5, 6 and drawing known as 'existing elevations and floor plans'.

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

That within 4 weeks of the development hereby permitted being occupied or brought into use a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006, to monitor the development, to enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control.

That the use of the garage hereby permitted shall be restricted to private use incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse on the site in that no commercial activity shall be carried out, in, or from, the garage and the garage will not be used for habitable purposes.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

Backaround PaDers:

Representation Letters

Email from Mrs A Kelly, 140 North Road, Bellshill received 1 4'h June 201 2 Email from Ms Agnes Graham, Trustee of Mr William Weir, 2 Hilltop Avenue, Bellshill received 27th June 201 2 Email from Ms Agnes Graham, Trustee of William & Frances Weir, 146 North Road, Bellshill received 27th June 201 2 Email from Mr Lorna Gilmour (tenant), 2 Hilltop Avenue, Bellshill received 3rd July 2012

Consultation Responses:

None

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Suzanne Cusick at 01 236 632645

Report Date:

9th July 201 2

APPLICATION NO: 12/00529/FUL

REPORT

1.

1.1

2.

2.1

3.

3.1

3.2

4.

4.1

5.

5.1

5.2

5.3

6.

6.1

Site Description

The application site consists of a detached garage to the rear of 144 North Road Bellshill, a detached one and half storey dwelling set within an established residential area. A single storey rear extension and front and rear dormer windows have been added to the original dwelling. The dwelling is bordered to the north, south and east by bungalow type dwellings. To the west and across North Road the dwellings are predominantly two stories in height and semi-detached or cottage flats.

Proposed Development

The proposed detached rear garage has been recently erected on the same location in the rear garden to replace the previous detached garage that was demolished as a result of its poor condition. The proposed garage features a pitched roof and measures approximately 6.1 metres high, 7.4 metres wide and 7.7 metres long. The proposed garage is slightly larger in height and area than the previous detached garage which featured a double and single pitched roof and a small single storey workshop attached to the rear of the garage. The previous garage measured approximately 7.4 metres wide, 5.4 metres long and 5.5 metres at its highest point. The rear workshop measured approximately 3.5 metres high, 4.2 metres wide and projected 1.9 metres from the rear elevation of the previous garage. The existing dropped kerb from North Road provides access to the proposal.

Amlicant’s Sumortinu Information

The applicant has submitted a letter in support of the application confirming the garage would be used solely to park the applicants own car and for the long term restoration of a classic car owned by the applicant which is currently stored in a friends garage. The applicant currently rents garage space to accommodate the parts and tools required to restore the classic car and the increased height and attic trusses of the garage would provide this necessary storage.

The applicant concluded that due to the poor and unsafe condition of the previous garage it was demolished and because the garage was rebuilt within the same footprint did not know planning permission was required.

Site History

None

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

The site is zoned as HSG7 (Established Housing Areas) in the Southern Area Local Plan.

The site is zoned as HCFlA (Residential Amenity) in the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

Consultations

None

7. RePresentations

7.1 Following the neighbour notification process four objections were received from the following residents:

7.2 The following summarises the points of the representations made:

1. The applicant appears to have shown complete disregard for the planning process and the surrounding residents by erecting the garage prior to seeking planning permission. This could set a precedent in seeking retrospective consent.

2. The increased height of the garage overshadows the living room area of 2 Hilltop Avenue and affects the sunlight on the rear patios of 2 Hilltop Avenue and 146 North Road.

3. The increased size and relocation of the garage (6 feet closer to the rear boundary of the site) results in the surrounding properties being dwarfed by the garage. The garage is visually unsightly and imposing on the skyline and blocks the view from the neighbouring dwellings.

4. The upper level of the garage is to be used as living accommodation for a family member.

8. Plannina Assessment

8.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The proposal raises no strategic issues and, as such requires to be assessed against the Local Plan Policies. In this instance the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 is relevant, with the site being zoned as HSG7 (Established Housing Area). Policy HSG12 (House Extensions) is also relevant to the proposal.

8.2 Policy HSG7 (Established Housing Areas) seeks to protect the established character of existing housing areas by opposing development which adversely affects the amenity of Established Housing Areas. Applications for new structures within the curtilage of a dwelling, such as garages, in such areas are acceptable subject to meeting the requirements of Policy HSG12 (Housing Extensions).

8.3 Policy HSG12 (Housing Extensions) sets out various criteria for assessing such applications, including the design, size, proportion and position of extensions, the effect on the amount of garden ground retained and the impact on the street scene, the impact of the proposal on neighbouring properties in relation to privacy, SunlighVdaylight and parking provision and access. The detached garage features a white metal up and over garage door and a white UPVC door on the front elevation and two small Velux windows on either side of the pitched roof. Upon completion, the garage would be finished in brown render and grey interlocking roof tiles to match the materials used on the dwelling at 144 North Road. The proposed garage largely occupies the same footprint as the previous garage however as a result of the redesign and area increase the garage has been sited slightly closer to the rear boundary by 0.3 metres and the height has increased by 0.6 metres. Whilst the garage is larger than the previous garage it is not considered that the visual impact on surrounding residential properties is any greater than the previous garage. Although the existing garage is located to the rear of the site it would be visible in part from North Road and Hilltop Avenue but it would be viewed as an outbuilding ancillary to the dwelling that it would serve. The design of the garage would therefore be considered acceptable. The house plot is of an adequate size that accommodates

this size of garage whilst still retaining an acceptable area of garden ground. In consideration of the size of the existing house, useable private garden ground and overall site area, the scale and massing of the current proposal is considered to be acceptable.

8.4 The privacy of the neighbouring residential properties is not affected as no windows are located on any of the garage elevations. The only windows would be small roof lights. A planning condition would ensure the garage is not used for habitable or commercial purposes to protect the amenity of the surrounding dwellings. With regards to overshadowing a sunlightldaylight assessment confirmed there would be no significant loss of sunlight or daylight due to the position, location and orientation of the garage. As mentioned above in paragraph 8.3, the garage has been erected 1.3 metres from the rear of the site, which is 0.3 metres closer than the previous garage and the garage is visible in part from the property directly to the rear of the site, 2 Hilltop Avenue, however there is some tree and hedgerow screening along the boundary that lessens the view of the garage. The rear garden area is relatively flat and the surrounding area slopes slightly west to east downward resulting in the rear garden being slightly raised above the level of 2 Hilltop Avenue and in turn the garage appearing somewhat higher from this view. Nonetheless it is not considered to have an unacceptable impact on this property in scale, size, massing or design. The garage is also visible from the neighbouring properties either side of the site but, the fact that it is visible from these properties does not make it unacceptable and in planning terms there is no right to a view.

8.5 Other Material Considerations - Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan (FDNLLP): The emerging local plan is a material consideration. The zoning of the site does not change in this plan and the development is considered to accord with policy HCF1 A Protecting Housing and Community facilities (residential amenity). Policy DSP4 (Quality of Development) seeks to ensure that development is well designed and does not have an adverse impact on neighbouring amenity. The garage complies with this policy for reasons explained below.

8.6 Extension Design: The garage is of an acceptable design and subservient to the existing house. The design is acceptable in scale and the garage will satisfactorily blend with the appearance of the main dwelling. A condition will ensure the garage is finished in materials which will match the existing dwelling. The garage does not result in a loss of SunlighVdaylight to surrounding properties as the properties are an adequate distance from the proposed garage or are orientated so that the garage would not have an adverse impact. An acceptable level of garden ground remains and in curtilage parking levels are unaffected. The design, scale and location of the garage to the rear of the dwelling house are therefore considered acceptable.

Representations

8.7 In response to the points of representation I would comment as follows:

1. The retrospective nature of this planning application does not set a precedent and as such is still the subject of the full and formal planning assessment process, including neighbour notification, as with all planning applications.

2. As discussed in paragraph 8.3 the proposal is not considered to constitute a significant impact in terms of overshadowing of neighbouring properties.

3. The proposal would not be significantly overbearing on the neighbouring properties due to the distance and screening of the garage in relation to the neighbouring dwellings. The proposed garage is 0.3 metres closer to the rear boundary, not six feet. As mentioned in paragraph 8.4 the loss of view from neighbouring dwellings is not considered a material planning consideration.

4. A condition would be imposed to ensure the proposal would be used for private use incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse and not as a separate dwellinghouse.

9. Conclusions

9.1 In conclusion, it is considered the design and impact of the detached rear garage is acceptable from a planning viewpoint and does not adversely affect the local residential amenity. The proposed garage accords with the Southern Area Local Plan 2008 and the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2009 and it is therefore recommended that the application be approved subject to the attached conditions

Application No:

12/00652/FUL

Proposed Development:

Sitting of Mobile Snack Van on Public Road Site Address:

Site Opposite 7 Grayshill Road Westfield Cum bernauld

Date Registered:

13th June 201 2

Applicant: Mr Gerard Marshall 78 Townhead Road Coatbridge ML5 2HU Application Level: Local Application

Agent: N/A

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Ward: Representations: 002 Cumbernauld North Balwant Singh Chadha, Alan Mastetton, Barry McCulloch, Alan O'Brien,

0 letter(s) of representation received.

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

A mobile hot food snack van is considered to be acceptable at this location as it can be regarded as being small scale and ancillary to the industrial area in which it is located. As such it is considered that there will be no adverse impact on the existing industrial character and amenity of the area and will be in accordance with the adopted Cumbernauld Local Plan Policies IB1, 162 and 184 and Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan Policy EDI 1Al- Protecting Economic Development Areas and Infrastructure - Industrial and Business Areas.

leproduced by permission f the Ordnance Survey on ehalf of HMSO. 0 Crown bpyight and database right 009. All rights reserved. kdnance Survey icence number 10[)023396.

' , , I ./' . *

12/00652/FUL

Mr Gerard Marshall

Sitting of Mobile Snack Van on Public Road

Site Opposite 7 Grayshill Road Wesffield Cum bemauld

v WESTFIELD

Produced by Plannina and DeveloDment Environhental Sewides North Lanarkshire C '

Fleming House

Cumbernauld G67 1JW

rbhire 2 Tryst Road colmdl

Proposed Conditions:-

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

That this permission shall ensure for a temporary period only and the snack van hereby permitted shall be removed from the site within 3 years of the date of this permission, unless a further application has been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and to accord with the terms of this application.

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

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

That a litter bin shall be provided on site for the duration of the permission.

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

That no open air storage of stock shall take place within the application site.

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

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

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

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

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

That prior to the snack bar hereby approved being placed on site details of it's size, style (static/mobile) and elevations shall be submitted to and for the written approval of the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required.

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

Backaround Papers:

Representation Letters None

Consultation Responses:

Traffic & Transportation

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ms Lisa Smith at 01 236 632522

Report Date:

10th July 201 2

APPLICATION NO. 12/00652/FUL

REPORT

1. Site Description

1.1 The application site is within Westfield industrial area and is adjacent to 7 Grayshill Road, approximately 35 metres from the junction with Orchardton Road.

2. Proposed Development

2.1 Planning permission is sought for the siting of a mobile snack van on the public road, and is required due to an Article 4 Direction.

3. Applicant’s Supportinq Information

3.1

4. Site History

0

0

0

No additional information has been submitted in support of the application.

00/00756/PRE Formation of Electricity Substation. 01/00358/FUL Siting of Mobile Snack Bar (Retrospective Application). 12/001 19/FUL Sitting of Mobile Snack Van on Public Road

5.

5.1

5.2

6.

6.1

7.

7.1

8.

8.1

Development Plan

In terms of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 the site is located within a Strategic Industrial Location and is covered by Policies IBI, 182 and IB4. These policies states that the area is a strategically significant industrial and business location which should be safeguarded from non-industrial and inappropriate uses.

In terms of the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan the site is within an area zoned as EDI 1Al -Protecting Economic Development Areas and Infrastructure - Industrial and Business Areas which supports the continuing industrial and business character of existing industrial and business areas.

Consultations

Traffic and Transportation has no objection.

0 letter(s) of representation received.

Plannincl Assessment

In accordance with Section 25 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The proposal raises no strategic issues and as such requires to be assessed against Local Plan Policies. In this instance Policies IB1, IB2 and 184 of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 are of relevance as their function is to safeguard industrial and business locations from non-industrial and inappropriate uses. The proposed snack van is of an auxiliary and small scale nature that will not have a detrimental impact on the industrial character of the area. The fact a snack van already exists on another section of Grayshill Road is not considered to be an issue in planning terms. Such uses are common in industrial locations and providing they do not pose a road safety hazard, which this does not, can provide an important facility for the local workforce.

8.2 The proposed snack van is also considered to be compliant with policy EDI 1Al- Industrial and Business Areas of the Finalised Draft North Lanarkshire Local Plan as it is of a small scale nature which will not have a detrimental impact on the existing industrial character of the area.

9. Conclusions

9.1 It is considered that the snack bar provides a necessary service in an established industrial area and does not raise road safety or nuisance issues or affect the amenity of surrounding industrial premises. The proposal complies with the industrial and business policies of the Cumbernauld Local Plan 1993 and the North Lanarkshire Local Plan Finalised Draft 2009.