_Planning Adviser Background Report
North Lanarkshire Council · 22 February 2023
Back to Local Review Body — 22 February 2023 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
North Lanarkshire Council Report Local Review Body Does this report require to be approved? ☐ Yes ☐ No Ref 22/01276/PPP Date Click here to enter a date. Planning Application: Planning Adviser Background Report From Pamela Humphries, Chief Officer of Place E-mail Laingg@northlan.gov.uk Telephone Gordon Laing, 07970018874 Executive Summary This background report summarises the key considerations for review by the members of the Local Review Body in determining the appellants appeal against the delegated refusal of their application. Recommendations That the members of the Local Review Body note the content of this background report. The Plan for North Lanarkshire Priority Improve the health and wellbeing of our communities Ambition statement (14) Ensure the highest standards of public protection
Page 2
1. Background 1.1 Planning Application 22/01276/PPP for a Dwellinghouse (in principle) at land west of 1 Cobbleton Road, New Stevenston, Motherwell was refused planning permission under delegated powers on the 14th December 2022. 1.2 A notice of review was submitted by the appellant dated 21st December 2022. 2. Description of Proposal and Location 2.1 Description of proposal: Dwellinghouse (in principle) Location: Land west of 1 Cobbleton Road, New Stevenston, Motherwell 2.2 The application site is located in a rural (Green Belt) location and within the Riccard Johnston Site of Interest for Nature Conservation (SINC) and consists of an area of dense vegetation, planting and trees. To the west of the application site there is a detached dwellinghouse and to the north-east are detached dwellinghouses. 2.3 Site Context Google Aerial View 1
Page 3
Google Aerial View 2 2.4 Plans Location Plan Site Plan - Existing
Page 4
Site Plan - Proposed
Page 5
2.5 Site Photographs View of Site Looking West along Cobbleton Avenue View of Site Looking East along Cobbleton Avenue
Page 6
Application Site Application Site
Page 7
Application Site Application Site
Page 8
2.6 Planning Policy 2.7 National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) adopted on the 13th February 2023 forms part of the Development Plan and is required to be taken account when determining planning applications. In circumstances where there are differences between NPF4 and the adopted North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (NLLDP), it should be noted that the NPF4 policy position will supersede the policies in the NLLDP. 2.8 The Chief Planner issued a letter on 8th February 2023, providing advice on NPF4 becoming part of the statutory ‘development plan’ alongside local development plans (LDPs) with the intention for this advice to support consistency in decision making ahead of new style LDPs being in place. In relation to the application of NPF4 Policy the letter states Section 25 of the 1997 Act requires that decisions are made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Application of planning judgement to the circumstances of an individual situation remains essential to all decision making, informed by principles of proportionality and reasonableness. It is important to bear in mind NPF4 must be read and applied as a whole. The intent of each of the 33 policies is set out in NPF4 and can be used to guide decision-making. Conflicts between policies are to be expected. Factors for and against development will be weighed up in the balance of planning judgement. It is recognised that it may take some time for planning authorities and stakeholders to get to grips with the NPF4 policies, and in particular the interface with individual LDP policies. As outlined above, in the event of any incompatibility between a provision of NPF and a provision of an LDP, whichever of them is the later in date is to prevail. Provisions that are contradictory or in conflict would be likely to be considered incompatible. Initial assessments are that while some LDP policies, particularly ones with thresholds for development derived from Clydeplan, will not be wholly applicable from the 13th of February, NPF and LDP policies are generally complimentary. In the case of this application the 33 Policies within NPF4 are presented for members consideration and it is for members to make a judgement on their applicability. As an aid the following policies may be considered to have particular relevance to this application: Policy 1 Tackling the climate and nature crises Policy 2 Climate mitigation and adaptation Policy 3 Biodiversity Policy 8 Green belts Policy 12 Zero Waste Policy 14 Design, quality and place Policy 17 Rural homes Policy 23 Health and Safety A copy of all NPF4 policies is included in the papers annex. As the site lies within the Rural Area as defined in NPF 4 then Policy 17 may be considered alongside Policy 8 and equivalent LDP policy PP4.
Page 9
2.9 North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan Local Plan Extract 2.10 The relevant Policies in the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022 and associated Guidance are detailed can be summarised as follows: PP 4 Green Belt Policy Purpose of Place AD 4 Green Belt Policy Amount of Development EDQ 1 Policy Site Appraisal EDQ 3 Policy Quality of Development PROT A Policy Natural Environment and Green Network Assets – A3 Local Sites SPG 07 Green Belt A copy of these policies in full are located the agenda papers annex. 2.11 The report of handling considered that the principle of the development was unacceptable, as the proposed development fails to meet the criteria set out in policy PP4 (Green Belt) as it has not been demonstrated that it is necessary in association with an appropriate rural use and the applicant has not provided sufficient material considerations or justification to suggest that the development plan should not prevail in this case. 2.12 Reasons for Refusal 1. That the proposed development is contrary to local development plan Policy PP 4 (Green Belt), in that it does not fall within the category of acceptable Green Belt
Page 10
development outlined in policy PP 4. No adequate justification, special circumstances or material considerations have been demonstrated to merit a departure from the development plan. 2. That even if the proposed development were to be considered to be acceptable in principle in the Green Belt (as already indicated in reason 1, it is not acceptable in principle), the application has not provided evidence or information to satisfy the council that the proposed development would not harm the integrity of, or species within, the Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) in which the application site is located. As such, the proposed would be contrary to local development plan Policy PROT A (Natural Environment and Green Network Assets). 3. That even if the proposed development were to be considered to be acceptable in principle in the Green Belt (as already indicated in reason 1, it is not acceptable in principle), the application would be contrary to the access and roads aspect of local development plan policy EDQ 3. 2.13 The report of handling recommended that the proposal should be refused for the reasons outlined in both the Reasoned Justification and in the Reasons for Refusal contained within the agenda papers annex. 2.14 The application was refused planning permission on 14th December 2022. 2.15 Consultations 2.16 NLC Roads: Did not make comment on the application but made comments on an earlier identical application (21/01834/PPP) in May 2022. Roads Development Service recommended that application 21/01834/PPP be refused. The application currently under consideration is essentially a duplicate of application 21/01834/PPP with the proposed development, location and site access remaining consistent to that proposed in application 21/01834/PPP, the previous comments by the Roads Development Service were therefore considered applicable. 2.17 NLC Pollution Control: No objection subject to conditions relating to intrusive site investigations being included within any permission. 2.18 NLC Greenspace: Advised that they accept the findings of Preliminary Ecological Appraisal submitted by the applicant. In addition Greenspace advised further bat surveys are required and given that the application site is within a Site of Nature Conservation, all recommendations on mitigation and biodiversity enhancement identified within the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal should be conditioned and included within any permission. It was also advised that further landscaping proposals should be submitted. 2.19 The Coal Authority: Advised that they have no objections subject to conditions relating to intrusive site investigations being included within any permission. 2.20 Representations 2.21 There were no representations received in relation to the application. 2.22 Review Submission
Page 11
2.23 The applicant has submitted a Review Statement and supporting documents contained in full within the agenda papers annex. The statement expresses, in summary, the applicant’s view that:- - The application site is located on the very edge of the Green Belt and previously contained a house historically. (The appellant has provided photographs and ordinance survey plans in support and these are contained in the agenda papers annex). - The appellant is happy to limit development to the footprint of the historic dwelling. - Two other houses currently are serviced by the access road and the road was intended to service all 3 dwellings the two other existing dwellings and application site. - The two existing dwellings also fail to fulfil the requirements of Green Belt policy as they do not provide facilities for agriculture, forestry or outdoor recreation and have been there for over 100 years. - The site is adjacent to an existing group of houses on Jerviston Road and a site has been designated for housing approximately 30m away. - The submitted Preliminary Ecological Report does not raise any matters that cannot be mitigated in environmental terms to prevent development of the site. - Cobbleton Road is privately owned and the applicant would adopt a shared responsibility for maintenance of the road with the two existing properties. - The proposed development would provide accommodation for a local business owner and whilst not providing a function relevant to the rural economy, the applicant does provide significant benefit to the local economy and wishes to develop the land in a sympathetic manner. 2.24 Representations subsequent to notification of interested parties of the notice of Review 2.25 No further representations have been submitted in response to the submission of the Notice of Review. 2.26 Conclusion and Decision on Proceeding with the Local Review Body Decision 2.27 As with all applications each case requires to be considered on its own merits and in accordance with the development plan policies unless material considerations outweigh the provisions of these policies. These are the factors and issues which require to be considered by the Local Review Body when determining this application. 2.28 The members are now requested to consider whether sufficient information is provided within this LRB Report and the associated annex to proceed with the hearing. 3. Measures of success 3.1 That the information provided is sufficient for the Local Review Body to determine the appellants review submission. 4. Supporting documentation 4.1 The Planning Adviser Background Report will be accompanied by additional supporting information contained within the background papers and includes:- - Planning Decision Notice. - Report of Handling
Page 12
- Planning Policy Documents - Consultation Responses - Notice of Review and Supporting Documentation. Pamela Humphries Chief Officer (Place) 5. Impacts ( http://connect/report-template-guidance ) 5.1 Public Sector Equality Duty and Fairer Scotland Duty Does the report contain information that has an impact as a result of the Public Sector Equality Duty and/or Fairer Scotland Duty? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? If Yes, has an assessment been carried out and published on the council’s website? https://www.northlanarkshire.gov.uk/your-community/equalities/equality-and-fairer- scotland-duty-impact-assessments Yes ☐ No ☐ 5.2 Financial impact Does the report contain any financial impacts? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, have all relevant financial impacts have been discussed and agreed with Financial Solutions? Yes ☐ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? 5.3 HR policy impact Does the report contain any HR policy or procedure impacts? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, have all relevant HR impacts have been discussed and agreed with People and Organisational Development? Yes ☐ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? 5.4 Legal impact Does the report contain any legal impacts (such as general legal matters, statutory considerations (including employment law considerations), or new legislation)? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, have all relevant legal impacts have been discussed and agreed with Legal and Democratic Solutions? Yes ☐ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? 5.5 Data protection impact Does the report / project / practice contain or involve the processing of personal data? Yes ☐ No ☒
Page 13
If Yes, is the processing of this personal data likely to result in a high risk to the data subject? Yes ☐ No ☐ If Yes, has a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) been carried out and e- mailed to dataprotection@northlan.gov.uk Yes ☐ No ☐ 5.6 Technology / Digital impact Does the report contain information that has an impact on either technology, digital transformation, service redesign / business change processes, data management, or connectivity / broadband / Wi-Fi? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? Where the impact identifies a requirement for technology, has an assessment been carried out (or scheduled) by the Enterprise Architecture Governance Group (EAGG)? Yes ☐ No ☐ 5.7 Environmental / Carbon impact Does the report / project / practice contain information that has an impact on any environmental or carbon matters? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? 5.8 Communications impact Does the report contain any information that has an impact on the council’s communications activities? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? 5.9 Risk impact Is there a risk impact? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the key risks and potential impacts, highlighting where the risk(s) are assessed and recorded (e.g. Corporate or Service or Project Risk Registers), and how they are managed? 5.10 Armed Forces Covenant Duty Does the report require to take due regard of the Armed Forces Covenant Duty (i.e. does it relate to healthcare, housing, or education services for in-Service or ex- Service personnel, or their families, or widow(er)s)? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the provision which has been made to ensure there has been appropriate consideration of the particular needs of the Armed Forces community to make sure that they do not face disadvantage compared to other citizens in the provision of public services.