Agenda Document Pack - Planning Committee - 14/05/2026
North Lanarkshire Council · 14 May 2026
Back to Planning Committee — 14 May 2026 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
5 May 2026 Members of the Planning Committee Chief Executive’s Office Rachel Blair Chief Officer (Legal, Democratic and Strategy) Civic Centre, Windmillhill Street, Motherwell ML1 1AB www.northlanarkshire.gov.uk Notice is given that a Meeting of the Planning Committee is to be held in the Council Chamber, Civic Centre, Windmillhill Street, Motherwell, ML1 1AB on Thursday, 14 May 2026 at 10:00 AM which you are requested to attend. The agenda of business is attached. Rachel Blair Chief Officer (Legal, Democratic and Strategy) Members : Clerk Name: Clare Louise McDonald Clerk Telephone: 07350 435308 Clerk Email: committee@northlan.gov.uk N Shevlin, G Currie, A Beveridge, B Burgess, A Bustard, J Cairns, M Coyle, S Coyle, K Docherty, A Duffy-Lawson, T Fisher, M Hughes, L Jarvie, T Johnston, J Keltie, J Logue, H Loughran, J McLaren, C McManus, M McPake, A McVey, L Mitchell, D Robb, A Smith, G Woods. Page 1 of 18
Page 2
Page 2 of 18
Page 3
Agenda 1 Declarations of Interest In Terms of the Ethical Standards In Public Life Etc. (Scotland) Act 2000 2 Planning Applications Index Submit Planning Applications Index 5 - 18 3 Presentation - Local Development Plan and Call for Sites/Ideas Page 3 of 18
Page 4
Page 4 of 18
Page 5
North Lanarkshire Council Planning Applications for consideration of Planning Committee Committee Date: 14th May 2026 Ordnance Survey maps reproduced from Ordnance Survey with permission of HMSO Crown Copyright reserved Item 2 Page 5 of 18
Page 6
APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING COMMITTEE 14th May 2026 Page No Application No Applicant Development/Site Recommendation 7 25/01244/PPP JWR Holdings Residential Development Land to the North of Dykehead Road Airdrie Refuse Page 6 of 18
Page 7
Application No: 25/01244/PPP Proposed Development: Residential Development Site Address: Land to the North of Dykehead Road Airdrie North Lanarkshire Date Registered: 20th February 2026 Applicant: JWR Holdings 52 Southburn Road Airdrie ML6 9AD Agent: Planning Services UK 37 Dyfrig Street Shotts ML7 4DQ Application Level: Major Application Contrary to Development Plan: Yes Ward: 08 Airdrie North Alan Beveridge, Sophia Coyle, Henry Emerson Dunbar, Richard Alan Sullivan Representations: 1 letter of representation received. Recommendation: Refuse Reasoned Justification: The proposal is contrary to National Planning Framework 4 and North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan policies in respect of green belt, housing land and design quality, and it is not considered that there are any material considerations to justify a departure from these policies. Page 7 of 18
Page 8
Reproduced by permission of the Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. © Crown Copyright and database right 2009. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100023396. Planning Application: 25/01244/PPP Name (of applicant): JWR Holdings Site Address: Land to the North of Dykehead Road Airdrie Development: Residential Development Page 8 of 18
Page 9
Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:- 1. The proposal is contrary to National Planning Framework 4 Policy 8 (Green Belts) and to North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan Policies PP 4 (Green Belt – Purpose of Place) and AD 4 (Green Belt – Amount of Development) as housing development on the edge of settlement is not a type of development which is permitted by these policies or compatible with their objectives. It is not considered that any adequate justification, special circumstances or material considerations have been demonstrated which would justify a departure from these policies. 2. The proposal is contrary to National Planning Framework 4 Policy 16 (Quality Homes) as it does not satisfy the requirements of part (f) of the policy in respect of the circumstances where new homes may be supported on land which is not allocated for that purpose in the local development plan, and this is not considered to be outweighed by compliance with any other part of that policy. It is not considered that any adequate justification, special circumstances or material considerations have been demonstrated which would justify a departure from this policy. 3. The proposal is contrary to National Planning Framework 4 Policy 14 (Design, Quality and Place) and to North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan Policy EDQ 3 (Quality of Development) as it would result in the built up area of Airdrie being extended in a piecemeal manner beyond the barrier created by a power line corridor and create an isolated fragment of development on the opposite side of that power line to the detriment of placemaking. It is not considered that any adequate justification, special circumstances or material considerations have been demonstrated which would justify a departure from these policies. Page 9 of 18
Page 10
Background Papers: Consultation Responses: Archaeology Consultant comments dated 9 March 2026 Infrastructure & Transportation comments dated 18 March 2026 Education comments dated 30 April 2026 Mining Remediation Authority comments dated 2 March 2026 Environmental Health (including Pollution Control) comments dated 27 February 2026 Scottish Power Energy Networks comments dated 24 March 2026 Contact Information: Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Keith Bathgate at planningenquiry@northlan.gov.uk Report Date: 30th April 2026 Page 10 of 18
Page 11
APPLICATION NO. 25/01244/PPP REPORT 1. Site Description 1.1 The application relates to approximately 4.1ha of agricultural land on the north-eastern edge of Airdrie, which is currently used as a field for rough grazing. The site is broadly rectangular in shape and is bordered by the A73 Stirling Road to the west, Dykehead Road (and the back gardens of a row of five cottages thereon) to the south, further rough grazing land to the east and an area of woodland to the north. The land falls gently from south east to north west through the site, and a high voltage electricity transmission line crosses the site. Most boundaries are currently marked by post and wire fences, though there are also sections of hedgerow and garden fences. The site is readily visible alongside the A73 being on rising ground. The only buildings immediately bordering the site are the cottages on Dykehead Road, but there are also two cottages facing the site on the opposite side of Stirling Road and an industrial estate on the opposite side of Dykehead Road. A modern housing estate at Linkwood Road backs onto the opposite side of Stirling Road but is separated from it by landscaping area. 2. Proposed Development 2.1 Planning permission in principle is sought for residential development, with the applicant indicating that 70 houses are intended. An indicative layout plan has been provided showing these a mixture of detached, semi-detached and terraced houses, with vehicular accesses onto both Stirling Road and Dykehead Road. The area under the power lines is shown as open space and a children’s play area. As the application is for permission in principle there are no detailed proposals and the submitted layout is indicative only. 3. Applicant’s Supporting Information 3.1 In addition to the application form and plans, the applicant has submitted a pre-application consultation report, a planning statement and a coal mining risk assessment. 4. Site History 4.1 The site has not previously been developed, and it has no recent planning history except for a recent Scottish Government Energy Consents Unit EIA Scoping application for upgrading of the Denny to Wishaw power transmission lines which cross the site (25/00782/ECU). 4.2 The undeveloped land immediately to the east of the application site is part of a much larger area which is subject to a current application for planning permission in principle for a housing-led mixed use development. That application (24/00732/PPP) is currently undetermined, and as that proposal is significantly contrary to the development plan it will require to be determined by the Full Council. 5. Development Plan 5.1 The following development plan policies are considered to be of relevance to this application. An assessment of the proposal against these policies is contained in Section 8 below. National Planning Framework 4 • Policy 1 (Tackling the Climate and Nature Crises) supports development that addresses the global climate emergency and nature crises. • Policy 2 (Climate, Mitigation and Adaptation) supports development that minimises emissions and adapts to the current and future impacts of climate change. • Policy 3 (Biodiversity) seeks to protect biodiversity, reverse biodiversity loss, have development Page 11 of 18
Page 12
deliver positive effects on biodiversity, and to strengthen nature networks. • Policy 7 (Historic Assets and Places) seeks to protect and enhance historic environment assets and places, and to enable positive change as a catalyst for the regeneration of places. • Policy 8 (Green Belts) supports compact urban growth and using the land around towns and cities sustainably. • Policy 9 (Brownfield, Vacant and Derelict Land and Empty Buildings) supports the reuse of brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings, and reducing the need for greenfield development. • Policy 12 (Zero Waste) supports development which is consistent with the Scottish waste hierarchy. • Policy 13 (Sustainable Transport) supports developments that prioritise walking, wheeling, cycling and public transport for everyday travel, and which reduce the need to travel unsustainably. • Policy 14 (Design, Quality and Place) supports well designed development that makes successful places by taking a design-led approach and applying the Place Principle. • Policy 15 (Local Living and 20 Minute Neighbourhoods) supports the application of the Place Principle and the creation of connected and compact neighbourhoods where people can meet the majority of their daily needs within a reasonable distance of their home, preferably by walking, wheeling, cycling or using sustainable transport options. • Policy 16 (Quality Homes) supports the delivery of more high quality, affordable and sustainable homes, in the right locations, providing choice across tenures and meeting the diverse needs of people and communities. • Policy 18 (Infrastructure First) supports an approach to land use planning which puts infrastructure considerations at the heart of placemaking. • Policy 21 (Play, Recreation and Sport) supports spaces and opportunities for play, recreation and sport. • Policy 23 (Health and Safety) seeks to protect people and places from environmental harm, to mitigate risks arising from safety hazards, and to support development that improves health and wellbeing. North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022 • Policy PROM LOC1 (Regeneration Priorities) promotes regeneration and sustainable growth by delivering the right amount of development in the right places, to the right quality and for the benefit of the communities affected. Physical regeneration of the existing urban area and the network of centres therein will be given priority. • Policy PROM LOC3 (Housing Development Sites) is no longer applicable, as it has been superseded by the new approach to housing land supply set out in NPF4 policy 16. • Policy PROT A (Natural Environment and Green Network Assets) protects natural and resilient, sustainable places by safeguarding natural heritage assets, including national and locally designated sites, the urban green network and protected species. • Policy PROT B (Historic Environment Assets) seeks to protect and create resilient sustainable places by safeguarding historic environment assets, including scheduled monuments, listed buildings, designed landscapes, canal corridors, and sites of architectural interest. • Policy PP 4 (Green Belt – Purpose of Place) seeks to protect the setting of communities, support regeneration of urban areas, protect natural assets and provide a high quality environment by promoting a Green Belt, within which only development of specific types or under specific circumstances will be supported. Development will be resisted unless it is for agriculture, forestry, recreation, tourism or it has a requirement for a Green Belt location and can be balanced against any adverse effects on the purposes of the Green Belt. • Policy AD 4 (Green Belt – Amount of Development) sets out criteria for assessing the amount of development proposed within the Green Belt. • Policy CI (Contributions to Infrastructure) indicates that the council will seek to secure developer contributions for new development which generates a requirement for new or enhanced infrastructure or services, including affordable housing, education, transport, green space and play facilities. • Policy EDQ 1 (Site Appraisal) requires that any proposed development be appraised in terms of the site and its surroundings to ensure that it will integrate successfully into the local area and avoid harm to neighbouring amenity. Applications are to be accompanied by documents sufficient to allow the appraisal of all matters relevant to the proposal. • Policy EDQ 2 (Specific Features for Consideration) details specific technical matters requiring Page 12 of 18
Page 13
special assessment, including flood risk, contaminated land, ground stability, utility pipelines and environmental management areas. • Policy EDQ 3 (Quality of Development) indicates that development will only be permitted where high standards of site planning and sustainable design are achieved. Applications are required to demonstrate that the proposal takes account of site appraisal, technical and protected asset policies as listed above and achieves a high quality of development, including delivering the qualities of successful places and moving towards a low-carbon economy, amongst other requirements. 6. Consultations 6.1 The Mining Remediation Authority has no objection to the proposal, subject to conditions requiring that a scheme of intrusive site investigations be carried out prior to any detailed application being submitted. 6.2 North Lanarkshire Council’s Archaeology Consultant note that the site is undeveloped and there are indications of historic cultivation, so there is potential for hitherto unknown prehistoric and medieval remains on the site. They have no objection subject to a condition requiring the implementation of a programme of archaeological works, with potential for additional works in the event of objects or remains being discovered. 6.3 North Lanarkshire Council Education Service indicates that there is currently sufficient capacity in the local schools to accommodate the predicted pupils from this development, and therefore no developer contribution is sought at this time. However, they comment that in the event of the application for planning permission in principle for the proposed housing-led mixed use development, for up to 3,000 homes on the adjacent site being approved that would require significant new capacity in the area (24/00732/PPP). 6.4 North Lanarkshire Council Infrastructure and Transportation Service has requested that a Transportation Statement be provided prior to any permission being granted, which should detail anticipated impacts on transportation and expected proposals for new infrastructure or mitigation. Various comments about the proposed access and indicative layout have been provided (this included no access onto Stirling Road) and these are discussed below. 6.5 North Lanarkshire Council Environmental Health (Pollution Control) have no objection but request various conditions in respect of contaminated land, mine gas, noise and external lighting. 7. Representations 7.1 One representation of support has been received from a local resident who considers that the site is unused and welcomes the proposed investment. They also comment that they would welcome provision of local services on the site as the existing and proposed houses in this area are outwith a comfortable walking distance from local shops. Additionally, they have noted the importance of minimising traffic disruption during construction work. 8. Planning Assessment Assessment Against Development Plan Policies 8.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires that applications for planning permission be determined against the policies of the statutory development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The development plan consists of National Planning Framework 4, 2023 (NPF4) and the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan, 2022 (the LDP), and relevant policies are listed in Section 5 above. In the event of conflict between the two plans, NPF4 takes precedence as it the most recent. 8.2 The application site lies within the green belt, so the policies of greatest relevance to the assessment of the proposal are those relating to green belts and to housing development. NPF4 Policy 8 (Green Belts) indicates that development proposals within green belts will only be supported for a limited Page 13 of 18
Page 14
range of specified development types and circumstances, none of which are applicable to this proposal. Additionally, any development within the green belt is required to have a locational justification for requiring a green belt site, to be compatible with the surrounding character of the countryside, to not undermine the purpose of the green belt, and to be appropriate in terms of its design, visual and environmental impacts. The corresponding LDP policies PP4 and AD4 are broadly similar in their requirements, with housing development not being supported in the green belt except in very limited circumstances which are not relevant to this proposal. The proposal is therefore contrary to all of these green belt policies. 8.3 NPF4 Policy 16 (Quality Homes) sets out the current national approach to housing land delivery and has superseded the former approach detailed in LDP policy PROM LOC 3 (which is consequently no longer applicable). Policy 16 supports the delivery of more high quality, affordable and sustainable homes in the right locations, promoting choice across tenures and meeting the diverse needs of people and communities. Of most direct relevance to the proposal is part (f) of Policy 16 which indicates that proposals for new housing on land which is not allocated for housing in the LDP will only be supported in limited circumstances where: • The proposal is supported by an agreed timescale for build-out; • The proposal is otherwise consistent with the plan spatial strategy and other relevant policies including 20-minute neighbourhoods; and • Delivery of sites is happening earlier than identified in the deliverable housing land pipeline (or in certain other circumstances which are not relevant to this proposal) 8.4 In this case the supporting documents do not specify a timescale for build-out, albeit that there is no information to suggest that the site is significantly constrained. The proposal is inconsistent with the development plan spatial strategy as it would involve an unplanned incursion into the green belt, and as discussed below it is not an optimal site in terms of 20-minute neighbourhoods. There is no evidence that housing delivery is happening earlier than anticipated, and there is significantly more allocated housing land available in North Lanarkshire than is required by the current MATHLR (Minimum All-Tenure Housing Land Requirement) set by the Scottish Government. The proposal is therefore contrary to part (f) of Policy 16 as it does not meet any of the requirements for housing development on unallocated sites to be supported. 8.5 NPF4 policies are required to be considered in the round, so other parts of Policy 16 are also relevant, including the provisions that: • Applications for more than 50 new homes should be accompanied by a statement of community benefit explaining the proposal’s contribution to meeting local affordable housing requirements, providing enhanced infrastructure or services, and improving the residential amenity of the surrounding area. • Proposals which improve choice and address identified gaps in provision are supported. This might include self-build homes, wheelchair accessible homes, build-to-rent and affordable homes, a range of house sizes, homes for older people and students, and homes for other specialised groups such as armed forces personnel. • Proposals should make provision for affordable homes to meet identified needs. Normally open market homes will only be supported where at least 25% of the homes would be affordable homes, unless LDPs set different requirements based on local requirements. In this case the applicant’s planning statement refers to community benefits including the general employment benefits of new housebuilding and of increasing the local population and the social benefits of increased housing choice, and to some modest localised benefits with are discussed below as material considerations. None of these benefits are considered to provide a justification for allowing a departure from the green belt or housing policies on this site. No information has been provided to indicate that the development would include affordable homes or address other gaps in provision of specific types of property, though the LDP (in Policy CI discussed below) does not require affordable housing provision in this part of North Lanarkshire so the lack of this does not amount to a conflict with the policy. The proposal is therefore neutral towards the other relevant parts of Policy 16, but this and the modest community benefits which might arise from the proposal are insufficient to outweigh the fact that it is directly contrary to part (f). Overall, therefore, the proposal is assessed as contrary to NPF4 Policy 16 and incompatible with the development plan’s Page 14 of 18
Page 15
approach to housing land supply. 8.6 The development plan includes policies which seek to direct new development to existing urban areas and to brownfield land. NPF4 Policy 9 (Brownfield, Vacant and Derelict Land) and LDP Policy PROM LOC 1 seek to encourage urban regeneration and to minimise the need to develop greenfield sites. The development of unallocated greenfield sites without a clear locational or land supply justification for doing so undermines the prospects of regenerating urban brownfield land and is therefore contrary to the aims of these policies. 8.7 NPF4 Policies 13 (Sustainable Transport) and 15 (Local Living and 20 Minute Neighbourhoods), and LDP Policy EDQ3 (Quality of Development) require that development should be accessible and should support sustainable travel and local living. The application site is on the edge of the settlement and is therefore around a 2km walk from the edge of the town centre and 2.5km from the railway station. The nearest designated local centre is Thrashbush which is around 1.5km away, and there are bus stops on Dykehead Road around 350m from the centre of the site which are currently served by an hourly bus service between Greengairs and University Hospital Monklands. The site is therefore not particularly accessible by sustainable and active travel means. There are other modern housing developments on the northern edge of Airdrie which are similarly distant from local facilities and the proposal would not be significantly less accessible than these, but these developments were approved prior to the adoption of NPF4. It is not therefore considered that these policies offer sufficient support for the proposal. 8.8 NPF4 Policy 14 (Design, Quality and Place) and the LDP EDQ (Environment and Design Quality) policies require a high standard of development which is well designed and integrated into the local area. The application is for permission in principle only, and therefore whilst an indicative layout has been provided this may not reflect what would emerge as part of a future detailed application. The indicative layout is not considered to be acceptable in the form shown as there are various road issues which would need to be addressed. The fact that the site is bisected by the power line corridor complicates the design of any housing development, and would result in a relatively small pocket of housing on the opposite side of the power lines from the rest of the town, separated from it by a corridor of open land below the wires which it would not be possible to soften with landscaping. It is considered that the proposal would result in a piecemeal expansion of the urban area beyond the power line corridor which forms a logical boundary to the built-up area at this location. Therefore, whilst the detail of the site layout could be refined and improved as part of a future detailed application, it is considered that in principle the construction of isolated and arbitrary housing north of the power lines at this location would be incompatible with good design principles, and contrary to these policies. It should also be noted that whilst it is considered that the southern smaller area of proposed housing may not conflict with the design quality policies, it would still not be in accordance with any of the development plan’s Green Belt or housing policies as detailed above. 8.09 NPF4 Policy 18 (Infrastructure First) and LDP Policy CI (Contributions to Infrastructure) require that development proposals make provision for any improvements to local infrastructure and services which are needed as a result of the proposal. In this case there is currently no requirement for an Education contribution as local schools have sufficient capacity. Additionally it is possible that off- site road works such as alterations to the junction or signal timings at the Stirling Road / Dykehead Road junction may be needed, although that would not be known until a detailed application with a transportation assessment was provided. This could be controlled by planning condition(s) and/or planning obligation. 8.10 NPF4 Policy 3 seeks to protect and enhance biodiversity. Development proposals should contribute to the enhancement of biodiversity and proposals which have adverse impacts on biodiversity will only be supported where appropriate design and mitigation is proposed. Applications for ‘major’ scale development (such as this proposal) will only be supported where the proposal is based on an understanding of the biodiversity interests which would be affected, adverse impacts have been avoided or mitigated, and significant biodiversity enhancements are to be provided (additional to any mitigation). LDP policy PROT A (Natural Environment and Green Network Assets) is of similar intent, while policies EDQ 1 and EDQ 3 include requirements that applications be supported by appropriate information, take account of existing site features including biodiversity, and that proposals are of suitable quality in respect of impacts on the environment and green network. In this Page 15 of 18
Page 16
case, the application is not supported by any information about the biodiversity of the existing site, other than the Planning Statement stating that the site is of limited ecological value and noting the intention to plant some new trees. The site is rough agricultural land which does not appear to have obvious ecological value, but it is not possible to determine whether it complies with these policies without survey information and mitigation / enhancement proposals. Whilst it would be possible to require the submission of these details at the detailed application stage, such an approach would not be consistent with the requirements of the biodiversity policies. 8.11 NPF4 Policy 7 (Historic Assets and Places) and LDP Policy PROT B (Historic Environment Assets) require the protection of built heritage and historic environment assets, including archaeology. The site is assessed as having potential to contain features of archaeological interest, and therefore a scheme of archaeological investigations would be needed in order to comply with these policies. That could be secured by a condition. 8.12 NPF4 Policy 23 (Health and Safety) and LDP Policy EDQ 2 (Specific Features for Consideration) include requirements that risks be identified and addressed, including the potential for contaminated land and for ground stability issues arising from old mineworkings. Subject to compliance with appropriate conditions the proposal should be consistent with these policies. 8.13 Other relevant policies include NPF4 Policy 12 (Zero Waste) and Policy 21 (Play, Recreation and Sport) which, together with equivalent provisions in LDP Policy EDQ 3 require provision of appropriate facilities for waste and recycling and of open space and play areas in accordance with the council’s relevant standards. Compliance with these policies could be addressed by conditions specifying that these matters be addressed in any detailed application. Material Considerations 8.14 The Applicant has provided a planning statement which acknowledges that the site is within the green belt but argues that the following material considerations justify its development for housing: • The site is low grade agricultural land and is an underperforming parcel of ground on the settlement edge which should be regarded as “grey belt” land (as defined in England and Wales) Response: The concept of “grey belt” land is not used in the Scottish planning system. As the application site is greenfield land is adjacent to a settlement edge it is doubtful whether it would qualify as grey belt in England, but the issue is moot as there are no development plan policies in Scotland supporting the development of such land. • The site is on the edge of Airdrie with access to the town’s services and amenities. Development of this small site on the edge of a settlement would not conflict with the wider green belt; Response: The site is on the edge of a settlement and to that extent is therefore better than an isolated site in the countryside, but this does not justify its development for housing. As discussed above the site is not particularly close to local services and amenities, with few services within an 800m walk of the site, so it would not achieve 20 minute neighbourhood objectives and has not provided any locational justification, material considerations or special circumstances to justify the need for the proposed housing. Whilst it could be considered that support of one housing site in the Green Belt is unlikely to have a strategic impact on the wider green belt, the incremental impact of permitting unplanned development on sites around settlement edges would be significantly contrary to the objectives of the green belt. • Economic benefits of new housebuilding in terms of construction employment and increased local population to sustain local businesses, pay council tax, etc.; Response: Such benefits are not specific to this site and do not provide a justification for allowing housing development in the green belt. • Would provide additional housing in Airdrie, where housing land supply is inadequate to meet Page 16 of 18
Page 17
needs. Response: As discussed in relation to NPF4 Policy 16 above, there is currently no requirement for additional sites to satisfy North Lanarkshire’s housing land requirements. The proposal does not meet the development plan’s requirements for housing development on an unallocated site, and any future housing land requirements should be identified through the local development plan process rather than by ad hoc development management decisions. The LDP process seeks to identify the most appropriate sites and would consider issues including which potential sites would be best able to satisfy 20 minute neighbourhood requirements. • The proposal is asserted to be in accordance with the objectives of NPF4 policies relating to climate change, housing, green belt and 20 minute neighbourhoods; Response: It is not clear how the applicant reaches such conclusions. The proposal has been assessed against relevant NPF4 policies above, and it is considered to be contrary to green belt, housing and design quality policies, and not to be consistent with 20 minute neighbourhood expectations. • Improved road safety due to extension of the 30mph speed limit on Stirling Road and Dykehead Road. Construction of the East Airdrie Link Road will divert traffic away from Stirling Road in the future. Response: If the Council’s Infrastructure and Transportation Service considered that extending the 30mph speed limit was necessary for road safety reasons they would be able to pursue this change without requiring a housing development on this site. The proposal to form a new junction onto Stirling Road is not considered to be acceptable, which undermines the case for changing the speed limit on that road. The planned East Airdrie Link Road is discussed below, but if it is built the traffic levels on Stirling Road would be expected to reduce which would improve road safety regardless of whether this development takes place. • Opportunity for existing houses on Dykehead Road to be connected to the new mains sewer; Response: This would be welcome but it would be a modest benefit limited to the small number of existing houses on Dykehead Road which currently have septic tanks, and it is not considered to justify the proposed development. • The proposal would provide a play area and an area of community open space below the power lines. It includes extensive tree planting and meadow-type grassland which would enhance biodiversity. Response: All housing development is expected to provide play facilities and open space in accordance with council standards, and in this case the use of undevelopable land below the power lines as open space would create a relatively large but not particularly attractive area of open space. The indicative layout plan shows some narrow strips of tree planting around the edges of the site and along the power line corridor, although the latter may not be possible as Scottish Power Energy Networks have objected to this. It is not considered that the planting and open space shown in the indicative layout would go beyond what would be required of any similar housing site. On the basis of the information provided, it is not clear that the proposal would have any significant biodiversity benefits. 8.15 As mentioned in paragraph 4.2 above, the land immediately to the east of the application site forms part of a much larger site for which there is a current application for planning permission in principle for a residential-led mixed use development of up to 3,000 houses, a new mixed-use local centre, employment and other uses (24/00732/PPP). The indicative masterplan for that application shows an area of housing in the field immediately adjacent to this application site. The neighbouring application has not yet been determined, and as that proposal would be significantly contrary to the policies of the development plan it will require to be decided by Full Council. Were that application to be approved then this site would become a gap site within the urban area and the principle of extending the settlement beyond the power lines could potentially be established, which would be a significant material consideration in its favour. However, should the neighbouring application be Page 17 of 18
Page 18
approved there would also be a significant impact on school capacity and a developer contribution would likely become necessary for the proposed development. Given the undetermined nature of the application on the neighbouring site and the fact that it would be contrary to development plan policy, this is not considered to be a significant material consideration at this time. 8.16 Another significant proposal in the vicinity of the site is the proposed East Airdrie Link Road (EALR), which would bypass Airdrie to the east and would remove much of the through traffic which currently uses Stirling Road. This may in time change the character of Stirling Road somewhat, but it will still remain the main road north out of Airdrie. 8.17 The high voltage power lines crossing the site would have significant implications for the design of any development, as the area below and adjacent to the power lines would have to be kept free of any buildings or trees. Such power lines are inevitably visually intrusive and can give rise to noise (e.g. electrical buzzing in certain weather conditions). Whilst the precise design and layout of the development would be matters for a future detailed application it is inevitable that there would be two separate areas of housing, and as noted above, the Planning Service considers that the development of a relatively small and isolated area of housing on the north side of the power lines would not be appropriate. 8.18 The application specifies 70 houses and this number of units is shown on the indicative layout plan. Whilst this number of houses appears to be achievable, as with any application for planning permission in principle it is possible that the additional information required for a detailed application may reveal design or capacity constraints, so the application has been regarded as being for ‘residential development’ as opposed to for a specific number of units. 9. Conclusions 9.1 The application seeks to develop a greenfield site within the green belt on the edge of Airdrie for housing, which would be contrary to National Planning Framework 4 policies 8 and 16 and to North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan policies PP 4 and AD 4. Additionally, the proposal would result in a piecemeal and fragmented extension of the urban area beyond the line of the existing high voltage power lines which bisect the site which is considered to be contrary to NPF 4 policy 14 and NLLDP policy EDQ 3, which require a high standard of design which takes account of the characteristics of the site. It is not considered that there are any material considerations or special circumstances which would justify a departure from these policies, and accordingly it is recommended that the application be refused. Page 18 of 18