Agenda Document Pack - Planning Committee - 13/08/2026
North Lanarkshire Council · 13 August 2026
Back to Planning Committee — 13 August 2026 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
4 August 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, 13 August 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, D Robb, A Smith, G Woods. Page 1 of 84
Page 2
Page 2 of 84
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 - 80 3 Cumbernauld and Coatbridge Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Plans Submit report by the Chief Officer (Place) seeking approval for the adoption of the updated Area Character Appraisal and Conservation Area Management Plans for Cumbernauld Village and Coatbridge (Blairhill an Dunbeth) Conservation Areas. 81 - 84 Page 3 of 84
Page 4
Page 4 of 84
Page 5
North Lanarkshire Council Planning Applications for consideration of Planning Committee Committee Date: 13th August 2026 Ordnance Survey maps reproduced from Ordnance Survey with permission of HMSO Crown Copyright reserved Item 2 Page 5 of 84
Page 6
APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING COMMITTEE 6th August 2026 Page No Application No Applicant Development/Site Recommendation 7 24/00210/FUL Taylor Wimpey Erection of 125 no. Two Storey Dwellinghouses and Associated Infrastructure and Landscaping. Land at Carnbroe Road Carnbroe Coatbridge Grant (P) 26 25/01133/FUL Braemont Living Ltd Residential Development for over 55's (42 No. Single Storey Dwellings) with Community Hub, SUDS & Associated Roads and Landscaping Land to the West of 41 Taggart Road Croy Refuse 46 26/00251/FUL Mr J. Cairns Residential Development (23 Dwellings) Land to the East of Millcroft Mill Millcroft Road Cumbernauld Refuse 67 26/00335/FUL Attraction and Facilities Hire Ltd Planning Application Seeking the Use of Existing Hardstanding Areas and Buildings for the Storage of Film Making Vehicles and Equipment/Infrastructure and Erection of Boundary Security Fence and Gate (Retrospective) Auchinstarry Farm Auchinstarry Road Croy G65 9SG Grant (P) 24/00210/FUL – Subject to a S75 should permission be granted for Education contribution Page 6 of 84
Page 7
Application No: 24/00210/FUL Proposed Development: Erection of 125 no. Two Storey Dwellinghouses and Associated Infrastructure and Landscaping. Site Address: Land at Carnbroe Road Carnbroe Coatbridge Date Registered: 22nd May 2024 Applicant: Taylor Wimpey Lightyear Building Marchburn Drive Glasgow PA3 2SJ Agent: N/A Application Level: Major Application Contrary to Development Plan: No Ward: 11 Coatbridge South Tracy Carragher,Geraldine Woods,Fergus MacGregor,Andrew Bustard, Representations: No letters of representation received. Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions Reasoned Justification: The proposed residential development of 125 dwellings meets the criteria set out in the policies contained within the National Planning Framework 4 and North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022. The proposed development can be accommodated without unacceptable detriment to the character and amenity of the surrounding area. Legal Agreement Should planning permission be approved then no decision notice should be issued until a Section 75 Legal Agreement has been concluded securing the required financial contributions towards Education provision. Page 7 of 84
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: 24/00210/FUL Name (of applicant): Taylor Wimpey Site Address: Land at Carnbroe Road, Carnbroe. Coatbridge Development: Erection of 125 no. Two Storey Dwellinghouses and Associated Infrastructure and Landscaping Page 8 of 84
Page 9
Proposed Conditions: - 1. That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers: - S5-0.3; SK105; SK106; 48-137-01C; 48-137-02C; 48-137-03C; 48-137-04C; 110-01 G; 110-02 E; 200-01 Q; 200-02 P; AL(0)02 H; AL(0)03; E1000 E; E1001 C; E1002 D; E1003 D; E1003 E; E1006 E; E1007 E; E1008 E; E1009 D; AMBLEFORD HOUSETYPE; AYLEFORD HOUSETYPE; AYNESDALE HOUSETYPE; BRAMBLEFORD HOUSETYPE; CORKHAM HOUSETYPE; HUBHAM HOUSETYPE; KEEFORD HOUSETYPE; KITHAM HOUSETYPE; PLUMDALE HOUSETYPE; TETFORD HOUSETYPE; CHALHAM HOUSETYPE; E001 A; AL(0)12.1 & AL(0)12.2 Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded. 2. That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175 : 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required. Information on the required format of the report and how it should be submitted to us can be found online: https://www.northlanarkshire.gov.uk/planning-and-building/planning-applications/how- discharge-contaminated-land-planning-conditions Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents. 3. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 2, shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the Remediation Strategy. Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents. 4. No development shall commence until: a) A scheme of further intrusive investigations has been carried out to accurately locate recorded mine shaft 274662-004 and to establish its condition; and b) Remediation works to address land instability arising from mine shaft 274662-004, as may be necessary, have been implemented on site in full in order to ensure that the site is made safe and stable for the development proposed. The intrusive site investigations and remedial works shall be carried out in accordance with authoritative UK guidance. Reason: To ensure that the site is made safe and stable for the development proposed. 5. Prior to the occupation of the development, or it being taken into beneficial use, a signed statement or declaration prepared by a suitably competent person confirming that the site has been made safe and stable for the approved development shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing. This document shall confirm the methods and findings of the further intrusive site investigations, and the completion of remedial works necessary to address the risks posed by past coal mining activity. Reason: To ensure that the site is made safe and stable for the development proposed. Page 9 of 84
Page 10
6. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the requirements of the publication titled `Drainage Assessment: A Guide for Scotland’ and any other advice subsequently published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) or the Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party (SUDSWP). The post-development surface water discharges shall ensure that the rate and quantity of run- off to any watercourse are no greater than the pre-development run-off for any storm return period unless it can be demonstrated that a higher discharge is necessary to protect or improve the aquatic habitat. SUDS shall still be provided even where discharges are proposed to public sewers notwithstanding any conditions imposed by Scottish Water. If the area of ground illustrated on Drawing No. SK105 for the SUDS is inadequate for the purpose, a revised layout drawing for this part of the proposed development shall be submitted to and for the approval of the Planning Authority prior to any works of any description being commenced on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the said Authority. Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site. 7. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 6 shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Within three months of the construction of the SUDS, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in drainage works) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant CIRIA Manual and the approved plans. Reason: To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site. 8. That prior to the commencement of development, the applicant shall provide written confirmation to the Planning Authority that all the requirements of Scottish Water can be fully met to demonstrate that the development will not have an impact on their assets, and that suitable infrastructure can be put in place to support the development. Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory sewerage and surface water drainage arrangements. 9. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority and notwithstanding the details already submitted, BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts a further landscaping scheme MUST be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include: - (a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, grass seeding and turfing; (b) inclusion of compensatory woodland and a network of wildlife corridors, including bat commuting and forage habitats, within the site that links to the existing network. Features to be incorporated into the landscape design should include; Minimum of 0.4 ha of native woodland planting to compensate for loss of plantation woodland. Planting scheme to include appropriate native species such as silver birch Betula pendula, rowan Sorbus aucuapria, pedunculate oak, wych elm Ulmus glabra, goat willow Salix caprea and hazel corylus avellana; and Species-rich native hedgerows to include species such as hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, blackthorn Prunus spinosa, holly Ilex aquifolium, elder Sambucus nigra, wych elm Ulmus glabra and hazel Corylus avellana. Standard trees can also be incorporated into hedgerows such as birch Betula spp., oak, rowan Sorbus aucuparia and wild cherry Prunus avium; Areas of species-rich wildflower meadow using native species mixes to provide species-rich insects including nectaring species, butterflies and moths; and SUDS scheme should be designed with biodiversity in mind and form part of the green & blue network and so not be isolated but connected with other features by areas of woodland and scrub. Page 10 of 84
Page 11
(c) notwithstanding the details provided within the Drawing No. AL (0)03 titled Wildlife Enhancement Plan. details of further bio-diversity improvement schemes which should include a minimum of one bird nesting feature per house or building; native tree planting per house or building; an average of a minimum of one bat roost feature per house or building; and invertebrate bricks to be included in boundary walls with associated areas of wildflower meadows, as recommended in the Ecology Officers consultation response. (d) a Biodiversity Management Plan should be set up for the site and incorporate all the above measures. For the avoidance of doubt this shall also be submitted for written authorisation by the Planning Authority. (e) a timetable for the implementation of these works contemporaneously with the development. Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail. 10. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a detailed timetable for all landscaping works to be carried out, shall be submitted for written authorisation by the Planning Authority, which shall provide for these works being carried out contemporaneously with the development of the site. Reason: To ensure the implementation of the landscaping scheme in the interest of amenity. 11. That all works included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 9 above, shall be completed in accordance with the approved timetable, and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the full occupation of the development hereby permitted, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species. Reason: To ensure the implementation of the landscaping scheme in the interest of amenity. 12. That before the occupation of any houses, a management and maintenance scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of: - (a) any communal fences and walls; (b) all other communal areas Reason: To ensure the maintenance of communal areas and infrastructure in the interest of amenity. 13. That BEFORE completion of the development hereby permitted, the management and maintenance scheme approved under the terms of condition 12 shall be in operation. Reason: To ensure the maintenance of communal areas and infrastructure in the interest of amenity. 14. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing materials to be used on all external walls and roofs shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved under the terms of this condition. Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the site and the general area. 15. That before the last of the dwellinghouses hereby permitted is occupied, all roads and footways shall be completed to final wearing course. Reason: In the interests of traffic safety and visual amenity of the area. Page 11 of 84
Page 12
16. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the site and the general area. 17. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the noise mitigation measures identified within Appendices E and F of the Noise Impact Assessment Proposed Residential Development at Carnbroe Road, Phase 2, Carnbroe Technical Report R-8614A-LH2-RGM 10th December 2025 shall be fully implemented before dwellings are occupied. For the avoidance of doubt the approved mitigation measures must be installed and validated by a suitable qualified acoustician. The validation must then be submitted for written authorisation by the Planning Authority prior to occupation. Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area. 18. That before the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme for the provision of the equipped play area shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, including any modifications as may be required, and this shall include: - (a) details of the type and location of play equipment, seating and litter bins to be situated within the play areas; (b) details of the surface treatment of the play area, including the location and type of safety surface to be installed; (c) details of the fences to be erected around the play area, and (d) details of the phasing of these works. (e) play equipment shall be located at least 15.0m from the nearest dwelling. (f) the play area shall be completed in full within six months of the occupation of the last dwellinghouse hereby approved. Reason: To ensure that the play scheme is to an acceptable standard and is implemented within a reasonable timescale. 19. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, that should 12 months or more elapse between the date of the protected species surveys and development commencing, further surveys shall be undertaken on the site to determine the presence of any statutorily protected species, the said surveys shall thereafter be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before any development commences on the site. All surveys to be undertaken prior the start of any development. As a result of the study, should any mitigation measures be required for any protected species a Habitat and Species Management Plan in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage is submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. Thereafter mitigation shall be implemented in accordance with the Habitat and Species Management Plan before works commence on the site. Reason: To ensure compliance with The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended); the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) as amended; the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 (as amended); and the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004. 20. That BEFORE any works take place on site and in accordance with the tree survey conducted by Angus Mackay Landscape and Arboricultural Consultants dated 15/05/26, a 6.5m wide exclusion zone shall be marked out along the northern boundary of the site and a construction exclusion zone protective fence shall be erected. Barriers should consist of Heras Fencing with panels joined together using a minimum of two anti-tamper couplings and braced on the inside of the CEZ with stabiliser struts in accordance with Figure 3(a) of BS5837:2012. Confirmation shall then be submitted by a qualified professional confirming that the fence has been installed in accordance with the recommendations of the above survey. For the avoidance of doubt all trees to the north of the site shall be protected in accordance with the recommendations in BS 5837:2012 Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction. There should also be no movement of machinery, stockpiling of materials, or changes in existing ground levels within the Construction Exclusion Zone throughout the duration of the construction works. Page 12 of 84
Page 13
Where excavations are necessary and approved within the CEZ (e.g. for service runs), all works must comply with BS5837:2012, Section 7.2. Excavations should be dug by hand, and all tree roots encountered that are greater than 25mm diameter should be retained intact. Cables, pipes and ducts should be fed below roots, and trenches should be backfilled as soon as possible to prevent desiccation of roots. Reason: To ensure the safety of the trees within the SINC to the north of the site. 21. No development shall take place within the development area until the developer 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: To identify and protect any putative archaeological remains with the site area 22. Notwithstanding the details of Conditions 16 and 17 above, and unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, BEFORE any development takes place on site, details shall be submitted for written authorisation by the Planning Authority of a suitable trespass proof fence of at least 1.8 metres in height adjacent to Network Rail's boundary. The fence will then be installed as per agreed details prior to the occupation of ANY dwellinghouses within the site. For the avoidance of doubt, the maintenance and renewal of this fence shall be included within the maintenance agreement required by Conditions 12 and 13 above. Reason: In the interests of public safety and the protection of Network Rail infrastructure. 23. Notwithstanding the details within Condition 9 above, where trees/shrubs are to be planted adjacent to the railway boundary, these should be positioned at a minimum distance from the boundary which is greater than their predicted mature height. Certain broad leaf deciduous species should not be planted adjacent to the railway boundary. Network Rail can provide details of planting recommendations for adjacent developments. Reason: To control the impact of leaf fall on the operational railway. 24. Notwithstanding the details within Condition 9 above, all landscaping shall be located such that it can be installed and maintained from within the development without requiring access to the trunk road. The integrity of the existing landscaping along the trunk road boundary shall be maintained and protected. Reason: To ensure that there will be no distraction to drivers on the Trunk Road, and that the safety of the traffic on the Trunk Road will not be diminished. 25. Notwithstanding the details of Conditions 16 and 17 above the fencing / barrier proposals along the boundary with the trunk road shall be located such that they can be erected and maintained from within the development without requiring access to the trunk road. The integrity of the existing fencing along the trunk road boundary shall be maintained and protected. For the avoidance of doubt, the fencing/barrier proposed along the boundary with the trunk road shall be implemented BEFORE the dwellings are occupied. Reason: To minimise the risk of pedestrians and animals gaining uncontrolled access to the trunk road with the consequential risk of accidents. 26. There shall be no drainage connections to the trunk road drainage system. Reason: To ensure that the efficiency of the existing trunk road drainage network is not affected. Page 13 of 84
Page 14
27. That unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the mitigation measures set out within Phase 2 Development at Carnbroe, North Lanarkshire: Preliminary Ecological Appraisal July 2026 in relation to the protection of badgers shall be fully enacted. For the avoidance of doubt, pre-works checks for this species need be undertaken before any works commence. This should include a 30-meter buffer from the site. Reason: To ensure compliance with The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended); the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) as amended; the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 (as amended); and the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004. 28. That unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the mitigation measures set out within Phase 2 Development at Carnbroe, North Lanarkshire: Preliminary Ecological Appraisal July 2026 in relation to the protection of birds should be followed. Reason: To ensure compliance with The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended); the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) as amended; the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 (as amended); and the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004. 29. That unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, confirmation shall be submitted for written authorisation by the Planning Authority of an agreed minimum buffer to Carnbroe Wood / the adjacent SINC, based on the tree survey and ecology work, which would be kept free from development and managed properly. Reason: In the interests and protection of the neighbouring SINC Background Papers: Consultation Responses: Traffic & Transportation received 3rd July 2024,28th October 2025, 22nd December 2025, 7th January 2026 and 27th April 2026 Greenspace received 22nd April 2026, 29th April 2026, 30th April 2026, 2nd June 2026 and 14th July 2026 Environmental Health received (including Pollution Control) received 20th June 2024, 31st October 2025 and 20th January 2026 Arboriculture received 14th October 2025 Archaeology Service received 3rd June 2024 Education received 24th October 2026 Community Partnership received 10th September 2025, 21st April 2026 and 27th April 2026 Coal Mining Remediation Authority received 12th June 2024, 31st October 2025, 25th March 2026 and 23rd April 2026 Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 5th August 2024 Scottish Water received 5th June 2024 Transport Scotland received 4th June 2024 Network Rail received 17th June 2024 Scottish Gas Network received 31st May 2024 NatureScot received 3rd June 2024 Contact Information: Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Gary McEwan at 01236 632500 Report Date: 18th May 2026 Page 14 of 84
Page 15
APPLICATION NO. 24/00210/FUL REPORT 1. Site Description 1.1 The application site is approximately 5 hectares of grassland immediately north of the A8 Glasgow and Edinburgh Road. The phase 1 Taylor Wimpey housing development (currently under construction) defines the site’s north boundary with Carnbroe Road to the east of the site and to the west of the site is the Motherwell-Glasgow railway line. An area of woodland which is also a SINC, is located to the northwest of the site. The application site is mainly open grassed agricultural land with low level scrub. The land is situated on an undulating site that rises from the south to the north of the site. 2. Proposed Development 2.1 Planning permission is being sought for the construction of 125 dwellinghouses. The mix of dwellings proposed is 48 detached, 40 semi-detached and 37 terraced style dwellinghouses all at two storeys in height. A play facility is proposed with 1000m2 of play with a 50/50 split in terms of equipped and general play. The play area forms part of the 4000m2 (approximately) of open space proposed throughout the application site. 3. Applicant’s Supporting Information 3.1 The applicant has provided supporting information summarised as follows; • Archaeology Report • Ecological Report • Flood Risk Assessment • Material Schedule • Ecological Impact Assessment • Updated Tree Survey • Street Engineering Review • Noise Impact Assessment • Site Investigation • JPB Mine Shaft Response • Mineshaft Investigation Report • Mineshaft Investigation Letter 4. Site History • 14/01575/PPP Mixed Use Development Comprising 400 Dwellinghouses, Local Retail Provision, Community/Healthcare Provision, Associated Roads and Infrastructure at Site At Carnbroe Road, Carnbroe - Withdrawn 4th May 2015. • 15/01792/PPP Mixed Use Development Comprising 400 Dwellinghouses, Local Retail Provision, Community/Healthcare Provision, Associated Roads and Infrastructure – Approved 14th February 2018. • 18/00279/AMD Vary Condition 4 (a) of Application 15/01792/PPP - Increase in Dwelling Numbers to 500 – Approved 15 Oct 2018. Page 15 of 84
Page 16
• 18/01043/AMD Modify the Terms of the Section 75 Planning Obligation (15/01792/PPP) – Approved 11th October 2018. 18/01326/MSC Erection of 210 Dwellinghouses - Approval of Matters Specified in Conditions of Planning Permission 15/01792/PPP – Approved 19th June 2019. • 20/00138/TPO Crown Lifting of Trees and Cutting back of hawthorn hedge – Refused 5th June 2020 – Appeal Dismissed. • 21/01065/MSC Proposed Residential Development (188 Units) including Infrastructure and Landscaping - AMSC for 15/01792/PPP (Conditions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 & 16) – Approved 2nd February 2022. • 23/01122/PAN Residential development with access, landscaping and other associated works. 5. Development Plan 5.1 National Planning Framework 4 Policies: • Policy 1 - Tackling the Climate and Nature Crisis • Policy 2 – Climate Mitigation • Policy 3 – Biodiversity • Policy 13 - Sustainable Transport • Policy 14 - Design, Quality and Place • Policy 15 - Local Living and 20-minute neighbourhoods • Policy 16 - Quality Homes. North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022 Policies: • PROM LOC3 only in as much as this is an Identified Housing Development Site • General Urban Area Policies – PP3 Purpose of Place and AD3 Amount of Development • Environmental & Design Qualities (EDQ1-3) 5.2 NPF4 forms part of the development plan. As such the proposed development requires to be assessed against the provisions and policies of both NPF4 and The North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (NLLDP). 5.3 The site is an allocated and identified Housing Development Site (NLMK1190) and lies within the General Urban Area where Purpose of Place Policy PP 3 applies. The aim of the Plan within these areas is to maintain and improve the level of amenity appropriate for the local context and encourage diversity in more mixed-use areas. This policy requires such proposals to be assessed against the criteria of AD 3 (Amount of Development), EDQ1 (Site Appraisal) and EDQ3 (Quality of Development) which considers issues such as location of development, size, materials and road safety and which states that proposals must integrate successfully with the surrounding area by avoiding harm to the neighbouring amenity. Page 16 of 84
Page 17
6. Consultations 6.1 NLC Traffic and Transportation raise no objection to the application. Detailed discussions have taken place in respect to the layout with additional supporting information and updated layouts provided throughout the processing of the application. There are no concerns raised over the relationship with the wider public road network. Further amendments were sought to address junction visibility splays, which have now been addressed by the applicant. 6.2 NLC Greenspace has indicated that they have no objections to the proposal. The original Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) report from 2021 recorded two outlier badger setts within 30meters of the proposes development. However, the updated PEA survey only record of badger on site was a latrine within the development. The PEA puts forward mitigation measure for this species. These must be taken forward. Pre-works checks for this species need be undertaken before any works commence. This should include a 30-meter buffer from the site. The PEA puts forward mitigation measures with regards to breeding birds which should be followed. They also indicated that confirmation should be provided of an agreed minimum buffer to Carnbroe Wood / the adjacent SINC, based on the tree survey and ecology work, which would be kept free from development and managed properly. They have also indicated that they wish confirmation that biodiversity enhancements, compensatory planting and ongoing management would be secured through a pre-commencement Biodiversity / Landscape and Ecological Management Plan, referencing the submitted Wildlife Enhancement Plan. The above matters can be addressed via condition. 6.3 NLC Environmental Health (including Pollution Control) has indicated that they have no objection to the proposal subject to conditions relating to Site Investigation and Noise. Conditions have been attached to ensure that their concerns are suitably addressed. 6.4 NLC Arboriculture were consulted for the current application, however, did not provide a detailed response. It should be noted that the updated tree survey by Angus Mackay Landscape and Arboricultural Consultants dated 15/05/26, supplied by the applicant, makes the same recommendations with regard to the construction exclusion zone to the north west of the site, as the previous survey, submitted for the application 21/01065/MSC and in March 2024 of the current application. It is therefore considered that as NLC Arboriculture reviewed the original tree survey and provided comments that these can be applied to the current application and covered by condition. A condition has been attached to the permission to ensure the protection of the trees at the edge of the SINC as indicated in the above-mentioned survey. 6.5 NLC Archaeology has recommended that a Written Scheme of Investigation is completed and reported upon. A condition has been attached which ensures that no development shall take place within the development area until the developer 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. It is noted that the applicant has submitted a written scheme of investigation. NLC Archaeology has advised that the WSI is fine, and when the work it describes is completed, reported upon and approved, then the condition could be considered for discharge, however at present the proposed condition should remain and not be signed off until all the work described is done. Page 17 of 84
Page 18
6.6 NLC Education has indicated that the proposed development falls within the catchment areas of Riverbank Primary School and St Stephen’s Primary School in Coatbridge. Pupils attending these schools typically transition to Coatbridge High School and St Andrew’s High School for their secondary education. To address existing educational infrastructure needs, an agreement has been reached to construct two new primary schools, replacing the current provision in the area. These new facilities have been designed with sufficient capacity to accommodate pupils arising from future residential developments within the catchment. NLC Education have therefore indicated that a developer contribution will be required to offset the proposed new development on the new primary school provision. They have also indicated that additionally the service anticipates increasing pressure on secondary school capacity due to the cumulative effect of ongoing housebuilding in the locality. A further contribution is therefore requested to mitigate the impact on the secondary education estate. The total contribution sought in respect of the development is £1,373,644.70, calculated in accordance with the published Supplementary Planning Guidance. 6.7 NLC Community Partnership have requested a play area be constructed within the development site. An area has been identified on the southern edge and a condition is proposed to ensure its delivery. Community Partnership will have the opportunity to comment on the proposal once the details are submitted as per the appropriate condition. 6.8 Mining Remediation Authority initially objected to the proposal due to the lack of sufficient data submitted in relation to the mine entry located to the south of the site. However, following additional submissions by the applicant, most recently the revised Mineshaft Investigation Report (7th April 2026, prepared by Johnson Poole & Bloomer), they have confirmed that as the applicant has been able to narrow down the zone of influence of the shaft to a distance of 10m extending from the shaft, they no longer object to the scheme, whilst noting a Material Consideration. As such they have advised that if planning permission is to be granted for the proposed development, then they recommend the inclusion of 2 conditions requiring further intrusive investigations and appropriate remediation be carried out. 6.9 Scottish Environment Protection Agency has indicated that they have no objection to the application on grounds of flood risk. 6.10 Scottish Water have no objections in principle to the development albeit that, if approved, the applicant should contact them timeously to ensure they can get connected to the necessary infrastructure. 6.11 Transport Scotland indicated that it has no objections to the proposal, however it has recommended conditions be attached to the permission regarding landscaping, fencing and barriers and drainage connections. Conditions have been attached to ensure that Transport Scotland get the opportunity to comment on these issues. 6.12 Network Rail indicated that it had no objections to the proposal, however, has recommended conditions to be attached to the permission regarding a trespass proof fence being installed and provision for the fence’s future maintenance and renewal to ensure public safety and protection of Network Rail infrastructure. They have indicated that no sustainable urban drainage scheme shall be located within 10m of the railway boundary and it shall be designed with long term maintenance plans which meet the development to protect the stability of the adjacent railway lines and the safety of the rail network. They have also indicated that in terms of the proposed landscaping scheme, that where trees/shrubs are to be planted adjacent to the railway boundary, these should be positioned at a minimum distance from the boundary, which is greater than their predicted mature height, to control the impact of leaf fall on the railway. Page 18 of 84
Page 19
They have also indicated that no development shall take place until a noise impact assessment has been submitted and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and that any approved noise attenuation shall be implemented prior to the development being brought into use and shall thereafter be retained in accordance with the approved scheme. Finally, they have provided an advisory note, which has been attached as an informative. A condition has been attached to the permission ensuring that a trespass fence will be installed prior to occupation of dwellings. No SUDS are proposed for the site adjacent to the railway line. The final Landscaping scheme has yet to be submitted and approved by the Planning Authority. A condition has been attached to ensure that any trees or shrubs proposed in proximity of the railway shall take account of their recommendations. As is indicated within paragraph 6.3 above, a noise impact assessment has been carried out and Environmental Health (including Pollution Control) has recommended that the noise attenuation measures indicated within appendices E and F of the Noise Impact Assessment Proposed Residential Development at Carnbroe Road, Phase 2, Carnbroe Technical Report R-8614A-LH2-RGM 10th December 2025 shall be fully implemented before dwellings are occupied. 6.13 Scottish Gas Network has indicated that they have no objection to the proposal as none of their assets will be affected by the proposal. 6.14 NatureScot indicated that they would not offer comment as the proposal does not meet their criteria for comment. 7. Representations 7.1 No representations were received following neighbour notification or following the newspaper advertisement published in the Airdrie and Coatbridge Advertiser on the 12th June 2024. 8. Planning Assessment 8.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 states that planning applications are to be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless other material considerations indicate otherwise. Accordingly, the proposed development requires to be assessed against the provisions and policies of both NPF4 adopted Feb 2023 and The North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan adopted 6 July 2022. 8.2 National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) In terms of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4), there are number of policies that affect the proposal, with the most notable ones being Policy 13 - Sustainable Transport, Policy 14 - Design, Quality and Place and Policy 16 - Quality Homes. These policies are imparted and disseminated to a significant extent within the NLLDP policies listed below in section 8.10 onwards. 8.3 Policy 1 – NPF4 policy 1, Tackling the Climate and Nature Crisis is met by the proposal as it provides new low-carbon housing and creates new green and biodiverse spaces on a site which is directly adjacent to an existing large urban area namely Carnbroe, which forms part of the wider urban area of Coatbridge. Page 19 of 84
Page 20
8.4 Policy 2 – NPF4 policy 2, Climate Mitigation indicates that development proposals will be sited and designed to minimise lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions as far as possible and will be sited and designed to adapt to current and future risks from climate change. It is considered that the proposal meets these requirements in that the location of the site is directly adjacent to an existing large urban area namely Carnbroe, forming part of the wider urban area of Coatbridge, which is readily served by public transport and is in walking distance of Carnbroe’s retail and community facilities including local primary schools. It should also be noted that a section of the site has been allocated for a future Community development which is currently being marketed by the applicant, which will serve the local needs of residents within the surrounding area. 8.5 Policy 3 – NPF4 policy 3 seeks to protect Biodiversity, reverse biodiversity loss, deliver positive effects from development and strengthen nature networks. Development proposals should avoid potential adverse impacts and should contribute to the enhancement of biodiversity including strengthening nature networks and the connections between them. Development proposals should include appropriate measures to conserve, restore and enhance biodiversity. The enhancement of Biodiversity within the site has been covered in the planning conditions in relation to the landscape scheme for the site. It should be possible to include measures like diverse planting for birds, bees and other insects. Bee hotels and bird and bat boxes could also be installed and where possible and native species will be planted. 8.6 Policy 13 - NPF4 policy 13 Sustainable Transport seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate developments that prioritise walking, wheeling, cycling and public transport for everyday travel, reducing the need to travel unsustainably and states that proposals to improve, enhance, or provide active travel infrastructure will be supported. It also states that development proposals will be supported where it can be demonstrated that the transport requirements have been considered in line with sustainable travel, which includes accessibility with public transport. This proposed development may be considered acceptable in sustainable travel terms in meeting the policy criteria as the site is well served by the existing road and footpath network and there is existing bus stops located on Carnbroe Road. There is a local convenience store located at the corner of Earlston Crescent and Carnbroe Road approximately 0.5km away. There are further local shops, take away food premises, pharmacy, dentists, place of worship and Community Centre on Paddock Street, all within 1km walking distance of the site. Whifflet public park is located approximately 1.2km away and Whifflet Train Station is located approximately 1.6km to the northwest. The wider area is well served with amenities and access to the greater transport network is readily available. 8.7 Policy 14 - NPF4 Policy 14 Liveable Places states that development proposals should be designed to improve the quality of an area whether in urban or rural locations and regardless of scale. Proposals will be supported if the development is consistent with the six qualities of successful places as set out in Appendix D of NPF4, namely: - Healthy, Pleasant, Connected, Distinctive, Sustainable and Adaptable. It is considered that the proposal is consistent with these qualities and is of a good design and without detriment to the surrounding area, it is therefore considered to comply with this policy. Page 20 of 84
Page 21
8.8 Policy 15 – NPF4 Policy 15 Local Living and 20-minute neighbourhoods indicates that places should be planned to improve local living in a way that reflects local circumstances, creating a network of mixed-use neighbourhoods which support health and wellbeing, reduce inequalities and are resilient to the effects of climate change. It is indicated that new and existing communities should be planned together with homes and the key local infrastructure including schools, community centres, local shops, greenspaces, health and social care, digital and sustainable transport links. As is indicated in paragraph 8.6 above, the location of various local amenities within walking distance, also accessible by public transport links, indicates that the proposed development meets the criteria of this policy. Furthermore, as is indicated in paragraph 8.4 above, if the area marked within the planning layout as Potential Future Development is developed (through a future application) as a community hub, then this would further enhance and strengthen this position. 8.9 Policy 16 - NPF4 Policy 16 Quality Homes supports developments for new homes on land allocated for housing in the LDP. The application site is within the General urban area and the proposed development of 125 units with mixed housing types meets the terms of this policy as it helps the Council’s ambition to reach its target for there being a mix of housing types and size of units within the area. The proposal includes a formal play area as well as other areas of open space and will provide benefits to biodiversity. The development will not have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the area and is compliant with the general principles of this policy. 8.10 North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (NLLDP) The North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan designates the site under Purpose of Place Policy PP3 General Urban Area which seeks to maintain and improve the level of amenity appropriate for the local context and encourage diversity in more mixed-use areas. 8.11 The above NPF 4 policies are embedded in the adopted NLLDP and, in particular, Policies PP 3, AD 3. EDQ 1 and EDQ 3 on design are discussed below. The development is therefore considered to be consistent with both NPF 4 and NLLDP Place policy. 8.12 Policy PP3 requires such proposals to be assessed against the criteria of AD 3 (Amount of Development), EDQ 1 (Site Appraisal) and EDQ 3 (Quality of Development) which consider a range of potential impact criteria such as design, materials, and road safety and so forth. The overall provision is that proposals must integrate successfully with the surrounding area by avoiding harm to the neighbouring amenity. 8.13 It is considered that the proposed development is suitable for this location as the site is an allocated and identified Housing Development Site (NLMK1190) and lies within the General Urban Area where Purpose of Place Policy PP 3 applies. 8.14 EDQ 1 POLICY Site Appraisal This policy indicates that the proposed development will require to be appraised in terms of the site and its surroundings to ensure it will integrate successfully into the local area and avoid harm to neighbouring amenity. The policy lists a variety of matters to be addressed in the appraisal these include: • massing, height, style, finishing materials, orientation and topography of the site, building lines, plot ratios, groupings, types of enclosure (e.g. fences, walls, hedges), existence and quality of connections and access including site and building entrances, roads, paths and visuals on the site, biodiversity of plants and animals on the site, landscape character Page 21 of 84
Page 22
The proposed dwellinghouses are of an acceptable height, style and massing with a similar mix of housing types that are provided throughout the surrounding area. A condition is in place to ensure that details of the finishes proposed for the dwellinghouses will be confirmed prior to development. The site is located to the south of the phase 1 development and will sit at a similar level to this development. The site is surrounded by similar styled dwellinghouses. The layout and nature of the housing proposed is considered acceptable, following a hierarchy of primary, secondary and tertiary spaces. The layout has been developed to have good frontages and where these have not been possible, there is landscaping proposed to prominent public frontages. The densities are considered acceptable, as are garden sizes and parking requirements. NLC Transportation raised no objection to the application, subject to conditions. Whilst some comments are given by NLC Transportation in respect to the internal layout, it is noted that the proposed site has been designed to take account of national policy guidance ‘Designing Streets’ in order to create a greater sense of place and provide a nature of street design that is more integrated and considered from a design perspective. Overall, it is accepted that a more design-led approach to the development has been achieved, whilst satisfactorily demonstrating functionality, safety and a good degree of passive surveillance from the proposed housing. The layout has also been supported by a Street Engineering Review The enhancement of Biodiversity within the site has been covered in the planning conditions in relation to the landscape scheme for the site. It should be possible to include measures like diverse planting for birds, bees and other insects. Bee hotels and bird and bat boxes could also be installed and where possible and native species will be planted. • public services available locally, e.g. schools, public transport, play/recreation provision, accessibility by a range of sustainable transport modes Education has indicated that the proposed development falls within the catchment areas of Riverbank Primary School and St Stephen’s Primary School in Coatbridge. Pupils attending these schools typically transition to Coatbridge High School and St Andrew’s High School for their secondary education. To address existing educational infrastructure needs, an agreement has been reached to construct two new primary schools, replacing the current provision in the area. These new facilities have been designed with sufficient capacity to accommodate pupils arising from future residential developments within the catchment. It is therefore considered that sufficient capacity will exist to serve the development. Play provision will be provided by an equipped play area located to the south of the application site. Satisfactory linkages are also considered to be provided to the surrounding area. It has been indicated that the scheme will have a 1000m2 activity zone with a 50/50 split between equipped and general play. The equipment would be within the south corner of the site to ensure compliance with required stand-offs, whilst ensuring that the furthest resident would have access to play facilities within 400m from their home and sensible spacing from the approved play area to the north. This proposed development may be considered acceptable in sustainable travel terms in meeting the policy criteria as the site is well served by the existing road and footpath network and there is existing bus stops located on Carnbroe Road. There are shops, schools and other community facilities within 1km of the development. Whifflet public park is located approximately 1.2km away and Whifflet Train Station is located approximately 1.6km to the northwest. The wider area is well served with amenities and access to the greater transport network is readily available. • ground stability and contamination on the site, impacts associated with the holistic water environment and flood risk Page 22 of 84
Page 23
A site investigation document has also been submitted by the applicant. The report has been peer reviewed and comments provided. A response has since been provided by the applicant which is now currently under review by Environmental Health (including Pollution Control). A flood risk assessment was submitted by the applicant, and SEPA indicated that they are in agreement with the conclusions of the submitted Flood Risk Assessment and have no objections to the development. 8.15 EDQ 3 POLICY Quality of Development This policy advises that development will only be permitted where high standards of site planning and sustainable design are achieved. Planning Applications will need to demonstrate that the proposed development takes account of the site appraisal carried out as a requirement of Policies EDQ1 and, if appropriate, EDQ2, assets protected under Policy PROT, any evaluation of design options, and achieves a high-quality development in terms of the following. a & b) Establishing a clear vision for the site with design principles which lead to the creation of a distinct, successful place addressing: siting; overall layout; density; form; scale; height; massing; proportion; detailing; colour; materials Providing a safe, pleasant, inclusive, convenient and welcoming development. The proposed dwellinghouses are of an acceptable height, style and massing with a similar mix of housing types that are provided throughout the surrounding area. A condition is in place to ensure that details of the finishes proposed for the dwellinghouses will be confirmed prior to development. The site is located to the south of the phase 1 development and will sit at a similar level to this development. The site is surrounded by similar styled dwellinghouses. The layout and nature of the housing proposed is considered acceptable, following a hierarchy of primary, secondary and tertiary spaces. The layout has been developed to have good frontages and where these have not been possible, there is landscaping proposed to prominent public frontages. The densities are considered acceptable, as are garden sizes and parking requirements. Play provision will be provided by an equipped play area located to the south of the application site. Satisfactory linkages are also considered to be provided to the surrounding area. NLC Transportation raised no objection to the application, subject to conditions. Whilst some comments are given by NLC Transportation in respect to the internal layout, it is noted that the proposed site has been designed to take account of national policy guidance ‘Designing Streets’ in order to create a greater sense of place and provide a nature of street design that is more integrated and considered from a design perspective. Overall, it is accepted that a more design-led approach to the development has been achieved, whilst satisfactorily demonstrating functionality, safety and a good degree of passive surveillance from the proposed housing. The layout has also been supported by a Street Engineering Review. c) Moving towards a low-carbon economy, addressing, resource efficiency, Mitigation of and Adaptation for the effects of Climate Change energy and waste issues in order to create a sustainable development with a low ecological footprint. This proposed development may be considered acceptable in sustainable travel terms in meeting the policy criteria as the site is well served by the existing road and footpath network and there is existing bus stops located on Carnbroe Road. There are shops, schools and other community facilities within 1km of the development. Whifflet public park is located approximately 1.2km away and Whifflet Train Station is located approximately 1.6km to the northwest. The wider area is well served with amenities and access to the greater transport network is readily available. Page 23 of 84
Page 24
d) Mitigating any likely air quality, noise, or pollution impacts particularly in or adjacent to Air Quality or Noise Management Areas. In some circumstances, mitigation may not always be possible, and avoidance may be required. A noise impact assessment has been submitted as part of this application and raises no significant concerns. Conditions are attached to address unresolved matters. While pollution matters regarding the site have been raised through consultation, conditions are attached to ensure that these matters can be fully addressed and that any remediation works required following review are carried out before any works take place on site. e) Ensuring that water body status is protected and, where possible, enhanced. SPG 09 (Flooding & Drainage) requires that applicable developments demonstrate any risk and means for mitigation of flooding and detail the measures for treatment of surface water through the use of SUDS principles. Treatment will be provided via SUDs and appropriate suspensive planning conditions can be applied in this regard. The new proposed foul water drainage from the new development is expected to discharge into a Scottish Water foul water sewer. As such, a Pre-Development Enquiry will be submitted to Scottish Water to confirm the existing system will be suitable to accept the demands of the development. In considering flood risk potential for surface water reference to the SEPA Flood Map indicates the potential for local surface water flooding to the south of the proposed development site. SEPA flood mapping indicates a negligible level of flooding risk. Any development of this site will incorporate suitable drainage to mitigate against any slight risk of flooding that currently exists. The proposal will not therefore increase the risk of surface water flooding to others, or within the site as the development of the site should resolve any future minor potential issues. It is recommended that the decision contains a condition requiring surface water is treated within a sustainable urban drainage system. f) Adequate provision has been made for the development and maintenance of landscaped areas and, and for linking to and enhancing open spaces and green networks. This can be realised through the application of the relevant suspensive planning conditions. It is considered that the proposed dwellinghouses have been designed in terms of siting, massing and finishing materials to an acceptable standard, as such, it is considered that the proposal complies with policies EDQ 1 and 3. It is also considered that the proposal by virtue of its design and location will not result in significant loss of residential amenity and accordingly the proposal is consistent with Policy EDQ3. 8.16 CI POLICY Contributions to Infrastructure North Lanarkshire Council will seek to secure developer contributions for new developments that, individually or cumulatively, generate a requirement for new or enhanced infrastructure or services, covering Affordable Housing in Cumbernauld Housing Sub-Market Area, and Education, Transport and Green Network Infrastructure, Amenity Space and Play across North Lanarkshire. In this case Education has indicated that contributions will be required. The total contribution sought in respect of the development is £1,373,644.70, calculated in accordance with the published Supplementary Planning Guidance. Page 24 of 84
Page 25
Other material considerations There are no material considerations that would merit refusal of this application. 9. Conclusions 9.1 The proposed development is acceptable in terms of its impact upon the site and the surrounding residential area. The development would utilise the existing infrastructure, facilities, road network and provides pedestrian access throughout the site. In addition, it is considered that the proposed development would not result in an unacceptable impact on environmental assets. The proposed development and associated layout are of an acceptable design and comply with the principles of Designing Streets and the relevant policies in the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan in that the development results in a significant enhancement of residential amenity and road and pedestrian safety. The proposed development of the site does not unduly impact on the surrounding area and, coupled with a scheme of landscaping, would contribute to a positive visual impact on the wider area. The application has been satisfactorily progressed to the position where outstanding and final detail can be confirmed via planning conditions. The proposed development meets the criteria set out in NPF4 National Planning Framework and the development policies contained within the North Lanarkshire Local Plan. There are no material considerations that would merit refusal of this application. Accordingly, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions. Page 25 of 84
Page 26
Application No: 25/01133/FUL Proposed Development: Residential Development for Over 55's (42No. Single Storey Dwellings) with Community Hub, SUDS & Associated Roads and Landscaping Site Address: Land to the west of 41 Taggart Road Croy Date Registered: 11th November 2025 Applicant: Braemont Living Ltd 1 West Regent Street Floor 3 Glasgow G2 1RW Agent: Jewitt & Wilkie Architects 38 New City Road Cowcaddens Glasgow G4 9JT Application Level: Local Application Contrary to Development Plan: Yes Ward: 01 Kilsyth Jean Jones, Heather Brannan-McVey, Denis Johnston. Representations: 34 letters of representation received (Including one from MSP Hepburn). Recommendation: Refuse Reasoned Justification: The proposal is unacceptable in terms of the development plan as it does not meet the criteria set out in the relevant polices and other material considerations. It is considered that the proposed Residential Development at this location would not represent a development that the National Planning Framework Policies and North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan intends to support within the designated Greenbelt. Notes to Committee Should planning permission be approved then no decision notice should be issued until an Affordable Housing Agreement has been signed off to the satisfaction of the planning authority and a legal agreement is in place ensuring it's delivery if required. Page 26 of 84
Page 27
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: 25/01133/FUL Name (of applicant): Braemont Living Ltd Site Address: Land to the West of 41 Taggart Road, Croy Development: Residential Development for Over 55's (42No. Single Storey Dwellings) with Community Hub, SUDS & Associated Roads and Landscaping Page 27 of 84
Page 28
Recommendation: Refuse for the following reasons: - 1. The proposal is contrary to National Planning Framework 4 - NPF4 Policies 8 (Green Belt) and 17 (Rural Homes) in that it does not comply with the criteria set out in the policies that would justify residential development at this location and does not represent a natural rationalisation of the Green Belt boundary. 2. The proposal is contrary to the North Lanarkshire Development Plan Policies PP4 and AD 4 (Green Belt) in that it does not comply with the criteria set out in the policies that would justify residential development at this location and does not represent a natural rationalisation of the Green Belt boundary. 3. The proposal is contrary to Policies EDQ 1 and 3 (Quality of Development) in that the proposed layout is sub-standard in terms of parking provision and the potential landscape impact due to the lack of proposed buffer planting on the western and southern boundaries of the site and the impact on amenity of existing residential area due to traffic generation through the access route. 4. The proposal is contrary to NPF4 Policy 16 (f) Quality Homes (unallocated housing site) in that it does not comply with the criteria set out within Policy 16(f). 5. The proposal is contrary to NPF4 Policy 15 (Local Living and 20-minute neighbourhoods). Page 28 of 84
Page 29
Background Papers: Consultation Responses: Scottish Environment Protection Agency dated 21st November 2025, 8th January, 2nd March, 24th April 2026 and 4th of June. Nature Scotland dated 20th November 2025. Historic Environment Scotland dated 13th November 2025. Scottish Power Environmental Planning - no response. Scottish Water date 17th November 2025. Scottish Gas Network – no response. NLC Traffic & Transportation dated 9th December 2025, 24th March, 7th of April and the 2nd of July 2026. NLC Education dated 17th November 2025. NLC Affordable Housing dated 21st November 2025. NLC Greenspace - no response. NLC Environmental Health (including Pollution Control) dated 17th December 2025, 15th January and 4th March 2026. NLC Archaeology Service dated 8th December 2025. NLC Assistant Community Partnership Manager Play Services dated 24th November and 17th December 2025. NLC Water Management dated 21st November 2025. Contact Information: Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Paul Williams at 01236 632500 Report Date: 6th August 2026 Page 29 of 84
Page 30
APPLICATION NO. 25/01133/FUL REPORT 1. Site Description 1.1 The application site comprises of agricultural grazing land and is part of Drumglass Farm. The site lies beyond the western boundary of Croy village. The site is bound to the north by the Moss Water burn, beyond which lies Drumglass farmhouse and steading, to the east by Taggart Road residential area and immediately by greenspace and planting associated with the residential area and to the south and west by the remainder of the agricultural field. The site slopes upwards from north to south. The northeastern corner of the site which crosses the Moss water lies within a SINC (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation). Other nearby features include the Edinburgh to Glasgow railway line (in cutting) and approximately 112 metres to the south of the site and a partially disused sewage works a similar distance to the west of the site. The site covers an area of approximately 1.9 Hectares and lies within the Green Belt as designated in the North Lanarkshire Council Local Development Plan 2022. 2. Proposed Development 2.1 The proposed development is for 42 bungalows specifically for people over 55 and an associated community hub. The proposed use of bungalows is to allow more physically accessible housing for the target age group. The applicant proposes that all dwellings would be restricted to occupants aged 55 and over secured in perpetuity through planning conditions and an associated Section 75 legal agreement. The proposal also includes 25% tenure blind affordable housing (11 units) spread evenly throughout the site to aid social cohesion and integration. It is envisaged that the Affordable housing would be delivered either by the Council or by a Registered Social Landlord such as a housing association. 2.2 Access to the site is proposed at the western end of Taggart Road straddling to the north of 41 Taggart Road and the Moss Water burn within an area of land designated as a SINC (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation). The proposed housing layout takes up just over half of the northern part of the field to the west of the Croy village urban boundary. A Community Hub immediately adjacent to the entrance into the site at the northern end of the site is proposed for the use of future residents, adjacent and to the west of the Community Hub, a SUDS (Sustainable Urban Drainage System) pond is proposed. The proposed internal road layout is in the form of a loop which mirrors parallel to the lines of the site boundary, with rows of bungalows along the western and southern boundaries. On the internal side of the loop access an additional 3 rows of bungalows are proposed which would back onto a central green space with a tapering conical shape. 2.3 37 parking spaces are proposed within the site as well, as landscaping and tree planting and a proposed pedestrian access path into open fields and countryside at the southwestern corner of the site. 3. Applicant’s Supporting Information 3.1 The applicant has provided the following supporting information :- • Architectural Design/Planning Statement – produced by Jewitt and Wilkie Architects. • Landscape Assessment – by TPG Landscape. • Preliminary Ecological Assessment and Biodiversity Enhancement Strategy – produced by Starling Learning • Drainage Strategy- by CS Engineering. • Desktop Site Investigation – by Landwise Geo-environmental Consultants. • Transport Statement – Connected Transport Planning. 4. Site History 4.1 None relevant. Page 30 of 84
Page 31
5. Development Plan 5.1 NPF4 forms part of the development plan. As such the proposed development requires to be assessed against the provisions and policies of both NPF4 and The North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan. The most relevant considerations some already enshrined in the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan policies are set out below. This application can therefore be considered against the policy provisions of the North Lanarkshire Local Development, and the National planning Framework 4 as follows:- National Planning Framework 4 The policies within NPF4 that are most relevant to the application are : • Policy 8 (Green belt) • Policy 17 (Rural Homes) • Policy 15 (Local Living and 20 minute neighbourhoods) • Policy 16 (f) (Development proposals for new homes on land not allocated for housing in the Local Development Plan) North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022 • PP 4 and AD 4 (Green Belt) • EDQ 1 to 3 (Quality of Development) 5.2 The development plan now comprises National Planning Framework 4 and the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan, under which the site is designated as being within the Green Belt. Policies (including NPF4 Policy 17 - Rural Homes and NLLDP policies PP4 and AD4 - Green Belt) impose restrictions on the construction of new houses in the Green Belt. 5.3 In considering this planning application for the proposed residential development, it should be noted that the provisions of NPF4 Policy 8 significantly aligns the local plan Green Belt policy PP 4, the application of this policy can therefore be quickly asserted as equivalent in its intent to the current policy position for assessment of this application. Policy 8 states that - a) Development proposals within a green belt designated within the LDP will only be supported if: i) they are for: • development associated with agriculture, woodland creation, forestry and existing woodland (including community woodlands); • residential accommodation required and designed for a key worker in a primary industry within the immediate vicinity of their place of employment where the presence of a worker is essential to the operation of the enterprise, or retired workers where there is no suitable alternative accommodation available; • horticulture, including market gardening and directly connected retailing, as well as community growing; • outdoor recreation, play and sport or leisure and tourism uses; and developments that provide opportunities for access to the open countryside (including routes for active travel and core paths); • flood risk management (such as development of blue and green infrastructure within a “drainage catchment” to manage/mitigate flood risk and/or drainage issues); • essential infrastructure or new cemetery provision; • minerals operations and renewable energy developments; • intensification of established uses, including extensions to an existing building where that is ancillary to the main use; • the reuse, rehabilitation and conversion of historic environment assets; or • one-for-one replacements of existing permanent homes. and Part 2 – National Planning Policy ii) the following requirements are met: • reasons are provided as to why a green belt location is essential and why it cannot be located on an alternative site outwith the green belt; • the purpose of the green belt at that location is not undermined; Page 31 of 84
Page 32
• the proposal is compatible with the surrounding established countryside and landscape character; • the proposal has been designed to ensure it is of an appropriate scale, massing and external appearance, and uses materials that minimise visual impact on the green belt as far as possible; and • there will be no significant long-term impacts on the environmental quality of the green belt. 5.4 In considering this planning application for the proposed residential development, it should be noted that the provisions of NPF4 Policy 17 significantly aligns the local plan Green Belt policy PP 4, the application of this policy can therefore be quickly asserted as equivalent in its intent to the current policy position for assessment of this application. Policy 17 states that - a) Development proposals for new homes in rural areas will be supported where the development is suitably scaled, sited and designed to be in keeping with the character of the area and the development: i. ii. iii. is on a site allocated for housing within the LDP; reuses brownfield land where a return to a natural state has not or will not happen without intervention; reuses a redundant or unused building; iv. is an appropriate use of a historic environment asset or is appropriate enabling development to secure the future of historic environment assets; v. is demonstrated to be necessary to support the sustainable management of a viable rural business or croft, and there is an essential need for a worker (including those taking majority control of a farm business) to live permanently at or near their place of work; vi. is for a single home for the retirement succession of a viable farm holding; vii. is for the subdivision of an existing residential dwelling; the scale of which is in keeping with the character and infrastructure provision in the area; or viii. reinstates a former dwelling house or is a one-for-one replacement of an existing permanent house. b) Development proposals for new homes in rural areas will consider how the development will contribute towards local living and take into account identified local housing needs (including affordable housing), economic considerations and the transport needs of the development as appropriate for the rural location. c) Development proposals for new homes in remote rural areas will be supported where the proposal: i. supports and sustains existing fragile communities; ii. supports identified local housing outcomes; and iii. is suitable in terms of location, access, and environmental impact. d) Development proposals for new homes that support the resettlement of previously inhabited areas will be supported where the proposal: i. is in an area identified in the LDP as suitable for resettlement; ii. is designed to a high standard; iii. responds to its rural location; and iv. is designed to minimise greenhouse gas emissions as far as possible. 5.5 NPF 4 Policies 1,2,3,11,13,14 and 16 which relate to sustainable climate ready design that the applicant sites in the submitted Planning Statement are assessed in paragraph 9 below. 5.6 NPF4 Policy 15 Policy 15 (Local Living and 20 minute neighbourhoods) intends to encourage, promote and facilitate the application of the place principle and create connected compact neighbourhoods where people can meet the majority of their daily needs within reasonable distance of their home, preferably by walking, wheeling or cycling or using sustainable transport options. 5.7 NPF4 Policy 16 (f) (Development proposals for new homes on land not allocated for housing in the Local Development Plan) sets out the qualifying criteria in which proposed housing developments on unallocated sites would be acceptable. It states that proposals for new homes on land not allocated for housing in the Local Development Plan will only be supported in limited circumstances where: i. the proposal is supported by an agreed timescale for build-out; and ii. the proposal is otherwise consistent with the plan spatial strategy and other relevant policies including local living and 20 minute neighbourhoods; Page 32 of 84
Page 33
iii. and either: • delivery of sites is happening earlier than identified in the deliverable housing land pipeline. This will be determined by reference to two consecutive years of the Housing Land Audit evidencing substantial delivery earlier than pipeline timescales and that general trend being sustained; or • the proposal is consistent with policy on rural homes; or • the proposal is for smaller scale opportunities within an existing settlement boundary; or • the proposal is for the delivery of less than 50 affordable homes as part of a local authority supported affordable housing plan. 5.8 Policy PP 4 states that North Lanarkshire Council will support developments for agriculture, forestry, recreation, or developments that need a non-urban location, including, where appropriate, Visitor Economy related development. Where specified by this Policy, applicants will be expected to provide the identified appraisals or assessments, which should be submitted with any planning application to allow consideration of the proposal. The purpose of the Green Belt is to protect the setting of communities, support regeneration by directing growth to urban areas, protect natural assets and provide a high quality environment. North Lanarkshire Council will encourage development appropriate for a Green Belt location by resisting development that is not for agriculture, forestry, recreation, tourism, or needs a Green Belt location, whilst allocating appropriate land for urban expansion. With regard to development that needs a Green Belt location, the need will be balanced against any adverse effects on the purposes of the Green Belt. Assessment of Appropriateness of any proposal for development (excluding Householder Development), or change of use, within the Green Belt, should include, but not be limited to: • support by a business plan, or statement justifying that the development is compatible with the Green Belt. • a statement that the proposal is not best suited to being located in a Centre, or General Urban Area, taking the Town Centres First Sequential Approach where appropriate. • a statement on the scale and nature of existing development in the Green Belt (all proposals require to satisfy the provisions of all EDQ Policies). • evidence that there is a specific locational requirement for the proposal. • evidence that the proposal will result in significant economic benefit. • its impact on travel patterns and accessibility by sustainable modes of transport (all proposals require to satisfy the provisions of Policy CI and Policy EDQ 3). The Council will resist other forms of development, through the full range of Policies in the Plan. Any application for planning permission will be subject to appropriate assessment of its impacts through the limits defined in the Amount of Development policy. All proposed development will be subject to assessment against relevant legislation and all other Policies in the Plan. 5.9 Policy AD 4 (Amount of Development in the Green Belt) assesses the potential impact of Green Belt appropriate uses. Where specified by this Policy, applicants will be expected to provide the identified appraisals or assessments, which should be submitted with any planning application to allow consideration of the proposal. Appropriateness refers to the nature and scale of the development and whether it would be more appropriate in a Land Use Character Area designated for the size and class of development proposed, or whether there are considerations which can be introduced to justify that the development is appropriate for the Green Belt, supported by a business plan, or statement. Assessment of amount of any development or change of use within the Green Belt should include, but not be limited to: • a statement on whether the proposal is an intensification of an existing use. • its impact on land supplies, including all housing proposals over 10 units on the Housing Land Supply. • evidence regarding the existence of suitable alternative sites. Development not meeting these requirements will not be supported. Page 33 of 84
Page 34
All proposals for housing of over 10 units should include an assessment of its impact on the Council’s Housing Land Supply, as required by Clydeplan Strategic Development Plan. Attention is also drawn to the requirements of PROM LOC3 POLICY Housing Development Sites. 5.10 Policies EDQ 1 and EDQ 3 (Quality of Development). Policy EDQ 1 states that any proposed development will require to be appraised in terms of the site and its surroundings to ensure it will integrate successfully into the local area and avoid harm to neighbouring amenity. The matters to be addressed in the appraisal include but are not limited to: • massing, height, style, finishing materials of any building or buildings on the site and surrounding Land Use Character Area • orientation and topography of the site and surrounding Land Use Character Area • mixture of uses in the Land Use Character Area • building lines, plot ratios, groupings, types of enclosure (e.g. fences, walls, hedges), landmarks in the Land Use Character Area • public utilities, e.g. underground services (including the fibre network), drainage systems, overhead power lines • public services available locally, e.g. schools, public transport, play/recreation provision • accessibility by a range of sustainable transport modes • lighting - day, night, seasonal variation of use, security arrangements, informal supervision • ground stability and contamination on the site and surrounding Land Use Character Area • existence and quality of connections and access including site and building entrances, roads, paths and visuals on the site and surrounding Land Use Character Area • Green Network, landscape character and quality on the site and surrounding Land Use Character Area • impacts associated with the holistic water environment and flood risk • biodiversity of plants and animals on the site and surrounding Land Use Character Area • heritage, or amenity value of buildings or structures above or below ground on the site and surrounding Land Use Character Area • the character and scale of any building clusters in rural areas • the nature and types of features to be safeguarded or enhanced on the site and surrounding Land Use Character Area • requirement for any additional assessments on the site and surrounding Land Use Character Area • the potential for a proposed development (particularly business uses) to co-locate and integrate with existing or proposed energy and waste innovations • the potential for installation and operation of low and zero-carbon generating technologies in new, refurbished or re-purposed buildings. • the existence of and impact of or on “Bad Neighbour” Development on the site and surrounding Land Use Character Area. Bad Neighbour uses are defined in Statutory Instrument 1992 No.224 (S.18) of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (Scotland) Order 1992 Schedule 7. 5.11 Policy EDQ 3 states that development will only be permitted where high standards of site planning and sustainable design are achieved. Planning Applications will need to demonstrate that the proposed development takes account of the site appraisal carried out as a requirement of Policies EDQ 1 a. It further states that any development should successfully address siting; overall layout; density; form; scale; height; massing; proportion; detailing; colour; materials. b. Providing a safe, pleasant, inclusive, convenient and welcoming development addressing: personal safety, security and crime prevention; adaptability (including, as appropriate, to the effects of Climate Change and for residential development for specialist provision); sustainable, safe, secure, and convenient access into and through the development that is easy to move around, attractive to pedestrians, cyclists, and people with disabilities; integration with public transport, green networks and wider links; sustainable access for cars where required, being safe for all road users, and appropriate parking or traffic calming being well located and integrated. Page 34 of 84
Page 35
6. Consultations 6.1 The Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) advised that a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) was required to be submitted due to the flood history and nature of the site. SEPA maintained a holding objection pending resolution of certain detailed aspects requiring revisions to the FRA and continued Flood risk issues relating to FRA. Upon the subsequent submission of further information, SEPA has withdrawn its original objection which was based on flood risk grounds. 6.2 Nature Scotland has provided standing Advice regarding protected species. 6.3 Historic Environment Scotland has confirmed that it has no comment to make and has provided an advisory note regarding the Antonine Wall Scheduled Ancient Monument which lies beyond and to the west of the site. Due to the distance between the site and the Scheduled Ancient Monument it is likely that the proposal would have no impact on it. 6.4 Scottish Water has confirmed that there is sufficient Capacity in drainage and water supply to support the proposal. No responses were received from Scottish Power Environmental Planning and Scottish Gas Network. 6.5 NLC Traffic & Transportation has recommended that the application be refused due to insufficient levels of proposed parking with 37 spaces being proposed and 73 required. It was also advised that a visibility splay of 2.4 m x 43m would be required. Furthermore, that the parking standard being applied is equally valid for ‘Amenity Housing for Older People’ and the NLC New Supply Team have confirmed that previous council provided amenity housing for older people has not been granted a reduction in the required parking standards. NLC Traffic & Transportation has also recommended refusal on road safety issues because the existing access road is not suitable to accommodate the additional traffic generated by the proposed development due to the lack of in curtilage parking for existing dwellings along the access road leading to on-street parking along the length of the road. 6.6 NLC Education has confirmed that there is currently sufficient capacity in terms of the relevant local schools. 6.7 NLC Affordable Housing has confirmed that affordable housing is required at 20% early engagement with New Supply Team to work out an Affordable Housing Agreement and identify possible Registered Social Landlord (RSL). 6.8 NLC Environmental Health (including Pollution Control) has advised that the site is within a low risk mining and contamination area and advised the use of standard operational conditions. The Peer Review from WSP concludes that no remedial measures are required. 6.9 NLC Archaeology Service has submitted no comment or objection. 6.10 NLC Assistant Community Partnership Manager Play Services has confirmed that they consider that although the proposed development is for over 55’s, there is potential for temporary visitors/guests/grandchildren etc to use any facilities provided. Furthermore, that the proposal falls within the category of medium sized development where 1,500 square metres of play space would be required to accord with the relevant standards. In this regard, a commuted sum for the existing play area to the east to be upgraded could be applied. 6.11 NLC Water Management has provided flooding and SUDS advice. Page 35 of 84
Page 36
7. Representations 7.1 As a result of the newspaper advert of the 19th of November 2025 and the neighbour notification process a total of 34 representations have been received. 27 objections including one from Mr Jamie Hepburn MSP and 7 representations of support have been received. These can be summarised as follows:- Objection points • Traffic/Roads/Safety/Parking Barbegs Crescent to Taggart Rd not fit for increased traffic (general or construction). There is a lack of parking provision for existing residents and cars are parked on the roadside. Taggart Rd is undulating, narrow with blind bends. Particular impact on western end of Taggart Rd where proposed access is to be constructed around an existing dwelling. The existing roads are poorly maintained with potholes. Streets are congested due to dropping off and picking up at school. As well as road backing up due to one way in and one way out at school. Also overspill parking from train station. • Flooding Issues at junction of Charleson Row and Taggart Rd Historic flooding in the area. • Loss of wildlife habitat Wild Geese graze in field in winter, Pine Martens, hedgehogs, Foxes, Otters, Kestrels Bats, Deer, Pheasants, Greenfinch and Starlings use the site. • Impact on amenities – GP and Dentist The proposal will result in extra pressure on GP and Dental Services in area. • Access to amenities for over 55s Steep hill walk to shop/ bus stops / train station. A combined small grocers and Post Office located halfway along Constarry Rd – all other shops to be accessed by bus or car. Bus stops only available on Constarry Road. • Viability of Hub Previous council funded Community Centre closed years ago. No information on viability of proposed hub and how it will be financed. • Noise from Hub There may be noise impact issues on existing dwellings as well as any future new residents. • Heavy Construction Traffic The existing street and road network not suitable for construction traffic. • Loss of Local Character Due to loss of part of field adjacent to the western village boundary. • Could set precedent for more dev of farmland adjacent to site in the GB • Inadequate consultation and notification Points of Support • Houses for older people • Energy efficient • Community Hub a bonus • No impact on A891 • Train Station provides car alternative • Work opportunities for local businesses and trades people Page 36 of 84
Page 37
• Dev will allow older people to release much needed family homes by moving into new over 55s development. 8. Planning Assessment 8.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the policies of the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Development Plan now consists of the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan and the National Planning Framework 4 (NPF 4). Accordingly, the proposed development requires to be assessed against the provisions and policies of both NPF4 and the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan. The application site is designated Green Belt within the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022 (NLLDP). 8.2 In terms of NPF4, Policy 8 (Green belt) and Policy 17 (Rural Homes) are most relevant. Policy 8 states that - a) Development proposals within a green belt designated within the LDP will only be supported if they are for: • development associated with agriculture, woodland creation, forestry and existing woodland (including community woodlands); • residential accommodation required and designed for a key worker in a primary industry within the immediate vicinity of their place of employment where the presence of a worker is essential to the operation of the enterprise, or retired workers where there is no suitable alternative accommodation available; • horticulture, including market gardening and directly connected retailing, as well as community growing; • outdoor recreation, play and sport or leisure and tourism uses; and developments that provide opportunities for access to the open countryside (including routes for active travel and core paths); • flood risk management (such as development of blue and green infrastructure within a “drainage catchment” to manage/mitigate flood risk and/or drainage issues); • essential infrastructure or new cemetery provision; • minerals operations and renewable energy developments; • intensification of established uses, including extensions to an existing building where that is ancillary to the main use; • the reuse, rehabilitation and conversion of historic environment assets; or • one-for-one replacements of existing permanent homes. and Part 2 – National Planning Policy ii) the following requirements are met: • reasons are provided as to why a green belt location is essential and why it cannot be located on an alternative site outwith the green belt; • the purpose of the green belt at that location is not undermined; • the proposal is compatible with the surrounding established countryside and landscape character; • the proposal has been designed to ensure it is of an appropriate scale, massing and external appearance, and uses materials that minimise visual impact on the green belt as far as possible; and Page 37 of 84
Page 38
• there will be no significant long-term impacts on the environmental quality of the green belt. In this case, it is considered that the proposed development does not comply with the above criteria albeit that the submitted Planning Statement states that no other alternative designated sites are available. 8.3 Policy 17 (Rural Homes) states that – a) Development proposals for new homes in rural areas will be supported where the development is suitably scaled, sited and designed to be in keeping with the character of the area and the development: i. is on a site allocated for housing within the LDP; ii. reuses brownfield land where a return to a natural state has not or will not happen without intervention; iii. reuses a redundant or unused building; iv. is an appropriate use of a historic environment asset or is appropriate enabling development to secure the future of historic environment assets; v. is demonstrated to be necessary to support the sustainable management of a viable rural business or croft, and there is an essential need for a worker (including those taking majority control of a farm business) to live permanently at or near their place of work; vi. is for a single home for the retirement succession of a viable farm holding; vii. is for the subdivision of an existing residential dwelling; the scale of which is in keeping with the character and infrastructure provision in the area; or viii. reinstates a former dwelling house or is a one-for-one replacement of an existing permanent house. b) Development proposals for new homes in rural areas will consider how the development will contribute towards local living and take into account identified local housing needs (including affordable housing), economic considerations and the transport needs of the development as appropriate for the rural location. c) Development proposals for new homes in remote rural areas will be supported where the proposal: i. supports and sustains existing fragile communities; ii. supports identified local housing outcomes; and iii. is suitable in terms of location, access, and environmental impact. d) Development proposals for new homes that support the resettlement of previously inhabited areas will be supported where the proposal: i. is in an area identified in the LDP as suitable for resettlement; ii. is designed to a high standard; iii. responds to its rural location; and iv. is designed to minimise greenhouse gas emissions as far as possible. Page 38 of 84
Page 39
Whilst the proposal takes into account the need for affordable housing and accessible over 55’s provision, it is considered that it does not comply with the other criteria and most notably that it is not on a site allocated for housing within the LDP. Furthermore, it is considered that the purpose of the green belt at that location would be undermined by the proposed development and that the proposal is not compatible with the surrounding established countryside and landscape character. 8.4 NPF4 Policy 15 Policy 15 (Local Living and 20 minute neighbourhoods) intends to encourage, promote and facilitate the application of the place principle and create connected compact neighbourhoods where people can meet the majority of their daily needs within reasonable distance of their home, preferably by walking, wheeling or cycling or using sustainable transport options. In this case, the application site is not considered to be the most convenient in terms of distance to the local shop, bus stops and train station when taking into the topography of the access to the site being via a hillside location involving steep gradients perhaps not conducive to an elderly pedestrian demographic. It is possible to reach the convenience store/post office, hot food takeaway and barber shop within approximately 13 minutes when using the centre of the application site as a median starting point. With the exception of another hot food takeaway at the western end of the village, these shops make up the overall provision of such pedestrian amenities within the village. Therefore, although these facilities can be reached from the site within 20 minutes, it is considered that the proposal does not wholly accord with the principle of creating connected neighbourhoods due to the sparsity of village centre facilities and the difficult topography in terms of steep inclines that the potentially elderly demographic residents would encounter. 8.5 Policy 16 (f) (Development proposals for new homes on land not allocated for housing in the Local Development Plan) sets out the qualifying criteria in which proposed housing developments on unallocated sites would be acceptable. It states that proposals for new homes on land not allocated for housing in the Local Development Plan will only be supported in limited circumstances where: i. the proposal is supported by an agreed timescale for build-out; and ii. the proposal is otherwise consistent with the plan spatial strategy and other relevant policies including local living and 20 minute neighbourhoods; iii. and either: • delivery of sites is happening earlier than identified in the deliverable housing land pipeline. This will be determined by reference to two consecutive years of the Housing Land Audit evidencing substantial delivery earlier than pipeline timescales and that general trend being sustained; or • the proposal is consistent with policy on rural homes; or • the proposal is for smaller scale opportunities within an existing settlement boundary; or • the proposal is for the delivery of less than 50 affordable homes as part of a local authority supported affordable housing plan. The proposal cites a 30 month programme for the delivery of the project and whilst the proposal does have an element of affordable housing, it is not considered to be consistent with the spatial strategy as the site is within the Green Belt and is not compliant with rural homes policy. It is further considered that the proposal does not significantly comply with Policy 15 due to the location and topography of the site and the access from Taggart Road being on a steep hillside (as discussed in paragraph 8.3 above). Furthermore, the proposal is not within the existing settlement boundary. For the above reasons, it is considered that the proposal does not comply with Policy 16 (f). Page 39 of 84
Page 40
8.6 In terms of the NLLDP, policies PP 4 Green Belt and policy AD 4 – Green Belt (Amount of Development) are most relevant in considering this case. The application has failed to satisfy any of the criteria listed in paragraph 8.2 above that would justify residential development in the Green Belt. Environmental and Design Qualities Policies policy EDQ 1, and EDQ 3 are also applicable both as a general requirement and in relation to the requirements within the body of Policy PP4. Policy AD 4 Green Belt (Amount of Development) seeks to protect the character and promote development in the Green Belt by restricting development to acceptable types and operating assessment criteria. Policy AD 4 confirms that assessment of the appropriateness of this proposal should be done under the assessment of policy PP 4. 8.7 In this case, it is considered that the proposal does not comply with Environmental and Design Qualities Policies policy EDQ 1, and EDQ 3 as the proposed layout has less than half the required parking provision and due to the lack of buffer screen boundary planting along the western and southern boundaries, it is considered that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the surrounding landscape character. Furthermore, the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the existing residential area due to traffic generation through the access route and also road safety issues due to the undulating nature of the access route and on-street parking activity due to a lack of in-curtilage parking to existing dwellings. 8.8 Furthermore, it is considered that it is not within the gift of Planning to control the demographic of tenure and there would be practical enforcement issues in terms of it can be enforced and controlled in practise. There also questions regarding how the proposed Community hub would be funded, maintained and sustained (as Croy had a Community Centre provided by Council that failed and could not be sustained). 8.9 Representations Objection points • Traffic/Roads/Safety/Parking Barbegs Crescent to Taggart Rd not fit for increased traffic (general or construction). There is a lack of parking provision for existing residents and cars are parked on the roadside. Taggart Road is undulating, narrow with blind bends with particular impact on western end of Taggart Rd where proposed access is to be constructed around an existing dwelling. The existing roads are poorly maintained with potholes. Streets are congested due to dropping off and picking up at school. As well as road backing up due to one way in and one way out at school. Also overspill parking from train station. Response: It is agreed that long stretches of the existing access road have significant levels of on -street parking due to the lack of in-curtilage parking. The winding and undulating nature of Taggart road has also been noted during site visits. Issues relating to the condition of the road and also congestion due to the primary school and chapel have also been noted. With regard to overspill from train station car park, it has been noted during site visits that the carparking facilities at the train station appear to be fully taken up but whether it causes overspill in Barbegs Crescent is unclear, however, this would be the logical place to park if the train station parking was full and it would be unreasonable to consider that this is not the case. • Flooding Issues at junction of Charleson Row and Taggart Rd Historic flooding in the area. Response: It is understood that there has been historic flooding at this location. However, after extensive consultation with SEPA, they have determined that the proposal will not have any detrimental impact on the application site and the surrounding area. Page 40 of 84
Page 41
• Loss of wildlife habitat Wild Geese graze in field in winter, Pine Martens, hedgehogs, Foxes, Otters, Kestrels Bats, Deer, Pheasants, Greenfinch and Starlings use the site. Response: It has not been possible to ascertain this claim and at the same time it would be unreasonable to doubt it. However, as the application site forms part of a larger arable field and farm, it is considered that if the application were to be granted, wildlife would be able to naturally re-locate to surrounding accommodation. Furthermore, if the application were to be approved, the relevant protected species and wildlife measures could be implemented through the imposition of relevant planning conditions. • Impact on amenities – GP and Dentist The proposal will result in extra pressure on GP and Dental Services in area. Response: It is agreed that the proposal is likely to result in extra demand on these services like any other residential development. Although, it is usually the case that a significant number of residents may prefer to stay with their existing medical practices if not too far away and some potential future residents may already use these local services. • Access to amenities for over 55s Steep hill walk to shop/ bus stops / train station not ideal for over 55s. The nearest and only shop is a combined small grocers and Post Office located halfway along Constarry Rd with all other shops requiring to be accessed by bus or car. Bus stops only available on Constarry Road. Response: It is agreed that the walk to from and the proposed site involves a reasonably steep hill due to the undulating topography of the access road. There is also a hot food takeaway and barbers next to the shop half way along Constarry Road. The train station and bus stops on Constarry Road are approximately half a mile from the site. • Viability of Hub Previous council funded Community Centre closed years ago. No information on viability of proposed hub and how it will be financed. Response: The closure of the council funded community centre is a matter of fact and it is agreed that there are question marks on how the proposed hub would be sustained. • Noise from Hub There may be noise impact issues on existing dwellings as well as any future new residents. Response: This may or may not be the case but can only be ascertained in the future is the development were to go ahead and such issues are raised through separate environmental health legislation. • Heavy Construction Traffic The existing street and road network not suitable for construction traffic. Response: Agreed, however, if the proposal were to go ahead, alternative construction access could potentially be realised via Howe Road and the existing farm fields. • Loss of Local Character Due to loss of part of field adjacent to the western village boundary. Response: It is agreed that it is inherent in the proposal that the existing character of the site being an arable field and its setting next to the western boundary of the site would be significantly changed. • Could set precedent for more development of farmland adjacent to site in the Green Belt. Response: This is a possibility. Page 41 of 84
Page 42
Inadequate consultation and notification. Response: All required neighbour notification was carried out. Notification of the proposed application was also published in the Cumbernauld News and Kilsyth Chronicle on the 19th of November 2025. Points of Support • Houses for older people Response: It is recognised that there is a need for houses for older people. • Energy efficient Response: It is recognised that the proposal follows a sustainable climate ready design that the applicant sites in the submitted Planning Statement. • Community Hub a bonus Response: A community Hub in general terms is considered a positive thing. The proposed Hub is intended for the use of future residents of the proposed development. • No impact on A891 Response: There will be some impact on the A891 (Constarry Road). However, it is considered that it will be within acceptable limits. • Train Station provides car alternative Response: Agreed. Although, it is considered that levels of car ownership within the potential development will be higher than forecast by the developer. • Work opportunities for local businesses and trades people Response: This is potentially the case. • Development will allow older people to release much needed family homes by moving into new over 55s development. Response: This is potentially the case. 8.10 Consultations 8.11 The Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) advised that a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) was required to be submitted due to the flood history and nature of the site. SEPA maintained a holding objection pending resolution of certain detailed aspects requiring revisions to the FRA and continued Flood risk issues relating to FRA. Upon the subsequent submission of further information, SEPA has withdrawn their original objection which was based on flood risk grounds. It is therefore considered that the proposal has the potential to comply with Policy 22 Flood Risk and Water Management. Page 42 of 84
Page 43
8.12 Nature Scotland has provided standing Advice regarding protected species. Historic Environment Scotland has confirmed that it has no comment to make. Scottish Water has confirmed that there is sufficient Capacity in drainage and water supply to support the proposal. NLC Education has confirmed that there is currently sufficient capacity in terms of the relevant local schools. NLC Archaeology Service has submitted no comment or objection. NLC Environmental Health (including Pollution Control) has advised that the site is within a low risk mining and contamination area and advised the use of standard operational conditions. The Peer Review from WSP concludes that no remedial measures are required. NLC Affordable Housing has confirmed that affordable housing is required at 20% early engagement with New Supply Team to work out an Affordable Housing Agreement and identify possible Registered Social Landlord (RSL). 8.13 NLC Traffic & Transportation has recommended that the application be refused due to insufficient levels of proposed parking with 37 spaces being proposed and 73 required. It was also advised that a visibility splay of 2.4 m x 43m would be required. Furthermore, that the parking standard being applied is equally valid for ‘Amenity Housing for Older People’ and the NLC New Supply Team have confirmed that previous council provided amenity housing for older people has not been granted a reduction in the required parking standards. NLC Traffic & Transportation has also recommended refusal on road safety grounds because the existing access road is not suitable to accommodate the additional traffic generated by the proposed development due to the lack of in curtilage parking for existing dwellings along the access road leading to on-street parking along the length of the road. The premise of the applicant is that people over 55 will have low levels of car ownership but this is not necessarily the case and how can the tenure demographic and car ownership levels be controlled in practical terms. The advice given from NLC Traffic and Transportation and the potential impact the proposal would have on road safety and the general amenity of the existing residential area within the proposed access route is considered to be a significant determining factor in the assessment of this application. 8.14 NLC Assistant Community Partnership Manager Play Services has confirmed that they consider that although the proposed development is for over 55’s, there is potential for temporary visitors/guests/grandchildren etc to use any facilities provided. Furthermore, that the proposal falls within the category of medium sized development where 1,500 square metres of play space would be required to accord with the relevant standards. In this regard, a commuted sum for the existing play area to the east to be upgraded could be applied. In this regard, the applicant was offered the opportunity, in lieu of on-site provision to provide a commuted sum to help upgrade existing nearby facilities. This was not taken up as a possibility as the applicant deems that there is adequate play facilities within vicinity in the context of over 55s provision. In this regard, on balance, it is considered that there is adequate open space provided within the proposed layout and that the existing play facilities to the east are adequate in terms of any potential additional usage brought about as a result of the proposed development. 9. Other Material Considerations -Applicant’s case for over 55’s accommodation and supportive comments. 9.1 In Planning Statement supporting the application, the applicant cites the key reasons why the application should be approved, these being:- • Policy Compliant Affordable Housing Provides 25% tenure-blind affordable homes (11units), pepper-potted with affordable units identical and appearance and specification to market homes. Secured in perpetuity via a Section 75 legal agreement Comment: This is potentially the case and in general terms a good approach. Page 43 of 84
Page 44
• Green Belt Justification – Exceptional Circumstances Site is low value, non-prime with no environmental or cultural constraints with physically contained defensible boundaries by settlement edge and railway corridor. The public benefits outweigh very limited Green Belt impact. Comment: The proposal does not meet the criteria within NPF4 Green Belt Policy 8 and North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022 Green Belt Policies PP 4 and AD 4 and is not a rationalisation of the Green Belt boundary but more of a bolt on as demonstrated by existing settlement boundary and proposed looped access around an existing dwelling via ground designated as a SINC. • Compliance with NPF4 Policy 16 – Quality Homes Deliver specialist housing for older people, a priority under Policy 16. The development is small-scale, well-contained, and demonstrably needed in this location and the site offers a suitable gradient, willing owner and proximity to services. Comment: The applicant’s principal premise for the proposal is that the council has identified the need for more accessible housing for over 55’s within the council area. It is understood that a report regarding this was ratified by the relevant housing committee. It is therefore agreed that a need for such a housing demographic exists with an ageing population within the council area. It is however considered that the application site is not the appropriate location for such housing due to the lack of pedestrian amenities (convenience shop/post office, a hot food takeaway and a Barber shop and also the steep gradients that have to be tackled to walk to the amenities via Taggart Road. Policy 15 -Local Living and 20 minute neighbourhoods is relevant to this. These services can be reached in approximately 13 minutes from the centre of the site. However, Croy does not have an identifiable and cohesive village centre but has a shop, hot food takeaway and barbers mid-way along Constarry Road and pedestrian access to them requires negotiating steep slopes. The site is not nestled within the village but beyond its boundaries. • Sustainable, Climate-Ready Design Comment: The proposal would have air sourced heat pumps, PV- ready roofs, EV charging infrastructure, SUDS pond and biodiversity enhancements. These elements support NPF4 Policy 1 (Tacking Climate and nature crises), Policy 2 (Climate mitigation and adaption), Policy 3 (Biodiversity), Policy 11 (Energy), Policy 13 (Stainable Transport), Policy 14 (Design, quality and place) and Policy 16 (Quality homes). It may be the case that the proposal has the potential to align with policies 1,2,3,11,13 and 14 but this does not outweigh the primary determining policies relating to the Greenbelt. • Community Benefit and Placemaking Community Hub supports ageing in place, combats isolation and delivers health/wellbeing services with sensory gardens, walking loop and dementia friendly design feature and it is fully aligned with NPF4’s Six Qualities of Successful Places (Healthy, Pleasant, Connected, Distinctive, Sustainable and Adaptable. Page 44 of 84
Page 45
Comment: This proposal has the potential to support the intended demographic in terms of health. However, question marks remain about the sustainability of the proposed hub in terms of how it would be funded and maintained in the long term. There are also issues regarding pedestrian connectivity due to the steep slopes that have to be negotiated going from the site to the village shop etc. There are also issues about long terms adaptability as the proposed dwellings are specialist in terms of intended demographic. • Deliverability and Programme Certainty 30 month build programme with repeatable bungalow types and developer has a proven track record with 30 plus years of experience. Comment: This may be the case, but no Registered Social Landlord has been identified with the proposed affordable home element. 10. Conclusions 10.1 Whilst it is recognised that the Council recognises that there is a need for more over 55’s accessible accommodation within North Lanarkshire, it is considered that this particular site is not the right location for such provision as concluded above. Whilst many of the NPF4 policies listed by the applicant can be complied with, the main headline Green Belt policies (NPF4 8 and NLLDP PP 4) cannot. It is further considered that the proposal does not comply with criteria set out NPF4 Policy 16 (f) (unallocated housing sites) and does not wholly satisfy the criteria set in Policy 15 (Local Living and 20 minute neighbourhoods as it is considered that the application site is not in the right location. Additionally, it is considered that the proposal does not represent a natural rationalisation of the Green Belt boundary but would be much more of a ‘Bolt on’ to the existing village of Croy. It is therefore recommended that this application be refused for the above reasons. Page 45 of 84
Page 46
Application No: 26/00251/FUL Proposed Development: Residential Development (23 Dwellings) Site Address: Land to the East of Millcroft Mill Millcroft Road Cumbernauld North Lanarkshire Date Registered: 19th March 2026 Applicant: Mr J. Cairns Millcroft Stables Millcroft Road Cumbernauld G67 4AG Agent: Enspire Architecture Studio Ltd Alloa Business Centre Whins Road Alloa FK10 3SA Application Level: Local Application Contrary to Development Plan: Yes Ward: 04 Cumbernauld East Claire Barclay, Tom Johnston, Barry McCulloch, Adam Smith. Representations: 22 letters of representation received. Recommendation: Refuse Reasoned Justification: The proposal is unacceptable in terms of the development plan as it does not meet the criteria set out in the relevant polices. The proposed Residential Development at this location would not represent a development that the National Planning Framework Policies and North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan intends to support within the designated Greenbelt. Page 46 of 84
Page 47
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: 26/00251/FUL Name (of applicant): Mr J. Cairns Site Address: Land to the East of Millcroft Mill, Millcroft Road Cumbernauld Development: Residential development (23 Dwellings) Page 47 of 84
Page 48
Reasons for Refusal: - 1. The proposed development is contrary to the Greenbelt policies in the NPF4 Policy 8 along with policy PP4 of the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (2022). In particular, the development would result in an unacceptable impact as it would result in the significant erosion of the Green Belt around the general urban area Cumbernauld, that contributes to the character, function, or qualities of place. No adequate justification, special circumstances or material considerations have been demonstrated to merit a departure from the development plan. 2. The proposed development is not intended to support agriculture or the creation of woodland the principle of the proposal does not therefore meet the aims of Green Belt Policy PP 4 POLICY Purpose of Place, AD 4 POLICY Amount of Development. 3. That the proposed development is not supported by Policy 16 Quality Homes of NPF4 or policy EDQ 3 of the local development plan in that the nature of the proposed development does not meet the criteria which would justify residential development in a site that has not been allocated for housing in the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan. The proposal represents the urbanisation of the rural area and therefore has the potential to undermine Green Belt objectives by focusing on outward growth into Greenfield locations significantly beyond the boundary containing the urban envelope. 4. The proposed development is not supported by policy EDQ3 Environmental and Design Quality Policies as the proposed access arrangement fails to provide adequate visibility to ensure safe operation, regardless of the design speed applied. The application therefore fails to comply with NPF4 Policy 13 and policy EDQ3 on road safety. 5. The site has not been allocated for residential development, is not recorded in the vacant and derelict land register and is predominantly green field, cumulatively and on balance these points do not support the position that this site is brown field land. The site is therefore not supported by NPF 4 Policy 9 Brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings. 6. Development proposals replacing green field with residential development will contribute to the erosion of rather than the enhancement of biodiversity, including strengthening nature networks and the connections between them. In doing so does not protect biodiversity or strengthen nature networks. In this respect the proposal is not supported by NPF4 Policy 3 – Biodiversity. 7. Development proposals are not consistent with the six qualities of successful places as it has not been demonstrated that the development will be Connected, Distinctive, Sustainable or adaptable. In that the scale, density, design and overall layout of the proposed development would not be acceptable representing urbanisation of a rural location inconsistent with the surrounding locale Policy EDQ 3, similarly the proposal is not supported by NPF4 Policy 14 – Design, Quality and Place 8. The proposed site has not been identified as having potential to accommodate new rural housing which will be considered where the policy intent is to encourage, promote and facilitate the delivery of more high quality, affordable and sustainable rural homes in the right locations. The application is therefore not supported by NPF4, Policy 17 9. The application site is not well-sited to encourage sustainable travel as an unplanned and sporadic development in the countryside poorly connected to the general urban area. The site is therefore not supported by policies NPF4, Policy13. Page 48 of 84
Page 49
Background Papers: Consultation Responses: Memo from Education dated 25/3/26 Email from Scottish Environment Protection Agency dated 14/4/26 Email from Scottish Water dated 2/4/26 Email from Coal Mining Remediation Authority dated 23/3/26 Emails from NLC Greenspace dated 11/5/26 and 13/7/26 Email from Environmental Health (including Pollution Control) dated 16/4/26 Memo from NLC Tree Assets Manager dated 23/3/26 and 15/6/26 Memo from Archaeology Service dated 30/3/26 Memos from NLC Traffic & Transportation dated 9/4/26 and 5//26 Contact Information: Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Gordon Arthur at esplanning@northlan.gov.uk Report Date: 28th July 2026 Page 49 of 84
Page 50
APPLICATION NO. 26/00251/FUL REPORT 1. Site Description 1.1 The site has a rural location and comprises of an agricultural yard measuring approximately 2900 m2 and currently used for arboriculture which is generally level though not surfaced throughout. A large agricultural shed constructed in profiled steel, chattel and shipping containers are located to the east of the yard. Beyond this boundary the ground falls sharply towards a single storey dwelling (Millcroft cottage). To the north lies Millcroft mill a further dwelling sitting significantly below the level of the site and beyond the woodland boundary. The west of the site is characterised by open field bound by stock fencing. A converted farm steading comprising of six cojoined dwellings with adjacent parking area sits coterminous with the southwest boundary. An area of woodland runs from the eastern boundary becoming denser along the northern boundary. The ground falls sharply beyond the northern boundary from 92 metres AOD to 86m meeting a watercourse beyond this site boundary. Notwithstanding a recently deposited soil mound, from the southeast corner, the site rises from 93 metres AOD to 95 metres AOD falling to 91 metres AOD at the northeast corner. The site is accessed from Millcroft Road via an existing access currently servicing the yard area. 2. Proposed Development 2.1 The application proposes 23 dwellings arranged around a loop road • Type 1 terraced single storey 1 bedroom • Type 2 detached single storey 2 bedroom (single vehicle integral garage) • Type 3 detached single storey 4 bedroom Five type 1 dwellings will be positioned in a terraced arrangement with sixteen type 2 dwellings arranged around a central green space area functioning as a SUDs collection point. The remaining two type three dwellings are positioned at the termination of this arrangement. Parking for the terraced properties will be a parking court arrangement separated by a 2-metre- wide access path with the remainder of the parking being in curtilage and staggered visitor parking along a largely shared surface arrangement. 3. Applicant’s Supporting Information 3.1 The following information has been submitted in support of the application • Planning statement • Coal Mining Risk Assessment • Geotechnical ground investigation (Phase 1) • Transportation Statement • Street Engineering Review • Preliminary Ecological Assessment • Arboriculture impact assessment Page 50 of 84
Page 51
4. Site History Recent relevant site history Includes: • 16/00006/PRA Agricultural Building for Agricultural Equipment & Feed • 18/01091/FUL Erection of a Dwellinghouse dismissed on appeal. • 19/00086/FUL Erection of a Dwellinghouse application withdrawn. • 19/01036/FUL Erection of a Dwellinghouse application withdrawn. • 23/00704/FUL New single dwellinghouse for short term letting accommodation appeal upheld The latter two appeal decisions (Local Review Body) which relate to the same site, albeit coterminous with the current site boundary, were recorded latterly as farm diversification submitted by the current applicant. 5. Development Plan 5.1 NPF4 forms part of the development plan. As such, the proposed development requires to be assessed against the provisions and policies of both NPF4 and The North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan. The most relevant considerations, some already enshrined in the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan policies, are set out below. This application can therefore be considered against the policy provisions of the North Lanarkshire Local Development and the National planning Framework 4 as follows. 5.2 National Planning Framework 4 The policies within NPF4 that are relevant to the application are : National Planning Framework NPF 4 • Policy 1 (Tackling the climate and nature crisis) • Policy 2 (Climate mitigation and adaptation) • Policy 3 (Biodiversity) • Policy 8 (Green belt) • Policy 9 (Brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings) • Policy 13 (Sustainable transport) • Policy 14 (Design, quality and place) • Policy 15 (Local Living and 20 minute neighbourhoods) • Policy 17 Rural Homes 5.3 North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022 • PP 4 and AD 4 (Green Belt) • CI (Contributions to Infrastructure) • EDQ 1 to 3 (Quality of Development. Page 51 of 84
Page 52
6. Consultations 6.1 Consultation responses include the following: • NLC Roads development initially advised that the application should be deferred pending further comment on visibility splays, road geometry, design capacity, utility vehicle tracking, parking provision and the introduction of footways. Notwithstanding the submission of additional supporting information matters relating to Road safety, it remained the view of the consultee that the application should be refused. • NLC Protective Services provided review of the applicant’s phase 1 desk study report. As this remains unresolved at the time of writing this report, should members be minded to approve the application, a condition on this subject is recommended. • NLC Education advise that their assessment is based on the proposal for 23 residential units, including 5 one-bedroom properties. Based on current school rolls and projected capacity, the impact of a development of this scale is expected to be minimal and it is anticipated that local schools will have sufficient capacity to accommodate the likely pupil yield from this proposal. • NLC Assistant Community Partnership Manager (Play) did not provide comment on the application, however as the applicant is providing an area for play within the site, a condition recommending the type of play equipment is recommended should members decide to approve the application. • NLC Tree assets manager request submission of an Arboriculture Impact Assessment (AIA) and Arboriculture Method Statement (AMS). Tree Assets have reviewed the submitted Arboriculture Impact Assessment, Tree Protection Plan and Arboriculture Method Statement and supports the proposed tree protection measures, subject to the control measures within the identified Special Measures Areas being implemented in full as specified, including supervision by the appointed Arboriculture Clerk of Works as recommended. On completion, the Arboriculture Clerk of Works should provide a report confirming that the approved protection measures were installed, maintained and complied with, and that works within the Special Measures Areas were completed in accordance with the approved methodology. Subject to this, Tree Assets has no objection. The foregoing comments are recommended as the subject of planning condition should members be minded to approve the application. • Archaeology Service advised that the proposed development has the potential to damage previously unknown archaeological remains, as such, recommend that in advance of construction a programme of archaeological works. A condition recommending a programme of archaeological works is recommended should members decide to approve the application. • Scottish Water has no objection to the application advising that the applicant must identify any potential conflicts with Scottish Water assets and contact their Asset Impact Team. Whilst the applicant has been notified of this requirement, it is recommended as a planning condition should members decide to approve the application. • Coal Mining Remediation Authority confirmed that it has no comments to make as the site is in a development low risk area. • Scottish Environment Protection Agency has no objection to the development and provided advice on private wastewater drainage and standing advice on drainage. Final drainage detail is recommended as the subject of planning condition if members are minded to minded to approve. Page 52 of 84
Page 53
7. Representations 7.1 Following the notification process and an advert in the local press, 22 letters of representation received 7 (including Milncroft farm residents association) objecting to the application and 15 in support. Further comments were received from Milncroft farm residents’ association after the statutory period for representation. This was in relation to an enquiry on works commencing in breach of planning controls rather than relating to the planning assessment itself. Comments relating to the application assessment received within the statutory period are summarised as follows: Objection comments include • Failure to notify neighbouring properties. • Lack of public transport infrastructure • Inadequate street lighting and sub-standard access • Loss of privacy and over development • Negative impact on drainage infrastructure • No footpath connections and poor accessibility • Development in the Green Belt contrary to Development plan policy. • The development does not meet the aims of the development plan including NPF4 policies 13,14,15 and 16. • Impact on existing residential amenity overlooking and loss of privacy • Inappropriate Scale and character of the development • Lack of active travel infrastructure • Impact on biodiversity and designated sites 7.2 With the exception of comments on notification, the foregoing points are addressed in the officer’s report. Support comments include • Development would fulfil a community need for single storey housing. • Development supports social cohesion and connected communities enabling families to remain together. Response: The planning system has a function principally set out in the policies of the development plan to support development where it is directed to a policy supported sustainable location. • Concerns relating to neighbour notification relate to procedure rather than planning merit. Response: The planning service agrees with this statement. Page 53 of 84
Page 54
7.3 Except for comments above the following points are addressed in the officer’s report. • Green Belt designation does not prohibit development. • In terms of residential amenity, privacy, overlooking and separation distances are assessed against established design principles and site-specific context. There are no fixed separation distances within national policy that apply universally in rural or low-density settings. • Drainage proposals where they meet technical and regulatory requirements are routinely accepted following consultation statutory bodies. • Character of development and settlement pattern should be based on the context of the site and surrounding built form. • Transport, access and active travel are matters for consultation with the Roads Authority with matters on road safety, capacity, access arrangements and sustainability are subject to technical review. • Planning balance all material considerations must be weighed in the planning balance. • The development accords with the Development plan on design, quality homes, biodiversity and natural environment, flood risk management and residential amenity. • The application will deliver a range of social economic benefits by increasing housing choice and availability, supporting local services and facilities, contributing to the local economy during construction and occupation. • Traffic generated by the development will be modest. • The application meets a clear housing need in terms of a shortage of bungalows and suitable homes for older people across North Lanarkshire and the wider Central Belt. This proposal targeted at older people and multi-generational living, directly addresses this need and aligns with NPF4 Policy 16 (Quality Homes). • Positive Contribution to the Area in terms of landscape setting. • Community and Economic Benefits for the local economy during construction and bring new residents who will contribute to the vibrancy of the surrounding area. • The proposal is located adjacent to an existing residential cluster at Milncroft Steading and is considered to represent a logical and contained extension to established development, rather than isolated encroachment into the wider countryside. • While the development will introduce change to the local character, it is notconsidered that this would result in unacceptable harm when balanced against the benefits of delivering new housing. Page 54 of 84
Page 55
• While the site is served by a rural road network with limited active travel infrastructure, the level of development proposed is not expected to give rise to severe impacts on road safety or network capacity. • the site is not located within a designated area, although it lies in proximity to North Bellstane Plantation SSSI. There is no evidence to suggest that the proposal would adversely affect the integrity of this designation. • Drainage and infrastructure matters can be addressed through the submission of a Sustainable. • Drainage Systems (SUDS) scheme and consultation with statutory bodies. • The development is capable of being designed to ensure acceptable separation distances and mitigation, such that no unacceptable impact on neighbouring properties would arise. • The classification of land as brownfield or greenfield is determined based on its current and recent use. Previous applications relating to agricultural storage do not necessarily establish the site's present status as an active agricultural holding. • The proposed density of 23 dwellings should be considered in terms of layout, design, and site capacity. • Transport and access arrangements are assessed by the relevant roads authority. Where deficiencies exist; mitigation measures or conditions are typically applied. • The proximity of designated sites does not preclude development where it can be demonstrated that there will be no significant adverse effect on site integrity. Issues relating to protected species, trees, and drainage are routinely addressed through surveys, assessments, • Any potential overlooking or loss of privacy must be assessed against currant standards and can be addressed through design measures where necessary. 8. Planning Assessment 8.1 Planning permission is sought for the construction of 23 dwellings and modification of an access at a rural location. 8.2 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act requires that planning decisions should accord with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 8.3 The Development Plan comprises the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan and the National Planning Framework 4 (NPF 4). Accordingly, the proposed development requires to be assessed against the policies of both National planning framework 4 (NPF4) and The North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan. Relevant development plan policies: 8.4 All development is expected to consider the global climate and nature crises. 8.5 Policy 1 (Tackling the climate and nature crisis) requires that these crises be given significant weight in the consideration of development proposals. Page 55 of 84
Page 56
8.6 Policy 2 (Climate mitigation and adaptation) requires that development be sited and designed sustainability. Given the site location, it is concluded that the site is not suitably accessible by sustainable travel and that it would result in the development of a greenfield site when more sustainable brownfield sites and existing buildings are available. The proposed development would therefore does not accord with the objectives of these policies. 8.7 Policy 3 (biodiversity) development should maintain or enhance biodiversity, therefore proposals should include appropriate conservation or mitigation measures. NLC Greenspace advised the site encroaches into the Shanks Burn (North) a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). SINCs (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation) are protected by council policy PROT A POLICY Natural Environment and Green Network Assets Category A3. The applicant has not demonstrated to the Council’s satisfaction that there will be no adverse impact or that any impacts can be mitigated in environmental terms relevant to the impact. The applicant was advised that the proposed development should be taken out of the SINC and a buffer implemented between the SINC and the proposed development. A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) was submitted and did not indicate adverse impact on protected species. In terms of biodiversity duty, a full landscape and biodiversity plan was recommended to include volumes of planting as well as species and all other biodiversity enhancements for the site. It is advised that all species are to be native nectar rich and that all enhancements should be led by the finding of the PEA report. This recommendation was not carried forward in the subsequent PEA report. Notwithstanding Greenspace developments consultation comments, the replacement of predominantly green field would result in development which is transformative meaning a significant loss of green field (ecological footprint) in direct opposition to Green Belt Policy designed to prevent the urbanisation of the countryside. In a planning context transformative often refers to a development or proposal that would fundamentally alter the character, function, or qualities of a place. For example: A proposal may be described as “transformative” if it changes the sense of place, amenity, or landscape character in a substantial way. In doing so being an effect that reshapes how something operates or is experienced. On balance the proposal is a residential development that will largely result in the loss of established green network of value which currently has an established and working function which not only includes ecology and landscape but also supports elements of placemaking. The application is therefore not supported by NPF 4 policy 3 biodiversity. In a wider planning context, this policy supports a longer-term planning vision of strategic planning integration principally to guide land use and infrastructure to sustainable locations in the urban area. This is discussed under NPF 4 Policy 8 Green Belt. 8.8 NPF 4 Policy 8 (Green Belt) seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate compact urban growth and use the land around our towns and cities sustainably. Development is directed to the right locations; urban density is increased, and unsustainable growth is prevented. 8.9 In doing so, Policy 8 supports the designation of green belts around settlements where there is a danger of unsustainable growth in car-based commuting or suburbanisation of the countryside. Development proposals within a designated green belt will only be supported for a limited range of countryside-appropriate uses and where the following requirements are met: • It is demonstrated that a green belt location is essential and the development cannot be accommodated on an alternative site out with the green belt; • The purpose of the green belt at that location is not undermined. • The proposal is compatible with the surrounding established countryside and landscape character. • The proposal has been designed to be of an appropriate scale and appearance to minimise visual impact on the green belt; and • There will be no significant long-term impacts on the environmental quality of the green belt. Page 56 of 84
Page 57
a) Development proposals within a Green Belt designated within the LDP will only be supported if: i) they are for: • development associated with agriculture, woodland creation, forestry and existing woodland (including community woodlands). • residential accommodation required and designed for a key worker in a primary industry within the immediate vicinity of their place of employment where the presence of a worker is essential to the operation of the enterprise, or retired workers where there is no suitable alternative accommodation available. Assessment of NPF 4 Policy 8 Green Belt 8.10 The proposed development would not satisfy the policies set out in paragraphs 8.4 to 8.9 above, not least as there is no specific policy requirement stated in the application why this residential development is a supported site in the green belt site at an unsustainable location. The proposal would therefore significantly undermine the purpose and character of this part of the Green Belt, resulting in a significant urbanisation of the rural area. 8.11 Accordingly, the proposal is contrary to Policy 8. This site lies within the designated Green Belt where supporting information and site assessment does not indicate that the site is formally associated or supports agriculture or the creation of woodland. Similarly, while a yard has been formed over part of the site, this is not land which is currently on the vacant and derelict land register nor it is land within the settlement boundary where further intensification of use may be considered acceptable. The partial use of the site merits consideration of NPF4 Policy 9. 8.12 NPF 4 Policy 9 (Brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings.) To encourage, promote and facilitate the reuse of brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings, and to help reduce the need for greenfield development. b) Proposals on greenfield sites will not be supported unless the site has been allocated for development or the proposal is explicitly supported by policies in the LDP. Policy 9 is intended to encourage, promote and facilitate the reuse of brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings, and to help reduce the need for greenfield development. In the interest of clarity, The National planning Framework defines brownfield as follows. Land which has previously been developed. The term may cover vacant or derelict land, land occupied by redundant or unused buildings and developed land within the settlement boundary where further intensification of use is considered acceptable. 8.13 Essentially forming part of the compact city model in directing development to appropriate location is discussed below under the section on other material considerations. NPF4 Policy 9 on brownfield land states: “Proposals on greenfield sites will not be supported unless the site has been allocated for development or the proposal is explicitly supported by policies in the Local Development Plan LDP.” 8.14 This is a central compact-city mechanism in limiting outward growth, maximising the reuse of existing urban land and containing settlement boundaries. Page 57 of 84
Page 58
8.15 This policy effectively reinforces urban containment, a key compact-city tool. In doing so it prioritises reuse and intensification of brownfield and previously used land tangential to the principal policy Green Belt by encouraging reuse of urban brownfield, vacant and derelict land thereby reducing the need for greenfield development. The site is currently 82 % green field and undeveloped in any way having been recorded at the prior notification for an agricultural shed (see planning history) as registered with the Scottish Government as an agricultural holding. 8.16 The site has not been allocated for residential development, nor is the proposal explicitly supported by policies in the Local Development Plan. The site contains a single built structure (profile steel shed) typical of agricultural buildings in the area, and it is reasonable to consider this as partially developed albeit under agricultural permitted development rights. However, taking the site as a whole, it is located well outwith the settlement boundary and is not recorded in the vacant and derelict land register. All of these points, cumulatively, do not support the position that this site is brown field land as set out above not least most of the site is green field agricultural which the current yard with permitted agricultural built structures has developed to support. The proposal which includes an area of a significant greenfield land overall is not supported by NPF 4 Policy 9 Brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings. 8.17 Policy 17 (Rural Homes) The applicant cites policy 17 Rural Homes in his supporting information. Development proposals for new homes in rural areas will be supported where the development is suitably scaled, sited and designed to be in keeping with the character of the area and the development: i. is on a site allocated for housing within the LDP. ii. reuses brownfield land where a return to a natural state has not or will not happen without intervention; iii. reuses a redundant or unused building; iv. is an appropriate use of a historic environment asset or is appropriate enabling development to secure the future of historic environment assets; v. is demonstrated to be necessary to support the sustainable management of a viable rural business or croft, and there is an essential need for a worker (including those taking majority control of a farm business) to live permanently at or near their place of work; vi. is for a single home for the retirement succession of a viable farm holding; vii. is for the subdivision of an existing residential dwelling; the scale of which is in keeping with the infrastructure provision in the area; or viii. reinstates a former dwelling house or is a one-for-one replacement of an existing permanent house. Page 58 of 84
Page 59
8.18 In considering NPF4, Policy 17 comments that rural housing will be considered where the policy intent is to encourage, promote and facilitate the delivery of more high quality, affordable and sustainable rural homes in the right locations. Returning to the above listed criteria the application is not within an allocated site. The majority of the site is green field (82%) with the remainder forming a yard area where the only significant structures are an agricultural shed and storage containers which will be removed by the development and only considered as partially contributing and therefore not significantly to brown field status as discussed under Policy 9 above. There are no structures of historic significance within the site. It has not been demonstrated that the residential development is intended to support a viable agricultural business or adaptation of an existing building. To the contrary the application indicates that the site will not continue to form part of an agricultural holding if approved. Supporting the position that NPF4 Policy 17 Rural Housing is not a supporting policy in this case. 8.19 Policy 13 (Sustainable transport) seeks to encourage sustainable travel and to reduce the need to travel by unsustainable modes. Development proposals should demonstrate that these requirements have been considered and where appropriate they should provide suitably safe and convenient access to walking, cycling and public transport networks, amongst other requirements. 8.20 The application site is separated from the existing settlement of Cumbernauld edge by 2.5 km of road. The rail station at Greenfaulds is around 2km from the site and is not capable of being accessed on foot along the A73. There is no bus stop close to the site and the nearest public transport appears to be over 2km walk beyond the urban edge of Cumbernauld where walking does not appear to be an option. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the proposal is considered not well-sited to encourage sustainable travel, as such, it is not supported by Policy 13. 8.21 Policy 14 (Design, quality and place) promotes well designed development which contributes to successful places. Development proposals should be well designed to improve the quality of the location and should be consistent with the six qualities of successful places (healthy, pleasant, connected, distinctive, sustainable and adaptable), whilst proposals which do not achieve this will not be supported. 8.22 The proposal is considered to represent unplanned and sporadic development in the countryside which would be poorly connected to the general urban area and would detract from its setting by introducing a significant level of urbanisation at a rural location. This is discussed further in the section of the report on other material considerations. Accordingly, the proposal is not supported by Policy 14. 8.23 Policy 15 (Local Living and 20-minute neighbourhoods) encourages "local living", including 20- minute neighbourhoods. Consideration will be given to existing settlement patterns and to the level and quality of interconnectivity with the surrounding area. 8.24 The proposal is considered to relate poorly to the existing settlement pattern of the urban area, being detached from the existing settlement. This is discussed further in the section of the report on other material considerations. The proposal therefore is not supported by the objectives of NPF4 Policy 15. 8.25 Policy 16 (Quality homes) The Proposal presents an argument based on Housing Need (NPF4 Policy 16) without comment on development limiting policies NPF4 Policy 16 (f). Development proposals for new homes on land not allocated for housing in the LDP will only be supported in limited circumstances. Page 59 of 84
Page 60
i. the proposal is supported by an agreed timescale for build-out; and ii. the proposal is otherwise consistent with the plan spatial strategy and other relevant policies including local living and 20-minute neighbourhoods; iii. and either: delivery of sites is happening earlier than identified in the deliverable housing land pipeline. This will be determined by reference to two consecutive years of the Housing Land Audit evidencing substantial delivery earlier than pipeline timescales and that general trend being sustained; or the proposal is consistent with policy on rural homes; or the proposal is for smaller scale opportunities within an existing settlement boundary; or the proposal is for the delivery of less than 50 affordable homes as part of a local authority supported affordable housing plan. 8.26 Whilst the application cites a shortfall, including a specific house type without substantive supporting information, for example referencing the terms supporting this position particularly within the housing land audit for assessment purposes, it is recognised the site does not lie within the urban area as discussed above. As a result, given the conflict with Green Belt (spatial strategy) policy an isolated development inconsistent with the Development Plans spatial strategy and other relevant policies referenced in this report including local living and 20-minute neighbourhoods which take precedence in assessing the application. The second point confirms this position that the development is not consistent with Green Belt policy as discussed under NPF4 policy 8. Overall, notwithstanding the applicant’s claim of a shortfall in a specific house type, it is considered that the development lies within an unsustainable location dependant on private car ownership. As discussed above, the development has the potential to undermine Green Belt objectives by focusing on outward growth into Greenfield locations significantly beyond the boundary containing the urban envelope. This is discussed further in the section of the report on other material considerations. North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (2022) 8.27 Green Belt PP 4 POLICY Purpose of Place North Lanarkshire Council will protect the setting of communities, support regeneration by directing growth to urban areas, protect natural assets and provide a high-quality environment, by promoting a Green Belt as defined on the Promote Map. North Lanarkshire Council will support developments for agriculture, forestry, recreation, or developments that need a non- urban location, including, where appropriate, Visitor Economy related development. 8.28 The purpose of the Green Belt is to protect the setting of communities, support regeneration by directing growth to urban areas, protect natural assets and provide a high-quality environment. North Lanarkshire Council will encourage development appropriate for a Green Belt location by resisting development that is not for agriculture, forestry, recreation, tourism, or needs a Green Belt location, whilst allocating appropriate land for urban expansion. It therefore reasonable to state that this policy is replicated within the National Planning Framework 4 Policy 8. Considering the purpose of this policy. 8.29 Further assessment under AD 4 POLICY Amount of Development. AD 4 POLICY Amount of Development The proposal includes (Class 9) dwellings requiring an assessment of appropriateness (Policy PP4). The policy advises that dwellings will only be acceptable to support a Green Belt Appropriate use. Page 60 of 84
Page 61
8.30 The principle of the proposal does not therefore meet the aims of Green Belt Policy PP 4 POLICY Purpose of Place, AD 4 POLICY Amount of Development. This is discussed at length under the equivalent NPF 4 Policy 8. Green Belt. Design Qualities policy EDQ1 to EDQ3 8.31 EDQ 1 POLICY Site Appraisal Any proposed development will require to be appraised in terms of the site and its surroundings to ensure it will integrate successfully into the local area and avoid harm to neighbouring amenity. The matters to be addressed in the appraisal include but are not limited to: • massing, height, style, finishing materials of any building or buildings on the site and surrounding Land Use Character Area • orientation and topography of the site and surrounding Land Use Character Area • mixture of uses in the Land Use Character Area 8.32 As this application is of local scale, it did not require to be accompanied by a design and access statement; however, each of the site appraisal bullet points listed in EDQ1 have been considered as part of the planning application process. A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal and Transport Statement together with Street Engineering Review were submitted with the application to allow these specific matters to be given detailed consideration. 8.33 Considering Policy EDQ2, the only specific feature for consideration in this instance is the potential for contaminated land due to the site having a developed yard area. The site will be subject to a detailed site investigation and the remediation strategy should members be minded to approve. At the time of writing, these documents were at an initial stage under review. It is considered that the proposal has the potential to accord with the relevant parts of this policy subject to any required mitigation measures being implemented. This can be secured by attaching relevant standard conditions should members be minded to approve. 8.34 Policy EDQ 3 Quality of Development sets out that development will only be permitted where high standards of site planning and sustainable design are achieved. Aspects such as siting, overall layout, density, form, scale, height massing, proportion, detailing, colour, materials for the proposed development need to be considered. Policy EDQ 3 also includes aspects related to creating areas which are safe for all road users with appropriate parking included within the development. The assessment of and (where necessary) the mitigation of noise or pollution impacts is also included within policy EDQ 3. 8.35 It is considered that the scale, density, design and overall layout of the proposed development would not be acceptable and would represent urbanisation of a rural location, inconsistent with the surrounding locale. While the proposed housing is single storey in height and of a scale and character comparable with examples in the rural area in terms of both its height and massing, it is the number of dwellings collectively within the site that would result in a significant and unacceptable amenity impact. Notwithstanding the proposed finishing materials, whilst not the same as nearby properties, are also considered to be acceptable in this area. Similarly, in terms of massing, as single storey dwellings alone would not significantly adversely affect the existing amenity in terms of privacy or overshadowing. Full details of the fencing can be secured by standard conditions should members be minded to approve the application. 8.36 Turning to transportation and parking aspects of policy EDQ 3b, the Roads Development Service provided comment on a submitted Transportation Statement and confirmed the adopted guidance on visibility splays. The internal layout was supported by a street engineering review, parking provision, design speed and junction visibility. Discussions have taken place on site layout in an attempt to ensure the requirements of the Roads Development Service have been complied with and are detailed on layout drawing 9900 PL02A. Page 61 of 84
Page 62
It is noted that the main vehicular access to the site shall be modified and adequate parking provision (both in-curtilage and visitor) is provided. However, NLC Roads advise that the submitted drawing indicates visibility splays of 2.5m x 70m at the proposed site access. This extent of visibility demonstrates that the required North Lanarkshire Council standard of 2.5m x 210m cannot be achieved from the proposed access in both directions along Millcroft Road. The Transport Assessment submitted states that a lower design speed of 40 mph is suitable because of the local road geometry. However, this is not accepted by NLC Roads. Without proper traffic survey data, it cannot be shown that vehicle speeds are always limited to this level. Furthermore, even if a lower design speed is accepted, the required visibility splays under North Lanarkshire Council guidance (2.4 m x 120 m) cannot be met at the proposed access in both directions along Millcroft Road. This reinforces the concern that the proposed access arrangement fails to provide adequate visibility to ensure safe operation, regardless of the design speed applied. 8.37 It is noted above that the site environs are not well served by public transport routes. Children attending school would be required to travel within the catchment identified in the consultation process to either New Monkland, St. Serf Primary typically transferring to Airdrie Academy. It is not currently clear whether pupils will be entitled to bus travel given the more rural location of the site. Based on the scale of the site these are not matters which can readily be addressed by the developer but serve to illustrate the unsustainable location of the development. The site does not connect to appropriate levels of footway/cycleway beyond its boundary. It is therefore not capable of according with the Councils Active Travel Strategy and could not connect or form part of a link to a wider upgraded network of routes in surrounding areas in the future. 8.38 The principles of policy NPF4 Policy 14 are significantly replicated across policies EDQ3, in particular, in considering supporting well connected networks that make moving around easy and reduce car dependency and road safety. The application is not supported by policies EDQ3b or NPF4 Policy 14. 8.39 NPF4 Policy 13 Development proposals will be supported where it can be demonstrated that the transport requirements generated have been considered in line with the sustainable travel and investment hierarchies. The principles of NPF4 Policy 13 are set out in the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan policies EDQ3 discussed above in paragraph 8.34. 8.40 Given the required visibility splays under North Lanarkshire Council guidance (2.4 m x 120 m) cannot be met at the proposed access in both directions along Millcroft Road. The proposed access arrangement fails to provide adequate visibility to ensure safe operation, regardless of the design speed applied. The application therefore fails to comply with NPF4 Policy 14 and policy EDQ3b on road safety. 8.41 NPF4 Policy 22 Flood risk and water management. The site is not in a high flood risk area and in terms of Sustainable Urban Drainage arrangements, the site shall be served by a SUDS basin in the centre of the site. It is considered that the proposal has the potential to accord with EDQ 1 and 3f in this regard. NPF4 Policy 22 is largely enshrined within LDP policy EDQ 3f however it is noted that the SUDs is designed to be attenuated and treated and discharged to a reed bed via a communal treatment tank. This provision of the SUDS scheme can be controlled by standard conditions. It is noted that the application confirms the potential for connection to Scottish water infrastructure for water supply. 8.42 On biodiversity and landscaping EDQ 3h, it is noted that the northern and western boundary of the site encloses trees subject to Tree Preservation Order. The Preliminary Ecological Survey confirmed that no important habitats were found on the site. While that may be the case, NLC Greenspace comment that the site encroaches into the Shanks Burn (North) a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). SINCs are protected by council policy PROT A POLICY Natural Environment and Green Network Assets Category A3. Page 62 of 84
Page 63
It is therefore recommended that the proposed development should be taken out of the SINC and a buffer implemented between the SINC and the proposed development. This is recommended as a planning condition should members be minded to approve the application. No impact on protected mammal species was identified. The development could impact on ground nesting birds if works were to take place in the nesting season 2027 onwards in which case a check for nesting birds within 48 hours of ground clearance would be required. At present there are no ground nesting birds as the vegetation is so short and there works during this nesting season would not impact on nesting breeding birds. It should also be noted that NLC Greenspace advised that that a full landscape and biodiversity plan should be drawn up for the site and should include number of planted species and all other biodiversity enhancements for the site. A landscape plan including biodiversity enhancements is recommended as a planning condition should members be minded to approve the application. 8.43 Local Development Plan Policy CI requires that new development proposals should provide or contribute towards any enhanced infrastructure or services which will be necessary because of the development, including education, affordable housing, and play facilities. 8.44 Since the Adoption of North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan, National Planning Framework 4 has come into effect. National Planning Policy 16 (e) states “Development proposals for new homes will be supported where they make provision for affordable homes to meet an identified need. In the absence of Scottish Government Guidance, the Council believes that its NLLDP Policy CI 1 Category Affordable Housing accords with National Planning Policy 16 (e) and (e) ii in setting out how its fully justified and tested Affordable Housing Policy will be applied to the consideration of planning applications for housing in North Lanarkshire. Policy CI 1 only applies to the Cumbernauld housing sub-market area when considering affordable housing category. This site lies outwith that area. In terms of education contribution, the Council will consider the requirement for contributions towards educational infrastructure for all new residential development proposals resulting in 5 or more dwellings, on a case-by-case basis, where an identified need has been demonstrated. Turning to play provision the applicant has indicated that on site provision will be provided. 8.45 Given the limited scale of the site there are no further requirements in terms of transport, green infrastructure or play facilities in line with the policies of the Local Development Plan. 8.46 Where NPF4 Policies are not referenced in this report, it has been considered that they are not relevant to the application under consideration due to the nature of the development itself or its size and scale. Other material considerations 8.47 The applicant has submitted a supporting statement: The applicant takes the view that the proposal complies with Green belt policy in that the site is contained within landscape features including a watercourse, a fence line, existing dwellings to the south and land to the west subject to a Planning Application Notification (PAN) for residential development. They further state that the site will be enclosed by built form, making the case that all of these features combine to round off the existing settlement pattern. 8.48 Whilst these points provide an argument for the physical setting of the development at a locational level, Planning Application Notification aside, they do not address the principle of the policy in that the site lies some 0.7 km beyond the designated green belt boundary resulting in the concept of defensible boundaries diminishing in relevance not being an extension to the existing Green Belt. It should also be noted that Planning application notification 22/00908/PAN submitted 2nd September 2022 was not taken forward and assessed for development adjacent to this site. It therefore has no physical presence or permission for residential development. Page 63 of 84
Page 64
8.49 The principal policy NPF8 takes a more strategic analysis of the designated green belt based on the compact city model in supporting a compact settlement. Although NPF4 does not use the phrase “compact city model” explicitly, its policies strongly align with compact-city principles: directing growth to the right locations, increasing density within settlements, reducing car dependency, and protecting greenfield land. These principles are not consistent with the proposed development. The purpose of NPF4 Policy 8 (Green Belt) is: “to encourage, promote and facilitate compact urban growth and use the land around our towns and cities sustainably.” 8.50 This is a direct expression of compact-city thinking: • Growth is focused inward, not outward. • Urban form is made more efficient. • Expansion into the countryside is limited. 8.51 NPF4 directs development to the “right locations” and prevents sporadic development outwith the urban envelope to prevent unsustainable growth. In doing so this reflects core compact-city objectives: • Densification over land-consuming expansion • Efficient, sustainable settlement patterns • Reduced reliance on dispersed development 8.52 NPF4 Green belt policy restricts new development on unallocated greenfield land, supports settlement-focused development patterns, directs growth to urban areas, protect natural assets, and maintain settlement form. This matches compact-city patterns by: • Reinforcing existing settlements • Concentrating development where services are located • Preventing sporadic, car-dependent rural expansion 8.53 The report goes on to comment on policy NPF 17 Rural homes commenting the policy supports the development as it: • Reinforces an existing cluster of single-storey homes • Provides bungalows — a house type in critical undersupply locally • Supports ageing-in-place and local downsizing 8.54 As the proposal is not supported by the principle Green Belt policy the concept of rural clusters becomes less significant. However, in this case the morphology of the area does not appear to be supported by the concept of cluster development, notwithstanding this is not a term formally defined in National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4). Page 64 of 84
Page 65
8.55 In the absence of this, an acceptable definition would be: a rural cluster is typically characterised by a small, identifiable grouping of existing buildings Usually several houses/buildings located close enough to form a recognisable group. Not a dispersed pattern of isolated dwellings. They should exhibit a coherent built form with some sense of layout, pattern, or structure (e.g., linear form along a road, or a tight group at a crossroads). Clear physical separation from a settlement boundary is also a feature of a rural cluster in that it is not part of a town or village and sits outside formal settlement boundaries defined in the Local development plan. 8.56 What is presented as a cluster in the application is more of a sporadic arrangement of scattered, individual dwellings in the rural area which do not form a distinct building group. 8.57 The remaining points are discussed below under policy NPF17. The applicants supporting information goes on to comment that North Lanarkshire’s Local Housing Strategy and Housing Need and Demand Assessment identify: • A shortage of accessible and older-persons housing • Limited delivery of single-storey homes • A need for downsizing-appropriate accommodation The Planning Statement notes: “There is a documented shortage of single-storey dwellings across North Lanarkshire.” 8.58 The applicant expresses the view that given Scotland’s declared housing emergency, the delivery of accessible homes is a significant material consideration outweighing Green Belt policy. It is the case that a national housing emergency has been declared and the proposal would provide additional dwellings which would contribute to the housing mix and supply of the area. However, the proposal would fail to meet the tests in policy 16(f) of NPF4 relating to the development of homes on unallocated land. There is currently nothing to suggest that the Scottish Government intends to depart from the policies of NPF4 to address the housing emergency. 8.59 The application supporting information considers housing need refers to a housing shortage in north Lanarkshire, referring to policy PP1 mixed use centres and general urban area, policy PP3 notwithstanding the site being positioned in the designated green belt where neither of these policies lend any planning weight or alignment to a planning assessment. This statement does not provide a clear assessment of how the proposed development complies with, and is supported by, Green Belt policy even when read in conjunction with the wider policy framework of NPF4 and the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (LDP). Notwithstanding the applicant’s claim of a housing shortfall within North Lanarkshire, which has not been evidenced, the site is not supported by the current Development Plan Policies, not least given the sites unsustainable location. 8.60 The applicant also notes in his statement that an application was approved in 2023 for 24 dwellings reference 22/00515/FUL and considers it to exhibit similar circumstance to this site. While the principle of each application being judged on its own merits remains, it should be noted that the 2023 site was in terms of the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan, within the General Urban Area. The development of housing on a brownfield site within the general urban area was assessed in principle consistent with this policy. Policy AD3 confirms that there are no quantity limits and no requirement for any assessment of housing land supply for sites within the General Urban Area. The principle of housing within the General Urban Area is therefore consistent with these policies and fundamentally differs from this application site positioned within the designated Green Belt. Page 65 of 84
Page 66
9 Conclusion 9.1 The development would result in an unacceptable urbanisation of the rural area that would result in an erosion of the adopted Green Belt that contributes to the character, function, or qualities of place. No adequate justification, special circumstances or material considerations have been demonstrated that the application is supported by the development plan. The proposed development is not therefore intended to support agriculture or the creation of woodland and the principle of the proposal does not therefore meet the aims of Green Belt Policy. The nature of the proposed development does not meet the criteria which would justify residential development in a site that has not been allocated for housing in the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan and therefore has the potential to undermine Green Belt objectives by focusing on outward growth into Greenfield locations significantly beyond the boundary containing the urban envelope. The proposed access arrangement fails to provide adequate visibility to ensure safe operation, regardless of the design speed applied. The site has not been allocated for residential development, nor has it been recorded in the vacant and derelict land register being predominantly green field therefore cumulatively and on balance these points do not support the position that this site is entirely brown field land. As such, replacing green field with residential development will contribute to the erosion of rather than the enhancement of biodiversity, including the loss of nature networks and the connections between them. In doing so the proposal does not protect biodiversity or strengthen nature networks. Development proposals are not consistent with the six qualities of successful places in that the scale, density, and overall layout of the proposed development would not be acceptable representing urbanisation of a rural location inconsistent with the surrounding locale. The proposed site has not therefore been identified as having potential to accommodate new rural housing which is considered where the policy intent is to encourage, promote and facilitate the delivery of more high quality, affordable and sustainable rural homes in the right locations. Given the location, the application site is not well-sited to encourage sustainable travel as an unplanned development in the countryside poorly connected to the general urban area. Given the foregoing It is recommended that the application is refused. 9.2 The applicant has requested a hearing on the application; however, members may wish to note the Councils protocol on hearings. This Protocol sets out the criteria to be used in considering requests for hearings by the Planning Sub-Committee in relation to planning applications and advises applications recommended for refusal will not be the subject of hearings as the applicant has a right of appeal to the Scottish Ministers. Page 66 of 84
Page 67
Application No: 26/00335/FUL Proposed Development: Planning Application Seeking the Use of Existing Hardstanding Areas and Buildings for the Storage of Film Making Vehicles and Equipment/Infrastructure and Erection of Boundary Security Fence and Gate (Retrospective) Site Address: Auchinstarry Farm Auchinstarry Road Croy G65 9SG Date Registered: 8th April 2026 Applicant: Attraction and Facilities Hire Ltd 1 Wrightbridge Farm Weald Road Lingfield CM14 5RB Agent: McInally Associates Ltd Suite G.09 The Greenlaw Works 6 South Greenlaw Way Newton Mearns Glasgow G77 6EF Application Level: Local Application Contrary to Development Plan: Yes Ward: 01 Kilsyth Jean Jones,Heather Brannan-McVey,Denis Johnston, Representations: 6 letter(s) of representation received. 4 counted as official representations. Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions Reasoned Justification: The proposed use of existing hardstanding areas and buildings for the storage of film making vehicles and equipment is acceptable as it could be accommodated within the site without adversely affecting the amenity and character of the surrounding area. As such, the proposal accords with the policy provisions of NPF4 and the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022 Page 67 of 84
Page 68
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: 26/00335/FUL Name (of applicant): Attraction and Facilities Hire Ltd Site Address: Auchinstarry Farm Auchinstarry Road Croy G65 9SG Development: Planning Application Seeking the Use of Existing Hardstanding Areas and Buildings for the Storage of Film Making Vehicles and Equipment/ Infrastructure and Erection of Boundary Security Fence and Gate (Retrospective) Page 68 of 84
Page 69
Proposed Conditions: - 1. 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 information on which this approval of permission is founded. 2. No vehicles, trailers or equipment associated with the approved development shall be parked, stationed, loaded, unloaded, or permitted to wait on any public road or on land out with the application site boundary at any time. All vehicle parking, manoeuvring, loading, and unloading activities associated with the development shall be undertaken wholly within the application site boundary shown on the approved plans. Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety. 3. Within 1 month of the date of this permission, detailed plans should be submitted to, and approved in writing by the planning authority showing the parking layout and manoeuvring areas for the associated vehicles. For the avoidance of doubt, the parking and manoeuvring shall ensure that all vehicles can enter and exit the site in a forward gear. Adequate space shall be provided and retained within the application site at all times to enable all vehicles associated with the development, including heavy goods vehicles, film production vehicles, and trailers, to enter, manoeuvre and exit the site in a forward gear. Reason: In the interest of traffic and pedestrian safety. 4. The detailed plans approved under Condition 3 shall be fully implemented within three months of the date of this permission and thereafter retained for the lifetime of the development Reason: In the interest of traffic and pedestrian safety. 5. For the avoidance of doubt the hours of operation of the site are restricted to 07:00 to 17:00 Monday to Sunday, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: To define the permission. 6. The use of the site hereby approved shall be limited solely to the storage of vehicles, trailers, welfare units, equipment, and associated infrastructure directly related to film and television production. No other materials, goods, plant, machinery, waste, commercial storage, distribution activities, or storage uses falling within Class 6 (Storage or Distribution) of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997 (as amended) shall be carried out on the site without the prior written approval of the Planning Authority. Reason: To define the permission 7. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include:- (a) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; (b) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development (c) a detailed timetable for all landscaping works which shall provide for these works being carried out contemporaneously with the development of the site Reason: To define the permission. Page 69 of 84
Page 70
8. That all works included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of Condition 7; above, shall be completed in accordance with the approved timetable, and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the full occupation of the development hereby permitted, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species. Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area. Background Papers: Consultation Responses: NLC Infrastructure and Transportation dated 5 June 2026 Historic Environment dated 21 April 2026 Archaeology Services dated 6 May 2026 Scottish Gas Network dated 20 April 2026 National Air Traffic Services dated 21 April 2026 Coal Mining Remediation Services – no response Contact Information: Alex Reid at 01236 632500 or planningenquiry@northlan.gov.uk Report Date: 22 June 2026 Page 70 of 84
Page 71
APPLICATION NO. 26/00335/FUL REPORT 1. Site Description 1.1 The application site forms part of Auchinstarry Farm on Auchinstarry Road, Croy. It comprises an existing hardstanding area and a number of buildings, while the remainder of the farm will continue to be used for agricultural purposes. The site is bound by residential properties to the north, Auchinstarry Marina to the east, and farmland to the west and south. 2. Proposed Development 2.1 The application seeks retrospective planning permission for part change of use of existing hardstanding areas and buildings and land used in relation to an existing farm to storage of film making vehicles and equipment / infrastructure and erection of boundary security fence and gate. 3. Applicant’s Supporting Information 3.1 A covering letter and supporting statement were received as part of the submission. The points raised are detailed below. 3.2 Response to NPF4 and LDP Policies: Policy 9 – Brownfield Vacant and Derelict Land and empty Buildings – The use complies with this policy due to the existing hard standing area of land and the reuse of existing buildings. Policy 31 – Culture and Creative Arts – The Scottish Government wish to promote the creative industries, which is a key outcome of Policy 31 by expanding the creative industries and providing jobs and investment. Location of storage is close to Glasgow which is a major hub for film and TV production. 3.3 The application site forms part of the wider Auchinstarry Farm holding and extends to approximately 0.9 hectares. The area subject to the application comprises existing hardstanding and storage buildings which are surplus to the current farm holding requirements. The remainder of the site continues to operate for agricultural purposes. 3.4 The site is used for the storage of specialist film and television production equipment including: • American-style actor and production trailers; • Welfare and toilet units; • Lighting towers; • Trackway; • Marquees; • Staging materials; • Props and production equipment; • HGVs and support vehicles; • Various towable production units A mixture of the above equipment will be stored in the existing structures, and any associated vehicles will be stored on the hardstanding at the rear of the site. 3.5 The applicant advises that the site is used solely for storage between productions, with no manufacturing, processing, warehousing, or industrial operations taking place. The use is described as intermittent and irregular, reflecting filming schedules. Page 71 of 84
Page 72
3.6 Vehicle movements are limited, typically amounting to one or two trips per day when equipment is deployed to, or returns from, filming locations. There may be extended periods when no vehicles enter or leave the site. Vehicle arrivals and departures are stated to occur between 07:00 and 17:00. Approximately 10–12 lorries may be stored on site, depending on production requirements. 4. Site History • 01/00364/OUT Development Comprising Housing, Hotel, Golf Course & Clubhouse, Holiday Chalets & Leisure Facilities (Application Refused - 12 December 2001) • 02/01500/OUT Development Comprising Housing, Hotel, Golf Course and Clubhouse, Holiday Chalets, and Leisure Facilities (repeat application). (Application Refused - 5 June 2003) • 40/00001/AG Erection of General-Purpose Farm Shed No 2. (Application Withdrawn) • 90/00006/PL Conversion and Extension of Barn to form Residential Development. (Application Refused 05 November 1990 • 95/00019/AG Erection of General-Purpose Agricultural Shed. (Application Permitted 7 June 1995) • 95/00021/OUT Erection of 3 Dwellings (Outline) (Application Permitted 02 July 1996) • 97/00129/FUL Erection of Two Dwelling Houses (Application Refused 06 August 2026) • 97/00326/FUL Erection of Two Dwellings (Application Permitted 14 January 1998) • 98/01199/FUL Alterations To Position And Design Of Previously Approved dwellings. (Application Permitted 01 October 1998) • 09/00431/FUL Construction of a Pedestrian Bridge (Application Permitted – 01 June 2009) • 12/00296/FUL Construction of a Building for (Class 1) Retail (Chandlers) (Application Permitted 11 June 2012) 5. Development Plan 5.1 The development plan consists of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) adopted on the 13 February 2023 and the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (LDP) adopted 2022. 5.2 The following NPF4 policies are relevant: Policy 8 – Greenbelt, Policy 9 – Brownfield, Vacant and Derelict Land and Empty Buildings, Policy 29 – Rural Development, and Policy 31 – Culture and Creativity. 5.3 Additionally, the following policies within the Local Development Plan are relevant: PROT B Category B1 Internation Site: Antonine Wall, Placemaking Policies 4 Green Belt and AD4 Amount of Development, EDQ1 Site Appraisal and EDQ3 Quality of Development 6. Consultations 6.1 NLC Infrastructure and Transportation were consulted on 22 May 2025. A response was received on 5 June 2026. It was advised that they do no object to the proposal subject to the following points which have been added as conditions: - • No vehicles associated with the development shall be parked or permitted to wait on the public road or outside the defined site boundary at any time. All parking, loading, and unloading activities mist be contained fully within the site. • Adequate space shall be provided within the site to enable all vehicles, including larger film production vehicles, to enter and leave the site in a forward gear. No reversing manoeuvres onto or from the public highway will be permitted. • The applicant should ensure that the operation of the site does not result in increased traffic congestion, obstruction, or inconvenience to neighbouring road users, particularly during peak hours. 6.2 Historic Environment were consulted on 20 April 2026, and they do not have any comments to make on the proposal. Page 72 of 84
Page 73
6.3 Archaeology Services were consulted on 20 April 2026; a response was received on 6 May 2026 advising that the site is in effect brownfield. Whilst it sits close to a scheduled monument, the canal and within the Antonine Buffer Wall zone, it is considered that there is no new physical impact and no additional setting impact. 6.4 Scottish Gas Network were consulted on 20 April 2026, a response was received on 20 April 2026 advising the high pressure, transmission gas pipeline, near this address will not be affected by the proposed plans. 6.5 National Air Traffic Services were consulted on 20 April 2026; a response was received on 21 April 2026 advising the proposal does not conflict with their safeguarding criteria. 6.6 Coal Authority were consulted on 20 April 2026; no response has been received at the time of writing this report. However, there is no groundbreaking proposed, therefore, the coal authority comments are not required. 7. Representations 7.1 Standard Neighbour Notification letters were issued on the 27 April 2026. 6 Letters of objections were received, however due to several objections being received from the same household, only 4 objections are officially counted. The points raised can be fairly summarised as follows:- • Farm is within the buffer zone of Antonine Wall, detrimental to the beauty of area. • Structure used as Workshop. • Materials burned on site. • Visual Impact with materials. • Green fence is unsightly and is higher than 1m. • Land Engineering Works. • Noise from vehicles arriving/departing. • Noise from gate. • Other works being carried out. • No Business Plan or Supporting Statement. • Change of Use will have Impact on residents. • Traffic and Road Safety. • Lighting and Visual Impact. • Fuel storage, biodiversity, and habitat concerns. • Application is misleading, hard standing was put in before planning permission was applied for. 8. Planning Assessment 8.1 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. The application raises no strategic issues and can be assessed against the local plan. 8.2 NPF4 forms part of the development plan; given the nature and scale of this development, the most relevant considerations are already enshrined in the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan policies (assessed below). The policies within NPF4 that are relevant to the application include Policy 8 – Greenbelt, Policy 9 – Brownfield, Vacant and Derelict Land and Empty Buildings, , Policy 29 – Rural Development and Policy 31 – Culture and Creativity. Page 73 of 84
Page 74
8.3 Policy 8 – Green Belt encourages, promotes and facilitates compact urban growth and the use of land around our towns and cities sustainably. However, the policy recognises that certain forms of development can be acceptable where they do not undermine the objectives of the Green Belt and where no significant adverse impacts arise. This policy seeks to protect the openness, landscape character and function of the Green Belt whilst recognising that certain forms of development may be acceptable where they do not undermine these objectives. In this instance, the proposal relates to the change of use of an existing area of hardstanding and buildings within the wider Auchinstarry Farm complex for the storage of specialist film and television production equipment and vehicles. No new buildings, engineering works or extensions are proposed. The application site comprises an established developed area which has historically been used for storage and vehicle parking purposes and is distinct from the agricultural land within the wider farm holding. The proposal therefore represents the reuse of an existing developed site rather than the encroachment of development into undeveloped Green Belt land. As a result, the proposal would not materially affect the openness of the Green Belt nor prejudice its wider function. The proposed use is specialist in nature and relates solely to the storage of film and television production equipment. There is no manufacturing, industrial processing or general storage and distribution activity proposed. The scale of activity is relatively limited, with vehicle movements described as intermittent and irregular in accordance with production schedules, often with lengthy periods where no vehicle movements occur. Movements are generally restricted to daytime hours. The site is also well contained within the existing farm complex and benefits from a degree of visual screening from surrounding land. Consequently, the proposal is not considered to result in significant adverse visual, landscape, or amenity impacts. Furthermore, the development supports Scotland's film and television industry through the provision of specialist storage facilities, contributing to the creative economy while making productive use of an existing developed site. Overall, the proposal is considered to preserve the openness and character of the Green Belt, utilise an established developed area, and avoid significant adverse environmental or amenity impacts. Accordingly, the development is considered to accord with the objectives of NPF4 Policy 8 8.4 Policy 9 – Brownfield, Vacant and Derelict Land and Empty Buildings encourages, promotes, and facilitates the reuse of brownfield, vacant and derelict land, and empty buildings, and to help reduce the need for greenfield development. Assessment: The proposal seeks to regularise the use of this existing developed area for the storage of specialist film and television production equipment and associated vehicles. The applicant has indicated that the application site has historically been used for non- agricultural purposes, including storage and vehicle parking, and is currently physically separated from the agricultural operations undertaken on the remainder of the farm. However, when assessing the application, it should be noted that in land use terms no planning permission has been granted for alternative uses and as such the application site is still considered to be part of the wider agricultural unit. Notwithstanding this, it is appreciated that this are may have been getting utilised for other purposes and be surplus to the current requirements of the associated farmland. Page 74 of 84
Page 75
Furthermore, the proposal makes use of existing infrastructure and buildings without requiring new construction, engineering works, or significant site alterations. This accords with the objectives of Policy 9, which seeks to encourage the sustainable reuse of existing sites and buildings and minimise the need for development on greenfield land. The proposal also secures an economic use for the site, supporting activity within Scotland’s film and television sector whilst making efficient use of land and buildings that are already in place. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to represent the sustainable reuse of a previously developed site and is therefore consistent with the aims and objectives of NPF4 Policy 9. 8.5 Policy 29 – Rural Development is to encourage rural economic activity, innovation and diversification while safeguarding rural character, natural assets and cultural heritage, and supporting the sustainability of rural economies and communities. Assessment: The proposal makes effective use of an existing hardstanding area and buildings and does not involve new construction, engineering works, or the loss of agricultural land. The site has historically been used for storage and vehicle parking and is considered previously developed land. The use is low intensity in nature, with vehicle movements generally limited to one or two trips per day, often separated by extended periods of inactivity. Operations are restricted to daytime hours, reducing the potential for disturbance. The supporting information confirms there would be no significant impacts on residential amenity, landscape character, the surrounding countryside, or the Antonine Wall heritage asset. Overall, the proposal represents an appropriate form of rural business diversification that supports employment and economic activity while reusing an existing developed site without causing significant environmental or amenity impacts. It is therefore considered consistent with the aims of NPF4 Policy 29. 8.6 Policy 31 – Culture and Creativity encourages, promotes, and facilitates development which reflects our diverse culture and creativity, and to support our culture and creative industries. Assessment: The proposed use plays an important supporting role within the film and television sector by providing a secure storage base for equipment used on productions operating throughout Scotland. The site’s location, with good access to Glasgow and the strategic road network, assists the efficient deployment of equipment to filming locations and supports the operational needs of the industry. The supporting information indicates that the use contributes to the retention and support of approximately 30 full-time and part-time jobs, including drivers, maintenance staff, coordinators, and other production support roles. The proposal therefore contributes to investment, employment and economic activity associated with Scotland’s creative sector, aligning with the policy objective of expanding cultural and creative industries. Furthermore, the proposal involves the productive reuse of existing buildings and hardstanding areas without the need for new development. It enables a specialist creative-industry use to operate from an existing site with no significant amenity, environmental or heritage impacts identified. Overall, the proposal supports the continued growth of the film and television industry, sustains employment, and makes effective use of an existing site. It is therefore considered to accord with the aims and objectives of NPF4 Policy 31 – Culture and Creativity. 8.7 The proposal must comply with policies set out in PROT B Category B1 Internation Site: Antonine Wall PP4 (Green Belt) and AD4 Policy (Amount of Development within the Adopted North Lanarkshire Local Plan 2022. Page 75 of 84
Page 76
8.8 PROT B Historic Environment Assets aims protect and create resilient sustainable places by safeguarding historic environment assets. There will be a presumption against development within the Frontiers of the Roman Empire (Antonine Wall) World Heritage Site Buffer Zones which would have an adverse impact on the site and its setting, unless: mitigating action to the satisfaction of the Council in consultation with Historic Environment Scotland can be taken to redress the adverse impact; and there is no conflict with other Local Development Plan Policies. Assessment: The application site lies within the Antonine Wall Buffer Zone but outside the Scheduled Monument itself. The proposal comprises the retrospective change of use of existing hardstanding and buildings for storage. No new buildings, engineering works or ground disturbance are proposed. The use utilises an existing brownfield site and does not introduce additional built development. The site is visually contained and screened. The archaeological consultation response advises that there is "no new physical impact and no additional setting impact". On this basis, the proposal is not considered to adversely affect the Antonine Wall World Heritage Site or its setting and is therefore, consistent with Policy PROT B: Historic Environment Assets 8.9 PP4 Green Belt Policy (Purpose of Place) aims to protect the setting of communities, support regeneration by directing growth to urban areas, protect natural assets and provide a high- quality environment. Assessment: The proposal utilises an existing developed area comprising hardstanding and buildings and does not involve new built development or expansion in to developed countryside, expansion into undeveloped countryside or the loss of agricultural land. The use is contained within an established farm complex and does not detract from the openness, landscape character, or wider function of the Green Belt. Furthermore, the proposal provides economic benefits through support for the film and television industry and the continued viability of the farm holding. 8.10 Policy AD4 (Amount of Development) – Development will be assessed for the implications related to the amount of development proposed. The need for an assessment depends on the combination of type, scale, and location of the development. Assessment: The proposal complies with Policy AD4 (Amount of Development) as it represents an appropriate use within an existing brownfield site. The supporting information demonstrates that the development utilises existing infrastructure and confirms that the use does not constitute an unacceptable intensification of activity. 8.11 Policy EDQ1 (Environmental Quality) - Proposed development requires to be appraised in terms of the site and its surroundings to ensure it will integrate successfully into the local area and avoid harm to neighbouring amenity. Assessment: The storage use is low-key in nature and is not anticipated to give rise to significant impacts on residential amenity, landscape character, heritage assets, or the natural environment. No new buildings or physical alterations are proposed. 8.12 Policy EDQ3 (Design and Accessibility – Proposed development will require to be appraised in terms of the site and its surroundings to ensure it will integrate successfully into the local area and avoid harm to neighbouring amenity. Assessment: The proposal is also consistent with Policy EDQ3 (Design and Accessibility). Vehicle movements are limited and intermittent, the site benefits from established access arrangements, and operations are confined to daytime hours. As such, no adverse impacts on road safety, accessibility or surrounding land uses are anticipated. 8.13 Overall, the proposal represents an appropriate reuse of an existing developed site and is considered to accord with Policies PROT B, PP4, AD4, EDQ1 and EDQ3 of the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022. Page 76 of 84
Page 77
8.14 The matters raised in the letters of objection are addressed in turn below. • Farm is within the buffer zone of Antonine Wall detrimental to the beauty of area. Response: As part of the assessment process, consultation was undertaken with both Historic Environment Scotland and Archaeology Service. No objections were received from either consultee, indicating that the proposed use would not adversely affect the historic environment or archaeological interests of the area. The development is therefore considered acceptable in this regard. In addition, the proposed use is not considered to be detrimental to the character or amenity of the surrounding area. Due to the site's location within an established farm complex, together with the presence of existing landform, mature trees and boundary vegetation, the storage area is largely screened from public view. In particular, views from the nearby canal towpath and public footpath network are significantly restricted, limiting the visual impact of the development on the wider landscape. Consequently, the proposal is not considered to result in any unacceptable visual intrusion or harm to the surrounding historic environment. • Structure used as Workshop Response: The applicant has confirmed that no vehicle repairs, maintenance activities, or other operational works will be undertaken on the site. The use is limited to the storage of film and television production vehicles, trailers, and associated equipment. To ensure the development operates as proposed, a condition has been attached restricting the use of the site and prohibiting repair, servicing, or maintenance activities. • Materials burned on site. Response: Concerns have been raised regarding the burning of materials on site. If substantiated, such activities have potential implications for residential amenity and environmental quality and are therefore relevant. However, the current application relates to the storage of film production equipment and vehicles, and no burning activity forms part of the development proposed. Any unauthorised waste disposal or burning activities would be more appropriately investigated under separate environmental health, waste management, or enforcement powers. • Visual Impact of stored materials Response: Visual amenity is a material planning consideration, particularly given the Green Belt location. However, such items are characteristic to the proposed use. Whilst the appearance of certain stored items may be unattractive, there is insufficient evidence that the storage use results in unacceptable visual harm or is materially out of character with the established developed farmyard environment. The condition and maintenance of individual items stored on the site would not, in itself, justify refusal of planning permission unless significant planning harm can be demonstrated • Green fence is unsightly. Higher than 1m Response: Fencing is part of the proposal. It is viewed that the fence is not detrimental to the surrounding area. It is considered that the colour of fence blends in with the surrounding area. • Land Engineering Works Response: the current application relates to the storage use of existing buildings and hardstanding. Any unauthorised earthworks may require separate investigation through planning enforcement procedures, however, the area to the west of the buildings appears to have been used historically as part of the agricultural yard and is considered that the current application appears to formalise the use of this area. Page 77 of 84
Page 78
• Vehicles arriving/departing all hours of the day and night. Response: Applicant states movement to and from site will be from 7am to 5pm. This has been conditioned to protect the residential properties in close proximity to the site. • Noise from gate can be heard day and night. Response: It is viewed that the closing and locking of the gates would not create substantial noise to negatively impact the surrounding area. • Other works being carried out. Response: The enforcement officer is investigating any other works being carried out on site. Depending on the outcome of the investigation, a further application could be required. • No Business Plan or Supporting Statement Response: A supporting statement and cover letter was submitted as part of the proposal. This is available for the public to view online. • Change of Use will have Impact on residents. Response: The proposal states the yard will be accessed typically, twice a day between 7am and 5pm. This is considered to be low level impact. There will be extended times when the site will not be accessed due to materials being out on production. • Traffic and Road Safety Response: NLC Infrastructure and Transportation were consulted. Conditions have been added to limit any impact to traffic and road safety. • Lighting and Visual Impact Response: There is no lighting proposed as part of the change of use. It is viewed that the change of use, due to the use of existing buildings for materials will not be detrimental to visual impact. • Intensification and mixed-use concerns Response: The application is for storage only; the enforcement team are currently investigating any additional works being carried out on site. If additional works are being carried out, they will be advised to stop or submit a further planning application. • Fuel storage, biodiversity, and habitat concerns. Response: No fuel will be stored within the site. The application will only use the existing hardstanding. This will not be detrimental to the existing environment, and the use is low level for storage of materials in the existing structures and vehicles on the hard standing. In terms of habitat, it is considered that giving the previous workings of this area, that the impact on any habitat was minimal and as such, is not a material consideration in this instance. Page 78 of 84
Page 79
• Application is misleading, hard standing was put in before planning permission was applied for. Response: Using GIS records, it is evident that an area of hardstanding was present on the site in previous years. The application is retrospective in nature, meaning that the works and associated use had already commenced prior to the submission of the planning application. The matter was investigated through the Council’s planning enforcement process, which resulted in the submission of the current application. Accordingly, the assessment focuses on the site and development as it currently exists and on the acceptability of the proposed use in planning terms. In addition, it is considered that the area to the west was already used as part of the agricultural yard associated with those buildings historically. 9. Conclusions 9.1 In conclusion, considering all the circumstances relevant to this application, the proposed development is considered acceptable, even though it is within the Greenbelt for the reasons stated in the above report. The proposal will not have a detrimental effect on the neighbouring properties and character of the surrounding area, therefore, complies with the relevant policies within National Planning Framework and within the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022. Taking account of the provisions of the development plan and all other material considerations, it is recommended that permission be granted subject to conditions. Page 79 of 84
Page 80
Page 80 of 84
Page 81
North Lanarkshire Council Report Planning Committee Does this report require to be approved? ☒ Yes ☐ No Ref Date 04/06/26 Cumbernauld (Village) and Coatbridge (Blairhill & Dunbeth) Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Plans From Gordon Liddell – Planning Officer, Strategy and Policy E-mail liddellg@northlan.gov.uk Executive Summary Conservation Areas play a pivotal role in the preservation of our environment and heritage. Furthermore, there is a responsibility on Council’s to have an up to date picture and review of our Conservation Areas and their character. Conservation Areas are designated under the Planning Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas (Scotland ) Act 1997. The current ACA’s and CAMP’s for Cumbernauld (Village) and Coatbridge (Blairhill & Dunbeth) were last approved by Planning Committee in November 2012. An updated ACA and CAMP for both areas is therefore required to bring the existing policy documents to an up-to-date position in line with Historic Environment Scotland aspirations. Smith Scott Mullen Architects were appointed in 2023 to prepare these documents. This work included undertaking a full review of the area’s character, carrying out wide community consultation and developing proposals to guide the council in its management of the conservation area. These guidelines have been agreed by officers and generally focus on ensuring that all new development is sympathetic to the character of the area. This report seeks committee approval for the adoption of the updated ACA’s and CAMP’s for Cumbernauld Village and Coatbridge (Blairhill & Dunbeth) Conservation Areas from a planning perspective. Recommendations It is recommended that the planning committee approve this report and the adoption of the updated Area Character Appraisal and Conservation Area Management Plans for Cumbernauld Village and Coatbridge (Blairhill & Dunbeth) Conservation Areas. The Plan for North Lanarkshire Priority Improve the health and wellbeing of our communities Ambition statement (24) Review and design services around people, communities, and shared resources Programme of Work Transforming Places Item 3 Page 81 of 84
Page 82
1. Background 1.1 Conservation Areas are designated under the Planning Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas (Scotland) Act 1997. 1.2 There are two updated Conservation Area Management Plans which Officers seek approval. A previous update to Airdrie (Town Centre & Drumgelloch) was approved in 2025. 2. Report 2.2 The current ACA and CAMP for Cumbernauld (Village) and Coatbridge (Blairhill & Dunbeth) were last approved by Planning Committee in November 2012. An updated ACA and CAMP for each area is therefore required bring policy and guidance up-to- date from a planning perspective. 2.3 Smith Scott Mullen Architects (who are conservation accredited by the Royal Incorporation of Architects Scotland) were appointed in 2023 to prepare these documents. This work included undertaking a full review of the area’s character, carrying out wide community consultation and developing proposals to guide the council in its management of the Conservation Areas. These guidelines have been agreed by officers and generally focus on ensuring that all new development is sympathetic to the character of the area. As well as refreshed documents, as part of the reviews, one minor amendment to the boundary of the Coatbridge (Blairhill and Dunbeth) Conservation Area was identified and proposed, and this is supported by Officers. 2.4 As well as being documents on which funding application may be sought, the updated Conservation Area Management Plans also have benefits in updating planning policy and guidance. It is recommended that these now be adopted. 3. Measures of success 3.1 Revised ACA and CAMP adopted for the respective areas 3.2 More up to date management plans for the respective Conservation Areas. 4. Supporting documentation 4.1 Cumbernauld (Village) Character Appraisal and Conservation Area Management Plan. 4.2 Coatbridge (Blairhill and Dunbeth) Character Appraisal and Conservation Area Management Plan. 5. Impacts 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? Page 82 of 84
Page 83
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 been discussed and agreed with Finance? 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 been discussed and agreed with People Resources? 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 been discussed and agreed with Legal and Democratic? 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 ☒ 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 significant technology change, has an assessment been carried out (or is scheduled to be carried out) 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? Page 83 of 84
Page 84
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. 5.11 Children’s rights and wellbeing impact Does the report contain any information regarding any council activity, service delivery, policy, or plan that has an impact on children and young people up to the age of 18, or on a specific group of these? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact and the provision that has been made to ensure there has been appropriate consideration of the relevant Articles from the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). If Yes, has a Children’s Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment (CRWIA) been carried out? Yes ☐ No ☐ Page 84 of 84