Agenda Document Pack - Planning Committee - 12/10/2023
North Lanarkshire Council · 12 October 2023
Back to Planning Committee — 12 October 2023 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
3 October 2023 Members of the Planning Committee Chief Executive’s Office Archie Aitken Chief Officer (Legal & Democratic) 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, 12 October 2023 at 10:00 AM which you are requested to attend. The agenda of business is attached. Archie Aitken Chief Officer (Legal & Democratic) Members : Clerk Name: Mark Hamill Clerk Telephone: 07811294702 Clerk Email: hamillm@northlan.gov.uk N Shevlin, G Currie, G Brennan, B Burgess, A Bustard, J Cairns, A Campbell, T Carragher, M Coyle, S Coyle, D Crichton, K Docherty, L Jarvie, T Johnston, J Logue, H Loughran, M McPake, J McPhilemy, A McVey, J Reddin, D Robb, G Robinson, A Smith, L Stubbs, G Woods. Page 1 of 146
Page 2
Page 2 of 146
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 - 66 3 Notice of Planning and Enforcement Appeals Decision Submit report by the Chief Officer (Place) advising of one planning and enforcement appeals decision 67 - 68 4 Draft Supplementary Guidance Education Contributions Submit report by the Chief Officer (Place) seeking approval to undertake the public consultation with external stakeholders on the Draft Supplementary Guidance on Education Contributions 69 - 102 5 Scottish Government Directions on Finalised Supplementary Guidance Planning and Noise and Affordable Housing Submit report by the Chief Officer (Place) providing an update on the outcome of the consultation with the Scottish Government on the Supplementary Guidance Documents: Planning and Noise and Affordable Housing. 103 - 146 Page 3 of 146
Page 4
Page 4 of 146
Page 5
North Lanarkshire Council Planning Applications for consideration of Planning Committee Committee Date: 12-10-2023 Ordnance Survey maps reproduced from Ordnance Survey with permission of HMSO Crown Copyright reserved Item 2 Page 5 of 146
Page 6
APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING COMMITTEE 12th October 2023 Page No Application No Applicant Development/Site Recommendation 7-19 22/00526/FUL Mr Abdul Majid Demolition of a commercial unit and 2 detached houses and construction of 3 storey building with commercial unit on ground floor with 6 flats above 120 North Road Bellshill ML4 1EX Grant 20-43 22/01493/PPP Moray Land Farming Partnership Residential Development (Permission in Principle) Site South Of Bedlay Castle Cumbernauld Road Chryston G69 9HP Refuse 44-51 23/00385/FUL Mr Alan Wilson Two semi detached dwellinghouses Land South Of Heatheryford Gardens Plains Refuse 52-65 23/00649/S42 Mr Robert Hill Residential Development (in principle) (Section 42 application to vary condition 2 of planning permission in principle 18/00580/PPP to carry out site investigations and remediation for each phase of development before development starts within that phase) Site To The West Of Morningside Road Newmains Grant Page 6 of 146
Page 7
Application No: 22/00526/FUL Proposed Development: Demolition of a commercial unit and 2 detached houses and construction of 3 storey building with commercial unit on ground floor with 6 flats above Site Address: 120 North Road Bellshill ML4 1EX Date Registered: 26th May 2022 Applicant: Mr Abdul Majid 120 North Road Bellshill ML4 1EX Agent: Lizzi Nutt TINTO Architecture Ltd Grandholm Crescent Bridge of Don Aberdeen AB22 8BB Application Level: Local Application Contrary to Development Plan: No Ward: 15 Bellshill Angela Campbell,Pat Patton,Lisa Stubbs,Anne McCrory, Representations: 20 letter(s) of representation received (17 objecting, 3 in support) Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions Reasoned Justification: It is considered that given that the existing site forms a retail premises and two dwellinghouses, that the demolition of the existing shop and dwellinghouses and replacement with a mixed-use development with a retail premises on the ground floor and six two-bedroom flats on the upper floors is acceptable in terms of the zoning within the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022 and surrounding properties on North Road. It is not considered that the development would result in significant negative impacts to the amenity of neighbouring properties or the wider predominantly residential area and is therefore considered acceptable in terms of the policies within the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022 Page 7 of 146
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: 22/00526/FUL Name (of applicant): Mr Abdul Majid Site Address: 120 North Road, Bellshill ML4 1EX Development: Demolition of a commercial unit and 2 detached houses and construction of 3 storey building with commercial unit on ground floor with 6 flats above Page 8 of 146
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:- 3885-PL(00)001 RevF, 3885-PL(04)001 RevB & 3885-PL(00)002 RevD Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded. 2. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing materials to be used on all external walls and roofs shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved under the terms of this condition. Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail. 3. That before the development is complete and any of the dwellings hereby permitted are occupied, all the parking and manoeuvring areas shown on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained, surfaced in a material which the Planning Authority has approved in writing before the start of surfacing work and clearly marked out, and shall, thereafter, be maintained as parking and manoeuvring areas. Thereafter, all off-street car parking spaces shall be provided within the site, as described on the approved plans and shall, thereafter, be maintained as car parking spaces. Reason: In the interests of traffic safety. 4. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority and for the avoidance of doubt, the boundary enclosure for the site shall be 2m in height and be either a wall or close boarded fence to ground level. Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail. 5. That BEFORE any of the dwellings hereby permitted, are occupied, the fences, or walls, as approved under the terms of Condition 4 above, shall be erected. Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate boundary treatment at the site. 6. That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175 : 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required. 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. 7. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 6 above , shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a chartered Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the Remediation Strategy. Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents. Page 9 of 146
Page 10
8. Notwithstanding details included in drawings hereby approved, the permission does not include any form of hot food takeaway element. For the avoidance of doubt, a further application will be required to be submitted if the applicant wishes to prepare, cook and sell hot food within the new shop. Reason: To ensure that this element of the proposal has been fully assessed in terms of the impacts to residents of the flats above, and neighbouring properties in terms of odour and noise. 9. Noise associated with the external plant shall not give rise to a noise level, assessed with the windows open, within any dwelling or noise sensitive buildings in excess of the equivalent to Noise Rating Curve (N.R.C.) 30 between 07.00 hours and 23.00 hours and N.R.C. 25 at all other times. Reason: In the interests of ensuring that the plant noise is within acceptable levels 10. That unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, prior to any works taking place on site, full details of the proposed plant and acoustic enclosure shall be submitted for written authorisation by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, this will include the submission of additional drawings showing the exact location of the proposed plant works, the make, model and specifications of the proposed plant works and full details of the proposed acoustic enclosure to be provided. Reason: In the interests of ensuring that the plant noise is within acceptable levels 11. Once the plant works and acoustic enclosure have been installed, a post work validation report shall be submitted for written authorisation by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, this should be carried out by a qualified professional and it should include a noise survey, demonstrating that the appropriate noise level standards have been achieved by the mitigation. Reason: In the interests of ensuring that the plant noise is within acceptable levels 12. That unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, vehicle deliveries to the site shall be as specified in the Ellendale Environmental Noise Impact Assessment section 5 page 37, dated 7th July 2023. For the avoidance of doubt, no HGV deliveries shall occur before 07:00 on any days. Any other deliveries made by panel vans shall occur no earlier than 06:00 and vehicle engines will be switched off whilst goods are transferred on foot from the vehicle to the retail unit via the access gate and rear service yard. Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area. 13. That before any works take place on site, full details of the proposed acoustic enclosure for the service area shall be submitted for written authorisation by the Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area. 14. That before any works take place on site, full details of proposed windows and ventilation systems including their specifications are required to be submitted for written authorisation by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, details shall be accompanied by an assessment of their efficacy in achieving the appropriate indoor noise standards for the development and should be accompanied by drawings. Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area. 15. Once the windows have been installed, a post work validation report shall be submitted for written authorisation by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, this should be carried out by a qualified professional and it should include a noise survey, demonstrating that the appropriate noise level standards have been achieved by the mitigation Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area. Page 10 of 146
Page 11
16. Prior to any works on site full details shall be submitted with regard to external lighting proposed for the development. For the avoidance of doubt, this should be designed such that the scheme minimises the upward spread of light near to and above the horizontal as well as reducing the spill of light and glare to a minimum by ensuring that the main beam angle of all lights directed towards any potential observer is not more than 70 degrees. Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area. 17. As one Soprano Pipistrelle bat roost has been confirmed as an ecological constraint by the Acorna Ecology Ltd, Bat Roost Potential & Subsequent Presence/Absence Survey - May-June 2023, an application is required to be submitted to NatureScot for a Bat License before any works are carried out on site. Once the license has been issued by NatureScot, full details of the license shall be submitted for written authorisation by the Planning Authority before any development is commenced on site. Reason: To ensure compliance with The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended); the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) as amended and the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004..' 18. That any mitigation works identified as required by the bat license in terms of condition 17 above shall be carried out in accordance with the terms of the bat license; to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure compliance with the terms of the Bat License issued by Naturescot and The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended); the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) as amended and the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004..' 19. That notwithstanding the terms of conditions 18 and 19 above and that before the development hereby permitted starts, a Bat Method Statement covering all demolition and construction works shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with Naturescot. Reason: To ensure compliance with The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended); the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) as amended and the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004.' 20. That any mitigation works identified by the Bat Method Statement in terms of condition 19 above shall be carried out in accordance with the terms of the Bat Method Statement; to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure compliance with The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended); the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) as amended and the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004. 21. 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 the said Authority and shall be certified by a chartered civil engineer as complying with the most recent SEPA SUDS guidance. 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. 22. That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 21 above shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Within three months of the construction of the SUDS, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in drainage works) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant 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 Page 11 of 146
Page 12
development site. 23. That prior to the commencement of development, the applicant shall provide written confirmation to the Planning Authority that all the requirements of Scottish Water can be fully met to demonstrate that the development will not have an impact on their assets, and that suitable infrastructure can be put in place to support the development. Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory drainage arrangements. 24. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include:- (a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, boundary treatment, grass seeding and turfing; (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; (c) 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 enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail, to ensure high quality visual amenity. 25. That all works included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 24 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. 26. That BEFORE the development herby permitted starts, a detailed drawing showing the location of all bin stores and boundary enclosures 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. Background Papers: Consultation Responses: Traffic & Transportation received on 28/06/22, 13/09/22 and 04/11/22 NLC Greenspace received on 16/09/22 and 05/06/23 Environmental Health (including Pollution Control) received on 24/06/22, 16/03/23 and 18/08/23 Contact Information: Mr Gary McEwan at esplanning@northlan.gov.uk or 01236 632500 Report Date: 2nd October 2023 Page 12 of 146
Page 13
APPLICATION NO. 22/00526/FUL REPORT 1. Site Description 1.1 The site is approximately 0.174 hectares and incorporates an existing retail unit and two dwellinghouses (to be demolished as part of the application), one to the north and one to the south of the retail unit. The site is located on North Road/B7070 which is a main thoroughfare, running from north to south, parallel with the A725 to the west, from the southern boundary of Coatbridge into the centre of Bellshill. There are currently 3 access points on North Road serving each of the existing properties. North Road is a busy thoroughfare which has a mix of residential and commercial uses, albeit North Road and the wider surrounding area is predominantly residential. The site is approximately 400m from Bellshill town Centre to the south. 2. Proposed Development 2.1 The proposed development involves the demolition of the existing single storey retail unit, the single storey detached dwelling to the north of the retail unit and the two-storey detached dwelling to the south of the retail unit. In their place would be a modern three storey, mixed use development, with a retail unit located on the ground floor, and six two-bedroom apartments located on the upper floors. A single access will serve a shared 22 space car park for both the shops and flats and this parking area will also allow servicing of the retail unit. 3. Applicant’s Supporting Information 3.1 Alongside the drawings, the applicant has provided various accompanying documents, including a planning statement, a design and access statement, a noise impact assessment, a bat survey, and a transportation statement. 4. Site History 4.1 Planning permission was refused 08/01053/FUL for alterations and single storey extension to retail unit, including a car park, relocation of ATM and for a change of use to part of the unit to a hot food takeaway. Following from this an application 08/01053/FUL was granted for a single storey extension to rear of shop, relocation of ATM and siting of air conditioning units. There was an application 10/00361/FUL, which was granted for alterations to shopfront and a change to the enclosure for the air conditioning units and for the installation of a bin store. A further application 17/01865/FUL was refused for the change of use of a part of the unit to form a hot food takeaway. 5. Development Plan 5.1 The proposal requires to be assessed under the terms of the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (NLLDP) 2022 and in particular under the terms of: • PP 3 POLICY Purpose of Place • AD 3 POLICY Amount of Development • EDQ1 Site Appraisal • EDQ3 Quality of Development 5.2 As highlighted in 5.1 above, the site is allocated within the Urban Area, where Purpose of Place Policy PP3 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 13 of 146
Page 14
5.3 NPF4 forms part of the development plan. Given the nature and scale of the development, the most relevant considerations are already enshrined in the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan policies. The policies within NPF4 that are relevant to the application are Policy 14 - Design, Quality and Place, and Policy 16 - Quality Homes. 6. Consultations 6.1 NLC Pollution Control raises no objection to the application provided that appropriate conditions are attached to any approval in relation to a Site Investigation, noise (regarding air conditioning units, road noise and glazing proposed for flats) ventilation and external lighting. Finally, they have requested that a restrictive condition be attached to the permission to ensure that the unit cannot install a hot food takeaway element to the proposal without planning permission, to ensure that the impacts of such a scheme can be fully assessed. Conditions have been attached, which address all of the above matters. 6.2 NLC Greenspace raises no objection to the application provided that appropriate conditions are attached to any approval in relation to the applicant attaining a bat license from Naturescot before any works take place on site, and for the applicant to adhere to the recommendations within the Acorna Ecology Ltd, Bat Roost Potential & Subsequent Presence/Absence Survey - May-June 2023. Conditions have been attached which require the applicant to obtain a bat license from Naturescot, with full details of the license to be submitted for written approval by the Planning Authority before any development takes place on site, and that all recommendations of this application are adhered to. Conditions have also been attached to ensure that a bat method statement is submitted for written approval by the Planning Authority before any works take place on site and that any mitigation works identified by the Bat Method Statement shall be carried out in accordance with the terms of the Bat Method Statement. 6.3 NLC Traffic and Transportation has recommended refusal of the planning application in terms of minimum junction spacing, car parking and servicing arrangement for the retail premises. Detailed discussions have taken place in respect to the layout with additional supporting information and updated layouts provided. In terms of the junction spacing, this was considered during the above-mentioned discussions, however it was determined that moving the location of the access to the south of the site would result in more negative impacts for neighbouring properties. In any case an altered access location would also fail to meet Traffic and Transportation’s minimum junction spacing standards. It is therefore considered that given that the proposal would reduce the number of accesses at the site from 3 (for the retail premises and the 2 houses) down to 1, on balance the new access is considered acceptable. In terms of car parking, there is a shortfall in parking proposed, and while it is acknowledged that the proposal will result in the intensification of the site, there is currently no parking for the shop at present. The proposal would introduce 22 parking spaces to be shared by shop customers and occupants of the 6 flats. It should also be noted that the property, being on a main bus route, and 0.9km from Bellshill Train Station, is well served by public transport infrastructure. Given that there is no parking at present, that the site is located on a main bus route (with a bus stop directly outside the existing shop) and the proximity of Bellshill Town Centre, it is considered that the parking proposed is acceptable. In terms of the servicing arrangement proposed, initially the applicant proposed a layby solution which was to be utilised by the service vehicles and for the bus stop, however Traffic and Transportation deemed that the conflict between buses, service vehicles and potential parked cars would be problematic. A second option was therefore proposed, whereby the service vehicles would utilise the car park area leaving the bus stop to the front of the unit (the service yard and the main storage area within the building and the access to it are located towards the rear of the building making it more attractive to service the proposed shop from the shared carpark). Traffic and Transportation comments are noted; however, the existing shop receives deliveries via the front of the shop. The current proposal has the potential remove the existing conflict with buses to the front of the retail unit, easing congestion on North Road at this point. While there may be some conflict occasionally between users of the car parking area and the service deliveries, and while it is recognised that that there may be more frequent/larger deliveries due to the increased size of the retail unit, this option on balance is considered acceptable and will result in fewer conflicts with traffic on North Road than the present situation. Page 14 of 146
Page 15
7. Representations 7.1 Following neighbour notification procedure, twenty (seventeen objection and three supporting) letters of representation were received within the allowed timeframe for making representation. These are summarised as follows: Objection comments • Traffic and Road Safety – Parking and trying to get out of driveways is dangerous enough without traffic generated by larger shop and flats, creating more congestion for North Road and neighbouring streets. The access is too close to the junction with Rowanden Avenue. The junction is already dangerous due to customers parking cars on both sides of the road. The proposal will result in more parking on North Road as proposed parking area is insufficient and those using shop will not use car park. Existing problems will be exacerbated by proposal with existing bus stop (North Road is main bus route), staff and customer parking and conflict with service vehicles. Occasionally there are 2-3 delivery vehicles at a time and there are not adequate loading facilities for lorries on North Road. Delivery numbers will also increase with larger shop. The demolition and construction will also impact traffic on North Road and surrounding streets. The car park at the pharmacy along the road, does not reduce customer parking on North Road. North Road surface is already in bad condition, development will make it worse. • Sunlight/Daylight/Overbearing – Building will overshadow surrounding properties, blocking light to homes and gardens. Also, a 3-storey building at this location will appear overbearing. • Privacy – The 3-storey property will result in the loss of privacy and overlooking. • Design – The 3-storey property will not be in-keeping with the surrounding properties which are a mix of single and 2-storeys in height. The substantially taller building with a flat roof is something more akin to what would be seen in a retail park. • Odour/Air pollution – Exhaust fumes from car park will impact on health of local residents. • Hot Food Takeaway – For several years the applicant has been running hot food takeaway ‘Babas Kitchen’, without permission, which has resulted in parking issues, litter and noise. The premises should also not be serving hot food as there are no toilet facilities for customers. • Drainage – There is no capacity for further flats. Victorian drainage system is not fit for purpose when under pressure. Connection of flats to the system will place further strain on the system. Drainage problems on North Road also add to congestion issues. • Existing Retail – There is no need for more retail space as area is well served by various supermarkets in the area. • Overdevelopment – The proposal is considered overdevelopment. Also, there is no amenity space for flats. • Disturbance during development – There will be increased noise, dust and other debris generated during demolition and construction of development. The development will also result in further congestion during building works. • Seagull problem – There is a seagull problem in the area which has been exacerbated in the past by staff from the shop feeding old bread to them. The proposed development with its flat roof design will provide nesting sites for the birds. • Noise – Noise will be generated by the development. The users of the car park including the unloading of deliveries will generate significant noise, opening and closing of doors of vehicles, engine noise, especially while reversing and while left running, as well as shouting from drivers. This happens with the current retail premises often early in the morning and it is likely that deliveries will increase due to the increased size of the premises. There will also be no time limit for users of the car park. Also, air conditioning units, which are not shown on the drawings, without the appropriate screening will result in noise being heard by neighbouring dwellings. The shop owner originally failed to install the correct screening for the existing AC units which were installed following the previous application to extend the shop. • Drawing details – Lack of detail on drawings, no dimensions given, materials details, where refrigeration units will be located, no boundary treatment details given, which raises security and privacy concerns. Bin store locations are also not provided, which raises concerns regarding odours and vermin. No details have been provided in relation to lighting including external lighting for car park, security lighting and the light generated by the flats. • Croftpark Street – Currently used as ‘short-cut’ and people speed along the street. Problem will get worse with development. • Dog owners – The owner of the shop encourages dog owners to leave there dogs outside Page 15 of 146
Page 16
while they shop. The dogs foul the pavement and frighten passers-by. • Nature of development – It is not clear what the nature of the business of the new commercial unit will be. • Application should be major – Given that the area is historically a residential area, it would be expected that some benefit or enhancement to the area would occur with such a major construction. This application should be deemed to be a major application. • Reuse of vacant retail – Vacant retail premises, of which there are many within the area should be utilised instead of building new units in accordance with local aims of directing such developments to town centres or secondary retail areas. Supporting comments • Parking – More off-street parking will help with congestion, reducing on-street parking making North Road safer. • Housing – More housing of a type desperately needed in the area. • Employment – Larger shop will employ more staff. • Benefits community – The current shop provides a local service to those who are less able to travel distances such as the elderly and those with disabilities. Existing shop provides banking facilities at the post office, which is a lifeline. 8. Planning Assessment 8.1 Under Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 8.2 Within the NLLDP the site is covered by 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. This policy also 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 issues such as size, materials and road safety and which states that proposals must integrate successfully with the surrounding area by avoiding harm to the neighbouring amenity. In terms of scale and massing, and design, initially the development was larger in terms of its scale, mass and height, however, the scheme has now been reduced in size, with only 6 flats proposed instead of 7 originally. The height of the development has been reduced to 8m in height at its highest point, to match closely the height of the existing 2 storey dwellinghouse to be demolished (7.25m approximately) and the existing retail unit (7m approximately). The houses on the opposite side of North Road although only 2 storeys are of similar height. It should also be noted that the existing two storey house and retail unit (which are located very closely together), have a combined width of 25m approximately, whereas the proposed unit would have a width of 26m approximately. Also of note is that the scale of the development has been broken up with the use of lighter and darker materials on the ground and first floor and the third floor respectively. Finally, the scale and mass of the building on the south side, has been reduced by stepping the upper floors (the third floor is also stepped back from the front elevation). It is considered that while the proposal will appear different from the existing residential properties in terms of the modern design, and will be larger in terms of scale and mass than surrounding houses, given its location on a main thoroughfare and that it will not be significantly taller or wider than the existing two storey dwellinghouse and retail unit, it is considered that the new development is acceptable in terms of scale, massing and design and will not appear overbearing to neighbouring properties. In terms of road safety, while NLC Traffic and Transportation comments are noted, it is considered that with the reduction of the number of accesses (from 3 to 1), the introduction of an off-street parking area, and that deliveries will be taken from the new parking area instead of North Road, that on balance the proposed development will improve upon the existing arrangement at this location. Given the size and scale of the proposal and its location relative to surrounding properties, it is considered that the proposal would not result in any significant sunlight or daylight issues. In terms of privacy, while the ground floor of the proposal would come quite far back into the site, up to 7.5m from the rear boundary, the upper floor flats would be 19m approximately from the shared rear boundary with Nos. 19, 17, 15 and 13 Croftpark Street. The closest neighbouring window to the rear elevation of the upper floors is 24m approximately (at Number 15 Croftpark Street), which is considered acceptable in terms of privacy. In terms of the property at No. 116 North Road, there Page 16 of 146
Page 17
is a side facing window which would be 11m approximately from the 3rd floor, side facing windows of the new development, however it is noted that there are existing side facing windows on the two-storey house to be demolished which are 5m away approximately. It is therefore considered that the development would not result in any greater privacy issues at No. 116 North Road than at present. In any case the proximity of the windows would be offset by the fact that the onlooking windows of the development would be located on the 3rd floor, whereas the window at No. 116 North Road is at ground level. In terms of the property at number 126 North Road, and those on the opposite side of North Road at Nos. 111 North Road and No. 1 Rowanden Avenue, these are 23m, 26m and 33m (approximately) respectively away from the closest windows of the new development. While there will be some overlooking of garden grounds because of the development, this would not be significantly greater than from two storey dwellings given the height of the proposed development. It is therefore considered that the development is acceptable from a privacy perspective. In terms of amenity space, it is recognised that there is a lack of outdoor amenity space. The applicant has attempted to address this matter by giving each flat a balcony/terrace. It should also be noted that many flatted properties in and around town centres do not have lots of amenity space. It is therefore considered that amenity space is acceptable in this instance. It is therefore considered that the proposal complies with Policies PP 3, AD 3, EDQ 1 and EDQ 3 of the adopted North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan. 8.3 In terms of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4), the most notable policies which affect the proposal are Policy 14 - Design, Quality and Place and Policy 16 - Quality Homes. These policies are embedded and reflected within the NLLDP policies listed above. 8.4 Policy 14 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. 8.5 Policy 16 supports developments for new homes on land allocated for housing in the LDP. The application site is within the urban area and the proposed development includes 6 flatted units for housing, so therefore 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. It will not have a detrimental impact on the area and is compliant with the general principles of this policy. 8.6 The above NPF 4 policies are embedded in the adopted NLLDP and, in particular, Policies PP 3, AD 3, EDQ 1 and EDQ 3 discussed in 8.2 above. The development is therefore considered to be consistent with both NPF 4 and NLLDP policies. Representations 8.7 In response to the grounds of representation above in 7.1, these are commented on in the same order as they appear above: Objections • Traffic and Road safety – It is considered that with the reduction of the number of accesses (from 3 to 1), the introduction of an off-street parking area that will also allow for delivery vehicles to service the proposed shop will mean that deliveries should be taken from North Road, that on balance the proposed development will improve upon the existing arrangement at this location where there are 3 access points and on road servicing of the shop is the only option • Sunlight/Daylight/Overbearing – Given the location and design of the proposed development in relation to neighbouring properties, it is not considered that the proposal will result in a significant negative impact on the sunlight or daylight received by neighbouring dwellinghouses. It is also considered that the changes made to the scheme ensures that it will not appear overbearing for neighbouring dwellings. • Privacy - As indicated in paragraph number 8.2 above, the proposal raises no window-to- window issues and while there will be some overlooking of garden grounds as a result of the Page 17 of 146
Page 18
development, this would not be significantly greater than two storey dwellings given the height of the proposed development. It is therefore considered that the development is acceptable from a privacy perspective. • Design – As is indicated in paragraph number 8.2 above, while the proposal will appear different from the existing residential properties in terms of the modern design and will be larger in terms of scale and mass than surrounding houses, given the changes made to the scheme, the proposal is considered acceptable in terms of scale, massing and design. • Odour/Air pollution – Comments are noted, however, NLC Pollution Control has raised no concerns in this regard. • Hot food takeaway – Comments are noted regarding ‘Babas kitchen’, however if this matter is to be looked into by the Planning Service, then a separate enforcement complaint should be made via the Council’s website. In terms of the proposed unit, a condition is in place that requires that a separate planning application will require to be made, if the applicant wishes to prepare cook and sell hot food within the new retail premises. • Drainage – A condition attached to the permission requires the applicant to 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. Furthermore, conditions are also attached requiring the applicant to submit and implement a surface water drainage scheme for written authorisation by the Planning Service. • Existing Retail – Whether there are other supermarkets in the area and whether there is a ‘need’ for a larger retail unit at this location are not material to the current application. This proposal is to replace an existing shop that serves local needs albeit with a larger unit which is considered to be acceptable in planning terms • Overdevelopment – While it is noted that there is a lack of outdoor amenity space, the applicant has attempted to address this matter by giving each flat a balcony/terrace. It should also be noted that many flatted properties in and around town centres do not have lots of amenity space. In terms of over development, the proposal involves the demolition of 3 properties and the erection of 1 property. Given the details discussed above in relation to the height, scale and massing of the development, it is not considered to be overdevelopment. • Disturbance during development – Comments are noted. NLC Pollution Control has provided comments relating to this, which will be attached to any permission as an informative. • Seagull problem – Whether or not the area has a ‘seagull problem’, is not a material planning consideration. This would potentially be a matter for other council services such as Environmental Health • Noise – NLC Pollution Control has provided comment on this matter and are happy with the proposed development provided that their concerns are addressed via condition. Conditions have been attached to the permission addressing noise matters. • Drawing details – Drawing details are considered sufficient to allow the Planning Authority to assess the application. Conditions have been attached to ensure that further details be submitted prior to any works taking place on site. • Croftpark Street – It is possible that traffic may increase on Croftpark Street during construction, however, there is no reason to believe that the completed development should lead to more traffic along Croftpark Street. • Dog owners – The activity of dog owners and their dogs is not a material planning consideration. • Nature of development – The ground floor of the new development will be a similar, but larger convenience store than exists at present. • Application should be major – The level of an application and whether it is major is determined by the size of the development site, area of floorspace in terms of retail development, and dwelling numbers in terms of flats and houses. Neither are large enough to be considered a major development in terms of the proposed development. • Reuse of vacant retail – This is not a material planning consideration. Support • Parking – Noted. • Housing – Noted. • Employment – Noted. • Benefits community – Noted. Page 18 of 146
Page 19
9. Conclusions 9.1 In conclusion, following assessment of the application and notwithstanding the objections received, it is considered that the proposed mixed-use development satisfactorily complies with the relevant policies of the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan and with the general principles of NPF 4. It is therefore recommended that planning permission is granted, Page 19 of 146
Page 20
Application No: 22/01493/PPP Proposed Development: Residential Development (Permission in Principle) Site Address: Site South Of Bedlay Castle Cumbernauld Road Chryston G69 9HP Date Registered: 6th January 2023 Applicant: Moray Land Farming Partnership c/o First Names (Isle of Man) Ltd First Names House Victoria Road Douglas, Isle of Man IM2 4DF Agent: Springfield Properties PLC Springfield House 3 Central Park Avenue, Larbert, FK5 4RX Application Level: Local Application Contrary to Development Plan: No Ward: 05 Stepps, Chryston And Muirhead John McLaren,Josh Cairns,Claire Louise Williams, Representations: 80 letter(s) of representation received. Recommendation: Refuse Reasoned Justification: The proposed development is considered contrary to the green belt policies in the NPF4 Policies 8 and 16(f) along with policy (Purpose of Place Policy PP4) of the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (2022) as the application has failed to justify the proposals in terms with it being associated with an acceptable Green Belt use or special circumstances or specific locational need that warrant approval of the application in this instance. The proposal is also considered to be contrary to Policies EDQ1 & 3 in that the proposed access arrangements are considered to be unsafe. Page 20 of 146
Page 21
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: 22/01493/PPP Name (of applicant): Moray Land Farming Partnership Site Address: Site South Of Bedlay Castle Cumbernauld Road Chryston G69 9HP Development: Residential Development (Permission in Principle) Page 21 of 146
Page 22
Reasons for refusal: 1. The proposed development is contrary to the Green Belt policies in the NPF4 Policy 8 along with Purpose of Place 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 loss of a valuable area of land that was historically associated with Belday Castle and which still helps to separate and define the settlements of Chryston and Moodiesburn and as such contributing strongly to the character of the area. No adequate justification, special circumstances or material considerations have been demonstrated to merit a departure from the development plan. 2. That the proposed development is contrary to policy 16 Quality Homes of NPF4, in that the residential aspect of the proposed development does not meet the criteria which would justify residential development on a site that has not been allocated for housing in the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan. 3. The proposed development is contrary to policies EDQ 1-3 Environmental and Design Quality Policies as the appropriate junction arrangement at this location cannot be adequately achieved creating an unacceptable detrimental impact on road safety. 4. No proposals have been forwarded that will achieve significant and clearly defined additional public benefits in accordance with relevant Scottish Government policy on woodland removal. Where woodland is removed, compensatory planting will most likely be expected to be delivered. The application is therefore not supported by NPF4 policy 6. 5. The applicant has not fully addressed technical issues in relation to the proposed development, namely it has not been demonstrated that the development can be undertaken without adverse impact on European Protected Species (bats) nor has it been demonstrated that the issue of noise has been suitably addressed in terms of noise from the nearby A80 but also that arising from the established boarding kennels to the north east of the site. As such the development is contrary to policies EDQ 1-3 Environmental and Design Quality Policies. Background Papers: Consultation Responses: NLC Traffic & Transportation dated 10th Feb 2023 NLC Education dated 19th Sept 2023 NLC Environmental Health (including Pollution Control) dated NLC Greenspace dated 20th Feb, 31st March and 5th Sept 2023 NLC Housing Strategy 24th Jan 2023 NLC Play provision 4th April 2023 Archaeological Services dated 17th Jan 2023 Historic Environment Scotland dated 20th Jan 2023 Transport Scotland dated 18th Jan 2023 Contact Information: Mrs Kirsten Devlin at esplanning@northlan.gov.uk or 01236 632500 Report Date: 2nd October 2023 Page 22 of 146
Page 23
APPLICATION NO. 22/01493/PPP REPORT 1. Site Description 1.1 The site is located south of Bedlay Castle, Moodiesburn, along the northern extent of the A80 Cumbernauld Road, immediately adjacent to the northern carriageway of Cumbernauld Road (A80) linking Moodiesburn to Chryston. It is characterised woodland dispersed residential properties and agricultural farmland. The southern boundary is formed by what would appear to be the stone estate boundary wall for Bedlay Castle beyond which is the A80. To the north and east of the development site are two residential properties associated with Bedley Castle and gardens. A third residential property lies adjacent to the site boundary (former gate lodge) situated at the southwest corner. To the west of the development is the Bothlan Burn which runs from the south at Gartcosh to the Luggie water in the north. 2. Proposed Development 2.1 Planning permission in principle is being sought for residential development on the eastern periphery of Chryston. An indicative layout and access point has been provided which proposes 12 dwellings within a landscaped setting split between 6 Detached dwellings and 6 Cottage flats. There is what appears to be a shared access from the A80 that the applicant includes within the application site and indicates they have control over. However, a new and separate access is proposed to serve the development site straight form the A80. 2.2 While some design details have been provided in the supporting information, this has been to assist assessment of the principle of development. Matters of internal layout and design of the site would still be subject to a further detailed planning application. 3. Applicant’s Supporting Information 3.1 The applicant has submitted the following information (along with some resultant follow-up submissions) in support of their application: • Design & Access Statement • Preliminary Ecological Appraisal • Ground investigation Report (including Coal Mining Risk Assessment) • Assessment of appropriateness • Preliminary bat roost assessment and bat roost potential report. • Flood Risk Assessment • Protected species survey (Bats) • Preliminary roost assessment (Bats) • Aboricultural impact assessment 4. Site History 4.1 There are no previous applications that are directly associated with the application site. 5. Development Plan 5.1 The Development Plan now consists of the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan and the National Planning Framework 4 (NPF 4). Upon its adoption on the 13th February 2023, National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) became part of the statutory ‘Development Plan’. It supersedes both Scottish Planning Policy (2014) and the Clydeplan Strategic Development Plan (2017). As a result, the Development Plan in respect of this site now comprises NPF4 (2023) and The North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (adopted 2022). On 8th February 2023, the Chief Planner for Scotland published Transitionary Arrangements Guidance which set out further details regarding how NPF4 should be applied. This confirmed that adopted Local Development Plans will continue to be part of the development plan. In circumstances such as North Lanarkshire’s, where the Local Development Plan has been adopted prior to publication of NPF4, legislation Page 23 of 146
Page 24
states that in the event of any incompatibility between a provision of NPF4 and a provision of an LDP, whichever of them is the later in date is to prevail. Accordingly, the proposed development requires to be assessed against the provisions and policies of both NPF4 and The North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan. 5.2 When assessing this proposal for a residential development it is considered that the following NPF 4 Policies are of particular relevance: National Planning Framework (NPF) 4 5.3 NPF4 policy 8 Greenbelt: This policy seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate compact urban growth and use the land around our towns and cities sustainably and to ensure the following outcomes: • Development is directed to the right locations, urban density is increased and unsustainable growth is prevented. • The character, landscape, natural setting and identity of settlements is protected and enhanced. • Nature networks are supported and land is managed to help tackle climate change. 5.4 NPF4 policy 13 Sustainable Transport To encourage, promote and facilitate developments that prioritise walking, wheeling, cycling and public transport for everyday travel and reduce the need to travel unsustainably. 5.5 NPF4 policy 14 Design, Quality and Place This policy seeks to ensure that developments are of a good design that are not detrimental to the amenity of surrounding area and are consistent with the 6 qualities of successful places – Healthy, Pleasant, Connected, Distinctive, Sustainable and Adaptable. 5.6 NPF 4 policy 15 - Local Living and 20 Minute Neighbourhoods This policy sets out that to establish this goal consideration will be given to existing settlement pattern, and the level and quality of interconnectivity of the proposed development with the surrounding area. 5.7 NPF 4 policy 16 - Quality Homes This policy supports new homes on land allocated for housing in Local Development Plans and sets out various requirements including, and not limited, to meeting local housing requirements, providing or enhancing local infrastructure, facilities or services and improving the residential amenity of the surrounding area. North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (NLLDP) 5.8 The following policies are relevant within the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan: • PP4 Greenbelt • AD4 Amount of Development • PROM LOC3 Housing Development Sites • C1 - Contributions to infrastructure • EDQ 1, 2, 3 assess the Environmental and Design Qualities 5.9 PP4 Greenbelt and AD4 Amount of Development This policy sets out that the council seeks to support developments for agriculture, forestry, recreation, or developments that need a non-urban location. The purpose of the Green Belt is to protect the setting of communities, support regeneration by directing growth to urban areas, Page 24 of 146
Page 25
protect natural assets and provide a high-quality environment. Policy AD4 requires that housing proposals support a Green Belt appropriate use. 5.10 PROM LOC3 Housing Development Sites This policy sets out that the council will provide an effective housing land supply. The policy sets out that sites that promoted as this will be brought forward through consideration of applications for planning permission. In the event of a shortfall in the five-year effective Housing Land Supply being demonstrated (by local authority area and/or Housing Sub-Market Areas), both brownfield and greenfield sites may be granted planning permission where it is demonstrated that the following criteria are satisfied: • the development will help to remedy the shortfall identified. • the development will contribute to sustainable development. • the development will be in keeping with the character of the settlement and the local area. • the development will not undermine Green Belt objectives; and, • any additional infrastructure required as a result of the development is either committed or to be funded by the developer. 5.11 CI Contributions to Infrastructure This policy sets out that the council will seek developer contributions for new developments that individually or cumulatively generate a requirement for new or enhanced services or infrastructure in respect of Affordable Housing, Education, Transport and Green Infrastructure, Amenity Space and Play. 5.12 Environmental and Design Quality Policies EDQ 1 – Site Appraisal EDQ 2 – Specific Features for Consideration EDQ 3 – Quality of Development These three polices consider the creation of a successful place or enhance existing places by integrating successfully into the local area and avoiding harm to neighbouring amenity. To do this a range of criteria is listed within these polices which includes amongst other things aspects of design, massing, materials, topography and aspects to protect the existing urban area and its specific characteristics, assets and attributes. They consider hazardous zones, utilities infrastructure and management areas and look to promote biodiversity and the environment whilst meeting the challenges of the climate change via suitable and safe access for all users to promote sustainable public travel or for example the provision of electrical charge points where the car is still a requirement. 6. Consultations 6.1 The following consultation responses have been received in respect of the application. NLC Traffic and Transportation recommended that the application be refused on Road safety grounds providing the following reasoning: a) The proposed development would take access off the A80, which in this location is a local distributor dual carriageway with a central grassed area, barrier and speed limit of 50mph. It is not appropriate for a new residential development to take access via a standard major / minor type junction arrangement at this location. There is little or no scope to provide the appropriate junction arrangement at this location. The proposed site access is approximately 55m to the east of the end of the merge where the A752 joins the A80. A proposed taper for left turns into new access appears to start within approximately 5m of the end of the existing merge. The proposed access is located too close to the existing merge. This would create a major road safety issue due to inadequate space for lane change manoeuvres for drivers exiting and merge and drivers entering the development. Page 25 of 146
Page 26
b) The proposed access would permit all movements which would require creating an opening within the existing central reserve. This would result in vehicles exiting the site to turn right crossing two lanes of eastbound traffic in order to join two lanes of west bound traffic, all of which is travelling at 50mph. This would create a major road safety issue. c) Even if the access were to operate under a left-in / left-out arrangement, points 1a) and 1b) would still apply NLC Greenspace Advise that the site lies within Moodiesburn Glen/ Bothlin Burn Bedlay Castle a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). They comment that SINCs are protected under PROT A POLICY Natural Environment and Green Network Assets and that planning permission will only be granted for proposals potentially affecting Local Sites if it can be 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. In terms of biodiversity, Greenspace Development requested further information in order to determine what impact the development will have on the SINC. Additional information was also sought in relation to protected species (bats) and as the SINC woodland is known to be home to bluebell (Hyacinthoides non-scripta). Bluebell is a Scottish and Local biodiversity action plan species. A further survey for bluebells during the growing season is needed. Green Space Development (Forestry and Access Manger) suggests that there should be a buffer of 5m from the development and woodland that would extend from either Root Protection Areas or drip line of existing trees – whichever is the greatest from the stem of the trees. Within the buffer zone, no ground works of any kind should take place. This is recommended as a planning condition should members be minded to approve the application. In view of the above comments, a further report was provided by the applicant. Namely a Nocturnal Bat Survey was undertaken and the following comments were received on 5th September 2023 from Green Space. Bats A nocturnal bat survey was undertaken in May and June 2023 to update existing information on the presence of roosting bats within the development footprint. One tree (T4) a Horse Chestnut was found to have to have a single summer non-breeding roost (Soprano pipistrelle bat). Commuting and Foraging A total of 5 species of bat were recorded during the nocturnal surveys. However as foraging and commuting surveys were not undertaken full details cannot be accessed. The survey report states that: Further survey work will be required to identify the activity levels of foraging and commuting bats within the site as well as species type to implement compensation and mitigation measures as appropriate. Further data will provide suitable evidence to compile a biodiversity enhancement plan for the safeguarding of regionally important species such as Noctule bat. As a consequence, the residual effect post-mitigation is currently (unknown). Greenspace Development also request that activity surveys are carried out to investigate potential adverse impacts to commuting and foraging. Surveys should be spread out so as to cover the early, mid and late part of the survey season. Greenspace Development also recommends automated surveys are carried out. Recommended survey effort, as stated in Bat Conservation Trust’s Bat Surveys – Good Practice Guidelines, must be followed. Page 26 of 146
Page 27
All mitigation and recommendations within: Table 6.1. Requirements and Recommendations for mitigating effects on identified ecological receptors must be taken forward. The applicant was reluctant to undertake a Bluebell Survey as requested by Greenspace on the basis that from their reading the legislation it appears Bluebells are only actually legally protected from being dug up and sold, which is not the case here. As the impact of the development on European protected species (bats) has not been fully addressed and this fact is reflected in the reasons for refusal. If members were minded to approve planning permission in principle the application would need to be continued to allow this matter to be fully addressed. Archaeology Although there the application does not have any designation it has been indicated that the proposed development has the potential to damage previously unknown archaeological remains and as such a condition should be placed on any approval requiring that a written scheme of investigation should be submitted for approval and carried out prior to the commencement of the development on the site should members be minded to approve. Historic Environment Scotland (HES) do not object in principle to the proposed development of houses within land to the south of Category A listed Bedlay Castle. They comment that if minded to approve members may wish to consider, as part of any planning conditions, requiring additional planting to the north shelterbelt to reinforce that screening. It is HES view is that the proposals do not raise historic environment issues of national significance and therefore they do not object. However, they advise that decision not to object should not be taken as our support for the proposals. This application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy on development affecting the historic environment, together with related policy guidance. Transport Scotland do not propose against the granting of permission. Local Housing Strategy comments that the Council’s Affordable Housing Policy seeks provision of a proportion of affordable housing in the Cumbernauld Sub- Market Area as follows: • On sites capable of accommodating 25 or more dwellings, the developer will normally be required to make on-site provision for 20% affordable dwellings integrated into the proposed development. • For sites with a capacity of 5 to 24 units, a commuted sum equivalent to provision of 20% affordable housing will be required; and • On-site provision means dwellings or serviced and accessible land within a housing development are transferred or sold, taking account of land value for affordable housing, to an appropriate social housing provider. This should generally be a Registered Social Landlord (housing association) or North Lanarkshire Council, for development at an end use value for affordable housing. In this instance, where site capacity is indicated as circa. 9 units, LHS preference is for the affordable housing requirement to be met by way of a commuted sum payment, equivalent to the provision of serviced land for 1 affordable housing unit (i.e., 20%). We would recommend the Applicant makes contact with the New Supply team to confirm the proposed affordable housing contribution. Members are advised that if minded to approve this application for permission in principle a planning condition on this matter would be required. NLC Play Services: For all developments comprising 30 dwellings or more, there is a requirement for on-site play provision or alternately a contribution from the developer towards local off-site play provision. As this development consists of 12 dwellings, there is no requirement for play provision. Page 27 of 146
Page 28
NLC Education: comments that the proposed development is situated within the catchment areas of Chryston Primary and St Barbara’s’ Primary schools. Pupils from these schools transfer to Our Lady’s High School, Cumbernauld, and Chryston High schools for secondary provision. The schools in the local area are experiencing capacity issues and any additional house building in the area will add to the pressures in the local school estate. Agreement is in place for a new build school to replace the current Chryston Primary school alongside increases to the capacities of St Barbara’s Primary school and Chryston High school. In order to help mitigate the impact of this proposed development on the local school estate the Service requests a developer contribution of £115,410.71. The contribution will help deal with the impact on educational facilities in the area. The contribution calculation is based on the cost of extending provision and proportionately distributed by the anticipated pupil yield per unit. NLC Education clarified that this cost was derived from an assessment of 12 units and so averaging this out the contribution per dwelling is in the order of £9617.56. The applicant has confirmed that if planning permission were to be granted they would be willing to meet the required contribution and that this would be achieved by a S75 legal agreement. If members were minded to grant planning permission in principle then permission would not be issued until a legal agreement had been concluded. NLC Protective Services Advise that the applicant would have to provide a noise impact assessment for the proposed development, for the effect of the road noise. Given the close proximity of an established boarding kennels there are also ‘agent of change’ implications here, and a thorough noise impact assessment would have to be undertaken and reviewed in the normal course of things. It is also their understanding that we don’t condition outstanding noise considerations ahead of a likely positive planning decision, due to the implications that such a material consideration can then have further down the line (i.e. it should all be sorted out up front in such cases). Notwithstanding, in this case that the application is being recommended for refusal, we made the applicant aware of the need for a noise assessment in the event that they wished to try and resolve this technical matte. They confirmed that they wanted the application determined based on the information submitted. Accordingly, the fact that noise, which is a material planning consideration, has not been addressed is reflected in the reasons for refusal. If members were minded to approve planning permission in principle, then the application would need to be continued to allow this matter to be fully addressed. 7. Representations 7.1 Following the carrying out of the statutory notification and press advert 82 letters of representation were received within the statutory period. These comments which included submissions from Scotland’s Garden Landscape Heritage, Gillian MacKay MSP and Councillor McLaren are summarised as follows: Planning policy & guidance a) The application is contrary to Local Development plan policy. As has been previously acknowledged by North Lanarkshire Council via its LDP 2022, the preservation of natural green corridors is of strategic and local importance and the preservation of outdoor spaces is a necessity. There are more than adequate proposed sites for new housing listed within the Local Area plan, some reasonably local to this site. Bedlay is not one of them and so the proposal is in breach of the local area plan. b) The development fails to comply with Scottish Planning Principle. c) The site impacts on a Historic Garden and Design Landscape Listing (as noted on the Local Plan 2005) and also by the Garden Society has 'disappeared' protecting the setting of the Castle. d) The council should consider carefully their duty of care to their constituents and the environment. As per their Environment Strategy: https://www.northlanarkshire.gov.uk/your- Page 28 of 146
Page 29
council/council-strategies-and-plans/council-strategies/environment-strategy. A key focus is "Improving the health and wellbeing of our communities". e) The development would be in conflict with Planning Advice Notice 65 and government guidance which instructs on the value of open space. Tree preservation order, trees and ecological & geological designation a) The Impact on protected species within site and surrounding environments should be considered. It is the responsibility of the Council to protect based on EU directive for the sizeable Bat population and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Most notable are the presence and obvious habitation of Water Voles, Bats and Badgers. Surveys should be carried out for the site on Bat species, per current legislative framework and guidance around EPS to planning authorities. As EPS have been observed/evidenced in the site, then the status of the species and the effect of the development on the species must be confirmed, before determining a planning application. It is also clear from the Scottish Natural Heritage guidance, that suspensive conditions are also not allowed in the case of EPS. This in practice means that planning authorities are not able to approve a development 'subject to Bat Surveys', and any developments that have these suspensive conditions should be returned to the relevant planning authority. This confirms my previous statement that the facts around EPS have to be determined before a planning decision and that this application is therefore non-compliant with legislation and guidance as it currently stands as no specific Bat survey has been presented. b) Deeds to the land under burden 4: The tree preservation order no.17 by county council of county of Lanark under town and county planning (Scotland) Act 1947 recorded G.R.S. (Glasgow) 23 march 1960, contains conditions affecting trees and groups of trees (including prohibitions against cutting down, topping, lopping, wilful destruction &c. thereof). Mature trees and tree clusters would be damaged in the process of building. c) The Tree survey submitted as part of the application significantly devalues the site, insinuating many of the trees are much younger than they are (as the owners of Bedlay Castle can personally detest because they have lived here for many generations). The report claims there are no ancient trees on site solely from a directory search of Woodland Trust. Certain veteran trees on our boundary are still waiting to undergo an assessment by the Woodland Trust to determine whether they should be officially classed as ancient trees. d) The surveyor was denied access to any boundary land owned by Bedlay Castle/Bedlay Kennels, therefore assumptions have been made without ever having stepped foot onto the surrounding grounds to assess in person. We insist an independent assessment should be carried out to re-evaluate the grounds, particularly the trees surrounding the boundary. e) In terms of Geology the rocky crag which this land sits upon are recognised as having significant value and also has the potential to be recognised/reinstated as a site of special scientific interest, having similar properties to the nearby SSSIs at Mollinsburn. f) The field has an avenue of lime trees which are under a Tree Preservation order and form part of an historic woodland landscape. The landscape provides mature habitat for protected species of wildlife and plants. This includes bats, water voles and birds of prey living in close proximity to the Bothlin Burn. g) In terms of wildlife habitat and geology the estate, once carried SSSI status, the removal of this designation without due consultation is also under investigation by adjoining landowners. The sites importance as a green corridor for the reintroduction of pine martins and red squirrels cannot be understated and the ecology report within the application significantly downplays the habitat value and habitat connectivity the site holds. h) No environmental impact assessment has been made of the site despite it covering 3 times the necessary area, and the dramatic partial closure of the Greenbelt gap mentioned in point 2, adding to the urbanisation of the area. i) The 'out of season' assessment on local flora and fauna leaves unreasonable gaps in the ability to gauge the full impact of the development. j) A working construction site may draw wildlife into a dangerous territory. Page 29 of 146
Page 30
Road safety a) The proposed development would create a dangerous junction situated at a point where cars have reached maximum acceleration to join the dual carriageway. This road layout is already known for fatalities without adding further dangerous and ill-thought-out junctions. In the past, numerous local dogs and a person on a bike have been killed on this section of road, not to mention the numerous car accidents that occur here on a frequent basis simply from cars leaving or entering the carriageway to enter Chryston on the already pre-existing road. The proposed junction to be added here would be reckless, it would cause cars to break and stop at the fastest point of the carriageway - and even if the plans were amended by the developers to add a deceleration lane to allow for safe breaking to leave the carriageway and enter the new development, this would be impossible to implement in line with DMRB guidelines because there is inadequate space to build a suitable length deacceleration lane whilst ensuring adequate space between the acceleration lane- unless more of the historic wall and trees protected by the tree preservation order were to be removed to accommodate a deceleration lane. In doing that, not only will it damage the protected historical features and ecology of the site, but it would compromise the one and only well-used public footpath connecting Chryston to Moodiesburn. Thus, putting more adults and children, particularly children walking themselves to and from school, at risk of being hurt or killed by vehicles at an already dangerous area of road, and that's without the added dangers of increased traffic, cars breaking and turning in, and reduced footpath space (if any would be left at all) beside this proposed site. b) More detail is needed with regard to matters pertaining to Roads/Traffic, Public Transport. Housing supply in the local area and Loss of identity of existing settlement a) The communities of Moodiesburn and Chryston have already lost significant and irredeemable quantity and quality of greenspace to private housing developments of tenure types unsuitable for local people, under the place principle these greenspace losses have reduced place value and led to detriments of social health and community wellbeing. b) The construction of so few houses on such a small site does not justify the destruction of the historic environment around the listed buildings adjacent to the site, indeed it also detracts from the environmental/historic context of Chryston Village itself and the positive psychosocial effects on the local community of having access to open space in the area. Impact on local infrastructure a) More building in the area is just adding to the detrimental effect that all the recent development is already having on the health and well-being of the residents in this area. The area is already overrun with families and children with no space in schools or doctors or dentist surgeries. How is building MORE houses going to solve it. The Muirhead, Chryston and Moodiesburn communities are already well overpopulated in terms of local council services: the schools are over capacity (the new Chryston school being built on Lanrig Road will only cover what they were already over limit for and does not take into account new house builds such as this proposed housing plan); the GP surgeries cannot take any more registered patients; most of the dog waste bins in the area were removed months ago due to a lack of council funds for emptying them; public transport in the area is scarce and unreliable, just to name a few of the many issues the community has faced. All because of new and destructive housing developments being built over the years. The local amenities, e.g. doctors/schools/dentists in Chryston/Moodiesburn, are already at full capacity and trying to get an appointment is only getting harder and harder as more people move into to the area into new development. b) There should be a duty of care that favours existing residents and prioritises the improvement of these services before they are made worse by adding further houses and strain. There are already several new developments underway in Stepps, Moodiesburn, Chryston and Gartcosh for new houses in the area so why are 6 more detached houses justified? The primary school is already over-subscribed before it's even finished being built due to the overpopulation of new builds and lack of suitable amenities and infrastructure. Page 30 of 146
Page 31
c) The wildlife corridor / Strathkelvin Walkway is used for recreational pursuits within a countryside setting. d) Public transport in the area is very poor, Stepps and Chryston cannot cope with any more developments due to its lack of amenities in the form of shops, schools and pharmacies. We reached capacity long ago and this development with further ruin the once small towns. Planning procedure a) Lack of attention to the planning process by the developer, specifically lack of notification to neighbours it would directly affect. Bedlay Castle did not receive formal notification of these proposals. Failure to inform neighbours within site boundary. Bedlay Castle did not receive Near Neighbour Notification this is a Breach of Planning Law. Advised we are not within 20 metre boundary and would see press advert. Drainage a) There is insufficiency in the information provided around sustainable drainage and the impact of the development on the Bothlin Burn whose water whose water has been recognised as being intrinsic to the recovery of freshwater habitat and riparian zone for the wider Kelvin tributaries catchment. Pollution a) The development would lead to increased noise, disturbance and light pollution which would impact on wildlife in the area, in particular nocturnal wildlife. b) Traffic generation - Increased volume of traffic, resulting in more congestion and air pollution c) increased run-off contributing to risk of flooding. d) Housing construction alters nutritional and biogeochemical cycles, enhances impervious surfaces as well as the risk of fire and spreading pollutants. e) Wastewater disposal and proximity to the Bothlin Burn. The plan shows that there is an intention to have "sustainable drainage systems" in front of the houses. The closest of these is only 80 metres from the burn. There appears to be little detail provided to NLC explaining the methodology and safety of the water disposal system. Advice from SEPA ought to have been obtained in this regard. Although the burn is considered to be within the "buffer zone" no attempt has been made to carry out a wildlife survey and an impact assessment as to the effect on the Bothlin Burn of these drainage systems. Are there, in fact, water voles? Bothlin Burn, another protected site, at risk of water pollution. Impact on local businesses a) Our dog day care business is licensed by North Lanarkshire Council to care for up to 50 dogs per day. Our dogs have accessed our secure grounds all the way up to the boundary fence of the proposed site (less than 20m away from the proposed new build houses & gardens). With this number of dogs on site, it should be expected that we generate a great deal of noise - any buyers of these proposed houses would experience the frustration of living next door to this noise. This would not benefit the future homeowners, nor does it benefit our business. This would be extremely stressful for both parties. Therefore, again, further consideration should be made in line with the 'Agent of Change' Principle Introduced by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019. Built Heritage (Archaeology) a) Despite being in close proximity to 3 historic and listed buildings, no archaeological assessment of the site has been made. Page 31 of 146
Page 32
(Listed building) b) The site is near historic A listed castle and B listed Garden house/estate offices. The creation of modern housing would taint the visual and physical qualities of the already built structures. This is an unnecessary development which encroaches on the Northern Corridor's most important cultural and historical asset, the Bedlay Estate and its environs. Setting- matters of archaeology, heritage & the sense of place of Bedlay Castle c) What is clear upon closer examination is that the area immediately to the south of the castle is shown surrounded by a red line, indicating that it was walled, potentially the location of the formal walled garden area. Most of the houses shown on the application fall into this area, which compromises the sense of place of Bedlay castle. attention should be taken to the 19th century mausoleum of James Campbell of Petershill which stood "in a clump of trees...in the lawn" that could conceivably lie within the area proposed for development. Overall, from a historical perspective, the development of the policies of the castle into housing should be avoided since it would detract from the setting of the locally important castle. No proper consideration has been given by the developer with regard to the historic character and sense of place of the landscape around the castle. d) Communities separated by the greenbelt are gradually closing together with lose of identity, this must be protected. The walkway will increase in significance as the seven lochs project is developed with its recreational link and opportunities for the historical / nature/educational use of this area. e) During the 16/17 century the Boyd family built a mausoleum which stood until the 1800s on the fields that are being put forward for housing. There is a pillar in the field marking where the mausoleum once sat. Local history should not be erased for quick profit. f) Scotland’s Garden and Landscape Heritage consider that the proposal will cause an unacceptable level of harm to this locally significant historic designed landscape as a result of irreversible development in the historic parkland, removal of established tree cover, the creation of a new access damaging the southern perimeter wall and potential detrimental visual impact on Category A-Listed Bedlay Castle. Formal designations and policy a) Recent examinations by the DPEA have identified no shortage of available land for housing within the Northern Corridor or indeed within the wider Cumbernauld Sub Housing Market Area. b) The site proposed lies within an area recognised in the 2005 local development plan as being designated Historical Garden and Designed Landscape. The removal of this designation is currently under investigation. c) The site contains architectural monuments and a Mausoleum, which as yet have not been fully investigated by the relevant authorities, although plans are already underway to rectify this and also to have areas of the local estate if possible, added to the Ancient Woodland inventory. d) Ancient semi-natural woodland is an irreplaceable resource and, along with other woodlands, hedgerows and individual trees, especially veteran trees of high nature conservation and landscape value, should be protected from adverse impacts resulting from development. Scottish Planning Policy on Ancient Woodland source: Nature.scot Miscellaneous a) Development denies carbon footprint for financial gains. b) Development would set a precedent against approved NLC greenbelt policy allowing other applications to argue a case. c) Water tables and wind direction may adversely affect the established trees protected by TPO. d) The ecology report submitted with the proposal contains significant deviations from the Ecology report for the larger parcel of land adjoining which was submitted at the call for Page 32 of 146
Page 33
sites stage and the council will have records of this as the developer submitted the report and call for sites’ submission as an objection to the Main Issues Report. Comparing the two and noting the significant redactions indicates the requirement for an independent survey to protect this vital habitat. e) Having looked at the constraints why has this application even being considered. f) The DPEA have identified other available land, why is this not being utilised? g) There is no benefit to more housing in an already overwhelmed area, especially the building of 6 luxury detached houses that will sell for more than the average working person can afford in this area. There is no shortage of luxury homes in North Lanarkshire the community would benefit from more amenities instead. h) Would it not be a great idea if you all took a drive through North Lanarkshire to see if you can count the many potholes on our roads and side roads and possibly use some cash to sort that mess out. i) Destruction and upheaval, on the roads. We have had enough of temporary lights, roadworks etc. j) There are no facilities similar to the Tryst or Broadwood for residents of Moodiesburn. 8. Planning Assessment 8.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Subject to suitable restrictions on the extent and nature of the development, it is considered that the proposal raises no issues of a strategic nature. The Development Plan comprises the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (NLLDP) and the National Planning Framework 4 (NPF 4) with NPF prevailing over any NLLDP policies that are incompatible with its aims and objectives. 8.2 National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4): The introduction of NPF4 in February 2023 requires that these policies be taken into account in assessing all developments. The most appropriate of these are discussed below. 8.3 NPF4 policy 8 Greenbelt This policy seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate compact urban growth and use the land around our towns and cities sustainably based on the compact city model. The NPF4 requirements for development are compatible with that of the local development plan which requires greenbelt development of a residential nature be for the use of someone employed in the immediate vicinity or that there is the reuse of an existing structure. Neither of which is applicable in this case. 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. Page 33 of 146
Page 34
• 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 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 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 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. The applicant’s supporting information comments that the site is part of the Bedlay castle estate and therefore represents an intensification of an existing residential use. No commentary is provided on the principle policy Green Belt where the current use is not residential. The application therefore represents a residential development in the green belt which does not comply in any respect to the above policy criteria. 8.4 NPF4 policy 13 Sustainable Transport To encourage, promote and facilitate developments that prioritise walking, wheeling, cycling and public transport for everyday travel and reduce the need to travel unsustainably. This development does not directly promote sustainable transport and no supporting information has been submitted evidencing that it is located on an established bus route with the nearest rail station being Stepps and therefore not within acceptable walking distance. It would therefore appear that this development is entirely dependent on private vehicles. NPF Policy 6 Forestry, woodland and trees a) Development proposals that enhance, expand and improve woodland and tree cover will be supported. b) Development proposals will not be supported where they will result in: • Any loss of ancient woodlands, ancient and veteran trees, or adverse impact on their ecological condition; • Adverse impacts on native woodlands, hedgerows and individual trees of high biodiversity value, or identified for protection in the Forestry and Woodland Strategy; • Fragmenting or severing woodland habitats, unless appropriate mitigation measures are identified and implemented in line with the mitigation hierarchy; • Conflict with Restocking Direction, Remedial Notice or Registered Notice to Comply issued by Scottish Forestry. c) Development proposals involving woodland removal will only be supported where they will achieve significant and clearly defined additional public benefits in accordance with relevant Scottish Government policy on woodland removal. Where woodland is removed, compensatory planting will most likely be expected to be delivered. d) Development proposals on sites which include an area of existing woodland or land identified in the Forestry and Woodland Strategy as being suitable for woodland creation will only be supported where the enhancement and improvement of woodlands and the planting of new trees on the site (in accordance with the Forestry and Woodland Strategy) are integrated into the design. No proposals have been forwarded that will achieve significant and clearly defined additional public benefits in accordance with relevant Scottish Government policy on woodland removal. Page 34 of 146
Page 35
Where woodland is removed, compensatory planting will most likely be expected to be delivered. The application is therefore not supported by NPF4 policy 6. 8.5 NPF4 policy 14 Design, Quality and Place This policy seeks to ensure that developments are of a good design that are not detrimental to the amenity of surrounding area and are consistent with the 6 qualities of successful places – Healthy, Pleasant, Connected, Distinctive, Sustainable and Adaptable The site currently makes a positive impact on the green belt adding considerable character to the area and a clear and robust separation of the settlements of Chryston and Moodiesburn. As indicated above it is considered that the natural boundary of the urban area is the settlement edge. Policy 14 also looks to ensure that the residents within a development have a pleasant place to live. Locations such as this could provide this however in this instance the quality of the greenbelt in this location also requires to be given due consideration. It is considered that the loss of this area would be detrimental to the buffer that this greenbelt provides between two distinct settlements separated by established woodland and a riparian corridor. 8.6 NPF 4 policy 15 - Local Living and 20 Minute Neighbourhoods This policy sets out that to establish this goal consideration will be given to existing settlement pattern, and the level and quality of interconnectivity of the proposed development with the surrounding area. In respect of proximity to local services it should be noted that the entrance to the site is approx. 0.77km distant from the edge of Chryston local centre and 1.4km from the shops in Moodiesburn. Access to both would involve walking alongside the A80 for at least part of the way. 8.7 NPF 4 policy 16 - Quality Homes This policy supports new homes allocated on land allocated for housing in Local Development Plans and sets out various requirements including and not limited to meeting local housing requirements, providing or enhancing local infrastructure, facilities or services and improving the residential amenity of the surrounding area. The policy also indicates that new homes on land not allocated for housing in the LDP will only be supported in limited circumstances (see below). As we are dealing with a site not allocated for housing in the NLLDP a very recent appeal decision for a site in West Lothian by the Scottish Ministers (19 July 2023) reference PPA-400- 2118 may be considered relevant (decision subject to an ongoing challenge in the court of session). The Ministers appeal decision was clear that all branches of NPF4 Policy 16 (f) need to be taken into account, not just point (i), full policy 16 (f) states: (f) Development proposals for new homes on land not allocated for housing in the LDP 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. Page 35 of 146
Page 36
In terms of the above policy members should note the following comments: i. There is no agreement on such a timescale. ii. Housing is not consistent with the spatial strategy, set by NLLDP Policy PP4 Green Belt. Neither (i) nor (ii) is met and NPF4 clearly states both have to be met. iii. The 10-year MATHLR set for North Lanarkshire at NPF4 Annex E of 7,350 is comfortably exceeded by the latest 7-year programmed Housing Land Audit, so there is no early delivery of sites that points to this site being appropriate. In addition, to the above it should also be noted that in the recently published Scottish Borders Local Development Plan 2 Report of Examination, in Particular Conclusion 63 adds further clarity on housing land. This states “NPF4 no longer states the need for a five-year effective land supply. All comparisons with that measurement are, therefore, now irrelevant…” 8.8 In conclusion, it is considered that NPF4 offers no support for the development sufficient to lead to a grant of planning permission in principle on this green belt site. Local Development Plan: 8.9 PP4 Greenbelt and AD4 Amount of Development These policies set out that the council seeks to support developments for agriculture, forestry, recreation, or developments that need a non-urban location. 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. Policy AD4 requires that housing proposals support a Green Belt appropriate use. The development under consideration does not require to be situated in a non-urban location, such as forestry, agriculture etc. It is noted that the boundary runs along the edge of the general urban area however should this development go ahead it is considered that detrimental impact on this narrow section of the greenbelt which maintains a robust boundary between Chryston and Moodiesburn. It is therefore considered that the proposed development is contrary to Policy PP4 and AD4. 8.10 PROM LOC3 Housing Development Sites Following on from para 8.7 above, through the West Lothian appeal decision Ministers confirmed the application of housing policy in relation to development on sites that are not designated for a residential use. The decision stated that the West Lothian Local Plan Policy HOU2 was an exceptions policy and has been replaced by NPF4 Policy 16 (f). In terms of how this applies to this application in Chryston, it is considered that PROM LOC 3 (Housing Development Sites) is almost identical in function, purpose and content regarding exceptions as the HOU2 policy in West Lothian. Therefore, this application also needs to be determined using NPF4 Policy 16 (f) and not PROM LOC 3. As indicated above this decision is also subject to ongoing legal challenge through the court of session. Of further relevance to consideration of this matter is Conclusion 63 in the recently published Scottish Borders Local Development Plan 2 Report of Examination. This states “NPF4 no longer states the need for a five-year effective land supply. All comparisons with that measurement are, therefore, now irrelevant…” Notwithstanding the above, prior to the above court of session decision being issued, for information purposes the proposal has been considered against policy for PROM LOC3 from the NLLDP. Policy PROM LOC 3 indicates that through this policy the Council will provide a generous supply of land to maintain a 5 year minimum effective housing land supply. It also indicates that any sites proposed outwith the paramateres of policy PROM LOC 3 will only be supported if they accord with other policies in the plan and policy PP4 (Green belt) is identified. The policy does indicate that, in the event of a shortfall in the 5 year effective land supply being demonstrated, both brown field and green field sites may be granted permission where it is demonstrated that the following criteria have been satisfied: Page 36 of 146
Page 37
a. the development will help to remedy any shortfall identified; Comment: The Council maintains the view that there is no shortfall, and that the current Housing Land Supply position, based on the following considerations, is sufficient. The Council considers that following the Adoption of North Lanarkshire Council’s Local Development Plan (July 2022) and the publication of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF 4, February 2023), the emerging and finalised replacement housing land requirements for each Local Planning Authority have been set and now laid out in Annex E of NPF 4. The Reporter in his examination report of the NLLDP has specifically instructed North Lanarkshire Council (NLC) to review the adequacy of its housing land supply against the finalised MATHLR. NLC’s 10-year Minimum All-Tenure Housing Land Requirement is 7,350 units. NLC’s Finalised 2022 Housing Land Audit is the most up to date position on the Council’s housing land supply and has been extrapolated to 10 years by including the non-effective element of effective sites to 2031. NLC’s 10-year All-Tenure housing land supply, as derived from the 2022 Finalised HLA, is 11,632 units. This is roughly 58% more than NLC’s MATHLR figure, demonstrating that there is sufficient housing land available across the Local Authority area. b. the development will contribute to sustainable development. Comment: The site is adjacent to the urban area and nearby infrastructure, including schools and public transport, however this requires to be balanced against the impact that the proposed development will have on the wider area and the impact on the green belt. The green belt is narrow at this point between the settlements Chryston and Moodiesburn and as such the development would have a significant and adverse impact. c. the development will be in keeping with the character of the settlement and the local area; Comment: the proposal put forward is only in principle and as such only indicative details have been provided for consideration at this point. The information provided does indicate that the development would be relatively low density. Notwithstanding this however the proposal would be at odds with the protection of the character of the green belt through the removal of a section of the green belt and the introduction of contemporary development with the landscape and built heritage of the location. d. the development will not undermine Green Belt objectives Comment: The objectives of the Greenbelt policy is to support uses that require a non- urban location and this is not such a use as housing can be accommodated within the urban area. This is not such a development and as discussed above even this small development would have a large and adverse impact on this narrow section of greenbelt. In terms of coalescence although this development would not join together the two urban areas, it would be a noticeable urban addition and erode this important section of the green belt, with the potential to set a president for future proposals of this nature. e. any additional infrastructure required as a result of the development is either committed or to be funded by the developer Comment: As part of the process of assessment other NLC services have been consulted to gauge the impact of the development on the surrounding community services. In this instance there is a requirement for contributions from the developer has been identified for affordable housing policy compliance and also for education contributions In conclusion with regards to housing need, regardless which policy applies i.e. from NPF4 or the NLLDP there is no support for the development of this important green belt site. Even if Page 37 of 146
Page 38
there was a demonstrated shortage of housing land this development would not provide a meaningful contribution such that it warranted allowing development of this green belt site. 8.11 CI Contributions to Infrastructure NLC Local Housing Supply preference is for the affordable housing requirement to be met by way of a commuted sum payment, equivalent to the provision of serviced land for 1 affordable housing unit (i.e., 20%). They recommend the Applicant makes contact with the New Supply team to confirm the proposed affordable housing contribution. Members are advised that if minded to approve permission in principle an appropriate planning condition would be required. NLC Education: comments that the proposed development is situated within the catchment areas of Chryston Primary and St Barbara’s’ Primary schools. Pupils from these schools transfer to Our Lady’s High School, Cumbernauld, and Chryston High schools for secondary provision. The schools in the local area are experiencing capacity issues and any additional house building in the area will add to the pressures in the local school estate. Agreement is in place for a new build school to replace the current Chryston Primary school alongside increases to the capacities of St Barbara’s Primary school and Chryston High school. In order to help mitigate the impact of this proposed development on the local school estate this Service requests a commuted sum of £115,410.71. intended to mitigate the impact of the development on educational facilities in the area. The contribution calculation is based on the cost of extending provision and proportionately distributed by the anticipated pupil yield per unit. The applicant has been asked whether or not they would be willing to meet the required education developer contribution which averages out at £9617.56 per dwelling and they have confirmed that they would be willing to do so if permission in principle were to be granted. Therefore, should members be minded to approve planning permission in principle, the permission would not be issued until a s75 legal agreement had been concluded which would ensure the required contribution per dwelling is made on submission of any further applications. It is considered that the requirements of this policy could be complied with. 8.12 Environmental and Design Quality Policies EDQ 1 – Site Appraisal EDQ 2 – Specific Features for Consideration EDQ 3 – Quality of Development These three polices look for proposed developments to create a successful place or enhance existing places by integrating successfully into the local area and avoiding harm to neighbouring amenity. To do this a range of criteria is listed within these polices which includes amongst other things aspects of design, massing, materials, topography and aspects to protect the existing urban area and its specific characteristics, assets and attributes. They consider hazardous zones, utilities infrastructure and management areas and look to promote biodiversity and the environment whilst meeting the challenges of the climate change via suitable and safe access for all users to promote sustainable public travel or for example the provision of electrical charge points where the car is still a requirement. a. Establishing a clear vision for the site with design principles which lead to the creation of a distinct, successful place. The application under consideration is in principle and as such a number of the design elements do not require to be provided. Notwithstanding this some information has been provided in order to assess potential impacts by the proposal. This includes the site access with detailed information provided in connection with this element. NLC Traffic and Transportation have provided comments and have indicated that the application should be refused for reasons set out above. b. Providing a safe, pleasant, inclusive, convenient and welcoming development: In referring to NLC Roads comments above it should be noted that a recommendation to refuse the access and junction arrangements on road safety grounds is material. Page 38 of 146
Page 39
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. The detailed design of the dwellings in relation to massing and materials etc has not been provided at this stage and would be part of any future detailed application as required should members be minded to approve this application. That said the location of the proposed development is contrary to the sustainable aims of NPF 4 in promoting compact city model of development. e. Mitigating any likely air quality, noise, or pollution impacts particularly in or adjacent to Air Quality or Noise Management Areas. With the exception of noise matters which have not been resolved no significant issues have been identified as part of the consultation process. f. Ensuring that water body status is protected. The proposed site is located to a watercourse designated as a Site of Interest for Nature Conservation (SINC) which is not under the ownership of the applicant. The site under consideration is not designated as but has the potential to impact the adjacent SINC. The information available has been assessed by NLC Greenspace which indicates that overall, the site itself does not contain any ecology to be preserved. Overall, should members be minded to approve the application conditions on Sustainable urban drainage should be applied in accordance with current SEPA guidance. h. Existing features of Green Network or Historic Environmental interest or Resources, protected under the terms of the Protect Assets Policies, and including features (e.g. traditional stone buildings/structures) identified through the site appraisal required by Policy EDQ 1, will be safeguarded or enhanced. It is accepted that the site is near historic A listed Bedlay Castle and B listed Garden house/estate offices. It is noted that HES acknowledges that the site is likely to have been within the parkland associated with the castle but it no longer forms part of the policies (the site has been sold off separately). It is considered that the development of modern housing in this green belt location would have an adverse impact on the area in general and it is noted that local perception as (evidenced in the letters of objection) is that this would also impact on the setting of these listed buildings. Whilst HES do not share this view, clearly local residents are of the view that the selling off of the application site does not mean that it no longer reads as part of the Parkland associated with the castle. There is some sympathy of this view given that the site is bounded by mature trees and an old estate stone wall. It is view of the planning service that the building of houses on this important green belt site would have an adverse impact on the character of the area as well as undermining the purpose of the green belt. On balance the application does not comply with the provisions of development quality policies above and furthermore there is no support for the development in the policies of the NLLDP that would indicate planning permission in principle should be granted. Assessment of Consultations: 8.13 Potential Contaminated Land A site investigation has been submitted at the principle stage with comments requested from the Council’s protective services. Initial comments may be conditioned should members be minded to approve and along with this if required a remediation strategy would require to be submitted to ensure that the area is suitable for residential use prior to the commencement of development. 8.14 NLC Greenspace In terms of the comments made by NLC Greenspace: a. Appropriate conditions could be placed on any approval to ensure that appropriate measures are undertaken to protect the SINC. b. In addition tree protection replacement measures should also be placed on any approval along with appropriate planting. Page 39 of 146
Page 40
However, it is acknowledged that the applicant has not fully resolved the protected species issues (relating to bats) and this has been reflected in the reasons for refusal Response to Representations: 8.15 In response to the grounds of representation, these are summarised as follows and the respective responses should be noted: Planning policy & guidance a) The development is contrary to the development plan. This is discussed in section 8 of the report. b) Scottish Planning policy has been superseded by National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) as set out in section 8 of this report. c) The environment Strategy is carried in the relevant policies relating to the assessment of this application as set out in section 8 of this report. d) While the impact generally is discussed in relation to setting the application is not covered by a designated landscape policy. Build heritage is discussed in section 8 of the report. e) Planning Advice Notice 65 (planning and open space) is guidance and is taken into consideration where appropriate in the assessment of planning applications. Tree preservation order, trees and ecological & geological designation a) The impact on protected species and habitat is considered in section 6 of this report. b) The entire site is covered by a tree preservation order and would therefore require the submission of an application for tree works or tree removal within the provisions statutory requirements should members be minded to approve the application. If permission in principle were to be granted it would need to be recognised that some protected trees would need to be felled. c) The tree survey submitted is accepted as part of the assessment of this application. There are currently no ancient woodland designations on this site. d) The application supporting information is sufficient in order to determine the setting of the development at the principle application stage. e) There are no geological specific protective designations approved within the site. f) The impact on protected species and habitat is considered in section 6 of this report. g) Should members be minded to approve a screening response under the environmental regulations may be submitted in accordance with the Regulations on environmental impact assessment. h) The submitted ecology report has been accepted and is discussed in section 6 of the report. i) A working construction site will under usual circumstance displace wildlife. Road safety a&b) The access and transportation arrangements are discussed in section 6 of the report. Housing supply in the local area and Loss of identity of existing settlement a) All developments whether allocated sites through the Local Development Plan process or in the case of this proposal are subject to the provisions of the Planning Act which sets out the processes whereby policies are set out for consideration. All developments whether approved by the planning committee or on appeal or refused have been subject to these provisions. In this case policies set out the Council’s position on protecting and supporting development in the Green Belt as the starting point for assessment along with other material considerations. b) The assessment of this application against relevant planning policies on housing supply, green belt etc is set out in section 8 of the report. Page 40 of 146
Page 41
Impact on local infrastructure a&b) The impact on housing land supply is considered through the local plan process and takes account of changes in the local population. The impact on local infrastructure is taken into consideration where sites are allocated in the Local Development Plan. Where sites are unallocated applications are subject to assessment which includes consultation with the Education Service. The expansion of medical provision is principally a matter for those services through the local development plan process. c) The Strathkelvin walkway route follows the John Muir Way from Kirkintilloch, skirting the towns of Milton of Campsie and Lennoxtown and on to Strathblane and lies within the neighbouring local authority area. It is therefore not clear what impact will result from this development. d) Public transport is provided by others Planning procedure a) Given that over 80 objections were received following the notification process the Planning Service is satisfied that the procedure was carried our successfully. Drainage a) The application is in principle, and should members be minded to approve a suitable condition will be attached to and subsequent matters specified application to bring forward a sustainable urban drainage system in line with Scottish Environment Agency guidelines. Pollution a) Should members be minded to approve this application a further detailed application should consider any increased noise, disturbance and light pollution which would impact on wildlife in the area once the final layout has been submitted. The issue of noise has not been fully resolved and this is reflected in the reasons for refusal b) Should members be minded to approve this application a condition covering flood risk assessment based on the final layout will be recommended c) In considering Protective Services guidance the increase in the number of proposed dwellings in the indicative layout would not be significant in terms of air pollution. d) Should members be minded to approve this application a condition covering site investigation and potential ground contamination will be recommended. e) The application is in principle and should members be minded to approve a suitable condition will be attached to and subsequent matters specified application to bring forward a sustainable urban drainage system in line with Scottish Environment Agency guidelines. Impact on local businesses a) The nearby dog day care business for up to 50 dogs per day is an accepted green belt use given the propensity to generate a great deal of noise. Therefore, residents of the proposed houses would experience significant disturbance living next door to this noise. This would represent a significant loss of amenity for future homeowners, as well as impacting on the business. As such both activities are in direct conflict with no identified mitigation in line with the 'Agent of Change' Principle Introduced by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 and are therefore incompatible at this location. The fact that this matter has not been fully resolved in reflected in the reasons for refusal. Built heritage (archaeology) a) Should members be minded to approve the application a planning condition covering potential archaeology is recommended. Page 41 of 146
Page 42
(Listed building) b) It is accepted that the site is near historic A listed castle and B listed Garden house/estate offices. It is noted that HES acknowledges that the site is likely to have been within the parkland associated with the castle but it no longer forms part of the policies (the site has been sold off separately). It is accepted that the development of modern housing in this green belt location would have an adverse impact on the area in general and it is noted that local perception as (evidenced in the letters of objection) is that this would also impact on the setting of these listed buildings. Whilst HES do not share this view, clearly local residents are of the view that the selling off of the application site does not mean that it no longer reads as part of the Parkland associated with the castle. There is some sympathy of this view given that the site is bounded by mature trees and an old estate stone wall. It is view of the planning service that the building of houses on this important green belt site would have an adverse impact on the character of the area as well as undermining the purpose of the green belt. Setting- matters of archaeology, heritage & the sense of place of Bedlay Castle c) It is agreed that the development of this prominent and important green belt land within the former policies of Bedlay Castle is undesirable d) It is accepted that development in the Green belt at this location would have a significant adverse impact and would contribute to coalescence of settlements. e) Should members be minded to approve the application a planning condition covering potential archaeology is recommended. f) Whilst noting HES are not objecting to the development in terms of its impacts on Bedlay Castle as indicated above it is apparent that this view is not shared by the many objectors to the proposed development. It is accepted that the building of houses on this important green belt site would have an undesirable impact on the character of the area Formal designations and policy a) It is agreed that the site is not allocated for housing development. b) The site is currently not currently a designated landscape by Historic Environment Scotland. c) Should members be minded to approve the application a planning condition covering potential archaeology is recommended. Members should note that the record does not indicate the site being an area of Ancient Woodland. d) While trees are protected on this site by Tree Preservation Order Members should note that the record does not indicate the site being an area of Ancient Woodland. Miscellaneous a) Land use planning policy seeks to direct development to sustainable places while considering liveable places and productive places through policies set out in NPF 4. b) All developments should be assessed on the merits of each individual application. c) It is accepted that water tables and wind direction may adversely affect the established trees protected by TPO. d) Both reports are written for different reasons and at differing periods but both cover the required information for the process for which they were intended. e) The Planning Service has a duty to consider all valid planning applications submitted. f) The DPEA have identified other available land as part of the Local Development Plan Process this is an unallocated site. g) The proposed development is not for civic amenities but a residential development in principle. The proposed house type is therefore indicative and subject to market as with all private house building. h) The planning service does not consider road surface repairs over the road network in North Lanarkshire. i) Most development brings a level of temporary traffic disruption in order to implement the development this is usually reasonably managed. Page 42 of 146
Page 43
j) This is a planning application for a residential development which does not consider leisure facilities. 9. Conclusion 9.1 The relevant legislation requires that planning application decisions are made in accordance with the relevant development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case it is recommended that the application be refused for the following reasons: 9.2 The proposal is contrary to the green belt policies contained in NPF4 and the Local Development Plan as it would result in the erosion of a valuable area that helps to define the settlements of Chryston and Moodiesburn, contributing the character of the area. The proposed development does not comply with either of these polices and constitutes an unacceptable form of development within the green belt. The proposal does not comply with the environmental and design quality policies of the local development plan as the arrangements for the access cannot be adequately achieved creating an unacceptable detrimental impact on road safety. Information has not been provided to allow protected species or noise issues to be addressed and resolved. 9.3 If the committee were minded to approve planning in principle the permission would not be issued util a legal agreement covering education contributions has been concluded. Page 43 of 146
Page 44
Application No: 23/00385/FUL Proposed Development: Two semi detached dwellinghouses Site Address: Land South Of Heatheryford Gardens Plains Date Registered: 27th April 2023 Applicant: Mr Alan Wilson Modern Housing Limited 166 Park Street Motherwell ML1 1PF Agent: N/A Application Level: Local Application Contrary to Development Plan: No Ward: 08 Airdrie North Alan Beveridge,Sophia Coyle,Henry Emerson Dunbar,Richard Alan Sullivan, Representations: 13 letter(s) of representation received. Recommendation: Refuse Reasoned Justification: Whilst the proposed residential use of this site would accord with Housing Development Site policy PROM LOC 3 and is in principle an acceptable use within the General Urban Area, it is considered that the proposed scale and layout of the development fails to meet the criteria set out in policy EDQ 3 and would result in the loss of a valuable area of open space. The proposed development would likely have a detrimental impact on traffic and pedestrian safety and on the amenity of neighbouring dwellings and the wider local area. As such, the proposal is contrary to Local Development Plan policies EDQ 3 and General Urban Area PP 3 and on balance it is concluded that planning permission be refused. Page 44 of 146
Page 45
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: 23/00385/FUL Name (of applicant): Mr Alan Wilson Site Address: Land South Of Heatheryford Gardens Plains Development: Two semi detached dwellinghouses Page 45 of 146
Page 46
Recommendation: Refuse for the Following Reasons:- 1. That the proposed development is contrary to policy EDQ 3 in that the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the area, given the proposed loss of an area of open space and that the proposed layout of the development is not in keeping with the design of the wider residential area. 2. That the proposed development is contrary to policy EDQ 3 as the proposed development would likely have a detrimental impact on traffic and pedestrian safety due to the location of the proposed vehicle access and driveway on to a local distributor road. 3. That the proposed development is contrary to policy General Urban Area PP 3 as it fails to comply with all aspects of this policy, specifically the provision that any proposal is required to satisfy the provisions of Policy EDQ 3. As the proposed development is considered contrary to policy EDQ 3, the proposed development fails to comply with policy General Urban Area PP 3. Background Papers: Consultation Responses: The Coal Authority Environmental Health (including Pollution Control) Traffic & Transportation Contact Information: Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact planningenquiry@northlan.gov.uk. Report Date: 14th September 2023 Page 46 of 146
Page 47
APPLICATION NO. 23/00385/FUL REPORT 1. Site Description 1.1 The application site is located within an existing established residential estate, with an area of approximately 585 sqm. The site is located on Heatheryford Gardens, Plains with existing dwellinghouse to the north, south and west. The application site slopes slightly from the northwest and north. 2. Proposed Development 2.1 Planning permission is sought for a two, semi-detached dwellinghouses. Each semi-detached dwellinghouse would be two storey with attic accommodation and will have four bedrooms. A total of seven off street parking spaces is being proposed to be accessed off Heatheryford Gardens. 3. Applicant’s Supporting Information 3.1 The applicant has provided architectural drawings, site section drawing, daylight/sunlight assessment drawings, a Mine Entry Report and further site investigation information as part of this application. 4. Site History 4.1 Planning permission for this site (as part of a wider residential development) was initially granted in 1999 and there have been multiple amendment applications approved since then. The most recent application (22/00960/FUL) for a single dwellinghouse on this site was refused on 7th December 2022. 4.2 Application 22/00960/FUL was refused through delegated powers and was considered to be contrary to policies EDQ 3 (Quality of Development) and PP 3 (General Urban Area) due to the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the area, given the proposed loss of an area of open space and that the proposed layout of the development is not in keeping with the design of the wider residential area. The proposed development was considered likely to have had a detrimental impact on traffic and pedestrian safety due to the location of the proposed vehicle access and driveway being on to a local distributor road. 5. Development Plan 5.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 states that a planning application should be assessed and decided in accordance with the relevant development plan policies unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 5.2 National Planning Framework 4 (NPF 4) has now been adopted and was published on 13th February 2023. NPF4 is now part of the development plan and replaces NPF 3 and Scottish Planning Policy. NPF 4 sets out policies in relation to creating a sustainable place, a liveable place, and a productive place. 5.3 The North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022 (NLLDP) identifies the application site lying within a Housing Development Site under policy PROM LOC 3 and is further designated as part of the General Urban Area under policies PP 3 and AD 3. 5.4 The NLLDP requires that all proposed development be assessed against policies EDQ 1 (Site appraisal) and EDQ 3 (Quality of Development). 6. Consultations 6.1 The Coal Authority has no objections to the proposed development. Page 47 of 146
Page 48
6.2 The council’s Pollution Control Service has advised that conditions relating to the undertaking of site investigation information and any necessary remediation works be attached to any permission. 6.3 The council’s Roads Development Service has advised that the applicant proposes to take direct frontage access from the proposed development site to Heatheryford Gardens via a dropped kerb vehicular footway crossing. Heatheryford Gardens is a local distributor road from which direct frontage access to individual dwellings is not permitted. The Roads Development Service has recommended that this application should be refused on this basis. 7. Representations 7.1 We have received 13 objections during the neighbour notification period and advertisement of this application (including three objections from the same household). Objections from Councillor Beveridge and Councillor Sullivan were also received. These 13 objections can be summarised as follows: • Impact on Heatheryford Gardens, the local distributor road, reducing vehicles safe use of the road • Impacts on pedestrians’ safe use of the existing footways • Impacts caused by parking on Heatheryford Gardens • Possible impacts on emergency vehicles • Increase traffic on already busy road • The additional access would cause unnecessary danger to road users and pedestrians • Loss of expected area of open green space • Impact on neighbouring sunlight/daylight • Impact caused by loss of privacy • Proposed dwellinghouses not in keeping with existing neighbouring dwellings • The proposed dwellinghouses are overly large. • The proposed development represents an overdevelopment of the site • An application for a single dwellinghouse was recently refused 7.2 Other issues were raised; however they are not material planning considerations. These include that there are already issues with speeding on local roads, that there were delays in receiving neighbour notification letters by post and that the applicant’s drawings do not accurately reflect the application site and neighbouring properties. 7.3 All neighbour notification letters are sent via Royal Mail and objector concerns regarding a delay in receiving neighbour notification letters is noted. 7.4 Concerns regarding the accuracy of drawings submitted by the applicant as part of this application is noted. All drawings (and documents) are received in good faith that thye are correct and accurate. We do, however, undertake our own assessment of the proposed development including an assessment of all information submitted. 8. Planning Assessment 8.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires that planning decisions are made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The assessment will therefore identify the development plan policies relevant to the proposal, will make an assessment against these policies and come to a conclusion on which decision (grant or refuse) would accord with them. It will then look at other material considerations to establish if there are any that would suggest a decision different from the one reached in relation to the development plan. National Planning Framework 4 8.2 The National Planning Framework 4 (NPF 4) is a long-term plan for Scotland that sets out where development and infrastructure is needed. NPF 4 sets out policies in relation to creating a sustainable place, a liveable place, and a productive place. Page 48 of 146
Page 49
8.3 It is considered that there is no conflict between the policies and aims of NPF 4 and the policies set out within the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022. There are no NPF 4 policies that would affect or change the local development plan polices in this case. Therefore, the proposal will be assessed under the policies of the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022. North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022 8.4 The application site is designated as a Housing Development Site under policy PROM LOC 3 within the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022. This site is further designated as part of the General Urban Area under policies PP 3 and AD 3 which seek to encouraging development that is in keeping with area with an often primarily residential character. 8.5 Policy PP 3 General Urban Area requires such proposals to be to be assessed against the criteria of EDQ 3 (Quality of Development) which considers issues such as size, materials, and road safety, and which states that proposals must integrate successfully with the surrounding area by avoiding harm to the neighbouring amenity. 8.6 Policy EDQ 1 Site Appraisal requires any development 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. This appraisal addresses matters such as design, massing, topography and transportation aspects. 8.7 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 provide a sustainable, safe, secure, and convenient access to and from the development that makes it easy to move around, and is attractive to pedestrians, cyclists, and people with disabilities. Any development would need to integrate well with public transport, green networks and wider links. The assessment of and (where necessary) the mitigation of pollution impacts is also included within policy EDQ 3. 8.8 With regard to policy PROM LOC 3 Housing Development Sites and policies PP 3 and AD 3 General Urban Area, the proposed development includes two semi-detached dwellinghouses both being two storey with attic accommodation. Private garden ground, seven off street parking spaces with access onto Heatheryford Gardens is also proposed. This proposal would be considered consistent with the site’s designation of being a site for housing development and would generally be considered acceptable in principle within an area which is often primarily residential in character. 8.9 With regard to policy PP 3 and AD 3, the proposed development is located with an existing General Urban Area and will enable an existing vacant site to be developed. Whilst the residential use of land within the General Urban area would be deemed to support the purpose of those places and offer an opportunity to meet the aims of those places, all proposals must satisfy the provision of policy EDQ 3. So, provided the proposal can be assessed positively against EDQ 3 (assessment to follow), the development would be regarded as acceptable for appropriateness under policy PP 3. 8.10 In relation to policies EDQ 1 the applicant has submitted information in relation to their appraisal of the application site including architectural drawings, site section drawing, daylight/sunlight assessment drawings, a Mine Entry Report and further site investigation information as part of this application. 8.11 With regard to policy EDQ 3, the impact of the proposed dwellinghouse on this site will need to be considered. Any proposal would need to comply with policy EDQ 3 in its own right, and also in terms of the proposal achieving full compliance with the abovementioned policy PP 3. 8.12 Previous permission for this site detail this site as an area of open space. It is considered that the removal of this area of open space would be detrimental to the amenity of the wider residential development given the overall lack of such space being available within the wider development. Page 49 of 146
Page 50
8.13 In relation to policy EDQ 3, we consider that the layout of the proposed development is not acceptable as the proposed space around the dwellinghouse does not comply with council guidance. The garden ground proposed is insufficient, with little to no front garden ground being provided. 8.14 The proposed dwellinghouses would essentially be standalone and not part of the linear street pattern which as being used within the wider existing residential development. It is considered that the siting of the proposed development in this location would not be in keeping with the wider layout of the area. 8.15 With regard to the transportation aspects of EDQ 3, the proposed development seeks a vehicle access onto Heatheryford Gardens. The Roads Development Service has recommended that this application be refused due to the proposed direct frontage access to Heatheryford Gardens via a dropped kerb vehicular footway crossing. The Roads Development Services has advised that Heatheryford Gardens is a local distributor road from which direct frontage access to individual dwellings is not permitted. Furthermore, there are no other properties taking direct frontage access to this road along its length. 8.16 As EDQ 3 requires developments to have sustainable access for cars where required, to be safe for all road users, and for appropriate parking or traffic calming being well located and integrated, it is considered that the proposed development would likely have a detrimental impact on traffic and pedestrian safety due to the location of the proposed vehicle access onto Heatheryford Gardens. It is further considered that given that the proposed vehicle access leads onto Heatheryford Gardens, local distributor road and its close proximity of the junction of Gartmorn Grove and Heatheryford Gardens, the proposed vehicle access is not well located and integrated. 8.17 Although the proposed development may be consistent with policies PROM LOC 3, PP 3, AD 3, and EDQ 1 of the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022, given lack of usable garden ground, the lack of integration with the existing wider residential development and potential impact of local roads including Heatheryford Gardens, the proposed development would be contrary to policy EDQ 3 of the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022. On this basis a refusal would be in accordance with the development plan and so, in terms of section 25, a refusal should be the decision unless there are material considerations that suggest a different decision. 8.18 As for other material considerations, thirteen objections during the neighbour notification period and advertisement of this application (including three objections from the same household) have been received. Objections from Councillor Beveridge and Councillor Sullivan were also received. A summary of all objections is detailed above. 8.19 The objections received primarily related to impacts on local roads and footways, impact of daylight/sunlight of neighbouring properties, impact on privacy of neighbouring properties, impacts on the amenity of the site and the wider existing residential area, the over development of the site and the loss of a previously approved area of open space. 8.20 Our assessment with regard to the transportation issues and design concerns raised by objectors and impacts on planning policy are detailed above. 8.21 With regards to privacy concerns, it is noted that the proposed dwellinghouses will be higher than the existing dwellinghouses on Dalcross Way with properties on Brodie Way being at a higher level than that of the application site. The potential overlooking onto properties on Dalcross Way would be limited given the lack of windows to the southern (side) elevation of the semi-detached dwellinghouses. There may be some overlooking due to the level changes between these properties however it would not be so significant to warrant a refusal in this case. The distance between the existing windows to the nearest property on Brodie Way is at least 25m, which is significantly higher than the minimally acceptable distance of 18m. 8.22 In relation to daylight/sunlight concerns which were specifically raised regarding 1 Brodie Way and 6 Dalcross Way, the applicant has provided daylight/sunlight assessment drawings H18- 02A and H18-22A. Page 50 of 146
Page 51
8.23 The Building Research Establishment’s guide ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight’ sets out empirical guidelines and methods for assessing natural light. The 25-degree test is to establish the effect a proposed building will have on existing properties with regard to obstructing daylight to existing windows/rooms. If the whole of the proposed development falls below a 25-degree line drawn from the centre of the lowest rear window of the property facing each plot, the development is not considered to have a substantial impact on daylight of that neighbouring property 8.24 For 6 Dalcross Way which is located to the south/south east of the application site, we consider the that impact of the daylight/sunlight on this neighbouring property could be impacted by the proposed dwellinghouses. Drawing H18-22A shows that a significant proportion of the proposed dwellinghouses is above the 25-degree line shown. 8.25 For 1 Brodie Way given the distance between the proposed dwellinghouse and the existing property, it is considered that there would not be a significant impact on the daylight/sunlight of 1 Brodie Way. 8.26 It is noted that the most recent planning permission (18/01481/FUL) designates the application site as an area of open space as part of the wider residential development. Whilst no specific landscaping has yet been planted on this site, once development is completed, would represent one of a few areas of open space directly accessible by neighbouring residents. We therefore consider that the loss of this open space would have a negative impact on both the site and the amenity of the wider area. 8.27 We consider that whilst not all the concerns raised by objectors can be supported, their concerns regarding the impact on amenity (daylight/sunlight), loss of open space and transportation concerns are material considerations which support and add weight to the development plan conclusions that the proposal be refused. There are no other material considerations that lead to the proposal being regarded as acceptable despite the development plan position. 9. Conclusions 9.1 To conclude, whilst the use of this site for residential accommodation is considered acceptable in this location, the loss of an area of open space, lack of garden ground, impacts on neighbouring daylight/sunlight would have an unacceptable and significant impact on the amenity of the application site and neighbouring existing dwellings. It is considered that given the limitations of the application site; these impacts cannot be sufficiently mitigated to enable this application to be approved. Page 51 of 146
Page 52
Application No: 23/00649/S42 Proposed Development: Residential Development (in principle) (Section 42 application to vary condition 2 of planning permission in principle 18/00580/PPP to carry out site investigations and remediation for each phase of development before development starts within that phase) Site Address: Site to the west of Morningside Road Newmains Date Registered: 15 August 2023 Applicant: Mr W.D & R.T Hill C/o Holder Planning Ltd 5 South Charlotte Street Edinburgh EH2 4AN Agent: Lesley McGrath Holder Planning 5 South Charlotte Street Edinburgh EH2 4AN Application Level: Major Application Contrary to Development Plan: No Ward: 18 Motherwell North Gerry Brennan,Andrew Duffy-Lawson,Ayeshah Khan, Anne Thomas Representations: 0 letter(s) of representations received. Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions Reasoned Justification: The application, which proposes variation of Condition 2 of planning permission in principle (Ref 18/00580/PPP approved on 4 February 2020) to allow submission of the site investigation report and detailed remediation strategy where necessary to be provided in two phases, has been considered together with a review of all other existing conditions and overall effect of granting a new permission. The principle of the development and variation of Condition 2, raise no conflict with the Development Plan. If approved, the existing Legal Agreement under Section 75 Agreement of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended, to secure index linked contributions towards local education provision should be updated to reflect the new permission. No further contributions under Section 75 of the Act are sought. Page 52 of 146
Page 53
Page 53 of 146
Page 54
Proposed Conditions:- 1. Plans and particulars of the matters listed below shall be submitted for consideration by the planning authority, in accordance with the timescales and other limitations in section 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended). No work shall begin until the written approval of the authority has been given, and the development shall be carried out in accordance with that approval. (a) the siting, design and external appearance of all buildings and other structures; (b) the means of access to the site; (c) the layout of the site, including all roads, footways, car and cycle parking areas; (d) the details of, and timetable for, the hard and soft landscaping of the site; (e) details of the management and maintenance of the areas identified in (d) above; (f) the design and location of all boundary walls and fences; (g) the provision of surface drainage works incorporating SUDS; (h) the disposal of sewage; (i) details of existing trees, shrubs and hedgerows to be retained; (j) details of existing and proposed site levels. (k) details of a play area commensurate with the scale of the proposed development. (l) details of necessary noise mitigation measures to be incorporated within buildings, the site and along its boundaries. Reason: to ensure that the matters referred to are given full consideration and to accord with section 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended). 2. Before any works of any description start on any phase of development as shown on the submitted Phasing Plan [Drawing ref: 20170(PL)014], unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report for that phase of development 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, namely, BS 10175: 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site-specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required. Reason: to establish whether site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future users of the site. 3. Any remediation works identified by the site investigation(s) required in terms of Condition 2, shall be carried out in accordance with a timetable to be agreed in advance with 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 and that any remediation identified has been implemented in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of prospective occupiers of the site. 4. Prior to works of any description being commenced on site, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) in terms of the relevant CIRIA Manual and other advice published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA). 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 users adjacent to and within the development site respectively. 5. The SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 4 above shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Following the construction of the SUDS, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Page 54 of 146
Page 55
Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS have been constructed in accordance with the relevant CIRIA Manual and the approved plans. Reason: to safeguard any adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future users. 6. Before any works start on site, the applicant must confirm in writing to the Planning Authority that foul drainage can be connected to the public sewer in accordance with the requirements of Scottish Water. The surface water must be treated in accordance with the principles of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland published by CIRIA in March 2000. Reason: to prevent groundwater or surface water contamination in the interests of environmental and amenity protection. 7. Before any works start on site, a further survey carried out by an appropriately qualified ecologist, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. This shall identify any implications for species protected by statute, and where required, include all necessary mitigation measures. Once approved, any mitigation measures shall be implemented and maintained as approved under the terms of this condition. Reason: to ensure that ecology and habitat surveys are up to date and in 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.) 8. Prior to occupation of the first house on the development site, the developer shall submit to the Planning Authority for its written approval a scheme for the completion, laying out and landscaping of all on-site open space areas, including details of how these will be maintained in the future. Once approved, the scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the submitted details. Reason: to ensure that the proposed areas of open space are adequately managed). 9. Notwithstanding the terms of condition 1 above, submitted plans shall accord with the following: • the connection to the existing roundabout at the junction of the A71 with Morningside Road shall be in accordance with the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, including those related to visibility. • footpath connection to be provided to Fergusson Crescent from the proposed development site. • additional bus stops on Morningside Road south of the roundabout at its junction with the A71, as per the submitted Transportation Assessment. • the proposed street arrangement should comply with the principles of ‘Designing Streets’. • House numbers shall not exceed 92 and the site layout shall accord with the approved development framework drawing (218034_ASL_00_XX_DR_A_0100). Reason: in accordance with submitted details and to enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail. 10. Prior to commencement of development, details of all on-site construction including the location of the site compound and the means of access to the site for construction traffic shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority. Reason: in the interests of the amenity of the area particularly neighbouring residential properties, to ensure that necessary contingencies are in place, to minimise pollution risks arising from construction activities and in the interests of road safety. 11. Full details of measures to protect the Auchter Water riverbank during construction, including details of protective fencing, must be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority in writing. Thereafter, during construction phase, the Auchter Water shall be protected at all times and no materials shall enter it from the application site. For the avoidance of doubt protection Page 55 of 146
Page 56
measures shall include a construction exclusion zone measured a minimum 10 metre boundary measured from the top of the bank along the line of the Auchter Water. Reason: to ensure the adequate protection of this important watercourse and its habitat. 12. No trees within the application site shall be lopped, topped or felled and no hedges shall be removed from the application site without the written approval of the Planning Authority. Reason: in the interests of the conservation value and visual amenity of the site. 13. Before any works start on site, a Biodiversity Enhancement Plan, including details for the retention and management of all woodland, trees, hedges and green space within the site shall be submitted to the Planning Authority in writing for approval. Thereafter, all woodland and areas of common green space within the application site as shown on Indicative PPP Masterplan [Drawing ref: 21804_ASL_00_XX_DR_A_0120], shall be retained in perpetuity for the purpose of providing biodiversity and informal recreation and for no other purpose. Reason: in the interests of conservation, restoration and enhancement of biodiversity and nature networks. 14. That prior to construction works starting on site an intrusive site investigation shall be undertaken to establish the exact situation regarding the coal mining legacy on site. The findings of this site investigation shall be submitted to the Planning Authority in the form of a detailed Coal Mining Risk Assessment for written approval in consultation with the Coal Authority. Any remediation works deemed necessary to implement this development shall be outlined in this report. Reason: To ensure that matters relating to coal mining risk are adequately addressed. 15. That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 15, shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority in consultation with the Coal Authority. Reason: To ensure that matters relating to coal mining risk are adequately addressed Background Papers: Consultation Responses: Environmental Health (including Pollution Control) received 6th September 2023 The Coal Authority received on 29 August 2023 Contact Information: Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Ann McGregor at 01236 632500 Report Date: 22nd September 2023 Page 56 of 146
Page 57
APPLICATION NO. 23/00649/S42 REPORT 1. Site Description 1.1 The application site, which occupies an area of 15.5 hectares (38.3 Acres) is located to the southeast of Newmains. The site is enclosed to the west by the Auchter Water, to the east by the residential area off Morningside Road (Grid Reference 556.827) and by open countryside to the south. The site is accessed from the A71 Morningside Road to the northeast. 1.2 The site rises north to south before falling at midpoint towards the south and falls progressively from east to west towards the Auchter water. The north, west and southern site boundary follow the course of Auchter water. An area of woodland (surrounding a disused sewage works) lies beyond Auchter water to the north. Land to the west and beyond this water body is characterised by previous industrial legacy interspersed with natural vegetative regeneration. Beyond the southern boundary the landscape is characterised by standing water. 1.3 The site is characterised by substantial belts and blocks of woodland which lie principally along the eastern portion of the site (northwest and south of the proposed housing). To the west, the land occupying higher slopes has been left undisturbed for a prolonged period and as a result, a range of tree species have since been established, including Birch and Sallow. 2. Site History 2.1 Planning application 06/00733/OUT Land to the west of Morningside Road Morningside Newmains Business Use Class 4, General Industrial Class 5 and Storage/Distribution Class 6 was withdrawn. 2.2 Planning application 07/00821/OUT Use of Land for Business Use (Class 4) General Industrial Use (Class 5) and Distribution / Storage Use (Class 6) was withdrawn. 2.3 Planning permission 04/01837/FUL (amended by permission 08/00072/AMD) permitted use of a site to the south of the application site as a rail head and 19/00278/AMD were revoked following the outcome of appeal decision 18/00580/PPP as the two permissions were considered incompatible. 2.4 Planning application 15/01635/PPP (residential development in principle) was refused permission by the Council in December 2015 due to its impact on the Green Belt and prematurity in view of the emerging Local Development Plan at the time. Thereafter,a subsequent planning appeal was dismissed in April 2017 by the Scottish Ministers. It was concluded that whilst there was (at that time) a shortage in the 5-year effective housing land supply, the proposal would have an unacceptable effect on the function of the Green Belt at this location. 2.5 Planning Permission 18/00580/PPP (residential development in principle) sought planning permission in principle for a proposed a new residential development accessed off the existing roundabout to northeast of the site on Morningside Road. The application was accompanied by indicative layout drawings demonstrating that the site has area capacity for 92 houses with the layout being split into two groupings to the north (44 units) and to the south (48 units); each linked by a singular road terminating in a cul de sac arrangement on a north south axis. Drainage infrastructure in the form of a SUD’s pond and pumping station servicing an existing residential development lies within the boundary of the application site to the south. The application was refused by the Council in January 2019 on the basis that it would lead to an inappropriate and unjustified form of development in the Green Belt and would place additional demands on community facilities and infrastructure without satisfactory mitigation. The application was subsequently approved on appeal where it was concluded that any conflict raised with the Development Plan at that time was outweighed by the additional benefits the development would bring to the economy and to the housing land supply, particularly so given the site’s allocation for housing development in the draft LDP at the time. Page 57 of 146
Page 58
3. Proposed Development 3.1 The planning application was submitted under Section 42 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 and seeks to vary Condition 2 (Site Investigations and Remediation Strategy) of Planning Permission 18/00580/PPP (Residential Development in Principle) & Associated Uses, to allow submission of the site investigation report and remediation strategy, where deemed necessary, to be provided in two phases and submitted in accordance with the detailed planning matters specified by conditions (MSC). 3.2 Condition 2 of Planning Permission currently reads as follows: Condition 2. Before any works of any description start on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175: 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site-specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required. Reason: to establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future users of the site. 3.3 The proposed variation to the wording of Condition 2 (highlighted in bold below) would read as follows: Condition 2. Before any works of any description start on any phase of development as shown on the submitted Phasing Plan Drawing Number 20170 (PL) 014, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report for that phase of development shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175: 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11. The report must include a site-specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required. Reason: to establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future users of the site 4. Applicant’s Supporting Information 4.1 The applicant has provided a letter in support of the variation of Condition 2 of the existing permission, together with suggested amendments to the wording of the condition and a proposed phasing plan. 4.2 The site was formerly used for mining operations and occupied in part by rail lines. Mine workings have now been completed and the site has been restored. A phase 1 Site Investigation Report accompanied the application for Planning Permission in Principle (18/00580/PPP) and identified the need for further site investigation works consisting of: • Trial pits • Cable percussive boreholes • Chemical contamination analysis • Gas and water monitoring • Rotary drilling Invasive plant survey 4.3 The works will inform, where appropriate, any Remediation Strategy to enable the site to be developed. 4.4 The applicant has advised that given the size of the site (15.5 hectares), it would be expedient to carry out the site investigations in a phased manner. The findings of site investigations in Page 58 of 146
Page 59
Phase one will inform the specification for site investigations in Phase two. 5. Development Plan 5.1 The statutory development plan consists of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan, Adopted 6th July 2022 (LDP). 5.2 The site is allocated in the LDP for housing (Housing Allocation NLMW1173) and is located in the General Urban Area where the following principal LDP policies and NPF4 policies apply: • LDP Policy PROM LOC3 Housing Development Sites • LDP Policy PP3 Purpose of Place • NPF4 Policy 15 Local Living and 20 Minute Neighbourhoods • NPF4 Policy 16 Quality Homes 5.3 Also relevant are LDP and NPF4 policies: : • LDP Policy CI Contributions to Infrastructure • LDP Policy EDQ 1 Site Appraisal • LDP Policy EDQ 2 Specific Features for Consideration • LDP Policy EDQ 3 Quality of Development • LDP Policy PROM LOC4 Special Landscape Areas & Green Network Improvements • LDP Policy PROT A Natural Environment and Green Network Assets • LDP Policy PROM ID1 Transport Improvements • LDP Policy PROM ID2 Utilities Improvements • NPF4 Policy 1 Tackling the climate and nature crises • NPF4 Policy 2 Climate mitigation and adaptation • NPF4 Policy 3 Biodiversity • NPF4 Policy 4 Natural Places • NPF4 Policy 6 Forestry, Woodland and Trees • NPF4 Policy 9 Brownfield, Vacant and Derelict Land and Empty Buildings • NPF4 Policy 13 Sustainable Transport • NPF4 Policy 14 Design, Quality and Place • NPF4 Policy 20 Blue and Green Infrastructure • NPF4 Policy 23 Health and Safety 5.4 Material to the current application is the existing planning permission in principle (18/00580/PPP) which was granted on appeal by Scottish Ministers on 12 July 2021 and the site’s allocation for housing in the current LDP. 6. Consultations 6.1 NLC Environmental Health (including Pollution Control) has no objection to the proposed variation of the Condition 2 (Site Investigation and Remediation Strategy) of the existing permission to allow the site investigations to be carried out in a phased manner. 6.2 NLC Roads has responded to advise that the original Transport Assessment comments provided in respect to the existing planning permission in principle (Ref: 18/00580/PPP) are still very relevant and should be addressed by the applicant before proceeding. NLC Roads original comments in response to the Transport Assessment submitted at the time are reiterated below: • The proposed development does not appear to be well served by public transport. Therefore, further details will be required regarding the following: • Pedestrian accessibility to the proposed development including active travel routes and routes to school. • Bus stops noted on Bonkle Road and Manse Road appear to be located outwith the recommended maximum distance of 400m from housing. Suitable locations where Page 59 of 146
Page 60
additional bus stops, preferably in lay-bys, could be located on Morningside Road south of its junction with the A71, to improve potential for bus usage. • Other railway stations exist which could potentially be used by residents of the proposed development site, e.g. Cleland and Hartwood - they should be indicated. • It should be noted the SCOTS National Roads Development Guide has not been adopted by North Lanarkshire Council. 7. Representations 7.1 Following the standard neighbour notification and press advertisement, no representations have been received. 8. Planning Assessment 8.1 The application has been submitted under Section 42 of The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended which applies to applications for planning permission for development of land without complying with conditions subject to which a previous planning permission was granted. Section 42 provides that the Planning Authority shall: • Consider only the question of the conditions subject to which planning permission should be granted [S42 (2)] • Decide that if planning permission should be granted subject to conditions differing from those subject to which the previous permission was granted, or that it should be granted unconditionally, grant planning permission accordingly [S42 (2) (a)] • Decide that if planning permission should be granted subject to the same conditions as those subject to which the previous permission was granted, refuse planning permission accordingly [S42 (2) (b)]. 8.2 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended provides that where, in making a determination under the Planning Acts, regard is to be had to the Development Plan, that determination shall accord with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. This principle applies to decisions taken on Section 42 applications (Jermon v West Dunbartonshire Council [2008] CSOH 76 and Pye v Secretary of State for the Environment [1999] PLCR 28] and is expanded upon in Paragraph 5 of Planning Circular 3/2013 where it is noted that in certain cases, applications submitted under Section 42 of the Act does not preclude the consideration of the overall effect of granting a new planning permission [clarified in Pye and followed in City of Edinburgh Council against The Scottish Ministers and (First) Granton Developments Ltd and (Second) Lester Gibbons [2020] ScotCS CSIH 13]. 8.3 The Development Plan consists of The North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (LDP) Adopted 6th July 2022 and the National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4), adopted on 13th February 2023. The determination of the application must therefore be made in accordance with both. However, in the event of any incompatibility between NPF4 and the LDP, NPF4 is to prevail in accordance with Section 24 (3) of the Act. Statements contained in both the LDP and NPF4 are also material to the determination of the application. Whilst the LDP and NPF4 must be read and applied as a whole and all applications subjected to assessment under both, the relative power of individual policies must still be weighed up in the balance of planning judgement. 8.4 The existing permission in principle was approved by Scottish Ministers in July 2019 prior to the adoption of the current LDP and adoption of NPF4 by Scottish Ministers. In view of changes to LDP and NPF4 policy since approval of the existing permission, it is necessary to consider whether the proposal meets the objectives of the current LDP and NPF4, together with consideration of the proposal to vary of Condition 2 of the existing consent. It is also appropriate to ensure that all other conditions attached to the grant of any new planning permission in principle do not raise any conflicts with NPF4 or the LDP. Accordingly, the planning assessment considers the current proposal to vary Condition 2 of the existing Page 60 of 146
Page 61
permission in the context of the LDP and NPF4 and the overall effect of granting a new planning permission in principle, together with a review of conditions attached to the existing planning permission in principle and any other material considerations. Variation of Condition 2 of Planning Permission in Principle (18/00580/PPP) 8.5 Policy EDQ2 of the LDP and Policy 9 of NPF4 provide that where land is known or suspected to be unstable or contaminated, development proposals will demonstrate that the land is, or can be made, safe and suitable for the proposed new use. The existing planning permission in principle makes provision in Condition 2 (Site Investigations and Remediation Strategy) for site investigations to be carried out and, where necessary remediation of the site, prior to commencement of the development. Given the size of the site (15.5 ha), the proposed variation of Condition 2 seeks to revise the wording of the condition to allow for the submission of the site investigation report and remediation strategy to be provided in two phases. The applicant has advised that the findings of site investigations in the first phase will inform the specification for site investigations in the second phase. The site investigation report and remediation strategy would then be submitted in accordance with the revised condition in a detailed planning application for matters specified in conditions (MSC). The phasing of the site investigations and remediation does not raise any conflicts with Policy EDQ2 of the LDP and/or Policy 9 of NPF4. Subject to other material considerations, outlined below, it is recommended that Condition 2 of the existing consent is therefore varied to allow site investigations to be conducted in a phased approach. Effect of Granting New Planning Permission in Principle 8.6 The effect of granting the current application to vary Condition 2 of the existing permission will result in a new stand-alone planning permission in principle, entirely independent of the original permission, that will be subject to a statutory commencement date of either five years from the date of the Decision Notice as provided for in Section 59 (2A) (a) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended, or any such other period as the Planning Authority may specify under Section 59 (2A) (b) of the Act. This raises the question as to whether the council would approve the same development for housing on the application site in light of the new national and LDP policy position. The effect of refusing the current application, will not alter the validity of the existing permission. The Principle of Housing Development on the Site 8.7 The principle of housing development on the site was established by Scottish Ministers (Planning Appeal Reference: PPA-320-2135 and Planning Application Reference 18/00580/PPP) on 12 July 2019 based on a shortage of land for housing in the housing land supply and given that the site had already been identified for housing in the emerging LDP at that time. Following the appeal decision, the site was allocated for housing development in the current LDP (Adopted July 2022) where Policy PP3 Purpose of Place and AD3 Amount of Development of the LDP apply; both of which generally support housing development that is in keeping with the residential character of the General Urban Area and where it improves residential amenity. Following adoption of the LDP, NPF4 came into force (13 February 2023) and became part of the statutory development plan. Policy 16 Quality Homes of NPF4 supports existing LDP land allocations, including land allocated for housing development. There is no incompatibility between Policy 16 of NPF4 and Policies PP3 and AD3 of the LDP; both support housing development on sites allocated for housing in the LDP. In view of the new policy context, there is no reason to doubt the principle of housing development on the site as still being acceptable. The principle of housing on the site raises no conflict with the LDP or NPF4. 8.8 If the current application is approved, matters currently secured by condition and/or by legal agreement, including design and layout, drainage and flood risk, noise, landscape, ecology, transport, coal mining risk and community facilities and infrastructure, would be subject to approval by the Planning Authority and further details would be submitted separately in any forthcoming MSC application(s). Notwithstanding, the above, the following matters have been reviewed to ensure compliance with the current LDP and NPF4: Page 61 of 146
Page 62
Design and Layout 8.9 Policy EDQ 1 Site Appraisal requires development to be appraised in terms of its site and surroundings to ensure that it will integrate successfully into the local area and avoid harm to neighbouring amenity. It addresses matters such as design, massing, topography and transportation aspects. Policy EDQ 3 Quality of Development provides that development will only be permitted where high standards of site planning and sustainable design are achieved and assesses aspects such as siting; layout; density; form; scale; height; massing; proportion; materials and parking. Where necessary, the assessment of mining, pollution and satisfactory mitigation are also required under Policy EDQ3. Policies EDQ1 and EDQ3 are considered to be compatible with the broad aims and objectives of Policy 14 Design, Quality and Place of NPF4 which seeks to improve the quality of an area, irrespective of its location in an urban or rural setting, against fixed criteria that is considered to be consistent with the criteria detailed in EDQ1 and EDQ3. 8.10 The design and layout shown on ‘Indicative, Illustrative Masterplan’ dated April 2018 (Drawing Number 218034_ASL_00_XX_DR_A_0110) proposes housing split into two groupings; 44 units to the north and 48 units to the south of the site linked by a singular road and terminating in a cul de sac arrangement on a north south axis, together with integration of new and existing pedestrian routes, increased permeability to existing landscaping features, increased banding zone of riparian vegetation and reduced area for development. A focal point of the layout as indicated in the Design and Access Statement by Austin Smith Lord and shown on the Illustrative Masterplan is the retention of a substantial area of woodland in the centre of the site. Drainage infrastructure in the form of a SUD’s pond and pumping station servicing the existing residential development to the east lies within the site boundary of the application site. The design and layout, whilst illustrative, does not raise any conflict with Policies EDQ1 and EDQ3 of the LDP or Policy 14 of NPF4 and is currently subject to a condition (Condition 1 of the existing consent) requiring further detailed information to be submitted for approval by the Planning Authority. Condition 1 of the existing consent sufficiently addresses design and layout matters. It is therefore recommended that the condition is carried over should planning permission in principle be granted. Drainage and Flood Risk 8.11 Policy EDQ1 provides that development will require to be appraised in the context of its site and surroundings to ensure that it will integrate successfully into the local area and take account of any impacts associated with the holistic water environment, flood risk, public utilities and drainage systems. The policy is compatible with Policy 22 Flood Risk and Water Management of NPF4. A Flood Risk and Drainage Assessment was submitted in support of the existing consent together with detailed plans of the proposed drainage layout showing disposal of foul sewage and surface water drainage. Whilst SEPA no longer provides advice on applications for developments located outside the functional flood plain, it did not raise any objection to the development when consulted previously in respect of the existing planning permission in principle. Drainage and flood risk are matters that require to be addressed further in any forthcoming MSC application and it is considered that Conditions 1 (g), 1 (h), 4, 5 and 6 of the existing planning permission in principle adequately address these matters. It is therefore recommended that Conditions 1 (g), 1 (h), 4, 5 and 6 of the existing planning permission in principle are carried over should planning permission in principle be granted. Noise 8.12 The noise impact of development proposals on residential amenity and health, are addressed in Policy EDQ3 of the LDP and Policy 23 of NPF4. Both policies are aligned in that they seek to ensure that mitigation is provided where necessary to rule out any unacceptable noise impacts. A Noise Impact Assessment was submitted in support of the previous consented application and no objection was raised by NLC Protective Services. A condition was also attached [Condition 1 (l)] to ensure that details of noise mitigation measures are incorporated within buildings, the site and along its boundaries and that details are submitted to the Planning Authority for approval in any forthcoming MSC application. In view of recent and previous comments received from Protective Services and given measures to mitigate any concerns relating to noise, it is considered that the proposed development raises no conflict with Policy EDQ3 of the LDP or Policy 23 of NPF4. Should planning permission in principle be Page 62 of 146
Page 63
granted, it is recommended that Condition 1 (l) of the existing consent is carried over. Landscape, Woodland and Trees 8.13 Policy EDQ1 of the LDP requires proposals for development to integrate successfully into the local landscape character and to be accompanied by an appraisal that takes account of Designing Streets and other relevant guidance. There is no conflict between Policy EDQ1 and other policies contained in NPF4. Whilst Policy 4 Natural Places of NPF4 is broader in context and provides that unacceptable impacts on the natural environment will not be supported, Policy 6 Forestry, Woodland and Trees of NPF4 is more specific in context and addresses impacts on existing woodland and tree cover. In each instance, it is clear that proposals that will have an adverse impact on either the natural environment or on existing woodland and tree cover will not be supported. 8.14 The previous application for planning permission in principle was accompanied by a Preliminary Landscape Appraisal. The Appraisal notes that in the northern half of the site, there are two level platforms which present ready development opportunities. Similarly, rank grassland to the southeast, immediately adjacent to residential development at Morningside, also presents some development potential. It is also noted in the Appraisal that elsewhere, steep embankments and rising ground to the east are now well wooded with broadleaf trees planted approximately 20 years ago. To the west, the neglected land has been colonised by various tree species including Birch and Willow. Riparian vegetation along the Auchter Water is thin and in generally poor condition. The Design and Access Statement submitted in support of the approved planning permission in principle proposed retention and extension of the existing woodland resource to include an additional belt of riparian vegetation 10.0M wide along the banks of the Auchter Water on the basis that it would contribute towards the wider green network, linking core habitats to the north and south. 8.15 The Design and Access Statement outlines proposals to incorporate each of the above opportunities within the design and layout of the development, together with retention and extension of the existing woodland to ensure that the proposed development integrates well with the existing landscape. This was supported and encouraged previously by NLC Green Spaces and in view of the benefits to biodiversity net gain and visual amenity, the proposed landscaping and woodland/tree planting and retention is considered to comply fully with the objectives of Policy EDQ1 of the LDP and Policies 4 and 6 of NPF4. 8.16 Condition 8 of the existing consent requires further details of landscaping to be submitted and approved by the Planning Authority in any forthcoming MSC application, whilst Condition 9 seeks to ensure that the development is implemented in accordance with the approved development framework (Illustrative Masterplan). It is recommended that, if planning permission in principle is granted, Conditions 8 and 9 of the existing planning permission in principle are carried over. Condition 12 of the existing consent which seeks to protect the woodland area and all existing trees and hedges on site in the interests of the conservation value and visual amenity of the site should equally be carried over to the grant of any new planning permission in principle. 8.17 Further, there is now a requirement, provided for in Policy 3 Biodiversity of NPF4, to ensure that proposals for major development contribute to the enhancement of biodiversity, including where relevant, restoring degraded habitats and building and strengthening nature networks and the connections between them, including future management. Similarly, there is a requirement in Policy 20 Blue and Green Infrastructure of NPF4 to ensure that blue and green infrastructure forms an integral element of design that responds to local circumstances with no net loss of either and, a requirement in Policy PROM LOC4 of the LDP to improve community access, recreation opportunities, and environmental and ecological quality in natural areas and green spaces that contribute to the health and quality of life through provision of green networks, corridors and linkages which are widely regarded as a key mechanism for reversing the effects of fragmentation on biodiversity. The proposed development presents an opportunity to enhance biodiversity and the existing green infrastructure and to provide and improve active travel links, public amenity and recreational opportunities. Given that biodiversity enhancement /incorporation of green and blue infrastructure has not been addressed in the current application and/or in any of the conditions attached to the existing planning permission in principle, it is recommended that if the current application for planning Page 63 of 146
Page 64
permission in principle is approved, a new condition (Condition 13 Biodiversity Enhancement) is imposed to ensure that it is incorporated in the detailed design as required by Policy PROM LOC4 of the LDP and Policy 3 of NPF4. Ecology 8.18 Policy PROT A Natural Environment and Green Network Assets provides that development will only be permitted where an appraisal has demonstrated that protected species would not be compromised or that any significant adverse effects on the protected species are mitigated. The policy applies to all areas and notes under Category 5 that not all locations important for species are identified within it. Equally, Policies 3 Biodiversity and 20 Blue and Green Infrastructure of NPF4 seek to protect natural habitats and enhance biodiversity. Whilst the site is not covered by any statutory designations, it lies to the south of Braedale Hill Local Nature Reserve (LNR) and is separated from the LNR by the A71 road and is adjacent to the Auchter Water. The site is also occupied by substantial blocks of woodland and riparian vegetation along the Auchter Water which it is proposed will be extended. The location and characteristics of the site present an opportunity to enhance biodiversity. 8.19 The previous application was supported by an Ecology Habitat Survey and supplementary information on protected species and habitat. The development was not considered to require an Environmental impact assessment (EIA) to record all species present. NLC Greenspace at that time recommended a number of habitat improvement measures. These were subsequently covered by planning conditions, including Conditions 4, 7, 8, 11 and 12. It is recommended that if planning permission in principle is granted, Conditions 4, 7, 8, 11 and 12 should be carried over to the new permission, together with the addition of Condition 13 (Biodiversity) to address biodiversity enhancement (including the impacts of artificial lighting on habitats and their species) in accordance with updated policies contained in the LDP and in NPF4. Coal Mining Legacy 8.20 Policy EDQ2 Specific Features for Consideration of the LDP and Policy 9 Brownfield, Vacant and Derelict Land and Empty Buildings of NPF4 require that where land is known or suspected to be unstable or contaminated, development proposals will demonstrate that the land is, or can be made, safe and suitable for the proposed new use. 8.21 The site lies within a Coal Authority high risk area. A Coal Mining Risk Assessment was therefore submitted in support of the existing planning permission in principle. The Coal Authority concurred with the conclusions of the Mining Risk Assessment Report and the subsequent report on preliminary site investigations, advising that coal mining legacy poses a risk to the proposed development and that further intrusive site investigation works should be undertaken prior to development in order to establish the exact situation regarding coal mining legacy issues on the site. Accordingly, if planning permission in principle is granted, it is recommended that Conditions 14 (Intrusive Site Investigations) and 15 (Remediation) are imposed. Community facilities and Infrastructure 8.22 Policy CI Contributions to Infrastructure seeks to secure developer contributions for new developments that, individually or cumulatively, generate a requirement for new or enhanced infrastructure. The existing permission is subject to a Legal Agreement under Section 75 of the Act to mitigate against impacts upon local education provision as a result of the development. Should planning permission in principle be granted, the existing Section 75 Agreement will require to be updated to take account of the new permission. Transportation 8.23 A Transportation Assessment was previously submitted in support of the existing planning permission in principle, which NLC Roads has reviewed and commented on. It is noted that since the time of the original submission and appeal decision to grant planning permission for housing, the site has been allocated for housing in the adopted LDP. This followed a lengthy and thorough LDP examination process during which the reporter concluded and attached Page 64 of 146
Page 65
weight to the finding, that housing on the site would represent sustainable development. In accordance with the reporter’s recommendations, it is now for the Development Management process at MSC stage to ascertain whether concerns raised by NLC Roads can be alleviated, mitigated, or avoided in accordance with the requirements of Policy 13 Sustainable Transport and Policy 15 Local Living and 20 Minute Neighbourhoods of NPF4. Should planning permission in principle be granted, matters raised by NLC Roads will require to be addressed in accordance with Condition 9 and Policy 16 of NPF4. Other Material Considerations 8.24 The existing planning permission in principle (Ref 18/00580/PPP) which was granted on appeal on 12 July 2019 and the site’s allocation in the LDP adopted on 6 July 2022 are material considerations that carry significant weight in the determination of this application. Conclusion 8.25 The current application, which has been submitted under Section 42, seeks to vary the wording of Condition 2 of planning permission in principle (Ref 18/00580/PPP) to allow submission of the site investigation report and remediation strategy, where deemed necessary, to be provided in two phases as part of the subsequent detailed planning application for matters specified by condition. The effect of the current application, if approved, would be to grant a new stand-alone planning permission in principle, which is entirely independent of the original permission. The permission will be subject to a statutory commencement date of either five years from the date of the Decision Notice as provided for in Section 59 (2A) (a) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended, or any such other period as the Planning Authority may specify under Section 59 (2A) (b) of the Act. In view of the overall effect of granting a new planning permission in principle coupled with changes to the national and local policy position, it was appropriate to reassess the proposed development in its entirety alongside the proposal to vary Condition 2 of the existing consent. Subject to conditions, including supplementary conditions, 13, 14 and 15, it is recommended that Condition 2 of the permission is varied to allow phasing of the site investigations and remediation strategy and that a new stand-alone planning permission in principle is granted. 8.26 If the recommendation is accepted, the issuing of the planning permission in principle will be subject to a legal agreement to secure index linked contributions towards the local education provision that was agreed before the grant of the previous planning permission18/00580/PPP. Page 65 of 146
Page 66
Page 66 of 146
Page 67
North Lanarkshire Council Report PLANNING COMMITTEE Agenda item _________ approval x noting Ref LB/ES Date 12/10/2023 NOTICE OF PLANNING AND ENFORCEMENT APPEALS DECISIONS From Chief Officer (Place) Email humphriesp@northlan.gov.uk Telephone 01236 632500 Executive Summary 1. Purpose of Report 1.1 This report is to advise the Committee of the recent decisions in respect of the undernoted planning appeals. Recommendations It is recommended that the Committee note the decision in respect of this appeal. Background Application No. & Proposal Applicant & Site Appeal Decision & Date Note 21/01460/MSC Erection of 75 Homes with Associated Works (Phase 3) Bellway Homes & Deuchny Properties Land East Of Lochend Road Gartcosh Appeal Dismissed 12/09/2023 PAMELA HUMPHRIES Chief Officer (Place) (02/10/2023) Item 3 Page 67 of 146
Page 68
Page 68 of 146
Page 69
North Lanarkshire Council Report Planning Committee Does this report require to be approved? ☒ Yes ☐ No Ref Date 12/10/23 Draft Supplementary Guidance: Education Contributions From Pamela Humphries, Chief Officer (Place) E-mail laingg@northlan.gov.uk Telephone Gordon Laing, 07970018874 Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to seek Planning Committee approval to undertake the public consultation with external stakeholders on the Draft Supplementary Guidance on Education Contributions. This will provide guidance for developers and landowners on the circumstances in which residential development proposals are required to be assessed in terms of their impact on the capacity of the education estate and the ability to accommodate the pupils generated by the development in the local schools. The guidance outlines the process on how the Council will continue to seek contributions towards education infrastructure in Primary and Secondary catchment areas where required. Contributions will be requested where capacity issues are identified through the cumulative impact of all emerging housing developments identified through the Housing Land Audit and Local Development Plan. The developer contributions will be required to contribute towards providing additional capacity through the provision of a new build school, permanent additional classrooms (extensions or modular accommodation) and adaptations to existing schools. Following consultation, the document will be finalised and submitted for further Committee approval prior to submission to the Scottish Government. On Scottish Government approval the guidance document will be published and become part of the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan. Recommendations It is recommended that the Committee: 1) agrees the draft policy guidance appended to this report and the proposed public consultation with external stakeholders. Item 4 Page 69 of 146
Page 70
1. Background 1.1 The North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (NLLDP) was Adopted in July 2022. As recommended by the Examination Reporter, this Supplementary Guidance (SG) relates to Policy CI 1 Category Education Contributions set out on page 71 of the NLLDP Policy Document. 1.2 The main purpose of this guidance is to provide guidance for developers and landowners on the circumstances in which residential development proposals are required to be assessed in terms of their impact on the capacity of the education estate and the ability to accommodate the pupils generated by the development in the local schools. 1.3 For all qualifying residential developments of 5 or more units the council will seek to secure contributions towards education infrastructure in Primary and Secondary catchment areas where required. These will be requested where capacity issues are identified through the cumulative impact of all emerging housing developments identified through the Housing Land Audit and Local Development Plan. 1.4 The developer contributions will be required to contribute towards providing additional capacity through the provision of a new build school, permanent additional classrooms (extensions or modular accommodation) and adaptations to existing schools. 1.5 The SG is intended to secure best value for the Council and ensure that the required education facilities and infrastructure are provided where necessary. The guidance promotes good practice on pupil yield evidence and engagement with developers to deliver any necessary expansion or new build schools as a direct result of the impact on the school estate from new housing developments. 2. Report 2.1 This Supplementary Guidance (SG) aims to assist landowners and developers in carrying out their initial financial appraisals to ensure that they take full account of development viability and will assist in determining the circumstances and the cost of education contribution requirements for their site at an early stage. 2.2 The document outlines the legislative and planning framework with regards to education contributions guidance and outlines that new development can have a significant impact on a wide variety of existing infrastructure, facilities, services and amenities and in such circumstances where it can be justified the Council will seek developer contributions to offset such impacts. 2.3 Residential housing developments can place additional requirements and capacity constraints on the education services of the Council. This guidance outlines the circumstances in which residential development proposals are required to be assessed The Plan for North Lanarkshire Priority Support all children and young people to realise their full potential Ambition statement (21) Continue to identify and access opportunities to leverage additional resources to support our ambitions Programme of Work Brighter Futures Page 70 of 146
Page 71
in terms of their impact on the capacity of the education estate and the ability to accommodate the pupils generated by the development in the local schools. All qualifying residential developments of 5 or more units will be assessed with regards to their impact on the education estate. 2.4 The council will continue to seek to secure contributions towards education infrastructure in Primary and Secondary catchment areas where required. These will be requested where capacity issues are identified through the cumulative impact of all emerging housing developments identified through the Housing Land Audit and Local Development Plan. 2.5 The developer contributions will be required to contribute towards providing additional capacity through the provision of a new build school, permanent additional classrooms (extensions or modular accommodation) and adaptations to existing schools. Implementation 2.6 When a planning application relating to development is submitted to the Council for consideration, it will be assessed to determine if there is a requirement for the prospective developer to make an appropriate developer contribution in accordance with the provisions of this supplementary guidance. 2.7 Development contributions will be sought for a contribution towards education infrastructure for all dwellings, except for developments that are within one of the following categories which are exempt from education developer contributions: • One bedroom Dwellings; • Proposals of fewer than 5 Dwellings; • Change of use, conversion or redevelopment whereby no additional residential units are constructed; • Development that would not put capacity pressures on schools e.g. Student accommodation linked to college/universities, housing for the elderly or dwellings with occupancy restrictions that prohibit children of nursery or school age. • Non-residential development. 2.8 Phased contributions will be acceptable in most instances and indicative conditions attached to any agreement to include the education authority retaining any payment for a specified period or as otherwise agreed with the Council, following the completion of the final dwelling, after which time the payment would be returned to the applicant if not spent or committed in full by the Council within 28 days of receipt of a written request from the applicant. 2.9 Contributions will be index linked to inflation from the point of the Council being minded to grant planning permission with the indexation being the All-in Tender Price Index as published by the Building Cost Information Service of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors on a quarterly basis. 2.10 In the committee report of January 2020, entitled Education Contributions – Gartcosh/Glenboig and South Cumbernauld Community Growth Areas, a new baseline figure for the CGAs was set but it was advised that "Going forward this matter will be kept under review to make sure that the contribution level remains current.” The SG, as required by the Policy in the LDP, applies to all residential developments therefore the SG is considered to represent the review referred to in 2020 and will apply to all applications and sites in the CGAs not currently subject to a legal agreement. Page 71 of 146
Page 72
Development Viability 2.11 The council is keen to support the development of brownfield sites which are designated for residential development. It is however recognised that some sites are particularly challenging to develop due to high remediation and/or infrastructure costs. In some cases the addition of an Education contribution may render a site economically unviable. It is proposed that in certain, limited, circumstances the council will consider a reduction or give an exemption from the requirement for an education contribution. In these circumstances it is proposed that this would be conditional on development commencing within a reasonable timescale and would be subject to review after 3 – 5 years (depending on site capacity) if development has not started or has stalled. 2.12 In circumstances where a developer considers that development viability is compromised by the requirement for an education contribution there is a requirement for all developers to undertake a full viability appraisal at the outset of their development which considers all likely costs including any other developer obligations and affordable housing if applicable. 2.13 Standard Development costs such as demolition works, retaining and ground works, landscaping, archaeological investigations, drainage works, site purchase, site servicing and flood prevention works will not normally be accepted as abnormal costs. Abnormal costs should be reflected in the purchase price of the land and in this respect, the developer will be asked to demonstrate that the purchase price reflects the condition of the site, including abnormal costs, as far as these could be reasonably be known. 2.14 Appendix 3 of the supplementary guidance attached to this report sets out the procedure that the developer would be required to carry out for unforeseen costs to be considered by the Council. Contribution Trigger 2.15 The cumulative impact assessment of emerging housing identifies those schools where it is anticipated that the pupils generated by housing allocations (programmed up by the current Housing Land Audit and Local Development Plan), will increase school capacity beyond 90%. Developer contributions for Education will be sought for infrastructure within these school catchment areas towards the projected pupils generated above 90% of the school capacity. The cost of accommodating these pupils is shared across the residential units (programmed in line with the current Housing Land Audit and Local Development Plan) within the catchment area. Calculations 2.16 The contribution is calculated using the Pupil Product Ratio against the number of houses planned within the catchment area of each school. The number of pupils generated is added to the current number of children in each school to calculate the overall percentage capacity. The number of spaces is proportionated against each school based on the Denominational/Non-Denominational split. This is calculated annually and based on a rolling five-year average. If the occupancy is identified to exceed 90% then a developer contribution will be required. If it is below 90% then a contribution is unlikely. If a school already exceeds 90% then a contribution will be required. Page 72 of 146
Page 73
Pupil Product Ratio (PPR) 2.17 The PPR is the number which identifies the average number of pupils relative to new areas of housing. Contributions are based on the anticipated number of residential units to generate children of school age (the anticipated number is represented as a pupil product ratio per property). The PPR used in North Lanarkshire for each age range is as follows: Primary School: 0.3 Secondary School: 0.24 It should be noted that these numbers are used as examples for the calculations based on the current figures. The figures above will be updated with the most up to date figures as and when the supporting information becomes available on an annual basis. 2.18 In order to achieve the correct calculation for each school the number of units within a development is multiplied by the Pupil Product ratio to project the total number of pupils anticipated to present for both primary and secondary education. The total is then split by the five-year average Non-Denominational/Denominational ratio. The five year average ratio is calculated by looking at the pupils in geographical areas and analysing the percentage of the total pupils in the area who attended each sector. When calculating the pupil product for each primary school the following calculation is used: [Total no of units] x [PPR] x [ND/D Split Percentage] = Pupil yield for given When calculating the pupil product for each high school the following calculation is used: [Total no of units] x [PPR] x [ND/D Split Percentage] = Pupil yield for given It should be noted that calculations will be rounded down to the nearest whole number. Non-Denominational / Denominational Ratio 2.19 Using the existing primary school population over the last five years, the education authority calculates the Non-Denominational/Denominational split which is used to determine the percentage of pupils from new housing who are anticipated to attend either school, based on the analysis carried out against the latest school census. Cost Per Pupil 2.20 The costs are based on previous NLC contracted work for new builds and extensions in North Lanarkshire schools. These figures are updated and adjusted following completion of the latest projects. The figures will be reviewed annually. An average of the latest completions is used for developer contribution calculations and are based on the following new build school calculation which takes the school capacity divided by the contract cost which equals the cost per pupil Contract Cost / School Capacity = Cost per Pupil 2.21 It should be noted that these figures only relate to ‘build costs’ and do not include any abnormal costs, land purchase or all design fees. The BCIS All In Tender Price Index Page 73 of 146
Page 74
will be used to evaluate and calculate costs for any given year up until the full contribution has been received. 2.22 The Guidance outlines the developer contributions calculations in appendix 1 and the developer contributions school list in appendix 2. These appendices as well as the figures in relation to the calculations as noted in 2.16 above will be reviewed annually and if anticipated changes are sought this would be done through committee approval. Consultation Procedure 2.23 The Council has to publicise the statutory Supplementary Guidance – Education Contributions for a period of 6 weeks to make all potentially interested parties aware of the guidance and give all who wish to do so the opportunity to comment thereon. The Council will consider any timeous representations made to it on the proposed Education Contributions Supplementary Guidance. 2.24 Following the conclusion of the consultation period and subsequent assessment of the responses, a report will be submitted to the Committee for approval of the finalised Education Contributions Supplementary Guidance. 2.25 The Council will send the Scottish Ministers a copy of the Guidance it has approved and intends to adopt. At that time the Council will also send the Scottish Ministers a Statement setting out the publicity measures undertaken, the comments received, and an explanation of how these comments were taken into account. After a period of 28 days from submission has elapsed, the Council may adopt the Supplementary Guidance Note unless the Scottish Ministers direct otherwise. 3. Measures of success 3.1 The measures of success would include: • Clearer guidelines for developers/applicants/landowners to help ensure that the requirement for education contributions is appropriately considered at an early stage. • Will help developers/applicants/landowners determine development viability and allow them to factor in the likely cost of education contributions if required. • Aligns with Government Policy on contributions to infrastructure which is an important consideration under NPF4. • It offers the Council a more robust framework to support the Council’s decisions in relation to any appeals referencing education contribution requirements. • Can help to increase the efficiency of processing planning applications in terms of setting the terms for associated legal agreements early that require to be signed prior to planning consent being issued. 4. Supporting documentation 4.1 Draft Supplementary Guidance Note – Education Contributions Pamela Humphries Chief Officer (Place) Page 74 of 146
Page 75
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? 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 ☒ Page 75 of 146
Page 76
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? 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). The proposals seek to enable the Council to provide the resources needed to ensure that the children of NLC have the best educational resource available to them. As such it is considered that the guidance is compliant with the overall aims of the UNCRC and in particular Articles: Article 3 Best interests of the Child to be a top priority at all times. Article 28 Right to Education ensuring Primary education is free. Article 29 Goals of Education to develop every childs personality, talents and abilities to their fullest potential. Page 76 of 146
Page 77
If Yes, has a Children’s Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment (CRWIA) been carried out? 1. Brief summary of policy/measure? The guidance seeks to secure best value for the Council and ensure that the required education facilities and infrastructure are provided where necessary. The guidance promotes good practice on pupil yield evidence and engagement with developers to deliver any necessary expansion or new build schools as a direct result of the impact on the school estate from new housing developments. 2. What aspects of the policy/measure will affect children and young people up to age 18? The Guidance seeks to ensure all primary and secondary age children have the required educational infrastructure to ensure that they receive the best education possible within the NLC area. 3. What likely impact, direct or indirect, will the policy/measure have on children and young people? It is envisaged that the guidance will have a positive impact on children both directly and indirectly given that is seeks to secure best value for the Council and ensure that the required education facilities and infrastructure are provided where necessary. The guidance promotes good practice on pupil yield evidence and engagement with developers to deliver any necessary expansion or new build schools as a direct result of the impact on the school estate from new housing developments. 4. Which groups of children and young people will be affected? The groups affected by this guidance are 5 to 18 year olds. Yes ☐ No ☒ Page 77 of 146
Page 78
Education Contributions September 2023 Supplementary Guidance Page 78 of 146
Page 79
1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 2 Education Establishments .................................................................................. 2 What are Contributions ....................................................................................... 3 Planning Policy ................................................................................................... 3 Implementation ................................................................................................... 7 Development Viability………………………………………………………………….7 Contribution Trigger ............................................................................................ 8 Calculations ........................................................................................................ 8 Useful Contacts ............................................................................................... 10 Appendices Appendix 1 – Developer Contribution Calculations .................................... 11 Appendix 2 – Developer Contribution School List ...................................... 15 Appendix 3 – Development Viability……………………………………………21 CONTENTS Page 79 of 146
Page 80
2 Introduction This publication provides statutory Supplementary Guidance from North Lanarkshire Council on developer contributions for education infrastructure. The guidance promotes good practice on pupil yield evidence and engagement with developers and planning authorities in order to deliver any necessary expansion or new build schools as a direct result of the impact on the school estate from new housing developments. North Lanarkshire Council is committed to providing the highest quality of education within its establishments and developer contributions for education are required to help mitigate the impact of developments on the education estate. This will allow the correct infrastructure to be put in place to support the additional pupil product from new developments and their impact on the educational estate. The introduction of any new development can have a significant impact on a wide variety of existing infrastructure, facilities, services and amenities and in such circumstances where it can be justified the Council will seek developer contributions to offset such impacts. Residential housing developments can place additional requirements and result in capacity constraints on the education services of the Council. This guidance outlines the circumstances in which residential development proposals are required to be assessed in terms of their impact on the capacity of the education estate and the ability to accommodate the pupils generated by the development in the local schools. All qualifying residential developments of 5 or more units will be assessed with regards to their impact on the education estate. Education Establishments North Lanarkshire Council currently provides an education service across the authority through secondary schools, primary schools and pre-five establishments. The council will seek to secure contributions for areas of education infrastructure in Primary and Secondary areas where required. These will be requested where capacity issues are identified through the cumulative impact of all emerging housing developments identified through the Housing Land Audit and Local Development Plan. The developer contributions will be required to contribute towards providing additional capacity through the provision of a new build school, permanent additional classrooms (extensions or modular accommodation) and adaptations to existing schools. Page 80 of 146
Page 81
3 What are Contributions In order for developer contributions to be secured, North Lanarkshire Council require developers to enter into a contract to offset adverse impacts of their project. In Scotland, they are most commonly (though not exclusively) made under Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. Section 75 agreements are used where conditions attached to the planning permission itself are not appropriate. While planning conditions control how a project is built and used, Section 75 agreements tend to provide for financial contributions and any requirements affecting land outside the area to which the planning permission relates, such as education infrastructure. Planning Policy This supplementary guidance has been prepared within the context of the following: • National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4); • Circular 3/2012: Planning Obligations and Good Neighbour Agreements (Revised 2020); and • North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (NLLDP) 2022 National Planning Framework 4 NPF4 was adopted on the 13th February 2023 and forms part of the statutory Development Plan (alongside the Local Development Plan) and is required to be considered when determining planning applications. In the event of any incompatibility between NPF4 and the adopted NLLDP 2022, it should be noted that the NPF4 policy position will supersede the policies in the NLLDP. Whilst there are several policy overlaps between NPF4 and the adopted NLLDP 2022, it is considered that Policy 18 Infrastructure First of NPF4 most closely aligns with the requirements of Policy CI Contributions to Infrastructure of the NLLDP 2022. NPF4 Policy 18 Infrastructure First outlines that: “a) Development proposals which provide (or contribute to) infrastructure in line with that identified as necessary in LDPs and their delivery programmes will be supported. Page 81 of 146
Page 82
4 b) The impacts of development proposals on infrastructure should be mitigated. Development proposals will only be supported where it can be demonstrated that provision is made to address the impacts on infrastructure. Where planning conditions, planning obligations, or other legal agreements are to be used, the relevant tests will apply. Where planning obligations are entered into, they should meet the following tests: - be necessary to make proposed development acceptable in planning terms - serve a planning purpose - relate to the impacts of the proposed development - fairly and reasonably relate in scale and kind to the proposed development - be reasonable in all other respects Planning conditions should only be imposed where they meet all of the following tests. They should be: - necessary - relevant to planning - relevant to the development permitted - enforceable - precise - reasonable in all other respects” Circular 3/2012 Planning Obligations and Good Neighbour Agreements (Revised 2020) Planning Circular 3/2012: Planning Obligations and Good Neighbour Agreements (Revised 2020) outlines that Local Authorities may use agreements under Section 75 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 to offset the impact of new development. The use of an agreement under Section 75 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Section 75 Agreement’) to help deliver necessary infrastructure and facilities is considered a legitimate planning objective by the Scottish Government. However, Section 75 Agreements should only be sought where they are required to make a proposal acceptable in land use planning terms and where the use of a planning condition, including a suspensive condition, is not appropriate. Conditions, including suspensive conditions, should be used wherever possible. Section 75 Agreements should only be sought where they meet the following tests: • Be necessary to make the proposed development acceptable in planning terms. Page 82 of 146
Page 83
5 • Shall serve a planning purpose and, where it is possible to identify infrastructure provision requirements in advance, should relate to development plans. • Shall relate to the proposed development either as a direct consequence of the development or arising from the cumulative impact of development in an area. • Shall fairly and reasonably relate in scale and kind to the proposed development. • Be reasonable in all other aspects. It is acknowledged that Section 75 Agreements can at times, cause delays in the planning process and place an additional financial burden on developers. In order to minimise delays and any financial burden the requirement for planning obligations should be identified as soon as possible – ideally at the pre-application stage - and relevant parties brought together to ensure that the process flows as smoothly as possible. In addition, it is recommended that timescales for any legal agreement be included where possible within a planning processing agreement in order that the applicant has a reasonable expectation on the delivery timescales for their decision – provided they too adhere to the agreed timescales for provision of supporting information. The timescale for completion of a legal agreement will be no more than 6 months from the date of committee approval unless exceptional circumstances require additional time for its signing. It should be noted that the requirement for and level of contribution (if necessary in terms of education infrastructure) can only be confirmed once a valid planning application has been submitted and a consultation response from NLC Education confirms the current position to the Planning Authority. However, guidance as to whether an Education contribution is likely to be required will be provided at the Pre Application process. In some circumstances it may be possible to expedite this process by use of an agreement under section 69 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 to achieve contributions towards provision of necessary infrastructure and facilities. Section 69 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 states that: ‘(1)…a local authority shall have power to do anything (whether or not involving the expenditure, borrowing or lending of money or the acquisition or disposal of any property or rights) which is calculated to facilitate, or is conducive or incidental to, the discharge of any of their functions.’ This provision provides the Council with a general power to enter into an Agreement with developers to secure the above contributions prior to the release of the planning consent. This type of Agreement does not have to be limited in its purpose to the restriction or regulation of the development or use of the land subject to the planning application and could also include the payment of money. Page 83 of 146
Page 84
6 North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022 The NLLDP CI Policy Contributions to Infrastructure outlines that: “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. Where new development is proposed that, individually or cumulatively, generates a requirement for new or enhanced infrastructure or services in the categories listed, developers will be expected to contribute towards the provision of the required infrastructure, facilities and services. This will include any infrastructure to be provided in advance of development proposed in this Plan. Developer contributions will be sought through a legal agreement or planning condition and in accordance with the five tests of Circular 3/2012 – “Planning Obligations and Good Neighbour Agreements”, as outlined by the Scottish Government and in accordance with this Guidance. Any information provided to developers by the Council before the application stage is only indicative, including the Action Programme for the delivery of those housing sites identified in this Plan.” Policy CI 1 Category Education “For proposed residential developments the Council is seeking education infrastructure contributions, through Legal Agreements or planning conditions, based on adaptations and new builds within our Schools and Centres 21 Programme and the identified solutions to deal with the impact of all known future development within the catchment areas. This may include contribution(s) towards early years provision, due to the increase in provision by 2020 outlined in the Children and Young People Act 2014. It should be noted that any potential need identified is based on known future housing provision and could be affected if additional units come forward as a result of housing sites that have not been identified through the Plan process. A contribution towards education infrastructure will be expected for all dwellings, with the exception of those with only one bedroom. Indicative conditions attached to any agreement will Page 84 of 146
Page 85
7 include the education authority retaining any payment for a period of 10 years or as otherwise agreed with the Council, following the completion of the final dwelling, after which time the payment would be returned to the applicant if not spent. Phased payments may be acceptable in most instances. Full details of any infrastructure and contribution requirements will be identified by the Council as Education Authority on a case-by-case basis through the Development Management process.” Implementation When a planning application relating to development is submitted to the Council for consideration, it will be assessed to determine if there is a requirement for the prospective developer to make an appropriate developer contribution in accordance with the provisions of this supplementary guidance. Development contributions will be sought for a contribution towards education infrastructure for all dwellings, except for developments that are within one of the following categories which are exempt from education developer contributions: • One bedroom Dwellings; • Proposals of fewer than 5 Dwellings; • Change of use, conversion or redevelopment whereby no additional residential units are constructed; • Development that would not put capacity pressures on schools e.g. Student accommodation linked to college/universities, housing for the elderly or dwellings with occupancy restrictions that prohibit children of nursery or school age. • Non-residential development. Phased contributions will be acceptable in most instances and indicative conditions attached to any agreement to include the education authority retaining any payment for a period of 10 years or as otherwise agreed with the Council, following the completion of the final dwelling, after which time the payment would be returned to the applicant if not spent or committed in full by the Council within 28 days of receipt of a written request from the applicant. For the avoidance of doubt all developer contributions will be index linked to inflation from the point of the Council being minded to grant planning permission (“Index meaning the All-in Tender Price Index as published by the Building Cost Information Service of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors on a quarterly basis;). Page 85 of 146
Page 86
8 Development Viability North Lanarkshire Council acknowledges that unforeseen or abnormal development costs can affect development viability and may take this into account dependent on the specific circumstances. Only in very exceptional circumstances where there are excessive, abnormal costs on sites that are designated for housing or within the urban area boundary in the North Lanarkshire local Development Plan 2022, it is likely that the Council will consider a reduction or give an exemption from the requirement for an education contribution. In circumstances where a developer considers that development viability is compromised by the requirement for an education contribution there is a requirement for developers to undertake a full viability appraisal at the outset of their development which considers all likely costs including any other developer obligations including affordable housing if applicable. Standard development costs such as demolition works, retaining and ground works, landscaping, archaeological investigations, drainage works, site purchase, site servicing and flood prevention works will not normally be accepted as abnormal costs. It is expected, and will require to be demonstrated, that the cost of preparing and developing land, including reasonably known ‘abnormal’ costs have been reflected in the purchase price/valuation of the land. The process to be followed where a developer is seeking an exemption from paying the required education contribution is set out in Appendix 3 of this Supplementary Guidance. Contribution Trigger The cumulative impact assessment of emerging housing identifies those schools where it is anticipated that the pupils generated by housing allocations (programmed up by the current Housing Land Audit and Local Development Plan), will increase school capacity beyond 90%. Developer contributions for Education will be sought for infrastructure within these school catchment areas towards the projected pupils generated above 90% of the school capacity. The cost of these pupils is shared across the residential units (programmed in line with the current Housing Land Audit and Local Development Plan) within the catchment area. Page 86 of 146
Page 87
9 Calculations The contribution is calculated using the Pupil Product Ratio against the number of houses planned within the catchment area of each school. The number of pupils generated is added to the current number of children in each school to calculate the overall percentage capacity. The number of spaces is proportionated against each school based on the Denominational/Non-Denominational split. This is calculated annually and based on a rolling five-year average. If the occupancy is identified to exceed 90% then a developer contribution will be required. If it is below 90% then a contribution is unlikely. If a school already exceeds 90% then a contribution will be required. The example of how the developer contributions are calculated appear in Appendix 1. Pupil Product Ratio (PPR) The PPR is the number which identifies the average number of pupils relative to new areas of housing. Contributions are based on the anticipated number of residential units to generate children of school age (the anticipated number is represented as a pupil product ratio per property). The PPR used in North Lanarkshire for each age range is as follows: *The figures below are used for example purposes only and are intended to demonstrate the calculation. For the most up to date figures please refer to https://www.northlanarkshire.gov.uk/planning-and-building/planning- applications/our-supplementary-planning-guidance *Primary School: 0.3 *Secondary School: 0.24 *These numbers are used as examples for the calculations In order to achieve the correct calculation for each school the number of units within a development is multiplied by the Pupil Product ratio to project the total number of pupils anticipated to present for both primary and secondary education. The total is then split by the 5-year average Non-Denominational/Denominational ratio. The five-year average ratio is calculated by looking at the pupils in geographical areas and analysing the percentage of the total pupils in the area who attended each sector. When calculating the pupil product for each primary school the following calculation is used: [Total no of units] x [PPR] x [ND/D Split Percentage] = Pupil yield for given school Page 87 of 146
Page 88
10 When calculating the pupil product for each high school the following calculation is used: [Total no of units] x [PPR] x [ND/D Split Percentage] = Pupil yield for given school Calculations will be rounded down to the nearest whole number. Non-Denominational/Denominational Ratio Using the existing primary school population over the last five years, the education authority calculates the Non-Denominational/Denominational split which is used to determine the percentage of pupils from new housing who are anticipated to attend either school. Based on the analysis carried out against the latest school census. Cost Per Pupil Costs are based on previous NLC contracted work for new builds and extensions in North Lanarkshire schools. These figures are updated and adjusted following completion of the latest projects. The figures will be reviewed annually. An average of the latest completions is used for developer contribution calculations and are based on the following information: New Build School calculation Contract Cost/School Capacity = Cost per pupil *These figures are used as examples for the calculations. Formal requests should be made to ef.forwardplanning@northlan.gov.uk ** It should be noted that these figures only relate to ‘build costs’. It does not include any abnormal costs, land purchase or all design fees. Developer Contribution Calculations are shown in Appendix 1 Developer Contribution School List is shown in Appendix 2 Page 88 of 146
Page 89
11 Useful Contacts For further advice on this Supplementary Planning Guidance and its applications, please contact: For queries relating to planning applications and development viability. Planning & Place Civic Centre Windmillhill Street Motherwell ML1 1AB Planningenquiry@northlan.gov.uk For queries relating to pre-application enquiries. Pre-application advice | North Lanarkshire Council For queries relating to the developer contribution figures, calculations or school list. Forward Planning (Education) Civic Centre Windmillhill Street Motherwell ML1 1AB ef.forwardplanning@northlan.gov.uk For general matters. North Lanarkshire Council Website http://www.northlanarkshire.gov.uk Page 89 of 146
Page 90
12 Appendix 1 – Developer Contribution Calculations New Builds Reference Site School Capacity Contract Cost Cost Per Pupil A 1522 £36,511,169 £23,988.94 B 1161 £33,071,295 £28,485.18 C 1117 £27,011,646 £24,182.32 D 484 £19,954,327 £41,227.95 E 434 £24,821,452 £57,192.29 F 509 £18,577,215 £36,497.48 Average £35,262.36 Contributions rounded down to £35,000 per pupil Cost per Unit £35,000 * 0.3 (PPR) = £10,500 per unit for Primary School Contribution £35,000 * 0.24 (PPR) = £8,400 per unit for Secondary School Contribution The calculation for Extensions/Additional Capacity to PPP and Non-PPP schools are based on the following information Page 90 of 146
Page 91
13 Extensions/ Additional Capacity - Non PPP School Reference Site GIFA Contract Cost Cost Per Sqm Design Fees A 235 £610,584 £2,598.23 14% B 184 £774,000 £4,206.52 14% C 93 £311,000 £3,344.09 14% Average 171 £565,195 £3,382.95 Cost per square metre = £3,382.95 Design Fee = 14% Cost per square metre including design fees = £3,855.42 Square metres required for each class = 57sqm classroom + 3sqm cloaks + 10sqm toilets and circulation = 70sqm Cost per classroom = £3,855.42 * 70 sqm = £269,883.60 Each classroom is anticipated to accommodate minimum 25 pupils Cost per pupil = £269,883.60 / 25 = £10,795.34 Cost per unit = £10,795.34 * 0.3 (PPR) = £3238.60 per unit for Primary School Contribution £10,795.34 * 0.24 (PPR) = £2590,88 Secondary per unit for School Contribution Page 91 of 146
Page 92
14 Extensions / Additional Capacity - PPP School North Lanarkshire has 25 PPP schools which are owned by external stakeholders. These schools are subject to additional costs when making adaptations to the buildings for ongoing revenue and life cycle costs. The total additional cost is £35,840 per classroom Cost per classroom = £3,855.42 * 70 sqm = £269,883.60 + £35,840 = £305,723.60 Each classroom is anticipated to accommodate minimum 25 pupils Cost per pupil = £305,723.60 / 25 = £12,228.94 Cost per unit = £12,228.94 * (PPR) = £3668.68 Primary School Contribution £12,228.94 * (PPR) = £2934.95 Secondary School Contribution The table below provides the sum of the costs to developers based on all calculations. Total Build Cost per pupil – As at March 2023* New Build Capacity Improvement PPP School Capacity Improvement Non-PPP School Primary £35,000 £12,228.94 £10,795.34 Secondary £35,000 £12,228.94 £10,795.34 *these figures will be reviewed annually, and BCIS Index linked Total Build Cost per unit – As at March 2023* New Build Capacity Improvement PPP School Capacity Improvement Non-PPP School Primary £10,500 £3,668.68 £3,238.60 Secondary £8,400 £2,934.95 £2,590.88 *these figures will be reviewed annually, and BCIS Index linked It should be noted that these figures only relate to ‘build costs’. It does not include any land purchase or all design fees. The BCIS All In Tender Price Index will be used to evaluate and calculate costs for any given year up until the full contribution has been received. A full school list is provided in Appendix 2 which identifies if a developer contribution is required or not. Page 92 of 146
Page 93
15 Appendix 2 – Developer Contribution School List (As at Sept 2023) Cluster PPP / Non PPP School Contribution Requested Airdrie Academy PPP Airdrie Academy No Non PPP Chapelside PS No Non PPP Golfhill PS No Non PPP Greengairs PS Yes Non PPP New Monkland PS No Non PPP Rochsolloch PS Yes Non PPP Tollbrae PS No Non PPP Victoria PS No Bellshill Academy Non PPP Lawmuir PS No Non PPP Mossend SP Yes Non PPP Noble PS No Non PPP Bellshill Academy No Braidhurst HS Non PPP Braidhurst HS No Non PPP Logans PS No Non PPP Muir Street PS No Brannock HS Non PPP Brannock HS Yes Non PPP Holytown PS Yes Non PPP Keir Hardie Memorial PS Yes PPP New Stevenston PS Yes Non PPP Newarthill PS No Calderhead HS Non PPP Alexander Peden PS Yes Non PPP Allanton PS No Non PPP Calderhead HS No Non PPP Dykehead PS No Non PPP Kirk 'O' Shotts PS No Non PPP Stane PS Yes Page 93 of 146
Page 94
16 Cluster PPP / Non PPP School Contribution Requested Caldervale HS Non PPP Calderbank PS No Non PPP Caldervale HS Yes PPP Chapelhall PS Yes PPP Clarkston PS Yes PPP Glengowan PS Yes Non PPP Hilltop PS No PPP Plains PS No Cardinal Newman HS Non PPP Cardinal Newman HS No Non PPP Holy Family PS No Non PPP Sacred Heart PS No Non PPP St Gerard's PS No Non PPP St John Paul II PS No Chryston HS Non PPP Chryston HS Yes Non PPP Chryston PS Yes Non PPP Gartcosh PS Yes Non PPP Glenmanor PS Yes PPP Stepps PS Yes Clyde Valley HS Non PPP Berryhill PS Yes Non PPP Clyde Valley HS Yes Non PPP Morningside PS Yes Non PPP Muirhouse PS No Non PPP Netherton PS Yes Non PPP Newmains PS Yes Non PPP Orchard PS Yes Non PPP Thornlie PS No PPP Wishaw Academy PS Yes Page 94 of 146
Page 95
17 Cluster PPP / Non PPP School Contribution Requested Coatbridge HS PPP Bargeddie PS Yes Non PPP Carnbroe PS Yes PPP Coatbridge HS Yes PPP Glenboig PS Yes Non PPP Greenhill PS No Non PPP Kirkshaws PS No Non PPP Langloan PS No Non PPP Old Monkland PS No Non PPP Shawhead PS No Non PPP Sikeside PS No Non PPP Townhead PS No Coltness HS PPP Calderbridge PS No PPP Cambusnethan PS No Non PPP Cleland PS Yes Non PPP Coltness HS No Cumbernauld Academy Non PPP Abronhill PS No Non PPP Carbrain PS No Non PPP Cumbernauld Academy Yes Non PPP Cumbernauld PS No Non PPP Kildrum PS No Non PPP Whitelees PS No Dalziel HS Non PPP Dalziel HS Yes Non PPP Glencairn PS Yes Non PPP Knowetop PS Yes Greenfaulds HS Non PPP Baird Memorial PS No Non PPP Condorrat PS No Non PPP Eastfield PS No Non PPP Greenfaulds HS No Non PPP St Helen's PS No Non PPP Westfield PS No Page 95 of 146
Page 96
18 Non PPP Woodlands PS No Page 96 of 146
Page 97
19 Cluster PPP / Non PPP School Contribution Requested Kilsyth Academy Non PPP Balmalloch PS No Non PPP Banton PS No Non PPP Chapelgreen PS No Non PPP Kilsyth Academy No Non PPP Kilsyth PS No Lenzie Academy Non PPP Auchinloch PS Yes OLHS - Cumbernauld Non PPP OLHS Cumbernauld Yes Non PPP St Andrew's PS No Non PPP St Barbara's PS Yes Non PPP St Joseph's PS Yes Non PPP St Lucy's PS Yes Non PPP St Margaret of Scotland PS No Non PPP St Mary's PS Cumbernauld No OLHS - Motherwell Non PPP Cathedral PS Yes Non PPP OLHS Motherwell No Non PPP St Bernadette's PS No Non PPP St Brendan's PS No Split Catchment Non PPP Ladywell PS Yes Split Catchment Non PPP Ravenswood PS No St Aidan's HS Non PPP St Aidan's HS No Non PPP St Aidan's PS No Non PPP St Brigid's PS No PPP St Ignatius PS No Non PPP St Mary's PS Cleland No Non PPP St Patrick's PS Shotts No Non PPP St Thomas' PS Yes St Ambrose HS Non PPP St Ambrose HS No Non PPP St Augustine's PS No Non PPP St Bartholomew's PS No PPP St Kevin's PS Yes Page 97 of 146
Page 98
20 Cluster PPP / Non PPP School Contribution Requested St Andrew's HS Non PPP Corpus Christi PS No PPP OL & St Joseph's PS Yes PPP St Andrew's HS No Non PPP St Bernard's PS No Non PPP St Mary's PS Coatbridge Yes Non PPP St Monica's PS No Non PPP St Patrick's PS Coatbridge Yes Non PPP St Stephen's PS Yes PPP St Timothy's PS No St Margaret's HS Non PPP All Saint's PS Yes PPP St Aloysius PS No Non PPP St Andrew's PS No PPP St David's PS Yes Non PPP St Dominic's PS No Non PPP St Edward's PS No Non PPP St Margaret's HS No PPP St Mary's PS Caldercruix No Non PPP St Serf's PS No St Maurice's HS Non PPP Holy Cross PS No Non PPP St Maurice's HS No Non PPP St Michael's PS Yes PPP St Patrick's PS Kilsyth No Taylor HS Non PPP Christ the King PS Yes Non PPP OL & St Francis PS No PPP St Patrick's PS New Stevenston Yes Non PPP St Teresa's PS Yes Non PPP Taylor HS Yes Uddingston Grammar Non PPP Aitkenhead PS No PPP Tannochside PS No Page 98 of 146
Page 99
21 Appendix 3 – Development Viability Development Viability Statement Requirements Where a developer is seeking an exemption or reduction of the education contribution on the basis of economic viability then the following information will be required: • An independent and verified Development Viability Statement undertaken by the DV or mutually agreed suitably qualified consultant. This allows a comparison of costs to be evaluated against projected house values and should also set out in detail why any abnormal development costs cannot be met from either a reduction in purchase price for the site and/or developer profit margins. This should include an explanation of financial assumptions and an explanatory note on all appraisal assumptions. The report should detail the financial implications of the additional costs and their implications for the viability of the development. • A certified dated copy of the original viability appraisal setting out the allowances made for developer obligations and affordable housing policy (if applicable) and compatibility with prevailing policy requirements. • From a RICS accredited firm a Quantity Surveyor’s (QS) detailed cost budget on development costs e.g., externals, infrastructure, and abnormal costs which include a detailed breakdown, produced in accordance with RICS published costing data and with regard to the recommended practice set out in the RICS Practice Statement Financial Viability in Planning: Conduct and Reporting (2021) (RICS FVIP). • Verified site valuation at the time of the application submission. • Projected market valuations for each property within the development (with supporting evidence). • An indication of the timescales within which each property would be marketed and sold and, where appropriate, development phasing information. • Design and Access statement (if applicable and available). Page 99 of 146
Page 100
22 • Build specification. • Assumptions on all grant funding and (where appropriate) evidence of transactions/negotiations with RSL’s. The confidential and sensitive nature of some financial information is acknowledged, and the content of the Assessment will remain confidential between the applicant and named officials within the Council, District Valuer or other third-party advisor as agreed and the relevant decision makers and committees. As a public body, however, the Council will require to comply with the terms of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 and the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 in relation to any request for disclosure of such information. Any applicable exemptions or exceptions under the legislation will be appropriately applied. Any requests received for such disclosure of information shall be considered on a case by case basis. Viability Assessment and Outcomes Once an agreed Development Viability Statement and supporting information is received by the Council it will be considered. If the applicant submits their own independent Development Viability Statement that has not been agreed in advance with the Council as being carried out by a suitably independent source then it will be independently reviewed by the District Valuer Service (DVS) or an alternative third-party advisor agreed by, and acting on behalf of the Council. This will be carried out at the developers’ expense with costs determined on an individual basis. The requirement for independent verification of Viability Assessments will only be removed where the time and cost associated with this process is disproportionate to the amount of developer contribution required. Each case will be determined by the Council on its own merits. The outcome of the Viability Assessment independent review will not be binding on the Council but may inform any recommendation to the appropriate planning decision maker. If the exercise establishes there are viability issues with the development as a result of the Education contribution requirement, the council will then have to determine if the shortfall in the education requirements can be borne by the Council and/or its partners as ultimately the impact of the development will need to be mitigated and paid for. In event that the Council can support the viability, it will proceed with such a recommendation but ultimately if the infrastructure cannot be funded to offset the impact of development, then the site will be required to be deferred until such time as the site can become viable on its own merits. Page 100 of 146
Page 101
23 For the avoidance of doubt the agreement to waive a contribution towards education provision would be for a timescale specified within the contribution waiver agreement (3 to 5 years maximum depending on the number of units to be constructed) and starting from the date of planning permission being granted. The Council would reserve the right to seek an updated Viability Assessment independent review at the end of the specified period and every 3-5 years for the duration of the planning permission or until site completion. Should the updated viability assessment show that the viability of the site had changed then the Council would reserve the right to withdraw a waiver on the remaining units still to be constructed and it would be expected that a contribution at the current established rate would be required for the remaining units. Land Value The price paid for land is not a justification for failing to accord with development plan policies. The Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) guidance on Financial Viability in Planning, Guidance Note (1st Edition- GN94/2012 - abbreviated to RICS FVIP) and now updated, at [para 1.2.4] of Assessing Viability confirms this, and the District Valuer (DV) or an alternative third-party advisor agreed by, and acting on behalf of the Council when instructed by the Council will adopt and use the RICS’s guidance as the most appropriate. The use of the DV in this way is supported by paragraph 22 of PAN 2/2010 setting out this as recommended good practice. It should be noted that financial viability can have regard to not just a single policy’s impacts but the cumulative impact of policy requirements and developer contributions. In terms of viability however all of these policy documents only recognise a departure from the policy requirements for provision of a developer obligation for education and to address viability and no other policy requirement. Page 101 of 146
Page 102
Page 102 of 146
Page 103
North Lanarkshire Council Report Planning Committee Does this report require to be approved? ☒ Yes ☐ No Ref Date 12/10/23 Scottish Government Directions on Finalised Supplementary Guidance: Planning and Noise and Affordable Housing From Pamela Humphries, Chief Officer (Place) E-mail laingg@northlan.gov.uk Telephone Gordon Laing, 07970018874 Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to update the Committee on the outcome of the consultation with the Scottish Government on the Supplementary Guidance Documents: Planning and Noise and Affordable Housing. The report outlines a summary of the directions received from the Scottish Government and the amendments made to the guidance as a consequence of those directions. Recommendations It is recommended that the Committee: 1) Note the changes to the finalised Supplementary Guidance requested by the Scottish Government and that the approved Supplementary Guidance Documents will now be published. The Plan for North Lanarkshire Priority Improve the health and wellbeing of our communities Ambition statement (14) Ensure the highest standards of public protection Programme of Work Sustainable Futures Item 5 Page 103 of 146
Page 104
1. Background Public Consultation 1.1 A six-week public consultation was undertaken between the 3rd April and 17th May on the two Supplementary Guidance Documents: Planning and Noise and Affordable Housing. The Supplementary Guidance documents were available to view at the Civic Centre and all public libraries within North Lanarkshire, the consultation was advertised in all the local newspapers, publicised on the Council’s social media platforms and response surveys were accessible via the Council’s live consultations page via the Council website. Subsequent to the public consultation the guidance was amended where necessary and submitted to the Planning Committee for final approval. 1.2 Members will note that the finalised guidance was approved by the Planning Committee on the 29th June 2023. Scottish Government Consultation 1.3 The finalised Supplementary Guidance: Planning and Noise and Affordable Housing were submitted to the Scottish Government for approval on the 20th July 2023. 1.4 The Scottish Government confirmed on the 8th of September 2023 that the supplementary guidance Planning and Noise may not be adopted until modifications specified in Annex A to their notice had been made and the reasons for the modifications were also set out in Annex A. 1.5 The Scottish Government confirmed on the 8th of September 2023 that the Scottish Ministers do not propose to issue a direction in relation to supplementary guidance Affordable Housing. 2. Report Scottish Government Directions Planning and Noise Supplementary Guidance Modification 1: 2.1 Modify paragraph 1.1 of the supplementary guidance to read: “This Supplementary Guidance (SG) forms part of the Development Plan and is a statutory requirement in the determination of planning applications” Reason: To align with the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 Modification 2: 2.2 Modify paragraph 1.2 of the supplementary guidance to read: “The SG expands upon the following North Lanarkshire Council Local Development Plan policies: Status • Policy EDQ 2C – Management Areas • Policy EDQ 3 (part e) – Quality of Development, Guidance” Reason: To align with North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (July 2022) Page 104 of 146
Page 105
Modification 3: 2.3 Modify paragraph 3.2.1 of the supplementary guidance to read: “Local Development Plan. The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended by the Planning etc (Scotland) Acts 2006 and 2019) and its associated regulations requires local authorities to produce a local development plan, setting out the Council’s detailed policies and proposals for the use, development, protection and improvement of land. North Lanarkshire Council adopted its Local Development Plan on 6th July 2022. Section 22 of The Town and Country Planning Act 1997 allows local authorities to adopt and issue guidance attached to a local development plan. Section 22 is continued in effect to enable the adoption of certain supplementary guidance until 31 March 2025 by regulation 4 of the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 (Commencement No. 11 and Saving and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2023.” Reason: To align with the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019. Modification 4: 2.4 Modify paragraph 4.1 of the supplementary guidance to read: “Noise must be a material consideration in any planning application when:” Reason: To align with Circular 3/2022 which sets out that possible material considerations include environmental impacts of the proposed development. This applies to the subsequent bullet points covering noise sensitive development and noise generating development. Modification 5: 2.5 Modify paragraph 4.2 of the supplementary guidance to read: “Noise sensitive uses may include a residential area, school or hospital while noise generating uses are likely to be cultural venues (including live music venues), noisy roads, railways, industrial and commercial sites.” Reason: To align with Section 41A – Conditional grant of planning permission: noise sensitive developments of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019. Modification 6: 2.6 Modify part a) and e) of paragraph 4.9 of the supplementary guidance to read: “At the very least this should include exploring the potential for: a) orientating the proposed buildings to reduce noise impact. b) the use of barriers and bunds to reduce the noise level at the noise sensitive receptor. c) designing the internal layout to place habitable rooms away from the line of site of any noise sources d) use of insulation of the building envelope to mitigate noise and e) reducing the noise at source” Page 105 of 146
Page 106
Reason: To align with Section 41A – Conditional grant of planning permission: noise sensitive developments of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019. Modification 7: 2.7 Modify paragraph 5.2.4 of the supplementary guidance to read: “It is desirable that external noise levels in gardens, patios and amenity space of residential properties do not exceed 50 dB LAeq,T, with an upper guideline value of 55 dB LAeq,T, where T is the daytime period of 16 hours, 07:00 to 23:00, development that cannot meet these guidelines should be avoided. Where proposed development cannot meet these criteria with the provision of the most effective noise mitigation measures in place, the number of affected properties and the level to which the guideline is exceeded, the following factors will be considered, by the planning authority when determining the suitability of the development: • The number of affected properties; • The level by which the guidelines are exceeded; • The impact on the amenity and wellbeing of the occupiers, in the context of all the proposed mitigation measures for the property.” Reason: To align with Policy 23 of NPF4. Modification 8: 2.8 Modify the table at 5.2.5 of the supplementary guidance to include “Rail Traffic” under sound source in column 1 and “Internally Night time: LAmax= 45 dB ***” in Rail Traffic Row 3, column 3. (See Notice of Intention to Adopt – Supplementary Guidance – Planning and Noise. Scottish Government correspondence dated 8th September 2023 Annex A Modification 8) Scottish Government Direction Affordable Housing Supplementary Guidance 2.9 No proposed directions in relation to this document. 3. Measures of success Planning and Noise Supplementary Guidance 3.1 The measures of success are that the finalised Supplementary Guidance will ensure that: • The consultation responses have been carefully considered and responded to. • Clearer guidelines for applicants to help ensure noise is appropriately considered at the earliest stage of design development. • Gives the Service a framework to offer advice on the likely impacts of development in terms of noise and consistency of approach. • Less likelihood of noise complaints associated with new developments. • Aligns with Government Guidance on health impacts of development which is an important consideration under NPF4. Page 106 of 146
Page 107
• It offers the Council a more robust framework to support the Council’s decisions in relation to any appeals referencing noise grounds. Affordable Housing Supplementary Guidance 3.2 The measures of success are that the finalised Supplementary Guidance will ensure that: • The consultation responses have been carefully considered and responded to. • Clearer guidelines for developers/applicants to help ensure that affordable housing is appropriately considered at an early stage. • Will help developers/applicants determine development viability and agree the valuation methodology with the Council at an early stage. • Aligns with Government Policy on Affordable Housing which is an important consideration under NPF4. • It offers the Council a more robust framework to support the Council’s decisions in relation to any appeals referencing affordable housing policy. • Can help to increase the efficiency of processing planning applications in terms of setting the terms for associated legal agreements early that require to be signed prior to planning consent being issued. 4. Supporting documentation 4.1 Finalised draft Supplementary Guidance Note – Planning and Noise 4.2 Finalised draft Supplementary Guidance Note – Affordable Housing 4.3 Notice of Intention to Adopt – Supplementary Guidance – Planning and Noise. Scottish Government correspondence dated 8th September 2023. 4.4 Notice of Intention to Adopt – Supplementary Guidance – Affordable Housing. Scottish Government correspondence dated 8th September 2023. Pamela Humphries Chief Officer (Place) Page 107 of 146
Page 108
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? 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? Page 108 of 146
Page 109
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? 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 109 of 146
Page 110
North Lanarkshire Council Supplementary Guidance Planning and Noise Page 110 of 146
Page 111
2 | P a g e Supplementary Guidance – Planning and Noise Contents Page 1 Status 3 2 Introduction 3 3 Legislative Framework and Planning Policy 4 4 Development Management in North Lanarkshire 6 5 Noise Guidance and Criteria 8 6 Noise Impact Assessment 14 Appendix 1 – References 16 Appendix 2 – Contact Details for Specialist Acoustic Help 17 Appendix 3 – Glossary of Acoustic Terms 18 Contact Details for North Lanarkshire Council 20 Page 111 of 146
Page 112
3 | P a g e 1. Status 1.1. This Supplementary Guidance (SG) forms part of the Development Plan and is a statutory requirement in the determination of planning applications. 1.2. The PG expands upon the following North Lanarkshire Council Local Development Plan policies: • Policy EDQ 2C – Management Areas • Policy EDQ 3(part e) – Quality of Development, Guidance 2. Introduction 2.1. The main purpose of this guidance is to assist developers, decision makers, agents, residents and others to identify issues to be addressed in any application for development in which noise will be an important consideration when assessing that application. 2.2. Noise is likely to be an important consideration where noise sensitive developments are planned near to existing noise sources, or where potentially noisy developments are introduced into existing noise sensitive areas. 2.3. Unwanted sound can have a significant impact upon environmental quality, public health and amenity. (1) Long term exposure to noise has been linked to increased risk of cardiovascular disease and stroke. Short term exposure has been linked to decreased quality of sleep including night awakenings. Disturbed sleep has been linked to fatigue, accidents and reduced performance (2). 2.4. Good acoustic design is imperative in the development of sites in which noise is a consideration. This process should examine the design options available in relation to the location of noise sensitive receptors to a noise source including the possibility of:- • reducing the noise at source • orientating the proposed buildings to reduce noise impact • the use of barriers and bunds to reduce the noise level at the noise sensitive receptor • designing the internal layout to place habitable rooms away from the line of site of any noise sources and • use of insulation of the building envelope to mitigate noise.(3) Page 112 of 146
Page 113
4 | P a g e 2.5. Early engagement with North Lanarkshire Council’s (NLC) Environmental Health Service to discuss the proposal and any noise issues on the proposed site is essential. These discussions should include whether a noise impact assessment report is required to be undertaken as part of the Planning application process and the terms of the assessment methodology as well as the internal and external noise level standards which will be applied by the local authority. Agreeing these matters in advance could prevent unnecessary delays during the planning process should an alternative noise impact assessment methodology or standard be applied. Environmental Health may continue to be involved throughout the process. 2.6. The Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) regulates noise from certain prescribed industrial processes. Notwithstanding the regulatory role of SEPA, the Council will determine whether any noise impact from an existing or proposed development is significant in terms of the Planning regime and the local authority will liaise with SEPA regarding any Planning application involving a proposed new prescribed process or proposed changes to an existing prescribed process. 3. Legislative Framework and Planning Policy 3.1. Scottish Government Policy 3.1.1 The Environmental Noise (Scotland) Regulations, 2006 requires the production of strategic noise maps for large urban area, transport corridors and large airports within Scotland. From these strategic maps, action plans were drawn up which identified areas where residents were likely to be exposed to the highest levels of noise. These areas are known as Noise Management Areas [NMAs]. These action plans also identified areas where individuals were likely to experience relatively low levels of noise and these are known as Quiet Areas [QAs]. The Scottish Government Action Plans aim to identify noise abatement measures designed to manage, avoid, prevent or reduce the harmful effects of noise exposure in NMA’s. These Action Plans also aim to maintain and protect environmental noise quality in QAs. Similarly, through the planning process Local Authorities are required to ensure that new development does not result in increasing numbers of people exposed to adverse noise impacts in both NMAs and QAs. At the time of publishing this guidance no noise management areas Page 113 of 146
Page 114
5 | P a g e or quiet areas have been declared in North Lanarkshire. 3.1.2 Planning Advice Note (PAN) 1/2011(1) provides guidance for planning authorities in relation to planning and noise and when noise impact assessment (NIA) will be required. The contents of this document have been considered in the development of this guidance together with appropriate European and national guidance on noise. 3.1.3 The Technical Guidance Note (4) which accompanies PAN 1 offers guidance regarding technical aspects of noise assessment and mitigation but recognises that it is up to each individual local authority to develop their own noise guidance and set appropriate noise standards specific to their local circumstances. 3.14 National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) specifically Policy 23 Health and safety requires noise impact to be taken account of in determining planning applications. Other policies refer to noise considerations as well. 3.2. North Lanarkshire Council Policy and Guidance 3.2.1. Local Development Plan. The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended by the Planning etc (Scotland) Acts 2006 and 2019) and its associated regulations requires local authorities to produce a local development plan, setting out the Council’s detailed policies and proposals for the use, development, protection and improvement of land. North Lanarkshire Council adopted its Local Development Plan on 6th July 2022(4). Section 22 of The Town and Country Planning Act 1997 allows local authorities to adopt and issue guidance attached to a local development plan. Section 22 is continued in effect to enable the adoption of certain supplementary guidance until 31 March 2025 by regulation 4 of the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 (Commencement No. 11 and Saving and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2023.” 3.2.2. The Business Plan for North Lanarkshire sets the direction for the council and its partners. Its purpose is to communicate the shared priorities and provide a focus for activities and resources. The plan details North Lanarkshire Council’s big ambitions in terms of realising large-scale regeneration and infrastructure projects. As part of these regeneration and infrastructure projects the noise impact of any development will be one of the many considerations. Page 114 of 146
Page 115
6 | P a g e 3.2.3. The Economic Regeneration Delivery Plan for North Lanarkshire sets out a high-level framework for improving economic opportunities and outcomes for all by delivering an integrated approach to investing in four key, inter-related areas: Housing supply; Town centres; Business and industry; Infrastructure. As part of this integrated approach the impact of noise on sensitive developments will require to be considered. Good acoustic design can provide a solution to potential noise impact issues when noise sensitive receptors and noise generating sources require to coexist in the same location. 4. Development Management in North Lanarkshire 4.1. Noise will be a material consideration in any planning application when: • Noise sensitive development (NSD) is proposed close to an existing noise source. • Noise generating development (NGD) is planned next to an existing noise sensitive development. 4.2. Noise sensitive uses may include a residential area, school or hospital while noise generating uses are likely to be cultural venues, live music venues, noisy roads, railways, industrial and commercial sites. 4.3. Where it is not possible to separate noisy and noise sensitive land uses, developers will have to incorporate good acoustic design and a sensitive approach to any new development proposals. This approach will be key in Town Centre locations where North Lanarkshire’s ambition is to create vibrant places with mixed use spaces which maximise social, economic and environmental opportunities. The planning authority will look favourably on acoustically well designed buildings, in town centre locations, to enable noise sensitive and noise generating development to succeed in these areas while maintaining good acoustic conditions for residents. 4.4. In a very small minority of areas which already have an unacceptably high noise level it may not be possible to mitigate the adverse effects of noise. In such circumstances noise sensitive development may not be appropriate. 4.5. The Environmental Protection Act, 1990, places a duty on Local Authorities to investigate noise complaints from, among others, industrial and commercial sources. Where statutory nuisance conditions exist, a Local Authority must serve Notice requiring the business to take action to reduce noise levels. This requirement may Page 115 of 146
Page 116
7 | P a g e result in a company having to reduce their operations or in extreme cases close their business. Therefore, in considering a NSD close to industrial/commercial sources there is an obligation on the planning authority to protect existing commerce and industry from complaints from residents of new housing development. 4.6. Developers should agree representative noise standards and the site-specific NIA methodology with the planning authority in advance of undertaking the assessment. 4.7. It is recognised by the World Health Organisation (WHO) that a large proportion of the public wish to sleep with their window open, slightly, for ventilation (6). For this reason, it is required that developers seek to use good building design to allow the windows of habitable rooms (bedrooms, living rooms and dining rooms) to be open slightly for ventilation while providing satisfactory internal noise levels. 4.8. Pan 1/2011 and BS 8233:2014 both recognise, in some areas where development is desirable, while it is preferable to have open windows in habitable rooms of a new noise sensitive development, this might not always be possible where external noise levels are high, and still achieve satisfactory internal noise levels(1)(3). 4.9. In North Lanarkshire developers will be expected to aim to achieve satisfactory internal noise levels with room window open slightly for ventilation. The developer must demonstrate that they have explored all potential mitigation options to try and achieve this goal on sites where noise levels are an issue. At the very least this should include exploring the potential for: a) orientating the proposed buildings to reduce noise impact. b) the use of barriers and bunds to reduce the noise level at the noise sensitive receptor. c) designing the internal layout to place habitable rooms away from the line of site of any noise sources d) of insulation of the building envelope to mitigate noise.(3) and e) reducing the noise at source at the expense of the applicant. Only after the applicant has provided justification to the satisfaction of the Council that these mitigation options have been exhausted, it may be possible to consider some proposals with ‘closed windows’ being part of an overall agreed noise mitigation strategy. Each site will be considered by the Planning Authority, on its own merits. The number of affected properties and the level to which the guideline is exceeded will be considered by the planning authority when determining the suitability of a Page 116 of 146
Page 117
8 | P a g e development where ‘closed windows/alternative ventilation’ is a limited part of an overall agreed noise mitigation strategy. This approach is highly likely to be more acceptable to NLC for anonymous transport noise sources without distinctive noise characteristics than for industrial/commercial noise sources for reasons which are outlined below. 4.10. The internal noise standards quoted within the various WHO documents and within BS 8233:2014 relate only to anonymous noise sources such as road and rail traffic. WHO research finds that residents consider these types of noise to be less annoying than noise from discrete known sources which often generate a stronger emotional response(6). WHO 1999, indicates that a window, open for ventilation, will provide attenuation of between 10 – 15 dB(6). WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region, 2018 provides guidance regarding attenuation which may be provided by windows within structures “The differences between indoor and outdoor levels are usually estimated at around 10 dB for open, 15 dB for tilted or half-open and about 25 dB for closed windows”(7). This is based on research on attenuation of road traffic noise and consequently NLC will apply a 15dB attenuation for window open for ventilation when transport noise sources are being assessed. 4.11. Noise from industrial and commercial sources is not anonymous in nature and is often more variable in level and character. It often contains discrete tones, impulsive and intermittent noise. As such it is considered to cause greater annoyance and disturbance to receptors. Due to the nature and character of industrial/commercial noise, which can include externally sited fan or plant noise, when assessing indoor noise levels within a noise impact assessment, an open window should be considered to give the lower end of the spectrum of attenuation at 10 dB. 5. Noise Guidance and Criteria 5.1. A quantitative assessment of noise levels impacting a site will be required as part of an application where noise is a material consideration. A qualitative assessment may also be required. 5.2. Anonymous Road and Rail Traffic Noise 5.2.1. The WHO Guidelines for community noise 1999(6), Night noise for Europe 2009(2) and Environmental Noise Guidelines for Europe, 2018(7) provide information about appropriate external and internal noise levels in relation Page 117 of 146
Page 118
9 | P a g e to anonymous noise from road and rail traffic. These noise levels have then been transposed into UK guidance in the form of BS 8233:2014(3) 5.2.2. The indoor ambient noise levels for new dwellings planned next to an existing road or rail noise source are given in BS 8233:2014 Table 4 which is reproduced below together with the accompanying notes:- Table 4 Indoor ambient noise levels for dwellings Activity Location 07:00 to 23:00 23:00 to 07:00 Resting Dining Sleeping (daytime resting) Living room Dining room/area Bedroom 35 dB LAeq, 16hour 40 dB LAeq, 16hour 35 dB LAeq, 16hour - - 30 dB LAeq, 8hour NOTE 1 Table 4 provides recommended levels for overall noise in the design of a building. These are the sum total of structure-borne and airborne noise sources. Groundborne noise is assessed separately and is not included as part of these targets, as human response to groundborne noise varies with many factors such as level, character, timing, occupant expectation and sensitivity. NOTE 2 The levels shown in Table 4 are based on the existing guidelines issued by the WHO and assume normal diurnal fluctuations in external noise. In cases where local conditions do not follow a typical diurnal pattern, for example on a road serving a port with high levels of traffic at certain times of the night, an appropriate alternative period, e.g. 1 hour, may be used, but the level should be selected to ensure consistency with the levels recommended in Table 4. NOTE 3 These levels are based on annual average data and do not have to be achieved in all circumstances. For example, it is normal to exclude occasional events, such as fireworks night or New Year’s Eve. NOTE 4 Regular individual noise events (for example, scheduled aircraft or passing trains) can cause sleep disturbance. A guideline value may be set in terms of SEL or LAmax, F’ depending on the character and number of events per night. Sporadic noise events could require separate values. NOTE 5 If relying on closed windows to meet the guide values, there needs to be an appropriate alternative ventilation that does not compromise the façade insulation or the resulting noise level. If applicable, any room should have an adequate ventilation (e.g. trickle ventilators should be open) during assessment. NOTE 6 Attention is drawn to the Building Regulations [30, 31, 32]. NOTE 7 Where development is considered necessary or desirable, despite external noise levels above WHO guidelines, the internal target levels may be relaxed by up to 5 dB and reasonable internal conditions still achieved. If there is noise from a mechanical ventilation system, the internal ambient noise levels should be reported separately with the system operating and with it switched off. If the room contains items such as fridges, freezers, cookers and water heaters, these should be turned off during measurement. Shorter measurement periods such as LAeq, 1 hour may be used by agreement, provided the selected shorter measurement period is shown to be representative of the entire night or day period. 5.2.3. To prevent sleep disturbance at night, as well as considering the equivalent sound pressure level (LAeq) of the sound source, the maximum indoor sound pressure level (LA,fast,max) and the number of those maximum sound events Page 118 of 146
Page 119
10 | P a g e should be assessed. WHO, 1999 suggests an LA,fast,max of 45 dB should not be exceeded for any single event more than 10-15 times per night, to prevent sleep disturbance(1). While WHO, 2009 suggests an LA,fast,max of 42 dB has been found to show no detectable adverse alteration in the sleeping individual(2). 5.2.4. It is desirable that external noise levels in gardens, patios and amenity space of residential properties do not exceed 50 dB LAeq,T, with an upper guideline value of 55 dB LAeq,T, where T is the daytime period of 16 hours, 07:00 to 23:00, development that cannot meet these guidelines should be avoided. Where proposed development cannot meet these criteria with the provision of the most effective noise mitigation measures in place, the following factors will be considered by the planning authority when determining the suitability of the development: • The number of affected properties; • The level by which the guidelines are exceeded; • The impact on the amenity and wellbeing of the occupiers, in the context of all the proposed mitigation measures for the property. 5.2.5. Relevant Target Noise levels for Road, Rail and Aircraft Traffic Sound Source Relevant Standard for Assessment Target Levels Standard from which target levels are derived Road Traffic Calculation of Road Traffic Noise 1998 [CTRN]; Design Manual for Roads and Bridges 2012 External Day time: LAeq[16hours]=50 – 55 dB*; or Lden < 53 dB External Night time: LAeq[8hours]= 45dB** ; or Lnight < 45 dB Internally Night time: LAmax= 45 dB *** WHO Guidance for Community Noise 1999, WHO Night Noise Guidelines for Europe, 2009, BS 8233:2014; WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for Europe, 2018 Rail Traffic Calculation of Railway Noise 1995[CRN] External Day time: LAeq[16hours]=50 – 55 dB*; or Lden < 54 dB External Night time: LAeq[8hours]= 45dB** ; or Lnight < 44 dB Internally Night time: LAmax= 45 dB *** WHO Guidance for Community Noise 1999, WHO Night Noise Guidelines for Europe, 2009, BS 8233:2014; WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for Europe, 2018 Air Traffic Guidance in BS 8233:2014; Civil Aviation Authority Lden < 55 dB Lnight < 40 dB WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for Europe, 2018 *BS8233:2014 recognises that it may not always be possible to meet 55 dB in residential Page 119 of 146
Page 120
11 | P a g e gardens, but that good design should be used to reduce noise levels in external amenity areas to the lowest possible level. **when assessed externally 1 m from the facade *** No more than 10 – 15 times per night. When considering the number of times per night each situation will be assessed on site by site basis and will be determined by the number of events and the levels of each event. 5.2.6 Any increase in traffic caused by a proposed development and assessment of its effect on noise levels at exiting residential properties should be included with in the NIA. 5.3 Industrial and Commercial Noise Sources 5.3.1 Noise from industrial and commercial sources is often varying in nature can be complex to assess. The most relevant standard for assessing new industrial and commercial development is BS 4142:2014+A1:2019. Methods for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound (8). 5.3.2 BS 4142:2014 provides a methodology of assessment and rating of commercial and industrial sound externally and gives an indication of whether that sound is likely to have an adverse effect on the residents of nearby dwellings both externally and internally. The standard is used to determine the impact of noise from a new industrial/commercial noise source on existing residential properties or from an existing industrial/ commercial noise source on a new residential development. This is achieved by determining: - a) The ambient, residual and background noise levels b) The rating level of the sound source, which may include penalties for the tonal, impulsive, intermittent or otherwise distinctive character of the sound c) The context in which the sound is occurring d) The significance of impact of the sound source by determining the level by which the rating level exceeds the background noise level e) An exceedance of +10 dB or more is considered to be an indication of likely significant adverse impact dependant on the context of the noise f) An exceedance of +5 dB or more is considered to be an indication of likely adverse impact dependant on the context of the noise g) The lower the rating level is relative to the measured background level the less likely it is that the specific noise source will have an adverse impact or a significant adverse impact. Page 120 of 146
Page 121
12 | P a g e 5.3.3 Relevant Noise Standards for Industrial/Commercial Noise BS 4142 Outcome Planning Advice LAr(T) – LA90,T is > 0 Noise is unlikely to be a consideration LAr(T) – LA90,T is > 0 and < +5 Where the rating level is above the background noise level by up to 5 dB it is in an indication that the noise may not be acceptable from a noise perspective depending on the context. Further noise mitigation is likely be required to reduce LAr(T) – LA90,T to as close to 0 as reasonably practicable. LAr(T) – LA90,T > + 5 Where the rating level is 5 dB or more above the background noise level this is an indication that the development is unlikely to be acceptable from a noise perspective. Further mitigation will be necessary to reduce the LAr(T) – LA90,T to as close to 0 as reasonably practicable. 5.4 Entertainment Noise 5.4.1 New commercial developments where amplified music or any broadcasting is a likely activity should be designed to ensure that this noise is contained within the development boundary and is inaudible within any neighbouring noise sensitive property. 5.4.2 New residential developments planned near venues where amplified music or broadcasting is likely, should be designed to ensure that noise from these sources is inaudible within the proposed noise sensitive properties and where appropriate in their gardens or amenity space. 5.5 Noise from Externally Sited Plant and Ventilation Systems 5.5.1 Noise from new or altered ventilation systems must be designed so that it meets the appropriate Noise Rating (NR) Curve in the nearest residential property. Where new NSD is located next to existing ventilation system noise the development should be designed to allow the noise standards detailed in 5.5.3 to be met. 5.5.2 Noise Level Standards for Ventilation Noise Noise Rating (NR) Curve Time of day NR 30 07:00-23:00 NR 25 23:00 – 07:00 NR20 (quieter areas) 23:00 – 07:00 Page 121 of 146
Page 122
13 | P a g e 5.5.3 For externally sited plant or ventilation systems which are located adjacent to: a) amenity areas where the background noise level is relatively low or b) high background noise levels where noise above NR 30 may be acceptable an assessment in terms of BS 4142:2014+A1:2019 may be more appropriate. Where either of these situations arise agreement should be sought from Environmental Health on the appropriate methodology prior to assessment. 5.6 Development where for traffic, industrial- commercial, entertainment and ventilation noise is material consideration will only be permitted where the planning authority is satisfied that the criteria outlined in 5.2 – 5.5 above have been achieved and that a development does not give rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life and/or does not require businesses to have unreasonable restrictions put on them because of changes to nearby land uses. 5.7 Wind Turbine Noise 5.7.1 Wind turbine development applications are not considered in this guidance. Advice on this topic can be found on our website at https://www.northlanarkshire.gov.uk/pests-and- pollution/pollution/noise/noise-guidance-wind-turbine-developments 5.8 Construction and Demolition Noise 5.8.1 In general control of noise from construction and demolition works in NLC is by means of guidelines on restricting the hours of operation of noisy equipment. These guideline times are: • Mondays to Fridays - 8am to 7pm • Saturdays - 8am to 1pm • Sundays and Bank Holidays - no noise should be audible at the site boundary. 5.8.2 The Control of Pollution Act, 1974 (9) (CoPA) Sections 60 and 61 may be used by the council to control noise from construction and demolition works. 5.8.3 Section 61 of the CoPA allows the person(s) carrying out the works to apply to the Council for permission to undertake these works at specified dates and Page 122 of 146
Page 123
14 | P a g e times, in a specific manner, using specified equipment/methods. The Council has 28 days to decide upon any application they receive. 5.8.4 Section 60 of the CoPA allows the Council to place restrictions on any construction/demolition works where it has had or believes it is likely to have complaints regarding noise. Any aspect of the site works can be restricted for example hours of operation, equipment used, work methods etc. 5.8.5 BS5228-1:2009 +A1:2014 Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites provides guidance for those undertaking this work. This document discusses noise mitigation controls, best practice in relation to communication with local residents, etc.(10) 6 Noise Impact Assessment 6.1 Noise impact assessment should be carried out by a suitably qualified and competent noise consultant. The consultant would be expected to hold membership of the Institute of Acoustics or the Association of Noise Consultants. 6.2 As a minimum a noise impact assessment report should include: - a) An Introduction Statement of qualifications, competency, professional memberships, experience, professional indemnity, etc. b) A description of site and proposal including the relevant noise source and associated detail c) Identification of the receptor, their proximity to source and their sensitivity d) The acceptable noise criteria agreed with the authority in advance e) Details of noise measurement survey undertaken should as a minimum include (but not limited to) details of the: - • device(s) used, assessment methodology, location, duration, meteorological conditions • interpretation of results, data summary, and any additional calculations • Any assumptions made • Impact assessment – analysis of results against acceptability criteria • Noise mitigation measures – discussion of any need for, the options available to mitigate Page 123 of 146
Page 124
15 | P a g e • observed noise levels, and the improvement various options might provide. f) Conclusions g) Recommendations h) Appendices, for raw measurement data, calibration certificates, calculations, if modelling used input parameters, additional maps and plans, details and specifications for mitigation measures. 6.3 Where there is significant night time noise in the area under consideration an attended night time noise survey is likely to be required. 6.4 Where noise mitigation measures are conditioned as part of the planning consent, the applicant may be required to validate that the measures detailed in the planning condition have been installed to the satisfaction of a suitably qualified acoustic consultant. It is likely that a report detailing these validation works will require to be submitted to, and approved by, the Planning Authority i.e. NLC before any such condition can be discharged. Page 124 of 146
Page 125
16 | P a g e Appendix 1 References 1. Planning Advice Note (PAN) 1/2011, Scottish Government 2011 2. World Health Organisation, Night noise guidelines for Europe 2009 3. BS 8233: 2014 Guidance on sound insulation and noise reduction for buildings 4. Assessment of noise: technical advice note, Scottish Government 2011 5. North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan, 2021 6. World Health Organisation, Guidelines for Community Noise 1999 7. World Health Organisation Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region 2018 8. BS 4142:2014+A1:2019. Methods for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound 9. The Control of Pollution Act, 1974 10. BS5228-1:2009 +A1:2014 Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites Page 125 of 146
Page 126
17 | P a g e Appendix 2 Contact details for acoustics organisations 1 Institute of Acoustics Sidbury Court 406 Sidbury Boulevard Milton Keynes MK9 2AF T: 0300 999 9675 E: ioa@ioa.org.uk IOA web site link to assist in finding a suitable noise consultant https://www.ioa.org.uk/find-acoustics-specialist-or-supplier 2 The Association of Noise Consultants 19 Omega Business Village Thurston Road Northallerton DL6 2NJ T: 020 8253 4518 E: info@theanc.co.uk ANC web site link to assist in finding a suitable noise consultant https://www.association-of-noise-consultants.co.uk/ 3 Building Research Establishment Red Tree Magenta Red Tree Business Centre 270 Glasgow Road, Rutherglen Glasgow, G73 1UZ T: +44 (0)1414 474999 E: enquiries@bregroup.com Page 126 of 146
Page 127
18 | P a g e Appendix 3 Glossary of Acoustic Terms ‘A’ weighting (dB(A)): A frequency dependent correction which weights sound to correlate with the sensitivity of the human ear to sounds of different frequencies. Ambient Noise: A measure of the typical noise (excluding any unusual events) present at a site. This is usually described in terms of LAeq,T. Anonymous noise: Noise that cannot be attributed to a single (specific source). For example, noise from cars on a road would be considered anonymous whereas a noisy ventilation unit would not. Audible: Sound that can be heard or is perceptible by the human ear. Background Noise: A measure of the underlying noise (excluding any unusual events) which is present at a site before a new noise source is introduced. This is usually described in terms of the LA90 level: the sound pressure level exceeded for 90% of the time. Decibel (dB): A unit used for many acoustic quantities to indicate the level of sound with respect to a reference level. Façade measurement: Noise measurements made outside an external wall of a structure (usually 1 metre from the wall). Good Acoustic Design: focuses on the techniques and principles employed in acoustic design, as well as room acoustics, hearing, speech, sound insulation, and noise control and design. Further details can be found in ProPG: Planning & Noise Professional Practice Guidance on Planning & Noise New Residential Development SD2-i SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT 2 GOOD ACOUSTIC DESIGN at https://www.ioa.org.uk/sites/default/files/14720%20ProPG%20Supplementary%202.pdf Habitable room: A room used for sleeping or recreation / relaxation. Inaudible: Sound that cannot be heard or is imperceptible to the human ear. Industrial-type noise sources: Noise sources that are industrial in character. For example, noise from plant and machinery, materials handling operations, or manoeuvring of heavy vehicles. Institute of Acoustics: A professional body representing persons at all levels working in the field of acoustics. LA90,T: Sound pressure level exceeded for 90% of the measurement period “T” or ‘background level’. LAeq,T: Equivalent continuous sound pressure level measured over the time period T Page 127 of 146
Page 128
19 | P a g e LAmax: The maximum RMS A weighted sound pressure level Noise: Unwanted sound. Noise assessment: Evaluation of noise climate by a suitably qualified person to assist in the determination of a planning application. Noise-sensitive premises /developments: Principally comprising residential premises, hospitals, schools and hotels. Other premises types may be deemed such depending upon circumstances. Noise Nuisance: A legal term used to describe noise at a level that is disturbing as perceived by a reasonable person. The meaning of nuisance is defined by precedent in common law. Outdoor Amenity Area: An outdoor area adjacent to a residential building which is designed and intended primarily for the leisure and recreation of the occupants of the dwelling. This will include gardens, landscaped areas, balconies. Rating Level: The noise level of an industrial noise source which includes an adjustment for the character of the noise. Used in BS4142:2014. Suitably qualified person: A person having a suitable combination of formal training and experience in the assessment of noise. Page 128 of 146
Page 129
20 | P a g e If you require further information or assistance, please contact North Lanarkshire Council using the details provided below: Planning Authority Address: Civic Centre Windmillhill Street Motherwell ML1 1AB Telephone: 01236 632500 Email: planningenquiry@northlan.gov.uk Environmental Health Address: Ground Floor, Civic Centre Windmillhill Street Motherwell ML1 1AB Telephone: 01236 856300 or 01236 856361 Email: Environmental-Health@northlan.gov.uk Or visit our website at https://www.northlanarkshire.gov.uk/ Page 129 of 146
Page 130
1 | P a g e North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan Affordable Housing Supplementary Guidance September 2023 Page 130 of 146
Page 131
2 | P a g e Contents Introduction……………………………………………………………………………Page 3 NPF4/National Planning Policy……………………………………………………..Page 3 Legislative Framework……………………………………………………………….Page 3 Council Recognition of Affordable Housing………………………………………..Page 4 Delivery Affordable Housing…………………………………………………………Page 4 Delivery Options………………………………………………………………………Page 6 Valuation Methodology…………………………………………………………….....Page 8 Funding Affordable Housing Delivery……………………………………………….Page 9 Affordable Housing Developer Models……………………………………………...Page 9 Planning Process……………………………………………………………………Page 10 Securing the Development………………………………………………………….Page 10 Review………………………………………………………………………………..Page 11 Page 131 of 146
Page 132
3 | P a g e Introduction This Supplementary Guidance (SG) advises developers and landowners how the identified shortfall in the provision of affordable housing in the Cumbernauld Housing Sub-Market Area (HSMA) will be addressed when proposals are submitted to the Council for housing developments of five or more units in the Cumbernauld HSMA. It is supplementary to Policy CI 1 Affordable Housing contained within the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (NLLDP) and the Affordable Housing Policy Background Report. This process is intended to secure best value for the Council and ensure the right type of affordable housing is provided in the right locations. Policy CI 1 Affordable Housing may also be applied on a case-by-case basis, where an identified need has been demonstrated. When developers carry out initial financial appraisals, they should ensure that they take full account of community expectations and development viability. This will assist in determining how the affordable housing requirements can be implemented. NPF4/National Planning Policy 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. Proposals for market homes will only be supported where the contribution to the provision of affordable homes on a site will be at least 25% of the total number of homes, unless the LDP sets out locations or circumstances where: i. a higher contribution is justified by evidence of need, or ii. a lower contribution is justified, for example, by evidence of impact on viability, where proposals are small in scale, or to incentivise particular types of homes that are needed to diversify the supply, such as self-build or wheelchair accessible homes. The contribution is to be provided in accordance with local policy or guidance.” In the absence of Scottish Government Guidance, the Council believes that its NLLDP Policy CI 1 Category Affordable Housing and this SG 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. Legislative Framework The SG takes account of: • The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by The Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 • The Housing (Scotland) Act 2001 Page 132 of 146
Page 133
4 | P a g e • Planning Advice Note 2/2010 (PAN 2/2010) • North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (Adopted July 2022) • National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) (Adopted February 2023) • Housing to 2040 NPF4 Policy 16 requires affordable housing provision where there is an identified need. The evidence base for an identified need is contained in the Affordable Housing Background Report and was confirmed by the Local Development Plan Examination prior to Adoption of NLLDP in 2022. Affordability is a key theme expressed in the Local Housing Strategy 2021-26. PAN2/2010 Affordable Housing and Housing Land Audits advises on how the planning system can facilitate the delivery of affordable housing. NLLDP Policy CI 1 is consistent with the guidance in SPP and PAN 2/2010. Council Recognition of Affordable Housing The Council recognises that affordable housing is typically housing available at non- market prices that meets the needs of those unable to afford to buy or rent on the open market. The Council recognises the following types of affordable housing provision, which are ranked in priority order, reflecting housing need within North Lanarkshire: • Social rented housing (highest priority) • Mid-market rented or intermediate rented housing • Shared equity • Shared ownership • Discounted low cost for sale/discounted market housing • Low-cost housing for sale through subsidy • Other forms of Discounted low-cost housing for sale These tenures are aligned with the affordable housing tenures set out in PAN 2/2010. Delivering Affordable Housing The Council recognises that a range of factors affect the delivery of affordable housing on individual sites. These include, but are not limited to: • Housing need • Site suitability • Costs and availability of public subsidy Each proposal will be considered on a site-by-site basis, considering costs of development and any infrastructure works necessary to facilitate development and render the site financially viable, as well as any pressure on existing social housing and proposed social housing newbuild within that particular locality. Page 133 of 146
Page 134
5 | P a g e Identifying the tenure-mix, type and scale of affordable housing will be determined on a site by- site basis to meet identified need and will be assessed with reference to the priorities identified in the following: • Local Housing Strategy • Strategic Housing Investment Plan • Housing Need & Demand Assessment • Housing waiting lists and pressure analysis • Regeneration master plans or other strategic locality planning • Contribution to the Council’s commitment to create mixed, sustainable communities Factors determining site-suitability for affordable housing are outlined below: • Affordable housing is generally, but not exclusively, required by communities more reliant on public transport, through economic circumstances, health, age or mobility. It is important these factors don’t disadvantage communities from accessing education, employment, community or recreation facilities, open space and health services. Affordable housing should be located close to amenities in accessible locations where communities can walk, cycle or use public transport to access services. • Topography of the site should be considered to ensure accessibility and mobility for residents, but also the development costs and financial viability of subsidised affordable housing. • Consideration should be given to whether or not the desired type of affordable housing required to meet local needs can be integrated with other house types being proposed within the development. In the interests of delivering mixed, sustainable communities affordable housing policy homes are expected to be indistinguishable in appearance to the market homes provided. • Subsidised affordable housing must comply with all relevant legislation and Scottish Government guidance in terms of design criteria such as Housing for Varying Needs. • Scale of development and proximity to other managed units along with integration must be balanced with the need for efficiency of development and housing management. By taking these factors into consideration at an early stage, the preferred form of affordable housing contribution can be agreed, and developers or landowners made aware of this prior to agreeing the valuation methodology jointly with the Council. This allows developers to consider affordable housing requirements as part of their site appraisal and land acquisition at an early stage. Page 134 of 146
Page 135
6 | P a g e Delivery Options Preference One: On-site Provision The first preference for affordable housing contributions is provision of on-site, subsidised affordable housing policy homes or serviced and accessible land1 being transferred or sold to an appropriate social housing provider. This should generally be a Registered Social Landlord (RSL) or North Lanarkshire Council for development at an end use value for affordable housing. Preference Two: Off-site Provision Provision of off-site affordable homes on another site within the developer’s ownership or suitable serviced and accessible land being transferred to the Council or appropriate RSL. It is for the developer to justify the omission of on-site provision and to guarantee the delivery of off-site provision, within a timescale agreed with the Council. Again, any land transferred should take account of the end use of the land for affordable housing. Preference Three: Commuted Sum Commuted sum as payment in lieu of equivalent of 20% affordable housing onsite provision. The commuted sum calculation will be determined by the District Valuer who should be appointed jointly by the Developer and the Council. Any assessment will take into account the end use value for affordable housing and the difference between it and the market value. This method will also consider site specific issues. Any commuted payments received will be spent on provision of affordable housing in the Cumbernauld Housing Sub-Market Area. Payment of a commuted sum may also be acceptable where the Council deem on or off-site provision is unsuitable or where insufficient funding is available to meet policy requirements. The Council shall utilise the commuted sum towards the provision of affordable housing within 10 years of payment. The Council will seek to secure on-site provision of affordable housing at the rate of 20% for all new housing developments with an overall site capacity of 25 or more homes and for sites of 5 to 24 homes the Council will seek payment of a commuted sum, in lieu of site provision, of a value equivalent to the cost of providing the percentage of serviced land required by the Affordable Housing Policy. An Affordable Housing Policy contribution will not be sought on sites of 1 to 4 homes. Where a proposal is for fewer than 5 units but is clearly part of a phased development of a larger site which would be subject to an affordable housing requirement, a contribution is required at an appropriate stage in the development as a whole. This Supplementary Guidance (SG) advises developers and landowners how the identified shortfall in the provision of affordable housing in the Cumbernauld Housing Sub-Market Area (HSMA) will be addressed when proposals are submitted to the 1 Serviced and accessible land is land that is ready to build on, with the necessary infrastructure in place, which includes utility connections as well as access to road networks and in locations where communities can walk, cycle or use public transport to access services. Page 135 of 146
Page 136
7 | P a g e Council for housing developments of five or more units in the Cumbernauld HSMA. It is supplementary to Policy CI 1 Affordable Housing contained within the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (NLLDP) and the Affordable Housing Policy Background Report. Please note that during the Adoption process, the Reporter specifically widened the scope of the Policy to be potentially applicable situationally elsewhere in North Lanarkshire under quite restrictive circumstances and that the Council was duty bound to accept this. The Reporter’s wording has the effect of future-proofing the Policy in the event that such, robust, evidence does arise during the lifetime of the Local Development Plan. This process is intended to secure best value for the Council and ensure the right type of affordable housing is provided in the right locations. Generally, where the Council or RSL can provide financial commitment that grant funding would be available to assist in delivery of the affordable housing units, then this would be the Council’s preferred delivery mechanism. Land transferred should be serviced, free from constraint, be able to be developed within an agreed timescale and be valued for delivery of affordable housing. In addition, the project must be within the Scottish Government’s subsidy target and development cost benchmarks. Planning applications are likely to proceed more efficiently if proposals for the delivery of affordable housing are set out as part of the initial planning application and early discussions with the Council and/or nominated RSL would be recommended. The Council is subject to public sector procurement rules and these rules may apply to the procurement of any affordable housing element of a development. PAN 2/2010 (Paragraph 21) states that where sites are unsuitable for affordable housing, developers may offer to provide the contribution on another site within their ownership, as long as the proposed alternative will help to meet an identified need in the same Housing Market Area. In some instances, provision of the affordable housing on an alternative site within the Cumbernauld Housing Sub-Market Area may be acceptable to the Council. Any alternative site will have to be deemed suitable by the Council (and in particular will either be allocated for housing within the Local Development Plan or have the benefit of planning permission for housing), be free from constraint, deliverable within agreed timescale and within Scottish Government subsidy target and development cost benchmark. The affordable housing delivered off-site will require to be equivalent to the value of the contribution required on the original site and also must be able to accommodate the requirement for affordable housing arising from development in its own right. Commuted sums in lieu of on-site provision will be accepted where: • The Council considers on or off-site provision unsuitable • No funding commitment can be given by the Council or a nominated RSL • Unsubsidised affordable housing is either financially unviable or will not meet identified need Page 136 of 146
Page 137
8 | P a g e The Council and developer will be required jointly to appoint the District Valuer, or other mutually agreed independent valuer, to value the affordable housing contribution required. The valuation at present will be based in accordance with guidance in Paragraph 22 of PAN 2/2010, which states that commuted sum payments should be ‘of a value equivalent to the cost of providing the percentage of serviced land required by the policy’. Accordingly, the commuted sum required will be equivalent to the cost of providing 20% of the site’s overall capacity in the form of serviced land for the provision of affordable housing by the Council or RSL. Commuted sums will be used to support the delivery of subsidised affordable housing within the Cumbernauld Housing Sub-Market Area. All resources from this source will be used in accordance with priorities identified within the Strategic Housing Investment Plan and Local Housing Strategy. By considering the preferred form of affordable housing contribution developers and landowners can make informed decisions in relation to agreeing a joint valuation methodology with the Council. This allows developers to consider affordable housing requirements as part of their site appraisal and land acquisition at an early stage. Valuation Methodology An agreed approach to valuations assists both developers and the Council with forward planning and delivery of the Affordable Housing Policy. Early consideration of the site valuation is important to allow developers to assess the potential impact of Affordable Housing Policy requirements. The Council and the developer will require to jointly appoint the District Valuer, or other mutually agreed independent valuer, to carry out an appropriate valuation. PAN 2/2010 sets out guidance on valuation of land for affordable housing. At the point of preparing this SG, VIP 12 and GN Valuation of Land for Affordable Housing in Scotland have been issued and provide the most up to date guidance in relation to valuation of land for affordable housing. Valuations will be calculated in terms of PAN2/2010 paragraph 25 for on-site provision and paragraph 26 for commuted sums. Paragraph 25 states that the commuted sum payments should be ‘of a value equivalent to the cost of providing the percentage of serviced land required by the policy’. Affordable housing land should be transferred at a value determined by the District Valuer, or other mutually agreed independent valuer suitably experienced in the type of property and the locality, appointed by mutual agreement between the parties. Valuations will be instructed jointly by the developer and Council and be based on the affordable housing mix required to meet the local identified housing need. Page 137 of 146
Page 138
9 | P a g e Only in exceptional circumstances will the affordable housing requirement be reduced or waived, and developers will be expected to provide evidence of associated costs if they seek to negotiate a reduction to the affordable housing policy requirements. The evidence will be evaluated by the Council and, if necessary, by a suitably qualified independent third party. Funding Affordable Housing Delivery The funding for delivering subsidised affordable housing will require the development to: • Meet with Local Housing Strategy priorities • Meet design and quality standards required by Scottish Government (including Housing for Varying Needs Standard and Secure By Design) • Be able to deliver proposed housing within Scottish Government’s regional development cost benchmarks • Be part of an existing or agreed development programme Where the affordable housing is to be delivered without subsidy: • A developer may in some circumstances elect to provide completed units without subsidy rather than the serviced plots required by the development plan policy. Affordable Housing Developer Models The Council will consider shared equity or ‘intermediate’ housing for rent as meeting identified affordable housing need in North Lanarkshire. Where it can be demonstrated by developers that unsubsidised forms of affordable housing for sale that maintain affordability in perpetuity in some way or another can be delivered, then these will also be considered. Developers will be expected to put in place an appropriate priority purchase scheme to target affordable housing at identified priority groups. Priority groups for affordable housing tenures in North Lanarkshire are those in housing need who cannot afford to buy or rent at market prices. Housing need refers to households lacking their own housing or living in housing which is inadequate or unsuitable for their needs, and who are unlikely to be able to meet their needs in the housing market without some assistance and who earn less than the average household income. The lower quartile weekly household income in North Lanarkshire is £3302. 2 Based on the Scottish Government Local Level Household Incomes Estimates (2018). Estimates are gross household income received by all adult householders, including welfare benefits, tax credits and housing benefit and is unequivalised income which does not adjust for size of household where there may be multiple incomes. Page 138 of 146
Page 139
10 | P a g e Planning Process It is advisable to ensure that officers of the Council’s Housing Service attend any pre-application discussions in advance of submitting planning applications. Following participation in discussions, it is hoped that developers will be able to submit an Affordable Housing Agreement Letter (produced by the Housing Service) along with their planning application, this document will demonstrate that the Council’s Head of Planning and Regeneration Service is satisfied that the provisions of the Affordable Housing Policy have been met. This document will then form the basis of the Legal Agreement that will subsequently enable planning permission to be granted in full. An Affordable Housing Agreement Letter neither grants, nor implies subsequent granting of planning permission. The Affordable Housing Agreement Letter will address matters such as: • The mechanism and timescale for the delivery of the affordable housing or commuted sum agreed between the developer/landowner and the Council/RSL • The method of establishing/setting the purchase price for the land • An agreement to transfer specified areas of land or buildings to an RSL or the Council • Detailed conditions relating to appropriate assessment of costs associated with abnormal ground conditions which will be subject to future site investigation and warranty • Detailed conditions relating to provision of an alternative commuted sum payment if for any reason following more detailed site and development cost appraisal the specified affordable housing cannot be delivered • Standard specification and definitions for the scale, type and tenure of affordable housing to be provided • An agreement on how any dispute will be resolved regarding valuation and exceptional site costs Securing the Development Where a requirement for affordable housing has been established and the value of same agreed, the affordable housing contribution will be secured by means of planning condition or a binding legal agreement between the Council and the developer or landowner seeking the planning consent as follows: • Applications for ‘Planning Permission in Principle” (where on-site provision is proposed) which are granted permission would be subject to a planning condition which requires the subsequent detailed application (Matters Subject Page 139 of 146
Page 140
11 | P a g e to Condition - MSC) to comply with the Affordable Housing Agreement Letter. The MSC application would then be the basis of a legal agreement as outlined below. • Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006 and Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 would be used to ensure that on or off- site schemes are implemented or to allow for the provision of a commuted sum of money on a phased basis. • Section 69 Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 would be used where the developer has agreed to provide the Council with a commuted sum of money and where this money would be provided as and when planning permission is granted. Legal agreements will require to be concluded prior to the issuing of planning consent. The legal agreement will seek to ensure that the terms of the Affordable Housing Agreement Letter are implemented within a defined timescale. The Council considers that affordable housing should remain affordable as long as there is an identified need shown in the Local Housing Strategy. It is considered that this can be most effectively achieved through the delivery of social rented housing. Where other mechanisms are used for delivery such as shared ownership, shared equity, discounted low-cost housing or private below rent market housing, developers will be required to ensure that future sales or rentals of the houses remain affordable as long as an affordable housing need remains. The above is not exhaustive and negotiations on the way in which affordable housing is provided within a site and the appropriate terms and conditions in the legal agreement will vary depending on specific site circumstances. Review The Supplementary Guidance will be kept under review to ensure that it remains accurate. The Council will therefore keep under review: • National legislative and policy developments • Changes to financial delivery and procurement frameworks • Changing local circumstances in relation to housing needs Monitoring the Local Housing Strategy, Strategic Housing Investment Plan along with the Housing Land Audit will be key in measuring the effectiveness of the delivery of the Council’s Affordable Housing Policy. Page 140 of 146
Page 141
Victoria Quay, Edinburgh EH6 6QQ www.gov.scot Local Government and Housing Directorate Planning, Architecture and Regeneration Division E: developmentplans@gov.scot Gordon Laing Planning Manager (Strategy & Policy) Enterprise & Communities Planning & Place North Lanarkshire Council By email: laingg@northlan.gov.uk cc: McLennaghanE@northlan.gov.uk Our ref: A44890210 8th September 2023 Dear Gordon NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ADOPT – SUPPLEMENTARY GUIDANCE – PLANNING AND NOISE I refer to your correspondence of 20th July 2023 certifying notice of North Lanarkshire Council’s intention to adopt the the supplementary guidance titled ‘Planning and Noise’. Scottish Ministers give notice that the supplementary guidance ‘Planning and Noise’ may not be adopted until modifications specified in Annex A to this notice have been made. The reasons for the modifications are also set out in Annex A. For the avoidance of doubt, prior to adopting this document as supplementary guidance, your Authority should satisfy itself that it has met the requirements set out in the Town and Country Planning (Development Planning) (Scotland) Regulations 2008. In particular, we would bring to your attention the need to comply with section 27(2) of the above regulations, which state that supplementary guidance adopted and issued under section 22(1) of the 19971 Act (in connection with a particular local development plan), may only deal with the provision of further information or detail in respect of the policies or proposals set out in the plan and then only provided that those are matters which are expressly identified in a statement contained in the plan as matters which are to be dealt with in supplementary guidance. Yours sincerely Adam Henry Planning, Architecture & Regeneration Division 1 Section 22 is continued in effect to enable the adoption of certain supplmentray guidance until 31 March 2025 by regulation 4 of the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 (Commencement No. 11 and Saving and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2023 (SSI 2023/10). Page 141 of 146
Page 142
Victoria Quay, Edinburgh EH6 6QQ www.gov.scot ANNEX A NORTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL – SUPPLEMENTARY GUIDANCE: PLANNING AND NOISE MODIFICATIONS REQUIRED For avoidance of doubt, the red text below identifies the new modified text 1. Modification: Modify paragraph 1.1 of the supplementary guidance to read: “This Supplementary Guidance (SG) forms part of the Development Plan and is a statutory requirement in the determination of planning applications” Reason: To align with the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. 2. Modification: Modify paragraph 1.2 of the supplementary guidance to read: “The SG expands upon the following North Lanarkshire Council Local Development Plan policies: Status • Policy EDQ 2C – Management Areas • Policy EDQ 3 (part e) – Quality of Development, Guidance” Reason: To align with North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (July 2022) 3. Modification: Modify paragraph 3.2.1 of the supplementary guidance to read: “Local Development Plan. The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended by the Planning etc (Scotland) Acts 2006 and 2019) and its associated regulations requires local authorities to produce a local development plan, setting out the Council’s detailed policies and proposals for the use, development, protection and improvement of land. North Lanarkshire Council adopted its Local Development Plan on 6th July 2022. Section 22 of The Town and Country Planning Act 1997 allows local authorities to adopt and issue guidance attached to a local development plan. Section 22 is continued in effect to enable the adoption of certain supplementary guidance until 31 March 2025 by regulation 4 of the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 (Commencement No. 11 and Saving and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2023.” Reason: To align with the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019. Page 142 of 146
Page 143
Victoria Quay, Edinburgh EH6 6QQ www.gov.scot 4. Modification: Modify paragraph 4.1 of the supplementary guidance to read: “Noise must be a material consideration in any planning application when:” Reason: To align with Circular 3/2022 which sets out that possible material considerations include environmental impacts of the proposed development. This applies to the subsequent bullet points covering noise sensitive development and noise generating development. 5. Modification: Modify paragraph 4.2 of the supplementary guidance to read: “Noise sensitive uses may include a residential area, school or hospital while noise generating uses are likely to be cultural venues (including live music venues), noisy roads, railways, industrial and commercial sites.” Reason: To align with Section 41A – Conditional grant of planning permission: noise- sensitive developments of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019. 6. Modification: Modify part a) and e) of paragraph 4.9 of the supplementary guidance to read: “At the very least this should include exploring the potential for: a) orientating the proposed buildings to reduce noise impact. b) the use of barriers and bunds to reduce the noise level at the noise sensitive receptor. c) designing the internal layout to place habitable rooms away from the line of site of any noise sources d) use of insulation of the building envelope to mitigate noise.(3) and e) reducing the noise at source ” Reason: To align with Section 41A – Conditional grant of planning permission: noise- sensitive developments of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019. Page 143 of 146
Page 144
Victoria Quay, Edinburgh EH6 6QQ www.gov.scot 7. Modification: Modify paragraph 5.2.4 of the supplementary guidance to read: “It is desirable that external noise levels in gardens, patios and amenity space of residential properties do not exceed 50 dB LAeq,T, with an upper guideline value of 55 dB LAeq,T, where T is the daytime period of 16 hours, 07:00 to 23:00, development that cannot meet these guidelines should be avoided. Where proposed development cannot meet these criteria with the provision of the most effective noise mitigation measures in place, the number of affected properties and the level to which the guideline is exceeded, the following factors will be considered, will be considered by the planning authority when determining the suitability of the development: The number of affected properties; The level by which the guidelines are exceeded; The impact on the amenity and wellbeing of the occupiers, in the context of all the proposed mitigation measures for the property.” Reason: To align with Policy 23 of NPF4. 8. Modification Modify the table at 5.2.5 of the supplementary guidance to read: Sound Source Relevant Standard for Assessment Target Levels Standard from which target levels are derived Road Traffic Calculation of Road Traffic Noise 1998 [CTRN]; Design Manual for Roads and Bridges 2012 External Day time: LAeq[16hours]=50 – 55 dB*; or Lden < 53 dB External Night time: LAeq[8hours]= 45dB** ; or Lnight < 45 dB Internally Night time: LAmax= 45 dB *** WHO Guidance for Community Noise 1999, WHO Night Noise Guidelines for Europe, 2009, BS 8233:2014; WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for Europe, 2018 Rail Traffic Calculation of Railway Noise 1995[CRN] External Day time: LAeq[16hours]=50 – 55 dB*; or Lden < 54 dB External Night time: LAeq[8hours]= 45dB** ; or Lnight < 44 dB Internally Night time: LAmax= 45 dB *** WHO Guidance for Community Noise 1999, WHO Night Noise Guidelines for Europe, 2009, BS 8233:2014; WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for Europe, 2018 Air Traffic Guidance in BS 8233:2014; Civil Aviation Authority Lden < 55 dB Lnight < 40 dB WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for Europe, 2018 Reason: Text originally not included in error by North Lanarkshire Council. Page 144 of 146
Page 145
Victoria Quay, Edinburgh EH6 6QQ www.gov.scot Local Government and Communities Directorate Planning and Architecture Division E: developmentplans@gov.scot Gordon Laing Planning Manager (Strategy & Policy) Enterprise & Communities Planning & Place North Lanarkshire Council By email: laingg@northlan.gov.uk cc: McLennaghanE@northlan.gov.uk planningenquiry@northlan.gov.uk ___ Ref: A45117241 8th September 2023 Dear Gordon North Lanarkshire Council – Local Development Plan - Supplementary Guidance - Affordable Housing - Notice of Intention to Adopt I refer to your correspondence of 20th July 2023, regarding North Lanarkshire Council’s intention to adopt the Affordable Housing Supplementary Guidance. Scottish Ministers do not propose to issue a direction in relation to this document. Prior to adopting this document as supplementary guidance, your Authority should satisfy itself that it has met the requirements set out in the Town and Country Planning (Development Planning) (Scotland) Regulations 2008. In particular, we would bring to your attention the need to comply with section 27(2) of the above regulations, which state that supplementary guidance adopted and issued under section 22(1) of the 19971 Act (in connection with a particular local development plan), may only deal with the provision of further information or detail in respect of the policies or proposals set out in the plan and then only provided that those are matters which are expressly identified in a statement contained in the plan as matters which are to be dealt with in supplementary guidance. Yours sincerely Adam Henry Planning, Architecture & Regeneration Division 1 Section 22 is continued in effect to enable the adoption of certain supplementary guidance until 31 March 2025 by regulation 4 of the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 (Commencement No. 11 and Saving and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2023 (SSI 2023/10). Page 145 of 146
Page 146
Page 146 of 146