Agenda Document Pack - Planning Local Review Body - 24/06/2024

South Lanarkshire Council · 24 June 2024
Back to Planning Local Review Body — 24 June 2024 and its agenda

Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.

Original council PDF · Download plain text

Page 1

Council Offices, Almada Street        
Hamilton, ML3 0AA 
Friday, 14 June 2024 
Dear Councillor 
Planning Local Review Body 
The Members listed below are requested to attend a meeting of the above Committee to be
held as follows:- 
Date:  Monday, 24 June 2024
Time:  10:30
Venue: Hybrid - Council Chamber, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton,
ML3 0AA 
The business to be considered at the meeting is listed overleaf. 
Yours sincerely 
Paul Manning
Chief Executive 
Members 
Richard Nelson (Chair), Gerry Convery (Depute Chair), Alex Allison, Colin Dewar, Gladys
Ferguson-Miller, Elise Frame, Lesley McDonald, Norman Rae, Graham Scott, David Shearer 
Substitutes
Robert Brown, Maureen Devlin, Grant Ferguson, Alistair Fulton, Graeme Horne, Ross Lambie,
Monique McAdams, Ian McAllan, Kenny McCreary, Davie McLachlan
1

Page 2

BUSINESS 
1 Declaration of Interests 
2 Minutes of Previous Meeting
Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Local Review Body held on 7 June 2024
submitted for approval as a correct record.  (Copy attached) 
5 - 14 
Item(s) for Decision 
3 Review of Case - P/23/0863 for Change of Use of Forecourt to Form
External Seating Area Ancillary to Cafe Premises at 270 Stonelaw Road,
Rutherglen
Report dated 13 June 2024 by the Executive Director (Finance and Corporate
Resources).  (Copy attached) 
15 - 18 
3a  Appendix 1 Planning Application Form P/23/0863 - previously issued  19 - 30 
3b  Appendix 2(a) Report of Handling P/23/0863 - previously issued  31 - 42 
3c  Appendix 2(b) Consultation Responses P/23/0863 - previously issued  43 - 48 
3d  Appendix 2(c) Representations P/23/0863 - previously issued  49 - 76 
3e  Appendix 3 Site Photographs and Location Plan P/23/0863 - previously
issued 
77 - 84 
3f  Appendix 4 Planning Decision Notice and Reasons for Refusal P/23/0863 -
previously issued 
85 - 92 
3g  Appendix 5 Notice of Review P/23/0863 - previously issued  93 - 140 
3h  Appendix 6 Further Representations P/23/0863 - previously issued  141 - 162 
3i  Appendix 7 Applicant's Comments on Further Representations P/23/0863 -
previously issued 
163 - 174 
4 Review of Case - P/23/1431 for Erection of Decking and Boundary Fence at
the Front Elevation (Retrospective) at Auchenblae, Newbigging Road,
Dunsyre, Lanark
Report dated 13 June 2024 by the Executive Director (Finance and Corporate
Resources).  (Copy attached) 
175 - 178 
4a  Appendix 1 Planning Application Form P/23/1431  179 - 188 
4b  Appendix 2(a) Report of Handling P/23/1431  189 - 196 
4c  Appendix 2(b) Consultation Response P/23/1431  197 - 200 
4d  Appendix 2(c) Representations P/23/1431  201 - 208 
4e  Appendix 3 Site Photographs and Location Plan P/23/1431  209 - 216 
4f  Appendix 4 Planning Decision Notice and Reasons for Refusal P/23/1431  217 - 228
2

Page 3

4g  Appendix 5 Notice of Review P/23/1431  229 - 238 
5 Review of Case - P/23/1524 for Erection of Replacement Single Storey Side
Extension, Replacement Front Dormer, Side Dormer, Rear First Floor
Gable Extension with Juliet Balcony, Replacement Detached Garage and
Associated Improvements at 20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell
Report dated 13 June 2024 by the Executive Director (Finance and Corporate
Resources).  (Copy attached) 
239 - 242 
5a  Appendix 1 Planning Application Form P/23/1524  243 - 254 
5b  Appendix 2 Report of Handling P/23/1524  255 - 262 
5c  Appendix 3 Site Photographs and Location Plan P/23/1524  263 - 274 
5d  Appendix 4 Planning Decision Notice and Reasons for Refusal P/23/1524  275 - 282 
5e  Appendix 5 Notice of Review P/23/1524  283 - 322 
5f  Appendix 6 Further Representation P/23/1524  323 - 332 
Urgent Business 
6 Urgent Business
Any other items of business which the Chair decides are urgent. 
For further information, please contact:-
Clerk Name: Stuart McLeod
Clerk Telephone: 07385 370 117
Clerk Email: stuart.mcleod@southlanarkshire.gov.uk 
3

Page 4

Page 5

PLANNING LOCAL REVIEW BODY (PLRB) 
Minutes of meeting held via Confero and in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Almada Street,
Hamilton on 7 June 2024 
Chair:
Councillor Richard Nelson 
Councillors Present:
Councillor Alex Allison, Councillor Gerry Convery (Depute), Councillor Maureen Devlin (substitute for
Councillor Graham Scott), Councillor Colin Dewar, Councillor Gladys Ferguson-Miller, Councillor
David Shearer 
Councillors' Apologies:
Councillor Elise Frame, Councillor Lesley McDonald, Councillor Norman Rae, Councillor Graham
Scott 
Attending:
Community and Enterprise Resources
T Finn and M O’Sullivan, Planning Advisers to the Planning Local Review Body
Finance and Corporate Resources
N Docherty, Administration Assistant; S McLeod, Administration Officer; S O’Neill, Legal Adviser to
the Planning Local Review Body 
1 Declaration of Interests 
No interests were declared. 
2 Minutes of Previous Meeting 
The minutes of the meeting of the Planning Local Review Body held on 17 May 2024 were
submitted for approval as a correct record. 
The PLRB decided: that the minutes be approved as a correct record. 
3 Review of Case for P/20/1877 for Formation of 6 House Plots with Associated
Works at Hallhill Farm, Lanark Road from Hazelbank to Auchenheath, Crossford,
Carluke 
A report dated 29 May 2024 by the Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources) was
submitted on a request for a review of the decision taken by officers, in terms of the Scheme of
Delegation, to refuse planning permission for planning application P/20/1877 by W Flemming for
the formation of 6 house plots with associated works at Hallhill Farm, Lanark Road from Hazelbank
to Auchenheath, Crossford, Carluke. 
To assist the PLRB in its review, copies of the following information had been appended to the
report:- 
 planning application form
 report of handling by the planning officer under the Scheme of Delegation together with
responses from consultees
 site photographs and location plan  
2
5

Page 6

 decision notice
 notice of review, including applicant’s statement of reasons for requiring the review
 further submission from Planning and Regulatory Services following notification of the
request for the review of the case 
The relevant drawings in relation to the review were available for inspection prior to the meeting
of the PLRB. 
The PLRB heard a Planning Adviser in relation to the case. 
The PLRB considered it had sufficient information to allow it to proceed to determine the review. 
The options available to the PLRB were to uphold, reverse or vary the decision taken in respect
of the application under review. 
In reviewing the case, the PLRB considered:- 
 all of the information appended to the report
 the relevant policies contained in the adopted South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan
2:-
 Policy 2 - Climate Change
 Policy 4 - Green Belt and Rural Area
 Policy 5 - Development Management and Placemaking
 Policy DM1 - New Development Design
 Policy GBRA1 - Rural Design and Development
 the relevant policies contained in the National Planning Framework 4 which had been
adopted on 13 February 2023 and formed part of the statutory development plan:-
 Policy 1 - Tackling the Climate and Nature Crises
 Policy 2 - Climate Mitigation and Adaptation
 Policy 14 - Design, Quality and Place
 Policy 15 - Local Living and 20 Minute Neighbourhoods
 Policy 17 - Rural Homes 
Following discussion, Councillor Shearer, seconded by Councillor Allison, moved that the decision
taken by officers, in terms of the Scheme of Delegation, to refuse planning permission for planning
application P/20/1877 by W Flemming for the formation of 6 house plots with associated works at
Hallhill Farm, Lanark Road from Hazelbank to Auchenheath, Crossford, Carluke, be reversed and
that the application be granted, subject to conditions, on the grounds that:- 
 the development site was a brownfield site
 there was no other current use for the site
 the development would contribute towards increasing the rural population 
Councillor Nelson, seconded by Councillor Convery, moved as an amendment that the decision
taken by officers, in terms of the Scheme of Delegation, to refuse planning permission for planning
application P/20/1877 by W Flemming for the formation of 6 house plots with associated works at
Hallhill Farm, Lanark Road from Hazelbank to Auchenheath, Crossford, Carluke, be upheld and
the application be refused for the reasons detailed in the decision notice.  On a vote being taken
using the electronic voting system, 3 members voted for the amendment and 4 for the motion
which was declared carried. 
The PLRB then considered appropriate conditions to be attached to the planning consent.  
6

Page 7

The PLRB decided: that the decision taken by officers, in terms of the Scheme
of Delegation, to refuse planning permission for planning
application P/20/1877 by W Flemming for the formation of 6
house plots with associated works at Hallhill Farm, Lanark
Road from Hazelbank to Auchenheath, Crossford, Carluke,
be reversed and that planning permission be granted for the
proposal subject to the conditions specified by the PLRB,
attached as Appendix 1 to this minute. 
In terms of Standing Order No 14, the Chair adjourned the meeting during this item of business at
10:22am and reconvened at 10:25am 
4 Review of Case – P/23/1297 for Erection of Dwelling House (Planning Permission
in Principle) at Land 60 Metres Northeast of Woodside Cottage, Muirhouse, Biggar
Road, Libberton, Lanark 
A report dated 29 May 2024 by the Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources) was
submitted on a request for a review of the decision taken by officers, in terms of the Scheme of
Delegation, to refuse planning permission for planning application P/23/1297 by E McCagherty
for the erection of a dwelling house (planning permission in principle) at land 60 metres northeast
of Woodside Cottage, Muirhouse, Biggar Road, Libberton, Lanark. 
To assist the PLRB in its review, copies of the following information had been appended to the
report:- 
 planning application form
 report of handling by the planning officer under the Scheme of Delegation together with
responses from consultees
 site photographs and location plan
 decision notice
 notice of review, including applicant’s statement of reasons for requiring the review
 further submission from Planning and Regulatory Services following notification of the
request for the review of the case
 comments from the applicant on the further submission received from Planning and
Regulatory Services 
The relevant drawings in relation to the review were available for inspection prior to the meeting
of the PLRB. 
The PLRB heard a Planning Adviser in relation to the case. 
The PLRB noted that the applicant had requested a site inspection and consideration of further
written submissions, however, on the basis of the above, the PLRB considered it had sufficient
information to allow it to proceed to determine the review.  The options available to the PLRB were
to uphold, reverse or vary the decision taken in respect of the application taken under review. 
In reviewing the case, the PLRB considered:- 
 all of the information appended to the report
 the relevant policies contained in the adopted South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan
2:-
 Policy 4 - Green Belt and Rural Area
 Policy 5 - Development Management and Placemaking
 Policy DM1 New Development Design
 Policy NHE13 Forestry and Woodland 
7

Page 8

 the relevant policies contained in the National Planning Framework 4 which had been
adopted on 13 February 2023 and formed part of the statutory development plan:-
 Policy 3 - Biodiversity
 Policy 6 - Forestry, Woodland and Trees
 Policy 15 - Local Living and 20 Minute Neighbourhoods
 Policy 16 - Quality Homes
 Policy 17 - Rural Homes 
Following its review of the information, the PLRB concluded that the development was contrary to
Policies 3, 6, 15, 16 and 17 of the National Planning Framework 4 and Policies 4, 5, DM1 and
NHE13 of the South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2. 
The PLRB decided: that the decision taken by officers, in terms of the Scheme
of Delegation, to refuse planning permission for planning
application P/23/1297 by E McCagherty for the erection of a
dwelling house (planning permission in principle) at land 60
metres northeast of Woodside Cottage, Muirhouse, Biggar
Road, Libberton, Lanark, be upheld. 
5 Review of Case – Application P/23/1213 for Change of Use of Residential Flat to
Short Term Let Accommodation (Existing Operation) at 7A Mansion Court,
Cambuslang 
A report dated 29 May 2024 by the Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources) was
submitted on a request for a review of the decision taken by officers, in terms of the Scheme of
Delegation, to refuse planning permission for planning application P/23/1213 by E Lupu for
change of use of a residential flat to short term let accommodation (existing operation) at 7A
Mansion Court, Cambuslang. 
To assist the PLRB in its review, copies of the following information had been appended to the
report:- 
 planning application form
 report of handling by the planning officer under the Scheme of Delegation together with
representations and responses from consultees
 site photographs and location plan
 decision notice
 notice of review, including applicant’s statement of reasons for requiring the review
 further submissions from interested parties and Planning and Regulatory Services following
notification of the request for the review of the case
 comments from the applicant on the further submissions received from the interested parties
and Planning and Regulatory Services 
The relevant drawings in relation to the review were available for inspection prior to the meeting
of the PLRB. 
The PLRB heard a Planning Adviser in relation to the case. 
The PLRB noted that the applicant had requested a site inspection and hearing session, however,
on the basis of the above, the PLRB considered it had sufficient information to allow it to proceed
to determine the review.  The options available to the PLRB were to uphold, reverse or vary the
decision taken in respect of the application taken under review.  
8

Page 9

In reviewing the case, the PLRB considered:- 
 all of the information appended to the report
 the relevant policies contained in the adopted South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan
2:-
 Policy 3 - General Urban Areas and Settlements
 Policy 5 - Development Management and Placemaking
 Policy 6 - Visitor, Economy and Tourism
 the relevant policies contained in the National Planning Framework 4 which had been
adopted on 13 February 2023 and formed part of the statutory development plan:-
 Policy 23 - Health and Safety
 Policy 30 - Tourism 
Following its review of the information, the PLRB concluded that the development was contrary to
Policies 23 and 30 of the National Planning Framework 4 and Policies 3, 5 and 6 of the South
Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2. 
The PLRB decided: that the decision taken by officers, in terms of the Scheme
of Delegation, to refuse planning permission for planning
application P/23/1213 by E Lupu for change of use of a
residential flat to short term let accommodation (existing
operation) at 7A Mansion Court, Cambuslang, be upheld. 
6 Review of Case – Application P/23/1227 for Change of Use of Flatted Dwelling (Sui
Generis) to Short Term Let (Sui Generis) at 0-2, 3 Arran Terrace, Rutherglen 
A report dated 29 May 2024 by the Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources) was
submitted on a request for a review of the decision taken by officers, in terms of the Scheme of
Delegation, to refuse planning permission for planning application P/23/1227 by Asset Leading
Investments for change of use of a flatted dwelling (sui generis) to short term let (sui generis) at
0-2, 3 Arran Terrace, Rutherglen. 
To assist the PLRB in its review, copies of the following information had been appended to the
report:- 
 planning application form
 report of handling by the planning officer under the Scheme of Delegation together with
responses from consultees
 site photographs and location plan
 decision notice
 notice of review, including applicant’s statement of reasons for requiring the review
 further submission from Planning and Regulatory Services following notification of the
request for the review of the case
 comments from the applicant on the further submission received from Planning and
Regulatory Services 
The relevant drawings in relation to the review were available for inspection prior to the meeting
of the PLRB. 
The PLRB heard a Planning Adviser in relation to the case. 
The PLRB considered it had sufficient information to allow it to proceed to determine the review. 
The options available to the PLRB were to uphold, reverse or vary the decision taken in respect
of the application under review.  
9

Page 10

In reviewing the case, the PLRB considered:- 
 all of the information appended to the report
 the relevant policies contained in the adopted South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan
2:-
 Policy 3 - General Urban Areas and Settlements
 Policy 5 - Development Management and Placemaking
 Policy 6 - Visitor, Economy and Tourism
 the relevant policies contained in the National Planning Framework 4 which had been
adopted on 13 February 2023 and formed part of the statutory development plan:-
 Policy 23 - Health and Safety
 Policy 30 - Tourism 
Following its review of the information, the PLRB concluded that the development was contrary to
Policies 23 and 30 of the National Planning Framework 4 and Policies 3, 5 and 6 of the South
Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2. 
The PLRB decided: that the decision taken by officers, in terms of the Scheme
of Delegation, to refuse planning permission for planning
application P/23/1227 by Asset Leading Investments for
change of use of a flatted dwelling (sui generis) to short term
let (sui generis) at 0-2, 3 Arran Terrace, Rutherglen, be
upheld. 
7 Urgent Business 
There were no items of urgent business. 
10

Page 11

Application P/20/1877 - Conditions and Reasons               Appendix 1 
Formation of 6 house plots with associated works at Hallhill Farm, Lanark Road from Hazelbank to
Auchenheath, Crossford, Carluke 
01.  The development to which this permission relates shall be begun no later than the expiration
of three years beginning with the date of grant of this decision notice. 
Reason: To comply with Section 58(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997
(as amended). 
02.  Prior to the commencement on site, detailed plans of the 6 dwelling houses proposed shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. 
The plans shall include:- 
(a) plans, sections and elevations of the proposed building together with the colour and type
of materials to be used externally on walls and roof; 
(b) Sections through the site, existing and proposed ground levels and finished floor levels; 
(c) Detailed layout of the site as a whole including, where necessary, provision for car parking,
details of access and details of all fences, walls, hedges or other boundary treatments; and 
(d) Existing trees to be retained and planting to be carried out within the site; and no work on
the plots shall be commenced until the permission of the Council as Planning Authority has
been granted for the proposals, or such other proposals as may be acceptable. 
Reason: To ensure the development is satisfactory in appearance and to maintain the visual
quality of the area. 
03.  That before any work commences on the site, a scheme of landscaping shall be submitted to
the Council as Planning Authority for written approval and it shall include:- 
(a) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows plus details of those to be retained and
measures for their protection in the course of development; 
(b) details and specification of all trees, shrubs, grass mix, etc., including, where appropriate,
the planting of fruit/apple trees; 
(c) details of any top-soiling or other treatment to the ground; 
(d) sections and other necessary details of any mounding, earthworks and hard landscaping; 
(e) proposals for the initial and future maintenance of the landscaped areas; 
(f) details of the phasing of these works; and no work shall be undertaken on the site until
approval has been given to these details. 
Reason: To ensure the appropriate provision of landscaping within the site. 
04.  That the approved landscaping scheme shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Council
as Planning Authority during the first available planting season following occupation of the
building(s) or completion of the development hereby approved, whichever is the sooner, to the
satisfaction of the Council. 
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area. 
05.  That before development starts, full details of the design and location of all fences and walls,
including any retaining walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to and approved by
the Council as Planning Authority. 
11

Page 12

Reason: To ensure the development is satisfactory in appearance and to maintain the visual
quality of the area.
06. That before any of the dwelling houses situated on the site upon which a fence is to be erected
is occupied, the fence or wall for which the permission of the Council as Planning Authority
has been obtained under the terms of Condition 5, shall be erected to the satisfaction of the
Council.
Reason: To ensure the development is satisfactory in appearance and to maintain the visual
quality of the area.
07. Details of the phasing of the development shall be submitted to the Council for approval, and
no work shall begin until the phasing scheme has been approved in writing. Following
approval, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme.
Reason: These details have not been submitted or approved.
08. That no development shall commence until drainage and flood risk details to include signed
appendices A to E are submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The
development shall not be occupied until the surface drainage works and any required flood
mitigation works have been completed in accordance with the details submitted to and
approved by the Council as Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the disposal of surface water from the site is dealt with in a safe and
sustainable manner, to return it to the natural water cycle with minimal adverse impact on
people and the environment and to alleviate the potential for on-site and off-site flooding.
09. That prior to any works commencing on site the applicant shall submit, for the written approval
of the Council as Planning and Roads Authority, details of road widening works to the existing
private access road as annotated on 20-063-PL-102 (Revision E), which extends circa 62
metres southeast from the B7086 Lanark Road, to include a 5.5 metre wide carriageway and
2.0 metre wide footway all to be detailed in accordance with the specification of the Council
as Planning and Roads Authority.
Reason: In the interest of road safety.
10. Once approved, the road widening and footway works referred to in the previous condition
shall be implemented on site in accordance with the approved design prior to occupation of
the first dwelling house to the satisfaction of the Council as Planning and Roads Authority.
Reason: In the interest of road safety.
11. That prior to any works commencing on site the applicant shall submit detailed proposals
showing how surface water run-off from all hardstanding areas is to be captured, treated, and
discharged in accordance with the Council’s Developer Design Guidance ‘Flood Risk
Assessments and Sustainable Drainage Systems May 2020’. Once approved, the drainage
shall be installed on site in accordance with the approved design and be completed prior to
occupation of the dwelling(s) and/or roads which it serves.
Reason: In the interest of road safety.
12. No dwelling house shall be occupied until the access roads and footpaths leading thereto from
the existing public road have been constructed in accordance with the specification of the
Council as Roads and Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interest of road safety.
12

Page 13

13. That prior to occupation of the first dwelling house hereby approved, a 2.5 metre by 35 metre
visibility splay shall be provided at the internal site entrance onto the existing private access
as shown on drawing 20-063-PL-102 (Revision E) and that nothing exceeding 0.9 metres in
height, when measured above the adjacent road channel level, shall be erected, planted or
allowed to grow within these visibility splays. 
Reason: In the interest of road safety. 
14. That prior to occupation of each dwelling house hereby approved, the car parking for that
dwelling house, as shown on drawing 20-063-PL-102 (Revision E), shall be formed in
accordance with the agreed specification to the satisfaction of the Council as Planning and
Roads Authority. 
Reason: To ensure the provision of appropriate car parking to serve the development. 
15. That prior to occupation of each dwelling house hereby approved, the applicant shall provide
a dedicated electric vehicle charging point for that dwelling in accordance with the Council’s
Supporting Planning Guidance ‘Electric Vehicles Charging Points August 2022’. 
Reason: To ensure the provision of appropriate electric vehicle charging facilities within the
development. 
16. That prior to completion of each dwelling house hereby approved, the first 2.0 metres of the
parking space/driveway serving that property shall be so surfaced in a bound material and
trapped to prevent any surface water or deleterious material from entering the prospectively
adoptable road. 
Reason: In the interest of road safety. 
17. That prior to occupation of each dwelling house hereby approved, the parking space/driveway
serving that property shall be constructed such that the gradient does not exceed 1 in 12. 
Reason: In the interest of road safety. 
18. That prior to any works commencing on site, the developer shall submit a Construction Phase
Traffic Management Plan (CPTMP) detailing the key items listed below, all for the written
approval of the Council as Roads Authority, and that once agreed all site operations shall be
undertaken in accordance with the approved CPTMP. 
(i) Delivery route for all construction vehicles.
(ii) Details of all temporary construction direction signage and route signage.
(iii) Provisions for emergency vehicle access.
(iv) Location and specification for wheel wash equipment to prevent mud, detritus and surface
water being deposited on the public road and/or the existing private access served off the
B7086 Lanark Road and passed Hallhill Cottages.
(v) Arrangements for additional road sweeping visits as and when required by site activities
and conditions or as requested by Roads, Transportation and Fleet Services.
(vi) Arrangement of construction compound(s) and contractor/staff car parking on site to
ensure that no vehicles are parked on the public road or the existing private access off the
B7086 Lanark Road and passed Hallhill Cottages.
(vii) Location and layout of delivery area and turning area within the site to ensure that all
construction delivery vehicles can enter and exit site in a forward gear.
(viii) Identification of a nominated person to whom any road safety issues can be referred.  
13

Page 14

(ix) Arrangements for undertaking initial joint road dilapidation surveys with a representative
of Roads, Transportation and Fleet Services at locations specified by the Council and for
ongoing dilapidation surveys including submission of written reports/photographs for the route
referred to under item (i) above. 
Reason: In the interest of road safety. 
Advisory Note:- 
In addition to the above conditions, the Roads Service recommends that an advisory condition be
attached to any planning consent issued stating that the applicant submit a Road Construction
Consent application under Section 21 of the Road (Scotland) Act 1984 covering the proposed private
access road upgrading/footway works and internal road works, and that they secure Section 56
Agreement under the terms of the Road (Scotland) Act 1984 for works on or immediately adjacent to
the existing public road. 
14

Page 15

Report
Agenda Item 
Report to: Planning Local Review Body 
Date of Meeting: 24 June 2024
Report by: Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources)  
Subject: Review of Case – Application P/23/0863 for Change of
Use of Forecourt to Form External Seating Area
Ancillary to Café Premises at 270 Stonelaw Road,
Rutherglen 
1. Purpose of Report
1.1. The purpose of the report is to present the information currently available to allow a
review of the decision taken by officers, in terms of the Scheme of Delegation, on the
following application:-
[purpose]
1.2. Summary Application Information 
Application Type: Detailed Planning Application 
Applicant: Mr Hugh Burns 
Proposal: Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area
ancillary to café premises 
Location:   270 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen, G73 3SA
Council Area/Ward: 11 – Rutherglen South 
1.3. Reason for Requesting Review 
X Refusal of
Application 
Conditions imposed  Failure to give decision
(deemed refusal) 
[1purpose]
2. Recommendation(s)
2.1. The Planning Local Review Body is asked to:-
[recs]
(1) consider whether it has sufficient information to allow it to proceed to
determine the review without further procedure and, if so, that:- 
(a) it proceeds to determine whether the decision taken in respect of the
application under review should be upheld, reversed or varied
(b) in the event that the decision is reversed or varied, the reasons and the
detailed conditions to be attached to the decision letter are agreed 
(2) in the event that further procedure is required to allow it to determine the
review, consider:- 
(a) what further information is required, which parties are to be asked to
provide the information and the date by which this is to be provided
(b) what procedure or combination of procedures are to be followed in
determining the review
3
15

Page 16

[1recs]
3. Background
3.1. The Council operates a Scheme of Delegation that enables Council officers to
determine a range of planning applications without the need for them to be referred
to Area Committees or the Planning Committee for a decision.
3.2. In terms of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the
Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006, and the Town and Country Planning (Schemes of
Delegation and Local Review Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013, where an
application for planning permission relates to a proposal that falls within the category
of “local development” and has been or could have been determined under the
Scheme of Delegation, the applicant is entitled to request that the determination be
reviewed by the Planning Local Review Body.
3.3. At its meeting on 17 May 2024, the PLRB deferred the review to a future meeting to
allow the planning application to be advertised in a local newspaper, in accordance
with the requirements of Regulation 20 of the Town and Country Planning (Schemes
of Delegation and Local Review Procedures) (Scotland) Regulations 2013.
3.4. A non-notification of owners’ advert was subsequently placed in the Rutherglen
Reformer on 29 May 2024 inviting representations within 14 days. The deadline has
now passed and no further representations have been received in respect of the
application.
4. Notice of Review – Statement of Reasons for Requiring the Review
4.1. In submitting their Notice of Review, the applicant has stated their reasons for
requiring a review of the determination in respect of their application. (Refer
Appendix 5)
4.2. The applicant is entitled to state a preference for procedure (or combination of
procedures) to be followed and has indicated that their stated preference is as
follows:-
Further written submissions Site inspection
Hearing session(s) X Assessment of review documents
only, with no further procedure
4.3. However, members will be aware that it is for the Planning Local Review Body to
determine how a case is reviewed.
5. Information Available to Allow Review of Application
5.1. Section 43B of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006 restricts the ability of parties to
introduce new material at the review stage. The focus of the review should,
therefore, be on the material which was before the officer who dealt with the
application under the Scheme of Delegation.
5.2. To assist the PLRB in its review, the following information for application P/23/0863,
contained in the agenda for the meeting of the PLRB held on 17 May 2024, has been
reissued:-
 Planning Application Form (Appendix 1)
 Report of Handling by the Planning Officer under the Scheme of Delegation
(Appendix 2(a))
 Copies of consultation responses (Appendix 2(b))
16

Page 17

 Copies of representations (Appendix 2(c))
 Site photographs and location plan (Appendix 3)
 Decision notice (Appendix 4)
 Notice of Review including statement of reasons for requiring the review
(Appendix 5)
 Further representations on the applicant’s Notice of Review (Appendix 6)
 Comments from the applicant’s agent on the further representations (Appendix
7) 
5.3. Copies of the relevant drawings are available for inspection by contacting
Administration and Legal Services prior to the meeting. 
Jackie Taylor
Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources) 
13 June 2024 
Link(s) to Council Values/Ambitions/Objectives
 Work with communities and partners to promote high quality, thriving and sustainable 
communities
 Accountable, effective, efficient and transparent 
Previous References
 Planning Local Review Body – 17 May 2024 
List of Background Papers
 Guide to the Planning Local Review Body 
Contact for Further Information
If you would like to inspect the background papers or want further information, please
contact:
Stuart McLeod, Administration Officer
Ext:  4815 (Tel:  01698 454815)
E-mail: stuart.mcleod@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
17

Page 18

Page 19

Planning Application Form 
Appendix 1  3a
19

Page 20

Page 21

Page 1 of 9
Floor 6, Council Offices Almada Street Hamilton ML3 0AA Tel: 0303 123 1015 Email: planning@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
Applications cannot be validated until all the necessary documentation has been submitted and the required fee has been paid.
Thank you for completing this application form:
ONLINE REFERENCE 100634666-001
The online reference is the unique reference for your online form only. The Planning Authority will allocate an Application Number when
your form is validated. Please quote this reference if you need to contact the planning Authority about this application.
Type of Application
What is this application for? Please select one of the following: *
 Application for planning permission (including changes of use and surface mineral working).
 Application for planning permission in principle.
 Further application, (including renewal of planning permission, modification, variation or removal of a planning condition etc)
 Application for Approval of Matters specified in conditions.
Description of Proposal
Please describe the proposal including any change of use: * (Max 500 characters)
Is this a temporary permission? *  Yes  No
If a change of use is to be included in the proposal has it already taken place?  Yes  No
(Answer ‘No’ if there is no change of use.) *
Has the work already been started and/or completed? *
 No  Yes – Started  Yes - Completed
Applicant or Agent Details
Are you an applicant or an agent? * (An agent is an architect, consultant or someone else acting
on behalf of the applicant in connection with this application)  Applicant  Agent
Change of use of forecourt and part of pavement to form external seating area ancillary to cafe premises.
3a
21

Page 22

Page 2 of 9
Agent Details
Please enter Agent details
Company/Organisation:
Ref. Number: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
First Name: * Building Name:
Last Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Telephone Number: * (Street): *
Extension Number: Address 2:
Mobile Number: Town/City: *
Fax Number: Country: *
Postcode: *
Email Address: *
Is the applicant an individual or an organisation/corporate entity? *
 Individual  Organisation/Corporate entity
Applicant Details
Please enter Applicant details
Title: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
Other Title: Building Name:
First Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Last Name: * (Street): *
Company/Organisation Address 2:
Telephone Number: * Town/City: *
Extension Number: Country: *
Mobile Number: Postcode: *
Fax Number:
Email Address: *
Padrino Design
Mr
Dominic
Hugh
Notarangelo
Burns
Lonmay Road
Stonelaw Road
1
270
The Wright Business Centre
0141 762 2000
G33 4EL
G73 3SA
Scotland
UK
Glasgow
Glasgow
Dominic@padrino.co.uk
dominic@padrino.co.uk
22

Page 23

Page 3 of 9
Site Address Details
Planning Authority:
Full postal address of the site (including postcode where available):
Address 1:
Address 2:
Address 3:
Address 4:
Address 5:
Town/City/Settlement:
Post Code:
Please identify/describe the location of the site or sites
Northing Easting
Pre-Application Discussion
Have you discussed your proposal with the planning authority? *  Yes  No
Site Area
Please state the site area:
Please state the measurement type used:  Hectares (ha)  Square Metres (sq.m)
Existing Use
Please describe the current or most recent use: *  (Max 500 characters)
Access and Parking
Are you proposing a new altered vehicle access to or from a public road? *  Yes  No
If Yes please describe and show on your drawings the position of any existing. Altered or new access points, highlighting the changes
you propose to make. You should also show existing footpaths and note if there will be any impact on these.
270 STONELAW ROAD
97.75
open space adjacent to cafe
South Lanarkshire Council
RUTHERGLEN
GLASGOW
G73 3SA
660468 262122
23

Page 24

Page 4 of 9
Are you proposing any change to public paths, public rights of way or affecting any public right of access? *  Yes  No
If Yes please show on your drawings the position of any affected areas highlighting the changes you propose to make, including
arrangements for continuing or alternative public access.
How many vehicle parking spaces (garaging and open parking) currently exist on the application
Site?
How many vehicle parking spaces (garaging and open parking) do you propose on the site (i.e. the
Total of existing and any new spaces or a reduced number of spaces)? *
Please show on your drawings the position of existing and proposed parking spaces and identify if these are for the use of particular
types of vehicles (e.g. parking for disabled people, coaches, HGV vehicles, cycles spaces).
Water Supply and Drainage Arrangements
Will your proposal require new or altered water supply or drainage arrangements? *  Yes  No
Do your proposals make provision for sustainable drainage of surface water?? *  Yes  No
(e.g. SUDS arrangements) *
Note:-
Please include details of SUDS arrangements on your plans
Selecting ‘No’ to the above question means that you could be in breach of Environmental legislation.
Are you proposing to connect to the public water supply network? *
 Yes
 No, using a private water supply
 No connection required
If No, using a private water supply, please show on plans the supply and all works needed to provide it (on or off site).
Assessment of Flood Risk
Is the site within an area of known risk of flooding? *  Yes  No  Don’t Know
If the site is within an area of known risk of flooding you may need to submit a Flood Risk Assessment before your application can be
determined. You may wish to contact your Planning Authority or SEPA for advice on what information may be required.
Do you think your proposal may increase the flood risk elsewhere? *  Yes  No  Don’t Know
Trees
Are there any trees on or adjacent to the application site? *  Yes  No
If Yes, please mark on your drawings any trees, known protected trees and their canopy spread close to the proposal site and indicate if
any are to be cut back or felled.
Waste Storage and Collection
Do the plans incorporate areas to store and aid the collection of waste (including recycling)? *  Yes  No
0
0
24

Page 25

Page 5 of 9
If Yes or No, please provide further details: * (Max 500 characters)
Residential Units Including Conversion
Does your proposal include new or additional houses and/or flats? *  Yes  No
All Types of Non Housing Development – Proposed New Floorspace
Does your proposal alter or create non-residential floorspace? *  Yes  No
Schedule 3 Development
Does the proposal involve a form of development listed in Schedule 3 of the Town and Country  Yes  No  Don’t Know
Planning (Development Management Procedure (Scotland) Regulations 2013 *
If yes, your proposal will additionally have to be advertised in a newspaper circulating in the area of the development. Your planning
authority will do this on your behalf but will charge you a fee. Please check the planning authority’s website for advice on the additional
fee and add this to your planning fee.
If you are unsure whether your proposal involves a form of development listed in Schedule 3, please check the Help Text and Guidance
notes before contacting your planning authority.
Planning Service Employee/Elected Member Interest
Is the applicant, or the applicant’s spouse/partner, either a member of staff within the planning service or an  Yes  No
elected member of the planning authority? *
Certificates and Notices
CERTIFICATE AND NOTICE UNDER REGULATION 15 – TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT
PROCEDURE) (SCOTLAND) REGULATION 2013
One Certificate must be completed and submitted along with the application form. This is most usually Certificate A, Form 1,
Certificate B, Certificate C or Certificate E.
Are you/the applicant the sole owner of ALL the land? *  Yes  No
Is any of the land part of an agricultural holding? *  Yes  No
Are you able to identify and give appropriate notice to ALL the other owners? *  Yes  No
If you cannot trace all the other owners, can you give the appropriate notice to one or more owner? *  Yes  No
Certificate Required
The following Land Ownership Certificate is required to complete this section of the proposal:
Certificate C
Change of use to allow external seating. The cafe arrangements for waste are not impacted upon.
25

Page 26

Page 6 of 9
Certificates
The certificate you have selected requires you to distribute copies of the Notice 1 document below to all of the Owners/Agricultural
tenants that you provided previously. Please note that your planning authority may be required to place an advertisement in a local
newspaper. You may wish to contact the planning authority for further guidance.
Notice 1 is required
 I understand my obligations to provide the above notice before I can complete the certificates. *
Land Ownership Certificate
Certificate and Notice under Regulation 15 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland)
Regulations 2013
I hereby certify that – (1) –
I am/The applicant is unable to issue a certificate in accordance with Regulation 15 of the Town and Country Planning (Development
Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013 and in respect of the accompanying application;
(2) - No person other than myself/the applicant was an owner of any part of the land to which the application relates at the beginning of
the period of 21 days ending with the date of the accompanying application.
or –
(3) - I have/the applicant has been unable to serve notice on any person other than myself/the applicant who, at the beginning of the
period of 21 days ending with the date of the accompanying application, was owner [Note 2] of any part of the land to which the
application relates.
or –
(2) - I have/The applicant has served notice on each of the following persons other than myself/the applicant who, at the beginning of
the period of 21 days ending with the date of the accompanying application, was owner [Note 2] of any part of the land to which the
application/appeal was owner [Note 2] of any part of the land to which the application relates.
Name:
Address:
Date of Service of Notice: *
26

Page 27

Page 7 of 9
(2) - None of the land to which the application relates constitutes or forms part of an agricultural holding;
or –
(2) - The land or part of the land to which the application relates constitutes or forms part of an agricultural holding and I have/the
applicant has served notice on every person other than myself/himself who, at the beginning of the period of 21 days ending with the
date of the accompanying application was an agricultural tenant.  These persons are:
Name:
Address:
Date of Service of Notice: *
(4) – I have/The applicant has taken reasonable steps, as listed below, to ascertain the names and addresses of the other owners or
agricultural tenants and *have/has been unable to do so –
Signed: Dominic Notarangelo
On behalf of: Mr Hugh Burns
Date: 05/07/2023
 Please tick here to certify this Certificate. *
Checklist – Application for Planning Permission
Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997
The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013
Please take a few moments to complete the following checklist in order to ensure that you have provided all the necessary information
in support of your application. Failure to submit sufficient information with your application may result in your application being deemed
invalid. The planning authority will not start processing your application until it is valid.
a) If this is a further application where there is a variation of conditions attached to a previous consent, have you provided a statement to
that effect? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
b) If this is an application for planning permission or planning permission in principal where there is a crown interest in the land, have
you provided a statement to that effect? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
c) If this is an application for planning permission, planning permission in principle or a further application and the application is for
development belonging to the categories of national or major development (other than one under Section 42 of the planning Act), have
you provided a Pre-Application Consultation Report? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
There is no methodology for doing this as the Scotlis website operated by the Keeper is unreliable.  he keeper's staff tend to be
evasive and lacking in candour.
27

Page 28

Page 8 of 9
Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997
The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013
d) If this is an application for planning permission and the application relates to development belonging to the categories of national or
major developments and you do not benefit from exemption under Regulation 13 of The Town and Country Planning (Development
Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013, have you provided a Design and Access Statement? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
e) If this is an application for planning permission and relates to development belonging to the category of local developments (subject
to regulation 13. (2) and (3) of the Development Management Procedure (Scotland) Regulations 2013) have you provided a Design
Statement? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
f) If your application relates to installation of an antenna to be employed in an electronic communication network, have you provided an
ICNIRP Declaration? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
g) If this is an application for planning permission, planning permission in principle, an application for approval of matters specified in
conditions or an application for mineral development, have you provided any other plans or drawings as necessary:
 Site Layout Plan or Block plan.
 Elevations.
 Floor plans.
 Cross sections.
 Roof plan.
 Master Plan/Framework Plan.
 Landscape plan.
 Photographs and/or photomontages.
 Other.
If Other, please specify: *  (Max 500 characters)
Provide copies of the following documents if applicable:
A copy of an Environmental Statement. *  Yes  N/A
A Design Statement or Design and Access Statement. *  Yes  N/A
A Flood Risk Assessment. *  Yes  N/A
A Drainage Impact Assessment (including proposals for Sustainable Drainage Systems). *  Yes  N/A
Drainage/SUDS layout. *  Yes  N/A
A Transport Assessment or Travel Plan  Yes  N/A
Contaminated Land Assessment. *  Yes  N/A
Habitat Survey. *  Yes  N/A
A Processing Agreement. *  Yes  N/A
Other Statements (please specify). (Max 500 characters)
28

Page 29

Page 9 of 9
Declare – For Application to Planning Authority
I, the applicant/agent certify that this is an application to the planning authority as described in this form. The accompanying
Plans/drawings and additional information are provided as a part of this application.
Declaration Name: Mr Dominic Notarangelo
Declaration Date: 05/07/2023
Payment Details
P
Created: 05/07/2023 12:34
29

Page 30

Page 31

Report of Handling 
Report dated 13 November 2023 by the Council’s Authorised Officer under the Scheme of
Delegation 
Appendix 2(a)  3b
31

Page 32

Page 33

Policy reference:  
National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4)(adopted 2023)
Policy 1 Tackling the climate and nature crises
Policy 2 Climate mitigation and adaptation
Policy 14 Design, quality and place
Policy 15 Local Living and 20-minute neighbourhoods
Policy 23 Health and safety
Policy 27 City, town, local and commercial centres
South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (SLLDP2) (adopted 2021)
Policy 2 Climate change
Policy 3 General Urban Areas and Settlements
Policy 5 Development Management and Placemaking
Policy 9 Network of Centres and Retailing
Policy DM1 New Development Design
Assessment
Reference no. P/23/0863
Delegated Report
Date 13 November 2023!
Planning
proposal:
Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to
cafe premises. 
Location: 270 Stonelaw Road
Rutherglen
G73 3SA
Application
Type :
Detailed planning application
Applicant : Mr Hugh Burns
Location :  270 Stonelaw Road
Rutherglen
G73 3SA
Decision:
Other
action/
notes:    
Application refused
None
Report by: Area Manager (Planning & Building Standards)
3b
33

Page 34

Representation(s):
Impact on privacy? Yes
Impact on sunlight/daylight? No
Impact on amenity? Yes
Traffic issues? Yes
Adheres to development plan policy? No
Adverse comments from consultees? Yes
Consultations Summary of response
Roads Development Management
Team
Environmental Services
Recommends refusal of the application. An additional 14
car parking spaces for the seating area is required due
to the car parking congestion that already exists within
the area. The proposal would only exacerbate the
current congestion situation at this location and 14
spaces cannot be provided at the site. 
Recommends refusal of the application due to concerns
relating to an adverse impact on adjacent properties
from noise from the outdoor facility. To protect residential
occupants or noise sensitive buildings from additional
transport noise generated from mixed traffic sources
including deliveries from commercial vehicles. The
applicant has not demonstrated that the proposal will not
adversely impact on available space for numerous
commercial waste bins at this location.
► 12 Objection letters
► 3 Support letters
► 1 Comment letters
34

Page 35

Planning Application Delegated Report
1 Application Summary
1.1 The applicant seeks consent for the change of use of a forecourt to form external seating
area ancillary to cafe premises, adjacent to 270 Stonelaw Road in Burnside, Rutherglen.
The site is located within the settlement boundary of Rutherglen and is designated in the
South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 as a Local Centre. 
1.2 The land identified for the change of use is an area of shared garden ground which is
located next to the junction of Stonelaw Road and Highburgh Drive in Burnside.  The site
area measures approximately 68 square metres and originally contained shrubbery and
grass.  The site has been cleared and a monobloc surface has been laid within the site.  
1.3 The Planning Service was advised that tables and chairs had been positioned in the
application site and this service contacted the applicant to advise that the furniture should
be removed as the change of use assessment had not been completed. The furniture was
removed from the site.
2 Representation(s)
2.1 Following the statutory period of neighbour notification and advertisement in the local
press, a total of 15 representations have been received (11 Objections, 3 Support and 1
Comments) as defined in the scheme of delegation;
• Noise and disturbance
• Traffic, parking and road safety
• Land ownership.
• Odours
• Privacy
• Litter and refuse
• Flooding
• Alcohol licence
The above issues will be considered in the assessment below and full copies are
available on the planning portal.
3 Assessment and Conclusions
3.1 Planning consent is sought for the change of use of a forecourt to form external seating
area ancillary to cafe premises, adjacent to 270 Stonelaw Road in Burnside, Rutherglen.
Under Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, all applications
must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material
considerations indicate otherwise. The development plan comprises the South
Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (adopted 29th March 2021) (SLLP2) and National
Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) which is now part of the development plan (adopted 13th
February 2023). The applicable policies in this instance are Policies 1, 2, 14, 15, 23 and
27 of NPF4 and Policies 2, 3, 5, 9 and DM1 of the SLLDP2 
3.2 Policies 1 and 2 of NPF4 and Policy 2 of the SLLDP2 seek to encourage, promote and
facilitate development that addresses the global climate emergency and nature crisis, and
which minimises emissions and adapts to the current and future impacts of climate
35

Page 36

change. The area previously contained grass and shrubs and although this has been
replaced by monobloc, the relatively small scale of the site in an urban area would not
have a significant detrimental climate impact. As such, this proposal is not considered to
raise any issues that conflict with the aims of Policy 1 or 2 of NPF4 or Policy 2 of
SLLDP2.
3.3 Policy 14 of NPF4 - Design, quality and place, states that development proposals which
are poorly designed, detrimental to the amenity of the surrounding area will not be
supported. The outdoor seating would be located in a garden area directly opposite and
below residential properties. The existing garden area measuring 7.5 metres in depth
provides a noise and privacy buffer to the residential properties from the road and footway
along Highburgh Drive. The public use of the area for outdoor seating would have a
detrimental impact on the surrounding residential amenity given the encroachment into
the existing garden buffer and from noise levels from visitors using the seating area. The
proposal is therefore considered contrary to Policy 14 of NPF4.
3.4 Policy 15 of NPF4 - Local Living and 20-minute neighbourhoods seeks to create
connected and compact neighbourhoods where people can meet the majority of their
needs within a reasonable distance from their home. The proposed development would
be located within a Local Centre as designated in the SLLDP2 and would be ancillary to
an existing business, therefore the proposal is not considered contrary to the aims of
Policy 15 of NPF4.
3.5 Policy 23 of NPF4 - Health and safety advises that development proposals that are likely
to raise unacceptable noise issues will not be supported. Environmental Services were
consulted in relation to the proposal. This service recommended refusal of the application
due to concerns relating to an adverse impact on adjacent properties from noise from the
outdoor facility and increased traffic levels. The proposal is not considered to comply with
Policy 23 of NPF4.
3.6 Policy 27 of NPF4 - City, town, local and commercial centres advises that development
proposals for non-retail uses will not be supported if further provision of these services will
undermine the character and amenity of the area. The Planning Service recognises and
encourages proposals which help to support town and local centres. However, careful
consideration must be given to development proposals in local centres which impact on
surrounding residential amenity. It is considered that the development proposal at this
location, given the proximity to residential properties, that the amenity of residents would
be undermined and as such, the proposal is contrary to Policy 27 of NPF4.
3.7 Policy 3 of the SLLDP2 - General Urban Areas and Settlements advises that
developments which would be detrimental to the amenity of residents and the wider
community or to the character of the surrounding area will not be permitted. As referred
to in paragraph 3.3 above, the seating area would be located within a garden area which
was designed to separate the residential properties from public footpath and adjacent
road. The change of use of the area would result in members of the public sitting within a
metre of the residential properties. Although there is an existing hedge along the western
boundary of the site, this would not significantly reduce the impact from noise or loss of
privacy to the adjacent properties. The proposal is therefore considered contrary to Policy
3 of SLLDP2.
3.8 Policy 5 of the SLLDP2 - Development Management states that proposals should have no
unacceptable significant adverse impact on adjacent buildings, streetscape or residential
36

Page 37

amenity in terms of noise disturbance. Environmental Services have recommended
refusal of the application given concerns relating to noise disturbance to the adjacent
residential properties. In addition, Environmental Services have advised that this service
has received complaints relating to the number and siting of refuse bins at this highly
visible location and that the applicant has not demonstrated that the proposal will not
adversely impact on available space for numerous commercial waste bins at this location.
Roads and Transportation Services also recommended refusal of the application as the
14 additional parking spaces required at the site cannot be provided. The proposed
development is considered to have a significant impact on the amenity of the adjacent
residential properties and road safety and therefore is considered to be contrary to Policy
5 of the SLLDP2.
3.9 Policy 9 of SLLDP2 - Network of Centres and Retailing advises that any proposals for
change of use will be assessed with regard to the provision of an appropriate mix of uses
that will meet economic and social need. A retail element should be retained to serve the
needs of the local community. The proposed development would not impact on the level
of retail provision within the local centre and as such, is not considered contrary to Policy
9 of the SLLDP2.
3.10 Policy DM1 of SLLDP2 - New Development Design advises that development proposals
should ensure that there is no conflict with adjacent land uses and no adverse impact on
existing or proposed properties in terms of overlooking, loss of privacy, overshadowing,
noise or disturbance. The proximity of the seating area to the adjacent residential
properties would result in an adverse impact in terms of loss of privacy, noise and
disturbance and as such would be contrary to Policy DM1 of SLLDP2.
11. The representations received relate to a number of subjects including noise, disturbance
and privacy, traffic, parking and road safety issues, land ownership, odours, litter, refuse,
and flooding. The concerns relating to noise, disturbance and loss of privacy are
considered justified by Planning and Environmental Services, as set out in the paragraphs
above and of a significant level to warrant refusal of the proposal. In terms of traffic,
parking and road safety, Roads and Transportation Services have recommended refusal
of the application as the required additional parking cannot be provided at the site. In
relation to land ownership, it is noted that a number of representations advised that the
site identified was owned by several parties who had not given approval for the land to be
utilised. It is also noted that the additional statement in response to representations
advises the land is not owned by the applicant. The consent of the appropriate
landowner(s) would be required to carry out works approved in a planning application. In
this instance, the decision is to refuse the planning application and any disputes relating
to ownership are not a planning matter. These are civil matters to be resolved between
the parties involved. The issues relating to odours, litter and refuse collection relate to the
operation of the existing business and the application under assessment relates to the
change of use of the adjacent land. Environmental Services have received
correspondence from residents relating to these issues and the Planning Service will
liaise with this service in relation to these concerns. In relation to concerns regarding
drainage/flooding from the monobloc area, damage to properties resulting from
inadequate drainage arrangements would be a legal matter which would require to be
addressed between the parties involved. In relation to an Alcohol Licence, Licencing
Service consult the relevant Council Services when applications for these licences are
submitted.
37

Page 38

3.12  Three letters of support and one letter of comment were submitted in relation to the
proposal.  The reasons for supporting the proposal included that the seating area would
contribute to the community, help stimulate the high street, would be a meeting area and
focal point, would improve the visual appearance or the area and would benefit local
safety in the evenings if people were sitting out in the area. While the Planning Service
encourages development proposals which would contribute and enhance the local centre
and economy, this should not be to the detriment of existing residents and unfortunately,
in this case, several adjacent residential properties would be significantly adversely
affected.  
3.13 A response in relation to the representations was received from the applicant’s agent
which stated that the applicant had not claimed to own the site and that the assessor’s
website is not reliable in identifying land ownership. The statement also advises that the
co-proprietors had abandoned the site and allowed it to become overgrown and that
access was not being denied to the landowners. As outlined in paragraph 3.11 above,
land ownership is a legal matter to be resolved between the parties involved.  The
statement advises that noise issues relating to the operation of the associated business
did not relate to the current application, however, an acoustic consultant will be briefed to
analyse the position.  Environmental Services have been contacted relating to noise and
vibration concerns relating to the adjacent business. The statement also advises that The
Scottish Government has promoted a ‘Continental Café Culture’ and that this has been
reinforced by NPF4.  Paragraphs 3.3, 3.5 and 3.6 above refer to the relevant policies in
NPF4 in the assessment of the application and why the proposed change of use at this
location could not be supported. The statement concludes that the applicant has invested
a substantial amount of money in the site, has upgraded the menu and made good use of
an abandoned area.  These matters are not a material planning consideration. 
3.14 In conclusion, the proposed change of use is considered to have a significant detrimental
impact on the amenity of the adjacent residential dwellings in terms of nuisance from
noise and loss of privacy from the seating area, increased disturbance from traffic noise
and traffic safety concerns.  The proposal would be located within an area specifically
deigned to form a degree of separation from the residential properties and the passing
public which would have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the character and
amenity of the neighbouring residential properties. In addition, Environmental Services
and Roads and Transportation Services have recommended refusal of the application.
The proposal is therefore considered contrary to Policies 14, 23 and 27 of the National
Planning Framework 4 and Policies 3, 5 and DM1 of the South Lanarkshire Local
Development Plan 2 and cannot be supported and refusal of the application is considered
justified.
4 Reason for decision
4.1 That to proposal for the change of use to an external seating area as the development
would have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the neighbouring residential properties
and surrounding amenity due to disturbance from noise and would exacerbate the
existing traffic congestion issues at this location.  The proposal is therefore considered
contrary to Policies 14, 23 and 27 of the National Planning Framework 4 and Policies 3, 5
and DM1 of the South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2.  Consequently, the
application is recommended for refusal and there are no other material considerations
which would outweigh the proposals variance with the development plan.
38

Page 39

Delegating officer:   Iain Morton
Date: 13 November 2023
List of background papers
► Application Form
► Application Plans
► NPF4
► South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (adopted 2021)
► Neighbour notification letter dated 
► Consultations
► Representations
Roads Development Management Team 08/11/2023
Environmental Services 13/09/2023
L DiGiacomo, 2-2, 266 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen, G73 3SA, Dated:
09.08.2023
15.08.2023
Mrs Linda Cunningham, Granville, Burnett Place, Port Elphinstone,
Inverurie, AB51 3US,
Dated: 
13.08.2023
Kirsty Owen, 1-1, 3 Highburgh Drive, Rutherglen, G73 3RR, Dated:
08.08.2023
05.09.2023
10.10.2023
Miss Lizzie Millar, 24 Limeside Avenue, Rutherglen, Rutherglen,
Rutherglen, Glasgow, G73 3PN,
Dated: 
09.08.2023 
Mrs Catherine Duncan, 2-1, 266 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen, Glasgow,
South Lanarkshire
G73 3SA
Dated: 
14.08.2023
Ashlene Doherty, Received Via Email Dated: 
11.08.2023
39

Page 40

Contact for further information
If you would like to inspect the background papers or want further information, please contact:-
Evelyn-Ann Wilson, Planning officer, Floor 6, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton, ML3 0AA
Phone: 07551842952   
Email: evelyn-ann.wilson@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
Mrs Joanne Hepworth, Flat 1/2 266 Stonelaw Road, Glasgow, G733SA Dated: 
03.08.2023
Mrs Catherine Smith, 4 Highburgh Drive, Burnside, Glasgow, G73 3RZ Dated: 
13.08.2023
Miss Vivienne Vine, 1/2, 1 Highburgh Drive, Burnside, G73 3RR Dated: 
14.08.2023
01.09.2023
Mr Mark Smith, Flat 1/1, 2 Highburgh Drive, Burnside, Glasgow, G73
3RZ
Dated:
08.08.2023 
07.09.2023 
Catherine Duncan, 0-2, 2 Highburgh Drive, Rutherglen, G73 3RZ, Dated: 
21.08.2023
Mr P Bree, 2/2 1 Highburgh Drive, South Lanarkshire, G73 3RR, , Dated: 
17.08.2023
40

Page 41

Planning Application
Application number: P/23/0863
Reasons for refusal
01. That the proposal would have a significant detrimental impact on the amenity of the
surrounding area which is contrary to section c) of Policy 14 Design, quality and place of
NPF4.
02. That the proposal is likely to raise unacceptable noise issues which is contrary to section
e) of Policy 23 Health and Safety of NPF4.
03. That the proposal would undermine the amenity of the area which is contrary to section c)
of Policy 27 City, town, local and commercial centres of NPF4.
04. That the proposal would be detrimental to the amenity of residents which is contrary to
Policy 3 General Urban Areas and Settlements of SLLDP2.
05. That the proposal will have an unacceptable significant adverse impact on the amenity of
nearby residents in terms of noise and lack of parking provision which is therefore
contrary to point 3 of Policy 5 Development Management and Placemaking of SLLDP2.
06. That the proposal would have an adverse impact on the existing neighbouring properties
in terms of noise and disturbance which is contrary to Policy DM1 New Development
Design of the SLLDP2.
Reason(s) for decision
That to proposal for the change of use to an external seating area as the development would
have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the neighbouring residential properties and
surrounding amenity due to disturbance from noise and would exacerbate the existing traffic
congestion issues at this location. The proposal is therefore considered contrary to Policies 14,
23 and 27 of the National Planning Framework 4 and Policies 3, 5 and DM1 of the South
Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2. Consequently, the application is recommended for
refusal and there are no other material considerations which would outweigh the proposals
variance with the development plan.
Informatives
01. This decision relates to drawing numbers:
Reference Version No: Plan Status
LOCATION PLAN Refused
PLAN AS PROPOSED Refused
41

Page 42

Page 43

Consultation Responses 
 Response dated 13 September 2023 from Environmental Services
 Response dated 8 November 2023 from Roads, Transportation and Fleet Services 
Appendix 2(b)  3c
43

Page 44

Page 45

Planning and Regulatory Services, Brandon Gate, 1 Leechlee Road, Hamilton ML3 0XB
Email: Aileen.Prentice@southlanarkshire.gov.uk 
To:  Planning & Building Standards Services  Our Ref. 576/491833
Your Ref. P/23/0863
If Calling Ask for Aileen Prentice
CC: Evelyn-Ann Wilson Phone 01698 455212
From: Aileen Prentice Date. 13 September 2023     
Subject: Application Ref: P/23/0863 
Address: 270 Stonelaw Road
Rutherglen
Glasgow
G73 3SA                                                                     
Proposed Development: Change of use of forecourt to form external seating
area ...... 
I refer to the above planning application consultation and would comment as follows; 
I recommend that the application be refused for the following reasons; 
• There are concerns regarding noise from the use of the outdoor facility which are likely
to adversely affect the adjacent properties.   
• To protect the occupiers of dwellings or noise sensitive buildings from additional
transport noise generated from mixed traffic sources including deliveries by commercial
vehicles. 
• Commercial Waste:  Environmental Services continue to receive complaints about the
location and number of commercial waste bins along this row of shops and the applicant
has not demonstrated that the proposed external seating area will not adversely impact
the available space for the siting of associated waste receptacles required by the
business. 
Should you require any further information, please contact Aileen Prentice. 
Aileen Prentice
Technical Officer  
Community and Enterprise Resources
Executive Director David Booth
Planning and Regulatory Services
3c
45

Page 46

Community and Enterprise Resources
Executive Director David Booth 
Roads, Transportation and Fleet Services – Transportation Engineering
Council offices, Floor 7, Almada Street, Hamilton, ML3 0AA Phone: 07983108378
Email: william.hyslop@southlanarkshire.gov.uk 
Memo 
To: Planning and Building Standards
Floor 6
Council Offices
Almada Street
Hamilton
Our ref:  P/23/0863  
Your ref: 
If calling ask for: William Hyslop  
Phone: 07983108378
cc:  Date: 8 November 2023
From: Stuart Laird
Engineering Manager 
Planning Application P/23/0863 - 270 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen 
We refer to the above application and would comment as follows. 
Proposal
Change of use from front garden to seating area for cafe 
Location
Garden area on Highburgh Drive at the junction of Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen. There is at present
street furniture and manholes at this location within the public boundary. 
Impact
The proposal is to change the use of the garden ground to provide an outdoor seating area for a
café. This site is located at the junction of Stonelaw Road/Highburgh Drive where there is waiting
and loading restrictions to prevent parking and allow access at this junction. This area has existing
parking issues and the roads are heavily parked with on street car parking. The proposals will
increase the number of customers at a location where there are known existing parking issues and
where there is no off street public parking nearby. 
46

Page 47

Recommendation 
We would object to this application for the reasons stated below. 
• The area shown on the drawing is 68 sqm and the car parking requirement for this type of
development is 1 space per 5 sqm. Therefore, additional car parking for 14 spaces would
be required. The need for car parking for this facility is due to existing congestion and this
proposal would only exacerbate the current situation. 
Should you have any queries regarding any aspect of the above response then please do not
hesitate to contact William Hyslop on the above extension. 
Stuart Laird
Engineering Manager 
47

Page 48

Page 49

Representations 
Representation From Dated
 Kirsty Owen 4/8/23
 Laura DiGiacomo 5/8/23
 Laura DiGiacomo 10/8/23
 Kirsty Owen 30/8/23
 Kirsty Owen 10/10/23
 Mr P Bree 
 Linda Cunningham 
 Ashlene Doherty 
 Catherine Duncan x 2 
 Joanne Hepworth 
 Lizzie Millar 
 Catherine Smith 
 Mark Smith x 2 
 Vivienne Vine x 2 
Appendix 2(c)  3d
49

Page 50

Page 51

From:
To: Planning
Subject: P/23/0863 Hugh burns
Date: 04 August 2023 09:11:17
Hi there,
I am writing regarding the above planning application reference. I wish to share my
concerns regarding the premises.
I worry about how many customers he wishes to seat out side, and the closing time. Most
of the other businesses close around 5 or 6, but I here he wishes to open until 9.
This will have an impact on noise and will add to our parking issues. The street is busy
enough and can be hard to park. Our car has already been hit 3 times while parked on the
street.
I also here that he wishes to keep the rubbish bins at the front of the building, im also not
happy about this. There are issues with the rubbish bins towards the end of the shops on
stonelaw road. They are not pleasant to pass, I don't with for this for out side my house.
I feel Mr Hughes is ploughing ahead with his plans for the premises without taking into
consideration the impact on the residents living here. The seating area is on Highburgh
drive, not stonelaw Road.
Kind regards
Kirsty owen
Flat 1/1
3 Highburgh drive
Burnside
G73 3RR
3d
51

Page 52

From:
To: Planning
Subject: Planning Objection to P/23/0863
Date: 06 August 2023 20:29:47
I wish to object to the proposed  change of use from  garden to a forecourt ,for the
following reason ,
1. The property at 270 Stonelaw road own 2/8 only of the  " proposed forecourt" and the
rest is owned by equal shares of 1/8th (re title deeds) to the four flats in close 266 Stonelaw
road, and the businesses at ,264 Stonelaw road and  268 stonelaw road .2.Mr Hugh Burns
has not got permission from any of the residential owners (that I am aware ) I have
received no notice in writing or permission to myself .I own and reside in 2/2 266
Stonelaw Road .My property is a corner flat therefore 2/3rds of my flat is in highburgh
drive G733Sa  and I am directly above the proposed planning applications  change of use .
2.The Noise and disturbance is of great concern to myself as the corner position seems to
amplify all sounds ,and I have to close my windows at that side of the flat,  if work is
being done(outside or inside)  or people sitting and  chatting below my windows .I have
lived at my property 266 stonelaw Road  for over 20 years so feel this is a serious concern
for myself as it will effectively make most of my flat uncomfortable and possibly
unusable  noise wise .
3.Odours  are another foreseeable reason for objection as  smells will rise and filter into
my flat re windows etc.
4 .Mr Burns does not own 270 Stonelaw Rd and is a tenant ,surely the permission has to be
agreed by all owners of 270 Stonelaw Road ?
I sincerely hope that you will refuse this Planning application as, it is for land, that is not
owned by the premises Mr Burns has Leased  nor has he seeked in writing to any
relevant owners for permission .(that I am aware of) I have not been  asked officially either
and I own 1/8th 
I have no objections to Mr Burns being Leasee of the  commercial Property but the garden
is ,for me., a real noise and disturbance concern. and i must object strongly .
I am
Yours sincerely
L DiGiacomo
Flat 2/2
266 Stonelaw road
G733SA
05/08/2023
52

Page 53

Page 54

Page 55

Page 56

Page 57

Page 58

Page 59

Page 60

From:
To: Wilson, Evelyn-Ann; Planning
Subject: P/23/0863
Date: 10 October 2023 09:20:31
Good morning,
I checked the portal and see that the application is still awaiting a decision, do I still have
time to add a comment?
I've heard further rumours that the bistro owners are intending on applying for an alcohol
licence.
I do not wish for the forecourt to be used for serving alcohol. The area concerned is
accross from where we live and I worry about the noise levels when the seating area is
used to full capacity.
When the cafe first applied for change is purpose it was from a shop to a cafe and I now
feel that its no longer going to be a cafe, its more a restaurant/bar.
Kind regards
Kirsty owen
60

Page 61

Comments for Planning Application P/23/0863
Application Summary
Application Number: P/23/0863
Address: 270 Stonelaw Road Rutherglen G73 3SA
Proposal: Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to cafe premises.
Case Officer: Evelyn-Ann Wilson
Customer Details
Name: Mr P Bree
Address: 2/2 1 Highburgh Drive South Lanarkshire
Comment Details
Commenter Type: Neighbour
Stance: Customer made comments in support of the Planning Application
Comment Reasons:
Comment:I think the upgrades and improvements carried out to the external, internal and facade
have been a great update and the modernisation has made it more fitting for the area. The outdoor
area was left unkept and overgrown beforehand but looks a lot better having been monoblocked
and a specific outdoor seating area would be a great addition. The previous tenant had seating out
on the public pavement which caused issues with pedestrian traffic and numerous food waste left
on the pavement. I feel that it would be beneficial to contain this to the forecourt area of the cafe.
61

Page 62

Comments for Planning Application P/23/0863
Application Summary
Application Number: P/23/0863
Address: 270 Stonelaw Road Rutherglen G73 3SA
Proposal: Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to cafe premises.
Case Officer: Evelyn-Ann Wilson
Customer Details
Name: Mrs Linda Cunningham
Address: Granville Burnett Plsace Port Elphinstone, Inverurie
Comment Details
Commenter Type: Member of public
Stance: Customer made comments in support of the Planning Application
Comment Reasons:
Comment:I am one of the owners of the property at 270 Stonelaw Road and along with two of the
other owners (there are 4 owners), see that the present tenant is doing an outstanding job of
updating the interior and exterior of the cafe.
The garden area outside the premises was in an untidy state due to the lack of attention being
shown by the people who reside at 266 Stonelaw Road. It was only ever cared for by the
DiGiacomo family (owners of 270 Sonelaw Road). We are supporting Hugh Burns in his
endeavours this is something that Burnside needs. The cafe was always the high-point meeting
place, and Burnside needs that focal point for the future.
62

Page 63

Page 64

Page 65

No embedded text on this page.

Page 66

Page 67


#$%& ''(
)**+,-,./.0
12345/6.07**89,:77*7;,28*-,<=2../.02<<=/:26*.>/.5,025+?7*@ABC7*.,=24D*2+>DE7;,50=,.>)AFFCGH
IJK27/?28*-,7;,25,2/.LE,?6*.>3J=/-/.05**34;,5,14*5MN5*3;*3,5,0E=25=J/?28*-,7;,25,2/.
LE,?6*.H1N7;/?/?2<<5*-,+>/74/==05,27=J/.:5,2?,.*/?,2.++/?7E582.:,H1*4.2.O7;*N7;,=2.+7;27/?8,/.0
+,-,=*<,+2.+12345/6.07**89,:77;/?2<<=/:26*.H
P/.+5,025+?
G?;=,.,Q*;,57J
C,.7N5*33J/R;*.,
63

Page 68

Comments for Planning Application P/23/0863
Application Summary
Application Number: P/23/0863
Address: 270 Stonelaw Road Rutherglen G73 3SA
Proposal: Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to cafe premises.
Case Officer: Evelyn-Ann Wilson
Customer Details
Name: Mrs Catherine Duncan
Address: 2-1, 266 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen Glasgow, South Lanarkshire G73 3SA
Comment Details
Commenter Type: Neighbour
Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application
Comment Reasons:
Comment:Comments for Planning Application P/23/0863
I object on the following grounds.......
1) OWNERSHIP The description of the area in this Planning Application ie the "forecourt", as in
"Change of use of forecourt and part of pavement to form external seating area ancillary to cafe" is
incorrect, because this "forecourt" is in fact the garden area belonging to all the owners of the
building at 266 Stonelaw Road, ie It does not belong exclusively to the cafe located at 270,
Stonelaw Road. There are eight owners in total. In line with the Title Deeds, the use of this garden
cannot be changed without the express permission of all of the owners. The applicant does not
own 270, Stonelaw Rd. The applicant is a tenant.
Further, the Planning Application asks the following question:- (4) - I have/The applicant has taken
reasonable steps, as listed below, to ascertain the names and addresses of the other owners or
agricultural tenants and *have/has been unable to do so -..................and the answer is given as
follows: "There is no methodology for doing this as the ScotLis website operated by the Keeper is
unreliable However, the applicant
was advised as to the owners of this garden. I am one of the owners and I have not given any
permission either verbally, or in writing, for this garden to be used.
2) TRAFFIC AND PARKING Additional custom will generate much more traffic in this limited
corner area and thus put further pressure on already finite street parking in this vicinity. There is
no easy, readily accessible, parking at this corner site. More cars trying to park will exacerbate an
already difficult parking situation in Highburgh Drive. There are double yellow lines currently on
this busy corner of the road at the junction with Highburgh Drive and Stonelaw Road. Even now,
drivers already frequently park cars on these double yellow lines, presenting a danger to both
pedestrians and cars. So more traffic, will present more danger to both pedestrians and cars. This
64

Page 69

traffic situation is not helped by a busy bus stop located on Stonelaw Road near this corner,
causing further congestion.
Also, increased traffic in this area will cause more air pollution from exhaust fumes.
3) DETRIMENTAL IMPACT ON NEIGHBOURING AMENITY The Planning Application asks the
following question:- Please describe the current or most recent use: * (Max 500 characters)
..................and the answer is given as follows: "open space adjacent to café" However, this is not,
and never was "open space". This is the garden belonging to the owners of premises within the
building at No 266, Stonelaw Road. According to the Title Deeds, each owner owns one eighth of
this garden. No one owner can change the use of the garden without the agreement of all the
owners. The applicant is a tenant, not an owner. The applicant does not have this permission to
change the use.
This garden is a "green space" in an urban area and, as such, should be valued and protected.
This café is located below residential blocks of flats, in Stonelaw Road and Highburgh Drive. The
increased noise, late night disturbance, nuisance and littering will lower living standards of the
residents locally.
Litter will be an issue around this eating establishment, and will detract from the residents' living
standards thus having a negative effect on the character and appearance of this residential area.
The noise levels of 30/40 (approx) people in a small area, so close to living accommodation, is
unacceptable to residents and results in the inability of residents to open the windows of their flats.
The residents of this local area deserve to have their living standards protected.
This application is requested "in perpetuity". It is unacceptable and unreasonable that any such
permission would be without limit of time. Such permission, "in perpetuity", could not possibly take
account of any change of tenant in the cafe, and thus it does not protect the living standards of
present and future owners/residents of the residential flats. As such, therefore, this arrangement
also limits their rights as citizen, of the present and future owners/residents of the residential flats.
65

Page 70

From:
To: Planning
Subject: Comments for Planning Application P/23/0863
Date: 14 August 2023 20:05:41
Comments for Planning Application P/23/0863
270 Stonelaw Road Rutherglen G73 3SA
Dear Sir.
I was unable to submit this response through the South Lanarkshire Planning webpage as I kept
receiving an error message as follows......
§ Your comments could not be submitted due to an error in the system.
I am Catherine Duncan
Flat 0/2,
2,Highburgh Drive,
Burnside, Rutherglen
G73 3RZ,
I am a neighbour,
I object.
My comments are as follows:
I note that the Planning Permission Application is for "Change of use of forecourt and part of
pavement to form external seating area ancillary to café"; however, it would appear that no area
of pavement is delineated on the map which accompanied the Neighbour Notification nor on
any online Planning Application.
Also, the term forecourt is incorrect, because this “forecourt” is, in fact, the garden area
belonging to all the owners of the building at 266, Stonelaw Road, ie It does not belong
exclusively to the café located at 270, Stonelaw Road. There are seven owners in total of this
garden (although one owner is entitled to a share of two eighths). In line with the relevant Title
Deeds, the use of this garden cannot be changed without the express permission of all of the
owners. The applicant does not have this permission. The applicant does not own 270, Stonelaw
Rd. The applicant is a tenant.
I wish to object to this application for the following reasons:
1) ODOURS: There is an extraction fan on the outside wall next to my flat at Flat 0/2, 2,
Highburgh Drive. Was planning permission given for this fan in this location? If so, I received no
Neighbour Notification about it. It is most unusual to have such an appliance on the external wall
of a building facing into the street.
The location of this fan, extracting fumes/vapours from the kitchen, will cause fumes and smells
to enter my flat, especially if the windows are open. This is unacceptable.
2) TRAFFIC AND PARKING: Additional custom at this café will generate much more traffic in this
limited corner area and thus putting further pressure on already finite street parking in this
vicinity. There is no easy, readily accessible, parking at this corner site. More cars trying to park
will exacerbate an already difficult parking situation in Highburgh Drive. There are double yellow
lines currently on this busy corner of the road at the junction with Highburgh Drive and Stonelaw
Road. Even now, drivers already frequently park cars on these double yellow lines, presenting a
danger to both pedestrians and cars. So, more traffic will present more danger to both
pedestrians and cars. This traffic situation is not helped by a busy bus stop located on Stonelaw
Road near this corner, causing further congestion.
Also, increased traffic in this area will cause more air pollution from exhaust fumes.
3) DETRIMENTAL IMPACT ON NEIGHBOURING AMENITY: The Planning Application asks the
following question:- Please describe the current or most recent use: * (Max 500 characters)
66

Page 71

………………and the answer is given as follows: “open space adjacent to café“ However, this is not,
and never was “open space”. This is the garden belonging to the owners of premises within the
building at No 266, Stonelaw Road. According to those Title Deeds, each owner owns one eighth
(with one owner having a two eighth share) of this garden. No one owner can change the use of
the garden without the agreement of all the owners. The applicant is a tenant, not an owner.
The applicant does not have this permission to change the use of this garden area.
This garden is a “green space” in an urban setting and, as such, should be valued and protected.
This café is located below residential blocks of flats, in Stonelaw Road and Highburgh Drive. The
increased noise, late night disturbance, nuisance and littering will lower living standards of the
residents in these flats.
My flat is next door to this garden, therefore customers immediately outside my windows will
increase the volume of noise dramatically in my flat, especially if alcohol, or late-night opening is
involved. In these circumstances, the noise levels of people in this small area, so close to living
accommodation, is unacceptable to me and any residents living close by. Residents of this local
area deserve to have their living standards protected.
Litter will be an issue around this eating establishment, and will detract from the residents’ living
standards and also having a negative effect on the character and appearance of this residential
area.
This application is requested “in perpetuity”. It is unacceptable and unreasonable that any such
permission would be without limit of time. Such permission, “in perpetuity”, could not possibly
take account of any change of tenant in the café and thus it does not protect the living standards
of present and future owners/residents of the residential flats. As such, therefore, this
arrangement limits their rights as citizen, of the present and future owners/residents of these
residential flats.
I trust this is now in order
Kind regards,
Catherine Duncan
Sent from Mail for Windows
67

Page 72

Comments for Planning Application P/23/0863
Application Summary
Application Number: P/23/0863
Address: 270 Stonelaw Road Rutherglen G73 3SA
Proposal: Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to cafe premises.
Case Officer: Evelyn-Ann Wilson
Customer Details
Name: Mrs Joanne Hepworth
Address: Flat 1/2 266 Stonelaw Road Glasgow
Comment Details
Commenter Type: Neighbour
Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application
Comment Reasons:
Comment:Objecting on grounds of layout and density of development - the external seating area is
not solely owned by the applicant. It is part owned by the applicant and seven others including
myself, as clearly highlighted in the title deeds.
Objecting also on the grounds of noise and disturbance - the applicant intends to use the area for
'bring your own bottle' nights, which undoubtedly would cause undue noise. The current tenant in
the flat has a 6 month old baby.
68

Page 73

Comments for Planning Application P/23/0863
Application Summary
Application Number: P/23/0863
Address: 270 Stonelaw Road Rutherglen G73 3SA
Proposal: Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to cafe premises.
Case Officer: Evelyn-Ann Wilson
Customer Details
Name: Miss Lizzie Millar
Address: 24 Limeside Avenue, Rutherglen Rutherglen Rutherglen, Glasgow
Comment Details
Commenter Type: Member of public
Stance: Customer made comments in support of the Planning Application
Comment Reasons:
Comment:I'd like to support this application.
I live in the area and would love the high Street to be better used, with more options for socialising
in Burnside. Outdoor seating would really add to the community feel of the area and be the start of
a thriving high street.
In general, high streets are noisy places and I don't believe there should be an attempt to keep
them quiet and unused.
Outdoor seating would also make the high street more welcoming through the evenings adding a
level of safety to those walking home alone. This area in particular is a good opportunity to add
outdoor seating whilst not over loading the pavement.
69

Page 74

Comments for Planning Application P/23/0863
Application Summary
Application Number: P/23/0863
Address: 270 Stonelaw Road Rutherglen G73 3SA
Proposal: Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to cafe premises.
Case Officer: Evelyn-Ann Wilson
Customer Details
Name: Mrs Catherine  Smith
Address: 4 Highburgh Drive Burnside Glasgow
Comment Details
Commenter Type: Neighbour
Stance: Customer made comments neither objecting to or supporting the Planning Application
Comment Reasons:
Comment:As a frequent user of Café Gelato, I was delighted to see the improvements made to the
outside sitting area. However, I am slightly concerned about the opening hours - noise levels - lack
of privacy for tenants of 2 Highburgh Drive, especially the new owner to be of the ground floor flat
adjacent to the outside seating... Also, I'm not entirely sure that Mr Burns owns that land?
70

Page 75

Comments for Planning Application P/23/0863
Application Summary
Application Number: P/23/0863
Address: 270 Stonelaw Road Rutherglen G73 3SA
Proposal: Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to cafe premises.
Case Officer: Evelyn-Ann Wilson
Customer Details
Name: Mr Mark Smith
Address: Flat 1/1, 2 Highburgh Drive Burnside Glasgow
Comment Details
Commenter Type: Neighbour
Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application
Comment Reasons:
Comment:I too would like to add a comment in regards to the ventilation unit that has been
installed and running since the business has been operational. This ventilation unit creates a
major disturbance all throughout the day and night. The unit creates an unwanted hum all day
everyday. This is particularly aggravating at night whilst trying to sleep. Throughout the day the
television must be turned up to an ungodly level to drown out the constant drone from the unit. I
am obviously not against having one, but having a quieter one AND only having it run during
operational hours seems most appropriate.
71

Page 76

Comments for Planning Application P/23/0863
Application Summary
Application Number: P/23/0863
Address: 270 Stonelaw Road Rutherglen G73 3SA
Proposal: Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to cafe premises.
Case Officer: Evelyn-Ann Wilson
Customer Details
Name: Mr Mark Smith
Address: Flat 1/1, 2 Highburgh Drive Burnside Glasgow
Comment Details
Commenter Type: Neighbour
Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application
Comment Reasons:
Comment:Under the heading of Parking: Due to the location of the premises being situated at a
corner of a main road there is no readily available access to easy parking and would thus increase
the traffic on an already busy road.
Under the heading of Road Safety: Due to the location of the premises being situated at a corner
of a main road, the bend it is situated on has double yellow lines and double double yellows also.
As of this moment these are blatantly ignored and cause the entrance to Highburgh Drive to be an
accident waiting to happen with cars being parked at said junction and with the increase of
numbers to the cafe/shop I fear this parking would become more of an issue.
Under the heading of Traffic Generation - As stated previously the additional 30-50 customers this
would allow would attract more cars to an already car dense area and potentially lead to more foot
traffic mixed with car traffic. This being said would lead to the entrance of Highburgh Drive being a
high risk area for pedestrians/cars.
Under the heading of Noise and Disturbance - With my flat being diagonally above the forecourt,
the increased numbers of customers outside would increase volume dramatically (unsure of time
cafe is open until, even worse if it has a late opening time). The noise levels would cause me to
not open my windows with the customers being loud at full capacity. Being a shift worker if the
hours were extended it would disrupt my sleep.
Under the heading of Odours - The ventilation from the kitchen is under my window and would
potentially cause the fumes to reach my window and into my flat which would be most unwelcome.
72

Page 77

Comments for Planning Application P/23/0863
Application Summary
Application Number: P/23/0863
Address: 270 Stonelaw Road Rutherglen G73 3SA
Proposal: Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to cafe premises.
Case Officer: Evelyn-Ann Wilson
Customer Details
Name: Miss Vivienne Vine
Address: 1/2, 1 Highburgh Drive Burnside
Comment Details
Commenter Type: Neighbour
Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application
Comment Reasons:
Comment:I have a further comment to add now that this site is operational.
The external fan that has been installed is audible in the street and unfortunately is it also audible
inside my home with windows closed. When on it is making it is a constant disturbance and can be
heard over anything I watch or listen to, even with the volume turned right up. It's a constant
annoying hum like a tumble dryer going round next to you. It's not acceptable to have this intrusion
in my living space. And i live across the road, some distance. Those living directly beside it must
find it unbearable.
This has gone on through the day and into the evening and night this week, as late as 2am, when
the business is shut but work is still going on inside.
73

Page 78

Page 79

Page 80

Page 81



 !"#$%&'()*+,-./-012/
33*)44+.506"#$)!78#!38&"9)*:)$;5//6
,*##4!+<9!$:)#=&4)#==#*) #&*""#=#*')>")*$!4)!"$:!*)!!$ !*?"# !=)*)'4)4@
<!4)A== )*+BC)?$D$$E4#$

F

Page 82


%!')+G44HC)$$)H$)
33*)44+I-.JIK:9(&*:9L*C)M&*$43)
F

Page 83


<#'')$")*N?)+%):9(#&*
6"!$ )+<&4"#')*#(O) "4"#"9),!$$$: !"#$
<#'')$"8)!4#$4+
<#'')$"+P4"*#$:?#(O) ""#"9)!$$$:! !"#$
Q,-./-012/=#*<9!$:)#=&4)#==#*) #&*""#=#*')>")*$!4)!"$:!*)!!$ !*?"# !=)*)'4)4
!".506"#$)!78#!38&"9)*:)$;5//6R
N9)*)!4#$4=#*'?#(O) "#$!*)+
DC$:$ #4)*#>'"?"#"9)! !"#$4")
DP"4!*)43)$"!4"*))"
D94"#*?#=$#4)!$334"&*(!$ )J #$4"*& "#$34"&*(!$ )
D7#*S9!4!*)!3?4"!*")37"9#&"!$$$:)*'44#$
D$")$3)3&4)7 !&4)$#4)J*C! ?J"*!== !$3*#!34!=)"?44&)4J"")*!$3*&((49$"9)
4"*))"
DS)9##3#=!")*#)$$:9#&*47"9:*)!")*34"&*(!$ )
D!*S$:*)4"* "#$4!$34)*#&4*#!34!=)"?44&)479 99!C)())$*)#*")3"#"9) #&$ !$3
# )
D$4&== )$"$=#*'!"#$Q3*!7$:4'$'!!$3$!3)T&!")R
P7#&3S)"#*)'$3"9)<#&$ "9!""94! !"#$$))34"#()3)")*'$)3$$)7"9"9)
L)C)#')$",!$@N9)L)C)#')$",!$Q4$ )I/"9U)(*&!*?.0./R4'!3)&#=%!"#$!
,!$$$:U*!')7#*SVQ%,UVR79 94)"4#&"6 #""49;#C)*$')$"!$$$:# ?!$3"9)
<#&$ W4#7$X# !L)C)#')$",!$QXL,R@%U,V3)"!4C#&')IJ# )4Y/Q;)$)*!&*(!$
!*)!R4"!")4"9!"*##4!479 93)"*')$"!?'! "*)43)$"!!')$"?7$#"()4&#*")3@
N943)C)#')$"7'! "*)43)$"!!')$"?$):!"C)?$'&")4:$= !$"7!?4!$3
"9)*)=#*)49#&3()*)=&4)3@
74

Page 84

Page 85

Page 86

Page 87

Page 88

Page 89

Page 90

Page 91

Page 92

Page 93

Page 94

Page 95

Page 96

Page 97

!"

Page 98

Page 99

Page 100

Page 101

Page 102

Page 103

Page 104

Page 105

Page 106

Page 107

No embedded text on this page.

Page 108

Page 109

Page 110

Page 111

Page 112

Page 113

Page 114

Page 115

Page 116

Page 117

Page 118

Page 119

&

%

Page 120

Page 121

Page 122

'()

Page 123

Page 124

Page 125

*!**+%%

Page 126

Page 127

Page 128

Page 129

No embedded text on this page.

Page 130

Page 131

Page 132

Page 133

Page 134

,*!!-!

Page 135

No embedded text on this page.

Page 136

Page 137

Page 138

No embedded text on this page.

Page 139

Page 140

Page 141

Page 142

No embedded text on this page.

Page 143

Page 144

Page 145

Page 146

Page 147

No embedded text on this page.

Page 148

Page 149

Page 150

Page 151

Page 152

Page 153

Page 154

Page 155

Page 156

Page 157

Page 158

Page 159

Page 160

Page 161

Page 162

Page 163

Page 164

Page 165

Page 166

Page 167

Page 168

Page 169

No embedded text on this page.

Page 170

Page 171

Page 172

Page 173

Page 174

Page 175

Page 176

Page 177

Page 178

Page 179

Page 180

Page 181

Page 182

Page 183

Page 184

Page 185

Page 186

Page 187

Page 188

Page 189

Page 190

Page 191

Page 192

Page 193

Page 194

Page 195

Page 196

Page 197

Page 198

Page 199

Page 200

Page 201

Page 202

Page 203

Page 204

"#

Page 205

Page 206

Page 207

Page 208

Page 209

Page 210

Page 211

"#

Page 212

Page 213

No embedded text on this page.

Page 214

Page 215

Page 216

Page 217

Page 218

Page 219

Page 220

Page 221

Page 222

Page 223

Page 224

Page 225

Page 226

Page 227

Page 228

Page 229

Page 230

Page 231

No embedded text on this page.

Page 232

Page 233

Page 234

Page 235

Page 236

	
&		$

Page 237

Page 238

Page 239

Page 240

Page 241

Page 242

Page 243

Page 244

Page 245

Page 246

Page 247

Page 248

Page 249

Page 250

Page 251

Page 252

Page 253

Page 254

Page 255

Page 256

Page 257

Page 258

No embedded text on this page.

Page 259

No embedded text on this page.

Page 260

Page 261

Page 262

Page 263

Page 264

No embedded text on this page.

Page 265

No embedded text on this page.

Page 266

Page 267

Page 268

Page 269

Page 270

Page 271

Page 272

Page 273

Page 274

Page 275

Page 276

Page 277

Page 278

Page 279

Page 280

Page 281

Page 282

Page 283

Page 284

Page 285

Page 286

'*

Page 287

Page 288

Page 289

Page 290

Page 291

Page 292

Page 293

No embedded text on this page.

Page 294

No embedded text on this page.

Page 295

Page 296

Page 297

Page 298

Page 299

Page 300

Page 301

Page 302

Site photographs and location plan 
Appendix 3  3e
77

Page 303

Page 304

Photo 1 looking northwest 
3e
79

Page 305

Photo 2 looking northeast 
80

Page 306

Photo 3 looking northwest 
81

Page 307

Photo 4 looking northeast 
82

Page 308

Page 309

Page 310

Planning Decision Notice and Reasons for Refusal 
Appendix 4  3f
85

Page 311

Page 312

Community And Enterprise Resources
Executive Director David Booth
Planning And Regulatory Services
Dominic Notarangelo
Padrino Design
The Wright Business Centre
1 Lonmay Road
Glasgow
Scotland
G33 4EL
Our Ref: P/23/0863
Your Ref:
If calling ask for: Evelyn-Ann Wilson
Date: 15 November 2023
Dear Sir/Madam
Proposal: Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to
cafe premises.
Site address: 270 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen, G73 3SA,
Application no: P/23/0863
I would advise you that the above application was refused by the Council and I enclose the
decision notice which sets out the reasons for refusal.  Please note that the Council does not
issue paper plans with the decision notice. The application is refused in accordance with the
plans and any other documentation listed in the reasons for refusal imposed on the
accompanying decision notice and which can be viewed using the  Council’s online planning
application search at https://publicaccess.southlanarkshire.gov.uk/online-applications/
If you consider that you can overcome the reasons for refusal and that it is not the principle of the
development that is unacceptable, you may submit an amended application.  If you do amend
your proposals and re-apply within one year of this refusal, then you will not have to pay a fee,
provided the proposal is of the same character or description as the application which has just
been refused.
As your application has been refused, you may appeal against the decision within 3 months of
the date of the decision notice.  The attached notes explain how you may appeal.
Should you have any enquiries relating to the refusal of your application or a potential amended
submission, please contact Evelyn-Ann Wilson on 07551842952
Yours faithfully
Head of Planning and Regulatory Services
Enc:
3f
87

Page 313

Application no.
P/23/0863
Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended
by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006
To: Mr Hugh Burns Per: Dominic Notarangelo
270 Stonelaw Road,
Rutherglen, G73 3SA,
The Wright Business
Centre, 1 Lonmay Road,
Glasgow, Scotland, G33
4EL,
With reference to your application received on 05.07.2023 for planning permission under the
above mentioned Act:
Description of proposed development:
Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to cafe
premises.
Site location:
270 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen, G73 3SA,
SOUTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL in exercise of their powers under the above mentioned Act
hereby:
REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION
for the above development in accordance with the plan(s) specified in this decision notice and the
particulars given in the application, for the reason(s) listed overleaf in the paper apart.
Date: 15th November 2023
Head of Planning and Regulatory Services
This permission does not grant any consent for the development that may be required under
other legislation, e.g. Building Warrant or Roads Construction Consent.
South Lanarkshire Council
Community and Enterprise Resources
Planning and Regulatory Services
88

Page 314

South Lanarkshire Council
Refuse planning permission
Paper apart - Application number: P/23/0863
Reason(s) for refusal:
01. That the proposal would have a significant detrimental impact on the amenity of the
surrounding area which is contrary to section c) of Policy 14 Design, quality and place of
NPF4.
02. That the proposal is likely to raise unacceptable noise issues which is contary to section
e) of Policy 23 Health and Safety of NPF4.
03. That the proposal is likely to raise unacceptable noise issues which is contrary to section
e) of Policy 23 Health and Safety of NPF4.
04. That the proposal would be detrimental to the amenity of residents which is contrary to
Policy 3 General Urban Areas and Settlements of SLLDP2.
05. That the proposal will have an unacceptable significant adverse impact on the amenity of
nearby residents in terms of noise and lack of parking provision which is therefore
contrary to point 3 of Policy 5 Development Management and Placemaking of SLLDP2.
06. That the proposal would have an adverse impact on the existing neighbouring properties
in terms of noise and disturbance which is contrary to Policy DM1 New Development
Design of the SLLDP2.
Reason(s) for decision
That to proposal for the change of use to an external seating area as the development would
have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the neighbouring residential properties and
surrounding amenity due to disturbance from noise and would exacerbate the existing traffic
congestion issues at this location. The proposal is therefore considered contrary to Policies 14,
23 and 27 of the National Planning Framework 4 and Policies 3, 5 and DM1 of the South
Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2. Consequently, the application is recommended for
refusal and there are no other material considerations which would outweigh the proposals
variance with the development plan.
89

Page 315

Notes to applicant
Application number: P/23/0863
Important
The following notes do not form a statutory part of this decision notice. However, it is
recommended that you study them closely as they contain other relevant information.
01. This decision relates to drawing numbers:
Reference Version No: Plan Status
LOCATION PLAN Refused
PLAN AS PROPOSED Refused
Community And Enterprise
Resources Executive Director David
90

Page 316

Booth Planning And Regulatory
Services
Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act
1997
1. Compliance with conditions
Under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (Section
145), failure to comply with any condition(s) imposed on any planning permission may
result in the service by the Council of a “Breach of Condition Notice” requiring
compliance with the said condition(s).
There is no right of appeal against such a Notice and failure to comply with the terms of
the Notice within the specified time limit will constitute a summary offence, liable on
summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1000.
2. Procedure for appeal to the planning authority
(a) If the applicant is aggrieved by the decision of the planning authority to refuse
permission for or approval required by a condition in respect of the proposed
development, or to grant permission or approval subject to conditions, the applicant
may require the planning authority to review the case under section 43A of the Town
and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, within three months from the date of this
notice. The notice of review should be addressed to:
Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources)
Administration and Legal Services
Council
Headquarters
Almada Street
Hamilton
ML3 0AA
To obtain the appropriate forms:
Administration and Legal Services at the above
address. Telephone: 07385 370 117
E-mail: stuart.mcleod@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
(b) If permission to develop land is refused or granted subject to conditions, whether by the
planning authority or by the Scottish Ministers, and the owner of the land claims that the
land has become incapable of reasonably beneficial use in its existing state and cannot
be rendered incapable of reasonably beneficial use by the carrying out of any
development which has been or would be permitted, he may serve on the planning
authority a purchase notice requiring the purchase of his interest in the land in
accordance with Part 5 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.
91

Page 317

Page 318

Notice of Review (including Statement of Reasons for
Requiring the Review) submitted by applicant Hugh
Burns 
Appendix 5  3g
93

Page 319

Page 320

Page 1 of 5
Floor 6, Council Offices Almada Street Hamilton ML3 0AA  Tel: 0303 123 1015  Email: planning@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
Applications cannot be validated until all the necessary documentation has been submitted and the required fee has been paid.
Thank you for completing this application form:
ONLINE REFERENCE 100634666-005
The online reference is the unique reference for your online form only. The  Planning Authority will allocate an Application Number when
your form is validated. Please quote this reference if you need to contact the planning Authority about this application.
Applicant or Agent Details
Are you an applicant or an agent? * (An agent is an architect, consultant or someone else acting
on behalf of the applicant in connection with this application)  Applicant  Agent
Agent Details
Please enter Agent details
Company/Organisation:
Ref. Number: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
First Name: * Building Name:
Last Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Telephone Number: * (Street): *
Extension Number: Address 2:
Mobile Number: Town/City: *
Fax Number: Country: *
Postcode: *
Email Address: *
Is the applicant an individual or an organisation/corporate entity? *
  Individual    Organisation/Corporate entity
Padrino Design
Dominic
Notarangelo
Lonmay Road
1
The Wright Business Centre
0141 762 2000
G33 4EL
Scotland
Glasgow
Dominic@padrino.co.uk
3g
95

Page 321

Page 2 of 5
Applicant Details
Please enter Applicant details
Title: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
Other Title: Building Name:
First Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Last Name: * (Street): *
Company/Organisation Address 2:
Telephone Number: * Town/City: *
Extension Number: Country: *
Mobile Number: Postcode: *
Fax Number:
Email Address: *
Site Address Details
Planning Authority:
Full postal address of the site (including postcode where available):
Address 1:
Address 2:
Address 3:
Address 4:
Address 5:
Town/City/Settlement:
Post Code:
Please identify/describe the location of the site or sites
Northing Easting
Mr
270 STONELAW ROAD
Hugh
South Lanarkshire Council
Burns
RUTHERGLEN
Stonelaw  Road
270
GLASGOW
G73 3SA
G73 3SA
UK
660468
Rutherglen
262122
Burnside
dominic@padrino.co.uk
96

Page 322

Page 3 of 5
Description of Proposal
Please provide a description of your proposal to which your review relates. The description should be the same as given in the
application form, or as amended with the agreement of the planning authority: *
(Max 500 characters)
Type of Application
What type of application did you submit to the planning authority? *
 Application for planning permission (including householder application but excluding application to work minerals).
 Application for planning permission in principle.
 Further application.
 Application for approval of matters specified in conditions.
What does your review relate to? *
 Refusal Notice.
 Grant of permission with Conditions imposed.
 No decision reached within the prescribed period (two months after validation date or any agreed extension) – deemed refusal.
Statement of reasons for seeking review
You must state in full, why you are a seeking a review of the planning authority’s decision (or failure to make a decision). Your statement
must set out all matters you consider require to be taken into account in determining your review. If necessary this can be provided as a
separate document in the ‘Supporting Documents’ section: * (Max 500 characters)
Note: you are unlikely to have a further opportunity to add to your statement of appeal at a later date, so it is essential that you produce
all of the information you want the decision-maker to take into account.
You should not however raise any new matter which was not before the planning authority at the time it decided your application (or at
the time expiry of the period of determination), unless you can demonstrate that the new matter could not have been raised before that
time or that it not being raised before that time is a consequence of exceptional circumstances.
Have you raised any matters which were not before the appointed officer at the time the  Yes  No
Determination on your application was made? *
If yes, you should explain in the box below, why you are raising the new matter, why it was not raised with the appointed officer before
your application was determined and why you consider it should be considered in your review: * (Max 500 characters)
Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to cafe premises. | 270 Stonelaw Road Rutherglen G73 3SA
Please see attached document "Statement of Appeal 270 Stonelaw Road. Road"
97

Page 323

Page 4 of 5
Please provide a list of all supporting documents, materials and evidence which you wish to submit with your notice of review and intend
to rely on in support of your review. You can attach these documents electronically later in the process: * (Max 500 characters)
Application Details
Please provide the application reference no. given to you by your planning
authority for your previous application.
What date was the application submitted to the planning authority? *
What date was the decision issued by the planning authority? *
Review Procedure
The Local Review Body will decide on the procedure to be used to determine your review and may at any time during the review
process require that further information or representations be made to enable them to determine the review. Further information may be
required by one or a combination of procedures, such as: written submissions; the holding of one or more hearing sessions and/or
inspecting the land which is the subject of the review case.
Can this review continue to a conclusion, in your opinion, based on a review of the relevant information provided by yourself and other
parties only, without any further procedures? For example, written submission, hearing session, site inspection. *
 Yes  No
In the event that the Local Review Body appointed to consider your application decides to inspect the site, in your opinion:
Can the site be clearly seen from a road or public land? *  Yes  No
Is it possible for the site to be accessed safely and without barriers to entry? *  Yes  No
Checklist – Application for Notice of Review
Please complete the following checklist to make sure you have provided all the necessary information in support of your appeal. Failure
to submit all this information may result in your appeal being deemed invalid.
Have you provided the name and address of the applicant?. *  Yes  No
Have you provided the date and reference number of the application which is the subject of this  Yes  No
review? *
If you are the agent, acting on behalf of the applicant, have you provided details of your name  Yes  No  N/A
and address and indicated whether any notice or correspondence required in connection with the
review should be sent to you or the applicant? *
Have you provided a statement setting out your reasons for requiring a review and by what  Yes  No
procedure (or combination of procedures) you wish the review to be conducted? *
Note: You must state, in full, why you are seeking a review on your application. Your statement must set out all matters you consider
require to be taken into account in determining your review. You may not have a further opportunity to add to your statement of review
at a later date. It is therefore essential that you submit with your notice of review, all necessary information and evidence that you rely
on and wish the Local Review Body to consider as part of your review.
Please attach a copy of all documents, material and evidence which you intend to rely on  Yes  No
(e.g. plans and Drawings) which are now the subject of this review *
Note: Where the review relates to a further application e.g. renewal of planning permission or modification, variation or removal of a
planning condition or where it relates to an application for approval of matters specified in conditions, it is advisable to provide the
application reference number, approved plans and decision notice (if any) from the earlier consent.
DOC 1 SR Original Application Form DOC 2 SR Case Officer's email of 21st July 2023 DOC 3 SR1st Additional
supporting documents application form DOC 4 SR Location Plan DOC 5 SR Plan as Proposed DOC 6 SR 2nd
Additional supporting documents application form DOC 7 SR Plan as Proposed DOC 8 SRResponse to
Representations DOC 9 SR Case Officer's report DOC 10 SR Decision Notice
P/23/0863
15/11/2023
05/07/2023
98

Page 324

Page 5 of 5
Declare – Notice of Review
I/We the applicant/agent certify that this is an application for review on the grounds stated.
Declaration Name: Mr Dominic Notarangelo
Declaration Date: 12/02/2024
99

Page 325

Planning Appeal
Refusal
of Application
270 Stonelaw Road
Rutherglen G73 3SA
P/23/0863
P A D R I N O   D E S I G N
The Wright Business Centre
1 Lonmay Road
Glasgow G33 4EL
t. 0141 762 2000
f. 0141 762 2001
w. www.padrino.co.uk
100

Page 326

The application site lies at the Junction of Stonelaw Road and Highburgh Drive in the Burnside
are of Rutherglen..
The application for external Seating was submitted on 5th July 2023. (DOC 1 SR) The submitted
drawings covered both he tarmac surfaced area at he junction and the derelict garden ground
adjacent.
On 20th July 2023 the case officer e mailed (DOC 2SR) e mailed to advise that the tarmac area
did not require planning consent, requesting that the submitted drawings be revised to reduce
the application site, as detailed in the e mail (DOC 2SR). This was done and the drawings returned
on that day, with the new application form (DOC 3 SR). The application was validated the next day,
the 21st July 2023.
The, validated, application drawings were, therefore, (DOC 4 SR) Location Plan and (DOC 5 SR)
Plan as proposed.
A number of representations were posted on the Local Authority planning portal.
A response was submitted, accompanied by a further application form on 19th September (DOC 6
SR). This submission was receipted by the Scottish Government on 17th September 2023 (DOC 7
SR). The response document (DOC 8 SR) replies to the issues as raised whether or not hey are
material planning considerations
The case officer's Report (DOC 9 SR) and Decision Notice (DOC 10 SR) are submitted herewith.
In terms of the reasons for refusal we would submit as follows:-
1. That the proposal would have a significant detrimental impact on the amenity of the
surrounding area which is contrary to section c) of Policy 14 Design, quality and place of
NPF4.
Response.
As highlighted in the Case officer's e mail of the 21st July 2023 (DOC 2 SR) makes it clear
that this is a 'hospitality venue with permitted development rights for external seating on the
footpath, under NPF4. The application is merely an extension to the area with permitted
development rights.
2. That the proposal is likely to raise unacceptable noise issues which is contary to section e)
of Policy 23 Health and Safety of NPF4.
Response
As highlighted in the Case officer's e mail of the 21st July 2023 (DOC 2 SR) makes it clear
that this is a 'hospitality venue with permitted development rights for external seating on the
footpath, under NPF4. This increase to the external seating area, as permitted by NPF4
would not materially increase noise levels. The regulation of opening hours may be an
appropriate condition.
101

Page 327

3. That the proposal is likely to raise unacceptable noise issues which is contrary to section e)
of Policy 23 Health and Safety of NPF4.
Response
As highlighted in the Case officer's e mail of the 21st July 2023 (DOC 2 SR) makes it clear
that this is a 'hospitality venue with permitted development rights for external seating on the
footpath, under NPF4. This increase to the external seating area, as permitted by NPF4
would not materially increase noise levels.
4. That the proposal would be detrimental to the amenity of residents which is contrary to
Policy 3 General Urban Areas and Settlements of SLLDP2.
Response
As highlighted in the Case officer's e mail of the 21st July 2023 (DOC 2 SR) makes it clear
that this is a 'hospitality venue with permitted development rights for external seating on the
footpath, under NPF4. This increase to the external seating area, as permitted by NPF4
would not materially increase noise levels.
5. That the proposal will have an unacceptable significant adverse impact on the amenity of
nearby residents in terms of noise and lack of parking provision which is therefore contrary
to point 3 of Policy 5 Development Management and Placemaking of SLLDP2.
Response.
This cafe was taken over and refurbished to a high standard. The main customer base is
retired local people. The cafe contributes to the principles of the 20 minute neighbourhood
and active travel, the customer profile is not car bound.
6. That the proposal would have an adverse impact on the existing neighbouring properties in
terms of noise and disturbance which is contrary to Policy DM1 New Development Design
of the SLLDP2.
Response
As highlighted in the Case officer's e mail of the 21st July 2023 (DOC 2 SR) makes it clear
that this is a 'hospitality venue with permitted development rights for external seating on the
footpath, under NPF4. This increase to the external seating area, as permitted by NPF4
would not materially increase noise levels.
Summary.
This cafe provides a, much enjoyed, local venue for a demographic in Burnside that enjoys the
pleasure of meeting their friends and enjoy the opportunity to sit outside on the few days that the
weather permits. The profile is not a noisy one and the facility contributes to the wellbeing of those
that use it.
The proposal chimes with a number of Scottish Government initiatives, namely
Place making
Active travel
The promotion of European cace culture
102

Page 328

List of Supporting attachments
DOC   1 SR Original Application Form
DOC   2 SR Case Officer's email of 21st July 2023
DOC   3 SR 1st Additional supporting documents application form
DOC   4 SR Location Plan
DOC   5 SR Plan as Proposed
DOC   6 SR     2nd Additional supporting documents application form
DOC   7 SR Plan as Proposed
DOC   8 SR Response to Representations
DOC   9 SR Case Officer's report
DOC 10 SR Decision Notice
103

Page 329

Page 330

Page 2 of 9
Agent Details
Please enter Agent details
Company/Organisation:
Ref. Number: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
First Name: * Building Name:
Last Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Telephone Number: * (Street): *
Extension Number: Address 2:
Mobile Number: Town/City: *
Fax Number: Country: *
Postcode: *
Email Address: *
Is the applicant an individual or an organisation/corporate entity? *
 Individual  Organisation/Corporate entity
Applicant Details
Please enter Applicant details
Title: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
Other Title: Building Name:
First Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Last Name: * (Street): *
Company/Organisation Address 2:
Telephone Number: * Town/City: *
Extension Number: Country: *
Mobile Number: Postcode: *
Fax Number:
Email Address: *
Padrino Design
Mr
Dominic
Hugh
Notarangelo
Burns
Lonmay Road
Stonelaw Road
1
270
The Wright Business Centre
0141 762 2000
G33 4EL
G73 3SA
Scotland
UK
Glasgow
Glasgow
Dominic@padrino.co.uk
dominic@padrino.co.uk
105

Page 331

Page 3 of 9
Site Address Details
Planning Authority:
Full postal address of the site (including postcode where available):
Address 1:
Address 2:
Address 3:
Address 4:
Address 5:
Town/City/Settlement:
Post Code:
Please identify/describe the location of the site or sites
Northing Easting
Pre-Application Discussion
Have you discussed your proposal with the planning authority? *  Yes  No
Site Area
Please state the site area:
Please state the measurement type used:  Hectares (ha)  Square Metres (sq.m)
Existing Use
Please describe the current or most recent use: *  (Max 500 characters)
Access and Parking
Are you proposing a new altered vehicle access to or from a public road? *  Yes  No
If Yes please describe and show on your drawings the position of any existing. Altered or new access points, highlighting the changes
you propose to make. You should also show existing footpaths and note if there will be any impact on these.
270 STONELAW ROAD
97.75
open space adjacent to cafe
South Lanarkshire Council
RUTHERGLEN
GLASGOW
G73 3SA
660468 262122
106

Page 332

Page 4 of 9
Are you proposing any change to public paths, public rights of way or affecting any public right of access? *  Yes  No
If Yes please show on your drawings the position of any affected areas highlighting the changes you propose to make, including
arrangements for continuing or alternative public access.
How many vehicle parking spaces (garaging and open parking) currently exist on the application
Site?
How many vehicle parking spaces (garaging and open parking) do you propose on the site (i.e. the
Total of existing and any new spaces or a reduced number of spaces)? *
Please show on your drawings the position of existing and proposed parking spaces and identify if these are for the use of particular
types of vehicles (e.g. parking for disabled people, coaches, HGV vehicles, cycles spaces).
Water Supply and Drainage Arrangements
Will your proposal require new or altered water supply or drainage arrangements? *  Yes  No
Do your proposals make provision for sustainable drainage of surface water?? *  Yes  No
(e.g. SUDS arrangements) *
Note:-
Please include details of SUDS arrangements on your plans
Selecting ‘No’ to the above question means that you could be in breach of Environmental legislation.
Are you proposing to connect to the public water supply network? *
 Yes
 No, using a private water supply
 No connection required
If No, using a private water supply, please show on plans the supply and all works needed to provide it (on or off site).
Assessment of Flood Risk
Is the site within an area of known risk of flooding? *  Yes  No  Don’t Know
If the site is within an area of known risk of flooding you may need to submit a Flood Risk Assessment before your application can be
determined. You may wish to contact your Planning Authority or SEPA for advice on what information may be required.
Do you think your proposal may increase the flood risk elsewhere? *  Yes  No  Don’t Know
Trees
Are there any trees on or adjacent to the application site? *  Yes  No
If Yes, please mark on your drawings any trees, known protected trees and their canopy spread close to the proposal site and indicate if
any are to be cut back or felled.
Waste Storage and Collection
Do the plans incorporate areas to store and aid the collection of waste (including recycling)? *  Yes  No
0
0
107

Page 333

Page 334

Page 6 of 9
Certificates
The certificate you have selected requires you to distribute copies of the Notice 1 document below to all of the Owners/Agricultural
tenants that you provided previously. Please note that your planning authority may be required to place an advertisement in a local
newspaper. You may wish to contact the planning authority for further guidance.
Notice 1 is required
 I understand my obligations to provide the above notice before I can complete the certificates. *
Land Ownership Certificate
Certificate and Notice under Regulation 15 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland)
Regulations 2013
I hereby certify that – (1) –
I am/The applicant is unable to issue a certificate in accordance with Regulation 15 of the Town and Country Planning (Development
Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013 and in respect of the accompanying application;
(2) - No person other than myself/the applicant was an owner of any part of the land to which the application relates at the beginning of
the period of 21 days ending with the date of the accompanying application.
or –
(3) - I have/the applicant has been unable to serve notice on any person other than myself/the applicant who, at the beginning of the
period of 21 days ending with the date of the accompanying application, was owner [Note 2] of any part of the land to which the
application relates.
or –
(2) - I have/The applicant has served notice on each of the following persons other than myself/the applicant who, at the beginning of
the period of 21 days ending with the date of the accompanying application, was owner [Note 2] of any part of the land to which the
application/appeal was owner [Note 2] of any part of the land to which the application relates.
Name:
Address:
Date of Service of Notice: *
109

Page 335

Page 7 of 9
(2) - None of the land to which the application relates constitutes or forms part of an agricultural holding;
or –
(2) - The land or part of the land to which the application relates constitutes or forms part of an agricultural holding and I have/the
applicant has served notice on every person other than myself/himself who, at the beginning of the period of 21 days ending with the
date of the accompanying application was an agricultural tenant.  These persons are:
Name:
Address:
Date of Service of Notice: *
(4) – I have/The applicant has taken reasonable steps, as listed below, to ascertain the names and addresses of the other owners or
agricultural tenants and *have/has been unable to do so –
Signed: Dominic Notarangelo
On behalf of: Mr Hugh Burns
Date: 05/07/2023
 Please tick here to certify this Certificate. *
Checklist – Application for Planning Permission
Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997
The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013
Please take a few moments to complete the following checklist in order to ensure that you have provided all the necessary information
in support of your application. Failure to submit sufficient information with your application may result in your application being deemed
invalid. The planning authority will not start processing your application until it is valid.
a) If this is a further application where there is a variation of conditions attached to a previous consent, have you provided a statement to
that effect? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
b) If this is an application for planning permission or planning permission in principal where there is a crown interest in the land, have
you provided a statement to that effect? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
c) If this is an application for planning permission, planning permission in principle or a further application and the application is for
development belonging to the categories of national or major development (other than one under Section 42 of the planning Act), have
you provided a Pre-Application Consultation Report? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
There is no methodology for doing this as the Scotlis website operated by the Keeper is unreliable.  he keeper's staff tend to be
evasive and lacking in candour.
110

Page 336

Page 8 of 9
Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997
The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013
d) If this is an application for planning permission and the application relates to development belonging to the categories of national or
major developments and you do not benefit from exemption under Regulation 13 of The Town and Country Planning (Development
Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013, have you provided a Design and Access Statement? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
e) If this is an application for planning permission and relates to development belonging to the category of local developments (subject
to regulation 13. (2) and (3) of the Development Management Procedure (Scotland) Regulations 2013) have you provided a Design
Statement? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
f) If your application relates to installation of an antenna to be employed in an electronic communication network, have you provided an
ICNIRP Declaration? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
g) If this is an application for planning permission, planning permission in principle, an application for approval of matters specified in
conditions or an application for mineral development, have you provided any other plans or drawings as necessary:
 Site Layout Plan or Block plan.
 Elevations.
 Floor plans.
 Cross sections.
 Roof plan.
 Master Plan/Framework Plan.
 Landscape plan.
 Photographs and/or photomontages.
 Other.
If Other, please specify: *  (Max 500 characters)
Provide copies of the following documents if applicable:
A copy of an Environmental Statement. *  Yes  N/A
A Design Statement or Design and Access Statement. *  Yes  N/A
A Flood Risk Assessment. *  Yes  N/A
A Drainage Impact Assessment (including proposals for Sustainable Drainage Systems). *  Yes  N/A
Drainage/SUDS layout. *  Yes  N/A
A Transport Assessment or Travel Plan  Yes  N/A
Contaminated Land Assessment. *  Yes  N/A
Habitat Survey. *  Yes  N/A
A Processing Agreement. *  Yes  N/A
Other Statements (please specify). (Max 500 characters)
111

Page 337

Page 9 of 9
Declare – For Application to Planning Authority
I, the applicant/agent certify that this is an application to the planning authority as described in this form. The accompanying
Plans/drawings and additional information are provided as a part of this application.
Declaration Name: Mr Dominic Notarangelo
Declaration Date: 05/07/2023
Payment Details
P
Created: 05/07/2023 12:34
112

Page 338

12/02/2024, 18:58 Roundcube Webmail :: P/23/0863 - Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to cafe premises - 270 Stonelaw Roa…
https://webmail.padrino.co.uk/cpsess6062265916/3rdparty/roundcube/index.php?_task=mail&_safe=0&_uid=46991&_mbox=INBOX&_action=print&_extwin=1 1/2
Subject P/23/0863 - Change of use of forecourt to form external seating
area ancillary to cafe premises - 270 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen.
From Wilson, Evelyn-Ann <Evelyn-Ann.Wilson@southlanarkshire.gov.uk>
To Dominic Notarangelo <dominic@padrino.co.uk>
Date 2023-07-20 13:14
Good afternoon Dominic,
 
P/23/0863 - Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to cafe premises - 270
Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen.
 
I have been allocated the application above. 
 
Firstly, the new Permitted Development rights in PART 2H HOSPITALITY USES – OUTDOOR SERVERY
PROVISION ADDED UNDER SSI 2023 No35 Class 9L.
(1) Development consisting of—
(a) a change of use of part of a public road adjacent to relevant premises for the purposes of selling or
serving food or drink supplied from those premises or consuming good or drink supplied from those
premises, and
(b) placing furniture for use in connection with such purposes.
Conditions
(2) Development is permitted by this class subject to the condition that no furniture may be placed in a
public road so as to cause an obstruction unless consent has ﬁrst been obtained from the relevant roads
authority under section 59 of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984(a).
Interpretation (3) In this class— “furniture” means—
(a) counters or stalls for selling or serving food or drink,
(b) tables, counters or shelves on which food or drink can be placed,
(c) chairs, benches or other forms of seating,
(d) umbrellas, ramps, barriers, heaters and other articles used in connection with the outdoor consumption
of food or drink,
(e) decking structures for the purpose of creating a level surface on which items mentioned in sub-
paragraphs (a) to (d) can be placed, “relevant premises” means a premises— (a) used for a purpose
speciﬁed in class 3 (food and drink) of the schedule of the Use Classes Order, (b) used as a public house,
 
The public road includes the footpath network and Planning Consent is not required for non-permanent
furniture, however, consent from the roads authority is. 
 
Planning consent is however required for the change of use of the forecourt.  I note that the location plan
and the plan of premises and external area differ in that the later contains the footpath area and the location
plan does not.  As planning consent is not required for the pavement area, the plan can be amended to only
contain the forecourt land and premises.  If any permanent features such as fences over 1m in height,
planters, canopy’s etc are proposed, there should be included in the plans with dimensions and elevations. 
(It is noted that an unauthorised fence over 1m in height is present on street view from June 2022).  Can
you advise if any permanent/boundary structures are proposed? Will the timber fence be removed? If not,
will this be included in the current application?
 
I would be grateful if you could advise on/address the points above, prior to the validation of the proposal.
 
Should you wish to discuss anything relating to the application, please contact me on the number below.
 
113

Page 339

12/02/2024, 18:58 Roundcube Webmail :: P/23/0863 - Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to cafe premises - 270 Stonelaw Roa…
https://webmail.padrino.co.uk/cpsess6062265916/3rdparty/roundcube/index.php?_task=mail&_safe=0&_uid=46991&_mbox=INBOX&_action=print&_extwin=1 2/2
Kind regards,
Evelyn Ann Wilson, Planning Ofﬁcer (West Team)
Planning and Regulatory Services, Community and Enterprise Resources, South Lanarkshire Council
Council Offices, Floor 6, Almada Street, Hamilton, ML3 0AA
Tel: 07551842952  Email: evelyn-ann.wilson@southlanarkshire.gobv.uk   Web: Planning and building standards -
South Lanarkshire Council
Further information on our commitment to our customers can be found in our Customer Charters using the
following link: Planning and Enforcement Charters - South Lanarkshire Council
South Lanarkshire Council Disclaimer
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended only for the use of the individual or group
named above. If you receive this email in error, please notify your system manager immediately and erase the mail
from your system. Any copyright material included with the e-mail should be solely used by its intended recipient and
only for the purpose intended. The information contained within the message and any associated files are not
necessarily the view of South Lanarkshire Council and do not bind the Council in any legal agreement.
WARNING: While South Lanarkshire Council takes steps to prevent computer viruses from being transmitted via
electronic mail attachments, we cannot guarantee that attachments do not contain computer virus code. You are
therefore strongly advised to undertake anti-virus checks prior to accessing the attachment to this electronic mail.
South Lanarkshire Council grants no warranties regarding performance use or quality of any attachment and
undertakes no liability for loss or damage howsoever caused. South Lanarkshire Council may monitor the content of
e-mails sent and received via its network for the purpose of ensuring compliance with its policies and procedures.
114

Page 340

Page 1 of 3
Floor 6, Council Offices Almada Street Hamilton ML3 0AA  Tel: 0303 123 1015  Email: planning@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
Applications cannot be validated until all the necessary documentation has been submitted and the required fee has been paid.
Thank you for completing this application form:
ONLINE REFERENCE 100634666-002
The online reference is the unique reference for your online form only. The  Planning Authority will allocate an Application Number when
your form is validated. Please quote this reference if you need to contact the planning Authority about this application.
Site Address Details
Planning Authority:
Full postal address of the site (including postcode where available):
Address 1: 
Address 2:
Address 3:
Address 4:
Address 5:
Town/City/Settlement:
Post Code:
Please identify/describe the location of the site or sites
Northing Easting
Applicant or Agent Details
Are you an applicant or an agent? * (An agent is an architect, consultant or someone else acting
on behalf of the applicant in connection with this application)  Applicant  Agent
270 STONELAW ROAD
South Lanarkshire Council
RUTHERGLEN
GLASGOW
G73 3SA
660468 262122
115

Page 341

Page 2 of 3
Agent Details
Please enter Agent details
Company/Organisation:
Ref. Number: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
First Name: * Building Name:
Last Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Telephone Number: * (Street): *
Extension Number: Address 2:
Mobile Number: Town/City: *
Fax Number: Country: *
Postcode: *
Email Address: *
Is the applicant an individual or an organisation/corporate entity? *
  Individual    Organisation/Corporate entity
Applicant Details
Please enter Applicant details
Title: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
Other Title: Building Name:
First Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Last Name: * (Street): *
Company/Organisation Address 2:
Telephone Number: * Town/City: *
Extension Number: Country: *
Mobile Number: Postcode: *
Fax Number:
Email Address: *
Padrino Design
Mr
Dominic
Hugh
Notarangelo
Burns
Lonmay Road
Stonelaw Road
1
270
The Wright Business Centre
0141 762 2000
G33 4EL
G73 3SA
Scotland
UK
Glasgow
Burnside
Dominic@padrino.co.uk
dominic@padrino.co.uk
116

Page 342

Page 3 of 3
Proposal/Application Details
Please provide the details of the original application(s) below:
Was the original application part of this proposal?  *  Yes   No
Application Details
Please select which application(s) the new documentation is related to.
Application: *
Document Details
Please provide an explanation as to why the documentation is being attached after the original application was submitted: * (Max 500
characters)
Checklist – Post Submission Additional Documentation
Please complete the following checklist to make sure  you have provided all the necessary information in support of your application.
The additional documents have been attached to this submission. *  Yes   No
Declare – Post Submission Additional Documentation
I/We the applicant/agent certify that this is a submission of Additional Documentation, and that all the information given in this
submission is true to the best of my/the applicants knowledge.
Declaration Name: Mr Dominic Notarangelo
Declaration Date: 20/07/2023
100634666-001, application for Planning Permission, submitted on 05/07/2023
Drawing amended for validation
117

Page 343

Locality Plan
scale  1:1250
July 2023
2335
D R A W I N G P R O J E C T C L I E N T D A T E D R A W N S C A L E
J O B  No. D R A W I N G  No. R E V I S I O N
DN
Locality Plan
01
P A D R I N O    D E S I G N
The Wright Nisiness Centre
1 Lonmay road
GLASGOW  
G33  4EL 
tel.        0141 762 2000
fax.       0141 762 2001 
design@padrino.co.uk
www.padrino.co.uk
1:1250 @A4
5
Scale in metres
1005 20 30 40 50
North
270 Stonelaw Road
Burnside  G73 3SA
Hugh Burns
264    
2702  
Highburgh  Drive
Stonelaw 
Road
118

Page 344

P A D R I N O    D E S I G N
The Wright Business Centre
1 Lonmay Road
Glasgow   
G33 4EL 
tel.        0141 762 2000
fax.       0141 762 2001 
design@padrino.co.uk
www.padrino.co.uk
D R A W I N G
C L I E N T
P R O J E C T
D A T E D R A W N
J O B  No. D R A W I N G  No. R E V I S I O N
Floor Plan  
July 2023
2335 02
1:100 @ A3
270 Stonelaw Road
Burnside  G73  3SA
DN
Hugh Burns
A
Rev A  20/7/23 Application site redefined
ServiceService
Service
Counter
Counter
External searting area
68 Square metres
119

Page 345

Page 1 of 3
Floor 6, Council Offices Almada Street Hamilton ML3 0AA  Tel: 0303 123 1015  Email: planning@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
Applications cannot be validated until all the necessary documentation has been submitted and the required fee has been paid.
Thank you for completing this application form:
ONLINE REFERENCE 100634666-003
The online reference is the unique reference for your online form only. The  Planning Authority will allocate an Application Number when
your form is validated. Please quote this reference if you need to contact the planning Authority about this application.
Site Address Details
Planning Authority:
Full postal address of the site (including postcode where available):
Address 1:
Address 2:
Address 3:
Address 4:
Address 5:
Town/City/Settlement:
Post Code:
Please identify/describe the location of the site or sites
Northing Easting
Applicant or Agent Details
Are you an applicant or an agent? * (An agent is an architect, consultant or someone else acting
on behalf of the applicant in connection with this application)  Applicant  Agent
270 STONELAW ROAD
South Lanarkshire Council
RUTHERGLEN
GLASGOW
G73 3SA
660468 262122
120

Page 346

Page 2 of 3
Agent Details
Please enter Agent details
Company/Organisation:
Ref. Number: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
First Name: * Building Name:
Last Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Telephone Number: * (Street): *
Extension Number: Address 2:
Mobile Number: Town/City: *
Fax Number: Country: *
Postcode: *
Email Address: *
Is the applicant an individual or an organisation/corporate entity? *
 Individual  Organisation/Corporate entity
Applicant Details
Please enter Applicant details
Title: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
Other Title: Building Name:
First Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Last Name: * (Street): *
Company/Organisation Address 2:
Telephone Number: * Town/City: *
Extension Number: Country: *
Mobile Number: Postcode: *
Fax Number:
Email Address: *
Padrino Design
Mr
Dominic
Hugh
Notarangelo
Burns
Lonmay Road
Stonelaw Road
1
270
The Wright Business Centre
0141 762 2000
G33 4EL
G73 3SA
Scotland
UK
Glasgow
Burnside
Dominic@padrino.co.uk
dominic@padrino.co.uk
121

Page 347

Page 3 of 3
Proposal/Application Details
Please provide the details of the original application(s) below:
Was the original application part of this proposal?  *  Yes  No
Application Details
Please select which application(s) the new documentation is related to.
Application: *
Document Details
Please provide an explanation as to why the documentation is being attached after the original application was submitted: * (Max 500
characters)
Checklist – Post Submission Additional Documentation
Please complete the following checklist to make sure  you have provided all the necessary information in support of your application.
The additional documents have been attached to this submission. *  Yes  No
Declare – Post Submission Additional Documentation
I/We the applicant/agent certify that this is a submission of Additional Documentation, and that all the information given in this
submission is true to the best of my/the applicants knowledge.
Declaration Name: Mr Dominic Notarangelo
Declaration Date: 17/09/2023
100634666-001, application for Planning Permission, submitted on 05/07/2023
Response to representations posted.
122

Page 348

270 Stonelaw Road
G73 3SA
September 2023   Application Ref.  P/23/0863
Response to representations
Response
to
representations
P A D R I N O    D E S I G N
The Wright Business Centre
1 Lonmay road
GLASGOW  
G33  4EL 
tel.        0141 762 2000
fax.       0141 762 2001 
design@padrino.co.uk
www.padrino.co.uk
123

Page 349

There have been a number of representations in respect of this application and it is
considered appropriate to respond in order to address the misconceptions that are
duplicated within some of the representations.
Ownership
A) It has never been claimed that the Applicant owns the site which is covered by the
completion of the relevant section of the application form.
B) Identification of co proprietors. As there appears to be no factor for the properties
and the Assessors website is not reliable this agent cannot rely on word of mouth.
Accordingly the additional fee was submitted to enable the Council to place the
advertisement as required by the act. This is in order to evidence that the legislation has
been complied with
C) The co proprietors appeared to have abandoned the area in question and allowed it
to become overgrown (See Appendix 1)
D) The co proprietors are not being denied access they will have unrestricted access to
the area in question and provided with complimentary coffee and a cake on any days that
hey choose to exercise said right of access.
E) Ownership is not a material planning issue provided that the notification has been
carried out in accordance with the legislation.
Application Site
G) The application site, as defined, on the drawings is as the legislation requires. The
tarmac area, under the provisions of NPF4 does not require planning consent which is why
it is not covered by the application.
Noise issues
H) The issues of noise from mechanical plant would appear to be related to the,
extant, cafe and are not related to this application. Nevertheless because these
comments have been raised an acoustic consultant will be briefed to perform an analysis
of the position. This should not form any part of the consideration of this application.
124

Page 350

13/09/2023, 23:14 Roundcube Webmail :: Re: Burnside
https://webmail.padrino.co.uk/cpsess0738223425/3rdparty/roundcube/index.php?_task=mail&_safe=0&_uid=42937&_mbox=INBOX&_action=print&_extwin=1 1/2
Re: Burnside
From Steven Livingston <steven.livingston@libertyone.co.uk>
To dominic@padrino.co.uk <dominic@padrino.co.uk>
Date 2023-05-09 16:37
Link to site - Cafe Gelato 
https://maps.app.goo.gl/BPxkYmZT2c8Jhn7Q9
Before
After
Place making
The Scottish Government has been promoting Place making as a key strategy.  Holyrood
has made funding available to local authorities to promote a 'Continental Cafe Culture' 
This has been reinforced by the provisions of NPF4.   The area applied for is to enhance
the area that NPF4 allows to be utilised which will meet the aspirations of the Scottish
government in terms of 'cafe culture'.
The applicants have invested a substantial amount of money in re decorating and re
equipping the premises.  The menu, and price point, have been upgraded in a conscious
desire to avoid the cafe being an alternative to school meals
The applications makes good use of an abandoned area without denying the co
proprietors the free and unrestricted access to the area.
125

Page 351

13/09/2023, 23:14 Roundcube Webmail :: Re: Burnside
https://webmail.padrino.co.uk/cpsess0738223425/3rdparty/roundcube/index.php?_task=mail&_safe=0&_uid=42937&_mbox=INBOX&_action=print&_extwin=1 1/2
Re: Burnside
From Steven Livingston <steven.livingston@libertyone.co.uk>
To dominic@padrino.co.uk <dominic@padrino.co.uk>
Date 2023-05-09 16:37
Link to site - Cafe Gelato 
https://maps.app.goo.gl/BPxkYmZT2c8Jhn7Q9
Before
After
Appendix 1
126

Page 352

Policy reference:  
National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4)(adopted 2023)
Policy 1 Tackling the climate and nature crises
Policy 2 Climate mitigation and adaptation
Policy 14 Design, quality and place
Policy 15 Local Living and 20-minute neighbourhoods
Policy 23 Health and safety
Policy 27 City, town, local and commercial centres
South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (SLLDP2) (adopted 2021)
Policy 2 Climate change
Policy 3 General Urban Areas and Settlements
Policy 5 Development Management and Placemaking
Policy 9 Network of Centres and Retailing
Policy DM1 New Development Design
Assessment
Reference no. P/23/0863
Delegated Report
Date 13 November 2023!
Planning
proposal:
Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to
cafe premises. 
Location: 270 Stonelaw Road
Rutherglen
G73 3SA
Application
Type :
Detailed planning application
Applicant : Mr Hugh Burns
Location : 270 Stonelaw Road
Rutherglen
G73 3SA
Decision:
Other
action/
notes:
Application refused
None
Report by: Area Manager (Planning & Building Standards)
THIS DOCUMENT IS ALSO INCLUDED AT APPENDIX 2(a)
127

Page 353

Representation(s):
Impact on privacy? Yes
Impact on sunlight/daylight? No
Impact on amenity? Yes
Traffic issues? Yes
Adheres to development plan policy? No
Adverse comments from consultees? Yes
Consultations Summary of response
Roads Development Management
Team
Environmental Services
Recommends refusal of the application. An additional 14
car parking spaces for the seating area is required due
to the car parking congestion that already exists within
the area. The proposal would only exacerbate the
current congestion situation at this location and 14
spaces cannot be provided at the site. 
Recommends refusal of the application due to concerns
relating to an adverse impact on adjacent properties
from noise from the outdoor facility. To protect residential
occupants or noise sensitive buildings from additional
transport noise generated from mixed traffic sources
including deliveries from commercial vehicles. The
applicant has not demonstrated that the proposal will not
adversely impact on available space for numerous
commercial waste bins at this location.
► 12 Objection letters
► 3 Support letters
► 1 Comment letters
128

Page 354

Planning Application Delegated Report
1 Application Summary
1.1 The applicant seeks consent for the change of use of a forecourt to form external seating
area ancillary to cafe premises, adjacent to 270 Stonelaw Road in Burnside, Rutherglen.
The site is located within the settlement boundary of Rutherglen and is designated in the
South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 as a Local Centre. 
1.2 The land identified for the change of use is an area of shared garden ground which is
located next to the junction of Stonelaw Road and Highburgh Drive in Burnside.  The site
area measures approximately 68 square metres and originally contained shrubbery and
grass.  The site has been cleared and a monobloc surface has been laid within the site.  
1.3 The Planning Service was advised that tables and chairs had been positioned in the
application site and this service contacted the applicant to advise that the furniture should
be removed as the change of use assessment had not been completed. The furniture was
removed from the site.
2 Representation(s)
2.1 Following the statutory period of neighbour notification and advertisement in the local
press, a total of 15 representations have been received (11 Objections, 3 Support and 1
Comments) as defined in the scheme of delegation;
• Noise and disturbance
• Traffic, parking and road safety
• Land ownership.
• Odours
• Privacy
• Litter and refuse
• Flooding
• Alcohol licence
The above issues will be considered in the assessment below and full copies are
available on the planning portal.
3 Assessment and Conclusions
3.1 Planning consent is sought for the change of use of a forecourt to form external seating
area ancillary to cafe premises, adjacent to 270 Stonelaw Road in Burnside, Rutherglen.
Under Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, all applications
must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material
considerations indicate otherwise. The development plan comprises the South
Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (adopted 29th March 2021) (SLLP2) and National
Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) which is now part of the development plan (adopted 13th
February 2023). The applicable policies in this instance are Policies 1, 2, 14, 15, 23 and
27 of NPF4 and Policies 2, 3, 5, 9 and DM1 of the SLLDP2 
3.2 Policies 1 and 2 of NPF4 and Policy 2 of the SLLDP2 seek to encourage, promote and
facilitate development that addresses the global climate emergency and nature crisis, and
which minimises emissions and adapts to the current and future impacts of climate
129

Page 355

Page 356

Page 357

3.12  Three letters of support and one letter of comment were submitted in relation to the
proposal.  The reasons for supporting the proposal included that the seating area would
contribute to the community, help stimulate the high street, would be a meeting area and
focal point, would improve the visual appearance or the area and would benefit local
safety in the evenings if people were sitting out in the area. While the Planning Service
encourages development proposals which would contribute and enhance the local centre
and economy, this should not be to the detriment of existing residents and unfortunately,
in this case, several adjacent residential properties would be significantly adversely
affected.  
3.13 A response in relation to the representations was received from the applicant’s agent
which stated that the applicant had not claimed to own the site and that the assessor’s
website is not reliable in identifying land ownership. The statement also advises that the
co-proprietors had abandoned the site and allowed it to become overgrown and that
access was not being denied to the landowners. As outlined in paragraph 3.11 above,
land ownership is a legal matter to be resolved between the parties involved.  The
statement advises that noise issues relating to the operation of the associated business
did not relate to the current application, however, an acoustic consultant will be briefed to
analyse the position.  Environmental Services have been contacted relating to noise and
vibration concerns relating to the adjacent business. The statement also advises that The
Scottish Government has promoted a ‘Continental Café Culture’ and that this has been
reinforced by NPF4.  Paragraphs 3.3, 3.5 and 3.6 above refer to the relevant policies in
NPF4 in the assessment of the application and why the proposed change of use at this
location could not be supported. The statement concludes that the applicant has invested
a substantial amount of money in the site, has upgraded the menu and made good use of
an abandoned area.  These matters are not a material planning consideration. 
3.14 In conclusion, the proposed change of use is considered to have a significant detrimental
impact on the amenity of the adjacent residential dwellings in terms of nuisance from
noise and loss of privacy from the seating area, increased disturbance from traffic noise
and traffic safety concerns.  The proposal would be located within an area specifically
deigned to form a degree of separation from the residential properties and the passing
public which would have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the character and
amenity of the neighbouring residential properties. In addition, Environmental Services
and Roads and Transportation Services have recommended refusal of the application.
The proposal is therefore considered contrary to Policies 14, 23 and 27 of the National
Planning Framework 4 and Policies 3, 5 and DM1 of the South Lanarkshire Local
Development Plan 2 and cannot be supported and refusal of the application is considered
justified.
4 Reason for decision
4.1 That to proposal for the change of use to an external seating area as the development
would have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the neighbouring residential properties
and surrounding amenity due to disturbance from noise and would exacerbate the
existing traffic congestion issues at this location.  The proposal is therefore considered
contrary to Policies 14, 23 and 27 of the National Planning Framework 4 and Policies 3, 5
and DM1 of the South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2.  Consequently, the
application is recommended for refusal and there are no other material considerations
which would outweigh the proposals variance with the development plan.
132

Page 358

Delegating officer:   Iain Morton
Date: 13 November 2023
List of background papers
► Application Form
► Application Plans
► NPF4
► South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (adopted 2021)
► Neighbour notification letter dated
► Consultations
► Representations
Roads Development Management Team 08/11/2023
Environmental Services 13/09/2023
L DiGiacomo, 2-2, 266 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen, G73 3SA, Dated:
09.08.2023
15.08.2023
Mrs Linda Cunningham, Granville, Burnett Place, Port Elphinstone,
Inverurie, AB51 3US,
Dated:
13.08.2023
Kirsty Owen, 1-1, 3 Highburgh Drive, Rutherglen, G73 3RR, Dated:
08.08.2023
05.09.2023
10.10.2023
Miss Lizzie Millar, 24 Limeside Avenue, Rutherglen, Rutherglen,
Rutherglen, Glasgow, G73 3PN,
Dated:
09.08.2023
Mrs Catherine Duncan, 2-1, 266 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen, Glasgow,
South Lanarkshire
G73 3SA
Dated:
14.08.2023
Ashlene Doherty, Received Via Email Dated:
11.08.2023
133

Page 359

Contact for further information
If you would like to inspect the background papers or want further information, please contact:-
Evelyn-Ann Wilson, Planning officer, Floor 6, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton, ML3 0AA
Phone: 07551842952 
Email: evelyn-ann.wilson@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
Mrs Joanne Hepworth, Flat 1/2 266 Stonelaw Road, Glasgow, G733SA Dated:
03.08.2023
Mrs Catherine Smith, 4 Highburgh Drive, Burnside, Glasgow, G73 3RZ Dated:
13.08.2023
Miss Vivienne Vine, 1/2, 1 Highburgh Drive, Burnside, G73 3RR Dated:
14.08.2023
01.09.2023
Mr Mark Smith, Flat 1/1, 2 Highburgh Drive, Burnside, Glasgow, G73
3RZ
Dated:
08.08.2023
07.09.2023
Catherine Duncan, 0-2, 2 Highburgh Drive, Rutherglen, G73 3RZ, Dated:
21.08.2023
Mr P Bree, 2/2 1 Highburgh Drive, South Lanarkshire, G73 3RR, , Dated:
17.08.2023
134

Page 360

Page 361

Community And Enterprise Resources
Executive Director David Booth
Planning And Regulatory Services
Dominic Notarangelo
Padrino Design
The Wright Business Centre
1 Lonmay Road
Glasgow
Scotland
G33 4EL
Our Ref: P/23/0863
Your Ref:
If calling ask for: Evelyn-Ann Wilson
Date: 15 November 2023
Dear Sir/Madam
Proposal: Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to
cafe premises.
Site address: 270 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen, G73 3SA,
Application no: P/23/0863
I would advise you that the above application was refused by the Council and I enclose the
decision notice which sets out the reasons for refusal.  Please note that the Council does not
issue paper plans with the decision notice. The application is refused in accordance with the
plans and any other documentation listed in the reasons for refusal imposed on the
accompanying decision notice and which can be viewed using the  Council’s online planning
application search at https://publicaccess.southlanarkshire.gov.uk/online-applications/
If you consider that you can overcome the reasons for refusal and that it is not the principle of the
development that is unacceptable, you may submit an amended application.  If you do amend
your proposals and re-apply within one year of this refusal, then you will not have to pay a fee,
provided the proposal is of the same character or description as the application which has just
been refused.
As your application has been refused, you may appeal against the decision within 3 months of
the date of the decision notice.  The attached notes explain how you may appeal.
Should you have any enquiries relating to the refusal of your application or a potential amended
submission, please contact Evelyn-Ann Wilson on 07551842952
Yours faithfully
Head of Planning and Regulatory Services
Enc:
THIS DOCUMENT IS ALSO INCLUDED AT APPENDIX 4
136

Page 362

Application no.
P/23/0863
Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended
by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006
To: Mr Hugh Burns Per: Dominic Notarangelo
270 Stonelaw Road,
Rutherglen, G73 3SA,
The Wright Business
Centre, 1 Lonmay Road,
Glasgow, Scotland, G33
4EL,
With reference to your application received on 05.07.2023 for planning permission under the
above mentioned Act:
Description of proposed development:
Change of use of forecourt to form external seating area ancillary to cafe
premises.
Site location:
270 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen, G73 3SA,
SOUTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL in exercise of their powers under the above mentioned Act
hereby:
REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION
for the above development in accordance with the plan(s) specified in this decision notice and the
particulars given in the application, for the reason(s) listed overleaf in the paper apart.
Date: 15th November 2023
Head of Planning and Regulatory Services
This permission does not grant any consent for the development that may be required under
other legislation, e.g. Building Warrant or Roads Construction Consent.
South Lanarkshire Council
Community and Enterprise Resources
Planning and Regulatory Services
137

Page 363

Page 364

Notes to applicant
Application number: P/23/0863
Important
The following notes do not form a statutory part of this decision notice. However, it is
recommended that you study them closely as they contain other relevant information.
01. This decision relates to drawing numbers:
Reference Version No: Plan Status
LOCATION PLAN Refused
PLAN AS PROPOSED Refused
Community And Enterprise
Resources Executive Director David
139

Page 365

Booth Planning And Regulatory
Services
Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act
1997
1. Compliance with conditions
Under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (Section
145), failure to comply with any condition(s) imposed on any planning permission may
result in the service by the Council of a “Breach of Condition Notice” requiring
compliance with the said condition(s).
There is no right of appeal against such a Notice and failure to comply with the terms of
the Notice within the specified time limit will constitute a summary offence, liable on
summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1000.
2. Procedure for appeal to the planning authority
(a) If the applicant is aggrieved by the decision of the planning authority to refuse
permission for or approval required by a condition in respect of the proposed
development, or to grant permission or approval subject to conditions, the applicant
may require the planning authority to review the case under section 43A of the Town
and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, within three months from the date of this
notice. The notice of review should be addressed to:
Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources)
Administration and Legal Services
Council
Headquarters
Almada Street
Hamilton
ML3 0AA
To obtain the appropriate forms:
Administration and Legal Services at the above
address. Telephone: 07385 370 117
E-mail: stuart.mcleod@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
(b) If permission to develop land is refused or granted subject to conditions, whether by the
planning authority or by the Scottish Ministers, and the owner of the land claims that the
land has become incapable of reasonably beneficial use in its existing state and cannot
be rendered incapable of reasonably beneficial use by the carrying out of any
development which has been or would be permitted, he may serve on the planning
authority a purchase notice requiring the purchase of his interest in the land in
accordance with Part 5 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.
140

Page 366

Further Representations 
Further Representations From
 L DiGiacomo by email
 A Doherty by email x2
 C Duncan by email
 J Hepworth by email
 K Owen by email
 V Vine by email 
Appendix 6  3h
141

Page 367

Page 368

From:
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2024 9:59 AM
To: McLeod, Stuart <Stuart.McLeod@southlanarkshire.gov.uk>
Subject: P/23/0863
I wish to re-emphasise  my original objections .Mr Burns does Not own 270
Stonelaw road and most definitely have NO rights (on any level) to illegally take
possession for use  the proposed garden area ,It is not incorporated in the lease
nor does Mr Burns have permission (from the owners of the garden) to use it at
all. .Please advise if my objection will be use in the review process and also a list
of all participating members who will make the final decision
Laura DiGiacomo 
3h
143

Page 369

1
Jessup, Shona
From:
Sent: 28 February 2024 19:46
To: McLeod, Stuart
Subject: Re: Planning Local Review Body - 270 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen
Just to add to the email, I do not give permission for the cafe to use the outdoor area. I own part of this area and I 
don’t give permission.  
 
Happy to discuss further.  
 
Kind regards  
 
 
Sent from my iPhone 
 
> On 27 Feb 2024, at 17:19,   
>  
> Good aŌernoon  
>  
> I’m looking to add further comments on why the above premises shouldn’t open the outdoor seaƟng area. 
>  
> 1. I own (along with other residents) part of the outdoor area and we did not get asked permission from the cafe to 
create an outdoor seaƟng area.  
>  
> 2. When they did open it, it increased traﬃc incredibly to what is already a busy area. There was no parking for 
local residents either. 
>  
> 3. The noise levels went through the roof. My ﬂat is directly above and my main bedroom where I sleep and work 
from home is directly above the outdoor seaƟng area. It greatly aﬀected my mental health when they opened it due 
to the noise.  
>  
> I understand the cafe now has permission to open late and serve an alcohol licence. Can I ask why the residents 
were not informed of this? I have major concerns for my mental health due to the noise especially if it’s late hours 
and the outdoor seaƟng area opens up. Also there will be more people out on the street late at night and I have 
safety concerns. Burnside is a dry area and I heavily object to the late hours and alcohol licence. How can I formally 
complain?  
>  
> Kind regards  
> Ashlene Doherty  
>  
>  
> Sent from my iPhone 
144

Page 370

From:
To: McLeod, Stuart
Subject: Planning Local Review Body - 270 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen
Date: 11 March 2024 21:52:52
Dear Mr McLeod,
Thank you for notice of the forthcoming appeal of the recent Planning Permission case
P/23/ 0863, which was recently refused.
From your letter, I note that the information I submitted at the time of the application, in
August 2023, will be considered by the review body.  I would ask that this information be
considered most carefully as absolutely nothing has changed since August 2023.
I would particularly like to reiterate the following points 
1. OWNERSHIP,,,,,,,,, this ground is NOT owned by the applicant, and NO permission
has been sought from or granted by the rightful owners for the use of this land. This
ground is the garden belonging to the owners of flats in building 266, Stonelaw
Road and NOT (and never was) a forecourt. 
All the information in the first objection, sent in August 2023, is still relevant.
2. TRAFFIC AND PARKING .......All the information in the first objection, sent in
August 2023, is still relevant.
3. DETRIMENTAL IMPACT ON NEIGHBOURING AMENITY.....All the information in the
first objection, sent in August 2023,            
is still relevant.
4. The granting of a frequent temporary drinks licences and a BYOB policy at this
premises only encourages noisy behaviour and a supply of readily available glass
bottles.
5. This application is requested “in perpetuity”. It is unacceptable and unreasonable
that any such permission would be without limit of time. Such permission, “in
perpetuity”, could not possibly take account of any change of tenant in the premises
and thus it does not protect the living standards of present and future
owners/residents of the residential flats. As such, therefore, this arrangement limits
their rights as citizen, of the present, and any future owners/resident,  of these
residential flats.
I still strongly object to this Planning Application.
Yours sincerely,
Catherine Duncan
145

Page 371

1
Jessup, Shona
From:
Sent: 28 February 2024 09:46
To: McLeod, Stuart
Subject: Planning Local Review Body - 270 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen
 
Hello, 
 
I would like to add that my stance is sƟll to object to the use of the forecourt for external seaƟng area. My reasons 
would sƟll be that: 
 
1. The area is part owned by myself and other residents and there has been no permission given for use of this 
private area. The applicant does not own any part of the area as he is renƟng the shop. 
2. ObjecƟon on grounds of noise, especially with the sale of alcohol on premises. This would cause disrupƟve noise 
to residents. 
3. ObjecƟon due to traﬃc and parking implicaƟons. This road and surrounding is already extremely congested and 
this would further exacerbate these issues. 
4. Final decision was already made to refuse the applicaƟon and the leƩer states “under exisƟng legislaƟon, you do 
not have a right to appeal against this decision”. 
 
Kind regards, 
 
Joanne Hepworth 
 
Sent from my iPhone 
146

Page 372

From:
To: McLeod, Stuart
Subject: P/23/0863
Date: 05 March 2024 17:39:30
Good evening,
I still feel strongly regarding my opinion to object, especially now with the alcohol licence and opening late on
a Friday and Saturday night.
I understand my response will be sent to Mr Hughs for comment.
The use of this space has a direct impact on the quality of living all of the residents living on Highburgh Drive.
Mr Burns developed and used this residential shared garden space for commercial use last year before he had
the proper planning in place or sole ownership of the land.  What consent was given for this? We had to wait
months for the outcome of the planning decision before there was any resolution to our problems. Just because
he has invested money in the development of the area, does that give him any more right in how this land is
used?
I don’t feel that the right property size or location has been chosen for his new business venture. Most of us
living on the street are families raising children or retired and wish to live a peaceful life! 
I don’t feel like any consideration has been given to us living on Highburgh drive, just the business needs. The
owners have clearly shown that there no respect for the rules we all need to following living here, from planning
permission and the use of the double yellow lines and parking on the pavement outside of the bistro. Parking on
the pavement reduces the space prams and wheelchair users require on the pavement!. The traffic wardens have
increased their patrols but this has not made any difference, has soon the wardens have left the yellows are in
use again by the same offenders. (Vehicle regs connected with bistro - )
The way I see it is:
Negatives for additional seating outside are –
Increase in traffic and need for parking,
o Increase in seating area means more customers and staff.
o Parking on the street remains an issue even without the additional customers. The
double yellow lines on Highburgh drive are in use the majority of the time,
especially by the owners.
o Increase in customers would mean more traffic passing on the already congested
street and with more passing vehicles there is more risk of damage to resident’s cars
parked on the street. Our car has been damaged 4 times whilst parked on the street
Increase in noise,
o When the seating area was used last year this created a lot of noise, and this was
without alcohol and opening late. This is a massive concern to me and I’m sure I’m
not the only one that feels this way
The property is too small for the business needs.The majority of the seating was external last
year causing more inconvenience and disruption to the properties close by. Last year during the
warmer months the staff from the bistro were taking their breaks on our garden wall. And the
staff where smoking in the entrances to the flats next to the bistro and discarding their
cigarettes in the street. .
Increase in litter and cigarette ends
Kirsty Owen
147

Page 373

o    Litter bins are provided but there was an increase in litter in the street from napkins,
leftover food and cigarette ends. We don’t seem to have this issue after the planning
was refused and the outdoor seating removed
We no longer have a café on the street where we can pop in for a reasonably priced breakfast or
lunch.
From what I could find online there was a change in property use from a shop to a café. But
now, its not a café, its more going down the route of a Bistro and Cocktail bar, opening later
than a cafe. Should the residents have a say on whether they want a drinking establishment next
to their property? I certainly don’t wish to have a bar next to our property! Many of my other
neighbours feel the same.
Kind regards
Kirsty
148

Page 374

Page 375

Page 376

Page 377

Page 378

Page 379

Page 380

Page 381

Page 382

Page 383

Page 384

Page 385

Page 386

Page 387

From:
To: Jessup, Shona; McLeod, Stuart
Subject: Re: Planning Local Review Body - 270 Stonelaw Road, Rutherglen
Date: 11 March 2024 14:46:39
Attachments: image003.png
Dear Shona and Stuart
Thank you for sending notice of this.
I still object to this proposal for all of the reasons outlined in my previous response.
South Lanarkshire Council made the correct decision on this the first time round
because the proposals clearly go against Scottish Government policy
and this includes the fact that this development would have a detrimental impact
on neighbouring residential amenity and road safety. Since the original application
this impact has been further demonstrated as being of concern because the
business has gone from operating as a 9-5 cafe premises to a 9-11pm restaurant
and bar business selling and advertising alcohol, through a continuous series of
event licences from 11am-11pm daily. The traffic and parking issues on Highburgh
Drive (over double yellow lines and on pavements) have continued to be a daily
issue and hazzard for those living, working or visiting here and the council are
aware of this. Mr  chooses to park his own car on the pavement and
on double yellow lines frequently. This blocks the entrance to my home and
others. It also blocks the pavement from proper safe use by pedestrians, the
elderly, parents with buggys etc. This is illegal and unsafe. Vehicles coming into or
out of the street are unable to see at a junction with a yellow box. Suppliers and
customers to this business also park illegally and dangerously on a daily basis.
Increasing the external seating at this business would cause a major noise
disturbance for residents and it would cause major traffic issues too, across an
extended number of hours. Allowing this would create an additional burden for the
council and police services to manage and install interventions for noise and road
safety.
Please do keep me informed about this application and let me know if you need
anything else.
Best Wishes
Vivienne
Vivienne Vine
162

Page 388

Applicant’s Comments on Further Representations
Submitted by Interested Parties in the Course of the
Notice of Review Consultation Process 
Appendix 7  3i
163

Page 389

Page 390

Page 1 of 3
Floor 6, Council Offices Almada Street Hamilton ML3 0AA  Tel: 0303 123 1015  Email: planning@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
Applications cannot be validated until all the necessary documentation has been submitted and the required fee has been paid.
Thank you for completing this application form:
ONLINE REFERENCE 100634666-006
The online reference is the unique reference for your online form only. The  Planning Authority will allocate an Application Number when
your form is validated. Please quote this reference if you need to contact the planning Authority about this application.
Site Address Details
Planning Authority:
Full postal address of the site (including postcode where available):
Address 1: 
Address 2:
Address 3:
Address 4:
Address 5:
Town/City/Settlement:
Post Code:
Please identify/describe the location of the site or sites
Northing Easting
Applicant or Agent Details
Are you an applicant or an agent? * (An agent is an architect, consultant or someone else acting
on behalf of the applicant in connection with this application)  Applicant  Agent
270 STONELAW ROAD
South Lanarkshire Council
RUTHERGLEN
GLASGOW
G73 3SA
660468 262122
3i
165

Page 391

Page 2 of 3
Agent Details
Please enter Agent details
Company/Organisation:
Ref. Number: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
First Name: * Building Name:
Last Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Telephone Number: * (Street): *
Extension Number: Address 2:
Mobile Number: Town/City: *
Fax Number: Country: *
Postcode: *
Email Address: *
Is the applicant an individual or an organisation/corporate entity? *
  Individual    Organisation/Corporate entity
Applicant Details
Please enter Applicant details
Title: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
Other Title: Building Name:
First Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Last Name: * (Street): *
Company/Organisation Address 2:
Telephone Number: * Town/City: *
Extension Number: Country: *
Mobile Number: Postcode: *
Fax Number:
Email Address: *
Padrino Design
Mr
Dominic
Hugh
Notarangelo
Burns
Lonmay Road
Stonelaw Road
1
270
The Wright Business Centre
0141 762 2000
G33 4EL
G73 3SA
Scotland
UK
Glasgow
Glasgow
Dominic@padrino.co.uk
dominic@padrino.co.uk
166

Page 392

Page 3 of 3
Proposal/Application Details
Please provide the details of the original application(s) below:
Was the original application part of this proposal?  *  Yes   No
Application Details
Please select which application(s) the new documentation is related to.
Application: *
Document Details
Please provide an explanation as to why the documentation is being attached after the original application was submitted: * (Max 500
characters)
Checklist – Post Submission Additional Documentation
Please complete the following checklist to make sure  you have provided all the necessary information in support of your application.
The additional documents have been attached to this submission. *  Yes   No
Declare – Post Submission Additional Documentation
I/We the applicant/agent certify that this is a submission of Additional Documentation, and that all the information given in this
submission is true to the best of my/the applicants knowledge.
Declaration Name: Mr Dominic Notarangelo
Declaration Date: 23/04/2024
100634666-005, application for Notice of Review, submitted on 12/02/2024
Response to further representations
167

Page 393

Page 394

270 Stonelaw Road
G73 3SA
23 April 2024   Application Ref.  P/23/0863
Response to Local Review Body representations
Response
to
Local Review
Body 
representations
P A D R I N O    D E S I G N
The Wright Business Centre
1 Lonmay road
GLASGOW  
G33  4EL 
tel.        0141 762 2000
fax.       0141 762 2001 
design@padrino.co.uk
www.padrino.co.uk
169

Page 395

13/09/2023, 23:14 Roundcube Webmail :: Re: Burnside
https://webmail.padrino.co.uk/cpsess0738223425/3rdparty/roundcube/index.php?_task=mail&_safe=0&_uid=42937&_mbox=INBOX&_action=print&_extwin=1 1/2
Re: Burnside
From Steven Livingston <steven.livingston@libertyone.co.uk>
To dominic@padrino.co.uk <dominic@padrino.co.uk>
Date 2023-05-09 16:37
Link to site - Cafe Gelato
https://maps.app.goo.gl/BPxkYmZT2c8Jhn7Q9
Before
After
Planning, LOCAL RECIEW APPLICATION 270 Stonelaw Road
In respect of the application to the Local Review Body there have been a number of
representations in respect of the Local Review Body application and it is considered
appropriate to respond in order to address the misconceptions that are duplicated within
some of the representations.
Representation 1 Laura Di Giacomo
44
It has never been claimed that the Applicant owns the site which is covered by the
completion of the relevant section of the application form. Land Ownership is not a
material Planning Consideration. The position advanced by Laura Di Giacomo
has no locus in the planning process.
Representation 2 Ashlene Doherty
This representation is an, entirely, civil matter and has no locus in the planning process,
Representation 3 Catherine Duncan
1 Ownership. As already stated this would be is an, entirely, civil matter and has no
locus in the planning process,
2 Traffic and parking. As will be noted on the response to the images submitted any,
infringements, alleged or obvious, are a matter for the appropriate enforcing authority.
Motorists have been using these local roads in this way for decades.
3 Detrimental impact on amenity. NPF4 allows the use of the tarmac area, the
application is solely to use the. previously, un maintained forecourt as an extension to the
MPF 4 rights. The following image shows the dilapidated state of this area, with it's
negative amenity impact, is clear. The investment in upgrading an maintaining this area
has a positive impact on the amenity and is in accordance with the Scottish Government's
initiative of promoting 'Cafe Culture'
170

Page 396

13/09/2023, 23:14 Roundcube Webmail :: Re: Burnside
https://webmail.padrino.co.uk/cpsess0738223425/3rdparty/roundcube/index.php?_task=mail&_safe=0&_uid=42937&_mbox=INBOX&_action=print&_extwin=1 1/2
Re: Burnside
From Steven Livingston <steven.livingston@libertyone.co.uk>
To dominic@padrino.co.uk <dominic@padrino.co.uk>
Date 2023-05-09 16:37
Link to site - Cafe Gelato 
https://maps.app.goo.gl/BPxkYmZT2c8Jhn7Q9
Before
After
4  Alcohol licence.    This is a matter for the Licensing board to determine.
5  In Perpetuity.     The application was stated as not being a time limited application.
Representation  4   Joanne Hepworth
1  Ownership    It has never been claimed that the Applicant owns the site which is
covered by the completion of the relevant section of the application form.  Land
Ownership is not a material Planning Consideration.  It is not disputed that the applicant
rents the shop  which he does from the .
171

Page 397

13/09/2023, 23:14 Roundcube Webmail :: Re: Burnside
https://webmail.padrino.co.uk/cpsess0738223425/3rdparty/roundcube/index.php?_task=mail&_safe=0&_uid=42937&_mbox=INBOX&_action=print&_extwin=1 1/2
Re: Burnside
From Steven Livingston <steven.livingston@libertyone.co.uk>
To dominic@padrino.co.uk <dominic@padrino.co.uk>
Date 2023-05-09 16:37
Link to site - Cafe Gelato
https://maps.app.goo.gl/BPxkYmZT2c8Jhn7Q9
Before
After
2 Noise. NPF 4 permits the use of part of the external area any noise nuisance can be
addressed by Environmental Health enforcement. On a technical basis any noise on the
area that is the subject of this application would have to be 10db higher than the
permitted area before the noise level would elevate.
3 Traffic and parking As will be noted on the response to the images submitted any,
infringements, alleged or obvious, are a matter for the appropriate enforcing authority.
Motorists have been using these local roads in this way for decades.
4 Claim that decision stated that there was no right of appeal.
Incorrect the decision notice states "As will be noted on the response to the images
submitted any, infringements, alleged or obvious, are a matter for the appropriate
enforcing authority.
Representation 5/1 Social media post. There is no narrative to explain what this means
other than a statement of fact.
Representation 5/2 Social media post. There is nothing that suggests any relevance to
this application.
Representation 5/3 Social media post. There is nothing that suggests any relevance to
this application.
Representation 5/4 Image of a Volvo SUV parked on a road and footpath
There is no evidence as to why this car was parked at the location and this, obvious,
parking infringement is a matter for enforcement by another Authority.
Representation 5/5 Image of various vehicles parked on a road
There is no evidence as to why this car was parked at the location and any parking
infringement, alleged or obvious is a matter for enforcement by another Authority.
Representation 5/6 Image of a Mercedes A Class parked on a road
There is no evidence as to why this car was parked at the location and any, alleged,
parking infringement is a matter for enforcement by another Authority.
Representation 5/8 Image of a Porsche SUV parked on a road/pavement
There is no evidence as to why this car was parked at the location and any parking
infringement, alleged or obvious is a matter for enforcement by another Authority
Representation 5/9 Image of a Mercedes SUV parked on a road/pavement
There is no evidence as to why this car was parked at the location and any parking
infringement, alleged or obvious is a matter for enforcement by another Authority
Representation 5/10 Image of a Volvo SUV parked on a road
There is no evidence as to why this car was parked at the location and any, alleged,
parking infringement is a matter for enforcement by another Authority.
172

Page 398

Representation 5/11   Images of a Van and a Mercedes saloon car parked on a road
There is no evidence as to why this car was parked at the location and any, alleged,
parking infringement is a matter for enforcement by another Authority.
Representation 5/12   Image of a Porsche SUV parked on a road
There is no evidence as to why this car was parked at the location and any, alleged,
parking infringement is a matter for enforcement by another Authority.
Representation 5/13   Kirsty Owen  ( accompanying images 5/1 to 5/13
1      
In terms of shared garden space the foregoing image is an accurate portrayal as to the
condition of said 'shared garden space".
Any noise nuisance that could be attributed to either the NPF 4 permitted, or this
proposed extension can be dealt with under other legislation.
The negatives referred to have already been addressed above.
Representation  6  Vivienne Vine
The Scottish government policy is to encourage outside seating at street cafe  situations
hence NPF 4 permitting this on the tarmac area.  The remainder of Vivienne Vine's
comments have already been responded to as above.s
173

Page 399

Page 400

Report
Agenda Item 
Report to: Planning Local Review Body 
Date of Meeting: 24 June 2024
Report by: Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources)  
Subject: Review of Case – Application P/23/1431 for Erection of
Decking and Boundary Fence at the Front Elevation
(Retrospective) at Auchenblae, Newbigging Road,
Dunsyre, Lanark 
1. Purpose of Report
1.1. The purpose of the report is to present the information currently available to allow a
review of the decision taken by officers, in terms of the Scheme of Delegation, on the
following application:-
[purpose]
1.2. Summary Application Information 
Application Type: Detailed planning permission 
Applicant: Mr James Stuart 
Proposal: Erection of decking and boundary fence at the front elevation
(retrospective)
Location:   Auchenblae, Newbigging Road, Dunsyre, Lanark, ML11 8NQ 
Council Area/Ward: 3 – Clydesdale East 
1.3. Reason for Requesting Review 
Refusal of
Application X Conditions imposed  Failure to give decision
(deemed refusal) 
[1purpose]
2. Recommendation(s)
2.1. The Planning Local Review Body is asked to:-
[recs]
(1) consider whether it has sufficient information to allow it to proceed to
determine the review without further procedure and, if so, that:- 
(a) it proceeds to determine whether the decision taken in respect of the
application under review should be upheld, reversed or varied
(b) in the event that the decision is reversed or varied, the reasons and the
detailed conditions to be attached to the decision letter are agreed 
(2) in the event that further procedure is required to allow it to determine the
review, consider:- 
(a) what further information is required, which parties are to be asked to
provide the information and the date by which this is to be provided
(b) what procedure or combination of procedures are to be followed in
determining the review
4
175

Page 401

[1recs]
3. Background
3.1. The Council operates a Scheme of Delegation that enables Council officers to
determine a range of planning applications without the need for them to be referred
to Area Committees or the Planning Committee for a decision.
3.2. In terms of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the
Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006, and the Town and Country Planning (Schemes of
Delegation and Local Review Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013, where an
application for planning permission relates to a proposal that falls within the category
of “local development” and has been or could have been determined under the
Scheme of Delegation, the applicant is entitled to request that the determination be
reviewed by the Planning Local Review Body.
4. Notice of Review – Statement of Reasons for Requiring the Review
4.1. In submitting their Notice of Review, the applicant has stated their reasons for
requiring a review of the determination in respect of their application. (Refer
Appendix 5)
4.2. The applicant is entitled to state a preference for procedure (or combination of
procedures) to be followed and has indicated that their stated preference is as
follows:-
Further written submissions X Site inspection
Hearing session(s) Assessment of review documents
only, with no further procedure
4.3. However, members will be aware that it is for the Planning Local Review Body to
determine how a case is reviewed.
5. Information Available to Allow Review of Application
5.1. Section 43B of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006 restricts the ability of parties to
introduce new material at the review stage. The focus of the review should,
therefore, be on the material which was before the officer who dealt with the
application under the Scheme of Delegation.
5.2. The following information is appended to this report to assist the Planning Local
Review Body in its review of the decision taken by officers:-
 Planning Application Form (Appendix 1)
 Report of Handling by the Planning Officer under the Scheme of Delegation
(Appendix 2(a))
 Copy of submission from statutory consultee (Appendix 2(b))
 Copies of representations (Appendix 2(c))
 Site photographs and location plan (Appendix 3)
 Decision notice (Appendix 4)
 Notice of Review including statement of reasons for requiring the review
(Appendix 5)
5.3. Copies of the relevant drawings are available for inspection by contacting
Administration and Legal Services prior to the meeting.
176

Page 402

6. Notice of Review Consultation Process
6.1. No further representations were received in the course of the 14 day period from the
date on which notification of the request for a review of the case was given. 
Jackie Taylor
Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources) 
13 June 2024 
Link(s) to Council Values/Ambitions/Objectives
 Work with communities and partners to promote high quality, thriving and sustainable
communities
 Accountable, effective, efficient and transparent 
Previous References
 None 
List of Background Papers
 Guide to the Planning Local Review Body 
Contact for Further Information
If you would like to inspect the background papers or want further information, please
contact:
Stuart McLeod, Administration Officer
Ext:  4815 (Tel:  01698 454815)
E-mail: stuart.mcleod@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
177

Page 403

Page 404

Planning Application Form 
Appendix 1  4a
179

Page 405

Page 406

Page 1 of 7
Floor 6, Council Offices Almada Street Hamilton ML3 0AA Tel: 0303 123 1015 Email: planning@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
Applications cannot be validated until all the necessary documentation has been submitted and the required fee has been paid.
Thank you for completing this application form:
ONLINE REFERENCE 100651486-001
The online reference is the unique reference for your online form only. The Planning Authority will allocate an Application Number when
your form is validated. Please quote this reference if you need to contact the planning Authority about this application.
Type of Application
What is this application for? Please select one of the following: *
 Application for planning permission (including changes of use and surface mineral working).
 Application for planning permission in principle.
 Further application, (including renewal of planning permission, modification, variation or removal of a planning condition etc)
 Application for Approval of Matters specified in conditions.
Description of Proposal
Please describe the proposal including any change of use: * (Max 500 characters)
Is this a temporary permission? *  Yes  No
If a change of use is to be included in the proposal has it already taken place?  Yes  No
(Answer ‘No’ if there is no change of use.) *
Has the work already been started and/or completed? *
 No  Yes – Started  Yes - Completed
Please state date of completion, or if not completed, the start date (dd/mm/yyyy): *
Please explain why work has taken place in advance of making this application: * (Max 500 characters)
Applicant or Agent Details
Are you an applicant or an agent? * (An agent is an architect, consultant or someone else acting
on behalf of the applicant in connection with this application)  Applicant Agent
We have built decking at the front of the house . As the house is on a hill the decking is raised to floor level as there was a lot of
stairs to walk up to the front door . The decking now makes this much easier to enter .
There was a building company working in the area putting up a fence for a neighbour . We asked if he could build decking while
he was here in the area . Dunsyre is a very small village .
30/10/2023
4a
181

Page 407

Page 2 of 7
Applicant Details
Please enter Applicant details
Title: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
Other Title: Building Name:
First Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Last Name: * (Street): *
Company/Organisation Address 2:
Telephone Number: * Town/City: *
Extension Number: Country: *
Mobile Number: Postcode: *
Fax Number:
Email Address: *
Site Address Details
Planning Authority:
Full postal address of the site (including postcode where available):
Address 1: 
Address 2:
Address 3:
Address 4:
Address 5:
Town/City/Settlement:
Post Code:
Please identify/describe the location of the site or sites
Northing Easting
Mr
AUCHENBLAE
James
South Lanarkshire Council
Stuart
NEWBIGGING ROAD
auchenblae
DUNSYRE
Auchenblae
LANARK
ML11 8NQ
ML118NQ
United Kingdom
648199
south lanarkshire
307193
newbigging rd dunsyre
182

Page 408

Page 3 of 7
Pre-Application Discussion
Have you discussed your proposal with the planning authority? *  Yes   No
Pre-Application Discussion Details Cont.
In what format was the feedback given? *
 Meeting  Telephone  Letter  Email
Please provide a description of the feedback you were given and the name of the officer who provided this feedback. If a processing
agreement [note 1] is currently in place or if you are currently discussing a processing agreement with the planning authority, please
provide details of this. (This will help the authority to deal with this application more efficiently.) * (max 500 characters)
Title: Other title:
First Name: Last Name:
Correspondence Reference Date (dd/mm/yyyy):
Number:
Note 1. A Processing agreement involves setting out the key stages involved in determining a planning application, identifying what
information is required and from whom and setting timescales for the delivery of various stages of the process.
Site Area
Please state the site area:
Please state the measurement type used:  Hectares (ha)   Square Metres (sq.m)
Existing Use
Please describe the current or most recent use: *  (Max 500 characters)
Access and Parking
Are you proposing a new altered vehicle access to or from a public road? *  Yes   No
If Yes please descr be and show on your drawings the position of any existing. Altered or new access points, highlighting the changes
you propose to make. You should also show existing footpaths and note if there will be any impact on these.
Are you proposing any change to public paths, public rights of way or affecting any public right of access? *  Yes   No
If Yes please show on your drawings the position of any affected areas highlighting the changes you propose to make, including
arrangements for continuing or alternative public access.
As the decking was built quickly , I contacted the planning and asked if someone could come out to check if what we had built was
ok . I was informed to contact buildings warrant dept which I did and I sent in photographs of decking . They confirmed no warrant
was needed . I then contacted planning and was told to submit a plan . I also asked building warrant dept to pass on the email
with the pictures to planning .
15.75
Helps enter the front of the property
Mr
James Stuart
13/11/2023
183

Page 409

Page 4 of 7
How many vehicle parking spaces (garaging and open parking) currently exist on the application
Site?
How many vehicle parking spaces (garaging and open parking) do you propose on the site (i.e. the
Total of existing and any new spaces or a reduced number of spaces)? *
Please show on your drawings the position of existing and proposed parking spaces and identify if these are for the use of particular
types of vehicles (e.g. parking for disabled people, coaches, HGV vehicles, cycles spaces).
Water Supply and Drainage Arrangements
Will your proposal require new or altered water supply or drainage arrangements? *  Yes   No
Do your proposals make provision for sustainable drainage of surface water?? *  Yes   No
(e.g. SUDS arrangements) *
Note:-
Please include details of SUDS arrangements on your plans
Selecting ‘No’ to the above question means that you could be in breach of Environmental legislation.
Are you proposing to connect to the public water supply network? *
  Yes
  No, using a private water supply
  No connection required
If No, using a private water supply, please show on plans the supply and all works needed to provide it (on or off site).
Assessment of Flood Risk
Is the site within an area of known risk of flooding? *  Yes    No   Don’t Know
If the site is within an area of known risk of flooding you may need to submit a Flood Risk Assessment before your application can be
determined. You may wish to contact your Planning Authority or SEPA for advice on what information may be required.
Do you think your proposal may increase the flood risk elsewhere? *  Yes    No   Don’t Know
Trees
Are there any trees on or adjacent to the application site? *  Yes   No
If Yes, please mark on your drawings any trees, known protected trees and their canopy spread close to the proposal site and indicate if
any are to be cut back or felled.
Waste Storage and Collection
Do the plans incorporate areas to store and aid the collection of waste (including recycling)? *  Yes   No
If Yes or No, please provide further details: * (Max 500 characters)
Residential Units Including Conversion
Does your proposal include new or additional houses and/or flats? *  Yes   No
4
We have bins to store recycling and waste
4
184

Page 410

Page 5 of 7
All Types of Non Housing Development – Proposed New Floorspace
Does your proposal alter or create non-residential floorspace? *  Yes   No
Schedule 3 Development
Does the proposal involve a form of development listed in Schedule 3 of the Town and Country  Yes   No   Don’t Know
Planning (Development Management Procedure (Scotland) Regulations 2013 *
If yes, your proposal will additionally have to be advertised in a newspaper circulating in the area of the development. Your planning
authority will do this on your behalf but will charge you a fee. Please check the planning authority’s website for advice on the additional
fee and add this to your planning fee.
If you are unsure whether your proposal involves a form of development listed in Schedule 3, please check the Help Text and Guidance
notes before contacting your planning authority.
Planning Service Employee/Elected Member Interest
Is the applicant, or the applicant’s spouse/partner, either a member of staff within the planning service or an  Yes    No
elected member of the planning authority? *
Certificates and Notices
CERTIFICATE AND NOTICE UNDER REGULATION 15 – TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT
PROCEDURE) (SCOTLAND) REGULATION 2013
One Certificate must be completed and submitted along with the application form. This is most usually Certificate A, Form 1,
Certificate B, Certificate C or Certificate E.
Are you/the applicant the sole owner of ALL the land? *  Yes    No
Is any of the land part of an agricultural holding? *  Yes    No
Certificate Required
The following Land Ownership Certificate is required to complete this section of the proposal:
Certificate A
Land Ownership Certificate
Certificate and Notice under Regulation 15 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland)
Regulations 2013
Certificate A
I hereby certify that –
(1) - No person other than myself/the applicant was an owner (Any person who, in respect of any part of the land, is the owner or is the
lessee under a lease thereof of which not less than 7 years remain unexpired.) of any part of the land to which the application relates at
the beginning of the period of 21 days ending with the date of the accompanying application.
(2) - None of the land to which the application relates constitutes or forms part of an agricultural holding
Signed: Mr James Stuart
On behalf of:
Date: 13/11/2023
 Please tick here to certify this Certificate. *
185

Page 411

Page 6 of 7
Checklist – Application for Planning Permission
Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997
The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013
Please take a few moments to complete the following checklist in order to ensure that you have provided all the necessary information
in support of your application. Failure to submit sufficient information with your application may result in your application being deemed
invalid. The planning authority will not start processing your application until it is valid.
a) If this is a further application where there is a variation of conditions attached to a previous consent, have you provided a statement to
that effect? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
b) If this is an application for planning permission or planning permission in principal where there is a crown interest in the land, have
you provided a statement to that effect? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
c) If this is an application for planning permission, planning permission in principle or a further application and the application is for
development belonging to the categories of national or major development (other than one under Section 42 of the planning Act), have
you provided a Pre-Application Consultation Report? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997
The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013
d) If this is an application for planning permission and the application relates to development belonging to the categories of national or
major developments and you do not benefit from exemption under Regulation 13 of The Town and Country Planning (Development
Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013, have you provided a Design and Access Statement? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
e) If this is an application for planning permission and relates to development belonging to the category of local developments (subject
to regulation 13. (2) and (3) of the Development Management Procedure (Scotland) Regulations 2013) have you provided a Design
Statement? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
f) If your application relates to installation of an antenna to be employed in an electronic communication network, have you provided an
ICNIRP Declaration? *
 Yes  No  Not applicable to this application
g) If this is an application for planning permission, planning permission in principle, an application for approval of matters specified in
conditions or an application for mineral development, have you provided any other plans or drawings as necessary:
 Site Layout Plan or Block plan.
 Elevations.
 Floor plans.
 Cross sections.
 Roof plan.
 Master Plan/Framework Plan.
 Landscape plan.
 Photographs and/or photomontages.
 Other.
If Other, please specify: * (Max 500 characters)
186

Page 412

Page 7 of 7
Provide copies of the following documents if applicable:
A copy of an Environmental Statement. *  Yes   N/A
A Design Statement or Design and Access Statement. *  Yes   N/A
A Flood Risk Assessment. *  Yes   N/A
A Drainage Impact Assessment (including proposals for Sustainable Drainage Systems). *  Yes   N/A
Drainage/SUDS layout. *  Yes   N/A
A Transport Assessment or Travel Plan  Yes   N/A
Contaminated Land Assessment. *  Yes   N/A
Habitat Survey. *  Yes   N/A
A Processing Agreement. *  Yes   N/A
Other Statements (please specify). (Max 500 characters)
Declare – For Application to Planning Authority
I, the applicant/agent certify that this is an application to the planning authority as described in this form. The accompanying
Plans/drawings and additional information are provided as a part of this application.
Declaration Name: Mr James Stuart
Declaration Date: 13/11/2023
Payment Details
Payment date: 13/11/2023 12:51:00
Created: 13/11/2023 12:51
187

Page 413

Page 414

Report of Handling 
Report dated 14 February 2024 by the Council’s Authorised Officer under the Scheme of
Delegation 
Appendix 2(a)  4b
189

Page 415

Page 416

Householder Delegated Report of Handling
1. Site Description and Proposal
1.1 Retrospective householder planning permission is sought for the erection of an area
of timber decking and a front boundary fence at the front of the site dwelling at
Auchenblae, Newbigging Road, Dunsyre.
1.2 The timber decking with balustrade and front side boundary fencing was completed
recently and was the subject of an enforcement enquiry (ENP/23/0401).
1.3 The application site consists of a two-storey semi-detached dwelling which was built
around the mid-20th Century. The dwelling is rendered (white) with areas of red/brown
brick and a concrete tile roof. There are also white upvc windows and a black
composite front door, which is accessed via concrete steps. The land to the front of
the house slopes gently to the road, where a double driveway has been constructed
and the where the front of the house and amenity space is visible from the road.
1.4 The house is in a small hamlet of dwellings with large gardens and there is a Category
B listed church 68m to the south of the site dwelling, to the south of the highway. The
site falls within a circular area defined as an ‘Archaeological Trigger’ area, which is
centred on Dunsyre Church to the south.
1.5 The wider area consists of a wide, open rural valley with rolling hills to the north,
Dunsyre Hill is approx. 0.7km to the north of the site dwelling and it is 401m in height.
The valley runs to the south west and consists of a narrow river (South Medwin) and
agricultural land.
Reference no: P/23/1431
Proposal: Erection of decking and boundary fence at the front
elevation (Retrospective)
Site Address: Auchenblae
Newbigging Road
Dunsyre
Lanark
ML11 8NQ
Applicant: Mr James Stuart
Agent: n/a
Application Type: Householder
Development Plan
Compliance:
Y
Recommendation: Grant
Representations: 1 Support 1 Object 1 Comments
4b
191

Page 417

1.6 The existing timber decking extends approx. 3.3m from the front elevation of the site
dwelling, in front of the main entrance door. It is approx. 4.5m wide and 0.5m high with
a 1m tall balustrade. The side timber fence to the immediate west of the decking is
approx. 1.8m tall near to the dwelling and 1m towards the highway.
1.7 The submitted plans show that the decking would be reduced to a 0.49m (1.6ft)
projection from the front concrete steps which lead up to the front main door. The width
of the decking would be reduced to 2.71m (8.9ft). The height of the reduced decking
would be reduced to 0.2m from 0.5m. The fence would be reduced to a height of 1m
overall, along its full length.
2. Consultations
West of Scotland Archaeology Service
- No adverse comments or recommendations (12-DEC-2023)
3. Representations
Statutory neighbour notification was undertaken in respect of this application and three
letters of representation have been received as a result of this, which are summarised
as:
No. 1 Newbigging Road – Original notifier of the Enforcement Case (ENP/23/0401) –
- Partially blocked shared path (fence)
- Loss of privacy
- Overlooking
Braeside, Newbigging Road – Concern over the labelling of the site dwelling on the
Site Location Plan as this positioned on the neighbours land. No objection to the
proposals (18-DEC-2023)
Mountview Cottage, Newbigging Road – Comments made in support of the application
(08-FEB-2024)
4. Development Plan
Under Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, all
applications must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless
material considerations indicate otherwise.
National Planning Framework 4
National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) is Scotland’s national spatial strategy for
Scotland. It sets out spatial principles, regional priorities, national developments, and
national planning policy. NPF4 supports the planning and delivery of sustainable
places, liveable places, and productive places.
National Planning Framework 4 Policies
Policy 1: Tackling the climate and nature crises
Policy 2: Climate mitigation and adaption
Policy 16: Quality homes
South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (2021)
For the purposes of determining planning applications the Council assesses proposals
against the policies contained within the adopted South Lanarkshire Local
Development Plan 2 (SLLDP2). In this regard the application site and associated
proposals are affected by the following policies contained in the SLLDP2:-
192

Page 418

SLLDP2 Volume 1 Policies
Policy 2: Climate Change
Policy 4: Green Belt and Rural Area
Policy 5: Development Management and Placemaking  
SLLDP2 Volume 2 Policies
Policy DM2: House Extensions and Alterations
Policy DM22: Enforcement 
Policy DM23: Monitoring 
Policy GBRA1: Rural Design and Development 
South Lanarkshire Council (SLC) Supporting Planning Guidance
Development at a Dwellinghouse 
Planning Circular’s
10/2009: Planning Enforcement 
5. Assessment and Discussion 
5.1 The main issues to be addressed in the determination of this application includes the
layout, siting and design of the proposal, and an assessment of any visual and amenity
impacts. The policies contained within National Planning Framework 4 and the South
Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 are the main consideration in this case. 
5.2 As per the guidance detailed in the letter from the Chief Planner dated 8 February
2023, it is considered that Policy 2 of the NPF4 is not a key consideration for
householder applications.  As such, a quantitative assessment of emissions is not
required for a planning application of this scale, and the relatively small-scale nature
of this application means that there are no conflicts with the aims of Policies 1 and 2
of NPF4 and Policy 2 of SLLDP2 which seek to promote developments that address
the global climate emergency and nature crisis. At this time, its climate impacts are
best considered through the Scottish Building Standards process rather than imposing
specific constraints at the planning stage. 
5.3 Policies 4, 5 and DM2 of the SLLDP2 collectively seek to ensure that all new proposals
are appropriately designed and scaled, with no adverse impact on amenity. Policy 16
of National Planning Framework 4 advises that householder development proposals
will be supported where they: 
i. Do not have a detrimental impact on the character or environmental quality of
the home and the surrounding area in terms of size, design, and materials; and 
ii. Do not have a detrimental effect on the neighbouring properties in terms of
physical impact, overshadowing or overlooking. 
5.4 Policy DM22 and DM23 establish that enforcement action can be taken against any
unauthorised development that The Council considers to unacceptably harm
public/residential amenity. Monitoring shall also be undertaken to ensure that any
development is carried out in accordance with planning legislation, approved plans and
conditions, especially in relation to impacts to neighbours. 
5.5 Taking these policy considerations into account, the proposed amendments can be
adequately accommodated within the residential plot and there would be sufficient
garden ground at the front remaining. 
193

Page 419

5.6 The reduced area and height of the decking would limit the amount of raised amenity
space at the front of the dwelling. This would then reduce the panoramic views over
the neighbours’ front gardens when compared to the current larger decked area. The
amenity of the surrounding neighbours would also be improved, especially concerning
direct overlooking and loss of privacy. The appearance of the untreated timber does
appear bold at the front elevation, however this would eventually fade and weather and
would not require a condition to paint it. 
5.7 The boundary fence is proposed to be reduced to 1m along its full length, which would
represent an acceptable improvement to the current taller fence which currently
overshadows part of the front neighbouring garden (No. 1) and looks overbearing in
appearance from this neighbour’s perspective. The proposed changes would therefore
be in accordance with what is set out in the ‘Development at a Dwellinghouse SPG
(2022)’ and would meet the aims and objectives of Policy DM22. 
5.8 An appropriately worded condition would be added to this determination to ensure that
the decking and fence is reduced within an acceptable time period in accordance with
the submitted plans. Any boundary disputes are not considered to be a planning
matter. The plans are sufficient to make a planning decision and any concerns
regarding the labelling of the site dwelling on the site location plan are noted, however
it the plan is acceptable to make a planning assessment.   
5.9 Overall, the proposed development (shown in the ‘proposed’ plans) is appropriately
designed and scaled, with no adverse amenity impacts and is in accordance with the
relevant policies contained within the LDP.  Therefore, the application is recommended
for approval. 
6. Recommendation and Conditions
Grant subject to conditions: 
01. The existing decking and fencing shall be reduced and amended in accordance
with the approved ‘proposed’ plans (received 09-FEB-2024) within 3 months of
the date of this decision notice. 
Reason: To comply with the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997,
as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. 
7. Reason for Decision 
The proposal is appropriately designed and scaled with no adverse visual or amenity
impacts in accordance with Policies 1, 2 and 16 of the adopted National Planning
Framework 4 and Policies 2, 4, 5, DM2 of the adopted Local Development Plan 2. 
Authorised by: David Russell 
Date: 14th February 2024 
Background Papers
Further information relating to the application can be found online: P/23/1431 | Erection of
decking and boundary fence at the front elevation (Retrospective) | Auchenblae Newbigging
Road Dunsyre Lanark ML11 8NQ (southlanarkshire.gov.uk) 
Corporate Considerations
194

Page 420

The report raises no impacts or risks in terms of equalities or financial implications.  Any
implications in terms of climate change, sustainability or the environment will have been
considered above in terms of the relevant national and local policies.  
Contact for Further Information
If you would like to inspect the background papers or want further information, please contact:-
Rob Croydon – Planning Officer
Mobile: 07551 839 698 Email: rob.croydon@southlanarkshire.gov.uk 
195

Page 421

Page 422

Consultation Responses 
 Response dated 12 December 2023 from West of Scotland Archaeology Service 
Appendix 2(b)  4c
197

Page 423

Page 424

From: O"Hare, Martin (NRS)
To: Planning
Subject: Planning Application P/23/1431 (OFFICIAL)
Date: 12 December 2023 09:44:51
OFFICIAL
Dear Sir or Madam,
I refer to the above application for retrospective consent for the erection of an area of decking at Auchenblae,
Newbigging Road, Dunsyre, which was sent to us for comment on the 7th of December.  I have downloaded details of the
proposal from the Council’s online planning system, and having compared these against information contained in the
Historic Environment Record and with available cartographic sources, I would advise that it appears unlikely to raise a
substantive archaeological issue. 
The house that is the subject of the proposal is located in an area that is likely to have some general potential to
produce sub-surface archaeological material; however, the building itself is of modern construction, and occupies a plot
of ground that was shown as undeveloped agricultural land on the 1st edition Ordnance Survey map of 1864.  Current
aerial photographs indicate that the decking would be installed on an area of existing hardstanding, which is likely to
have had a detrimental effect on any sub-surface archaeological features or deposits that may have been present in this
area.  In addition, it is also the case that the application is for retrospective consent, with supporting photographs
supplied by the applicant showing that it has already been constructed.  That being the case, the retention of the deck
would not raise any archaeological issue, and nor would they be any apparent scope for a programme of archaeological
fieldwork.
Regards,
Martin O’Hare
Martin O'Hare
Historic Environment Records Officer
West of Scotland Archaeology Service
231 George Street, Glasgow, G1 1RX
email: Martin.O'Hare@wosas.glasgow.gov.uk
OFFICIAL
Please print responsibly and, if you do, recycle appropriately.
Disclaimer: This email is from Glasgow City Council or one of its Arm’s Length Organisations (ALEOs). Views
expressed in this message do not necessarily reflect those of the council, or ALEO, who will not necessarily be bound by
its contents. If you are not the intended recipient of this email (and any attachment), please inform the sender by return
email and destroy all copies. Unauthorised access, use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. Please be aware
that communication by internet email is not secure as messages can be intercepted and read by someone else. We
therefore strongly advise you not to email any information which, if disclosed to someone else, would be likely to cause
you distress. If you have an enquiry of this nature then please write to us using the postal system. If you choose to email
this information to us there can be no guarantee of privacy. Any email, including its content, may be monitored and used
by the council, or ALEO, for reasons of security and for monitoring internal compliance with the office policy on staff
use. Email monitoring or blocking software is also used. Please be aware that you have a responsibility to make sure that
any email you write or forward is within the bounds of the law. Glasgow City Council, or ALEOs, cannot guarantee that
this message or any attachment is virus free or has not been intercepted and amended. You should perform your own
virus checks.
Protective Marking
We are using protective marking software to mark all our electronic and paper information based on its content, and the
level of security it needs when being shared, handled and stored. You should be aware of what these marks mean for
4c
199

Page 425

Page 426

Representations 
Representations From Dated
 June Hogg 25/10/23
 June Hogg 08/12/23
 Marilyn Dungey 18/12/23
 Joseph Neill-Velasco 
Appendix 2(c)  4d
201

Page 427

Page 428

From: Croydon, Rob
To: Planning
Subject: P/23/1431 - Auchenblae, Newbigging Road - Dunsyre - Objection
Date: 08 December 2023 12:31:01
Please can you add this original email – sent on 23-OCT-2023 - as a neighbour objection from No.
1 Newbigging Road, Dunsyre >
Newbigging Road
Dunsyre
Lanark
ML11 8NQ
Thanks,
Rob.
From: 
Sent: Friday, December 8, 2023 12:23 PM
To: Croydon, Rob <Rob.Croydon@southlanarkshire.gov.uk>
Subject: Fwd: Neighbours fence and Decking.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From:
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2023 at 10:33
Subject: Neighbours fence and Decking.
To: <planning@southlanarkshire.gov.uk>
June Hogg
1 Newbbing Road
Dunsyre
Ml118NQ
To whom it may concern ,
My neighbours at Auchenblea Dunsyre are erecting a six foot fence at the front of the house
which they have attached to the building between us .It is built in the middle of a shared access
path to the road which is now partially blocked .
They are also in the process of building a decking which is attached to the fence
Which two feet away from my living room window and is high enough for them to be looking
straight into my window.I am very concerned about this and would
Very much appreciate someone getting in touch as soon as possible.
Yours sincerely,
June Hogg
4d
203

Page 429

From:
To: Croydon, Rob
Subject: Re: Auchenblae - Newbigging Road - Objection
Date: 08 December 2023 12:00:25
Attachments: image001.png
image003.jpg
image002.png
image004.png
The height of the fence at the end of neighbours decking is 1.83m and length of this part of
fence is3.45m. We are very concerned with the height and being very close to our window
that they can now stand on the decking and be looking straight into our living room which
in our view is invading our privacy.
Hope you managed to get hold of the email I sent to planning dated 25th October about my
concern when they were erecting the fence and decking if not I can try and send you it
over.
Regards
Mrs Hogg
On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 09:31, Croydon, Rob <Rob.Croydon@southlanarkshire.gov.uk>
wrote:
Dear Mrs Hogg,
As discussed, – please send me the measurements that you have taken – and any relevant
information.
However, we don get involved in boundary disputes. We will however look at the
planning concerns such as overlooking and overshadowing.
Kind regards,
Rob Croydon, Planning Officer (East Team)
Planning and Regulatory Services, Community and Enterprise Resources, South
Lanarkshire Council
Council Offices, Floor 6, Almada Street, Hamilton, ML3 0AA
Mobile: 07551 839 698 Email: rob.croydon@southlanarkshire.gov.uk Web: Planning and
building standards - South Lanarkshire Council
Further information on our commitment to our customers can be found in our Customer
Charters using the following link: Planning and Enforcement Charters - South Lanarkshire
Council
204

Page 430

Page 431

Page 432

Comments for Planning Application P/23/1431
Application Summary
Application Number: P/23/1431
Address: Auchenblae Newbigging Road Dunsyre Lanark ML11 8NQ
Proposal: Erection of decking on front elevation (Retrospective)
Case Officer: Rob Croydon
Customer Details
Name: Mr Joseph Neill-Velasco
Address: Mountview Cottage Dunsyre Lanark
Comment Details
Commenter Type: Member of public
Stance: Customer made comments in support of the Planning Application
Comment Reasons:
Comment:I do not see any issues with this decking. I does not block or obstruct anything as a
neighbour and also gives a safer area to walk and stand on level ground as the drive and path and
garden are all on a hill. Makes the property more pleasing.
207

Page 433

Page 434

Site photographs and location plan 
Appendix 3  4e
209

Page 435

Page 436

Photo 1 looking north
4e
211

Page 437

Photo 2 looking northwest 
212

Page 438

Photo 3 looking west 
213

Page 439

Photo 4 looking south 
214

Page 440

Photo 5 looking north 
215

Page 441

Page 442

Planning Decision Notice and Reasons for Refusal 
Appendix 4  4f
217

Page 443

Page 444

Floor 6, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton, ML3 0AA
Email rob.croydon@southlanarkshire.gov.uk Phone: 
Community And Enterprise Resources
Executive Director David Booth
Planning And Regulatory Services 
Mr James Stuart
Auchenblae
Newbigging Road
Dunsyre
Lanark
ML11 8NQ
Our Ref: P/23/1431
Your Ref: 
If calling ask for: Rob Croydon
Date: 16 February 2024 
Dear Sir/Madam 
Issue of decision – compliance with conditions 
Proposal: Erection of decking and boundary fence at the front elevation
(Retrospective)
Site address: Auchenblae, Newbigging Road, Dunsyre, Lanark, ML11 8NQ
Application no: P/23/1431 
I am pleased to enclose the decision notice relating to the above mentioned application which
was recently approved by the Council, subject to conditions.  Please note that the Council does
not issue paper plans with the decision notice.  The application is granted in accordance with the
plans and any other documentation listed in the conditions imposed on the accompanying
decision notice and which can be viewed using the  Council’s online planning application search
at https://publicaccess.southlanarkshire.gov.uk/online-applications/ 
Please check the decision notice carefully for any conditions imposed on the consent which
require the submission and approval of details before works start on site.  It is most important
that these are dealt with before work on the development begins.  If the development starts
without complying with these ‘pre-commencement’ conditions, it may be rendered unlawful. 
Enforcement action may also be taken if conditions or details are not submitted and approved by
the Council, if you are required to do so. 
I would also advise you that under the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006, once you have decided
the date that you will start work on the development, you must inform the Council of that date as
soon as possible. This ensures that the Council is aware that the development is due to begin
and can follow up on any suspensive conditions attached to the planning permission as
mentioned above. If you do not notify the Council, that is a breach of planning control and action
may be taken against you. I enclose a ‘Notification of initiation of development’ for you to submit
when you are ready to begin work. Similarly, you require to notify us when the development has
been completed and a ‘Notification of completion of development’ is also attached for this
purpose. 
4f
219

Page 445

If you have any queries regarding the conditions which have been imposed, or the procedures
associated with the notification of initiation of development or completion of development notices,
then please contact the officer named above. 
Yours faithfully 
Head of Planning and Regulatory Services 
Enc:
220

Page 446

Application No         
P/23/1431 
Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended
by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006 
To : Mr James Stuart  Per :    
Auchenblae
Newbigging Road
Dunsyre
Lanark
ML11 8NQ   
With reference to your application received on 13.11.2023 for planning permission under the
above mentioned Act : 
Description of proposed development : 
Erection of decking and boundary fence at the front elevation (Retrospective) 
Site location : 
Auchenblae
Newbigging Road
Dunsyre
Lanark
ML11 8NQ 
SOUTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL in exercise of their powers under the above mentioned Act
hereby: 
GRANT CONDITIONAL PLANNING PERMISSION 
for the above development in accordance with the plan(s) specified in this decision notice and the
particulars given in the application, subject to any condition(s) listed overleaf in the paper apart. 
Any condition(s) are imposed by the Council for the reasons detailed. 
Date: 16th February 2024 
Head of Planning and Regulatory Services 
This permission does not grant any consent for the development that may be required under
other legislation, e.g. Building Warrant or Roads Construction Consent. 
South Lanarkshire Council
Community and Enterprise Resources
Planning and Regulatory Services  
221

Page 447

South Lanarkshire Council 
Grant planning permission 
Paper apart - Application number: P/23/1431 
Conditions and reasons 
01. The existing decking and fencing shall be reduced and amended in accordance with the
approved 'proposed' plans (received 09-FEB-2024) within 3 months of the date of this
decision notice. 
Reason: To comply with the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as
amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. 
Reason(s) for decision 
The proposal is appropriately designed and scaled with no adverse visual or amenity impacts in
accordance with Policies 1, 2 and 16 of the adopted National Planning Framework 4 and Policies
2, 4, 5, DM2 of the adopted Local Development Plan 2.
222

Page 448

Notes to applicant
Application number: P/23/1431
Important
The following notes do not form a statutory part of this decision notice. However, it is
recommended that you study them closely as they contain information which guides you to other
relevant matters that may assist in ensuring that the development is properly carried out.
01. This decision relates to drawing numbers:
Reference Version No: Plan Status
Location Plan 13-NOV-2023 Approved
Proposed Plans 09-FEB-2024 Approved
02. Failure to comply with the conditions imposed on this planning permission can result in
the planning authority serving a Breach of Condition Notice and/or Enforcement Notice. If
any of the requirements set out in these notices are not then complied with, a fixed
penalty notice may be served seeking the payment of the sum specified in the penalty
notice to the Planning Authority. The sum will be as set by The Town and Country
Planning (Amount of Fixed Penalty) (Scotland) Regulations 2000.
03. The person carrying out the development must give advance notice in writing to the
planning authority of the date when it intended to start. Failure to do so is a breach of
planning control. It could result in the planning authority taking enforcement action [See
sections 27A and 123(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as
amended)].
04. As soon as possible after it is finished, the person who completed the development must
write to the planning authority to confirm the position [See section 27B of the Town and
Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended)].
223

Page 449

The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997
Town and Country Planning (Development
Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013 
Notification of initiation of development (regulation 40) 
This notice must be submitted to the Council before you intend to start work which has planning
permission. Failure to do so is a breach of planning control under S123(1) of the Town and
Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006. 
Please check your planning permission carefully for any conditions imposed which require the
submission and approval of details before works start on site.  You must ensure that these are
dealt with before work on the development begins.  If the development starts without complying
with these ‘pre-commencement’ conditions, it may be rendered unlawful. 
Please complete the form and return it to Planning and Regulatory Services, South Lanarkshire
Council, Floor 6, Council HQ, Almada Street, Hamilton ML3 0AA or email
planning@southlanarkshire.gov.uk 
Planning application reference number         Date of decision notice 
Name and address of person carrying out development 
Is the above person the owner of all the land to which the development relates? 
Yes            No 
If not, please provide the name and address of the owner 
Is any person being contacted to oversee carrying out of the development on site? 
Yes            No
Mr James Stuart
Auchenblae
Newbigging Road
Dunsyre
Lanark
ML11 8NQ
P/23/1431  16.02.2024
224

Page 450

If yes, please provide the name and contact details for that person 
Description of development 
Site location 
Intended date of initiation of development 
Signed (agent/developer*) 
Date 
Contact details:
Planning and Regulatory Services
Floor 6
Council HQ
Almada Street
Hamilton ML3 0AA
Email: rob.croydon@southlanarkshire.gov.uk   Phone:  
Web: www.southlanarkshire.gov.uk 
Auchenblae
Newbigging Road
Dunsyre
Lanark
ML11 8NQ 
Erection of decking and boundary fence at the front elevation (Retrospective) 
225

Page 451

The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 
Notification of completion of development 
This notice must be submitted to the Council as soon as is practicable after completion of the
work which has planning permission.  If the planning permission is for a phased development,
notice of the completion of each phase must be notified to the Council.  As soon as the
development (or phase of development) is completed, please complete the form and return it to: 
Planning and Regulatory Services, South Lanarkshire Council, Floor 6, Council HQ, Almada
Street, Hamilton ML3 0AA or email planning@southlanarkshire.gov.uk  Tel: 0303 123 1015,
selecting option 7. 
Planning application reference number    Date decision notice issued 
Name and address of person carrying out development 
Description of development 
Site location 
Date of completion    Signed (agent/developer*)         Date 
Mr James Stuart
Auchenblae
Newbigging Road
Dunsyre
Lanark  
Erection of decking and boundary fence at the front elevation (Retrospective) 
Auchenblae
Newbigging Road
Dunsyre
Lanark
ML11 8NQ
P/23/1431 16.02.2024
226

Page 452

Important notes 
Community And Enterprise
Resources Executive Director David
Booth Planning And Regulatory
Services 
Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act
1997
1. Compliance with conditions 
Under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (Section
145), failure to comply with any condition(s) imposed on any planning permission may
result in the service by the Council of a “Breach of Condition Notice” requiring
compliance with the said condition(s). 
There is no right of appeal against such a Notice and failure to comply with the terms of
the Notice within the specified time limit will constitute a summary offence, liable on
summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1000. 
2. Procedure for appeal to the planning authority 
(a) If the applicant is aggrieved by the decision of the planning authority to refuse
permission for or approval required by a condition in respect of the proposed
development, or to grant permission or approval subject to conditions, the applicant
may require the planning authority to review the case under section 43A of the Town
and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, within three months from the date of this
notice. The notice of review should be addressed to: 
Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources)
Administration and Legal Services
Council
Headquarters
Almada Street
Hamilton
ML3 0AA 
To obtain the appropriate forms:
Administration and Legal Services at the above address.
Telephone: 07385 370 117
Email: stuart.mcleod@southlanarkshire.gov.uk 
(b) If permission to develop land is refused or granted subject to conditions, whether by the
planning authority or by the Scottish Ministers, and the owner of the land claims that the
land has become incapable of reasonably beneficial use in its existing state and cannot
be rendered incapable of reasonably beneficial use by the carrying out of any
development which has been or would be permitted, he may serve on the planning
authority a purchase notice requiring the purchase of his interest in the land in
accordance with Part 5 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. 
227

Page 453

Page 454

Notice of Review (including Statement of Reasons for
Requiring the Review) submitted by applicant James
Stuart 
Appendix 5  4g
229

Page 455

Page 456

4g
231

Page 457

Page 458

Page 459

Page 460

Notice of Review Form
List of documents and evidence
Please provide a list of all supporting documents. materials and evidence which you wish to submit
with your Notice of Review and intend to rely on in support of your review.
If required we can get doctors letter for my wife's illness and we can ask for police Letter for Proof of
abuse that my daughter won't through .
0 1\� AL-14..�-� &.� &:..£,.� ,1'-�f'\\ c�GA..... rl.J...NS �� i..... ,
��--,N(;.. .., ':J:._ \.+-4-,-i�- /;;-NC. L:..:,�� Pv,;_,N\�
N.Qte: A copy of the Notice of Review, the review documents and any notice of the procedure of the
review will be made available for inspection by prior appointment (Phone: 08457 406080) at the
office of Planning and Building Standards Services, Montrose House, 154 Montrose Crescent,
Hamilton ML3 6LB until such time as the review is determined. It may also be made available on
the Council's website.
Checklist
Please mark the appropriate boxes to confirm that you have provided all supporting documents and
evidence relevant to your review:
$]x Full completion of all parts of this form
�x Statement of your reasons for requiring a review
□ 2 copies of all documents, materials and evidence which you intend to rely on (eg planning
application form, plans and drawings, decision notice or other documents) which are now the
subject of this review.
Note. Where the review relates to a further application. eg renewal of planning permission or
modification, variation or removal of a planning condition or where it relates to an application for
approval of matters specified in conditions, it is advisable to provide the application reference
number, approved plans and decision notice from that earlier consent.
Declaration
I the applicant/agent [delete as appropriate] hereby serve notice on the planning authority to
review the application as set out on this form and In the supporting documents.
Signed: I • James stuart
I
Date: ,....17-.-3.-2-02_4 _____ __,
This form and 2 copies of all supporting documents should be sent to:
Planning and Regulatory Services
Community and Enterprise Resources, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton,
ML30AA
Email: planning@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
Phone: 03031231015 
For official use
235

Page 461

Page 462

Page 463

Page 464

Report
Agenda Item 
Report to: Planning Local Review Body 
Date of Meeting: 24 June 2024
Report by: Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources)  
Subject: Review of Case – Application P/23/1524 for Erection of
Replacement Single Storey Side Extension,
Replacement Front Dormer, Side Dormer, Rear First
Floor Gable Extension with Juliet Balcony,
Replacement Detached Garage and Associated
Improvements at 20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell 
1. Purpose of Report
1.1. The purpose of the report is to present the information currently available to allow a
review of the decision taken by officers, in terms of the Scheme of Delegation, on the
following application:-
[purpose]
1.2. Summary Application Information 
Application Type: Detailed Planning Application 
Applicant: Christopher and Louise Banks 
Proposal: Erection of replacement single storey side extension,
replacement front dormer, side dormer, rear first floor gable
extension with Juliet balcony, replacement detached garage
and associated improvements
Location:   20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell, G71 8SG
Council Area/Ward: 16 – Bothwell and Uddingston 
1.3. Reason for Requesting Review 
X Refusal of
Application 
Conditions imposed  Failure to give decision
(deemed refusal) 
[1purpose]
2. Recommendation(s)
2.1. The Planning Local Review Body is asked to:-
[recs]
(1) consider whether it has sufficient information to allow it to proceed to
determine the review without further procedure and, if so, that:- 
(a) it proceeds to determine whether the decision taken in respect of the
application under review should be upheld, reversed or varied
(b) in the event that the decision is reversed or varied, the reasons and the
detailed conditions to be attached to the decision letter are agreed 
5
239

Page 465

(2) in the event that further procedure is required to allow it to determine the
review, consider:-
(a) what further information is required, which parties are to be asked to
provide the information and the date by which this is to be provided
(b) what procedure or combination of procedures are to be followed in
determining the review
[1recs]
3. Background
3.1. The Council operates a Scheme of Delegation that enables Council officers to
determine a range of planning applications without the need for them to be referred
to Area Committees or the Planning Committee for a decision.
3.2. In terms of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the
Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006, and the Town and Country Planning (Schemes of
Delegation and Local Review Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013, where an
application for planning permission relates to a proposal that falls within the category
of “local development” and has been or could have been determined under the
Scheme of Delegation, the applicant is entitled to request that the determination be
reviewed by the Planning Local Review Body.
4. Notice of Review – Statement of Reasons for Requiring the Review
4.1. In submitting their Notice of Review, the applicant has stated their reasons for
requiring a review of the determination in respect of their application. (Refer
Appendix 5)
4.2. The applicant is entitled to state a preference for procedure (or combination of
procedures) to be followed and has indicated that their stated preference is as
follows:-
Further written submissions Site inspection
Hearing session(s) X Assessment of review documents
only, with no further procedure
4.3. However, members will be aware that it is for the Planning Local Review Body to
determine how a case is reviewed.
5. Information Available to Allow Review of Application
5.1. Section 43B of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006 restricts the ability of parties to
introduce new material at the review stage. The focus of the review should,
therefore, be on the material which was before the officer who dealt with the
application under the Scheme of Delegation.
5.2. The following information is appended to this report to assist the Planning Local
Review Body in its review of the decision taken by officers:-
 Planning Application Form (Appendix 1)
 Report of Handling by the Planning Officer under the Scheme of Delegation
(Appendix 2)
 Site photographs and location plan (Appendix 3)
 Decision notice (Appendix 4)
 Notice of Review including statement of reasons for requiring the review
(Appendix 5)
240

Page 466

5.3. Copies of the relevant drawings are available for inspection by contacting
Administration and Legal Services prior to the meeting. 
6. Notice of Review Consultation Process
6.1. 1 further representation was received, a Statement of Observations from the
Planning Officer on the applicant’s Notice of Review, in the course of the 14 day
period from the date on which notification of the request for a review of the case was
given.  This is attached as Appendix 6. 
6.2. The applicant had the opportunity to comment on the further representation received. 
No comments on the further representation were received from the applicant. 
Jackie Taylor
Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources) 
13 June 2024 
Link(s) to Council Values/Ambitions/Objectives
 Work with communities and partners to promote high quality, thriving and sustainable 
communities
 Accountable, effective, efficient and transparent 
Previous References
 None 
List of Background Papers
 Guide to the Planning Local Review Body 
Contact for Further Information
If you would like to inspect the background papers or want further information, please
contact:
Stuart McLeod, Administration Officer
Ext:  4815 (Tel:  01698 454815)
E-mail: stuart.mcleod@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
241

Page 467

Page 468

Planning Application Form 
Appendix 1  5a
243

Page 469

Page 470

Page 1 of 6
Floor 6, Council Offices Almada Street Hamilton ML3 0AA  Tel: 0303 123 1015  Email: planning@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
Applications cannot be validated until all the necessary documentation has been submitted and the required fee has been paid.
Thank you for completing this application form:
ONLINE REFERENCE 100653743-001
The online reference is the unique reference for your online form only. The  Planning Authority will allocate an Application Number when
your form is validated. Please quote this reference if you need to contact the planning Authority about this application.
Description of Proposal
Please describe accurately the work proposed: * (Max 500 characters)
Has the work already been started and/ or completed? *
 No   Yes - Started     Yes – Completed
Applicant or Agent Details
Are you an applicant or an agent? * (An agent is an architect, consultant or someone else acting
on behalf of the applicant in connection with this application)  Applicant  Agent
Erection of a single storey side extension, first floor rear extension and new dormer to existing dwellinghouse.
5a
245

Page 471

Page 2 of 6
Agent Details
Please enter Agent details
Company/Organisation:
Ref. Number: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
First Name: * Building Name:
Last Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Telephone Number: * (Street): *
Extension Number: Address 2:
Mobile Number: Town/City: *
Fax Number: Country: *
Postcode: *
Email Address: *
Is the applicant an individual or an organisation/corporate entity? *
  Individual    Organisation/Corporate entity
Applicant Details
Please enter Applicant details
Title: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
Other Title: Building Name:
First Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Last Name: * (Street): *
Company/Organisation Address 2:
Telephone Number: * Town/City: *
Extension Number: Country: *
Mobile Number: Postcode: *
Fax Number:
Email Address: *
Other
Mr & Mrs
Declan
Christopher & Louise
Hendrie
Banks
Ellismuir Way
Dunlop Crescent
20
Ellismuir House
01698 451295
G71 5PW
G71 8SG
United Kingdom
Scotland
Uddingston
Bothwell
declan@abode-architects.co.uk
declan@abode-architects.co.uk
246

Page 472

Page 3 of 6
Site Address Details
Planning Authority:
Full postal address of the site (including postcode where available):
Address 1: 
Address 2:
Address 3:
Address 4:
Address 5:
Town/City/Settlement:
Post Code:
Please identify/describe the location of the site or sites
Northing Easting
Pre-Application Discussion
Have you discussed your proposal with the planning authority? *  Yes   No
Trees
Are there any trees on or adjacent to the application site? *  Yes    No
If yes, please mark on your drawings any trees, known protected trees and their canopy spread close to the proposal site and indicate if
any are to be cut back or felled.
Access and Parking
Are you proposing a new or altered vehicle access to or from a public road? *  Yes    No
If yes, please descr be and show on your drawings the position of any existing, altered or new access points, highlighting the changes
you proposed to make. You should also show existing footpaths and note if there will be any impact on these.
Planning Service Employee/Elected Member Interest
Is the applicant, or the applicant’s spouse/partner, either a member of staff within the planning service or an  Yes    No
elected member of the planning authority? *
20 DUNLOP CRESCENT
South Lanarkshire Council
BOTHWELL
GLASGOW
G71 8SG
658390 270562
247

Page 473

Page 4 of 6
Certificates and Notices
CERTIFICATE AND NOTICE UNDER REGULATION 15 – TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT
PROCEDURE) (SCOTLAND) REGULATION 2013
One Certificate must be completed and submitted along with the application form. This is most usually Certificate A, Form 1,
Certificate B, Certificate C or Certificate E.
Are you/the applicant the sole owner of ALL the land? *  Yes    No
Is any of the land part of an agricultural holding? *  Yes    No
Certificate Required
The following Land Ownership Certificate is required to complete this section of the proposal:
Certificate A
Land Ownership Certificate
Certificate and Notice under Regulation 15 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland)
Regulations 2013
Certificate A
I hereby certify that –
(1) - No person other than myself/the applicant was an owner (Any person who, in respect of any part of the land, is the owner or is the
lessee under a lease thereof of which not less than 7 years remain unexpired.) of any part of the land to which the application relates at
the beginning of the period of 21 days ending with the date of the accompanying application.
(2) - None of the land to which the application relates constitutes or forms part of an agricultural holding
Signed: Declan Hendrie
On behalf of: Mr & Mrs Christopher & Louise Banks
Date: 05/12/2023
 Please tick here to certify this Certificate. *
248

Page 474

Page 5 of 6
Checklist – Application for Householder Application
Please take a few moments to complete the following checklist in order to ensure that you have provided all the necessary information
in support of your application. Failure to submit sufficient information with your application may result in your application being deemed
invalid. The planning authority will not start processing your application until it is valid.
a) Have you provided a written description of the development to which it relates?. *  Yes  No
b) Have you provided the postal address of the land to which the development relates, or if the land in question  Yes  No
has no postal address, a description of the location of the land? *
c) Have you provided the name and address of the applicant and, where an agent is acting on behalf of the  Yes  No
applicant, the name and address of that agent.? *
d) Have you provided a location plan sufficient to identify the land to which it relates showing the situation of the  Yes  No
land in relation to the locality and in particular in relation to neighbouring land? *. This should have a north point
and be drawn to an identified scale.
e) Have you provided a certificate of ownership? *  Yes  No
f) Have you provided the fee payable under the Fees Regulations? *  Yes  No
g) Have you provided any other plans as necessary? *  Yes  No
Continued on the next page
A copy of the other plans and drawings or information necessary to describe the proposals
(two must be selected). *
You can attach these electronic documents later in the process.
 Existing and Proposed elevations.
 Existing and proposed floor plans.
 Cross sections.
 Site layout plan/Block plans (including access).
 Roof plan.
 Photographs and/or photomontages.
Additional Surveys – for example a tree survey or habitat survey may be needed. In some instances you  Yes  No
may need to submit a survey about the structural condition of the existing house or outbuilding.
A Supporting Statement – you may wish to provide additional background information or justification for your  Yes  No
Proposal. This can be helpful and you should provide this in a single statement. This can be combined with a
Design Statement if required. *
You must submit a fee with your application. Your application will not be able to be validated until the appropriate fee has been
Received by the planning authority.
Declare – For Householder Application
I, the applicant/agent certify that this is an application for planning permission as descr bed in this form and the accompanying
Plans/drawings and additional information.
Declaration Name: Mr Declan Hendrie
Declaration Date: 05/12/2023
249

Page 475

Page 6 of 6
Payment Details
Payment date: 05/12/2023 09:36:00
Created: 05/12/2023 09:36
250

Page 476

Page 1 of 3
Floor 6, Council Offices Almada Street Hamilton ML3 0AA  Tel: 0303 123 1015  Email: planning@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
Applications cannot be validated until all the necessary documentation has been submitted and the required fee has been paid.
Thank you for completing this application form:
ONLINE REFERENCE 100653743-002
The online reference is the unique reference for your online form only. The  Planning Authority will allocate an Application Number when
your form is validated. Please quote this reference if you need to contact the planning Authority about this application.
Site Address Details
Planning Authority:
Full postal address of the site (including postcode where available):
Address 1: 
Address 2:
Address 3:
Address 4:
Address 5:
Town/City/Settlement:
Post Code:
Please identify/describe the location of the site or sites
Northing Easting
Applicant or Agent Details
Are you an applicant or an agent? * (An agent is an architect, consultant or someone else acting
on behalf of the applicant in connection with this application)  Applicant  Agent
20 DUNLOP CRESCENT
South Lanarkshire Council
BOTHWELL
GLASGOW
G71 8SG
658390 270562
251

Page 477

Page 2 of 3
Agent Details
Please enter Agent details
Company/Organisation:
Ref. Number: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
First Name: * Building Name:
Last Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Telephone Number: * (Street): *
Extension Number: Address 2:
Mobile Number: Town/City: *
Fax Number: Country: *
Postcode: *
Email Address: *
Is the applicant an individual or an organisation/corporate entity? *
  Individual    Organisation/Corporate entity
Applicant Details
Please enter Applicant details
Title: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: *
Other Title: Building Name:
First Name: * Building Number:
Address 1
Last Name: * (Street): *
Company/Organisation Address 2:
Telephone Number: * Town/City: *
Extension Number: Country: *
Mobile Number: Postcode: *
Fax Number:
Email Address: *
Other
Mr & Mrs
Declan
Christopher & Louise
Hendrie
Banks
Ellismuir Way
Dunlop Crescent
20
Ellismuir House
01698 451295
G71 5PW
G71 8SG
United Kingdom
Scotland
Uddingston
Bothwell
declan@abode-architects.co.uk
declan@abode-architects.co.uk
252

Page 478

Page 3 of 3
Proposal/Application Details
Please provide the details of the original application(s) below:
Was the original application part of this proposal?  *  Yes   No
Application Details
Please select which application(s) the new documentation is related to.
Application: *
Document Details
Please provide an explanation as to why the documentation is being attached after the original application was submitted: * (Max 500
characters)
Checklist – Post Submission Additional Documentation
Please complete the following checklist to make sure  you have provided all the necessary information in support of your application.
The additional documents have been attached to this submission. *  Yes   No
Declare – Post Submission Additional Documentation
I/We the applicant/agent certify that this is a submission of Additional Documentation, and that all the information given in this
submission is true to the best of my/the applicants knowledge.
Declaration Name: Mr Declan Hendrie
Declaration Date: 07/02/2024
100653743-001, application for Householder Application, submitted on 05/12/2023
Additional documents provided in response to planning officers concerns regarding the original proposals received on 02/02/24.
Deadline for response set by planning officer 09/02/24.
253

Page 479

Page 480

Report of Handling 
Report dated 7 February 2024 by the Council’s Authorised Officer under the Scheme of
Delegation 
Appendix 2  5b
255

Page 481

Page 482

Householder Delegated Report of Handling
1. Site Description and Proposal
1.1 Full planning permission is sought for a re-modelled front dormer, new windows and
doors, a replacement single storey side extension, new cladding, demolition and re-
build of rear garage, a first-floor side extension and a first-floor rear extension with
Juliet balcony, at 20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell, which is a corner site.
1.2 The application site consists of a mid-20th Century semi-detached dormer bungalow,
which has been previously extended, with parking for three vehicles on site, with
vehicle access to the side highway. There is hardstanding and landscaping to the front.
At the side and rear the gardens are lawned and there is also a detached single garage
at the rear. The surrounding area is suburban with similar semi-detached dormer
bungalows, some of which have also been previously extended.
1.3 The proposals would see the demolition of the existing front dormer and the
construction of a new one which would measure 2m in height (0.3m increase in height)
by 3.1m width. The front door would be replaced with a composite door, and the
existing windows would be replaced. The side existing side extension would be
extended to the side by 1m, and its depth would be increased by 0.6m. The height
would be decreased by 0.1m.
1.4 At first floor level a rear extension is proposed over the existing kitchen extension, it
would have a dual pitched roof with a ridge height of 6.4m, a width of 7.9m (matching
the ground floor kitchen), and it would project 3.4m from the existing rear elevation and
would have a rear facing Juliet balcony. The single garage would be demolished and
Reference no: P/23/1524
Proposal: Erection of replacement single storey side extension,
replacement front dormer, side dormer, rear first floor
gable extension with juliet balcony, replacement
detached garage and associated improvements.
Site Address: 20 Dunlop Crescent
Bothwell
G71 8SG
Applicant: Mr & Mrs Christopher & Louise Banks
Agent: Declan Hendrie
Application Type: Full Planning Permission
Development Plan
Compliance:
Y
Recommendation: Grant
Representations: 0 Support 0 Object 0 Comments
5b
257

Page 483

rebuilt with a width of 2.7m, a length of 6.2m and height of 3.1m to the ridge of the dual
pitched roof.
1.5 Proposed materials will consist of:
• White silicone render
• White double-glazed aluminium double glazed window frames
• ‘Kingspan Kooltherm K5’ cladding (with render)
• Single ply membranes for the dormers
• White carrier boards
• ‘Velux’ type roof light windows
• Double glazed aluminium sliding doors
• Ecoscape composite slatted board cladding (silver birch)
1.6 The ground floor side extension would become the ‘snug’ and on the first floor an
additional bedroom is proposed, with an en-suite, a repositioned main bathroom and
additional storage.
2. Consultations
No formal consultations were required to be undertaken in respect of this proposal.
3. Representations
Statutory neighbour notification was undertaken in respect of this application and no
letters of representation have been received as a result of this publicity.
4. Development Plan
Under Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, all
applications must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless
material considerations indicate otherwise.
National Planning Framework 4
National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) is Scotland’s national spatial strategy for
Scotland. It sets out spatial principles, regional priorities, national developments, and
national planning policy. NPF4 supports the planning and delivery of sustainable
places, liveable places, and productive places.
National Planning Framework 4 Policies
Policy 1: Tackling the climate and nature crises
Policy 2: Climate mitigation and adaption
Policy 16: Quality homes
South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (2021)
For the purposes of determining planning applications the Council assesses proposals
against the policies contained within the adopted South Lanarkshire Local
Development Plan 2 (SLLDP2). In this regard the application site and associated
proposals are affected by the following policies contained in the SLLDP2:-
SLLDP2 Volume 1 Policies
Policy 2: Climate Change
Policy 3: General Urban Areas and Settlements
Policy 5: Development Management and Placemaking
SLLDP2 Volume 2 Policies
Policy DM2: House Extensions and Alterations
258

Page 484

South Lanarkshire Council (SLC) Supporting Planning Guidance
Development at a Dwellinghouse
5. Assessment and Discussion
5.1 The main issues to be addressed in the determination of this application includes the
layout, siting and design of the proposal, and an assessment of any visual and amenity
impacts. The policies contained within National Planning Framework 4 and the South
Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 are the main consideration in this case.
5.2 As per the guidance detailed in the letter from the Chief Planner dated 8 February
2023, it is considered that Policy 2 of the NPF4 is not a key consideration for
householder applications. As such, a quantitative assessment of emissions is not
required for a planning application of this scale, and the relatively small-scale nature
of this application means that there are no conflicts with the aims of Policies 1 and 2
of NPF4 and Policy 2 of SLLDP2 which seek to promote developments that address
the global climate emergency and nature crisis. Currently, its climate impacts are best
considered through the Scottish Building Standards process rather than imposing
specific constraints at the planning stage.
5.3 Policies 3, 5 and DM2 of the SLLDP2 collectively seek to ensure that all new proposals
are appropriately designed and scaled, with no adverse impact on amenity. Policy 16
of National Planning Framework 4 advises that householder development proposals
will be supported where they:
i. Do not have a detrimental impact on the character or environmental quality of
the home and the surrounding area in terms of size, design, and materials; and
ii. Do not have a detrimental effect on the neighbouring properties in terms of
physical impact, overshadowing or overlooking.
5.4 Taking these policy considerations into account, the proposals would fall short of the
aims and objectives of Policy DM2. The siting, form, design, and materials would
adversely impact the character of the existing site dwelling and the surrounding area.
The large side dormer aims to create two rooms within the roof space in the side hip
(bedroom and en-suite), which would appear excessive in the form of the proposed
large flat roof dormer. Typically, dormers are subservient to the roof slope so they can
provide a window and therefore daylight into the existing roof space. Here, the dormer
would provide two new rooms at the side rather than a window. An amended plan was
requested to draw back the side dormer away from the eaves to lessen the impact of
this dormer, but this was not provided by the agent. Therefore, the proposed side
dormer would have a detrimental impact on the character of the home and the
surrounding area due to its prominent location at the side of the dwelling at this corner
site, especially regarding Policy 16 of the National Planning Framework 4 and Policy 5
of SLLDP2.
5.5 The rear facing Juliet balcony would also increase levels of over-looking to the
dwellings and private gardens to the rear and it was requested that this was replaced
with a standard matching window due to larger opening, as the level of overlooking
would be less adverse, however this was also refused by the agent. It is noted that No.
24 Dunlop Crescent to the immediate rear has had a large single storey rear extension
and that the roof of this faces the proposed balcony, but there would still be direct views
into their rear windows and garden and views into the rear garden of No. 18 from the
Juliet balcony for it to be considered unacceptable. Therefore, the rear Juliet balcony
259

Page 485

would have an adverse and detrimental impact on the amenity of the surrounding
neighbours, especially in regard to Policy 3 of the SLLDP2.
5.6 The first-floor rear extension over the existing kitchen extension would be accepted,
as the adjoining neighbour (No. 18) has a similar extension, although there would be
a minor increase in overshadowing to the recessed rear ground floor window of No. 18
(from the site visit it was not clear if this window is for a habitable room). The
remodelled front dormer, garage and single storey side element would on their own be
accepted, however when viewed together with the context of all the proposed element
would be considered over-development of the site, especially tasking in to account the
previous extensions to the original dwelling.
5.7 The proposed white coloured silicone render for the large side cheeks of the dormers
would not be acceptable as they should really match the colour of the existing roof
(red/orange tiles). Due to the large coverage, they would appear discordant with the
existing dwelling and the surrounding area as they would be highly visible from the
highway due to this corner site location.
5.8 Overall, the proposed development is not appropriately designed and scaled, and
there would be adverse amenity impacts and it is not in accordance with the relevant
policies contained within the LDP. Therefore, the application is recommended for
refusal.
6. Recommendation and Conditions
Grant subject to conditions:
01. The proposal is contrary to Policy 16 of National Planning Framework 4 as the
size and design of the proposed side dormer will have a detrimental impact on
the character of the home and the surrounding area. The proposal will also
have a detrimental effect on the neighbouring properties in terms of physical
impact and overlooking.
02. The proposal is contrary to Policy 3 of the South Lanarkshire Local
Development Plan 2 as the development would have a detrimental impact on
the amenity of neighbouring residents in terms of overlooking and a detrimental
impact on the character of the surrounding area in terms of visual appearance
and impact.
03. The proposal is contrary to Policy 5 of the South Lanarkshire Local
Development Plan 2 as it would have an unacceptable significant adverse
impact on the adjacent properties/streetscape in terms of scale, massing, and
design. It would also have an unacceptable significant adverse impact on the
amenity of nearby residential properties in terms of overlooking.
04. The proposal is contrary to Policy DM2 of the South Lanarkshire Local
Development Plan 2 as the form, scale and design of the proposed
development is not respectful of the character of the existing dwelling and the
wider area. The proposed development will also overwhelm the existing
dwelling, neighbouring properties and streetscene in terms of size and scale.
Finally, the development will significantly adversely affect adjacent properties
in terms of overlooking.
7. Reason for Decision
The proposal is contrary to Policy 16 of the National Planning Framework 4 (adopted
2023) and Policies 3, 5, and DM2 of the Local Development Plan 2 (adopted 2021) as
260

Page 486

it will result in a detrimental impact on visual and residential amenity. There are no
other material considerations which would outweigh the proposals variance with the
development plan. 
Authorised by: David Russell 
Date: 7th February 2024 
Background Papers
Further information relating to the application can be found online: P/23/1524 | Erection of
replacement single storey side extension, replacement front dormer, side dormer, rear first floor
gable extension with juliet balcony, replacement detached garage and associated
improvements. | 20 Dunlop Crescent Bothwell G71 8SG (southlanarkshire.gov.uk) 
Corporate Considerations
The report raises no impacts or risks in terms of equalities or financial implications.  Any
implications in terms of climate change, sustainability or the environment will have been
considered above in terms of the relevant national and local policies.  
Contact for Further Information
If you would like to inspect the background papers or want further information, please contact:-
Rob Croydon – Planning Officer
Mobile: 07551 839 698 Email: rob.croydon@southlanarkshire.gov.uk 
261

Page 487

Page 488

Site photographs and location plan 
Appendix 3  5c
263

Page 489

Page 490

Photo 1 looking south  
5c
265

Page 491

Photo 2 looking west  
266

Page 492

Photo 3 looking east  
267

Page 493

Photo 4 looking north  
268

Page 494

Photo 5 looking north  
269

Page 495

Photo 6 looking north  
270

Page 496

Photo 7 looking northwest  
271

Page 497

Photo 8 looking northeast  
272

Page 498

Photo 9 looking west
273

Page 499

Page 500

Planning Decision Notice and Reasons for Refusal 
Appendix 4  5d
275

Page 501

Page 502

Floor 6, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton, ML3 0AA
Email rob.croydon@southlanarkshire.gov.uk Phone: 
Community And Enterprise Resources
Executive Director David Booth
Planning And Regulatory Services 
Declan Hendrie
Ellismuir House
Ellismuir Way
Uddingston
United Kingdom
G71 5PW 
Our Ref: P/23/1524
Your Ref: 
If calling ask for: Rob Croydon
Date: 9 February 2024 
Dear Sir/Madam 
Proposal: Erection of replacement single storey side extension, replacement
front dormer, side dormer, rear first floor gable extension with juliet
balcony, replacement detached garage and associated
improvements.
Site address: 20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell, G71 8SG, 
Application no: P/23/1524 
I would advise you that the above application was refused by the Council and I enclose the
decision notice which sets out the reasons for refusal.  Please note that the Council does not
issue paper plans with the decision notice. The application is refused in accordance with the
plans and any other documentation listed in the reasons for refusal imposed on the
accompanying decision notice and which can be viewed using the  Council’s online planning
application search at https://publicaccess.southlanarkshire.gov.uk/online-applications/ 
If you consider that you can overcome the reasons for refusal and that it is not the principle of the
development that is unacceptable, you may submit an amended application.  If you do amend
your proposals and re-apply within one year of this refusal, then you will not have to pay a fee,
provided the proposal is of the same character or description as the application which has just
been refused. 
As your application has been refused, you may appeal against the decision within 3 months of
the date of the decision notice.  The attached notes explain how you may appeal. 
Should you have any enquiries relating to the refusal of your application or a potential amended
submission, please contact Rob Croydon on 
5d
277

Page 503

Yours faithfully 
Head of Planning and Regulatory Services 
Enc:  
278

Page 504

Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended
by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006 
To: Mr & Mrs Christopher &
Louise Banks 
Per: Declan Hendrie 
20 Dunlop Crescent,
Bothwell, G71 8SG, 
Ellismuir House, Ellismuir
Way, Uddingston, United
Kingdom, G71 5PW, 
With reference to your application received on 05.12.2023 for planning permission under the
above mentioned Act: 
Description of proposed development: 
Erection of replacement single storey side extension, replacement front
dormer, side dormer, rear first floor gable extension with juliet balcony,
replacement detached garage and associated improvements. 
Site location: 
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell, G71 8SG,   
SOUTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL in exercise of their powers under the above mentioned Act
hereby: 
REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION 
for the above development in accordance with the plan(s) specified in this decision notice and the
particulars given in the application, for the reason(s) listed overleaf in the paper apart. 
Date: 9th February 2024 
Head of Planning and Regulatory Services 
This permission does not grant any consent for the development that may be required under
other legislation, e.g. Building Warrant or Roads Construction Consent. 
South Lanarkshire Council
Community and Enterprise Resources
Planning and Regulatory Services 
Application no. 
P/23/1524 
279

Page 505

South Lanarkshire Council
Refuse planning permission
Paper apart - Application number: P/23/1524
Reason(s) for refusal:
01. The proposal is contrary to Policy 16 of National Planning Framework 4 as the size and
design of the proposed side dormer will have a detrimental impact on the character of the
home and the surrounding area. The proposal will also have a detrimental effect on the
neighbouring properties in terms of physical impact and overlooking.
02. The proposal is contrary to Policy 3 of the South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2
as the development would have a detrimental impact on the amenity of neighbouring
residents in terms of overlooking and a detrimental impact on the character of the
surrounding area in terms of visual appearance and impact.
03. The proposal is contrary to Policy 5 of the South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2
as it would have an unacceptable significant adverse impact on the adjacent
properties/streetscape in terms of scale, massing, and design. It would also have an
unacceptable significant adverse impact on the amenity of nearby residential properties in
terms of overlooking.
04. The proposal is contrary to Policy DM2 of the South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan
2 as the form, scale and design of the proposed development is not respectful of the
character of the existing dwelling and the wider area. The proposed development will also
overwhelm the existing dwelling, neighbouring properties and streetscene in terms of size
and scale. Finally, the development will significantly adversely affect adjacent properties
in terms of overlooking.
Reason(s) for decision
The proposal is contrary to Policy 16 of the National Planning Framework 4 (adopted 2023) and
Policies 3, 5, and DM2 of the Local Development Plan 2 (adopted 2021) as it will result in a
detrimental impact on visual and residential amenity. There are no other material considerations
which would outweigh the proposals variance with the development plan.
280

Page 506

Notes to applicant 
Application number: P/23/1524 
Important
The following notes do not form a statutory part of this decision notice. However, it is
recommended that you study them closely as they contain other relevant information. 
01. This decision relates to drawing numbers: 
Reference Version No: Plan Status  
22038-20006 A Refused  
22038-20016 B Refused  
22038-20020 B Refused  
22038-20021 B Refused  
22038-20030 A Refused  
22038-20031 A Refused  
22038-20032 B Refused  
22038-20033 B Refused  
22038-20035 A Refused  
22038-20040 A Refused   
281

Page 507

Important notes 
Community And Enterprise
Resources Executive Director David
Booth Planning And Regulatory
Services 
Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act
1997 
1. Compliance with conditions 
Under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (Section
145), failure to comply with any condition(s) imposed on any planning permission may
result in the service by the Council of a “Breach of Condition Notice” requiring
compliance with the said condition(s). 
There is no right of appeal against such a Notice and failure to comply with the terms of
the Notice within the specified time limit will constitute a summary offence, liable on
summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1000. 
2. Procedure for appeal to the planning authority 
(a) If the applicant is aggrieved by the decision of the planning authority to refuse
permission for or approval required by a condition in respect of the proposed
development, or to grant permission or approval subject to conditions, the applicant
may require the planning authority to review the case under section 43A of the Town
and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, within three months from the date of this
notice. The notice of review should be addressed to: 
Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources)
Administration and Legal Services
Council
Headquarters
Almada Street
Hamilton
ML3 0AA 
To obtain the appropriate forms:
Administration and Legal Services at the above address.
Telephone: 07385 370 117
Email: stuart.mcleod@southlanarkshire.gov.uk 
(b) If permission to develop land is refused or granted subject to conditions, whether by the
planning authority or by the Scottish Ministers, and the owner of the land claims that the
land has become incapable of reasonably beneficial use in its existing state and cannot
be rendered incapable of reasonably beneficial use by the carrying out of any
development which has been or would be permitted, he may serve on the planning
authority a purchase notice requiring the purchase of his interest in the land in
accordance with Part 5 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. 
282

Page 508

Notice of Review (including Statement of Reasons for
Requiring the Review) submitted by applicant
Christopher and Louise Banks 
Appendix 5  5e
283

Page 509

Page 510

Notice of Review Form
Page 1 of 6 
For official use:  NOR/ _  _  /  _  _  /  _  _  _
Date received by PLRB:  _  _  /  _  _  /  _  _
Notice of Review 
Under Section 43A(8) of The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) in
respect of decisions on local developments
The Town and Country Planning (Schemes of Delegation and Local Review Procedure) (Scotland)
Regulations 2013
The Town and Country Planning (Appeals) (Scotland) Regulations 2013 
This notice requires to be served on the Planning Authority within 3 months of the date of
the decision notice or from the date of expiry of the period allowed for determining the
application which is set as 2 months following the validation date of the application 
IMPORTANT:  Please read and follow the guidance notes provided when completing this
form.  Failure to supply all the relevant information could invalidate your Notice of Review. 
Please complete in BLOCK CAPITALS 
Applicant(s) 
Name: CHRISTOPHER & LOUISE
BANKS 
Address: 
Postcode:
20 DUNLOP CRESCENT,
BOTHWELL 
G71 8SG 
Contact Telephone 1: 
Contact Telephone 2: 
Fax No: 
E-mail:* 
Agent (if any) 
Name: CONNOR STEVEN 
Address: 
Postcode:
ABODE ARCHITECTS
ELLISMUIR HOUSE, 
ELLISMUIR WAY
UDDINGSTON 
G71 5PW 
Contact Telephone 1: 07775343181
Contact Telephone 2: 
Fax No: 
E-mail:* connor@abode-architects.co.uk 
Mark this box to confirm that all contact should
be through this representative: 
* Do you agree to correspondence regarding your review being sent by e-mail?
Yes  No 
Application reference number:  P / 2 3 / 1 5 2 4 
Site address: 
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell, G71 8SG 
Description of
proposed development:
Erection of replacement single storey side extension, replacement
front dormer, side dormer, rear first floor gable extension with Juliet
balcony, replacement garage and associated improvements 
5e
285

Page 511

Notice of Review Form
Page 2 of 6
Validation date 
of application: 11.12.2023  Date of decision (if any): 09.02.2024 
286

Page 512

Notice of Review Form
Page 3 of 6
Nature of application
1. Application for planning permission (including householder application)
2. Application for planning permission in principle
3. Further application (including development that has not yet commenced and where a time
limit has been imposed; renewal of planning permission; and/or modification, variation or
removal of a planning condition)
4. Application for approval of matters specified in conditions
Reasons for requesting review
1. Refusal of application by appointed officer
2. Failure by appointed officer to determine the application within the period allowed for
determination of the application
3. Conditions imposed on consent by appointed officer
Review procedure
In cases where the Planning Local Review Body considers that it has sufficient information,
including the Notice of Review, the decision notice, report of handling and any further
representations from interested parties, it may, under Regulation 12, proceed to determine the
review. It is anticipated that the majority of cases the Planning Local Review Body deals with will
fall into this category.
The Planning Local Review Body will decide on the procedure to be used to determine your review
and may at any time during the review process require that further information or representations be
made to enable it to determine the review. Further information may be required by one or a
combination of procedures, such as written submissions, the holding of one or more hearing
sessions and/or inspecting the land which is the subject of the review case.
Although the Planning Local Review Body will decide on the procedure to be used to determine
your review, you can indicate what procedure (or combination of procedures) you consider most
appropriate for the handling of your review. You may tick more than one box if you wish the review
to be conducted by a combination of procedures.
1. Further written submissions 3. Site inspection
2. One or more hearing sessions 4. Assessment of review documents only,
with no further procedure
If you have marked box 1 or 2, please explain here which of the matters (as set out in your
statement below) you believe ought to be subject of that procedure, and why you consider further
submissions or a hearing are necessary:
Site inspection
In the event that the Local Review Body decides to inspect the review site, in your opinion:
1. Can the site be viewed entirely from public land?
Yes No
2. Is it possible for the site to be accessed safely, and without barriers to entry?
If there are reasons why you think the Planning Local Review Body would be unable to undertake
an unaccompanied site inspection, please explain here:
No barriers to access, you can walk around the side of the house to the rear garden.
287

Page 513

Notice of Review Form
Page 4 of 6
Statement of reasons for requiring the review
You must state, in full, why you are requesting a review on your application. Your statement must
set out all matters you consider require to be taken into account in determining your review. Note:
you may not have a further opportunity to add to your statement of review at a later date. It is,
therefore, essential that you submit with your Notice of Review all necessary information and
evidence that you rely on and wish the Planning Local Review Body to consider as part of the
review.
If the Planning Local Review Body issues a notice requesting further information from any other
person or body, you will have a period of 14 days in which to comment on any additional matter
which has been raised by that person or body.
State here the reasons for your Notice of Review and all matters you wish to raise. If necessary,
this statement can be continued or provided in full in a separate document. You may also submit
additional documentation with this form.
Please refer to LRB 20 – Request for Review Statement which sets forth our reasoning for this
Notice of Review.
Have you raised any matters which were not before the appointed officer at the time the
determination on your application was made?
Yes No
If yes, you should explain in the box below, why you are raising new material, why it was not raised
with the appointed officer before your application was determined and why you consider it should
now be considered in your review.
288

Page 514

Notice of Review Form
Page 5 of 6 
List of documents and evidence 
Please provide a list of all supporting documents, materials and evidence which you wish to submit
with your Notice of Review and intend to rely on in support of your review. 
The documents noted below were submitted as part of the application process prior to decision. 
LRB 02 - 22038-20001 Location Plan – Rev A
LRB 03 - 22038-20005 Existing Block Plan – Rev A
LRB 04 - 22038-20006 Existing Block Plan – Rev A
LRB 05 - 22038-20010 Existing Ground Floor Plan – Rev A 
LRB 06 - 22038-20011 Existing First Floor Plan – Rev A
LRB 07 - 22038-20015 Existing Elevations – Rev A
LRB 08 - 22038-20016 Downtakings – Rev B
LRB 09 - 22038-20020 Proposed Ground Floor Plan – Rev B
LRB 10 - 22038-20021 Proposed First Floor Plan – Rev B
LRB 11 - 22038-20030 Proposed Front Elevation – Rev A
LRB 12 - 22038-20031 Proposed Gable Elevation – Rev B
LRB 13 - 22038-20032 Proposed Rear Elevation – Rev B
LRB 14 - 22038-20033 Proposed New Shed – Rev B
LRB 15 - 22038-20035 Proposed Roof Plan – Rev A
LRB 16 - 22038-20040 Proposed Sections – Rev A 
The below documents are provided as supplemental information:
LRB 01 – Application forms & Certificate
LRB 17 – Report of Handling
LRB 18 – Decision Notice
LRB 19 – Notice of Review Form (this document)
LRB 20 – Request for Review Statement 
Note:  A copy of the Notice of Review, the review documents and any notice of the procedure of the
review will be made available for inspection by prior appointment (Phone: 08457 406080) at the
office of Planning and Building Standards Services, Montrose House, 154 Montrose Crescent,
Hamilton ML3 6LB until such time as the review is determined.  It may also be made available on
the Council’s website.
Checklist 
Please mark the appropriate boxes to confirm that you have provided all supporting documents and
evidence relevant to your review: 
Full completion of all parts of this form 
Statement of your reasons for requiring a review 
2 copies of all documents, materials and evidence which you intend to rely on (eg planning
application form, plans and drawings, decision notice or other documents) which are now the
subject of this review. 
Note. Where the review relates to a further application, eg renewal of planning permission or
modification, variation or removal of a planning condition or where it relates to an application for
approval of matters specified in conditions, it is advisable to provide the application reference
number, approved plans and decision notice from that earlier consent. 
289

Page 515

Notice of Review Form
Page 6 of 6
Declaration 
I the agent hereby serve notice on the planning authority to review the application as set out
on this form and in the supporting documents. 
Signed:   Date: 13.03.2024 
This form and 2 copies of all supporting documents should be sent to:- 
Planning and Building Standards Services
Community and Enterprise Resources, Montrose House, 154 Montrose Crescent,
Hamilton ML3 6LB 
Email: planning@southlanarkshire.gov.uk 
Phone:  08457 406080 
For more information or if you want this information in a different format or language,
please phone 01698 455379 or send email to planning@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
For official use 
Date stamp) 
290

Page 516

connor@abode-architects.co.uk 
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell 
MARCH 2024 REQUEST FOR REVIEW STATEMENT 
291

Page 517

20 DUNLOP CRESCENT, BOTHWELL   
2
Appeal to South Lanarkshire Council’s Local Review Body against the decision of the planning officer
to refuse full planning permission for the erection of a replacement single storey side extension,
replacement front dormer, side dormer, rear first floor gable extension with Juliet balcony,
replacement detached garage and associated improvements at 20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell.
Planning Reference P/23/1524
1. Introduction
This Review Statement has been prepared by Abode Architects, on behalf of “the Applicants” and
owners of 20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell, G71 8SG, (“the Property”). This statement should be read in
conjunction with the application drawings and all other supporting material. 
We feel that the application has been refused in contradiction to SLC Planning’s own guidance and
vexatiously; evidenced by the correspondence that we received from planning during the application
determination process. We were first contacted by SLC Planning regarding their concerns over the
development on Friday 2nd February at 5pm, the determination deadline was Sunday 4th February.
In this correspondence we were advised that we had until Friday 9th February to submit a response
or the application would be refused. 
We note SLC planning did not formally request an extension of time as the determination would no
longer be made within the statutory period; which is a lack of due regard for the statutory processes. 
Abode Architects promptly issued a response email to the planning officer on Monday 5th February
to seek further clarification on their concerns raised and outline proposed changes to the design
proposals. This email went unanswered and on Wednesday 7th February (when given the expedited
deadline placed on us to provide revised proposals) Abode Architects contacted the case officer by
telephone and was advised that he hadn’t reviewed our response and was “instructed by his team
leader to draft the refusal” (paraphrase); two days prior to the above deadline of Friday 9th February
that SLC had set themselves. 
The main issues raised within the officer’s report of handling and the email issued to us on 2nd
February have been “overlooking” (caused by the Juliet balcony that is no longer part of the proposals),
the “solid to void ratio” of the side dormer extension and the “materiality” of the dormers. We have
responded to each of the “Reason(s) for refusal” below, to explain our dispute with the officer’s
recommendation to refuse.
The planning application was refused without opportunity for discussion, even though the case officer
advised that there was a 7-day period to discuss the application between parties – but then issued a
refusal within this timeframe. The reasons for refusal are not concisely written and duplicate policy. 
We dispute the Planning Officers reasons for refusing the application and respectfully request that the
Council’s Local Review Body overturn that decision and approve the application. 
292

Page 518

20 DUNLOP CRESCENT, BOTHWELL
3
2. Summary of Applicant’s Reasons for Review
• The proposal fully complies with the relevant policies within Local Development Plan 2.
• The size and scale of the proposals reflect that of other substantial extensions granted in the
neighbourhood and it is therefore implicit that this scale of extension cannot be considered by SLC
to dominate this type of house.
• Numerous properties within Dunlop Crescent have multiple dormer extensions, mostly with
materials which do not match the roof, but are “visually compatible” with the existing dwelling.
• The proposals do not present direct overlooking into any gardens and fully comply with relevant
18m window-to-window distance as outlined within the LDP.
• Overlooking to the boundary on side neighbour is not any different to the same overlooking that
the neighbouring property has in to our clients garden at present – and therefore it is implicit that
a window on the rear elevation at first floor is acceptable.
• SLC Planning did not afford Abode Architects the appropriate time to discuss the application with
them, as outlined within the introduction section above.
3. Grounds of Appeal
The application has been refused by South Lanarkshire Council via delegated decision. The Decision
Notice details 4 reasons albeit many of the reasons are interlinked. This section responds to each of
the reasons for refusal in turn.
Reason 1
The proposal is contrary to Policy 16 of National Planning Framework 4 as the size and design of the
proposed side dormer will have a detrimental impact on the character of the home and surrounding
area. The proposal will also have a detrimental effect on the neighbouring properties in terms of
physical impact and overlooking
Response to Reason 1
Reason 1 refers to Policy 16 of NPF4 – specifically in relation to the proposed side facing dormer.
NPF Policy 16 - Quality Homes seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate the delivery of more high
quality, affordable and sustainable homes. In respect of householder development (Policy 16 g)
proposals will be supported where they do not have a detrimental impact on the character or
environmental impact of the home in respect of size, design and materials, and do not have a
detrimental impact on neighbouring properties in terms of physical impact, overshadowing or
overlooking. We address these points below in direct relation to SLC provided Guidance for extensions
& dormers – as this is what SLC would deem to be suitable scaled / massed / non-detrimental
development.
293

Page 519

20 DUNLOP CRESCENT, BOTHWELL
4
We contest the planning officer’s assessment of the proposed side dormer and its impact. Firstly, we
would note the statement in the report of handling “5.4 … Typically, dormers are subservient to the
roof slope so they can provide a window and therefore daylight into the existing roof space. Here, the
dormer would provide two new rooms at the side rather than a window.” We will demonstrate below
that the proposed dormer is subservient to the roof slope. We would like to highlight that there is no
policy/ guidance preventing the creation of more than one room within a dormer and this should not
be a material consideration. Additionally, there is already an existing bedroom space within the area
of the proposed dormer and a new small en-suite being created. We therefore deem the planner’s
assessment to be incorrect.
In regard to the subservience of the proposed dormer extension; please see extracts from South
Lanarkshire DM2 House Extensions & Alterations - LDP2 Supporting Planning Guidance specifically in
relation to dormer extensions below;
“a. be stepped below the ridgeline of the existing roof and drawn back from the eaves.”
As visible from the submitted application elevation drawings it is clear that the dormer complies with
this guidance; currently siting 0.7m below the existing ridge line.
“b. Aim for a minimum set back of 0.3m from the edge of the roof, including any adjoining roof boundary
with a neighbouring semi-detached or terraced property.”
As visible from the submitted application elevation drawings it is clear that the dormer complies with
and exceeds this guidance. Refer to application drawing 22038-20021 demonstrating this.
“c. Where located on a prominent or visible frontage, they should not extend the full width of the roof.
Two small dormers on the same elevation can offer an alternative to one large dormer, which may be
out of scale with the existing house.”
As visible from the submitted application elevation drawings it is clear that the dormer complies with
this guidance. We note that due to the corner plot location of the property the side elevation is a
prominent frontage. Nevertheless, the proposed dormer does not extend the full width of the
elevation only occupies 35% of the hosting roof pitch and we would therefore regard it as being
subservient.
“e. The roof and walls of the dormer should be finished in materials which either match or are visually
compatible with the existing house ..”
As visible from the submitted application elevation drawings it is clear that the dormer complies with
this guidance. This guidance allows for the materiality of the dormers not to match existing but to be
visually compatible with the existing house. As the existing house is to be re-rendered as part of the
thermal upgrading of the property, the proposed render to the dormer will be compatible. The
majority of the street consists of light toned render as the external finish to the main house, so
proposals are also within keeping with the wider context.
If the proposals comply with the council’s own guidance which is there to protect the character of the
surrounding area we do not understand how it can be determined that the side dormer has a
detrimental impact.
No reference to the side dormer causing issues of overlooking has been made in the officer’s report of
handling, we therefore assume that this refers to the proposed rear extension window at first floor. The
proposed window, as shown on Proposed Block Plan (drg no. 22038-20006 and extracted below for
ease), is over 18m from the rear facing elevation of no. 24, the neighbouring property to the rear. South
Lanarkshire LDP2 Supporting Planning Guidance DM2 which advises “Extensions should not result in a
significant loss of privacy to neighbouring houses or their garden ground. The distance between
294

Page 520

20 DUNLOP CRESCENT, BOTHWELL   
5
windows of directly facing habitable rooms should be 18 metres.” Given our compliance with this
policy, we do not agree that there is a detrimental impact to the privacy of this neighbouring property. 
When assessing the impact of overlooking to no. 18 Dunlop Crescent we would argue that the proposals
do not have a detrimental effect on their privacy when compared to the existing dwelling and their own
outlook over the applicant’s property. Please see diagram demonstrating our assessment.
295

Page 521

20 DUNLOP CRESCENT, BOTHWELL   
6
As shown in the top diagram, both properties begin to have a view into the adjacent garden at 60
degrees from eye level (1500mm above FFL). The bottom diagram demonstrates that the height of the
window does not provide our applicants with an aspect into the neighbours property that is greater
than the vice versa. 
We note that original proposals had a Juliet balcony in the location of the proposed window, but this
has been amended to be a window at the request of SLC Planning (and was resubmitted prior to
determination). 
Reason 2
The proposal is contrary to Policy 3 of the South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 as the
development would have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the neighbouring residents in
terms of overlooking and a detrimental impact on the character of the surrounding area in terms of
visual appearance and impact
Response to Reason 2
Reason 2 refers to SLC LDP2 policy 3 which relates to General Urban Areas and Settlements – although
this particular policy is aimed at new development, not house extensions & alterations (which is
covered specifically in SLC Policy DM2 House Extensions & Alterations). 
296

Page 522

20 DUNLOP CRESCENT, BOTHWELL   
7
We have disputed the officer’s opinion that the proposals will have a detrimental impact on the
amenity of the neighbouring residents in terms of overlooking in the response to Reason 1 above
(with reference to SLC Policy DM2) and ask you to defer to this. 
Regarding the visual appearance of the development having a detrimental impact on the character of
the surrounding area, we would argue that no element of the proposals is without precedent within the
existing streetscape and each of which has been considered acceptable development. As demonstrated
in our response to Reason 1, all proposals comply with SLC Policy and there are numerous examples of
similar dormers and extensions within the street (example photos included at the end of this report). 
Reason 3 
The proposal is contrary to policy 5 of the South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 as it would
have an unacceptable significant adverse impact on the adjacent properties / streetscape in terms
of scale, massing, and design. It would also have an unacceptable significant adverse impact on the
amenity of nearby residential properties in terms of overlooking.
Response to Reason 3
Reason 3 refers to SLC LDP2 policy 5 which relates to Development Management & Placemaking –
although this particular policy is aimed at new development, not house extensions & alterations
(which is covered specifically in SLC Policy DM2 House Extensions & Alterations).   
We believe this assessment to be a misrepresentation of the existing dwelling and neighbouring
properties. In regard to the rear extension, the proposal reflects closely the form and scale of the same
extensions at no.18 (next door) and no.16 Dunlop Crescent. In respect of the proposed side dormer, this
populates an area of 14.8m2 which is 35% of the total area of the roof pitch it is hosted on (41.8m2).
Furthermore, when assessed in conjunction with the front dormer, they occupy 19% of the total
proposed roof area. It is therefore reasonable to assess the proposals do not overwhelm the existing
dwelling. We also note that within the context of Dunlop Crescent there are 8 properties that have
multiple dormer extensions, on more than 1 elevation, 3 of which are to the gable elevation. 
This further augments our argument that the proposed development does not overwhelm the
neighbouring properties and street scene as cited within the reasons for refusal. 
We would also contest that the proposed materiality of the dormers is not respectful of the character
of the existing dwelling and the wider area as stated within the officer’s report of handling “The
proposed white coloured silicone render for the large side cheeks of the dormers would not be acceptable
as they should really match the colour of the existing roof (red/orange tiles). Due to the large coverage,
they would appear discordant with the existing dwelling and the surrounding area as they would highly
visible from the highway due to this corner site location.” South Lanarkshire LDP2 DM2 House Extensions
& Alterations (applicable policy) states “3.4.e. The roof and walls of the dormer should be finished in
materials which either match or are visually compatible with the existing house.” As noted within our
response to reason 1, given the proposals also include rendering of the existing dwelling with a matching
white render and reconstruction of the existing dormer to have a matching white render we assert that
the proposals comply with the specific DM2 Planning Guidance. We believe this stance to be bolstered
by the fact that there are multiple other dormer extensions within Dunlop Crescent that do not match
the colour of the existing roof, see images below; 
297

Page 523

20 DUNLOP CRESCENT, BOTHWELL   
8
No. 2 Dunlop Crescent (below)– White uPVC cladding to entire front elevation dormer (dormer of
different material to main building) 
No. 2 Dunlop Crescent (below) – White uPVC cladding to entire rear elevation dormer (dormer of
different material to main building) 
298

Page 524

20 DUNLOP CRESCENT, BOTHWELL   
9
No. 3 Dunlop Crescent (below) – White uPVC Cladding to front face of front elevation dormer (dormer
of different material to main building) 
No. 4 Dunlop Crescent (below) – White uPVC Cladding (dormer of different material to main building) 
299

Page 525

20 DUNLOP CRESCENT, BOTHWELL   
10 
No. 5 Dunlop Crescent (below) – White uPVC Cladding (dormer of different material to main building) 
No. 7 Dunlop Crescent (below) – White uPVC Cladding (dormer of different material to main building) 
300

Page 526

20 DUNLOP CRESCENT, BOTHWELL   
11 
No. 11 Dunlop Crescent (below) – Dark Grey uPVC Cladding (dormer of different material to main
building) 
No. 25 Dunlop Crescent (below)  – Front face White uPVC (dormer of different material to main building) 
301

Page 527

20 DUNLOP CRESCENT, BOTHWELL
12
Regarding the issue of overlooking, we would highlight that the officer’s report of handling only makes
reference to this issue in relation to no. 24 & no. 18 Dunlop Crescent. For this reason, we assume the
issue here to be in regards to the proposed window at first floor within the rear extension. Note the
officer’s report of handling refers to this window as a Juliet balcony however the proposals were
amended to remove the Juliet Balcony and replace with a window as requested in the chief planner’s
email dated 2nd February 2024. We argue that in reference to no. 24 Dunlop Crescent, we are fully
compliant with South Lanarkshire LDP2 Supporting Planning Guidance which advises “Extensions should
not result in a significant loss of privacy to neighbouring houses or their garden ground. The distance
between windows of directly facing habitable rooms should be 18 metres.” As shown on Proposed
Block Plan (drg no. 22038-20006), the proposed window is over 18m from the rear elevation of no. 24.
We note no. 24 has a rear extension which does come closer to our property but there is no direct view
into the rooms within. When assessing the impact of overlooking to no. 18 Dunlop Crescent we would
argue that the proposals do not have a detrimental effect on their privacy when compared to the
existing dwelling and their own outlook over the applicant’s property. As shown in our response to
reason for refusal 01, the below diagrams reiterate that the proposed cill height does not cause greater
overlooking that the aspect from the neighbours property.
302

Page 528

20 DUNLOP CRESCENT, BOTHWELL   
13 
Reason 4
The proposal is contrary to Policy DM2 of the South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 as the
form, scale, and design of the proposed development is not respectful of the character of the
existing dwelling and the wider area. The proposed development will also overwhelm the existing
dwelling, neighbouring properties & streetscene in terms of size & scale. Finally, the development
will significantly adversely affect adjacent properties in terms of overlooking
Response to Reason 4
In response to Reason 4, we first need to understand the stance of planning in regard to scale. 
In each reason thus far, size & scale has always been in relation to the side facing dormer. We set out
in our response to Reason 1, how the proposals FULLY comply with the applicable policy DM2 in
relation to siting, scale & position of dormer. Therefore we contest that the dormer will overwhelm
the existing dwelling.
If there are concerns regarding any other part of the proposal, this has not been cited as part of the
reason of refusal; but we would like to address the wider project in any case:
- Rear extension at first floor is a direct replica of the rear extension to the rear of the adjacent 18
Dunlop Crescent. In terms of scale, size & respectful of character this is fully compliant with policy. 
- Ground floor sunroom extension is a replacement of an existing conservatory (extended an
additional 1m outwards). Given that this is only 3.3m in total depth, and is circa 10m from the street
& 20m+ to the nearest property, we would deem this sunroom extension compliant with policy. 
- The garage is a like-for-like replacement of an existing garage, and therefore is not deemed to be
detrimental to the character of the area as its form/scale already exists
- The front dormer is being rebuilt in a like-for-like state – to improve its thermal efficiency and
reduce carbon emissions; which are key targets of NPF4 & the LDP.
- The proposals include the overcladding of the existing house in external wall insulation to improve
its thermal efficiency and reduce carbon emissions; which are key targets of NPF4 & the LDP. 
If it is implied by SLC planning that the cumulative effect of the above is the reason for the form, scale
& design not being compliant with the policy; again we would context this based on the below:
- Plot to building ratios of application site and directly adjacent properties (lower % = better ratio):
o APPLICATION SITE 
20 Dunlop Crescent = Building (122m2) divided by Plot (450m) = 27% ratio
o Small selection of adjacent properties
o 2 Dunlop Crescent = Building (161m2) divided by Plot (452m) = 36% ratio
o 18 Dunlop Crescent = Building (87m2) divided by Plot (298m) = 29% ratio
o 22 Dunlop Crescent = Building (146m2) divided by Plot (534m) = 27% ratio
o 24 Dunlop Crescent = Building (165m2) divided by Plot (466m) = 35% ratio
o 27 Dunlop Crescent = Building (150m2) divided by Plot (373m) = 40% ratio
o 29 Dunlop Crescent = Building (160m2) divided by Plot (412m) = 39% ratio 
As the % of the total development at the application site is the lowest of the neighbouring examples
and one of the lowest total development footprint, we do not deem that this is will “overwhelm the
existing dwelling, neighbouring properties & streetscene in terms of size & scale”.
303

Page 529

20 DUNLOP CRESCENT, BOTHWELL   
14 
4. Conclusion
This Review Statement has assessed the proposal against the policies referred to by the Planning Officer in their
Reasons for Refusal. The proposal is found to comply with the aims of the Development Plan in respect of
extensions and alterations to dwelling houses and meet the requirements of NPF4. 
We note from the officer’s reasons for refusal and report of handling that the objections to the proposals centred
on the scale & materiality of the side dormer extension & the proposed rear elevation window at first floor,
which have both been cited under the 4 separate reasons for refusal. We believe that citing these matters under
the heading of 4 separate reasons for refusal, one for each policy reference, promotes the idea that the planner’s
reasons for refusal were more extensive than they were. 
We hope that the previous responses & previously submitted drawings (re-uploaded as part of the appeal for
ease of handling) provide sufficient context to the design & proposal rationale.
As such we respectfully request that the Local Review Body overturn the Planning Officers decision and approve
the proposal. 
304

Page 530

20 DUNLOP CRESCENT, BOTHWELL   
15 
Appendix 1
List of Documents 
Document Reference Document Title Revision
LRB 01 Application Forms and
Certificate
-
LRB 02 Location Plan                  
22038-20001
Rev A
LRB 03 Existing Block Plan              
22038-20005
Rev A
LRB 04 Proposed Block Plan   
22038-20006
Rev A
LRB 05 Existing Gound Floor Plan
22038-20010
Rev A
LRB 06 Existing First Floor Plan
22038-20011
Rev A
LRB 07 Existing Elevations
22038-20015
Rev A
LRB 08 Downtakings
22038-20016
Rev B
LRB 09 Proposed Ground Floor Plan          
22038-20020
Rev B
LRB 10 Proposed First Floor Plan               
22038-20021
Rev B
LRB 11 Proposed Front Elevation
22038-20030
Rev A
LRB 12 Proposed Gable Elevation       
22038-20031
Rev B
LRB 13 Proposed Rear Elevation
22038-20032
Rev B
LRB 14 Proposed New Shed (garage)
22038-20033
Rev B
LRB 15 Proposed Roof Plan
22038-20035
Rev A
LRB 16 Proposed Sections
22038-20040
Rev A
LRB 17 Report of Handling -
LRB 18 Decision Notice -
LRB 19 Notice of Review Form -
LRB 20 Request for Review Statement
(this document)
-
305

Page 531

The planning application form is included at Appendix 1 of the review
documents. 
306

Page 532

33
1
1
6
24
37
22
29
15
2
31
20
Ordnance Survey, (c) Crown Copyright 2023. All rights reserved. Licence number 100022432
FERRY ROAD
DUNLOP CRESCENT
58.2m
Memorial
Hamilton Rd
Hamilton Dr
SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
In addition to risks normally associated with the type of
work detailed on this drawing, note the following significant
risks:
CONSTRUCTION
CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE
DEMOLITION
Drawing Title
Project
DateScale Job No.
Client
Drawing Number Rev
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWINGS
All dimensions to be checked on site by the contractor and
any discrepancies to be notified to the architect prior to
works being commenced.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any work
executed from those documents and drawings shall remain
the property of Abode Architects.
T: +44 (0) 1698 451 295 18 Haddow St.
E: info@abode-architects.co.uk Hamilton
W: www.abode-architects.co.uk ML3 7HX
Purpose of Issue
1 : 1250 @
A3
A
Location Plan
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell
May 2322038
Chris & Louise Banks
22038-20001
Planning
Scale 1:1250  @ A3
125m25m 100m75m50m0m
Application Boundary
Rev Description Date Issued
A Updated for planning issue. 01.12.23 DH
307

Page 533

33
24 22
29
2
20
DUNLOP CRESCENT
Hamilton
Existing garage
Existing sun room
Existing single storey
rear extension
SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
In addition to risks normally associated with the type of
work detailed on this drawing, note the following significant
risks:
CONSTRUCTION
CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE
DEMOLITION
Drawing Title
Project
DateScale Job No.
Client
Drawing Number Rev
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWINGS
All dimensions to be checked on site by the contractor and
any discrepancies to be notified to the architect prior to
works being commenced.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any work
executed from those documents and drawings shall remain
the property of Abode Architects.
T: +44 (0) 1698 451 295 18 Haddow St.
E: info@abode-architects.co.uk Hamilton
W: www.abode-architects.co.uk ML3 7HX
Purpose of Issue
1 : 500 @ A3
A
Existing Block Plan
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell
May 2322038
Chris & Louise Banks
22038-20005
Planning
Scale 1:500  @ A3
50m10m 40m30m20m0m
Application Boundary
Rev Description Date Issued
A Updated for planning issue. 01.12.23 DH
308

Page 534

33
24 22
29
2
20
DUNLOP CRESCENT
Hamilton
Existing garage to be replaced
with new structure / roof
Existing sun room to be
replaced with single storey
side extension
New first floor added
above existing ground
floor extension
SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
In addition to risks normally associated with the type of
work detailed on this drawing, note the following significant
risks:
CONSTRUCTION
CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE
DEMOLITION
Drawing Title
Project
DateScale Job No.
Client
Drawing Number Rev
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWINGS
All dimensions to be checked on site by the contractor and
any discrepancies to be notified to the architect prior to
works being commenced.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any work
executed from those documents and drawings shall remain
the property of Abode Architects.
T: +44 (0) 1698 451 295 18 Haddow St.
E: info@abode-architects.co.uk Hamilton
W: www.abode-architects.co.uk ML3 7HX
Purpose of Issue
1 : 500 @ A3
A
Proposed Block Plan
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell
May 2322038
Chris & Louise Banks
22038-20006
Planning
Scale 1:500  @ A3
50m10m 40m30m20m0m
Application Boundary
Rev Description Date Issued
A Updated for planning issue. 01.12.23 DH
309

Page 535

UP
14.7 m²
Living Room
13.2 m²
Bedroom
10.7 m²
Living Space 4.3 m²
Bathroom
21.4 m²
Kitchen /
Dining
9.8 m²
Sun Room
0.8 m²
Store
SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
In addition to risks normally associated with the type of
work detailed on this drawing, note the following significant
risks:
CONSTRUCTION
CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE
DEMOLITION
Drawing Title
Project
DateScale Job No.
Client
Drawing Number Rev
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWINGS
All dimensions to be checked on site by the contractor and
any discrepancies to be notified to the architect prior to
works being commenced.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any work
executed from those documents and drawings shall remain
the property of Abode Architects.
T: +44 (0) 1698 451 295 18 Haddow St.
E: info@abode-architects.co.uk Hamilton
W: www.abode-architects.co.uk ML3 7HX
Purpose of Issue
1 : 50 @ A3
A
Existing Ground Floor Plan
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell
Oct 2222038
Chris & Louise Banks
22038-20010
Planning
Scale 1:50  @ A3
5m1m 4m3m2m0m
Rev Description Date Issued
A Updated for planning issue. 01.12.23 DH
310

Page 536

DN
8.6 m²
Bedroom
14.3 m²
Bedroom
2.0 m²
Wardrobe
4.0 m²
En Suite
SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
In addition to risks normally associated with the type of
work detailed on this drawing, note the following significant
risks:
CONSTRUCTION
CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE
DEMOLITION
Drawing Title
Project
DateScale Job No.
Client
Drawing Number Rev
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWINGS
All dimensions to be checked on site by the contractor and
any discrepancies to be notified to the architect prior to
works being commenced.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any work
executed from those documents and drawings shall remain
the property of Abode Architects.
T: +44 (0) 1698 451 295 18 Haddow St.
E: info@abode-architects.co.uk Hamilton
W: www.abode-architects.co.uk ML3 7HX
Purpose of Issue
1 : 50 @ A3
A
Existing First Floor Plan
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell
Oct 2222038
Chris & Louise Banks
22038-20011
Planning
Scale 1:50  @ A3
5m1m 4m3m2m0m
Rev Description Date Issued
A Updated for planning issue. 01.12.23 DH
311

Page 537

FFL
0
First Floor
2983
Eaves
2670
Ridge
6253
EGL
-300
Dormer Eaves
5113
FFL
0
First Floor
2983
Ridge
6253
Rear Ext. Eaves
2320
EGL
-300
Dormer Eaves
5113
FFL
0
First Floor
2983
Eaves
2670
Ridge
6253
EGL
-300
Dormer Eaves
5113
SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
In addition to risks normally associated with the type of
work detailed on this drawing, note the following significant
risks:
CONSTRUCTION
CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE
DEMOLITION
Drawing Title
Project
DateScale Job No.
Client
Drawing Number Rev
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWINGS
All dimensions to be checked on site by the contractor and
any discrepancies to be notified to the architect prior to
works being commenced.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any work
executed from those documents and drawings shall remain
the property of Abode Architects.
T: +44 (0) 1698 451 295 18 Haddow St.
E: info@abode-architects.co.uk Hamilton
W: www.abode-architects.co.uk ML3 7HX
Purpose of Issue
1 : 100 @ A3
A
Existing Elevations
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell
Oct 2222038
Chris & Louise Banks
22038-20015
Planning
Front Elevation (Existing) Rear Elevation (Existing)
Left Gable Elevation (Existing)
Scale 1:100  @ A3
10m2m 8m6m4m0m
Rev Description Date Issued
A Updated for planning issue. 01.12.23 DH
312

Page 538

UP
DN
Existing sunroom to
be removed
Existing doors to be
removed, opening to
be widened
Existing doors to be removed and replaced
All existing windows to be
removed and replaced
Existing front door to be
removed and replaced
Existing extension roof
to be removed
Existing partitions and
doors to be removed
Existing dormer to be
removed and
reconstructed
Opening created in existing
roof, existing rear dormer
to be removed
Existing rooflight to be
removed
Opening created in
existing roof to host
new side dormer
SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
In addition to risks normally associated with the type of
work detailed on this drawing, note the following significant
risks:
CONSTRUCTION
CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE
DEMOLITION
Drawing Title
Project
DateScale Job No.
Client
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWINGS
Drawing Number Rev
All dimensions to be checked on site by the contractor and any
discrepancies to be notified to the architect prior to works being
commenced.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and drawings
prepared by Abode Architects and in any work executed from
those documents and drawings shall remain the property of
Abode Architects.
T: +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E: info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: www.abode-architects.co.uk
A: 18 Haddow St, Hamilton, ML3 7HX
Purpose of Issue
1 : 100 @ A3
B
Downtakings
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell
May 2322038
Chris & Louise Banks
22038-20016Planning
Ground Floor Downtakings First Floor Downtakings
Scale 1:100  @ A3
10m2m 8m6m4m0m
Rev Description Date Issued
A Updated for planning issue. 01.12.23 DH
B Updated following client
comments
04.12.23 DH
313

Page 539

UP
4.3 m²
Bathroom
21.4 m²
Kitchen /
Dining
10.7 m²
Living Space
13.2 m²
Bedroom
14.7 m²
Living Room
12.2 m²
Snug
540 2260 540
890
3000
890
Double glazed aluminium bi-fold
doors; colour - white, within existing
structural opening.
Aluminium double glazed window
to extension; colour - white
3m aluminium double glazed sliding
doors onto side garden; colour - white
2955
2700
Existing fence retained
Pocket sliding doors into extension
Existing garage to be
demolished and rebuilt
Existing external walls to be overclad
with 100mm Kingspan Kooltherm K5
external wall insulation (EWI), with
silicone render; colour - white
150
Existing external walls to be overclad with 100mm
Kingspan Kooltherm K5 external wall insulation
(EWI), with silicone render; colour - white
3340 950 2165
Aluminium double glazed window
to extension; colour - white
6250
4165
2935
Existing window to be removed and
replaced with 350mm wide aluminium
double glazed window; colour - white
Existing opening widened, new
lintels to engineer's  specification
New white
aluminium window
New
white
aluminium
window
New white
aluminium window
New white
aluminium window
New composite
front door
New white
aluminium
window
380
Extension external wall finish to be silicone
render on blockwork; colour - white
4778 Extension Depth
3341 Extension Width
1800
Existing construction
Demolished construction/ Structural opening
Proposed construction
SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
In addition to risks normally associated with the type of
work detailed on this drawing, note the following significant
risks:
CONSTRUCTION
CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE
DEMOLITION
Drawing Title
Project
DateScale Job No.
Client
Notes
Drawing Number Rev
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWINGS
All dimensions to be checked on site by the contractor and
any discrepancies to be notified to the architect prior to
works being commenced.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any work
executed from those documents and drawings shall remain
the property of Abode Architects.
T: +44 (0) 1698 451 295 18 Haddow St.
E: info@abode-architects.co.uk Hamilton
W: www.abode-architects.co.uk ML3 7HX
Purpose of Issue
1 : 50 @ A2
B
Proposed Ground Floor Plan
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell
Oct 2222038
Chris & Louise Banks
22038-20020
Planning
Scale 1:50  @ A2
5m1m 4m3m2m0m
Rev Description Date Issued
A Updated for planning issue. 01.12.23 DH
B Updated following client
comments
04.12.23 DH
NB: All existing windows replaced with
aluminium double glazed types; colour - white
314

Page 540

DN
4.0 m²
Bathroom
13.0 m²
Bedroom
6.8 m²
Bedroom
13.3 m²
Bedroom
Built in wardrobe within eaves space
Aluminium double glazed
window; colour - white
Aluminium double glazed
window with obscure
glazing; colour - white
Aluminium double glazed window off new
double bedroom; colour - white
2no 1180x780mm velux rooflights
above bedspace
3500
1000
2415
2800
2360
2075
4055
3555
1200
1.5 m²
Cupboard
2.9 m²
Ensuite
1180x780mm velux rooflights to new bathroom
Built in wardrobe within
eaves space; 1.5m high
doors
2360
1730
Existing dormer to be reconstructed,
size to match existing. External wall
finish to be silicone render on carrier
board; colour - white
3395
760
2100
685
550
630
Existing stair to be retained
1015
Interlocking concrete roof tiles
to match existing; colour - red
Aluminium double glazed
window; colour - white
550 2100 550
Single ply
membrane roof to
single storey side
extension
Area of new roof infill where existing
rear dormer removed
Upgrade insulation between all existing roof rafters
Upgrade insulation between all
existing oxter walls
Engineer to confirm any structural upgrade
work to form opening in existing roof
Void to GF
2680
Ecoscape composite slatted cladding board external
finish to first floor extension; colour - Silver Birch
Dormer external wall finish to be silicone render on
carrier board; colour - white
uPVC fascias/ soffits & rainwater goods; colour to
match existing
Dark grey hatch denotes area of
min. 2m headroom
Light grey hatch denotes area of
min. 1.8m headroom
4724 Dormer W
idth
3194 Dormer Width
WINDOW
1510
Existing construction
Demolished construction/ Structural opening
Proposed construction
SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
In addition to risks normally associated with the type of
work detailed on this drawing, note the following significant
risks:
CONSTRUCTION
CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE
DEMOLITION
Drawing Title
Project
DateScale Job No.
Client
Notes
Drawing Number Rev
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWINGS
All dimensions to be checked on site by the contractor and
any discrepancies to be notified to the architect prior to
works being commenced.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any work
executed from those documents and drawings shall remain
the property of Abode Architects.
T: +44 (0) 1698 451 295 18 Haddow St.
E: info@abode-architects.co.uk Hamilton
W: www.abode-architects.co.uk ML3 7HX
Purpose of Issue
1 : 50 @ A2
B
Proposed First Floor Plan
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell
Oct 2222038
Chris & Louise Banks
22038-20021
Planning
Scale 1:50  @ A2
5m1m 4m3m2m0m
Rev Description Date Issued
A Updated for planning issue. 01.12.23 DH
B Juliet doors & balcony replaced
with window in response to
Planning officer comments.
07.02.24 DH
315

Page 541

FFL
0
First Floor
2983
Eaves
2670
Ridge
6253
EGL
-300
New gable dormer
2896
size to match existing
Reconstructed front dormer
Single ply membrane roof to single storey
side extension
Extension external wall finish to be
silicone render on blockwork; colour -
white, with facing brick base course
Hatch denotes walls to be overclad with 100mm Kingspan Kooltherm K5
external wall insulation (EWI), with silicone render; colour - white
Aluminium double glazed window to
extension; colour - white
1180x780 velux rooflight to new bathroom
Existing dormer to be reconstructed,
size to match existing. External wall
finish to be silicone render on
carrier board; colour - white
350mm aluminium window to bay
window to accommodate adjacent EWI
Existing external walls to be re-rendered
in white silicone render
Dormer Eaves
5113
1150
950
2100
Aluminium double glazed window;
colour - white. Aluminium PPC cill;
colour - to be agreed with client
New single ply membrane roof to
dormer
Existing window to be replace with new
double glazed aluminium type; colour -
white
Existing window to be replace with new double glazed aluminium type;
colour - white
Existing front door to be replaced with
new composite type; final design to be
agreed with client
1200
900
2260
uPVC fascias/ soffits and rainwater
goods; colour - white
uPVC fascias/ soffits and rainwater
goods; colour - white
Dormer external wall finish to be silicone
render on carrier board; colour - white
New single ply membrane roof to dormer
uPVC fascias/ soffits and rainwater
goods; colour - white
3341 Extension Width
SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
In addition to risks normally associated with the type of
work detailed on this drawing, note the following significant
risks:
CONSTRUCTION
CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE
DEMOLITION
Drawing Title
Project
DateScale Job No.
Client
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWINGS
Drawing Number Rev
All dimensions to be checked on site by the contractor and any
discrepancies to be notified to the architect prior to works being
commenced.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and drawings
prepared by Abode Architects and in any work executed from
those documents and drawings shall remain the property of
Abode Architects.
T: +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E: info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: www.abode-architects.co.uk
A: 18 Haddow St, Hamilton, ML3 7HX
Purpose of Issue
1 : 50 @ A3
A
Proposed Front Elevation
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell
May 2322038
Chris & Louise Banks
22038-20030Planning
Materials:
Existing external walls - White silicone render
Single storey extension walls - White silicone render
Dormer - White silicone render on carrier board
First Floor extension - Ecoscape composite slatted board, Silver Birch
New pitched roof - Red concrete roof tiles to match existing
New flat roof - Single ply membrane
Fascias, soffits & rainwater goods - White uPVC
New windows - White Aluminium
Scale 1:50  @ A3
5m1m 4m3m2m0m
NB: All existing windows replaced with
aluminium double glazed types; colour - white
Rev Description Date Issued
A Updated for planning issue. 01.12.23 DH
316

Page 542

FFL
0
First Floor
2983
Ridge
6253
EGL
-300
Extension Width
3341
Window & Door Head
2100
Dormer Roof
5514
First floor extension
Ecoscape composite slatted cladding board external
finish to first floor extension; colour - Silver Birch
Aluminium double glazed window
to extension; colour - white
Extension external wall finish to be
silicone render on blockwork; colour -
white, with facing brick base course
Double glazed aluminium bi-fold
doors; colour - white.Hatch denotes walls to be overclad with 100mm
Kingspan Kooltherm K5 external wall insulation
(EWI), with silicone render; colour - white
Dormer external wall finish to be
silicone render on carrier board;
colour - white
Aluminium double glazed window off new double bedroom;
colour - white
Extension Ridge
6174
Aluminium string course at cladding/render
junction; colour to be agreed with client
Existing opening
2163
Existing window to be replace with new
double glazed aluminium type; colour - white
Interlocking concrete roof tiles to match existing; colour - red
New single ply membrane roof to
dormer
uPVC fascias/ soffits and rainwater
goods; colour - white
Single ply membrane roof to single
storey side extension
uPVC fascias/ soffits and rainwater
goods; colour - white
2100
1050
1050
910
200
1510
1900
SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
In addition to risks normally associated with the type of
work detailed on this drawing, note the following significant
risks:
CONSTRUCTION
CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE
DEMOLITION
Drawing Title
Project
DateScale Job No.
Client
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWINGS
Drawing Number Rev
All dimensions to be checked on site by the contractor and any
discrepancies to be notified to the architect prior to works being
commenced.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and drawings
prepared by Abode Architects and in any work executed from
those documents and drawings shall remain the property of
Abode Architects.
T: +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E: info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: www.abode-architects.co.uk
A: 18 Haddow St, Hamilton, ML3 7HX
Purpose of Issue
1 : 50 @ A3
B
Proposed Rear Elevation
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell
May 2322038
Chris & Louise Banks
22038-20032Planning
Scale 1:50  @ A3
5m1m 4m3m2m0m
NB: All existing windows to be replaced
with aluminium windows
Rev Description Date Issued
A Updated for planning issue. 01.12.23 DH
B Juliet doors & balcony replaced
with window in response to
Planning officer comments.
07.02.24 DH
Materials:
Existing external walls - White silicone render
Single storey extension walls - White silicone render
Dormer - White silicone render on carrier board
First Floor extension - Ecoscape composite slatted board, Silver Birch
New pitched roof - Red concrete roof tiles to match existing
New flat roof - Single ply membrane
Fascias, soffits & rainwater goods - White uPVC
New windows - White Aluminium
317

Page 543

FFL
0
EGL
-300
Window & Door Head
2100
Shed Ridge
3135
4820 905 525
FFL
0
EGL
-300
Window & Door Head
2100
Shed Ridge
3135
2700 150
FFL
0
Shed Ridge
3135
150 2700
1008
685
1008
150
3515 685 613 910 526
2048
5597
3254
SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
In addition to risks normally associated with the type of
work detailed on this drawing, note the following significant
risks:
CONSTRUCTION
CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE
DEMOLITION
Drawing Title
Project
DateScale Job No.
Client
Drawing Number Rev
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWINGS
All dimensions to be checked on site by the contractor and
any discrepancies to be notified to the architect prior to
works being commenced.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any work
executed from those documents and drawings shall remain
the property of Abode Architects.
T: +44 (0) 1698 451 295 18 Haddow St.
E: info@abode-architects.co.uk Hamilton
W: www.abode-architects.co.uk ML3 7HX
Purpose of Issue
As indicated
@ A3
B
Proposed New Shed
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell
May 2322038
Chris & Louise Banks
22038-20033
Planning
1 : 501
Shed Front Elevation
1 : 502
Shed Right Gable Elevation
1 : 503
Shed Left Gable Elevation
Scale 1:50  @ A3
5m1m 4m3m2m0mShed Location
Rev Description Date Issued
A Updated for planning issue. 01.12.23 DH
B Updated following client
comments
04.12.23 DH
318

Page 544

40°
40°40°
40°40°
30°
30°
Interlocking concrete roof tiles to match existing; colour - red
2no 1180x780mm velux rooflights above bedspace
uPVC fascias/ soffits and rainwater goods; colour - white
New single ply membrane roof to dormer
New single ply membrane roof to dormer
uPVC fascias/ soffits and rainwater goods; colour - white
uPVC fascias/ soffits and rainwater goods; colour - white
Single ply membrane roof to single
storey side extension
uPVC fascias/ soffits and
rainwater goods; colour - white
Indicative location of PV panels. Quantity & location
to be designed by specialist manufacturer/supplier.
SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
In addition to risks normally associated with the type of
work detailed on this drawing, note the following significant
risks:
CONSTRUCTION
CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE
DEMOLITION
Drawing Title
Project
DateScale Job No.
Client
Drawing Number Rev
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWINGS
All dimensions to be checked on site by the contractor and
any discrepancies to be notified to the architect prior to
works being commenced.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any work
executed from those documents and drawings shall remain
the property of Abode Architects.
T: +44 (0) 1698 451 295 18 Haddow St.
E: info@abode-architects.co.uk Hamilton
W: www.abode-architects.co.uk ML3 7HX
Purpose of Issue
1 : 100 @ A3
A
Proposed Roof Plan
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell
Nov 2322038
Chris & Louise Banks
22038-20035
Planning
Rev Description Date Issued
A Updated following client
comments
04.12.23 DH
Scale 1:100  @ A3
10m2m 8m6m4m0m
319

Page 545

FFL
0
First Floor
2983
Eaves
2670
Ridge
6253
EGL
-300
Dormer Roof
5514
Extension Ridge
6174
1302 1629 2247
1620
2695 2983
2216
2100
Existing construction
Demolished construction/ Structural opening
Proposed construction
SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
In addition to risks normally associated with the type of
work detailed on this drawing, note the following significant
risks:
CONSTRUCTION
CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE
DEMOLITION
Drawing Title
Project
DateScale Job No.
Client
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWINGS
Drawing Number Rev
All dimensions to be checked on site by the contractor and any
discrepancies to be notified to the architect prior to works being
commenced.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and drawings
prepared by Abode Architects and in any work executed from
those documents and drawings shall remain the property of
Abode Architects.
T: +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E: info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: www.abode-architects.co.uk
A: 18 Haddow St, Hamilton, ML3 7HX
Purpose of Issue
1 : 50 @ A3
A
Proposed Sections
20 Dunlop Crescent, Bothwell
Nov 2322038
Chris & Louise Banks
22038-20040Planning
Rev Description Date Issued
A Updated following client
comments
04.12.23 DH
Scale 1:50  @ A3
5m1m 4m3m2m0m
320

Page 546

The Delegated Report of Handling is included at Appendix 2 of the review
documents. 
The Planning Decision Notice is included at Appendix 4 of the review
documents. 
321

Page 547

Page 548

Further Representation 
Further Representation From
 Statement of Observations from Planning Officer on Applicant’s Notice of Review 
Appendix 6  5f
323

Page 549

Page 550

Date: 10 April 2024
Town and Country Planning (Schemes of Delegation and Local Review
Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013
Planning Local Review Body: Response to Notice for Review 
Proposal: Erection of replacement single storey side extension,
replacement front dormer, side dormer, rear first floor gable
extension with juliet balcony, replacement detached garage
and associated improvements.
Applicant:
Site address:
Mr & Mrs Christopher & Louise Banks
20 Dunlop Crescent
Bothwell
G71 8SG 
Application no: P/23/1524 
1. Planning Background 
1.1 The above planning application was submitted to the Council on 5th December
2023. After the expiry of neighbour notification and due consideration of the
proposal the agent was advised via a courtesy phone call and email on 2nd
February 2024 that the proposal could not be considered favourably as it did not
meet policies relating to: 
•   Adverse impact to the character of the original dwelling and surrounding   
area due to the proposed scale, design, materials and visual impacts
•   Adverse impact on neighbouring dwellings due to its mass and scale and
associated overlooking. 
The agent was requested to revise the proposal primarily in order to reduce the
scale and mass of the side dormer and remove the rear Juliet balcony. On the
5th February 2024 the agent advised that they would not be willing make the
requested changes. 
1.2 Following consideration of the proposal, especially an assessment in terms of
the provisions of the development plan, the application was refused consent
under delegated powers on 7th February 2024. The Report of Handling sets out
the planning policy and other material considerations for the decision. The
reasons for refusal are listed in the decision notice. These documents are
available elsewhere in the papers. 
2 Assessment against the development plan and other relevant policies
5f
325

Page 551

2.2 Under Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, all
applications must be determined in accordance with the development plan
unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The development plan
comprises the South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (SLLDP2) (adopted
29 March 2021) and National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) (adopted 13
February 2023). Section 24(3) of the 1997 Act confirms that if there is an
inconsistency between NPF4 policies and SLLDP2 , then the policies in NPF4
prevail. 
2.3 The applicable polices against which the proposal was assessed are set out in
detail in the Council’s Report of Handling. 
3 Observations on the appellant Notice of Review. 
3.1 The appellant has submitted a statement to support their review. The grounds
raised will be summarised and responded to below. 
3.2 Reason 1 – The appellant contests the planning officer’s assessment of the
proposed side dormer and its impact. 
3.3 Response: An assessment of the proposed flat roofed side dormer was
considered using relevant policies of the SLLDP2 and the guidance contained
within Supporting Planning Guidance (SPG) – Development at a Dwellinghouse
(November 2022). This SPG’s purpose is to reinforce, support and supplement
the terms of the policies already contained within the adopted SLLDP2 and it is
a material consideration in the determination of planning applications. 
3.4 The following is a summary of the criteria which should be considered when
considering the formation of dormer windows as stated in the above SPG.
Dormers should: 
a. Be stepped below the ridgeline of the existing roof and drawn back
from the eaves.
b. Aim for a minimum set back of 0.3m from the edge of the roof,
including any adjoining roof boundary with a neighbouring
semi-detached or terraced property.
c. Where located on a prominent or visible frontage, they should not
extend the full width of the roof. Two small dormers on the same
elevation can offer a suitable alternative to one large dormer, which
may be out of scale with the existing house.
d. Rear dormers will be assessed in relation to how visible they are
from public view and how they impact on the privacy of adjacent
326

Page 552

houses and gardens. In certain cases, a longer dormer, rather than
2 smaller separate dormers may be acceptable.
e. The roof and walls of the dormer should be finished in materials
which either match or are visually compatible with the existing house.
Please annotate the materials on elevation plans submitted as part
of a planning application. 
3.5 In their appeal statement the appellant has provided a response to points a, b, c,
and e, as set out in the SPG regarding dormers, which can be summarised as
follows: 
a) the dormer complies with this guidance currently siting 0.7m below the
existing ridge line.
b) the dormer complies with and exceeds this guidance. 
c) the dormer complies with this guidance. We note that due to the corner plot
location of the property the side elevation is a prominent frontage.
Nevertheless, the proposed dormer does not extend the full width of the
elevation and only occupies 35% of the roof pitch and we would therefore
regard it as being subservient.
e) This guidance allows for the materiality of the dormers not to match existing
but to be visually compatible with the existing house. As the existing house is
to be re-rendered as part of the thermal upgrading of the property, the
proposed render to the dormer will be compatible. The majority of the street
consists of light toned render as the external finish to the main house, so
proposals are also within keeping with the wider context. 
3.6 In the interests of clarity these responses are addressed as follows: 
a) It is acknowledged the top of the flat roof dormer is approx. 0.7m from the
apex of the ridge of the main/original roof. 
b) There is a minimum set-back of 0.3m on the proposed plans.
c) The proposed flat roof dormer does not extend the full length of the extended
roof. In the context of the original scale of the original roof and visibility of the
side dormer from the side road it is considered excessive in scale.
Furthermore, the SPG also offers a solution that two smaller dormers on the
same elevation can offer a suitable alternative to one large dormer, which
may be out of scale with the ‘existing house’ as mentioned in the SPG. The
proposed elements of an extension must also be considered in the context of
Policy DM2 (House Extensions and Alterations), which is the overarching
policy. In this case the dormer represents an excessive form of development
in terms of its overall width, height, and scale, compared to the original scale
of the existing side hipped roof and therefore the original dwelling, especially
when viewed from the highway to the side of the dwelling. Other examples of
visible dormers nearby are smaller than this proposed side dormer. 
327

Page 553

d) (‘d’ is not included in this assessment as it refers to rear dormers and not side
dormers).
e) The proposed white render for a large side dormer would not blend in with
the colour of the existing red roof tiles and would look out of character due to
its prominence. It was requested that the side cheeks and walls of the dormer
should be altered to match the existing cheeks of the front and rear dormer
(red roof tiles). This would have reduced the overall appearance and
dominance of the side dormer, especially regarding the proposed materials
of the large expanse of proposed white render above the level of the eaves.
This amendment was not acceptable to the appellant. 
3.7 The provisions of the SPG must be considered in tandem with the relevant
policies, especially Policy DM2 which states: 
“1. The siting, form, scale, design and materials respect the character
of the existing dwelling and the wider area. Within this context, high
quality, innovative design will be encouraged where it complements
the character of the building and its surroundings. 
2. It does not dominate or overwhelm the existing dwelling, neighbouring
properties or streetscene in terms of size, scale or height. 
3. It does not significantly adversely affect adjacent properties in terms
of overlooking or loss of privacy, daylight or sunlight.” 
The proposed side dormer will dominate and overwhelm the existing dwelling,
particularly the original roof, when viewed from the side. Dormer windows should
not be constructed as large box-type dormers, on prominent elevations. 
3.8 It was also requested that the design of the side dormer was reconsidered as the
solid to void ratio was not correct, especially given the prominence of the dwelling
and its relationship/visibility from the adjoining road at the side. The area of the
solid facing walls of the side dormer were overly prominent and a reduced dormer
may have been considered acceptable. However, at the time of making the
assessment and the completion of the report of handling, no amended plans
were received. 
3.9 Reason 2 – The appellant contests the planning officer’s assessment of the
impact to the character of the surrounding area, in regard to Policy 3 of
SLLDP2. 
3.10 Response: Policy 3 was relevant to the assessment of the application as it
requires all development proposals to enhance the character and amenity of
established  urban areas and settlements. Paragraph 3.20 in SLLDP2 Volume 1
stipulates the following: 
328

Page 554

“…To achieve this, the character and amenity of these areas (urban areas and
settlements) has to be safeguarded. The majority of the built-up areas of South
Lanarkshire are not subject to specific policies and proposals identifying
development opportunities. It is nonetheless important that these areas are
safeguarded and enhanced, and the amenity enjoyed by their residents is
protected. This will be taken into account in the consideration of any
development proposals in these areas.” 
3.11 Policy DM2 (House Extensions and Alterations) then sets out further detailed
criteria on what aspects of house extension and alterations would be considered
favourably: 
1) The siting, form, scale, design and materials respect the character
of the existing dwelling and the wider area. Within this context, high
quality, innovative design will be encouraged where it complements
the character of the building and its surroundings.
2) It does not dominate or overwhelm the existing dwelling, neighbouring
properties or streetscene in terms of size, scale or height.
3) It does not significantly adversely affect adjacent properties in terms of
overlooking or loss of privacy, daylight or sunlight …. 
3.12 Therefore Policy 3 and DM2 can be read in tandem with each other, especially
regarding residential extensions and alterations. 
3.13 Furthermore, the impacts to residential amenity remain a valid reason for refusal.
For clarity, the proposed side dormer was refused on design, scale, and
character grounds not just residential amenity.  This is set out in the Report of
Handling; a request for an amended plan to reduce the opening for the Juliet
balcony to a smaller window, which would match the existing scale of the
windows of the existing dwelling, was requested from the agent but this was
again rejected by the appellant. 
3.14 Since the Report of Handling was prepared it has transpired that amended plans
were submitted to change the large opening of the Juliet balcony to a smaller
window. However, these amended plans were not considered as the report had
already been completed and the determination was concluded based on the
original plans. 
3.15 Reason 3 – The appellant contests the planning officer's assessment of the
impact of the proposals in relation to the existing dwelling and the
neighbouring properties, especially regarding Policy 5 Development
Management and Placemaking. 
3.16 Response: Policy 5 is entirely pertinent here as the policy advises “all proposals
require to be well designed and integrated with the local area”. The policy also
sets out the following: 
329

Page 555

“When assessing development proposals, the Council will ensure that, where
appropriate: 
1) There is no unacceptable significant adverse impact on the adjacent buildings
or streetscape in terms of layout, scale, massing, design, external materials
or amenity.”
It has already been advanced both in the Report of Handling and this review that
the side dormer is too large and dominating on this side elevation which is fully
visible from the side road. It has also been established that the appellant refused
to amend this side dormer to reduce the scale and the adverse impact it caused. 
3.17 Reason 4 – The appellant contests the planning officer’s assessment that
the proposals will overwhelm the existing dwelling in terms of proposed
size and scale. 
3.18 Response: The appellant references the dormer again in this reason which has
been addressed in the original Report of Handling and this response to review.
For clarity, the appellant refused to reduce the dormer in the first instance and
therefore the application was determined based on the original plans. 
3.19 Furthermore, the appellant has provided further comments relating to some
procedural aspects of the planning process. These comments primarily relate to
the fact that amended plans were submitted after the application was
determined. These drawings were not available when the application was
determined and therefore are not relevant or material to this appeal review. 
3.20 Summary and conclusion 
3.21 The application sought planning permission for the erection of a replacement
single storey side extension, the replacement of the front dormer, a new side
dormer, a rear first floor gable extension with juliet balcony, replacement
detached garage and associated improvements to the dwellinghouse. 
3.22 The reasons for refusal were three-fold - the proposal does not meet the policies
regarding the established design and character of the existing dwelling, the
surrounding area, and the residential amenity of the dwellings to the rear of the
site (and their rear gardens). It is accepted that there are other dormers on other
houses nearby, however, they are not of same scale or mass. It is well
established that each application has to be carefully considered on its own
merits. 
3.23 The appellant was not willing to amend the proposal as requested. The
application was therefore determined on the basis of the originally submitted
drawings. 
3.24 In conclusion, the request for this review does not satisfactorily address the
reasons for refusal. It is therefore respectfully requested that this request for a
review is dismissed and the original decision upheld. 
330