Agenda Document Pack - Planning Local Review Body - 07/08/2023

South Lanarkshire Council · 7 August 2023
Back to Planning Local Review Body — 7 August 2023 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, 28 July 2023 
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, 07 August 2023
Time:  10:30
Venue: Hybrid - Committee Room 1, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton,
ML3 0AA 
The business to be considered at the meeting is listed overleaf. 
Yours sincerely 
Cleland Sneddon
Chief Executive 
Members 
Richard Nelson (Chair), Gerry Convery (Depute Chair), Alex Allison, Mary Donnelly, Gladys
Ferguson-Miller, Mark Horsham, Lesley McDonald, Norman Rae, Graham Scott 
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 24 April 2023
submitted for approval as a correct record.  (Copy attached) 
5 - 8 
Item(s) for Decision 
3 Review of Case - P/22/0281 for Erection of 2 Storey Rear Extension with
Associated Alterations and the Formation of a Roof Terrace at 75 Kirk
Street, Strathaven
Report dated 28 July 2023 by the Executive Director (Finance and Corporate
Resources).  (Copy attached) 
9 - 12 
3a  Appendix 1 Planning Application Form P/22/0281  13 - 20 
3b  Appendix 2 Report of Handling P/22/0281  21 - 28 
3c  Appendix 3 Site Photographs and Location Plan P/22/0281  29 - 36 
3d  Appendix 4 Planning Decision Notice and Reasons for Refusal P/22/0281  37 - 44 
3e  Appendix 5 Notice of Review P-22-0281  45 - 98 
3f  Appendix 6 Further Representation P/22/0281  99 - 106 
4 Review of Case - P/23/0156 - for Erection of New Roof with Increased
Ridge Height to Facilitate Second Floor of Accommodation, Installation of
Front and Rear Dormers and Erection of Balcony at Sion, 47 Burnblea
Street, Hamilton
Report dated 28 July 2023 by the Executive Director (Finance and Corporate
Resources).  (Copy attached) 
107 - 110 
4a  Appendix 1 Planning Application Form P/23/0156  111 - 120 
4b  Appendix 2(a) Report of Handling P/23/0156  121 - 128 
4c  Appendix 2(b) Representations P/23/0156  129 - 134 
4d  Appendix 3 Site Photographs and Location Plan P/23/0156  135 - 144 
4e  Appendix 4 Planning Decision Notice and Reasons for Refusal P/23/0156  145 - 152 
4f  Appendix 5 Notice of Review P/23/0156  153 - 218 
4g  Appendix 6 Further Representation P/23/0156  219 - 224 
4h  Appendix 7 Applicant's Comments on Further Representation P/23/0156  225 - 234 
Urgent Business 
2

Page 3

5  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 Committee Room 1, Council Offices, Almada Street,
Hamilton on 24 April 2023 
Chair:
Councillor Richard Nelson 
Councillors Present:
Councillor Alex Allison, Councillor Gerry Convery (Depute), Councillor Mary Donnelly, Councillor
Gladys Ferguson-Miller, Councillor Mark Horsham, Councillor Graham Scott 
Councillors' Apologies:
Councillor Lesley McDonald, Councillor Norman Rae, Councillor Dr Ali Salamati 
Attending:
Community and Enterprise Resources
J Wright, Planning Adviser to the Planning Local Review Body
Finance and Corporate Resources
M Cannon, Legal Adviser to the Planning Local Review Body; S Jessup, Administration Assistant; S
McLeod, Administration Officer 
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 20 February 2023 were
submitted for approval as a correct record. 
The PLRB decided: that the minutes be approved as a correct record. 
3 Review of Case – Application P/22/0915 for Formation of House Plot (Planning
Permission in Principle) at 103 – 104 Crosswood Terrace, Tarbrax, West Calder 
A report dated 14 April 2023 by the Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources) was
submitted on a request for a review of planning application P/22/0915 by M Carroll for the
formation of a house plot (planning permission in principle) at 103 – 104 Crosswood Terrace,
Tarbrax, West Calder. 
To assist the PLRB in its review, copies of the following information had been appended to the
report:- 
 planning application form
 response from a statutory consultee and representation received
 site photographs and location plan
 notice of review, including the applicant’s statement of reasons for requiring the review  
2
5

Page 6

As the application had not been determined by Planning and Regulatory Services (deemed
refusal), no report of handling was available in respect of the application. To facilitate the review
and comply with the statutory timescale, the Head of Administration and Legal Services, in
consultation with the Chair, had asked for observations from Planning and Regulatory Services
on the notice of review to be provided in advance of the meeting. The applicant had been given
the opportunity to comment on those observations, however, no comments had been received.
The observations from Planning and Regulatory Services had been appended to the report. The
PLRB concluded that this information could be accepted on the basis that it provided information
necessary to assess the case.
The relevant drawings in relation to the review were available for inspection prior to the meeting
of the PLRB.
The PLRB heard the 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 grant or refuse the application taken under review.
In reviewing the case, the PLRB considered:-
 the information submitted by all parties
 the relevant policy contained in the adopted South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2:-
 Policy DM3 – Sub-division of Garden Ground
 the relevant policy contained in the National Planning Framework 4 which had been adopted
on 13 February 2023 and formed part of the statutory development plan:-
 Policy 16 – Quality Homes
Following its review of the information and after discussion, the PLRB considered whether there
was valid policy justification to support the proposed development at the proposed location and
concluded that it was contrary to Policy 16 of the National Planning Framework 4 and Policy DM3
of the adopted South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2.
The PLRB decided: that planning application P/22/0915 by M Carroll for the
formation of a house plot (planning permission in principle) at
103 – 104 Crosswood Terrace, Tarbrax, West Calder be refused
for the reason determined by the PLRB, attached as an
appendix to this minute.
[Reference: Minutes of Planning Committee of 9 May 2006 (Paragraph 4)]
4 Urgent Business
There were no items of urgent business.
6

Page 7

Application P/22/0915 – Reason for Refusal       Appendix 
Formation of a house plot (planning permission in principle) at 103 – 104 Crosswood Terrace,
Tarbrax, West Calder 
01. There was no valid policy justification to support the proposed development at this site.  The
proposal would, therefore, be contrary to Policy 16 of the National Planning Framework 4 and
Policy DM3 of the adopted South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2. 
7

Page 8

Page 9

Report
Agenda Item 
Report to: Planning Local Review Body 
Date of Meeting: 7 August 2023
Report by: Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources)  
Subject: Review of Case – Application P/22/0281 for Erection of
2 Storey Rear Extension with Associated Alterations
and the Formation of a Roof Terrace 
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: W Watson 
Proposal: Erection of 2 storey rear extension with associated
alterations and the formation of a roof terrace
Location:   75 Kirk Street, Strathaven, ML10 6BA
Council Area/Ward: 5 Avondale and Stonehouse 
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
[1recs]
3
9

Page 10

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:-
X 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)
 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.
10

Page 11

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 representations
received.  No comments on the further representation were received from the
applicant. 
Paul Manning
Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources) 
28 July 2023 
Link(s) to Council Values/Priorities/Outcomes
 We will work towards a sustainable future in sustainable places
 Good quality, suitable and sustainable places to live
 Thriving business, fair jobs and vibrant town centres
 Caring, connected, 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 454 815 / 07385 370 117)
E-mail:  stuart.mcleod@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
11

Page 12

Page 13

Planning Application Form 
Appendix 1  3a
13

Page 14

Page 15

Page 1 of 6
Montrose House 154 Montrose Crescent Hamilton ML3 6LB  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 100538068-001
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
Single storey rear extension, loft conversion, dormer extension and internal alterations.
3a
15

Page 16

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: *
Abode Architects
Miss
Connor
Whitney
Steven
Watson
Haddow Street
Kirk Street
18
75
01698 451295
ML3 7HX
ML10 6BA
Scotland
Scotland
Hamilton
Strathaven
connor@abode-architects.co.uk
16

Page 17

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 describe 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? *
75 KIRK STREET
South Lanarkshire Council
STRATHAVEN
ML10 6BA
644258 270015
17

Page 18

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: Connor Steven
On behalf of: Miss Whitney  Watson
Date: 21/02/2022
 Please tick here to certify this Certificate. *
18

Page 19

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 described in this form and the accompanying
Plans/drawings and additional information.
Declaration Name: Mr Connor Steven
Declaration Date: 21/02/2022
19

Page 20

Page 6 of 6
Payment Details
Pay Direct     
Created: 26/02/2022 14:30
20

Page 21

Report of Handling 
Report dated 10 February 2023 by the Council’s Authorised Officer under the Scheme of
Delegation 
Appendix 2  3b
21

Page 22

Page 23

Reference no. P/22/0281
Delegated Report   
Date 08 February 2023 
Planning proposal: Erection of two storey rear extension with associated alterations and the
formation of a roof terrace  
Location:  75 Kirk Street
Strathaven
ML10 6BA 
Application Type :  Householder  
Applicant :  Miss Whitney Watson 
Location :   75 Kirk Street
Strathaven
ML10 6BA 
Decision: 
Other action/notes:     
Application refused 
(1) None  
Report by: Area Manager (Planning & Building Standards)
Policy reference:  
South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (adopted 2021)
Policy 5 - Development Management and Placemaking
Policy 14 - Natural and Historic Development
Policy DM2 - House Extensions and Alterations
Policy NHE6 - Conservation Areas 
Strathaven Conservation Area Management Plan (CAMP) 2017
Development Management, Placemaking and Design Supplementary Guidance (2015)
Natural and Historic Environment Supplementary Guidance (2015) 
Assessment:
Impact on privacy? Yes
Impact on sunlight/daylight? No
Impact on amenity? Yes
Traffic issues? No
Adheres to development plan policy? No
Adverse comments from consultees? No 
Representation(s): 
► 0 Objection letters
► 0 Support letters
► 0 Comment letters 
3b
23

Page 24

Planning Application Delegated Report
1 Application Summary
1.1 The applicant seeks detailed planning consent for the erection of a two-storey extension
to the rear of an existing detached dwellinghouse at 75 Kirk Street, Strathaven. The
proposed extension would also involve the formation of a large roof terrace. The
application site is located within the designated Strathaven Conservation Area.
1.2 The proposed extension would replace an existing conservatory and small
bathroom/utility room extension. It would be proposed to extend across effectively the full
width of the existing dwellinghouse and it would project approximately 4.5 metres from the
existing rear elevation. The extension would comprise of a ground floor kitchen/living
space with large, glazed sliding doors on the rear elevation. Following discussions with
the agent, the upper floor design was amended and reduced in scale from the originally
submitted proposal, no longer projecting beyond the existing rear building line. The
proposed upper floor extension would involve an increase in the height of the existing roof
and the formation of what would effectively be a full-width rear dormer, with large windows
and glazed doors on the rear elevation leading to a full-width roof terrace built on the roof
of the ground floor extension. Three new roof windows are also proposed for the front
elevation, to serve the upper floor space. The proposed extension would be finished in
zinc cladding in contrast to the rendered finish of the existing dwellinghouse.
2 Representation(s)
2.1 Statutory neighbour notification was undertaken in respect of this application and the
proposal was further advertised in the local press and by a site notice. No letters of
representation have been received as a result of this publicity.
3 Assessment and Conclusions
3.1 Following a detailed assessment of this proposal, it is considered that it would not comply
with the relevant policies of the adopted Local Development Plan as it would have a
significant adverse impact upon residential and visual amenity in the area, and upon the
wider character of the Conservation Area. In this respect, the proposed full-width
extension is considered to dominate the existing house due to its excessive size and
height in relation to the existing building. The roof requires to be raised in height to
accommodate the proposed upper floor accommodation given its scale, and the extension
is of a contrasting modern design when compared to the existing building. Whilst a
contrasting design can be successful in certain circumstances, the site is located within a
Conservation Area and the proposal would significantly adversely impact upon the visual
amenity and overall character of the area. In addition, the full width roof terrace would be
likely to allow for excessive overlooking over neighbouring private gardens, even with
privacy screens.
3.2 In terms of its impact upon the Conservation Area, whilst the extension is located to the
rear it would be highly visually prominent from the street due to its size and modern
design. In addition, the front elevation would be significantly altered with the increase in
the height of the roof between the existing chimneys and the formation of new roof
windows. The impact upon the streetscape and overall character of the Conservation
Area is considered to be significant. It would not comply with the policies or guidance
contained within the Strathaven Conservation Area Management Plan, or with the
relevant policies of the adopted Local Development Plan.
24

Page 25

3.3 No letters of representation have been received in connection with this application and no
formal consultations were required to be undertaken in this instance given the application
type.   
3.4 Given the above, it is considered that the proposed extension is not of a size, scale or
design that would suitably integrate with the existing dwellinghouse, and that the proposal
would have a significant adverse impact upon the character of the Conservation Area and
upon residential amenity.  As such, it is considered that planning permission should be
refused.   
3.5 The Revised Draft National Planning Framework 4 was approved by the Scottish
Parliament on 11 January 2023. The next step is its formal adoption and publication by
Scottish Ministers. Due to its advanced stage, the Revised Draft NPF4 is now considered
to be a material consideration in the determination of this application. However, there are
not considered to be any specific implications in respect of the provisions of the draft
framework relating to this application. 
4 Reason for decision 
4.1 The proposal is contrary to Policies 5, 14, DM2 and NHE6 of the adopted South
Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (2021) in that the size, scale and design of the
proposed extension would not suitably integrate with the scale, design or character of the
existing building and that it would have a significant adverse impact upon the character of
the wider Conservation Area.  In addition, the proposal would have a significant adverse
impact upon residential amenity. 
Delegating officer:   Iain Morton 
Date: 10 February 2023 
Previous references
 None   
List of background papers
► Application Form
► Application Plans
► South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (adopted 2021)
► Development Management, Placemaking and Design Supplementary Guidance (2015)
► Natural and Historic Environment Supplementary Guidance (2015)
► Strathaven Conservation Area Management Plan (CAMP) 2017
► Neighbour notification letter dated 09 March 2022
► Newspaper Advert, East Kilbride News dated 18 January 2023
► Site Notice, dated 18 January 2023
► Correspondence with agent, various dates 
Contact for further information
If you would like to inspect the background papers or want further information, please contact:- 
Andrew Muir, Planning Officer, Floor 6, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton, ML3 0AA
Phone: 07551843180   
Email: andrew.muir2@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
25

Page 26

Planning Application
Application number: P/22/0281
Reasons for refusal
01. The proposal is contrary to Policy NHE6 of the South Lanarkshire Local Development
Plan in that it represents an inappropriate and incongruous form of development within
the Conservation Area which would have an adverse effect on the Conservation Area in
general and the streetscape in particular.
02. The proposed extension does not conform to the scale, design or character of the original
building on the site or the surrounding built form and would therefore be detrimental to the
amenity of the area in general.
03. If approved, the proposal would result in a loss of privacy and would adversely affect the
amenity of adjacent properties.
04. If approved, the proposal would set an undesirable precedent which could encourage
further similar applications, resulting in an adverse impact on the character of the
Conservation Area.
Reason(s) for decision
The proposal is contrary to Policies 5, 14, DM2 and NHE6 of the adopted South Lanarkshire
Local Development Plan 2 (2021) in that the size, scale and design of the proposed extension
would not suitably integrate with the scale, design or character of the existing building and that it
would have a significant adverse impact upon the character of the wider Conservation Area. In
addition, the proposal would have a significant adverse impact upon residential amenity.
Informatives
01. This decision relates to drawing numbers:
Reference Version No: Plan Status
21070-AA-001 Refused
21070-AA-020 Refused
21070-AA-021 Refused
21070-AA-022 Refused
21070-AA-023 Refused
21070-AA-030 Refused
21070-AA-031 Refused
21070-AA-032 Refused
21070-AA-033 Refused
21070-AA-034 Refused
26

Page 27

21070-AA-050  Refused  
21070-AA-002  Refused  
21070-AA-051 A Refused  
21070-AA-052 A Refused  
21070-AA-053 A Refused  
21070-AA-054 A Refused  
21070-AA-055 A Refused  
21070-AA-056 A Refused  
21070-AA-057 A Refused  
21070-SK-100  Refused  
21070-SK-101  Refused  
21070-SK-102  Refused   
27

Page 28

Page 29

Site photographs and location plan 
Appendix 3  3c
29

Page 30

Page 31

Photo 1  3c
31

Page 32

Photo 2 
32

Page 33

Photo 3 
33

Page 34

Photo 4 
34

Page 35

Photo 1 
3c
35

Page 36

Page 37

Planning Decision Notice and Reasons for Refusal 
Appendix 4  3d
37

Page 38

Page 39

Floor 6, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton, ML3 0AA
Email andrew.muir2@southlanarkshire.gov.uk Phone: 07551843180 
Community And Enterprise Resources
Executive Director David Booth
Planning And Regulatory Services 
Connor Steven
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX 
Our Ref: P/22/0281
Your Ref: 
If calling ask for: Andrew Muir
Date: 14 February 2023 
Dear Sir/Madam 
Proposal: Erection of two storey rear extension with associated alterations and
the formation of a roof terrace
Site address: 75 Kirk Street, Strathaven, ML10 6BA, 
Application no: P/22/0281 
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 Andrew Muir on 07551843180 
Yours faithfully 
Head of Planning and Regulatory Services 
Enc:  
3d
39

Page 40

Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended
by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006 
To: Miss Whitney  Watson  Per: Connor Steven 
75 Kirk Street , Strathaven ,
ML10 6BA, 
18 Haddow Street,
Hamilton, ML3 7HX, 
With reference to your application received on 28.02.2022 for planning permission under the
above mentioned Act: 
Description of proposed development: 
Erection of two storey rear extension with associated alterations and the
formation of a roof terrace 
Site location: 
75 Kirk Street, Strathaven, ML10 6BA,   
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: 14th February 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 
Application no. 
P/22/0281 
40

Page 41

South Lanarkshire Council 
Refuse planning permission 
Paper apart - Application number: P/22/0281 
Reason(s) for refusal: 
01. The proposal is contrary to Policy NHE6 of the South Lanarkshire Local Development
Plan in that it represents an inappropriate and incongruous form of development within
the Conservation Area which would have an adverse affect on the Conservation Area in
general and the streetscape in particular. 
02. The proposed extension does not conform to the scale, design or character of the original
building on the site or the surrounding built form and would therefore be detrimental to the
amenity of the area in general. 
03. If approved, the proposal would result in a loss of privacy and would adversely affect the
amenity of adjacent properties. 
04. If approved, the proposal would set an undesirable precedent which could encourage
further similar applications, resulting in an adverse impact on the character of the
Conservation Area. 
Reason(s) for decision 
The proposal is contrary to Policies 5, 14, DM2 and NHE6 of the adopted South Lanarkshire
Local Development Plan 2 (2021) in that the size, scale and design of the proposed extension
would not suitably integrate with the scale, design or character of the existing building and that it
would have a significant adverse impact upon the character of the wider Conservation Area.  In
addition, the proposal would have a significant adverse impact upon residential amenity. 
41

Page 42

Notes to applicant 
Application number: P/22/0281 
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  
21070-AA-001  Refused  
21070-AA-020  Refused  
21070-AA-021  Refused  
21070-AA-022  Refused  
21070-AA-023  Refused  
21070-AA-030  Refused  
21070-AA-031  Refused  
21070-AA-032  Refused  
21070-AA-033  Refused  
21070-AA-034  Refused  
21070-AA-050  Refused  
21070-AA-002  Refused  
21070-AA-051 A Refused  
21070-AA-052 A Refused  
21070-AA-053 A Refused  
21070-AA-054 A Refused  
21070-AA-055 A Refused  
21070-AA-056 A Refused  
21070-AA-057 A Refused  
21070-SK-100  Refused  
21070-SK-101  Refused  
21070-SK-102  Refused   
42

Page 43

COMMUNITY AND ENTERPRISE RESOURCES
Executive Director David Booth
Planning and Economic Development 
Important notes 
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 (Corporate Resources)
Council Headquarters
Almada Street
Hamilton
ML3 0AA 
To obtain the appropriate forms: 
Administrative Services at the above address. 
Telephone: 01698 454108
E-mail:   pauline.macrae@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. 
43

Page 44

Page 45

Notice of Review (including Statement of Reasons for
Requiring the Review) submitted by applicant W Watson 
Appendix 5  3e
45

Page 46

Page 47

Notice of Review Form
Page 1 of 7
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: Whitney Watson
Address:
Postcode:
75 Kirk Street
Strathaven
ML10 6BA
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: 01698 451 295
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 2 / 0 2 8 1
Site address:
75 Kirk Street, Strathaven, ML10 6BA
Description of
proposed development:
Erection of two storey rear extension with associated alterations and
the formation of a roof terrace
Validation date
of application: 28.02.2022 Date of decision (if any): 14.02.2023
3e
47

Page 48

Notice of Review Form
Page 2 of 7
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
48

Page 49

Notice of Review Form
Page 3 of 7
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.
We believe that this application has wrongly been refused by SLC.
The extension comprises the removal of an existing rear conservatory, ground floor extension,
dormer & garage – all in a miss-mash of conflicting styles and aesthetics – to be replaced by a
cohesive extension with small roof terrace & rear dormer, designed in such a way to minimise
viewing from the front, but to maximise the clients usable space to the rear.
We feel that the application was not given the due consideration & thorough review that it should
have received by the case officer & SLC. This was evident through the fact it took just short of 1
year to issue a decision; a lack of communication & ignoring of emails for months on end from the
case officer; as far as we know the case officer did not visit the site; the case officer forgot to
request a newspaper advertisement and asked for this after 10-11 months after application
validation; and finally even in the “reason(s) for refusal” SLC have referenced non-applicable policy
(NHE6).
The main issues raised within the officer’s report of handling & the reasons for refusal refer mainly
to the scale of the extension & the contrasting nature due to this being within a conservation area.
We have sought to respond to each of the “Reason(s) for refusal” below, to give further context to
why certain design decisions were made & to explain why we disagree with the refusal.
01. The proposal is contrary to Policy NHE6 of the South Lanarkshire Local Development
Plan in that it represents an inappropriate and incongruous form of development within the
Conservation Area which would have an adverse affect on the Conservation Area in general
and the streetscape in particular.
Policy NHE6 is not applicable to this application, therefore proposals cannot be contrary to this
policy.
02. The proposed extension does not conform to the scale, design or character of the
original building on the site or the surrounding built form and would therefore be detrimental
to the amenity of the area in general.
Supplementary Guidance 9 advises that “Alterations and extensions to buildings in conservation
areas must also preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the area”. We specifically
designed a high-quality extension to the rear of a house which is barely visible from the street, and
as such not really visible from the conservation area. The scale of the adjacent context is that of 1.5
storey bungalows which have been substantially extended to the rear, and it’s immediate neighbour
to the west has a large, overpowering 2 storey extension with windows that overlook our client’s
garden.
Within the “Report of Handling” it refers to the proposals being “highly visually prominent from the
street due to its size and modern design”. As shown on 21070-SK-100 & 21070-SK-102 before/after
visualisations (submitted as additional supporting documents along with the application) this is not
accurate, as you can BARELY see the extension from the street. From the east (left on Kirk Street –
see SK-102) you can see the smallest little triangle of the dromer from the opposite site of the road.
49

Page 50

Notice of Review Form
Page 4 of 7
From the west (right on Kirk St), you can see the dormer and extension in the exact same way that
you can see the current dormer & conservatory – the visual impact is no different to what is currently
visible…
Although there is reference to “raising the roof”, we require to raise the ridge height of the existing
roof by 135mm (around 5 inches) due to the current headroom within the existing bedroom at first
floor being non-compliant with current Building Regulations minimum headroom requirements.
Although raising the ridge, 5 inches is not even going to be noticeable from the street!
Regarding the character of the existing house & the modern design of the extension, we see so
many poor-quality additions to buildings within conservation areas. Our proposed extension seeks
to rationalise the clumsy nature of the existing dormer / extension & conservatory massing on the
house (refer to existing photo on previously submitted 21070-SK-101). At ground floor, we do not
project any further in to the rear garden than the existing conservatory does (see previously
submitted 21070-AA-057)
e existing rear of the building is a miss-mash of styles added at various points throughout the
lifetime of the building). We find that the “standard” approach to development within conservation
areas to be often poor-quality pastiche with cheap materials and poor quality design. We instead
find that the most successful projects within conservation areas are those of which who understand
the context in which their buildings sit. They respect the character of the defining existing streets,
but are designed with traditional materials – used in a contemporary manner (note that zinc cladding
has been used widely across the UK & Europe since the 19th century.
03. If approved, the proposal would result in a loss of privacy and would adversely affect the
amenity of adjacent properties.
This relates to the rear roof terrace. As shown on our submitted drawing 21070-AA-002 (existing &
proposed block plan), the roof terrace (and whole extension for that matter) does not project any
further in to the gardens than the adjacent properties. Specifically, the roof terrace sits roughly in
line with the ‘original’ rear wall of the adjacent properties before they were both extensively
extended.
Therefore we believe that the privacy of the adjacent properties is not adversely affected.
04. If approved, the proposal would set an undesirable precedent which could encourage
further similar applications, resulting in an adverse impact on the character of the
Conservation Area.
We believe that as outlined above, the proposal has sought to create a high-quality extension to an
existing home within the conservation area using high quality materials & thorough, well considered
design. The fact remains that it is almost invisible from the street front of Kirk Street (no more so
than the existing poor quality conservatory & dormer are), and as such do not believe that the
approval of this application leads to an “undesirable precedent”.
We hope that the above & previously submitted drawings (re-uploaded as part of the appeal for
ease of handling) provide sufficient context to allow the decision to be overturned. The extension is
hardly visible from the streetscape & is to the rear of the dwelling. It is not any larger, nor does it
project any further than any of the extensions to dwellings either side – therefore we strongly
disagree with the reasons for refusal as previously noted.
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.
50

Page 51

Notice of Review Form
Page 5 of 7 
51

Page 52

Notice of Review Form
Page 6 of 7
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.
All of the documents noted below were submitted as part of the application process prior to
decision.
21070-AA-001 
21070-AA-002
21070-AA-020
21070-AA-021
21070-AA-022
21070-AA-023
21070-AA-030
21070-AA-031
21070-AA-032
21070-AA-033
21070-AA-034
21070-AA-050
21070-AA-051 A
21070-AA-052 A
21070-AA-053 A
21070-AA-054 A
21070-AA-055 A
21070-AA-056 A
21070-AA-057 A
21070-SK-100
21070-SK-101
21070-SK-102
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.
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:  Connor Steven on behalf of
Abode Architects
08.05.23
52

Page 53

Notice of Review Form
Page 7 of 7 
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) 
53

Page 54

Page 55

74a
70
74
75
9
11
17
11a
21
79
32
80
78
82
76
67
Ordnance Survey, (c) Crown Copyright 2022. All rights reserved. Licence number 100022432
KIRK STREET
RYELAND STREET
DUNLOP STREET
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Jan'22
21070-AA-001
LOCATION PLAN
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:1250 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
Scale of Metres - 1:1250
10 0 20 40 60
3e
55

Page 56

Page 57

1549
75KIRK STREET
1040
KIRK STREET
105004500
1491
1649
75
2000
ROOF
TERRACE
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Jan'22
21070-AA-002
EXISTING & PROPOSED BLOCK PLAN
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:500 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
Scale of Metres - 1:500
05 10 20 25155
Existing Block Plan Proposed Block Plan
3e
57

Page 58

Page 59

KITCHEN
HALLWAY
CONSERVATORY
BATHROOMUTILITY
LIVING ROOMBEDROOM
DRESSING ROOM
A
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Jan'22
21070-AA-020
EXISTING GROUND FLOOR PLAN
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:50 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
0.5 0 1 2 3
Scale of Metres - 1:50
3e
59

Page 60

Page 61

BEDROOM
LOFT
WC
A
RIDGE
EXISTING CHIMNEYEXISTING CHIMNEY
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Jan'22
21070-AA-021
EXISTING FIRST FLOOR PLAN
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:50 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
0.5 0 1 2 3
Scale of Metres - 1:50
3e
61

Page 62

Page 63

EAVES +2.32m
FFL +0.0m
FFL +2.9m
EGL -0.15m
RIDGE +5.2m
EAVES +2.32m
FFL +0.0m
FFL +2.9m
EGL -0.15m
RIDGE +5.2m
EAVES +2.32m
FFL +0.0m
FFL +2.9m
EGL -0.15m
RIDGE +5.2m
EAVES +2.32m
FFL +0.0m
FFL +2.9m
EGL -0.15m
RIDGE +5.2m
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Jan'22
21070-AA-022
EXISTING ELEVATIONS
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:100 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
1 0 2 4 6
Scale of Metres - 1:100
FRONT ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION
REAR ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION
3e
63

Page 64

Page 65

808
1965
LIVING ROOM DRESSING ROOM
BEDROOM
CONSERVATORY
EAVES +2.32m
FFL +0.0m
FFL +2.9m
EGL -0.15m
2698
RIDGE +5.2m
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Jan'22
21070-AA-023
EXISTING SECTION A-A
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:50 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
0.5 0 1 2 3
Scale of Metres - 1:50
3e
65

Page 66

Page 67

KITCHEN
HALLWAY
CONSERVATORY
BATHROOMUTILITY
LIVING ROOMBEDROOM
DRESSING ROOM
A
EXISTING CONSERVATORY TO BE REMOVED
OPENING FOR NEW DOOR
INTERNAL LOAD BEARING WALLS TO BE
REMOVED
EXISTING STAIRCASE TO BE
REMOVED
SECTION OF WALL TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING UTILITY & BATHROOM
TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING KITCHEN TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING WINDOW TO BE REMOVED
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Jan'22
21070-AA-030
DOWNTAKINGS GROUND FLOOR PLAN
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:50 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
0.5 0 1 2 3
Scale of Metres - 1:50
3e
67

Page 68

Page 69

BEDROOM
LOFT
WC
A
INTERNAL PARTITIONS TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING BATHROOM TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING DORMER TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING CONSERVATORY TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING UTILITY & BATHROOM TO BE
REMOVED
EXISTING RIDGE TO BE MOVED
EXISTING STAIRCASE TO BE REMOVED &
INFILLED
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Jan'22
21070-AA-031
DOWNTAKINGS FIRST FLOOR PLAN
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:50 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
0.5 0 1 2 3
Scale of Metres - 1:50
3e
69

Page 70

Page 71

EAVES +2.32m
FFL +0.0m
FFL +2.9m
EGL -0.15m
EAVES +2.32m
FFL +0.0m
FFL +2.9m
EGL -0.15m
OPENING FOR VELUX
CABRIO
OPENING FOR VELUX
EXISTING DORMER TO BE
REMOVED
EXISTING SECTION OF ROOF TO BE
REMOVED IN PREPARATION FOR
NEW DORMER
EXISTING CONSERVATORY TO
BE REMOVED
AREA OF EXISTING HOUSE
TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING
CONSERVATORY TO
BE REMOVED
EXISTING WINDOW
TO BE REMOVED
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Jan'22
21070-AA-032
DOWNTAKINGS ELEVATIONS
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:100 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
1 0 2 4 6
Scale of Metres - 1:100
FRONT ELEVATION
REAR ELEVATION
3e
71

Page 72

Page 73

EAVES +2.32m
FFL +0.0m
FFL +2.9m
EGL -0.15m
EAVES +2.32m
FFL +0.0m
FFL +2.9m
EGL -0.15m
EXISTING DORMER TO
BE REMOVED
EXISTING CONSERVATORY TO
BE REMOVED
EXISTING DORMER TO BE
REMOVED
EXISTING
CONSERVATORY TO
BE REMOVED
AREA OF EXISTING HOUSE
TO BE REMOVED
NEW OPENING FOR
DOOR
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Jan'22
21070-AA-033
DOWNTAKINGS ELEVATIONS
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:100 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
1 0 2 4 6
Scale of Metres - 1:100
EAST ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION
3e
73

Page 74

Page 75

A
EXISTING DORMER TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING CONSERVATORY TO BE REMOVED
AREA OF EXISTING HOUSE TO BE
REMOVED
SECTION OF EXISTING ROOF TO BE REMOVED
OPENING FOR VELUX CABRIO
OPENING FOR VELUX
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Jan'22
21070-AA-034
DOWNTAKINGS ROOF PLAN
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:50 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
0.5 0 1 2 3
Scale of Metres - 1:50
3e
75

Page 76

Page 77

HALLWAY
LIVING ROOMBEDROOM
3000
STORE
TOTAL AREA OF EXTENSION
TO INTERNAL WALL
40.7m²
2300
1100
1 2
3
4
5
6
7
8910111213
15
2150
KITCHEN
15.1m2
DINING AREA
12.2m2
LIVING AREA
13.7m2
BATHROOM
6.8m2
UTILITY
7.1m2
A
1100 2200 1100 5000 1100
10500
EXTENT OF EXTENSION
3200
1000
1000
4500
EXTENT OF EXTENSION
B BOILER MOVED TO UTILITY ROOM
1693
NEW DARK GREY ALUMINIUM SLIDING
DOORS
1.5x0.8m ROOF WINDOWS
EXISTING WALLS
NEW WALLS
NEW DOOR TO UTILITY ROOM
NEW DARK GREY ALUMINUM SLIDING
DOORS
BUILT IN SHELVING
NEW STAIRCASE
3130
STEELWORK TO ENGINEERS
SPECIFICATION
1000
STEELWORK TO ENGINEERS
SPECIFICATION
STORE
1365
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Jan'22
21070-AA-050
PROPOSED GROUND FLOOR PLAN
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:50 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
0.5 0 1 2 3
Scale of Metres - 1:50
3e
77

Page 78

Page 79

A
1.2m HEADROOM
4
5
6
7
8910111213
14
15
1.8m HEADROOM 1798
2750
NEW RIDGE LINE
1.2m HEADROOM
1.8m HEADROOM
NEW RIDGE LINE
BEDROOM
16.9m2 BEDROOM
13.8m2
BATHROOM
4.9m2
1531
981
4510
FORMER RIDGE
NEW STAIRCASE
NEW DARK GREY  PATIO DOORS
OPENING ONTO ROOF TERRACE
NEW 1.0x0.6m ROOF WINDOW
2.52x0.94m VELUX CABRIO ROOF
WINDOWS
1.1m PROTECTIVE GLASS
BALUSTRADE TO REAR
1.5x0.8m FLAT ROOF WINDOW
4781
10500
1.8m PROTECTIVE FROSTED GLASS
BALUSTRADE TO SIDES1.8m PROTECTIVE FROSTED GLASS
BALUSTRADE TO SIDES
DASHED LINE DENOTES EXTERNAL
WALL BELOW
ROOF TERRACE
20.8m22000
3053
4510
3736
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
SDDormer size & roof terrace reduced in size A 21/06/22
Jan'22
A21070-AA-051
PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:50 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
0.5 0 1 2 3
Scale of Metres - 1:50
3e
79

Page 80

Page 81

EAVES +2.32m
FFL +0.0m
FFL +2.9m
EGL -0.15m
NEW RIDGE +5.3m
2.52x0.94m VELUX CABRIO ROOF
WINDOWS
NEW 1.0x0.6m ROOF WINDOW
NOTE EXISTING RIDGE OF HOUSE
RAISED BY APPROX 135mm TO ALLOW
SUFFICIENT HEADROOM AT FIRST
FLOOR AS EXISTING BEDROOM HAS
LESS THAN 2m HEADROOM
SLATE FROM REAR ROOF
DOWNTAKINGS TO BE USED ON NEW
SECTION TO FRONT
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
SDRidge height increase reduced fromm 300mm to 135mmA 21/06/22
Jan'22
A21070-AA-052
PROPOSED FRONT ELEVATION
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:50 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
0.5 0 1 2 3
Scale of Metres - 1:50
3e
81

Page 82

Page 83

EAVES +2.32m
FFL +0.0m
FFL +2.9m
EGL -0.15m
NEW RIDGE +5.3m
DOOR HEAD +2.25m
ROOF HEIGHT +3.0m
NEW DARK GREY PATIO
DOORS OPENING ONTO
ROOF TERRACE
NEW DARK GREY
ALUMINIUM SLIDING
DOORS
NEW DARK GREY
ALUMINIUM SLIDING
DOORS
VM ZINC STANDING SEAM
ZINC CLADDING
VM ZINC STANDING SEAM
ZINC CLADDING
DOOR HEAD +5.0m
1.1m PROTECTIVE GLASS
BALUSTRADE TO FRONT
1.8m HIGH PROTECTIVE
BARRIER TO SIDE ELEVATIONS
(FROSTED GLASS)
DARK BRICK BASE COURSE
ZINC STRING COURSE
NOTE EXISTING RIDGE OF HOUSE
RAISED BY APPROX 135mm TO
ALLOW SUFFICIENT HEADROOM
AT FIRST FLOOR, AS EXISTING
BEDROOM HAS LESS THAN 2m
CLEAR HEADROOM
VM ZINC CAPPING PIECE
VM ZINC CAPPING PIECE
490 2800 766 1900 1193 2800 490
10439
EXTENT OF DORMER
1100 5000 1100 2200 1100
10500
EXTENT OF EXTENSION
NEW DARK GREY
WINDOW
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Height of ground floor extension reduced to 3m
SDRidge height increase reduced from 300mm to 135mm A 22/06/21
Jan'22
A21070-AA-053
PROPOSED REAR ELEVATION
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:50 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
0.5 0 1 2 3
Scale of Metres - 1:50
3e
83

Page 84

Page 85

1.8m PROTECTIVE FROSTED GLASS
BALUSTRADE TO SIDE ELEVATIONS
VM ZINC STANDING SEAM ZINC
CLADDING
FFL +0.0m
FFL +2.9m
EGL -0.15m
NEW RIDGE +5.3m
VM ZINC STANDING SEAM ZINC
CLADDING
NEW DOOR TO UTILITY
ROOF HEIGHT +3.0m
VM ZINC CAPPING PIECE
DARK BRICK BASE COURSE
ZINC STRING COURSE
VM ZINC CAPPING PIECE
1000 750
4500
EXTENT OF EXTENSION
BF
2000
EXTENT OF TERRACE
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Ground floor extension height reduced to 3m
Terrace depth reduced to 2m
Dormer size reduced to sit wholly within existing roof footprint
SDRidge height increase reduced from 300mm to 135mm A 21/06/22
Jan'22
A21070-AA-054
PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:50 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
0.5 0 1 2 3
Scale of Metres - 1:50
3e
85

Page 86

Page 87

1.8m PROTECTIVE FROSTED GLASS
BALUSTRADE TO SIDE ELEVATIONS
VM ZINC STANDING SEAM ZINC
CLADDING
FFL +0.0m
FFL +2.9m
EGL -0.15m
NEW RIDGE +5.3m
VM ZINC STANDING SEAM ZINC
CLADDING
ROOF HEIGHT +3.0m
VM ZINC CAPPING PIECE
DARK BRICK BASE COURSE
ZINC STRING COURSE
VM ZINC CAPPING PIECE
4500
EXTENT OF EXTENSION
2000
EXTENT OF TERRACE
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Ground floor extension height reduced to 3m
Terrace depth reduced to 2m
Dormer size reduced to sit wholly within existing footprint
SDRidge height increase reduced from 300mm to 135mm A 21/06/22
Jan'22
A21070-AA-055
PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:50 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
0.5 0 1 2 3
Scale of Metres - 1:50
3e
87

Page 88

Page 89

LIVING ROOM
FFL +0.0m
FFL +2.9m
EGL -0.15m
BEDROOM
UTILITY KITCHEN
NEW RIDGE +5.3m
500
NEW DARK GREY ALUMINIUM SLIDING
DOORS
1.1m PROTECTIVE GLASS BALUSTRADE
TO REAR
NEW DARK GREY PATIO DOORS
OPENING ONTO ROOF TERRACE
1.5x0.8m FLAT ROOF WINDOW
2.52x0.94m CABRIO ROOF
WINDOWS
DOOR HEAD +2.25m
ROOF HEIGHT +3.0m
NOTE EXISTING RIDGE OF HOUSE
RAISED BY APPROX 135mm TO ALLOW
SUFFICIENT HEADROOM AT FIRST
FLOOR
1.8m HIGH PROTECTIVE BARRIER TO
SIDE ELEVATIONS (FROSTED GLASS)
STEELWORK TO ENGINEERS
SPECIFICATION
2000
EXTENT OF TERRACE
2515
2100
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Ground floor extension height reduced to 3m
Terrace depth reduced to 2m
Dormer size reduced to sit wholly within existing roof footprint
SDRidge height increase reduced from 300mm to 135mmA 21/06/22
Jan'22
A21070-AA-056
PROPOSED SECTION A-A
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:50 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
0.5 0 1 2 3
Scale of Metres - 1:50
3e
89

Page 90

Page 91

A
A
RIDGE
A
A
2.52x0.94m CABRIO ROOF
WINDOWS
NEW 1.2x0.6m ROOF WINDOW
1.5x0.8m FLAT ROOF WINDOW
1.8m PROTECTIVE GLASS
BALUSTRADE TO SIDES
(FROSTED GLASS)
FORMER RIDGE
1:80 FALL
ROOF TERRACE
REAR DORMER WITH SINGLE
PLY ROOF MEMBRANE WITH
FALL TO REAR
SLATE FROM REAR ROOF
DOWNTAKINGS TO BE USED
ON NEW SECTION TO FRONT
1.1m PROTECTIVE GLASS
BALUSTRADE TO FRONT
EXISTING CHIMNEY
NEW RIDGE LINE
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Ridge height increase reduced from 300mm to 135mm
Dormer size reduced to sit wholly within existing roof footprint
SDTerrace depth reduced to 2mA 21/06/22
Jan'22
A21070-AA-057
EXISTING & PROPOSED ROOF PLAN
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
210701:100 @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
EXISTING ROOF PLAN PROPOSED ROOF PLAN
1 0 2 4 6
Scale of Metres - 1:100
3e
91

Page 92

Page 93

Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
JUNE '22
21070-SK-100
SHEET 1 OF 3
EXISTING & PROPOSED VISUAL
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
21070NTS @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
Existing Visual
Proposed Visual
Proposed dormer extension
Proposed velux cabrio roof windows
Proposed extension
Existing dormer
Existing conservatory
Proposed terrace
3e
93

Page 94

Page 95

Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
JUNE '22
21070-SK-101
SHEET 2 OF 3
EXISTING & PROPOSED VISUAL
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
21070NTS @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
Existing Visual
Proposed Visual
Proposed dormer extension
Proposed extension
Existing dormer
Existing conservatory
Proposed terrace
3e
95

Page 96

Page 97

Proposed dormer extension
Client
Project Title
Drawing Title
Scale Date
Drawing Number Revision
T:  +44 (0) 1698 451 295
E:  info@abode-architects.co.uk
W: abode-architects.co.uk
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
commencing. No assumption should be made without reference
to the architect.
© All Rights Reserved. Copyright in all documents and
drawings prepared by Abode Architects and in any works
executed from these documents and drawings shall remain the
property of Abode Architects.
Rev Description Date By
Job No.
Abode Architects
18 Haddow Street
Hamilton
ML3 7HX
ADDITIONAL NOTES
JUNE '22
21070-SK-102
SHEET 3 OF 3
EXISTING & PROPOSED VISUAL
AT 75 KIRK STREET, STRATHAVEN
SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION & DORMER EXTENSION
21070NTS @ A3
WHITNEY WATSON
PLANNING
Existing Visual
Proposed Visual
Proposed velux cabrio roof windows
3e
97

Page 98

Page 99

Further Representation 
Further Representation From
 Statement of Observations from Planning Officer on Applicant’s Notice of Review 
Appendix 6  3f
99

Page 100

Page 101

STATEMENT OF OBSERVATIONS 
Planning Application No. P/22/0281 
Erection of two storey rear extension with associated alterations and the formation of
a roof terrace
75 Kirk Street, Strathaven, ML10 6BA 
1.0  Planning Background 
1.1 A planning application was submitted for the erection of a two-storey rear extension to
an existing detached dwellinghouse located within the Strathaven Conservation Area
which included the formation of a roof terrace. Following due consideration of the
proposals the planning application was refused by the Council under delegated powers
on 14 February 2023. The report of handling sets out the decision and the reasons for
refusal are listed in the decision notice. These documents are available elsewhere
within the papers. 
1.2  The application site is a detached 1.5 storey dwellinghouse located within an
established residential area of Strathaven. The property is located on one of the busier
streets in the town, the A71 Kirk Street, and whilst the majority of the surrounding
properties are residential, there is a supermarket located immediately to the back of
the site.  The site is located within the designated Strathaven Conservation Area. 
1.3 The application was advertised by means of neighbour notification, a newspaper
advert, and the display of a site notice.  No letters of representation have been received
in connection with the proposal. 
2.0  Assessment Against the Development Plan and Other Relevant Policies 
2.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended,
requires that an application for planning permission is determined in accordance with
the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 
2.2 In terms of the South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (SLLDP2) (adopted
2021), the following policies are applicable: 
• Policy 5: Development Management and Placemaking
• Policy 14: Natural and Historic Environment
• Policy DM2: House Extensions and Alterations
• Policy NHE6: Conservation Areas 
2.3 Following the consideration of this proposal National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4)
(2023) has been adopted by the Scottish Government and this forms part of the
development plan scheme.  The relevant policies of NPF4 to this proposal are: 
• Policy 7: Historic Assets and Places
• Policy 14: Design, Quality and Place
• Policy 16: Quality Homes 
3f
101

Page 102

2.4  The application site is designated as being within the Strathaven settlement boundary
and within the Strathaven Conservation Area within the adopted South Lanarkshire
Local Development Plan 2 2021 (SLLDP2). SLLDP2 Policy 5 - Development
Management and Placemaking states that development proposals should take
account of and be integrated within the local context and built form. Development
proposals should have no significant adverse impacts on the local community and
there should be no significant adverse impact on adjacent buildings in terms of layout,
scale, massing, design, external materials, or amenity as well as no adverse
implications for public safety. 
2.5 Specific guidance on householder extensions is set out in SLLDP2 Policy DM2 –
House Extensions and Alterations.  This policy states that house extensions and
alterations will be considered favourable where it can be demonstrated that they
comply with a set criterion, including; that the siting, form, scale, design and materials
respect the character of the existing dwelling and wider area with innovative design
being encouraged where it complements the character of the building and its
surroundings, that the size, scale or height does not dominate or overwhelm the
existing building, neighbouring properties or streetscene, that it does not significantly
adversely affect neighbouring properties in terms of overshadowing, loss of light or
privacy, that it retains adequate parking, bin storage and useable garden ground and
that it does not have an adverse impact upon traffic or public safety. 
2.6 SLLDP2 Policy 14 – Natural and Historic Environment states that the Council will seek
to protect important natural and historic sites and features.  In designated Conservation
Areas, development which would have a significant adverse impact following the
implementation of mitigation measures will only be permitted where the effects are
outweighed by significant social or economic benefits.  This is further developed in
SLLDP2 Policy NHE6 - Conservation Areas which advises that development within a
Conservation Area or affecting its setting shall preserve or enhance its character and
be consistent with any relevant Conservation Area appraisal or management plan that
may have been prepared for the area.  The design, materials, scale, and siting of any
development shall be appropriate to the character of the Conservation Area and its
setting.   
2.7 The Strathaven Conservation Area Management Plan (CAMP) (2017) is also a
consideration in the assessment of this application.  Policy CAMP 1.1 – Development
Principles seeks to ensure that the design and construction of any development within
the Conservation Area will reconcile the new with the old so that the significance of the
old is preserved and enhanced, and not diminished.  There is a set criterion to be
considered including; that the original historic building is the focus in any development
scheme, with alterations and extensions informed by the existing character, that all
alterations, extensions and new structures are well designed and of a quality
commensurate with the historic buildings and character of the site, and that substantial
alterations and additions may have a strong character of their own, while minor works
should not draw attention to themselves and should be of high design quality and
complement rather than mimic existing buildings. 
2.8 NPF4 Policy 7 – Historic Assets and Places states that development proposals in
Conservation Areas will only be supported where the character and appearance of the
Conservation Area and its setting is preserved or enhanced.  Relevant considerations
include the architectural and historic character of the area, the existing density, built
102

Page 103

form and layout and the context and siting, quality of design and suitable materials. 
Development Proposals in Conservation Areas will ensure that existing features which
contribute to the character of the area and its setting are retained.  NPF4 Policy 14 –
Design, Quality and Place states that design proposal will be designed to improve the
quality of an area, and that proposal will only be supported where they are consistent
with the six qualities of successful places: healthy, pleasant, connected, distinctive,
sustainable, and adaptable.  NPF4 Policy 16 – Quality Homes states that householder
development proposal will be supported where they do not have a detrimental impact
on the character or environmental quality of the home and surrounding area in terms
of size, design, and materials and where they do not have a detrimental effect on
neighbouring properties in terms of physical impact, overshadowing or overlooking. 
Householder development proposals that provide adaptations in response to risks from
the changing climate, or relating to people with health conditions that lead to
accommodation needs will be supported. 
2.9 In assessment, the proposal is considered to have a significant adverse impact upon
residential and visual amenity in the area, and upon the character of the Conservation
Area.  The proposed full-width extension is considered to dominate the existing house
due to its excessive size and height in relation to the existing building.  The roof
requires to be raised in height to accommodate the proposed upper floor
accommodation given its scale, and the extension is of a contrasting modern design
when compared to the existing building.  Whilst a contrasting design can be successful
in certain circumstances, the site is located within a Conservation Area and the
proposal’s design and scale would significantly adversely impact upon the visual
amenity and overall character of the area.  In addition, the full width roof terrace would
be likely to allow for excessive overlooking over neighbouring private gardens, even
with privacy screens.  Whilst the extension is located to the rear it would be highly
visually prominent from the street due to its size and modern design.  In addition, the
front elevation would be significantly altered with the increase in the height of the roof
between the existing chimneys and the formation of new roof windows.  The adverse
impact upon the streetscape and overall character of the Conservation Area is
considered to be significant. 
2.10 Given the above, the proposal was therefore not deemed to be in accordance with
Policies 5, 14, DM2 or NHE6 of the adopted South Lanarkshire Local Development
Plan 2 due to its overall scale, design, impact upon privacy, impact upon residential
amenity and due to its adverse impact upon the character of the Conservation Area.  It
was also considered in line with the relevant guidance contained within Strathaven
Conservation Area Management Plan and with the proposed NPF4, which has since
been adopted.  It is considered that the proposal would also specifically not be in
accordance with Policies 7, 14 or 16 of the National Planning Framework 4 (2023). 
3.0 Observations on Applicants Notice of Review 
3.1 The applicants have submitted a statement to support their review. The grounds are
summarised below: 
(a)  That the application was not given due consideration and a thorough
review by the Planning Service due to the time taken to issue a decision,
a lack of communication, late advertisement of the application, a
perceived lack of site visit and the view that a non-applicable policy
(NHE6) was referred to in the reasons for refusal.   
103

Page 104

Response:  It is considered that the application has been properly assessed
by the Planning Service.  Determination of the application was significantly
delayed both by workload pressures and by attempts to seek amendments to
the proposal to make it more acceptable in terms of its impact upon amenity
and the character of the area.  The site was visited as part of this application
and the late advertisement was an unfortunate oversight as generally rear
householder extensions do not need to be advertised as affecting the character
of a Conservation Area, however the overall scale of this proposal and the
increase in the height of the roof was such that such advertisement was
required in this instance.  Finally, Policy NHE6 – Conservation Areas is
applicable to the assessment of an application located within a designated
Conservation Area.       
(b)  Policy NHE6 is not applicable to this application, therefore the proposal
cannot be contrary to this policy.
Response:  South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (2021) Policy NHE6
– Conservation Areas is applicable to all developments proposed within a
Conservation Area.  The application site is located within the designated
Strathaven Conservation Area and therefore this policy is applicable.  It may be
that the applicant/agent is referring to ‘Policy NHE6’ of the previous Local
Development Plan, which does refer to a separate topic.   
(c)  The proposal is for a high-quality extension to the rear of a house which
is barely visible from the street and as such not really visible from the
Conservation Area.  The before and after visualisations show that the
extension can barely be seen from the street.  From the east you can see
a small section of the dormer and from the west you can see the dormer
and extension, in the same way that you can see the current dormer and
conservatory.  The visual impact is no different to what is existing.
Response:  The visualisations provided by the agent, whilst helpful, are taken
from select angles and do not show the full extent of the impact of the proposed
extension.  It is considered that the rear extension would be reasonably
prominent in the area due to its scale and contrasting design, and the increase
in the height of the roof and alterations to the front elevation would be readily
visible.  High quality innovative design is certainly encouraged, but the size and
scale of the proposal is important too, as is the impact upon neighbouring
residents and, where applicable, the impact upon the character of the
Conservation Area.   
(d)  The ridge height of the roof needs to be raised due to the current
headroom within the existing bedroom at first floor being non-compliant
with building regulations.  Raising the ridge by 5 inches is not going to
be noticeable from the street.  
Response:  It is understood that there are technical reasons behind the
proposed increase in the roof height, however the planning application process
is concerned with the impact of the development upon the amenity and
character of the wider area.  In this instance, the proposal is considered to
dominate the existing house, in that it is effectively adding a two-storey
extension onto a traditional 1.5 storey dwellinghouse.  The increase in the
height of the ridge would be noticeable and, together with the new roof windows
to the front, there would be a significant change to the character of the building
and to the wider Conservation Area. 
104

Page 105

(e)  Other 1.5 storey bungalows have been extended to the rear, including the
neighbouring property which has a large, overpowering two storey
extension with windows which overlook the applicant’s garden.  
Response:  It is noted that the two immediate neighbouring properties have
been extended, and these extensions are quite different in scale and design to
that proposed in this application.  The most recent alteration appears to be the
granting of consent for a small upper floor balcony to the rear of the property at
number 77, however it is noted that this is significantly smaller in size than the
roof terrace that forms part of this application and that it can successfully
incorporate screening due to its size and position in relation to neighbouring
properties (EK/17/0372).  The other applications on record for works to these
properties are older and would have been considered against the applicable
Local Development Plan policies and guidance in place at the time, as
appropriate. 
It should be noted that consent was refused for the specific proposal, but not
for the principle of a rear extension at this location.  The Planning Service would
be happy to further engage with the applicant/agent over proposals for this site.   
(f)  The proposal seeks to rationalise the clumsy nature of the existing
dormer/extension and conservatory massing on the house.  The rear of
the existing building is a miss-mash of styles added at various points. 
The proposal has sought to create a high-quality extension to an existing
home using high-quality materials and a thorough, well connected
design.  At ground floor level it does not project any further into the rear
garden than the existing conservatory does. 
Response:  It is noted that the existing house has been altered by the erection
of a conservatory, rear extension, and rear dormer.  These are not of a size or
scale that are visually prominent from the front of the property, or from the wider
Conservation Area.  The proposed extension is of a much larger scale, with the
virtual full-width upper floor section and roof terrace making it effectively a two-
storey dwelling in appearance, rather than 1.5 stories in height.  Its size is such
that it is also much more visually prominent.  A smaller scale, single-story
contemporary extension would be more likely to suitably integrate with the
existing building, without adversely impacting upon the wider Conservation
Area.   
(g)  The roof terrace does not project further into the gardens than the
adjacent properties before they were both extended.  The terrace sits
roughly in line with the ‘original’ rear wall of the adjacent properties. 
Therefore, it is believed that the privacy of the adjacent properties is not
adversely affected. 
Response:  The proposal would seek to construct an upper floor terrace across
effectively the full width of the dwellinghouse, allowing for unobstructed views
over the neighbouring properties gardens.  Whilst some screening to the sides
can be provided by screen barriers, there would be open views to most of the
gardens, given the length of the terrace proposed.  In urban residential areas
a degree of mutual overlooking is commonplace and complete privacy is rarely
possible, but the size and scale of the roof terrace is such that it would
significantly affect the privacy of neighbouring residents.  
105

Page 106

(h)  The proposal would not lead to an ‘undesirable precedent’ due to its high-
quality design.  
Response:  Whilst each planning application is considered on its own merits
against the relevant policies of the development plan, the granting of consent
for one extension which did not comply with development plan policies and
guidance would be likely to lead to further such proposals being submitted for
consideration.  The cumulative impact of several similar out of character
extensions would further adversely impact upon the character of the
Conservation Area. 
4.0  Conclusions 
4.1  In summary, the proposal does not accord with the provisions of the adopted Local
Development Plan 2 relating to Policy NHE6, or with National Planning Framework 4
(NPF4) Policies 7, 14 or 16.  In addition, there are no material considerations which
outweigh the provisions of the development plan. It is therefore respectfully requested
that the Review Body refuse planning permission for the proposal.
106

Page 107

Report
Agenda Item 
Report to: Planning Local Review Body 
Date of Meeting: 7 August 2023
Report by: Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources)  
Subject: Review of Case – Application P/23/0156 for Erection of
New Roof with Increased Ridge Height to Facilitate
Second Floor of Accommodation, Installation of Front
and Rear Dormers and Erection of Balcony 
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: J Peeka 
Proposal: Erection of new roof with increased ridge height to facilitate
second floor of accommodation, installation of front and rear
dormers and erection of balcony
Location:   Sion, 47 Burnblea Street, Hamilton, ML3 6RF
Council Area/Ward: 19 Hamilton 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
[1recs]
4
107

Page 108

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))
 Copies of representations (Appendix 2(b))
 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.
108

Page 109

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. 
Comments from the applicant are contained in the submission attached as
Appendix 7. 
Paul Manning
Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources) 
28 July 2023 
Link(s) to Council Values/Priorities/Outcomes
 We will work towards a sustainable future in sustainable places
 Good quality, suitable and sustainable places to live
 Thriving business, fair jobs and vibrant town centres
 Caring, connected, 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 454 815 / 07385 370 117)
E-mail:  stuart.mcleod@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
109

Page 110

Page 111

Planning Application Form 
Appendix 1  4a
111

Page 112

Page 113

Page 114

Page 115

Page 116

Page 117


 !"##$#%"&

Page 118

No embedded text on this page.

Page 119

Page 120

'()

Page 121

*)+',+*
-&&

Page 122

Page 123

No embedded text on this page.

Page 124

.,//

Page 125

Page 126

0/

Page 127

Page 128

).

Page 129

./

Page 130

/)1/2).

Page 131

&/+
!)

Page 132

*02&

Page 133

')&&

Page 134

2"
3454%6%7%6%4% ##89##
!)

Page 135

Page 136

Page 137

Page 138

Page 139

Page 140

Page 141

Page 142

0+!):

Page 143

No embedded text on this page.

Page 144

Page 145

'-)0;

Page 146

-&&

Page 147

4.;)

Page 148


02,//+:1)2

Page 149

Page 150

Page 151

)&

Page 152

No embedded text on this page.

Page 153

Page 154

'-)0.)&&

Page 155

+
<=>?@AB>>CDEFGD@H
I))&&

Page 156

2J:

Page 157

2)2;

Page 158

'"K
L-&&

Page 159

2&

Page 160

No embedded text on this page.

Page 161

Page 162

'&

Page 163

Page 164

Page 165

')

Page 166

'2

Page 167

/2

Page 168

;*

Page 169

'N+
O-&&

Page 170

2&

Page 171

No embedded text on this page.

Page 172

Page 173

'&

Page 174

Page 175

Page 176

&+
O7)&&

Page 177

PM

Page 178

Page 179

Page 180

;2&

Page 181

No embedded text on this page.

Page 182

Page 183

'&

Page 184

P/2

Page 185

P,

Page 186

,2&

Page 187

No embedded text on this page.

Page 188

Page 189

Page 190

Page 191

N
O-&&

Page 192

2-&&,2
&2/

Page 193

Page 194

Page 195

+
Q?RESD>GD@H@ATS@>@RFC
:/.)&&

Page 196

Page 197

Page 198

0)

Page 199

'2"KM
U##)N
5)&0&

Page 200

JK OVL4
52)

Page 201

'2.

Page 202

//

Page 203

)&&)/0*

Page 204

&J OVL4
M-

Page 205

;W4X2)

Page 206

Page 207

'2+NK
);*/0.

Page 208

Page 209

/Y&/JK
L4OVZ[/OV9&/
B>>CDEFHG@SB\?HGQ?GFDCR
-0

Page 210

&&

Page 211

Page 212

Page 213

JKM-

Page 214

Page 215

Page 216

)P

Page 217

Page 218

Page 219

Page 220

Page 221


.)22)&&

Page 222

Page 223

Page 224

No embedded text on this page.

Page 225

Page 226

;))&&

Page 227

N O-&&

Page 228

L-'

Page 229

Page 230

Page 231

;)

Page 232

/2&)P/2

Page 233

Page 234

/.

Page 235

0+
4a
113

Page 236

Page 237

Page 238


 
!"#$%&'  "(
)*+,-#.( /"-#-0-  ,#",-#.1"."2(3
4 ,#(3 0-  ,#(
5,#(3  0-  ,-#.(
6
7$2",-#.(3 89:(3
;< ",-#.( =(
>". ,-#.( 7"?&! %(3
4<,-#.( !"-%(3
"@"(3
;# (3
A2$$ @  B -""  "&@"$" %C3
DA B -E'  "&!"$" %


FFG

Page 239


$$ @ 
7 ( /"-#-0-  ,#",-#.1"."2(3
'27 ( 0-  ,#(
4 ,#(3 0-  ,-#.(
6
5,#(3 89:(3
!"#$%&'  " =(
7$2",-#.(3 7"?&! %(3
;< ",-#.( !"-%(3
>". ,-#.( "@"(3
4<,-#.(
;# (3
@2 HI"-89@":5
>
9#
J"$2
9# 2
K
L"" B-
0-.9
M
NO
9 "
P6N6==66NQQ
66QR
>5QS)4
T U "#
TU
0 "*L 
I# "
#V@2 H2"-+@"+-K
,
114

Page 240

Page 241

Page 242


 !"#
$% &''!(&& )(&(*+'% &+ '(,(!(-.(/#
''!(&&0#
''!(&&1#
''!(&&2#
''!(&&3#
''!(&&4#
5 ,67"68((9(#
 &7 '(#
(&('()"6'(&+!.(( +  )(&( !&(&
: ! ;&
<=>>?

Page 243

@A?B@A
C-(" '&+&&('" !%! % &,(% !"DE FG(&H:

Page 244




(&(&((&(!(#
(&(&((9(&!(9("%(&('# FC(+!(&*/H8I!(J(!(&*&IK9/
LM

Page 245

ANO
(&('(&+!.((+!!( !9 &!(+(&(#E*JP4QQ+!+(!&/
??A<RAN
!(" %! % &(,(!('-(+(++(&&  !)! 9%.+! 'DE FG(&H:
S)G(&%(&('(&+!.('& , " !'!,&(% &  )"(P&K(!(' !(,++(&&% &T(+(&
" %! % &( 9U(KG & '& & ,(P&)  %&' ()(!(,.("9%+ (&(K
8SV:
WQ2KQQ
X,(Y &(
8 Z!U&!(7 +
3W[\]:[Z;85];;5
CJSZ5V:
JZ2^]$
^43^_3 1W0W_^
115

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

Page 259

Page 260

Page 261

'(

Page 262

Page 263

Page 264

Page 265

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

-
1

Page 292

Page 293

Page 294

Page 295

.&

Page 296

&(

Page 297

&&

Page 298

Page 299

Page 300

Page 301

Page 302

Page 303

Page 304

Page 305

Page 306

Page 307

**(&

Page 308

Page 309

Page 310

Page 311

+23)

Page 312

Page 313

Page 314

Page 315

-*
456789:;;<=5>?@85A>5B7C885>B7D7>6E
F

Page 316

Page 317

Page 318

Page 319

No embedded text on this page.

Page 320

Page 321

Page 322

Page 323

Page 324

!"

Page 325

#$
H'(

Page 326

Page 327

Page 328

Page 329

Page 330

!"

Page 331

#$
,

Page 332

**/IH/

Page 333

Page 334

-
$

Page 335

JK
1

Page 336

Page 337

Page 338

Page 339

/IH/

Page 340

Page 341

Page 342

Page 343

L$M

Page 344

Page 345

Page 346

Page 347

Page 348

Page 349

N)'

Page 350

Page 351

Page 352

Page 353

Page 354

Page 355

Page 356

(
#"

Page 357


!$)

Page 358

Page 359

!$

Page 360

Page 361

Page 362

&
%$)

Page 363

Page 364

Page 365

Page 366

Page 367

&(

Page 368

No embedded text on this page.

Page 369

Page 370

&)&

Page 371

Page 372

-*
CEE7EED7>6OPQ<OO?RAES
%

Page 373

Page 374

Page 375

((& !"

Page 376

 !$#HMT
%

Page 377

Page 378

Page 379

((&'

Page 380

No embedded text on this page.

Page 381

&'U&V(

Page 382

Page 383

Page 384

Page 385

Page 386

Page 387

Page 388

Page 389

&*"'1
/N1
&)

Page 390

''

Page 391

No embedded text on this page.

Page 392

Page 393

&*
H('

Page 394

Page 395

Page 396

&(

Page 397

Page 398

Page 399

No embedded text on this page.

Page 400

!"

Page 401

 !$#HMT
W877E

Page 402

Page 403

No embedded text on this page.

Page 404

Page 405

No embedded text on this page.

Page 406

&X

Page 407

Page 408

Page 409

#"

Page 410

!$
%"

Page 411

Page 412

Page 413

'(&

Page 414

No embedded text on this page.

Page 415

Page 416

Page 417

Page 418

No embedded text on this page.

Page 419

Page 420

Page 421

Page 422

Page 423

Page 424

&&

Page 425

Page 426

Page 427

Page 428

Page 429

&*
45E6796O85B75>?YO<<7Z6AO>
H

Page 430

Page 431

Page 432

Page 433

&&

Page 434

Page 435

Page 436

,&

Page 437

- #"

Page 438

!$
[
[
116

Page 439

Page 440

Page 441

Page 442

Page 443

Page 444

Page 445

Page 446

Page 447

Page 448

Page 449

"##

Page 450

$$%
&'()*'+,)-.

Page 451

/+),(

Page 452

0+1.2*)+3

Page 453

45+6'7()5+
8

Page 454

Page 455

Page 456

:$

Page 457

:;

Page 458

Page 459

Page 460

Page 461

:<

Page 462

Page 463

 >?
@..

Page 464

ABC'(

Page 465

5D

Page 466

E5+

Page 467

F52()+3

Page 468

G'6'.5CH'+,

Page 469

Page 470

J75C5('*

Page 471

E'K

Page 472

L.557(C-1'
8

Page 473

Page 474

Page 475

Page 476

Page 477

Page 478

::M:

Page 479

$=

Page 480

 >?
N1O'*2.'

Page 481

Page 482

G'6'.5CH'+,
8

Page 483

Page 484

Page 485

Page 486

Page 487

Page 488

Page 489

Q:

Page 490

Page 491

Page 492

R$

Page 493

Page 494

Page 495

Page 496

T;:

Page 497

Page 498

U:9 >>?8:V

Page 499

W:;
X:::Y

Page 500

8Q:

Page 501

 :YQ:

Page 502

X$

Page 503

R$:%

Page 504

ZY:

Page 505

[#\S

Page 506

Page 507

Page 508

Page 509

Page 510

Page 511

:9

Page 512

Page 513

Page 514

Page 515

Page 516

Page 517

Page 518

:;

Page 519

$$:Y

Page 520

Page 521

Page 522

Page 523

Page 524

Page 525

Q:^

Page 526

Page 527

:::Y
9

Page 528

Page 529

Page 530

Page 531

Page 532

Page 533

Page 534

Page 535

Page 536

$Y

Page 537

Page 538

Page 539

Page 540

Page 541

$$_

Page 542

Page 543

:::Y

Page 544

9V

Page 545

;]

Page 546

Page 547

Page 548

Page 549

Page 550

Page 551

Page 552

Page 553

Page 554

Page 555

Page 556

:::Y

Page 557

Page 558

Page 559

Page 560

Page 561

Page 562

Page 563

Page 564

Page 565

Page 566

Page 567

Page 568

Q:

Page 569

Page 570

Page 571

R$

Page 572

Page 573

Page 574

$$_

Page 575

Page 576

Page 577

T!

Page 578

Page 579

a:$
:

Page 580

Page 581

$:$:Y

Page 582

Page 583

:::Y

Page 584

9^
J.-++)+3

Page 585

N'76)1'

Page 586

bHC.5B''cb.'1,'*

Page 587

d'He'7

Page 588

0+,'7'(,

Page 589

Page 590

$:

Page 591

Page 592

Page 593

$:V

Page 594

<:

Page 595

Page 596

Page 597

QQ]

Page 598

Page 599

Page 600

;:

Page 601

Page 602

:::Y

Page 603

Page 604

Page 605

: > ?
$

Page 606

QQ]

Page 607

Page 608

Page 609

:::Y

Page 610

9=

Page 611


4'7,)D)1-,'(

Page 612

-+*

Page 613

E5,)1'(
UfZT
g
UhTf

Page 614

h8

Page 615

iT
Uf

Page 616

j8fZ

Page 617

ZfajkhT
i

Page 618

\"

Page 619

Page 620

Tim

Page 621

h8

Page 622

UijTZ

Page 623

Xkh
a

Page 624

8fnfkiX fT

Page 625

 hhaf fT
XZiUf8jZf%

Page 626

RUiTkh8%

Page 627

ZfajkhT
i

Page 628

[#\S
i:

Page 629

U$

Page 630

Page 631

Page 632

$Q

Page 633

Page 634

]Q

Page 635

:Y

Page 636

Page 637

Page 638

$:

Page 639

Q^

Page 640

Page 641

Page 642

Page 643

Page 644

U$

Page 645

Page 646

gQ

Page 647

\
U$

Page 648

Page 649

U$

Page 650

Page 651

Page 652

U$

Page 653

f^
h

Page 654

9<

Page 655

$:

Page 656

Page 657

Page 658

;:

Page 659

Page 660

hkk

Page 661

Page 662

:=

Page 663

 ? >

Page 664

:9

Page 665

Page 666

Page 667

Page 668

Page 669

Page 670

Page 671

Y$

Page 672

:Y=

Page 673

 > ?
4'7,)D)1-,'

Page 674

&'p2)7'*
T

Page 675

;:Y

Page 676

k:

Page 677

i;:

Page 678

U$

Page 679

Page 680

Page 681

Page 682

$Q

Page 683

Page 684

$:

Page 685

Page 686

Page 687

U$

Page 688

h
o:

Page 689

Page 690

:!

Page 691

Page 692

Page 693

_:Y

Page 694

::

Page 695

Page 696

;:

Page 697

_$:^
117

Page 698

Page 699

Page 700


 !""#$%&!'#$()'*"&#+,& -.&/#"#$&'#01*"###)234*&56#7"#")6#1&!$'829!&*"#$8
()'*"&#:;<+=
 !">
?-@0! 0-"A
2+8B%&5:&#&--"#60:* C-"55*!"#/":"#&/#2>#05:&#/-&D#:5!& "#05"& -*"#$D:-&/#&:-
*::'#$"*":-& & /-!-#&*::-"#E0":6"#'#F5$G8& "#05"& -*"#$&/-!--"55*!"&#*":"
-@)###)& -5&$& ;+$"0:#$#)/--$"& -"!!&65"#0#)"55*!"&#G
2;8B%&#& -*"#$&/-!--"55*!"&#*":!&#:':& &6:5"& "#")!'*'"*-&*$#)
9)#$H 9"696-:
I#@-"* & H %>
3"H <EC<;C;<;=
J1*":!K-&! 0-: !"GL
MNOPNQ

Page 701

QRN

Page 702

No embedded text on this page.

Page 703

Page 704

SRTQ

Page 705


.&/#"#$&'#01*"###)29!&*"#$8>!+UUE
.-.&/#"#$&'#01*"###)234*&56#7"#")6#1&!$'829!&*"#$8()'*"&#:;<+=
1*":"K" /6&6#:&!&65*- &**&/#)!-!K*:#&$&#:'-"0&'-"45&4$$"**-#!::"0# &6"&#
#:'55&& 0&'"55*!"&#GV"*'&:'@6:'  !## &6"&#/-0&'"55*!"&#6"0:'*#0&'"55*!"&#@#)$6$
#4"*$G.-5*"###)"'-&0/**#&:"5&!::#)0&'"55*!"&#'#*:4"*$G
"8? -::" '-"55*!"&#/--:"4""&#& !&#$&#:""!-$&"54&':!&#:#D-"40&'5&4$$":"6#&
-"  !WL
XY:X%&J%&"55*!"@*&-:"55*!"&#
@8? -::"#"55*!"&# &5*"###)56::&#&5*"###)56::&##5#!5"*/--:"!&/##:#-*"#$D-"4
0&'5&4$$":"6#&-"  !WL
XY:X%&J%&"55*!"@*&-:"55*!"&#
!8? -::"#"55*!"&# &5*"###)56::&#D5*"###)56::&##5#!5*&" '-"55*!"&#"#$-"55*!"&#: &
$4*&56#@*&#)#)&-!")&:& #"&#"*&6"Z&$4*&56#2&--"#&#'#$9!&#[;& -5*"###)>!8D-"4
0&'5&4$$"1B>55*!"&#&#:'*"&#(5&WL
XY:X%&J%&"55*!"@*&-:"55*!"&#
.&/#"#$&'#01*"###)29!&*"#$8>!+UUE
.-.&/#"#$&'#01*"###)234*&56#7"#")6#1&!$'829!&*"#$8()'*"&#:;<+=
$8? -::"#"55*!"&# &5*"###)56::&#"#$-"55*!"&#*":&$4*&56#@*&#)#)&-!")&:& #"&#"*&
6"Z&$4*&56#:"#$0&'$&#&@#  &6F65&#'#$()'*"&#+=& .-.&/#"#$&'#01*"###)234*&56#
7"#")6#1&!$'829!&*"#$8()'*"&#:;<+=D-"40&'5&4$$"3:)#"#$>!!::9"6#WL
XY:X%&J%&"55*!"@*&-:"55*!"&#
8? -::"#"55*!"&# &5*"###)56::&#"#$*":&$4*&56#@*&#)#)&-!")&0& *&!"*$4*&56#:2:'@Z!
&)'*"&#+=G2;8"#$2=8& -34*&56#7"#")6#1&!$'29!&*"#$8()'*"&#:;<+=8-"40&'5&4$$"3:)#
9"6#WL
XY:X%&J%&"55*!"@*&-:"55*!"&#
8? 0&'"55*!"&#*":&#:"**"&#& "#"###"&@65*&0$#"#*!&#!!&66'#!"&##/&KD-"40&'5&4$$"#
?%?(13!*""&#WL
XY:X%&J%&"55*!"@*&-:"55*!"&#
118

Page 706

Page 707




		
 	!
"#$%&'(
")(
"*(
"+(
",(
-.%/* '%(
-$(
-%	/	(
-0(

Page 708




0!12.3455

% 	6!
7)#(1 -8"9/7
7:	#:	7#(1 -8"9/7
7*,'7(1 -8"9/7
7:

Page 709

72	#6:	#
(1 -8"9/7
:	/#;:#(1 -8"9/7
7<7<% -8"9/7
+$7(1 -8"9/7
=6#(1 -8"9/7
7%	7	(1 -8"9/7
0#2
(2.3455

>?@ABC?DEFCGHHAI@BJIFKJFLABKKIKMGNJOFCIJP

Page 710


/		6(<	
%/ 	(
:9! .##
::! 5Q/5R/R5RS
LBPT?KJ>?JBIAU
%:
+!5V/5R/R5RSRW!XV
119

Page 711

Page 712

Report of Handling 
Report dated 3 April 2023 by the Council’s Authorised Officer under the Scheme of
Delegation 
Appendix 2(a)  4b
121

Page 713

Page 714

Planning proposal: Erection of new roof with increased ridge height to facilitate second floor of
accommodation, installation of front and rear dormers and erection of
balcony.  
Location:  Sion
47 Burnblea Street
Hamilton
South Lanarkshire
ML3 6RF 
Application Type:  Detailed planning application   
Applicant:  Mr. Joseph Peeka    
Location:   Sion
47 Burnblea Street
Hamilton
South Lanarkshire
ML3 6RF    
Decision: 
Other action/notes:    
Application refused 
None  
Report by: Area Manager (Planning & Building Standards) 
Policy reference:  
National Planning Framework 4 (adopted 2023)
NPF4: Policy 1 Tackling the climate and nature crises
NPF4: Policy 2 Climate mitigation and adaptation
NPF4: Policy 16 Quality homes 
South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (adopted 2021)
SLDP2: Policy 2 Climate change
SLDP2: Policy 3 General Urban Areas and Settlements
SLDP2: Policy 5 Development Management and Placemaking
SLDP2: Policy DM2 House Extensions and Alterations 
Assessment
Impact on privacy? No
Impact on sunlight/daylight? No
Impact on amenity? No
Traffic issues? No
Adheres to development plan policy? Yes
Adverse comments from consultees? No 
Reference no. P/23/0156
Delegated Report   
Date 
4b
123

Page 715

Consultations Summary of response 
None     
Representation(s): 
► 2 Objection letters
► 0 Support letters
► 0 Comment letters 
124

Page 716

Planning Application Delegated Report
1 Application Summary
1.1 The applicant seeks detailed planning consent for the erection of new roof with increased
ridge height to facilitate second floor of accommodation, installation of front and rear
dormers and erection of balcony at Sion, Hamilton. The application site is located within
an established residential area.
1.2 The existing house appears to be the result of historic back land development that shares
a boundary with 7 other properties (with 6 of those boundaries being rear gardens). The
property is over two levels and the proposal has the potential to raise significant privacy
and overlooking issues.
1.3 The relevant policies to be considered in this assessment for this application are Policy
16g of the National Planning Framework and policy DM2 of the adopted South
Lanarkshire Local Development Plan.
1.4 Policy 16g 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.
1.5 Policy DM2 – Housing Extensions and Alterations states:
- 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.
- It does not dominate or overwhelm the existing dwelling, neighbouring properties or
streetscene in terms of size, scale or height.
- It does not significantly adversely affect adjacent properties in terms of overlooking or
loss of privacy, daylight or sunlight.
- It retains adequate car parking, usable garden ground and bin storage within the site.
- It does not have an adverse impact on traffic or public safety.
2 Representation(s)
2.1 Statutory neighbour notification was carried out in respect of this proposal, following which
two letters of objection were received. The grounds of objection can be summarised as
follows:
(a) The new house bedroom windows will look directly into my flat and I am not
happy about that.
Reason: The distance of the applicants’ windows is over the 18 metre threshold
from window to window from 5 & 7 Novar Street. Although, with the proposed
extension, the dormer windows will be sited on a high vantage point that will have
clear visibility into all gardens of the properties situated on Burnblea Street. This
will result in a clear overlooking and privacy issue and will have a detrimental
effect on the privacy of all neighbouring properties.
125

Page 717

(b) My flat is directly behind this house and so is my garden, the height and size
will affect my view from my window and will block sunlight into my garden. 
Reason: The applicants property is located to the rear of 5 Novar Street. The
proposed roof extension will block the neighbouring properties enjoyment of their
property by limiting views and believe that the increased roof extension will block
natural sunlight into the objector’s garden. 
(c) As someone who regularly works from home, I have a concern about the
noise aspect and the general disruption of this potential project and how it
could affect the area, especially with the length of time it would likely take
for it to be completed.
Reason: The siting of the applicants property is to the rear of 51, 49 and 45
Burnblea Street, 84 and 86 Alness Street, 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11 Novar Street. Whilst it
is anticipated that noise and general disruption is inevitable during a development,
the siting of the applicants property will generally mean the development will be
more disruptive to neighbouring properties than usually anticipated. 
3 Assessment and Conclusions 
3.1 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 9th April 2021) and National Planning
Framework 4 (adopted on 13th February 2023). Section 24(3) of the 1997 Act confirms
that if there is an inconsistency between NPF4 policies and a Local Development Plan
which was adopted before the 13th February 2023, then the policies in NPF4 prevail. 
3.2 Following a detailed assessment of the proposal, it is considered that this application
would not comply with relevant policies from either the South Lanarkshire Local
Development Plan or the National Planning Framework 4 as it would result in a
detrimental effect on the neighbouring properties in terms of physical impact and
overlooking. In this respect, the proposed erection of the new roof with increased ridge
height to facilitate second floor of accommodation, installation of front and rear dormers
and erection of balcony all combines to result in a considerable increase in overlooking
and privacy issues to the rear of surrounding properties, particularly those to the North
and West. In addition, the high-pitched roof design is not in keeping with the surrounding
area in terms of size or design. The resulting addition would not complement the existing
streetscape and competes in scale to an unsatisfactory degree with the original dwelling. 
3.3 Two objections were received in connection with this application and no formal
consultations were required to be undertaken in this instance given the application type. 
3.4 Given the above, it is considered that the proposal will have a significant adverse impact
upon amenity and that it does not comply with the relevant national or local development
plan policies and guidance. Therefore, it is believed that the refusal of planning consent is
justified in this instance. 
4 Reason for decision 
4.1 The proposal is contrary to Policies 1, 2, and 16 of the National Planning Framework 4
(adopted 2023) and Policies 2, 3, 5 and DM2 of the Local Development Plan 2 (adopted
2021) as it will result in a detrimental impact upon amenity as a result of overlooking and
visual impact. There are no other material considerations which would outweigh the
proposals variance with the development plan.
126

Page 718

Delegating officer:   David Russell 
Date: 03/04/2023 
Previous references
 None   
List of background papers
► Application Form
► Application Plans
► South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (adopted 2021)
► Neighbour notification letter dated 
► Consultations 
None 
► Representations  
Mrs. Gail Webster, 5 Novar Street, Hamilton, ML3 6TG. Dated: 
26.02.2023
26.02.2023 
Mr. Dylan Webster, 7 Novar Street, Hamilton, ML3 6TG. Dated: 
25.02.2023
25.02.2023 
Contact for further information: 
If you would like to inspect the background papers or want further information, please contact: 
Graham Fyfe, Planning officer, Floor 6, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton, ML3 0AA
Phone: 077551839094   
Email: graham.fyfe@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
127

Page 719

Planning Application
Application number: P/23/0156
Conditions and reasons
01. The proposed extension does not conform to the scale, design or character of the original
building on the site or the surrounding built form and would therefore be detrimental to the
amenity of the area in general.
02. If approved, the proposal would result in a loss of privacy and would adversely affect the
amenity of adjacent properties.
03. If approved, the proposal would result in direct overlooking of private garden ground and
would adversely affect the amenity of adjacent properties.
Reason(s) for decision
The applicant seeks detailed planning consent for the erection of new roof with increased ridge
height to facilitate second floor of accommodation, installation of front and rear dormers and
erection of balcony. After a thorough assessment of the proposal and all associated plans and
documents, it is considered that the proposal raises significant concerns in terms of its size,
design, and has various issues relating to privacy and overlooking of neighbouring properties.
Informatives
01. This decision relates to drawing numbers:
Reference Version No: Plan Status
FLOOR PLAN AS
EXISTING
40(AL)300A Refused
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
AS PROPOSED
40(AL)300C Refused
FIRST FLOOR PLAN AS
PROPOSED
40(AL)311D Refused
SECTION A-A AS
EXISTING
40(AL)400A Refused
SECTIONS AS
PROPOSED
40(AL)410B Refused
ELEVATIONS AS
EXISTING
40(AL)500A Refused
ELEVATIONS AS
PROPOSED 1 of 2
40(AL)510C Refused
ELEVATIONS AS
PROPOSED 2 of 2
40(AL)511C Refused
128

Page 720

Representations 
Representation From 
 Gail Webster, by email 
 Dylan Webster, by email 
Appendix 2(b)  4c
129

Page 721

Page 722

Comments for Planning Application P/23/0156
Application Summary
Application Number: P/23/0156
Address: Sion 47 Burnblea Street Hamilton South Lanarkshire ML3 6RF
Proposal: Erection of new roof with increased ridge height to facilitate second floor of
accommodation, installation of front and rear dormers and erection of balcony.
Case Officer: Graham Fyfe
Customer Details
Name: Mrs Gail Webster
Address: 5 Novar Street, hamilton Hamilton
Comment Details
Commenter Type: Neighbour
Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application
Comment Reasons:
Comment:My flat is directly behind this house and so is my garden, as the height and size
capacity of the plan has not been included I know that it will affect my view from windows if it is too
high. The new house bedroom windows will look directly into my flat which I am definitely not
happy about and will block sunlight in my garden. honestly don't know why the neighbours right
next door to them are allowing this to happen as the are almost on top of each other as it is. I will
be very unhappy if this plan is approved.Mrs Gail Webster.
4c
131

Page 723

Page 724

Comments for Planning Application P/23/0156
Application Summary
Application Number: P/23/0156
Address: Sion 47 Burnblea Street Hamilton South Lanarkshire ML3 6RF
Proposal: Erection of new roof with increased ridge height to facilitate second floor of
accommodation, installation of front and rear dormers and erection of balcony.
Case Officer: Graham Fyfe
Customer Details
Name: Mr Dylan Webster
Address: 7 Novar Street Hamilton
Comment Details
Commenter Type: Neighbour
Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application
Comment Reasons:
Comment:Not an outright objection but I certainly would like to find out more information about
this, we have no idea how high this new roof will actually be and how it will affect the homes
behind or in front of the property in a variety of ways.
Also being someone that works from home regularly, I have a slight concern about the noise
aspect and general disruption of this potential project and how it could affect the area, especially
with the length of time it would likely take for it to be completed.
Thanks.
4c
133

Page 725

Page 726

Site photographs and location plan 
Appendix 3  4d
135

Page 727

Page 728

Photo 1 Looking north to south standing at the driveway 
4d
137

Page 729

Photo 2 Rear of property (looking south to north) 
138

Page 730

Photo 3 Rear of property looking north-west 
139

Page 731

Photo 4 Rear Garden looking west to east 
140

Page 732

Photo 5 Rear Garden looking north to South 
141

Page 733

Photo 6 Front of house looking from driveway 
142

Page 734

Photo 1 
4d
143

Page 735

Page 736

Planning Decision Notice and Reasons for Refusal 
Appendix 4  4e
145

Page 737

Page 738

Floor 6, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton, ML3 0AA
Email graham.fyfe@southlanarkshire.gov.uk Phone: 077551839094 
Community And Enterprise Resources
Executive Director David Booth
Planning And Regulatory Services 
Sam Smithers
Archi-House(Scotland)Ltd
9 Woodside Avenue
Bridge Of Weir
PA11 3PQ 
Our Ref: P/23/0156
Your Ref: 
If calling ask for: Graham Fyfe
Date: 6 April 2023 
Dear Sir/Madam 
Proposal: Erection of new roof with increased ridge height to facilitate second
floor of accommodation, installation of front and rear dormers and
erection of balcony.
Site address: Sion, 47 Burnblea Street, Hamilton, ML3 6RF, 
Application no: P/23/0156 
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 Graham Fyfe on 077551839094 
Yours faithfully 
Head of Planning and Regulatory Services 
Enc:  
4e
147

Page 739

Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended
by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006 
To: Mr Joseph Peeka
NA
Per: Sam Smithers 
Sion, 47 Burnblea Street,
Hamilton, ML3 6RF, 
9 Woodside Avenue,
Bridge Of Weir, PA11 3PQ, 
With reference to your application received on 09.02.2023 for planning permission under the
above mentioned Act: 
Description of proposed development: 
Erection of new roof with increased ridge height to facilitate second floor of
accommodation, installation of front and rear dormers and erection of balcony. 
Site location: 
Sion, 47 Burnblea Street, Hamilton, ML3 6RF,   
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: 6th April 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 
Application no.
P/23/0156 
148

Page 740

South Lanarkshire Council 
Refuse planning permission 
Paper apart - Application number: P/23/0156 
Reason(s) for refusal: 
Reason(s) for decision 
The proposal is contrary to Policies 1, 2, and 16 of the National Planning Framework 4 (adopted
2023) and Policies 2, 3, 5 and DM2 of the Local Development Plan 2 (adopted 2021) as it will
result in a detrimental impact upon amenity as a result of overlooking and visual impact. There
are no other material considerations which would outweigh the proposals variance with the
development plan. 
149

Page 741

Notes to applicant 
Application number: P/23/0156 
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  
FLOOR PLAN AS
EXISTING
40(AL)300A Refused  
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
AS PROPOSED
40(AL)300C Refused  
FIRST FLOOR PLAN AS
PROPOSED
40(AL)311D Refused  
SECTION A-A AS
EXISTING
40(AL)400A Refused  
SECTIONS AS
PROPOSED
40(AL)410B Refused  
ELEVATIONS AS
EXISTING
40(AL)500A Refused  
ELEVATIONS AS
PROPOSED 1 OF 2
40(AL)510C Refused  
ELEVATIONS AS
PROPOSED 2 OF 2
40(AL)511C Refused   
150

Page 742

COMMUNITY AND ENTERPRISE RESOURCES
Executive Director David Booth
Planning and Economic Development 
Important notes 
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 (Corporate Resources)
Council Headquarters
Almada Street
Hamilton
ML3 0AA 
To obtain the appropriate forms: 
Administrative Services at the above address. 
Telephone: 01698 454108
E-mail:   pauline.macrae@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. 
151

Page 743

Page 744

Notice of Review (including Statement of Reasons for
Requiring the Review) submitted by applicant J Peeka 
Appendix 5  4f
153

Page 745

Page 746

Page 747

No embedded text on this page.

Page 748

Page 749

Page 750

!"#$%&$#$#'(#'$')*&+,-

Page 751

./.0,

Page 752

10/
++

Page 753

Page 754

21.3

Page 755

Page 756

.22.4.2+0
%./3

Page 757

Page 758

Page 759

+,.++

Page 760

Page 761

&
5"65*7*
*7*5* '$$(889#:$$'
%.

Page 762

.4

Page 763

Page 764

Page 765

Page 766

Page 767

30%.;,.

Page 768

3<

Page 769

++

Page 770

52<.
3

Page 771

Page 772

10;4

Page 773

.3

Page 774

Page 775

Page 776

.+,.

Page 777

Page 778

.++

Page 779

0
=>>?@ABCDEF=GHCDIHDB@?J
3

Page 780

++

Page 781

,KLM,.

Page 782

Page 783

Page 784

Page 785

Page 786

2.

Page 787

.++

Page 788

Page 789

<..++

Page 790

N O++P,
=GHCDIHDB@?J
;,

Page 791

+3Q,

Page 792

&
7052& R

Page 793

S,5

Page 794

Page 795

Page 796

.&L


5&L S,5&
"5&L  S,52&
'
%+.

Page 797

52&L MN&L
*T

Page 798

52& (&
!

Page 799

252& %

Page 800

<Q3&L


T52&

Page 801

3&L
;

Page 802

Page 803

&L
*&L
6.++1

Page 804

Page 805

Page 806

Page 807

Page 808

3KL
P61O,

Page 809

Page 810

Page 811

3
<S;,"
<
S
22

Page 812

Page 813


#
$88($8$$('$
UV$;

Page 814


W
<-<2+,0

Page 815


4f
155

Page 816

Page 817

Page 818


 !" 
# $ %&'(')' " *+(&+'(,-&,&.$/
0.# $ )' " *+($
1 +($/ )' " *+'(,$
""2
3+($/ 456$/
7&(890*  & "":$
#.&+'(,$/ #&;97 8$/
<= &+'(,$ 7&'8$/
>&, +'(,$ &!&"$/
1=+'(,$
<( ""$/
?
@@A

Page 819


 *'.& 8$
1'&""&B. 4 !'" *&!&";.C ,6$
""2$
"":$
""D$
""E$
""F$
#&;97 895($
&7&"$
 " B89"! ,.&! &&B. & 
+&. * < *
>
5G0+
H&.
5&'.3I. 7&'! 
I
EJ)KL+)3<5#L<<#
)',5
EJ
5 &
M>G3#0+
>3DNL1
>3DNL1
5!&"
NFENOE
M( &
:J2JON
156

Page 820

Page 821

Page 822


 !"##$"%" & '( )  % *+"$+( )!"*%,-+#$"%" &+ )#.%+/0"!&"&%+
"$%" &' /1 /&##*"%+%+0/&% '%+&&"&0)%+ "%(23
456788$+$%9
:;<
=+%%( '"$%" &#"#( ))./"%% %+&&"&0)%+ "%(>3
?@"$%" &' &&"&0/"" &4"&$)#"&0+ )+ #"$%" &.)%6$)#"&0"$%" &% * A/"&9,
B@"$%" &' &&"&0/"" &"&"&$",
BC)%+"$%" &,
B@"$%" &'  ! '/%%$"'"#"&$ &#"%" &,
=+%# ( )!"*%% >3
?D')E %"$,
BF&% '/"" &*"%+G &#"%" &"/ #,
BE #$"" &$+#*"%+"&%+$".#" #4%* / &%+'%!"#%" &#% &(0#6%&" &9H#/#'),
IJ

Page 823

Page 824

Page 825

KLMN
O )/)%%%"&')1*+(( )A"&0!"* '%+&&"&0)%+ "%(P#$"" &4 '")% /A#$"" &9,O )%%/&%
/)%% )%/%%( )$ &"#Q)"% .%A&"&% $$ )&%"&#%/"&"&0( )!"*,R'&$(%+"$&. !"##
%# $)/&%"&%+ST) %"&0U $)/&%P$%" &23456788$+$%9
E %2( ))&"A(% +!')%+  %)&"%(% ##% ( )%%/&% '%%#%1 "%"&%"%+%( ) #)$
 '%+"&' /%" &( )*&%%+#$"" &V/A% %A"&% $$ )&%,
O )+ )#& %+ *!"&(&*/%%*+"$+*& %.' %+&&"&0)%+ "%(%%+%"/"%#$"##( )"$%" &4 %
%+%"/6"( '%+" # '#%/"&%" &91)&( )$&#/ &%%%+%%+&*/%%$ )#& %+!.&"#.' %+%
%"/ %+%"%& %."&0"#.' %+%%"/"$ &Q)&$ '6$%" &$"$)/%&$,
W!( )"#&(/%%*+"$+*& %.' %+ "&%# ''"$%%+%"/%+ BO?E
U%/"&%" & &( )"$%" &*/#>3
R'(1( )+ )#6"&"&%+. 6. *1*+(( )""&0%+&*/%%1*+("%*& %"#*"%+%+ "&%# ''"$.' 
( )"$%" &*#%/"&#&#*+(( )$ &"#"%+ )#.$ &"##"&( )!"*23456788$+$%9
-+"$&%A#%"#&&"&0$ &&%' %+$%" & '&*  '*"%+"&$#"#0+"0+%% '$""%%$ &#'   '
$$ // #%" &1"&%%" & '' &%&## /&#$%" & '.$ &(%T" &1XYZ)&.T%%1W/"% &,
'% %+/%%% )%*"%+"&%+T%%/&%"&T) % '%+"DQ)%% D!"*,
157

Page 826

Page 827

Page 828

Page 829

Page 830

Page 831

Page 832

Page 833

Page 834

Page 835

Page 836

Page 837

Page 838

Page 839

Page 840

Page 841

"#

Page 842

Page 843

Page 844

Page 845

No embedded text on this page.

Page 846

Page 847

Page 848

Page 849

$%&'()**

Page 850

+
,--./012/345621/.7

Page 851

Page 852

Page 853

Page 854

Page 855

Page 856

Page 857

Page 858

Page 859

Page 860

"
8

Page 861

Page 862

Page 863

Page 864

 9%
8

Page 865

Page 866

Page 867

Page 868

Page 869

 9%
:6;/6<=>306?@>6
A

Page 870

BC

Page 871

Page 872

Page 873

Page 874

Page 875

Page 876

Page 877

Page 878

Page 879

Page 880

Page 881

Page 882

Page 883

Page 884

Page 885

Page 886

Page 887

Page 888

Page 889

Page 890

Page 891

Page 892

Page 893

Page 894

Page 895

Page 896

Page 897

Page 898

Page 899

Page 900

Page 901

Page 902

Page 903

Page 904

Page 905

Page 906

"F

Page 907

Page 908

Page 909

Page 910

Page 911

Page 912

Page 913

Page 914

!G

Page 915

Page 916

Page 917

Page 918

Page 919

Page 920

Page 921

Page 922

!I

Page 923

Page 924

Page 925

Page 926

Page 927

"
J

Page 928

Page 929

Page 930

Page 931

Page 932

Page 933

Page 934

Page 935

No embedded text on this page.

Page 936

Page 937

Page 938

Page 939

Page 940

Page 941

Page 942

Page 943

9F

Page 944

Page 945

Page 946

Page 947

Page 948

Page 949

Page 950

"%
K#

Page 951

LM

Page 952

Page 953

Page 954

Page 955

Page 956

&!

Page 957

Page 958

+ N

Page 959

Page 960

Page 961

Page 962

"#

Page 963

No embedded text on this page.

Page 964

Page 965

Page 966

Page 967

Page 968

Page 969

Page 970

Page 971

Page 972

Page 973

Page 974

Page 975

No embedded text on this page.

Page 976

Page 977

Page 978

Page 979

Page 980

Page 981

Page 982

Page 983

Page 984

Page 985

Page 986

Page 987

Page 988

Page 989

Page 990

Page 991

Page 992

Page 993

Page 994

Page 995

9&'()**

Page 996

+
O

Page 997

Page 998

Page 999

Page 1000

BC

Page 1001

Page 1002

Page 1003

Page 1004

Page 1005

Page 1006

Page 1007

Page 1008

Page 1009

 $
J

Page 1010

Page 1011

Page 1012

Page 1013

Page 1014

No embedded text on this page.

Page 1015

!9% K#

Page 1016

LM
O!

Page 1017

Page 1018

Page 1019

Page 1020

Page 1021

Page 1022

Page 1023

Page 1024

Page 1025

 9% L#

Page 1026

KM
O

Page 1027

Page 1028

Page 1029

Page 1030

Page 1031

Page 1032

Page 1033

D !

Page 1034

Page 1035

Page 1036

Page 1037

Page 1038

Page 1039

Page 1040

Page 1041

Page 1042

No embedded text on this page.

Page 1043

Page 1044

Page 1045

"&'()**

Page 1046

+
P

Page 1047

Q RF

Page 1048

Page 1049

Page 1050

Page 1051

S T(B
P

Page 1052

Page 1053

B
P

Page 1054

Page 1055

Page 1056

Page 1057

Page 1058

Page 1059

Page 1060

No embedded text on this page.

Page 1061

Q
P

Page 1062

Page 1063

Page 1064

Page 1065

No embedded text on this page.

Page 1066

SP

Page 1067

Page 1068

ZF
P

Page 1069

Page 1070

QF
P

Page 1071

Page 1072

R DT

Page 1073

Page 1074

Q* J'CN
R

Page 1075

Page 1076

Page 1077

QQ C

Page 1078

]P

Page 1079

QS P

Page 1080

Page 1081

Page 1082

Page 1083

Page 1084

Page 1085




HSUH*Q)X
*XH*VHS*SU
D

Page 1086

Page 1087

Page 1088

Page 1089

Page 1090

Page 1091

Page 1092

Page 1093

Page 1094

Page 1095

Page 1096

Page 1097

Page 1098

Page 1099

Page 1100

Page 1101

Page 1102

Page 1103

Page 1104

Page 1105

Page 1106

"
*YH*SHS*SU
O

Page 1107

Page 1108

Page 1109

Page 1110

Page 1111

Page 1112

Page 1113

Page 1114

Page 1115

Page 1116

Page 1117

Page 1118

Page 1119

BCD

Page 1120

Page 1121

Page 1122

Page 1123

Page 1124

Page 1125

Page 1126

Page 1127

Page 1128

"
158

Page 1129

Page 1130

Page 1131

Page 1132


 !"#!$%&' !(!()!*%  %+,-.$)!$/ ,#((%&"/!#01!2%0)"3!'1%3,4!4"  ()!-!$!##"12,-*%1&"(,%-,-#0''%1(%*2%01"''!" 56", 01!
(%#07&,("  (),#,-*%1&"(,%-&"21!#0 (,-2%01"''!" 7!,-.4!!&!4,-3" ,45
8"3!2%0'1%3,4!4()!-"&!"-4"441!##%*()!"'' ,$"-(95: ;<!#=>%
8"3!2%0'1%3,4!4()!4"(!"-41!*!1!-$!-0&7!1%*()!"'' ,$"(,%-+),$),#()!#07?!$(%*(),# ;<!#=>%
1!3,!+9:
@*2%0"1!()!".!-(A"$(,-.%-7!)" *%*()!"'' ,$"-(A)"3!2%0'1%3,4!44!(", #%*2%01-"&! ;<!#=>%=>BC
"-4"441!##"-4,-4,$"(!4+)!()!1"-2-%(,$!%1$%11!#'%-4!-$!1!D0,1!4,-$%--!$(,%-+,()()!
1!3,!+#)%0 47!#!-((%2%0%1()!"'' ,$"-(9:
8"3!2%0'1%3,4!4"#("(!&!-(#!((,-.%0(2%011!"#%-#*%11!D0,1,-."1!3,!+"-472+)"( ;<!#=>%
'1%$!401!E%1$%&7,-"(,%-%*'1%$!401!#F2%0+,#)()!1!3,!+(%7!$%-40$(!49:
>%(!G<%0&0#(#("(!A,-*0  A+)22%0"1!#!!/,-."1!3,!+%-2%01"'' ,$"(,%-5<%01#("(!&!-(&0#(#!(%0("  &"((!1#2%0$%-#,4!1
1!D0,1!(%7!("/!-,-(%"$$%0-(,-4!(!1&,-,-.2%011!3,!+5<%0&"2-%()"3!"*01()!1%''%1(0-,(2(%"44(%2%01#("(!&!-(%*1!3,!+
"(" "(!14"(!5@(,#()!1!*%1!!##!-(," ()"(2%0#07&,(+,()2%01-%(,$!%*1!3,!+A"  -!$!##"12,-*%1&"(,%-"-4!3,4!-$!()"(2%01! 2
%-"-4+,#)()!H%$" I!3,!+J%42(%$%-#,4!1"#'"1(%*2%011!3,!+5
 !"#!"(("$)"$%'2%*"  4%$0&!-(#A&"(!1," "-4!3,4!-$!+),$)2%0,-(!-4(%1! 2%- ;<!#=>%
E!5.5' "-#"-4K1"+,-.#F+),$)"1!-%+()!#07?!$(%*(),#1!3,!+:
>%(!GL)!1!()!1!3,!+1! "(!#(%"*01()!1"'' ,$"(,%-!5.51!-!+" %*' "--,-.'!1&,##,%-%1&%4,*,$"(,%-A3"1,"(,%-%11!&%3" %*"
' "--,-.$%-4,(,%-%1+)!1!,(1! "(!#(%"-"'' ,$"(,%-*%1"''1%3" %*&"((!1##'!$,*,!4,-$%-4,(,%-#A,(,#"43,#"7 !(%'1%3,4!()!
"'' ,$"(,%-1!*!1!-$!-0&7!1A"''1%3!4' "-#"-44!$,#,%--%(,$!E,*"-2F*1%&()!!"1 ,!1$%-#!-(5
M

Page 1133

Page 1134


@BL!()!"'' ,$"-(B".!-($!1(,*2()"((),#,#"-"'' ,$"(,%-*%11!3,!+%-()!.1%0-4##("(!45
K!$ "1"(,%->"&!G N1C-41!+J!--,!
K!$ "1"(,%-K"(!G OPBOQBRORS
159

Page 1135

Page 1136

STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF
REQUEST TO REVIEW THE REFUSAL
BY SOUTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL OF 
PLANNING APPLICATION REFERENCE 
P/23/0156 
4f
161

Page 1137

STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF
REQUEST TO REVIEW THE REFUSAL
BY SOUTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL OF 
PLANNING APPLICATION REFERENCE 
P/23/0156 
3 Abbotts Court
Dullatur
G68 0AP 
Tel: 07720 700210
E-mail: andrew@andrewbennieplanning.com              May 2023 
COPYRIGHT 
The contents of this report must not be reproduced in whole or in part without the formal written
approval of Andrew Bennie Planning Limited. 
162

Page 1138

CONTENTS 
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Proposals Subject to Review
3.0 Reasons for Requesting Review
4.0 Review Procedure
5.0 Grounds of Review
6.0 Summary 
Appendix 1: Notice of Review Form (submitted via eplanning)
Appendix 2: Schedule of Documents
Appendix 3: Review Documents (submitted via eplanning) 
163

Page 1139

1.0 INTRODUCTION 
1.1 This Statement has been prepared by Andrew Bennie Planning Limited on behalf of Mr
Joseph Peeka in support of his request that the Planning Authority, under the provisions of
Section 43A(8) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 Review the decision
of the Appointed Person to refuse planning permission in respect of planning application
reference P/23/0156. 
1.2 This Statement should be read in conjunction with the matters set out within the completed
Notice of Review Form. 
164

Page 1140

2.0    PROPOSALS SUBJECT TO REVIEW 
2.1  Under the terms of the planning application which forms the basis of this Request to Review,
full planning permission was sought for the erection of a new roof with increased ridge height
to facilitate the creation of a second floor of accommodation, including the installation of
front and rear dormers and the erection of a balcony on the north facing (front) elevation of
the property known as “Sion”, 47 Burnblea Street, Hamilton. 
2.2 The proposed works to the roof of the existing property would allow for the creation of two
additional bedrooms (to meet the needs of the Applicant’s family) and a shower room. 
2.3 Externally the gable wells of the extended property would be finished in a dry dashed render
to match the existing dwelling house, with the faces and checks of the two dormer windows
being finished in timber effect cladding. 
2.4 The new roof of the property and the roofs of the two dormer windows would be finished in
grey concrete roof tiles. 
2.5 Full details of the proposed development are provided on those plans which form part of the
overall submission in support of this Request to Review. 
165

Page 1141

3.0 REASONS FOR REQUESTING THE REVIEW 
3.1 On the basis of the Grounds of Review, which are set out within Section 5.0 of this Statement,
it is submitted that the Appointed Person has failed to provide sufficient reason to reasonably
justify the refusal of this planning application when considered against the relevant
provisions of the development plan. 
3.2 It is submitted that the application proposals can be both fully and reasonably justified
against the relevant provisions of the development plan. 
3.3 Consequently, this Review is put forward on the basis of the unreasonable and unjustifiable
grounds for the refusal of the planning application in question. 
166

Page 1142

4.0 REVIEW PROCEDURE 
4.1 In addition to consideration of those matters, which are set out within the Notice of Review
Form and this Statement, it is requested that the Local Review Body also carry out an
inspection of the Site prior to their consideration and determination of this Review. 
167

Page 1143

5.0    GROUNDS OF REVIEW 
5.1 The application which forms the basis of this Request to Review was refused planning
permission by Notice dated 6th April 2023, with the stated reason for the refusal of the
application being as follows: 
“The proposal is contrary to Policies 1, 2, and 16 of the National Planning
Framework 4 (adopted 2023) and Policies 2, 3, 5 and DM2 of the Local
Development Plan 2 (adopted 2021) as it will result in a detrimental impact upon
amenity as a result of overlooking and visual impact. There are no other material
considerations which would outweigh the proposals variance with the
development plan.” 
5.2 A full copy of the Decision Notice on this application is provided within the list of documents
lodged in support of this Request to Review. 
5.3 The Appellants response to this stated reason for the refusal of this application is set out
below. 
5.4 Dealing first of all with the provisions of Policies 1 & 2 of National Planning Framework 4
(NPF 4), attention is drawn to the matters set out within paragraph 1.3 of the Report of
Handling (RoH) where it is stated that: 
“The relevant policies to be considered in this assessment for this application are Policy 16g
of the National Planning Framework and policy DM2 of the adopted South Lanarkshire Local
Development Plan.” 
5.5 From this statement, it is clear that Policies 1 & 2 of NPF 4 are not considered to be of
relevance to the consideration of the application, with it being further noted that neither of
these Policies are subject to any form of assessment within the RoH. 
5.6 Despite the absence of any form of assessment of these two policies, said policies are
referred to within paragraph 4.1 of the RoH where it is simply stated, amongst other things,
that the proposed development is contrary to these two policies. 
168

Page 1144

5.7 In the absence of any form of proper assessment within the RoH, it is submitted that it is
wholly unreasonable and unjustifiable for these two policies to be cited within the terms of
the reason for the refusal of this application.
5.8 This notwithstanding, when consideration is given to the terms of these two policies, it is
both clear and self-evident that they are of no significant material relevance to the
determination of this application. 
5.9     Policy 1: Tackling the climate and nature crisis, advises that: 
“When considering all development proposals significant weight will be given to the global
climate and nature crises.” 
5.10 The proposed development, given its nature and scale will have no adverse impact upon the
global climate and nature crisis and to this extent does not conflict with the aims and
objectives of this policy. Indeed, in light of the fact that the proposed development will allow
the applicant to make maximum beneficial use of his property in a manner that best
addresses the needs of his family, it could be argued that the proposals would actually help
address the climate crisis. 
5.11 It is also worth noting that any alternative means of extending the property to meet the
requirements of the applicant’s family would involve extending the overall footprint of the
property which would in turn increase the volume of rainwater run-off that requires to be
dealt with. 
5.12 Increasing the square footage of the property by going upwards, as proposed in this case,
does not increase the level of hard surfaces (such as roofs) that need to be drained and as
such represents, in climate impact terms, the most environmentally sensitive way in which
to provide the property with the additional accommodation required and as such is
considered to be in accord with the terms of Policy 1. 
5.13   Policy 2: Climate mitigation and adaption, advises that:
“a)  Development proposals will be sited and designed to minimise lifecycle greenhouse gas
emissions as far as possible. 
b)  Development proposals will be sited and designed to adapt to current and future risks
from climate change. 
169

Page 1145

c) Development proposals to retrofit measures to existing developments that reduce
emissions or support adaptation to climate change will be supported.”
5.14 None of the various stands of this policy, if applied fairly and reasonably, would carry an
automatic presumption against the proposed development, with it being considered that
given the resource minimisation aspects of the proposed development, it could be argued
that the proposals enjoy direct support from the terms of this policy.
5.15 In terms of Policy 16, the RoH cites part (g) as being the salient aspect of the policy as
regards the assessment of the application. 
5.16   Part (g) of the Policy advises that:
“g) 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.” 
5.17 In considering part (g)(i) of the policy, it is important to understand and appreciate that the
original property on the application site has been extended on a number of occasions in the
past, with the result being that the dwelling house as it now stands lacks any clear
architectural identity or character.
5.18 As a consequence of this, whilst it is acknowledged that the proposed works will result in a
change to the nature of the roof on the main part of the property, in the round, this change
is not considered to be sufficient to justify any suggestion that the works will detrimentally
impact on the character or environmental quality of the home.
5.19 In short, just because the appearance of the home is altered, this does not, in and of itself,
mean that the change to the appearance of the home is detrimental.
5.20 It should also be note that the external finishes of the proposed roof alterations will be
finished in materials to match those on the existing dwelling house, which will assist in
ensuring that the works are successfully “blended into” the existing dwelling house.
5.22 With regards to part (g)(ii), it is submitted that whilst the height of the main part of the
property will be increased, given the separation distance which lies between this part of the
property and the existing properties to the north, which lie at a distance of over 25m, the
170

Page 1146

proposed development will have little if any physical impact on these properties and will not
result in any degree of overshadowing.
5.23 In terms of overlooking, the properties on Burnblea Street will not be adversely impacted by
the proposed development given the separation distance of over 25m between the respective
properties.
5.24 With regards to the property number 86 Alness Street, the new windows at the proposed
upper level face this property at an oblique angle which significantly reduces any potential
for direct overlooking, with it also being of relevance to note that the upper floor windows
within said property directly overlook the application site.
5.25 With regards to the properties on Novar Street, it is of significant relevance to note that
neither of the two windows on the proposed south facing dormer serve habitable room, one
being within shower room (and features frosted glass) and the other being within a hallway.
5.26 On this basis, these two windows do not give rise to the potential for any overlooking
concerns.
5.27 In terms of overshadowing, as the properties on Novar Street lie at a higher level than the
application site, it is simply not possible for the proposed works to overshadow said
properties, also noting that as the application site lies to the north of Novar Street, the
proposed works will not have any impact upon the level of sunlight enjoyed by these
properties.
5.28 In view of the matters set out above, it is submitted that in terms of the assessment of the
proposed development against the terms of NPF 4, the provisions of Policies 1 and 2 are not
of direct material relevance to the assessment, and in any event have not been the subject
of any consideration within the terms of the RoH, and in terms of Policy 16 part (g) the
proposed development can be fully and reasonably justified.
5.29 Turning now to the provisions of the adopted Local Development Plan, the stated reason for
refusal of this planning application indicates that the proposed development is contrary to
Policies 2, 3, 5 and DM2 of the Plan. 
5.30   Policy 2: Climate Change states that: 
“In order to fulfil the plan's overall strategic vision, as defined in paragraph 3.2, and to meet
Scottish Government targets relating to climate change and the reduction of greenhouse
171

Page 1147

gases, any new development proposals should seek to minimise and mitigate against such
effects by ensuring that they;
1. are sustainably located;
2. where appropriate involve the reuse of vacant and derelict land;
3. utilise renewable energy sources;
4. incorporate low and zero carbon energy generating technologies at an early design stage,
and therefore reduce predicted carbon dioxide emissions in line with current building
standards;
5. avoid areas of medium to high flood risk;
6. protect ecosystem services by ensuring no significant adverse impacts on the water and
soil environment, air quality, biodiversity and blue/green networks, have no adverse
effect on the integrity of any Natura 2000 sites and identify opportunities for
enhancement of the natural heritage;
7. include opportunities for active travel routes and provide for trips by public transport;
8. include opportunities for the creation and enhancement of green infrastructure;
9. include opportunities for the greening of vacant and derelict land;
10. provide electric vehicle recharging infrastructure to encourage greater use of low carbon
vehicles;
11. minimise waste through the provision of appropriate recycling, storage and collection
points within developments;
12. where appropriate, development proposals should ensure that they can be connected
to heat networks, including district heating, which may be developed in the future; and
13. avoid or minimise disturbance of carbon-rich soils and, where appropriate, include
provision for restoration of damaged peatlands.
Where an applicant is able to demonstrate that a proposal has significant technical constraints
in the use of low and zero-carbon generating technologies other solutions will be considered.
Development proposals must also accord with other relevant policies and proposals in the
development plan. Refer to Appendix 1 for relevant Volume 2 policies and additional
guidance.”
5.31 As was the case with Policy 1 of NPF 4, the matters covered by Policy 2 of the LDP are not of
material relevance to the consideration and assessment of this application and as such it is
submitted that it is unreasonable for this policy to be cited as a reason for the refusal of the
application.
172

Page 1148

5.32  Policy 3: General Urban Areas and Settlements states that: 
“Within the urban areas and settlements identified on the proposals map, residential
developments on appropriate sites will generally be acceptable. Proposals for uses that are
ancillary to residential areas will be assessed on their individual merits, with particular regard
to their affect on the amenity and character of the area. 
Particular consideration will be given to likely impacts on the amenity of the area. This will
include locally important greenspace, local services and facilities, proposed servicing, parking
arrangements and access. 
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. This particularly
applies to 'bad neighbour' uses which can affect neighbours by virtue of visual impact, noise,
smell, air pollution, disturbance, traffic or public safety. 
Development proposals must also accord with other relevant policies and proposals in the
development plan. Refer to Appendix 1 for relevant Volume 2 policies and additional
guidance.”  
5.33 It is clear from the way it is worded that this policy is intended to provide the basis against
which new build residential and appropriate ancillary use developments within the
established urban areas are to be assessed and that it is not intended to form the basis for
the assessment of “house holder” applications for domestic extensions such as that proposed
under this application. 
5.34 As such, and as is the case for Policy 2, the matters covered by Policy 3 of the LDP are not
of material relevance to the consideration and assessment of this application and as such it
is submitted that it is unreasonable for this policy to be cited as a reason for the refusal of
the application. 
5.35   Policy 5: Development Management and Placemaking states that: 
“In order to ensure that development takes account of the principles of sustainable
development, all proposals require to be well designed and integrated with the local area.
Proposals should have no unacceptable significant adverse impacts on the local community
and the environment. Where appropriate, proposals should include measures to enhance the
173

Page 1149

environment and address the six qualities of placemaking. Further detail is included in
supporting planning guidance on Design and Placemaking.
When assessing development proposals, the Council will ensure that, where appropriate;
1. there is no unacceptable significant adverse impact on adjacent buildings or streetscape
in terms of layout, scale, massing, design, external materials or amenity;
2. the development shall not have an unacceptable significant adverse impact on the
amenity of any nearby residential properties in terms of overshadowing, overlooking or
other loss of residential amenity as a result of light, noise, odours, dust or particulates
or other emissions;
3. the proposed development provides suitable access, parking and connection to public
transport, encourages active travel, has no adverse implications for public safety and
incorporates inclusive access for all people, regardless of disability, age or gender;
4. sustainability issues are addressed through carbon reduction measures and energy
efficient design, layout, site orientation and building practices, including provision for
heat network infrastructure and safeguarding space for future pipework/piperuns and
energy centres;
5. risks to new development from unstable land resulting from past mining activities are
fully assessed and, where necessary, mitigated prior to development;
6. the development will have no unacceptable significant impact on the natural or historic
environment and no adverse effect on the integrity of any Natura 2000 sites;
7. the development does not result in, or can mitigate against, any unacceptable
significant adverse impact on quiet areas, the water environment, air quality or soil
quality;
8. the proposal includes appropriate:
• utility and road infrastructure
• open space, green infrastructure and landscape provision
• water management (including foul drainage) and Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS)
including the provision of SuDS during the construction of the development.
Development proposals must also accord with other relevant policies and proposals in the
development plan. Refer to Appendix 1 for relevant Volume 2 policies and additional
guidance.”
5.36 From the way it is worded, it is evident that Policy 5 recognises that not all the defined
assessment criterion will be applicable to the assessment of all applications.
174

Page 1150

5.37 Of the list of 8 criteria, it is considered that only criteria 1 and 2 are appropriate and
applicable to the assessment of this application. 
5.38 Criteria 1 requires that developments have “no unacceptable significant adverse impact on
adjacent buildings or streetscape in terms of layout, scale, massing, design, external
materials or amenity”. 
5.39 Given the back land nature of the application site, it is considered that the proposed
development cannot have any impact, adverse or otherwise, upon the surrounding
streetscape, this being on the simple basis that the dwelling house on the site does not form
part of any streetscape. 
5.40 In terms of this criterion therefore, the acceptability of the proposals requires to assessed in
terms of their impact on adjacent buildings in terms of layout, scale, massing, design,
external materials or amenity. 
5.41   Dealing with each of these specified matters in turn, the following comments are made. 
5.42 With regards to layout, as the proposed development is wholly contained within the footprint
of the existing property, it is considered that it has no impact upon the wider area in relation
to this consideration. 
5.43 In terms of its scale, when considered within the context of the existing dwelling house, it is
considered that the addition of two modestly sized bedroom within the heightened roof
structure is not out of scale in terms of its impact on the existing dwelling house and would
not result in the “extended” dwelling house being of a scale which would be out of keeping
with the general scale of the dwelling houses which bound onto the site. 
5.44 In terms of massing, it is considered that within the context of the existing dwelling house,
the massing if the proposed dormers/roof heightening are appropriate and acceptable. 
5.45 The design of the proposed alterations to the property must of, necessity, be viewed within
the context of the design of the dwelling house as it stands at present. 
5.46 Due to the way it has developed over the years the existing dwelling house, other than in
its use of a common palette of external finishing materials, lacks any significant degree of
design cohesion with the result being that there are no overriding design principles which
require to be followed in terms of the proposed works.
175

Page 1151

5.47 As a direct consequence of the shallow roof pitch of the existing dwelling house, the
proposed upper floor level can only be created by lifting the roof of the property to allow for
the required headroom to be created. 
5.48 Creating the required accommodation on either of the existing floor levels of the property is
not feasible due to the internal configuration of the property and as such there is no
alternative but to extend the property upwards. 
5.49 Whilst it is accepted that the proposed works significantly alter the appearance of the
property, when viewed within the context of the surrounding built form, and in particular the
property which lies to the immediate east side of the application site, it is not considered
that the design of the proposed alterations to the property raise any issues of significant
concern. 
5.50 In terms of the external finishes proposed, these will all match those used on the existing
property and to this end are appropriate and acceptable. 
5.51 For the various reasons set out above, it is submitted that the proposed development will
have no adverse impact in terms of its effect on the surrounding area. 
5.52 Criterion 2 requires that development “shall not have an unacceptable significant adverse
impact on the amenity of any nearby residential properties in terms of overshadowing,
overlooking or other loss of residential amenity as a result of light, noise, odours, dust or
particulates or other emissions”. 
5.53 The various issues have been addressed above and to avoid unnecessary repetition, other
than to highlight that it has been demonstrated that the proposed development will have no
adverse impacts when considered against these issues, our position in respect thereof is not
repeated here. 
5.54 Considering the above, it is submitted that the proposed development can be fully and
reasonably justified against the requirements of Policy 5 of the LDP. 
5.55   Policy DM2: House Extensions and Alterations of the LDP states that:
“House extensions and alterations will be considered favourably where it can be 
demonstrated that the proposal complies with the following criteria: 
176

Page 1152

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.
4. It retains adequate car parking, usable garden ground and bin storage within the site.
5. It does not have an adverse impact on traffic or public safety.”
5.56 Of the above noted criterion, only numbers 1 – 3 are of relevance to the consideration and
assessment of the application.
5.57 As is the case with the relevant criteria within Policy 5, criteria 1 – 3 concern matters which
have already been addressed earlier within this Statement and it is not considered necessary
to repeat this assessment here.
5.58 In overfall summary, the RoH fails to address most of the Policies which are cited within the
stated reason for the refusal of this application. In the absence of any such assessments, the
Appointed Person has failed to demonstrate that the proposed development cannot be fully
and reasonably justified against the policies of the development plan which are noted within
the terms of the reason for refusal, noting further that a number of the policies which are
referred to in this regard are simply of no material relevance to the consideration of the
application.
177

Page 1153

6.0 SUMMARY 
6.1 It is our respectful submission that the Council, via the Appointed Person has failed to
provide sufficient information to support and justify the stated reasons for the refusal of
this planning application. 
6.2  It is submitted that in terms of the relevant provisions of the adopted Development Plan,
the proposed development can be fully and reasonably justified against the various policies
which have been referenced within the stated reason for the refusal of the application. 
6.3 Taking into account all of those matters set out above, I would respectfully
request that the Local Review Body uphold this Review and in so doing, grant
planning permission pursuant to planning application reference P/23/0156. 
178

Page 1154

APPENDIX 1
Submitted via eplanning 
179

Page 1155

APPENDIX 2 
180

Page 1156

SCHEDULE OF REVIEW DOCUMENTS 
Document 1 Application Form and associated certificates
Document 2 Existing Location Plan
Document 3 Proposed Location Plan
Document 4 Elevations as Existing
Document 5 Proposed Elevations Sheet 1
Document 6 Proposed Elevations Sheet 2
Document 7 Proposed 1st Floor Plan
Document 8  Existing Sections
Document 9 Proposed Sections
Document 10  Report of Handling
Document 11 Decision Notice 
181

Page 1157

APPENDIX 3
Submitted via eplanning
182

Page 1158

Page 1 of 7
Montrose House 154 Montrose Crescent Hamilton ML3 6LB 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 100616943-001
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
Loft conversion with increased roof pitch, dormers to front & rear and small balcony.
THIS ALSO APPEARS IN THE PAPERS AT APPENDIX 1
4f
183

Page 1159

Page 2 of 7
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: *
Archi-House(Scotland)Ltd
Mr
Sam
Joseph
Smithers
Peeka
Woodside Avenue
Burnblea Street
9
47
Sion
01412211433
PA11 3PQ
ML3 6RF
United Kingdom
UK
Bridge of Weir
Hamilton
sam@archi-house.co.uk
NA
184

Page 1160

Page 3 of 7
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.
SION
703.00
Dwelling-house
South Lanarkshire Council
47 BURNBLEA STREET
HAMILTON
ML3 6RF
654684 271786
185

Page 1161

Page 4 of 7
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
3
3
186

Page 1162

Page 5 of 7
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
Certificate Required
The following Land Ownership Certificate is required to complete this section of the proposal:
Certificate A
Bins outside next to car parking, internal storage within kitchen.
187

Page 1163

Page 6 of 7
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: Sam Smithers
On behalf of: NA
Date: 07/02/2023
 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
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
188

Page 1164

Page 7 of 7
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)
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 Sam Smithers
Declaration Date: 07/02/2023
Payment Details
Pay Direct
Created: 08/02/2023 21:48
189

Page 1165

Page 1166

1200
500
500
Dining
12.3 m2
Reception
21.4 m2
Ensuite
2.6 m2
500
Garage
17.0 m2
Bed 2
10.8 m2
Bed 3
7.6 m2
Entrance hall
5.1 m2
Hallway
4.5 m2
Bathroom
6.8 m2
Bed 1
14.2 m2
St
Living
23.3 m2
StSt
Kitchen
12.2 m2
Utility
4.6 m2
WC
2.1 m2
Conservatory
10.1 m2
Paving
Paving
Grass
Grass
Planting
Grass
Paved parking
Bins
A A
C
C
B B
50 1 2 3 4
DrawnDate
Design
Drawing No.
Scale Checked
Revision
Drawing Title
Location
For
Revision Notes ByDate
Copyright reserved. Design right
reserved. Do not scale dimensions
from this drawing. All dimensions to be
checked on site prior to commencing
works. Not warranted for construction
or tendering unless indicated.
Archi-HOUSE,
Sam Smithers
Chartered Architect, BArch, PGDip
9 Woodside Avenue,
Bridge of Weir
PA11 3PQ
T:  07732 016 829
E:  smithers_sam@hotmail.com
Ground floor plan
As existing
1:100
SLS
- A
40(AL)300
12/01/23
47 Burnblea Street,
Hamilton, ML3 6RF
PLANNINGGround floor plan as existing
Scale: 1:1001
N
A        SLS                  27.02.23
Scale bar updated.
4f
191

Page 1167

Page 1168

1200
500
500
Dining
12.3 m2
Reception
21.4 m2
Ensuite
2.6 m2
500
Garage
17.0 m2
Bed 2
10.8 m2
Bed 3
7.6 m2
Entrance hall
5.1 m2
Hallway
4.5 m2
Bathroom
6.8 m2
Bed 1
14.2 m2
St
Living
23.3 m2
Kitchen
12.2 m2
Utility
4.6 m2
WC2.1 m2
Conservatory
10.1 m2
Paving
Paving
Grass
Grass
Planting
Grass
Paved parking
Bins
C
C
A A
B B
SVP
Min 600mm
D D
C
A A
B B
D D
50 1 2 3 4
Existing wall
Downtakings
New wall
KEY
DrawnDate
Design
Drawing No.
Scale Checked
Revision
Drawing Title
Location
For
Revision Notes ByDate
Copyright reserved. Design right
reserved. Do not scale dimensions
from this drawing. All dimensions to be
checked on site prior to commencing
works. Not warranted for construction
or tendering unless indicated.
Archi-HOUSE,
Sam Smithers
Chartered Architect, BArch, PGDip
9 Woodside Avenue,
Bridge of Weir
PA11 3PQ
T:  07732 016 829
E:  smithers_sam@hotmail.com
Ground floor plan
As proposed
1:100
SLS
- C
40(AL)300
19/01/23
47 Burnblea Street,
Hamilton, ML3 6RF
PLANNING
Ground floor plan as proposed
Scale: 1:1001
N
A        SLS                  30.01.23
Layout updated to client comments.
B        SLS                  01.02.23
Layout updated to client comments.
C        SLS                  27.02.23
Title box updated.
4f
193

Page 1169

Page 1170

Concrete roof tiles,
Large format dark grey
Windows, light grey
aluminium
Dry-dash render, white
Smooth render, light grey
Timber effect cladding, white
Concrete roof tiles,
Large format dark grey
Windows, white UPVC
Stone effect 75mm high blocks
Dry-dash render, white
Smooth render, light grey
Timber effect cladding, white
50 1 2 3 4
Concrete roof tiles,
Large format dark grey
Windows, light grey
aluminium
Dry-dash render, white
Smooth render, light grey
Timber effect cladding, white
Timber stair & handrail,
natural varnish
Brick piers and PC stone copes
with decorative stone balustrade
Concrete roof tiles,
Large format dark grey
Windows, white UPVC
Stone effect 75mm high blocks
Dry-dash render, white
Smooth render, light grey
Timber door
Brick piers and PC stone copes
with decorative stone balustrade
DrawnDate
Design
Drawing No.
Scale Checked
Revision
Drawing Title
Location
For
Revision Notes ByDate
Copyright reserved. Design right
reserved. Do not scale dimensions
from this drawing. All dimensions to be
checked on site prior to commencing
works. Not warranted for construction
or tendering unless indicated.
Archi-HOUSE,
Sam Smithers
Chartered Architect, BArch, PGDip
9 Woodside Avenue,
Bridge of Weir
PA11 3PQ
T:  07732 016 829
E:  smithers_sam@hotmail.com
Elevations as existing
1:100
SLS
- A
40(AL)500
17/01/23
47 Burnblea Street,
Hamilton, ML3 6RF
PLANNING
East elevation as existing
Scale: 1:1001
West elevation as existing
Scale: 1:1003
North elevation as existing
Scale: 1:1002
South elevation as existing
Scale: 1:1004
A        SLS                  01.03.23
Window materials updated.
4f
195

Page 1171

Page 1172

50 1 2 3 4
48.3°
Concrete roof tiles,
Large format dark grey
Windows, light grey aluminium
Dry-dash render, white
Smooth render, light grey
Timber effect cladding, white
Circular window, obscure glass fixed light,
light grey UPVC1300
800
Light
Concrete roof tiles,
Large format dark grey
Windows, light grey
aluminium
Dry-dash render, white
Smooth render, light grey
Timber effect cladding, white
Timber stair & handrail,
natural varnish
Brick piers and PC stone copes
with decorative stone balustrade
Concrete roof tiles,
Large format dark grey
Windows, light grey
Aluminium
Timber effect cladding, white
DrawnDate
Design
Drawing No.
Scale Checked
Revision
Drawing Title
Location
For
Revision Notes ByDate
Copyright reserved. Design right
reserved. Do not scale dimensions
from this drawing. All dimensions to be
checked on site prior to commencing
works. Not warranted for construction
or tendering unless indicated.
Archi-HOUSE,
Sam Smithers
Chartered Architect, BArch, PGDip
9 Woodside Avenue,
Bridge of Weir
PA11 3PQ
T:  07732 016 829
E:  smithers_sam@hotmail.com
Elevations as proposed
Sheet 1 of 2
1:100
SLS
- C
40(AL)510
26/01/23
47 Burnblea Street,
Hamilton, ML3 6RF
PLANNING
East elevation as proposed
Scale: 1:1001
North elevation as proposed
Scale: 1:1002
A        SLS                  30.01.23
Layout updated to client comments.
B        SLS                  27.02.23
Window sizes revised to client
comments.
C        SLS                  22.03.23
Balcony legs removed.
4f
197

Page 1173

Page 1174

50 1 2 3 4
48.3°
15.0° Concrete roof tiles,
Large format dark grey
Windows, white UPVC
Stone effect 75mm high blocks
Dry-dash render, white
Smooth render, light grey
Timber effect cladding, white
FlueLight
Concrete roof tiles,
Large format dark grey
Windows, white UPVC
Stone effect 75mm high blocks
Dry-dash render, white
Smooth render, light grey
Brick piers and PC stone copes
with decorative stone balustrade
Timber rooflight,
anthracite grey externally
Timber cladding to dormer
cheeks and roof, painted white
Circular window, clear glass
fixed light, light grey UPVC
Light
DrawnDate
Design
Drawing No.
Scale Checked
Revision
Drawing Title
Location
For
Revision Notes ByDate
Copyright reserved. Design right
reserved. Do not scale dimensions
from this drawing. All dimensions to be
checked on site prior to commencing
works. Not warranted for construction
or tendering unless indicated.
Archi-HOUSE,
Sam Smithers
Chartered Architect, BArch, PGDip
9 Woodside Avenue,
Bridge of Weir
PA11 3PQ
T:  07732 016 829
E:  smithers_sam@hotmail.com
Elevations as proposed
Sheet 2
1:100
SLS
- C
40(AL)511
26/01/23
47 Burnblea Street,
Hamilton, ML3 6RF
PLANNING
West elevation as proposed
Scale: 1:1001
South elevation as proposed
Scale: 1:1002
A        SLS                  30.01.23
Layout updated to client comments.
B        SLS                  27.02.23
Windows updated to client
comments.
C        SLS                  22.03.23
Balcony legs removed.
4f
199

Page 1175

Page 1176

Bed 5
17.1 m2
Hall
12.4 m2
+1000
+1200
+2400
+2100
+1800
+1500
+2100
Shower
3.9 m2
Balcony
2.7 m2
C
C
A A
B B
+2400
+1800
+1500
+1200
W
SVP
Bed 4
14.3 m2
Eaves tank
Coffin tank
D D
123456
7
8
9
10
11 12 13
E
Q
U
A
L
EQUAL
EQUAL
225
225
E
Q
U
A
L
EQUAL
EQUAL
50 1 2 3 4
Existing wall
Downtakings
New wall
KEY
DrawnDate
Design
Drawing No.
Scale Checked
Revision
Drawing Title
Location
For
Revision Notes ByDate
Copyright reserved. Design right
reserved. Do not scale dimensions
from this drawing. All dimensions to be
checked on site prior to commencing
works. Not warranted for construction
or tendering unless indicated.
Archi-HOUSE,
Sam Smithers
Chartered Architect, BArch, PGDip
9 Woodside Avenue,
Bridge of Weir
PA11 3PQ
T:  07732 016 829
E:  smithers_sam@hotmail.com
First floor plan
As proposed
1:100
SLS
- D
40(AL)311
26/01/23
47 Burnblea Street,
Hamilton, ML3 6RF
PLANNING
N
A        SLS                  30.01.23
Layout updated to client comments.
B        SLS                  01.02.23
Revised to retain reception roof.
First floor plan as proposed
Scale: 1:1001
C        SLS                  27.02.23
Window sizes revised.
D        SLS                  24.03.23
Balcony enlarged to client request.
4f
201

Page 1177

Page 1178

50 1 2 3 4
Existing pitched roof construction
Concrete roof tiles, on tiling battens, on cementitious
sarking board (possibly asbestos-based), cold roof, approx
300mm mineral wool insulation between and over existing
structure. Existing roof trusses are formed from 95x35mm
timbers forming bottom and top chords with 70x30mm ties
at 600mm crs. 12.5mm plasterboard to underside.
Existing floor construction
Timber floor with mineral wool between floor joists & mesh
to restrain.
Existing wall construction
Dry dash render on 102.5mm common brickwork external
leaf, 50mm cavity filled with blown EPS bead insulation,
102.5mm common brick internal leaf, timber straps,
plasterboard finish internally.
KitchenLiving Dining
Living
HallCorridorBath
DrawnDate
Design
Drawing No.
Scale Checked
Revision
Drawing Title
Location
For
Revision Notes ByDate
Copyright reserved. Design right
reserved. Do not scale dimensions
from this drawing. All dimensions to be
checked on site prior to commencing
works. Not warranted for construction
or tendering unless indicated.
Archi-HOUSE,
Sam Smithers
Chartered Architect, BArch, PGDip
9 Woodside Avenue,
Bridge of Weir
PA11 3PQ
T:  07732 016 829
E:  smithers_sam@hotmail.com
Cross section
As existing
1:100
SLS
- A
40(AL)400
26/01/23
47 Burnblea Street,
Hamilton, ML3 6RF
WARRANT
Section AA as existing
Scale: 1:1001
A        SLS                  27.02.23
Scale bar updated.
Section CC as existing
Scale: 1:1003
Section BB as existing
Scale: 1:1002
4f
203

Page 1179

Page 1180

50 1 2 3 4
Hall
Reception
BedroomEnsuite
4390
1745
2642
2395
247
Bedroom 5
Living
Hall
Balcony
CorridorBath
Bedroom 5 Bedroom 4Shower
Hall
KitchenLiving Dining
2100
1792
795
DrawnDate
Design
Drawing No.
Scale Checked
Revision
Drawing Title
Location
For
Revision Notes ByDate
Copyright reserved. Design right
reserved. Do not scale dimensions
from this drawing. All dimensions to be
checked on site prior to commencing
works. Not warranted for construction
or tendering unless indicated.
Archi-HOUSE,
Sam Smithers
Chartered Architect, BArch, PGDip
9 Woodside Avenue,
Bridge of Weir
PA11 3PQ
T:  07732 016 829
E:  smithers_sam@hotmail.com
Cross Sections
As proposed
1:100
SLS
- B
40(AL)410
26/01/23
47 Burnblea Street,
Hamilton, ML3 6RF
PLANNING
A        SLS                  30.01.23
Layout updated to client comments.
Section AA as proposed
Scale: 1:1001
Section CC as proposed
Scale: 1:1003
Section BB as proposed
Scale: 1:1002
B        SLS                  27.02.23
Title box updated.
4f
205

Page 1181

Page 1182

Planning proposal: Erection of new roof with increased ridge height to facilitate second floor of
accommodation, installation of front and rear dormers and erection of
balcony. 
Location:  Sion
47 Burnblea Street
Hamilton
South Lanarkshire
ML3 6RF 
Application Type: Detailed planning application
Applicant:  Mr. Joseph Peeka
Location:   Sion
47 Burnblea Street
Hamilton
South Lanarkshire
ML3 6RF
Decision:
Other action/notes:
Application refused
None
Report by: Area Manager (Planning & Building Standards)
Policy reference:  
National Planning Framework 4 (adopted 2023)
NPF4: Policy 1 Tackling the climate and nature crises
NPF4: Policy 2 Climate mitigation and adaptation
NPF4: Policy 16 Quality homes
South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (adopted 2021)
SLDP2: Policy 2 Climate change
SLDP2: Policy 3 General Urban Areas and Settlements
SLDP2: Policy 5 Development Management and Placemaking
SLDP2: Policy DM2 House Extensions and Alterations
Assessment
Impact on privacy? No
Impact on sunlight/daylight? No
Impact on amenity? No
Traffic issues? No
Adheres to development plan policy? Yes
Adverse comments from consultees? No
Reference no. P/23/0156
Delegated Report
Date
THIS ALSO APPEARS IN THE PAPERS AT APPENDIX 2A
4f
207

Page 1183

Consultations Summary of response 
None     
Representation(s): 
► 2 Objection letters
► 0 Support letters
► 0 Comment letters 
208

Page 1184

Page 1185

(b) My flat is directly behind this house and so is my garden, the height and size
will affect my view from my window and will block sunlight into my garden. 
Reason: The applicants property is located to the rear of 5 Novar Street. The
proposed roof extension will block the neighbouring properties enjoyment of their
property by limiting views and believe that the increased roof extension will block
natural sunlight into the objector’s garden. 
(c) As someone who regularly works from home, I have a concern about the
noise aspect and the general disruption of this potential project and how it
could affect the area, especially with the length of time it would likely take
for it to be completed.
Reason: The siting of the applicants property is to the rear of 51, 49 and 45
Burnblea Street, 84 and 86 Alness Street, 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11 Novar Street. Whilst it
is anticipated that noise and general disruption is inevitable during a development,
the siting of the applicants property will generally mean the development will be
more disruptive to neighbouring properties than usually anticipated. 
3 Assessment and Conclusions 
3.1 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 9th April 2021) and National Planning
Framework 4 (adopted on 13th February 2023). Section 24(3) of the 1997 Act confirms
that if there is an inconsistency between NPF4 policies and a Local Development Plan
which was adopted before the 13th February 2023, then the policies in NPF4 prevail. 
3.2 Following a detailed assessment of the proposal, it is considered that this application
would not comply with relevant policies from either the South Lanarkshire Local
Development Plan or the National Planning Framework 4 as it would result in a
detrimental effect on the neighbouring properties in terms of physical impact and
overlooking. In this respect, the proposed erection of the new roof with increased ridge
height to facilitate second floor of accommodation, installation of front and rear dormers
and erection of balcony all combines to result in a considerable increase in overlooking
and privacy issues to the rear of surrounding properties, particularly those to the North
and West. In addition, the high-pitched roof design is not in keeping with the surrounding
area in terms of size or design. The resulting addition would not complement the existing
streetscape and competes in scale to an unsatisfactory degree with the original dwelling. 
3.3 Two objections were received in connection with this application and no formal
consultations were required to be undertaken in this instance given the application type. 
3.4 Given the above, it is considered that the proposal will have a significant adverse impact
upon amenity and that it does not comply with the relevant national or local development
plan policies and guidance. Therefore, it is believed that the refusal of planning consent is
justified in this instance. 
4 Reason for decision 
4.1 The proposal is contrary to Policies 1, 2, and 16 of the National Planning Framework 4
(adopted 2023) and Policies 2, 3, 5 and DM2 of the Local Development Plan 2 (adopted
2021) as it will result in a detrimental impact upon amenity as a result of overlooking and
visual impact. There are no other material considerations which would outweigh the
proposals variance with the development plan.
210

Page 1186

Delegating officer:   David Russell 
Date: 03/04/2023 
Previous references
 None   
List of background papers
► Application Form
► Application Plans
► South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2 (adopted 2021)
► Neighbour notification letter dated 
► Consultations 
None 
► Representations  
Mrs. Gail Webster, 5 Novar Street, Hamilton, ML3 6TG. Dated: 
26.02.2023
26.02.2023 
Mr. Dylan Webster, 7 Novar Street, Hamilton, ML3 6TG. Dated: 
25.02.2023
25.02.2023 
Contact for further information: 
If you would like to inspect the background papers or want further information, please contact: 
Graham Fyfe, Planning officer, Floor 6, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton, ML3 0AA
Phone: 077551839094   
Email: graham.fyfe@southlanarkshire.gov.uk
211

Page 1187

Page 1188

Floor 6, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton, ML3 0AA
Email graham.fyfe@southlanarkshire.gov.uk Phone: 077551839094
Community And Enterprise Resources
Executive Director David Booth
Planning And Regulatory Services
Sam Smithers
Archi-House(Scotland)Ltd
9 Woodside Avenue
Bridge Of Weir
PA11 3PQ
Our Ref: P/23/0156
Your Ref: 
If calling ask for: Graham Fyfe
Date: 6 April 2023
Dear Sir/Madam
Proposal: Erection of new roof with increased ridge height to facilitate second
floor of accommodation, installation of front and rear dormers and
erection of balcony.
Site address: Sion, 47 Burnblea Street, Hamilton, ML3 6RF, 
Application no: P/23/0156
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 Graham Fyfe on 077551839094
Yours faithfully
Head of Planning and Regulatory Services
Enc:
THIS ALSO APPEARS IN THE PAPERS AT APPENDIX 4
4f
213

Page 1189

Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended
by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006
To: Mr Joseph Peeka
NA
Per: Sam Smithers
Sion, 47 Burnblea Street,
Hamilton, ML3 6RF, 
9 Woodside Avenue,
Bridge Of Weir, PA11 3PQ,
With reference to your application received on 09.02.2023 for planning permission under the
above mentioned Act:
Description of proposed development:
Erection of new roof with increased ridge height to facilitate second floor of
accommodation, installation of front and rear dormers and erection of balcony.
Site location:
Sion, 47 Burnblea Street, Hamilton, ML3 6RF,
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: 6th April 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
Application no.
P/23/0156
214

Page 1190

South Lanarkshire Council 
Refuse planning permission 
Paper apart - Application number: P/23/0156 
Reason(s) for refusal: 
Reason(s) for decision 
The proposal is contrary to Policies 1, 2, and 16 of the National Planning Framework 4 (adopted
2023) and Policies 2, 3, 5 and DM2 of the Local Development Plan 2 (adopted 2021) as it will
result in a detrimental impact upon amenity as a result of overlooking and visual impact. There
are no other material considerations which would outweigh the proposals variance with the
development plan. 
215

Page 1191

Notes to applicant 
Application number: P/23/0156 
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  
FLOOR PLAN AS
EXISTING
40(AL)300A Refused  
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
AS PROPOSED
40(AL)300C Refused  
FIRST FLOOR PLAN AS
PROPOSED
40(AL)311D Refused  
SECTION A-A AS
EXISTING
40(AL)400A Refused  
SECTIONS AS
PROPOSED
40(AL)410B Refused  
ELEVATIONS AS
EXISTING
40(AL)500A Refused  
ELEVATIONS AS
PROPOSED 1 OF 2
40(AL)510C Refused  
ELEVATIONS AS
PROPOSED 2 OF 2
40(AL)511C Refused   
216

Page 1192

COMMUNITY AND ENTERPRISE RESOURCES
Executive Director David Booth
Planning and Economic Development 
Important notes 
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 (Corporate Resources)
Council Headquarters
Almada Street
Hamilton
ML3 0AA 
To obtain the appropriate forms: 
Administrative Services at the above address. 
Telephone: 01698 454108
E-mail:   pauline.macrae@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. 
217

Page 1193

Page 1194

Further Representation 
Further Representation From
 Statement of Observations from Planning Officer on Applicant’s Notice of Review 
Appendix 6  4g
219

Page 1195

Page 1196

STATEMENT OF OBSERVATIONS 
Notice of Review - Town and Country Planning (Schemes of Delegation and Local   
Review Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013 
Planning Application No. P/23/0156 
Proposal - Erection of new roof with increased ridge height to facilitate second floor
of accommodation, installation of front and rear dormers and erection of balcony at
Sion, 47 Burnblea Street, Hamilton, ML3 6RF. 
Applicant: Mr. Joseph Peeka. 
1.0 Planning Background
1.1 The above planning application was submitted to the Council in early February
2023. The application was originally made invalid due to no fee being received.
The applicant then paid the fee on the 10th of February 2023 and the application
was validated on that date. Following due consideration of the proposal, the
planning application was refused consent under delegated powers on the 3rd of
April 2023. The applicant was offered the opportunity to withdraw rather than
receive a refusal however no withdrawal was forthcoming. The Report of
Handling sets out the planning policy and other material considerations for the
decision. The reasons for the refusal are listed in the decision notice. These
documents are available elsewhere within the papers. 
1.2 The application site is a dwelling located at 47 Burnblea Street, Hamilton. The
house appears to have been formed as a result of backland development
several decades ago and is positioned in such a way that it is bounded on 3
sides by the rear gardens of 6 different residential properties. Although we do
not have the original application records, we would presume that the single-
storey nature, and very low roof, of the existing premises was originally chosen
to try and minimize the 7impact it had on surrounding properties. The
application site is further described in the Report of Handling. 
1.3 Following the receipt of this appeal it has come to our attention that, due to an
internal system error, the decision notice issued on the 6th of April 2023 did not
contain the detailed reasons for refusal set out in the Report of Handling. This is
an error in the part of the Council, which we have sought to rectify be providing
an amended copy of the decision notice. Irrespective of this issue, the appellant
appears to have obtained the reasons for refusal from the Report of Handling so
thankfully they have not been disadvantaged in the preparation of their request
for a review. 
1.4 The reasons for refusal set out in the Report are as follows; 
01. The proposed extension does not conform to the scale, design or character of
the original building on the site or the surrounding built form and would therefore
be detrimental to the amenity of the area in general.
4g
221

Page 1197

02. If approved, the proposal would result in a loss of privacy and would adversely
affect the amenity of adjacent properties. 
03. If approved, the proposal would result in direct overlooking of private garden
ground and would adversely affect the amenity of adjacent properties. 
2.0 Assessment against the development plan and other relevant policies 
2.1 Under Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act1997, 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 29 March
2021) and National Planning Framework 4 (which was laid before the Scottish
Parliament on 8 November 2022 and adopted by Scottish Ministers on 13
February 2023).Section 24(3) of the 1997 Act confirms that if there is an
inconsistency between NPF4 policies and a Local Development Plan which was
adopted before 13 February 2023, then the policies in NPF4 prevail. 
2.2 The Policies used in the determination of this application are set out in detail in
the Council’s Report of Handling which also details how the proposal was
assessed against said Policies. No further comment in this regard is therefore
required.   
3.0 Observations on applicants Notice of Review 
3.1 The applicants have submitted a statement to support their review. The grounds
are summarised below: 
3.2   It is clear that Policies 1 & 2 of the NPF 4 are not considered to be of relevance
to the consideration of the application, with it being further noted that neither
of these Policies are subject to any form of assessment within the RoH. In the
absence of any form of proper assessment within the RoH, it is submitted that
it is wholly unreasonable and unjustifiable for these policies to be cited within
the terms of the reason for the refusal of this application. 
Reason: The appellant has highlighted the use of Polices 1 and 2 of the National
Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) being detailed in the Reason for decision. However, as
clear in the Report of Handling and in the stated reasons for refusal, issues of
overlooking, design and amenity were the principal motivations for refusing this
application. The reasons for refusal specifically quote considerations from Policy 16g)
of the national Planning Framework 4 and Policies 3, 5 and DM2 of the South
Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2. We would agree that Policies 1 and 2 of
NPF4 should mot be the determining factor in reaching a decision on this Review. 
3.3   Whilst it is acknowledged that the proposed works will result in a change to
the nature of the roof on the main part of the property…the works will not
detrimentally impact on the character or environmental quality of the home.
Just because the appearance of the home is altered means the appearance of
the home is detrimental.
Reason: The proposed works used to increase the height of the roof to facilitate a
second-floor accommodation with front and rear dormers and a balcony would not 222

Page 1198

have been in keeping with properties in the surrounding area and would compete in
scale to an unsatisfactory degree with the original house. The design approach to
reprofile a new roof at a significantly increased angle is inelegant and creates a
dwelling with an unusual profile for the surrounding area. Were a second floor to
have been considered appropriate, a more suitable approach would have been to
extend the existing elevations up to create additional accommodation rather than
trying to maintain the existing eaves line. The proposal is contrary to Policy 16g (i) of
NPF 4 in that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the existing property
and on the surrounding area in terms of size, design and scale.   
3.4  Given the separation distance which lies between the property and existing
properties to the north, which lie at a distance of over 25 metres, the proposed
development will have little if any physical impact on these properties and will
not result in any degree of overshadowing. In terms of overlooking, the
properties on Burnblea Street will not be adversely impacted by the proposed
development given the separation distance of over 25 metres between the
respective properties. 
Reason: In their grounds of appeal the appellant has repeatedly addressed privacy
concerns solely in the context of building position, window-to-window privacy failures
and appropriate minimum distances between habitable rooms. However, as stated
within the Report of Handling the main privacy concern with the application is the
increased overlooking into surrounding private garden ground. To facilitate the
second floor of accommodation, the increased ridge height with both front and rear
dormers and the installation of a balcony would provide the appellant with a clear
elevated vantage point into several neighbouring rear gardens. From the proposed
balcony, the appellant would have a clear view into number 45, 49 and 51 Burnblea
Street and 86 Alness Street all to the detriment of residential amenity. 
3.5  The stated reason for refusal of this planning application indicates that the
proposed development is contrary to Policies 2, 3, 5 and DM2 of the Plan.
Reason: Policies 3, 5 and DM2 of SLLDP 2 specifically address issues of visual and
residential amenity with DM2 detailing specific considerations for alterations to
existing residential property. Policy 2 of SLLDP2 relates to climate change and we
would accept that the principal reasons for refusal should focus on the proposals
suitability in terms of Policies 3, 5 and DM2. 
3.6   Policy DM2: House Extensions and Alterations of the LDP... only numbers 1 –
3 are of relevance to the consideration and assessment of the application.
Reason: In relation to Policy DM2 of the LDP2, the proposal would be overdominant
in relation to the neighbouring properties and adversely impact adjacent properties in
terms of overlooking. The proposal would provide a clear vantage point into
neighbouring properties and their garden ground to the increased roof ridge line
supporting the front and rear dormers, and the balcony offering a clear field of view
that would detrimentally impact upon residential amenity.   
4.0 Conclusions 
4.1 In summary, the proposed development does not comply with the provisions of Policy
16 of the adopted National Planning Framework 4, section (g). The proposed erection
223

Page 1199

of new roof with increased ridge height to facilitate second floor of accommodation,
installation of front and rear dormers and erection of balcony would result in a large
degree of overlooking into neighbouring properties garden grounds and ultimately
lead to significant privacy issues. In addition, the high-pitched roof is not in keeping
with the surrounding area in terms of size or design and would contradict the existing
streetscape as it competes in scale to an unsatisfactory degree with the original
dwelling.   
4.2 Furthermore, the proposed development does not comply with the terms of the     
Policy DM2 Housing Extensions and Alterations. of the adopted Local Development
Plan 2. The proposed roof extension is not well designed and does not integrate
with the surrounding area and the proposed balcony and dormers gave the
appellant the direct ability to look into neighbouring garden grounds. In this respect,
the proposal would directly contradict Policy DM2 Housing Extensions and
Alterations. 
4.3 The Report of Handling submitted as documentation provides an assessment of all
the material planning considerations associated with this proposal. As such, it is
clear that the proposal does not comply with the terms of Policy 16(g) of the
National Planning Framework 4 nor Policy DM2 of the South Lanarkshire Local
Development Plan 2. There are no other material planning considerations that
would outweigh the provision of the Development Plan. It is a statutory requirement
that when making any determination under the Planning Act regard must be had to
the development plan, and the determination shall be in accordance with the
provisions of the development plan unless materials considerations indicate
otherwise. 
4.4 Therefore, it is respectfully requested that the Review Board refuse planning
permission for the proposal. 
224

Page 1200

Applicant’s Comments on Further Representation
Submitted by Planning and Regulatory Services in the
Course of the Notice of Review Consultation Process 
Appendix 7  4h
225

Page 1201

Page 1202

SUPPLEMENTARY STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF 
THE REQUEST TO REVIEW THE REFUSAL BY 
SOUTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL OF
PLANNING APPLICATION REFERENCE P/23/0156
SION, 47 BURNBLEA STREET, HAMILTON 
4h
227

Page 1203

SUPPLEMENTARY STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF 
THE REQUEST TO REVIEW THE REFUSAL BY 
SOUTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL OF
PLANNING APPLICATION REFERENCE P/23/0156
SION, 47 BURNBLEA STREET, HAMILTON 
Prepared by: 
Andrew Bennie Planning Limited
3 Abbotts Court 
Dullatur
G68 0AP 
Tel: 07720 700210                                 June 2023
Email: andrew@andrewbennieplanning.com 
COPYRIGHT 
The contents of this statement may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the written consent
of Andrew Bennie Planning Limited. 
228

Page 1204

CONTENTS 
1.0 Introduction 
2.0   Response to Interested Party Submission 
229

Page 1205

1.0 INTRODUCTION 
1.1 This Statement has been prepared by Andrew Bennie Planning Limited, on behalf of Mr. J Peeka,
and is submitted in further support of our Request to Review the refusal of planning application
number P/23/0156. 
1.2 It should be noted that this Statement is submitted without prejudice to our stated position that
the Council’s Planning and Regulatory Service does not constitute an “interested party” within
the meaning set down under the Town and Country Planning (Scheme of Delegation and Local
Review Procedure)(Scotland) Regulations 2013 and the 1997 Planning Act and as such, their
Statement of Observations should not be considered as part of this Review. 
230

Page 1206

2.0 RESPONSE TO INTERESTED PARTY SUBMISSION 
2.1 For ease of reference, the comments which are set out below are listed under the numbered
paragraph from the Council’s Observations to which they relate. 
Paragraph 3.2 
2.2 It is noted and welcomed that the Council has accepted that Policies 1 and 2 of NPF 4 were not
a determining factor in terms of the decision that was reached on the application which forms
the basis of this Review. 
2.3 In further commenting on this matter, I would note that having accepted that these two policies
were not of relevance in terms of the assessment of the application, the Council should have
made clear for the purposes of this Review that said policies should not have been referred to
within the terms of the Reason for the Refusal of the application and that the LRB should not
take said policies into account when determining this Review. 
Paragraph 3.3 
2.4 In stating that the proposed works to the subject property would not be in keeping with the
properties in the surrounding area, the Council fail to have regard the fact that it could be
reasonably stated that the existing property in its current form is similarly out of keeping with
the character of the surrounding area, with the same being true of the detached property which
lies to the immediate east side of the site, which in terms of its design is unlike any other
properties in the area. 
2.5 Whilst the proposed works will, as has already been acknowledged, change the appearance of
host property, it is and remains my position that the scale and significance of this change is such
that it will not, on balance, be detrimental to the character and amenity of the surrounding area
and that as such the proposals can be reasonably justified against the terms of NPF 4 Policy
16(g)(i). 
Paragraph 3.4 
2.6 It has been stated that the proposed works will increase overlooking into surrounding private
gardens. 
231

Page 1207

2.7 With regards to the properties on Burnblea Street, the proposed upper storey windows would be
set back some 25m from the mutual boundary between the properties, this being well in excess
of the 18m window to window distance that is accepted by the Council as affording sufficient
separation and privacy when applied to new residential development layouts (based on 19m back
gardens and directly opposing rear elevations). 
2.8 Consequently, it is not accepted that it can be reasonably stated that the proposed works will
have a detrimental impact upon the privacy of those properties which lie to the north side of the
site. 
2.9 The Council also fail to recognize that due to the nature of the surrounding topography, the rear
garden of the Review property is directly overlooked by those properties at numbers 1 - 11 Novar
Street, which lie to its south side, and also by the properties at numbers 82 and 84 Alness Street,
with it being noted the numbers 82 and 86 Alness Street also directly overlook the rear gardens
of the properties at numbers 1 – 11 Novar Street. 
2.10 From this, it is clear that none of the properties on Alness Street and Novar Street to which the
Council have referred benefit from a high degree of privacy as matters stand at present and the
additional “impact” of the proposed works will not lead to any significant diminution of the
existing level privacy enjoyed by any of the properties within the surrounding area. 
Paragraph 3.5 
2.11 It is acknowledged and welcomed that the Council has accepted that Policy 2 of the SLLDP2 has
been erroneously referred to within the stated reason for the refusal of the application which
forms the basis of this Review. 
Paragraph 3.6 
2.12 The terms of this paragraph largely repeat the position set out within 3.4 and consequently, and
to avoid any unnecessary repetition, I would refer to my comments at paragraphs 2.7 – 2.10
above. 
Paragraph 4.1 
2.13 Reference has been made to the impact that the proposed works would have upon the existing
street scene. 
232

Page 1208

2.14 Whilst such potential impacts would constitute a valid area of concern, the simple fact that the
existing/host property occupies a backland site and is wholly shielded from Burnblea Street by
an existing property it is axiomatic that the proposed works cannot have an adverse impact upon
the street scene.
233