1

Application No. Date registered APPLICANT

S/96/003 62/OUT 27 June 1996 WIMPEY HOMES HOLDINGS LTD, KIRKTNTILLOCH ROAD, BISHOPBFUGGS, GLASGOW G64 2PS

Agent DEVELOPMENT LOCATION

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT BRANCHAL ROAD, CAMBUSNETHAN, WISHAW

Estimated Cost Ward No. Grid Reference

9

File Reference 3/73(26 I)/CP/AB

Site History

Green Belt Development Plan

Contrary to Dev. Plan 0 Yes

CONSULTATIONS

Objection Central Scotland Countryside Trust NLC Education Department NLC Leisure Services (Head of Parks & Amenity)

No Objection West of Scotland Water (Water)

Conditions West of Scotland Water (Sewerage) The Coal Authority

Community Council No Reply

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours Section 23

0 96 Letters of objection to original plans 18 letters of objection to revised plans

COMMENTS This outline application relates to the use of approximately 16 hectares of land within the designated Greenbelt, for residential purposes. The site lies to the north and east of Cambusnethan in Wishaw and is currently occupied by pasture land and areas of peripheral woodland. It should be noted that the site area has been reduced from that indicated on the plans, as originally submitted. The original plans included an additional area of 9 hectares, to the south east of the site (north of Cambusnethan Street). The site is bounded by existing residential developments to the south and south west. The land to the north of the site has been designated as a Site of Interest for Nature Conservation. A section of the proposed residential site to the west of Branchal Road, is included within the boundaries of the S.I.N.C. The main point of vehicular access to the site would be from a roundabout on Branchal Road. It is estimated that the site would be capable of

\

-I

I .. .

3

accommodating up to 500 dwellings. Observations on the details of consultation responses and numerous letters of objection in relation to this application, are contained in the accompanying report, along with my observations on the planning merits of the proposed development.

RECOMMENDATION

Refuse, on the following grounds, viz:-

(1) That the proposed use of this land for residential development would be contrary to the policies of the Finalised Wishaw Local Plan and the Consultative Draft of the Motherwell District Local Plan, in which the land is zoned as Greenbelt.

(2) The proposed use of this land for residential development would be contrary to Structure Plan Policy RES 2, which seeks to direct new residential development to infill or redevelopment Sites , within urban areas, in preference to sites in the Greenbelt.

e (3 ) The proposed development would be contrary to policy E N 1 2 of the

Consultative Draft of the Motherwell District Local Plan, which seeks to protect areas of importance for Wildlife Conservation.

List of Background Papers

Application and plans received 27/6/96 Supplementary plans received 26/7/96 Letters received 8/10/96,22/8/97, 5/12/97, 17/12/97, 7/1/98 & 19/1/98 from applicant Traffic Impact Analysis dated 30/1/98 Additional Information in support of Traffic Impact Analysis submitted 30/4/98 Finalised Wishaw Local Plan Consultative Draft of Motherwell District Wide Local Plan Letter received 12/8/96 from West of Scotland Water Letter received 9/8/96 from Director of Education, North Lanarkshire Council Letter received 2 1/8/96 from The Coal Authority Letter dated 11 October 1996 from Central Scotland Countryside Trust Memos received 18/8/96, 13/1/98, 13/5/98 from Head of Parks & Amenity, North Lanarkshire Couiicil Leisure Services Department Letter received 27/8/96 from James Daly, 8 Greendale, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs G Williams, 9 Greendale, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs A Clark, 1 Pine Lawn, Cambusnethan Letter received 20/8/96 from Mr M. McKay, 13 Barra Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 30/8/96 from Mr W. Park, 513 Cambusnethan Street, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr M. McDonald, 10 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan

@

4

Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr J. Christie, 14 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr G. Hegarty, 16 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Helen McQuade, 3 Greendale, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr. I. Price, 5 Greendale, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Anthony Paterson, 6 Greendale, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from J & A E Stevenson, 6 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr J. Carsewell, 15 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mrs Irene Hunter, 13 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mrs E Hughs, 1 1 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from J. Finlayson, 2 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Linda Johnston, 5 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Amanda Lockhart, 8 Pine Lawn, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Helen Shearer, 13 Pine Lawn, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Donald Morrison, 5 Pine Lawn, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs McAleer, 2 1 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Jamie Rodgers, 19 Louisirille Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Stephen Smith, 17 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Alan Dick, 1 1 Forest Park, Birch Meadows, Cambusnetlian Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr D. Adie, 23 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs Collins, 38 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs McWhinnie, 28 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr J. Waddell, 26 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr I. Rhinds, 24 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr R. McLaren, 4 Forest Park, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr T. Murphy, 7 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs J. Clark, 9 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr Richard Ronnie, 17 Forest Park, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs Reynolds, 36 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs K Wilson, 22 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs Smith, 20 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from M. B. McNally, 18 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs A. Ruthven, 3 1 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnetlian Letter received 28/8/96 from C. M. Davie, 35 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr J. Redfern, 2 Forest Park, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr Glen Scolley, 8 Webster Grove, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr Mohammed, 1 Green Dale, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Miss Dane, 4 Greendale, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs I. Fraser, 7 Forest Park, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Miss E. Quigley & Mr C. McCafferty, 13 Forest Park, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr A & Mr J. Martin, 5 Forest Park, Cambusnetlian Letter received 27/8/96 from R. M. Scott, 24 Webster Groves, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from VaIerie Marshall, 20 Webster Groves, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from A. Wilson, 16 Webster Groves, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs Wilkie, 10 Webster Groves, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mark Aston, 1 Webster Groves, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs Johnston, 3 Forest Park, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs W Cogan, 12 Pine Lawn, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr Mathieson, 12 Forest Park, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Kenneth Marrs & Julia Strang, 14 Forest Park, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mark Aiton, 1 Webster Groves, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Lesley Mitchell, 12 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs Kennedy, 29 Louisville Avenue, Cambusnethan

-

5

Letter received 27/8/96 from Jean Walker, 4 Webster Groves, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Hugh Cairns, 22 Webster Groves, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Linda Fowler, 9 Webster Groves, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/97 from Jim Poole, 4 Pine Lawn, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs Sim, 15 Webster Groves, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr & Mrs Riley, 7 Greendale, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr Hazlet, 13 Webster Groves, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr J. Fair, 7 Greendale, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Mr J. Johnston, 6 Forest Park, Cambusnethan Letter received 27/8/96 from Audrey Goodwin, 9 Pine Lawn, Cambusnethan Letter received 26/8/96 from Elaine Millar, 15 Barra Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 22/8/96 from W. Watson, 45 1 Cambusnethan Street, Cambusnethan Letter received 15/7/96 from Mrs E. J. Clements, 7 Easter Crescent, Cambusnetlian Letter received 17/9/96 from Eleanor Watson, 3 Easter Crescent, Cambusnethan Letter received 12/7/96 from George Young, 14 Rankin Road, Cambusnethan Letter received 9/7/96 from J. Andrew, Plainfield, 507 Cambusnethan Street, Cambusnethaii Letter received 10/7/96 from Mrs C. A. Williamson, 3 Hallside Gardens, Wishaw Letter received 10/7/96 from Roberta Gold, 1 Easter Crescent, Cambusnethan Letter received 9/7/96 from Alan Wilson, 9 Easter Crescent, Cambusnethan Letters received 5/7/96 & 20/8/96 from A. B. Littlejohn, Stanley, 160 Manse Road, Newinains Letter received 5/7/96 from T. McIvor, 2 1 Barra Avenue, Wishaw Letter received 8/7/96 from E. H. Hay, 20 Barra Avenue, Wishaw Letters received 5/7/96 & 6/9/96 from Alexander & Jane Low, 499 Cambusnethan Street, Cambusnethan Letter received 3/7/96 from Mrs Clare Boyle, 5 1 1 Cambusnethan Street, Cambusnethan Letter received 4/7/96 from Mr & Mrs Dalgleish, 19 Barra Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 5/7/96 from Alex Davidson, 17 Barra Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 6/7/96 from A & M Eadie, Millford Cottage, 483 Cambusnethan Street, Cambusnethan Letter received 10/7/96 from Gordon Govan, 11 Easter Crescent, Cambusnethan Letter received 7/7/96 from Marion Dempster, 505 Cambusnethan Street, Cambusnethan Letter received 5/7/96 from Mrs A Lawson, 18 Barra Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 28/6/96 from Mr L M Taylor, 14 Barra Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 17/6/96 from Mr & Mrs Mawer, 16 Barra Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter received 18/7/96 from Mr & Mrs H Lawrie, Huelan, 5 Easter Crescent, Cambusnetlian Letter received 27/7/96 from Mrs Millar, 440 Cambusnethan Street, Cambusnethan Letter received 3 1/7/96 from Mr J. Bailley, Branchalbum Farm, Cambusnethan Letter dated 30/12/97 from Miss Isobel Thompson, 184 Branchalfield Drive, Cambusnethan Letter dated 6/12/97 from Audrey Lawson, 18 Barra Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter dated 22/12/97 from Sylvia Jack, 178 Branchalfield Drive, Cambusnethan Letter dated 19/1/98 from Mary Hogg, 5 1 Thrashbush Road, Cambusnethan Letter dated 12/12/97 from Yvonne Miller, 440 Cambusnethan Street, Cambusnetlian Letter dated 11/12/97 from Mr P Mawer, 16 Barra Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter dated 1 1/12/97 from Mr T McIvor, 21 Barra Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter dated 19/12/97 from Mr & Mrs Stevenson, 6 Louisville Avenue, Birch Meadows, Cambusnethan Letter dated 15/12/97 from Elaine Miller, 15 Barra Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter dated 16/12/97 from Johnston Miller, 168 Branchalfield Drive, Cambusnetlian Letter dated 17/2/97 from Mr G Taylor, 14 Barra Avenue, Cambusnethan Letter dated 22/12/97 from A & E Tavendale, 75 Lewis Court, Cambusnethan Letter dated 9/12/97 from Mr A Wilson, 9 Easter Crescent, Cambusnethan Letter dated 15/12/97 form Mr G Govan, 11 Easter Crescent, Cambusnethan Letter dated 22/12/97 from Mr E McInture, 1 Hallside Gardens, Cambusnethan Letter dated 29/12/97 from Mr G Robertson, 192 Branchalfield Dirve, Cambusnetlian

@

@

6

Letter dated 30/12/97 from Mr M Lanigan, 170 Branchalfield Drive, Cambusnethan Letter dated 29/12/97 from Miss Marie McCroy, 190 Branchalfield Drive, Cambusnethan

Any person wishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Motherwell 302138 and ask for Mrs Parkes.

7

APPLICATION NO S/96/00362/OUT

REPORT

1 .O APPLICATION SITE AND PROPOSALS

1.1 This 16 hectare site lies within the Greenbelt, to the North and East of the Cambusnethan area of Wishaw. The site is currently occupied by rough grassland with peripheral areas of woodland.

The site is bounded by existing residential areas to the south and south west. Land to the north and west of the site has been designated as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation. A portion of the site to the north west and a small strip of land to the east is included within the boundaries of the S.I.N.C.

1.2 This Outline Application relates to the development of this greenfield site for residential purposes. It is estimated that the site would be capable of accommodating up to 500 dwellings. The proposed master plan for this site indicates the establishment of 4 neighbourhood areas (N1 - N4). The identity of these areas would be reinforced by the provision of structural tree planting around their boundaries. The proposed main vehicular access to the site would be from a roundabout on Branchal Road. A proposed pedestrian link and possible emergency access route may also be provided from Rankin Road. A landscaped strip would be provided between the existing residential areas and the proposed development and between each of the six proposed 'neighbourhood areas', within the development scheme. The locations for five children's play areas are also indicated on the submitted plans.

1.3 It should be noted that the application has been revised substantially from when it was first submitted in June 1996. The application, as originally submitted, related to the development of 25 hectares of land, the additional 9 hectares of which, was situated to the south east of the current site boundary. This land bordered onto the backs of properties on Rankin Road and Cambusnethan Street. Part of this additional site was included within the Branchal Moss Site of Interest for Nature Conservation. The original plans also included provision for an access to be made onto Cambusnethan Street.

@ 2.0 CONSULTATIONS

2.1 West of Scotland Water has no objections to the proposed development, although it advises that the layout of the proposed development could be constrained by the presence of existing sewerage pipelines which traverse the site.

2.2 The Coal Authority advises that the site is located within the likely zone of influence from five seams of coal, at shallow to approximately 100 metres in depth, the last working date being 1945. There are 6 mine entries situated within the site's boundaries and in view of mining circumstances, a prudent developer should seek appropriate technical advice, before any works are undertaken on site.

2.3 The Director of Education at North Lanarkshire Council reports that the area of the site, identified as N4 on the proposed master plan, is included within the catchment area for Newmains Primary School, which has sufficient capacity to cope with the increase in pupil numbers. However, the areas ofthe site identified as N1 - N3, are included within the catchment areas for Cambusnethan Primary, which is presently operating at very close to

8

capacity. Should the development proceed, the Department reports that there is a possibility that some pupils may not be accommodated within this school and would have to be transported elsewhere by the Authority.

2.4 The Head of Parks and Amenity at North Lanarkshire Council Leisure Services Department, comments as follows:-

The site lies immediately to the South and East of areas of wetland and woodland known as Branchal Moss and Branchal Plantation, respectively. These combined areas have been designated as a S.I.N.C. (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation). The ecologically vulnerable site provides a locally and naturally important habitat for a wide range of wildlife species.

The proposed development would destroy an area of meadowland, located within the Branchal Plantation S.I.N.C., which provides an important habitat for many valuable wildlife species.

Rights of way which pass through this area, would be significantly altered or removed. In view of the above, the following recommendations are offered in respect of this application.

a)

b)

The hydrological implications of developments on this site should be investigated to ensure that there would be no adverse effect on the moss habitat. A buffer zone, including the area of mossland within the application site, should be retained along the south side of the walkway on the former railway park, to decrease pressure on the SNC. The rights of way should be retained or alternative routes should be found. The Area of Scientific Interest under the applicant's ownership, to the North of this site, should be handed over to North Lanarkshire Council, to provide for its management for nature conservation, in conjunction with the remainder of the SINC, which already falls within the Council's Ownership. The part of the site which falls within the Branchal Plantation S.I.N.C. should be removed from the site boundary.

c) d)

e)

2.5 Central Scotland Countryside Trust has objected to the proposed development on this large greenfield site, within the Greenbelt. It comments that the land makes a substantial contribution as the greenfield, northern edge to Cambusnethan. As well as having a visual role, it also functions as a rural buffer zone, between the housing edge and the wetland habitats of Branchal Moss, to the north.

If the development were to proceed, the right of way along the former railway line would change in character from a countryside walk to a pathway along the urban edge. It further considers that this encroachment of the urban edge would be detrimental to the ecology of Branchal Moss and the adjacent woodlands, as it would remove an important buffer zone and affect the hydrological balance of the Moss.

3.0 REPRESENTATIONS

3.1 Letters of objection were received from 96 neighbouring residents, in relation to this application as originally submitted. The main grounds of objection were as follows:-

9

The amount of traffic generated by the development would cause the overloading of the existing road network, to the detriment of public safety. There would be insufficient capacity within the existing schools in the area, to serve a development on this scale. The existing water and sewerage systems are already close to capacity, in this area and would be unable to serve this scale of development. The area is poorly served in terms of local amenities, such as shopping and leisure facilities and would therefore be unsuitable for the siting of another large scale residential development. The proposal would be contrary to national, regional and local planning guidance, in that it would result in the loss of a substantial area of Greenbelt. This area of Greenbelt serves as an important buffer zone between the built up areas of Cambusnethan and Newmains. The site includes a large section of marshland adjacent to Branchal Road, which serves as an important habitat for local wildlife. The proposal would consequently destroy the complex ecosystem which exists on this part of the site and would damage the viability of the remaining area of mossland to the North the application site. The proposed development of this substantial greenfield site could prejudice the development of approved brownfield sites and as a consequence would be harmful to the process of urban generation, which is being pursued by the Council. The location of the proposed residential development, on the periphery of the existing settlement, would be energy inefficient in terms of the resulting land use patteni. The proposal would therefore be contrary to the aims of sustainable development currently being promoted by the Council, through the Local Plan. The proposed development would be detrimental to the amenity of existing residents in the area, as it would result in overshadowing, loss of outlook, and privacy and an increase in levels of noise and disturbance and consequent fall in property values, in the locality. One neighbouring resident has also objected to the proposed development, on the grounds that the required construction works would result in an unacceptable level of disturbance, for a protracted period, throughout the locality. One objector has raised the possibility that the site may be prone to subsidence, owing to the presence of old mine workings within the area. The owner of Branchal Farm has written to advise that the access road to his farm is on Branchal Road and cannot be obstructed at any time.

3.2

3.3

3.4

I should also advise that objections were initially received from a number of neighbours on the grounds that the original plan which formed the basis of this application was of poor qualiv. being out of date and providing insufficient information. I would confirm however, that the developer has since provided a more detailed plan, and has renotified neighbours of this submission.

Residents of the Birchmeadows estate have also objected to the proposal, on the grounds that the applicant should have notified them directly, as joint owners of communal open space, which falls within the site's boundaries. I should advise however, that I have received further confirmation from Wimpey Homes, that they are the sole owners of all land falling within the application site.

A total of 18 further letters of objection have been received from local residents, in relation to the revised application. Six of these letters were from representatives who had previously

10

objected to the plans as originally submitted. The grounds of objection contained in these letters are similar to those received, in relation to the original application.

4.0 PLANNING OBSERVATIONS

4.1 The Development of this large area of land within the Greenbelt for residential purposes, raises a number of important planning issues, which require consideration in the determination of this application:-

4.2 GREENBELT

4.2.1 The application site forms part of the Greenbelt to the North of Wishaw, which performs an important function in preventing the coalescence of the existing settlements of Newmains and Cambusnethan. It also serves as an important nature conservation resource, as referred to in paragraph 4.4.1. Furthermore Structure Plan Policies seek to protect agricultural land of this quality from development, where alternative sites exist. It is considered that the loss of 16 hectares of land, at this sensitive location, Lvould therefore be inappropriate and undermine the integrity of the remaining Greenbelt in this area.

4.2.2. In certain cases, Greenbelt releases have been justified on the grounds that there is a shortage of housing land over a particular housing land supply period. However, in this instance there is a considerable surplus of land over the 1998-2003 period and there is therefore no argument for further release on these grounds. Moreover, it is likely that further Greenbelt release i n this area, would undermine the regeneration process and prejudice the take up of established land for housing opportunities. The proposal is therefore considered contrary to Local and Structure Plan policies, relating to development in the Greenbelt and cannot therefore be supported on policy grounds.

4.3 TRAFFIC

4.3.1 Many objections from the local community were based largely on the affects of the proposal on road safety in the area. I should advise, however, that the site area and its resulting capacity has been substantially reduced from that which formed the basis of the original. Instead of being capable of accommodating up to 700 dwellings, it is estimated that the revised site area would accommodate between 400-500 dwellings.

4.3.2 A Traffic Impact Analysis has also been submitted, relating to the development site, as currently proposed. This indicates that the existing road system would be capable of accommodating up to 200 dwellings, without any requirement for improvement. However, its findings identify the need for a roundabout to be constructed to the north of Branchal Road, once more than 200 dwellings are built at this site. I am of the opinion, however, that the proposed roundabout would be required from the onset of development, as any increase in house numbers in the area, without such an improvement, is likely to result in an increase in traffic using unsuitable side roads, to the detriment of road safety. Having considered the study’s findings fully, I am therefore of the opinion that the surrounding road network would be capable of accommodating up to 400 additional dwellings, providing that the proposed roundabout is constructed at the commencement of development.

11

4.4. ECOLOGY

4.4.1 The area of this site which lies to the west of Branchal Road is occupied by a meadowland which is included within the Branchal Plantation S.I.N.C. (Site of Interest for Nature Conservation). The proposed development would effectively remove this locally important wildlife habitat, which contains a number of valuable species and 2 established walkways.

4.4.2 The remainder of the site lies immediately to the south of Branchal Moss S.I.N.C., an area of wetland, which provides an important habitat for plant and animal species. It should be noted that the application, as originally submitted, included part of the Branchal Moss S.I.N.C., within its boundaries. The site boundary has, however, since been amended to exclude most of the Moss area, apart from a small strip on the eastern edge of the site. This strip is to be retained for structural planting on the finalised plans. There is the possibility, however, that the development of this land in such close proximity to Branchal Moss could affect the drainage of this sensitive area of wetland and damage the long term viability of its indigenous wildlife.

4.4.3 The application site also forms an important area of open space, which serves as a buffer zone. between the built up urban edge and the wildlife habitat at Branchal Moss. The applicant has offered the Council approximately 15 acres of wetland to the north of the application site, which falls within the Branchal Moss S.I.N.C., in return for developing tlie current application site. The bringing of this S.I.N.C. under Local Authority control would be welcomed from a nature conservation viewpoint. However, the submitted master plan indicates very little i n terms of a landscaped buffer zone, on the boundary with the S.I.N.C. The proposed development would thus be likely to result in gardens bordering directly onto tlie public walkway, on the edge of the S.I.N.C. If the area is developed for residential development i n this manner, it is considered likely that Branchal Moss would suffer from vandalism and other forms of environmental damage, due to the close proximity of this large residential area.

4.4.4 It is noted that there are a number of public rights of way passing through, or adjacent to tlie boundaries of the application site, as highlighted by the Head of Parks and Amenity. The amended plans submitted by Wimpey, indicate the retention of certain public footpaths throughout the site. It is considered possible that such rights of way could be retained within the site, providing that the layout of any resulting housing scheme is designed in a satisfactory manner. It is likely, however, that the rural quality of such rights of way would be severely diminished by their incorporation within a large housing estate, thus affecting the enjoyment of those using them for recreational purposes.

4.5. SERVICES

4.5.1 Neighbouring objectors have expressed concerns that the development will place undue pressure on local schools which are already oversubscribed. The Department of Education has confirmed that the site lies within the catchment area for Cambusnetlian Primary, and this school is operating at close to capacity . Should a development of this scale proceed, there is therefore the likelihood that some children would have to be transported to neighbouring schools, with space capacity. Whilst this situation is not seen as entirely satisfactory, the Department would not wish to object to the development on these grounds. I would therefore consider, that lack of local educational facilities, cannot be accepted as a valid ground for refusing this application.

4.5.2 Objections to the proposed development also relate to the shortage of shopping and other community facilities within the locality. This part of Cambusnethan consists of a large

12

residential area, much of which includes previous development phases by tlie applicant, Wimpey Homes. This immediate area is lacking in shopping and related facilities. There are, however, existing local shops and services located a reasonable distance from the application site at Newmains and I am not therefore, seriously concerned about this proposal from this point of view.

4.6 RESIDENTIAL AMENI7Y

4.6.1 Concerns have been expressed by existing residents in the neighbourhood, about the effects of the proposed development upon the amenity of their properties, in terms of loss of privacy, outlook and overshadowing. The amended plan submitted by Wimpey does show an area of planting to be provided between the existing and proposed residential areas. It is considered that providing such planting is carried out and maintained properly and is of a sufficiently generous standard, it should serve to protect the privacy and amenity of existing dwellings and to reinforce the identity of separate neighbourhood areas. In the event that this application is approved, the layout and design of the proposed development could be controlled at the detailed application stage, in order to ensure that the amenity of existing residents is protected.

5 .O

5.1

5.2

5.3

CONCLUSIONS

The development of this 16 hectare site in the Greenbelt for residential purposes, is contrary to national planning guidelines and to Structure and Local Plan policies relating to the protection of the Greenbelt.

It is further considered that the proposed development would directly damage the Branchal Plantation and probably indirectly the ecology of Branchal Moss, both of which are sites of Importance for Nature Conservation and would therefore be contrary to Local Plan Policies, aimed at the protection of the natural environment.

For the above reasons, I therefore consider that this application should be refused.

a