Controversial plan to build new homes on greenbelt land near Airdrie kicked out by councillors
The massive Orchard Brae development, which proposed to build almost 1000 new homes on the Europark site, adjacent to Eurocentral, went before councillors on Thursday.
A controversial plan to build hundreds of new homes on greenbelt land near Airdrie has been kicked out by North Lanarkshre councillors.
The massive Orchard Brae development, which proposed to build almost 1000 new homes on the Europark site, adjacent to Eurocentral, went before councillors on Thursday.
North Lanarkshire Council planners advised the 244 hectare plan should be rejected, with councillors voting to knock back the application with 42 against and 18 supporters backing it.
Nine councillors withdrew after declaring a possible conflict of interest.
The council report stated: 'It is acknowledged that the proposal has some benefits, but the need for additional housing land and the justification provided for the employment land are not accepted, and it is considered that the employment and economic benefits are likely to be substantially less than the applicant estimates.
'The benefits of the proposal are therefore not considered to be sufficient to justify such a significant departure from the development plan, and for this reason it is recommended that planning permission in principle should be refused.
'The proposal is contrary to National Planning Framework and to North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan Policies as the development would result in detrimental impacts upon a valuable area of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network.
'The development as a whole is inconsistent with the wider policies of the development plan and therefore its adverse impacts on the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network cannot be justified.
'It is not considered that any adequate justification, special circumstances or material considerations have been demonstrated which would justify a departure from these policies.'
Opponents - including the Woodhall, Faskine and Palacecraig Conservation Group - believed the plans would destroy a historic area of greenbelt, damage wildlife and deprive residents of valuable outdoor space.
At the meeting, objector Dr Ann Glen called on councillors to reject the plans.
She said: 'Nature's condition reflects our values. Our mission should to be to foster a world where communities can flourish in harmony with nature. Not by destroying it, as the destruction of this greenbelt would imply.
'Nor should we be allowing it to be destroyed for speculative gain. That is completely unacceptable.'
Politicians from all sides of the political spectrum spoke of their delight at the news.
Central Scotland Labour MSP Richard Leonard said: 'When I first stood for Parliament in 2016 this was a rising issue. Almost a decade of campaigning led by local people has paid off.
'It has been a long hard 10 years but this is a victory for democracy and the people. We remain vigilant and ready to keep the campaign going for as long as it takes.'
Airdrie South Progressive Change councillor Paul DiMascio said: 'Local democracy won through and the strength of feeling against building on the green belt had been made clear. Crucially, approval would have been a clear breach of national and local guidelines.
'Should Orchard Brae appeal to the Scottish Reporter it is imperative that they both know the strength of feeling which was apparent against this proposal and take full account of North Lanarkshire's position which was made clear and ensure that this development does not get the nod down the line on appeal, via the back door.
Conservative MSP Graham Simpson added: 'It's fantastic news that the massive Woodhall and Faskine development has been rejected.
'It's been my pleasure and honour to work alongside everyone in opposing these plans.'
Scott Gillespie, director for Orchard Brae, said the group were disappointed by the decision made by North Lanarkshire Council.
He continued: "When officers published their report recommending refusal, despite a decade of discussions and the changes they asked us to implement in 2024 being made, it was clear that we faced an uphill task.
'I want to thank the 18 elected members who supported our proposals alongside our local partners who joined us at the hearing. Their support is very much appreciated.
'We remain fully committed to our vision for this landmark mixed-use development, which we firmly believe would deliver significant benefits to the local community and beyond including more than 2000 jobs.
'It is apparent at the hearing that these benefits cannot be readily delivered elsewhere in North Lanarkshire, so there is a threat that they may now be lost.
'We have taken on board feedback from the council and local stakeholders and shaped our plans accordingly, including a vibrant economic hub, much-needed housing, a medical centre, a state-of-the-art football facility, a new primary school, additional investment in surrounding secondary schools, and, notably, a nationally-recognised country park covering 64 per cent of the site.
'This proposal was never a choice between development and greenspace. It offered the best of both, delivering jobs, training opportunities, and high-quality, sustainable homes within an enhanced natural environment.
'Many within the local community have shown strong support for this balanced and forward-thinking approach. It is unfortunate that this was not reflected in today's decision.
'We will now carefully consider our next steps and how best to move forward with our proposals and long-term vision for the area.'
*Don't miss the latest headlines from around Lanarkshire. Sign up to our newsletters here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
13-06-2025
- The Independent
Pensioners who challenged winter fuel payment decision in court lose case
A pensioner couple have lost their legal challenge over government decisions to cut the winter fuel payment (WFP) and its Scottish equivalent. Peter and Florence Fanning, from Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire, raised the petition in the Court of Session in Edinburgh following the announcement last July from Chancellor Rachel Reeves of plans to cut the allowance. The couple lost their entitlement to the financial assistance and became worried about their ability to afford their heating bills. They brought the legal action with the help of ex-SNP MP Joanna Cherry KC, who represented them as senior counsel. In April 2024, the provision of a winter fuel-related payment was devolved to Scottish ministers who proposed a new benefit – the pension age winter heating payment (PAWHP) – causing an adjustment to the block grant funding provided to the Scottish Government by the UK Government. Scottish ministers proposed the payment would be universal, and not means-tested. After Labour swept to power at Westminster in July 2024, Ms Reeves announced the WFP would no longer be available to those not in receipt of pension credit or other means-tested benefits, resulting in a reduction to the block grant estimated to be around £160 million. The court heard Scottish ministers considered they had no option but to replicate the decision of the UK Government with regards to the PAWHP. The Fannings, who received the WFP in 2023 but were not eligible for PAWHP in 2024, challenged both decisions, claiming neither government had considered the Equality Act 2010 and had both 'failed to consult' with pensioners. They sought to quash the decisions of both governments, and sought a finding they both acted in a way which was 'irrational and unreasonable'. The Fannings also sought a finding that both decisions were unlawful under the Human Rights Act 1998. However, Judge Lady Hood rejected all six requests. In a U-turn earlier this week, the UK Government announced the vast majority of pensioners in England and Wales will again receive the winter fuel payment this winter, and the Scottish Government said it is 'working through the options' in the wake of that decision. In her decision, published on Friday, Lady Hood found neither government had failed to exercise their duties under the Equality Act 2010, and neither government was under a duty to consult. She also held the decisions were neither 'irrational nor unreasonable' and did not breach the Human Rights Act 1998, and she ruled they were 'in pursuit of a legitimate aim'. In a written judgment, Lady Hood said: 'In this case, the decision which each respondent faced as to whether the payment of WFP, or PAWHP, should be made on a universal or means-tested basis fell within the field of socioeconomic policy. 'It was a policy decision involving questions of the allocation of resources, and practical and political assessments that this court would not be well-placed to judge. 'That the policy decisions could result in hardship for those falling on one side of a brightline rule is not enough to render it irrational in the legal sense.' Lady Hood said: 'The petitioners asserted that elderly people suffering from disabilities rendering them vulnerable to cold temperatures constituted a group in our society which has suffered considerable discrimination in the past… However mere assertion is not enough to bring a group within that definition, and the petitioners did not sufficiently demonstrate to the court that this cohort of the population did do so.' She added that 'in the absence of any evidence of past widespread discrimination against elderly persons by the government having been put before the court by the petitioners, the categorisation could not be applied to elderly people as a cohort'. The petition was refused on all grounds. Lady Hood wrote: 'In respect of each of the respondents, the rules as to eligibility for payments of WFP and PAWHP were set out in terms of the legislation implementing the respective respondents' policy decisions. 'In these circumstances, and standing the decision reached above on the public sector equality duty and the issue of consultation, the schemes are in accordance with law. 'They are in pursuit of a legitimate aim.' Lady Hood's judgment concluded: 'I shall therefore repel the petitioners' first to eighth pleas‑in‑law, and refuse the petition.' The Govan Law Centre, which acted for the couple, said the pensioners should be 'commended for their courage in pursuing this litigation'. A spokesperson added: 'While our clients have lost their case, we have no doubt that this has been influential in securing the partial U-turn made by the Scottish Government last November and the major policy U-turn confirmed by the UK Government earlier this week. 'We hope the Scottish Government will now restore the pension age winter heating payment in full for people such as our clients. 'Even had the petitioners won, the most the court could have done would have been to order each government to go back to the drawing board to reconsider the cuts. The fact they have already reconsidered vindicates our clients' decision to bring litigation.'
Daily Record
13-06-2025
- Daily Record
Controversial plan to build new homes on greenbelt land near Airdrie kicked out by councillors
The massive Orchard Brae development, which proposed to build almost 1000 new homes on the Europark site, adjacent to Eurocentral, went before councillors on Thursday. A controversial plan to build hundreds of new homes on greenbelt land near Airdrie has been kicked out by North Lanarkshre councillors. The massive Orchard Brae development, which proposed to build almost 1000 new homes on the Europark site, adjacent to Eurocentral, went before councillors on Thursday. North Lanarkshire Council planners advised the 244 hectare plan should be rejected, with councillors voting to knock back the application with 42 against and 18 supporters backing it. Nine councillors withdrew after declaring a possible conflict of interest. The council report stated: 'It is acknowledged that the proposal has some benefits, but the need for additional housing land and the justification provided for the employment land are not accepted, and it is considered that the employment and economic benefits are likely to be substantially less than the applicant estimates. 'The benefits of the proposal are therefore not considered to be sufficient to justify such a significant departure from the development plan, and for this reason it is recommended that planning permission in principle should be refused. 'The proposal is contrary to National Planning Framework and to North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan Policies as the development would result in detrimental impacts upon a valuable area of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network. 'The development as a whole is inconsistent with the wider policies of the development plan and therefore its adverse impacts on the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network cannot be justified. 'It is not considered that any adequate justification, special circumstances or material considerations have been demonstrated which would justify a departure from these policies.' Opponents - including the Woodhall, Faskine and Palacecraig Conservation Group - believed the plans would destroy a historic area of greenbelt, damage wildlife and deprive residents of valuable outdoor space. At the meeting, objector Dr Ann Glen called on councillors to reject the plans. She said: 'Nature's condition reflects our values. Our mission should to be to foster a world where communities can flourish in harmony with nature. Not by destroying it, as the destruction of this greenbelt would imply. 'Nor should we be allowing it to be destroyed for speculative gain. That is completely unacceptable.' Politicians from all sides of the political spectrum spoke of their delight at the news. Central Scotland Labour MSP Richard Leonard said: 'When I first stood for Parliament in 2016 this was a rising issue. Almost a decade of campaigning led by local people has paid off. 'It has been a long hard 10 years but this is a victory for democracy and the people. We remain vigilant and ready to keep the campaign going for as long as it takes.' Airdrie South Progressive Change councillor Paul DiMascio said: 'Local democracy won through and the strength of feeling against building on the green belt had been made clear. Crucially, approval would have been a clear breach of national and local guidelines. 'Should Orchard Brae appeal to the Scottish Reporter it is imperative that they both know the strength of feeling which was apparent against this proposal and take full account of North Lanarkshire's position which was made clear and ensure that this development does not get the nod down the line on appeal, via the back door. Conservative MSP Graham Simpson added: 'It's fantastic news that the massive Woodhall and Faskine development has been rejected. 'It's been my pleasure and honour to work alongside everyone in opposing these plans.' Scott Gillespie, director for Orchard Brae, said the group were disappointed by the decision made by North Lanarkshire Council. He continued: "When officers published their report recommending refusal, despite a decade of discussions and the changes they asked us to implement in 2024 being made, it was clear that we faced an uphill task. 'I want to thank the 18 elected members who supported our proposals alongside our local partners who joined us at the hearing. Their support is very much appreciated. 'We remain fully committed to our vision for this landmark mixed-use development, which we firmly believe would deliver significant benefits to the local community and beyond including more than 2000 jobs. 'It is apparent at the hearing that these benefits cannot be readily delivered elsewhere in North Lanarkshire, so there is a threat that they may now be lost. 'We have taken on board feedback from the council and local stakeholders and shaped our plans accordingly, including a vibrant economic hub, much-needed housing, a medical centre, a state-of-the-art football facility, a new primary school, additional investment in surrounding secondary schools, and, notably, a nationally-recognised country park covering 64 per cent of the site. 'This proposal was never a choice between development and greenspace. It offered the best of both, delivering jobs, training opportunities, and high-quality, sustainable homes within an enhanced natural environment. 'Many within the local community have shown strong support for this balanced and forward-thinking approach. It is unfortunate that this was not reflected in today's decision. 'We will now carefully consider our next steps and how best to move forward with our proposals and long-term vision for the area.' *Don't miss the latest headlines from around Lanarkshire. Sign up to our newsletters here.
BBC News
13-06-2025
- BBC News
Scottish couple lose legal challenge of winter fuel payment cuts
A couple have lost a bid to sue the UK and Scottish governments over the decision to cut winter fuel Peter and Flo Fanning, from Coatbridge in North Lanarkshire, took their case to the Court of Session in Edinburgh in March, alleging that both governments failed to adequately consult with those of pension age and did not release an equality impact assessment on the Court of Session ruled to refuse the petition on couple's lawyers have said they have no doubt the Fanning's litigation had been influential in securing U-turns by both governments. A spokesperson from the Govan Law Centre told BBC Scotland News: "While our clients have lost their case at first instance, we have no doubt that this litigation has been influential in securing the partial U-turn made by the Scottish government last November and the major policy U-turn confirmed by the UK government earlier this week."We hope that the Scottish government will now follow suit and restore the winter fuel payment in full for people such as our clients."Earlier this week, the UK government abandoned plans to withdraw the payments from all but the poorest pensioners after the scheme drew widespread Scottish government had already launched its own winter fuel benefit in response to the original cuts which included extra support for those less well-off, but also a universal payment which is unaffected by Govan Law Centre added the legal challenge "was always one of process" and the fact the UK government has already reconsidered the cuts "vindicates" their said that an appeal would have "reasonable prospects of success" but added it is unlikely that legal aid would be provided for this. What's happening with winter fuel payments? About 10 million pensioners in England and Wales lost their allowance under new measures announced by chancellor Rachel Reeves in July last on pension credit or certain other means-tested benefits retained the annual payments, worth between £100 and £ Scotland, the payment was devolved to Holyrood in April 2024, but the Scottish government followed the actions of their counterparts in Westminster in terminating it in August 2024, arguing £160m had been taken from its budget.A new alternative, called the Pension Age Winter Heating Payment (PAWHP), was due to be introduced the following month, but that has since been pushed back to winter will also be means-tested, despite ministers claiming it would not Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville recently said the universal approach of the devolved Scottish scheme was important - but that wealthier pensioners would be made aware that they could opt current plan is for all pensioner households to receive at least £100 regardless of income, while those on pension credit will receive up to £305 depending on the devolved government in Northern Ireland also followed suit, but affected pensioners were given a one-off £100 payment from Stormont in November.
