A - 22-0471-PP - PFS Lochwinnoch - DL070325
Renfrewshire Council · 18 March 2025
Back to Planning and Climate Change Policy Board — 18 March 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Report by Chief Planning Officer Planning and Climate Change Policy Board: 18th March 2025 Reference No 22/0471/PP Application Type Planning Permission Proposal Erection of petrol filling station, EVC charging points, Class 1 retail unit, Class 3 (coffee shop), car parking, associated facilities, landscaping, infrastructure works and new junction access Location Site on Northern Boundary of Roadhead Forge, Beith Road, Lochwinnoch Ward 9 - Johnstone North, Kilbarchan, Howwood and Lochwinnoch Community Council Lochwinnoch Community Council Applicant Euro Garages Ltd Recommendation Refuse All plans, reports, documents and representations relating to this application can be viewed in full online at https://pl-bs.renfrewshire.gov.uk/online- applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=REBWRJMWI6P00 This report fulfils the requirements of regulation 16, Schedule 2, paragraphs 3(c) and 4 of The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013. The report is presented to the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board in line with the Council's Scheme of Delegation. In this instance, Councillors Andy Doig, Chris Gilmour and Gillian Graham have requested that the application be considered at determined by the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board as local residents deem the proposed development to be controversial. Proposal This application seeks planning permission for a roadside services area comprising a petrol filling station and electric vehicle charging points, with associated retail and drive-thru provision alongside a separate Class 3 drive-thru unit, car parking, landscaping, infrastructure works and the formation of a new junction access, on land adjacent to the A737 Roadhead Roundabout, Lochwinnoch. The petrol filling station (PFS) and associated retail/café unit would be located to the north of the site and would be a single storey unit. The PFS unit would provide a range of convenience goods together with motor vehicle goods alongside a drive-thru provision. The gross floor area of the unit would be approx. 515sqm with an estimated sales area of 360sqm. The PFS would be approx. 5.23m high sloping down south to north to approx. 3.8m high. The building would measure 17m x 35m. The proposed Class 3 café drive-thru unit would be located on the eastern area of the site close to the EVC bays and would comprise of a gross floor area of approx. 219sqm. The unit would also be single storey with a maximum height of 5.8m. Finishing materials to both units would be cement panels, aluminium panels and timber cladding with glazing. 8 electric vehicle charging points would be provided within the site together with 4 disabled bays and 49 standard parking spaces. Sheffield cycle racks would also be provided. The site would be accessed from the south of the site at Auchengrange Hill where local widening is proposed to accommodate a new all movements priority access junction. A footway link would also lead into the site from Auchengrange Hill together with an additional pedestrian link connecting to the existing pedestrian/cycle route to the west.
Page 2
Site Description The site is located to the east of Lochwinnoch and is situated adjacent to the Roadhead Roundabout, at the junction of the A737/A760 and is rectangular in shape, extending to approximately 1.75 Ha. Auchengrange Hill runs parallel along its southern boundary. Immediately to the south of the site (along the A737) are existing business/industrial units, with dwelling houses located in a linear pattern to the south of these premises. A small unofficial layby/parking area is located to the east of the site, which provides separation between the A737 trunk road; this area comprises the tarmacked surface of the former Auchengrange Hill road, which is used as a formal cyclepath (National Cycle Route 7) and a landscaped area. The site is currently in agricultural use and is enclosed by hedgerows on all boundaries. Beyond the hedgerow, the Auchengrange Hill road aligns the site to the south. Agricultural fields adjoin the site's northern and eastern boundaries. Pre-Application Consultation with Officers The Scottish Government strongly encourages constructive pre-application discussions between prospective applicants and the planning authority. Pre-application discussions seek to identify key planning considerations at an early stage and help inform what supporting information is required to support a subsequent application. Initial discussions were had prior to the submission of the application. Negotiated Improvements Following submission, the following changes have been negotiated between officers and the applicant: Updated plans have been submitted through the course of the consideration of the application mainly focusing on changes to the internal layout. Site History The planning history for the site is as follows; Application No: 07/1126/PP Description: Conversion of outbuilding to create a dwellinghouse. Decision: Granted subject to conditions. Application No: 06/0705/PP Description: Conversion and extension of existing outbuilding to form 1.5 storey dwelling house. Decision: Withdrawn Application No: 12/0453/PP Description: Erection of three 1.5 storey terraced dwellinghouses Decision: Refused Application No: 13/0180/CL Description: Certificate of lawfulness for use of land for the siting of one caravan (defined as 'caravan 1' on plans) Decision: Grant Application No: 22/0577/EA Description: Request for EIA Screening Opinion on Roadside Services Area Comprising Petrol Filling Station and EVC Charging Points, Ancillary Retail Unit (including a Drive-Thru facility), Class 3 (Food & Drink) Drive-Thru Unit, Car
Page 3
Parking, Associated Facilities, Landscaping, Infrastructure Works and New Junction Access Decision: Withdrawn Application No: 22/0580/EA Description: Request for an Environmental Impact Assessment screening opinion for a Erection of petrol filling station, EVC charging points, Class 1 retail unit (including drive-thru facility), Class 3 (food & drink) drive-thru unit, car parking, associated facilities, landscaping, infrastructure works and new junction access Decision: Environmental Assessment Not Required. Consultations ▪ Glasgow Airport Safeguarding – Consultation response not available at the time of writing the report. ▪ Chief Executive's Service (Roads Development) – Object to the proposal as it fails to demonstrate a safe walking, wheeling and cycle connections to and from Lochwinnoch. Further details are also sought with regards to queueing space onto Aucherange Hill, swept paths and internal operation of the drive-thru window. ▪ Transport Scotland – Do not advise against the granting of planning permission. ▪ National Air Traffic Services (NATS) – No objections. ▪ Muirshiel Country Park – Concerns over appearance of proposed buildings and lighting in rural setting and proximity to other retail services in urban setting at Beith, Kilbirnie, Johnstone and Linwood. Potential for pollution of water courses. Only one bird survey has been carried out. ▪ Environment, Housing & Infrastructure (Env. Protection) – No objections subject to conditions with regards to lighting specification, a Noise Impact Assessment, site investigation, remediation and verification conditions. ▪ Lochwinnoch Community Council – Object on the basis that the proposals are contrary to the provisions of Adopted Local Development Plan 2021 Policy ENV1, the excessive no. of EVC units, site access, congestion, no safe pedestrian crossing, impact of retail element on Lochwinnoch Town Centre, lack of mains water supply or connection with foul water drainage, pumps too close to access road. Representations The application has been publicised in line with the requirements of the relevant legislation. Sixty-three representations have been received in respect of the proposed development. Fifty- eight of the representations (eight of which comprise a pro-forma letter) object to the proposed development, while five representations are submitted in support of the proposals. The issues raised in the objections can be summarised as follows, with these considered in detail in the assessment section below: ▪ Proximity to RSPB reserve. ▪ Impact on traffic. ▪ There are already petrol stations along the route in Johnstone and also Beith. ▪ Concerns over development within the greenbelt and precedent. ▪ Disturbance during construction.
Page 4
▪ Impacts on property value and loss of views. ▪ Impact on existing businesses. ▪ Not in-keeping with surrounding area including the setting of Lochwinnoch Conservation Area. ▪ Promotion of fossil fuels. ▪ Concerns over litter. ▪ Noise and light pollution. ▪ Pollution through leaks. ▪ No significant benefit to local economy. ▪ Lack of planning transparency and consultation. ▪ Traffic Assessment not accurate. ▪ Buildings and structures are not designed to support the principles of low carbon generating technology to reduce emissions. The issues raised in the letters of support can be summarised as follows: ▪ The development would be a positive amenity for the village of Lochwinnoch and would provide a facility which is currently lacking (car charging, drive-thru and filling station). ▪ The proposal would provide jobs. ▪ The proposal would make use of the land. ▪ There would also be a negligible impact on the road network. Policy Context In making any determination under the Planning Acts, regard is to be had to the statutory development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this instance the statutory Development Plan consists of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and the Renfrewshire Local Development Plan (2021) (LDP). The following provisions of the Development Plan are considered relevant to the determination of this application: National Planning Framework 4 ▪ Policy P1 – Tackling the climate ▪ Policy 8 - Green belts ▪ Policy 13 - Sustainable transport ▪ Policy 14 - Design, quality and place ▪ Policy 18 - Infrastructure first ▪ Policy 22 - Flood risk and water management ▪ Policy 27 - City, town, local and commercial centres ▪ Policy 28 – Retail ▪ Policy 29 Rural development Full details relating to the policies of the NPF4 can be found online. Renfrewshire Local Development Plan ▪ Policy ENV1 - Green Belt ▪ Policy ENV2 – Natural Heritage ▪ Policy C2 - Development outwith Renfrewshire's Network of Centres ▪ Policy I1 - Connecting Places ▪ Policy I3 - Flooding and Drainage ▪ Policy I7 - Zero and Low Carbon Buildings Full details relating to the policies of the LDP can be found online. Other relevant policies and guidance
Page 5
▪ New Development Supplementary Guidance 2022. ▪ Delivering the Environment Strategy: Green Belt Development Criteria and Noise. ▪ Delivering the Centres Strategy: Hot Food; Public Houses; Licensed Venues and Amusement Arcades. ▪ Delivering the Infrastructure Strategy: Connecting Places; Flooding and Drainage; and Provision for Waste Recycling in New Developments. Material Considerations ▪ Chief Planners letter of 8th February 2023. ▪ PAN 75 – Planning for Transport. Submitted Reports and Assessments In assessing and reporting on a planning application the Council is required to provide details of any report or assessment submitted as set out in Regulation 16, Schedule 2, para 4c) (i) to (iv) of the Development Management regulations. The following reports and assessments were submitted in support of the application: ▪ Planning Statement: The Planning Statement provides details on the site context, planning history, pre-application consultation, development description, legislative and planning policy context and planning policy assessment. ▪ Transport Assessment: Provides details on site access, internal arrangements, parking provision, development trip generation and anticipated highway impacts. ▪ Travel Plan: Provides details on the anticipated roads and transportation issues related with the development. ▪ Tree Survey: Provides details of a tree survey, arboricultural implications assessment, mitigating proposals, tree losses and planting and method statement. ▪ Landscape Visual Appraisal: Considers the impact of the development on the surrounding landscape and settlement character. ▪ Geo Environmental Assessment: Presents the findings of a combined Phase I Desk Study and Phase III Intrusive Investigation to determine ground conditions, establish if there are any environmental risks associated with the site and its development. ▪ Flood Risk Assessment: Concludes that the proposal is classified as "least vulnerable uses" and is appropriate and sustainable with regards to flood risk. ▪ Drainage Strategy: Contains details to ensure surface water runoff would be effectively managed close to source and would not increase flood risk to others. ▪ Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey: The findings of the Phase 1 Habitat Survey do not require further protected species surveys however recommendations are detailed with regards to nesting birds and habitat enhancement. Scottish Ministers Direction In determining a planning application, the Council is required to provide details of any Direction made by Scottish Ministers under Regulation 30 (Directions requiring consultation), Regulation 31 (Directions requiring information), Regulation 32 (Directions restricting the grant of planning permission) and Regulation 33 (Directions requiring consideration of condition) of The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland)
Page 6
Regulations 2013, or under Regulation 50 (that development is EIA development) of The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017. None. Planning Assessment Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act requires decisions on planning applications to be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Development Plan comprises the National Planning Framework 4 (2023) and the adopted Renfrewshire Local Development Plan (2021). The fourth National Planning Framework (NPF4) provides the long-term national spatial strategy for planning in Scotland. It sets out the Scottish Government's current view on delivering sustainable, liveable and productive places through the application of spatial principles. As the application site in this case is situated at a rural location which is designated as green belt in the adopted Renfrewshire Local Development Plan (LDP), Policy 8 and Policy ENV1 of the LDP are relevant to the assessment of this application as they set out specific circumstances in new will be supported in principle in green belt and rural areas. A summary of acceptable development includes: ▪ Development associated with agriculture, woodland creation, forestry and existing woodland; ▪ Residential accommodation required and designed for a key worker in a primary industry within the immediate vicinity of their place of employment; ▪ Horticulture; ▪ Outdoor recreation, play and sport or tourism uses; and developments that provide opportunities for access into the open countryside; ▪ Flood risk management; ▪ Essential infrastructure or new cemetery provision; ▪ Minerals operations and renewable energy developments; ▪ Intensification of established uses; ▪ The reuse, rehabilitation and conversion of historic assets; or ▪ One-for-one replacements of existing permanent homes. The applicant’s state that Policy ENV1 supports types of development which are essential infrastructure and given the lack of modern on-line roadside services on the A737 strategic road network, it is their view that the proposal would accord with Policy ENV1 as essential infrastructure. However, it is considered that the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the retail/commercial elements of the proposal would not generate significant footfall and given the scale, nature, function and role of the retail/café element of the proposal when taken into the context of the overall development, it cannot be considered ancillary to a roadside services use and has characteristic of a standalone retail/café facility (the scale of the retail/café element in the context of the wider development is considered in more detail further in the assessment section below with regards to Policy 27 in relation to floorspace). As such, it is considered that it has not been demonstrated that the proposed development relates to any of the above developments as an acceptable greenbelt use. The proposal would therefore not comply with Policy 8 and ENV1. Notwithstanding this, the New Development Supplementary Guidance, Green Belt Development Criteria sets out several criteria against which all development proposals within the green belt will be assessed against. When the proposal is assessed, the following conclusions (set out in bold below) can be made in response to each of the criteria:
Page 7
▪ There would be no loss of prime quality agricultural land or of lesser quality that is locally important - The site is not characterised as prime agricultural land and there is no evidence that it is a locally important area of agricultural land. ▪ Adverse impacts on the qualities of wild land that cannot be overcome by siting, design, and other mitigation – The site is not considered to be defined as wild land. ▪ Traffic and access infrastructure can be sensitively accommodated - Discussions with the applicants and the Council’s Chief Executive Service (Roads Development) have taken place around improved connectivity to Lochwinnoch whereby Roads Development have requested a toucan crossing over the A737 and the upgrading and widening of the A760 Largs Road footway to connect the site with the existing railway station cycle route from the village at the RSPB bird reserve junction. Improved railway crossing facilities for pedestrians and cyclists has also been also sought. The applicants state that the improvements sought to facilitate access to the RSPB reserve would not be feasible. It is considered that the wider improvements sought to the RSPB reserve would not be proportionate due to the scale and the nature of the development proposed. However, although a footway link would also lead into the site from Auchengrange Hill together with an additional pedestrian link connecting to the existing pedestrian /cycle route to the west, there are concerns with regards to safe pedestrian/cycling connectivity over the A737 to and from the site. As detailed above, Roads Development have requested a toucan crossing. The applicants have stated that they would be agreeable to considering potential improvements to the existing informal means of crossing over the A737. However, no tangible or formalised details have been provided or presented for assessment as part of this application. As such, it is considered that safe walking, wheeling and cycle connections to and from the site have not been demonstrated. As such, the proposal would not comply with this criterion. ▪ No significant effects on public water supply and water environment from any pollution risk – A Geo-Environmental Assessment was submitted which did not identify risks on public water supply and water environment. ▪ The development links to existing green network and active travel routes or provides new enhanced routes – As discussed above, although a footway link would also lead into the site from Auchengrange Hill together with an additional pedestrian link connecting to the existing pedestrian /cycle route to the west, there are concerns with regards to safe pedestrian/cycling connectivity over the A737 to and from the site. It is therefore considered that the proposal would not comply with this criterion. ▪ Proposals to protect and provide access to open space have been incorporated - The proposal would not impact on any existing access to open space. However, it is considered that the proposal would result in the loss of an area of designated green belt land and as previously outlined, this is contrary to policies of the development plan. ▪ Development will not have a significant detrimental impact on the local landscape character. Development layout, design and siting must reflect local landscape character and respect and incorporate important landscape features such as traditional field enclosures, water courses, woodlands, and skyline – A Landscape and Visual Impact Appraisal (LVA) was submitted which identifies the area as a combination of “Broad Valley Lowland and Rugged upland Farmland Landscape Character Type.” There are no local landscape designations, National Nature Reserves, National Parks or
Page 8
Country Parks located within the study area, however, Lochwinnoch Nature Reserve lies approx. 1km to the west of the site. It is considered that the visibility of the application site is limited due to the screening effects of local landform (the application site is located on relatively low-lying ground, falling to the east). It is concluded that the proposed development would not adversely impact the quality, character, landscape setting or impact open space. ▪ It can be demonstrated that there is careful consideration of the siting, design, scale and grouping of any buildings and infrastructure – The general layout of the site is dictated by the functional need to service vehicles. The simple form of the café and retail unit, and the proposed materials, consisting of timber and concrete cladding and glazing, are not considered to be particularly ominous. Landscaping around the edge of the site would soften the impact of the proposal. Whilst visible from locations further afield, the scale and design are not considered to pose any significantly detrimental landscape impact due to its position adjacent to the large roundabout. The layout, siting and design is does not conflict with this criterion and is compliant with policy 14 of NPF4. ▪ Appropriate landscaping proposals have been incorporated including the provision of well- designed boundary treatment - Policy ENV 2 advises that in considering tree or woodland removal, proposals should minimise any adverse impacts on habitats, species, network connectivity or landscape character. Policy 3 also states that proposals for local development should include appropriate measures to conserve, restore and enhance biodiversity, in accordance with national and local guidance. One tree would be removed due to ash dieback. However, landscape mitigation is proposed, and this includes retention and protection of existing trees on the site boundary. Appropriate arboricultural management of the existing trees would be carried out, planting of new hedgerows and the formation of a landscape buffer to establish a better interface with the countryside and screen/filter views of the development. ▪ There are adequate services available for the development, or this can be provided – Given the proximity of the strategic road network and Lochwinnoch, services would be available. ▪ There is no significant detrimental effect on identified nature conservation interests, including species and habitats - The applicant has submitted a Phase 1 Habitat Survey which confirmed that no non-statutory protected species existed on the site at that time. Although the proposal would result in the loss of habitats, there would be retention of the majority of the existing hedgerows and proposed landscaping. Given the Habitat Survey was undertaken in 2022, It is considered appropriate to attach a condition to any grant of planning permission to ensure that up to date surveys are undertaken and submitted to the council for consideration and approval. NPF4 provides a basis for the high-level management of drive through locational choices and sets out a planning policy approach whereby new drive-thru developments which do not meet certain locational criteria will not be supported. Policy 27 (d) sets out that drive-thru developments will only be supported where they are specifically supported in the LDP. The Adopted Local Development Plan does not have a policy on drive-throughs. Nevertheless, the Chief Planners letter of the 8th of February 2023 confirms that Policy 27 (d) was not a moratorium on such developments and that the intent of the policy was to ensure that this type of development is considered as an integral part of the wider development plan. The letter reiterates that in situations where the Adopted LDP does not
Page 9
have specific drive-thru sites allocated, decisions will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and regard should be given to wider policies within NPF4 and the statutory development plan. The Planning Service has taken into consideration the Chief Planners letter when assessing this development in relation to Policy 27 of NPF4. The applicant states that whilst the proposal includes elements that if provided by themselves, would constitute retail, the proposal is for a roadside facility which are generally accepted are not suitable for a town centre location because their entire purpose is to serve the needs of those travelling on the strategic and other road network. The proposal is to serve the safety and welfare needs of motorists, and for it not to be a destination in its own right for those who are not motorists. The fact that these facilities are not immediately accessible by pedestrians and cyclists from Lochwinnoch demonstrates that it will meet the needs only of those who it is designed to serve, and not of those who can and should access other retail outlets and cafes in the village. Policy 27(b) relates to uses that would ‘generate significant footfall’. As detailed above, the applicant states that the proposal is for a roadside facility and as such the proposed use would not fall within the scope of this policy. The applicant states that the retail/café would primarily provide a facility for those utilising the PFS and the electric charging facilities. It is however, considered that the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the retail/café elements of the proposal would not in itself generate significant footfall which would require consideration against Policy 27. The retail element is for a 515sqm store selling convenience goods. Given the site location at the edge of Lochwinnoch it is likely that the retail store could also be used by people from the village and would not solely be used as roadside services. PAN75 (Annex F) provides a useful description of facilities that would be expected to form part of roadside services, this includes retail use, but it is recommended that: ‘Provision be limited to a single unit of up to 200 square metres net floorspace to be treated as a maximum prior to planning authorities setting actual limits in development plans dependent on local circumstances, e.g. for service areas in particular locations of national tourist significance more or larger retail units may be permissible where this will not conflict with environmental objectives; all retail activity is to meet the reasonable needs of travellers only.’ There is no Development Plan policy which specially relates to roadside services and as such no limits have been set in terms of the scale of use that would be appropriate in Renfrewshire. Notwithstanding this, in considering the scale, nature, function and role of the retail/café element in the context of the wider development, it is not considered to be ancillary or subordinate. Without specific policy support for roadside services in Policy 8 and ENV1 and given the location and scale of the proposed retail/café use it is considered necessary to assess the proposal against both of Policy 27 in NPF4 and Policy C2 in the Renfrewshire Local Development Plan. In terms of Policy 27 and C2 it is considered that the submitted sequential test is reasonable and that the proposal would not have a significant detrimental impact on the viability and vitality of the network of centres identified in LDP2 therefore the development would also comply with Policy 28 (d) and 29 of NPF4 as it could contribute positively to the viability and diversity of the local rural economy. Notwithstanding this, policy C2 also requires proposals to demonstrate that it is accessible by a choice of sustainable transport modes. The proposal has failed to demonstrate this. While the applicant states that this is not required for a roadside service, it is considered that there
Page 10
is not a policy position that supports this and for the reasons set out above the proposed retail/commercial use should be considered in relation to both Policy 27 and Policy C2. For reasons discussed above, the proposal is considered to be contrary to Policy C2. Policy 28 also seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate retail investment to the most sustainable locations that are most accessible by a range of sustainable transport modes. The Travel Plan submitted in support of the application states that there is a footpath along the A760 providing pedestrian access to and from Lochwinnoch providing a potential accessibility option for staff residing within the area. However, as detailed above, there are concerns regarding pedestrian/cycle access from Lochwinnoch to the site over the A737. The Council’s Chief Executive's Service (Roads Development) also objected to the proposal as it fails to demonstrate a safe walking, wheeling and cycle connections to and from Lochwinnoch contrary to Policies 13 and I1 which advocate good accessibility and connectivity to walking, cycling and public transport. In response to Policies 22 and 13, a Floor Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy were submitted which confirmed that the majority of the site is not at risk to flooding from any source informing the layout of the proposed development. The Drainage Strategy also confirms that the development drainage assessment satisfies all elements of the latest guidelines. With regards to Policies 1 and I7, LED lighting is proposed to reduce energy consumption and the applicant states that all Euro Garages development achieve a minimum BREEAM rating of ‘good’ across all sites. It is also accepted that the electric vehicle charging points are being provided for in-line with this policy. However, given the scale, nature, function and role of the retail/café element of the proposal, it is considered that it cannot be deemed ancillary to a roadside services use and has characteristic of a standalone retail/café facility. Given the location and scale of the proposed development it is likely to increase dependency on car travel which is contrary to Policy 1 of NPF4 which seeks to address the climate emergency by applying a spatial strategy which helps reduce emissions. With regards to the concerns raised in the representations, each of these have been considered as part of the assessment of this application. The points raised are summarised in bullet points and the responses to these are set out in bold below each: ▪ Proximity to RSPB reserve. The proposed development would be located approx. 1km to the east of the RSPB reserve and would be separated by the A737. Given the distance and intersecting land, it is not considered that the development would adversely impact directly or indirectly on the RSPB reserve. ▪ Impact on traffic. Transport Scotland and the Council’s Chief Executive's Service (Roads Development) have no objections on the grounds of traffic impact. ▪ There are already petrol stations along the route in Johnstone and also Beith. The existence of similar businesses is not a material planning consideration. There are also no policies which dictate the separation distances of such developments. ▪ Concerns over development within the greenbelt and precedent.
Page 11
For the reasons discussed above, it is considered that the proposal would not be an acceptable greenbelt use and would be contrary to Policies 8 and ENV1. ▪ Disturbance during construction. This would be a matter for the Council’s Environment, Housing & Infrastructure (Env. Protection) to consider should construction result in noise disturbance etc. ▪ Impacts on property value and loss of views. These matters are not material planning considerations. ▪ Impact on existing businesses. This is not a material planning consideration. ▪ Not in-keeping with surrounding area including the setting of Lochwinnoch Conservation Area. For the reasons detailed above, it is considered that the proposal would not have a significant adverse visual impact on the surrounding area including the Lochwinnoch Conservation Area. ▪ Promotion of fossil fuels. This is not a planning issue. ▪ Concerns over litter. This is not a material planning consideration. ▪ Noise and light pollution. LED lighting is proposed. However, the Council’s Environment, Housing & Infrastructure (Env. Protection) have requested details of light specification and a Noise Impact Assessment. This could be addressed through either a request for further information or the imposition of an appropriate worded planning condition if the application was being recommended for approval. ▪ Pollution through leaks. This would be a matter for the applicant to consider in-line with Scottish Water and SEPA should this occur. ▪ No significant benefit to local economy. It is considered that the proposal could potentially have a benefit to the local economy with regards to potential job creation and attracting visitors to the local area. ▪ Lack of planning transparency and consultation. Neighbour notification, publicity and consultation were carried out in-line with statutory requirements. All relevant plans, drawings and supporting information
Page 12
associated with the application were also publicly available on the electronic planning file for any interested party to view. ▪ Traffic Assessment not accurate. Transport Scotland and the Council’s Chief Executive's Service (Roads Development) have not raised specific issues with the accuracy of the Traffic Assessment. ▪ Buildings and structures are not designed to support the principles of low carbon generating technology to reduce emissions. The applicant has confirmed that Euro Garages development achieve a minimum BREEAM rating of ‘good’ across all sites in line with Policy I7. With regards to the representations in support of the proposal, each of these have been considered as part of the assessment of this application. The points raised are summarised in bullet points and the responses to these are set out in bold below each: ▪ The development would be a positive amenity for the village of Lochwinnoch and would provide a facility which is currently lacking (car charging, drive-thru and filling station). Regardless of the development providing a facility which is currently lacking, as assessed and considered above, the principle of the development would not accord with the relevant provisions of the Development Plan and as such, cannot be supported. ▪ The proposal would provide jobs. The potential for job creation is noted and acknowledged in the assessment above. ▪ The development would make use of the land. As detailed above, the development in this greenbelt location for the reasons assessed and considered does not accord with the relevant provisions of the Development Plan. • There would also be a negligible impact on the road network. Whilst Transport Scotland and the Council’s Chief Executive's Service (Roads Development) have not raised concerns with regards to the potential impact on the road network as a result of the development, there are concerns with regards to accessibility to and from the site. Section 75 Obligations The Council is required to provide a summary of the terms of any planning obligation which is required to be entered into under Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act in relation to the grant of permission for the proposed development: None. Conclusion In view of the above, it is considered that the proposal would not accord with the relevant provisions of the Development Plan. There are no other material considerations. Planning permission should therefore be refused.
Page 13
Recommendation Refuse planning permission. Reason(s) for Recommendation 1. The proposed development is contrary to the Policy 8 of National Planning Framework 4 and Policy ENV 1 of the Renfrewshire Local Development Plan and the associated New Development Supplementary Guidance as due to the scale of the development, it has not been demonstrated that the proposal is an acceptable green belt use, nor has it been demonstrated that there are safe walking, wheeling and cycle connections to and from the site. 2. That due to the location and scale of the proposed development, it will increase dependency on car travel contrary to Policy 1 of National Planning Framework 4 which seeks to address the climate emergency by applying a spatial strategy which helps reduce emissions. 3. That the proposed development fails to demonstrate that it is accessible by a choice of sustainable transport modes contrary to Policy C2 of the Renfrewshire Local Development Plan. 4. That the proposed development fails to demonstrate a safe walking, wheeling and cycle connections to and from Lochwinnoch contrary to Policies 13 of National Planning Framework 4 and I1 of the Renfrewshire Local Development Plan which advocate good accessibility and connectivity to walking, cycling and public transport. Schedule of Plans Determined Drawing Number Revision Drawing/Document Title Stamped Drawing 640-AP-100 B Location Plan 640-AP-101 D Existing and Proposed Site Plan 640-AP-200 A Drive Thru Proposed Ground Floor Plan 640-AP-201 A Drive Thru Proposed Elevations 640-AP-300 A PFS Proposed Ground Floor 640-AP-301 A PFS Proposed Elevations 01 C Landscape Layout 500 Drainage Strategy App 1 501 Drainage Strategy App 503 Drainage Strategy App 503 Typical Drainage Construction Details
Page 14
640-AP-110 B Existing Site Sections 640-AP-111 E Proposed Site Sections 640-AP-400 B PFS Canopy 640-AP-401 Ancillary Details 640-AP-501 CGI 2 P15325 Drainage Strategy Report Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey May 2022 Flood Risk Assessment June 2022 Landscape Visual Appraisal June 2022 Phase I II Geo Environmental Assessment Phase I II Geo Environmental Assessment Planning Statement June 2022 Travel Plan Framework June 2022 3701222 Transport Assessment June 2022 640-HP-500 Aerial CGI 1 DEP01019 - 1 ZTV Sequence May 2022 Noise Impact Assessment Town Centre First Assessment 2024 For further information please contact Fiona Knighton, Development Standards Team, Email: fiona.knighton@renfrewshire.gov.uk