E - 25-0405-LB - Speirsfield House Paisley LB Demolition
Renfrewshire Council · 4 November 2025
Back to Planning and Climate Change Policy Board — 4 November 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
PUBLIC Planning and Climate Change Policy Board: 4 November 2025 Report by Chief Planning Officer Reference No 25/0405/LB Application Type Listed Building Consent Proposal Demolition of listed building Location Speirsfield House Residential Home, 34 Stevenson Street, Paisley Ward 4 - Paisley Northwest Community Council Paisley West and Central Community Council Applicant Mr Lakhbir Sidhu Recommendation Grant Subject to Conditions 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=SX9Q58MWIL600 The report is presented to the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board in line with the Council's Scheme of Delegation. In this instance, this is a listed building application which seeks consent to demolish a category B listed building. Proposal This application seeks Listed Building Consent for the demolition of Speirsfield House on Stevenson Street in Paisley. The B-listed villa, which dates from the 1870s, is a two-storey sandstone property with a slate roof and timber framed windows. The building was extensively damaged during a fire in August 2024. Site Description Speirsfield House is located within a primarily residential area, just beyond the northern boundary of the Castlehead Conservation Area. The building fronts onto a driveway to the east, is bound by residential properties to the south and borders a sheltered housing complex to the north. The application site backs onto an area of greenspace, beyond which is a care home and multistorey flats. 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. Pre-application discussions have taken place, focusing on the damage caused by the fire, the planning process in respect of the demolition of listed buildings and the requirements of Historic Environment Scotland as a statutory consultee. Negotiated Improvements No changes have been negotiated. Site History The planning history for the site is as follows; if no history is listed then planning has no record of previous applications for the site.
Page 2
PUBLIC Application No: 22/0151/PP Description: Erection of 4 semi-detached dwellinghouses Decision: Withdrawn Application No: 22/0800/PP Description: Change of use from care home to dwellinghouse and house in multiple occupancy with associated external alterations, parking and paths Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 22/0826/LB Description: External and internal alterations associated with change of use from care home to dwellinghouse and house in multiple occupancy Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 23/0304/PP Description: Erection of detached dwellinghouse and creation of two openings in boundary wall Decision: Pending Consideration Application No: 24/0674/LB Description: Demolition of listed building Decision: Withdrawn Application No: 20/0557/PP Description: Change of use from care home to eight flats and one maisonette Decision: Returned Invalid Application No: 21/0069/PP Description: Conversion of vacant care home to form 9 flatted dwellings Decision: Returned Invalid Application No: 18/0401/LB Description: Removal of floor, ceiling and wall coverings to treat dry rot. Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 16/0626/LB Description: Works associated with the conversion including formation of hard standing, access ramps and landscaping. Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 16/0630/PP Description: Erection of three storey extension to side of residential college, part demolition of existing extension with erection of an additional storey to existing two storey extension, external alterations to existing extension with formation of hard standing and Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 15/0319/CL Description: Certificate of lawfulness for proposed use of premises as a residential college and alterations to the internal layout of proposed extension. Decision: Grant Application No: 12/0612/PP Description: Conversion of dwellinghouse to 2 no. flats Decision: Grant
Page 3
PUBLIC Application No: 13/0214/PP Description: Erection of 2 storey extension to nursing home, part demolition and extension of existing single storey extension, re-landscaping to provide car parking and erection of perimeter fence to north of site Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 10/0871/LB Description: Erection of 2 storey extension to nursing home, part demolition and extension of existing single storey extension, re-landscaping to provide car parking and erection of perimeter fence to north of site Decision: Refused Application No: 10/0870/PP Description: Erection of 2 storey and single storey extension to nursing home, formation of car parking and landscaping works. Decision: Refused Application No: 97/1097/LB Description: Installation of replacement windows and repairs. Decision: Withdrawn Application No: 92/1185/LB Description: Internal alterations and erection of external lift, lifthousing and ramp. Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 06/0279/PP Description: single storey extension to the rear of a single storey detached dwelling house Decision: Grant subject toa Section 75 agreement Consultations Historic Environment Scotland (HES) - queried some of the assumptions made in the various reports submitted in support of the application but ultimately advised that the proposal does not raise historic environment issues of national significance and therefore they do not object. In addition, HES did not object following a meeting between them, the Planning Service and the applicant's quantity surveyor to discuss the figures in more detail. HES's consultation response refers to national and local policies on listed buildings and related policy guidance that should be used to reach a decision. Representations The application has been publicised in line with the requirements of the relevant legislation. The following representations were received: Object - 1 Support - 0 Neutral - 0 The issues raised can be summarised as follows: 1. The building should not have been allowed to become derelict Policy Context In making any determination under the Planning Acts, regard is to be had to the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this instance the Development Plan
Page 4
PUBLIC 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 7 - Historic assets and places Full details relating to the policies of the NPF4 can be found online. Renfrewshire Local Development Plan Policy ENV3 - Built and Cultural Heritage Full details relating to the policies of the LDP can be found online. Other relevant policies and guidance Delivering the Environment Strategy - Listed Buildings Historic Environment Scotland: Managing Change in the Historic Environment Guidance (Demolition of Listed Buildings) Submitted Reports and Assessments The following reports and assessments were submitted in support of the application: Development Deficit Report - sets out the applicant's justification for the demolition in the context of the damage sustained in the fire. Structural Inspection Report (January 2025) - details the condition of the building following the fire. Cost Estimate (April 2025) - sets out the estimated costs associated with repairing the building so it can be used as a single dwelling. The report concludes that the cost of these repairs, including the erection of a temporary façade retention system, would be £3.55 million. Cost Estimate (July 2025) - sets out the estimated costs associated with constructing 6 flats behind the retained façade. The report also explores the costs associated with constructing 20 flats and a single dwelling within the grounds of the building as a means to offset the conservation deficit generated by constructing flats behind the retained façade. This report has been superseded by the October 2025 cost estimate that proposes 8 flats are constructed behind the façade to try and improve economic viability. Cost Estimate (October 2025) - sets out the estimated costs associated with retaining the façade, demolishing the rest of the building, constructing 8 flats behind the retained façade and tying the two structures together. The report concludes that the cost of these works would be £3.35 million, before allowances are made for preliminaries, contingencies, VAT and professional fees. The report also explores the costs associated with constructing 20 flats and a single dwelling within the grounds of the building as a means to offset the conservation deficit generated by constructing flats behind the retained façade. The report estimates that the cost of constructing the 21 units would be £5.78 million. Valuation Report (April 2025) - details the possible market value of the building once it is restored to a standard befitting a listed building and returned to use as a single dwelling. The report estimates that the building would be worth approximately £950,000.
Page 5
PUBLIC Valuation Report (July 2025) - details the possible market value of flats constructed both behind the retained façade and in the grounds to the front of Speirsfield House. The report estimates that flats constructed behind the façade could sell for £240,000 while the units within the curtilage could sell for £190,000. A development consisting of 29 units would have an overall estimated market value of £5.91 million. Planning Assessment The Town and Country Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 states that in considering whether to grant listed building consent special regard must be had to the desirability of preserving the listed building and its setting as well as any features of special architectural or historic merit. The Development Plan is a material consideration in the assessment of such applications. Speirsfield House was extensively damaged by a fire in August 2024. The Structural Inspection Report submitted by the applicant notes that the roof and sections of the first floor have been destroyed while stonework across the building has been damaged. The three gables on the front elevation are freestanding as there is no support from the roof structure. Internally, many of the features of special architectural merit have either been destroyed in the fire or saturated when the fire was extinguished to the point that they are beyond saving. The loss of the roof has meant the interior of the building has been exposed to the elements since the day of the fire. Any attempt to restore the building is therefore likely to be a technically complex and costly endeavour. Both Policy 7 of NPF4 and Policy ENV3 of the Local Development Plan state that the demolition of listed buildings will only be supported where it has been demonstrated that there are exceptional circumstances and that all reasonable efforts have been made to retain, reuse and/or adapt the building. Historic Environment Scotland's "Managing Change in the Historic Environment" guidance note on the demolition of listed buildings also supports these principles, with the document advising that demolition should only be approved as a last resort and typically at the end of a process that has considered and discounted all other feasible options. Both policies and the guidance note set out criteria to be considered when assessing whether an application for the demolition of a listed building is acceptable. Demolition may only be considered acceptable if it is demonstrated that the proposal accords with one of the following: The building is not of special interest. The building is incapable of repair. The repair of the building is not economically viable, having been marketed at a price reflecting its location and condition to potential restoring purchasers for a reasonable period. The demolition of the building is essential to delivering significant benefits to economic growth or the wider community. In light of the context set out above, the demolition of Speirsfield House can be assessed against the four tests as follows: The building is not of special interest Prior to the fire, the building was a high-quality example of a late 19th Century sandstone villa that contained both internal and external features of architectural merit. While the structure of the building was severely damaged by the fire and a number of the original features were lost, restoring the building would return it to a state where it is again a high-quality example of a Victorian villa.
Page 6
PUBLIC The building therefore has the potential to be of special interest again following a comprehensive restoration, albeit it is acknowledged that many of the original features have been lost and would need replacing with modern replicas. The building is incapable of repair The Structural Inspection Report provided by the applicant details the condition of the building following the fire. The report has been written by a structural engineer and makes use of photography from a drone to assess the condition of the structure. The survey notes that the building is in poor condition and that repairs would be expensive but ultimately concludes that "repairs are theoretically achievable". The building is therefore not incapable of repair. The repair of the building is not economically viable, having been marketed at a price reflecting its location and condition to potential restoring purchasers for a reasonable period A cost estimate submitted as part of the application details the costs associated with the full reinstatement of Speirsfield House for use as a single dwelling. The report has been produced by a qualified quantity surveyor who notes that in addition to works directly required to restore the building, the damage sustained is so severe that interim façade retention works costing approximately £530,000 would be required to protect the sandstone exterior while the rest of the building is reinstated. The report estimates that the total cost of restoring Speirsfield House to a standard befitting a B listed building would be £3.55 million. The applicant has also submitted a valuation report. This has been produced by a chartered surveyor and notes that the estimated value of the reinstated property would be approximately £950,000. Based on both reports, reinstating Speirsfield House for use as a single dwelling would result in a conservation deficit of approximately £2.6 million. Historic Environment Scotland have not objected to the figures used in these calculations or countered the justification provided by arguing that such a repair would be economically viable. As such, it is clear that restoring the building for use as a single dwelling would not be economically viable. However, the Planning Service and Historic Environment Scotland also asked the applicant to explore if the conservation deficit could be offset by constructing a residential development within the curtilage of the property. The applicant proposed that 20 flats and a single dwelling could be constructed within the grounds to the front of the house. Given restoring Speirsfield House for use as a single dwelling produced such a large conservation deficit, the applicant proposed to construct individual flats behind the retained façade as part of these calculations in an attempt to improve the financial viability of the project. A cost estimate with 6 flats was submitted initially before the number was increased to 8 flats in another attempt to improve overall financial viability. It is important to note that the proposed residential development is speculative and planning does not necessarily endorse the construction of such a development at the site. Instead, the proposal has been developed to allow consideration to be given as to whether the cost of building 8 flats behind a retained façade could be offset through the construction of a larger residential development within the curtilage of the building. The cost of erecting a façade retention system, demolishing the remainder of Speirsfield House and clearing the site is estimated to be £505,000. The cost of constructing 8 flats behind a retained façade is estimated to be £3.35 million before allowances for contingencies, preliminaries, professional fees and VAT are made. The overall cost of constructing an 8 unit development behind the retained façade is estimated to be £3.85 million.
Page 7
PUBLIC The corresponding valuation report estimates that flats constructed behind the façade could sell for approximately £240,000 per unit. The overall market value of the 8 flats would therefore be £1.92 million, resulting in a conservation deficit of approximately £1.93 million. While this is less than the £2.6 million conservation deficit that would arise if the building was restored for use as a single dwelling, it is still clearly a substantial deficit for a building of this size. The same report estimates that the cost of constructing the residential development within the grounds of the Speirsfield House would be £5.78 million before allowances for contingencies, preliminaries, professional fees and VAT are made. The corresponding valuation report estimates that these properties could sell for £190,000 each, with an overall market value of £3.99 million. Based on these figures, a 21-unit development would generate a deficit of approximately £1.79 million. These figures suggest the proposed 21-unit development within the curtilage of the house would not, in itself, be economically viable. It may well be possible that costs could be reduced, or sale prices increased to the point that the construction of such a development breaks even. However, even if this point is reached an additional £1.93 million would still need to be found to cover the conservation deficit generated by the construction of 8 flats behind the retained façade. It is therefore clear that a 21-unit development within the grounds of the house would not generate sufficient profit to offset the conservation deficit generated by the development behind the retained façade and such an approach would not be economically viable. Substantially increasing the number of units built within the grounds of Speirsfield House has been considered to allow the conservation deficit to be shared across a greater number of properties and therefore increase the probability that the development breaks even. However, a substantial increase in the number of units within the grounds of Speirsfield House would not be encouraged from a planning perspective given it may result in the overdevelopment of the site. Overdevelopment would negatively impact on the setting of the retained façade, defeating the point of efforts to save the structure. Based on the above figures, it is clear that offsetting the conservation deficit by constructing a residential development within the grounds of the house would not be economically viable. Given how substantial the conservation deficits are for both the reinstatement of the building as a single dwelling and the retention of the façade as part of a wider residential development, it is not considered that marketing the property in the hope of finding another buyer would be reasonable or practical. Indeed, Historic Environment Scotland's guidance note confirms that demolishing a listed building on economic grounds will not rest solely on marketing but instead on a wider process where the viability of alternative options has taken place. The results of such a process have been discussed above. Historic Environment Scotland have considered the condition, character and appearance of the building along with the likely costs of a meaningful restoration, and whilst they raised a number of matters which they requested clarification on, they ultimately conclude that this proposal does not raise any significant historic environment issues and that on this basis they do not raise an objection to the reports or the proposal more broadly. Overall, having regard to the evidence submitted in support of this application, together with the overall position of Historic Environment Scotland, it is considered that the requirements of this test have been satisfactorily met. It is accepted that it would not be economically viable to reinstate Speirsfield House for use as a single dwelling. Constructing newbuild residential properties within the grounds of the house would not generate the capital needed to offset the conservation deficit generated when flats are constructed behind the retained façade. It is regrettably concluded that the damage sustained during the fire is so great that the building is beyond economic repair.
Page 8
PUBLIC The demolition of the building is essential to delivering significant benefits to economic growth or the wider community No planning application has been submitted at the present time that would require Speirsfield House to be demolished in order to unlock benefits to economic growth or benefits to the wider community. Summary In view of the above, it is clear that the restoration of Speirsfield House for use as a single dwelling would not be economically viable. The option of retaining the façade and incorporating it into a future development on the site also has been explored but would not be economically viable. All reasonable efforts have therefore been made to retain, reuse and/or adapt the listed building. The proposed demolition therefore complies with Policy 7 b) iii) of NPF4, Policy ENV3 of the Local Development Plan and the associated supplementary guidance on the demolition of listed buildings. The proposal also accords with Historic Environment Scotland's guidance note on the demolition of listed buildings. The Development Deficit Report notes that some of the features that have not been badly damaged may be of interest to salvage experts. It is therefore considered appropriate to add a condition requiring the applicant to demonstrate that the building has been surveyed by a salvage expert prior to demolition. This would ensure features of the building that are still of value can be saved and reused in the repair of similar buildings elsewhere. Representations While the condition of the building prior to the fire is regrettable, the Council has limited powers to force the repair or reuse of a listed building. Notwithstanding this, the Planning Service worked with the owner to grant the consents required to separate the unlisted modern annex from Speirsfield House and to convert the building into a single dwelling prior to the fire. Conclusion In view of the above, it is considered that the proposal would accord with the relevant provisions of the Development Plan. There are no other material considerations. Listed building consent should therefore be granted subject to conditions. Recommendation Grant Subject to Conditions Reason(s) for Recommendation 1. The proposal accords with the provisions of the Development Plan and there were no material considerations which outweighed the presumption in favour of development according with the Development Plan. Condition(s) 1. Prior to any demolition works taking place, a report shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Planning Authority demonstrating that the building has been surveyed by a salvage expert. The report shall itemise all material from the building that is to be salvaged, where the material will be stored and how it is intended the material will be reused. All material shall thereafter be salvaged and stored in line with the approved report. Reason: To ensure that architectural features of note are saved and capable of reuse.
Page 9
PUBLIC Advisory Note(s) 1. None required. Schedule of Plans Reviewed Drawing Number Revision Drawing/Document Title AE(0)100 Location Plan as Existing - Supporting Statement - Cost Estimate (April 2025) - Cost Estimate (July 2025) - Cost Estimate (October 2025) - Valuation Report (April 2025) - Valuation Report (July 2025) - Structural Inspection Report For further information please contact James McCafferty, Development Standards Team, Email: james.mccafferty@renfrewshire.gov.uk