24_0516_PP - Thriplee Road FINAL
Renfrewshire Council · 17 March 2026
Back to Planning and Climate Change Policy Board — 17 March 2026 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Planning and Climate Change Policy Board: 17 March 2026 Report by Chief Planning Officer Reference No 24/0516/PP Application Type Planning Permission (Major) Proposal Erection of residential development comprising 10 dwellinghouses and 23 flats with associated infrastructure and landscaping Location Site on Western Boundary of No 24, Thriplee Road, Bridge of Weir Ward 11 - Bishopton, Bridge of Weir and Langbank Community Council Bridge of Weir Community Council Applicant James (Glasgow) Ltd Recommendation Grant Subject to Conditions & Legal Agreement 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=SH7Y58MWJ3H00 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, the application relates to a major development as defined within the Town and Country Planning (Hierarchy of Development) (Scotland) Regulations 2009. Proposal This application seeks planning permission for the erection of a residential development comprising of 10 dwellinghouses and 23 flats with associated infrastructure and landscaping on land to the west of Thriplee Road in Bridge of Weir. Access would be taken from Thriplee Road to the east, with a new road forming a loop around the centre of the site. Provision for active travel would be made across the development. A mixture of detached and semi-detached dwellings would be located across the site, as would three blocks of flats that would reach a maximum height of three storeys and associated parking. Areas of greenspace would be formed in the centre of the site and along its northern boundary while a SUDS basin and associated landscaping would be created in the northeastern corner. Pockets of soft landscaping would be formed across the development. Site Description The application site is bound to the north, east and south by existing residential properties. An area of ancient woodland and the Threeplands Wood SINC (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation) are found to the west. The site measures approximately 2.5 hectares, with 0.7 hectares of the southern portion located in the Ranfurly Conservation Area. The land slopes from south to north before dropping off along the northern boundary. The site is predominately comprised of grassland while deciduous tree cover is found along the
Page 2
northern boundary and a group of both evergreen and deciduous trees are located in the southern portion. 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 principle of development, the consenting process, impact on the education estate, impact on the Conservation Area and access and connectivity issues. Negotiated Improvements Following submission, five dwellings have been removed from along the northern boundary. This has allowed for the retention of additional trees, compensatory tree planting and the creation of an area of species rich meadowgrass that would be beneficial to wildlife and would help ensure the requirements of the Development Plan in respect of biodiversity, tree cover and habitat connectivity are met. The removal of these units also avoids the need for an engineered solution to the change in levels along the northern boundary. In addition, the following changes and improvements were negotiated between the Planning Authority and the applicant: ▪ Installation of formal play equipment in the centre of the site ▪ Improved pedestrian connectivity across the development and out into surrounding areas ▪ Provision of secure cycle storage for the blocks of flats ▪ Formation of an offsite footpath connection between National Cycle Route 75 (NCR75) and Kilmacolm Road ▪ A £10,500 financial contribution towards lighting a section of NCR75 ▪ A £3,200 financial contribution towards upgrading road markings at the junction of Prieston Road and Bridge of Weir Road ▪ A financial contribution of £240,240 to mitigate the impact the development would have on the education estate 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. Application No: 23/0696/PN Description: Erection residential development Decision: Accepted Application No: 24/0053/EA Description: Screening opinion on need for an Environmental Assessment for erection of residential development Decision: Environmental Assessment Not Required Application No: 25/0133/TC Description: Felling of 29 trees (in part retrospect) Decision: No Objection Consultations ▪ Environment, Housing & Infrastructure (Env. Protection) - no objection, subject to conditions relating to the remediation of potentially contaminated land.
Page 3
▪ Chief Executive's Service (Roads Development) - no objection, subject to conditions and the provision of offsite upgrades. ▪ Children's Services - no objection, subject to a financial contribution in respect of the impact the development would have on Gryffe High School and St Benedict's High School. ▪ Ironside Farrar Ltd (Council’s Independent Ecological Consultants) - no objection on ecological or biodiversity grounds. The Preliminary Ecological Assessment and Bat Survey are considered to be comprehensive and comply with best practice guidance. ▪ Scottish Water - no objection. ▪ Dougal Baillie Associates (Council’s Independent Drainage Consultants) - no objection. ▪ West of Scotland Archaeology Service - no objection, subject to conditions. ▪ Bridge of Weir Community Council - object on the grounds that the village does not want or need the housing, that local schools and healthcare facilities could not cope and that the proposal would erode the village boundary. The Community Council also believe that the development would have an unacceptable impact on biodiversity, trees and the existing road network, that insufficient strategies to reduce emissions are proposed and that the application and supporting information are deficient. The Community Council also are of the opinion that the proposal is contrary to the Bridge of Weir Local Place Plan, specifically Ambition 2 which supports the reinstatement of a greenbelt designation on the land. The Community Council also note that those who wrote in support of the proposal do not live in Bridge of Weir. Representations The application has been publicised in line with the requirements of the relevant legislation. The following representations were received: Object - 395 Support - 63 Neutral - 0 The issues raised by the objectors can be summarised as follows: 1. Loss of trees and impact on those that would remain. 2. Loss of habitat and negative impact on biodiversity. 3. Impact on local school capacity. 4. The surrounding road network could not cope. 5. Impact of healthcare facilities. 6. The existing sewage network could not cope. 7. Additional traffic would negatively impact existing residential properties. 8. Construction would negatively impact residential amenity. 9. Active travel connections onto Torr Road would be unsafe. 10. The proposal would increase the likelihood of flooding. 11. Bridge of Weir has enough housing. 12. The proposal does not include social/affordable housing. 13. Existing public transport provision is inadequate. 14. The Transport Assessment is inadequate. 15. An Environmental Impact Assessment is required. 16. A bat survey should be undertaken.
Page 4
17. Construction traffic would cause problems on the road network. 18. Trees were felled prior to the submission of the application. 19. Those who support the application do not live in Bridge of Weir. 20. Local amenities are not sufficient to support the development. 21. The applicant also plans on developing land to the west. 22. Too many houses have already been built in Bridge of Weir and in Renfrewshire. 23. The SUDS basin is poorly located and potentially unsafe. 24. Construction may destabilise the land. 25. Additional large homes will not help affordability. 26. Loss of greenbelt/agricultural land. 27. A connection to the electricity grid would be required. 28. A lamppost blocks access into the site. 29. Insufficient information has been submitted to assess the proposal. 30. Flats are out of keeping with the character of the area. 31. The proposal is of poor design and would have an unacceptable visual impact. 32. Internet/telephone connections are at capacity. 33. Negative impact on the Ranfurly Conservation Area and nearby listed buildings. 34. Loss of greenspace. 35. Brownfield sites should be developed instead. 36. Renfrewshire Council would need to spend money to upgrade infrastructure. 37. The development would upset older residents. 38. Submitted plans are incorrect. 39. The site, in its current form, should be better maintained. 40. The drainage strategy is insufficient and potentially unsafe. 41. Unacceptable impact on privacy. 42. The proposal does not incorporate sufficient strategies to reduce emissions. 43. The development would overshadow existing properties. 44. The land is used by walkers. 45. Local residents do not want the development. 46. The development would be cut off from the rest of Bridge of Weir. 47. The development would breach burdens on title deeds. 48. The proposal is contrary to the Development Plan. 49. The applicant has not communicated their plans to local residents. 50. The proposal would breach neighbouring residents’ human rights. 51. Approval would open the door to more development elsewhere in the village. 52. The topography of the site makes it difficult to develop. 53. A rail link towards Glasgow should be provided. 54. The development would undermine the character of the village. 55. No EV chargers are proposed. 56. Trees at the site are protected by a Tree Preservation Order. 57. Gradients on active travel routes are too steep. 58. Noise from the pumping station serving the flats would harm residential amenity. 59. Insufficient parking within the development. 60. Negative impact on house prices. 61. Behaviour of the applicant. 62. Invasive species are present at the site. 63. Loss of sequestered carbon. 64. The proposal has been varied since it was submitted. 65. The time given for public comment on the revised proposal was insufficient. The issues raised in support of the application can be summarised as follows: 1. The development would help younger people stay in Bridge of Weir. 2. Bridge of Weir needs more housing. 3. Local businesses would benefit from increased footfall. 4. The development wouldn't unacceptably impact local infrastructure.
Page 5
5. Pressure on services is for others to sort (but the developer should contribute). 6. The proposal would enhance conditions for wildlife. 7. The proposal would help reduce flood risk. 8. The development is well designed. 9. A more diverse range of house types available in Bridge of Weir is welcome. 10. Traffic levels in the village are fine and could cope with extra properties. 11. The provision of housing outweighs any possible negative impacts. 12. Construction would boost economic growth. 13. The development would help improve infrastructure/amenities in the area. 14. Property values will rise as a result of the development. 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 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 1 - Tackling the climate and nature crises ▪ Policy 2 - Climate mitigation and adaptation ▪ Policy 3 - Biodiversity ▪ Policy 4 - Natural places ▪ Policy 6 - Forestry, woodland and trees ▪ Policy 7 - Historic assets and places ▪ Policy 8 - Green belts ▪ Policy 11 - Energy ▪ Policy 12 - Zero waste ▪ Policy 13 - Sustainable transport ▪ Policy 14 - Design, quality and place ▪ Policy 15 - Local Living and 20 minute neighbourhoods ▪ Policy 16 - Quality homes ▪ Policy 18 - Infrastructure first ▪ Policy 20 - Blue and green infrastructure ▪ Policy 21 - Play, recreation and sport ▪ Policy 22 - Flood risk and water management ▪ Policy 27 - City, town, local and commercial centres Full details relating to the policies of the NPF4 can be found online. Renfrewshire Local Development Plan ▪ Policy C1 - Renfrewshire’s Network of Centres ▪ Policy P1 - Renfrewshire's Places ▪ Policy P3 - Housing Mix and Affordable Housing ▪ Policy P5 - Green/Blue Network ▪ Policy P6 - Open Space ▪ Policy ENV1 – Green Belt ▪ Policy ENV2 - Natural Heritage ▪ Policy ENV3 - Built and Cultural Heritage ▪ Policy I1 - Connecting Places ▪ Policy I3 - Flooding and Drainage ▪ Policy I4 - Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Developments
Page 6
▪ Policy I5 - Waste Management ▪ Policy I7 - Zero and Low Carbon Buildings ▪ Policy I8 - Developer Contributions Full details relating to the policies of the LDP can be found online. Other relevant policies and guidance ▪ Delivering the Infrastructure Strategy - Connecting Places ▪ Delivering the Infrastructure Strategy - Flooding and Drainage ▪ Delivering the Infrastructure Strategy - Renewable and Low Carbon ▪ Delivering the Infrastructure Strategy - Provision for Waste Recycling in New Developments ▪ Delivering the Infrastructure Strategy - Developer Contributions ▪ Delivering the Places Strategy - Creating Places ▪ Delivering the Places Strategy - Open Space Provision in New Developments ▪ Delivering the Environment Strategy - Trees, Woodlands and Forestry ▪ Delivering the Environment Strategy - Biodiversity ▪ Delivering the Environment Strategy - Natural Heritage ▪ Delivering the Environment Strategy - Built and Cultural Heritage ▪ Renfrewshire Planning and Development Tree Policy ▪ Renfrewshire's Places Residential Design Guide ▪ Renfrewshire - A Guide to Development in Conservation Areas ▪ Site Development Brief - Thriplee Road, Bridge of Weir ▪ NatureScot: Standing advice for planning consultations – Bats ▪ NatureScot: A guide to understanding the Scottish Ancient Woodland Inventory (AWI) ▪ National Roads Development Guidance ▪ Developer Contributions (Education) Planning Guidance ▪ Scottish Government Planning Guidance: Biodiversity ▪ The Scottish Government’s Policy on Control of Woodland Removal ▪ Bridge of Weir Local Place Plan ▪ Report to Renfrewshire Council on the Proposed Renfrewshire Local Development Plan 2 Examination (February 2021) ▪ Opinion of the Court of Session - Cosmopolitan Hotels Limited v Renfrewshire Council (November 2021) ▪ Letter from the Chief Planner and Minister for Public Finance - Planning for Housing (June 2024) ▪ Letter from the Chief Planner and Cabinet Secretary for Housing - Housing Emergency Action Plan & the Planning System (September 2025) Submitted Reports and Assessments The following reports and assessments were submitted in support of the application: ▪ Arboricultural Survey Report (February 2024) - details the condition of trees found within the application site boundary. ▪ Archaeological Desk Based Study and Walk Over Field Survey (January 2024) - outlines the findings of a desk study and walk over survey in respect of potential archaeological remains at the site. ▪ Bat Survey (November 2025) - details bat activity at the site and in the surrounding area, outlines possible measures for their protection and ways to enhance habitat. ▪ Design, Access and Sustainability Statement (January 2026) - explains the development parameters, design concepts and principles that have shaped and informed the layout.
Page 7
▪ Drainage and Flood Risk Assessment Report (January 2026) - examines existing drainage arrangements at the site and details how the proposed drainage strategy would meet the requirements of Renfrewshire Council and Scottish Water. The report also explores whether the development would be at risk of flooding or would increase the risk of flooding to others. ▪ Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) (April 2024) - the LVIA considers the impact of the development on the wider landscape surrounding the site. ▪ Method Statement for Archaeological Work (April 2024) - outlines how archaeological works at the site should be conducted in respect of the findings of the Archaeological Desk Based Study and Walk Over Field Survey. ▪ PAC Report (February 2024) - provides details of the Pre Application Consultation process and its outcomes. ▪ Planning Statement (July 2024) - provides the applicant's justification for the proposal against the relevant provisions of the Development Plan. ▪ Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (June 2024) - provides details of the ecological condition of the site and the surrounding area. The report also outlines the findings of targeted bat and badger surveys that have been undertaken at the site. ▪ Outline Biodiversity Enhancement Management Plan (January 2026) - identifies measures that can be implemented at the site for the benefit of nature. The report also outlines how these measures should be managed in the long term. ▪ Site Investigation Phase 1 Desk Study Report (December 2023) - considers the condition of the land in respect of potential contamination. ▪ Transport Assessment (May 2024) - examines the impact the development would have on the wider road network, explores possible active travel links and details how the proposal would comply with relevant policies and guidance. 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) 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 Introduction The application site was recommended for allocation as a Policy P2 housing site with an indicative capacity of 30 units by the Scottish Government as part of their assessment of the now adopted Renfrewshire Local Development Plan (LDP). The Scottish Government reporter who examined the LDP noted that the "site is well contained. It is bounded on three sides by existing housing, thus creating a small infill
Page 8
between existing houses" and that woodland to the west provides a “strong and defensible green belt boundary”. The reporter also noted that the "impact of the development on the visual character, landscape character and setting of the village would not be significant". However, the Policy P2 designation was rejected by the Council following a decision by the Communities, Housing and Planning Policy Board in April 2021. This decision was subsequently quashed by the Court of Session in June 2022 and as the Court of Session is unable to allocate sites, the land is now white space and sits outwith the spatial strategy that forms part of the adopted LDP. The housing emergency declared by the Scottish Government in May 2024 is relevant to the assessment of the application. Letters from the Cabinet Secretary for Housing, the Planning Minister and Chief Planner in June 2024 and September 2025 have reiterated the key role the planning system has to play in the delivery of new housing that will help address the emergency. In particular, the Ministers and Chief Planner have emphasised the importance of the proportionate assessment of applications and reiterated that applications must be assessed against the Development Plan as a whole. Contradictions between individual policies are to be expected and must be weighed up by the decision maker. Assessment Although the application site is not allocated for housing, Policy 16 f) iii) of NPF4 provides qualified support for smaller scale housing developments within an existing settlement boundary. As residential properties are found on three sides the site presents an opportunity for a small scale infill development which would form part of Bridge of Weir and would not extend beyond the woodland to the west that provides a defensible greenbelt boundary. Policy 16 f) also requires such proposals to comply with the following criteria: ▪ the proposal is supported by an agreed timescale for build-out ▪ the proposal is otherwise consistent with the plan spatial strategy and other relevant policies including local living and 20 minute neighbourhoods In respect of the first criteria, the applicant has advised that once works start they would complete the development within three years. Given the number of units proposed such a buildout rate is realistic and is therefore accepted. In respect of the second criteria, despite the Court of Session judgement the "spatial strategy" that covers Renfrewshire as a whole continues to exist. Within the spatial strategy, the land immediately to the north, east and south is covered by Policy P1 which provides a general presumption in favour of a continuance of the built form while the land to the west is covered by Policy ENV1 greenbelt designation. The Policy ENV3 Conservation Area designation that covers a portion of the site and the land beyond is also relevant. To consider whether the proposal is consistent with the spatial strategy and all other relevant considerations set out across NPF4 and the LDP it is appropriate to assess the application against the five criteria for creating successful place that are set out in the New Development Supplementary Guidance. Access and Connectivity The development would be accessed via Thriplee Road, with the existing carriageway and footways continuing into the site. No concerns have been raised by Roads Development with regard to the suitability of the access or the ability of the wider road network to cope subject to the upgrades detailed below. A condition can be added to ensure streetlighting provision at the access is sufficient for the increased pedestrian and vehicular activity.
Page 9
A Construction Traffic Management Plan can be requested via condition to ensure the delivery of the development would not have an unacceptable impact on existing roads. The road network within the site would take the form of a single loop, with all properties fronting onto the road to create a well defined streetscape that benefits from passive surveillance. A 2 metre wide footway would be found on both sides of the carriageway across the development. Parking would be provided in line with the requirements of the National Roads Development Guidance while coverage cycle storage would be provided for the flats. Raised tables and pockets of landscaping designed to narrow the carriageway would reduce vehicle speeds, contributing to the creation of a pleasant place to live in line with the requirements of Policy 14 of NPF4. The proposal would also comply with Policy 21 e) of NPF4 in this regard in that the public realm has been designed to enable children and young people to move around safely and independently. The footpath that would run through the central area of greenspace would improve connectivity within the site and help encourage the use of the greenspace. The footpath in the northeast corner would connect to existing paths that lead onto Torr Road. This would provide active travel connections towards the village centre, public transport options, local schools and NCR75. Active travel connectivity would also be provided via the main access onto Thriplee Road. Although the gradient of sections of the path network is acknowledged to be greater than would ordinarily be encouraged, the applicant has agreed to install steps, handrails, non-slip surfacing, lighting and carry out maintenance to the existing sections of path to improve safety and accessibility. Levels across the development would not be dissimilar to those found across existing residential streets to the east. The applicant has also agreed to provide the following offsite improvements following discussions with the Planning Authority: ▪ formation of a footpath at the Morar Living Care Home that would provide an active travel connection between Kilmacolm Road and NCR75 ▪ provision of £10,500 towards lighting NCR75 between the proposed connection discussed above and Livery Walk ▪ provision of £3,200 to alter road marking to improve sightlines at the junction of Bridge of Weir Road and Prieston Road It is considered that the request from Roads Development that the northbound lane at the junction of Main Street and Houston Road be widened would be disproportionate to the benefit provided and would result in the loss of a pocket of greenspace. All the above measures would, when taken together, ensure the development is served by active travel and public transport options in line with the requirements of Policy 13 of NPF4 and Policy I1 of the LDP. The developer contributions would also help improve active travel provision in Bridge of Weir more widely and would comply with Ambition 1 in the Bridge of Weir Local Place Plan. The proximity of the site to the village centre means the development would contribute to, and benefit from, local living in line with the requirements of Policy 15 of NPF4 as well as contribute to the vitality and viability of Bridge of Weir Village Centre in line with Policy 27 of NPF4 and Policy C1 of the LDP. In particular, the gentle increase in density provided by the 23 flats would help improve the viability of businesses and services and would align with Ambition 3 of the Bridge of Weir Local Place Plan. Overall, it is considered that, subject to conditions and an appropriate legal agreement, the access and connectivity arrangements would be acceptable. The site has been designed,
Page 10
and offsite enhancements secured, to improve active travel connectivity and reduce reliance on private cars. Environment and Community Policy 1 of NPF4 requires development proposals to give significant weight to the climate and nature crises. Policy 3 b) states that major developments will only be supported where it can be demonstrated that the proposal would conserve, restore and enhance biodiversity. Policy 3 b) goes on to state that proposals should be based on an understanding of the existing characteristics of the site and its ecological context prior to development and that potential negative effects should be fully mitigated in line with the mitigation hierarchy prior to identifying enhancements. The mitigation hierarchy requires developers to avoid and minimise any negative impacts, restore damaged habitats and then offset any impacts that cannot be avoided. Policy 3 d) also requires adverse impacts on biodiversity, including cumulative impacts, to be minimised through careful planning and design while Policy 4 requires consideration to be given to the impact the proposal would have on designated sites and protected species. Similarly, Policy ENV2 of the LDP seeks to minimise the impact developments would have on the natural environment while the associated Supplementary Guidance states that proposals should not significantly affect existing species or habitats and should be appropriately designed to improve habitat connectivity. Given existing tree cover, Policy 6 of NFP4 and the Supplementary Guidance on Trees, Woodlands and Forestry as well as the Council's Tree Policy are also relevant. These seek to enhance, expand and improve existing woodland and tree cover and encourage the planting of new native specimens. The loss of any existing tree cover requires to be compensated for in line with the mitigation hierarchy. The Site Development Brief also seeks to protect tree cover, with compensatory planting required for any trees that are removed. These points are expanded upon in the Scottish Government's Planning Guidance on Biodiversity. The applicant has submitted a suite of documents that examine the current condition of the site in respect of biodiversity. These have been reviewed by the Council's external ecologist and found to be satisfactory. The findings of the reports have been used to inform the development proposal and any mitigation and enhancement measures required in line with Policy 3 d). There are no environmental designations in place at the site. Although the Threeplands Wood SINC is located approximately 40 metres to the west the development would not impact the designation given the separation distance. The integrity and ecological condition of the area of Ancient Woodland would not be affected by the development given it measures 6.5 hectares. The Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) finds that in terms of habitat, the grassland which covers most of the site is of low ecological value. Leylandii that have been planted as a windbreak are also of low ecological value but the deciduous trees found along the northern boundary and in the southern portion of the site are of high value. The PEA notes that the trees along the northern boundary play an important role in allowing wildlife such as birds and bats to move across the wider landscape. The PEA found no badger setts within 100 metres of the application site. Although badgers may be active in the area, the woodland, farmland and golf course to the west provide a vast
Page 11
area of habitat that is better connected and less likely to be the subject of human disturbance. As such, it is not proportionate to request additional surveys. A full bat survey was submitted at the request of the Planning Authority. The survey finds that the site's overall suitability for bats is high but no bat roosts were found within the site boundary. The area of ancient woodland and SINC to the west is identified as a likely location of bat roosts. NatureScot’s standing advice in respect of bats requires developers to compensate for any negative impacts that cannot be avoided or mitigated before going on to enhance conditions for the species. The initial site layout retained 15 deciduous trees in the southern portion of the site but would have resulted in the removal of almost all trees along the northern boundary. Given the findings of the ecological surveys, the resulting loss in tree cover and habitat would have been unacceptable in relation to the relevant provisions of the Development Plan. Following discussions between the Planning Authority and the applicant a revised site layout that better protects existing tree cover and retains habitat connectivity has been submitted. Five detached dwellings that would have sat along the northern boundary have been removed to allow for the retention of 22 deciduous trees, compensatory tree planting and the creation of an area of species rich meadowgrass to ensure the existing foraging and commuting habitat is retained and enhanced. The proposal would still involve the removal of 31 deciduous trees along the northern boundary, 26 deciduous trees in the southern portion of the site and all leylandii. However, the applicant's Arboricultural Survey notes that almost all the deciduous trees to be removed are either low quality Category C trees or Category U trees that are unsuitable for retention even if the use of the land does not change. Several of the trees to be removed have ash dieback while no Category A, ancient or veteran trees would be felled. The removal of trees across the site to implement the revised layout is therefore acceptable given their poor condition. However, in line with the mitigation hierarchy the tree loss and corresponding ecological impact must be offset. The 22 retained trees along the northern boundary would be complemented with 60 newly planted specimens while an understory would be created along the length of the boundary using smaller saplings. An area of species rich meadowgrass would also help compensate for any foraging habitat that would be lost. The 15 trees retained in the southern portion of the site would be complemented with 23 specimens. The use of standard, heavy standard and extra heavy standard specimens would help provide instant impact while the use of native specimens such as birch, alder and Scots pine is welcome from a biodiversity perspective. In total, 123 trees would be planted across the development, with the overwhelming majority found in communal areas where they will be afforded the opportunity to establish and grow over time. This would ensure woodland habitat that provides connectivity into the site and across the wider landscape from the ancient woodland and SINC to the west would be maintained for species such as birds and bats in the long term. Conditions can be added to ensure all proposed planting takes place and is maintained thereafter, that no additional trees are removed without the approval of the Planning Authority and to ensure the trees that would remain are adequately protected during construction. The Outline Biodiversity Enhancement Management Plan also recommends that bat, bird and habitat boxes are installed across the site to compensate for any loss of nesting habitat. A condition can be added to ensure compliance. The proposal therefore satisfactorily mitigates the negative impacts of the tree and woodland habitat loss in line with the requirements of the mitigation hierarchy. The Development Plan then requires conditions for wildlife to be enhanced.
Page 12
The compensatory tree planting would, when combined with the retained tree cover, create habitat that features deciduous and evergreen specimens of varying ages. Given the poor condition of many of the existing trees and the number of specimens that would be planted, the proposal would therefore ensure tree cover is enhanced and expanded in the long term. The replacement of non-native species such as Lawson Cypress with native specimens would also help improve conditions for wildlife. In addition, the creation of a SUDS basin that would incorporate planting suited to the location would help introduce standing water into the site, creating new habitat that would be beneficial for species such as birds and bats that would make use of the tree cover. The applicant's bat survey and Outline Biodiversity Enhancement Management Plan both highlight the benefits of the SUDS basin in respect of improving conditions for wildlife. Integrating the SUDS basin with existing and proposed green infrastructure would comply with Policies 20 b) and 22 c) of NFP4, Policy P5 of the LDP and would contribute towards the creation of a pleasant residential environment in line with Policy 14 of NPF4. A condition requiring any lighting in communal areas to be sensitive to bats and other wildlife can be added to ensure the new and retained habitat can be used by nocturnal species. Finally, components of the broader landscaping scheme such as native hedging and shrub planting would diversify the variety of species found at the site to the benefit of wildlife. Overall, the applicant has demonstrated that the proposal would enhance conditions for wildlife. Given the above, the proposal is considered to comply with policies 1, 3, 4 and 6 of NPF4, Policy ENV2 of the LDP and all relevant guidance. The revised proposal has sought to avoid, minimise and then compensate for tree and habitat loss before going on to enhance conditions for wildlife using nature based solutions targeted to the species found at the site. Given existing tree cover was found to be in poor condition, the proposal would ensure native tree cover is secured in the long term in line with the aims of the Council's Tree Policy and the Site Development Brief. Notwithstanding the above it should be noted that the results of the PEA were only valid for 18 months, until October 2025. As any planning consent granted for the site would remain valid for 3 years it is not considered reasonable or proportionate to request another survey prior to the determination as its findings may be dated by the time the consent is implemented. The bat survey completed in November 2025 also provides an up-to-date picture of the most common protected species found at the site and is valid until November 2027. Instead, a further PEA can be requested via condition to identify if any additional measures are required in respect of protected species prior to the commencement of development. Policy 22 of NPF4 as well as Policy I3 of the LDP and its associated supplementary guidance state that proposals must not increase the risk of flooding to others, be at risk of flooding themselves and that surface water runoff must be managed sustainably. Following discussions with the Council’s external drainage consultant, it is accepted that all aspects of the relevant policies and the Council's guidance can be fully complied with. A condition can be added to ensure a full drainage and flood risk assessment are submitted for approval prior to the commencement of development and that all relevant measures are in place prior to the occupation of the first dwelling and maintained thereafter to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. As such, the proposal would comply with Policy 22 of NPF4 as well as Policy I3 of the LDP and the associated guidance. The drainage strategy will also be designed to cope with the impacts of heavier rainfall brought about by climate change, in line with the requirements of Policy 2 b) of NPF4.
Page 13
Foul waste would connect to the existing sewer while drinking water would be provided from the mains supply in line with the requirements of Policy 22 d) of NPF4. Scottish Water have not objected to the proposal. Environmental Protection have not objected, subject to the application of conditions in respect of potential contaminated land. As such, the site can be made safe for development in line with the requirements of Policy 9 of NPF4. The West of Scotland Archaeological Service has requested that a programme of archaeological works is carried out prior to the commencement of development to ensure any historic artefacts buried at the site are recovered and recorded. A condition can be added to ensure compliance. Context and Character As the application site is bound on three sides by residential properties, the proposal would represent a small infill development that would be consistent with surrounding Policy P1 designations and the extent of existing housing found to the north and south. The development would not look out of place when viewed from the surrounding landscape or from neighbouring properties given the residential character of the area. Environmental Protection have raised no concerns in respect of noise. The proposal is therefore consistent with the Policy P1 designation within the spatial strategy in that it would represent the continuation of the existing built form found to the north, east and south. Although the land immediately to the west is designated as greenbelt, the erection of a residential development would not impact on the designation and the proposal would not fragment the greenbelt, limit its use or otherwise harm its environmental qualities. The area of woodland to the west provides a defensible greenbelt boundary and would help screen the housing from land within greenbelt. The southern portion of the site would be located within the Ranfurly Conservation Area while the rest of the site would sit adjacent to it. Policy 7 d) of NPF4, Policy ENV3 of the LDP and the relevant guidance require proposals to preserve the character of Conservation Areas while Policy 7 e) encourages the retention of natural features such as trees that contribute to the character of the Area. The Council's Conservation Area guidance characterises the Ranfurly Conservation Area as containing "large houses in various styles set in well wooded grounds". The land that sits within the Conservation Area is small relative to the area of the site as a whole and is somewhat detached from the main body of the Conservation Area. The development would not be accessed from the Conservation Area itself. The density, layout and scale would all be acceptable and the historic character of the Area would not be undermined. The blocks of flats, which would reach a maximum of three storeys in height, are of an acceptable design and would help diversify the range of housing stock available in the area. The majority of the trees to be removed from the Conservation Area are leylandii that do not contribute to its character while the retention of deciduous tree cover, proposed tree planting and the broader landscaping strategy discussed above would all ensure compliance with Policy 7 e). The use of stone and zinc cladding to complement the white render finish to the buildings is welcome and would ensure the appearance of the buildings is of an appropriate quality. In addition, planning permission for 4 dwellings of a similar scale, design and finish was approved off Prieston Road in 2017 (16/0770/PP). These dwellings sit within the Conservation Area but do not detract from its character or overall quality.
Page 14
As the development would be approximately 60 metres from the B and C listed buildings found to the south their setting would not be negatively affected. Given the above, the proposal is consistent with the Conservation Area designation within the spatial strategy and would not have a negative impact on nearby listed buildings. Overall, the proposal would be in keeping with the character of the surrounding area and would be consistent with the designations contained within the plan spatial strategy. Ambition 2 of the Bridge of Weir Local Place Plan and the desire to see the land returned to the greenbelt and remain as greenspace in order to prevent development is noted. However, the land is not identified as greenbelt in the current plan spatial strategy and compliance with the plan spatial strategy as a whole has been demonstrated above. Children's Services have no objection to the proposal, subject to the developer paying a financial contribution in respect of the following schools as they are operating at above 85% capacity. The contribution has been calculated in line with the Council's Developer Contributions (Education) Planning Guidance and works out as follows for each school: ▪ Gryffe High School - £166,320 ▪ St Benedict's High School - £73,920 The applicant has agreed to pay the contribution and an appropriate legal agreement can be entered into to ensure compliance. As such, the proposal complies with Policy 18 of NPF4 and Policy I8 of the LDP in that the impacts of the development on infrastructure can be mitigated. The provision of infrastructure such as a connection to the national grid as well as telephone and internet services would be a matter for the applicant to pursue with the providers of those services. Buildings and Design The proposed development would create a varied streetscape, with a mixture of flats as well as detached and semi-detached dwellings found across the site. The mix of house types and unit sizes mean the proposal would comply with Policy P3 of the LDP and Policy 16 c) of NPF4 in that it would help widen the choice available to those looking to live in Bridge of Weir. The provision of flats in particular is welcome and would comply with Ambition 5 of the Bridge of Weir Local Place Plan in that they would diversify house types and help allow more young people to continue to live in the village. All buildings, including the blocks of flats, would be of a size and design that is acceptable for the location and would not result in the overdevelopment of the plot. The proposal raises no privacy or overlooking concerns and an acceptable amount of garden ground would be provided for all dwellings. Both the dwellings and blocks of flats would be finished in a combination of white render, stone and zinc cladding while each of the buildings would have a pitched roof finished with grey roof tiles. The use of a common palette of materials is welcome. The choice of finishing materials for all areas of hardstanding, including footpaths, would be acceptable. Residents living in the development as well as residents in nearby properties would benefit from the proposed areas of open space. These have been incorporated into the layout in line with Policy 20 b) of NPF4 and Policy P6 of the LDP. Following discussions with the Planning Authority, the applicant agreed to provide formal play equipment within the central area of open space in line with the requirements of Policy 21 d) of NPF4 and Ambition 4 of the Bridge of Weir Local Place Plan. The central location means the play area would benefit from passive overlooking but would not raise any amenity issues for residents. A condition can be added to ensure the play equipment is delivered in line with the approved plan. The
Page 15
broader provision of greenspace and opportunities for informal play would also align with Policy 21 f). The applicant's sustainability statement notes that solar panels and air source heat pumps would be installed across the development while EV charging facilities would be provided for each property. The proposal would therefore comply with policies 1, 2 and 11 of NPF4 and Policy I4 of the LPD in that the proposal could make use of low and zero carbon technologies to reduce emissions. Provision for the storage and disposal of waste across all properties would be acceptable in line with the requirements of Policy 12 of NPF4 as well as Policy I5 of the LDP and the relevant supplementary guidance. As such, the design of the development and the appearance and impact of the buildings contained within it are acceptable. Layout and Form The form of the development would reflect that of the surrounding built environment. The layout of the road and footpath network within the site would create a well-connected, permeable layout that links to the existing settlement. The change in levels across the site would not be a barrier to development and the topography of the wider area has not prevented the continued occupation of the existing housing to the north and east. The proposal works with, rather than against, the topography of the land with many of the buildings lower at the front that at the rear to avoid them appearing over dominant in the streetscape and to avoid the need for a significant under build. The removal of the five units along the northern boundary discussed above avoids the need for an engineered solution to allow development to come forward in this portion of the site. Areas of open space, pockets of landscaping and significant tree cover would be found across the site. These would soften the appearance of the development and would assist in the creation of a pleasant place to live in line with the requirements of Policy 14 of NPF4. The retention of existing mature trees would help integrate the development into the surrounding landscape. The extent of boundary treatments visible from the streetscape would be limited. A condition can be added to ensure all fences and boundary walls to be erected across the development are to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Overall, the layout and form of the development raise no concerns. Representations Whether too many houses have been built in Bridge of Weir and across Renfrewshire, whether the applicant intends to build more housing and the fact that there are brownfield sites elsewhere that could be built on are not relevant to the assessment of this application. In respect of the claim that approving this application would make it easier to build elsewhere in Bridge of Weir, it should be noted that each application is assessed on its own merits. There is no policy requirement for the proposed development to contain social or affordable housing. Whether the applicant has adequately communicated their intentions to residents is not a material planning consideration. The requirements for pre-application consultation set out in legislation have been met and the application has been widely publicised by the Planning Authority. The time given to allow individuals to comment on the revised plans exceeds the
Page 16
21 day period set out in regulation 18 of The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations. Whether trees were felled prior to the submission of the application, the current condition of the land, the behaviour of the applicant, the potential for older residents to be upset, the fact the land may be used by walkers and the potential for construction to destabilise the land are all not material planning considerations. The contents of title deeds, the impact of construction activity and the potential for house prices to decrease are also not material considerations. All drawings and supporting information submitted by the applicant was considered sufficient by the Planning Authority and all relevant consultees to allow the application to be assessed in line with both The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013 and the Development Plan. Section 32A of The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 allows Planning Authorities to agree to the varying of a planning application after submission, provided it does not consider there has been a substantial change to the development proposed. Given the revision involves the removal of five units to accommodate additional retained trees, compensatory tree planting and habitat creation with no changes to the wider layout it is not accepted that the changes negotiated constitute a substantial change. In respect of the claim that the proposal would result in the loss of greenbelt land, the site is not within the greenbelt. There are no TPO designations in place at the site and the limited environmental impact from the loss of sequestered carbon would be offset by the compensatory planting proposed. The limited nature of public transport in Bridge of Weir is acknowledged. However, it is considered that the provision of 33 additional units, including the increase in density provided by the flats, would support the existing public transport offering and would help make improved services more viable. The existing Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Screening Opinion issued before the application was received is still valid and the proposal would not have a significant effect on the environment. The affordability of the housing is not a material planning consideration though the proposal would increase supply in the area and would widen the range of house types available. Infrastructure upgrades have been provided in line with the requests of consultees and the relevant provisions of the Development Plan. It would be unreasonable for the applicant to make a financial contribution to a rail link given no such project exists. In respect of the claim that healthcare facilities could not cope, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde were consulted as part of the preparation of the adopted LDP. This included an invitation to comment on the Main Issues Report and Proposed Plan that both discussed the possibility of allocating the land as a housing site. No comments were received. GPs and dentists operate as private businesses and it would be for them to respond to the housing as they see fit. It is not accepted that the erection of a residential development that is found to comply with all relevant provisions of the Development Plan would breach anyone's human rights. All other issues have been addressed in the above report. The points raised by those supporting the application are noted, as is the geographical spread of these representations.
Page 17
Conclusion Policy 16 f) of NPF4 provides support for smaller scale housing developments within an existing settlement boundary provided the following criteria are met: ▪ the proposal is supported by an agreed timescale for build-out ▪ the proposal is otherwise consistent with the plan spatial strategy and other relevant policies including local living and 20 minute neighbourhoods The above assessment has found that the erection of a residential development at the site would be consistent with the plan spatial and all other relevant policies and guidance. The timeframe for delivery suggested by the applicant is also acceptable. The proposal therefore complies with Policy 16 f) of NPF4. Compliance with all other relevant provisions of the Development Plan has been demonstrated above. Planning Obligations The Council is required to provide a summary of the terms of any planning obligation(s) and any associated legal agreement(s) and/or mechanism(s) required to secure them including those provisions under The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act in relation to the grant of permission for the proposed development. As detailed above, an appropriate form of legal agreement/mechanism would be required to secure the following planning obligations: ▪ the formation of a footpath at the Morar Living Care Home that would provide an active travel connection between Kilmacolm Road and NCR75 ▪ the provision of £10,500 towards lighting NCR75 between the proposed connection discussed above and Livery Walk ▪ the provision of £3,200 to alter road markings to improve sightlines for traffic turning right at the junction of Bridge of Weir Road and Prieston Road ▪ a £166,320 financial contribution towards Gryffe High School ▪ a £73,920 financial contribution towards St Benedict's High School Conclusion In view of the above, the proposal would accord with the relevant provisions of the Development Plan. There are no other material considerations. Planning permission should therefore be granted subject to conditions and an appropriate form of legal agreement to secure the planning obligations discussed above. Recommendation Grant Subject to Conditions and the provision of a form of Legal Agreement/mechanism to secure planning obligations. 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. That the development hereby permitted must be begun within three years of the date of this permission. Reason: To be in compliance with Section 58 of The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by Section 32 of The Planning (Scotland) Act 2019. 2. No development shall commence on site until written approval of:
Page 18
a) a Site Investigation report (characterising the nature and extent of any soil, water and gas contamination within the site); and, if remedial works are recommended therein b) a Remediation Strategy and Implementation Plan identifying the proposed methods for implementing all remedial recommendations contained with the site investigation report prepared in accordance with current authoritative technical guidance, has been provided by the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the site will be made suitable for its proposed use. 3. Prior to the occupation of any unit within an identified phase of development, the developer shall submit for the written approval of the Planning Authority: a) a Verification Report confirming completion of the works specified within the approved Remediation Strategy for that phase of development; or b) if remediation works are not required but soils are to be imported to site, a Verification Report confirming imported soils are suitable for use on the site shall be submitted to the Planning Authority and approved in writing Reason: To demonstrate that the works necessary to make the site suitable for use have been completed. 4. Prior to the commencement of development, a Construction Traffic Management Plan (including, but not limited to, details of the location of the compound, contractor parking and the route construction traffic would take to the site) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority. The approved Construction Traffic Management Plan shall be implemented prior to development commencing and remain in place until the development is complete. Reason: In the interests of road safety. 5. The vehicular and pedestrian access into the development shall be constructed in line with the requirements of the National Roads Development Guidance. Reason: In the interests of road safety. 6. Prior to the commencement of development, an assessment of street lighting provision between the access into the site and the junction of Thriplee Road and Carruth Road shall be undertaken and submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. The installation of any additional or upgraded lighting columns identified as necessary by the survey shall be agreed in writing with the Planning Authority and installed by the applicant prior to the occupation of the first dwelling, unless otherwise agreed in writing by Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of safety. 7. Prior to occupation of the final dwelling, all bin and cycle stores detailed on approved drawings 1418-23/MP03 (Rev K), 1418-23/MP16 (Rev C) and 1418- 23/MP17 (Rev B) shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority,
Page 19
unless otherwise agreed in writing by Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of connectivity and the appropriate storage of waste. 8. Prior to the commencement of development, details of the design of all footpaths and footways, including upgrades to existing footpaths, within the application site boundary shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Planning Authority. Information to be submitted shall include, but not be limited to, repairs and resurfacing to existing footpaths as well as the installation of steps, barriers, handrails, non-slip surfaces and lighting across the development. Thereafter, the all works shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the final dwelling, unless otherwise agreed in writing by Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of connectivity and safety. 9. Prior to the commencement of development, a Drainage Strategy and Flood Risk Assessment shall be submitted to, and approved by, Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. The Drainage Strategy shall accord with the 'Council's Drainage Assessment - Notes for Guidance'. A maintenance plan covering all aspects of the Drainage Strategy and Flood Risk Assessment shall also be submitted to, and approved by, Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. Thereafter, the approved Drainage Strategy and Flood Risk Assessment shall be implemented in full prior to the completion of the development and maintained thereafter for the lifetime of the development to the satisfaction of Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure potential flood risk is appropriately managed and to ensure adequate provision is made for drainage associated with the development. 10. Prior to the commencement of development, the applicant shall submit for the written approval of the Planning Authority: a) a timetable for the implementation of all soft landscaping shown on approved drawings "Landscape Proposal - Sheets 1-4 (April 2024)" b) a timetable for the implementation of the formal play equipment shown on the approved drawing "Landscape Proposal - Play Area (Jan 2025)" c) a strategy for the future management and maintenance of all landscaped areas, footpaths and play equipment, including provision for replacement planting if individual plants were to become diseased, die, become seriously damaged or are removed within 5 years of being planted All landscaping and play equipment shall thereafter be implemented in line with the aforementioned drawings and the agreed timetable, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. The landscaping, footpaths and play equipment shall also be maintained in line with the approved management strategy for the lifetime of the development, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure a robust landscaping strategy is implemented in the interests of visual amenity.
Page 20
11. Tree removal shall only occur in line with approved drawing 1418-23/MP02 (Rev B) (Site Plan as Existing) and no additional trees shall be removed unless agreed in writing in advance with the Planning Authority. All existing trees to be retained as part of the development shall be protected in line with the recommendations of the approved drawing "Landscape Proposal - Sheet 1 (April 2024)". For the avoidance of doubt, any retained trees which, within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species, unless Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and nature conservation. 12. Prior to the commencement of development, details of any external lighting to be installed in communal areas shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. The lighting shall be designed and operated in accordance with bat-friendly lighting principles, including the avoidance of light spill beyond the site boundary and the prevention of lighting on key habitat features such as trees, hedgerows and watercourses. Lighting shall accord with the Institute of Lighting Professionals Guidance Note 08/23 (Bats and Artificial Lighting). Thereafter, the approved strategy shall be implemented in full and maintained for the lifetime of the development, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the natural environment. 13. Prior to occupation of the final dwelling, all bird, bat and habitat boxes detailed in section 5.1.7 of the approved Outline Biodiversity Enhancement Management Plan (SLR, January 2026) shall be installed across the site and shall remain in place for the lifetime of the development, unless otherwise agreed in writing by Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure appropriate provision is made for the long term enhancement of nature at the site. 14. Prior to the commencement of development, the developer shall submit an updated Preliminary Ecological Assessment for the written approval of the Planning Authority. Should any protected species be discovered, no development shall take place until suitable mitigation measures are submitted to, and approved in writing by, Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. Development shall thereafter only proceed in full accordance with these approved measures. Reason: In the interests of biodiversity and site management.
Page 21
15. Prior to the commencement of development, full details of the design and location of all fences, walls, boundary treatments and retaining walls to be erected across the site shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. Prior to occupation of any particular dwellinghouse or flat, any boundary treatments any retaining walls to be erected in association with that plot shall be erected in accordance with the approved drawing, unless otherwise agreed in writing by Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. Prior to occupation of the final dwelling, all boundary treatments and retaining walls to be erected in communal areas shall be erected in accordance with the approved drawing, unless otherwise agreed in writing by Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. Reason: These details have not been submitted. 16. No development shall take place until the developer has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological works in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant, agreed by the West of Scotland Archaeology Service, and approved by the Planning Authority. Thereafter, the developer shall ensure that the programme of archaeological works is fully implemented and that all recording and recovery of archaeological resources within the development site is undertaken to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority in agreement with the West of Scotland Archaeology Service. Reason: To ensure appropriate consideration of any archaeology given the possibility of such interest within the site. Advisory Note(s) 1. None required. Schedule of Plans Reviewed Drawing Number Revision Drawing/Document Title 1418-23 / MP01 Location Plan 1418-23 / MP02 B Site Plan as Existing 1418 - 23 / MP03 K Site Plan as Proposed, Key Plan & Roads Layout 1418 - 23 / MP04 K Landscaped Site Plan as Proposed 1418 - 23 / MP05 Plots P1-P3 Plans & Elevations 1418 - 23 / MP06 C Plots P4, P5, P6, P14 & P15 Plans & Elevations 1418 - 23 / MP07 B Plots P7 & P8 Plans & Elevations 1418 - 23 / MP09 Plot F1 Plans 1418 - 23 / MP10 Plot F1 Elevations 1418 - 23 / MP11 Plot F2 Plans & Elevations 1418 - 23 / MP12 Plot F3 Plans 1418 - 23 / MP13 Plot F3 Elevations 1418 - 23 / MP14 D Proposed Presentation Sections and Views 1418-23 / MP15 F Design, Access & Sustainability Statement 1418 - 23 / MP16 C Garages & Flat Refuse Stores 1418 - 23 / MP17 B Cycle Shelters 1418-23 / MP19 A Adoption Plan 677-01-11i Landscape Proposals (Sheet 1 of 4)
Page 22
677-01-12i Landscape Proposals (Sheet 2 of 4) 677-01-13i Landscape Proposals (Sheet 3 of 4) 677-01-14i Landscape Proposals (Sheet 4 of 4) 677-01-15b Landscape Proposals – Play Area 60710-T-01 Topographical Survey 60710-T-02 Topographical Survey 60710-T-03 Topographical Survey 60710-T-04 Topographical Survey 60710-T-05 Topographical Survey 60710-T-06 Topographical Survey 60710-T-07 Topographical Survey 60710-T-08 Topographical Survey 60710-T-09 Topographical Survey - Method Statement for Archaeological Work - Archaeological Desk Based Study and Walk Over Field Survey - Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment - Planning Statement - Arboricultural Survey Report - Transport Assessment 15539-GOO-ZZ-XX-DR-C- 07 Access Road Longitudinal Section - Pre-Application Consultation Report - Update Preliminary Ecological Appraisal - Bat Survey Report - Outline Biodiversity Enhancement Management Plan For further information please contact James McCafferty, Development Standards Team, Email: james.mccafferty@renfrewshire.gov.uk