23-0354-PP RAI - PP Application GMC DL
Renfrewshire Council · 28 May 2024
Back to Planning and Climate Change Policy Board — 28 May 2024 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Report by Chief Planning Officer Planning and Climate Change Policy Board: 28 May 2024 Reference No 23/0354/PP Application Type Planning Permission-Full Proposal Redevelopment, partial demolition and conversion of former infirmary into 45 flats and erection of two blocks of additional flats providing 36 units, with associated parking and landscaping Location Alexandra Nursing Home, Calside, Paisley Ward 6 - Paisley Southeast Community Council Charleston Community Council (no longer active) Applicant Mr Abdullah Hamid Recommendation Grant subject to conditions All plans, reports, documents and representations relating to this application can be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=RX20TCMWICB00 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, this application requires to be decided by the Board due to the proposals constituting "Major Development" as described in The Town and Country Planning (Hierarchy of Developments) (Scotland) Regulations 2009. Proposal Planning permission is sought for the redevelopment, partial demolition and conversion of the former Royal Alexandra Infirmary in Paisley into 45 flats, together with the erection of two blocks of additional flats to provide 36 units, with associated parking and landscaping. The former infirmary consists of a substantial, landmark category B-listed building which lies to the south of the town centre between two main roads, Calside to the west and Neilston Road to the east. The building is of a general E-shaped footprint, with three long wings extending south from its main entrance and reception areas at the north. The eastmost of these wings has previously been converted into 24 flats, while the remainder of the building has lain vacant since its last use as a private nursing home which ceased in the mid-2000s. The building also features a modern single storey extension on its north elevation which the applicant proposes to demolish. Of the 45 flats to be formed within the former infirmary, 30 of these would be accommodated at ground and first floor level, with 15 on the ground floor, 14 on the first floor and 1 comprising a maisonette over both the ground and first floors. 9 further flats would be accommodated at second floor level, with one of these accommodated within the central tower and also featuring a mezzanine floor. The 6 remaining flats would be formed at a lower ground floor level within a section of the building connecting the central and east wings. 25 of the flats would accommodate two bedrooms, while the remaining 20 would be single bedroom flats. Aside from the demolition of the newer single storey extension on the north elevation of the building, the main external alterations would be the formation of a series of dormers on the west elevation of the west wing and the east elevation of the central wing to serve some of
Page 2
the attic level flats. The rounded verandah balconies at the southern end of the two wings
would also be retained. Internally, the former wards would be subdivided to support the
development. Some minor adjustments have also been undertaken during the assessment
of the application to the proposed internal layout to reflect comments Historic Environment
Scotland made in relation to a concurrent application for listed building consent (ref:
23/0355/LB).
The two new build blocks of flats would both be four storeys in height and would be located
to the west and north of the hospital respectively. The west block ("Building 2" on the
application drawings) would be sited on a grassed area situated between an internal road
running alongside the west wing and Calside. This block would be of an irregular wedge-
shaped footprint and would accommodate a total of 20 flats, comprising 5 on each of its 4
floors. The north block ("Building 3") would have a square footprint and would be erected
partly on the footprint of the demolished extension but separated from the main hospital
building by parking. This block would accommodate 16 flats, comprising 4 on each floor.
Of the 36 new build flats accommodated in the two new buildings, 32 would be two bedroom
flats, with the remaining 4 being single bedroom. As such, the development as a whole
would accommodate 57 two bedroom and 24 single bedroom flats.
Both new building blocks would feature steep-sided, dark grey zinc roofs and red facing
bricks, with additional dark grey zinc panelling. The top floor of both buildings would
accommodate attic flats within the roof space served by wallhead dormers.
Parking would also be formed at various locations throughout the development site,
including areas between the infirmary building and the two new build blocks and also
between the three wings, with access to these latter areas obtained from the existing
perimeter road at the south of the site. The application also proposes soft landscaping,
including an amenity space to the west of the new north block and a programme of tree
planting.
Site Description
The former infirmary lies prominently between two main roads to the south of Paisley town
centre, these being Calside to the west and Neilston Road to the east. The building was
designed by the renowned Paisley architect TG Abercrombie and dates from the late 19th
century. It comprises mostly of two or three storeys, with additional attic floor space and a
central tower, together with its three long wings extending south and the non-original
extension to the north which the applicant proposes to demolish.
Access is obtained via a connecting road which links Calside and Neilston Road and which
also provides access to additional buildings to the north including two other former hospital
buildings which also form part of the listing for the wider former infirmary. These comprise
the Peter Coats Building which originally provided nurses' accommodation and now contains
private flats; and a former dispensary and lodge which now accommodates a children's
nursery.
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 following matters:Page 3
▪ As the proposals constitute a major development, the applicant was required to undertake pre-application consultation with the local community. A pre-application consultation report has been submitted by the applicant which outlines the consultation undertaken. This refers to two public events undertaken in the area containing display boards and provides an outline of the feedback at both events. The report notes that while a lot of support was expressed, some concerns were raised with respect to matters including effects on traffic, parking and the existing access road; construction noise and disturbance; anti-social behaviour both at present and during and following construction; overshadowing impacts; and phasing of the development. ▪ A pre-application site meeting also took place involving the applicant's agent, planning officers at Renfrewshire Council and officers from Historic Environment Scotland. Discussions during the meeting focused on the condition of the building and on various specific internal and external features, in seeking their preservation and, where possible, restoration as part of the proposed development. Discussions were also held on viability, the positioning and scale of the proposed new build blocks and access and parking arrangements. Negotiated Improvements Following submission, the following changes have been negotiated between officers and the applicant: ▪ Minor adjustments to window designs including proposed dormers, on advice of Historic Environment Scotland. ▪ Minor adjustments to internal layout to protect the character of some important rooms including a board room and hexagonal room on the advice of Historic Environment Scotland. ▪ Addition of 9 further parking spaces within the site. ▪ Agreement to secure improvements to access provision and traffic management by way of conditions in the event that planning permission should be granted. Site History Application No: 23/0062/PN Description: Residential conversion of former hospital building, new residential dwellings, related amenity space, landscaping and parking Decision: Accepted Application No: 23/0355/LB Description: Redevelopment, partial demolition and conversion of former infirmary into 45 flats Decision: This application is also being presented to Board today for determination Application No: 14/0117/PP Description: Alteration and change of use of existing care home to form 35 dwellings and erection of 12 No. new build flats (Variation of Condition 1 of planning permission 11/0176/PP to extend the period for commencement of development by an additional three years). Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 13/0744/LB Description: Alterations and change of use of former care home to form 35 dwellings including part demolition. Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 13/0384/LB
Page 4
Description: Removal of roof light and reinstatement of roof covering Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 11/0176/PP Description: Variation of Condition 1 of planning permission 05/1075/PP to extend the period for commencement of development by three years Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 05/1075/PP Description: Alteration and change of use of existing care home to form 35 dwellings and erection of 12 No. new build flats. Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 05/1076/LB Description: Alterations and change of use of existing care home to form 35 dwellings including part demolition. Decision: Grant subject to conditions Consultations Children's Services - No objection subject to the applicant entering into a section 75 legal agreement to make a financial contribution to education provision in the area. Chief Executive's Service (Roads Development) - No objection subject to conditions relating to cycle parking provision, a waste strategy, a construction traffic management plan and proposals for improving accessibility for pedestrians and vehicles. Environment, Housing & Infrastructure (Env. Protection) - No objection subject to conditions to investigate and address potential site contamination; the submission and approval of a dust management; and provision of a suitable glazing specification for windows on Building 2 to mitigate the impacts of road traffic noise from Calside. Also comment that Building 3 would be in close proximity to the nursery but there is no suitable condition that could be applied to mitigate noise generated from the nursery. Scottish Water - No objection. Glasgow Airport Safeguarding - No objection subject to a condition requiring a Bird Hazard Management Plan and informative note regarding the use of cranes in proximity to an aerodrome. NATS - No objection. S.E.P.A – Confirmed that the application falls outwith their parameters for requiring to be consulted. Historic Environment Scotland – In terms of impact on the setting of the listed building, HES had no objection. In terms of the proposed alterations to the listed building, these will be assessed under the concurrent listed building application that is being presented to Board today. Representations The application has been publicised in line with the requirements of the relevant legislation. The following representations were received:
Page 5
Object - 3 Support - 1 Neutral - 0 The issues raised can be summarised as follows: The letter of support comments that the development will significantly improve the character and economic performance of the local area. It further states that residential use is the only feasible option for the site and that due consideration appears to have been given to neighbouring residents. The points of objection may be summarised as follows: Access traffic and road safety issues 1. Concern regarding the impact the completed development would have on traffic flows, with safety implications for existing residents and children at the adjacent nursery, particularly as a result of the proximity of Building 3. 2. Concern that the existing private road to the north is insufficient for the additional traffic the development would generate, taking into account traffic already generated by the nursery. 3. Concerns also regarding the cost and liability implications for existing neighbouring residents who are liable for the northern half of the access road. It is further commented that the submitted Transport Statement misrepresents the situation by not making it clear that part of the private road network does not come under the sole ownership of the applicant. 4. Concern that insufficient parking is proposed and that parking allocations within the neighbouring development at Alexandra Gate will be negatively impacted. 5. Concern regarding the impact on parking and access for existing neighbouring residents during construction works, including access for bin collections and emergency services. General amenity issues 6. Concern regarding noise and disturbance from additional traffic following completion of the proposed development. 7. Concern that the proximity of Building 3 and proposed amenity areas to existing residential properties will result in noise and disturbance. 8. Concern regarding noise from construction works. 9. Concerns regarding loss of privacy and overlooking as a result of Building 3 and the proximity of proposed amenity areas. Concerns are raised in relation to overlooking of both neighbouring windows and garden areas. 10. Concern that Building 3 will result in overshadowing of neighbouring flats and garden areas to the north and east, resulting in loss of amenity and increased heating costs. Issues relating to built form, design and density
Page 6
11. Objection raised to the design, materials and layout of the new build elements, as well as the proposed landscaping, on the basis that they are not in keeping with, and would detract from, the existing listed building. 12. Objection to the density of development and particularly the inclusion of Building 3 due to limited space and concerns it will result in a "cramped" or "overcrowded" 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 6 - Forestry, woodland and trees Policy 7 - Historic assets and places Policy 9 - Brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings 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 22 - Flood risk and water management Full details relating to the policies of the NPF4 can be found online. Renfrewshire Local Development Plan Policy P1 - Renfrewshire's Places Policy P2 - Housing Land Supply Policy P3 - Housing Mix and Affordable Housing Policy ENV2 - Natural Heritage Policy ENV3 - Built and Cultural Heritage Policy I1 - Connecting Places Policy I3 - Flooding and Drainage 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 Renfrewshire New Development Supplementary Guidance 2022 ▪ Delivering the Places Strategy: Creating Places ▪ Delivering the Infrastructure Strategy: Connecting Places; Provision for Waste Recycling in New Developments; Flooding and Drainage; and Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Developments. ▪ Delivering the Environment Strategy: Built Heritage; Trees, Woodland and Forestry;
Page 7
Historic Environment Scotland's Historic Environment Policy for Scotland (HEPS) and associated "Managing Change in the Historic Environment" guidance notes. Renfrewshire's Places Residential Design Guide March 2015. Developer’s Contributions (Education) – Draft Planning Guidance Submitted Reports and Assessments In assessing and reporting on a planning application the Council is required to provide details of any report or assessment submitted as set out in Regulation 16, Schedule 2, para 4(c) (i) to (iv) of the Development Management Regulations. The following reports have been submitted in support of the application, and can be summarised as follows: Tree Survey by Caledon Tree Consultants – This report identifies trees throughout the site of varying maturity, including specimen trees of good quality near the site entrance and along the southern boundary. These include common lime, silver birch and goat willow. The report also identifies groupings of trees of lesser quality alongside the west boundary next to Calside containing mostly flowering cherry and other fruit bearing species, together with a cluster of quick-growing conifers. It is observed that these latter trees would be removed to accommodate Building 2. Arboricultural Impact Assessment by DEP Landscapes - Building on the tree survey by Caledon Consultants, the submitted AIA confirms that 17 individual trees plus a group of approximately ten quick-growing conifers would require to be removed to accommodate Building 2, while a small cluster of young trees comprising mostly silver birch and goat willow would also require to be removed to accommodate parking between the central and east wings of the building. The report outlines that the trees to be removed would all be category B (moderate quality) or category C (low quality) trees. The report also sets out measures that would be employed to protect retained trees during construction and details of a programme of compensatory planting to include Norway maple and hornbeam along the west boundary, together with rowan, birch and small fruit trees elsewhere within the site. The report advises in this respect that the site characteristics would allow planting on the basis of four new trees for everyone removed. The proposed planting is set out on an accompanying landscaping plan. Preliminary Roost Assessment, Nesting Bird Check and Nocturnal Surveys by Direct Ecology – This report outlines the results of a preliminary roost assessment and nocturnal activity survey for bats. The survey finds that there are ingress and roost opportunities for bats and considers the building to have moderate bat roost potential and some potential for hibernating bats. The results of two nocturnal surveys undertaken in May and June 2023 found pipistrelle bats to be present, including a potential maternity roost. The report therefore makes a number of recommendations including pre-work surveying and checking, as well as installation of bat and bird boxes in the vicinity. The report also finds evidence of nesting by feral pigeons and jackdaws and recommends measures to minimise the possibility of disturbance to breeding birds. Conservation Condition Report - Outlines the findings of a non-invasive survey of the building with accompanying photographs of the exterior and interior. Also provides a detailed history of the site and statement on the special interest of the building. The report highlights the impact of fires, vandalism, water penetration and encroaching vegetation among other
Page 8
issues which have resulted in significant damage to parts of the building. In particular, it is noted that a link corridor between the central and east wings of the building has lost its roof due to fire, while the slated roofs over the main wings are generally in poor condition and requiring renewal, as is the flat roof over the main tower and many of the original windows. While the report also finds that re-pointing will be required throughout, the stonework of the building is found to be generally in a reasonable condition. Internal fixtures identified include a main decorative staircase which the report hopes can be repaired as part of the redevelopment. Structural Appraisal Report - Outlines in further detail the findings of a survey of the building and makes a series of recommendations in order to confirm its structural stability. Recommendations include further surveying of structural elements, the renewal of the roof and measures for protecting the flooring. Feasibility Cost and Development Appraisal Comparison - Provides costings and income estimates for three development options comprising redevelopment of the infirmary on its own; or accompanied by one new build block of 20 additional units; or by two new build blocks accommodating 36 additional units. The findings conclude that in order for the redevelopment of the infirmary to be financially viable, both the new build blocks are necessary. Drainage Assessment Report – Outlines proposals for addressing foul and surface water drainage generated by the development. The report also includes an analysis of flooding in the area which notes that according to SEPA flood maps the site is clear of any risk of surface water flooding. The report outlines that foul drainage would be directed to an existing combined sewer, while surface water drainage would be directed initially to a SuDS attenuation tank which would provide attenuation for a 1 in 200 year storm event taking into account climate change. Surface water discharges would then be directed to the combined sewer network via a hydro-brake control. Transport Assessment – Submitted at the request of the Council’s Roads Development officers, the Transport Assessment considers various issues relating to matters of traffic, accessibility and parking in relation to the development. The report contains details on access provision for serving the development and a review of existing pedestrian, cycle and public transport provision in the area. The report also includes analysis of a people trip assessment of the proposals and concludes that the nature of the surrounding road network is sufficient to accommodate the proposals. Analysis of parking to serve the development notes that while the amount of vehicular parking proposed does not meet the recommendations set out in the SCOTS National Roads Development Guide, the proposed parking is sufficient to accommodate the proposals when taking into account the location of the development; the active travel and public transport provision serving the area; and Policy 13 of NPF4 which allows consideration of lower levels of parking, particularly in urban locations where other sustainable transport modes are available. Glazing Area Calculation – Submitted on the recommendation of Environment, Housing & Infrastructure Services (Environmental Protection team) to assess the natural light afforded to habitable rooms within the two new build blocks. The findings of the report have subsequently been confirmed by Environment, Housing & Infrastructure Services as acceptable. Design & Access Statement – Provides an overview of the proposed development. The statements also includes a history of the site and an appraisal of the building form and its
Page 9
present condition. Additionally, the statement provides a series of daylighting calculations, 3D visuals and an initial outline of aspects including landscaping, parking and phasing. 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 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act requires decisions on planning applications to be made in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Development Plan comprises the National Planning Framework 4 (2023) (NPF4) and the adopted Renfrewshire Local Development Plan (2021) (LDP). The fourth National Planning Framework (NPF4) provides the long-term national spatial strategy for planning in Scotland. It sets out the Scottish Government's current view on delivering sustainable, liveable and productive places through the application of spatial principles. Policy 7 (Historic Assets and Places) of NPF4 states that development proposals which sensitively repair, enhance and bring historic buildings on the national Buildings at Risk Register, back into beneficial use will be supported, while Policy ENV3 of the LDP supports the sympathetic restoration of listed buildings, subject to the proposed redevelopment being sensitive to the character, setting and appearance of the building. Additionally, Historic Environment Scotland's Historic Environment Policy for Scotland (HEPS) also supports the sensitive restoration and conversion of historic assets including listed buildings. The existing building in this case is a landmark historic building which is category B listed and lies prominently between two main arterial roads. Other than its east wing, which has previously been converted to flats, the building has lain vacant for approximately 20 years and has been on the Buildings at Risk Register since 2010. The proposal to bring the building back into use is therefore supported by Policy 7, Policy ENV3 and HEPS, subject to the restoration being sensitively undertaken. Additionally, the proposal is also supported in principle by Policy 9 (Brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings) of NPF4 which advocates the sustainable reuse of existing buildings over their demolition. In terms of land use policy, the application site is identified in the Renfrewshire LDP as a Housing Land Supply site which can contribute to the range and choice of residential units in Renfrewshire. Policy P1 (Renfrewshire's Places) and Policy P2 (Housing Land Supply) of the LDP are both applicable in this regard in supporting residential use and the development is therefore compliant in principle with both policies. Policy 16 (Quality Homes) of NPF4 states that development proposals for new homes on land allocated for housing in the LDP will be supported and the principle of the development is also therefore supported by this policy.
Page 10
The applicant has demonstrated that the building can be redeveloped with minimal impact on the building's external appearance. The main external alteration to the original building would be the addition of dormer windows. These have been reduced during the assessment of the application and are of a discreet scale and appropriate pitched roof design. As such, the dormers would not appear prominent and can be accommodated with minimal disruption. The impact of these alterations on the character of the listed building is assessed under the concurrent listed building application being presented to Board today. Other external alterations would relate to essential repairs to make the building suitable for reuse, including renewal of roof materials and refurbishment or replacement of windows, balustrades and flashings on a general like-for-like basis. The single storey extension on the north elevation to be demolished is a much later addition featuring cream rendered walls and a flat roof and contrasting notably from the original building. Its removal would also enable the current obscured section of the original north elevation to be reinstated. Internally, some inevitable changes would be required to support the proposed conversion, including partitioning of the former wards in the central and west wings and removal of some secondary staircases. The applicant proposes to retain and repair the principal staircase, while they have also undertaken some minor alterations to the proposed layout to protect the character of some of the more important rooms, including a boardroom and hexagonal room on the first floor, in line with comments from Historic Environment Scotland received in relation to the concurrent application for listed building consent. Considered as a whole, the proposed physical changes to the listed building to support its reuse are considered acceptable and to therefore accord with Policies 7 and ENV3 and also with relevant guidance including the Renfrewshire New Development Supplementary Guidance on Listed Buildings and Historic Environment Scotland's "Managing Change in the Historic Environment" guidance notes. With regard to the two new build blocks (Buildings 2 and 3), Policy 7 of NPF4 advises that "enabling development" for historic environment assets "that would otherwise be unacceptable in planning terms" will only be supported where it has been demonstrated that the proposal is essential to secure the future of the historic environment asset at risk and is the minimum necessary to secure the restoration, adaptation and long-term future of the asset. Policy ENV3 of the LDP also allows enabling development to help secure the sympathetic restoration of listed buildings, subject to criteria outlined within the New Development Supplementary Guidance. In this regard, the development must not materially harm the heritage value or setting of the listed building and be carefully sited to preserve or enhance the character and setting of the building. As with Policy 7, the enabling development must be the minimum necessary to secure the future of the asset, whilst it must also raise no significant conflict with any other policy or guidance. In this case, the applicant has submitted an analysis which considers three options, comprising redevelopment of the infirmary on its own; redevelopment plus one new build block of 20 additional units; and redevelopment plus two new build blocks accommodating 36 additional units. The analysis provides estimates on the costings and sales for each option in concluding that the third option should be pursued. While it is noted that the estimates for the second option also arrives at a small profit, the margin is very small at approximately 6%. The third option would provide an estimated profit at between 10 and 11%.
Page 11
In terms of impact on education, Children's Services have been consulted on the application and have confirmed that they have no objection to the development of 81 flats subject to the developer entering into a section 75 legal agreement with the Council to provide a financial contribution to education provision in the area. This request is made on the basis that the site falls within the catchment for two schools - St Andrew's Academy and St Fergus Primary School – which are both operating at over 85% capacity. It is noted that the proposed development is expected to generate 1.46 additional pupils for St Andrews Academy and the same number for St Fergus Primary. In this regard, careful consideration is required in terms of the necessity for addressing over- capacity in the schools in the area versus the viability of securing the preservation and sustainable reuse of the listed building. The listed building in this case is considered to be of integral importance to the surrounding area, being a very highly regarded and historically significant example of a category B listed building designed by one of Paisley's most renowned architects. Lack of use of the majority of the original building for close to 20 years has significantly blighted an area which previously benefited from its status as a landmark civic building to the surrounding area. As also outlined above, the proposed conversion to residential use is also strongly supported in principle by Development Plan policy and offers considerable potential benefits to the wider area from a placemaking perspective. It is clear that the future survival of the listed building is at risk if a viable new use is not secured. At the same time, the lack of educational capacity is acknowledged as a very serious issue. There is a clear identified need for additional investment in the school estate to address the current capacity issues where these are liable to be made worse by new residential development coming forward. While the importance of this is appreciated, the listed building is in a deteriorating condition and the viability of securing its preservation and sustainable reuse is considered of sufficient importance to the wider built environment and Paisley as a whole. As such, an exceptional case is considered to exist in this particular instance such that on balance it is concluded that a financial contribution in respect of education provision, given the low pupils numbers projected from the proposed development, should not be insisted upon in this case. In taking into account the above, it is also accepted that a suitable case has been made as to the need for both new build blocks to support the viability of rehabilitating the listed building. The principle of the new build blocks is also therefore accepted, subject to their impact on the setting of the listed building and the amenity of neighbouring residents and the surrounding area. To assess these impacts, detailed consideration is required against the provisions set out in the Renfrewshire New Development Supplementary Guidance and Residential Design Guide, taking into account any other relevant Development Plan policies and the guidance of Historic Environment Scotland. The main requirements set out in the New Development Supplementary Guidance and Residential Design Guide are considered below: Context and Character The new build elements to the north and west of the listed building would both contain four storeys, with the top storey in both cases being set within the roof space. While the number of floor levels would broadly accord with the redeveloped infirmary, the new buildings would be of a noticeably lesser height given the traditionally higher ceilings within the infirmary, and its range of projecting features including its central tower (which would also feature an additional mezzanine floor to serve one flat). Other buildings in the vicinity include the Peter Coats Building to the north which is generally three storey. Neilston Road to the east is mostly characterised by residential flats typically of three or four storeys, whilst Calside features a greater mixture of one, two and three storey
Page 12
buildings primarily for residential use. Additionally, two high rise blocks (Hamilton Court and Union Court) are also situated just beyond Stock Street approximately 50 metres south of the application site, with the former of these two blocks also sited adjacent to Calside. Taking these characteristics into account, the two new build blocks are not considered of a scale or mass that is out of context with the general character of the surrounding built environment. The impact of the new build proposals on the setting of the listed buildings is considered in further detail under "Layout and Built Form" below. In terms of Policy P3 - Housing Mix and Affordable Housing of the LDP the development, will provide a range of one and two bedroom flats to the area. Both Policy 16 of NPF4 and Policy P3 of the LDP require the provision of affordable homes as part of private housing sites. Policy P3 sets out that affordable homes shall be delivered in all residential developments where 50 or more dwellings are proposed providing up to 25% of the total site capacity in line with the New Development Supplementary Guidance. The recent HNDA study prepared by Arneil Johnston to support the preparation of the Renfrewshire Local Housing Strategy 2023 identified a need for new affordable homes across Renfrewshire including in the Paisley Housing Sub Market Area. While the Council and RSL partners have delivered more than 700 social rent and shared equity affordable homes in Paisley over the last 5 years there remains a need to deliver new social rented homes to meet need and demand in the area. Therefore, in implementing Policy P3 of LDP the preference would be to deliver new social rented homes on private sites with a capacity of more than 50 units. The delivery of social rented homes is supported through the Scottish Government’s Affordable Housing Supply Programme with funding allocated through the Council’s 5 year Strategic Housing Investment Plan. However, Renfrewshire’s funding allocation from Scottish Government for this financial year has fallen by 26% and the level of funding available over the remaining years of the SHIP programme is currently uncertain. Therefore, at this time there is no certainty if and when funding would be available to support the delivery of social rented homes on this site, As outlined above the viability assessment provided by the applicant indicates that the profit for the successful delivery of the scheme is approximately 10% and this has been on the basis that the value of all of the flats are sold as private housing at the going rate for the area. In assessing the proposed development it is considered that the reuse of this site and the delivery of homes at the edge of Paisley Town Centre is a regeneration priority. This listed building has been in gradual decline and this proposal would secure the preservation and sustainable reuse of this important listed building. It would provide a mix of one and two bedroom flats which would complement the other house types in the area. It is therefore considered that given these particular circumstances that the proposal is acceptable, in this instance. Access and Connectivity At the recommendation of Roads Development, a Transport Assessment has been submitted by the applicant in view of the scale of the development proposed. The assessment considers the likely traffic impact and parking need of the development. In terms of the latter, some 90 spaces are proposed throughout the development, equating to one space for each of the 81 dwellings proposed, plus 9 visitor spaces. This is less than the parking standards set out in the Society of Chief Officers of Transportation in Scotland (SCOTS) Roads Development Guide; however, the guide does also outline that reductions
Page 13
may be considered in the case of development within an urban area which has good links to sustainable transport. Allowance for a lower level of parking provision is also made by Policy 13 (Sustainable Transport) of NPF4 which states that development proposals "which are ambitious in terms of low/no car parking will be supported, particularly in urban locations that are well-served by sustainable transport modes and where they do not create barriers to access by disabled people ". The applicant's Transport Assessment outlines that the development is accessible to a range of sustainable transport. For pedestrians, the site is well-served by local amenities including local supermarkets and other shops, particularly on Neilston Road, plus local parks including Saucelhill Park to the north-east and Brodie Park to the south. The assessment notes that both Calside and Neilston Road are well-served by good quality pedestrian footways and crossing points. Large places of employment such as the Royal Alexandra Hospital to the west are also noted as being within walking distance, along with Paisley Town Centre, with the site approximately 500 metres from the junction of Causeyside Street with Canal Street and Gordon Street and just under 1 kilometre from the High Street. The two nearest primary schools, St Charles Primary School and Lochfield Primary School are approximately 0.7km and 1.3km away respectively. The National Cycle Route (NCR) 7 can be accessed from within Saucelhill Park via a link path at the south end of the park which is approximately 300 metres from the application site, while regular bus services are readily available on both Neilston Road and Calside and Paisley Canal Station just over 5 minutes walk away. Taking into account the above, the development is accessible to local services, amenities and sustainable transport and supports NPF4 Policy 15 (Local Living and 20 Minute Neighbourhoods). The applicant's Transport Assessment also contains an analysis of estimated car journeys generated by the proposed development which it considers to justify the lower level of parking proposed. Taking into consideration the sustainable transport provision already available in the area, the reduced parking is considered acceptable in terms of Policy 13 of NPF4 and Policy I1 of the LDP and has also been accepted by the Council's Roads Development officers. However, in their assessment of the Transport Assessment, the Council's Roads Development officers have recommended a number of conditions including provision of cycle parking and improvements to the internal road network and in terms of improving accessibility for pedestrians. These conditions are all considered reasonable in the interests of managing the impacts of the development and making it safe and accessible. Layout and Bult Form Policy 14 (Design, Quality and Place) of NPF4, Policy P1 of the LDP and the Renfrewshire New Development Supplementary Guidance and Residential Design Guide seek to promote well designed development that makes successful places. As noted above, the scale and mass of the two new build blocks (Buildings 2 and 3) is not considered out of keeping with the general scale and mass of other buildings which characterise the surrounding area. The number of flats proposed and the form of the two new build blocks is considered commensurate to the general density and form of development in the area and appropriate for its urban location.
Page 14
In terms of the impacts of Buildings 2 and 3 on the setting of the listed buildings, reference is made to Historic Environment Scotland's "Managing Change in the Historic Environment" guidance note on settings which outlines a number of key considerations. These include consideration of views of the historic assets in the area and consideration as to whether proposed development would dominate or detract in a way that affects how people may understand or appreciate the historic assets. The visual impact relative to the scale of the historic asset and the ability of the setting to absorb new development without eroding its key characteristics are also important considerations. It is noted that the two proposed new build blocks would have some impacts on views of the infirmary from public vantage points but these impacts are not considered significantly adverse to its general setting. Building 2, in sitting between the west wing of the infirmary and Calside, would obscure views of the west side of the infirmary from the road, although it is noted that this is already currently the case in summer months due to tree cover. Building 2 has also been sited so that visibility of some more important features at either end of the west wing of the infirmary would be retained from the road. This would include visibility of the nearest curved verandah balconies at the south end of the west wing and of the nearest of the turrets at its north end. It is further noted that the west elevation of the infirmary, although contributing to its overall character and interest, is a secondary elevation rather than a principal elevation and on balance it is considered that Building 2 can be accommodated with minimal impact on the setting of the infirmary, taking also into consideration its lesser height. Building 3 would partly sit in front of the north elevation of the infirmary which contains its main formal entrance and reception areas. The building would in large part be situated over part of the footprint of the single storey extension to be demolished and therefore would obscure part of the north elevation. Notwithstanding this, the block would be approximately ten metres from the main building at its nearest points, with car parking situated between the two buildings. Additionally, it is observed that the existing access road would continue to loop round Building 3, as is the case with the exiting north extension. As such, uninterrupted views of the north elevation of the infirmary would be retained from the access road on either side of Building 3, as well as from within the car park itself. The extent of the amenity space to the west of Building 3, together with the car parking, roads and additional landscaping would also lend a suitable sense of openness between Building 3 and all three infirmary buildings such that the new building would be absorbed by these structures without significantly detracting from the listed structures as a grouping notwithstanding its central location between these buildings. The lesser height of the two new buildings and use of contemporary materials which would complement rather than replicate the original buildings would also help ensure that they clearly read as later non- original buildings which play a secondary role to the original infirmary. On the whole, it is considered that the general layout and form of the development will lend it an identity which contributes to the wider urban environment to the south of the town centre as promoted by Policies 14 and P1 and the relevant guidance highlighted above. Environment and Community The siting of Building 2 would require the removal of some 27 trees between the road at Calside and the west wing of the infirmary. A further small cluster of young trees between the central and east wings would also be removed to make way for parking.
Page 15
The applicant has submitted a tree survey by professional arborists which provides an assessment of the trees proposed for removal, as well as trees which would be retained. The survey identifies a range of good quality specimen trees near the site entrance and along the southern boundary, including common lime, silver birch and goat willow which would be retained. The trees that would be removed to accommodate Building 2 are generally of lesser quality, comprising mostly of younger flowering cherry and other fruit bearing species, together with a cluster of quick-growing conifers. These are all identified by the survey as either trees of moderate quality (Category B) or low quality (Category C). Aerial photography within the applicant's Conservation / Condition Report from 2001 shows this area as being largely devoid of any notable tree cover, thereby confirming the relatively young age of the trees. The cluster of trees between the central and east wings to be removed are also noted to be insignificant, consisting largely of young birch and willow. Building on the tree survey, the applicant has also submitted an arboricultural impact assessment which sets out measures that would be employed to protect retained trees during construction, together with a programme of compensatory planting to include Norway maple and hornbeam along the west boundary and other species including native rowan and whitebeam elsewhere within the site. The report advises in this respect that the site characteristics would allow planting on the basis of four new trees for every one removed and sets this out on an accompanying landscaping plan. The quantity and species of the trees to be planted are considered to more than compensate for the trees to be removed. Additionally, a number of good quality existing trees, particularly limes planted at strategic locations within the infirmary grounds, will be retained and contribute positively to the character of the development. As such, the proposals are considered to comply with Policy 6 (Forestry, Woodland and Trees) of NPF4 and Policy ENV2 of the LDP in preserving and enhancing the tree cover at the site. The proposed replanting also includes appropriate levels of native tree and plant species which will enhance the opportunity for biodiversity within the site, in accordance with Policy 3 (Biodiversity) of NPF4. The landscaping plan indicates good levels of green amenity areas around edges of the application site and more centrally, including the sizeable area of amenity space to the west of Building 3 and between parking areas. The Renfrewshire Residential Design Guide outlines that in the case of developments of 50 residential units or more, the Council will seek a children's play area on the basis of 1 square metre per unit. It is therefore considered appropriate to condition further details of play equipment to be installed within the development. It is noted that the amenity areas around the development, particularly the area to the west of Building 3, offer potential for the siting of play equipment to support this objective. In terms of drainage, the applicant has submitted a Drainage Impact Assessment (DIA) which outlines that foul drainage from the development would be discharged to a combined sewer to the north, while surface water would be directed to a SuDS attenuation tank under the amenity space to the west of Building 3 and then directed east via an "attenuation sewer" to the combined network. These arrangements would control the rate of surface water discharges to a restricted level calculated through modelling within the DIA. The report outlines that the proposed measures would allow the rate of discharge to be controlled to manage a "1 in 200 year" flood event, with an additional 41% allowance made to allow for climate change. The DIA has been reviewed and is found to make appropriate arrangements to manage drainage, subject to assurance that Scottish Water will allow connection to their network. The
Page 16
applicant has advised in this regard that detailed discussions have taken place with Scottish Water and they are hopeful of obtaining their agreement. In the event that this does not occur, it is considered appropriate to apply a condition that an amended drainage impact assessment is submitted for further consideration. Taking these points into account, the development is considered acceptable with respect to both Policy 22 (Flood risk and water management) of NPF4 and Policy I3 of the LDP. Buildings and Design The applicant advises that both new build blocks have been designed to complement rather than replicate the existing hospital buildings. Both would in this respect take some design cues from the existing building in emulating the steep sided roof gradient and wallhead dormers of the infirmary, as well as its vertically proportioned windows. However, the buildings would also feature more contemporary finishing materials, with the walls featuring a red facing brick and the roofs and recessed balcony areas featuring a dark grey zinc finish. Subject to a condition requiring final details of the exact materials used, this approach is considered appropriate. The guiding principles outlined in Historic Environment Scotland's "Managing Change in the Historic Environment" guidance note on extensions are considered to also be relevant in the assessment of the new build blocks. The guidance note advises that an addition which seeks to complement rather than replicate the original building will in many cases be preferable, stating that a quite substantial addition which takes design cues from the original building without replicating its detail will typically have a less radical effect on the appearance of the original building than an addition of similar scale which instead seeks to replicate the original building. In this regard, an addition which seeks to replicate the original building runs the risk of presenting a confusing picture in separating "old" from "new" and therefore detracting from the original building. However, an addition which takes some design cues from the original without fully replicating the original building can ensure that the latter continues to be understood and recognised as the dominant element. Following on from this, a later addition which follows the general design of the original building but features contemporary materials should enable the new build elements to reflect their period of construction without detracting from the original building. The applicant in this case has consciously sought to design the new build elements as complementary additions which still offer some similarities to the original buildings without complete replication. It is considered that the proposed new build elements in this regard strike an appropriate balance and are suitably sensitive in respecting the primacy of the original historic buildings in the area. It is considered in this regard that the proposed design, finish and layout of the buildings accord appropriately with the relevant guidance from Historic Environment Scotland and make a contribution to the place in accordance with Policy 14 (Design, Quality and Place) and Policy 16 (Quality Homes) of NPF4 and Policy P1 of the LDP. In terms of daylighting and overshadowing, the applicant has conducted an analysis of potential overshadowing from Building 3 in relation to the neighbouring existing properties. This finds that the building would cast an additional shadow outwith summer months when the sun is at a lower height and would have some effect on the natural sunlight afforded to the windows and garden areas of some of the neighbouring flats to the north and west. It is noted that these additional impacts would be confined to certain parts of the day, with the flats in the original Peter Coats Building largely affected only during early morning to mid- morning hours and the flats and garden areas of the more recent Peter Coats building to the north affected from mid-morning through to early afternoon. From early afternoon onwards there would be no further impact from Building 3 on the natural sunlight afforded to these properties, while in the summer months any additional impact would be very limited given the higher position of the sun.
Page 17
As such, while it is acknowledged that Building 3 would result in some impacts on the natural sunlight afforded to the flats to the north and west, the additional overshadowing impacts would be relatively short-lived as regards each individual window and garden area affected during a typical day outwith the summer months, while there would be no significant adverse impact during the summer itself. In terms of overlooking, the north elevation of Building 3 would be approximately 14 metres from the nearest neighbouring windows to the north. While this is less than the typical recommended minimum distance of 18 metres as regards window-to-window overlooking, the windows would be slightly angled rather than directly facing and any overlooking impact is not considered of significant detriment to warrant refusal of the proposal. Overlooking of the garden areas of some of these existing flats would also be at an acceptable distance to not be regarded as an unacceptable. Windows on the west elevation of Building 3 would be a greater distance of approximately 23 metres from the nearest flats to the west and raise no significant adverse issues. Building 3 would also be approximately 13 metres from the north end of the east wing of the original infirmary which already accommodates flats, but any overlooking impact would be minimal given that the nearest windows would be set at an approximate 45 degree angle in relation to the nearest facing windows of the existing building. Windows between Building 2 and the west elevation of the original infirmary would mostly be a minimum of 18 metres. The windows of the southmost flats in Building 2 would be a lesser distance of 7 metres from the wall of the west elevation of the infirmary but approximately 13 metres from the nearest windows as these would be recessed and also not directly facing. Any overlooking between Building 2 and the west wing of the infirmary would not be of an extent that raises any significant adverse issues. In terms of the amenity spaces, these are not considered to raise any new overlooking issues of substance given that public views of any affected windows or garden areas already exist. The central amenity area in particular would in any case be sensitively sited in relation to existing flats, whilst also being well-overlooked by windows on the west elevation of Building 3 which would add a sense of security for children playing within this area. In terms of the proposed flats themselves, Environment, Housing & Infrastructure Services (Environmental Protection Team) initially raised a concern that some of the proposed flats within the Infirmary could feature insufficient natural light from their windows. However, the applicant has submitted a further analysis which satisfactorily demonstrates that all flats would be sufficiently served in this regard and these findings have been accepted. Policy I7 of the LDP states that all new buildings, subject to certain exceptions, shall in meeting building regulation energy requirements, install technology that produces low or no amounts of carbon dioxide emissions, to reduce the predicted emissions by at least 15% below 2007 building standards rates. Buildings subject to change of use or conversion are exempt from this requirement. The applicant's Design and Access Statement outlines an intention to integrate low energy/sustainable design measures in the refurbishment of the infirmary and in their approach to the site as a whole, including the incorporation of a low-energy design strategy for the new flats. To demonstrate compliance with Policy I7, it is considered appropriate to apply a condition requiring the submission of further detailed proposals on these measures. The implementation of such measures also supports the policies of NPF4, particularly Policy 1 (Tackling the climate and nature crises) and Policy 2 (Climate mitigation and adaptation).
Page 18
Response to objections In response to the points of objection raised in the letters of representation, points 1, 2, 4, 9, 10, 11 and 12 are all addressed in the above assessment. In relation to the remaining points: 3 - Matters relating to liability are a civil matter between land owners and not a material planning consideration. Issues that other owners may have regarding costings or liability in relation to the private road would require to be raised with the developer. 5 & 8 - A construction and environmental management plan will be requested via condition to ensure that the construction phase is managed appropriately. 6 & 7 - It can be anticipated that existing residents living adjacent to the application site are likely to experience increased levels of noise and disturbance from traffic and the general activity of people associated with the completed development. However, this is not considered out of keeping with the general residential character and relative high-density nature of the surrounding urban area. Section 75 Obligations The Council is required to provide a summary of the terms of any planning obligation which is required to be entered into under Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act in relation to the grant of permission for the proposed development: None. Conclusion In conclusion, it is considered that the proposals would deliver a good quality, urban residential development which would enable the sustainable conversion and reuse of one of Paisley's landmark listed buildings which is at risk and contributes to the physical quality and identity of the place. The development in this regard is found to accord with the relevant provisions of the Development Plan and in particular supports three of the overarching spatial principles set out in NPF4 - "Conserving and recycling assets", "Local living" and "Compact urban growth". It is therefore recommended that planning permission is granted subject to the conditions undernoted. 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. That in accordance with the “Phasing of Works” submitted on Tuesday 14th May 2024, the listed building (Building 1 in the application drawings) shall be fully secured, made water and windtight, restored, upgraded and internally fitted out as outlined in phases 1 and phases 2a of the “Phasing of Works” plan to the satisfaction of Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority prior to construction then commencing on Buildings 2 and 3, unless otherwise agreed in writing.
Page 19
Reason: To ensure that satisfactory arrangements are in place to secure the restoration and re-use of the listed building on the site. 2. No development in respect of Buildings 2 or 3, as identified in the application drawings, shall commence on site until written approval of: 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 setting out the proposed methods for implementing all remedial recommendations contained with the site investigation report and including (where relevant) a materials management plan and a phasing plan showing how the site is to be subdivided for the purposes of remedial implementation and/or verification reporting 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 occupation of any unit within Buildings 2 or 3 as identified in the application drawings, an identified phase of development: 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. That prior to the commencement of development, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The CEMP shall include (but not be limited to) provisions in respect of: ▪ mitigation measures for potential dust, noise, and vibration impacts on nearby properties, ▪ waste management, pollution control and mitigation, ▪ a plan showing existing drainage pipes and other utilities within the site and procedures for how they will be safeguarded during construction, ▪ surface water management, ▪ procedures for monitoring compliance and dealing with any breaches of the approved management plan, ▪ the formation of access from the public road to accommodate construction vehicles including geometry, surfacing, and sightlines ▪ the additional signage on both public roads where access will be taken to inform drivers of the construction vehicles. ▪ details of proposed temporary site compound for storage of materials, machinery, and designated car parking. The measures set out within the approved CEMP shall thereafter be implemented on site during the construction phase.
Page 20
Reason: To ensure environmental impacts are mitigated during the construction phase, and that the construction phase is undertaken safely. 5. That notwithstanding the terms of condition 4 above no works shall commence on site prior to the submission and approval by Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority of a Dust Management Plan submitted either separately or as part of the Construction Environmental Management Plan required by Condition 4. The Dust Management Plan shall set out how potential dust arising during demolition and development of the site will be managed to prevent or minimise emissions during these works. The plan shall take cognisance of the Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM) 2014 document 'Guidance on the Assessment of Dust from Demolition and Construction' in assessing dust impact risk and where necessary identify appropriate mitigation measures. Reason: To ensure dust impacts are mitigated during the demolition and construction phases. 6. Development of Buildings 2 and 3 shall not commence until a Bird Hazard Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with Glasgow Airport. The submitted plan shall include details of: ▪ management of any flat/shallow pitched/green roofs on buildings within the site which may be attractive to nesting, roosting and "loafing" birds. The management plan shall comply with Advice Note 8 'Potential Bird Hazards from Building Design'. The Bird Hazard Management Plan shall be implemented as approved, on completion of the development and shall remain in force for the life of the development. No subsequent alterations to the plan are to take place unless first submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with Glasgow Airport. The Bird Hazard Management Plan must ensure that flat/shallow pitched roofs be constructed to allow access to all areas by foot using permanent fixed access stairs ladders or similar. The owner/occupier must not allow gulls, to nest, roost or loaf on the building. Checks must be made weekly or sooner if bird activity dictates, during the breeding season. Outside of the breeding season gull activity must be monitored and the roof checked regularly to ensure that gulls do not utilise the roof. Any gulls found nesting, roosting or loafing must be dispersed by the owner/occupier when detected. The owner/occupier must remove any nests or eggs found on the roof. The breeding season for gulls typically runs from March to June. The owner/occupier must obtain the appropriate licences where applicable from NatureScot before the removal of nests and eggs. Reason: It is necessary to manage the development in order to minimise its attractiveness to birds which could endanger the safe movement of aircraft and the operation of Glasgow Airport. 7. That prior to the development of Building 2 or Building 3 commencing, a detailed schedule of the proposed external finishes for both buildings shall be submitted for the written approval of Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. These details shall include specifications of the finishing materials for all walls, roofs,
Page 21
windows and rainwater goods. Thereafter, the buildings shall be constructed only in accordance with such details as may be approved to the satisfaction of Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of the visual amenity of the area. 8. That prior to the development of Building 2 or Building 3 commencing, a Sustainability Statement confirming the technologies that would be installed producing low or no amounts of carbon dioxide emissions in accordance with Policy I7 of the Adopted Renfrewshire Local Development Plan shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. Thereafter, the technology shall be installed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of environmental sustainability and addressing current and future impacts of climate change. 9. That all planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping as shown on drawing P02 by DEP Landscaping Initiatives, shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of any of the flats hereby approved, or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner; and any trees or plants which, within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed 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 interest of the amenity of the area. 10. Prior to the occupation of any of the flats hereby approved, details of a Local Area for Play (LAP) shall be submitted for the written approval of Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority and thereafter implemented in accordance with the approved details. The details shall demonstrate that the layout, access and equipment are suitable for use by children of all abilities and that an appropriate number of inclusive items of play equipment are installed. Maintenance of the play area finally approved, shall be in accordance with a scheme to be agreed between the developer and the individual occupiers of the development or a factor appointed to act on their behalf. Reason: In the interests of residential amenity. 11. That prior to the completion of Building 2, details of the glazing for all windows to be installed on the west elevation of the building shall be approved in writing by Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. The glazing specification shall be such that internal noise levels within individual rooms with windows closed shall not exceed 40dB daytime and 30dB night time, measures as LAeq,T. Reason: To ensure inhabitants of Building 2 are protected from the effects or road traffic noise. 12. That prior to commencement of development, full details shall be submitted for the written approval of Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority of the following details concerning the redevelopment of Building 1: a) Details of the make and type of all new roof slates;
Page 22
b) Detailed drawings of all replacement or refurbished windows and external doors; c) Detailed drawings of all replacement or refurbished ridge ventilators; d) Detailed drawings of any alteration or replacement of the verandah balcony balustrades. The development shall thereafter proceed only in accordance with the approved details and the above works shall all be completed prior to the occupation of any of the flats within the former infirmary building. Reason: In the interest of preserving the special interest of the listed building. 13. That should the developer be unable to obtain consent to secure a connection to the existing sewer network in respect of surface water drainage from the development, an amended Drainage Impact Assessment shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall proceed in accordance with the approved drainage details. Reason: To ensure adequate drainage provision within the site. 14. That prior to the commencement of development, a pedestrian routing plan shall be submitted which ensures appropriate pedestrian provision for accessing all dwelling units hereby approved to the satisfaction of Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of safe accessibility to the individual dwelling units within the application site. 15. That prior to the commencement of development, details of all cycle parking shall be submitted for the written approval of Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. Thereafter the cycle parking shall be implemented prior to the occupation of the individual dwelling units for which they serve. For the avoidance of doubt, the provision shall also accord with the National Roads Development Guide. Reason: In the interests of the development supporting sustainable active travel and a reduction in dependence on motor vehicle use. 16. Prior to development commencing, a detailed scheme outlining improvements to pedestrian provision at the access points from Calside and Neilston Road shall be submitted for the written approval of Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. Thereafter, the scheme shall be implemented prior to the occupation of any of the dwelling units hereby approved. Reason: In the interests of enhancing pedestrian safety and accessibility. 17. That during and following construction works, any disturbance to the surface of the public footway on Calside which results from the construction of the development shall be addressed through the regular maintenance and resurfacing of the footway to an adoptable standard, to the satisfaction of Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of public safety.
Page 23
18. Prior to development commencing, a scheme for incorporating passing places or alternative improvements in respect of the existing road running along the northern boundary of the application site and connecting Calside and Neilston Road shall be submitted for the written approval of Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. Thereafter, the scheme shall be implemented prior to the occupation of any of the dwelling units hereby approved. Reason: In the interests of traffic management. 19. Prior to the commencement of development, a waste strategy outlining provisions for the storage and collection of domestic waste shall be submitted for the written approval of Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority. The strategy shall thereafter be implemented as approved. Reason: To ensure waste generated from the new dwelling units is adequately addressed. 20. That all works shall proceed in accordance with the recommendations for protecting bats outlined in Section 5 of the submitted report entitled 'Preliminary Roost Assessment, Nesting Bird Check and Nocturnal Surveys' by Direct Ecology 14.08.2023 and shall include further pre-work surveys and updated surveys where required in accordance with Section 5.1.1 of the Report. The results of all additional surveys shall be submitted to and approved by Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority prior to development proceeding. Reason: To ensure the continued protection of existing bat populations in accordance with European and national legislation. Advisory Note(s) 1. Glasgow Airport Safeguarding has observed that given the nature of the proposed development it is possible that a crane may be required during its construction. In the circumstances, your attention is drawn to the requirement within the British Standard Code of Practice for the safe use of cranes, for crane operators to consult the aerodrome before erecting a crane in close proximity to an aerodrome. This is explained further in Advice Note 4 - Cranes (available at https://www.aoa.org.uk/policy-campaigns/operations-safety). Schedule of Plans Determined Drawing Number Revision Drawing/Document Title 2305-WLA-B2- XX -ZZ-A-1000 Location Plan 0002-WLA-XX- XX -DR-A-0002 Existing Site Plan 0202-WLA-XX- XX -DR-A-0202 C Proposed Site Plan 2305-WLA-B1- XX -M2-A-0001 A Building 1 – Existing Lower Ground Floor Plan 2305-WLA-B1- XX -M2-A-0002 A Building 1 – Existing Ground Floor Plan 2305-WLA-B1- XX -M2-A-0003 A Building 1 – Existing First Floor Plan 2305-WLA-B1- XX -M2-A-0004 A Building 1 – Existing Attic Floor Plan 2305-WLA-B1- XX -M2-A-0005 Building 1 – Existing Roof Plan 2305-WLA-B1- XX -M2-A-0201 A Building 1 – Proposed Lower Ground Floor
Page 24
Plan 2305-WLA-B1- XX -M2-A-0202 A Building 1 – Proposed Ground Floor Plan 2305-WLA-B1- XX -M2-A-0203 A Building 1 – Proposed First Floor Plan 2305-WLA-B1- XX -M2-A-0204 A Building 1 – Proposed Attic Floor Plan 2305-WLA-B1- XX -M2-A-0205 Building 1 – Proposed Roof Plan 2305-WLA-XX- XX -M2-A-5001 A Building 1 – Existing Elevations 1 2305-WLA-XX- XX -M2-A-5002 A Building 1 – Existing Elevations 2 2305-WLA-XX- XX -M2-A-5003 Building 1 – Existing Elevations 2 2305-WLA-XX- XX -M2-A-5004 Building 1 – Existing Elevations & Sections 4 2305-WLA-XX- XX -M2-A-5201 C Building 1 – Proposed Elevations 1 2305-WLA-XX- XX -M2-A-5202 B Building 1 – Proposed Elevations 2 2305-WLA-XX- XX -M2-A-5203 Building 1 – Proposed Elevations 3 2305-WLA-XX- XX -M2-A-5204 Building 1 – Proposed Elevations & Sections 4 2305-WLA-XX- XX -M2-A-6002 A Building 1 – Existing Sections 2305-WLA-XX- XX -M2-A-6202 A Building 1 – Proposed Sections 2305-WLA-ZZ- XX -M2-A-5201 A Context Elevations 1 2305-WLA-ZZ -XX -M2-A-5202 A Context Elevations 2 2305-WLA-XX- XX -M2-A-8201 B Proposed Dormer P02 Landscaping Planning Layout 2305-WLA-B2- XX -M2-A-0202 Building 2 – Proposed Ground Floor Plan 2305-WLA-B2- XX -M2-A-0203 Building 2 – Proposed First / Second Floor Plans 2305-WLA-B2- XX -M2-A-0204 Building 2 – Proposed Third Floor Plan 2305-WLA-B2- XX -M2-A-0205 Building 2 – Proposed Roof Plan 2305-WLA-B2- XX -M2-A-5201 Building 2 – Proposed Elevations 2305-WLA-B3- XX -M2-A-0202 Building 3 – Proposed Ground Floor Plan 2305-WLA-B3- XX -M2-A-0203 Building 3 – Proposed First / Second Floor Plans 2305-WLA-B3- XX -M2-A-0204 Building 3 – Proposed Third Floor Plan 2305-WLA-B3- XX -M2-A-0205 Building 3 – Proposed Roof Plan 2305-WLA-B3- XX -M2-A-5201 Building 3 – Proposed Elevations Design and Access Statement by Wellwood Leslie (Parts 1, 2 and 3) BS5837:2012 Tree Survey by Caledon Tree Surveys (April 2023) Arboricultural Impact Assessment by DEP Landscape Initiatives (15/06/2023) Preliminary Roost Assessment, Nesting Bird Check and Nocturnal Surveys by Direct Ecology (Version 1; dated 14/08/2023) Conservation Condition Report by Wellwood Leslie Architects Structural Appraisal by Indev Consult (ref: 23-006-001; dated 16/02/2023) Feasibility Cost and Development Appraisal Comparison by nbm Construction Cost Consultants (May 2023) and supplementary email from agent dated 17/05/2024 Drainage Assessment Report by Indev
Page 25
Consult (June 2023) supplemented by additional documents received by email on 18/03/2024 comprising: • Updated Drainage Layout Plan (23-006-20) • 200 Year Rural Runoff calculations; • 1 in 30 year + 40% calculations; • 1 in 100 year + 40% calculations; • 1 in 200 year + 41% calculations Transport Statement by ECS Transport Planning Limited (November 2023) Glazing Area Calculation by Wellwood Leslie (received 15/09/2023) Former Royal Alexandra Infirmary – Phasing of Works (received by email: 14/05/2024) Pre-Development Enquiry Application – Capacity Review from Scottish Water (ref: DSCAS-0082360-FY3) (date: 17/05/2023) PAC Report – Proposed Residential Conversion and Housing Development by Wellwood Leslie For further information please contact Andrew Mackenzie, Development Standards Team, Email: andrew.mackenzie@renfrewshire.gov.uk.