Agenda Document Pack - Planning and Climate Change Policy Board - 28/05/2024
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.
Some pages contain no extractable text. They may be blank, graphics or scanned pages. OCR has not been applied.
Page 1
Notice of Meeting and Agenda Planning and Climate Change Policy Board Date Time Venue Tuesday, 28 May 2024 13:00 Council Chambers (Renfrewshire), Council Headquarters, Renfrewshire House, Cotton Street, Paisley, PA1 1AN MARK CONAGHAN Head of Corporate Governance Membership Councillor Jim Paterson (Convener): Councillor Bruce MacFarlane (Depute Convener): Councillor Jennifer Adam: Councillor Alison Ann-Dowling: Councillor Andy Doig: Councillor Chris Gilmour: Councillor Neill Graham: Councillor Anne Hannigan: Councillor Kenny MacLaren: Councillor Jamie McGuire: Councillor Marie McGurk: Councillor John McNaughtan: Councillor Iain Nicolson: Councillor John Shaw: Councillor Ben Smith: Hybrid Meeting Please note that this meeting is scheduled to be held in the Council Chambers. However, it is a hybrid meeting and arrangements have been made for members to join the meeting remotely should they wish. Further Information This is a meeting which is open to members of the public. A copy of the agenda and reports for this meeting will be available for inspection prior to the meeting at the Customer Service Centre, Renfrewshire House, Cotton Street, Paisley and online at http://renfrewshire.cmis.uk.com/renfrewshire/CouncilandBoards.aspx For further information, please email democratic-services@renfrewshire.gov.uk
Page 2
Members of the Press and Public Members of the press and public wishing to attend the meeting should report to the customer service centre where they will be met and directed to the meeting. Webcasting of Meeting This meeting will be filmed for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site – at the start of the meeting the Convener will confirm if all or part of the meeting is being filmed. To find the webcast please navigate to https://renfrewshire.public-i.tv/core/portal/home
Page 3
Apologies Apologies from members. Declarations of Interest and Transparency Statements Members are asked to declare an interest or make a transparency statement in any item(s) on the agenda and to provide a brief explanation of the nature of the interest or the transparency statement. Development Management 1 Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2024 Report by Chief Executive. 1 - 50 2 Discretionary Fees – Building Standards Report by Chief Executive. 51 - 56 3 Street naming and numbering – protocol and charging Report by Chief Executive. 57 - 76 4 Planning Enforcement Charter 2024 Report by Chief Executive. 77 - 104 Consultation 5 Investing in Planning: A consultation on resourcing Scotland’s planning system Report by Chief Executive. 105 - 116
Page 4
Planning Applications Planning Applications Members must deal with planning applications in an objective manner to ensure that they cannot be challenged with accusations of bias or predetermination. Votes on planning applications must be seen to be impartial and not influenced by party political issues. 6 Planning Applications List of planning applications to be determined by the Board. 117 - 118 6(a) 19/0765/PP - Erection of residential development in principle at Erskine Bridge Hotel Erskine Harbour Erskine PA8 6AN by Cosmopolitan Hotels Limited 119 - 134 6(b) 22/0310/AD - Display of two internally illuminated box signs (in retrospect) at 2 West Brae Paisley PA1 2EB by Mr Abubakr Malik 135 - 138 6(c) 23/0354/PP - 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 at Alexandra Nursing Home Calside Paisley PA2 6LX by Mr Abdullah Hamid 139 - 164 6(d) 23/0355/LB - Redevelopment, partial demolition and conversion of former infirmary into 45 flats at Alexandra Nursing Home Calside Paisley PA2 6LX by Mr Abdullah Hamid 165 - 172 6(e) 23/0738/PP - Construction of vehicular access and associated works at Torrance House Erskine Harbour Erskine PA8 6PA by CWP Erskine Ltd 173 - 180 6(f) 24/0052/EB - Section 36 application to construct and operate a 150MW battery energy storage facility together with associated infrastructure, substation, security fencing, cctv, security lighting and landscaping (Energy Consents Unit consultation request) to view plans go to 181 - 202
Page 5
https://www.energyconsents.scot/ at Neilston Battery Storage System Site Gleniffer Road Paisley by Carolanne Brown Energy Consents Unit Scottish Government 6 (g) 24/0118/PP - Section 42 application to vary conditions 4 and 5 of planning permission 99/02668/DC, to allow for increased gross retail floorspace and to widen the range of goods sold from Unit I and to consolidate previously granted consents to allow a wider range of goods to be sold from Units D2, E and J at Braehead Retail Park 136 King's Inch Drive Renfrew Glasgow G51 4BT by Braehead (Glasgow) Ltd 203 - 210 6 (h) 24/0153/PP - Erection of up to a 49.9MW Battery Energy Storage System Ward 2 (BESS) at Land Off Barnwell/ Wright Street Renfrew PA4 8AN by P3P Partners LLP 211 - 224
Page 6
No embedded text on this page.
Page 7
___________________________________________________________________ To: Planning and Climate Change Policy Board On: 28 May 2024 ___________________________________________________________________ Report by: Chief Executive ___________________________________________________________________ Heading: Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2024 ___________________________________________________________________ 1. Summary 1.1 The purpose of this report is to inform the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board of the Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2024. The refreshed Biodiversity Action Plan has been developed in collaboration with the Council’s partner organisations in the biodiversity community. 2. Recommendations 2.1 It is recommended that the Board: (i) Approves the Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2024 and publication on the Renfrewshire Council webpage. 3. Background 3.1 A Local Biodiversity Action Plan (LBAP) for Renfrewshire, East Renfrewshire and Inverclyde was originally prepared in 2004. The plan was developed in partnership with the three local authorities and a range of organisations and stakeholders with an interest in biodiversity. 3.2 In 2018 Renfrewshire Council published a separate Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2018 – 2022. This was prepared in partnership with some 25 biodiversity partner organisations active in Renfrewshire. The plan involved a significant review of the original document, setting out a positive and ambitious approach which identified a range of principles and actions which supported the conservation, promotion, and enhancement of biodiversity across Renfrewshire. Item 1 PACC280524 Page 1 of 224
Page 8
4. Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2024 4.1 The Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2024 provides an update to the 2018 document. The plan reflects current Scottish Government guidance and legislation which places a strong emphasis on the response to climate change and biodiversity, such as the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy to 2045 and National Planning Framework 4. 4.2 The plan continues to set out a positive and ambitious approach, identifying a range of principles and actions which reflect the current landscape of active biodiversity partner organisations and their activities. In this context the plan provides a refreshed framework for the conservation, promotion and enhancement of biodiversity across Renfrewshire. 5. Next Steps 5.1 The Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan provides a framework for partnership initiatives which promote biodiversity across Renfrewshire over the coming years. A variety of innovative mechanisms will be explored to secure the external resources required to implement many of the actions identified within the plan. 5.2 Some actions identified within the plan are already underway. This includes strong progress on the restoration of more than 200 hectares of peatland at Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park, a feasibility study considering potential enhancements to the Candren Burn, Paisley in partnership with SEPA and a range of conservation activities developed by the Friends of Jenny’s Well, Paisley such as a new amphibian pond at the Local Nature Reserve in partnership with Froglife, 5.3 Progress on delivery of the Biodiversity Action Plan will be monitored by the Council and its partners through a Steering Group, with updates reported to the Board as appropriate. ___________________________________________________________________ Implications of the Report 1. Financial – None. 2. HR & Organisational Development – None. 3. Community Planning – Creating a sustainable Renfrewshire for all to enjoy – the action plan seeks to support and enhance biodiversity and the network of green spaces across Renfrewshire. 4. Legal – None. 5. Property/Assets – None. 6. Information Technology – None. Page 2 of 224
Page 9
7. Equality & Human Rights - (a) The Recommendations contained within this report have been assessed in relation to their impact on equalities and human rights. No negative impacts on equality groups or potential for infringement of individuals’ human rights have been identified arising from the recommendations contained in the report. If required following implementation, the actual impact of the recommendations and the mitigating actions will be reviewed and monitored, and the results of the assessment will be published on the Council’s website. 8. Health & Safety – None. 9. Procurement – None. 10. Risk – None. 11. Privacy Impact – None. 12. Climate Change – this report summarises work which the Council plans to complete which will contribute positively towards achieving Renfrewshire’s Plan for Net Zero. ________________________________________________________________ Appendix 1 Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2024 List of Background Papers (a) “Renfrewshire Biodiversity Duty Report 2021–2023”; Planning and Climate Change Policy Board; March 2024 ___________________________________________________________________ Author: The contact officer within the service is Euan Shearer, Regeneration and Place Manager, 0141 487 1461, email: euan.shearer@renfrewshire.gov.uk . Page 3 of 224
Page 10
Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2024 Page 4 of 224
Page 11
Contents Introduction ..................................................3 Scotland’s Biodiversity Strategy 2045 : .........4 Biodiversity Conservation Approach in Renfrewshire .............................4 Policy Framework ..........................................5 Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan’s Vision for 2045: ........................ 7 Action plans ................................................10 People Power: Communication and Engagement .........................................11 People Power: Managed Sites ......................15 Geodiversity ................................................18 Green Networks ..........................................20 Priority Habitats in Renfrewshire ................24 Invasive Non Native species .........................29 Monitoring and Review ................................31 Appendix 1: Organisations actively participating in the Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan ........33 Appendix 2: Plant Species of Conservation Concern in Renfrewshire ........35 Appendix 3: Bird Species of Conservation Concern in Renfrewshire..............................41 Images kindly provided by members of the Renfrewshire Local Biodiversity Action Plan Steering Group. 2 Page 5 of 224
Page 12
3 Introduction This is the second Biodiversity Action Plan for Renfrewshire and replaces the Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2018-2022. The plan has been produced in partnership with a range of local biodiversity organisations and reflects a shared vision for enhanced biodiversity across Renfrewshire. The plan sets out a positive and ambitious approach to biodiversity conservation and promotion. A continued commitment to partnership working and increased community involvement will be key if successful outcomes for biodiversity are to be achieved and delivered. Page 6 of 224
Page 13
4 Scotland’s Biodiversity Strategy 2045: Tackling the Climate Challenge A key element of this plan is integration between the Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan and Scotland’s Biodiversity Strategy to 2045: Tackling the Climate Challenge. This is to ensure that resources deployed locally are aligned to national priorities and thereby maximise opportunities for external funding support from national agencies. All of Renfrewshire’s priority habitats are included on the current Scottish Biodiversity List and categorised in the top priority as “conservation action needed”. Scotland’s Biodiversity Strategy to 2045 continues to place emphasis on both an ecosystem approach and landscape scale operations to promote biodiversity with an aim of reversing biodiversity decline. The Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan embraces these principles and provides a framework to support organisations involved in promoting biodiversity in Renfrewshire to deliver landscape scale projects where opportunities arise. Renfrewshire’s biodiversity baseline sits at a relatively modest level in comparison to many other parts of Scotland with biodiversity-rich habitats and ecosystems tending to be held within small, isolated and dispersed sites, especially in the lowlands, where intensive human activities have had a significant impact. Key actions in the Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan aim to safeguard and enhance these sites, improving links between them via nature networks, harnessing resources before embarking on more ambitious initiatives. Biodiversity Conservation Approach in Renfrewshire The Renfrewshire Biodiversity Partners’ approach in this Action Plan is to conserve current biodiversity and capacity and where possible support enhancement. Over the period of the 2018-2022 Action Plan there were encouraging signs that a growing awareness of the importance of biodiversity in Renfrewshire is having a positive impact on the ground. Biodiversity is now embedded in national policy frameworks and the policy documents of Biodiversity Partners, a key consideration in the delivery of actions and projects. Several community-led initiatives have also undertaken projects to enhance local environments in and around Renfrewshire’s settlements. The Biodiversity Action Plan provides a framework for opportunities to “join up” these pockets of activity into nature networks and to coordinate how they benefit biodiversity for the wider communities of Renfrewshire. Page 7 of 224
Page 14
5 Policy Framework A policy framework to support biodiversity is embedded at national, regional and local levels through Scotland’s National Planning Framework, the Central Scotland Green Network and Local Development Plan. The Scottish Government’s National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) adopts policies which safeguard and enhance biodiversity, placing a strong emphasis on nature recovery and restoration as part of a wider response to climate change. NPF4 also retains the Central Scotland Green Network (CSGN) as a National Development. The CSGN seeks to achieve a fundamental transformation across 19 local authority areas in terms of environmental improvements, economic benefits and enriched quality of life. The vision of the CSGN is to transform central Scotland into a place where the environment adds value to the economy, and where people’s lives are enriched by the environment’s quality. It seeks to restore nature at scale and act as an exemplar of green infrastructure in placemaking, provide multiple benefits for health, biodiversity and supporting adaptation to climate change. As the Central Scotland Green Network is a National Development, it brings with it the possibility of additional resources for biodiversity projects. Its importance is reflected in this document in which habitat actions and broader landscape scale projects have been brought together under a Green Networks chapter. The Green Networks chapter also reflects the importance of the Glasgow & Clyde Valley Green Network Partnership which champions greenspace initiatives across eight local authority areas in the Glasgow City Region. As well as adopting policies which safeguard and enhance biodiversity, the Renfrewshire Local Development Plan places a strong emphasis on developing and reinforcing local green networks as an integral part of its Place Strategy by identifying and mapping strategic green network opportunities. Renfrewshire’s Plan for Net Zero also has a strong focus on optimising biodiversity to enhance Renfrewshire’s natural environment, particularly through the use of nature based solutions to help address the impacts of climate change, while connecting people and nature. There is a growing appreciation of the role geodiversity plays in underpinning biodiversity conservation, supporting landscape-scale conservation and providing ecosystem services. Geodiversity itself is subject to degradation or loss and is therefore also the subject of conservation initiatives. This has been emphasised in Scotland’s Geodiversity Charter, which was launched by the Minister for Environment and Climate Change in June 2012 and relaunched in November 2017. The Charter has over 50 signatories across organisations including local authorities, government agencies, industry and higher education. Page 8 of 224
Page 15
6 Renfrewshire’s Biodiversity Action Plan—Lessons Learned One of the lessons learned from the Biodiversity Action Plan process in Renfrewshire is that the initiatives which made the greatest positive progress were those with local champions to take the required work forward and inspire others to become involved in conservation actions. It is also recognised that health restrictions associated with the Covid-19 Pandemic had a significant impact upon biodiversity activities, particularly where this involved face to face educational and awareness raising work. In view of this, the Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2024 incorporates a series of species and actions within the “People Power” chapters, to support and grow local biodiversity expertise and enthusiasm. Page 9 of 224
Page 16
7 Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan’s Vision for 2045: Renfrewshire Renewed Naturally By 2045 Renfrewshire will have a species-rich system of green and blue networks from the uplands of the Renfrewshire Heights to the tidal waters of the Clyde estuary. It will contain environments abundant in wildlife which make the area more resilient to the effects of climate change and benefit physical and mental health by providing opportunities to experience nature locally. Page 10 of 224
Page 17
8 Delivering the 2045 Vision Seven key principles will steer delivery of the vision for 2045. These are summarised under the headings below, recognising that some are interlinked. 1 Climate Change Actions developed and delivered by the biodiversity partners will help Renfrewshire’s characteristic habitats and species to become more resilient to the impacts of climate change. Actions in relation to the suite of designated sites (local and national) will aim to support improved connections and management, protecting species against climate change where possible, and allowing them to adapt through moving to new areas. Reflecting national policy guidance, the development of nature networks across Renfrewshire will be a key focus. Geodiversity often responds dynamically to climate change, and these responses may affect the survival, extent or ground conditions of local ecosystems. Careful consideration of geodiversity may help in the identification of suitable corridors through which species might adapt and move. The creation of habitats providing important ecosystem services, such as carbon storage or flood mitigation, will be supported (such as through Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems) or by restoration in some cases, (such as Renfrewshire’s peatland habitats). The maintenance of other intact habitats and their enhancement will also be supported. Native woodland and wetlands are particularly important for these purposes and their roles should be recognised through appropriate conservation management. 2 Landscape Scale Conservation (Ecosystem Approach) There are a number of opportunities in Renfrewshire for organisations from all sectors to work together to improve the economy, environment and social opportunities across areas by focusing on biodiversity and geodiversity targets as the impetus for cohesive action. This could include the Renfrewshire Heights or within some of the river valleys in which a catchment wide approach could reap dividends for all sectors. These clusters sometimes follow watercourses or line the steeper slopes of hill ridges. Adopting the principle of better linkages between these sites, in line with Nature Network aims, should reduce habitat fragmentation and allow key species to distribute to other areas. Page 11 of 224
Page 18
9 3 Designated Sites An examination of the spatial distribution of designated sites in Renfrewshire shows that there are already clusters or linear series of sites which have been recognised as being of at least local significance for biodiversity. The Biodiversity partners aim to safeguard and expand these designated sites, supporting the formation of nodes within more connected nature networks, thereby helping to enhance local habitats and species. Some designated sites also have geodiversity value, so improved recording of both elements of the local ecosystem will be encouraged, along with evaluation of the significance of inter-relationships between the rock, soil substrate and biodiversity. 4 Invasive Non Native Species It is important that biodiversity partners continue to contribute to research regarding Invasive Non-Native Species and participate in coordinated control action where appropriate, including liaison with organisations in neighbouring areas and in regional and national forums. In addition, where opportunities arise, individual Invasive Non-Native Species will be tackled as part of the implementation of comprehensive habitat management plans for individual sites. Vigilance and biosecurity will be required when any management activities are planned or implemented on any sites with biodiversity importance, especially watercourses. 5 People and Partnership Experiencing nature brings tangible benefits for health and mental well-being. Therefore, a diverse biodiversity should play a fundamental role in the wellbeing of communities and the health of the economy throughout Renfrewshire. People and communities will be encouraged to become more involved in maintaining local biodiversity, contributing directly through voluntary conservation activities like ground works, recording species groups and monitoring sites. 6 Education Supporting the People and Partnership principle, opportunities will be pursued to continue to invest in local programmes to raise public awareness of Renfrewshire’s biodiversity and its relevance to our communities. Information about biodiversity will be readily available on a variety of platforms so that it is accessible to children, families, students, researchers, land managers, consultants and developers. 7 Knowledge Biodiversity partners will consider and progress opportunities to improve the collection, storage, processing and dissemination of scientific information about Renfrewshire’s biodiversity. This knowledge flow is needed to ensure appropriate development, land management and conservation action - including the identification of situations in which more research is required before decisions can be made. The Better Biodiversity Data Project for Scotland provides an important opportunity to support knowledge generation and sharing which aligns with the aims of the Biodiversity Action Plan. Opportunities will be taken to liaise with the National Biodiversity Network Trust to ensure that Renfrewshire’s biodiversity is fully recognised and that mechanisms for addressing data gaps in innovative ways are explored. Page 12 of 224
Page 19
10 Action plans The People Power Priority Continuing to increase the involvement of people is essential for the future conservation of Renfrewshire’s biodiversity. Some of the more notable successes arising from previous Local Biodiversity Action Plans were the result of efforts by community groups and local specialists working to conserve and promote biodiversity interests. Therefore many of the actions within Renfrewshire’s Biodiversity Action Plan seek to encourage and support the engagement of more specialists and enthusiastic community groups to drive the plan forward and enable actions to be delivered. This Biodiversity Action Plan places people at the forefront of actions, designed to assist delivery of the Scottish Government vision for tackling the biodiversity emergency. The following actions are designed to stimulate and sustain increased involvement by people in conserving Renfrewshire’s biodiversity resources. The chapter is divided into two parts, the first covering general or area-wide initiatives and the second highlighting those biodiversity rich sites which have onsite staff or other people who can provide very practical and hands-on experiences. Page 13 of 224
Page 20
11 People Power: Communication and Engagement Actions identified in the following table promote biodiversity and provide a framework for engaging people more effectively in biodiversity work. As part of this, it is recognised that people’s interest in biodiversity conservation issues is more generally linked to individual species than the broader concept of habitats. Therefore a range of actions are designed to conserve individual species, where it is clear that people power will generate positive outcomes across broader habitat areas. Page 14 of 224
Page 21
12 People Power: Communication and Engagement Action plan Action No. Benefits and/ or beneficiaries Action/Activity Lead Partner Priority PP01 Communication and engagement Evaluate role of Local Biodiversity Action Plan Steering Group in taking forward biodiversity initiatives in Renfrewshire. LBAPSG High PP02 Communication and engagement Develop Paisley Museum public programming, as part of the Paisley Museum Reimagined project, to raise awareness of biodiversity and conservation initiatives. OneRen / Paisley Museum High PP03 Communication and engagement Support local biodiversity groups and enthusiasts to undertake wildlife surveys in publicly accessible sites in Renfrewshire’s towns and villages to highlight the potential importance of urban areas for biodiversity and to engage local communities. LBAPSG Medium PP04 Communication and engagement Support volunteers monitoring Renfrewshire’s plants (particularly those species shown in Appendix 2) and to develop conservation initiatives to prevent decline of plant species. Botanical Society of Britain & Ireland High PP05 Communication and engagement Encourage volunteers to monitor Renfrewshire’s birds (as shown in Appendix 3), and to develop conservation initiatives which aim to reverse decline of bird species. Scottish Ornithologists Club (SOC) Clyde Branch High PP06 Communication and engagement Establishment of a Clyde Branch Discussion Group to coordinate local inputs, bring together current recorders, experienced bird watchers and beginners for peer-to-peer education. Set up and manage a mentoring system to help inexperienced bird watchers gain species identification skills. SOC Clyde Branch High PP07 Communication and engagement Continuation of volunteers monitoring Renfrewshire’s butterflies and drafting conservation proposals where required. Priority species will include Green Hairstreak, Purple Hairstreak, Common Blue, Small Copper, Small Pearl-bordered Fritillary, Large Heath and Small Heath. Butterfly Conservation Scotland High Page 15 of 224
Page 22
13 People Power: Communication and Engagement Action plan (continued) Action No. Benefits and/ or beneficiaries Action/Activity Lead Partner Priority PP08 Communication and engagement Continue to deliver the “Clyde in the Classroom” and “Flying Fish” projects, taking school children out in the field to visit and study their local river or burn and introducing school pupils to the life cycle of the native Brown Trout and its conservation needs. Clyde River Foundation High PP09 Communication and engagement Working alongside local partners like the Yearnstane Project and the Friends of Clyde Muirshiel, use native tree planting and woodland conservation projects to increase the numbers of people actively engaged in practical biodiversity projects in Renfrewshire. Eadha Enterprises High PP10 Communication and engagement Support volunteers monitoring Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park’s biodiversity resources and to draft, develop and implement proposals for conservation initiatives which aim to reverse declines at a landscape scale. Friends of Clyde Muirshiel High PP11 Communication and engagement Use various surveys and channels to identify and map places where Swifts nest in Renfrewshire. Investigate opportunities for Swift conservation projects in Renfrewshire, in line with SNH’s 2017 Swift Best Practice Advice Note and the Concern for Swifts (Scotland) website. Concern for Swifts High PP12 Communication and engagement Monitor birds through ringing and deliver events to the public, a schools’ programme and involve students with research through universities. Clyde Ringing Group High PP13 Communication and engagement Continue to offer biodiversity audits and biodiversity enhancements to Renfrewshire schools. Starling Learning Medium Page 16 of 224
Page 23
14 People Power: Communication and Engagement Action plan (continued) Action No. Benefits and/ or beneficiaries Action/Activity Lead Partner Priority PP14 Communication and engagement Encourage and support volunteers monitoring plants, butterflies, birds, amphibians and other wildlife in collaboration with other organisations. Promote conservation activities and events through meetings, website and social media and encourage participation. Paisley Natural History Society High PP15 Communication and engagement Promote conservation gardening activities and events through meetings, shows and other public events to encourage participation by individual gardeners. Paisley Florist Society Gardening Club, High PP16 Communication and engagement Organise face-to-face and online training and networking opportunities based around national biodiversity conservation priorities, providing advice to local organisations on national funding schemes such the Nature Restoration Fund. NatureScot High PP17 Communication and engagement Provide low cost, nesting, roosting and habitat boxes, plus planters and other garden structures for community greenspace projects. Renfrewshire Wildlife High PP18 Communication and engagement Guide local support for the Better Biodiversity Data Project to develop the first steps in a strategic approach to the collection, collation and sharing of biological data across Scotland. National Biodiversity Network (NBN) Trust Medium PP19 Communication and engagement Implementation of the Swift and Barn Owl artificial nest box projects in Lochwinnoch. Lochwinnoch Force for Nature High Page 17 of 224
Page 24
15 People Power: Managed Sites There are a number of sites in Renfrewshire which are managed predominantly or partially for biodiversity conservation. These provide opportunities to communicate with local people and encourage them to become involved directly in conserving Renfrewshire’s biodiversity. These opportunities are highlighted in the following table. Page 18 of 224
Page 25
16 People Power: Managed Sites Action Plan Action No. Benefits and/ or beneficiaries Action/Activity Lead Partner Potential PP20 Managed site users Continue to support local community organisations playing an active role in biodiversity conservation, for example in their funding bids for projects which support the Biodiversity Action Plan. Renfrewshire Council High PP21 Managed site users Continue to encourage the formation and activities of Friends groups covering Renfrewshire’s parks, local nature reserves and other publicly managed greenspaces and support their efforts to enhance biodiversity. Renfrewshire Council Medium PP22 Managed site users Provide facilities and services at Gleniffer Braes Country Park and Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park to encourage local community engagement in biodiversity conservation, including continuing to deploy staff to supervise groups of volunteers carrying out biodiversity conservation work in priority habitats. Renfrewshire Council High PP23 Managed Biodiversity Site Users Provide facilities and services at Lochwinnoch Nature Reserve to encourage local community engagement in biodiversity conservation, including continuing to deploy staff to supervise groups of volunteers carrying out biodiversity conservation work in priority habitats. Royal Society for the Protection of Birds High PP24 Managed Biodiversity Site Users Ensure people have access to Glen Moss Wildlife Reserve to engage with biodiversity, including, where resources allow, supporting volunteers to carry out monitoring, biodiversity conservation and access work on all habitats. Scottish Wildlife Trust High PP25 Managed Biodiversity Site Users Continue to recruit, train and retain volunteer Wildlife Champions for the National Cycle Network through the Greener Greenways project. Sustrans High Page 19 of 224
Page 26
17 People Power: Managed Sites Action Plan (continued) Action No. Benefits and/ or beneficiaries Action/Activity Lead Partner Potential PP26 Managed Biodiversity Site Users Provide facilities and services at Boden Boo, Erskine, Johnstone Woods, Windyhill, Howwood Community Woodland and Knockmountain, to encourage local community engagement in biodiversity conservation, including continuing to deploy staff to supervise groups of volunteers carrying out biodiversity conservation work in priority habitats. Forestry & Land Scotland High PP27 Managed Biodiversity Site Users Provide facilities and services at Finlaystone Country Estate to encourage local community engagement in biodiversity conservation, including continuing to deploy staff to supervise groups of volunteers carrying out biodiversity conservation work in priority habitats. Finlaystone Country Estate Medium PP28 Managed Biodiversity Site Users Continue to ensure Lesser Whitethroat research, habitat management and monitoring work can continue at Brownside Braes within Gleniffer Braes Country Park. Paisley Natural History Society High PP29 Managed Biodiversity Site Users Communicate widely the biodiversity benefits, community capacity and health promotion gains associated with community growing. Renfrewshire Council Medium PP30 Managed Biodiversity Site Users Support opportunities to increase the number of allotment and community growing sites/ plots in Renfrewshire and encourage the lease of appropriate sites to engaged communities, in line with the Community Empowerment Act and as a key step in the process of reconnecting people with nature. Renfrewshire Council Medium PP31 Managed Biodiversity Site Users Focus on Jenny’s Well Local Nature Reserve for educational activities providing volunteering opportunities and generally improving access to raise awareness of biodiversity conservation. Friends of Jenny’s Well High Page 20 of 224
Page 27
18 Geodiversity Biodiversity is fundamentally linked to underlying geological features. Geodiversity is a term abbreviated from geological diversity and encompasses rocks, minerals, fossils, soils, sediments, landforms and associated processes, all of which are the foundation for habitats, niches, and ultimately biodiversity. Previous Local Biodiversity Action Plans have included a general description of the area’s geodiversity resources and summarised how the geological framework had led to the formation of today’s landscapes and their habitats. It is recognised that there are links and opportunities for complementary actions which could benefit both geological and biological processes. One key example of where biodiversity is closely linked with geodiversity is in soil, which comprises a mixture of components derived from both geological and biological processes. The varying nature of this and other combinations between geology and biology has presented us with a diversity of landscapes, habitats, niches and species. Page 21 of 224
Page 28
19 It is recognised that geodiversity conservation must be a key part of biodiversity conservation. There is therefore the need to have a better understanding of the geodiversity resources in Renfrewshire. Renfrewshire’s rolling hills and valleys have been extensively extracted for mineral resources in the past. Historic maps show quarries and other mineral excavations dotted across the landscape, but the current significance of surviving relicts has not been evaluated. They have the potential to become valuable resources for public education and interpretation. Geodiversity Action Plan Action No. Benefits and beneficiaries Action/Activity Lead Partner Priority GD1 Geodiversity Compile a schedule of locally important geodiversity sites in Renfrewshire, with summary descriptions produced for each location. Strathclyde Geoconservation High GD2 Geodiversity Review requirements for promoting geodiversity in Renfrewshire through publications (online and other media). Strathclyde Geoconservation High GD3 Geodiversity Devise programmes to recruit local volunteers to support geodiversity conservation. Strathclyde Geoconservation High Similarly, Renfrewshire’s glacial history means that some watercourses flow through spectacular gorges as a result of natural excavation processes, where sequences of rock strata have been exposed. One of these sequences, the River Gryfe between Bridge of Weir and Crosslee, is of national importance. In other places water has been held back by impermeable rocks and superficial deposits. The water has filled hollows formed during the last Ice Age, allowing the development of shallow lochs and deep layers of peat bearing distinctive blanket bog and raised bog habitats. These accumulations of dead organic matter represent both important geodiversity and biodiversity conservation resources. A small number of actions in relation to geodiversity are set out below. These reflect resources available from partner organisations and highlight key actions which will support geodiversity conservation in Renfrewshire as an important element of this plan. Page 22 of 224
Page 29
20 Green Networks Integration of environmental issues with social considerations, economic regeneration and health in a coordinated manner is a key consideration in this Action Plan. Generally, the Plan identifies actions supporting the development of Green Network principles, in which biodiversity and geodiversity are considered alongside access, active travel, healthy living, community growing, flood control, air quality, climate change adaptation and other quality of life issues. This holistic approach maximises the opportunities for action, diversifies delivery mechanisms and assists access to resources. In particular, this integrated, multiple benefits approach reflects the ‘Nature Network’ principles which underpin Scotland’s Biodiversity Strategy to 2045. The strategy identifies five key strategic actions: 1. Accelerate restoration and regeneration; 2. Expand and connect protected areas and improve their condition; 3. Support nature-friendly farming, fishing and forestry; 4. Recover and protect vulnerable and important species; 5. Generate the investment needed to support nature recovery. The actions and initiatives being undertaken in Renfrewshire to align with the approach of the 2045 strategy are summarised in the following table. Page 23 of 224
Page 30
21 Green Networks Action Plan Action No. Benefits and beneficiaries Action/activity Lead Partner Priority NN01 Designated sites in Renfrewshire Review the Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation network across Renfrewshire, resurveying and reassessing sites as required and evaluating candidate sites suggested for addition to the schedule. Renfrewshire Council High NN02 Designated sites in Renfrewshire In relation to designated sites, ensure opportunities to maximise gains for biodiversity are identified, supported, and implemented as part of statutory functions, including the new requirements for Councils to define nature networks. At the same time, seek opportunities to integrate geodiversity, create new habitats, enhance habitats, and form nature networks linking areas rich in biodiversity. Renfrewshire Council High NN03 Designated sites in Renfrewshire Explore opportunities for managed realignment on the Inner Clyde SPA. Royal Society for the Protection of Birds Medium NN04 Designated sites in Renfrewshire Explore the effects of recreational disturbance on the Inner Clyde SPA and methods to reduce this. Royal Society for the Protection of Birds Medium NN05 Designated sites in Renfrewshire Enhance habitats to encourage the return of a breeding population of Hen Harriers in the Renfrewshire Heights SPA, including community engagement work and building stakeholder support. Renfrewshire Council High NN06 Nature Network Enhancement Develop a Green Network Strategy and Nature Network for Renfrewshire, to align with principles of NPF4 and Scottish Government’s “Biodiversity Strategy to 2045”. Renfrewshire Council High NN07 Nature Network Enhancement Develop and deliver the Greener Greenways Project in Renfrewshire, creating and enriching corridors for wildlife along the National Cycle Network, particularly creating priority habitats, e.g., ponds, lowland fens, wet woodland. Sustrans Medium Page 24 of 224
Page 31
22 Green Networks Action Plan (continued) Action No. Benefits and beneficiaries Action/activity Lead Partner Priority NN08 Nature Network Enhancement Assist the creation of community gardens, allotments and other food growing opportunities in support of community aspirations in various locations across Renfrewshire, whilst reinforcing nature networks in urban areas. Renfrewshire Growing Grounds Forum Medium NN09 Nature Network Enhancement Develop a Forestry & Woodland Strategy – reflecting the previous strategy for Glasgow & Clyde Valley area – in accordance with NPF4. Renfrewshire Council High NN10 Nature Network Enhancement Identify, promote, and carry out greening of sites in line with Renfrewshire Council’s Vacant & Derelict Land Strategy, in partnership with community organisations. Renfrewshire Council Medium NN11 Nature Network Enhancement Implement current and future phases of the “Biodiversity Areas” Project https://storymaps.arcgis.com/ stories/86b7ab224cce402f8f8e3fa2434c0ac4 Renfrewshire Council High NN12 Nature Network Enhancement Participate in the Clyde Climate Forest initiative, concentrating initially on the urban priority areas identified by CCF canopy analysis research – Foxbar and Ferguslie Park. Renfrewshire Council High NN13 Nature Network Enhancement Support the efforts of community organisations to create or enhance biodiversity rich habitats within existing publicly accessible greenspaces. Renfrewshire Council High Page 25 of 224
Page 32
23 Green Networks Action Plan (continued) Action No. Benefits and beneficiaries Action/activity Lead Partner Priority NN14 Climate Change Resilience Use climate change spatial analyses produced by Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network Partnership and others to build a case for adaptation interventions which involve using new or enhanced natural habitat elements at specific localities and generally across Renfrewshire. Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network Partnership Low NN15 Climate Change Resilience Review Biodiversity Action Plan, site management plans and other conservation strategies, plans and projects to ensure that: a) risks from adverse climate change have been identified, b) future changes in these pressures are assessed, c) that these are being explicitly addressed wherever possible incorporating adaptation measures, d) carbon capture within habitats is considered. Renfrewshire Council Low Page 26 of 224
Page 33
24 Priority Habitats in Renfrewshire In aiming to tailor the approach in Scotland’s Biodiversity Strategy 2045 to Renfrewshire, actions identified below have been aligned through focusing on habitats included on the Scottish Biodiversity List and prioritised as “Conservation Action Required”. In future, the increased focus on Nature Networks may require closer alignment between priority habitats and more generalised nature network actions, as habitat fragmentation is a key concern for biodiversity conservation. Priority Habitats Action Plan Action No. Site, topic or habitat type Action/activity Lead Partner Priority PH01 Habitats – Lowland Fens Complete an inventory of lowland fen sites in Renfrewshire, including an assessment of their current conservation condition. Renfrewshire Council High PH02 Habitats–Lowland Fens Ensure all good quality Lowland Fen sites are included within SINCs. Renfrewshire Council High PH03 Habitats–Lowland Fens Employ results of the Clyde Wetlands Project to extend and enhance network of Lowland Fen habitats in Renfrewshire. GCVGNP High PH04 Habitats–Lowland Fens Investigate opportunities for habitat enhancements at Paisley Moss LNR to control scrub invasion, drying out of the fen, etc. Glasgow Airport High PH05 Habitats–Lowland Fens Implementation of the Dargavel Burn SSSI Management Plan, in line with guidance from NatureScot. Forestry & Land Scotland High PH06 Habitats–Lowland Fens Implementation of the Glen Moss Management Plan, including measures to protect the lowland fen, such as controlling scrub and other actions as agreed through discussion with NatureScot. Scottish Wildlife Trust High PH07 Habitats–Lowland Raised Bogs Complete an inventory of lowland raised bog sites in Renfrewshire which are suitable for restoration projects through the Peatland Action Programme. GCVGNP / NatureScot High Page 27 of 224
Page 34
25 Priority Habitats Action Plan (continued) Action No. Site, topic or habitat type Action/activity Lead Partner Priority PH08 Habitats–Lowland Raised Bogs Continue surveying for the presence of Large Heath butterflies on Lowland Raised Bog sites. Butterfly Conservation Scotland High PH09 Habitats–Blanket Bogs Explore opportunities to restore Sergeantlaw Moss (if landowners are supportive) through drain blocking and scrub control projects. Renfrewshire Council High PH10 Habitats–Blanket Bogs Develop and present case for Barochan Moss to be restored as part of reclamation of ROF Bishopton and “community woodland park” attached to the new community of Dargavel. BAE Systems High PH11 Habitats–Blanket Bogs Implement the approved Muirshiel Country Park Woodland Management Plan 2016-2025, specifically the sections relating to the removal of invasive Sitka Spruce regeneration from deep peat areas. Renfrewshire Council High PH12 Habitats–Blanket Bogs Implement the NatureScot Peatland Action recommended peat habitat restoration project at West Tandlemuir Farm. Renfrewshire Council High PH13 Habitats–Blanket Bogs Continue developing (biodiversity focused) moorland restoration projects with appropriate partners for privately owned sections of the Renfrewshire Heights Special Protection Area. GCVGNP / NatureScot High PH14 Habitats–Lowland Heathland Continue restoration of juniper at the Cample Burn, Renfrewshire Heights. Renfrewshire Council High PH15 Habitats–Lowland Heathland Complete an inventory of high-quality lowland heathland sites in Renfrewshire, ensuring best examples of lowland heathland are included within SINCs. Renfrewshire Council High Page 28 of 224
Page 35
26 Action No. Site, topic or habitat type Action/activity Lead Partner Priority PH16 Habitats – Lowland Meadows Ensure best examples of lowland meadow sites in Renfrewshire are included within SINCs. Renfrewshire Council High PH17 Habitats – Lowland Meadows Devise strategy for affording protection and positive management for best examples of lowland meadow sites. Renfrewshire Council High PH18 Habitats–Lowland Meadows Employ results of the Clyde Grasslands Project to extend and enhance network of high-quality Lowland Meadow habitats in Renfrewshire. GCVGNP High PH19 Habitats–Lowland Meadows Update inventory of Greater Butterfly Orchid locations in Renfrewshire, including appeal for information about the presence of the species, as a good indicator of quality grassland habitats and a Scottish Biodiversity List species categorised as “conservation action required”. Renfrewshire Wildlife High PH20 Habitats–Lowland Meadows Ensure that sites which are discovered to hold significant Greater Butterfly Orchids colonies during field surveys are covered by SINCs or afforded protection by other means. Renfrewshire Council High PH21 Habitats–Lowland Dry Acid Grassland Design, implementation and promotion of the grassland habitat sections of the Biodiversity Areas Project, as per specifications agreed with NatureScot and the Scottish Government Nature Restoration Fund award. Renfrewshire Council High PH22 Habitats–Lowland Dry Acid Grassland Investigate the extent and quality of lowland dry acid grassland sites in Renfrewshire. Renfrewshire Council High Priority Habitats Action Plan (continued) Page 29 of 224
Page 36
27 Priority Habitats Action Plan (continued) Action No. Site, topic or habitat type Action/activity Lead Partner Priority PH23 Habitats–Lowland Dry Acid Grassland Ensure best examples of lowland dry acid grassland are included within SINCs. Renfrewshire Council High PH24 Habitats–Rivers Support SEPA’s efforts to improve Candren Burn, Paisley to “Good” standard ecologically, via proposed Water Environment Fund project. Renfrewshire Council High PH25 Habitats–Rivers Implementation of the Nature Restoration Fund supported “Restoring Renfrewshire’s Rivers” project to control INNS plants. Renfrewshire Council High PH26 Habitats–Ponds Continue fish population and other aquatic surveys of river catchments in response to requests from anyone either undertaking or considering working in or alongside any of the Clyde catchment rivers. Clyde River Foundation High PH27 Habitats–Ponds Investigate compilation of a list of ponds of potential conservation interest in Renfrewshire, with a view towards future monitoring as resources permit. Clyde Amphibians & Reptiles Group Medium PH28 Habitats–Ponds Trial the use of planted artificial floating islands at RSPB Scotland’s Lochwin-noch Reserve.. Royal Society for the Protec-tion of Birds High PH29 Habitats–Ponds Maintain and extend network of small ponds along the National Cycle Network. Sustrans High PH30 Habitats–Ponds Creation of a new pond at Jenny’s Well Local Nature Reserve to help the survival of breeding amphibians – in partnership with FrogLife. Friends of Jenny’s Well High Page 30 of 224
Page 37
28 Priority Habitats Action Plan (continued) Action No. Site, topic or habitat type Action/activity Lead Partner Priority PH31 Habitats – Lowland Mixed Deciduous Woodland Produce FCS approved WIAT management plans for Renfrewshire Council owned Lowland Mixed Deciduous Woodland sites. Renfrewshire Council High PH32 Habitats–Lowland Mixed Deciduous Woodland Implement the Renfrewshire Woods Land Management Plan 2016-2026 at Boden Boo, Johnstone Woods, Windyhill, Howwood Community Woodland and Knockmountain. Forestry & Land Scotland Medium PH33 Habitats–Lowland Mixed Deciduous Woodland Manage semi-natural self-sown and planted woodlands at Jenny’s Well Local Nature Reserve in Paisley. Friends of Jenny’s Well High PH34 Habitats–Upland Birchwoods Implement the approved Muirshiel Country Park Woodland Management Plan 2016-2025, particularly the sections for Orblis Hill and Monument Hill (will also benefit examples of Upland Oakwood and Lowland Mixed Deciduous Woodland habitats). Renfrewshire Council High PH35 Habitats – Upland Birchwood Develop, deliver and promote tree planting activities in privately owned Upland Birchwood sites in Renfrewshire. Yearnstane Project High PH36 Habitats–Upland Oakwood Produce FCS approved management plan for Shaw Wood, Paisley, a Renfrewshire Council-owned Upland Oakwood site. Renfrewshire Council High PH37 Habitats–Wet Woodlands Investigate linear section of Upland Oakwood lining the River Calder upstream of Lochwinnoch and devise management prescriptions for proposing to landowners. Renfrewshire Council High PH38 PH37 Develop, deliver, and promote tree planting activities in privately owned Upland Oakwood sites across Renfrewshire. Yearnstane Project High PH39 PH37 Produce FCS approved WIAT management plan for a Council-owned Wet Woodland site in Renfrewshire. Renfrewshire Council High PH40 PH37 Develop, deliver and promote tree planting activities in privately owned Wet Woodland sites across Renfrewshire. Yearnstane Project High Page 31 of 224
Page 38
29 Invasive Non-Native species The Scottish Biodiversity Strategy to 2045 recognises non-native species and wildlife diseases as one of five direct drivers of global biodiversity loss. In Renfrewshire the issues and challenges are most readily seen along its watercourses, where invasive non-native plant species like Giant Hogweed, Japanese Knotweed and Himalayan Balsam can dominate some stretches of riverbank. The presence of North American Mink in the same water systems has been one of the major contributory factors towards the loss of the Water Vole from Renfrewshire. The White Cart Water also has widespread populations of Bullhead and Gudgeon, both non-native fish which the Clyde River Foundation fears may be damaging trout and salmon breeding success through egg predation. The requirement for ongoing active detection of Invasive Non-Native Species is illustrated by the tree disease, Ash Dieback Disease, which was first found in the UK only in 2012 but which saw confirmed infections in eastern and central Renfrewshire during 2016. It is now prevalent throughout the area and is causing significant issues for woodland managers. Other invasive non-native species have been with us for much longer and cause concern for biodiversity conservation, for example Rhododendron ponticum and a variety of other imported trees and shrubs. These non-native species have adapted to Renfrewshire’s wet climate and soils and now threaten a number of sites containing Lowland Raised Bog, Blanket Bog, Lowland Mixed Deciduous Woodlands, Upland Birchwood and Upland Oakwood habitats in particular. Page 32 of 224
Page 39
30 Invasive Non-Native Species Action Plan Action No. Problems tackled Action/Activity Lead Partner Priority INNS01 Giant Hogweed, Japanese Knotweed, Himalayan Balsam, Rhododendron ponticum. Development and delivery of the Nature Restoration Fund supported “Restoring Renfrewshire’s Rivers” project, monitoring and controlling five invasive plant species along five river valleys - including tracking locations, extents and population densities, making control inputs in publicly owned and managed greenspaces, sharing information about invasive non-native species identification and control. Renfrewshire Council High INNS02 Giant Hogweed Continuing Giant Hogweed control along the White Cart Water in Paisley town centre and elsewhere on Council land as required. Renfrewshire Council High INNS03 Rhododendron ponticum Continuing control of invasive non-native trees and shrubs at Muirshiel Country Park and Parkhill Woods, in line with the approved management plans. Renfrewshire Council High INNS04 Rhododendron ponticum Continuing control of invasive non-native trees and shrubs at Finlaystone Countryside Estate. Finlaystone High INNS05 Rhododendron, Japanese Knotweed & Himalayan Balsam Implement control measures for Rhododendron ponticum, Japanese Knotweed and Himalayan Balsam at Johnstone Woods. Forestry & Land Scotland High INNS06 Rhododendron, Japanese Knotweed & Himalayan Balsam Implement control projects to remove Giant Hogweed, Japanese Knotweed and Himalayan Balsam from Jenny’s Well Local Nature Reserve. Friends of Jenny’s Well INNS07 Himalayan Balsam Implement control measures for Himalayan Balsam in Howwood Community Woodland. Forestry & Land Scotland High Page 33 of 224
Page 40
31 Monitoring and Review Several performance reviews of previous Local Biodiversity Action Plans have been undertaken in recent years. These exercises revealed that monitoring and review were two areas which had presented some difficulty for the LBAP partners and that a reappraisal of the approach was needed. The introduction of a Biodiversity Duty reporting regime for public bodies, to comply with the provisions of the Wildlife & Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2011 has placed a greater focus on monitoring and review since 2014. The emphasis of this process is however much more focussed on the policies and actions of the public bodies, rather than their impact on biodiversity resources on the ground. At a national level, focus is being brought to the monitoring and evaluation of different habitats and species by the RSPB led State of Nature Partnership, which is producing State of Nature Reports every three years for the UK and its constituent nations, including Scotland. The challenge for local biodiversity partners, particularly in view of diminishing resources, is to identify creative approaches to share data and the implications at the Renfrewshire level. Page 34 of 224
Page 41
32 Monitoring and Review Action Plan Action No. Benefits and Beneficiaries Action/Activity Lead Partner Priority MR01 All Species Participate in national species monitoring schemes as opportunities arise. All High MR02 All Species Production and online publication of public bodies’ Biodiversity Duty Report, as required by the Wildlife & Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2011 on a three-year cycle. Renfrewshire Council High MR03 Birds Compilation and publication of the Clyde Bird Report as a guide to fluctuations in local bird populations. Scottish Ornithologists’ Club High MR04 Rivers Continue collecting river quality data from ad hoc surveys (as commissioned and permitted) and encouraging local angling clubs to participate in river surveys. Clyde River Foundation High MR05 All species and habitats Collect, record in recommended formats, and submit biological records to the Glasgow Museums Biological Records Centre, so that data can be uploaded to the National Biodiversity Network database and to other national recording schemes. All High MR06 Various, as resources and expertise permit Regular recording of flowers, birds and butterflies at Jenny’s Well Local Nature Reserve. Friends of Jenny’s Well High Page 35 of 224
Page 42
33 Appendix 1: Organisations actively participating in the Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2024 Organisation Name BAE Systems Botanical Society of Britain & Ireland (BSBI) Brediland Allotments Association Butterfly Conservation Scotland Clyde Amphibians & Reptiles Group Clyde Ringing Group Clyde River Foundation Concern for Swifts Darkwood Crew Eadha Enterprises Erskine Community Allotments Association Finlaystone Country Estate Friends of Clyde Muirshiel Friends of Jenny’s Well Glasgow & Clyde Valley Green Network Partnership Glasgow Airport Glasgow City Region Strategic Environment Partnership Page 36 of 224
Page 43
34 Organisation Name Grow in Glenburn Lochwinnoch Community Development Trust Lochwinnoch Force for Nature Lochwinnoch Sustainable Community Garden National Biodiversity Network (NBN) Trust NatureScot OneRen Paisley Florist Society Gardening Club Paisley Natural History Society Paisley West End Allotments Group Renfrew Association of Growers and Gardeners Renfrewshire Council Renfrewshire Growing Grounds Forum Renfrewshire Wildlife Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) Scottish Ornithologists’ Club (Clyde Branch) Scottish Wildlife Trust Starling Learning Strathclyde Geoconservation Sustrans Scotland West End Growing Grounds Association Yearnstane Project Page 37 of 224
Page 44
35 Appendix 2: Plant Species of Conservation Concern in Renfrewshire Nationally Significant Plants Growing in Renfrewshire: Found in less than 5% (141) of 10km squares in GB Scientific Name English Name No. of 10km squares recorded in the Atlas Cicuta virosa Cowbane 139 (“Caplaw” in Renfrewshire) Corallorhiza trifida Coral Root Orchid 102 Elatine hydropiper Eight-stamened Waterwort 33 Hierochloe odorata Holy Grass 18 Lysimachia thyrsiflora Tufted Loosestrife 51 This information has been compiled from a range of sources, with the national distributions being assessed using the BSBI’s New Atlas of the British and Irish Flora (2002) (edited by Preston, Pearman and Dines). The Renfrewshire dimension was provided by various sources, including the audit process which preceded the production and publication of the 2004 Local Biodiversity Action Plan, from Keith Watson’s 2013 Flora of Renfrewshire, from Phase 1 Habitat Surveys undertaken in 1991 and 1999 and from SINC surveys undertaken since initial designation in 2002. The information is presented below in three levels of National Significance and three levels of Local Significance. Higher plants are one of the better groups for information held, because of a history of surveying and data compilation at both national and local levels, as can be seen below. Page 38 of 224
Page 45
36 Found in less than 10% (281) of 10km squares in GB Scientific Name English Name No. of 10km squares recorded in the Atlas Carex aquatilis Water Sedge 219 Meum athamanticum Spignel 164 Salix myrsinifolia Dark-leaved Willow 276 Sedum villosum Hairy Stonecrop 211 Zostera noltei Dwarf eel-grass 159 Found in less than 20% (562) of 10km squares in GB Scientific Name English Name No. of 10km squares recorded in the Atlas Asplenium viride Green Spleenwort 435 Carex diandra Lesser Tussock Sedge 378 Carex lasiocarpa Slender Sedge 461 (Walls Hill and Hartfield Moss in Ren.) Carex limosa Bog-sedge 423 Carex pauciflora Few-flowered Sedge 377 Carum verticillatum Whorled Caraway 296 Diphasiastrum alpinum Alpine Clubmoss 539 Drosera intermedia Oblong-leaved Sundew 508 Hammarbya paludosa Bog Orchid 302 Oenanthe lachenalii Parsley Water-dropwort 551 (“Erskine” in Renfrewshire) Pseudorchis albida Small-white Orchid Old records only Pyrola minor Lesser Wintergreen 558 Rubus chamaemorus Cloudberry 394 Ruppia maritima Beaked Tasselweed 363 (“Langbank” in Renfrewshire) Saxifraga hypnoides Mossy Saxifrage 406 Stellaria nemorum Wood Stitchwort 432 Trientalis europaea Chickweed Wintergreen 514 (Bardrain Glen in the 1940s) Page 39 of 224
Page 46
Renfrewshire Significance: Found in 5 sites or fewer in Renfrewshire: very uncommon Scientific Name English Name Estimated No. sites where species has been found in Renfrewshire Campanula latifolia Giant Bellflower 1 Carex acuta Slender Tufted-sedge 1 Carex arenaria Sand Sedge 1 Carex dioica Dioecious Sedge 1 Carex disticha Brown Sedge 1 Carex paniculata Greater Tussock Sedge 3 Carex pauciflora Few-flowered Sedge 1 Carex pilulifera Pill Sedge 1 Carex pulicaris Flea Sedge 1 Carex spicata Spiked Sedge 1 Centaurium erythraea Centaury 1 Chrysosplenium alternifolium Alternate-leaved Golden Saxifrage 1 Corallorhiza trifida Coral Root Orchid 2 Cystopteris fragilis Brittle Bladder-fern 1 Ceratocapnos claviculata Climbing Corydalis 2 Cruciata laevipes Crosswort 1 Drosera anglica Great Sundew 1 37 Page 40 of 224
Page 47
38 Found in 5 sites or fewer in Renfrewshire: very uncommon (continued) Scientific Name English Name Estimated No. sites where species has been found in Renfrewshire Dryopteris carthusiana Narrow Buckler-fern 2 Eleocharis quinqueflora Few-flowered Spike-rush 1 Empetrum nigrum Crowberry 1 Galium odoratum Sweet Woodruff 1 Geranium pratense Meadow Cranesbill 5 Gymnadenia conopsea Fragrant Orchid 1 Gymnocarpium dryopteris Oak Fern 2 Hippurus vulgaris Marestail 2 Huperzia selago Fir Clubmoss 1 Juniperus communis Juniper 2 Lathraea squamaria Toothwort 1 Listera cordata Lesser Twayblade 1 Listera ovata Twayblade 3 Littorella uniflora Shoreweed 1 Lysimachia thyrsiflora Tufted Loosestrife 1 Lythrum salicaria Purple Loosestrife 1 Melica uniflora Wood Melick 1 Menyanthes trifoliata Bogbean 5 Nuphar lutea Yellow Water Lily 2 Ophioglossum vulgatum Adder’s-tongue 1 Page 41 of 224
Page 48
Found in 5 sites or fewer in Renfrewshire: very uncommon (continued) Scientific Name English Name SINC No. or other sites where found Paris quadrifolia Herb Paris 1 Phegopteris connectilis Beech Fern 1 Platanthera bifolia Lesser Butterfly Orchid 1 Polystichum setiferum Soft Shield Fern 1 Pyrola minor Lesser Wintergreen 1 Rhinanthus minor Yellow Rattle 4 Rorippa palustris Marsh Yellow-cress 1 Salix aurita Eared Willow 1 Salix myrsinifolia Dark-leaved Willow 1 Stellaria nemorum Wood Stitchwort 1 Triglochin palustris Marsh Arrowgrass 1 Trollius europaeus Globeflower 1 Utricularia minor Lesser Bladderwort 2 Utricularia vulgaris Greater Bladderwort 1 Vaccinium oxycoccos Cranberry 2 Vaccinium vitis-idaea Cowberry 1 Viola lutea Mountain Pansy 2 Viola tricolor Wild Pansy 1 Vulpia bromoides Squirreltail Fescue 1 39 Page 42 of 224
Page 49
40 Found in 6 -10 sites or fewer in Renfrewshire: uncommon Scientific Name English Name Estimated No. sites where species was found in Renfrewshire Carex aquatilis Water Sedge 7 Carex diandra Lesser Tussock Sedge 6 Carex echinata Star Sedge 8 Carex limosa Bog-sedge 6 Carum verticillatum Whorled Caraway 8 Drosera rotundifolia Sundew 7 Hydrocotyle vulgare Marsh Pennywort 6 Lychnis flos-cuculi Ragged Robin 8 Menyanthes trifoliata Bogbean 6 Meum athamanticum Spignel 6 Rhinanthus minor Yellow Rattle 6 Found in 10-20 sites or fewer in Renfrewshire: less common This table will be populated as ongoing survey work across Renfrewshire progresses during the lifespan of this Biodiversity Action Plan. Scientific Name English Name Estimated No. sites where species was found in Renfrewshire Platanthera chlorantha Greater Butterfly Orchid 11 Page 43 of 224
Page 50
Appendix 3: Bird Species of Conservation Concern in Renfrewshire Since the outset of the LBAP process in Renfrewshire, bird conservation inputs have depended on the expertise and inputs of the Scottish Ornithologists’ Club Clyde Branch for its ornithological components. This continues to be the case for the Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan and SOC has provided updated information on local bird species of conservation concern, which is based on many years of monitoring bird populations and distributions. The SOC has reviewed the latest Red and Amber lists included in 2021’s Birds of Conservation Concern 5 and concluded that the following species are the most pertinent for the Renfrewshire Biodiversity Action Plan. Selected Red List species of concern in Renfrewshire Selected Amber List species of concern in Renfrewshire Hen Harrier Whooper Swan Kestrel Lapwing Shelduck Rook Swift Woodpigeon Sedge Warbler Cuckoo Moorhen Willow Warbler Skylark Oystercatcher Common Whitethroat Grasshopper Warbler Common Sandpiper Wren House Martin Redshank Dipper Starling Snipe Song Thrush Mistle Thrush Black-headed Gull Dunnock Spotted Flycatcher Lesser Black-backed Gull Meadow Pipit Whinchat Short-eared Owl Grey Wagtail House Sparrow Tawny Owl Bullfinch Tree Sparrow Sparrowhawk Reed Bunting Tree Pipit Greenfinch Linnet Lesser Redpoll Yellowhammer 41 Page 44 of 224
Page 51
42 SOC Clyde Branch has narrowed down these lists further to a selection of species which are realistically viable for conservation measures in Renfrewshire. Even within this selection, SOC has recognised the resource challenges faced by all the biodiversity partners by identifying local priority (*) candidates and indicated the summary reasons for selection in the following tables below. Red List SPECIES SOC comments on conservation requirements Notes on status and distribution Hen Harrier * The Renfrewshire Heights Special Protection Area (SPA) lies entirely within Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park. The designation was applied because of its national importance for breeding Hen Harrier. This is one of the highest categories of nature conservation importance in the UK, indeed Europe, and there is a responsibility to monitor the breeding population and address the habitat requirements of this species. The breeding population of Hen Harriers declined after the publication of the 2004 LBAP and there are currently no breeding pairs in Renfrewshire. Swift Being tackled through Actions summarised within this Action Plan, particularly PP11. Scattered and to be clarified by the survey element of specific Actions above. Lapwing * This is a declining species in Renfrewshire, thought to be mainly due to lack of suitable ‘honeypot’ breeding sites, which theoretically could be relatively easily created through habitat manipulation and cooperation from farmers. Only a handful of sites in Renfrewshire believed to still hold nesting Lapwings. House Martin Initiate public education programme to deter illegal destruction of nests on residential and other properties. Widespread but dependent on small, isolated habitats. Starling Requires action at national and farming policy level, but maintained grassland under public ownership, private golf courses, etc, could be managed more sympathetically towards sustaining the bird’s natural (invertebrate) food supply. Reasonably common and widespread as a breeding species in Renfrewshire. Mistle Thrush Creation of native woodlands in semi-upland habitats. Reasonably common and widespread as a breeding species in Renfrewshire. Page 45 of 224
Page 52
43 Red List (continued) SPECIES SOC comments on conservation requirements Notes on status and distribution Spotted Flycatcher Habitat manipulation, mainly by appropriate tree planting at suitable sites. No recent records of nesting in Renfrewshire. Whinchat * Habitat manipulation by creating open neutral grassland habitats, lightly grazed; advising farmers and foresters on glade requirements. Has declined as a result of changing agricultural practices. Tree Sparrow * Retention of traditional colony sites, e.g old farm buildings; erection of nest boxes in suitable habitat; supplementary feeding. Has declined as a result of changing agricultural practices. Linnet Conservation of areas of gorse scrub and farmland hedgerows; control of burning by farmers, especially during nesting season; sensitive road verge maintenance planning. Has declined as a result of changing agricultural practices. Yellowhammer Encourage farmland biodiversity appropriately for the species. Has declined as a result of changing agricultural practices. Page 46 of 224
Page 53
44 Amber List SPECIES SOC comments on conservation requirements Notes on status and distribution Whooper Swan * Action required to sustain Renfrewshire’s internationally important flock of Icelandic Whooper Swans. Specifically, encourage an appropriate land management regime on the sanctuary area within the Black Cart Special Protection Area. Reduction in recent years as a wintering bird in Renfrewshire. Shelduck * Encourage research into the decline of wintering and breeding Shelduck on the Inner Clyde Special Protection Area. Red Grouse Encourage moorland management of the Renfrewshire Heights SPA to produce a naturally sustainable population of Red Grouse, as part of an overall plan for the conservation of biodiversity focusing on Hen Harrier. Formerly an Amber Listed species on the Birds of Conservation Concern schedules. Low population levels and limited distribution in Renfrewshire. Redshank Integrate with appropriate wetland habitat plans. Encourage research into the decline of wintering and passage Redshank on the Inner Clyde Special Protection Area Reduction in recent years as a wintering bird in Renfrewshire. Only a handful of sites in Renfrewshire believed to still hold nesting Redshank. Snipe As Redshank for breeding habitat, also moorland water table management. Only a handful of sites in Renfrewshire believed to still hold nesting Snipe. Black-headed Gull Review previous draft plan. The species has continued to decline. Lesser Black-backed Gull Attempt to halt and where possible reverse the effects of illegal persecution. Short-eared Owl Integrate ecological requirements to the Hen Harrier prescribed management plan for the Renfrewshire Heights SPA. Only occurs in Renfrewshire as an occasional winter visitor. Page 47 of 224
Page 54
Amber List (continued) SPECIES SOC comments on conservation requirements Notes on status and distribution Kingfisher Design riparian tree planting to discourage disturbance of nests by anglers. Localised breeding population. Kestrel Create more open neutral grassland areas and wider woodland glades to facilitate improved hunting habitat. Has declined as a result of changing agricultural practices. Song Thrush * Conservation of scrub woodland habitat and selective naturalisation of public parkland; also, education on use of garden pesticides. Reasonably common and widespread as a breeding species in Renfrewshire. Dipper Installation of nesting niches/boxes in bridge construction and maintenance works. Widespread but dependent on small, isolated habitats. Bullfinch Encourage conservation and retention of scrub woodland, and inclusion of Prunus and Malus fruit tree species. Small but widespread population in Renfrewshire. Reed Bunting Integrate with appropriate wetland habitat plans, and conserve areas of purple moor grass Molinia caerulea (winter seed supply). Widespread but dependent on small, isolated habitats. 45 Page 48 of 224
Page 55
46 Other Bird Species of Local or Regional Significance Only species with potential practical opportunities for local conservation measures are listed here. SPECIES SOC comments on conservation requirements Notes on status and distribution Kingfisher Design riparian tree planting to discourage disturbance of nests by anglers. Formerly an Amber Listed species on the Birds of Conservation Concern schedules. Localised breeding population. Lesser Whitethroat Lesser Whitethroat is retained as an LBAP species in Renfrewshire because: 1.They are locally rare in both Renfrewshire and Ayrshire. 2.The breeding habitat in itself is extremely rare in those counties. 3. It remains a perfect indicator species for quality scrubland habitat, which benefits other important scrub species i.e. Song Thrush & Linnet. 4. Long term field research in Renfrewshire & Ayrshire (SW Scotland) is still ongoing and vitally important as, according to the British Trust for Ornithology, this is the only research project in the UK that is looking into the Lesser Whitethroat specifically and the distribution results are an important source of information for a migratory species which has benefited from climate change. 5. Funding for habitat management (restoration & replanting) is still ongoing in Gleniffer Braes Country Park. 6. Scientific papers about habitat management / distribution and habitat preference changes for the Lesser Whitethroat are in preparation for future publication. Species has only a tentative presence in Renfrewshire, nesting intermittently at a single site in Gleniffer Braes Country Park. Page 49 of 224
Page 56
For more information visit Renfrewshire Councils website at www.renfrewshire.gov.uk or contact regenerationandplace@renfrewshire.gov.uk Customer service centre Renfrewshire House Cotton Street Paisley PA1 1AN 0300 300 0300 Page 50 of 224
Page 57
___________________________________________________________________ To: Planning and Climate Change Policy Board On: 28 May 2024 ___________________________________________________________________ Report by: Chief Executive ___________________________________________________________________ Heading: Discretionary Fees – Building Standards ___________________________________________________________________ 1. Summary 1.1 This report seeks to update the discretionary fees which are associated with Building Standards. 1.2 The report recommends that existing discretionary fees as associated with Building Standards are revised to take account of current costs and staff time. 1.3 The report also recommends that an annual increase is applied on 1st April each year in line with any percentage increase which is applied to charges for services as agreed as part of the Council budget setting. ________________________________________________________________ 2. Recommendations 2.1 It is recommended that the Board: (i) Approve the proposed discretionary charging fees associated with Building Standards as detailed in Appendix 1 of this report. (ii) Approve the annual increase, to discretionary charging fees associated with Building Standards as detailed in Appendix 1. The annual increase is to be applied on 1st April each year in line with any percentage increase which is applied to charges for services as agreed as part of the Council’s annual budget setting. ___________________________________________________________________ Item 2 PACC280524 Page 51 of 224
Page 58
3. Discretionary Charging 3.1. The Building Standards team undertakes tasks which are both statutory and non-statutory. Statutory tasks are set out in relevant legislation and charges are applied in line with nationally set fees. 3.2. Non statutory tasks relate to a number of different issues and can include the provision of approved plans, documentation, property history and letters of comfort. Fees relating to non-statutory tasks are not set nationally and instead each authority has the ability to set their own local fee. 3.3. Fees relating to non-statutory tasks within Building Standards were last reviewed in 2007 and in this regard Appendix 1 sets out the proposed amendments which would take effect on 1st July 2024. 3.4. In addition to the above and to ensure that fees continue to reflect the demands placed upon the Building Standards Team, it is also proposed that an annual increase is applied to all matters listed in Appendix 1 in line with any percentage increase which is applied to charges for services as agreed as part of the Council’s annual budget setting. The new charges would then take effect on 1st April annually. 4. Next Steps 4.1. The discretionary charging scheme as outlined in Appendix 1 will be published online and applicants and developers made aware of the charging scheme which will come into effect on 1st July 2024. 4.2. The discretionary fees listed in Appendix 1 will be increased on an annual basis on 1st April in line with any percentage increase which is applied to charges for services as agreed as part of the Council’s annual budget setting. Implications of the Report 1. Financial – The introduction of discretionary charging will result in an increase in the fees received by the Building Standards Team. 2. HR & Organisational Development – None. 3. Community/Council Planning – 4. Legal – None. 5. Property/Assets – None. 6. Information Technology – None. Page 52 of 224
Page 59
7. Equality & Human Rights – (a) The Recommendations contained within this report have been assessed in relation to their impact on equalities and human rights. No negative impacts on equality groups or potential for infringement of individuals’ human rights have been identified arising from the recommendations contained in the report. If required following implementation, the actual impact of the recommendations and the mitigating actions will be reviewed and monitored, and the results of the assessment will be published on the Council’s website. 8. Health & Safety – None. 9. Procurement – None. 10. Risk – None. 11. Privacy Impact – None. 12. COSLA Policy Position – None. 13. Climate Risk – None. Appendix 1: Discretionary Charging – Building Standards Author: David Love, Chief Planning Officer Tel: 07483410182; Email: david.love@renfrewshire.gov.uk Page 53 of 224
Page 60
APPENDIX 1: DISCRETIONARY CHARGING – BUILDING STANDARDS Type Current Fee Proposed Fee Building Standards Enquiries: Copy plans/Building Warrant (BW) and Completion Certificate (CC) documentation £50 per search Plus external printer costs for microfiche copies £62.50 per property (includes a copy of BW and CC) Copy plans/BW and CC documentation Building Standards Enquiries: Letter of comfort Where unauthorised work has been carried out prior to the 1st May 2005 without a building warrant and a site visit is required. £200 £250 Building Standards Enquiries: Confirmation of Exemption Confirmation that proposed works are either exempt from building warrant approval under Regulation 3, schedule 2 or do not require building warrant approval under Regulation 5 Schedule 3. £50 £62.50 per property Building Standards Enquiries: Building warrant property history £50 £62.50 per property * Building Standards Enquiries: Enforcement case property history and outstanding debt £50 £62.50 per property * Admin costs associated with Dangerous Buildings Sliding scale up to 12% of demolition costs Flat fee of 10% of demolition costs Erection of Raised Structure £300 £375 Sports Ground – Safety Certificate New Application Amend/Revision to existing Certificate (requiring an inspection) Amend/Revision to existing Certificate (not £1,400 £808 £269 £1,750 £1,010 £336.25 Page 54 of 224
Page 61
requiring an inspection) Special Safety Certificate No fee £1,010 Section 50 Building Standards Certificate No fee £100 Copies of plans and supplementary information ‐ copying/handling charge as below: Digital/paper/microfiche copies – document retrieval and handling fee: Plan/document: £2 per plan/document up to a maximum of 50 plan/documents, thereafter P.O.A Page 55 of 224
Page 62
Page 56 of 224
Page 63
___________________________________________________________________ To: Planning and Climate Change Policy Board On: 28 May 2024 ___________________________________________________________________ Report by: Chief Executive ___________________________________________________________________ Heading: Street naming and numbering – protocol and charging ___________________________________________________________________ 1. Summary 1.1 The purpose of this report is to seek Board approval of a revised street naming and numbering protocol and to seek agreement to introduce charges for the street naming and numbering process. ___________________________________________________________________ 2. Recommendations 2.1 It is recommended that the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board approve: (1) the street naming and numbering protocol set out in Appendix 1. (2) the introduction of charges for street naming and numbering as set out in Appendix 2. _________________________________________________________ 3. Background 3.1 The power to name and number streets is provided to the Council under the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982. Within Renfrewshire Council, these powers are delegated to the Head of Economy and Development within the Chief Executive’s Service. Tasks in relation to this power can range from numbering a single property to within a street, to naming a number of new streets within a multi-street development and applying street numbers to each property within these streets. 3.2 The current street naming and numbering protocol was approved in 2012. The Council has not previously charged for its naming and numbering service. ___________________________________________________________________ Item 3 PACC280524 Page 57 of 224
Page 64
4. Street naming and numbering - protocol 4.1 A revised street naming and numbering protocol is attached at Appendix 1 for approval. This document sets out the protocol the Head of Economy and Development will undertake when assigning new street names, and some of the conventions that will be followed in doing so. It also illustrates how properties will be numbered in different types of development. 4.2 With regard to the process for assigning new street names, the revised protocol sets out that the Head of Economy and Development will consult with local elected members, the local community council(s), and any tenants and residents’ associations operating in the area. This is a change from the existing approach whereby only local elected members are consulted. Where agreement on a street name cannot be reached with the consultees, the Head of Economy and Development, in consultation with the Convenor of the Planning and Climate Change Board, shall determine which names are allocated to new streets. 4.3 The revised protocol sets out matters that the Head of Economy and Development will take account of in assigning street names and numbers. These are: Names associated with the site or area where the new street is to be located. These could reflect, for example, past uses of the site, nearby landmarks, or people or events associated with the site or area. The continuation of a street naming theme already in use in the area. The use of a series of thematically linked names e.g., birds/animals, trees, rivers/lochs, with a connection to Renfrewshire. The commemoration of a local, national, or international event, or a sporting event or triumph. Avoid use of street names that may be considered controversial or offensive. Avoid street names that are difficult to spell or pronounce or be overlong, or otherwise cause confusion. Avoid street names including punctuation e.g., apostrophes, hyphens, and abbreviations. Avoid street names that are already in use in the same settlement or that sound like street names in use in that settlement (e.g., Parker Street and Barker Street). Developer’s marketing names will not be used as part of the address unless it is appropriate as a street name. The number ‘13’ will not be used in street numbering. 4.4 The protocol also sets out the circumstances in which names such as ‘road’, ‘street’, ‘crescent’ will be used, and the convention for street numbering. A procedure for renaming or renumbering streets is also included, for the rare occasions it would be needed. ___________________________________________________________________ Page 58 of 224
Page 65
5. Street naming and numbering – charging 5.1 As at January 2024, analysis by the Council found twenty-four of the thirty-two Scottish local authorities with responsibility for street naming and numbering charge for this service. It is a service undertaken by the Council for the benefit of the developer and residents/occupiers of new development. The time involved in identifying and consulting on new street names and numbering properties can be substantial and it is considered reasonable for Renfrewshire Council to introduce charges for this service to assist with cost recovery. 5.2 The proposed charges are set out in Appendix 1 and reflect, approximately, an average of the charges made by other Scottish local authorities who charge for this service. Charges will be applied to all external organisations and individuals. 5.3 It is proposed that the charges are introduced from 1 July 2024, and increased on 1 April each year in line with any percentage increase which is applied to charges for services as agreed as part of the Council’s annual budget setting. ________________________________________________________________ Implications of the Report 1. Financial – if the proposed street naming and numbering charges had been applied in financial year 2023/24, an income of approximately £8,000 would have been generated. 2. HR & Organisational Development – none. 3. Community/Council Planning – none. 4. Legal – Section 97 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 provides for local authorities in Scotland to name roads and give premises a distinguishing number. The Act does not preclude charging for this service. 5. Property/Assets – none. 6. Information Technology – none. 7. Equality & Human Rights - The recommendations contained within this report have been assessed in relation to their impact on equalities and human rights. No negative impacts on equality groups or potential for infringement of individuals’ human rights have been identified arising from the recommendations contained in the report because the proposals have no impact on any individuals. If required following implementation, the actual impact of the recommendations and the mitigating actions will be reviewed and monitored, and the results of the assessment will be published on the Council’s website. 8. Health & Safety – none. 9. Procurement – none. Page 59 of 224
Page 66
10. Risk – none. 11. Privacy Impact – none. 12. Cosla Policy Position –not applicable. 13. Climate Risk - not applicable. _________________________________________________________ Appendix 1 – Proposed Street naming and numbering protocol (May 2024) Appendix 2 – Proposed Street naming and numbering charges (May 2024) ___________________________________________________________________ Author: Alan Williamson, Strategy and Place Manager, alan.williamson@renfrewshire.gov.uk, 07811 053968 Page 60 of 224
Page 67
Renfrewshire Council Street Naming and Numbering Protocol May 2024 Page 61 of 224
Page 68
Renfrewshire Council Street Naming and Numbering Protocol 1 Introduction 1.1 The power to name and number streets, to alter these, and to require owners of properties to display the number on their premises is given to the Council under the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982, Section 97. 1.2 The powers are delegated to the Head of Economy and Development within the Chief Executive’s Service - along with the daily management of the Council’s Corporate Address Gazetteer, which allocates a Unique Property Reference Number (UPRN) to each property. 2 Street Naming and Numbering Requests 2.1 Requests for Street Naming and Numbering broadly fall into two groups: (a) Requests for a new street number(s) within an existing street. This is usually a technical issue and in normal circumstances will be determined by the Head of Economy and Development. (b) Requests for street naming and numbering of new developments. This will require the issuing of a new street name which will be the subject of consultation. The procedure for this is set out below. 3 Street Naming and Numbering – New Developments 3.1 In circumstances where a development will result in the creation of a new road, the Head of Economy and Development will consult with the local elected members, the local community council(s), and tenants and residents’ associations operating in the area, for their views on a suitable name. The consultees will be informed of any names suggested by the developer and any alternatives which the Head of Economy and Development considers appropriate. 3.2 The consultees identified above will have a period of 10 working days to advise of comments. If no comment has been received following this period, a reminder will be sent with a further five working days provided for representations. 3.3 Where there are multiple suggestions for new street names, the Head of Economy and Development will engage with consultees to reach an agreed name. If an agreement cannot be reached, the Head of Economy and Development, in consultation with the Convenor of the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board, shall determine which names are allocated to new streets. 3.4 In considering new street names, the Head of Economy and Development will take account of the following: Names associated with the site or area where the new street is to be located. These could reflect, for example, past uses of the site, nearby landmarks, or people or events associated with the site or area. The continuation of a street naming theme already in use in the area. Page 62 of 224
Page 69
The use of a series of thematically linked names e.g., birds/animals, trees, rivers/lochs, with a connection to Renfrewshire. The commemoration of a local, national, or international event, or a sporting event or triumph. Avoid of street names that may be considered controversial or offensive. Avoid street names that are difficult to spell or pronounce or be overlong, or otherwise cause confusion. Avoid street names including punctuation e.g., apostrophes, hyphens, and abbreviations. Avoid street names that are already in use in the same settlement or that sound like street names in use in that settlement (e.g., Parker Street and Barker Street). Avoid naming streets after living people. Developer’s marketing names will not be used in addresses. 3.5 The street “surname” (i.e., the latter part of the name – such as “Avenue”, “Grove”, or “Way”) should reflect the topography and layout of the street. For example: Road, Street, Way, and Drive for through and distributor roads Avenue for tree-lined roads Circle, Oval, Crescent, or Square may be used to reflect the geometry of a street. Terrace may be used if the street contains terraced houses. Court may be used for a block of flats. Place may be used for a cul-de-sac. Grove or Gardens may be used in appropriate circumstances. Rise or Heights may be used for hillside or elevated streets. The above approach will encourage consistency in naming throughout Renfrewshire. 3.6 The number ‘13’ will not be used in street numbering. 3.7 Once street names and property numbers have been agreed, postcodes will be requested from Royal Mail. The full postal addresses and a site layout will then be distributed to our standard Street Naming and Numbering contacts (e.g., emergency services, utilities, and Royal Mail), enabling them to update their records – thus helping ensure consistency of addressing across all organisations. 4 Renaming and Renumbering Procedure 4.1 Where confusion or error has arisen over street numbering and the Council is requested to resolve this, the Head of Economy and Development will seek to secure a solution with minimum disruption to all parties. Action to change street names and / or numbers will only be taken where there is a clear and unavoidable need to resolve an anomaly. 4.2 Where the renaming of a street is required, the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 requires a public notification exercise to be undertaken. In addition to an advertisement required under the provisions of the Act, the Head of Economy and Development will consult with elected members, community councils, and tenants and residents’ associations within the area the proposal is located. Page 63 of 224
Page 70
Before a final decision to rename a street is undertaken, the Head of Economy and Development will take account of representations received. Where a proposal for renaming or renumbering is likely to have a significant effect, the Head of Economy and Development may consider seeking reimbursement of costs where appropriate. 5 Street Naming and Numbering Conventions Property Numbering The centre of the town or village is taken as the starting point (origin) for all numbering. Numbers increase in a direction away from the origin. The general rule is odd numbers on the left-hand side of the street and even numbers on the right-hand side. For subsequent streets, numbers increase in a direction away from the adjoining main street nearest the origin. This process continues until all streets are covered. See diagrammatic illustration below. In exceptional circumstances, for example in a cul-de-sac or where it is unlikely a street will ever be extended or made a through road, consecutive numbers should be allocated commencing with no.1 on the left and numbering clockwise. Omission of number 13 is standard practice in all circumstances. Gap Sites Numbering Where a gap site is being developed, individual numbers should be allocated wherever possible. However, where this is not possible, (for example the demolition of tenement blocks being replaced by main door dwellings) a suitable suffix should be allocated. Page 64 of 224
Page 71
Property Floor Levels Floor Level 0 should be assigned to the Floor Level having the lowest access point from/to the building. Any floors below 0 and only accessible via floor 0 should be classed as basements and designated B1, B2, ..…etc. and floors above 0 designated 1,2,.…etc. Note that in some cases Floor Level 0 will not be the level from which the building’s postal address is derived. Residential Property Sub-Division# Where a property is subdivided a relevant unique number should be allocated wherever possible. If this is not possible, the numbers should be derived by adding an appropriate suffix to each one of the properties. For example, the subdivision of number 10 would result in the allocation of numbers 10A and 10B. In the same way, if a basement property is formed then a relevant suffix should be allocated to both the ground and the basement property. # Note difference for Retail/Commercial Main Door Property Sub-Division. (See section 9) Residential Property – Flat Numbering All flats with a common entrance should, wherever possible, be numbered in a clockwise direction with the first flat number being the first from the left on each landing. Page 65 of 224
Page 72
Ground Floor First Floor Where there is only one flat on each floor it should be numbered as first from left. i.e., 0/1, 1/1 etc. There may be some exceptions to this rule, for example where there are mezzanine levels. House numbers in these cases may be used but only as a last resort. Residential Property – Sub-Divided Flats Where a flat already allocated with a flat number becomes sub divided, new flat numbers should be allocated within the confines of the established flat numbering. First Floor Sub-division Residential Property – Maisonettes Maisonettes should always be numbered to the floor level containing their principal entrance. There may be floor levels where there is no principal entrance to any maisonette or flat. However, these floor levels must be counted to allow for possible future subdivision of maisonettes into flats. Page 66 of 224
Page 73
Retail / Commercial Main Door Property Conjoining Where retail / commercial units are conjoined a number must be allocated from the existing numbering. This should be done in relation to the access point of the premises. Retail / Commercial Main Door Property Sub-Division* Where a retail / commercial property is sub divided a unique number should be allocated where possible. If this is not possible the current occupier should retain the original number# and the new occupier will have a suffixed number. #Generally, the current occupier in a retail / commercial subdivision will want to retain the original number as they will have made an investment in business stationery etc. with their original address. Page 67 of 224
Page 74
* Note difference for Residential Property Sub-Division. Retail / Commercial Sub-Property Numbering Retail / Commercial Sub-Property Numbering should follow the same convention as Residential Property Flat Numbering as set out in section 5. Substitute the word Flat with Unit / Suite as appropriate. First Floor Retail / Commercial Sub-Property – Sub-Division Where a retail / commercial property unit is sub divided the same convention as Residential Property Sub-divided flats should be used. (See section 6). First Floor Sub-division Shopping Malls (i) When numbering shopping malls, the units should be numbered in a clockwise fashion from the left wherever possible. Where a larger or double unit exists a gap should be left in the numbering to accommodate any future subdivision, which may occur. If the development is multi storey, then the upper storey unit numbers should be prefixed with the level on which they are situated. Where more than one entrance exists numbering should start from the main entrance. Page 68 of 224
Page 75
Ground Floor First Floor Page 69 of 224
Page 76
Shopping Malls (ii) Where a shopping mall has been erected on a named street a suitable street number should be allocated, and the units within it uniquely identified by level and unit numbers. Where a single occupation will cover a large or conjoined unit a gap should be left in the numbering to accommodate any future subdivision which may occur. Where a unit has a street entrance of its own, a street number should be allocated in the normal fashion. Page 70 of 224
Page 77
Where a new road is named because of a shopping mall development an appropriate street number (s) should be allocated, bearing in mind any future development which may occur in the area. The units within it should be uniquely identified by level and unit numbers. Where a single occupation will cover a large or conjoined unit a gap should be left in the numbering to accommodate any future subdivision which may occur. Page 71 of 224
Page 78
Industrial Units Where possible a separate number should be allocated to each individual unit. Where this is not possible a unique unit number should be allocated to each unit. See below as an example of how this could be handled. The layout of the development would of course dictate the sequence of the unit numbering, but the principle should be the same. The officer should allocate the unit numbers at the same time as numbering the whole property. Where more than one block of units exists within the same property number a block identifier should be allocated. Page 72 of 224
Page 79
Industrial Estates Where the internal roads within an industrial estate have been named, the normal procedure for street numbering should be applied. Where a single occupation will cover a large or conjoined unit, a gap should be left in the numbering to accommodate any future subdivision which may occur. Page 73 of 224
Page 80
Where the internal roads are unnamed and for access purposes only then a suitable street number should be allocated to the entire site - and block and / or unit numbers allocated to the properties. Where a single occupation will cover a large or conjoined unit a gap should be left in the numbering to accommodate any future sub-division which may occur. Further Information The above detail should cover most eventualities. However, some exceptions may arise. In these cases, reference should be made to Street Naming and Numbering within Economy and Development so that consistency can be maintained. If there are any other queries on the above conventions and their relationship to the Corporate Address Gazetteer, please contact the Street Naming and Numbering Team using one of the following: email: dc@renfrewshire.gov.uk phone: 0300 300 0144 call or write to: Street Naming and Numbering Economy and Development Chief Executive’s Service Renfrewshire Council Renfrewshire House Cotton Street Paisley PA1 1WB Page 74 of 224
Page 81
Appendix 2 Proposed street naming and numbering charges (May 2024) The following charges will be applied when the Council is requested to (i) name/rename streets in new developments (ii) number/renumber (or name) properties in new developments. Charge for the identification and application of a new street name: £190 per street Charge for the identification and application of street numbering Number of properties Charge 1 £80 2-5 £150 6-10 £200 11-25 £280 26-50 £450 51-100 £750 101-150 £1060 151-200 £1100 201+ £1260 Letter of confirmation of official address - £80 Formal change of house/property name/number - £80 * No charges will apply if a house or property needs to be renumbered as a result of address anomaly. * Charges will be increased on 1 April each year in line with any percentage increase which is applied to charges for services as agreed as part of the Council’s annual budget setting. * Charges will be applied to all external organisations and individuals. Page 75 of 224
Page 82
Page 76 of 224
Page 83
___________________________________________________________________ To: Planning and Climate Change Policy Board On: 28 May 2024 ___________________________________________________________________ Report by: Chief Executive ___________________________________________________________________ Heading: Planning Enforcement Charter 2024 ___________________________________________________________________ 1. Summary 1.1 This report presents the Renfrewshire Planning Enforcement Charter 2024. 1.2 The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) requires the planning enforcement charter to be reviewed every two years. 1.3 The planning enforcement charter sets out the process and procedures for how and when planning will deal with a breach of planning control. ________________________________________________________________ 2. Recommendations 2.1 It is recommended that the Board: (i) Approve the Renfrewshire Planning Enforcement Charter 2024 as presented in Appendix 1 to this report. ___________________________________________________________________ 3. Background 3.1. The Renfrewshire Planning Enforcement Charter sets out the process and procedures for how and when the Planning Service will deal with a breach of planning control. It provides information and advice as to how a suspected breach of planning control can be brought to the attention of planning. 3.2. Service standards and timescales are highlighted in the charter with a commitment to dealing with breaches of planning control through prioritisation of action depending on the seriousness of the breaches of planning control. Item 4 PACC280524 Page 77 of 224
Page 84
3.3. In the Council Budget for 2024 funding has been made available for a Planning Enforcement Officer post for the next two years. This post is currently being advertised. One of the primary responsibilities of the new postholder will be to implement the new Enforcement Charter. 4. Planning Enforcement Charter 2024 4.1. The revised Planning Enforcement Charter outlines the role of planning enforcement, the applicable policies and procedures and the standards of service to be expected. 4.2. The charter notes that the purpose of planning enforcement is to find a solution or to deal with the issue rather than seek to punish. 4.3. It should be noted that planning enforcement is a discretionary power and each case is considered in terms of the nature of the planning breach and the wider public interest. 4.4. The Enforcement Charter outlines that following issues will be prioritised: Significant detrimental impact on public safety; and Irreversible damage to listed buildings; Significant detrimental impact on amenity; Protected by Tree Preservation Orders/in Conservation Areas. Unauthorised felling of trees and matters affecting trees 5. Next Steps 5.1. If approved, the updated planning enforcement charter will replace the current enforcement charter on the Council web pages. 5.2. Planning will continue to keep the effectiveness of the enforcement charter under review and future updates will be presented to the Board when required. ___________________________________________________________________ Implications of the Report 1. Financial – The extent and details of the additional duties is still to be confirmed. 2. HR & Organisational Development – None. 3. Community/Council Planning – The Charter assist in promoting Renfrewshire as a place to live, work and visit. 4. Legal – None. 5. Property/Assets – None. 6. Information Technology – None. Page 78 of 224
Page 85
7. Equality & Human Rights - (a) The Recommendations contained within this report have been assessed in relation to their impact on equalities and human rights. No negative impacts on equality groups or potential for infringement of individuals’ human rights have been identified arising from the recommendations contained in the report. If required following implementation, the actual impact of the recommendations and the mitigating actions will be reviewed and monitored, and the results of the assessment will be published on the Council’s website. 8. Health & Safety – None. 9. Procurement – None. 10. Risk – None. 11. Privacy Impact – None. 12. COSLA Policy Position - None. 13. Climate Risk – The proposed site development briefs seek to ensure that any development coming forward is undertaken in a sustainable manner and aids the adaption required as a result of climate change. ___________________________________________________________________ Appendix 1 – Renfrewshire Planning Enforcement Charter 2024 ___________________________________________________________________ Author: David Love, Chief Planning Officer Tel: 07483410182; Email: david.love@renfrewshire.gov.uk Page 79 of 224
Page 86
Renfrewshire Council Planning Enforcement Charter 2024 Page 80 of 224
Page 87
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 2 This Charter explains; • How the enforcement process works, • The role of Renfrewshire Council, • The current powers available to the Council and, • The Service Standards that are set out. It also explains what happens at each stage of what can be a lengthy process. Enforcement Of Planning Control A high quality planning system is essential in creating great places. Public confidence in an efficient and effective planning service is key to this delivery. Working alongside our communities with input from the public and other stakeholders is central to assisting in the delivery of a high quality planning system. Enforcing planning regulations in a timeous, consistent and proportionate way is important and there is a role for the public in letting Planning know when there is a potential breach of planning control. The aim of this charter is to make sure the procedures set out are fair and reasonable and that we keep everyone involved and informed when throughout the process. Page 81 of 224
Page 88
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 3 Enforcement is a discretionary power. That means that, even where there is a breach of planning control, the Council has to consider if it is in the wider public interest to take enforcement action. The Council will not act as arbiter between parties where there us no public interest involved or breach of planning control. Taking formal enforcement action is a last resort when other ways of solving the problem have been exhausted. Where a satisfactory outcome cannot be achieved by negotiation, the Council can take action where it is proportionate and necessary. Service Standard 1 By publishing our standards and targets, the aim is to ensure the enforcement process and procedures are fit for purpose making it responsive to the needs of our stakeholders. We will continuously monitor the contents of this Charter to ensure that standards and targets are being met. Planning permission is required for certain types of development. There are occasions however, when developers or householders undertake work without planning permission or fail to keep to the permission they have been given. Councils have powers to enforce planning controls in cases where they consider it is in the wider public interest to do so. A breach of planning control is not a criminal offence. The purpose of planning enforcement is to find a solution or deal with the issue rather than to punish for what is often a mistake. Any action taken has to be appropriate to the scale of the breach and the harm it may have caused. Planning have legal powers to take formal enforcement action if unfortunately we can not negotiate a satisfactory solution to problems that have arisen. More detailed information on the use of enforcement powers can be found in the Scottish Government publication Circular 10/2009: Planning Enforcement which can be found online at: https://www.gov.scot/publications/ planning-circular-10-2009-planning- enforcement/ Page 82 of 224
Page 89
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 4 Householders Planning permission is required for a range of developments including extensions to your house or building within the garden ground. Some minor works can be carried out without applying for permission (know as permitted development). A link to the current permitted development rights for householders can be found at the link below to assist in confirming the requirement or otherwise for formal planning permission to have been sought prior to the commencement of any development works: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ ssi/2011/357/schedule/made Work carried out or being carried out without planning permission or listed building consent; An unauthorised change of use; Failure to comply with conditions attached to a permission or listed building consent; Departures from approved plans or consent; Carrying out works to trees that are protected by a planning condition or trees in conservation areas. Enforcement Of Planning Control Possible breaches of planning control include: Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 4 Guidance on Householder Permitted Development Rights can be found using this link. People sometimes carry out work without planning permission because they are unaware that permission is required. If you are concerned that there has been a potential breach of planning control, please report your concerns by completing the online form at https://myaccount. renfrewshire.gov.uk/ en/service/ Report_a_Suspected_Planning_ Breach. Page 83 of 224
Page 90
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 5 A D S A D S A D S A D S A D S A D S Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 5 Advertisements Planning enforcement also covers the physical display of advertisements such as billboards and advertisement hoardings: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1984/467/pdfs/uksi_19840467_en.pdf The actual content of an advertisement is not covered by planning control. Any complaints relating to content should be made directly to the Advertising Standards Authority. The display of banners and ad-hoc signs placed remotely from the business premises or activity is not acceptable. Limited opportunity will be given to the party responsible for the display to remedy the matter voluntarily. Direct action will be contemplated as the first response. The Council will consider what action to take in relation to unauthorised advertisements and alert the relevant Service to deal with the matter. Trees Trees and woodlands contribute greatly to amenity and the quality of place. The Planning & Development Tree Policy sets out the framework to protect and maintain existing trees, this can be found using the following link. Trees in a conservation area are also protected and subject to control. Further details on the Council’s tree protection measures can be found at following link. Tree Preservation Orders (TPO) are used to protect trees, groups of trees or woodlands that add to the character and appearance of the area. If you want to carry out work to any tree, or trees covered by a tree preservation order or trees in a conservation areas, approval requires to be sought from the Council please contact dc@renfrewshire.gov.uk for assistance. High Hedge Legislation came into force in 2014. The purpose of the legislation is to consider issues in relation to high hedges which have an impact on the reasonable enjoyment of a property and when the issue has not been able to resolved amicably between neighbours. Scottish government guidance can be found at the following the link. Page 84 of 224
Page 91
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 6 Implications Of Potential Breach What are the legal implications of not complying with planning legislation? Failure to gain planning permission, listed building consent, advertisement consent or treeworks consent, before development or works are carried out or an advertisement is displayed may have financial or legal implications which could prove problematic to resolve. Not observing the regulatory requirements may significantly delay or impede the conveyancing transaction for the sale of a house, or letting of commercial premises. What are the time limits on Enforcement Action? It should be noted that Enforcement action has to be taken within time limits: The four year limit - this applies to ‘unauthorised operational development’ (the carrying out of building, engineering, mining or other operations in, on, over or under land) and a change of use to a single dwellinghouse. After four years following this type of breach, the development becomes lawful, and no enforcement action can be taken. In circumstances where there is an unauthorised use or works have been carried out without consent, the Council will usually expect the submission of the appropriate formal application to regularise matters. However there is no guarantee that consent will be granted. The failure to comply with conditions to which permission or consents are subject, prior to, during or following development can have similar implications and may require amended Planning Permission or Listed Building Consent application to be submitted to regularise the situation. The ten year limit - this applies to all other development including change of use (other than to a single dwellinghouse) and breaches of condition. After ten years, the development becomes lawful if no enforcement action has begun; and no enforcement action can be taken. There is no time limit for breaches of Listed Building Control (works undertaken to a Listed Building) they will always be considered no matter the time limit from the potential breach. Page 85 of 224
Page 92
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 7 The following information is essential when reporting a potential breach: • The address of the property concerned; • Details of the suspected breach of planning control, with times and dates if relevant; • Your name and contact details; and • Information on how the breach affects you and others. We will treat all reports as confidential and will not publish any personal details, name, address and contact details of the complainant. All data submitted to us will be handled in accordance with the relevant data protection legislation. It should be noted that under Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 and the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2002 we may need to disclose information relating to the substance of any reports received. Requests for total confidentiality may also limit our ability to take formal action and we cannot guarantee this if the case leads to court proceedings. We do not accept anonymous complaints in relation to breaches of planning control. Any potential breach in planning control can be reported using our online form at https://myaccount. renfrewshire.gov.uk/en/service/ Report_a_Suspected_Planning_ Breach. However if this is not possible concerns can be posted to: Development Standards, Chief Executive’s Service, Renfrewshire House, Cotton Street, Paisley, PA1 1JD. How To Report A Potential Breach Of Planning Control Contacting Your Local Councillor In some instances, your local councillor may be the first person you approach in relation to a potential breach of planning control. We would encourage everyone to report any potential breach of planning control using the contact details opposite to enable direct contact with the relevant officers and to be kept up to date with the process and procedures. Councillors being involved in enforcement cases may prevent them from making decisions on any potential applications associated with the case or other formal action. This is in line with the Standards Commission Code of Conduct*. * https://www.standardscommissionscotland.org.uk/ Page 86 of 224
Page 93
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 8 Information received by the Council is checked to see if it involves a possible breach of control and includes all the detail required for a possible investigation. Some complaints, such as neighbour disputes over boundaries and ownership, relate to legal matters over which Planning has no control and these matters cannot be investigated. The Council will generally take action in the interests of the wider public amenity or safety. Where enquiries relate to an area of the Council function other than Planning, the matter will be referred to the relevant Council Service, and the enquirer notified. Service Standard 2 After preliminary checking and compliance with the requirements for investigation, the complaint will be recorded. Once recorded, an acknowledgement will be sent to the person who made the complaint within 5 working days. The acknowledgement will include a reference number and contact details of the investigating officer. What Happens Next Page 87 of 224
Page 94
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 9 Timescale Any action that is taken has to be appropriate to the scale of the problem and also importantly the harm that it may be causing. Priority will be given to breaches of planning control, including:- • Significant detrimental impact on public safety; and • Irreversible damage to listed buildings; • Significant detrimental impact on amenity; • Protected by Tree Preservation Orders/in Conservation Areas. • Unauthorised felling of trees and matters affecting trees Service Standard 3 An investigation into the matter will be undertaken and a response updating the complainant will be provided within 28 working days of the initial acknowledgment. This response will also advise what proposed action will be taken, if any. This may include the need for additional investigation prior to deciding on a course of action or if the matter does not involve a breach of planning control or if it is not intended to take any further action. Page 88 of 224
Page 95
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 10 Timeframes for Action The length of time required to investigate an issue can be affected by a number of factors, including gathering evidence, negotiations between parties or for formal action to be initiated and concluded. Similarly, an application to regularise the breach of control or an appeal against a decision of Planning can also have an impact on timescales to resolve the issue. Service Standard 4 The Council aim to keep people informed about significant stages in the progress of the case. Where there has been no progress for a period of 28 working days, the case officer will provide an update. The Council recognises that delays can be a source of considerable frustration to those submitting information, particularly if they consider that their amenity is affected. Consequently, it is appreciated that there is a need to keep interested parties informed of significant stages in the progress of a case. If you want and require regular updates you should contact the case officer for an update. Please note that the preferred method of communicating with all parties is electronically, if this is possible, and where there is no legal or procedural need for letters. Page 89 of 224
Page 96
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 11 There will be a focus on trying to sort out a situation by negotiating with the person responsible for breaching planning control. We will give the person responsible for the breach in planning control a specific amount of time to meet the requirements. The length of time will depend on how serious the issue is and the harm it may be causing. Service Standard 5 The Council also has powers to remove or destroy placards and posters that do not have advertisement consent or deemed consent. If the person who put up the advertisement can be identified, they have to be given at least two days notice that the Council intends to take the advertisement down. If they cannot be readily identified, then the advertisement can be removed immediately as can those affixed or erected on Council property. Processes & Procedures In some cases action may not be appropriate, even though planning controls have been breached. There may be cases where it is appropriate to ask the person in breach of planning control to make a retrospective planning application. Until we make a decision on the retrospective application, we will not take formal action. If a retrospective application is submitted, the normal neighbour notification and publicity will be carried out and we will fully consider any comments before a decision is made. Formal enforcement action will only be taken where, the breach of planning control is significant and would unacceptably affect public amenity, public safety or the use of land and buildings meriting protection in the public interest. The action taken must be proportionate to the breach. We will not take action simply because someone does not have planning permission or refused to send us a retrospective planning application. Planning has to consider each case on its merits and decide on the most appropriate solution. Planning is unlikely to take formal action for developments which in planning terms, are deemed to be acceptable. Planning has discretion on whether to take enforcement action in any given situation and various options are open to Planning. Page 90 of 224
Page 97
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 12 Only a small number of cases require formal action. This begins within either an Enforcement Notice or Breach of Condition Notice being served on those involved in the development. Both notices include the following information; • A description of the breach of control that has taken place, • The steps that should be taken to remedy the breach, • The timescale for taking these steps, • The consequences of failure to comply with the notice, and • Where appropriate, any rights of appeal the recipient has and how to lodge an appeal. Penalties Failure to comply with a Notice may result in the planning authority taking further action. This can include a range of possible options including; • Referring the case to the Procurator Fiscal for possible prosecution, • Carrying out work and charging the person for the costs involved, • Seeking a Court interdict to stop or prevent a breach of planning controls. It should be noted that the expectation is that cases will be resolved without the need for any referrals to the Procurator Fiscal. In terms of any unresolved enforcement breaches, a proportionate approach will be adopted when considering potential referrals to the Procurator Fiscal. Formal Action Appeals Appeals against Enforcement Notices are considered by Scottish Ministers and dealt with, in most cases, by independent Reporters from the Scottish Government Directorate of Planning and Environmental Appeals. Anyone who has submitted information on a breach of planning control will be advised of the appeal either by the Council or the Scottish Government. There is no right of appeal against a Breach of Condition Notice. Service Standard 6 Where a planning breach cannot be resolved and action is justified, a formal notice will be served. The Council will write to the developer in advance of serving any notice warning of the intent to do so. Thereafter, the recipient of the notice will be advised as to what action is required, the timescales involved and the available options to resolve the issue. Page 91 of 224
Page 98
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 13 Acknowledgement and initial investigation to determine if it constitutes development. 5 working days 1 Enforcement Process Response to complaint following initial site investigation. 28 working days 2 If a breach is identified invitation to make an application or what is required to rectify the matter or if no enforcement action is to be taken interested parties will be advised of the decision. 3 If no progress is made contact will be maintained with the complainant to advise of key developments going forward. 4 If there is no attempt to rectify matters the Planning Authority will consider taking further action. 5 Page 92 of 224
Page 99
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 14 No appeal against the notice or its terms. If they are not complied with, the case may be referred to the Procurator Fiscal, or an interdict or interim interdict sought. Details of Enforcement Notices, Breach of Conditions Notices, Stop Notices, Temporary Stop Notices and Notices under Section 33A (notice requiring the submission of a retrospective planning application) are entered into an Enforcement Register. You can inspect the register online via the public planning portal. Section 33A Notice, Breach of Condition Notice, Stop Notice or Temporary Stop Notice Enforcement Notice, Listed Building Enforcement Notice, Advertisement Enforcement Notice or Amenity Notice Powers of Entry Council officials have powers to enter land or buildings to:- • Establish if there has been a breach of planning control; • Check is there has been compliance with a formal notice; • Check if a breach has been satisfactorily resolved. This power applies to any land or buildings and may involve officials entering land adjacent to the site of the breach. Monitoring of Major Planning Permissions In line with the Act, Renfrewshire Council will seek to monitoring the compliance with planning permissions which have been granted in respect of major developments. This monitoring will be undertaken by the planning case officer at regular intervals as the development progresses. The outcome of this monitoring will be found via the online portal under the planning reference, to allow these records to be available to the public. Types Of Enforcement Action Service Standard 7 Renfrewshire Council is committed to providing the highest standards of service to our communities. If we do not meet these standards let us know as quickly as possible so that we can put things right. The developer may lodge an appeal with the Scottish Ministers. Procedures are held in abeyance until the appeal is determined. The Ministers may vary the terms of the notice. Failure to comply with the notice can be reported to the Procurator Fiscal. Page 93 of 224
Page 100
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 15 In line with the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019, Renfrewshire Council are required to monitor major development and ensure they are constructed in line with the respective planning consent. Officers will monitor all major developments and will seek to ensure that the development progress in compliance with relevant conditions and the wider consent and approved plans. In the event that the development does not proceed in compliance with the respective consent Officers will seek a resolution to such matters which may include taking formal enforcement action should a resolution not be reached. Monitoring of Major Developments Page 94 of 224
Page 101
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 16 The Planning Enforcement powers available to the Council are set out in Part IV of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 and in Chapter IV of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997. The Planning Acts are available from The Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI) at www.opsi.gov.uk. Government policy on planning enforcement is set out in Circular 10/2009, “Planning Enforcement”. This document is available from the Scottish Government and can be viewed electronically at https://www.gov.scot/publications/planning-circular-10-2009-planning-enforcement/. This may be served where the Council requires the submission of a planning application for development which has already taken place without the appropriate planning permission. Technically, this constitutes formal enforcement action and extends the period within which other enforcement action may be taken. This is used to obtain information about activities on land where a breach of planning control is suspected. It is served on the owner or occupier, or a person with any other interest in the land or who is carrying out operations on the land. They are required to provide information about operations being carried out on the land and any conditions or limitations applying to any planning permission already granted. Failure to comply with the notice within 21 days of it being served is an offence and can lead to a fine in the Courts. Request for Application Notice (Section 33A of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997) Planning Contravention Notice Appendix - Enforcement Powers Page 95 of 224
Page 102
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 17 This is used to enforce the conditions applied to any planning permission. It is effective from the date it is served. It may be used as an alternative to an enforcement notice (see below), and is served on any person carrying out the development and/or any person having control of the land. There is no right of appeal. Contravening a breach of condition notice can result in the Council referring the case to the Procurator Fiscal for possible prosecution, with a fine on conviction of up to £5000 Breach of Condition Notice This must be served on the current owner, occupier and anyone else with an interest in the property. The procedures are similar to those outlined above. The notice must specify the steps to be taken to remedy the breach and a final date for compliance. Failure to meet the terms of the notice by the date specified is an offence. There is the right of appeal to Scottish Ministers against the notice. Breaches of listed building control are a serious matter. It is a criminal offence to undertake unauthorised works to demolish, significantly alter, or extend a listed building. In certain circumstances, this can lead either to an unlimited fine or imprisonment. This is used in urgent or serious cases where unauthorised activity must be stopped, usually on grounds of public safety. When a stop notice is served, the planning authority must also issue an enforcement notice. There is no right of appeal against a stop notice and failure to comply is an offence. An appeal can be made against the accompanying enforcement notice. If a stop notice is served without due cause, or an appeal against the enforcement notice is successful, the Council may face claims for compensation. The use of stop notices therefore needs to be carefully assessed by the Council. Listed Building Enforcement Notice Stop Notice This is generally used to deal with unauthorised development, but can also apply to breach of planning conditions. There are similar notices and powers to deal with listed buildings (see below), and advertisements. An enforcement notice will specify a time period to take effect (a minimum of 28 days – but see the section below on advertisements), the steps that must be taken to remedy the breach and the time for this to be completed. There is a right of appeal to the Scottish Ministers and the terms of the notice are suspended until a decision is reached. Failure to comply with an enforcement notice within the time specified is an offence, and may lead to a fine of up to £50,000 in the Sheriff Court. Failure to comply may also result in the Council taking direct action to correct the breach (see other powers below). Enforcement Notice Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 17Page 96 of 224
Page 103
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2019 | 18Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 18 An interdict may be granted by the courts and is used to stop or prevent a breach of planning control. Court proceedings can prove costly and the Council normally only seeks interdicts in very serious cases e.g. where public safety may be involved or unauthorised works are taking place to a listed building. The Council can seek an interdict, however, in relation to any breach without having to use other powers first. Breaching and interdict is treated as a contempt of court and carries heavy penalties. Failure to comply with the terms of an enforcement notice within the time specified can result in the Council carrying out the specified work. The Council may recover any costs it incurs from the landowner. Issued where Enforcement Notice or Breach of Condition Notice not complied with - this can be served where a person is in breach of an enforcement notice or a breach of condition notice where the notice is served within the six month period immediately following the compliance period stated in the enforcement notice; and that no prosecution proceedings have been started in respect of the breach. There is no right of appeal against a fixed penalty notice. The penalty for breach of an enforcement notice or a breach of condition notice is £2,000 and £300 respectively. The amount payable is reduced by 25% if paid within 15 days Payment discharges any liability for prosecution but does not however discharge the requirements of the original enforcement or breach of condition notice and the Planning Authority retains the power to take direct action to remedy the breach and recover any costs associated with such work. There is no right of appeal against a fixed penalty notice. Interdict and Interim Interdict (Section 146 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997) Direct Action Other Powers Fixed Penalty Notices Takes effect immediately when it is issued and, unlike a stop notice, does not require the issue of an enforcement notice. It would be used to stop an activity that would, in the Planning Authority’s view, cause damage to the environment and/or local amenity. The temporary stop notice might not prohibit the activity over the entire site. For example, it might instead restrict it to certain areas or times. The maximum period a temporary stop notice can be in effect for is 28 days. Temporary Stop Notices Page 97 of 224
Page 104
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2022 | 19 Telephone Development Management on 0300 3000 144. Building Standards, Chief Executive’s Service, Renfrewshire House, Cotton Street, Paisley, PA1 1JD. Telephone 0300 3000 144 or email bc@refrewshire.gov.uk. If you need advice about a specific planning issue you can also contact Planning Aid for Scotland which provides a free and independent advice service for individuals and community groups across Scotland. They can be contacted at:- http://www.planning-aid-scotland.org.uk/ or by calling their helpline on 0300 323 7602. E-mail dc@renfrewshire.gov.uk or write to: Development Standards, Chief Executive’s Service, Renfrewshire House, Cotton Street, Paisley, PA1 1JD. Complaints Office, Renfrewshire Council, Renfrewshire House, Cotton Street, PAISLEY PA1 1WB Email: complaints@renfrewshire.gov.uk Contact details for general inquiries on planning issues Other useful contacts – enquiries regarding building warrants Planning Aid for Scotland Contact details for reporting potential breaches of planning control Contact details regarding customer service Contacts Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 19Page 98 of 224
Page 105
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 20 Telephone Building Standards on 0300 3000 144. Flytipping and litter issues can be reported online at https://myaccount.renfrewshire.gov.uk/service/Tell_us_about_litter. Abandoned vehicles can be reported online at https://myaccount.renfrewshire.gov.uk/en/AchieveForms/?form_uri=sandbox-publish://AF-Process- e9a8544c-5897-404b-87c7-2a2d869f956f/AF-Stage-62d7a702-5a77-4d28-90bb-e04a9d3d26ca/ definition.json&redirectlink=%2Fen&cancelRedirectLink=%2Fen&consentMessage=yes. Such issues can be reported online at https://www.renfrewshire.gov.uk/graffiti. Dangerous Buildings Fly Tipping and Litter Abandoned Vehicles This Enforcement Charter considers the enforcement of planning, however other services also deal with enforcement matters under different legislation. Depending in the nature of the issue in question, other services may be best placed to assist. Graffiti and Vandalism Other Contacts Page 99 of 224
Page 106
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 21 Complaints Procedure If you are unhappy about the way we have delivered a service, you can complain in person, by phone, in writing, by email or via our online form at www.renfrewshire.gov.uk. Please tell us your full name and address, as much as you can about the complaint, what has gone wrong, and how you want to resolve the matter. Our complaints procedure has two stages: Investigation Stage 2 We aim to resolve complaints quickly. This could mean on-the-spot apology and explanation if something has clearly gone wrong and immediate action to resolve the problem. We will give you our decision at Stage One in five working days or less, unless there are exceptional circumstances. If we can’t resolve your complaint at this stage, we’ll explain and tell you what you can do next. We might suggest that you take your complaint to Stage Two. Frontline Resolution Stage 1 Stage Two deals with two types of complaint; those that have not been resolved at Stage One and those that are complex and need detailed investigation. When using Stage two we will acknowledge receipt of your complaint within three working days; discuss your complaint with you to understand why you remain dissatisfied and what outcome you are looking for, and give you a full response to the complaint as soon as possible and within 20 working days. If our investigation will take longer than 20 working days, we will tell you. We’ll agree revised time limits with you and keep you updated on progress. Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2022 | 21Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 21Page 100 of 224
Page 107
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 22 Who else can I contact? We hope that by following our complaints procedure you will find that your problem is solved quickly and effectively. If however, after completing our complaints procedures you still remain dissatisfied, you may of course still refer the problem to the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman. Generally, you must contact the Ombudsman within 12 months. You can contact the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman by: Address : Bridgeside House, 99 McDonald Road, Edinburgh, EH7 4NS or Freepost SPSO Email : ask@spso.org.uk Website : www.spso.org.uk Phone : 0800 377 7 330 Fax : 0800 377 7331 Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 22Page 101 of 224
Page 108
Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 23Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2022 | 23Renfrewshire Council Enforcement Charter 2024 | 23Page 102 of 224
Page 109
Development Standards, Chief Executive’s Service Renfrewshire Council Renfrewshire House Cotton Street, Paisley PA1 1JD T: 0300 300 0144 E: DC@renfrewshire.gov.uk Page 103 of 224
Page 110
Page 104 of 224
Page 111
___________________________________________________________________ To: Planning and Climate Change Policy Board On: 28 May 2024 ___________________________________________________________________ Report by: Chief Executive ___________________________________________________________________ Heading: Investing in Planning: A consultation on resourcing Scotland’s planning system ___________________________________________________________________ 1. Summary 1.1 The Scottish Government has recently published a consultation on resourcing Scotland’s planning system. 1.2 The consultation document sets out a range of options which seek to improve the capacity of the Scottish planning system and planning authorities. 1.3 The consultation seeks views on a range of issues including planning fees, increasing discretionary charging and resourcing other parts of the planning system. ___________________________________________________________________ 2. Recommendations 2.1 It is recommended that the Board: Note that The Scottish Government have published a consultation on resourcing Scotland’s planning system. Agree that the draft response as detailed is submitted as the response from Renfrewshire Council. _________________________________________________________ 3. Background 3.1 The Scottish Government is undertaking a consultation in respect of resourcing the planning system in Scotland with a view to ensuring that planning authorities are financially resourced to deliver future ambitions. Item 5 PACC280524 Page 105 of 224
Page 112
3.2 The consultation document acknowledges that local authorities continue to face financial challenges and notes that Skills Development Scotland have identified that 550-600 planners would be required to meet replacement demand across Scotland due to expected retirements, while 130 additional planners would be required to cover a projected 11% growth in the planning sector up to 2030. 3.3 The consultation seeks views from stakeholders to ensure the planning system is equipped to deal with current and future challenges. 4. Issues Considered 4.1 The consultation document seeks views on the following issues: Proportionality Certainty Streamlining, alignment and standardisation Skills, recruitment and retention A Planning Hub Annual inflationary increase to planning fees Locally set planning fees Increasing discretionary charging Fee for proposals on unallocated sites Masterplan Consent Areas Fees for planning appeals Digital service charge Energy generation Shellfish farming Cumulative impact 4.2 The consultation paper can be viewed at https://www.gov.scot/publications/investing-planning-consultation-resourcing- scotlands-planning-system/documents/. 4.3 Officers have reviewed the consultation document and have drafted responses to the question posed. The draft responses are detailed in Appendix 1. 5. Next Steps 5.1 It is recommended that the Board agree the response as detailed in Appendix 1 is submitted in advance of the submission deadline as the response from Renfrewshire Council. ___________________________________________________________________ Implications of the Report 1. Financial – None. 2. HR & Organisational Development – None. Page 106 of 224
Page 113
3. Community/Council Planning – the consultation document outlines potential changes to how the planning system would be resourced which may have an impact on the council and local communities. 4. Legal – None. 5. Property/Assets – None. 6. Information Technology – None. 7. Equality & Human Rights - The Recommendations contained within this report have been assessed in relation to their impact on equalities and human rights. No negative impacts on equality groups or potential for infringement of individuals’ human rights have been identified arising from the recommendations contained in the report 8. Health & Safety – None. 9. Procurement – None. 10. Risk – None. 11. Privacy Impact – None. 12. Cosla Policy Position – None. 13. Climate Risk – Not Applicable. ___________________________________________________________________ Author: David Love, Chief Planning Officer. Tel: 07483410182; Email: david.love@renfrewshire.gov.uk Page 107 of 224
Page 114
APPENDIX 1 – DRAFT RESPONSE Question 1: Which assessments might benefit most from improved proportionality? It is considered that providing a definitive list of assessments which might benefit most from proportionality is difficult given that each development proposal and the related site is different and considerations require to be undertaken on a case by case basis in order to ensure the nature of the proposed development and the site in question is fully considered and evaluated. It is considered that early pre-application discussions between the applicant and Planning Authority can assist in considering the proposal and site in question and therefore allow for proportionality to be considered on a case by case basis. Question 2: To what extent do you agree that processing agreements are an effective tool for creating certainty in planning decision making timescales? Strongly agree | Partially agree | No view | Partially disagree | Strongly disagree Please explain your view Processing agreements can provide some level of certainty in relation to decision making timescales and can be effective where both parties seek to adhere to any agreement. Processing agreements are often amended throughout the consideration of an application to reflect changing circumstances and can help offer some degree of certainty to both applicant and officers. Question 3: Do you consider that current resourcing issues are impacting on the use of processing agreements? Strongly agree | Partially agree | No view | Partially disagree | Strongly disagree Please explain your view Focus is primarily given to the consideration and determination of applications and as such the administration and time required to create and/or update processing agreements often create additional pressures which can have an impact on their use. Question 4: Would you be prepared to pay a discretionary fee to enter into a processing agreement? Yes | No view | No Please explain your view This question is best answered by those submitting planning applications and not by planning authorities, however it should be noted that attaching a discretionary fee to a processing agreement may increase expectations on planning authorities and does not provide any guarantee to achieving a determination target date for the application, Page 108 of 224
Page 115
given circumstances may change and unforeseen issues be highlighted during the consideration of any application. Question 5: What additional actions can we take to improve certainty in the planning process? Certainty can be interpreted in a variety of ways and the ability of planning authorities to consider valid applications could be improved. The submission of valid applications at the outset would reduce delays, allow early consideration of the proposed development and help ensure certainty is provided. Question 6: Do you have further ideas on opportunities for streamlining, alignment or standardisation? The use of Section 75 templates would assist where they are applicable. In addition, consideration of different Reports of Handling for householder and other application types may help streamline the process and improve efficiency. Question 7: Are there any skills actions which you think should be prioritised? Greater resources would have the biggest impact and would help provide planning authorities with the capacity to undertake ongoing professional development in a structured manner. Specialist officers with a focus on particular issues would assist in considering and scrutinising development proposals. Officers with expertise in drainage, biodiversity, trees, historic environment etc would be a great asset to planning authorities. Question 8: Are there any skills actions not identified which you think would make a significant impact? We are supportive of the actions being undertaken and would suggest further opportunities for planners to upskill in relation to related disciples may also assist in improving the overall system. Question 9: Do you think that the concept of a ‘planning hub’, modelled on the Building Standards Hub would support authorities and deliver improvement in the system? Strongly agree | Partially agree | No view | Partially disagree | Strongly disagree Please explain your view A Planning Hub could potentially help support and assist planning authorities especially in relation to particular subject areas. We would however note concern in relation to how any such hub would operate and be financed. The proposed Hub could potentially attract staff resources away from planning authorities therefore having a detrimental impact, while we would question how resources and workload would be Page 109 of 224
Page 116
allocated between authorities? The provision of a Hub would also require financial investment which would be a burden on planning authorities should they be asked to contribute to a share of the costs. The performance of the Hub should also be considered given it could have an impact on the performance of planning authorities who are seeking support. Question 10: Are there other ways a hub could add value and provide support in the short and longer term? A Planning Hub could help support standardisation across authorities in some cases. Question 11: Which of the options do you think is most suitable, and why? i. Within Scottish Government ii. Within public organisation iii. Within a host authority iv. Other v. No view The Improvement Service or other such body would be most suitable thus giving some distance from Scottish Government and not being seen to be hosted by one authority where it may be perceived favourable treatment is provided. Question 12: How do you think a Planning Hub could be resourced? Additional funding and a commitment from central government would be required. Question 13: Do you agree that planning fees should increase annually in line with inflation? Strongly agree | Partially agree | No view | Partially disagree | Strongly disagree Please explain your view Costs of running the planning service continually increase and therefore an annual increase in line with inflation would be reasonable and justified. Question 14: Is a calculation based on the 12 month Consumer Price Index the most appropriate mechanism? Strongly agree | Partially agree | No view | Partially disagree | Strongly disagree Please explain your view We are supportive of this mechanism. Page 110 of 224
Page 117
Question 15: Should an annual inflationary increase apply to: i. Individual fees and increments ii. Individual fees, increments and maximums iii. No view Question 16: What would be your preferred approach to how planning fees are set in the future? Fees should continue to be set at a national level. Question 17: Are there key principles which should be set out in the event that fee setting powers are devolved to planning authorities? Although disagreeing with fees being devolved to planning authorities, should they be introduced key principles such a maximum/minimum fees should be set out by the Scottish Government. Question 18: What other processes that support the determination of a planning application could authorities be given powers to charge at their discretion? Fees could be applied to EIA screening and scoping opinions on a discretionary basis. Question 19: Do think the circumstances where a refund can be requested is set out as part of any published information regarding the introduction of a discretionary charge? Should refunds be considered, it is suggested that specific circumstances would require to be outlined at a national level. In addition, the level of such refund should also be set nationally. Question 20: Do you agree with the principle that authorities should have discretionary powers to increase fees for a proposal on an unallocated site within the development plan? Strongly agree | Partially agree | No view | Partially disagree | Strongly disagree Please explain your view There is merit in an increased fee being attached to development proposals where the site in question is unallocated. It is however considered that such an increase should be set at a national level either depending on the proposal or a percentage increase of the fee as would be applied at the time of submission. Page 111 of 224
Page 118
Question 21: Do you agree that planning authorities should be able to recoup the costs of preparing a Masterplan Consent Area through discretionary charging? Strongly agree | Partially agree | No view | Partially disagree | Strongly disagree Please explain your view The Planning Authority should have the ability to recoup costs associated with the preparation of a masterplan consent area. Question 22: Do you agree with the types of appeals that should incur a fee? Yes | no view | No Please explain your view It is considered that a fee should also apply to an appeal in relation to the non- determination of an application. If no fee is applicable, this may encourage applicants to submit an appeal at the earliest opportunity should they consider that a refusal to the planning application is likely. Question 23: Do you agree that setting the fee for applying to appeal the refusal of planning permission (to either DPEA or the planning authority) is set as a percentage of the original planning application fee? Strongly agree | Partially agree | No view | Partially disagree | Strongly disagree Please explain your view It is considered that a percentage of the planning application fee seems a reasonable way in which to calculate any fee associated with the appeal. We would however suggest that a minimum fee is applied given that where a small planning fee is applied any appeal fee is likely to be minimal and make little impact in recovering partial costs associated with the processing and consideration of the appeal. Question 24: If a percentage of fee approach to appeal charging was considered most appropriate, what level do you consider would be most appropriate to reflect volume of work by DPEA or the LRB? 10% | 20% | 30% | 40% | No view | Other Please explain your view 20% with the inclusion of a minimum fee of £150. Question 25: Do you agree that an authority should consider waiving or reducing an appeal fee where they have offered such a waiver on the related planning application? Strongly agree | Partially agree | No view | Partially disagree | Strongly disagree Please explain your view Page 112 of 224
Page 119
Costs are incurred in processing and considering an appeal. In addition, it is considered that there should be consistency in any waiver applied no matter if the appeal is dealt with by DPEA or the Local Review Body. Question 26: Do you have views on how a service charge for applying for planning permission or a building warrant online could be applied? A percentage of the application could be applied. Question 27: What other options are there to resource the operation and improvement of the eDevelopment service? Direct support from central government. Question 28: Should the current threshold of 50MW for applications for electricity generation which are to be determined by authorities be altered? Yes | No view | No Please explain your view A change in such thresholds would likely place further pressures on planning authorities. Question 29: Should different thresholds apply to different types of generating stations? Yes | No view | No Please explain your view Differing thresholds may create confusion. Question 30: What would be the resource implications of increasing the threshold for the determination of applications for onshore electricity generating stations? Planning authorities would likely see an increase in workload, while some authorities would lack the expertise to consider onshore electricity generating stations. Question 31: If Scottish Government were to make a voluntary contribution equivalent to a percentage of the offshore electricity fee to authorities, what level of contribution would be appropriate to support some recovery of costs? Please provide justification for your answer. In terms of consistency, the same voluntary contribution as applied to onshore proposals should apply. Page 113 of 224
Page 120
Question 32: Should we introduce a new category of development for applications for hydrogen projects? If so, how should these fees be set/calculated? Yes | No view | No Please explain your view Any introduction of fees should be based on the generation/storage capacities etc. Question 33: Are there different considerations for hydrogen production when compared with proposals which are concerned only with storage and distribution? Yes | No view | No Please explain your view Question 34: Do you agree that the standard £100 which applies to most prior notification and approval applications is appropriate? Yes | No view | No Please explain your view In most cases such submission take time to consider and process and as such the fee should be increased. Question 35: Are there particular PDR classes where you think the current fee should be amended? If so, please explain why that is considered to be the case. 33 Question 36: Would a reduction of the current fee (£200 per 0.1 hectare) be an appropriate approach to resolving this issue? No comment Question 37: What would you consider to be a reasonable fee for shellfish farm applications? (Please elaborate on your answer using an average shellfish farm development (5 x 220m twin-headline longlines at 20m spacing with 30m end moorings) as an example.) No comment Question 38: Which proposal would you most like to see implemented? Please explain the reason for your answer. Page 114 of 224
Page 121
Annual fee increases based upon set index in order to keep costs in line with raising costs elsewhere. Question 39: Do you have other comments on the cumulative impact of the proposals? None. Question 40: Do you have other ideas to help resource the planning system? Please set out how you think the proposal could be resourced. Greater support in relation to new entrants into the profession with reduced costs associated with higher education courses with consideration given to Scottish Government funding places. In addition to the above, we would also suggest that the infrastructure levy, as included in the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 should be brought forward by the Scottish Government and fully enacted. The introduction of such a levy would assist and contribute to funding local infrastructure which would help support communities and local people. Question 41: Please provide any information on the potential impacts of our proposals to assist with preparation of the following impact assessments: Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment Equality Impact Assessment Islands Communities Impact Assessment Child Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment Fairer Scotland Duty Strategic Environmental Assessment No comment Page 115 of 224
Page 122
Page 116 of 224
Page 123
SUMMARY OF APPLICATIONS TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING AND CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY BOARD ON 28/05/2024 RENFREWSHIRE COUNCIL Item No.PROPOSAL:LOCATION:APPLICANT: WARD: APPN. NO: 19/0765/PP Cosmopolitan Hotels Limited Titanium 1 King's Inch Place Erskine PA4 8WF Erskine Bridge Hotel Erskine Harbour Erskine PA8 6AN Erection of residential development in principle Ward 12 RECOMMENDATION: Refuse A 22/0310/AD Mr Abubakr Malik Oakshaw Guesthouse 2 West Brae Paisley PA1 2EB 2 West Brae Paisley PA1 2EB Display of two internally illuminated box signs (in retrospect)Ward 4 RECOMMENDATION: Refuse B 23/0354/PP Mr Abdullah Hamid 34 Sherbrooke Avenue Glasgow G41 4SD Alexandra Nursing Home Calside Paisley PA2 6LX 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 Ward 6 RECOMMENDATION: Grant subject to conditions C 23/0355/LB Mr Abdullah Hamid 34 Sherbrooke Avenue Glasgow G41 4SD Alexandra Nursing Home Calside Paisley PA2 6LX Redevelopment, partial demolition and conversion of former infirmary into 45 flatsWard 6 RECOMMENDATION: Grant subject to conditions D 23/0738/PP CWP Erskine Ltd ONE 37 George Street Edinburgh EH2 2HN Torrance House Erskine Harbour Erskine PA8 6PA Construction of vehicular access and associated works Ward 12 RECOMMENDATION: Grant subject to conditions E Item 6 PACC280524 Page 117 of 224
Page 124
Item No.PROPOSAL:LOCATION:APPLICANT: WARD: APPN. NO: 24/0052/EB Carolanne Brown Energy Consents Unit Scottish Government Neilston Battery Storage System Site Gleniffer Road Paisley Section 36 application to construct and operate a 150MW battery energy storage facility together with associated infrastructure, substation, security fencing, cctv, security lighting and landscaping (Energy Consents Unit consultation request) to view plans go to https://www.energyconsents.scot/ Ward 7 RECOMMENDATION: No objections with provisions F 24/0118/PP Braehead (Glasgow) Ltd 5 Churchill Place 10th Floor London E14 5HU Braehead Retail Park 136 King's Inch Drive Renfrew Glasgow G51 4BT Section 42 application to vary conditions 4 and 5 of planning permission 99/02668/DC, to allow for increased gross retail floorspace and to widen the range of goods sold from Unit I and to consolidate previously granted consents to allow a wider range of goods to be sold from Units D2, E and J Ward 1 RECOMMENDATION: Grant subject to conditions G 24/0153/PP P3P Partners LLP 41 Dover Street London W1S 4NS Land Off Barnwell/ Wright Street Renfrew PA4 8AN Erection of up to a 49.9MW Battery Energy Storage System (BESS)Ward 2 RECOMMENDATION: Refuse H Total Number of Applications to be considered = 8 Page 118 of 224
Page 125
Report by Chief Planning Officer Planning and Climate Change Policy Board: 28 May 2024 Reference No 19/0765/PP Application Type Planning Permission in Principle Proposal Erection of residential development in principle Location Erskine Bridge Hotel, Erskine Harbour, Erskine Ward 12 - Erskine and Inchinnan Community Council Erskine Community Council Applicant Cosmopolitan Hotels Limited Recommendation Refuse All plans, reports, documents and representations relating to this application can be viewed in full online at https://pl-bs.renfrewshire.gov.uk/online- applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=ZZZYL6MWWR919 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 in principle for residential development on a site to the northwest of Erskine town centre. A Design Statement has been submitted with the application which includes an indicative layout outlining the potential development. The indicative layout illustrates 246 dwellings and flats incorporating pedestrian and cycling links, amenity space, play facilities and a riverside park as well as vehicular access capable of accommodating buses. Site Description The site is located on the southern side of the River Clyde on the northern edge of Erskine within the grounds and adjacent to the Muthu Hotel and spa. The existing hotel car park forms part of the application site and an alternative car parking area within the grounds of the hotel would accommodate the parking needs for the hotel. The site extends to approximately 7.8 hectares and generally slopes downwards from the western boundary to the east towards the River Clyde. The majority of the site comprises of grassland, trees, some hardstanding and part of the existing hotel car park. There is an overhead electricity pylon that traverses the southeastern corner of the site. Vehicular access to the development would be via the northwestern arm of the Barholm roundabout and from Kilpatrick Drive to the south. Whilst both roads link to the A726, which borders the site to the west, Kilpatrick Drive provides a direct route to Erskine Town Centre. Although most of the site comprises scrub land, grassland and wooded areas designated within the Adopted Renfrewshire Local Development Plan as a Transition Area, there are two Item 6(a) PACC280524 Page 119 of 224
Page 126
Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) Erskine Hotel Wood SINC, located in the north west of the site and Erskine Old Lane SINC which bounds the south east of the site adjacent to the River Clyde walkway. Erskine Hotel Wood Tree Preservation Order (TPO) was designated in 2022 to protect the trees within the Erskine Hotel Wood, which broadly equates to the area also covered by the Hotel Wood SINC, and contained within the application site. This comprises a broad leaved woodland dominated by Sycamore and Ash, but which has a variety of other tree species in the canopy, including Wych Elm, Horse Chestnut, Silver Birch, Downy Birch, Pedunculate Oak, Crack Willow, Lime, Alder, Beech and a single Yew. A second Tree Preservation Order was designated to protect the trees within Old Lane SINC and other trees that are within the south east of the application site that bound the SINC. This woodland comprises a mixture of mainly native and fast-growing tree species with an element of non-native deciduous trees including Grey Alder and Hornbeam. The main species within the area are Ash, Silver Birch, Grey Willow and Goat Willow. Adjoining the site to the east is the Inner Clyde Special Protection Area (SPA), Ramsar Site and Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). Barrhill Plantation and Boden Boo SINC are within 1km to the north and Rashielee Strip is about 450m to the south. The site is located 0.95km from Bargarran and St John Bosco Primary Schools and nursery facilities, 1.6km from Park Mains High School and 7.1 km from Trinity High School. Erskine Town Centre is located to the south of the site and connected to it by footways. A planning application Ref No: 19/0184/PP seeking detailed planning permission for the erection of 246 dwellings and flats for this site, with a layout identical to the indicative layout submitted as part of this application, was submitted in March 2019 and refused at the Communities, Housing and Planning Policy Board on 27th October 2020. A subsequent appeal, to the Directorate of Planning and Environmental Appeals (DPEA), against this refusal was dismissed in July 2021. The reporter concluded that the complete loss of the SINC woodland would be to the detriment of local biodiversity and the amenity of the local area and would conflict with local development plan Policy ENV 2 and with the criteria applied through Policy E3 which requires proposals to co-exist with existing uses and avoid any significant effect on the character and amenity of the surrounding area. However, the reporter recognised that a negative outcome to the appeal would not discount a future contribution to the housing land supply being provided from the site as supported by Policy E3 of the local development plan. 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. Discussions have been ongoing throughout the consideration of the application in relation to environmental designations which exist within and adjacent to the application site. It was understood that amendments would be proposed however to date no amended plans have been received. Page 120 of 224
Page 127
Negotiated Improvements No changes have been negotiated. Site History Application No: 23/0291/PN Description: Proposal of Application Notice for Residential development Decision: Accepted Application No: 19/0184/PP Description: Erection of residential development comprising 246 dwellinghouses and flats, with associated infrastructure, open space and landscaping Decision: Refused Application No: 19/0342/CL Description: Use of ground as car park. Decision: Grant Application No: 19/0348/PP Description: Formation of car park hardstanding Decision: Grant Application No: 18/0176/NO Description: Erection of a residential development, associated infrastructure and landscaping Decision: Accepted Application No: 18/0270/EO Description: Request for screening opinion on need for Environmental Impact Assessment for erection of residential development Decision: Not required. Consultations Glasgow Airport Safeguarding - has indicated that the proposed development could conflict with safeguarding criteria unless appropriate conditions are imposed to control the location, height, layout, form, materials and landscaping of the development. Design Services (Flooding) - At the time of receipt of the application the Flooding Officer had no objection. However, it is recognised that since the application has been submitted the flooding information submitted has not been updated given the period that has elapsed since receipt and it does not consider the requirements of NPF4 or the River Clyde Model Update Technical Report by Fairhurst dated December 2021 required by SEPA. Therefore, the information provided at this time is inadequate to fully assess this matter at this time. Children's Services - No objection subject to a S75 agreement to secure a financial contribution in respect of education provision. S.E.P.A - No objection so long as the following conditions are imposed to control the development: 1. To comply with National Planning Framework (NPF4), the proposed development footprint should be kept out with the 1:200 year +CC (climate change) flood extent, as recommended in the flood risk assessment (FRA) Page 121 of 224
Page 128
2. A freeboard allowance of 0.82m is to be applied to the design flood level to inform finished floor levels for the development. 3. An Invasive Non-Native Species management plan requires to be submitted and approved before development commences. Environment, Housing & Infrastructure (Env. Protection) - No objection so long as appropriate conditions are imposed to ensure a site investigation and remediation strategy and implementation plan are submitted and thereafter on completion of any work required this is verified. In terms of noise the proposed development will result in the introduction of a noise sensitive development to an area that could be affected by noise from the adjacent hotel and by road noise and a new noise assessment requires to be carried out using appropriate methodology and taking quantitative and qualitative means of assessment. The noise impact assessment submitted by REC Ltd is not accepted and issues remain unresolved. In terms of lighting, external lighting associated with the hotel and car parking may adversely affect the residential development and a survey requires to be submitted to determine the impact of external lighting/floodlighting on the proposed development. NATS - No objection. Chief Executive's Service (Roads Development) – No objection subject to conditions. West Of Scotland Archaeology Service - No objection so long as a condition is imposed to ensure the developer secures the implementation of a programme of archaeological works in accordance with an approved written scheme of investigation. NatureScot - No objection so long as a condition is imposed to ensure the works are undertaken fully within the period during which there are no redshank or other protected wintering birds are likely to be present on the Inner Clyde (16 March to 15 September inclusive) or if works are to take place during this period acoustic and visual screen barriers are put in place between the works site and the SPA. In addition to this, appropriate conditions would require to be imposed to control piling, night lighting, the approval of a Construction Environment Management Plan and installation of post development informational signage informing new residents and visitors how to protect the nature conservation of the area. NatureScot also advise that an appropriate assessment requires to be carried out as a result of the proposal’s proximity to the SPA. This is considered below. NatureScot also highlight that a large proportion of the area proposed for new housing as part of the development is identified as a SINC and advise that SINC allocations being removed as part of any development proposal would set a very unwelcome precedent and would be extremely challenging to accommodate in a manner that complies with the Council’s statutory Biodiversity Duty as detailed in Section 1(1) of the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004. The potential for significant felling of well-established semi-natural woodland is also highlighted as a concern. The proposal’s impact on local ecological interests will be assessed below. Scottish Gas Networks - No response. Scottish Water - No objection. RSPB – Object on the basis that it has not been demonstrated that the proposed development will not compromise the integrity of the Inner Clyde Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). It is also considered that the proposed development will have an adverse effect on the integrity of the SPA. Page 122 of 224
Page 129
Inchinnan Community Council – Have raised concerns that any further housing developments in and around Erskine would be detrimental to the community and surrounding communities until existing infrastructure is improved. Representations The application has been publicised in line with the requirements of the relevant legislation. The following representations were received: Object - 3 Support - 0 Neutral - 0 The issues raised can be summarised as follows: ▪ The full planning application was refused for very good reasons. The situation has not changed, and the woodland and its associated ecology still require to be protected. ▪ The site is even more protected now by the addition of a Tree Preservation Order. ▪ Allowing the felling of a mature deciduous woodland would result in a huge loss of biodiversity, damage and fragment a key wildlife corridor and result in the loss of vital green open space to existing residents. ▪ The two SINCs now have TPO status and the Hotel Wood SINC and Old Erskine Lane SINC is on the native woodland survey for Scotland, the SSSI and SPA are all under threat. ▪ The proposal would negatively impact the amount of native woodland in the area as well as its mental health benefits. ▪ The site is prone to flooding thus connectivity is compromised at the waterfront due to tidal flooding and rising sea levels. ▪ Public services and public transport are already compromised, and more cars would further stress our broken infrastructure and increase air pollution. ▪ The proposal would not meet current standards including the new National Planning Framework 4 given the proposed development is both on an area prone to flooding and would remove a woodland. 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 13 - Sustainable transport Policy 16 - Quality homes Policy 18 - Infrastructure first Policy 22 - Flood risk and water management Page 123 of 224
Page 130
Full details relating to the policies of the NPF4 can be found online. Renfrewshire Local Development Plan Policy ENV2 - Natural Heritage Policy I1 - Connecting Places Policy I3 - Flooding and Drainage Policy I7 - Zero and Low Carbon Buildings Policy I8 - Developer Contributions Policy E3 - Transition Areas Policy P3 - Housing Mix and Affordable Housing Policy P6 – Open Space Full details relating to the policies of the LDP can be found online. Other relevant policies and guidance New Development Supplementary Guidance: Delivering the Environment Strategy Delivering the Places Strategy Delivering the Infrastructure Strategy Renfrewshire Planning and Development Tree Policy 2022 Scottish Government Appeal Decision Notice PPA-350-2037 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: Noise Impact Assessment Erskine Hotel 2019 - This report contains a series of noise surveys completed in order to determine the existing levels of sound across the site due to road traffic noise associated with the A726 and entertainment noise arising from the hotel to the north. Transport Assessment 2018 - The Transport Assessment has been prepared to assess the expected implications of this development on the surrounding transport network. It concludes that the proposed development is in accordance with current Government policy, with regard to the ability to integrate the development into existing and planned networks for pedestrians, cyclists and public transport and that access to sustainable transport networks is within the vicinity, in accordance with Local Transport Strategy aims. Through predicted impacts of development traffic generation and taking account that the development would be accessed from either of the two existing roundabouts positioned at the northern and southern boundaries of the site, it is predicted to operate within capacity. Design Statement 2019 – This statement claims that the design for Erskine has developed from a desire to create a development which connects the site and existing residential developments in the local area to the waterfront whilst embracing the design principles of Designing Places and Designing Streets. It states that the existing and proposed Page 124 of 224
Page 131
landscaping enhance the development’s setting which is in keeping with the environment and its surroundings. Flood Risk Assessment 2019 - The Flood Risk Assessment describes the proposed works; the baseline flood risk on site; the implications of the development on flood risk; and how the proposed works should be undertaken to comply with Scottish Planning Policy. It concludes that development has been limited to land out with the 1 in 200 year flood extent and the extent of development will be dictated by the flood contours established as part of this FRA, in line with SEPA guidance and Scottish Planning Policy. In order to provide the required level of protection, it is recommended that all development have a finished floor level that equates to the 0.5% AEP plus climate change level with an additional 300mm freeboard. The finished floor level of all properties should therefore be set at or above 5.7m AOD and access roads should be set at a minimum of 5.4m AOD. Drainage Strategy Report 2018 - This report outlines the proposed drainage design requirements and considerations taken in developing the drainage strategy to service the site. It states it has been written to recognise the requirements of Renfrewshire Council, Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA), Scottish Water (SW) and current best practice. Pre-Application Consultation Report - This report outlines the community engagement undertaken by the applicant during the pre-application consultation period and demonstrates compliance with statutory requirements. Habitats Regulations Appraisal (HRA) Screening Report 2019 - This HRA screening assessment is the first stage of a potential four stage process in considering the effects of a development on a European designated site. This HRA screening report considers the effects of the proposed development on the Inner Clyde SPA and Ramsar and whether it is likely to result in any of the threats or pressures listed on the 'Natura 2000 - Standard Data Form for the sites. The report notes that the proposed development site comes within 30 metres of the boundary of the Inner Clyde European Special Protection Area (SPA) classified for its population of non-breeding (wintering) redshank qualifying interest. The SPA’s status means that the requirements of the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c) Regulations 1994 as amended apply. Consequently, Renfrewshire Council is required to consider the effect of the proposal on the Inner Clyde SPA before it can be consented (commonly known as a Habitats Regulation Appraisal or HRA) In addition, the report notes that Redshank on the Clyde estuary are known to be displaced from feeding habitat by activities associated with development occurring with a distance of up to 150metres. It is NatureScot’s view that the proposal is likely to have a significant effect on the qualifying population of overwintering redshank of the Inner Clyde SPA. Consequently, the Council is required to carry out an appropriate assessment in view of the site’s Conservation Objectives for its qualifying interest. NatureScot have advised that on the basis of the information submitted by the applicants, if the proposal is undertaken strictly in accordance with appropriate mitigation measures, then the proposal will not adversely affect the integrity of the site. It should be noted however that the RSPB do not support this conclusion. Preliminary Ecological Appraisal 2018 - This report comprises a desk study, a Phase 1 habitat survey and a protected species walkover survey to inform an assessment of the nature conservation value of the site and to identify any potential constraints to the development proposals. It concludes that no evidence of protected species was recorded, although the occasional presence of badger and otter cannot be totally discounted. It is Page 125 of 224
Page 132
recommended that during construction work, all deep excavations and pipes are covered when not worked and shallow excavations should have a ramp or suitable means of escape. No potential bat roosts were identified within the site with more than negligible potential however given the potential of the site as a foraging resource or commuting corridor a suitable lighting plan should be designed for the site that should minimise light spill. Due to a typical range of common bird species it is recommended that any de-vegetation work, soil stripping or demolition of buildings should be undertaken outside of the nesting bird season where possible, or where not possible nest checks should be carried out by an ecologist immediately ahead of any the works. A number of non-native species were identified on the site and an invasive non-native species (INNS) Management Plan should be prepared in order to determine appropriate management on the site. SINC Assessment 2019 - This report comprises a Site of Importance to Nature Conservation Assessment of the Hotel Wood SINC located within the proposed development site. It concludes, due mainly to the presence of invasive species and only local species rarity that the SINC does not meet minimum thresholds for SINC status under the City of Edinburgh criteria. 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) and the adopted Renfrewshire Local Development Plan (2021). This application seeks planning permission in principle; therefore the main considerations are whether the principle of residential development at this location is acceptable and if it has been demonstrated that the impact of the proposed development is acceptable and for this particular case the characteristics of the proposal are such that it will not have an adverse impact on nature conservation interests and the loss of trees. 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 16 (Quality Homes) of NPF4 states that development proposals for new homes on land allocated for housing in the Local Development Plan (LDP) shall be supported. Although not specifically allocated as a housing site, the application site is designated in the Renfrewshire LDP as a Transition Area under Policy E3 which supports a range of uses, so long as they can co-exist with existing surrounding development, having no significant impact on the character or amenity of the surrounding area including avoiding any adverse effect on the integrity of any Natura 2000 site. Figure 2 within the associated New Page 126 of 224
Page 133
Development Supplementary Guidance lists the acceptable uses within each site which for this site includes residential. In light of the above, the principle of housing use on this site is supported, provided there would be no significant impact on the character or amenity of the surrounding area including any Natura 2000 site and subject to compliance with other relevant policies and considerations of the LDP. Part of the south east corner of the site is also designated as open space under Policy P6 of the LDP. This states that areas of open space, recreation provision and amenity space, as identified on the Local Development Plan Proposals Map, will be protected from development and that proposals require to be assessed in relation to criteria set out in the New Development Supplementary Guidance on Open Space. It is noted that these criteria include the requirement that the benefit of the proposed development to the public should clearly outweigh the present open space value of the site. This area of open space is also partially designated as a SINC and TPO (Old Lane SINC and TPO). It is therefore considered that the development’s impact on open space and the natural environment should be considered through assessment against Policy ENV2 'Natural Heritage'. This assessment will also consider the development’s impact on any Natura 2000 site. Policy ENV2 of the LDP states that proposals should protect and restore degraded habitats, enhance and promote access to Renfrewshire's natural environment and minimise any adverse impacts on habitats, species, network connectivity or landscape character. All proposals will be assessed in terms of the mitigation hierarchy, the cumulative impact of development based on the precautionary principle and should protect and where possible enhance; European and Ramsar Sites, protected species, SSSI’s, wild land, LNR’S, SINCs and wildlife corridors, biodiversity, landscape character and setting, Clyde Muirsheil Regional Park and trees, including those covered by a Tree Preservation Order. Delivering the Environment Strategy of the New Development Supplementary Guidance provides further guidance on assessing developments that affect the environment providing criteria for development to be assessed against. Natural heritage states that all developments require to follow the principles of the mitigation hierarchy to prevent or avoid impacts on the natural environment. If this is not possible then measures should be made to minimise and reduce any unavoidable impacts. The last resort would be the consideration of compensatory planting or habitat provision. It also considers that trees, woodlands, and forestry should be maintained and where possible enhanced throughout Renfrewshire by, amongst others, protecting ancient semi-natural woodland, along with other woodlands, hedgerows and individual trees from adverse impact resulting from development. Development will also be required to protect and where possible enhance SINCs to ensure that their nature conservation interest is maintained. Policy 3 of NPF4 'Biodiversity' seeks to protect biodiversity, deliver positive effects from development, and strengthen nature networks and considers that development proposals should contribute to the enhancement of biodiversity and also integrate nature-based solutions. Policy 4 of NPF4 'Natural Places' seeks to protect, restore and enhance natural assets making best use of nature-based solutions. It considers that development proposals that affect a site designated as a local nature conservation site or landscape area in the LDP will only be supported where development will not have a significant adverse effect on the integrity of the area or the qualities for which it has been identified which are not outweighed by social, environmental, or economic benefits. Page 127 of 224
Page 134
Policy 6 of NPF4 'Forestry, Woodland and Trees' seeks to protect and expand forests, woodlands, and trees. It states that development proposals involving woodland removal will only be supported where they achieve significant and clearly defined public benefits. Large pockets of the site are heavily wooded, and the Erskine Hotel Wood SINC is included within the application site and is located towards the north western boundary of the site. In addition to this SINC, Erskine Old Lane SINC bounds the south east corner of the site. Adjoining the site to the east is the Inner Clyde Special Protection Area (SPA), Ramsar Site and Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). In addition to these natural heritage considerations the impact of the development on protected trees must also be considered. Renfrewshire Planning & Development Tree Policy, 2022, seeks to restate the importance of trees and woodlands and the vital role they play in the setting, appearance and quality of Renfrewshire’s environment, as they make a significant contribution to the economy, communities and the environment. It states that in considering proposals for new development appropriate provision must be made for the planting and preservation of trees, especially trees subject to special protection. A Tree Preservation Order (TPO) was designated in 2022 to protect the trees within the Erskine Hotel Wood, located within the application site which broadly equates to the area also covered by the Erskine Hotel Wood SINC. In addition to this, a further TPO was made in 2022, Erskine Old Lane SINC TPO located to the east of the application site. Although this TPO largely covers the SINC of that name, the TPO extends further to the west than the SINC and covers woodland within the application site, in its south eastern corner. Given that the indicative layout extends into both of these protected areas, it is considered that the development of the site could potentially result in significant tree removal and removal of trees protected by a Tree Preservation Order. While the application is for planning permission in principle and the full details of design and layout would be considered under future applications that would come forward for additional matters specified in conditions (AMSIC), the ecological information submitted in support of the application is based on the indicative layout. The indicative layout submitted in support of the application illustrates a fairly dense development with pockets of landscaping, a linear park and landscaped edges. This layout would see the loss of the Erskine Hotel Wood SINC, wholescale tree removal within the area covered by the Erskine Hotel Wood TPO and development in proximity to the Hotel without clearly defined public benefits. In addition, it is considered that the impact of the proposal in relation to the Old Lane SINC TPO whilst not as significant could potentially have an adverse effect on the westerly arm and northern boundary of these protected trees. The applicant has submitted a SINC Assessment Report, a Habitat Regulations Appraisal Screening Report, and a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal in support of the application in an attempt to justify the development of the site as illustrated in the indicative layout. The SINC Assessment seeks to justify removal of the Erskine Hotel Wood SINC for inclusion within the developable land within the site and concludes that the SINC does not meet the minimum threshold for SINC status under the City of Edinburgh criteria. This, in part, was stated to be due to invasive species, identifying that snowberry covered around 50% of the shrub layer of the woodland areas of the SINC as well as in the older portion of the woodland, and is likely having a significant detrimental effect on the biodiversity of the woodland and continues to devalue the site. It is further stated that plants and species identified within the SINC, which although common and widespread in the UK generally, may have local significance in Renfrewshire due to their rarity here and could be transplanted to another location. Page 128 of 224
Page 135
The report concluded that the retention of the Erskine Old Lane SINC combined with other woodland to the north combined with the provision of a managed grassland and native planting scheme could ensure that there are a range of managed habitats for potentially displaced breeding birds and that green links could also ensure there is a green link between the retained SINC and the mudflats and Boden Boo to the north. In this regard, the Erskine Old Wood SINC was surveyed by Renfrewshire Council in 2016, given the potential for development of the site, and while it was recognised that at present there is little or no management undertaken, and the presence of invasive species, it was recommended that the designation be retained as the site remains locally important for biodiversity. The Erskine Old Wood SINC and TPO would be removed as part of the development of the site and Old Lane SINC is also likely to be impacted. NatureScot have expressed concerns regarding the proposal’s impact on local ecological interests and on tree felling and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds have also raised similar concerns around the loss of mature broad-leaved woodland and impact on local biodiversity value. The concerns raised by the consultees are valid material considerations that are supported within the development plan that require to be taken into account. It is clear that the community also places value on this resource in this location and that it links to other locations along the Clyde in terms of contributing to local greenspace and biodiversity. There is no evidence that this loss could be fully and comparably addressed locally particularly given the value placed on the existing mature woodland and replacement would take a significant period of time to establish elsewhere. Therefore, the approach proposed through indicative layouts and plans would not resolve compliance with local development plan requirements nor the requirements of NPF4 policies and as such it is considered that these natural heritage designations should be preserved, enhanced, and managed as part of any proposal. This view is reiterated by the reporter within the Decision letter issued in relation to the planning appeal against the refusal of planning permission for the full planning application (19/0184/PP). The application has been supported by the report 'Erskine Bridge Hotel Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (IKM Consulting, October 2018)' and a Habitat Regulation Screening Report 2019. The preliminary Assessment (Phase 1 habitat survey) was undertaken to inform an assessment of the nature conservation value of the site and to identify any potential constraints to development. The report considered the presence of the Inner Clyde SPA/Ramsar/SSSI located adjacent to the site and concluded that many of the species associated with the designation are unlikely to utilise the habitats present on the site nor likely to provide core habitats for either foraging or nesting and concluded that the proposed development would not directly affect the Inner Clyde designated sites. It discounted the presence of any protected species on the site. The Report accepts that any development within the site is likely to lead to the loss of semi- mature habitats and with the exception of the woodland areas it considered these habitats to be of local value and therefore impact on local conservation is not considered significant. NatureScot offered no objection in relation to impacts on either the SPA or SSSI provided appropriate separation distances are set and appropriate mitigation measures are employed during construction. Page 129 of 224
Page 136
Notwithstanding this, given the time that has passed since the preparation of these reports, and the conclusions drawn by the DPEA reporter on the previous application, updates would now be required to inform whether this view was still held by NatureScot. These have not been provided by the applicant. It is also noted that the RSPB objected on grounds of impact. The Habitat Regulations Appraisal Screening Report 2019 submitted in support of the application concludes that the proposal would not adversely affect the integrity of the Inner Clyde Special Protection Area (SPA). NatureScot similarly concluded that given the absence of evidence of specific redshank roosting sites or of other notable bird species, there would be no adverse impacts on the internationally important population of redshank which the Inner Clyde SPA has been classified to protect. However, RSPB Scotland have objected to the proposal primarily on the basis that it is likely to result in significant effect on the Inner Clyde Special Protection Area (SPA). RSPB state that the information submitted does not enable the Council to conclude beyond reasonable scientific doubt that there will not be an adverse effect on the integrity of the SPA. Given the age of the survey material currently lodged and comments received from the RSPB it is considered that it has not been adequately demonstrated that there would be no adverse impacts on the qualifying interests of the Inner Clyde Special Protection Area. The application site is subject to a TPO which covers an area commensurate with the Hotel Wood SINC and part of Old Lane SINC TPO also falls within the south eastern corner of the site. A proper assessment of the impact of development of the site in relation to the protected trees and to tree loss generally cannot be undertaken because the applicant, despite numerous requests, has failed to submit a tree survey as part of the supporting information. These trees contribute to the established character of the site and surrounding area. Given that most of the trees are located on the western boundary of the site where access would be taken, without a detailed tree survey the impact of the proposal on the trees cannot be properly assessed. As a result, it is considered that the proposal does not satisfy the policy requirements referred to above. For the above reasons it is therefore considered that it has not been appropriately demonstrated that development of the site for residential development would not significantly impact nature conservation interests nor lead to an unacceptable loss of trees and amenity space contrary to the requirements of Policies 3, 4 and 6 of NPF4 and Policies ENV2 and P6 of the LDP. As a result, neither does the use of the site for residential development comply with the requirements of Policy E3 of the LDP. Policy I1’Connecting Places’ of the LDP and Policy 13 of NPF4 recognise that increased access to and connectivity to walking, cycling and public transport networks is a key consideration for investing in Renfrewshire and that all developments require to ensure appropriate provision and accessibility. A Traffic Statement was submitted in support of the application making particular reference to the indicative layout. Roads Development have no objection subject to conditions regarding the connections and off-site works required to ensure the site is appropriately enhanced with good connections and linkages to the surrounding areas as well as ensuring that enhancement to the A726 is put in place to provide an attractive and safe environment for existing and new residents. Page 130 of 224
Page 137
These aspects of the proposal are detailed matters which would be considered through an AMSC application. Policy I3 of the LDP 'Flooding and Drainage' 22 of NPF4 states that development must not have an adverse impact on existing drainage infrastructure, increase the risk of flooding or result in the loss of land that has the potential to contribute to the management of flood risk. A Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy Report were submitted in support of this application and both reports were based on the indicative layout. At the time, the Council's flooding/drainage officer offered no objection in relation to flooding and was satisfied that the assessments provided by the applicant adequately demonstrated that the proposals would not have an impact on drainage or flooding in and around the site. However, it should be noted that these comments were provided before NPF4 was adopted and the applicant has not adequately demonstrated that the development of the site would meet the requirements of NPF4 and that of Policy 22 as these documents have not been updated. Policy P3 of the LDP states that development proposals that provide a mix of housing type and tenures to meet current and future housing needs and support sustainable mixed communities will be supported. While the design and access statement submitted in support of the application outlines an intention to provide a mix of housing types and tenures these aspects of the proposal are detailed matters which would be considered through an AMSC application. Policy I8 of the LDP 'Developer Contributions’ and NPF4 Policy 18 'Infrastructure First' states that contributions will be sought for infrastructure deficits. These include education provision, healthcare, traffic management and active travel, public transport infrastructure, open space, and blue/green infrastructure. However, it has to be demonstrated that these deficits and/or shortfalls in infrastructure capacity arise as a direct result of new developments. Children’s Services has advised that they have no objection to the proposed development subject to a S75 agreement to secure a financial contribution in respect of education provision. Policy 1 of NPF4 states that when considering all development proposals significant weight will be given to the global climate and nature crises. Policy 2 of NPF4 aims to encourage, promote, and facilitate development that minimises emissions and adapts to the current and future impacts of climate change and Policy I7 of the LDP seeks to ensure that all new buildings shall in meeting building regulation energy requirements demonstrate a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by at least 15% below 2007 building standards. While the design and access statement submitted in support of the application outlines an intention to integrate low energy and sustainable design measures in the development, such matters would require to be fully explored through any AMSC application. Three letters of representation were received where concerns were raised regarding a lack of appropriate amenities and infrastructure to support more housing within Erskine, a lack of supporting information and impact on protected sites, trees and flora and fauna. These concerns are reiterated through the objections from Inchinnan Community Council and the matters raised through objection have been addressed in the above assessment. In summary, it is considered that it has not been adequately demonstrated, based on the indicative layout and ecological information provided, that the application site could accommodate a residential development of the scale proposed without significantly adversely impacting natural heritage, contrary to Policies 3, 4 and 6 of NPF4 and Policies ENV2, P6 and E3 of the LDP. Neither has it been demonstrated that extensive tree removal from the site is either justified or could be adequately compensated contrary to Policies 3, 4 and 6 of NPF 4 and Policy ENV 2 of the LDP. It is also considered that the development Page 131 of 224
Page 138
cannot be supported as the applicant has been unable to demonstrate from the information submitted that amplified noise from the Erskine Bridge Hotel and road noise from the A726 can be effectively mitigated or that flooding has been properly taken into account. It is therefore recommended that the application be refused. 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: Should planning permission be granted Children’s Services has requested that a S75 agreement be agreed to secure a financial contribution in respect of education provision. Conclusion In view of the above, it is considered that the proposal would not accord with the relevant provisions of the Development Plan. There are no other material considerations. Planning permission should therefore be refused. Recommendation Refuse Reason(s) for Refusal 1. It has not been adequately demonstrated, based on the indicative layout provided and ecological information submitted, that the application site could accommodate a residential development of the scale proposed without significantly adversely impacting open space, the Inner Clyde SPA/Ramsar site and SSSI, Erskine Hotel Wood SINC and its TPO and Erskine Old Lane SINC TPO, contrary to Policies 3, 4 and 6 of NPF4 and Policies P6, ENV2 and E3 of the Renfrewshire Local Development Plan. 2. It has not been demonstrated that extensive tree removal from the site is either justified or could be adequately compensated contrary to Policies 3, 4 and 6 of NPF 4 and Policy ENV2 of the Renfrewshire Local Development Plan. 3. It has not been adequately demonstrated within the Noise Impact Assessment by REC dated 12 July 2019 that the impact of amplified noise from the Erskine Bridge Hotel and road noise from the A726 can be effectively mitigated and the residential amenity of any occupiers of the proposed housing can be effectively protected. 4. It has not been adequately demonstrated within the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) prepared by Aecom dated March 2019 that the proposed development would be able to meet the requirements of Policy 22 of NPF4 and Policy I3 of the Renfrewshire Local Development Plan as the FRA does not consider the policy requirements of NPF4 or the River Clyde Model Update Technical Report by Fairhurst dated December 2021 required by SEPA. Schedule of Plans Determined Drawing Number Revision Drawing/Document Title PL-001 Planning Layout VIA-001 Rev H Viability Layout Page 132 of 224
Page 139
Map 01 Route 1 Map Map 02 Route 2 Map LP-001 Location Plan CP01 Core Paths Masterplan Indicative Masterplan Noise Impact Assessment by REC dated 12 July 2019 Flood Risk Assessment by Aecom dated March 2019 Erskine Bridge Hotel Preliminary Ecological Appraisal by ikm dated October 2018 Energy Statement by Persimmon Homes dated March 2019 Design Statement by Persimmon Homes dated March 2019 SINC Assessment by ikm dated September 2019 Drainage Strategy Report by Aecom dated February 2018 Habitats Regulations Appraisal Screening Report by ikm dated March 2019 Pre-Application Consultation Report by Persimmon Homes dated March 2019 Transportation Assessment by DBA dated November 2018 For further information please contact Clare Murray, Development Standards Team, Email: clare.murray@renfrewshire.gov.uk. Page 133 of 224
Page 140
Page 134 of 224
Page 141
Report by Chief Planning Officer Planning and Climate Change Policy Board: 28 May 2024 Reference No 22/0310/AD Application Type Advertisement consent Proposal Display of two internally illuminated box signs (in retrospect) Location 2 West Brae, Paisley, PA1 2EB Ward 4 - Paisley Northwest Community Council Paisley West And Central Community Council Applicant Mr Abubakr Malik Recommendation Refuse All plans, reports, documents and representations relating to this application can be viewed in full online at https://pl-bs.renfrewshire.gov.uk/online- applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=RAVU4FMWGLV00 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 would normally fall within the Council's scheme of delegation to be determined by an appointed officer. However, a request was submitted by Cllr MacFarlane, Cllr Kenny MacLaren and Cllr Mags MacLaren, within 21 days of the application appearing on the weekly list, that the matter be removed from the scheme of delegation for determination by the Board due to concern regarding the size of the signs from the community council. Proposal This application seeks advertisement consent in retrospect for the display of two internally illuminated box signs at 2 West Brae, Paisley. The first advert comprises of a vertically orientated box sign measuring 4m in height by 0.6m in depth by 0.1m in width. This advert is positioned at first floor level, and fronts Wellmeadow Street. It features a white background with black lettering. The white background is illuminated. The second advert comprises of a horizontally orientated box sign measuring 2.4m in length by 0.3m in height by 66mm in width. This advert is positioned at first floor level, and fronts West Brae. It features a black background with white lettering. The white lettering is illuminated. Both adverts are internally illuminated, and advertise the upper floors as guesthouse accommodation. The adverts are being displayed without advertisement consent, and this retrospective application was sought following an investigation of an enforcement case. The retrospective application was sought in line with the procedures set out in the Councils Planning Enforcement Charter. The retrospective application allows the development to be formally considered before determining if it is acceptable or if further enforcement action would be required should the application be refused. Site Description Item 6(b) PACC280524 Page 135 of 224
Page 142
The application site is located on the corner of West Brae and Wellmeadow Street within the Paisley Town Centre Conservation Area. It comprises of a three storey, stone tenement building with retail use on the ground floor and the guest house accommodation and residential use on the upper floors. 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. No pre-application discussions have taken place. Negotiated Improvements No changes have been negotiated. Site History None Consultations Paisley West and Central Community Council - Object to the advertisements. The projecting sign is regarded as totally unsuited to the surrounding architecture and disproportionate to the business it seeks to advertise. Chief Executive's Service (Roads Development) - No objection subject to condition regarding luminance of the adverts. Representations In line with the respective legislation, it is not necessary to publicise advertisement applications. No representations were received: Policy Context Applications for advertisement consent shall be determined in accordance with The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (Scotland) Regulations 1984. National Planning Framework 4 Policy 7 - Historic assets and places Policy 27 - City, town, local and commercial centres Policy 14 - Design, quality, and place 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 ENV3 - Built and Cultural Heritage Full details relating to the policies of the LDP can be found online. Other relevant policies and guidance Renfrewshire Council's Display of Advertisements Guidance 2022 Submitted Reports and Assessments Page 136 of 224
Page 143
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 No reports or assessments were submitted in support of the application. Planning Assessment The display of advertisements is controlled by The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (Scotland) Regulations 1984. In considering proposals for advertisements, determination by a planning authority can only be made on two criteria, namely public safety, and amenity. Renfrewshire Council's Display of Advertisements Guidance 2022 reflects and expands upon the 1984 regulations and is used by the Council as the basis for assessing advertisement proposals. Public safety refers to the potential impact of the adverts on traffic and transport. Roads Development have offered no objection to the adverts subject to a condition relating to their luminance. Should the application be considered acceptable control of luminance could be controlled via a suitably worded condition which would ensure the adverts are acceptable with regard to public safety. With regard to amenity, the Council’s Display of Advertisements Guidance 2022 states that advertising for upper floor uses should generally be restricted to a plaque at the ground floor entrance. The guidance goes on to state that it will be generally unacceptable for such uses to advertise by using a fascia board, and that illuminated signs (regardless of the form of illumination) will be unacceptable above ground floor level. In this instance the two adverts being displayed contravene the Council’s guidance as they constitute illuminated fascia boards positioned above ground level. The position, size, design and method of illumination of the vertical box sign is out of keeping with the character and appearance of the area and is inconsistent with the streetscene given its prominent position on the front elevation of the building. The impact of the horizontal box sign is less significant given its position to the rear of the building, its smaller size and method of illumination which is restricted to the lettering only. However, the advertisement scheme must be assessed as a whole and on balance is considered to be contrary to the Councils guidance. The adverts are therefore also considered to be contrary to the above noted development plan policies as they do not safeguard or enhance the character and appearance of the Paisley Town Centre Conservation Area as required by Policy 7 of NPF4 and ENV3 of the LDP, and they do not enhance the quality of the built environment within the Paisley West End Local Service Centre as required by Policy 14 and 27 of NPF4 and C1 of the LDP. Conclusion The adverts do not comply with the relevant policies within the development plan and the Council's Display of Advertisements Guidance 2022 and are considered to have a detrimental impact on the visual amenity of the conservation area and the local service centre. The application is therefore recommended for refusal. Recommendation Refuse Reason(s) for Recommendation Page 137 of 224
Page 144
1.The position, size and illumination of the adverts has a detrimental impact on the character of Paisley Town Centre Conservation Area and the visual amenity of the surrounding area. They are therefore contrary to Policies 7,14 and 27 of National Planning Framework 4, Policy C1 and ENV3 of the Renfrewshire Local Development Plan, and Renfrewshire Council's Display of Advertisements Guidance 2022. Schedule of Plans Determined Drawing Number Revision Drawing/Document Title Guesthouse Location Plan Illuminated Sign to Shop Front and Indoor Light Box Photo A of Guesthouse Sign Photo B of Illuminated Sign to Shop Front and Indoor Light Box For further information please contact James Weir, Development Standards Team, Email: james.weir@renfrewshire.gov.uk. Page 138 of 224
Page 145
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 Item 6(c) PACC280524 Page 139 of 224
Page 146
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 140 of 224Page 147
▪ 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 141 of 224
Page 148
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 142 of 224
Page 149
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 143 of 224
Page 150
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 144 of 224
Page 151
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 145 of 224
Page 152
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 146 of 224
Page 153
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 147 of 224
Page 154
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 148 of 224
Page 155
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 149 of 224
Page 156
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 150 of 224
Page 157
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 151 of 224
Page 158
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 152 of 224
Page 159
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 153 of 224
Page 160
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 154 of 224
Page 161
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 155 of 224
Page 162
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 156 of 224
Page 163
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 157 of 224
Page 164
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 158 of 224
Page 165
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 159 of 224
Page 166
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 160 of 224
Page 167
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 161 of 224
Page 168
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 162 of 224
Page 169
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. Page 163 of 224
Page 170
Page 164 of 224
Page 171
Report by Chief Planning Officer Planning and Climate Change Policy Board: 28 May 2024 Reference No 23/0355/LB Application Type Listed Building Consent Proposal Redevelopment, partial demolition and conversion of former infirmary into 45 flats 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=RX20UKMWICF00 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 as the listed building application contains an element of demolition. In addition to the listed building application a concurrent application (23/0354/PP) requires to be considered by Board as the proposal constitutes a Major Development. Both applications are being presented to Board for consideration at the same time. Proposal Listed building consent is sought for the redevelopment, partial demolition and conversion of the former Royal Alexandra Infirmary in Paisley into 45 flats. The former infirmary consists of a substantial, landmark category B-listed building and 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 1comprising 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 east elevation of the central wing to serve some of 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 form some of the flats. Item 6(d) PACC280524 Page 165 of 224
Page 172
Some minor adjustments have also been undertaken to the proposed internal layout in response to comments made by Historic Environment Scotland. This application for listed building consent has been submitted concurrently with an application for planning permission (23/0354/PP) which additionally proposes the erection of two new build blocks of flats to the west and north of the infirmary building containing 20 and 16 flats respectively, together with parking and landscaping. 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 prominent 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 as outlined above and the modern 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: ▪ Discussion on various specific elements of the building - both external and internal - in seeking the preservation and, where possible, restoration of these elements as part of the proposed development. 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. 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: 23/0354/PP Description: 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 Decision: This application is also being presented to Board today for determination Page 166 of 224
Page 173
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 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 Historic Environment Scotland (HES) - Welcome the proposals but outline a number of recommendations on certain specifics to ensure the development can be undertaken in such a way that preserves as best as possible the special interest of the listed building. These recommendations include an amended design to the proposed dormers and some minor revisions to the internal layout. HES acknowledge that the poor condition of some areas of the building has prevented full inspection and analysis of some areas and features. As such, they confirm that they are agreeable to the detail of certain aspects, including the treatment of staircases, an entrance hall screen and internal chapel being conditioned. They also recommend the imposition of conditions regarding the detail of any replacement or refurbished windows, doors, ridge ventilators and verandah balcony balustrades. Representations The application has been publicised in line with the requirements of the relevant legislation. No representations were received: Policy Context Page 167 of 224
Page 174
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 NPF4: Policy 7 - Historic assets and places Full details relating to the policies of the LDP can be found online. Renfrewshire Local Development Plan LDP 2021: Policy ENV3 - Built and Cultural Heritage 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 Environment Strategy: Built Heritage. Historic Environment Scotland's Historic Environment Policy for Scotland (HEPS) and associated "Managing Change in the Historic Environment" guidance notes. 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: 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 present condition. Additionally, the statement provides a series of daylighting calculations, 3D visuals and an initial outline of aspects including landscaping, parking and phasing. Conservation Condition Report - Outlines the findings of a non-invasive survey of the building with accompanying photographs. 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 issues. 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 can potentially be repaired. 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. Page 168 of 224
Page 175
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. 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 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) 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. Policy ENV3 of the Renfrewshire LDP similarly 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) 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 into 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. Historic Environment Scotland's "Managing Change in the Historic Environment" guidance note on Use and Adaptation of Listed Buildings advises that proposals to bring a listed building back into use should be supported as long as they do the least possible harm. Consideration should be taken of what is most important and should be preserved. To accommodate the development in this case, minimal external alterations would be required. The main alteration would be the removal of the single storey extension on the north elevation which is a much later addition to the original building and is of limited special architectural interest. The extension in this respect features cream rendered walls and a flat Page 169 of 224
Page 176
roof which contrasts notably from the original building. Its removal would also enable the current obscured section of the original north elevation of the building to be reinstated. The other main external alteration to the original building would be the addition of the dormer windows which would be positioned eight each on the west elevation of the west wing and east elevation of the central wing. The dormers have been reduced to a slightly slimmer design during the assessment of the application and are considered of a suitably discreet scale and pitched roof design to result in no notable impact on the character of the listed building. The dormers would also feature appropriate sash and case windows, in keeping with the character of the building. 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. These alterations are uncontentious, but to ensure control over the final details, it is considered appropriate to apply conditions regarding the final specifications of any new roof slates, ridge ventilators, windows and balustrades. 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 hopes 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. Historic Environment Scotland have also highlighted a number of internal features which should ideally be preserved and/or restored where possible, but where their full condition cannot currently be ascertained due to the current dilapidated condition of the areas of the building where they are located. As such, it is considered acceptable to condition the submission of further details regarding these aspects. These include a former chapel which it has not been possible to fully inspect; a spiral staircase within the central tower, the condition of which is also unknown; and the main staircase and an entrance screen which are both recognised as important internal features but which are known to be fire-damaged. Considered as a whole, the proposed physical changes to the listed building to support its reuse are considered acceptable and to accord with Policies 7 and ENV3, as well as 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. The proposals offer an opportunity to secure the sustainable restoration and reuse of a highly significant listed building designed by one of Paisley's most renowned architects. It is considered that the proposals in this respect are to be welcomed and it is therefore recommended that listed building consent is granted subject to conditions. 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 Page 170 of 224
Page 177
In view of the above, it is considered that the proposal would accord with the relevant provisions of the Development Plan. There are no other material considerations. Listed building consent should therefore be granted subject to conditions. Recommendation Grant subject to conditions Reason(s) for Recommendation 1. The proposal accords with the provisions of the Development Plan and there were no material considerations which outweighed the presumption in favour of development according with the Development Plan. Condition(s) 1. That prior to the commencement of development, full details, shall be submitted for the written approval of Renfrewshire Council as Planning Authority of the following: a) Details of the make and type of all new roof slates; 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; e) Details regarding the reinstatement or repair of the first floor arched ceilings to the link corridors; f) The results of a condition survey and detailed proposals for the former chapel which seek to preserve all original features where these are found to be salvageable; g) Proposals for the reinstatement or repair of the spiral stair within the central tower, , together with drawings confirming the layout of any upper level within Flat S6 to be accessed from the stair; h) Details of the proposed repairs to the main staircase; i) Details of the proposals for the reuse of the balustrades from the secondary staircases elsewhere within the building; and j) Details of the proposed replacement entrance screen. 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. Reason: In the interest of preserving the special interest of the listed building. Advisory Note(s) Page 171 of 224
Page 178
None. 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 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 Design and Access Statement by Wellwood Leslie Conservation/Condition Report by Wellwood Leslie Structural Appraisal Report by Indev Consult (ref 23-006-001; dated 16/03/2023) Feasibility Cost and Development Appraisal Comparison by nbm Construction Cost Consultants (May 2023) and supplementary email from agent dated 17/05/2024) For further information please contact Andrew Mackenzie, Development Standards Team, Email: andrew.mackenzie@renfrewshire.gov.uk Page 172 of 224
Page 179
Report by Chief Planning Officer Planning and Climate Change Policy Board: 28 May 2024 Reference No 23/0738/PP Application Type Planning Permission-Full Proposal Construction of vehicular access and associated works Location Torrance House, Erskine Harbour, Erskine Ward 12 - Erskine and Inchinnan Community Council Erskine Community Council Applicant CWP Erskine Ltd 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=S5VCUIMWM8300 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, a request was submitted by Cllrs Nicolson, Shaw and Airlie-Nicolson, within 21 days of the application appearing on the weekly list, requesting that the matter be removed from the scheme of delegation for determination by the Board. It was considered by the aforementioned members that the application as it stands is incomplete with regards to meeting active travel policies and could if determined in isolation, and not considered along with footways and crossing points, create a significant issue for road safety given that the A726 in that area has had road fatalities in the past. Proposal This application seeks planning permission for the formation of a vehicular access from the Barholm Roundabout into an area of vacant land at Erskine Riverfront which has the benefit of planning permission in principle (PPiP), for residential development (20/0246/PP). This access point into the site, was part of the proposal for the PPiP and was considered acceptable at the Communities, Housing and Planning Policy Board in January 2022. During the assessment of that application the access was fully considered and planning permission in principle granted on the basis that vehicular access would be taken from the Barholm Roundabout. This application seeks to obtain detailed planning consent for the access to be formed from the roundabout to demonstrate certainty to the market that access to the site has approval to be taken at this point and allow an Approval of Matters Specified in Conditions (AMSC) application to be brought forward to develop the wider site for residential development. In this regard the applicant advises of advanced discussions with a housebuilder which centres on the landowner being able to demonstrate appropriate access to the site can be obtained. The plans submitted indicate a proposed access road with two lanes to afford separate ingress and egress from the roundabout divided by a small triangle of land, before forming a two-way section of road to form the vehicular access. The access would extend to approximately 35 metres in length, with a splay of approximately 41 metres. Given the topography of the existing landscaped bund the access would be set down within landscaped verges to afford a suitable tie in with existing road levels. Item 6(e) PACC280524 Page 173 of 224
Page 180
Excavation works would result in the loss of eight trees and a Tree Survey has been submitted in support of the application to categorise the trees in terms of their quality and value and to minimise unnecessary impact to the retained population. Site Description The site is located to the northwest of Erskine Town Centre and adjacent to the Barholm Roundabout on the A726. The application site extends to approximately 0.16 hectares. It is part of a larger site which extends to approximately 1.55 hectares which has planning permission in principle for residential development (20/0246/PP). The site is currently vacant with remnants of its previous development (Torrance House office block) and has a well-defined mature landscaped edge on its northern, southern, and eastern boundaries which is comprised of a mix of mature trees and shrubs on top of an earth bund. 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 relationship between this proposal and the extant planning consent for the wider site, the location and design of the access road and potential impact on trees. Negotiated Improvements Following submission, the following changes have been negotiated between officers and the applicant: No changes have been negotiated. However, it should be noted that a previous application for the proposed development was withdrawn (23/0586/PP) in order to move the proposed access slightly further east to minimise tree loss. Site History Application No: 23/0586/PP Description: Construction of vehicular access and associated works Decision: Withdrawn Application No: 20/0246/PP Description: Erection of residential development (in principle). Decision: Grant subject to conditions Consultations Bishopton Community Council - Object on the basis of inadequate school capacity should the site be developed. S.E.P.A - No comments. Environment, Housing & Infrastructure (Env. Protection) – No objection. Page 174 of 224
Page 181
Chief Executive's Service (Roads Development) - No objection subject to a suspensive condition which would prohibit works starting until wider details and permissions are forthcoming and granted for the wider site, including pedestrian access, and turning. West of Scotland Archaeology Service - No objection. Representations The application has been publicised in the Paisley and Renfrewshire Gazette in line with the requirements of the relevant legislation. No representations were received. 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 9 - Brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings Policy 13 - Sustainable transport Policy 18 - Infrastructure first Full details relating to the policies of the NPF4 can be found online. Renfrewshire Local Development Plan Policy E3 - Transition Areas Policy ENV2 - Natural Heritage Policy I1 - Connecting Places Full details relating to the policies of the LDP can be found online. Other relevant policies and guidance New Development Supplementary Guidance Delivering the Environmental Strategy - Trees, Woodland and Forestry Delivering the Infrastructure Strategy - Connecting Places Renfrewshire Planning & Development Tree Policy 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. Page 175 of 224
Page 182
The following reports have been submitted in support of the application, and can be summarised as follows: Arboricultural Survey to British Standard 5837 (2012) - September 2023 – The submitted tree survey forms part of the development design process, recording the trees in their current context. The aims of the survey are to categorise the trees as to their suitability for retention in terms of their quality and value and to minimise unnecessary impact to the retained tree population. The proposed development would affect two groups of trees, G4 which is made up of Larch and Birch and G5 which comprises Larch, Birch and Hawthorn. The trees are of moderate/good condition. Eight of the trees from the G4 grouping would require to be removed. 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). Policy 1 of NPF4 states that when considering all development proposals significant weight will be given to the global climate and nature crises. Policy 2 of NPF4 aims to encourage, promote, and facilitate development that minimises emissions and adapts to the current and future impacts of climate change. Policy 13 of NPF4 seeks to encourage, promote, and facilitate development that prioritises walking, wheeling, cycling and public transport for everyday travel and to reduce the need to travel sustainably. It considers that LDP's should prioritise locations for future development that can be accessed by sustainable modes. Policy 18 of NPF4 seeks to encourage, promote, and facilitate an infrastructure first approach which puts infrastructure considerations at the heart of placemaking. In line with these policies, the application site is designated within the LDP as being within a Transition Area under Policy E3, which supports a mix of developments including residential. In addition, the application site is subject of an extant PPiP for residential development, where roads infrastructure, connectivity, and access to other modes of transport was considered acceptable in principle subject to conditions to control the detail of any development as it comes forward through the submission of an AMSC application. Policy E3 supports a range of uses if they can co-exist with existing surrounding development, having no significant impact on the character or amenity of the surrounding area including avoiding any adverse impact on the integrity of any Natura 2000 site. Page 176 of 224
Page 183
Given that the application site has the benefit of planning permission in principle for residential development, including an access point from the Barholm Roundabout (20/0246/PP), it is recognised that the principle of the access proposed has been accepted (Communities, Housing and Planning Policy Board on 18 January 2022). It is therefore considered that the proposed development meets the requirements of NPF4 Policies 13 and 18, Policy E3 and that of the associated New Development Supplementary Guidance. The principle of the proposal, in association with redeveloping a vacant previously used site, would also be in line with Policy 9 and the Spatial Strategy outlined in the Adopted Renfrewshire Local Development Plan, which seeks to ensure that brownfield land in Renfrewshire's existing places is used before greenfield land or greenbelt. The main issues for consideration relate to the detailed design of the proposal, its timing and specifically to its impact on the surrounding roads network, the physical aspects of the site including trees/ natural environment and potential impacts on the Inner Clyde SPA located some 225 metres to the north and east of the site. Roads Development has offered no objection to the proposal and agree that in recognition of the active travel and connectivity requirements of the larger site, including provision of adequate footways and crossing points, this proposal could be controlled by condition to ensure that the access subject of this application is not formed until such time as the AMSC application has been approved and that the vehicular access would be formed in the same way as that required for any approved AMSC application to ensure appropriate footpath connections and crossing points are put in place Policy I1 'Connecting Places states that all development proposals require to ensure appropriate provision and accessibility including the ability to connect to active travel networks, public transport networks and hubs. These requirements would be considered through any AMSC application for the wider site. Notwithstanding this, conditions attached to the PPiP (20/0246/PP) require details of a signalised pedestrian and cycle crossing along with pedestrian access and footway/cycleway links to and from the development to the River Clyde Walkway, Erskine Town Centre, Bargarran Centre along with routes to St John Bosco/Bargarran Primary Schools and Park Mains High School should an AMSC application come forward to develop the approved housing site. Turning to impacts on trees and the natural environment, Policy 3 of NPF4 seeks to protect biodiversity, deliver positive effects from development, and strengthen nature networks. It considers that proposals for local development will include appropriate measures to conserve, restore and enhance biodiversity in accordance with national and local guidance and should be proportionate to the nature and scale of the development. Policy ENV 2 of the LDP requires development proposals to, amongst others, consider potential impacts on natural heritage and minimise any adverse impacts on habitats, special network connectivity or landscape character. Policy 6 of NPF4 and ENV2 of the LDP and the Council's Planning, and Development Tree Policy seek to ensure that due consideration is given to the safeguarding of trees as part of any development. Policy 4 of NPF4 Natural Places seeks to ensure that development proposals which by virtue of type, location or scale will have an unacceptable impact on the natural environment, will not be supported. Through the previous PPiP, impacts on trees and the natural environment of the site were considered as was the proximity to the Inner Clyde SPA. Due mainly to the previous uses on the site, it was assessed as having low potential to support protected species and a low level of environmental impact from the development. Page 177 of 224
Page 184
Relevant conditions were applied to the consent relative to landscaping and construction out with the Redshank Bird Breeding season. These requirements were imposed based on distances from the SPA. The application site in this instance is outwith the distance where mitigation would be required. A Tree Survey submitted as part of this application which formed part of the design process for the access, categorises the trees as to their suitability for retention in terms of their quality and value and has sought to minimise unnecessary impact to the retained tree population demonstrating the constraints and opportunities available in positioning of building and other work activity. The access proposed would require the removal of eight trees from the site. These trees are contained within two groupings of Larch and Birch and Larch, Birch and Hawthorn and vary from being in moderate to good condition. These tree groupings are large and contain between 14 and 20 trees each. Eight trees would be lost in consequence of the application proposal but most of the trees would be retained within these groups enabling the continuation of tree cover along most of the site boundary. A condition attached to any grant of planning permission could require additional planting to ensure that the access properly assimilates into the landscape. The continued maintenance and landscaping of the residential site would be considered through any application for matters specified in condition associated with the PPiP. It is considered that the proposal suitably complies with the policies outlined above. Bishopton Community Council have objected to the proposal on the basis that it is an enabler for the development of housing, which, if developed, would exert undue pressure on surrounding schools which are oversubscribed and exist in a differing climate to that which existed when PPiP, for the larger site was granted. In light of the above it is noted that the application is a stand-alone application which seeks planning permission for the creation of an access road into a currently vacant site. The development proposed is acceptable in this location and suitably complies with the requirements of the development plan. Any requirements relative to educational provision would be considered through the submission of any AMSC application. Concerns raised by local members and Roads Development are noted and it is recognised that this development should not come forward in isolation. Should planning permission be granted a suspensive condition has been attached to ensure the vehicular is not formed until an application is approved to develop the wider site that has consent in principle for housing. The suspensive condition would ensure that the design of the vehicular access would be such that it would meet that required for any approved development for the wider site in terms of footpath/active travel connections and crossing points and it would be required to have the same design as that approved for the wider site. In view of the above, it is considered that the proposal would accord with the relevant provisions of the Development Plan. There are no other material considerations. Planning permission should therefore be granted. 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. Page 178 of 224
Page 185
Conclusion In view of the above, it is considered that the proposal would accord with the relevant provisions of the Development Plan. There are no other material considerations. Planning permission should therefore be granted subject to conditions. Recommendation Grant subject to conditions Reason(s) for Recommendation 1. The proposal accords with the provisions of the Development Plan and there were no material considerations which outweighed the presumption in favour of development according with the Development Plan. Condition(s) 1. The development hereby permitted has until 18/01/2025 to commence. For the avoidance of doubt no work shall commence until the terms of condition 2 below are formally discharged in writing by the Council as Planning Authority. Reason: To reflect the timescale of the planning permission in principle for the site. 2. The vehicular access hereby approved shall not be commenced until an application for approval of matters specified in conditions has been approved for the wider site under planning application 20/0246/PP, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council as Planning Authority. Thereafter the approved vehicular access shall be formed in a manner that is exactly in line to the vehicular access approved under the application for approval of matters specified in conditions for the wider site. Reason: To ensure provision of an access, appropriate for the wider site and to control the timing of the development. 3. That before any development commences details of measures, which conform to BS5837:2012 "Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction" to protect all retained trees on site during construction works, shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. Thereafter, the approved scheme shall be implemented prior to work commencing on site and shall be maintained in place until the development is completed. Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area and to afford adequate protection to the trees. 4. That before any development of the site commences a scheme of landscaping shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority ; the scheme shall include:- (a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, grass seeding and turfing; (b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted; (c) an indication of all existing trees and hedgerows, plus details of those to be retained, and measures for their protection in the course of development, and (d) details of the phasing of these works; Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area. Page 179 of 224
Page 186
5. That within 6 months of the development hereby permitted being completed, (or within the next available planting season), all planting, seeding turfing and earth moulding included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 4 above, shall be completed; and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or diseased within 5 years of the completion of the development, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species; Reason: In the interests of amenity. Schedule of Plans Determined Drawing Number Revision Drawing/Document Title DR-C-001 P00 Site Location Plan DR-C-001 P00 Proposed Junction Layout, Levels and Construction Details Torrance House Tree Protection Plan DR-C-001 P01 Planning Layout DR-C-002 P00 Proposed Kerbing Layout and Detail DR-C-005 P00 Existing and Proposed Layout Comparison (Tree Removal) Torrance House, Erskine Arboricultural Survey dated 25 September 2023 For further information please contact Clare Murray, Development Standards Team, Email: clare.murray@renfrewshire.gov.uk. Page 180 of 224
Page 187
Report by Chief Planning Officer Planning and Climate Change Policy Board: 28 May 2024 Reference No 24/0052/EB Application Type Electricity Undertaking Determination Proposal Section 36 application to construct and operate a 150MW battery energy storage facility together with associated infrastructure, substation, security fencing, cctv, security lighting and landscaping (Energy Consents Unit consultation request) to view plans go to https://www.energyconsents.scot/ApplicationDetails.aspx?cr=ECU00 004868 Location Neilston Battery Storage System Site, Gleniffer Road, Paisley Ward 7 - Paisley Southwest Community Council Elderslie Community Council Applicant Carolanne Brown Energy Consents Unit Scottish Government Recommendation No objection, subject to suggested 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=S7RAWAMW00B00 The purpose of this report is to present for the consideration of the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board a formal consultation from the Energy Consents Unit (ECU) on an application made under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 for a 150MW battery energy storage system together with associated infrastructure, substation, security fencing, cctv, security lighting and landscaping on land at Gleniffer Road, Paisley. The Section 36 application includes an application for deemed planning permission for the same development under Section 57(2) of The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. Scottish Ministers are responsible, under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989, for the authorisation of any new, or extensions to existing, electricity generation schemes with a generation capacity in excess of 50 Megawatts (MW). As the proposed battery energy storage system would have a maximum installed capacity of 150MW, Renfrewshire Council has been formally consulted on the proposed development by the ECU in terms of Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989. The Council is a formal consultee in this process and not the determining or consenting authority. Scottish Ministers are the determining authority. In procedural terms the Council, as Planning Authority, requires to provide a response to the ECU that would then be taken into consideration as part of the consenting process. In this regard, the Council in response to the consultation can either: - Offer no objections to the Section 36 application as submitted; - Offer no objections subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions and/or legal obligations it considered neccesary to make the development acceptable (it should be noted that responsibility for discharging conditions and/or the legal obligations would fall upon the Council), or; - Object to the application, stating the grounds on which the objection is made. Members should note at this point that a decision to object to the application would trigger a public local enquiry in terms of Section 62 and schedule 8 of the Electricity Act 1989. Item 6(f) PACC280524 Page 181 of 224
Page 188
Should Scottish Ministers be disposed to grant the Section 36 application, the applicant has requested that deemed planning consent be granted via direction under the terms of section 57 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. A separate application for planning permission would not therefore be required for the proposed development. While the consultation response would normally fall within the scheme of delegation to be determined by officers, the scheme of delegation allows for officers to refer applications to the Board. The application has been refered in this instance to allow the proposed development to be fully considered given the scale of the development and the potential environmental matters associated with battery energy storage facilities. Proposal The proposed development comprises of a Battery Energy Storage Facility (BESS) with an output capacity of up to 150MW. The submission includes an indicative layout which shows four rows of the battery components arranged in a southwest to northeast orientation. The associated infrastructure which includes control rooms and transformers is located to the south east fronting Gleniffer Road. The site is served via an existing field access which will be upgraded, with an internal network of 4m wide roads providing access to the individual components. The proposal includes a landscaped buffer of approx. 30m in depth along the south east boundary, and approx. 20m in depth along the south west boundary. To the north east and north west there is an area of compensatory woodland planting associated with application 20/0793/PP which will provide some further screening when it matures. It is noted that planting in this area has commenced. It should be noted that the proposed site layout and component infrastructure is indicative of a 150MW installation. On this basis the developer has sought a micro-siting allowance of up to 25m in all directions within the red line boundary. This is to allow flexibility in procurement of the battery units and associated infrastructure, and the current advances in battery infrastructure technology. The proposed development has been the subject of an EIA screening request (ref: 23/0340/EA) from the ECU. The Councils response was that the development should be accompanied by an EIA given the cumulative visual impact of this and other consented developments along Gleniffer Road. However, Scottish Ministers concluded that the development did not require an EIA (ECU ref: ECU00004868). Site Description The application site comprises approx. 3 hectares of relatively flat grassland located on the northwestern side of Gleniffer Road. It is located approx. 600m to the south west of the Neilston substation, and approx. 3km to the south west of Paisley. The site is bound by Gleniffer Road to the south east, with rough grassland and low lying vegetation to the south west, north west and north east. The grid stability facility approved under application 20/0793/PP lies to the north of the site, with the Neilston sub station and a BESS approved under application 21/0034/PP lying to the north east. In terms of sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the application site Caplaw Farm lies approx. 250m to the south east, Lapwing Lodge is approx. 280m to the south west, and Bent Farm is approx. 550m to the west. Page 182 of 224
Page 189
The site is 230m to the south west of the Gleniffer Braes Country Park boundary. The Bardrain Glen, Sergeantlaw Moss and Gleniffer Braes West Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) is also 230m to the north east and 250m to the north of the site. 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. No pre-application discussions have taken place. Negotiated Improvements Following submission, no changes have been negotiated. Site History Application No: 23/0340/EA Description: Construction and operation of 150MW battery energy storage facility together with associated infrastructure, substation, security fencing, CCTV, security lighting and landscaping (Consultation request from Energy Consent Decision: Scottish Ministers decided that an EIA was not required. Consultations Glasgow Airport Safeguarding - No objections. Advisory note required with respect to the use of cranes. Environment, Housing & Infrastructure (Env. Protection) - No objection subject to condition relating to noise associated with the design, installation and operation of any plant, machinery or equipment. NATS - No comments. Chief Executive's Service (Roads Development) – raise concerns regarding the safety of the access to the site given the dip in the road, local speeds and impact of cumulative accesses being formed as new developments come forward. Roads Development have requested the following conditions in order to ensure the safety of this section of the road is protected, 1. Reserve a 7m width of frontage for use as a future pedestrian and cycle link along the frontage of the site. 2. Achieve 9x120m x 600mm high sightlines in both directions, removing all obstructions (fences, shrubs, scrub and dykes) within it. 3. Carry out a Road Safety Audit including 7-day speed survey to establish the 85percentile speeds in normal traffic situations and implement the recommendations. 4. Agree with Planning Authority and introduce measures to differentiate between the proposed access and Hartfield Road junction to prevent wrong turning. 5. Agree with Planning Authority temporary construction measures to reduce speeds locally and ensure site traffic doesn't need to cross into traffic coming from Paisley when exiting left. 6. Agree a joint routing agreement including East Renfrewshire's Road Authority should fill originate from there. Note, routes other than the B775 are not considered suitable for prolonged construction traffic deliveries. Scottish Power Networks (Transmission Sites) - No response. Page 183 of 224
Page 190
Scottish Power Networks (Distribution Sites) - No response. West of Scotland Archaeology Service - Condition required with respect to an archaeological watching brief and implementation plan. S.E.P.A - No objections. Nature Scot - Proposal will not give rise to any adverse impacts on any natural heritage interests of local or national importance. Broad range of proposed mitigations are welcomed. Ironside Farrar Ltd (IFL) (Councils Independent Consultants) - IFL were asked to review and provide comment on the following aspects of the project. Landscape and Visual Assessment - The assessment is largely adequate in scope and reasonable in its findings. There is sufficient detail to allow the main issues to be understood. There are some minor inconsistencies and some of the effects should be assessed as slightly higher although none would be extensive or major. It is recommended that landscape mitigation is undertaken at 1.5m to 2m centres (as opposed to the 5m centres set out) to ensure that the screening visualisations are more likely to be achieved at the 15-year period. Preliminary Ecological Appraisal - The site looks to be of low interest, but the report provided, and survey data presented is not considered adequate e.g. report does not conform to Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM) guidance, habitat baseline does not include a table of habitat areas, and species baseline is weak as it does not include survey data. There may be information that can be included, and the report revised. Land Capability for Agriculture - The site is not located on prime agricultural land or peatland. However additional information is still required regarding the protection of soils under National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4). The reporting should be updated to include references to relevant planning guidance/soil specific policy, review of the carbon and peatland map, and further details regarding construction and decommissioning and the management of previously undisturbed soils. Decommissioning, Restoration and Aftercare - Provides advice on the key considerations relevant to the decommissioning and restoration phase of the development as follows ▪ Decommissioning and removal of the battery energy storage system units including treatment of liquid bearing components ▪ Removal of any in-situ foundations including removal to a depth of at least 1m underground ▪ Removal of above ground infrastructure extending to substations, PV panels and mountings, inverters/ inverter containers, fencing, lighting masts, internal tracks, equipment and hard standings ▪ Cable removal including around heritage features ▪ Provision of Decommissioning Environmental Management Plan (DEMP) to be based on relevant elements of the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) ▪ A Traffic Management Plan (TMP) related to activities for decommissioning, demolition, and removal of infrastructure ▪ Locations of temporary stockpiles for decommissioned materials and equipment Page 184 of 224
Page 191
▪ Treatment of disturbed ground surfaces resulting from decommissioning of infrastructure including cable removal and any sub-surface elements to restore the land to its pre- construction status or such condition as agreed in writing with the LPA ▪ Restoration proposals including ecological and biodiversity enhancement works such as (but not limited to) provision of bird boxes, insect refuge and use of native seed mixes to deliver biodiversity gains and measures to safeguard all landscaping on the site which for the avoidance of doubt shall be retained. ▪ An aftercare plan to monitor success of restoration measures with scope for interventions if required ▪ A Decommissioning Timetable It is indicated that these matters can be suitably addressed via condition. The ECU consulted widely on the Section 36 application and a list of those who have responded (and who have not also been consulted by the Council), along with a summary of their comments, as shown on the ECU website, are provided below. BT – No objections. Scottish Water – No objections. Transport Scotland – No objections subject to conditions relating to the proposed route for any abnormal loads and the installation of temporary traffic control measures. Scottish Gas Networks – No objections. Historic Environment Scotland – No comments. Representations The consultation request was published on the Councils weekly list of applications. No representations have been submitted to the Council. The ECU also publicise the consent application, and representations can be submitted directly to them via their website. At the time of writing there are no representations available to view on the ECU website. Policy Context As noted above the Council is a consultee in the consenting process and not the determining authority. To infer the Councils consultation response an assessment against the Development Plan is required. 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 this submission: National Planning Framework 4 Policy 1 – Tackling the climate and nature crisis 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 Page 185 of 224
Page 192
Policy 11 - Energy Policy 13 - Sustainable transport Policy 14 - Design, quality and place 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 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 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 Environment Strategy: Green Belt Development Criteria. ▪ Delivering the Infrastructure Strategy: Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Developments 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: Flood Risk Assessment – The report notes that the application site is not within an area at risk of flooding from surface water, fluvial or coastal sources. The development is not predicted to increase surface water run off to the surrounding catchment. Site topography will not be materially altered, and SUDS features such as permeable access roads will be implemented. Design and Access Statement and Planning Statement – This statement advises that BESS developments will play an important role in reducing carbon emissions and increasing electricity consumption from renewable resources. Batteries provide stability and foundation to renewable led electricity production which is fluctuating. The site is considered to be free of environmental constraints that would preclude development, and appropriate mitigation can be provided where neccesary. Noise Assessment - An assessment has been undertaken using assumed noise emissions of the proposed plant as a final specification of the plant has not been provided. The assessment demonstrates that there are no exceedance of the environmental sound criteria during daytime and evening, and internal noise levels at night time. Assuming the development includes plant with noise emissions not more than those assumed within the assessment, then the impact of sound from the proposal is likely to be low. Landscape and Visual Assessment – The assessment acknowledges that the baseline landscape character would be altered as a result of the development, however, during the residual phase and with established landscape mitigation the effects on the landscape Page 186 of 224
Page 193
receptors would be reduced. The site is well contained and effects on the identified landscape character areas would be limited. The development provides an opportunity to enhance existing woodland and contribute to tree cover. Views of the site predominantly have a low or low to medium value, having limited local value, and already contain visual detractors. The set back of the development would soften views, and once mitigation has established views of the development would be very limited. The development is unlikely to incur any significant cumulative landscape and visual effects due to intervening landform. Preliminary Ecological Appraisal – This appraisal concludes that the development is unlikely to have a detrimental impact on Gleniffer Braes Country Park. The improved grassland within the site is of low ecological value. A root protection zone is required along the north west boundary. Recommendations are made with regard to protected species and biodiversity enhancements. Transport Statement – It is noted that a simple priority T junction will replace the existing field access. Trip generation associated with the operational phase is limited to between 10 and 20 vehicle trips per annum. It is estimated there will be 1,536 two-way vehicle trips associated with the construction phase. Parking for workers will be accommodated on site, and a suitable construction traffic route has been identified. The statements notes that any damage to the local road network can be rectified, while the development is not anticipated to have a severe impact on the operation of the local road network. Statement of Community Involvement and Pre-Application Consultation Report – This reports advises that the applicants have undertaken two community events which were held in Neilston on the 2nd and 23rd August 2023. This was supplemented by a website. The events were advertised in the press, with direct notification issued to neighbouring properties, community councils, local councillors, MP's, and MSP's. Issues of most prevalence were noise, light pollution, potential fire risk, harm to local scenery, flooding/drainage and health concerns. It is noted that while there are no statutory pre- application consultation procedures for section 36 applications, the ECU Good Practice for Applications Guidance (July 2022) states that applicants are expected to hold at least two public events prior to submitting an application. Archaeological Walkover Survey and Historic Environment Assessment – This report notes that there are no sites of interest visible at the site or within 500m of the study area. There are two sites of interest 1km to the north of the study area. There may be buried archaeological deposits within the area, and archaeological trial trenching may be required. West of Scotland Archaeology Service would provide advice on this. 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 The application has been submitted to the ECU under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989. Unlike a planning application, there is no requirement that the application be determined in Page 187 of 224
Page 194
accordance with the development plan. Instead, the development plan is one of a number of material considerations which require to be taken into account by the ECU in their determination of the application. To inform the Councils consultation response to the ECU, the development plan represents the appropriate document against which to base the Councils assessment of the application. The development plan comprises of the National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and the adopted Renfrewshire Local Development Plan 2022 (LDP). The application site is located within the green belt. Policies ENV1 of the LDP and 8 of NPF4 both consider essential infrastructure to be an acceptable form of development within the green belt in principle. Battery storage systems are a key component in the decarbonisation of the electricity grid, and the transition towards greater electricity generation from renewable sources. The battery systems will store excess energy during times of surplus generation. This is then fed back into the grid during times of demand. This provides for a more resilient and stable energy supply. It is considered that the proposal does constitute essential infrastructure and complies in principle with policies ENV1 of the LDP and 8 of NPF4 relating to the green belt. The development is also considered to comply with policies 1 and 2 of NPF4 relating to climate mitigation and tackling the climate crisis. The proposal must thereafter be assessed against the detailed development criteria set out within the green belt policies. This includes the green belt development criteria set out within the new development supplementary guidance which will be assessed in turn as follows. IFL have advised that the site is not located on prime quality agricultural land or peatland. In response to the feedback from IFL the applicant has further advised that the Carbon and Peatland Map (2016) established the soil as Class 0 mineral soil which is not a carbon-rich type soil. Details relating to the management strategy for soil on the site, cut and fill operations, retention and re-use of site won material, and the reinstatement of the site in terms of decommissioning can be addressed via condition. The development does not have any implications for areas of wild land. The Roads Development officer has not objected to the development. They have listed several matters that would need to be considered by the developer to ensure that the site can be accessed safely. This includes management of construction traffic at the site access and associated routing of construction vehicles, provision of sight lines, and undertaking a road safety audit. Conditions relating to these matters will be recommended to the ECU. It is noted that conditions are also requested with respect to reserving a 7m wide strip along the frontage of the site, agreeing measures to differentiate between the site access and the Hartfield Road junction to prevent wrong turning, and measures to reduce speeds locally and ensure site traffic doesn’t need to cross into oncoming traffic when exiting left. It is considered that these matters can be suitably addressed as part of the assessment associated with the above conditions, and separate conditions related to these matters are not required. Page 188 of 224
Page 195
There is no anticipated effect on public water supply or water courses from pollution risk. A condition is recommended with respect to the sustainable drainage of surface water. The development does not impinge upon any existing active travel routes. Regarding visual impact and landscape character, IFL advise that the landscape and visual assessment undertaken by the applicant is adequate in scope and reasonable in its findings. IFL advise that while some of the effects could be classified as slightly higher, this would not change the overall conclusions which are accepted. It is noted that the existing landscape character is heavily influenced by existing electricity infrastructure. This includes the well established Neilston sub station and the network of pylons, and also the recently approved greener grid park (ref: 21/0034/PP) and grid stability facility (ref: 20/0793/PP). The development site sits slightly remote from these existing developments, namely approx. 600m from the substation. However, the development includes mitigation in the form of the landscaped buffers which will screen the development over time. The planting mix can be controlled to ensure adequate coverage and density to ensure mitigation in winter months when leaves are not present. In the short term and prior to the landscaping maturing aspects such as boundary treatments and colour of the component infrastructure can be controlled again to ensure visual impact is mitigated. It is considered that the development will not have a significant impact on local landscape character. With respect to cumulative visual impact, IFL note that the development would be adding to an extensive energy landscape. The additional effects of the development would be relatively minor against this baseline and would be further reduced by the mitigation planting. It is considered that the development is acceptable with regard to cumulative visual impact. There is no requirement to incorporate access to open space, and the development does not impinge upon any existing areas of accessible open space. As the development footprint is set back from the site boundaries it is anticipated that all existing boundary treatments will be retained. The submission indicates that a 2.4m high wire mesh fence will enclose the site. Further details regarding the retention of existing boundary treatments and the colour and final design of proposed boundary treatments can be submitted via condition. The batteries and associated infrastructure are grouped together in the centre of the site, with landscaped buffers provided on all sides. I am satisfied that the grouping and positioning of the batteries and associated infrastructure is acceptable. Provision of the landscaped buffer is critical in ensuring the site can be suitably screened. This comprises of buffer zones along the south west and south east boundaries which will be planted out by the developer, and a zone along the north east and north west boundaries which has already been planted out in association with the neighbouring grid stability application. The buffer zones will ensure that over time the development is screened on all sides by planting. A detailed specification of the species and maturity of the planting to be undertaken within the landscaped buffer zones can be submitted via condition. IFL have advised that planting should be undertaken at 1.5m to 2m centres as opposed to the 5m centres set out in the supporting information to ensure that an appropriate density of planting is undertaken to screen the site effectively and in line with the year 15 visualisations provided by the applicant. Page 189 of 224
Page 196
The development will require a cable connection to the Neilston substation. The applicant has submitted a Preliminary Ecological Assessment (PEA) which concludes that the site currently is of low ecological and biodiversity value. The site primarily comprises of improved grassland habitat in this regard. While IFL ultimately agree with the conclusions set out within the PEA, they have advised that the report is light and poorly structured in the way that it reaches its conclusions. In response to the comments from IFL the applicants have provided an updated version of the PEA which contains further discussion around the baseline conditions, field survey work and overall recommendations. It is recommended that a landscape plan and biodiversity enhancement plan is produced and agreed with the local planning authority prior to the commencement of works. There is considered to be an opportunity to enhance the habitat and biodiversity value of the site. The site in its current condition primarily comprises of a single habitat type. The development provides an opportunity to create a woodland habitat within the landscape buffers, and also to improve the species diversity of the grassland in and around the batteries and the component infrastructure. The PEA also recommends the creation of hedgerows and the installation of bat boxes, bug hotels and log and stone piles. The enhancement of the site can be managed through an appropriately worded planning condition relating to the submission of a landscape scheme and biodiversity enhancement plan however it should be noted at this stage that the scheme should cover the site as a whole and not just the landscape buffers identified on the site layout. With regard to designated sites and protected species, the PEA concludes that the development is unlikely to have a detrimental impact on the closest designated receptor (Gleniffer Braes Country Park and the Bardrain Glen, Sergeantlaw Moss and Gleniffer Braes West Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC)) given the separation distance. As noted above the PEA has been updated to include additional analysis of protected species, and recommendations are made with respect to safeguarding invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles, birds, badgers, otters, and bats. A condition can be applied to ensure the recommendations within the PEA are implemented on site. The development does not include proposals to convert any existing buildings. In view of the above it is considered that the development complies with the green belt development criteria set out within the supplementary guidance. The criteria set out within Policy 8 of NPF4 which have not already been discussed above, are as follows. The green belt location is neccesary in this instance given its proximity to the Neilston substation to which a connection to the grid network can be made. Proximity to a substation where a grid connection is available is critical for BESS developments. It is noted that a large proportion of the land on the north west side of Gleniffer Road that is in proximity of the substation is designated within the SINC and the Country Park boundary. Parcels of land outweigh these boundaries are restricted by topography and ground conditions, and other consented development (namely the grid stability facility to the north). The development site is outwith these designated areas, is of lower ecological value, and is close enough to the substation to form a connection. It has therefore been proposed as a suitable site in this regard. Page 190 of 224
Page 197
The development is for essential infrastructure in an area already characterised by electricity infrastructure. The inclusion of substantial landscape buffers on all sides of the site will screen the development over time. The woodland within these buffers will complement the newer planting to the north and west of the site and the established High Bardrain woodland further to the north. It is considered that the purpose of the green belt at this location (which is to maintain identity of settlements, protect landscape setting, and promote access opportunities to open space) will not be undermined. There will not be any significant long-term impact on the environmental quality of the green belt. It should be noted at this stage that the applicant is seeking a 40 year time period for the consent at which point the development will be decommissioned and the site restored (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council). However, the landscape planting and biodiversity enhancements will be retained, and on balance the long term environmental quality of the green belt will be safeguarded. In view of the above assessment, it is considered that the development is fully compliant with the green belt policies ENV1 of the LDP and 8 of NPF4 and should be considered as a suitable development at this green belt location. Policies I4 of the LDP and 11 of NPF4 seek to support development proposals for renewable and low carbon energy developments in principle. This includes energy storage. Policy I4 includes several detailed assessment criteria which will be considered in turn as follows. The potential impact of the development with respect to local environment, landscape character and the natural environment has been discussed above. There are no above ground built heritage designations in or in close proximity of the site. The recommendations from the West of Scotland Archaeology Society regarding the requirement for an archaeological watching brief are noted. This can be managed via an appropriately worded planning condition. Potential impact on the water environment can be mitigated through the incorporation of a strategy to manage surface water and pollution control. A condition is recommended with respect to the sustainable drainage of surface water. With regard to amenity of neighbouring residential receptors, the Environmental Protection Team have offered no objections to the development however a condition is recommended with respect to limiting noise levels associated with the plant and machinery at the site. Visual impact can be mitigated by landscape planting, boundary treatments and the appearance of the component infrastructure as noted above. It is considered that the amenity of neighbouring residential receptors will not be detrimentally impacted in this regard. Matters relating to visual amenity and noise have been discussed above. There are no implications with regard to air quality, glare or shadow flicker. The development will not have a detrimental impact on outdoor sport or recreation interest. Matters relating to transport infrastructure and road safety have been discussed above. Glasgow Airport Safeguarding and NATS have offered no objections to the development with regard to the safe and efficient use of Glasgow Airport. Page 191 of 224
Page 198
The site is not within a potential heat network opportunity area. The relevant criteria within the new development supplementary guidance on renewable and low carbon energy developments (not already discussed above) are assessed as follows. Conditions can be used to ensure arrangements are in place to restore the site to an acceptable standard after the operation of the BESS has ceased. This includes the submission of decommissioning and restoration strategies, and also a bond or other financial guarantee to ensure funds are set aside for decommissioning and that the Council can call upon these funds to undertake the work if neccesary. The advice from IFL is noted with regard to the key considerations associated with the decommissioning and restoration of the development which are listed in the consultations section of the report. These considerations will be built into the recommended conditions. The development will contribute to renewable energy generation and carbon emission reduction targets by providing 150MW of storage capacity. This will allow energy from renewable sources to be stored at times where supply exceeds demand, and then fed back into the grid at times when demand exceeds supply. This will contribute to the further decarbonisation of the electricity supply, and also provide stability to the electricity grid. The criteria set out within Policy 11 of NPF4 which have not already been discussed above, are as follows. The applicant identifies the following socio-economic benefits associated with the development: ▪ Direct employment in the construction phase. ▪ Direct employment through operational and decommissioning phases. ▪ Job creation in the supply chain and related services. ▪ Stable energy prices leading to reduced energy costs. ▪ Increased energy security and stability. These are likely to constitute the maximum socio-economic benefits associated with a BESS development. There will be no detrimental impact on international or national designated sites. It is not anticipated that there will be any detrimental impacts on telecommunications and broadcasting installations. There are no trees within the site which would be removed to accommodate the development. A condition can be used to ensure appropriate measures are put in place to protect trees on the edge of the site (including those recently planted to the north east and north west) during the construction phase. The site is not at risk of flooding. Appropriate management of surface water will ensure that flood risk does not increase elsewhere. In view of the above, it is considered that the development complies with Policies I4 of the LDP and 11 of NPF4. The above assessment broadly demonstrates compliance with the other relevant development plan policies as follows. The development will contribute to the enhancement of biodiversity at the site in accordance with the requirements of Policy 3 of NPF4. Page 192 of 224
Page 199
The development will not have an unacceptable impact on the natural environment and will not have a significant impact on any national or local designated sites in accordance with Policy 4 of NPF4 and ENV2 of the LDP. There are no trees which will be removed to accommodate the development, and measures will be put in place to protect existing trees on the periphery of the site boundary. New woodland planting will be incorporated into the landscape buffer areas. The development accords with Policy 6 of NPF4 and ENV2 of the LDP. There are no above ground designated historic environment assets within or on the boundary of the site that would be impacted by the development. An archaeological watching brief will be required to ensure the potential for non-designated buried archaeological remains is investigated. The development complies with policy 7 of NPF4 and ENV3 of the LDP. Recommended conditions in respect of construction traffic management, sight lines and road safety audit will ensure that the site can be accessed safely, and that the operation of the local road network will be safeguarded during the construction and operational phases of the development. The development has a low trip generation during its operational phase and does not require accessibility via public transport or active travel routes. The development complies with policy 13 of NPF4 and I1 of the LDP. The depth of additional landscape planting that will form part of the scheme will over time improve the quality and environment of the area. It is acknowledged that in the short term and before the landscaping matures the development will be visible. However this impact can be mitigated via boundary treatments, and the positioning and external colour associated with the component infrastructure. The development complies with policy 14 of NPF4. The application site is not at risk of flooding, and the implementation of a sustainable drainage strategy for the management of surface water will not increase flood risk elsewhere. The development complies with policy 22 of NPF4 and I3 of the LDP. It is noted that the applicant has suggested a condition in relation to the micro siting of the component infrastructure. The condition would allow the developer to adjust the position of the component infrastructure by up to 25m (however not outwith the red line) from the position as shown on the submitted layout drawing without requiring a further written permission from the Council. This is to allow flexibility in procurement and design. The Council would have no objection to the imposition of this condition subject to confirmation within the wording of the condition that the infrastructure could not be located within the landscape buffers. Recommended wording for this condition is set out in the list of recommended conditions below. 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: A legal agreement to secure decommissioning and restoration of the site is required, and the ECU may wish to consider whether a S75 is the mechanism required to secure the agreement. Conclusion Page 193 of 224
Page 200
The approach to the assessment and recommendations within this report reflect the fact that the Council is a consultee under the Electricity Act 1989 and that the ECU are the determining authority. In conclusion, the proposed development is compliant with the development plan subject to planning conditions and a legal agreement to secure decommissioning. All other consultation responses noted to date indicate that the proposed development would be acceptable. It is therefore recommended that the Council raises no objections to the development subject to the suggested planning conditions listed below and to the conclusion of a legal agreement to secure appropriate funding for the decommissioning of the development and the restoration of the site. Recommendation No objection. Reason(s) for Recommendation 1. The proposed development is compliant with the development plan subject to planning conditions and a legal agreement to secure appropriate funding for the decommissioning of the development and the restoration of the site. All other consultation responses noted to date indicate that the proposed development would be acceptable. Condition(s) 1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of its grant. Reason: This condition is for the purpose of the good planning of the area, to ensure that the permission will lapse if it is not implemented within three years. 2. The development is hereby approved for a temporary period of 40 years from the date of final commissioning of the development. Written confirmation of the date of first commissioning shall be provided to the Planning Authority no later than one calendar month after that date. Reason: In order to retain effective planning control. 3. The output capacity of the BESS hereby approved shall not exceed 150MW. Reason: To define the consent in order to retain effective planning control. 4. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, an outline decommissioning, site restoration and aftercare strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The strategy shall, without limitation, detail proposals for: (a) The removal of all above and below ground elements of the development; (b) The treatment of all ground surfaces, including any sub surface areas, hard standing and access tracks which would restore the site to its former condition or other such condition as agreed by the Council as Planning Authority; (c) The phasing and timing of the works, including any environmental management provisions; (d) Details relating to how and when the strategy will be reviewed. Page 194 of 224
Page 201
Reason: To ensure the decommissioning and removal of the development is in an appropriate and environmentally acceptable manner and the restoration and aftercare of the site, in the interests of safety, amenity and environmental protection. 5. No later than 3 years prior to decommissioning of the development or the expiration of this consent (whichever is the earlier) a detailed decommissioning, restoration, and aftercare plan, based upon the principles of the approved outline decommissioning, restoration, and aftercare strategy, shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for written approval. The detailed decommissioning, restoration and aftercare plan shall include (but not be limited to the) provisions in respect of the following matters: ▪ Decommissioning and removal of the battery energy storage system units including treatment of liquid bearing components ▪ Removal of any in-situ foundations including removal to a depth of at least 1m underground ▪ Removal of above ground infrastructure extending to Substations, PV panels and mountings, inverters/ inverter containers, fencing, lighting masts, internal tracks, equipment and hard standings ▪ Cable removal including around heritage features ▪ Provision of Decommissioning Environmental Management Plan (DEMP) to be based on relevant elements of the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) ▪ A Traffic Management Plan (TMP) related to activities for decommissioning, demolition, and removal of infrastructure ▪ Locations of temporary stockpiles for decommissioned materials and equipment ▪ Treatment of disturbed ground surfaces resulting from decommissioning of infrastructure including cable removal and any sub-surface elements to restore the land to its pre-construction status or such condition as agreed in writing with the LPA ▪ Restoration proposals including ecological and biodiversity enhancement works such as (but not limited to) provision of bird boxes, insect refuge and use of native seed mixes to deliver biodiversity gains and measures to safeguard all landscaping on the site which for the avoidance of doubt shall be retained. ▪ An aftercare plan to monitor success of restoration measures with scope for interventions if required ▪ A Decommissioning Timetable Thereafter the detailed decommissioning, site restoration and aftercare plan shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plan, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the decommissioning and removal of the development in an appropriate and environmentally acceptable manner and the restoration and aftercare of the site, in the interests of safety, amenity and environmental protection. 6. Prior to the commencement of the Development hereby approved, a bond to cover the costs of decommissioning, site restoration and aftercare, as required by conditions 4 and 5 of this consent, shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. The acceptability of such bond shall be at the sole discretion of the Planning Authority. The bond must: a) be granted in favour of the Planning Authority and shall be maintained in favour of the Planning Authority throughout the duration of this consent and until the Page 195 of 224
Page 202
completion of all decommissioning, site restoration and aftercare obligations as required by conditions 1 and 2 of this consent; b) be granted by a bank or insurance company (whose identity and covenant strength shall firstly have been approved by the Council and shall have at least an A - rating) and who shall be capable of fulfilling the obligations under the guarantee; c) be for an amount which covers the value of all decommissioning, site restoration and aftercare liabilities, such amount to be determined by the Planning Authority at the commencement of Development; d) be subject to a review every five years from the date of this consent, or other such intervals as agreed by the Planning Authority. Each review shall be undertaken by a suitably qualified independent professional who has relevant experience in such matters and who has been agreed in writing beforehand by the Planning Authority. The review shall be submitted no later than three months prior to the expiry of the existing bond, for the written approval of the Planning Authority. Thereafter and at least 28 days prior to the expiry of the existing bond, a replacement bond in favour of and in terms acceptable to the Planning Authority and for the value advised by the review noted above, shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. e) come into effect on or before the date of commencement of Development, and expire no earlier than 24 months after the end of the aftercare period. No work shall begin at the site until both: ▪ written approval of the Planning Authority has been given to the terms of such bond and; ▪ the validly executed guarantee has been delivered to the Planning Authority. In the event that the bond becomes invalid for any reason, no operations will be carried out on site until a replacement bond completed in accordance with the terms of this condition is lodged with the Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of amenity and in order to retain effective planning control. 7. That no development shall take place within the development site 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 suitable investigations are undertaken in the interests of safeguarding archaeological heritage. 8. That prior to the commencement of construction works on site, the developer shall submit for the written approval of the Planning Authority a specification detailing the pre and post construction road condition survey to be undertaken on the local road network Page 196 of 224
Page 203
identified as part of the construction traffic route set out in figure 1 of the CAP (Construction and Access Plan). The specification shall detail the survey scope and methodology, the timings of the survey, provision for selection of an alternative construction traffic route and notification to the Council of an alternative construction traffic route, provision for survey of the alternative construction traffic route, the methodology for identifying any extraordinary damage to the road (damage to the construction traffic route attributable to construction vehicles serving the development between the pre and post construction condition surveys but excluding fair wear and tear attributable to general vehicle use of the route over the same period) and the means by which any extraordinary damage will be repaired including timescales for completion of the works. The pre and post construction road condition survey shall thereafter be undertaken in accordance with the approved specification, and all extraordinary damage repaired to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure any damage to the local road network arising from the construction of the development is repaired. 9. That prior to the commencement of development on site, full details of all landscaping works shall be submitted as part of a landscape strategy for the written approval of the Planning Authority. The landscape strategy shall include (but not be limited to) provisions in respect of: ▪ all existing trees, hedgerows, and boundary treatments both within and on the edge of the site to be retained including the management of these features and protection measures to be implemented during the construction phase (particularly in relation to a protection zone for all new and existing planting to the north east and north west of the site), ▪ confirmation of any hedgerows or trees that need to be removed including any to form the visibility splays associated with the access sightlines, ▪ all proposed trees, shrubs, hedgerows, areas of grass/wildflower seeding, turfing including size, species, spacing and location noting that all planting shall be a maximum of 2m centres. ▪ all areas of hard standing including location and materials (including the initial 5m of any access track taken from the public road which shall be finished in a bituminous material), ▪ all areas of surface water including ponds, and measures for the sustainable management and drainage of surface water where applicable, ▪ the implementation of all biodiversity and habitat enhancements including (but not limited to) those set out within sections 6.25 and 6.26 of the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal by R & D Ecology Ltd dated 28.04.2024 to ensure biodiversity net gain is achieved, ▪ a timetable for the implementation of the landscape strategy, Page 197 of 224
Page 204
▪ a strategy for the future management and maintenance of all landscaped areas including provision for replacement of trees, shrubs, hedgerows and areas of grass/wildflower seeding and turfing if they were to become diseased, die, become seriously damaged or are removed within 5 years of being planted. The approved landscape strategy shall thereafter be implemented on site in accordance with the approved timetable and shall be managed and maintained thereafter for the duration that the solar park is operational. Reason: To ensure a robust landscaping strategy is implemented in the interests of visual amenity, landscape character and biodiversity. 10. That prior to the commencement of development on site, the developer shall submit for the written approval of the Planning Authority a detailed drainage strategy for the site. The strategy shall set out the SUDS measures to be implemented at the site to ensure that surface water is managed sustainably and shall include a maintenance plan for all SUDS features. The drainage strategy as approved in writing by the Planning Authority shall thereafter be implemented on site and maintained thereafter for the life of the development. Reason: To ensure effective drainage infrastructure is installed on site and maintained appropriately in the interests of effective surface water management. 11. That prior to the commencement of development on site, the developer shall submit for the written approval of the Planning Authority a detailed lighting strategy for the site. The lighting strategy shall be developed in accordance with the Bat Conservation Trust’s Guidance Note 08/23 Bats and Artificial Lighting at Night. Only the approved lighting strategy shall thereafter be implemented on the site. Reason: To ensure a sympathetic lighting strategy is developed in the interests of natural heritage and visual amenity. 12. That prior to the commencement of development on site, the developer shall submit a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) for the written approval of the Planning Authority. The CTMP shall include (but not be limited to) details in respect of; ▪ Details of the design, layout, geometry and surface finish of the access at Gleniffer Road including geometry for the construction and post construction phase of the development. ▪ 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. ▪ A timetable for the construction phase including confirmation of site operating times on each day of the week. The details set out within the approved CTMP shall thereafter be implemented on site during the construction phase. Page 198 of 224
Page 205
Reason: To ensure traffic impacts are mitigated during the construction phase, and that the construction phase is undertaken safely. 13. That prior to the commencement of cabling works between the battery energy storage system hereby approved and any location or premises to which energy from the battery energy storage system will be transferred, an additional Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) will be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. The additional CTMP will specify the location of the proposed new cable connection, all enabling works required to install the cable including those within and out with the limits of the road and verge, works to any existing boundary fencing and walls and how these boundaries will be reinstated, and loss of any trees, hedgerows or vegetation and how this will be compensated for, and any necessary traffic management measures required to install the cable connection. The cable connection shall thereafter be installed in accordance with the measures set out within the approved CTMP. Reason: To ensure traffic impacts are mitigated during the installation of the cable connection, and that the cable connection phase is undertaken safely and the environment is protected 14. That prior to the commencement of any works on site, either enabling works or construction works, 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: o Project Title Page – Defines the project and applicant details o Distribution List – Includes external recipients chiefly LPA and internal distribution such as contractors; to ensure familiarity with the consented requirements o Introduction – Project overview, site description, scope of proposed works, programme of works, details of any previous environmental assessments o Roles and Responsibilities – Organisational Chart of project personnel and key contacts plus training and competencies and communication procedures o Environmental Management Policy Statement – To include any accreditations or EM Systems followed o Regulations and Requirements – Legislation, Regulations and Technical Guidance applicable to the nature and scope of the development o Identification of Environmental Assets and Impacts: o Emissions to air – dust, noise, vibration, traffic/ vehicle movements on site and to/ from site o Land and Water (extends to surface and ground water) – discharges from construction activities, i.e. pollution, substance contamination, damage, waste management o Archaeology and heritage features Page 199 of 224
Page 206
o Ecological features including habitats and species o Environmental Mitigation Measures and control plans with regard to identified environmental assets and the potential impacts arising from construction; to take cognisance of relevant Legislation and Regulations and follow appropriate Technical Guidance/ best practice o Inclusion of an Emergency/ Incident Response Plan o Monitoring and Auditing – Procedures for audits (internal and external), monitoring and inspections, environmental performance monitoring e.g. KPIs, monitoring/ inspection reporting o The measures set out within the approved CEMP shall thereafter be implemented on site during the construction phase. Reason: To ensure environmental impacts are mitigated during the construction phase, and that the construction phase is undertaken safely. 15. The design, installation and operation of any plant, machinery or equipment shall be such that noise associated with the development does not exceed Noise Rating Curve NR25 between the hours of 2300 to 0700 hours and NR 35 at all other times, when measured within any dwelling in the vicinity of the development. Structure borne vibration from the proposed development shall be imperceptible within any dwelling in the vicinity of the development. For an explanation of noise rating curves, refer to BS 8233:2014 Sound insulation and noise reduction in buildings- code of practice, Annex B Reason: To mitigate potential noise impact on sensitive receptors within the vicinity of the site boundary. 16. That prior to the commencement of development on site, the developer shall submit a specification for the written approval of the Planning Authority which details the final design and finishing colour of all above ground elements of the development including (but not limited to) buildings, containers, plant, batteries and other component infrastructure, and all boundary fencing and gates to be developed at the site. The development shall thereafter be undertaken in accordance with the details within the approved specification. Reason: To ensure the colour of all built elements within the site is reflective of the landscape setting in the interests of visual amenity. 17. That all recommendations set out in section 6 of the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal by R & D Ecology Ltd dated 28.04.2024 shall be implemented on site during the construction phase. Reason: In the interests of safeguarding protected species. 18. That prior to the commencement of development on site, the developer shall submit a site plan and section drawing(s) and associated specification for the written approval of the Planning Authority detailing the existing and proposed ground levels within the site including the requirement for any associated wall retention, cut and fill and earth moving. Only the approved details shall thereafter be implemented on site. Page 200 of 224
Page 207
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity. 19. That within three months of the date of consent a Road Safety Audit (RSA), shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for written approval. As part of the RSA it shall consider road safety measures to differentiate between the vehicular accesses along Gleniffer Road and that of its junction to Hartfield Road as well as the management of traffic during both the construction phase and operational phase of the development. Thereafter any approved measures that result from the RSA shall be implemented in accordance with a timetable approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: To reduce traffic speeds in the interests of traffic safety. 20. That prior to the commencement of development on site, the developer shall submit a plan for the written approval of the Planning Authority detailing the 9m x 120m x 0.6m sightlines to be provided from the centre of the proposed site access onto Gleniffer Road in both directions. These sight lines will be achieved unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. The works to form the sight lines (including removal of all obstructions in excess of 0.6m above ground level) shall thereafter be undertaken and the sight line formed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to the commencement of any development on the site unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the site can be accessed safely during the construction and operational phases of the development. 21. All development shall be constructed in the locations shown on the Proposed Site Layout Plan ref. APA-1315-DR-PL-003 Rev 10 titled Proposed Indicative Site Layout except where adjusted by micro siting of no more than 25m from the original position shown on the Proposed Site Layout Plan ref. APA-1315-DR-PL-003 Rev 10 titled Proposed Indicative Site Layout. Notwithstanding the micro siting allowance, the micro siting area shall be limited so that no development shall be located outside the red line site boundary or within the areas demarcated as third party mitigation landscaping land and proposed landscaping land as shown on the Proposed Site Layout Plan ref. APA- 1315-DR-PL-003 Rev 10 titled Proposed Indicative Site Layout. Any changes to development locations outside of the micro siting limit are to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: To retain effective control over the development. The following advisory note should be attached to the deemed planning permission 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. Advice Note 4 'Cranes and Other Construction Issues' (available at http://www.aoa.org.uk/policy- safeguarding.htm). Schedule of Plans Reviewed Drawing Number Revision Drawing/Document Title Page 201 of 224
Page 208
APA-1315-DR-PL-003 10 Proposed Indicative Site Layout APA-1315-DR-PL-001 2 Site Location Plan APA-1315-DR-PL-100 132kV Transformer APA-1315-DR-PL-101 Inverter APA-1315-DR-PL-102 Auxiliary Transformer APA-1315-DR-PL-103 1 Access Gate APA-1315-DR-PL-104 B DNO Building APA-1315-DR-PL-105 CCTV & Lighting APA-1315-DR-PL-106 Client & Control Room APA-1315-DR-PL-107 Transformer APA-1315-DR-PL-108 B Customer Switchroom APA-1315-DR-PL-109 Mesh Fence APA-1315-DR-PL-110 Battery Container Planning and Design and Access Statement by AAH consultants dated December 2023 RDECO00089/230/01 C Preliminary Ecological Appraisal by R & D Ecology Flood Risk Assessment by AAH consultants dated December 2023 15025A-20-R02-01-F Noise Assessment by Noise Consultants Ltd dated December 2023 Landscape and Visual Assessment by AAH consultants dated December 2023 Statement of Community Involvement and Pre-Application Consultation Report by AAH consultants dated December 2023 371 V2 Archaeological Walkover Survey and Historic Environment Assessment RHC-23-170-TS Foxbar, Renfrewshire Transport Statement, by Roberts Highway Consultants dated December 2023 For further information please contact James Weir, Development Standards Team, Email: james.weir@renfrewshire.gov.uk. Page 202 of 224
Page 209
Report by Chief Planning Officer Planning and Climate Change Policy Board: 28 May 2024 Reference No 24/0118/PP Application Type Planning Permission-Full Proposal Section 42 application to vary conditions 4 and 5 of planning permission 99/02668/DC, to allow for increased gross retail floorspace and to widen the range of goods sold from Unit I and to consolidate previously granted consents to allow a wider range of goods to be sold from Units D2, E and J Location Braehead Retail Park, 136 King's Inch Drive, Renfrew Ward 1 - Renfrew North and Braehead Community Council Renfrew Community Council Applicant Braehead (Glasgow) Ltd. 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=S8W0XCMWFH600 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. While the application would normally fall within the scheme of delegation to be determined by officers, the scheme of delegation allows for officers to refer applications to the Board. The application has been referred in this instance to allow the application to be fully considered for the potential impact on Renfrewshire’s Network of Centres. Proposal This proposal is an application under Section 42 to vary conditions 4 and 5 of planning permission 99/02668/DC, to allow for increased gross retail floorspace and to widen the range of goods sold from Unit I and to consolidate previously granted consents to allow a wider range of goods to be sold from Units D2, E and J at Braehead Retail Park, 148 Kings Inch Drive, Renfrew. Planning permission was granted subject to conditions on 2 March 2000 (99/02668/DC): - Erection of non-food retail warehousing etc. (Application to amend Condition NC(d) attached to Permission Number 2239/98 and also allow sale of automotive goods and accessories). Over the past 15 years, planning permission has been granted to allow a widening range of goods that can be sold from individual units (Units D2, E and J). This application seeks to consolidate these consents into a single up-to-date permission. Conditions 4 and 5 of Planning Permission of planning permission 99/02668/DC state the following: Condition 4 "The retail components of the scheme shall provide not more than the following areas of gross retail floorspace: - (a) the shopping mall: 50,000 square metres storage, of which not more than 11,000 square metres shall be used for the sale of convenience goods, not more than 38,250 square metres for the sale of comparison goods; (b) the retail warehouse park: 24,200 square metres." Item 6 (g) PACC280524 Page 203 of 224
Page 210
Amendment Sought "The retail components of the scheme shall not provide more than the following areas of gross retail floorspace: - (a) the shopping mall: 50,000 square metres storage, of which not more than 11,000 square metres shall be used for the sale of convenience goods, not more than 38,250 square metres for the sale of comparison goods; (b) the retail warehouse park: 25,000 square metres." The current gross retail floorspace of the retail park units is 23,142 sqm. Units G, H and I are currently wholly occupied by the electronics retailer, Currys. It is proposed that Currys will subdivide the existing three units to occupy units G and H only, with a proposed mezzanine space to provide additional sales area. The subdivision and mezzanine do not require planning permission. A planning application has also been submitted for the formation of an end-terrace enclosed outdoor sales area to Unit I (24/0117/PP). These proposals would bring the total gross floorspace area for the Retail Park to 24,843sqm (643sqm above the current restriction under condition 4 of 99/02668/DC). The S42 application therefore seeks additional flexibility to increase this to 25,000 sqm (800sqm above the current restriction). Condition 5 "The retail warehouses shall be used only for the sale of Do-It-Yourself, furniture, carpets, electrical, gardening goods and automotive goods and accessories to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority." Amendment Sought "The retail warehouses shall be used for the sale of Do-It-Yourself, furniture, carpets, electrical, gardening goods and automotive goods and accessories to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority, with the exception that: Unit I and its associated external display area comprising 3,439 square metres gross will comprise of Class 1A unrestricted comparison (non-food) goods only in accordance with planning permission reference 13/0502/PP. Unit E shall be used for the sale of Class 1A unrestricted comparison (non-food) goods only in accordance with planning permission reference 21/0027/PP. Unit J, which measures 10,558 square metres gross, shall be used for the sale of Class 1A goods, of which no more than 6,332 square metres shall be used for the sale of convenience goods and no more than 4,226 square metres shall be used for the sale of comparison goods. This is in accordance with planning permission 08/0698/PP." Following the subdivision of Units G and H as detailed above, the resultant remaining vacant commercial unit (Unit I) will be repurposed for use by a new tenant, utilising ground floor sales area and a new outdoor sales area extending from the eastern elevation (24/0117/PP). The Planning Statement submitted with the application states that the intended occupier of Unit I is a leading general variety goods retailer. The retailer sells a range of DIY, furniture, electrical and automotive goods, which are allowed under condition 5 of 99/02668/DC. In addition, the retailer also sells a multitude of other comparison goods such as toys, seasonal items and a small range of clothing items, plus ancillary convenience goods. The S42 application therefore seeks flexibility for the sale of the sale of convenience and comparison goods in line with the previously approved planning permissions (08/0698/PP, 13/0502/PP and 21/0027/PP). If successful, the effect of a Section 42 application to modify a planning condition or conditions is to grant a further planning permission for the whole development again but with the amended condition or conditions replacing those that were previously issued, or with conditions removed if required. All other conditions, if relevant, are also required to be attached Page 204 of 224
Page 211
to any new planning permission. A review of the conditions attached to the previous planning permission 99/02668/DC will also therefore be carried out. Site Description The application site comprises Braehead Retail Park, 148 King's Inch Drive, Renfrew. Braehead which is a Local Commercial Centre as identified in the Renfrewshire Local Development Plan (2021) (LDP). The Retail Park is located to the southeast of, and immediately adjacent to Braehead which is a Strategic Centre as identified in the Adopted LDP. Marlinford Quay and the Clydeside Walkway bound the site immediately to the northeast, with Sainsbury's Braehead to the southeast and the existing Retail Arcade to the northwest. Car parking and the Braehead Retail Park access road from King's Inch Drive are located immediately to the southwest of the site. 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. No pre-application discussions have taken place. Negotiated Improvements No changes have been negotiated. Site History Most recent relevant planning history detailed below: Application No : 24/0117/PP Description: Erection of end-terrace enclosed outdoor sales area with associated alterations Decision: Pending consideration Application No.: 21/0027/PP Description: Use of Unit as Class 1 (Retail) for the sale of unrestricted comparison good only Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 21/1555/AD Description: Display of one internally illuminated fascia sign, three non-illuminated secondary signs, three non-illuminated directional signs and one internally illuminated totem replacement Decision: Grant Application No: 18/0462/PP Description: Erection of (non-food) retail warehouse development including sprinkler tank, sub-station and pump room, and provision of parking, access, landscaping and public realm Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 18/0090/AD Page 205 of 224
Page 212
Description: Display of non-illuminated fascia sign Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: Renewal of planning permission 14/0160/PP 'Erection of end-terrace retail unit as western extension to existing retail warehouse units, alteration to road layout and additional landscaping Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 16/0200/PP Description: Erection of retail unit as eastern extension to existing retail warehouse units and provision of landscaping. (Section 42 application for the deletion of Condition 1 of planning approval 10/0318/PP). Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 13/0502/PP Description: Change of use of retail warehouse (Unit D2,938sqm) to Class 1 Retail (comparison goods only) Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 08/0698/PP External alterations to existing Class 1 retail unit, reconfiguration of site including removal of garden centre, formation of new service yard, alterations to car park and access roads and construction of petrol filling station Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 99/02668/DC Description: Erection of non food retail warehousing etc (Application to amend Condition NC(d) attached to Permission Number 2239/98 and also allow sale of automotive goods and accessories. Decision: Grant subject to conditions Consultations Chief Executive (Roads Development) – No objections. Representations The application has been publicised in line with the requirements of the relent legislation. No representations were received: 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 NPF4: Policy 27 - City, town, local and commercial centres Page 206 of 224
Page 213
NPF4: Policy 28 - Retail Full details relating to the policies of the LDP can be found online. Renfrewshire Local Development Plan LDP 2021: Policy C1 - Renfrewshire's Network of Centres LDP 2021: Policy I1 - Connecting Places Full details relating to the policies of the LDP can be found online. Other relevant policies and guidance New Development Supplementary Guidance: - Local Commercial Centres 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: Braehead Retail Park Planning and Retail Statement (Section 42) - The submitted statement describes the site and surroundings, planning history, development proposals, policy context and provides a planning assessment for the site. This report also included a Retail Impact assessment that advised there was no negative impact on Renfrewshire’s network of centres. 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 National Planning Framework 4 (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 27 "City, town and commercial centres" of NPF4 states that LDPs should support sustainable futures, in particular opportunities to enhance city and town centres. They should where relevant, also support proposals for improving sustainability of existing commercial centres where appropriate. Criterion b) of Policy 27 states that "unless a Town Centre First Assessment demonstrates that: all centre and edge of centre options have been sequentially assessed and discounted as unsuitable or unavailable; the scale of development cannot reasonably be altered or reduced in scale to allow it to be accommodated in a centre; and the impacts on existing centres have been thoroughly assessed and there will be no significant adverse effect on the vitality and viability of the centres." Page 207 of 224
Page 214
A Town Centre First Assessment has been prepared as part of the application and is contained within the Section 42 Statement. The Sequential Assessment summarises that Braehead Strategic Centre and Renfrew Town Centre are the closest centres to the application site and within Renfrewshire's Network of Centres. These centres were therefore assessed for sequentially preferable sites that could accommodate the proposals parameters. No sites were found within or to the edge of the centres that were large enough, to accommodate the operational requirements of the intended operator for Unit I. The proposed alterations to conditions 4 and 5 would enable a new complementary retailer to be introduced to the Local Commercial Centre that would be complementary to existing uses. It is considered that although the vacancy rate figures used for both Braehead Shopping Centre and Renfrew Town Centre are outdated, there are no current vacant units that would be of a size and format that could accommodate the proposal and the provided reasons discounting potential units in both Braehead Strategic Centre and Renfrew Town Centre are considered to be valid. The principle of retail development in this location has already been established through the original planning permission. In addition, the scale of the change proposed by the S42 application is not considered to be of a level that would unacceptably impact any of the existing centres in the network. The Retail Impact Assessment submitted in support of the application concludes (on the basis of supporting data) that the proposal would not cause a significant adverse effect on other centres and for the reasons detailed above, it is considered that the proposal would generally comply with the relevant provisions of Policy 27 of NPF4. Policy 28 "Retail" of NPF4 seeks to encourage, promote and facilitate retail investment to the most sustainable locations. In this instance, as discussed above, the proposal would enhance an existing commercial centre and as such the proposal is considered to be acceptable in principle. Policy 28 states that "new retail proposals…will be supported in …commercial centres if they are allocated as sites suitable for new retail development in the LDP. The application site relates to existing retail units within a Local Service Centre as identified in the LDP. Policy C1 of the LDP welcomes development that supports the role and function of the network of centres. It is considered that the proposals would strengthen the network and enhance the Local Commercial Centre, by increasing the range of retailers available in an accessible location in accordance with Policy C1. The policy also states that all development proposals will be considered in line with the hierarchy and role and the function of centres as set out in the LDP, including relevant guidance provided in the New Development Supplementary Guidance (SG). The application included a Retail Assessment which provides a Sequential Assessment of the centres within a 10-minute drive of the application site, and an Impact Assessment which adequately demonstrate that there would be no unacceptable impact on the network of centres as a result of the proposal. The Assessment also identifies that this proposal would have less of an impact when compared to previous expired planning consents to extend the commercial centre. While these consents were granted prior to the adoption of NPF4, it is reasonable to highlight this proposal in relation to previous consented floorspace. It is considered that the submitted impact assessment adopts a proportionate approach and the conclusions appear to be reasonable. For the reasons given above, it is considered that the proposal would comply with Policy 28 of NPF4 and C1 of the LDP. Policy I1 (Connecting Places) states that all development proposals require to ensure appropriate provision and accessibility including the ability to connect to active travel networks, public transport networks, hubs and interchanges. The application site is located adjacent to Braehead Strategic Centre and within an existing Local Commercial Centre. As such, the location already benefits from appropriate transport and accessibility provision. The proposal would therefore comply with Policy I1. Page 208 of 224
Page 215
Section 75 Obligations The Council is required to provide a summary of the terms of any planning obligation which is required to be entered into under Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act in relation to the grant of permission for the proposed development: None. Conclusion In view of the above, it is considered that the proposal would accord with the relevant provisions of the Development Plan. There are no other material considerations. Planning permission should therefore be granted subject to the proposed revised changes to the planning conditions. As the Retail Park has been developed and has been in operation for a number of years, many of the conditions attached to the original consent have been met and are no longer necessary or relevant and as such have been removed from the list of recommended conditions. Recommendation Grant subject to conditions Reason(s) for Recommendation 1. The proposal accords with the provisions of the Development Plan and there were no material considerations which outweighed the presumption in favour of development according with the Development Plan. Condition(s) 1. The retail components of the scheme shall provide not more than the following areas of gross retail floorspace: - (a) the shopping mall: 50,000 square metres storage, of which not more than 11,000 square metres shall be used for the sale of convenience goods, not more than 38,250 square metres for the sale of comparison goods; (b) the retail warehouse park: 25,000 square metres. Reason: To limit the gross retail floorspace and to ensure that it does not have an adverse impact upon the role and function of any other network centre. 2. The retail warehouses shall be used for the sale of Do-It-Yourself, furniture, carpets, electrical, gardening goods and automotive goods and accessories to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority, with the exception that: Unit I and its associated external display area comprising 3,439 square metres gross will comprise of Class 1A unrestricted comparison (non-food) goods only in accordance with planning permission reference 13/0502/PP. Unit E shall be used for the sale of Class 1A unrestricted comparison (non-food) goods only in accordance with planning permission reference 21/0027/PP. Unit J, which measures 10,558 square metres gross, shall be used for the sale of Class 1A goods, of which no more than 6,332 square metres shall be used for the sale of convenience goods and no more than 4,226 square metres shall be used for the sale of comparison goods. This is in accordance with planning permission 08/0698/PP. Page 209 of 224
Page 216
Reason: To define the consent to ensure the use of the retail units reflects the role and function of the commercial centre, and to ensure that the use does not have an adverse impact upon the role and function of any other network centre 3. Noise from or associated with the development (the building and fixed plant) shall not give rise to a noise level, assessed with windows closed, within any dwelling or noise sensitive building in excess of that equivalent to Noise Rating Curve (NRC) 35 between the hours of 0700 and 2200 and Noise Rating Curve (NRC) 25 at all other times. Reason: In the interests of amenity. Advisory Note(s) None Schedule of Plans Determined Drawing Number Revision Drawing/Document Title PL-02 001 Location Plan (PL)020 Location Plan 70110618 Braehead Retail park Planning and Retail Statement (Section 42) by wsp dated January 2024 For further information please contact Fiona Knighton, Development Standards Team, Email: fiona.knighton@renfrewshire.gov.uk. Page 210 of 224
Page 217
Report by Chief Planning Officer Planning and Climate Change Policy Board: 28 May 2024 Reference No 24/0153/PP Application Type Planning Permission-Full Proposal Erection of up to a 49.9MW Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) Location Land Off Barnwell/ Wright Street, Renfrew, PA4 8AN Ward 02 - Renfrew South And Gallowhill Community Council Renfrew Community Council Applicant P3P Partners LLP Recommendation Refuse All plans, reports, documents and representations relating to this application can be viewed in full online at https://pl-bs.renfrewshire.gov.uk/online- applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=S9I8Y9MWFQQ00 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 proposed development falls within the 'major' category of development as defined by The Town and Country Planning (Hierarchy of Development) (Scotland) Regulations 2009. Proposal This application seeks planning permission for the erection of up to a 49.9MW Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) at Wright Street, Renfrew. The BESS comprises of seventy two battery modules (which each feature 8 individual battery units), six transformers, a client control building, a substation and an auxiliary transformer. Access to the site is via the internal access road that currently serves the Bidfood distribution depot to the west of the site. This road connects with Barnwell Street to the west of the stopping up point which splits Barnwell Street from Wright Street. There is a 28m deep landscape buffer between the edge of the footway on Barnwell Street / Wright Street and the boundary fence. The buffer features a mix of tree and shrub planting, grass seeding and an attenuation pond. The control building, substation and auxiliary transformer are grouped together in the north west corner of the site, with the batteries set out in six groups of twelve across the remainder of the site. There is an internal access road network, and two car parking spaces are proposed. The submission is accompanied by indicative drawings of the various elements of the development. The substation measures 7m in width, 6.7m in length and 4m in height. It has a flat roof and is of a red brick construction. The control building measures 12m in length, 4m in width and 3m in height. It incorporates a flat roof and is finished green. The individual battery units are 2.3m in height and 1.3m in length and width and are finished white. The auxiliary transformer is 1.7m in height, while the BESS transformers are 3.6m in height. A 3m high boundary fence is proposed. Native hedge planting will also be incorporated along the north east and south east boundaries. There is also an additional pocket of tree and shrub planting in the south east corner of the site. There are eight 5m high CCTV and lighting columns proposed. Item 6 (h) PACC280524 Page 211 of 224
Page 218
Site Description The application site extends to 1.65 hectares in area. It is bound by Barnwell Street / Wright Street to the north, Houston's Bottling Plant to the east, a waste water treatment plant to the south, and Bidfoods distribution depot to the west. Westway Business Park is located on the opposite side of Barnwell Street / Wright Street to the north. The closest residential properties are located on Babcock Drive approx. 50m to the south east, and Methuen Road approx. 75m to the south east. It is noted that Methuen Drive occupies an elevated position in relation to the application site. 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: The proposed development would be contrary to Policy E1. Any application would therefore require a supporting statement outlining the material considerations which would justify a proposal that does not comply with the development plan. Negotiated Improvements Following submission, the following changes have been negotiated between officers and the applicant: ▪ The applicant has agreed to upgrade the frontage of the site to provide an additional section of active travel link to tie in with the works already completed on Barnwell Street to the west of the site. These upgrades can be secured by an appropriately worded condition. Site History Application No: 21/1607/PP Description: Erection of boundary fence Decision: Grant Application No: 22/0364/AD Description: Display of four non-illuminated fascia signs Decision: Grant Application No: 23/0385/PN Description: Proposed Battery Energy Storage System Decision: Accepted; Application No: 24/0162/EA Description: Request for screening opinion as to the requirement for an Environmental Impact Assessment relating to the installation of a 49.9MW Battery Energy Storage System Decision: Environmental Assessment not Required Application No: 20/0717/PP Description: Approval of Matters Specified in conditions 3.4.1 - 3.4.10 (inclusive) and 4.5.8 of Planning Permission 20/0120/PP - Erection of Class 6 (Storage & Distribution) building with associated access, parking and landscaping. Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 20/0120/PP Page 212 of 224
Page 219
Description: Erection of Class 4 (Business), Class 5 (General Industrial) and Class 6 (Storage & Distribution) development, with associated access, parking and landscaping (in principle). Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 19/0792/EO Description: Request for screening opinion as a requirement for a Environmental Impact Assessment relating to the erection of class 4 (business), class 5 (general industrial) and class 6 (storage & distribution) development Decision: Environmental Assessment not Required Application No: 19/0789/NO Description: Erection of class 4 (business), class 5 (general industrial) and class 6 (storage & distribution) development Decision: Accepted; Application No: 09/0063/EO Description: Request for screening opinion on the need for an Environmental Impact Assessment for residential development Decision: Environmental Assessment not Required Consultations Glasgow Airport Safeguarding - No objection subject to conditions relating to submission of Bird Hazard Management Plan and that the landscaping and soft water scheme shall be implemented as shown in the plans and shall not be altered without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority in consultation with Glasgow Airport Safeguarding. Environment, Housing & Infrastructure (Env. Protection) - Noise assessment required. Conditions relating to land contamination required. NATS - No objections Chief Executive's Service (Roads Development) – No objection subject to conditions relating to completion of the Wright St frontage works identified within the red hatching on Systra Drg 108980/A/GL/01 rev B, formation of a 2m wide footway from the new gates to the existing footway network including dropped kerb connections, formation of a 3m wide shared foot and cycleway through the site connecting the Wright St Cycleway to the southeastern extent of the site for eventual connection to the Renfrew Paisley cycleway, to provide at traffic free at grade connectivity between Paisley and AMIDS, and formation of a 2.5x30x1.05m sightline at the sites gateway onto Bidfoods existing access road. Scottish Power Networks (Transmission Sites) - No comments. Scottish Power Networks (Distribution Sites) - No objections. Scottish Water - No objections. S.E.P.A - Development is below threshold with which site specific advice would be provided. Scottish Fire and Rescue Service – No response. Representations The application has been publicised in line with the requirements of the relevant legislation. Page 213 of 224
Page 220
The following representations were received: Object - 6 Support - 0 Neutral - 0 The issues raised can be summarised as follows: ▪ Safety and fire risk from thermal runaway. These uses are generally located on the periphery of populated areas. ▪ Proposal is in an industrial area but creates no permanent jobs. It is not therefore consistent with Policy E1. ▪ Site is in the flood plain. ▪ Proposal may prevent expansion of neighbouring premises including storage of high value flammable stock. Houston's bottling plant advise they have plans to expand which would place them under COMAH regulations, and the proposal may prevent this. They also advise that existing stock may have to be removed. ▪ The SEIL should be promoted for similar uses which are compatible with existing uses. The proposal could have a detrimental impact on the function of the SEIL and would remove an opportunity site. ▪ The proposed grid connection is 3km away from the site. ▪ An EIA is required. ▪ The public consultation process was not satisfactory with minimal publicity and communication. ▪ Impact on residential amenity and proximity to residential properties. ▪ Noise and EMF buzzing. ▪ Are there other examples of BESS sites near residential areas. ▪ Chemical composition of the batteries and potential contamination of land and water if they were to fail. ▪ Impact on local wildlife. ▪ Impact on road network. ▪ Timeline for construction. ▪ Management of construction vehicles and how will they access the site. ▪ During baseline testing for the noise assessment was construction noise from Westway omitted. 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 9 - Brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings Policy 11 - Energy Policy 13 - Sustainable transport Policy 14 - Design, quality and place Page 214 of 224
Page 221
Policy 22 - Flood risk and water management Policy 23 - Health and safety Policy 26 - Business and industry Full details relating to the policies of the NPF4 can be found online. Renfrewshire Local Development Plan Policy E1 - Renfrewshire's Economic Investment Locations Policy E2 - City Deal Investment Framework Policy ENV2 - Natural Heritage Policy ENV4 - The Water Environment Policy I1 - Connecting Places Policy I3 - Flooding and Drainage Policy I4 - Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Developments New Development Supplementary Guidance Delivering the Economic Strategy – Economic Investment Locations Delivering the Environment Strategy – Natural Heritage and the Water Environment Delivering the Infrastructure Strategy – Connecting Places, Flooding and Drainage and Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Developments Full details relating to the policies of the LDP can be found online. 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: Flood Risk Assessment – This report notes that the site is located within an area at little to no risk of flooding from fluvial and coastal sources. There is an area in the centre of the site at low to medium risk of surface water flooding. A SUDS scheme is proposed which would discharge surface water to sewer along Wright Street Attenuation is proposed to ensure greenfield run off rate can be achieved. Infiltration of surface water will be investigated. A detailed design will be prepared. Pre-application Consultation Report - This report outlines the community engagement undertaken by the applicant during the pre-application consultation period and demonstrates compliance with statutory requirements. Consideration has been given to comments received, and the design and layout of the development has evolved to take specific account of key environmental considerations and likely issues associated with residential amenity. Design and Access Statement – The report provides an appraisal of the site, the development, and the policy and legislative context around BESS. There is a specific section related to fire safety which outlines the fire safety measures ranging from initial testing and manufacturing of the batteries to on site safety and fire risk mitigation. In terms of policy the statement asserts that the development meets the tests of Policy E1 in respect of development outside classes 4, 5 and 6 being deemed acceptable. Transport Statement – The statement advises that all construction and maintenance vehicles will access the site via the new bridge crossing with the construction period lasting up to Page 215 of 224
Page 222
eight months. The report states that there will be negligible trip generation during the operational period and concludes that there will be no significant impact upon the public road network. Preliminary Ecological Appraisal – The report notes that there is a negligible risk of adverse impacts to statutory designated sites within 5km of the development. The site is assessed as being an open mosaic habitat on previously developed land, and has high conservation value as a UKBAP Priority Habitat. Further surveys are recommended with respect to vertebrates, botanicals, bats, nesting birds (should works take place within the main breeding season) and mitigation measures to ensure a quantifiable increase in biodiversity include planting of native species rich hedgerow, creation of a suds feature, enhancement of existing habitats, and tree planting. Site offers low potential to support badgers and otters. Noise Impact Assessment – This report notes that the proposed development is unlikely to give rise to significant adverse noise impacts at the nearest noise sensitive receptors, and will not disrupt existing residential amenity. 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 The application site is located within the Advanced Manufacturing and Innovation District Scotland (AMIDS) strategic economic investment location (SEIL). Policy E1 of the Local Development Plan (LDP) states that economic investment locations are identified and promoted for the development of Class 4 Business, Class 5 General Industry and Class 6 Storage and Distribution uses, along with support for a wider range of employment generating uses. Proposals for employment generating uses not listed in classes 4, 5 or 6 require to demonstrate the resultant economic impact of the proposed development, and that the proposals would not have a significant detrimental impact on the role and function of the economic investment location, the visibility of the network of centres, transport infrastructure and the built and natural environment. Policy 26 of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) states that development proposals for business and industry uses on sites allocated for those uses in the LDP will be supported. Other employment uses will be supported where they will not prejudice the primary function of the area and are compatible with the business/industrial character of the area. It should be noted that the application site has planning permission in principle for class 4, 5 and 6 development via application 20/0120/PP. It is also noted that while the site has lain vacant for over ten years the infrastructure to serve the site has recently been improved through the completion of the bridge crossing at Barnwell Street (see planning application 17/0485/PP) which connects the site with the rest of the AMIDS campus and Glasgow Airport. Page 216 of 224
Page 223
The proposed BESS development does not fall within classes 4, 5 and 6 and is not considered to be a significant employment generating use with respect to its operation. The operational phase only requires intermittent maintenance visits. The applicant has sought to demonstrate that the development would still bring economic benefit through job opportunities created during the construction phase (a peak of up to 20 construction staff is anticipated), opportunities within the supply chain, and through the contribution towards provision of a more secure, stable, lower carbon and lower cost energy supply which could stimulate investment in other business sectors. It is also stated that continued investment in the renewable energy and battery storage sector will contribute to the growth of this industry and to increased employment opportunities in this specific field. In this instance the development does not fall within classes 4, 5 or 6. For the purposes of policies E1 of the LDP and 26 of NPF4 employment generating uses are generally considered to be those which result in direct employment creation at the site during the operational phase. While the potential economic benefits associated with the development as noted above are acknowledged, it is considered that the development is not an employment generating use as it does not create employment opportunities at the site during the operational phase. It is noted that policy E1 also refers to ancillary service provision. However, in this instance the BESS would be connected to the national grid and not directly to any of the businesses within the SEIL. It cannot therefore be considered as ancillary service provision. In view of the above, while there is some economic benefit associated with the development it is, on balance, considered to be contrary in principle to policies E1 of the LDP and 26 of NPF4. In addition to the above it is noted that Policy E2 of the LDP seeks to support development proposals which ensure the anticipated economic benefits of the city deal investment framework are fully realised. As noted above the city deal investment framework includes the new bridge crossing over the White Cart Water which enhances accessibility to the application site. The new bridge crossing means that vehicles can access the site without going via Wright Street. It should be noted that for the purposes of the LDP the SEIL boundary was extended to include this site specifically following the city deal investment. For the purposes of LDP 2014 the site was located within a transition area. It is considered that if the site is not developed for an employment generating use in accordance with Policy E1 of the LDP then the economic benefits associated with the city deal investment will not be fully realised. The development is also therefore considered to be contrary to Policy E2 of the LDP. Policy 1 of NPF4 states that when considering all development proposals significant weight will be given to the global climate and nature crises. Policy 2 of NPF4 aims to encourage, promote, and facilitate development that minimises emissions and adapts to the current and future impacts of climate change. BESS developments support the transition to a low carbon electricity network by importing and exporting large amounts of electricity with no time lag. This helps to balance transmission requirements as any excess energy generated from renewable sources can be stored at times of excess supply and then transmitted at times of excess demand. Page 217 of 224
Page 224
The transition to a low carbon electricity network will help to address the global climate crisis. As the development will help facilitate this transition, it is considered to comply with Policies 1 and 2 of NPF4. Policy 11 of NPF4 goes on to state that development proposals for all forms of renewable, low-carbon and zero emissions technologies will be supported. These include energy storage such as batteries. The net economic impact of the development including local employment and opportunities within the supply chain has been outlined above. There is no detrimental impact on international or national designations as set out in the supporting ecological appraisal. In terms of potential impact on neighbouring residential properties at Babcock Crescent and Methuen Road, the Environmental Protection Team have approved the accompanying Noise Impact Assessment. It is therefore considered that the development will not have a significant detrimental impact on residential amenity with respect to noise. There are no air quality issues associated with the operation of the development. With respect to visual impact, the development will be partly screened from residential properties and Houston's Bottling Plant. The development also incorporates landscaping along the north eastern, south eastern, and south western boundaries which will contribute to screening the site over time as the landscaping matures. It is noted that the development will be most visible to the properties on Methuen Drive as these properties are on ground which is elevated above the level of the site. On balance it is however not considered that the nature of the development is significantly out of keeping with the character and appearance of Barnwell Street which is an established industrial and commercial location. There are not considered to be significant landscape or visual impacts associated with the development. It is noted that the representations which have been received raise concern over potential impact on residential amenity arising from health and safety matters such as fire risk in addition to contamination and pollution. Concerns raised in relation to fire risk are not sufficient reason to justify refusal of a planning application, and there are no laws that specifically govern the fire safety of BESS. Individual batteries may have to adhere to product safety regulations however control over this would fall outwith the remit of the planning system. In this instance, the applicant has provided a response to the concerns around fire risk, noting that the batteries undergo testing at the manufacturing stage and incorporate layers of fire check resilience. This includes a fire suppression system, continuous monitoring of the batteries, and appropriate spacing. The applicant has also agreed to the submission of a Fire Safety Management Plan via an appropriately worded planning condition should planning consent be granted. On this basis, it is considered that the applicant could suitably address fire risk. In view of the above, it is considered that the development complies with Policy 23 of NPF4 which seeks to protect people and places from environmental harm. With respect to pollution risk, SEPA have advised that the development falls below the energy generation consultation trigger within which they would provide specific advice on the planning application. Attention is drawn to SEPA’s standing advice on the regulatory requirements and regulatory guidelines which could apply to the operation of the Page 218 of 224
Page 225
development. This includes matters such as pollution prevention. It is the developer’s responsibility to ensure the development operates in compliance with the relevant requirements and guidelines. For the purposes of the planning application a pollution prevention plan could be incorporated into a condition relating to the management of the construction phase should planning consent be granted. There is no impact on public access, walking or cycling routes. There have been no objections from NATS or Glasgow Airport Safeguarding with respect to aviation interests. It is noted that Glasgow Airport Safeguarding have approved the landscaping and soft water strategies, and have requested a Bird Hazard Management Plan which can be submitted via condition should planning consent be granted. It is not anticipated that there will be any detrimental impact on telecommunications or broadcasting installations. The Roads Development Officer has offered no objections to the development with respect to potential impact on road traffic. An appropriately worded planning condition could be used to ensure construction and operational traffic access the site via the new bridge crossing (and not via Wright Street) in accordance with the Transport Statement. It is noted that the development will not generate significant trips during the operational phase. However, notwithstanding this the applicant has agreed to upgrade the frontage of the site to deliver a gap in cycle infrastructure along Barnwell Street / Wright Street. Further details of the upgrade works could be requested via an appropriately worded planning condition, as could matters in relation to the visibility splay at the site access and connecting the site access with the pedestrian network. The request to form a 3m wide active travel route through the site to connect Barnwell Street with the Paisley-Renfrew core path is not considered to be reasonable as the completion of this connection relies on third party land, and a connection between Wright Street and the core path is being delivered as part of the development on Babcock Drive. In view of the above it is considered that the development complies with Policies 13 of NPF4 and I1 of the LDP. There are no impacts on any historic environment assets. The application site is not at risk from coastal or river flooding. The applicant has presented an acceptable outline strategy with respect to the sustainable management of surface water. A detailed strategy can be submitted via condition. There is not considered to be a significant pollution risk associated with the development as noted above. It is considered that the development complies with Policies 22 of NPF4 and I3 of the LDP with respect to flooding and drainage and Policy ENV4 of the LDP regarding the water environment. The ecological status of the site is outlined within the Ecological Appraisal. Whilst the site is brownfield it has been naturalised, and is considered to constitute an open mosaic habitat on previously developed land which has high conservation value as a UKBAP Priority Habitat. While this classification should not prevent regeneration of the brownfield site in principle, the biodiversity value of the site should still be considered in accordance with Policies 3 and 9 of NPF4. In this instance, the Ecology Appraisal makes recommendations as to how biodiversity gain can be delivered at the site. This includes the grass, hedgerow and tree planting and the surface water strategy as set out in the landscape scheme. It is considered that the appraisal Page 219 of 224
Page 226
sets out a suitable approach, however a specific Biodiversity Enhancement Plan is required to quantify the biodiversity gain. This could be submitted via an appropriately worded planning condition. The Ecology Appraisal does not anticipate any significant impact on protected species, however pre-development checks are recommended with respect to vertebrates, botanicals, bats, nesting birds. An appropriately worded planning condition could be used to ensure these checks are undertaken. The development will not result in the loss of any trees or areas of woodland. As noted above the landscape strategy includes two areas of tree planting at the north east frontage and south west corner of the site. In view of the above I am satisfied the development complies with Policies 3 and 9 of NPF4 and ENV2 of the LDP. In terms of decommissioning, a strategy could be sought via condition. This would require the need for a bond to ensure sufficient funds are available and that the Council could call upon these funds if required. The overall contribution to greenhouse gas emission reduction and renewable energy generation associated with the development is acknowledged, and there are no significant detrimental impacts with respect to the environment, residential amenity, or landscape. The development is therefore considered to comply with Policy 11 of NPF4. Policy I4 of the LDP and the associated new development supplementary guidance states that renewable and low carbon energy developments will be supported in principle where they are appropriate in terms of the location, sitting and design having regard to cumulative effects. Matters relating to the local environment, landscape character, built and natural heritage, water environment, amenity of neighbouring properties, visual amenity, transport infrastructure and the safe and efficient use of Glasgow airport have been addressed above. Regarding cumulative effects, it is noted that a screening opinion has been submitted for a BESS at the waste water treatment works to the south east of the site however an application has not been received. There are no concerns at this time over cumulative impact in this regard. The development will not have a detrimental impact on outdoor sport or recreation interest. Policy I4 of the LDP requires all major development planning applications to consider the feasibility of connecting to a heat network. The nature of the proposed development means it stores excess energy and releases this to the grid at times of need, resulting in a more secure and stable network of energy within the grid. As it does not generate electricity and simply stores then releases it, it is not possible to connect to a heat network. The efficiency of the batteries being proposed also results in less heat being generated, in turn, resulting in less power being lost, greater efficiency and increased safety. The site selection process has been driven by the potential for a grid connection at Braehead Park Substation. The applicant therefore sought approx. 5 acres of brownfield land within a commercially viable radius. Several sites were identified and after considering the constraints the land at Barnwell Street was selected as the best option. The reasons for this included the brownfield location within an industrial area, background noise, and no Page 220 of 224
Page 227
flooding, ecological or natural/built heritage constraints. The planning statement advises that the opportunity to develop on a brownfield site is rare. In view of the above it is considered that the development complies with Policy I4 of the LDP. Policy 14 of NPF4 seeks to encourage, promote, and facilitate well designed development that makes successful places. The development will re-use a vacant brownfield site. The incorporation of a scheme of landscaping, which includes a 28m deep landscape buffer between the edge of the footway on Barnwell Street / Wright Street and the site boundary fence, will ensure the site is suitably screened. The submission specifies an indicative finishing colour for the various elements of the development. This includes green for the buildings, and white for the battery units. The colour of the boundary fence has not been specified. The finishing colour for all components of the development including the boundary treatment could be submitted via condition. It is considered that the overall appearance of the site is likely to be commensurate with the industrial character at the western end of Barnwell Street, and that the visual impact will be softened over time as the boundary landscaping matures. On this basis it is considered that the development complies with Policy 14 of NPF4. In terms of the representations received, the points raised are addressed as follows: Safety and fire risk from thermal runaway. These uses are generally located on the periphery of populated areas. Matters relating to safety and fire risk have been addressed in the foregoing assessment. Proposal is in an industrial area but creates no permanent jobs. It is not therefore consistent with Policy E1. Matters relating to compliance with Policy E1 have been addressed in the foregoing assessment. Site is in the flood plain. SEPA have confirmed that the site is not within the fluvial and coastal flood risk area. Matters relating to surface water flooding are a matter for the Council to consider. An acceptable outline strategy for the sustainable drainage of surface water has been included. Proposal may prevent expansion of neighbouring premises including storage of high value flammable stock. Houston's bottling plant advise they have plans to expand which would place them under COMAH regulations, and the proposal may prevent this. They also advise that existing stock may have to be removed. Ultimately an intention to expand cannot be afforded significant weight as the expansion may not take place. Additionally, there is no definitive indication that the presence of a BESS would ultimately prevent the neighbouring property from expanding. The representation refers to expanding to the point where a COMAH designation is applicable however it is possible that the residential properties to the south east could also be a prohibiting factor to an expansion of this nature. The SEIL should be promoted for similar uses which are compatible with existing uses. The proposal could have a detrimental impact on the function of the SEIL and would remove an opportunity site. Noted. The proposed development is considered to be contrary to the development plan. It would result in the loss of a site which is safeguarded for business and industry and employment generating uses while failing to deliver new jobs as intended by the City Deal investment. This would not be in line with the identified role and function of the SEIL. Page 221 of 224
Page 228
The proposed grid connection is 3km away from the site. Grid connection is ultimately a matter for the developer to consider and should not be an impediment to the grant of planning permission. An EIA is required. The requirement for an EIA has been screened out via application 24/0162/EA. The public consultation process was not satisfactory with minimal publicity and communication. The public consultation process was undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the relevant legislation. Impact on residential amenity and proximity to residential properties. Potential impact on residential amenity has been addressed in the foregoing assessment. Noise and EMF buzzing. The Environmental Protection Team have approved the Noise Impact Assessment, and on this basis it has been demonstrated that the development will not have a detrimental impact on the amenity of residential properties with regards to noise. Are there other examples of BESS sites near residential areas. Each application must be assessed on its own merits. Chemical composition of the batteries and potential contamination of land and water if they were to fail. Matters relating to pollution and potential contamination have been addressed in the foregoing assessment. Impact on local wildlife. Matters relating to ecology and protected species have been addressed in the foregoing assessment. Impact on road network. The impact of the development on the road network has been addressed in the foregoing assessment. It is noted again that the proposed access to the site for construction and operational vehicles follows the new crossing over the White Cart Water and on this basis, vehicles should not be trying to access the site via Wright Street. Timeline for construction. The supporting information sets out an indicative 8 month construction phase. Should planning permission be granted the developer would have up to three years to commence the development. Management of construction vehicles and how will they access the site. It is noted again that the proposed access to the site for construction and operational vehicles follows the new crossing over the White Cart Water and on this basis, vehicles should not be trying to access the site via Wright Street. During baseline testing for the noise assessment was construction noise from Westway omitted. The scope, methodology and conclusions within the Noise Impact Assessment have been approved by the Environmental Protection Team Section 75 Obligations Page 222 of 224
Page 229
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 The development is not considered to comply in principle with Policies 26 of NPF4 and E1 and E2 of the LDP. It is not a development that falls within classes 4, 5 or 6, an airport related use, ancillary service provision, or some other employment generating use with respect to jobs being created directly at the site during the operational phase. The supporting information submitted with the application does not demonstrate that the proposal is an employment generating use with respect to the aspirations for the AMIDS SEIL. The AMIDS SEIL is identified as a key location to support innovation in manufacturing across Scotland. The application site was included as part of the AMIDS SEIL in the LDP to maximise the benefits associated with the City Deal infrastructure investment which sought to stimulate economic investment and make a significant contribution to the Renfrewshire economy and sustainable and inclusive economic growth including increased employment in line with Policy E2. The proposal although making a contribution to delivering a low carbon and net zero economic recovery would not be in accordance with the LDP in that it would result in the loss of a site which is safeguarded for business and industry and employment generating uses while failing to deliver new jobs as intended by the City Deal investment and it would not be in line with the identified role and function of the SEIL. In the above assessment it is recognised there is support for the development in respect to Policies 1, 2 and 11 of NPF4 and I4 of the LDP. Compliance with Policy 1 of NPF4 in terms of tackling the climate crisis is noted in particular. However, while the development complies with policy 11 of NPF4 the overall contribution to renewable energy generation targets and on greenhouse gas emission reduction targets must be taken into consideration. The proposed BESS would have a 49.9MW generating capacity which is not of the same scale and contribution as other BESS sites (both approved and proposed) within the Council area (namely 21/0034/PP and 24/0052/EB both at Gleniffer Road). On balance and taking the above assessment into consideration it is considered that greater weight should be afforded to Policies E1 and E2 of the LDP and 26 of NPF4 with respect to appropriate uses for the site. The proposal is contrary to these policies and that of the site's designated purpose within the local development plan. While compliance with Policies 1, 2 and 11 of NPF4 and I4 of the LDP is noted this is not considered to outweigh the provisions of Pe2olicies E1 and E2 of the LDP and 26 of NPF4. It is therefore recommended that the application is refused for the reasons outlined below. Recommendation Refuse Reason(s) for Recommendation 1. The proposal does not fall within Class 4 Business, Class 5 General Industrial or Class 6 Storage and Distribution, is not an airport related use or ancillary service provision, and is not an employment generating use. It is therefore contrary to Policy 26 of National Planning Framework 4, Policy E1 of the adopted Renfrewshire Local Development Plan, and the associated New Development Supplementary Guidance on Delivering the Economic Strategy which seek to identify and promote Class 4 Business, Class 5 General Industrial and Class 6 Storage and Distribution development, airport related use or ancillary service Page 223 of 224
Page 230
provision, and other employment generating uses within Renfrewshire's Economic Investment Locations. 2. The proposal would not result in anticipated economic benefits associated with the delivery of Renfrewshire's City Deal infrastructure projects (as set out in Figure 4 of the Renfrewshire Local Development Plan) from being fully realised as it will not generate increased employment at a designated development opportunity site located within the City Deal Investment Framework. It is therefore contrary to Policy E2 of the adopted Renfrewshire Local Development Plan and the associated New Development Supplementary Guidance on Delivering the Economic Strategy. Schedule of Plans Determined Drawing Number Revision Drawing/Document Title 13015-0002-03 Site Location Plan 13015-0003-03 Existing Site Plan 13015-0005-02 Indicative Site Sections Plan 13015-0006-01 Indicative Proposed Site Elevations 13015-0007-01 Indicative DNO Substation Plans and Elevations 13015-0008-02 Indicative Client Control Building Plan and Elevations 13015-0009-01 Indicative CATL Battery Plan and Elevations 13015-0010-01 Indicative MV TX Plan and Elevations 13015-0011-01 Indicative PCS Plan and Elevations 13015-0012-01 Indicative Auxiliary TX Plan and Elevations 13015-0013-01 Indicative Lighting Column Plan and Elevations 13015-0015-02 Indicative Proposed Site Plan with Landscape Shown 13015-RPS-XX-EX-RP-L-9005 Landscape Management Plan 13015-RPS-XX-EX-DR-L-9001 02 Soft Landscape Proposals: Strategy 13015-RPS-XX-EX-DR-L-9002 02 Soft Landscape: Detailed Proposals 01/03 13015-RPS-XX-EX-DR-L-9003 02 Soft Landscape: Detailed Proposals 02/03 13015-RPS-XX-EX-DR-L-9004 02 Soft Landscape: Detailed Proposals 03/03 04028 001 P3P Renfrew BESS Noise Impact Assessment ECO03308 3 Preliminary Ecological Appraisal PLN-NPI-NP13015-TRP 01c Renfrew BESS Transport Statement and Construction Traffic Management Measures NP13015 Planning, Design and Access Statement NP13015 1 Pre-Application Consultation Report HLEF04029 2 Flood Risk Assessment and Conceptual Surface Water Drainage Strategy For further information please contact James Weir, Development Standards Team, Email: james.weir@renfrewshire.gov.uk. Page 224 of 224