24-0586-LB Former Renfrew Police Station FINAL
Renfrewshire Council · 5 November 2024
Back to Planning and Climate Change Policy Board — 5 November 2024 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Report by Chief Planning Officer Planning and Climate Change Policy Board: 5 November 2024 Reference No 24/0586/LB Application Type Listed Building Consent Proposal Demolition of police cells and offices to rear of former Renfrew Police Station and stripping out of all wood within main front part of building to mitigate dry and wet rot Location Former Renfrew Police Station, Inchinnan Road Ward 1 - Renfrew North and Braehead Community Council Renfrew Community Council Applicant Renfrewshire Council 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=SIKK5IMWJOB00 The report is presented to the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board in line with the Council's Scheme of Delegation, as it refers to an application for listed building consent which includes an element of demolition. Proposal This application relates to the category B listed former County Police Chambers at Inchinnan Road, Renfrew. There are two distinct elements to the application. Firstly, listed building consent is sought for demolition of the rear section of the building, containing a former hall, offices and holding cells. Secondly, consent is also sought for stripping out of wooden elements within the retained front part of the listed building due to the presence of both dry and wet rot. The application has been submitted by Renfrewshire Council and is accompanied by a Statement of Justification which also includes as an appendix a building survey inspection report from 2018. Subsequent to this, a further survey report dated September 2024 has also been received. The Statement of Justification outlines that since the building became vacant in 2012 it has been marketed for reuse but has been subject to minimal interest. In setting out its reasoning for the proposed demolition of the rear part of the building, the statement considers that this element of the building is of lesser value compared with the main front part. The survey information also finds this part of the building to be in particularly poor condition, while the layout, particularly of the holding cells, is considered to significantly limit the potential for any viable reuse. The statement therefore considers that demolition of the rear part of the building would enhance the attraction and viability for the front part to be reoccupied. The proposed stripping out of wood from the retained front part of the building would include original wood panelling throughout this part of the building. This includes decorative areas of panelling within the main reception rooms, offices and a former courthouse, as well other fixtures and features such as fireplaces and doors. The stripping out is proposed due to the deteriorating condition of the wooded elements. The statement considers this essential to prevent further spread of rot, while it also notes that addressing this matter would remove a significant barrier and cost impediment for any future developer. Site Description The former police chambers dates from 1910 and was designed by the Glasgow Architect, Alexander Nisbet Paterson, in the "Baronial Revival" style. The main front part of the building
Page 2
comprises two storeys and directly fronts Inchinnan Road to the south-west, close to its junction with Hairst Street and Paisley Road to the south-east. The building overlooks Robertson Park on the opposite side of Inchinnan Road which opened shortly after its construction in 1912. A further category B listed building, the historic Victory Baths, completed in 1921, also flanks the former police chambers on its south-east side. A narrow path runs between the two listed buildings, providing access to a car park and Renfrew Town Sea Scouts Hall to the rear, beyond which are tenements on Muir Street and Anderson Drive to the north-east. Flanking the remaining north-west side of the former police chambers are a single dwellinghouse on Inchinnan Road and additional tenements and houses on Bell Street which back on to the listed building from the side. The principal frontage of the listed building features red ashlar sandstone and is dominated by a flat parapet roof on the south-east side, with adjoining lower pitched roof sections featuring crowstep gables on the north-west side. Internally, the front part of the building features various rooms, including the main reception rooms, office and the former courthouse. Dark wooden doors and panelling feature throughout the original interior and include panelling within the individual rooms and relating to the sheriff’s bench, dock and public gallery within the courthouse. The rear section proposed for demolition consists of a single storey and comprises three main sections. Along the north-west side is a small hall with internal timber panelling which is accommodated under a slate roof with crowstep gable, similar to the adjoining section of the two-storey building to the front. The hall then connects with a flat roofed section to the rear featuring grey rendered walls which accommodates former offices and a kitchen. Running alongside the hall and offices/kitchen on the south-east side are the holding cells which are accommodated under a low arched concrete roof, with the external walls of this section featuring grey render over facing bricks. Internally, the cells and an associated corridor are decorated with white tiling throughout. 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: ▪ A meeting was arranged prior to the application being submitted to discuss the condition of the building and the proposal to strip out the wooded items and whether this would require listed building consent. The applicant was advised that an application would be required. Negotiated Improvements None. Site History Application No: 06/1209/PP Description: Erection of 3m high weld mesh fence with access gate. Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 05/1082/AD Description: Internally illuminated wall mounted national police sign. Decision: Grant subject to conditions Application No: 05/1215/LB
Page 3
Description: Display of wall mounted internally illuminated national police sign. Decision: Grant subject to conditions Consultations Historic Environment Scotland – No objections. Comment that the main priority is securing a new sustainable use for the building and extensive alterations are preferable to losing it entirely. Note that the rear extensions are in particularly poor condition and of lesser interest than the main street-facing element. Also accept that the proposed demolition of the rear extensions would make reuse of the main building more likely, while the removal of the affected timber elements would help prevent uncontrolled collapse and further spread of rot. Suggest that prior to works taking place, a photographic record of the building including the holding cells should be carried out, if possible. Scottish Civic Trust – No objections. Comment that the demolition should be undertaken quickly without delaying a fresh campaign to find a restoring purchaser. Strongly recommend that any future listed building consent application by any new owner is accompanied by a Statement of Significance, while also advise that more detail is required on the safe replacement of structural timber in the main building and the recycling of salvageable fabric. Representations Two representations have been received. One representee raises a concern that the partial demolition of the building could lead to the remaining part being allowed to fall into disrepair. They also query why the building could not have been turned into a museum with a small charge for entry and consider there to have been a lack of necessary investment in Renfrew’s historic buildings, citing the deterioration and recent demolition of the category B listed Brown Institute. The second representee notes that the structural report is six years old and queries why annual inspections have not been undertaken. They also express regret at the loss of the wooden panelling and doors and consider that the Council, in being responsible for looking after the building, should have taken better steps to ensure its protection, particularly in the case of the wooden panelling in the courthouse. However, they consider the removal of the rear part of the building to be logical. 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) (2023) 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 NPF4 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.
Page 4
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 The following reports and assessments were submitted in support of the application: Statement of Justification for the Partial Demolition and Internal Works of the Renfrew Police Station (Former), Inchinnan Road, Renfrew by Renfrewshire Council: Provides an outline and reasons for the proposals, with accompanying figures where relevant. In terms of the proposed demolition of the rear part of the building, the statement provides three primary reasons for this, namely: ▪ The condition of the rear of the building being such that any resultant reinstatement cost is likely to be unrealistically high; ▪ The holding cells and offices having been built for a specific purpose which in their current layout and format are not considered suitable for other uses, and are therefore likely to be a contributing factor in the minimal interest shown in the building from potential developers; and ▪ The rear portion of the building being added at a later stage and now adversely affecting the front building envelope which is of higher architectural value. In terms of the proposed stripping out of the wood, the statement advises that wood throughout the building is affected by both wet and dry rot and removal is therefore required in the interests of the viability of any future redevelopment of the building. It is stated that removal of the wooded items is essential to prevent the further spread of rot, while it also removes a significant barrier and cost for future potential developers and addresses any potential health risks associated with decaying materials. The statement also contains a policy analysis of the proposed demolition which includes consideration against the four standard criteria for demolition of historic buildings outlined in Historic Environment Scotland guidance. The statement concludes that the proposed demolition is compliant in satisfying two of the four criteria, namely: that demolition is essential to delivering significant benefits to economic growth and the wider community; and that it is not economically viable for the rear section of the building to be retained. Building Survey Inspection Report by Brown+Wallace Chartered Building Surveyors (June 2018): Submitted as an appendix to the applicant’s Statement of Justification, the report outlines the results of a structural inspection in 2018 which found the building to be in a poor condition due largely because of it having been unoccupied for several years. The survey, in outlining its findings, set out a series of recommended remedial measures. Building Survey letter report by Timber Preservation Division (17/09/2024): Outlines the results of a more recent survey. This finds that the rear part of the building is in particularly poor condition, with signs that the roof is collapsing into the building. Given the condition of the rear element and its layout not lending itself well to other uses, its removal is considered appropriate. The survey report also recommends the retention of the front part of
Page 5
the building, subject to the stripping out of its internal components and checks thereafter that it remains structurally safe and fully wind and watertight. Commission Report by Renfrewshire Council (September 2024): Discusses the structural issues associated with demolishing the rear part of the building. The report includes photographs which show a section of the rear roof sagging due to rotting timber, with collapse of the section of roof considered to be “imminent”. The report also shows the roof over a corridor section having already collapsed, with a temporary repair in place. The report concludes that the hall and office areas at the rear are suffering significant structural distress and are recommended for demolition, while the adjoining cells, although still structurally sound, do not offer any obvious alternative use. 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 Town and Country Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) 1997 Act states that in considering whether to grant listed building consent for any works, special regard must be had to the desirability of preserving the listed building or its setting, or any features of special architectural or historic merit. 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 demolition of listed buildings will not be supported unless it has been demonstrated that there are exceptional circumstances and that all reasonable efforts have been made to retain, reuse and/or adapt the listed building. The policy also states that development proposals for the reuse, alteration or extension of a listed building will only be supported where they preserve its character, special architectural or historic interest and setting. Policy ENV 3 (Built and Cultural Heritage) of the Renfrewshire LDP presumes against the demolition of any listed building or works that adversely affect its special interest or setting, adding that no listed building should be demolished unless fully justified. Historic Environment Scotland's Historic Environment Policy for Scotland (HEPS) supports these principles, whilst their "Managing Change in the Historic Environment" series of guidance notes provide more detailed advice and recommendations. Proposed demolition of rear element of building To assess whether the proposed demolition of the rear portion of the building is justified in terms of the above, Historic Environment Scotland's "Managing Change in the Historic Environment" guidance note on Demolitions outlines four tests under which demolition may
Page 6
be established as acceptable. These four tests are also reflected in NPF4 Policy 7 and the Renfrewshire New Development Supplementary Guidance. In this regard, demolition may only be considered acceptable if it is demonstrated that the proposal accords with one of the following: (a) The building is not of special interest; (b) The building is incapable of repair; (c) The repair of the building is not economically viable, having been marketed at a price reflecting its location and condition to potential restoring purchasers for a reasonable period. (d) The demolition of the building is essential to delivering significant benefits to economic growth or the wider community. Proposals typically only require to satisfy one of the four tests, although Historic Environment Scotland guidance outlines that exceptions to this may apply. The applicant, in their supporting information, outlines that they consider the proposal to comply with the latter two of the above four tests. Nevertheless, for the purpose of this report, the four tests are considered in order, as follows: (a) The building is not of special interest It is apparent that the main front part of the building which would be retained is the more significant portion and contributes most importantly to both its special historic and architectural interest as an example of the Scottish Baronial Revival style. The section proposed for removal is all single storey and contains few features of note, being mostly of a grey render finish over facing bricks, with little architectural detailing of note evident. One part, which previously accommodated the hall, is more traditional in featuring a dual-pitched slate roof and crowstep gable, although this is not prominently visible as it is enclosed to the rear and on one side by the less traditional single storey elements to be removed and to the front by the adjoining two storey portion of the building. Internally, the hall features wood panelling in keeping with the main two storey element of the building, while the former cells feature white tiling throughout which does lend a particular character to this part of the building. In summary, it is agreed that the rear part of the building does not offer the same level of special interest as the front portion. However, it nevertheless does contribute to some degree to the overall special interest of the building. As such, the proposed demolition is not considered to fully comply with the first test. (b) The building is incapable of repair The structural information shows that the rear part of the building is in particularly poor condition. The slate roof over the hall has a pronounced sag and its partial collapse is described as "imminent". A section of roof over a corridor at the transition between the two storey and single storey elements is already noted to have collapsed, with a temporary repair in place, whilst significant water ingress is also observed within the offices at the very rear. Despite these issues, there is nothing in the application to suggest these parts of the building could not be successfully repaired when considered on their own merits and without prejudice to any cost that would be incurred, prohibitive or otherwise. As such, the proposed demolition does not pass the second test.
Page 7
(c) The repair of the building is not economically viable, having been marketed at a price reflecting its location and condition to potential restoring purchasers for a reasonable period The Statement of Justification considers the proposed demolition to satisfy the third test in terms of the repair of the rear element of the building not being economically viable. The statement notes that the marketing of the building since it was vacated in 2012 has resulted in minimal interest. It considers that the poor condition of the rear elements of the building and the prohibitive costs for refurbishing make the restoration of this part of the building economically unviable. It also notes that the cells and offices were built for a specific purpose which in their current format and layout does not lend well for suitable conversion to other potential uses. It thereby considers that the costs associated with refurbishing and the unsuitable format and layout of the rear part of the building are likely to be two important factors contributing to the minimal interest shown in the site. On consideration of the application documentation, it is apparent that there are significant structural issues with the rear portion of the building, the restoration of which is likely to be highly expensive. The impractical layout of this part of the building for other possible uses, particularly the holding cells, is also accepted. On this basis, it is agreed that the restoration of the rear element would not be cost-effective when the likely costs of the necessary works are weighed against any potential benefits. Historic Environment Scotland agree that the most important priority is to secure the sustainable reuse of the main front part of the building and also accept that the removal of the rear element should enhance the prospect for this taking place. It is accepted that any benefits to be accrued from restoring the rear element of the building are likely to be very limited and to not enhance the prospect of saving the main part of the listed building. It is therefore agreed that the financial outlay this would incur would not be justified and the proposed demolition of the rear element of the building is therefore considered to satisfy the third test in not being economically viable. (d) The demolition of the building is essential to delivering significant benefits to economic growth or the wider community The Statement of Justification considers that the demolition of the rear elements of the building satisfy the fourth test and would bring about a number of benefits to the area. The statement considers that the demolition would enhance the potential attraction of the wider building to potential developers and therefore, the prospects for it being saved. It points out that the removal of the rear element also creates a larger footprint for potential developers “to work with”, while the removal of the rotten wood eliminates a further potential impediment for developers, also thereby enhancing the prospect for future reuse. The statement also considers that a more appealing site offers the potential for increased economic growth to the local area. In terms of the information presented, it is accepted that the removal of the rear element of the building is likely to enhance the prospect for the main part of the building being reused. This in itself represents a clear benefit for the local area. The building is situated at a prominent town centre location and its place in the history and context of the town is obvious. As long as the building continues to be vacant, the risk of further deterioration will remain, to the detriment of the surrounding area. Establishing the sustainable reuse of the building therefore remains the priority and any measures that should enhance this prospect are to be supported. As it is accepted that the removal of the rear element is likely to enhance the attraction of the building to future potential users, the proposed demolition of the rear element is considered to satisfy the fourth test above.
Page 8
In terms of the above, the demolition only requires to satisfy one of the four tests. In this case, the demolition of the rear single storey element of the building is found to pass two of the four tests highlighted above and is therefore considered acceptable under the relevant policies and guidance. Proposed stripping of internal wood Regarding the stripping of the internal wood, Historic Environment Scotland's "Managing Change in the Historic Environment" guidance note on Interiors states that internal fixtures and features which contribute to the special interest of a listed building should be retained, where possible, noting that the removal of historic materials will usually be damaging to its special interest. The original wood panelling and other such features within the building in this case have clearly contributed importantly to the character and special interest of the listed building. This is evidenced by old photographs of these elements which highlight the prominence of the timber throughout the front part of the building, including decorative panelling within various rooms including the courthouse, as well as the doors, fireplaces and various other fixtures of interest. However, these components have unfortunately been severely eroded by both wet and dry rot such that their retention is now considered untenable. In this regard, retaining these features is considered to risk the spread of further rot and decay through the building and removal is therefore necessary. Historic Environment Scotland have also confirmed that they have no objection to the removal of the internal timber. In their consultation response, they make specific reference to their "Managing Change in the Historic Environment" guidance note on Use and Adaptation of Listed Buildings. This states that, "Alterations to a building, even if they are extensive, will be better than losing the building entirely. If the only way to save a building is a radical intervention, we have to avoid being too cautious when we look at the options. If a building might be totally lost, we should be open to all the options to save it." In this context, the stripping out of the internal wood elements, although regrettable, is appropriate in the interests of saving the listed building and accords with the relevant policies and guidance outlined above. In terms of any additional points raised by the representees, an updated survey report (dated September 2024) has been submitted since the original representation which had highlighted the age of the 2018 survey. It is noted that notwithstanding the six-year gap between these documents, the building has still been subject to regular monitoring and inspections throughout this time. The points raised regarding the deterioration of the building, as well as the Brown Institute, are noted. For the reasons highlighted above, the proposals in this case are considered to improve the opportunity for the remaining building to secure a sustainable, financially viable new use. The Scottish Civic Trust have commented that further details are required in relation to the replacement of any structural timbers and the recycling of all salvageable fabric. On the former point, the engineering consultants on behalf of the applicant have confirmed that none of the timber proposed for removal from the main front part of the building is structural. In relation to the latter issue, the applicant advises that the salvaging of any timber materials is highly unlikely due to their deterioration and the risk of contamination from infectious rot. However, it is the intention that the works would proceed on the basis that any materials which are found on removal to be worthy and suitable for salvage would be retained for further consideration. It is considered in this regard that a condition can be applied requiring that a record of any salvaged materials be provided following the works, albeit it is
Page 9
recognised that there is a reasonable possibility that only very limited, or potentially no, items may be found which are suitable for salvage. Historic Environment Scotland have recommended that a photographic record of the building should be undertaken prior to works commencing, although it is recognised that it may not be possible to photograph all of the rear rooms due to their unsafe condition. It is nevertheless considered prudent to attach a condition requiring that a photographic record is provided of all areas where removal of timber or demolition is proposed, and where it is safe for these areas to be photographed. In summary, the information provided by the applicant is considered sufficient to demonstrate that the proposals are appropriate measures in the interests of preserving the listed building. The single storey rear element of the building is acknowledged as being of lesser special interest compared with the main front part of the building, while the poor condition and impractical format and layout of these areas is also a likely deterrent to attracting any new user. The removal of the timber, meanwhile, is very regrettable, as it is apparent that this contributed to the special interest of the listed building. However, it has been demonstrated that removal of the timber is essential in the interests of protecting and preserving the main front part of the building from further deterioration. Considered together, the proposals are accepted as necessary in the short-term interest of protecting the building from further deterioration, while they are also considered beneficial to the likelihood of securing the future occupation of the building and its preservation. In helping to safeguard the main front part of the listed building, the proposals are found to be compliant with NPF4 Policy 7 and Policy ENV3 of the Renfrewshire Local Development Plan, together with the Renfrewshire New Development Supplementary Guidance and the policies and guidance of Historic Environment Scotland. As such, it is 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 The proposals, while resulting in the loss of certain elements which previously contributed to the special interest of the listed building, are found to be appropriate and necessary in the interests of preserving the most important front section of the listed building and enhancing its potential for future reuse. As such, it is recommended that listed building consent 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 prior to the works commencing, a photographic record of all rooms within the building shall be submitted, other than any areas which cannot be photographed for safety reasons.
Page 10
Reason: In the interest of maintaining a record of the listed building prior to the demolition and stripping out works taking place. 2. That within 3 months following the completion of the works hereby approved, an inventory of all architectural materials which have been salvaged and retained shall be submitted to the Planning Authority. The inventory shall record details of the location, storage and safe keeping of all items. The inventory shall be maintained and updated in order that the relocation or reuse of any items continues to be recorded and the Planning Authority shall be notified in writing of any such updates to the inventory. Reason: In the interests of maintaining a record of any salvaged materials that contributed to the special interest of the listed building and the potential future reuse and care of these materials. Advisory Note(s) None. Approved Drawings and Supporting Documents Drawing Number Revision Drawing/Document Title Not numbered Location Plan – Former Renfrew Police Station, Inchinnan Road, Renfrew 11427-00 P1 Former Renfrew Police Station - Elevations Statement of Justification for the Partial Demolition and Internal Works on the Renfrew Police Station (Former), Inchinnan Road, Renfrew by Renfrewshire Council Building Survey Inspection Report of Former Renfrew Police Station, Inchinnan Road, Renfrew, PA4 8ND for Renfrewshire Leisure by Brown+Wallace Chartered Building Surveyors (date: June 2018) (submitted as Appendix to Statement of Justification) Survey Report/Letter by Timber Preservation Division (date: 17/09/2024) Commission No 23068 – Former Renfrew Police Station, Inchinnan Road, Renfrew – Report by Renfrewshire Council (date: September 2024) For further information please contact Andrew Mackenzie, Development Standards Team, Email: andrew.mackenzie@renfrewshire.gov.uk.