Item 6 - DC25/073/FUL - Change of use of former Scottish Water site to dog walking area
West Dunbartonshire Council · 9 September 2026
Back to Planning Committee — 9 September 2026 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
WEST DUNBARTONSHIRE COUNCIL Report by Planning, Building Standards and Environmental Health Manager Planning Committee: 9th September 2026 DC25/073/FUL: Change of Use of part of former Scottish water site to dog walking area at Former Waterworks, Garshake Road, Dumbarton by Mr Michael Crowe 1. REASON FOR REPORT 1.1 The planning application has been subject of an Elected Member request for the proposal to be brought before the Planning Committee, and this has been agreed by the Convener of the Planning Committee and the appointed officer. Under the terms of the approved Scheme of Delegation, it therefore requires to be determined by the Planning Committee. 2. RECOMMENDATION 2.1 Grant planning permission subject to the conditions set out in Section 9 below. 3. DEVELOPMENT DETAILS 3.1 The application site comprises the southern section of a former Scottish Water facility located immediately to the north of Garshake Road where the road terminates. The site is an irregular triangular area of land extending to an area of approximately 0.8 hectares. Vehicular access is taken directly from a section of private road which is situated immediately to the north of the termination of the publicly adopted road with the access point located on the southwest corner of the site. The site is screened by trees and vegetation as you approach from the south, with a narrow strip of trees and vegetation to the south-west. As such, the site itself is only clearly visible when in close proximity to it. As existing, a galvanised security fencing encloses the site to the southeast and southwest with the northern boundary of the site currently open to the remainder of the wider former water site where redundant and derelict buildings remain. 3.2 The site is bounded to the west by a private road accessing towards Maryland Farm, and this road forms part of Core Path 56 (Lang Craig's Wood / Maryland Farm route). Maryland Farm itself, and associated buildings are situated approximately 650 metres away from the site. A further private road bounds the site to the east and this leads to Garshake Farm situated approximately 450 metres from the site. A care home and assisted living accommodation known as Baxter View is situated across Garshake Road to the southwest of the site. To the southeast of the site lies a further former water facility where planning permission in principle for a small residential development was recently granted by the Local Review body. Beyond this, the site is surrounded by a mixture of redundant former water infrastructure, agricultural fields and woodland. ITEM 6
Page 2
3.3 It is proposed to: • Change of use of land from the former water authority facility to form a dog walking area (sui generis), • Erection of temporary portable building for staff and security provision on an existing area of hardstanding, • Erection of new fencing; and • Form 3no. parking spaces on an existing area of hardstanding. 3.4 In terms of the detail of the proposal, the dog walking area will be split into two parts and fenced off. The access that runs through the middle of the site will be retained to maintain the existing access to the land and buildings to the north. A portable building for staff welfare and security of the site measuring approximately 7.5m length x 3 metres wide and 2.7m in height, with a footprint of approximately 22sqm, together with 3 no. parking spaces are proposed to be sited to the north-west of the site. 3.5 In terms of the recent planning history of the site, a previous planning application (ref: DC19/124) for a Class 5 industrial use on a larger part of the water infrastructure site included part of the current application site. This was refused by Planning Committee in November 2019 due to concerns regarding Green Belt location of the use with reference to the Development Plan policies and general compatibility with the amenity of the area. This refusal was upheld at Appeal. 3.6 In support of the proposal, the applicant has submitted a Preliminary Ecological appraisal (PEA) and a Planning Statement inclusive of a business and management plan for the use of the land as a dog walking area. 4. CONSULTATIONS 4.1 West Dunbartonshire Council Roads Service No objections subject to conditions relating to there being no surface water discharge to the public road and the sightlines being maintained as per the submitted drawing. 4.2 West Dunbartonshire Council Biodiversity Officer No objections subject to conditions requiring a landscaping plan, planting and biodiversity enhancements as recommended in the submitted Preliminary Ecological Appraisal. 4.3 West Dunbartonshire Council Environmental Health Service No objections subject to conditions on hours of operation, the number of dogs on site at any given time and site contamination. 4.4 Scottish Water No objection. 5. REPRESENTATIONS
Page 3
5.1 Two objections were received from neighbouring residents. The full details are contained within the planning file and are available for public viewing. However, the key points of objection can be summarised as follows: Compliance with the Development Plan • The proposal is piecemeal and not part of a comprehensive approach to the rest of the surrounding site. • Contrary to West Dunbartonshire’s Development Plan 2010 Policy E8. • The proposal should have a 5-year business plan as per policy GB1. • Previous applications for this site were refused at the committee and appeal because the full plot was not being developed comprehensively. Site Layout, Design, and Safety • The proposal fails to outline plans to make safe, remove, or renovate the existing disused, unsafe buildings on the wider site. • No details are provided on how the dog walking area will be separated from the rest of the site. • No boundary treatments are proposed along the red boundary lines of the site. • Inadequate size and scale with the 0.3-hectare site deemed too small for a commercial dog walking business that includes staff and parking. • The business may spill over into surrounding fields and paths, causing local congestion. • Lack of basic utility connections (water, sewage, electricity). • This type of low investment pop-up business with no thought of design or enhancement of the area should be rejected. Roads, Access and Parking • Existing vehicle parking along Baxter View already creates severe congestion and blocks private access roads to Maryland and Garshake Farms. • Increased traffic is anticipated on adjacent routes, notably the core path, which is already heavily used by commercial dog walkers. • Existing traffic restricts access to property. • The local road network via Campbell Avenue lacks the necessary infrastructure and capacity to safely accommodate an increase in traffic volume. • The applicant's claim of "low and intermittent" vehicle movements is unrealistic. • The entrance must stay clear for large farm vehicles, emergency services, and to maintain a calm environment for the livestock. • Scottish Water still have the right of access and are still working and utilising this site. • The core path is already heavily used as a dog walking route. • Sightlines include trees and bushes outside the property boundary that cannot legally be cut or altered.
Page 4
Business and Operational Use
• The application lacks essential details regarding operating hours, the
maximum number of dogs on-site at once, commercial waste disposal
methods, noise mitigation measures dog containment, a business plan and
on-site utilities.
• The development conflicts with an active utility site ("The Dome"), where
Scottish Water requires unhindered vehicle access and parking.
• The site might be used as a 24-hour doggy daycare or boarding kennel.
• No locational need for there to be a further fenced dog walking area for use
by Doggy Carers Ltd who are based in Cardross.
Impact on Local Amenity and Environment
• Persistent dog barking from dawn until dusk is expected to negatively affect
the peace and wellbeing of nearby residents, specifically those at Baxter View
Care Home.
• Traffic and activity from the development will worsen noise pollution and
negatively impact nearby homes.
• Incompatible development to neighbouring land uses including proposed 9
dwellings in principle and an existing care home with autistic adults with
needs of peace and quiet.
• High volume of dogs within a small area impacting on animal welfare with
noise impacting on cattle within fields surrounding site.
• Construction noise and disturbance.
Ecology and Biodiversity
• Trees are to be cut back, and it is not clear whether a tree survey has been
carried out.
Other matters
• Location description is wrong in referencing the site as derelict waterworks
• Not all application information and details are publicly viewable online.
5.2 The points and concerns raised shall be considered in the appraisal in Section 7
below.
6. ASSESSMENT AGAINST THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
National Planning Policy Framework 4
6.1 Policy 1 relates to tackling the climate and nature crises and states that when
considering all development proposals significant weight will be given to the global
climate and nature crises. Policy 2 also relates to the climate in the form of climate
mitigation and adaptation, and states development proposals will be sited and
designed to minimise lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions as far as possible and
development proposals will be sited and designed to adapt to current and future risks
from climate change. The proposal would have a neutral impact in respect of Policies
1 and 2.
6.2 Policy 3 seeks to protect biodiversity, reverse biodiversity loss, deliver positive effects
from development and strengthen nature networks. Subject to conditions, the
proposal is acceptable in this respect.Page 5
6.3 Policy 4 f) states that development proposals that are likely to have an adverse effect on species protected by legislation will only be supported where the proposal meets the relevant statutory tests. The applicant has submitted a Preliminary Ecological Assessment (PEA) to identify any potential protected species within the site. No conflict in respect of protected species is noted and is discussed further in section 7 below. 6.4 Policy 6 seeks to protect and expand forests, woodland and trees. Whilst some scrub clearance which may include small self-seeded trees will be undertaken as part of a general tidy of the site, the applicant has stated that there is no tree felling proposed. The applicant proposes to tidy up the site and remove any scrub present. Subject to conditions the proposal complies with policy 6 of the NPF4. 6.5 Policy 8 supports development within the Green Belt in a limited number of circumstances. The nature of the proposed use, which will comprise a commercial dog walking operation rather than a general dog walking area providing for outdoor recreation and leisure facility for dog owners means that the proposed use will not specifically fall into any of the development proposals supported by part (a) of this Policy. There is thus conflict with this Policy which is discussed further in section 7 below 6.6 Policy 9 supports the sustainable reuse of brownfield land including vacant and derelict land and buildings, whether permanent or temporary. Based on the submitted information it is considered that the proposal complies with the policy. 6.7 Policy 12 relates to waste and advises that development proposals will set out how much waste the proposal is expected to generate and how it will be managed. Only limited waste will be generated, and no concerns arise in respect of this policy. 6.8 Policy 14 requires that development proposals will be designed to improve the quality of an area whether in urban or rural locations and regardless of scale and it is not considered that there is any conflict with this Policy. Policy 15 relates to local living and 20-minute neighbourhoods. Development proposal will contribute to local living including, where relevant, 20-minute neighbourhoods. Whilst the proposal may not directly contribute to local living, is located in close proximity to the urban area and this, together with the limited scale of the proposal, ensures that it does not impact adversely on the wider aims and aspirations of local living. This is discussed further in Section 7 below. 6.9 Policy 22, which relates to flood risk and water management, states that proposals will not increase the risk of surface water flooding to others, or itself be at risk; manage all rain and surface water through sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) and seek to minimise the area of impermeable surface. The proposal is out with an area shown at risk of river flooding on the SEPA flood maps and only a very small area of low likelihood of surface water flooding exists within the site. This raises no concern in respect of the development and there is no conflict with the Policy. 6.10 Policy 23 relates to Health and Safety which aims to safeguard people form environmental harm and promote and facilitate development that improves health and wellbeing. Part (e) states that development proposals that are likely to raise unacceptable noise issues will not be supported. With the attachment of planning conditions relating to the hours of use and the operation of the site, no concerns arise in respect of this Policy.
Page 6
6.11 It is concluded that there is some conflict with Policy 8 and a full assessment of all considerations is set out in the appraisal in Section 7 below. West Dunbartonshire Adopted Local Plan 2010 6.12 Policy GB1 presumes against development within the green belt with a limited number of exceptions. The nature of the proposed use, which will comprise a commercial dog walking operation rather than a general dog walking area providing for outdoor recreation and leisure facility for dog owners means that the proposed use is not one listed in the Policy. The Policy goes on to state that development will not be permitted where there would be an adverse impact on landscape character and for changes of use there requires to be particular regard paid to design, siting, landscape nature conservation and protection of habitat. The proposal is acceptable with reference to these matters as fully assessed in Section 7 below. Policy GD1 sets out a requirement that all new development is expected to be of a high quality of design and to respect the character and amenity of the area in which it is located. With appropriate conditions, it is considered that no concerns arise in respect of this Policy. 6.13 Policy H 5 aims to safeguard and where possible enhance the character and amenity of existing residential areas. The area in question is not located within or adjacent to a residential area as identified on the Proposals Map although residential uses do lie within the area and this is fully assessed in Section 7 below. 6.14 Policy E1 aims to ensure the conservation of biodiversity and Policy E5 addresses development proposals affecting trees. Policy E9 requires that development proposals will have regard to the landscape character and distinctiveness of the Plan area and of adjoining areas. Proposals which are detrimental to the landscape will not generally be supported. Policies F1 and F2 aim to ensure that new development is not at risk from, and does not increase the risk of flooding, and has suitable SuDS drainage infrastructure. No concerns arise in respect of these matters. 6.15 Policy E8 relates to Environmental Improvement Opportunities and advises that sites identified in Schedule E8 are presently vacant, derelict or underused and represent an opportunity for environmental improvements. The Policy advises that the rejuvenation and restoration of sites on this Schedule will be encouraged. The Policy goes on to note that proposal for environmental improvements must be compatible with the surrounding land use, in compliance with other Local Plan policies and should achieve a comprehensive redevelopment and restoration of the site. The land subject of this application is identified in Schedule E8 and the condition and appearance of the application site will be improved by the proposal. Whilst the proposal does not result in the comprehensive redevelopment of the full site identified within the Schedule E8 as preferred in the Policy, the existing access to the wider area beyond the application site will be retained and the proposal would not prevent future environmental improvements coming forward. Whilst not taking a comprehensive approach to the wider area, it is accepted that the proposal will improve the application site and this is assessed fully in Section 7 below. 6.16 It is concluded that there is some conflict with Policies E8 and GB1 and a full assessment of all considerations is set out in the appraisal in Section 7 below. 7. ASSESSMENT AGAINST MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Page 7
West Dunbartonshire Local Development Plan (LDP2) Proposed Plan 2 7.1 On 15 March 2023, the Planning Committee took a decision that the Council would not adopt Local Development Plan 2. The Proposed Local Development Plan 2 (LDP2), incorporating the recommended modifications of the Examination Report received on 22 April 2020, which were accepted by the Planning Committee of 19 August 2020, remains the Council’s most up to date spatial strategy and is therefore afforded significant weight in the assessment and determination of planning applications, subject to compatibility with NPF4. The Scottish Ministers’ Direction relating to the adoption of LDP2, dated 18 December 2020, is also a material consideration. 7.2 Policy GB1 restricts development in the green belt to a limited number of circumstances. As with the position relative to Policy 8 of NPF4 and Policy GB1 of the adopted Local Plan, a commercial dog walking operation rather than a general dog walking area providing for outdoor recreation and leisure facility for dog owners means that the proposed use will not specifically fall into any of the development proposals specifically supported this Policy. It is, however, considered that the small scale and type of changes proposed to the layout and design would be compatible with the surrounding landscape character and subject to suitable conditions would avoid any mitigate any adverse effects on the landscape and surrounding environmental quality. 7.3 Policy CP1 requires new development to take a design-led approach to creating sustainable places, which put the needs of people first and demonstrate the six qualities of successful places. The proposal is acceptable in this respect. 7.4 Policy H4 relates to residential amenity. The policy states that the Council will protect, preserve and enhance the residential character and amenity of existing residential areas at all times. The area in question is not located within or adjacent to a residential area as identified on the Proposals Map although residential uses do lie within the area and this is fully assessed below. 7.5 Policies ENV1, ENV4, and ENV6 are all similar to the ecology and tree, water environment and flooding policies of the adopted Local Plan. Policy ENV8 relates to air, light and noise pollution. All new development must ensure that significant adverse noise impacts on surrounding properties and uses are avoided. The proposal is considered acceptable in this respect. 7.6 Policy ENV9 requires developers to establish the nature of any contamination on a site and where contamination is present and risks to key receptors are identified, remediation will be required to ensure the site can be made suitable for its future use. The proposal complies with the Policy subject to conditions. Policy CON3 is not supportive of development which disrupts or adversely impacts on any existing or potential core path, right of way, bridle path, or footpath, including off-path access rights, used by the general public for recreational or other purposes. No core paths will be interrupted by the development and no adverse visual impacts to core path users will occur. 7.7 It is considered that the proposal results in some conflict with Policy GB1 and a full assessment is set out below.
Page 8
Principle of Development 7.8 The application site is located within the Green Belt as defined by both the adopted Local Plan and the proposed Local Development Plan 2. The land subject of this application is explicitly identified within Schedule E8 of the adopted Local Plan (under Ref: E8(1)) with the area identified on the Proposals Map. As set out above, Policy E8 relates to Environmental Improvement Opportunities, advising that sites within this schedule are presently vacant, derelict, or underused, thereby representing distinct opportunities for environmental improvements and restoration. The proposal seeks planning permission for the establishment of a commercial dog walking site on part of the area identified on the Proposals Map under E8(1). 7.9 Objections have been raised regarding conflict with the aims of Policy E8 which seeks a comprehensive approach to the improvement of the whole area identified on the Proposals Map under E8(1). Whilst it is true that the proposal does not result in the comprehensive redevelopment of the full site identified within the Schedule E8, it can be noted that previous planning permissions have been granted on the wider E8(1) designation within Schedule E8 including the erection of the Care Home which was originally granted by Planning Committee in 2009 (ref: DC09/186/FUL) with consent subsequently being re-established and amended by later applications, and the proposed residential development opposite granted planning permission in Principle by the Local Review Body in March 2026 (ref: DC25/057/PPP). Neither proposals reflect the Policy desire for a comprehensive approach to the area identified in Schedule E8 and previous planning decisions demonstrate a clear acceptance of an approach of considering proposals on an individual basis within this area. Further to this, in terms of the Council’s most up to date spatial strategy set out within the Proposed Local Development Plan 2 and therefore afforded significant weight in the assessment and determination of planning applications, there is no equivalent to Policy E8 of the adopted Plan and thus no equivalent requirement to consider a comprehensive approach to improvements within this larger brownfield site within the Green Belt. The lack of a comprehensive approach to the wider E8(1) designation within the adopted Local Plan can therefore, in principle, be accepted. The development proposal will also result in some improvement to the condition and appearance of the application site which is currently vacant, overgrown and in poor condition. 7.10 Turning to the acceptability of the proposal with reference to the Green Belt location, Policy 8 of NPF4, and Policy GB1 of both the adopted Local Plan and proposed Local Development Plan 2 advise that development in the Green Belt will only be supported in limited circumstances. The specified circumstances include proposals for outdoor recreational uses in which the dog owners would use the land for dog exercising within a secure location. However, this is not how the proposed site would operate. The proposed use of the site would limit use to a specific dog day care and dog walking service, with use of the site being staff-led and not available for use by individual customers or the general public. Dogs would be collected and brought to the site for scheduled walking and exercise sessions and after the session, which is indicated to be an hour, they will be returned home or to their daycare location. The nature of the proposed use is therefore not one that is specifically supported by the Policy 8 of NPF4, and Policy GB1 of both the adopted Local Plan and proposed Local Development Plan 2. It must therefore be considered whether it can be accepted at this location contrary to these policies.
Page 9
7.11 In considering the proposal, it is acknowledged that a use of this nature would be difficult to provide within the urban area due to the availability of land. Green spaces in the urban area generally take the form of areas specifically laid out for the purposes of providing for public recreation or forming part of the green network within the urban area and would not be readily available to be enclosed for such a use. The general nature of the proposal with limited physical development is also not one which would lead to the spread of the built-up area. It is also not considered in this case that the proposal would likely have an adverse visual impact to the detriment of the local landscape character 7.12 It is suggested that whilst not a use specifically directed to this location by the development plan and not one specifically supported by Policy 8 of NPF4, and Policy GB1 of both the adopted Local Plan and proposed Local Development Plan 2, this is a use where a location in the Green Belt would be appropriate and the objectives of the Green Belt would not be undermined nor set an unacceptable precedent for the use of Green Belt land. 7.13 Overall, the principle of the development of the site for a dog walking area of this nature can be supported on this site and it rests to consider whether there are any other material planning considerations or site constraints which suggest that the proposal would not be acceptable. Design, Appearance and Visual Amenity 7.14 This proposal involves the change of use of part of an area land that previously comprised a wider water infrastructure facility. While the site is within the Green Belt as discussed above, it is a brownfield site and is not considered to be of a high value contribution area in its current condition. The site and the surrounding north of the site have a slow rising gradient running from south to north and is comprised with derelict buildings and infrastructure. Pockets of woodland within the south east and notably the south west side of the site have areas of scrubland and grassland which, over the past 15 years have resulted in some re-naturalisation of the site. The presence of trees within this site provides screening and visual amenity and the proposed site layout will retain these natural features. In terms of the site design and layout, the proposal utilises the existing access and hard surface for parking. The dog walking areas within the site will be fenced off with a 1.2 metre high wire mesh fence which matches that generally found enclosing agricultural fields for example. 7.15 A temporary portacabin is proposed to oversee the welfare of staff and the security of the site. The size, scale and form raise no concerns and the proposed portacabin is suitably sited on the hardstanding area situated to the far north west corner of the site. 7.16 It is considered that the proposed alterations and design is low impact, and the development will integrate well into the landscape and is visually compatible with the adjacent the core path to the western boundary of the site where it is frequently used by dog owners on a daily basis. Overall, it is considered that the proposal and the layout will create an acceptable development from a design and visual perspective which will address the six qualities of successful places by ensuring the layout and form of the development is appropriate, complying with policies NPF4 Policy 14, Policies GD1, and CP1 of the adopted and proposed Plans.
Page 10
Roads and Parking 7.17 The site is accessed via an existing private access road that continues from the public road at the top of Garshake Road. Access is to be shared with the northern part of the site. An area of parking is proposed within the existing hardstanding situated to the north west of the application site which provides three spaces for the staff. Objections have been raised over concerns relating to traffic and parking congestion at the top of Garshake Road during the day, associated with Baxter View and the use of the Core Path, and this can restrict access to adjacent farmland. Further concerns were raised that extra traffic associated with this development will exacerbate this. In this case, the proposed 3 no of parking spaces will provide off road parking for the development, ensuring that additional parking on the road does not occur. The level of traffic associated with the proposed use will also be limited and this is considered to have a negligible impact on the existing road network. The Council’s Roads Service was consulted on the application and raised no objections regarding roads matters or parking. Whilst the Roads Service seek a condition relating to the maintenance of visibility splays from the site, the access to the site utilises an existing entrance which served the water infrastructure site with associated vehicle movements. The level of traffic at this location is also extremely low and the connection with the public road network is straight ahead from the site. It is noted that the visibility splays are out with the application site and cross onto adjacent verges of the private road. It would thus not be appropriate to attach a condition requiring their maintenance. Whilst noting the cautionary position of the Roads Service, the proposal utilises an existing, long established access in an area of low levels of traffic and it is therefore not considered appropriate to require specific visibility splays to be maintained. An advisory note can be attached to advise that vegetation within the control of the application site is kept clear of the exiting access to assist with visibility. A condition can ensure surface water from the site does not drain to the public road network as recommended by the Roads Service. Trees and landscaping 7.18 The site contains several trees, but none are protected by a Tree Preservation Order or located within a designated conservation area. Accordingly, they could be removed from site in the absence of a planning application. Although the objections question the lack of a tree survey, no mature trees are indicated to be felled. The Council’s Biodiversity Officer reviewed the proposal and requested a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA). The PEA confirmed the site features broadleaved woodland, dense continuous scrub, and ephemeral short perennial habitats, with only the ephemeral short perennial habitat scheduled for removal. The Biodiversity Officer raised no objections, provided conditions for a detailed landscaping plan and planting proposals are met prior to development. 7.19 Impact on Core Path There is a core path designated as Core Path 56 which follows the route of Garshake Road to the south west of the proposed site before taking the left hand fork at the end of the public road adjacent to the site, upward toward Maryland Farm and the Lang Craigs / Overtoun woodland path network. It is highlighted in the objections that the core path is already heavily used, including as a dog walking route by both the public and commercial dog walkers. The proposal will not interrupt the core path network. The core path at this location extends from the urban area and takes an attractive route through rolling grazing land with various trees and pockets of woodland within the wider landscape. It is not considered the experience of the landscape by users of the section of core path adjacent to the site will change. Overall, no adverse impact upon the core path network will occur.
Page 11
Ecology, biodiversity and protected species. 7.20 The application site is a partially derelict, brownfield site within the green belt, which has re-naturalised over a period of 15 to 20 years with scrub, grassland, and woodland pockets. While no buildings are proposed to be removed on the application site, derelict structures lie to the north. The site holds no direct statutory designation, but multiple designated sites exist within a 10 km radius. 7.21 The Council’s Biodiversity Officer raised concerns over the naturalisation of the brownfield site and the potential impact of the development on ecology and protected species of the site and surrounding site. A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal was submitted by the applicant during the assessment of the application. While the site offers suitable habitat for protected species none were found within the site and surrounding site. Recommendations of biodiversity mitigation and enhancements and have been made within the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA). 7.22 It is considered that the site use as a dog walking area would not in itself present further risk of disturbance now that the PEA has established no priority or protected species on site. Whilst no concerns arise in respect of protected species, the site as a whole, has the potential to host breeding birds, and therefore conditions and preconstruction surveys will be implemented. Full details of biodiversity enhancement in accordance with Policy 3 of NPF4 can also be addressed by condition. The Council’s Biodiversity Officer raises no concerns regarding the methodology and findings of the PEA, and subject to the above matters being addressed by condition, raises no concerns. Residential Amenity 7.23 The proposed change of use is within close proximity to Baxter View adult care home within approximately 20m of the boundary of the care home. Further to this, planning permission in principle for a proposed residential development situated south east of the site has been previously granted. It must therefore be considered as to whether the change of use of land to form a dog walking site would be acceptable with refence to residential amenity. Concerns have been raised in the objections including the potential noise affecting residential amenity, in particular related to the care home for autistic adults and existing/proposed residential development within the vicinity of the site. The assessment examines potential impacts on residential amenity including characteristics protected by the Equality Act 2010, which in this case would include disability. It is noted that activity can already occur at this location from those on Garshake Road including many dog walkers that frequent the location. The Council’s Environmental Health Service were consulted on the application and raise no concerns regarding potential noise disturbance. Whilst it is accepted that a dog walking area can cause of noise, Environmental Health are content that no adverse impact from noise would occur providing conditions were attached restricting the operational hours to Monday to Friday 09:00 to 16:00 with no more than four walking sessions per day and the volume of dogs to a maximum of 12 present on site at one time. This approach accords with that set out in the applicant’s operational statement. Further to this assessment, it can be noted that the Baxter View received a neighbour notification and no objections were raised. Garshake and Maryland Farms are situated some distance from the site and no concerns arise in terms of the amenity impact upon these properties. The nature of the proposal would not result in any significant construction noise and Environmental Health also raise no concerns in this respect.
Page 12
7.24 On balance, it is concluded that with the recommended conditions on the operation of the site, the level of activity which would occur within this proposed development and existing area would not be so extensive as to be to the detriment of the amenity of the residents of both the existing and proposed residential properties. The proposed development is acceptable with reference to amenity impacts. Flooding and drainage 7.25 With respect to flooding and drainage, the Garshake Burn runs from north to south to the east of the site. The proposal is out with an area shown at risk of river flooding on the SEPA flood maps and only a very small area of low likelihood of surface water flooding exists within the site. This raises no concern in respect of the development and there is no conflict with Policy 22 of NPF4. Other Matters raised by consultees 7.26 With respect to other matters raised during the assessment from consultees Environmental Health raised contamination concerns from past industrial use. Policy ENV9 and NPF4 Policy 9d require developers to test the site and clean up risks before use. This can be addressed by condition as recommended by Environmental Health and with this approach, the proposal complies with these policies. Scottish Water offer no objections to the proposal. Other Matters raised in representations 7.27 Turning to other matters raised in the objection and not already assessed above, concerns have been raised regarding the applicant lacking ownership of trees and access to roads and that the trees can’t legally be cut or altered. The granting of planning permission does not convey any legal rights on an applicant to carry out work or access land and these issues would be a civil matters between the parties involved and not a material planning consideration. Further to this, comments have been made that the proposal is more likely intended for doggy daycare and potential boarding kennels rather than a walking facility for business users. Any future use as dog daycare or dog boarding would necessitate a further planning application and such uses are not proposed at this time. There is nothing to suggest that livestock in nearby fields would be disturbed by the proposal. The provision of on-site utility connections is a matter for the applicant to address if required. The application site is clearly identified in the application submission and is as outlined on the location plan, ref: PL-907-00. Finally with reference to procedural matters, all application documentation required to be provided as part of the planning register with reference to Regulation 16 and Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013 has been available to view via the Council’s website.
Page 13
8. CONCLUSION 8.1 The application site represents a previously developed, brownfield, area of land situated within the Green Belt, currently characterised by an unkempt appearance and ongoing issues with vandalism. Consequently, its contribution to the visual amenity of the wider Green Belt is considered low. Whilst not a use specifically directed to this Green Belt location by the development plan, the proposed change of use to a secure dog walking facility introduces an acceptable use that does not conflict with the fundamental aims of the Green Belt. Furthermore, the development is considered to be acceptable with reference to adjacent residential amenity and access to the land to the north remains and the wider former water site is not sterilised for future improvement. No adverse visual impacts will occur and through the inclusion of a robust management plan it has been demonstrated that the facility can operate without detriment to the area. Subject to the imposition of appropriate planning conditions to secure the mitigation measures set out, the proposal will maintain acceptable levels of residential amenity and environmental protection. 8.1 Whilst there is conflict with Policy 8 of NPF4, Policies GB1 and E8 of the Local Plan and Policy GB1 of the Proposed Local Development Plan 2, the proposal is supported by a number of other policies within the Development Plans as detailed in the assessment above. On balance, and with suitable conditions, the proposal can be justified with reference to the development plan as a whole, will result in improvement of the visual appearance of the site, and will not detract materially from the role and function of the Green Belt in this location. The development is therefore considered to be acceptable. 9. CONDITIONS 1. That unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the dog walking site hereby permitted shall at all times operate in accordance with that set out in the submitted “Operational Overview and Licensing Plans for Doggy Carers” and for the avoidance of doubt shall not operate out with the hours of Monday to Friday 09:00 to 16:00 with no more than 12 dogs be present within the application site as a whole at any time. Reason: In order to protect adjacent residential amenity. 2. Prior to the commencement of development on site, a Biodiversity Enhancement Plan setting out how the proposal enhances biodiversity beyond the current baseline, together with the implementation on site, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. All measures shall then be implemented as approved. Thereafter, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, the development shall be completed in accordance with the approved plan. Reason: To assist with the integration of the proposal with its surroundings in the interest of amenity, and to comply with the requirements of NPF4 Policy 3 Reason: In the interest of biodiversity.
Page 14
3. a) No development (other than investigative work) can take place until such time as a comprehensive site investigation has been carried out to the appropriate Phase level and submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority. The investigation shall be completed by a suitably qualified and competent person and completed in accordance with relevant guidance. b) If the Phase 1 investigation indicates any potential pollution linkages, a Conceptual Site Model must be formulated, and these linkages must be subjected to risk assessment. If a Phase 2 investigation is required, then a risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages will require to be submitted. c) If the risk assessment identifies any unacceptable risks, then an appraisal of remedial options and remediation strategy will be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. No works other than investigative works shall be carried out on site prior to receipt of the Planning Authority’s written approval of the remediation strategy. Reason: To protect public health and to ensure that the site is suitable for its intended use. 4. a) Remediation of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the approved remediation strategy prior to the proposed development being brought into use. Any amendments to the approved remediation strategy shall not be implemented unless approved in writing by the Planning Authority. b) On completion of the remediation works and/or prior to the site being occupied, the developer shall submit a verification report to the Planning Authority, confirming that the works have been carried out in accordance with the approved remediation strategy and that the works have successfully reduced the risks to acceptable levels. Reason: To protect public health and to ensure that the site is suitable for its intended use. 5. The presence of any previously unexpected contamination that becomes evident during the development of the site shall be reported to the Planning Authority in writing within one week, and work on the site shall cease. At this stage, if requested by the Planning Authority, an appropriate investigation and risk assessment shall be undertaken, and a remediation strategy shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority prior to the recommencement of site works. The approved details shall be implemented as approved. Reason: To protect public health and to ensure that the site is suitable for its intended use 6. If there is a requirement to either re-use site won material or to import material, then the assessment criteria and sampling frequency that would adequately demonstrate its suitability for use shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority prior to any material being re-used or imported. In addition to this and in accordance with BS3882:2015 and BS8601:2013, material to be used in the top 300mm shall also be free from metals, plastic, wood, glass, tarmac, paper and odours. On completion of the works and at a time and or phasing agreed by the Planning Authority, the developer shall submit a verification report containing details of the source of the material and appropriate test results to demonstrate its suitability sor use.
Page 15
Reason: To protect public health and to ensure that the site is suitable for its intended use 7. No clearance of any vegetation on site shall be undertaken during bird nesting season (1st March to 31st August inclusive), unless otherwise approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard breeding birds and their nests in accordance with the Wildlife and Countrysides Act 1981. 8. Notwithstanding condition 7 above together with the approved plans, all recommendations within the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal dated 14th May 2026 shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority, unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of biodiversity and protected species 9. The parking spaces showing on approved drawing PL-907-01 Rev B shall be formed and made available for use prior to the commencement of the dog walking use hereby permitted. Thereafter they shall remain available for use at all times by those using the facility. Reason: To ensure appropriate parking for the proposed use. 10. Surface water shall be intercepted within the site with no discharge to the public road network or connection to the public road drainage system. Reason: To avoid surface water impact to the public road, in the interests of road safety
Page 16
Michael Mulgrew Planning, Building Standards and Environmental Health Manager Date: 9th September 2026 Person to Contact: Michael Mulgrew, Planning & Building Standards Manager Email: Michael.Mulgrew@west-dunbarton.gov.uk James McColl, Development Management Team Leader Email: James.McColl@west-dunbarton.gov.uk Appendix: Location Plan Background Papers: 1. Application forms and plans 2. Representations 3. Consultation responses 4. National Planning Framework 4 5. West Dunbartonshire Local Plan 2010 6. Proposed West Dunbartonshire Local Development Plan 2 2020, as amended Wards affected: Ward 3 (Dumbarton)