Item 6a - DC25.182.PPP
West Dunbartonshire Council · 14 January 2026
Back to Planning Committee — 14 January 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: 14th January 2026 DC25/182/PPP: Planning Permission in Principle for a Class 7 hotel with cafe/restaurant, meeting rooms and rooftop lounge. Car-lite layout with modest parking/cycle storage, single access from south/east and screened servicing. Flood-resilient with SuDS at Development Site At, Ossian Way, Clydebank by Montgomery Developers 1. REASON FOR REPORT 1.1 The planning application is subject to an objection from a statutory consultee. Under the terms of the approved Scheme of Delegation, it therefore requires to be determined by the Planning Committee. 2. RECOMMENDATION 2.1 Refuse planning permission for the reasons set out in Section 9 of the report. 3. DEVELOPMENT DETAILS 3.1 The site sits within the wider Queens Quay Masterplan area. The extent of the masterplan area lies to the south of Clydebank Town Centre on the north bank of the River Clyde, which was previously a location of shipbuilding in Clydebank. Planning permission in principle was granted for the wider site (DC02-283) for mixed use development in July 2005. There has been significant progress on the redevelopment of the wider site with the construction of Titan Business Centre, Aurora House, West College Scotland – Clydebank Campus and Clydebank Leisure Centre, which are all located within the southeastern part of the wider Queens Quay site considered through a variety of further planning applications. A further planning permission in principle (DC15/234) was granted for the part of the site northwest of the college building which remains undeveloped and this consent in principle remains live with the recent grant of a Section 42 application to update one of the planning conditions (DC24/091/FUL). This consent does not cover the current application site which sits at the south-eastern most point of the wider Queens Quay area, to the east of Clydebank Leisure Centre, and to the south of the West College Scotland – Clydebank Campus, Aurora House and the Titan Enterprise building. 3.2 This application is an application for planning permission in principle for a Class 7 hotel which will include a café/restaurant, meeting rooms and rooftop lounge. The proposal also proposes parking/cycle storage, a single access from the south/east, screened servicing, flood resilience and SuDS. As this is an application for planning permission in principle, full design details are not required at this stage. The applicant has however indicated that the proposed hotel will be five stories in height sitting between 20m and 23m in height. Visualisations are provided of the indicative concept which give a flavour of how the site could be developed and is described within the pre-app document as having a fluid and sculptural form composed of smooth white glass fibre reinforced concrete “ribbons” that wrap continuous, river facing glazing. Its form is stated to celebrate the town’s shipbuilding heritage, the meander of the river and the backdrop ITEM 6a
Page 2
of the Kilpatrick Hills. The indicative sculpted prow is deliberate reference to the hull lines of the QE2 and other iconic Clyde-built vessels. 3.3 Whilst final details of parking provisions are not required at this stage the applicant’s submitted documentation states that the scheme adopted a deliberately car-lite approach that builds on the site’s public transport accessibility and riverside walk/cycle connections. The applicant’s Transport Assessment and Travel Plan notes that the car park will provide approximately 25-30 spaces including, 2 accessible bays, 4 electric vehicle charging bays and 2 loading/servicing spaces. 10 secure and covered cycle stands are also to be provided. The pre-app document references 40-45 on site spaces, 8 of which are accessible with 12 electric vehicle charge points to be installed. 70 long-stay cycle spaces for staff and guests as well as 12 short-stay spaces are also indicated. 4. CONSULTATIONS The Coal Authority 4.1 The application site falls within the defined High Risk Area (DHRA); therefore, within the site and surrounding area there are coal mining features and hazards which need to be considered in relation to the determination of this planning application. More specifically, The Coal Authorities information indicate that the eastern part of the site lies in an area of outcropping coal seams, which may have been worked in the past. Voids and broken ground associated with such working may pose a risk to ground stability and public safety. The applicant needs to submit a Coal Mining Risk Assessment to support their planning application. As no relevant information has been submitted at this time, the Coal Authority’s Planning and Development Team objects to this application noting their fundamental concern. West Dunbartonshire Council Roads Service 4.2 The proposed approach to parking provision does not comply with National Roads Development Guide, even when considering the sites proximity to public transport links. The provision must be revised to ensure sufficient capacity can be achieved. Additionally, a Transport Assessment is required to demonstrate how the development will manage the travel demand. West Dunbartonshire Council Roads Service (Flooding) 4.3 No objection in principle to the application but a detailed Flood Risk Assessment is recommended for the site if approval is granted. Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) 4.4 No objections subject to a condition relating to a Flood Risk Assessment being submitted. West Dunbartonshire Council Environmental Health 4.5 No objection subject to conditions relating to dust, noise, working times (including deliveries), construction noise, piling method statement, contaminated land, unexpected contamination and importation/reuse of soil and waste. Glasgow Airport 4.6 No objections subject to conditions relating to details of the location, height, layout, form and materials of buildings and structures within the proposed development and a Bird Hazard Management Plan.
Page 3
Scottish Power 4.7 No objection but notes that there is a Substation with high voltage and low voltage underground cables within the vicinity of the proposal. Scottish Water 4.8 No objection but notes that the applicant should be aware that this does not confirm that the proposed development can currently be serviced. Renfrewshire Council (Planning) 4.9 No objection. Marine Scotland 4.10 No response. 5. REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 None. 6. ASSESSMENT AGAINST THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN National Planning Policy 4 6.1 The site is within the ‘Clyde Mission’ area, identified as one of eighteen National Developments with National Planning Framework 4 which recognises that significant land assets are under-utilised across the Clyde, (including waterfront sites such as Queens Quay) and that longstanding inequality, in relation to poor environment and health outcomes require to be tackled as a national priority. The Clyde Mission designation aims to repurpose and reinvigorate vacant and derelict land as well as adapting the area to the impacts of climate change, where nature-based solutions would be particularly supported. Delivery of the development proposals for the site would support the objectives of this national development. Whilst within the Clyde Mission area, the proposed development is not considered as a national development as it falls within the category of Local Development as set out in The Town and Country Planning (Hierarchy of Developments) (Scotland) Regulations 2009. 6.2 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. Policy 3’s intent is to protect biodiversity, reverse biodiversity loss, deliver positive effects from development and strengthen nature networks. Subject to a variety of matters being addressed by condition, the proposal would have a neutral impact in respect of Policies 1, 2 and 3. 6.3 Policy 7 states that development proposals with a potentially significant impact on historic assets or places will be accompanied by an assessment which is based on an understanding of the cultural significance of the historic asset and/or place. A variety of listed buildings lie in the vicinity of the site including the Category A listed Titan crane. Given the distance between the proposal and subject to conditions on final design it is considered that the site could be developed without having a significant impact on nearby listed buildings or structures. 6.4 Policy 9 relates to brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings. Part a) states that development proposals that will result in the sustainable reuse of brownfield
Page 4
land including vacant and derelict land and buildings, whether permanent or temporary, will be supported. The redevelopment of this brownfield site is this supported by part C of the policy. Part c) of Policy 9 states that where land is known or suspected to be unstable or contaminated, development proposals will demonstrate that the land is, or can be made, safe and suitable for the proposed new use. This has not been demonstrated and as such the proposal does not comply with part c) of the Policy. 6.5 Policy 11 supports development proposals for all forms of renewable, low-carbon and zero emissions technologies. Policy 13 relates to sustainable transport and aims to encourage, promote and facilitate developments that prioritise walking, wheeling, cycling and public transport for everyday travel and reduce the need to travel unsustainably. Criterion e) 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. 6.6 Development proposals will be designed to improve the quality of an area whether in urban or rural locations and regardless of scale as per Policy 14. Policy 15 relates to local living and 20-minute neighbourhoods. Development proposal will contribute to local living including, where relevant, 20-minute neighbourhoods. The application site is located in an urban area near a wide range of facilities. Any future applications for matters specified by condition for the detail of the development on site could ensure proposals are acceptable with reference to the existing settlement pattern, and the level and quality of interconnectivity of the proposed development with the surrounding area. There is thus no conflict with these Policies. 6.7 Policy 22 - 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 has no objections from SEPA and as such there is no conflict with the Policy. 6.8 Policy 23 relates to Health and safety. Part (e) states that development proposals that are likely to raise unacceptable noise issues will not be supported. No concerns arise in respect of this Policy. 6.9 Policy 30 relates to tourism and supports new or extended tourist facilities or accommodation in location identified in the Local Development Plan. Part b) of the policy also states that proposals for tourism related development will take into account certain criteria including compatibility with the surrounding area in terms of the nature and scale of the activity and impacts of increased visitors and opportunities for sustainable travel and appropriate management of parking and traffic generation and scope for sustaining public transport services. 6.10 Additional information has been requested from the applicant which has not been provided. Without this information it cannot be demonstrated that the proposal is supported by all policies of NPF4. This is assessed fully in Section 7 below. West Dunbartonshire Adopted Local Plan 2010 6.11 The application site is identified as a regeneration priority, and under Policy RP1 there is support for the redevelopment of underused, vacant and derelict land. Policy UR1 also promotes the re-use of land and buildings in the urban area that become vacant, derelict or underused in order to stimulate the process of urban renewal and thereby enhance the Plan area as a place to live, work and visit.
Page 5
6.12 Design and layout considerations are set out in Policy GD1 which outlines that all new developments are expected to be of high-quality design and to respect the character and amenity of the area in which it is located. Proposals are required to be considered against a list of development control criteria. Policy BE2 aims to ensure that in relation to any works affecting a listed building or its setting, its appearance, character and setting is not adversely affected. Policy R5 requires developers of waterfront sites to provide paths to and along the riverbank. In accordance with Policy DC3, development within the safeguarding zone around Glasgow Airport, should not affect the operational integrity or safety of the airport. No concerns arise in respect of these Policies at this ‘in principle’ stage. 6.13 Policy LE8 support applications for tourist industry developments throughout the Plan area conditional on the criteria below being satisfied. The Council recognises the Forth and Clyde Canal Corridor and the Lower Clyde and Firth of Clyde as Tourism Development Areas. All tourist related development proposals will be required to satisfy the certain criteria including that there are no adverse environmental, landscape, infrastructure and transport implications. The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposal will not have infrastructure and transport implications. 6.14 Policy T2 states that the Council will identify opportunities for access improvements to Regeneration Priorities. Policy T4 requires development sites to be well integrated into walking, cycling and public transport routes. Significant new development is to be accessible to public transport networks and developer contributions will be required where such development is shown to impact on public transport infrastructure. 6.15 Policy E1 states that the Council in exercising its planning function it will further the conservation of biodiversity. Policy E2A states that development likely to have a significant effect on a Natura 2000 site will be subject to an appropriate assessment. Where an assessment is unable to conclude that a development will not adversely affect the integrity of the site development will only be permitted where: there is no alternative solutions; there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest. Policy E2B states that development that affects an SSSI will only be permitted where an appraisal demonstrates: the objectives of the designated area and the overall integrity of the area would not be compromised; or any significant adverse effects are clearly outweighed by social or economic benefits of national importance. In this instance the Natura 2000 site is the Inner Clyde SPA. The Inner Clyde SPA is approximately 490m away and as such is not impacted by the development. 6.16 Policies F1 states that the Council will resist development that is likely to increase the risk of flooding or are located in a functional flood plain. Policy F2 requires inclusion of sustainable urban drainage. Policy F3 states that the Council will use the standards of flood protection set out in Scottish Planning Policy. The up-to-date development plan position in flooding is set out within Policy 22 of NPF4 which therefore has primacy in this instance. 6.17 Subject to conditions, the proposal overall complies with the policies of the adopted local plan and is assessed fully in Section 7 below. 7. ASSESSMENT AGAINST MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS West Dunbartonshire Local Development Plan (LDP2) Proposed Plan 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,
Page 6
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 Through Policy 1 land to the West of Garth Drive, known as Plots 4 and 5, will continue to be supported for Business, Industrial, Commercial and Restaurant uses. Hotel or commercial leisure uses will also be considered in this area where the criteria in Policy E2 are met. The development of the site is supported by these policies. Policy W1 relates to waterfront development and requires proposals adjacent to the waterfront to meet certain criteria. This includes that developments shall present a frontage to the waterfront which enhances the appearance of the waterfront and contributes to the overlooking of it. Proposals for the design, massing and scale of built form, including materials and colour should also demonstrate a coordinated approach that successfully integrates the development within the landscape and wider views. It is considered that subject to conditions, the proposal has the ability to comply with the Policies, and the development of a hotel is supported in principle. 7.3 Policy CP1 seeks to ensure that all new development will be expected to contribute towards creating successful places by having regard to the six qualities of a successful place (distinctive, adaptable, resource efficient, easy to get to/move around, safe and pleasant, and welcoming). Policy CP2 requires the integration and consideration of green infrastructure from the outset of the design process through to its maintenance and stewardship of the resource. Subject to conditions and the final design and detail of the development, the proposal offers no conflict with the six qualities of successful places. 7.4 Proposals for alternative uses of land or premises which are currently or have been previously used for business, industrial or commercial uses will be supported where it can be demonstrated that they accord with certain criteria in accordance with Policy E2. The criteria are as follows: a) There is no adverse impact on the operation of existing uses or the potential for future business, industrial or employment use within the area; b) The proposal protects and enhances the attractiveness of the area as an industrial and business location; c) The proposal is ancillary to the industrial and business uses; d) There is no unacceptable detrimental impact on the availability of employment land; and e) The economic benefit that the proposal can bring to the area is demonstrated. 7.5 Policy E6 relates to Tourism development and supports the development of new and existing tourist facilities throughout the Council area where there would be no adverse effect on the integrity of a Natura 2000 site, and they avoid adverse impacts on the green network and built heritage and are in accordance with other relevant policies within the plan. Policy E7 relates to Glasgow Airport and does not permit development that would adversely impact on the operation of the Airport. Glasgow Airport has offered no objections subjection to conditions relating to the building details and a Bird Hazard Management Plan. 7.6 Policy BE2 relating to Listed Buildings states that development that would adversely affect the special interest, character or setting of a listed building will not be permitted unless it can be clearly demonstrated and it meets certain criteria. The proposal is acceptable with reference to this policy. The proposal is acceptable with reference to these policies.
Page 7
7.7 Policies ENV1, ENV4, and ENV6 are all similar to the ecology and tree, water environment and flooding policies of the adopted Local Plan, although in respect of flooding, the up-to-date development plan position is set out within Policy 22 of NPF4 which has primacy. Subject to conditions, there is no conflict with these policies. 7.8 Policies ENV8 relates to Air, Light and Noise Pollution and Policy ENV9 Contaminated Land. Policy CON1 requires development proposals to accord with Designing Streets, the National Roads Development Guidelines, and be in alignment with the provisions of the Regional and Local Transport Strategies. Developments which do not meet these requirements will not be acceptable unless sufficient justification has been provided to demonstrate why a departure from these strategies is required. It has not been demonstrated that the proposal complies with the National Roads Development Guidelines. 7.9 Policy ENV10 relates to unstable land and states that in areas of past coal mining activity, developers will be required to establish the nature and extent of any land instability. Where land instability is present and a risk is identified, remediation works will be required to ensure that the site can be made safe and stable for its future use. The applicant has not provided a Coal Mining Risk Assessment and as such compliance with the policy cannot be established. 7.10 The matters relevant to the assessment against the above policies are addressed in detail below. Specifically, it is concluded that the proposal is not in accordance with Policy ENV10 of the proposed Local Development Plan 2. Creating Places Guidance and Green Network and Green Infrastructure Guidance 7.11 The Creating Places Supplementary Guidance – November 2022 seeks to achieve high quality development with a design led approach based on a thorough appraisal of the site and an analysis of its context and sets out that this is expected for all development proposals and it is considered this is achieved. Subject to conditions, no conflicts are expected to arise with the guidance. Principle of Development 7.12 Queens Quay is the largest and most significant regeneration opportunity in West Dunbartonshire, covering an area of 41 hectares to the south of Clydebank Town Centre and fronting onto the River Clyde. It lies within the Clydebank Waterfront Strategic Economic Investment Location which supports the key sectors of business and financial services, as well as life sciences. 7.13 The proposed site is allocated as site LE1(4) within the adopted Local Plan (LP) and site E1(15) in the proposed Local Development Plan 2 (LDP2). Whilst these are business and industry allocations, intended for Use Classes 4 and 5, Policy E2 of LDP2 allows for alternative uses of business and industrial land in certain circumstances. Given the location of the proposal, within the vicinity of the West College Scotland – Clydebank Campus, Clydebank Leasure Centre and business centre it is considered that a hotel will not have an adverse impact on the surrounding uses. The adjacent E1(8) allocation through LDP2 is also for Class 4 and 5 and would not be sterilised from use through the erection of a hotel. The proposal for a hotel has the potential to enhance the attractiveness of the area, particularly given its current vacant nature. There remains allocated employment land within Clydebank and as such it is considered that there will be no unacceptable detrimental impact on the availability of employment land.
Page 8
7.14 The Development Strategy for Queens Quay and Queens Quay Policy 1 - Land to the West of Garth Drive supports the proposed allocation of Plots 4 and 5 for commercial, hotel or restaurant development, or a mixture of these uses Business, Industrial, Commercial and Restaurant uses. Hotel or commercial leisure uses will also be considered in this area where the criteria in Policy E2 are met. As stated above it is considered that the proposal complies with Policy E2. 7.15 It is therefore considered that there is support within both the adopted and proposed plans for a hotel development in this location and is consistent with policies outlined above. It therefore rests to consider whether there are any other material planning considerations that suggest that the proposal would be unacceptable. Design, Appearance and Visual Amenity 7.16 The application is for a planning permission in principle and as such detailed drawings are not required to be submitted. The application has been submitted with indicative drawings and visuals. The design concept proposed through the visualisations is striking and modern. Whilst elevation drawings have been provided, these are not to scale. Reference is made in the pre-app document to an anticipated overall height of 20-23 metres to parapet with five stories indicated within the drawings. The adjacent college is four stories high at its highest point and the Titan Enterprise business centre is three stories. Aurora House is 23.36m in height for comparison. Subject to detailed designs and materials being submitted, the principle of a five-storey hotel of 20-23m in height in this location is acceptable. There is also nothing to suggest that a suitable approach to the wider site in terms of hard and soft landscaping could not be achieved. 7.17 The addition of such a building would be a positive addition to the most significant regeneration opportunity within the Council area. Subject to conditions relating to final design of the hotel, a modern design of the indicated massing would be acceptable in this location. Traffic, parking and sustainable transport 7.18 The applicant’s supporting documentation submitted states that the scheme adopted a deliberately car-lite approach that builds on the site’s public transport accessibility and riverside walk/cycle connections. The Transport Assessment and Travel Plan notes that the car park will provide approximately 25-30 spaces including, 2 accessible bays, 4 electric vehicle charging bays and 2 loading/servicing spaces. 10 secure and covered cycle stands are also to be provided. The pre-app document references 40- 45 on site spaces, 8 of which are accessible with 12 electric vehicle charge points to be installed. 70 long-stay cycle spaces for staff and guests as well as 12 short-stay spaces are also indicated. 7.19 The Roads Service were consulted on the application and have noted that the proposal is not in compliance with the National Road Development Guide (NRDG). Council’s work off a baseline of 1.2 spaces per bedroom for a hotel which in this instance equates to 154-163 spaces. Based on NRDG of 1 space per 2.5 bedspaces the proposal would require 102-109 spaces. The proposed provision of either 25-30 or 40-45 spaces therefore falls short of the expected minimum. This also does not include parking for any restaurant/café and the public floor area and number of staff is not provided. 7.20 The Roads Service consultation notes that 5% of the total provision of parking should be for accessible parking and note that the proposed 8 accessible spaces would be acceptable. The provision of 12 active electric vehicle charge points with infrastructure for 12 more is acceptable and aligns with NRDG. 70 long-stay and 12-short stay cycle spaces exceeds NRDG but does not compensate for any deficit in parking.
Page 9
7.21 The Roads Service have stated that whilst a car lite development has been proposed, the application does not acknowledge that the nearest public transport provision for busses is 400m for eastbound and 500m for westbound from the development and 600m from rail connections. The Roads Service have recommended that the parking provision does not comply with NRDG standards, even when considering the site proximity to public transport links and that the proposal should be revised to ensure sufficient capacity. 7.22 These points were highlighted to the applicant’s agent and confirmation was sought on whether the proposal could provide the parking levels as stated within the consultation response as the shortfall shown is 59%. The applicant has stated that no further details will be provided as part of this application for planning permission in principle. Given the size of the site there are concerns that the parking may not be achievable on the site and no solutions have been provided by the agent or applicant. Whilst a question therefore remains on how adequate parking provision could be accommodated on site, it is recognised that the application is considered in principle only. The final design of the site and accommodation provided in any proposed building would require to be undertaken in the context of the parking requirements for a development of this nature. Any granting of permission would require a condition which ensures that the required parking levels are provided within the site. Flood risk and water management 7.23 Policy 22 (Flood risk and water management) of NPF4 seeks to strengthen resilience to flood risk by promoting avoidance as a first principle and reducing the vulnerability of existing and future development to flooding. Policy 22 states that development proposals at risk of flooding or in a flood risk area will only be supported in certain circumstances, including the redevelopment of previously used sites in built up areas where the LDP has identified a need to bring these into positive use and where proposals demonstrate that long - term safety and resilience can be secured in accordance with relevant SEPA advice. In such cases, it will be demonstrated by the applicant that: all risks of flooding are understood and addressed; there is no reduction in floodplain capacity, increased risk for others, or a need for future flood protection schemes; the development remains safe and operational during floods; flood resistant and resilient materials and construction methods are used; and future adaptations can be made to accommodate the effects of climate change. As the proposal is within the Queens Quay Development Strategy policy area, it is identified as being required to be brought into positive use. The Council’s Road Service offer no objections on flooding grounds but highlight the need for a detailed Flood Risk Assessment for the site through condition. Similarly, SEPA provide no objections subject to the addition of a condition relating to a Flood Risk assessment submission. It is considered that subject to this condition the development proposal is acceptable with reference to with the adopted Local Plan and proposed Local Development Plan policies and Policy 22 of NPF4. Ecology, biodiversity and protected species 7.24 The site is laid with hardcore with limited rough vegetation. No concerns arise in respect of ecology and biodiversity. The Inner Clyde Special Protection Area (SPA) classified for its overwintering Redshank is some 490 metres from the application site, significantly beyond the distance that necessitates a consultation with NatureScot. No concerns therefore arise in this respect. The approach to biodiversity enhancement will require to be set out within the detail of the development and this requirement can be addressed by condition.
Page 10
Ground conditions 7.25 The Council’s Environmental Health Service were consulted on the application and recommend conditions relating to contaminated land. It is agreed that this can be addressed by condition and such an approach can ensure that the site is, or can be, made suitable for its intended use. 7.26 The site is located within a development high risk area and coal outcrop area as defined by The Coal Authority. This area runs in a strip from the former Playdrome site, down towards the current planning application site and then crosses the River Clyde. As such the Coal Authority has been consulted on the application. The response raised “fundamental concern” and the Coal Authority have objected. The Coal Authority highlighted the requirement for a Coal Mining Risk Assessment in order to interpret and assess the coal mining risks present. The requirement for a Coal Mining Risk Assessment was passed to the agent for the application however the applicant has confirmed that they do not intend to submit further reports and that they wish for the application to proceed to determination with the current information. 7.27 Policy 9 of NPF4 part c) and policy ENV10 of the LDP2 relate to unstable land, with Policy 9 stating that where land is known or suspected to be unstable or contaminated, development proposals will demonstrate that the land is, or can be made, safe and suitable for the proposed new use. As a Coal Mining Risk Assessment has not been provided it is not possible to determine if the land is or can be made safe for development in this instance. The proposal therefore does not comply with these policies. Other matters 7.28 Matters relating to the construction phase of the development, including those highlighted by Environmental Health in their consultation response including dust, noise, working hours and piling can be addressed by condition. Matters raised by Glasgow Airport can be addressed by condition and assessed further in the context of the detailed design of any development. 7.29 The approach to incorporate renewable energy technologies can be addressed by condition. The expectation would be that the development would be designed to connect to the energy centre unless it was demonstrated beyond doubt by the applicant that this was not practicable of feasible. 8. CONCLUSION 8.1 The desire for a hotel within the Queens Quay site has long been established, with Development Strategy policy within the proposed Local Development Plan 2 stating that there is support for Plots 4 and 5 for commercial, hotel or restaurant development or a mixture of these uses. The proposal includes indicative images of a bold and modern designed building which has the possibility to add to the high-quality design of the existing development that proceeded at Queens Quay. 8.2 Concerns have been raised by the Council’s Roads Service which have not been addressed by the applicant through the planning application. Given that this is an application for planning permission in principle, it may be that the final design can accommodate the required level of parking. Any granting of permission would require to be appropriately conditioned to ensure that the parking is provided. 8.3 The Coal Authority have raised fundamental concerns with the application and have requested a Coal Mining Risk Assessment due to the proposal’s location within high- risk area and coal outcrop area. This information has not been provided by the
Page 11
applicant and as such it is not possible to determine if the land can be made safe in accordance with part c) of Policy 9 of NPF4 and Policy ENV10 of the LDP2. Whilst the applicant has requested that this be conditioned as part of the Planning Permission in Principle, the absence of this information means that the principle of the proposal in this location cannot be established. This concern is not outweighed by the potential benefits of the development of other policy support. As such it is recommended that planning permission be refused. 9. REASONS FOR REFUSAL 1. The proposal has not demonstrated that the land is, or can be, made safe and suitable for the proposed use as a Class 7 hotel with associated infrastructure. Accordingly, the proposal is not supported by Policy 9 c) of National Planning Framework 4 together with Policy ENV10 of the proposed West Dunbartonshire Local Development Plan 2 Michael Mulgrew Planning, Building Standards and Environmental Health Manager Date: 14th January 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. Consultation responses 3. National Planning Framework 4 4. West Dunbartonshire Local Plan 2010 5. Proposed West Dunbartonshire Local Development Plan 2 2020, as amended 7. Creating Places Guidance (2022) Wards affected: Ward 6 (Clydebank Waterfront)