13
There were submitted reports by the Head of Economy & Development relative to the following applications for planning permission that required to be determined by the Board.
(A) 19/0782/PP - ERECTION OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT COMPRISING 142 DWELLINGHOUSES AND 106 FLATS WITH ASSOCIATED ACCESS, LANDSCAPING AND ANCILLARY WORKS AT LAND TO EAST OF CLYDE VIEW PARK, KINGS INCH ROAD, RENFREW BY BELLWAY HOMES LIMITED.
It was proposed that consideration of the application be continued pending confirmation of the terms of the proposed Section 75 agreement and the conditions applicable should the application be approved. This was agreed.
DECIDED: That consideration of the application be continued pending confirmation of the proposed terms of the Section 75 agreement and the conditions applicable should the application be approved.
(B) 20/0368/PP - CHANGE OF USE FROM OFFICE TO NURSERY WITH EXTERNAL PLAY AREA, SINGLE STOREY FRONT EXTENSION AND EXTERNAL ALTERATIONS AND FORMATION OF COMMUNITY GARDEN AT BARRATT HOMES SALES OFFICE, MULBERRY SQUARE, RENFREW BY MR HAMILTON.
Councillor McGurk, seconded by Councillor McNaughtan, moved that the application be approved subject to conditions detailed in the report and the successful conclusion of a Section 75 agreement to secure the provision and implementation of the open space/community garden area and that these areas would be maintained for lifetime of the developer by the owner of the land.
Councillor Burns, seconded by Councillor Doig, moved as an amendment that the application be refused for the following reasons:
(i) loss of greenspace; (ii) unacceptable increase in traffic volume at the site throughout the day; and (iii) detriment to the amenity of residents.
On the roll being called, the following members voted for the amendment: Councillors Binks, Burns, Andy Doig, Don, Graham, J MacLaren, K MacLaren, M MacLaren, Nicolson and Rodden.
The following members voted for the motion: Councillors Brown, McGurk, McNaughtan, Devine and Sheridan.
Ten members having voted for the amendment and five members having voted for the motion, the amendment was accordingly declared carried.
DECIDED: That the application be refused as it would result in (i) loss of greenspace; (ii) unacceptable increase in traffic volume at the site throughout the day; and (iii) detriment to the amenity of residents.
(C) 19/0800/PP - ERECTION OF THREE STOREY EXTENSION TO REAR OF DETACHED, CONVERTED VILLA TO FORM NINE FLATS AT 30 MANSIONHOUSE ROAD, PAISLEY BY MS WILSON
It was proposed that the application be refused for the reasons detailed within the report. This was agreed.
DECIDED: That the application be refused for the reasons detailed within the report.
(D) 19/0801/LB - ERECTION OF THREE STOREY EXTENSION TO REAR OF DETACHED, CONVERTED VILLA TO FORM NINE FLATS AT 30 MANSIONHOUSE ROAD, PAISLEY BY MS WILSON.
It was proposed that the application be refused for the reasons detailed within the report. This was agreed.
DECIDED: That the application be refused for the reasons detailed within the report.
(E) 20/0613/PP - ERECTION OF CATTERY BUILDING, RECEPTION LODGE, ENTRY GATES AND ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPING WORKS AT NETHER BELL TREES, NEWTON OF BELLTREES, LOCHWINNOCH BY MR MACFADYEN
Councillor Devine, seconded by Councillor McGurk, moved that the application be refused for the following reasons:
The proposal was contrary to the Local Development Plan, being an unacceptable and inappropriate development in the greenbelt; and for the material considerations that it would result in an unacceptable increase in traffic volume; adverse impact on road safety in the vicinity due to issues accessing the site; the fabric of the proposed building would have an adverse impact on visual amenity, in particular in relation to the listed buildings nearby; unacceptable noise impact; and interference with active travel use and enjoyment of the Semple Trail. This was agreed.
DECIDED: That the application be refused as the proposal was contrary to the Local Development Plan, being an unacceptable and inappropriate development in the greenbelt; and that it would result in an unacceptable increase in traffic volume; adverse impact on road safety in the vicinity due to issues accessing the site; adverse impact on visual amenity, in particular in relation to the listed buildings nearby; unacceptable noise impact; and interference with use and enjoyment of the Semple Trail.