There were no declarations of interest or transparency statements intimated prior to the commencement of the meeting.

The Chair summarised the procedure to be followed at the meeting of the Local Review Body (LRB), a copy of which had been circulated to members prior to the meeting.

Consideration was given to a Notice of Review submitted in respect of the Planning Authority's decision to refuse planning permission for the change of use from former Class 1A (beauty salon) to Sui Generis (short-term let serviced accommodation) with associated external works including formation of garden and parking area and erection of fencing at 5 Glenburn Road, Paisley, PA2 8TA (25/0207/PP).

The following materials were before members in relation to the Notice of Review:

(i) the Planning Authority’s submission, which included the report of handling, accompanying documents and decision notice; and

(ii) the Notice of Review, together with supporting statement and productions submitted by the applicant.

The Chair confirmed that the LRB required to decide whether it had sufficient information before it to make a decision on this matter or whether further procedure was required to allow the LRB to determine LRB01.26/Planning Application 25/0207/PP. The independent Planning Officer highlighted that the supporting statement document, setting out how the short-term let accommodation would operate, referred to in the Planning Authority’s submission, was not included within the paperwork circulated to members. It was noted that the omitted information could be considered a material consideration in determining the application. It was the consensus that the LRB did not have sufficient information before it to reach a decision. The Chair moved that consideration of the application be continued to the next meeting of the Local Review Body to enable the relevant documentation to be provided to members. This was agreed unanimously.

DECIDED: That consideration of LRB01.26 (Planning Application 25/0207/PP) be continued to the next meeting of the Local Review Body to enable the supporting statement document, setting out how the short-term let accommodation would operate, referred to in the Planning Authority’s submission to be provided to members.

Consideration was given to a Notice of Review submitted in respect of the Planning Authority's decision to refuse planning permission for the erection of one and half storey dwellinghouse and associated work at Portnauld, Greenock Road, Inchinnan, Renfrew, PA4 9PB (25/0633/PP).

The following materials were before members in relation to the Notice of Review:

(i) the Planning Authority’s submission, which included the report of handling, accompanying documents and decision notice; and

(ii) the Notice of Review, together with supporting statement and productions submitted by the applicant.

The Chair confirmed that the LRB required to decide whether it had sufficient information before it to make a decision on this matter or whether further procedure was required to allow the LRB to determine LRB02.26/Planning Application 25/0633/PP.

It was agreed that the LRB had sufficient information before it to reach a decision.

The Chair then advised that the LRB required to determine the application in accordance with the provisions of the development plan, including any supplementary guidance, unless material considerations indicated otherwise.

Following consideration, Councillor Nicolson, seconded by Councillor McNaughtan, moved that the application be refused for the reasons detailed in the report of handling prepared by the Planning Case Officer and included within the papers circulated to members prior to the meeting. This was agreed unanimously.

DECIDED: That LRB02.26 (Planning Application 25/0633/PP) be refused for the reasons detailed below:

(a) The development would be contrary to Policy 8 of National Planning Framework 4 and Policy ENV1 of the Renfrewshire Local Development Plan in that it has not been demonstrated that there is a specific locational need for dwellinghouse at the application site and there are no other material considerations sufficient to outweigh the lack of any demonstrable locational need; and

(b) The proposed development is considered contrary to Policy 14 of National Planning Framework 4 and the Council's New Development Supplementary Guidance and New Development in the Countryside Guidance in that the development by reason of its relationship with the existing neighbouring dwelling together with its siting, design and scale would have a detrimental impact on the character, appearance and residential amenity of the area.

Consideration was given to a Notice of Review submitted in respect of the Planning Authority's decision to refuse planning permission for the change of use of former community garden to parking facility associated with existing business (Kilbarchan Vehicle Services) at Site to East of Junction with Waterside Lane, Kilbarchan Road, Johnstone (25/0320/PP).

The following materials were before members in relation to the Notice of Review:

(i) the Planning Authority’s submission, which included the report of handling, accompanying documents and decision notice; 

(ii) the Notice of Review, together with supporting statement and productions submitted by the applicant; and

(iii) further representations received from interested parties together with comments from the appellant in respect of the issues raised.

The Chair confirmed that the LRB required to decide whether it had sufficient information before it to make a decision on this matter or whether further procedure was required to allow the LRB to determine LRB03.26/Planning Application 25/0320/PP.

It was agreed that the LRB had sufficient information before it to reach a decision.

The Convener then advised that the LRB required to determine the application in accordance with the provisions of the development plan, including any supplementary guidance, unless material considerations indicated otherwise.

Following consideration, Councillor McNaughtan, seconded by Councillor McGurk, moved that the application be refused for the reasons detailed in the report of handling prepared by the Planning Case Officer and included within the papers circulated to members prior to the meeting. This was agreed unanimously.

DECIDED: That LRB03.26 (Planning Application 25/0320/PP) be refused for the reasons detailed below:

(a) The proposed development is contrary to Policy 20 of National Planning Framework 4, Policy P6 of the Local Development Plan and the New Development Supplementary Guidance on Open Space in that the proposal would result in the loss of an area of open space designated within the adopted spatial strategy; and 

(b) The proposed development is contrary to Policy 14 of National Planning Framework 4, Policy P1 of the Local Development Plan and the New Development Supplementary on Creating Places and in that the proposal would not be compatible with surrounding uses or conductive to the creation of a pleasant place.