30 flats and shop at 14 - 18 Macdowall Street, Johnstone

“Site Description The application site is relatively flat, extends to approximately 0.26 hectares and is located approximately 45 metres to the southwest of Johnstone Town Centre. The northern portion of the site has been derelict for over 15 years while the southern portion contains a single storey building that is occupied by a dog daycare facility. This building would be demolished to accommodate the proposal.”

“Residential properties, including flats, are found to the east, south and west. Planning permission was previously granted (but has since lapsed) for the erection of a 35-unit residential development comprised solely of flats on a large parcel of derelict land to the north (Reference 19/0877/PP and Reference 22/0127/PP). Planning permission also exists…”

“Negotiated Improvements Following submission, changes have been secured via condition to improve pedestrian connections within the development and to ensure the retail unit does not harm the amenity of properties found nearby. Conditions have also been secured to ensure the soft landscaping helps boost biodiversity and for the planting of street trees on the footway that runs along the front of the application site.”

“Overall, it is considered that, subject to conditions, the access and connectivity arrangements of the residential element of the development would be acceptable. The site has been designed to improve active travel connectivity and reduce reliance on private cars.”

“Environmental Protection have raised no concerns in respect of noise, subject to conditions controlling the operation of plant and the hours when deliveries can be made. To further protect the amenity of nearby residents, including those that will live above the unit, a condition can also be added to restrict the occupancy of the unit to Class 1A businesses.”

“Consultations • Environmental Protection - No objections, subject to conditions relating to noise and potential contamination.”

“Chief Executives Roads Development - No objections, subject to conditions relating to the provision of footways and cycle storage facilities within the curtilage of development as well as conditions relating to alterations to the public road to allow the development to be accessed safely.”

“The issues raised can be summarised as follows: Overshadowing concerns 2. Loss of privacy 3. The development would be taller than nearby properties…”

“The road network could not cope with the increase in traffic 5. Residents/visitors to the retail unit may use existing private parking spaces 6. The development would make the road network unsafe 7. Noise would harm residential amenity 8. The design statement is incorrect 9. Existing retail units nearby are vacant 10. Emergency services would struggle to access the properties 11. Antisocial behaviour would increase because of the development 12.”

“Councillor Paterson, seconded by Councillor Nicolson, moved that the planning application be granted subject to the conditions and reasons detailed within the report.”

“Councillor Gilmour, seconded by Councillor MacFarlane, moved as an amendment: "That the application be refused on the grounds that the proposed building height is excessive and results in an overbearing and dominant impact on neighbouring properties. Under NPF4 Policy 14 (Design, Quality and Place), new development must respect the scale and character of its surroundings and avoid overbearing massing.”

“The following members voted for the motion: Councillors Adam, Ann-Dowling, Andy Doig, Hannigan, McGurk, McNaughtan, Nicolson, Paterson, Shaw and Smith.”

“DECIDED: That the planning application be granted subject to the conditions and reasons detailed within the report. 5(d)”