Appeal fails to overturn refusal of plans for flats on former Langside convent site

Glasgow councillors have rejected plans to knock down a sandstone villa on Mansionhouse Road and build 20 flats, in a five-storey block, due to a lack of information.

The property is near to the former Bon Secours Hospital, which is being converted into flats. It was previously used as a convent, with residential accommodation, for the Sisters of Bon Secours.

Council planners had rejected the application, which they said contained “insufficient and incorrect” information.

Issues raised in the refusal included the loss of mature trees without a “good arboricultural reason”, no energy statement, inadequate screening for flood risk and the loss of a traditional sandstone building without “reasoned justification”.

It also stated there was no adequate cycle parking or open space provision.

But the applicant, Iain Wilson Properties, requested a review of the decision.

They said a “thorough review” of the surrounding buildings had been carried out to determine “optimal scale and massing” and that cycle parking, as well as 20 car parking spaces, would be provided.

A tree survey had been commissioned and “very few trees will be taken down given the majority of mature trees line the site boundaries”, the applicant stated.

The statement, submitted with the request for the review, added the site is “run-down and unkempt having been vacated some time ago” and the proposals would “vastly improve” the area.

“In addition to on-site landscaping, prospective purchasers will be able to take advantage of the lush Queen’s Park just a few minutes’ walk away.”

The applicant stated internal alterations, as the villa was not designed as a convent, mean the “layout is not a true reflection of a traditional sandstone villa” and the property is “not in a great condition”.

Almost 50 people objected to the initial application, including Langside, Battlefield and Camphill Community Council, and there were 22 objections to the review.

The council’s planning local review committee also rejected the proposal, with Councillor Michael Cullen saying: “The missing information is too much of a risk.

“The applicants themselves have probably limited the ability of this committee to make a proper decision.”

A council officer said the applicant had been advised the “best remedy” might be to withdraw the plans and resubmit with more information but had preceded with the review.