A bid to knock down “eyesore” former offices and build 12 flats for social housing in Cranhill has been turned down again.

SIM Building Group, which has been working with Thenue Housing Association on the scheme, had appealed against council planners’ decision to refuse permission.

They wanted to demolish an empty two-storey red brick building, once used as council social work offices, at 1 Ruchazie Place to make way for flats.

The applicants claimed the “loss of these affordable homes would have very real and negative consequences for those in need of good quality, safe housing in the area”.

Glasgow Times:

Planning officials rejected the proposal due to concerns over “poor quality” design, an “excessive” car parking area and failure to provide “adequate” outdoor space for residents. More information on flood risk was also required, planners said.

Now Glasgow’s planning review committee has upheld the initial decision by seven votes to four.

Councillors were concerned that pedestrian access to the building “would be to the rear”.

Bailie Christy Mearns said: “Is there a risk that residents to the building will be effectively walking through a car park to get to the entrance?

A council official said the applicants had been advised that "entrances should be on the street”.

She added they had also been told that a “path from the main entrance should be introduced, straight out onto Gartcraig Road”.

READ NEXT: Glasgow City Council cracks down on fly-tipping with over 150 notices

Five people had objected to the application, raising concerns over a loss of privacy, inadequate transport links and the negative impact on sunlight to neighbouring properties. It was also claimed the plan was “incongruous with its surroundings”.

An initial review meeting in November had been continued to allow the applicant to provide more information, including an ecology survey, hydraulic modelling of the Carntyne Burn, the level of bike parking and the amount of open space provided.

The applicants said the “unsightly” offices have been empty for several years and have “in recent times been broken into and set on fire with the building becoming an eyesore for local residents”.

Their appeal statement claimed the plan would deliver “much-needed, high-quality affordable homes”, which would reduce Thenue Housing Association’s waiting list of over 300 applicants.

They believed, as the development was for social housing, the council should “show flexibility” on the car parking and open space. 

The appeal stated the “triangular” site “lends itself to having both the residential block and the communal garden space located at the widest part of the site, with the car parking situated at the existing entrance to the site for road safety and away from the primary junction”.

Social housing developments have “much lower than average car ownership”, it added, and the applicants “would have agreed to remove certain spaces if required”. 

Open space was “never discussed during the planning process”, the appeal claimed, but the developers were “content” to make a financial contribution to compensate.

The appeal also claimed the flats would be “more than adequately absorbed into the context of the surrounding area, without its design appearing to be incongruous in any way”.

However, Councillor Eva Bolander, who chaired the committee, said issues over access to the site, the proposed car park and privacy had been raised.

She said: “I think it is generally a fairly good application and it’s always good to see registered social landlords coming forward and wanting to build affordable houses in the city. We are in need of more housing.

“There are a few things I wish could have been done slightly differently. I am not quite convinced this is the best planning proposal coming forward because of the issues we have been discussing.”

Councillor Ken Andrew added the plan was “fatally flawed”.

He said: “Unfortunately, there seems to be a number of issues that should have been relatively easy to have resolved in terms of the access to the building,” he said.

“The building could have been turned 180 degrees and the main entrance could have been accessed onto Ruchazie Place. The car park could have been moved to the north side of the building. 

“Cars don’t need sunshine, grass and plants do, and so do people.”