A plan to turn a southside Glasgow flat into a short term let for tourists has been refused by city bosses.

Applicant Fiona Lean proposed to lease out the property in the Croftfoot area to a maximum of four people for 14 days or more.

The ground floor property on Ashcroft Drive has two bedrooms, a private garden and one parking place.

The Planning Local Review Committee heard last week that although the property was just one of the city’s 300,000 homes, council officials were braced for a flood of similar applications.

SNP councillor Paul Leinster said: “We are going to have an increasing number of these (short term let applications) at planning. We know the pressure on housing in the city is massive for all types of housing. We don’t have enough of anything basically.”

He raised doubts about the benefits of turning the home into a “facility for tourists”.

He added: “I don’t think removing a residential property from the market can be justified on that basis.”

Describing car parking in the area as a “nightmare”, he added: “The last thing this area needs is more cars coming into it.”

Councillor Wardrop, Scottish Greens, also highlighted that one parking space is not enough and expressed concern about a lack of cycle parking.

Committee chair, SNP councillor Ken Andrew, said it would involve “removing a family property.”

The applicants lodged an appeal after the application was first refused.

They put forward a number of points including that there will be no increased pressure on local facilities.

An appeal statement said: “It is incorrect to presume that there will be an intensification of noise or of activity in the garden. The property is likely to be empty for periods of time, and it is not intended to target family groups with children who may be more likely to use the garden area.

It added: “There will be no increased pressure on local facilities or amenities. The property has access to active travel routes and frequent bus and rail services, and there is a row of shops nearby.”

But the application was refused  following an appeal.

Appeal chiefs ruled it was an “unacceptable introduction of commercial”, which would disrupt a well established residential area. They also criticised the lack of cycle parking.