Wilton Street gap-site planning application
Update 15 September 2026
The application has been withdrawn.
A planning application (25/02916/PPP | Erection of flatted residential development) has been submitted for the gap site between nos. 259 and 275 Wilton Street.
We have submitted the objection below.
If you wish to make a comment on the application, please note the closing date is Monday 30 March 2026.
While the principle of residential development may be acceptable in some locations, the current outline proposal raises a number of significant planning concerns. The limited information submitted does not adequately demonstrate that the site is suitable for a flatted development of unspecified scale or density.
1. Site Constraints and Drainage. An area beside the site already has surface water issues and development is likely to worsen local flooding
The site is steeply sloping and there has been surface water movement across and around the site (flooding to properties at Kelvinside Terrace West). Neighbours advise that they have previously experienced issues with groundwater movement and a spring in the area.
Given the gradient of the site and the constrained nature of the plot, there is concern that development could alter existing drainage patterns, exacerbate surface water movement and increase runoff affecting neighbouring properties or the adjacent road. The application does not include sufficient detail regarding drainage strategy or how surface water runoff will be managed. Without a clear drainage assessment and appropriate sustainable drainage proposals, it is not possible to conclude that the development would not worsen existing drainage problems.
2. Access, Road Width and Highway Safety
The road serving the site is narrow and already constrained. The introduction of a flatted development could significantly increase vehicle movements, including residents’ vehicles, visitors, deliveries, refuse collection and emergency service access. The application does not provide information on access arrangements, vehicle manoeuvring or parking provision. Given the limited road width and constrained site conditions, there are legitimate concerns that the development could create road safety issues.
At present the bin lorry uses the lane between Kelvinside Terrace South and Wilton Street. There is a turning area for the bin lorry in the vicinity of the proposed development site. Neighbours are concerned about the risk of future development compromising this arrangement.
3. Risk of Overdevelopment
The proposal seeks outline consent without providing meaningful parameters for the potential height, massing or density of the development. The site is located between a seven-storey tenement building and a three-storey townhouse, meaning that the scale of any new building will be highly sensitive.
Without defined parameters, there is a real risk that the site could be overdeveloped in order to maximise the number of units. Due to the constrained nature of the site, such overdevelopment could lead to poor design, excessive scale and unacceptable impacts on neighbouring properties.
4. Impact on Character and Streetscape
As an infill site situated between buildings of very different scale and form, careful design and appropriate building height will be critical to ensure that any development integrates successfully with the surrounding streetscape.
At present the application does not provide sufficient detail to demonstrate how a flatted development could achieve a sensitive transition between the adjacent buildings. Granting outline consent without clear design parameters risks permitting a development that may be visually dominant or out of keeping with the established character of the area.
5. Residential Amenity
Flatted developments typically involve multiple storeys and higher occupancy levels. Without clarity on building height, layout, window positions or balconies, it is not possible to properly assess potential impacts on neighbouring residential amenity. If the development is taller or close to boundaries it may block natural light and create overshadowing of neighbouring properties or gardens. There is therefore concern that a development on this constrained site could result in overlooking, loss of privacy, overshadowing or general disturbance to neighbouring properties.
6. Open space
The site is noted in the local development plan as a ‘Development site containing open space’; the Open Space Map illustrating the City’s protected open spaces notes that where there is a ‘development site containing open space, this open space will either be retained /replaced on site or its loss compensated.
7. Construction access
The last time an attempt was made to develop this site, incompetent site operations resulted in the collapse of an adjacent building. Given the steep topography of the site and the constrained road access, there are significant questions regarding the practical buildability of the development. The steep gradient of the site combined with the narrow road frontage raises concern that significant excavation or retaining structures may be required, potentially resulting in inadequate and unsuccessful site operations.
The application does not demonstrate how construction access, delivery of materials, or site operations could be safely managed – this is a very significant concern for neighbouring residents.
Conclusion
In summary, the application does not provide sufficient information to demonstrate that the site is suitable for flatted residential development or that the proposal would not result in unacceptable impacts relating to drainage, access, overdevelopment and residential amenity.
Given the constrained nature of the site, its steep topography, drainage issues and limited road access, it is not evident that the principle of a flatted development can be accommodated on the site without adverse impacts.
For these reasons, we respectfully request that Glasgow City Council refuse the outline planning application.
Apologies we missed the deadline. We are trying to set up our community grp, first meeting tonight 7pm 10th June at Army reserve. Agree with the planning objection