Business Operations and Partnerships Department
Director of Business Operations & Partnerships: Louise Pringle
Council Headquarters, Eastwood Park, Giffnock, East Renfrewshire, G46 6UG
Phone: 0141 577 3000
website: www.eastrenfrewshire.gov.uk
Date: 27 May 2025
When calling please ask for: John Burke (Tel No. 0141 577 3026)
e-mail:- This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

TO: Councillors B Cunningham (Chair), J McLean (Vice Chair), P Edlin, A Ireland, C Lunday, M Montague and A Morrison.

PLANNING APPLICATIONS COMMITTEE
A meeting of the Planning Applications Committee will be held in the Council Chamber, Council Headquarters, Eastwood Park, Giffnock on

Wednesday 4 June 2025 at 2.00pm.

The agenda of business is as shown below.
Louise Pringle
L PRINGLE
DIRECTOR OF BUSINESS OPERATIONS & PARTNERSHIPS

AGENDA
1. Report apologies for absence.
2. Declarations of Interest.

3. Motion on Notice
Consider Notice of Motion in the following terms:-
In accordance with Council standing orders and the scheme of administration, the
movers of this motion instruct planning officers to issue a Revocation Order under
Section 65 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, for application
2025/0043/TP – Construction and operation of a 40 MW battery energy storage facility
together with associated infrastructure, substation, security fencing, CCTV, security
lighting and landscaping.
Moved by: Councillor McLean
Seconded by: Councillor Morrison

For information on how to access the virtual meeting, please e-mail:-

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

A recording of the Council meeting will also be available following the meeting on the
Council’s YouTube Channel

www.youtube.com/user/eastrenfrewshire/videos

This document can be explained to you in other languages and can be provided in
alternative formats such as large print and Braille. For further information, please
contact Customer First on 0141 577 3001 or email

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

You can read any other papers/reports on Council webpage here -

www.eastrenfrewshire.gov.uk/PAC-04062025

28/05/2025

Published Barrhead News On Line

U-turn sought on Eaglesham battery storage facility plan
10 hrs ago
Local government

By Drew Sandelands
Local Democracy Reporter

Permission for a controversial plan to store energy in batteries on greenbelt land in Eaglesham could be revoked by East Renfrewshire Council.

Two Conservative councillors, Jim McLean and Andrew Morrison, will ask the council’s planning committee to back a U-turn at a meeting next week.

Initially, councillors rejected a plan from GPC 1337 Ltd, a subsidiary of Apatura, for a 40MW battery energy storage facility on an agricultural site at the east side of Glasgow Road.

But the firm’s second bid was approved last month, despite over 300 objections, on the casting vote of the chair, Cllr Betty Cunningham, Labour, after a 3-3 vote. Both applications had been recommended for approval by planners.

Since the second plan got the green light, a Scottish Government reporter has announced his decision to uphold the original refusal of the first application. He had been considering an appeal by the applicants.

More than 3,000 people have signed a petition calling for the planning approval to be overturned. It states: “Our voices have been ignored and the decision does not reflect the best interest of those who call this area home.”

Cllr McLean and Cllr Morrison opposed both proposals when they were presented to the planning committee. They raised concerns over the appropriateness of the site.

The aim of the scheme is to store surplus energy from the national grid in the batteries, which would then be returned when required. It has been described as a “temporary” installation, with the site returned to its previous condition after 40 years.

The first application was refused after councillors raised concerns over the risk of fire from lithium-ion batteries. Local MSP Jackson Carlaw, Conservative, has said the greenbelt should be protected and the proposal is "intrusive and inappropriate”.

He also said there were “very serious concerns and real-life examples of fires that have erupted at battery plants because of the lithium-ion batteries”.

Keith Bray, the independent reporter appointed by Scottish Ministers, refused the appeal over the original application earlier this month.

He found that “while the proposal could make a small scale and indirect contribution to renewable energy and greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, it would entail development that has adverse visual effects in a greenbelt location where strict control over new development is to be exercised”.

Mr Bray added: “When completing my decision, the council approved a revised scheme on the site and the appellant asked to submit it. Given it was late in the appeal process I did not accept it.”

He also said the company had asked to submit drawings which showed the “installation of two further above ground water tanks” to align with the proposal’s fire safety plan. These weren’t accepted as they "constituted a change to the proposal”.

Council officials had reported the second application differed from the original as more information has been submitted on fire safety and a water tank is now proposed to be underground.

They added the development includes specialised container units for the batteries and fire suppression equipment.

Following the reporter’s decision, Mr Carlaw added it “highlights with even greater clarity that people in Eaglesham and Waterfoot have been utterly ignored and failed by the council”.

He called on councillors who backed the development to “consider their position and resign”.

GPC 1337 Ltd has said the development will “support the decarbonisation of the energy industry in the UK” and 28 other sites had been considered, but this is “the only deliverable, viable” one.

The plans were “accompanied by a suite of technical documents which demonstrate the proposal will not lead to significant adverse harm,” the applicants added.

East Renfrewshire’s planning applications committee will meet on Wednesday, June 4. The motion asks for planning officials to issue a revocation order under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

It's worth watching the recording !

You can view recording of meeting here -

www.youtube.com/user/eastrenfrewshire/videos

09/06/2025

Published Barrhead News

Bid to revoke Eaglesham battery plant permission fails

By Drew Sandelands
Local Democracy Reporter

A bid to revoke planning permission for a controversial battery energy storage plant in Eaglesham failed after it was ruled “not competent” - but campaigners are continuing their fight.

Conservative councillors Jim McLean and Andrew Morrison urged East Renfrewshire’s planning committee to U-turn on its decision to approve the construction of the 40MW facility on greenbelt land.

At a heated meeting last week, councillors were told a lawyer had advised the motion was incompetent and no vote was held.

However, it is understood East Renfrewshire Council has received notice of a judicial review, as campaigners keep up their efforts to get the ruling overturned.

Almost 3,500 people have signed a petition against the plan from GPC 1337 Ltd, a subsidiary of Apatura, to store energy in batteries on agricultural land at the east side of Glasgow Road.

But East Renfrewshire councillors, who rejected an initial proposal, approved a second application last month. Since then, an independent reporter appointed by the Scottish Government has upheld the refusal of the first bid.

That ruling led Cllr McLean and Cllr Morrison, who had opposed the development, to bring a motion to the planning committee, which called for permission to be revoked.

Objectors have raised concerns over building on greenbelt land as well as the potential risk of fire from lithium-ion batteries.

In a bizarre start to the meeting, councillors struggled to appoint a chairperson. Cllr Betty Cunningham, Labour, the committee’s chairwoman, passed away recently, and the deputy, Cllr McLean, couldn’t fill the role as he was proposing the motion.

Cllr Chris Lunday, SNP, was put forward by Cllr Morrison but rejected the nomination. He suggested Cllr Paul Edlin, Conservative, who also turned down the position.

Provost Mary Montague then nominated Cllr Annette Ireland, an independent, who accepted the role. An official said the chair had to decide whether the motion was competent, but the council had sought external legal advice.

The advice, from Douglas Armstrong KC, indicated that “a motion simply seeking revocation of the earlier decision such as before the committee today is not competent”, the official said.

He added the motion identifies “no basis for revocation” and “neither references nor assesses the statutory criteria or the potential consequences relevant to such a decision”.

The Conservatives turned down an offer to withdraw the motion. Cllr Ireland said: “I am left in a position that if I rule your motion is competent, that is myself going against legal advice.

“The position you have put me in, I would absolutely deserve to be reported to standards [Standards Commission for Scotland] if I ruled your motion was competent. It glaringly is not.

“Following the law is incredibly important, we don’t just get to rewrite planning legislation. Certainly not to satisfy politics or local pressure. I rule that this motion is not competent in view of the legal advice that we have just heard.”

A motion could be submitted to a meeting of the full council later this month.

Eastwood MSP Jackson Carlaw, Conservative, has backed the campaign against the facility and joined campaigners ahead of the meeting.

Afterwards, he said the decision to grant planning permission was “unacceptable” and “bewildering” when the reporter had later rejected the first and “near identical” application.

Mr Carlaw said it was “incredibly frustrating” the motion was declared not competent, but that it would “not dissuade local residents who are fighting heroically and tirelessly to stop the development”.

The aim of the scheme is to store surplus energy from the national grid in the batteries, which would then be returned when required. It has been described as a “temporary” installation, with the site returned to its previous condition after 40 years.

Keith Bray, the independent reporter, rejected the appeal over the original application, finding it would lead to “adverse visual effects in a greenbelt location”.

Council officials previously reported the second application differed from the original as more information has been submitted on fire safety and a water tank is now proposed to be underground.

GPC 1337 Ltd has said the development will “support the decarbonisation of the energy industry in the UK” and 28 other sites had been considered, but this is “the only deliverable, viable” one.

The plans were “accompanied by a suite of technical documents which demonstrate the proposal will not lead to significant adverse harm,” the applicants added.

You can read Barrhrad News here

www.barrheadnews.com/