Another row over commercial enterprise being given a foothold in public parks has erupted - this time over plans to transform a disused Victorian toilet block into a health foods cafe.
Plans for a 30-seater restaurant specialising in organic and health foods as well as drinks have already been granted permission in principle for the C-listed Queens Rooms - which have lain empty in Glasgow's Kelvingrove Park for 25 years.
However, the team behind the proposal face a string of objections, chief among them the principle that a public building is being used for commercial purposes.
This has fuelled concern by entrepreneur Gary Pilkington, who is giving up a career in education to concentrate on the project, that he is being swept up in another row over plans for a restaurant, bar, nightclub and conference centre, with a lease of up to 99 years, within the nearby Botanic Gardens.
Mr Pilkington has argued his application is not comparative in terms of scale and detail to that of Stefan King's proposal for the Botanic Gardens. Glasgow City Council's planning committee is expected to approve the scheme for the Kelvingrove restaurant, to be called An Clachan Cafe, today.
However, two surrounding community councils, Hillhead and Woodlands and Park, along with the Friends of Kelvingrove Park and Green councillor Nina Baker have lodged a string of objections.
These include: a lack of consultation; concern the cafe could apply for an alcohol licence; there are already sufficient facilities in the surrounding area; and that the space inside the building is too small for the use envisaged.
Councillor Baker said: "What people want is something owned by the public, and where the public reap the benefits and not the mushrooming of commercial developments within parks."
Tom Johnston, of Woodlands and Parks Community Council, added: "I've nothing against this guy but I wish his pitch was somewhere else and not in a public park. Our concern is assets are being disposed of in an unregulated fashion."
Mr Pilkington said he felt his plans were being tainted by the row over those put forward for the Botanic Gardens. He said: "Some of the objections appear political in nature and there's a misapprehension that the two schemes are similar. They are not. There's only a coincidence of the timing."
Ian Barlow, his architect, added: "It's possible this is being objected to on the back of the Botanics scheme. The issue of Botanics and commercial facilities in parks is not of my client's making."
The cafe would be open until 5pm during winter months and 8pm or 9pm in the summer, would not sell alcohol and would be granted a 25-year lease as well as 30 additional seats outside.
The partnership behind it will also contribute 10% of the costs towards upgrading facilities in the park, including a children's play area.
The report before the committee claims that most of the objections are not valid within the parameters of planning and confirms it will be sent to the Scottish Executive for final approval if it is cleared today.
The application comes as several west end politicians claim the Botanics proposal is much larger than has been portrayed and extends into more sections of the park than they previously believed. Following a meeting with senior council officials, Mary Paris of the LibDems and the SNP's Alex Dingwall are asking that the full plans, with dimensions, are made public - followed by a consultation.
Meanwhile, efforts to allay concerns over the Botanics scheme appear to have had the opposite effect, with some elected members wanting all details immediately made public. Cllr Dingwall said: "It is critical the full presentation showing the artistic mock-ups are now put out in the public domain so people can see exactly what is being proposed and are then consulted on it."
Cllr Paris added: "We are talking about a much larger area for this development than just the site of the former railway station. It is quite a substantial slice of land to the west of that and we have serious concerns. I would also be interested in looking again in more detail at the other expressions of interest."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article