Plans for a drive-through dessert parlour in Paisley — which were met with 41 letters of objection — have been knocked back by Renfrewshire Council.

An application sought permission for the construction of the shop, alongside access and parking, on a patch of grassland at the junction of the town’s Glenburn Road and Caplethill Road.

Concerns were raised in the community over the potential for increased traffic at the spot, noise and disturbance and an “over concentration” of businesses in a residential area.

Officers recommended the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board refuse the proposals on Tuesday, because they would “result in the loss of some open space and have a “detrimental impact” on the “character” of the area.

They also said the development lacked “adequate provision” for “accessibility for sustainable modes of travel” and questioned whether it was “compatible with the safe and efficient operation of the local road network”.

Councillors agreed and the application was subsequently refused.

Bruce MacFarlane, depute convener of the board, said: “The rejection of this planning application will be welcomed by the local community.

“Not only were there legitimate planning reasons to reject this application, but it was also clear that this development was not wanted by the local community.

“I am of the firm belief that this decision was the correct one and I would like to thank those who took the time to submit their objections.”

Councillor Marie McGurk told the board she was “absolutely delighted” with the refusal, before saying: “On behalf of the community in the area, I thank the officers for doing that.”

In a statement after the meeting, she added: “When this application was brought to my attention it was immediately clear that this location would be unsuitable for a drive-through of that nature due to several planning concerns.

“I am glad that this view was shared by other members of the planning board and that this application was rightfully rejected.

“Having previously been convener of this board I had experience to ensure that legitimate planning reasons were used in order to have fundamental reasons to reject this.”