Northcare (Scotland) Ltd submitted a second bid in October to replace Anniesland Bowling and Tennis Club at Helensburgh Drive with a “high quality” facility after Glasgow City Council planners refused permission for the original application earlier last year.

Under the revised plan, Northcare said it would deliver rooftop terraces, a cocktail lounge, spa and cinema, cafe with outside terrace, and private and public garden areas.

The care home operator said it will also make a payment toward alternative provision for a tennis court and bowling green nearby.

Councillors on the city’s planning applications committee rejected the revised proposal last year.

A report by officials stated: “The proposed erection of a 66-bed residential care home would result in the loss of protected open space, contrary to the Sustainable Spatial Strategy, and would have a single access which would be a hazard to pedestrian, cycle and vehicle traffic accessing the site.

“While the proposed development could potentially help address a need in the local area, for care within the local community, this does not outweigh the strong presumption in favour of the retention of protected open space.”

Northcare then raised the case with the Scottish Government’s planning and environmental appeals division.

However, the government’s reporter Allison Coard agreed with the council. Her report stated: “The land has remaining amenity value as an open space in the built-up area irrespective of an existing outdoor sports use.

“I find the proposal does not appropriately compensate for the overall loss of protected open space in an area of identified deficiency in such provision.

“I am not persuaded that the proposed replacement of the existing open space with a care home and small community garden would better serve the needs of the local community in an area where there is a deficiency of such open space.”

The report added: “Given the extent of the building mass, its height and the comparative ground level, I consider the building fails to reflect the residential scale and character of the area.

“The building lacks a street frontage or spacious setting. I consider it would appear as a bulky and incongruously large building in comparison to the surrounding residential scale properties that are currently grouped around this established open space.

“The scale and nature of the proposed redevelopment of this open space compounds my concern regarding the loss of that space and the consequent impact on the amenity of the area and the access that local residents would have to locally accessible open space.”