Plans to establish a purpose-built research and development centre for electric race cars by McMurtry Automotive Ltd have been rejected by Stroud District Council planners.
The proposals for a new building on land near Renishaws Roundabout along Charfield Road in Kingswood were discussed at the council’s development control committee earlier this week. The proposed facility was designed to run parallel to the B4058 and featured a footprint of 4,820 square metres. Parking provisions included 60 spaces plus three accessible bays situated to the south and east of the building.
Despite these plans, council officers recommended refusal due to insufficient evidence to justify the location in the countryside.
READ MORE: Bristol named the best UK city to visit in 2026, just a short drive from Gloucestershire
Daniel Jones, planning agent representing McMurtry Automotive, addressed the committee in support of the application. He emphasised the importance of retaining the “innovative” electric vehicle technology company within the Stroud district.
“It’s exactly the type of high value business the district and county should support and retain,” Jones stated. “This is not a speculative application. It is for a known end user with an immediate need for purpose-built research, development and production facilities.”
He further highlighted that the company requires certainty to invest and grow locally, pointing out that the scheme would generate high-skilled engineering jobs and support a successful local enterprise.
Jones also outlined a clear rationale for the chosen site, which is adjacent to Renishaw, an established centre of high technology and research offering access to world-class engineering resources. Additionally, he noted a family connection, as the late Sir David McMurtry was the founder of McMurtry Automotive.
Marilyn Basketter, vice-chair of Kingswood Parish Council, expressed her council’s support for the officers’ recommendation to refuse the application, clarifying that this stance does not oppose employment development on the site altogether.
“We recognise the importance of creating jobs, supporting businesses and the economic benefits this proposal could bring,” said Basketter. “Our concern is that approving this application in isolation could jeopardise the long-term employment potential of the wider site.”
She voiced worries about the absence of a masterplan for the overall site and stressed that the applicant had ample opportunity to submit one.
“Granting permission now could prejudice the future development of the remainder of the allocation,” she added. “It could restrict how the site is planned and developed in the future and ultimately jeopardise the very business and employment opportunities the allocation was intended to provide.”
Labour Councillor Dave Matthews (Cainscross) acknowledged the complexity of the application but concurred that there was insufficient justification for the proposed location.
“There’s tremendous warmth towards the McMurtry family, to David McMurtry specifically, and to Renishaw as an organisation, which is a major consideration locally,” Matthews said. “However, it’s clear that this application does not comply with the usual criteria we expect.”
He cited concerns about the large building’s visual impact on the open countryside and potential effects on wildlife.
In a vote, the committee decided to refuse permission in line with the officers’ recommendation by eight votes to one, with Councillor Lindsey Green (Conservative, Berkeley Vale) voting against the refusal.