This is a letter submitted by Annabel Goldie objecting to Vincent Goodstadt, Structure Plan Manager, Glasgow & The Clyde Valley Structure Plan Joint Committee on the GLASGOW AND THE CLYDE VALLEY CONSULTATIVE DRAFT STRUCTURE PLAN MAY 2005 |
Vincent Goodstadt Esq Structure Plan Manager Glasgow & The Clyde Valley Structure Plan Joint Committee 10 Killermont Street Glasgow G2 3NW 17th June 2005 Dear Mr Goodstadt GLASGOW AND THE CLYDE VALLEY - CONSULTATIVE DRAFT STRUCTURE PLAN MAY 2005 Preliminary Comment I am a regional member of the Scottish Parliament for the West of Scotland. I am also a resident in Bishopton, Renfrewshire having lived there since 1961. As an MSP I have received from persons living within Bishopton both written and verbal opinions of concern about the identification of Bishopton as an area suitable for urban expansion. The overwhelming majority of these representations has been negative and opposed to the development of Bishopton as an area of urban expansion. I am also aware that there has been formed within the community a group known as the Bishopton Action Group and I understand that many individual letters will be submitted to you opposing the development of Bishopton as an area of urban expansion. In addition I have received from the Bishopton Community Council a copy of its response to the Consultative Draft and have noted that on behalf of Bishopton residents the Community Council objects to the identification of Bishopton as an area of urban expansion. As an MSP for the regional area of which Bishopton forms part, I would urge you to give the most serious consideration to these views which have been submitted or will be submitted to you and I would observe that there is a very great strength of feeling in relation to this specific proposal within the Bishopton Community. Response to the Consultative Draft Structure Plan - May 2005 This is my own response to the above. Having looked at the Consultative Draft Structure Plan, I have noted that the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 has four key inter-related aims, - economic growth, - social cohesion, - environmental sustainability and - integrated land use and transportation. I also note that of the three identified key themes, the first of these is strengthening communities. It would be helpful in the draft to have a summary of specific progress since the 2000 Structure Plan and an indication of where the projections made in 2000 have fallen short. The absence of that information on the four key inter-related areas means the consultative draft is deficient. For example the Momentum for Change Section merely details the Scottish Executive?s National Planning Framework of April 2004, which in turn reaffirms development priorities identified in the 2000 Plan. No information is provided to substantiate what is driving these priorities or to provide evidence of their continuing relevance. Further the Momentum for Growth Section states that employment rates have increased, unemployment rates have reduced and out migration is slowing down. There is also reference to improved economic performance. Unfortunately there is no analysis of that data and there is no basis on which to assess how robust the employment and economic projections are. By contrast, data available externally confirms that:- Economy Inverclyde has the second poorest business birth rate in Scotland. see 1 below Average earnings in Inverclyde were 13% lower than those for Scotland as a whole in April 2003, the fourth lowest in Scotland. see 2 below As a whole West Dunbartonshire is the third most deprived area in Scotland after Glasgow and Dundee. (WDC Social and Economic Profile, 2003-04) see 3 below Employment The number of people in employment during the period 1995 to 2000 had reduced by 13% across the West Dunbartonshire Council area at a time when employment in the West of Scotland as a whole had risen by 6%. (SLIMS, 2002) see 4 below Unemployment in Inverclyde is 5.5% compared to 3% nationally. see 5 below Migration Population in the Inverclyde area fell by 7% between 1991 and 2001 and is expected to fall by a further 11% in the period to 2016. see 6 below Inverclyde is forecast to lose a greater proportion of its population than any other council in Scotland, due to net out-migration and a falling birth rate. see 7 below Health Service Provision It is the case that certain facilities at Inverclyde Royal Hospital, Greenock and Vale of Leven Hospital, Dunbartonshire have been either closed or restricted, these decisions driven by declining population rendering the provision of certain clinical services unsustainable. By contrast the Royal Alexandra Hospital in Paisley is at maximum capacity. Educational Provision Population decline and projected decline have led Inverclyde Council to propose closing or amalgamating secondary schools. This existing data suggests that the identification of strategic locations in the Consultative Draft Structure Plan for potential development may be flawed. These general observations and conclusions do call into question the overarching strategy of the Consultative Draft Structure Plan. As a resident of Bishopton I have a particular interest in and concern about the identification in Schedule 1 (c) "Established Urban Expansion Areas" in the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley 2005 Structure Plan of the Royal Ordnance Factory site Bishopton as a preferred location for long term expansion, reaffirming the initial identification of this site in 2000. Other than that this site is available for development, it is difficult to see how on any objective appraisal of the criteria in the Consultative Draft Structure Plan this site continues to be considered suitable for development for urban expansion. On grounds of general strategy and on the basis of social cohesion, environmental sustainability and integrated land use and transportation (3 of the key aims) the site fails to meet these criteria. The proposed development also sits ill with one of the key themes "strengthening communities". Bishopton and the surrounding area is affluent with an already overstretched and inadequate infrastructure. The village is congested, road infrastructure within and out with the village is heavily used, medical and educational facilities are at about maximum usage and the limited recreational facilities are at saturation point. The contrast with neighbouring areas such as Inverclyde and West Dunbartonshire is marked as the previous statistical data discloses. It seems to me extraordinary that these two communities with these existing and intensifying problems should not command priority attention within the Consultative Draft Structure Plan. If they did, economic growth, social cohesion, environmental sustainability and integrated land use and transportation would all be achieved as would strengthening communities. Interestingly the development potential of the two communities is recognised both at p.16 paragraph 2.21 and p.33 paragraph 4.20 of the Consultative Draft Structure Plan. The identification of the Bishopton Royal Ordnance Factory Site also begs interesting questions in relation to availability of vacant and derelict land for development. The Technical Report TR 1/05 identifies 4803 hectares available for development. The Background Report (Ref. BR 4/05) prepared by Cass Associates for BAE and Redrow Homes confirms that the ROF site comprises 964 hectares of which 175 will remain for core activity by BAE, 566 will be forestry/open and only 223 will be deployed for urban expansion. This identified area for urban expansion represents a mere 4.64% of vacant and derelict area within the Structure Plan area. It is difficult to see how that small percentage of total area commands such strategic planning importance. It is clear there are other available areas in communities more in need of population decline reversal and economic regeneration. Indeed TR1/05 at page 1 bullet point number 3 states that 78% (3724 hectares) of the total vacant and derelict land in Glasgow and the Clyde Valley is within the existing urban area. Further in relation to the proposed development of part of the 223 hectares for business purposes, p.9 paragraph 2.3 and p.31 paragraph 4.6 and diagram 8 of the Draft Consultative Structure Plan show demand is exceeded by land supply. In short development of the 223 hectares is not at this time necessary by reference to criteria specified in the Draft Consultative Structure Plan. That conclusion can be arrived at by consideration of that criteria and reference to other development potential of alternative areas within the Structure Plan. On these general grounds I therefore object to the identification of Bishopton as an area for urban expansion. In addition very significant specific issues are raised by the potential development of the R.O.F site as proposed in relation to the existing community of Bishopton for the following reasons. Strengthening Communities In the Consultative Draft Structure Plan at page 32, Paragraph 4.7 states "Strategic Policy 6 and its related schedules 6 (a-e) in the 2000 Plan seek to strengthen communities and enhance the quality of life and health of their residents." Paragraph 4.8 states "These policies remain valid and do not require to be altered".? Implicit within that is the assumption that development will reinforce and support local communities and not impose unacceptable impacts upon the physical identity or quality of life within them. At least these were the criteria expressed in the 2000 Plan at p.16. and if these criteria are now being abandoned or revoked that should be expressly stated in the draft consultative document otherwise common sense and good planning practice and procedure demand their continued relevance. The proposed development of Bishopton as an area of urban expansion with a proposed 2000/2200 houses and related business usage is in direct conflict with and contravenes the express and implied criteria for strengthening communities. Bishopton comprises one of the few remaining villages in the Renfrewshire rural hinterland. Despite extensive residential development over 40 years it retains a local atmosphere and is a physically integral community. Geographically it is bounded on the south by the Glasgow - Gourock/Wemyss Bay railway line with two very restricted points of traversal. It is effectively bounded on the north by the M8 motorway. The existing community is therefore physically integral. As previously indicated infrastructure and facilities are congested and overstretched. The existing community has only very limited capacity for further development. Enhancing that community by the expansion proposed is neither possible nor environmentally sustainable for the following reasons.
Urban Expansion Areas In the Consultative Draft Structure Plan page 14, paragraph 2.14 states "it is central to national and local planning policies that new development should be located where households will not need to be solely dependent on the use of a car for work, school, shopping and leisure trips."
As the proposed development of Bishopton as an area of urban expansion either contravenes or is in conflict with the Draft Consultative Structure Plan stated criteria for strengthening communities and urban expansion areas, I object to the identification of Bishopton as an area of urban expansion. Conclusion I am opposed to the identification of Bishopton as an area for urban expansion development for the general reasons which I have described on pages 2-4 and for the more specific reasons described on pages 5 and 6 of this letter. Yours sincerely, Annabel M Goldie MSP West of Scotland Region [1] P.12., The Community Plan for Inverclyde: A Strategy For Change, June 2003. [2] P.9., Inverclyde Council: The Audit of Best Value and Community Planning: Audit Scotland, May 2005. [3] P.8., West Dunbartonshire Local Housing Strategy 2004-2009, April 2004. [4] P.8., West Dunbartonshire Local Housing Strategy 2004-2009, April 2004. [5] P.8., Inverclyde Council: The Audit of Best Value and Community Planning: Audit Scotland, May 2005. [6] P.8., Inverclyde Council: The Audit of Best Value and Community Planning: Audit Scotland, May 2005. [7] P.8., Inverclyde Council: The Audit of Best Value and Community Planning: Audit Scotland, May 2005. |