JACKTON & THORNTONHALL

COMMUNITY COUNCIL [COMCIL]

An Informal Meeting

Thursday 01 March 2001, 8.15 PM

Malcolm Reid         (Secretary COMCIL)

Fiona McCrae        (COMCIL)

Michael West        (Treasurer Designate COMCIL)  

Doreen Sweeney    (COMCIL)

George Gibson        (Resident) 

2. Councillor McCann explained that he had been absent from recent special meetings of COMCIL and residents, which had been called to discuss aspects of EKLAP affecting Thorntonhall and Jackton. This was to allow residents to discuss and decide on their arguments, so that he could then consider them and decide on the extent to which he could add his representation on behalf of his constituents to SLC. He would consult with Cllr Scott and report back to Malcolm Reid.

3. Malcolm Reid summarised the current position, which was that following the strong consensus opinion at recent meetings, a planning consultant had been engaged and was due to attend a progress meeting of COMCIL and residents on 7th March. Meanwhile residents were being encouraged to express their views on the SLC Representation Form, to be submitted to SLC by 19th March.

Six members of the COMCIL have been invited to attend a meeting on Thursday 8th March at the Civic Centre for a presentation and question and answer session regarding the EKLAP. As Chairman of the Association of Community Councils, Malcolm Reid had asked which other COMCILS had been invited to attend the meeting, and was told that only Jackton & Thorntonhall COMCIL had been invited, and that Cllrs Scott and Thompson and senior planners would be present.

4. Fiona McCrae mentioned the visit by Andy Kerr MSP on 22@d January to see the site of the proposed development and he was following up the circumstances of the consultation between SLC/COMCILs in drawing up EKLAP.

5. George Gibson re-iterated that the consultations on draft EKLAP in 1999 took place while community councils were disbanded during boundary changes, and Jackton and Thorntonhall were not invited. (Note that Jackton & Thorntonhall Community Council was scheduled to be permanently disbanded and its area merged with others, and the Community Council only survived by submitting applications by a sufficient number of residents).

Furthermore the proposals for the Thorntonhall development did not come forward until late 2000, when the SLC land therein was declared surplus to operational requirements and recommended for sale for housing development. Cllr McCann was requested to enquire whether documents or seminar decisions on EKLAP existed to show when and why this infringement of greenbelt was approved.

6. Cllr McCann suggested that discussion of past consultations was not being productive, and it was agreed that COMCIL clarify to him the grounds upon which objection was being made to the development.

Cllr McCann referred to the large coloured map enclosed with the " finalised draft" of EKLAP and suggested that the shaded area of Thorntonhall would "square off' the boundary of greenbelt. He suggested that the argument that this infringement would create a precedent - "the thin edge of the wedge" - was a weak and emotive one.

Several residents pointed out that the shaded area covered the relatively compact core of the village, plus the proposed new development which comprised an extension to the north. The shaded area did not include the long-established houses along Peel Road and Waterfoot Road south of the railway, nor the extensions of Braehead Road and Thornton Road.

The "squaring off' to the north is in reality creating a new greenbelt/ village boundary by joining up a few widely separated, outlying houses. If this basis for infringement of class 3.2 agricultural land in the greenbelt is accepted, it may be used as grounds for absorbing substantial further areas to the east, south and south-west, thus completely destroying the character and outlook of the area, The fear among the residents of such a precedent is thus very real.

7. Cllr McCann asked for a summary of the grounds on which objections were made, so that he could decide the extent to which he could support the objections. These grounds were briefly summarised as:

- The housing development would cover prime-class 3.2 agricultural land (as defined by the McCauley Register) within one of the three most sensitive greenbelt areas of SLC.

- The conditions for re-designating greenbelt for housing as laid down in "SLP 1 Housing" policy had not been fulfilled.

- With average plot area of 0.1ha, the development would not be in keeping with existing housing. It would not be sustainable, lacking amenities, access roads through the village, or access to an adequate sewage disposal system. The character and outlook of the village would be substantially changed.

- The policies of SLC for housing, greenbelt and environment, and National Scottish Executive guidelines are not being complied with: (Ref : NPP G 3 ; SLP1 ; STRAT 1 and 2. ENY 1, 2 and 6 RES 5 LR2 and 3).

- The late addition of the proposed development to the EKLAP and the financial terms, whereby: an area of SLC land would be sold to a developer (for £1.4m), who would then be granted planning permission to build on this and 3.8 ha of adjacent farmland - all presently greenbelt: and whereby SLC would receive half the excess in house price over £375,000; all suggest that the project is financially driven, rather than being based on sound planning policies, or on the stated priorities of SLC - low-cost affordable housing, schools, road improvements.

8. Malcolm Reid explained that the objection to the development at Jackton, due to take place later (2003-2006) was on different grounds, although many of the comments on changing the character of the village would equally apply, while sustainability was of equal importance.

9. Malcolm Reid thanked Cllr McCann for his visit and the exchange of views, and his offer to take the residents views into consideration in future contacts with SLC planners.