|
My letter of December 2005 to the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan Joint Committe is produced here for your information.
The Structure Plan Manager's response is in red, received 24 January 2006.
Mr Vincent Goodstadt
Structure Plan Manager
Glasgow & Clyde Valley Structure Plan Joint Committee
10 Killermont Street
GLASGOW
G2 3NW
Dear Sir
Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure PlanConsultative Draft, May 2005Consultation Response, December 2005I
wish to make comment on the above document with respect to considerable
comment received by me from Bishopton residents who are concerned about
the designation of Bishopton as a "Community Growth Area", formerly
"Area of Urban Expansion".You are aware of my earlier
comments described in correspondence of 20 June 2005. I thank you for
your response at that time. However, many of the concerns expressed in
my earlier correspondence remain.
Population Projections
The majority of Bishopton residents who have contacted me are sceptical of the population projection figures.Will you present your population analysis and associated independent assessment for public scrutiny?From
the Structure Plan Manager:- "The analysis behind the popoulation
assumptions of the Plan, including potential options, has been present
for public scrutiny. This was set out in the Background Report BR 1/05,
Technical Reports 9/05 (May 2005) and A/05 (October 2005) as well as a
report by Economic Forecasting Consultants, 'Regional Forecasts' who
were commisioned jointly by the Joint Committee and Scottish Enterprise
to investigate the economic basis of the 'Agenda for Sustained Growth'.
Amongst the options that have been considered are those that would
involve both lower and higher levels of rowth compared with those which
are proposed to use. The scale of growth has also been a matter which
was discussed at length at the meetings with local interest groups."It
is clear that the Structure Plan is promoting the "growth" of Bishopton
rather than development of the Royal Ordnance site (ROF) in another
non-contiguous location. I understand this is a consequence of National
Planning Policy. However, with such a significant development one would
expect due consideration of all options. I do not believe that all
options have been considered fully. This is evidenced in the Structure
Plan "consultation process".
Consultation
You
have previously advised me that consultations have been on-going since
the Structure Plan was published in 2000. This is not the public's
perception. There is a common perception that, whilst statutory
procedures may have been followed, there was no attempt to communicate
with the wider population who are generally unaware of procedural
issues associated with Structure Planning.I believe the
consultation process has been flawed. It has failed to engage with
Bishopton's residents; the very people who, it is claimed, stand to
benefit from any future ROF development.Why did the Structure Plan process not engage fully with Bishopton residents?From
the Structure Plan Manager:- "The Bishopton residents have been
consulted fully at all stages of Structure and Local Planning. Most
recently the Joint Committee has undertaken three rounds of
consultation. This has included communicating personally with all
individuals who have responded to the consultations. The current
process has ensured that local residents' views have been able to be
expressed and taken into account by the Committee."
Public Transport
It
is clear that the adjacent railway line is influential in the choice of
Bishopton for "Community Growth". I ask that you note my previous
comment (June 2005) that Bishopton is not served effectively by public
transport. Whilst residents enjoy a frequent rail service, the single
local bus service falls far below any aspirations for a robust,
integrated public transport service. If Bishopton's ROF site is
developed the situation may become intolerable.What measures may the Structure Plan invoke to ensure appropriate public transport provision in Bishopton?From
the Structure Plan Manager:- "The Structure Plan includes a range of
policies to ensure that the development of communities is properly
planned and managed. This includes the requirement for master planning,
as well as a general requirement that appropriate provision has been
made by the development for the implementation of appropriate
infrastructure including transport measures for the minimisation and
management of the future levels of traffic generated, including Green
Transport Plans. These will be matters that Renfrewshire Council will
have to address in its consideration of any proposal."It
is clear that current national transport policies encourage the use of
public transport. At present, this is simply not an option for a
considerable majority of Bishopton's residents.
ROF Site Decontamination and Remediation
The
decontamination and remediation of the ROF site is a major concern to
Bishopton's residents. The community seeks reassurances that the
regulatory framework associated with such issues will protect and
shelter residents from consequential harm.
You are aware of
the public meeting I hosted in Bishopton Community Centre on 2nd
December 2005. Regrettably, the impression given at that meeting was
that neither Renfrewshire Council nor the Scottish Environmental
Protection Agency had a clear understanding or appreciation of local
concerns and failed to convince those in attendance that they would
monitor decontamination and remediation processes effectively.
Will
the Structure Plan be amended to give residents confidence in the
statutory processes associated with decontamination and remediation of
sites such as ROF Bishopton?
From
the Structure Plan Manager:- "The Plan places a specific obligation on
the need to address health and safety issues in considering any
application. The current statutory procedures are well established and
will be required to be applied to any proposed development at
Bishopton."
Is it procedurally correct that
Bishopton be designated a Community Growth Area without reference to
the significant decontamination issues associated with site development?
From
the Structure Plan Manager:- "It is possible for a proposal in a plan
to be made without having to make explicit reference to the need for
decontamination. This however does not arise in the case of Bishopton
since the proposals for all Community Growth Areas set out in the Draft
Finalised Written Statement place an explicit requirement on the need
for the treatment of any associated derelict or contaminated land."
Service Provision
With
regard to Bishopton, there are significant capacity issues relating to
schools provision, health services, recreation / community facilities
and the road network.
Bishopton Health Centre operates from a
building that is less than 30% the expected capacity for the population
served. Clearly, continuation of this service in its present
accommodation is unsustainable in the event of the ROF development
proceeding.
School provision is a major concern. Renfrewshire
Council has not yet made any public statement on its intentions for
school provision in any new development.
Recreational and
community facilities are fundamental to creating cohesion amongst
residents of any identifiable settlement. Bishopton does not enjoy
local access to many such facilities at present. Without their
inclusion in any future development, Bishopton would not function as a
community but rather as an overburdened housing estate.
What
measures may the Structure Plan recommend and promote to ensure the
sustainability of communities affected by policies advocated in the
Plan?
From the Structure Plan
Manager:- "I note that this question relates to the question of
ensuring appropriateĀ provision is made for local services, many of
which the residents do not have access to. This matter was addressed by
the Committee in the requirements that it proposes to place upon the
master planning of the development, as set in paragraph 2.13 of the
Draft Finalised Written Statement."
Conclusion
As
in my correspondence of June 2005, I would wish to see a better balance
between the aspirations of Bishopton residents and the wider strategic
aspirations of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan.
Despite
the significant representation made from Bishopton to the Structure
Plan Team, to BAE Systems (ROF site owners) and, to a lesser extent,
Renfrewshire Council since the development plans for Bishopton were
publicised there appears to have been little change to the Structure
Plan.
The most common response to representations appears to
indicate that Bishopton residents will have an opportunity to comment
through appropriate planning processes.
What can one say to those who wish to comment right now?
The
principle of Bishopton as a Community Growth Area is not yet accepted
by the very residents who will be most affected by any development.
Will you reassure Bishopton that our views have been considered and properly analysed?
From
the Structure Plan Manager:- "As you will be aware from our previous
discussions there will be further opportunities that will be provided
to make representations on the decisions of the Joint Committee. I
understand that this question relates to the fact that the matters that
have been raised are ones which can only be addressed at a local
planning level, and not the Structure Plan, since they relate to the
detailed planning and design. The views of the residents of Bishopton
have been made available in full to the Committee and will be given
full consideration before a decision is taken."
Bishopton
residents must be confident that the Structure Plan process and any
consequential planning applications for ROF Bishopton will not lead to
the ruin of a very desirable place to live.
Will you reassure Bishopton that any Structure Plan recommendations will not be detrimental to that which we currently enjoy?
From
the Structure Plan Manager:- "The proposed alteration to the Structure
Plan provides a framework of policies for the planned redevelopment of
the largest area of derelict and vacant land in the Structure Plan
area. The required master planning of the proposed development provides
the means by which the needs of the existing as well as new households
can be planned for."
I ask that you give the above
questions and discussion your most serious consideration and look
forward to receiving your detailed response in good time.
Yours faithfully
Councillor Iain Langlands
cc. Mr R Darracott, Director of Planning & Transport, Renfrewshire Council
| 
