Thumbs-up for homes

Nine ob­jec­tions lodged

Hamilton Advertiser - - NEIGHBOURHOOD NEWS - Alas­tair Mc­neill

Con­tro­ver­sial plans for 42 homes in Fern­ie­gair were ap­proved by coun­cil­lors this week.

Ap­pli­cant Clyde Val­ley Hous­ing As­so­ci­a­tion/wil­son De­vel­op­ments wish to build 25 flats and 16 ter­raced houses on a 0.9 hectare site on the vil­lage’s Carlisle Road.

The scheme was de­scribed by of­fi­cials as a “small de­vel­op­ment of twobed­room flats and three­bed­room ter­raced houses which are con­sid­ered as af­ford­able homes.”

Nine ob­jec­tions to the pro­posal were lodged with plan­ners. One de­scribed Fern­ie­gair as ‘over­crowded’ with ‘in­suf­fi­cient ameni­ties.’ It also pointed out that there was no shop, nurs­ery or school and the plans would cre­ate ‘ab­so­lute dis­rup­tion to the com­mu­nity.’

But South La­nark­shire Coun­cil plan­ning chief Michael Mcg­lynn stressed that the site was part of a larger hous­ing plan within the Fern­ie­gair Com­mu­nity Growth Area. As a re­sult ex­ist­ing in­fra­struc­ture, he said, had been as­sessed and de­vel­oper con­tri­bu­tions re­quested for all pri­vate houses built in the area. He added: “This will con­trib­ute to ad­di­tional com­mu­nity and ed­u­ca­tional fa­cil­i­ties and road up­grades.”

Other ob­jec­tions re­ceived in­cluded loss of wildlife, road safety and traf­fic lev­els, hous­ing den­sity and loss of pri­vacy for ex­ist­ing res­i­dents.

How­ever, Mr Mcg­lynn stated that the ap­pli­cant would be re­quired to sub­mit a habi­tat sur­vey as a con­di­tion of plan­ning con­sent and im­ple­ment any rec­om­men­da­tions.

He also said that no ac­cess or road safety is­sues had been raised by the au­thor­ity’s Roads and Trans­porta­tion Ser­vices, and En­vi­ron­men­tal Ser­vices had made no ad­verse com­ments about noise.

Com­ment­ing on hous­ing den­sity and pri­vacy, he pointed out: “The pro­posed build­ings are po­si­tioned [in such a way] that they com­ply with the min­i­mum 20 me­tres dis­tance re­quired be­tween di­rectly fac­ing hab­it­able win­dows which en­sures that there will be no ad­verse im­pact to those prop­er­ties in terms of over­shad­ow­ing or loss of pri­vacy.

“The pro­posed lay­out com­plies with the guid­ance con­tained within the coun­cil’s res­i­den­tial de­sign guide.

“It is con­sid­ered that the pro­posal does not rep­re­sent over-de­vel­op­ment of the site and is in keep­ing with de­vel­op­ment in the sur­round­ing area.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.