Five minutes to take on developers
I take an interest in reports of development and planning matters so your articles on the subject in the Observer ( August 8, 2018) attracted my attention, particularly the one on the start of construction of the crematorium at Bannockburn.
I am however interested in the reaction of other communities when they find out that some developer or other has designs on their area.
I note, unsurprisingly, that the prospect of a retirement village between Causewayhead and Blairlogie has the natives in a flap.
Similarly the intentions of Graham’s The Family Dairy to take their rejected plans to the Court of Session has irked the residents of Bridge of Allan.
Stirling North councillor Danny Gibson thought it regrettable that they did not give in gracefully and garner the goodwill of the locals. He adopted a similar stance when advising prospective developers not to appeal their rejected application at the Orchard House site.
What councillor Gibson seems not to understand is that corporate financial interests will exploit to the limit and pursue their legitimate rights within the laws and regulations that apply to them. Graham’s have that right to appeal and will pursue it till they win or are knocked out; goodwill be hanged.
Regarding the crematorium application, I gave a presentation to the planning hearing on behalf of the community but we did not consider that satisfactory.
There were some fundamental issues, such as the roads, that the community at large agreed with but there were issues that were particular to different community groups.
We were allocated five minutes in total to present our case in a hearing that lasted more than two and a half hours. It was sensible for one presentation to encapsulate all the issues.
In preparation for a planning application, developers will employ agents to represent them and specialist consultants to provide reports running into thousands of words.
They engage with planning officials, road departments, archaeologists, environmentalists, organisations such as SEPA and many more. That is what our five-minute presentation was up against ; we were supported by three out of four Bannockburn councillors, two of whom jargon reply.
We will now be regular cinema goers to the uni. Big mistake Vue.
Callum Christison Stirling
were on the planning panel. Margaret Brisley, who wasn’t on the panel, exercised her right as a constituency councillor to speak. Bannockburn Community Council were also opposed to the application. On the rare occasions that developers don’t win at the hearing, as Graham’s have shown, they have the right of appeal right up to the courts. Communities or individuals have no right of appeal. Councillor Gibson and other politicians would better serve their communities by ensuring that they have the right to fairness when engaged in planning disputes. Goodwill is meaningless in such circumstances.
John Fowler Benview Bannockburn