Residents say new housing could destroy communities
RESIDENTS of Glenshellach in Oban have blasted comments by a leading rural housing advocate saying ‘social problems’ will increase unless the current scheme behind the hospital stops until a masterplan is developed.
In last week’s Oban Times, residents of Glenshellach were told by former councillor Drew MacFarlane Slack they should be ‘expressing thanks’ rather than complaining about housing developments in the area.
Matters have now come to boiling point after an application for blocks of flats was lodged in mid-August with Argyll and Bute Council.
To date 55 letters have been received by the council’s planning department, 53 of which are against the application.
A pro-forma letter used by the majority of complainants states that they believe the number of units on the site has more than doubled.
Complainants wrote: ‘This development is the wrong development on the wrong site.’
They cite a number of reasons, including a conflict with the local development plan (LDP), the scale of the development – the flats are eight metres higher than existing flats – and inadequate private and public open space.
Residents say they have been guaranteed a masterplan for the area by councillors. But a council press officer said that, while there is an LDP, he had no knowledge of a masterplan. The spokesman said it was the developer’s responsibility to put together a masterplan.
A spokesman for Glenshellach Residents Group (GRG) said: ‘Proposing three-storey flats at this site is completely inappropriate. The visual impacts of this scale of development in this location would be jarring and be visible from Nant Drive, Soroba and the railway.
‘Over- development and high density can lead to undesirable outcomes. There is no shortage of development land in the Oban area, therefore no need for high- density development. The development at Catalina Avenue was originally allocated 50 units but this was increased to 90 units through the 2015 local development plan.’
The GRG spokesman believed the application with the council would mean there are 102 units – 12 more than the allocation in the LDP.
‘To grant a near doubling of the unit numbers changing the site from medium to high density and then allowing further increases is ludicrous’, he said. ‘The result is that long- established traditional communities will disintegrate and social problems escalate. If everybody only took the LDP as an indication rather than a rule then it would be a free for all.’
Jane MacLeod on behalf of the developer, MacLeod Construction, said: ‘The LDP contains policies that are intended to guide development.
‘The council is obliged to consider any planning application that is made against all of the planning policies and guidance within the plan and against any other material planning considerations. The LDP is a guide, not a tablet of stone. As far as we are aware the development plan does not require a masterplan for the current application.
‘Eleven units, which is the indicative capacity set out in the LDP, is an under-utilisation of land as the site can comfortably accommodate a higher density development that meets all other council policy requirements and helps to deliver much needed affordable housing.
‘At a time when the population of Argyll and Bute is falling and there is an impetus to drive forward economic development, it is important to create jobs and to train and retain our young people, as well as attracting people to live here.’
A spokesman for Argyll and Bute Council said: ‘There are two applications currently being considered for this area, neither of which require a masterplan.
‘ We are hoping that a masterplan to guide the wider development of the area will come forward in due course.’
Councillor Roddy McCuish said: ‘I met the local community and assured them that we expect a masterplan to be submitted.’