Press release

MILTON OF CAMPSIE GREENBELT PRESERVATION PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE PUBLICATION The MOC Greenbelt Preservation Group Steering Committee met newly elected MP Stuart McDonald on Friday morning, 15 May 2015 to discuss the overwhelming local opposition to Bellway’s initial plans to build 80 houses on the greenbelt at the northern part of Redmoss Farm. This was Stuart’s first official constituency meeting since being elected last Thursday. At the meeting it was revealed that Bellway have been in further discussion with the Council, outwith the current consultation process, to reinstate and extend the original plan to build 220 houses on the southern part of the site. It was decided to hold a drop in session to assist people to submit representations to the Council. The session will be held in the Village Hall this Tuesday night, 19 May 2015, from 7.00pm to 9.00pm. Stuart McDonald said: "I know there is strong opposition in the village to the proposals for housing on Redmoss Farm, but also disquiet about the difficulties in submitting consultation responses to the council. That's why the idea of holding a drop-in workshop to help local people complete response forms and make their views known is very welcome indeed, and I'd encourage as many residents as possible to head along on Tuesday night to get involved." MOC Greenbelt Preservation Secretary, Alan Harris said: “ It is vital that as many people as possible submit representations to the Council before the deadline at 5.00pm on WEDNESDAY 27 MAY 2015 as this may be the last chance to prevent building on Redmoss Greenbelt. Anyone who wishes further information or who cannot attend the meeting can contact me by email on secretary@mocgreenbelt.org ENDS For further information contact: Alan Harris: secretary@mocgreenbelt.org

Updated links

NB. Paper forms are available from the Council or in the Library and can be submitted by post

These are the new links: Emailing Microsoft Word form: If you are going to submit multiple responses then this is the easiest method. When completed, please attach the form(s) to an email and send to ldp@eastdunbarton.gov.uk. Representation Form (doc) (76Kb) Representation Form (rtf) (1.50Mb) Paper Forms: are also available and can be posted to: Land Planning Policy, Development and Regeneration, Southbank House, Strathkelvin Place, Kirkintilloch G66 1XQ. Representation Form (pdf) (380Kb) Online Survey: if you do not have access to Microsoft Word or do not wish to use a paper form, an online version of the form can be completed and automatically submitted via our Survey Monkey facility. Survey Monkey Representation Representations will be processed by East Dunbartonshire Council in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998. The data you provide will be used for the purpose of the consultation. The comments you provide will be made available online as part of this consultation although no personal detail will be published. Completed representations must be received by 5pm on Wednesday 27 May 2015. Submissions received after this date will not be accepted.

We recommend that you concentrate on one or two of the material considerations set out in the document prepared by a local expert that you received with the Community Council Newsletter earlier this month e.g. the planning history of the site – the same Application (for the whole site) was rejected by the Reporter in 2011, since which time nothing has changed except that the South area has now been dropped and it is proposed to build 80 rather than 50 houses on the North area. the proposed development would have a negative impact on the character, functions and amenity of the village. the proposed development does not satisfy the criteria for sustainable urban development – it is not within 400 metres of public transport so would encourage the use of private cars. it does nothing to support regeneration – there are numerous brownfield with Milton of Campsie sites that could accommodate a total of 80 affordable houses e.g. Lillyburn and West Baldoran Farm, and nearby at Broomhill Hospital and Tom Johnston House. protecting the greenbelt – there is a long established defensible boundary behind the existing houses in Elizabeth Ave and Laburnum Drive and intrusion into the greenbelt would set a dangerous precedent. the environmental impact – see new document attached (written by the same local expert). This was issued with the original email two weeks ago but omitted last night, a further copy is attached. the inadequacy of the service infrastructure to accommodate new development including access to the site presumably at Marley Way, increased traffic on Redmoss Road etc, water pressure issues and so on. risk of flooding from unsustainable development The above list is not exhaustive. Please also remember to complete the final section of the form where you are asked HOW THE PROPOSED PLAN SHOULD BE MODIFIED. This is where you need to say something like The proposal to build any houses on Redmoss Farm in Milton of Campise should be removed from the LDP. Alan Harris

FURTHER COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSAL TO BUILD 80 HOUSES ON THE NORTH REDMOSS FARM SITE First, the proposal infringes 8 of the 10 principal planning policies (specifically policies 2 – 9). Second, the history of the site is of significance. As you are aware, this is the latest in a series of development applications submitted over the course of four decades since the land was withdrawn from agriculture. These have all been refused by the Council or by the Reporter on appeal by the developer/landowner. It is evident that judged even on the Council’s own criteria for sustainable development the Redmoss Grasslands site is not– and has never been - a sustainable development location. Indeed even this Council would not have identified the area for development had Bellway not played the ‘affordable housing’ card. Third, in terms of Policy 8, much of the Council case for their withdrawal of the southern site and focus on the northern site is based on their site assessment. (This was undertaken on one day in November, and in a recent meeting I had with the ‘LDP team leader’ it was clear to me that they are not 100% confident in the strength of this report and indeed suggested they would have to undertake further studies – but this would probably be after permission was granted!). The site assessment supporting document may appear to be a clear ‘expert’ justification of the Council’s decision.. However, in my view the site assessment in November 2014 identifies little difference in ecological value between the two Redmoss sites. While the southern site contains potentially more meadow flowers, the northern site has more wildlife including protected bats, badgers, roe deer, pheasants, buzzards, badgers, newts, hedgehogs, and toads; is part of a LNCS; an important wildlife corridor; is subject to TPOs; and is close to the Glazert river with its otters and water voles. The distinction between the 2 sites is qualitative with each having particular fauna and flora attributes that collectively make up the valued landscape and environment of Redmoss Grasslands. The surveyor’s conclusion that any development should be on the northern site - ( a) ignores the complementarity of the 2 sites and the integrity of the whole area; and (b) is clearly influenced by the presumption of development inherent in the Council’s designation of Redmoss as a ‘preferred development location’.

How to get involved in current consultation

Details of the Consultation process can be viewed by going to the section headed:

Current consultation activity

on the Council web site or copying and pasting this link into your browser:

http://www.eastdunbarton.gov.uk/content/council_and_government/consultations,_complaints_and/consultation_and_engagement/current_consultation_activity/proposed_local_development_pla.aspx

If you scroll down the page you will find a section headed:

Public Consultation - How to Respond

where you will see this Representation Form link to the form which the Council continue to insist is used for representations. This despite the fact that they are unable to show that there is any Law or Government Regulation which stipulates that a person has to use their Response Form rather than simply writing a letter. When I phoned the Council they told me that whilst electronic submission is their preferred method of representation, it is not essential and I was told that letters would be accepted; but they have now gone back on this.

I have continued to pursue this aspect with the Council on behalf of those who are not on the internet or unfamiliar with the technology required to download and subsequently submit the form by email.

The Council say that anyone who has difficulty downloading the form can " contact the Council by telephone to discuss receiving a paper form".

The Council also say that "The notification letter/email did not state that electronic forms must be submitted "; and that "written representations will be accepted where individuals cannot submit them electronically but the representation form must be used."; which suggests that a person can submit the form other than electronically. This is a direct contradiction to the INSTRUCTIONS which clearly state that the form has to be downloaded and the form " must be submitted by email or via an online survey monkey" i.e. electronically. " Representations submitted by any other means will not be accepted. "

Therefore we now have the ridiculous situation where someone who is not on the internet or unfamiliar with the technology required to download and subsequently "add (the document) to an email" (by which I think they mean attach or insert) then phones the Council and receives the form but:

1. There is insufficient space on the form for more than say 50 words; whereas you are allowed to write 2,000 words per form per issue; and

2. It is not clear how such a person should submit the form since one assumes that a person who cannot download the form will be equally unable to scan it to submit by email and "representations submitted by any other means (e.g. by mail or simply handing into the Council Offices) will not be accepted".

In addition the Council say that " Multiple forms can be submitted by individuals or households in one email. If using the survey monkey multiple forms can be sent per IP address."; which appears to confirm the concern that different individuals within the same household cannot send their own representations by email using the same IP address.

The above represents the position as at 4.50pm on 21st April.

If you are concerned or simply confused you may obtain more information if you attend the surgery but I will update you as soon as I have more information.

Please feel free to forward this email to any concerned citizen and ask them to email me so that I have their address for future reference.