kilmacolm 2012

Kilmacolm – Port Glasgow Road: The Plots

Background

7.413  This small area of green belt land lies on the south west side of Port Glasgow Road at the northern edge of the village.  On the other side of the road is a long ribbon of detached and semi-detached houses. To the south east is the semi-detached house

'St Fillans' and further properties fronting the road.   The south western boundary is undefined on the ground, but beyond it is agricultural land sloping down to the former railway line which  is  now a  footpath  and cycle  track.    The short  north  western boundary is the south eastern boundary of the garden of the property 'Creggan', to the north west of which is another detached property 'Penlee' and then open countryside. The site itself slopes down from the road to the south, and a small burn traverses it running from north west to south east.  It is used for grazing.

7.414  I  understand  that  the site is divided  into  plots,  owned by the  present or previous owners of the houses on the other side of the road.  In the 1988 local plan it was shown as being in the green belt.  In 1987 an application to build a house on one of the plots was refused by the former Inverclyde District Council for reasons relating to green belt,  ribbon development  and road safety,  and a subsequent appeal  was dismissed the following  year (P/PPA/SN/95).   In the consultative draft local plan

(1998) the whole area was identified as a possible housing site, and in the 2000 local plan it is shown as housing site ho97 with a capacity of 8 houses. It is listed in Table

4.1 as change no.13 to the inner edge of the green belt boundary:

"Release of small strip of land rounding-off this settlement edge, which could accommodate 8 dwellings and, by so doing,  will  afford greater long-term protection to the sensitive landscape wedge of designated green belt running into the heart of Kilmacolm."

7.415  However, this allocation attracted 54 objections, and in  September 2003 the council  decided to remove the housing allocation and  reinstate the  site in the green belt (Draft Modification 101).  That decision attracted 3 fresh objections.

7.416  In the 1998 consultative draft local plan, a much larger area to the west, north west and south west (known as 'The Wedge') was also shown as a possible housing site, but was not shown as such in the 2000 local plan.  An objection was lodged by CALA to its non-allocation, but was subsequently withdrawn.

Objectors:       see Appendix 3

7.417  The 54 original objectors to the allocation of site ho97 feel that there is no good reason  to remove this land from the green  belt; there  is certainly no need for more  land  to  be  used  for housing.   If the  council's 'rounding-off' argument (a subjective and cosmetic excuse) is taken to its logical conclusion, every little inlet of green belt is at risk, and every settlement will become a regular circle, oval or square. This particular site is seen as part of a green isthmus reaching right into the centre of the village, and greatly enhances the rural atmosphere which Kilmacolm enjoys.  The village's special features are its stone walls and green spaces which contribute to an individual 'feel' that could so easily be lost if the balance between building and green space is adversely  altered.    The amenity  value of this green  space for  someone approaching from the north  would be lost, and  ribbon development created. The proposed allocation is contrary to local plan policies H3 & 4  and DS8 and to the council's stated intention to safeguard the green belt,  and could result in increased pressure to build on land to the west.

7.418  Other concerns include additional traffic and access dangers; loss of recreation area and access to cycle track; loss of outlook and views towards village centre; effect on tourism; risk of flooding; effect on wildlife; and building should instead take place at the former brownfield quarry on Port Glasgow Road (see below).

7.419  At the inquiry, evidence in support of the council's change of heart was given by Kilmacolm Civic  Trust, Mr D Biggart, Mr D  Chandler, & Ms M McKenzie. Kilmacolm Civic  Trust does not believe that the objection site should be removed from the green belt,  and refers to the planning appeal  in  1988 (para 7.414  above). Development on  the site would be detrimental to the present attractive and rural character of one of the main arteries into the village; the edge of the farmland is only

150m from the centre of the village, and the appearance of Port Glasgow Road would be destroyed (as has happened at Gryffe Road). The fingers of green space leading into the village centre are characteristic of Kilmacolm and should be maintained; there is no case for 'rounding-off' the settlement boundary.  If houses have to be built, consideration should instead be given to building in the large gardens of large houses. A precedent would be created re the larger site to the west, and there would be traffic implications. If any development has to take  place, this should be at the gap site further down Port Glasgow Road where the public toilet was situated.  In post-inquiry correspondence, exception was taken to the comments made by Mr Hammond re the Trust's decision taking processes. See also paras 7.358-.60 above.

7.420  Mr Biggart and Kilmacolm Community  Council are concerned that, in  his evidence to the inquiry, Mr Hammond has  made  a number of factual  errors and misrepresentations.

7.421  Mr Chandler believes  – based on his experience at the Hydro pond – that bricks and mortar are no substitutes for nature, and that in planning matters what you see is not what you get.  He fully supports the position now taken by the council re this objection  site.   SDD Circular 24/1985 appears  to be a veto against any  further development on the  edge  of  Kilmacolm,  but developers are  still prepared to try because of the high profits on offer. In recent years  much new housing  has been tacked on to the village, but it actually detracts from the village's basic appeal.  The older parts  remain  the most interesting  – for  a large  village,  Kilmacolm has  a delightful rural quality, lying in  an undulating landscape providing green vistas and perspectives which we  should not  dream of touching.   The recent SNH document

'Scotland's Future Landscapes'  highlights the detrimental cumulative effect  on  the landscape we inhabit  through small incremental changes over several years. The demand for  new housing  and infrastructure is one of the  driving forces behind this deterioration.  The  energies and skills of developers should be directed away  from green belt sites.

7.422  Ms McKenzie stresses the need to see open green land as an essential of life for present and future generations.   A short-term view is inappropriate.   Fields and woods are required to feed urban and suburban populations.  Building should instead take  place   on  brownfield  sites  within  settlements.    To build  more   houses  in Kilmacolm would  merely increase the amount of  traffic and hence pollution. As elsewhere, Inverclyde's green belt should be kept as near sacrosanct as possible and should  not be  eroded away even in  small bites  by individuals or companies whose sole desire is to  make money  from a  resource which is a  very important  part of everyone's quality of life and a commodity which belongs to all living creatures now and in the future.

7.423  The council originally proposed the  housing allocation of the objection site, not because of any strategic need  to add to the housing  land supply, but rather to rationalise the green belt boundary  (para 7.414 above).   At  the inquiry,  Mr Malone

explained that the housing land supply was not the issue but that, having been made aware of the  numerous  objections, the  council took the  view  that  the pattern  of development  here  was of   considerable  importance  to  the  rural   character  and appearance at the  entrance  to  the village, and  that  to  allow  development would detrimentally  affect the existing character and would  screen  the remainder of the green belt wedge to the south which contributed significantly to the rural atmosphere of the village.  Development would not  offer greater  protection  to  the green belt wedge  but rather  would make it  even  more  difficult to resist pressure for further development there – all of which would be to the detriment of the visual appearance of the area. It is understood that CALA has an option on 2 of the plots, which it might use as an access from the wedge to Port Glasgow Road.

7.424  There is no anomaly in the green belt boundary here. Rather it is considered unfortunate that the  2 houses to the north  west were built, because the  edge of the settlement on this side of Port Glasgow  Road  should have been the  south east boundary of the objection site.   The crucial factor is the importance of the site to the rural character of the area. It is not an 'infill' or 'gap' site suitable for development. In the local plan, the former is defined as:

"Vacant or derelict 'gap' sites  created by the removal of a building  not in active or beneficial use within the urban area, which could be a development site…"

An 'infill' site could be quite large, but here it is in the green belt. A 'gap' site would normally be small if within an urban area, with development on at least 3 sides; if a greenfield site, it would be a 'gap' if its development would lead to a better settlement boundary.  On this basis, the objection site cannot be compared with other small infill and gap brownfield sites that have been developed in Kilmacolm. Apart from the 2 houses to the north west, this part of the village remains undeveloped. There is no suggestion that allocating the objection site would necessarily lead to further ribbon development beyond the 2 houses to the north west.

7.425  Mr Hammond believes that the council's planning officials must have known what they were doing when they originally prepared the local plan with the objection site shown as a housing opportunity for 8 dwellings. It is clearly a 'gap' between 2 groups of houses built on similar amenity feus.  Its development would not constitute a continuation of ribbon development, as the 2 houses to the north west already exist. Rather it would constitute a rounding-off of the edge of the settlement, which is one reason for altering a green belt boundary. This is one  of the last gap sites left in Kilmacolm  and should never  have  been  in  the green  belt in the first place.  Its development would, however, be noticed by people on the cycle track to the west and south west.

7.426  The  council appears to have been influenced by the fact that there were 54 objections to the site's residential allocation, but 16 of these are invalid and irrelevant as they are from people supporting the allocation of a nearby site at the former quarry. More importantly, of the 10 houses opposite the site which would be most affected by the potential loss of  view, the occupiers of only  5 have objected.   Only 29% of residents in Port Glasgow Road have objected, and some of these seem to think that the whole wedge is to go for housing. He also disputes the validity of the objection made by the Kilmacolm Civic Trust, which objects to almost anything, and believes that  many of the other objectors have no direct  interest. He thinks  that  the large number of objections was brought about by local lobbying.  It is unacceptable for some objectors to claim that there is enough building in the village as soon as their personal needs have been satisfied.    SNH accepts the alteration to the green  belt boundary here.

7.427  If 8 houses were built, the council would receive more than £20,000 in council tax for  minimal outlay. This income  could go a long way towards funding the running costs  of the Community Centre, thus increasing  the amenity and  economic development of Kilmacolm.

7.428  CALA (which has concluded missives with all owners of the individual plots) points out in a written submission that, although the council claimed that no changes to green  belt  boundaries  were required on   the grounds  of   strategic  housing requirements, it nonetheless took the opportunity to amend the boundary of the inner

edge at 15 locations – 2 of which were in Kilmacolm. In relation to those 2 sites, the reasoning was to make the boundary more permanent for the longer-term and to the fact  that  they  were  appropriate in order  to  help  maintain a  limited number of development opportunities of under 10 houses (within the threshold of structure plan schedule 9) to assist with some change and mobility within the local housing market. However, the council has now decided to retain  the objection site in the green belt, against  the advice of its  planning  officers  and without  any proper explanation. Presumably those officers remain of the  view that the site "involves  least servicing costs and minimum impact on agriculture, nature conservation and landscape setting", that it does not breach any of the 3 main purposes upon which green belts have been established (SDD Circular 24/1985), and that its development for local reasons would not impinge adversely on the 'sensitive wedge' shown in fig.3.6 of the local plan.

7.429  From its responses to other objections (including some to the non-allocation of the nearby  former quarry), it can also be  assumed that the  council was originally satisfied   that  the  objection   site  does not  present a  strong  landscape  edge  to Kilmacolm, that its allocation would  not lead to ribbon development, that it  would help to define for the long-term a secure and defensible green belt boundary, that it is little  different from other  small infill and  gap  sites that have been developed  in Kilmacolm in recent years, that no adverse precedent would be set, that development limits would be set consistent with what is already there in terms of built form, and that  its development  would not  constitute  a major  or  environmentally damaging encroachment into the countryside.

7.430  The  structure plan key diagram  offers considerable scope to local plans in fulfilling the strategic policy requirement re green belts. One of the stated purposes of the green belt in the structure plan is to support the development of the green network, which includes the former railway line to the west of the objection site.  Clearly the council did not originally think that there would be any adverse effect on this feature. In terms of strategic policy 6, land has to be allocated to provide choice in terms of size and type of housing for each  HMA and the needs for  social  rented  housing identified in local plans.  As this was one of the express aims of the green belt review carried out by the council, it is perfectly in order for the local plan to make necessary adjustments to the green belt boundary to ensure compliance.

7.431  Mr Reid of 4 Lodge Park notes in a written submission that the council has provided no justification for its decision to retain the site in the green belt. If there is no  strategic requirement for housing land to be released in Kilmacolm,  he wonders why the council is proposing that 40 houses be built in the green belt at the former Balrossie School.

7.432  The entrance to Kilmacolm from the north west is currently characterised by ribbon development  along Port Glasgow Road.  There is a  substantial green wedge which runs between the houses on  the south side of the road and the  cycle  track. While  development of that wedge would be likely to be detrimental to the visual appearance of the entrance to the village, the same does not apply to the objection site, which comprises a number of undeveloped building plots and is clearly an infill site within  the confines of the  village.    Well designed housing  often enhances the entrances to villages, e.g. the large house to the south of Houston Road which, while being in a  particularly  dominant location, has  not been detrimental  to the visual appearance of the southern entrance to the village.

7.433  The council's argument that the allocation of the objection site would make it more difficult to resist development pressure on the land to the west lacks any form of justification.   The south  western boundary of the  objection site joins  the line of  the rear gardens  of the properties on either side and is therefore a natural  boundary. There is no relationship between the objection site and land to the west.  In relation to his attempt to obtain planning permission for a house on one of the plots in the 1980s, he points out that the planning committee of the former council was misled as to its precise location, and that the decision to refuse permission was only reached after some councillors had been swayed by comments made by the local councillor.   That same councillor was responsible for so many objections being made to the local plan.

Conclusions

7.434  I should say first that  my consideration of the various objections here is not influenced by various  allegations made re discrepancies  in  the minutes  of  the Kilmacolm  Civic Trust,  the hypocrisy of some objectors, or the involvement  of the local councillor. I am merely considering the planning aspects, although I believe that several of the original objections have to be seen in the context of their main agenda: support for a proposal to release a nearby site for housing.  Nor am I influenced by the fact that the plots  are so called because they were originally envisaged  as  building plots; that was before  the introduction of the Town & Country  Planning legislation after the second world war.

7.435  Although 8 houses were  originally  proposed, I agree with  almost  all parties that the determining issue here does not relate to any alleged 'need' for more houses in Kilmacolm.  I appreciate the point raised by CALA re the question of choice but, for the avoidance of doubt, I do not consider that this would be  a good site for the building of affordable houses. In relation to Kilmacolm as a whole, I refer to paras 7.158-.159 above.

7.436  It is not possible to be certain that this site lies within the structure plan's Green  Belt  Structural  Corridor  between Kilmacolm  and Port Glasgow, but  it  is reasonably clear that it  forms part of the northern  'sensitive wedge' illustrated in fig.3.6 of the local plan.  I accept that it forms a 'gap' between the 2 detached houses to the north west and the row of semi-detached houses to the south east, but I believe that it is sufficiently  large a 'gap' and obviously part of the  countryside  to  make it difficult to apply the general presumption in favour of developing 'gap sites' that are normally smaller and within built-up areas.  Looking at a 2-dimensional map, I can understand why infilling this 'gap' may appear logical in the sense of 'rounding-off' development on the south west side of Port Glasgow Road; however, this is much less obvious on the ground, where my site inspections have confirmed what many of the objectors have claimed re the importance of south westerly views over the site and the agricultural  land  beyond in terms  of  the rural  character of the  northern  part  of Kilmacolm for local residents and particularly for people entering the village from the north west.  Although written 16 years ago, the words of the Reporter re a proposal for one house also seem to me to be still applicable:

"Despite the existence  of the  2 outlying houses to the north, this large gap provides a pleasant view  across  the lower ground to  the west…   I therefore conclude that there would be an adverse effect on local amenity  and on the character of this part of the green belt… the overall result would be a line of about 8 new houses filling the gap in the road frontage, with agricultural land to the rear.  These houses would link with those existing to form an extended ribbon development. The pleasant open character of this part of Port Glasgow Road would be lost."

7.437  To my mind, it is the 2 detached houses to the  north west that provide the anomaly, not the objection site. Moreover, I also agree with several of the objectors that 'rounding-off' is not necessarily appropriate for Kilmacolm and particularly not for this part of it.  It is entirely possible that  the houses that would be built here – particularly if by CALA –  would be of high visual quality, but  that  would not overcome the loss of the rural aspect that is such a feature here.

Recommendation

7.438  Draft Modification 101 should be made.

The Plots(top of page)