DCSIMG

Widespread opposition for Waterfoot plan

editorial image

editorial image

 

The battle to retain greenbelt land in Waterfoot continues, as a west of Scotland MSP reports overwhelming opposition to a proposal for a major housing scheme.

As reported in The Extra, Gladman Development Ltd has submitted a Proposal of Application Notice (PAN) for a 46 acre residential scheme to the west of Glasgow Road — designated in the council’s proposed Local Development Plan as greenbelt.

MSP Jackson Carlaw had recently sent out a survey to residents, and received a 52.04 per cent response — with only one in support of the proposal.

He told The Extra: “What we have is an unsolicited and unnecessary application which is outwith the local plan.

“That plan makes provision for thousands of additional houses in East Renfrewshire to meet potential demand, but it certainly doesn’t include greenbelt in Waterfoot.

“It undermines the whole concept of villages in East Renfrewshire, of which there are only Uplawmoor, Eaglesham and Waterfoot left.”

The MSP is now hand-delivering letters after complaints that not all households received them, and the survey is available at www.jacksoncarlawmsp.com.

Residents have joined together as Waterfoot Action in opposition to Gladman’s proposal, and spokesman John McCourt said: “The vast majority of people are against the development and we’ll continue to fight for what we feel is the heart and soul of our community.

“That beautiful piece of land is what Waterfoot is about, and we want to preserve it. We want people to know that it isn’t about NIMBYism, and isn’t about spoiling our view — the plan will have a huge impact on schools, roads and infrastructure.

“There are some big questions which we think need to be answered.”

East Renfrewshire council’s Local Development Plan is now being examined by the Scottish government reporter.

In a recent letter to The Extra, ERC chief executive Lorraine McMillan said: “During this process the council will continue to defend the position that this site should be retained in the greenbelt.”

 

Comments

 
 

Back to the top of the page