|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29th October 2003, 7.30 pm, Burngreen Hall
Those present 54 - plus four workshop facilitators
Meeting chaired by Scott Johnston, of Kilsyth Community Council
The Press and Councillor Tom Barrie (Labour) in Attendance
Receive specific comments on the application, and prioritise these views for and against
Take a vote on the proposal
Measure the community views in terms of forward planning for the area
Determine the best form of community action to take in responding to the application
Elect an action group to take the matter forward
1. Recording those present (names and addresses)
2. Welcome by chair and explanation of purpose of meeting (SJ)
3. Brief history of site and development (RK)
4. Explanation of the workshops (RK)
5. Workshops
6. Research question:
7. What is the case for and against the proposal by Wimpey Homes to build 159 houses at Cavalry Park?
Brainstorm the issues – go around the whole group in turn
List issues for and against on a large sheet of paper
Put issues in priority order (each person to place issues in order in turn)
Record a vote on whether your group is for or against the development.
Report back
6. Main Meeting – Report back by workshop groups
7. Discussion and questions
8. Seek nominations for group to take forward the campaign.
9. Agree meeting with Planning Aid on Monday evening
10. Close
THE
WORKSHOPS
|
Issue Against |
Group 1 |
Group 2 |
Group 3 |
Group4 |
|
|
Increase traffic |
ü |
ü |
ü |
üü |
5 |
|
Damage to integrity of Colzium estate and breach of deed of covenant |
üü |
üüü |
üüü |
ü |
9 |
|
Flood risk and lack of sewerage |
üüü |
ü |
ü |
üü |
7 |
|
Green belt |
ü |
üü |
üü |
|
5 |
|
Damage to wildlife and habitat – intended as bird sanctuary |
ü |
ü |
ü |
üü |
5 |
|
Increase pressure on overloaded public services – schools full |
ü |
ü |
ü |
|
3 |
|
Against Local Plan |
ü |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Set precedent |
ü |
|
|
|
1 |
|
No local need for this type of housing |
ü |
|
|
ü |
2 |
|
Waste of money spent on Colzium improvements |
ü |
ü |
|
|
2 |
|
Damage to tourism & jobs (50+) predicted in Colzium Plan (goes against consultants report) |
ü |
ü |
ü |
ü |
4 |
|
Already seen huge increase of housing in Kilsyth in past decade |
ü |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Threat to peaceful use of park for functions like Carnival |
ü |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Urban townhouse development totally out of place and too expensive – poor house designs |
|
ü |
ü |
üüü |
5 |
|
Archaeology unexplored - graves |
|
ü |
ü |
ü |
3 |
|
Should develop brownfield and town centre sites first |
|
|
ü |
ü |
2 |
|
Damage to visual amenity & noise |
ü |
|
ü |
ü |
3 |
|
Disruption will add to chaos as waterfall village is delayed – two huge sites on main road |
|
|
ü |
ü |
3 |
ISSUES FOR
|
Traffic calming |
|
|
|
ü |
1 |
|
Best use of vacant land |
|
|
|
ü |
1 |
|
Meet housing shortfall |
ü |
ü |
|
ü |
3 |
|
Minimise impact on Colzium through planting |
|
|
|
ü |
1 |
|
Attract inward investment |
|
|
|
ü |
1 |
|
Impact on local house prices |
ü |
|
|
ü |
2 |
|
No loss of historical amenity |
|
|
|
ü |
1 |
|
Formalise entrance to Kilsyth |
ü |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Positive effect on local business |
|
ü |
|
|
1 |
VOTING
|
|
Group 1 |
Group 2 |
Group 3 |
Group4 |
Total |
VOTES FOR the development |
1 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
4 |
VOTES AGAINST the development |
13 |
14 |
13 |
8 |
48 |