Posted 22nd June 2016
There are basically two government appointed people (the role is called a Reporter) coming to a conclusion on whether the land should be sold for housing or saved. We’ve been informed today that the first one has concluded that the land should NOT be sold for housing. We’ve waited a very long time for this and it’s a great result! So well done all that have been campaigning and helping the land over the years. Some background on this decision: Glasgow City Council proposed a new City Development Plan (which all planning applications refer to) back in 2012, and loads of us objected to them labeling the land for housing. The Scottish Government appointed a Reporter to decide on those areas the public wanted something very different from the Council. Today the Reporter sided with you the people
Ok lets get some context on this. Yesterday the second Reporter that’s been appointed said they would be having a public hearing and we will be heard at that in due course. That is to determine the planning application from New City Vision Ltd. The decision today is based what the land should be labeled as in the forthcoming City Development Plan. In short you’d expect both Reporters to come to the same conclusion, as they both will be looking at the same facts. But ofcourse lets not count our chickens just yet! We and others will be making as strong a case as ever at the forthcoming hearing. If you’d like to get involved with any aspect of managing the land or the campaign then do email in and let us know, we still need all the help we can get. But this goes down as a great landmark day!
Overall conclusions (copied from Government document and available on Council website)
I recognise that the development of this site for housing would make a contribution towards meeting the shortfall in the provision of land for new housing in the City, which we have identified as a deficiency in the Proposed Plan in Issue 17. However, the land at Clouston Street is a highly valued open space which is well used and maintained by the local community, and which should continue to be safeguarded for that purpose. Its development for housing would be in conflict with planning policies which seek to protect such areas. I have therefore decided to modify the Proposed Plan by deleting Housing Proposal H023.
Since the Proposed Plan does not designate open spaces I am unable to formally designate the site as an open space. It will be a matter for the council to reflect the outcome of this examination in its review of its Open Space Map, and in its Open Space Strategy (see Issue 6).
Modify the Proposed Plan by deleting Housing Proposal H023.