Sheephill above the village of Bowling and Dumbuck Quarry at Milton with the cup and ring markings going back to Roman times. Planners say quarry is not dangerous.
By Bill Heaney
The A82 Glasgow to Loch Lomondside road was recently dubbed by the BBC Panorama programme as the most dangerous in the United Kingdom.
It must also be in the top ten of the dirtiest roads in Britain given the filth and dust that pours down the hillsides on to the Boulevard at the Sheephill Quarry in the Old Kilpatrick Hills overlooking the West Dunbartonshire villages of Milton and Bowling.
But who cares if the mud and surface water makes the road a danger to the public and forces local motorists driving past Dumbuck to have to wash their cars when they get home?
Certainly not the SNP/Green Scottish Government who have just overturned a decision by West Dunbartonshire Council for further development of the quarry, where local people have been complaining for many years about blasting, rocks rolling down the hill and the state of the roads near motor racing hero Jackie Stewart’s old garage at Dumbuck.
Councillors have been told that a Reporter to the Government has decided to overturn their decisions to close the gates of the quarry at Dunglass Roundabout for a final time.
Council lawyer Peter Hessett said: “The Committee will recall that the above application was refused by the
Council in March 2021. Shortly after, the appellant appealed the decision to the Planning and Environmental Appeals Division.
“The Council has been notified of a ‘Notice of Intention’ that the Reporter is minded to allow the appeal and grant planning permission subject to 39 conditions and following the signing and registering or recording of a planning obligation under section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 or some suitable alternative arrangement, securing a bond sufficient to cover the expected restoration and aftercare works for the quarry extension.”
Now that sounds complicated – and it is – but that’s what the red tape brigade who prepare these reports are paid for.
Mr Hessett said: ” The Reporter has given the appellant and the Council up to a 12 week period to conclude the planning obligation. The principal of such a bond had been previously agreed between the appellant, William Thompson and Son of Broadmeadow in Dumbarton, and Council officers and it is necessary to ensure that the quarry extension site is restored after it has been worked.
“If, by the end of the 12 week period, the relevant obligation has not been registered or recorded the Reporter will consider whether planning permission should be refused or granted without a planning obligation.”
The Government Reporter suggests all this is much ado about virtually nothing – “in reaching the decision on balance found that the proposal was in accordance with the development plan.”
Mr Hesset added: “There is some tension with policy GB1 Green Belt. The only significant environmental effects are the visual effects of the extension from some locations, including cumulative effects with the extraction of the remainder of the quarry. However the Reporter concluded that these did not give rise to
significant conflict with the development plan.
“In respect of the other main issues it was concluded that there would be no other significant environmental effects and no conflict with the development plan.
“The updated noise assessment was not found to be inconsistent with[previous] advice and subject to the proposed noise conditions which sets noise limits, significant adverse noise effects are unlikely. In terms
of blasting/vibration there are a number of proposed conditions which would control blasting in the extension area identical to those now imposed in the permission.
“There is no technical evidence before the Reporter which indicates that blasting from the extension area would cause vibration at problematic levels for any nearby properties. A similar conclusion was reached on dust deposition and relevant conditions would aim to ensure the extension area is operated so as to minimise the release of dust. In terms of the effects on core path users it was acknowledged there might be increased levels of noise and dust for path users in the vicinity of the proposed extension but this would only be for a fairly short stretch of path and unlikely to be a significant deterrent to users of the path.”
There will uproar amongst locals at the finding which states “the low ecological value of the site means that there are no significant effects on biodiversity. Other matters identified by objectors were not considered to have a significant effect.
“It was concluded by the Reporter that the proposed development accords with the relevant provisions of the development plan and that there are no material considerations which justify refusing to grant planning permission. The Reporter considered that the reasoned conclusions on the significant environmental effects of the proposed development are up to date.
“For the most part, the Reporter has imposed the conditions proposed by the Council and only made slight amendments … the Reporter has removed conditions relating to the main quarry road and to wheel washing of vehicles leaving the quarry and removed the first condition that the proposed development commence with two years as he does not believe that they are necessary for the appeal development.”
The Council lodged representations to Historic Environment Scotland to the application for Scheduled Monument Consent for removal of Sheephill Fort.
Historic Environment Scotland on 21st November were minded to grant Scheduled Monument Consent for quarrying operations which affect the Scheduled Monument subject to a number of conditions regarding the excavation, recording and publishing of findings regarding the Sheephill Fort.
The application is presently awaiting a decision from the Scottish Ministers who have extended the time period for consideration.