The old OLSP being demolished and Brucehill, Clerkhill and Cardross Road in the West End.
By Bill Heaney
Given that you live in the West End of Dumbarton and you think the traffic on the main road to Cardross and Helensburgh is a nightmare as it surely is at the moment, well you ain’t seen nothing yet.
Just think what it will be like when 66 new houses are built on the site of the former Our Lady and St Patrick’s High School and each family occupying one of them them has a couple of cars.
It will be murder trying to get out on to the main drag from Oxhill, Brucehill, Castlehill and Westcliff, not to mention the Carmelite Convent, where another tranche of new houses is under construction, Comleybank Lane, St Michael’s Church, St Michael’s Primary School, the Joint Hospital, Kyle Terrace, Westcliff and Havoc Road.
Expect plenty of people to be late for their work and high school pupils who used to have a reasonably short walk to school but are now faced with a daily trek over the hills and far away to Crosslet Road and Bellsmyre to get frequently soaked.
As for safety, there is a crossing outside St Michael’s PS which mothers and children have to cross at their peril when the traffic is “bad” and cars are queued back as far as Dalreoch and Westcliff.
What is going to happen when cars start emerging from the new housing sites at Clerkhill and the Monument Park across the road from it?
You couldn’t make it up but unfortunately I have to sometimes because West Dunbartonshire Council refuses to speak to The Democrat.
They are offended because I once told a press officer to bugger off. She was one of a group of suits who were on a mission to have me ejected from the meeting.
I didn’t go along to their planning meeting where the Cardross Road situation was strongly tipped to get the green light, because of the atmosphere there.
I believe it’s so bad that the SNP and Labour members almost came to blows last week and that Cllrs Michelle McGinty and Gordon Scanlon’s “heated” disagreement spilled out into the corridors of the old Burgh Hall and a council officer had to intervene.
And these people have the cheek to suggest that others should behave themselves.
Cllr Jim Ballan told me later that he would have been reported to the Standards Committee had it been him what dunnit – “And if it was you they would have called the police!”
Anyway, back to Cardross Road where a report from planning officer Pamela Clifford went before the esteemed elected members for approval.
What is happening?
Well, it appears that the Planning Committee indicate that it remains “minded” to grant planning
permission for the housing estate.
But that will only be finalised once a mountain of bureaucratic baloney about a legal agreement in respect of securing the financial payment towards open space provision/ green infrastructure improvements in the local area.
What is it that Parkinson’s Law says about work expanding to the time allocated to it?
Councils have been told to be open and transparent but going through committee papers for West Dunbartonshire Council is like wading through treacle.
When you see what people get paid between £80,000 and £120,000 a year for – working out lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions, for example – it’s little wonder that taxes are going through the roof.
There is Policy 13 which ‘supports proposals to improve, enhance or provide active travel infrastructure, public transport infrastructure or multi-modal hubs. This includes proposals for electric vehicle charging infrastructure’.
Can you imagine going into a shop and ordering a multi modal hub?
Then there is ‘local living and 20 minute neighbourhoods’.
I bet you are delighted dear reader to know the development proposal will contribute to local living including, where relevant, 20 minute neighbourhoods.
Not to mention that that consideration will be given to existing settlement pattern, and the level and quality of interconnectivity of the proposed development with the surrounding area, including local access to affordable and accessible housing options, ability to age in place and housing diversity.
Policy 16 relates to quality homes. Development proposals for new homes on land allocated for housing in LDPs will be supported.
It supports proposals for new homes that improve affordability and choice. This includes a range of size of homes.
Tell that to the hundreds of local people who are homeless and how much social housing will be included in the Monument and Clerkhill developments.
The document contains ‘proposals for buildings that will be occupied by people will be supported where they are designed to promote sustainable temperature management, for example by prioritising natural or passive solutions such as siting, orientation, and materials’.
I am, truly astonished that they haven’t plans to create direct lines to weather women Judith Ralston or Carol Kirkwood and tell them when they would like it to be sunny on the Havoc Shore.
And then there is the matter of green infrastructure. We are told: ‘Proposals that result in fragmentation or net loss of existing green infrastructure will only be supported where it can be demonstrated that the proposal would not result in or exacerbate a deficit in green infrastructure provision, and the overall integrity of the network will be maintained.’
Thank the Lord for that, when all some people want to know is when they are getting their bin emptied.
Lastly, there is reference to the weans, the weans of the West End, one of whom hopefully will grow up to write a Booker Prize winner, just like Douglas Stuart in his biography Shuggy Bain.
This policy relates to play, recreation and sport and requires development proposals that are likely to be occupied or used by children and young people to be incorporate well designed, good quality provision for play at an appropriate scale.
New streets should be inclusive and enable children and young people to play in the neighbourhood. New play provision will as far incorporate a range of requirements including being accessible.
Well, there ain’t no point in purchasing expensive swings and roundabouts if they are not accessible, or is there?
That possibility could only occur in West Dunbartonshire and ‘not increase the risk of surface water flooding to others, or itself be at risk; manage all rain and surface water through sustainable urban drainage systems, SUDS. Is there soap powder in that?
And seek to minimise the area of impermeable surface.
Policy 23 does not support proposals which are likely to raise unacceptable noise issues. So don’t shout at your councillors.
The layout and design of the development has been developed to ensure that it integrates with the existing residential form.
A high quality development will be created which enhances the local residential area as well as improvements to the footpath and greenspace networks. The development will provide high quality housing with good connections to the surrounding area and wider green network.
“This new housing development will transform the immediate surroundings and contribute to the longer term redevelopment/regeneration of the area and provide quality housing. It will result in a high quality residential development and it remains that there are no material considerations which suggest that planning permission should not be granted,” Pamela Clifford has told the committee.
The report adds that there are no people implications.
What do people matter anyway?
Top picture: An old aerial picture of Castlehill and the West End looking along Cardross Road towards Helensburgh.