Developers clash over Tesco plans [ET]

RIVAL developers clashed at a public inquiry over major superstore plans.

Tesco is appealing a decision to refer a planning application for a development of supermarket and student flats at Partick, close to Glasgow Harbour to the Scottish Government.

[A 'Times reader comments]:-

The ET really need to get to grips on the planning system and provide accurate information.

Tesco arent appealing against a decision to refer a planning application to the SG. They are appealing to the SG against the non-determination of 2 planning applications by GCC.

Are your reporters nodding off while the Inquiry is on??

Read the full article…

 

Reportback From Sighthill Meeting

Graham Campbell (Sighthill Tenant) writes: The Pinkston Tenants’ Association meeting in Sighthill on Monday 29th October went quite well in the end. Although it was attended by Paul Martin MSP, Springburn SNP Councillor Phil Greene and to my surprise (given I was chairing it!) two senior managers from the GHA – the first priority was what the tenants had to say about their housing. The GHA staff took reports of repairs needed and racial harassment occurring for one Zimbabwean asylum seeker resident who bravely spoke out and was supported by the tenants present from her church. It was the first time there had been a meeting including the misguided tenants who attended Compass/LHO’s so-called Consultative Forum – selected to exclude the PTA reps. These forum members have now had to recognise they need PTA as championed by Save Our Homes activists like myself and Elaine Ellis because the local Compass LHO has simply not “consulted” them for months after using them to gerrymander a yes vote for demolition from about 70 people at an open day in June 2006.

The GHA’s Director of Finance and Regeneration David Hastings responsible for housing stock (demolition) surveys and consultations began by explaining the GHA’s Housing Futures Assessment process and the difference between core stock which they want to keep and invest in – and stock for disposal i.e. demolition or handover to someone else. Hastings went out of his way to assure us that no decision had yet been made by GHA Board (which contains several high-rise residents including apparently its chair Sandra Forsythe) about Sighthill but that there was a deadline April-September 2008 but he hoped it would be much sooner than April.

In answer to tenants’ questions Bill Munsie (chair of what GHA calls Local shared housing services for north Glasgow) went even further and said that even if the decision by the GHA Board was to demolish – it would be ’some years’ (i.e. at least 5-10 years) before it actually happened. In the meantime some “holding investment” in the flats could still take place so that they are up to standard during the regeneration process.

For once the GHA people seemed to really listen to our sound arguments for the future sustainability of our flats, the spurious nature of Compass LHO consultations up to now; and the fact that even the GHA-funded GoWell mass health & population survey of 673 Sighthill residents (one of the 12 areas involved in this 10-year longitudinal surveys of 6,000 Glasgow residents on the impact of regeneration programmes) showed just 4% support for demolition with over 70% happy with their flats.

Some of the ex-forum members were very vocifierous in saying some Pinkston buildings should come down, criticising the damp and level of repairs needed. But they agreed that it was largely down to the anti-social behaviour of some tenants combined with chronic lack of maintenance and repairs by GHA that there lives were made unpleasant. When asked directly by me from the chair “if these were sorted would you stay in Sighthill? one of them said yes.

Once again the ODS consultants’ estimate for total refurbishment of £66 million was trotted out. This was hotly disputed as the exact real costs would be known to Compass/GHA based on the repairs records which landlords are obliged to keep for stock condition. In other words they know exactly how much each flat really needs and it certainly won’t amount to £66 million of refurb. The ODS/Compass 2006 stock condition survey which came up with the £55m figure was based on surveying just 2 flats (probably the ones in very poorest condition) in each double multi-block – just 12 flats overall)which they claimed would cost nearly £56,000 per flat!!

This was clearly nonsense since ODS were obviously assuming worst-case scenario for each flat when most flats are in good condition though need some work doing – they do not all need total refurb.

We know from other multies that a large part of water ingress comes form poor external cladding and roofing. Recent programmes for cladding similar buildings in Townhead and Edgefauld Rd, Springburn came in at between £1.5m and £2.5m per block. A maximum of £25million for all of Sighthill or just £10-15million if we’re talking Pinkston multies.

Demolition contractors had been appointed for Fountainwell multies and had held one local consultative meeting on October 21st 2007 aiming to complete the job during 2008.
In addition several tenants asked whatever happened to the new kitchens and bathrooms we were promised at stock transfer? Again the answer was dependent on whether Core investment or holding investment applied to Sighthill.

Paul Martin and Phil Greene seemed to be totally convinced now that the high flats do have a future and that a deal could and should be reached as to a mix of new build in Fountainwell and refurbished housing in Pinkston which keeps the existing Sighthill community together. Some older tenants asked if they would be guaranteed to return in the new build, but the GHA could not give that assurance because it would breach the equality of the housing points system to give preference based on seniority instead of on housing need. However the need for a written guaranteed right of return for existing tenants is one of the PTA’s key demands.

It was agreed to have a next PTA public meeting in early February 2008 with the same panel to report back on progress.

 

Broomhill Ave. Park Fight Taken to Parliament

The comment below, taken from the Evening Times website, sums up very well the fight to stop another unsustainable development.  Developers want to swallow another much loved local park in Broomhill.  We’ve covered this issue since it emerged.  This is the latest on the fight.

Posted by: Stewie Griffin, Glasgow on 1:29pm Fri 19 Oct 07
GCC at it again, their greed knows no bounds. Who exactly is benefiting from all this construction, certainly not the ordinary citizens of Glasgow, just property developers. We need green space in Glasgow, it’s overcrowded as it is. This new Culture Quango will not be happy until they have sold off every park in Glasgow.

From the ET…

“CAMPAIGNERS trying to save an area of green space targeted for housing have taken their fight to Holyrood. The park, at the bottom of Broomhill Avenue near Partick, has been used for more than 50 years by children, dog walkers and for community events. But, as reported last week in the Evening Times, residents recently discovered the ground, which is ownd by Glasgow City Council, was to be sold as part of a multi- million pound housing development. The land, with trees, bushes and wildlife, was originally to be included in a roads scheme, but was never used for the purpose. advertisement As a result, council bosses decided it was surplus to needs and agreed it could be sold as part of a package. The other sites for sale include the Balshagray annex of Anniesland College and the former Balshagray swimming pool, both owned by the college. However, Councillor Aileen Colleran is furious she was not consulted about the decision. And Liberal DemocratMSP Robert Brown is now taking the issue up at the Scottish Parliament. Mr Brown, who has lodged a Parliamentary motion backing campaigners, said: “This is an example of the pressure there is on green space, particularly in the West End.” Resident Chris Osborne is heading a pressure group that wants the land to remain as open space. He said: “This area is massively important because it is used on a daily basis and there is a real strength of feeling against the sale.” Ms Colleran added: “This is one of the few pieces of green space in the area.” Ms Colleran and the action group have both lodged formal requests with the council asking that the sale be halted until locals are consulted. A council spokesman said: “The council is aware of local feeling on this issue and will take this into account when considering the future of the area.” Publication date 19/10/07″

You can sign an online petition to support this campaign, here: http://www.petitiononline.com/broomave/petition.html

 

 

 

More green space under threat…

Hi Everyone
Would be V greatful if you could sign a petition on -
www.broomhillavenue.com
(you can do it privately)
The council have put the bit of greenspace at the bottom of our street up for sale (as well as the college being sold). and we recon the developers will want to build flats on it, chopping down the trees and changing the landscape completely. Steven Purcell is determined to sell off any available greenspace in Glasgow to pay for the Commonwealth Games!

muchas muchas gracias!

Mari and John

 

Green light for ‘danger’ roadside ads

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/display.var.1692458.0.green_light_for_danger_roadside_ads.php

Posted by: hugo, south side on 11:44am today

 

As a resident in one of the above areas, i want to know why the community have not been consulted about this. I am sick of the council saying the money will go to front line services, this is simply to make the idea more palatable to local peopl. We are bombarded enough with advertising, without it being place in our built environment. The council would be better looking at the quality of some of our environments rather than looking at how they generate more income. Surely the people who live in these areas should have a say in this decision.

As a resident in one of the above areas, i want to know why the community have not been consulted about this. I am sick of the council saying the money will go to front line services, this is simply to make the idea more palatable to local peopl.

We are bombarded enough with advertising, without it being place in our built environment.

The council would be better looking at the quality of some of our environments rather than looking at how they generate more income.

Surely the people who live in these areas should have a say in this decision.

 

Letter to the Herald – Wilton Street Tenement Collapse

John F. Crawford’s comment (Sep.4) adds to the extensive discussion in your columns of the nature and causes of the collapse of the wall in Wilton Street on Monday 27 August).   Many of your correspondents, and indeed your headline article and leader (August 29), have focused on problems in the maintenance of Scotland’s stone-built Victorian heritage.   As someone living  beside the devastated site in question, however, I wish to point to yet more disturbing issues.

First, it should be stressed that the collapsed wall was not a tenement gable-end but the already-weakened remnant end dividing wall of a terraced town house.   Secondly, a major new-build development project was being carried out on the adjoining gap site with, on the very day of the collapse, significant excavations close to the wall in question.

The local community is demanding a full and rigorous official inquiry, including  statutory investigations by the Health & Safety Executive.   This is because an aggressive development project, carried out adjacent to an old building in precarious condition, seemed to be a disaster waiting to happen.

Fortuitously, fatalities and serious injuries were avoided.   But I would urge Glasgow City Council to recognize this near-catastrophe as a wake-up call that should provoke serious examination of the fundamental lessons to be learnt for its future development policy and procedures.   One of these might well be greater restraint in its less discriminating efforts to cover green and leafy areas with concrete.  The next time, there may be blood as well ink on the Council’s hands!

 

More on transport opportunities wasted

A comment on the ET’s website about the news that Stefan King’s G1 group’s proposal to open a nightclub in the old railway station in the Botanic Gardens is not popular with locals…

Posted by: John Hamilton, Pacific Quay on 5:51pm Fri 7 Sep 07

What other city would allow such a fantastic asset as an already built underground station and line serving it, running below prime real estate, to remain closed and mothballed? Just reopen the station/line SPT, get your b!oody fingers out and start providing a city as major as Glasgow with a proper, 21st Century rapid transit system! No more bul!****, no more Subway closing at 6pm on a Sunday etc. Start re-opening the many disuses underground lines in Glasgow and do what you should be doing for this city!! Other cities would love to have so many already built underground lines beneath them, the tragedy for Glasgow is this hopeless, corrupt, crony-ridden city council and useless SPT have NO vision for Scotland’s major city.

What other city would allow such a fantastic asset as an already built underground station and line serving it, running below prime real estate, to remain closed and mothballed?

Just reopen the station/line SPT, get your b!oody fingers out and start providing a city as major as Glasgow with a proper, 21st Century rapid transit system!

No more bul!****, no more Subway closing at 6pm on a Sunday etc. Start re-opening the many disuses underground lines in Glasgow and do what you should be doing for this city!!

Other cities would love to have so many already built underground lines beneath them, the tragedy for Glasgow is this hopeless, corrupt, crony-ridden city council and useless SPT have NO vision for Scotland’s major city.

The city has seen many recent debates around the future of public transport. What do you think?

 

Suspicious Govan fires prompts questions from Evening Times readers

http://eveningtimes.co.uk/news/display.var.1679400.0.0.php

 

Rogue Factors

Earlier today the Glasgow Housing Association was forced to pay up to £1000 to owners it factored, after it emerged GHA had mischarged for VAT: Evening Times – - There can be victories!

 

ET Website post – ‘proposed new fastlink bus system’

Posted by: Bill Forbes, Cambuslang on 5:38pm Wed 22 Aug 07

Ian, I think the big problems in Edinburgh will be traffic problems. If the bridge tolls are scrapped and more traffic enters the city, there will be massive problems for Edinburgh. I’d be willing to wager that a white knight will appear for them perhaps in the shape of a Stagecoach and the Council will sell their stake to Mr Soutar. He already has the Manchester and Sheffield trams, don’t you think he has even considered Edinburgh? But that is Edinburgh and this is Glasgow. Frank is right; there should be a new plan worth supporting. Have a look at my web site ([bold]www.subway2020.com[/bold] ) and see what you think. The SPT refused to consider it because it was “amateurish” and they were happy with spending £[bold]90,000[/bold] to get the proposal for the East End Circle – which (although only three months ago) has now been set aside while a new East – West subway extension is considered. But the main theme here is the SPT wasting money. They’ve spent [bold]£90K[/bold] on a Subway plan which has now been scrapped. They are spending more on another study (including a junket, oops, sorry, fact finding mission to Toulouse) for another scheme. They are spending [bold]£450,000[/bold] on a second stage “FastLink” study (that means they have already spent the money on the first stage) and they don’t even know if they’ll get approval. The funny thing is, I’ve had a look at the SPT’s budget for this year and there is no mention of this being planned. Similarly, there is no mention of a [bold]£250,000[/bold] first phase study into a Maglev train running between Glasgow and Edinburgh (stages 2 & 3 of the study will cost another [bold]£750,000[/bold] ). But the real damming thing is that the SPT 15 year transport plan (Regional Transport Strategy) published in March shows that the second and third phase of Fastlink is not to be ready until [bold]2016[/bold] . Where are they getting all the money? Well perhaps, because there are major delays to the Partick Station scheme they have a budget which is not going to be spent this year. So rather than give the money back, they find other things to spend it on. Just perhaps.

Ian,

I think the big problems in Edinburgh will be traffic problems. If the bridge tolls are scrapped and more traffic enters the city, there will be massive problems for Edinburgh. I’d be willing to wager that a white knight will appear for them perhaps in the shape of a Stagecoach and the Council will sell their stake to Mr Soutar. He already has the Manchester and Sheffield trams, don’t you think he has even considered Edinburgh?

But that is Edinburgh and this is Glasgow. Frank is right; there should be a new plan worth supporting. Have a look at my web site (www.subway2020.com ) and see what you think. The SPT refused to consider it because it was “amateurish” and they were happy with spending £90,000 to get the proposal for the East End Circle – which (although only three months ago) has now been set aside while a new East – West subway extension is considered.

But the main theme here is the SPT wasting money. They’ve spent £90K on a Subway plan which has now been scrapped. They are spending more on another study (including a junket, oops, sorry, fact finding mission to Toulouse) for another scheme. They are spending £450,000 on a second stage “FastLink” study (that means they have already spent the money on the first stage) and they don’t even know if they’ll get approval. The funny thing is, I’ve had a look at the SPT’s budget for this year and there is no mention of this being planned. Similarly, there is no mention of a £250,000 first phase study into a Maglev train running between Glasgow and Edinburgh (stages 2 & 3 of the study will cost another £750,000 ).

But the real damming thing is that the SPT 15 year transport plan (Regional Transport Strategy) published in March shows that the second and third phase of Fastlink is not to be ready until 2016 .

Where are they getting all the money? Well perhaps, because there are major delays to the Partick Station scheme they have a budget which is not going to be spent this year. So rather than give the money back, they find other things to spend it on.

Just perhaps.