RESIDENTS are furious plans for 50 homes in the East End of Glasgow have been given the green light – despite 342 objections.
And people are angry some of the £4.26million development, to be built on derelict land, will be used as homeless units in an area where homeless provision is already higher than average for the city.
Milnbank Housing Association is heading up the development of 38 semi-detached terraced houses and 12 cottage flats to be built on Appin Road and Corsock, Todd and Aitken Streets.
Rosemary Crossan, 39, who lives on nearby Dreghorn Street, is a tenant of Milnbank Housing Association.
She helped organise letters of objections and a petition.
A total of 342 signed up against the development with the councillor for the area, Patricia Chalmers, also objecting to the plan.
Mrs Crossan said: “To say that we’re unhappy is an understatement.
“The homes were supposed to be for existing tenants of Haghill.
“Now we’re being told they’re going to people outwith the area. And as if that’s not a big enough problem, we were told they’re using some of the houses for homeless units.”
The mother of three added: “I live next to a homeless unit and we’ve had all sorts of problems.”
Alan Benson, director of Milnbank Housing Association, confirmed seven of the 50 homes would be given over to people affected by the closure of city council hostels for the homeless. He said the remainder would be used to rehouse Glasgow Housing Association tenants within the ongoing programme of demolitions across the city.
Michelle Collins, 23, also a Milnbank tenant on Dreghorn Street, said the planning committee which gave the homes the go-ahead had treated objectors with contempt.
The mother of one said: “We feel we’ve been treated with total contempt by these elected councillors.
“Our own homes are falling to pieces and we have to put up with this – it’s a disgrace.”
Planning committee convener Robert MacBean said: “I understand there may be local concern about who will be living in the homes when they are built.
“However the planning committee is not in charge of who moves in.
“There was no conflict with the proposed development and the council’s planning policy or its housing strategy.
“Councillor Chalmers wanted a site visit but this would have been difficult to fit in before the elections and we decided to make a determination on the day rather than putting it off.”