Housing plan for village compared to 'lottery win'

Published 10 Dec 2009 10:37 9 Comments

Share this

By Rosalyn Campbell

THE CONTROVERSIAL development proposals for Bishopton's former ROF site amount to 'a lottery win' for the village - a local resident has claimed.

Bishopton Community Council members and visitors heard last week from Bob Darracott, director of planning and transport at Renfrewshire Council, who described the benefits of the proposed development.

Plans include the creation of 2,500 new homes on the site after it is remediated and decontaminated.

A local resident who attended the community council meeting said: "When you add up the value of all the benefits that are going to come to the village, it's the equivalent of winning the lottery several times over.

"A windfall like this doesn't often come to a community. There is £30 million being put on offer for the village - that's an awful lot of money.

"They plan to create separate motorway links so that the village is separate from the development in terms of traffic flow.They are going to secure the provision of a new health centre - which is very important as the present health centre is inadequate for the community."

The cash that the developer would be required to spend on Bishopton would include: contributing £714,000 towards improving local bus services; £1.2 million to be spent by Transport Scotland on improvements to the M8; £300,000 to fund community projects and £100,000 to fund improvements to the Newton Road Recreation Ground.

Mr Darracott also told the Community Council the developer is required to build a new primary school to be transferred to the Council at nil cost, secure the provision of a health centre and provide a full-size, floodlit synthetic sports pitch and two new grass pitches within the development.

£100,000 would also have to be given towards an Innovation Fund to develop and encourage environmentally friendly innovations, another £100,000 to fund adaptations to residential units for elderly and disabled persons, as well as improvements carried out to park and ride facilities.

A community council spokesperson said: "We are very impressed with the scale and the scope of the section 75 agreement negotiated by the Director of Planning and Transport and his team.

"It seems to meet all the aspirations and concerns expressed by residents of Bishopton over the many consultations conducted by the community council over the last seven years or so. Not least the very substantial financial provision made to add a third layer of environmental monitoring by independent environmental consultants."

The plans have however met with fierce opposition from Bishopton Action Group, whose concerns include the impact of the proposed remediation methods on the environment. They have lodged a formal objection and continue to campaign against the development.

This article appeared in The Gazette 09 Dec 09

Have your say. Post a comment on this article.

Peter Wilson
Unregistered User
Dec 10, 15:10
Report comment

Quote from expert witness Dr. Dick van Steenis MBBS:

"Bishopton site contains lead (brain damage & enhances mercury 50x etc), nickel (asthma, heart attacks & cancers), chromium (lung cancer), manganese (arteriosclerosis, Parkinsons disease etc.), fluoride (ADHD, fluorosis, lung fibrosis, thyroid disease, heart disease, birth defects, arthritis, depression), a**enic (cancers), PAHs (birth defects & cancers), asbestos fibres, Pesticides &/or herbicides (OPIN, depression & Parkinsons disease).

Diseases including deaths that may hence be expected from the Bishopton site proposed development are Birth defects & stillbirths, Raised infant mortality, SIDS, SADS, Frequent infections from T-lymphocyte diversion, Neurological problems including Parkinsons, Lower IQ, Coronary heart disease & atherosclerosis, Strokes, Diabetes 2, Multiple chemical sensitivity, ME, CFS, Hypothyroidism & other Hormone disruption, Clinical depression & Suicides, Obesity, higher yob & crime incidence, and a range of Cancers, including lung & breast."

Does that sound like winning the lottery to you?

Recommend? Yes 0 No 0
John Mackintosh
Unregistered User
Dec 10, 15:57
Report comment

Yes, a lottery win paid out in Monopoly money! Much of the mmuch vaunted £30million(?) is associated with the land value, a value out on it by the developper. In truth the land has no value at all without the development itself. Another 'con' being perpetrated on the residents of Bishopton.

Also, any new health centre or community facility will be further away from the existing community, and more difficult to get to so what benefit is that to the existing populace?

Recommend? Yes 0 No 0
John Mackintosh
Unregistered User
Dec 10, 16:30
Report comment

Further to my previous comment,your article states "It seems to meet all the aspirations and concerns expressed by residents of Bishopton over the many consultations conducted by the community council over the last seven years" . what a load of tosh! the Community council organised a referendum in 2005, the results of which were a whopping 92% of those who voted, voted AGAINST the development. In a survey, again organised by the Community Council the following year, it INCREASED to 94% of the respondents who voted, voted AGAINST the development. Those are the ONLY consultations conducted by the Community Council.

Sounds like someone is just not listenning to the people they should be representing!

As to a "Third layer" of environmental monitoring, I would like to know what the first two layers are!

Recommend? Yes 0 No 0
barton71
Unregistered User
Dec 10, 18:58
Report comment

It is a shame that it has come to this. Much of the appeal of Bishopton is the fact that it is not a particularly large community, around 5000 if i am not mistaken. Adding another 2500 is going to change the village forever, and in my view, not in a good way.

The people who are delighted with this, are the ones who stand to make money from the proposals.

Recommend? Yes 0 No 0
J MacCormack
Unregistered User
Dec 12, 12:37
Report comment

A few weeks ago the Government announced a program of looking for "brownfield" sites throughout the UK to plant millions of trees as a simple, effective way of carbon capture. Is the former Bishopton ROF site not a prime candidate for such a use? Protect the people living nearby AND help the environment, surely a win/win situation for everyone.

Recommend? Yes 0 No 0
Clarification
Unregistered User
Dec 13, 10:23
Report comment

I believe Barton71 has his units confused. The 5000 figure he quotes relates to the number of residents. There are just over 2000 houses in the current community. The addition of a further 2500 will more than double the size of the community. In practice the railway line running through the middle of the village will also mean that there will be two communities! It is not going to be an integrated community. There will be the existing one which has to cope with overloaded facilities in the interim, then a second one which will have all the new investment.

Recommend? Yes 0 No 0
John McCreadie
Unregistered User
Dec 14, 13:39
Report comment

All of this "pie in the sky" for Bishopton is predicated on 2,500 new homes being and sold at a substantial profit, without that nothing happens.

Five miles up the road at Braehead five or six of the country's top developers are on a 2000 new build project. Go and ask them for a projection of when they might ever get out of there with any profit at all.

If Bishopton needs improvements it should get on with it on it's own. Whatever facilities will be needed for a 6000 minimum increase in the population will be of little benefit to the existing community.

Recommend? Yes 0 No 0
Stuart Duffy
Unregistered User
Dec 15, 15:17
Report comment

The only reason that the Council peddles this diatribe is to shore up a ludicrous decision to make money at the expense of the health of residents in the immediate area where contamination can leak too like Bishopton, Erskine, Houston, Linwood, Paisley and Bridge of Weir.

At a public meeting we had the other contemptuous "spin" thrown at us that the RoF wasn't at the top of the 'most polluted sites' in Renfrewshire. When pressed on this matter the council official then added... "...if we were to take all the different parts of the factory together then it would be number 1"

This summed up their approach, deceitful and non disclosure. And to add insult to injury they sum up their approach to remediation of the factory's poisonous waste by having BAe as the main contractor as they have no experience of this type of deadly poisoning. It stands as reason that BAe are delighted to be judge, jury and the executioner of the residents of Renfrewshire and anyone who buys a house if the GET AWAY with it.

Too harsh? Have a look at their track record in Enfield.

Makes me wonder if the Serious Fraud Office should extend their bribery enquiry into BAe and add Renfrewshire to the list of Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Tanzania, Chile, Romania, Qatar, and the Czech Republic.

We can only hope they come and see the strange decisions being made in the face of overwhelming evidence against the decision to build on such a poisonous real estate!

Recommend? Yes 0 No 0
EWING MITCHELL
Unregistered User
Dec 15, 19:37
Report comment

57% of voters in Switzerland voted against the building of minarets and the government banned it

92% of voters in Bishopton voted against the building of 2500 houses and Renfrewshire Council totally ignored the referendum Why?

MONEyrnIt is the Renfrewshire Council that have won the lottery not the residents of Bishopton who fear the toxic "CLEAN UP"

Recommend? Yes 0 No 0

Follow @thegazettepaper

Return to the main index, get more from this section or browse our News archives.