DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

Report by Development Management Manager

1 DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION

Application for permission in principle for a 352 Ha settlement expansion, including residential, commercial, industrial, recreation and retail uses, community facilities, landscaping and open space. Road and rail infrastructure, including M9 junction, train station and park and ride, and primary and secondary school provision at: Land around Winchburgh, West Lothian

2 DETAILS

Reference no. 1012/P/05 Owner of site Primary land owners: Winchburgh Trust John Cadzow (Auldcathie) Ltd John Cadzow (Glendeveon) Ltd Earl of Hopetoun Marquess of Linlithgow Network Rail British Waterways West Lothian Council Transport Scotland The full list of owners is contained in the file Applicant Cala Land Investments Ward & local Broxburn, Uphall & Ltd members Winchburgh J Campbell A Davidson E Glass G Morrice Case officer Wendy McCorriston Contact 01506 775218 details [email protected]

Reason for referral to Development Management Committee: Major application with more than 5 objections and council interest.

3 RECOMMENDATION

3.1 Grant planning permission in principle, subject to conditions and legal agreement(s).

3.2 Refer the master plan to the Development and Transport PDSP and the Council Executive with a recommendation that it be adopted as Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG).

4 DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND PROPOSAL AND BACKGROUND

4.1 This application is for permission in principle for a major urban expansion of the existing settlement of Winchburgh. The application boundaries extend to the M9 corridor in the northeast and east; to the boundary with the former Auldcathie landfill site in the northwest; beyond Glendevon farm to the west and to Old Glendevon Farm Cottages to the southwest (see attached location plan).

4.2 The application boundary largely follows the boundary of the allocated Core Development Area (CDA) for Winchburgh (see attached plan), as identified in the adopted West Lothian Local Plan. There are two areas where the application boundary is extended beyond the CDA boundary to allow for additional landscaping to be implemented, and three areas to allow for road works and associated landscaping. There are also two areas at Faucheldean and adjacent to the M9 motorway that are within the allocated CDA boundary but not part of this planning application.

4.3 The planning application shows the settlement expansion (and proposals for improvements which extend into the existing urban area) comprising 7 different “Character Areas” (see attached plan), ranging from the new Town Centre area to the west of the canal, to the Duntarvie employment areas in the north and several primarily residential areas. In each of these Character Areas a strategic landscape framework is to be established within which “Development Blocks” are identified (see attached land- use mix plan). These are the areas proposed for future development.

4.4 The strategic landscape framework is to be used to provide new woodland/open space corridors, landscaped SUDS facilities, district and neighbourhood parks and sports and play facilities. Normal landscape and SUDS requirements will, where appropriate, also be incorporated within the Development Blocks.

4.5 The main components of the proposed settlement expansion are:

 3,450 residential units, including affordable housing  Two employment areas  A new town centre with retail, commercial, leisure and other compatible uses  Land for a partnership centre  A canal basin  A railway station  Two park and ride facilities  A motorway junction and road connections  A distributor road connection to Broxburn  A network of paths, including connections into the existing path network in the area  Three neighbourhood retail/commercial centres  Two secondary schools (one denominational and one non-denominational) on a joint campus on the west side of the development, with school and community sports pitches and facilities  Two or three new primary schools (as required) and extension/improvements to the existing Holy Family/Winchburgh Primary Schools building  A town park around the former claypit, a district park and three neighbourhood parks with play and sports facilities

4.6 The planning application is accompanied with the following supporting documents, some of which were included at the time of the initial submission and some which have been submitted, or updated, in response to issues raised during the processing of the application:

 Final Master Plan, updated September 2009  Environmental Statement  Environmental Statement: technical appendices  Environmental Statement: non-technical summary  Supplementary wildlife/habitat surveys (badgers, bats, amphibians, great crested newts and watercourses and water bodies)  Public Consultation Report  Transport Assessment  Development Appraisal Report  Local Roads Assessment  Flood Risk Assessment  Water Management Plan  Glendevon Pond Water Balance Report  Beatlie Drainage Channel Report  Pitch and Play Park Proposals Summary Document  Noise Report  Niddry Castle Bing: redevelopment strategy and options.

Where appropriate, additional consultations/notifications have been carried out in respect of any additional information and the comments from consultees/representees contained in this report reflect the most up to date position of these bodies and individuals.

4.7 The master plan sets out an overall vision for the settlement expansion: as an integrated living and working environment with a wide variety of local services and community facilities to serve the existing and new populations. It then goes on to establish the design approach for the development: as a sustainable community, which aims to integrate with and improve the existing village, whilst respecting the local landscape’s intrinsic qualities.

4.8 In setting out the basic approach to the design of the settlement expansion the master plan identifies all the issues that have been taken into account in developing the proposed urban structure. These range from the policies outlined in the development plan to a detailed assessment of the site’s characteristics, including existing landscape character, cultural heritage, archaeology, ecological and wildlife habitats, watercourses and bodies, and ground conditions and contamination.

4.9 Following an assessment of the above characteristics, an overall development concept has been arrived at and then taken forward as a set of development principles for the master plan area. These cover issues like housing mix, height and density of development, the approach to vehicular and pedestrian/cycle integration, the development of a landscaped framework and the approach to energy and waste minimisation.

4.10 Detailed design parameters are given for the seven character areas in the master plan (as referred to in para 4.3 above) including guidance on what will be expected from future developers in locations such as the town centre, the district and town parks, the employment areas and some of the key approaches into the expanded settlement such as Glendevon from the south and Hawkhill from the east.

4.11 An indicative phasing plan has been submitted as part of the master plan, which indicates the proposed order in which the development blocks and associated infrastructure will be built. This shows that the first area proposed for development is block K to the immediate west of Winchburgh, followed by several of the blocks in the Glendevon area. These blocks will include up to 550 houses, including affordable housing, the first part of the distributor road, a new primary school, a neighbourhood play area and associated areas of open space, SUDS and landscaping.

4.12 The environmental statement (ES) sets out the anticipated impacts of the development, ranging from the visual and environmental/wildlife impacts on the surrounding area to the health and socio-economic impacts on the existing community. The relevant consultative bodies have assessed the findings of the ES and their comments are set out in section 7 of this report.

4.13 The other technical supporting documents have also been assessed by the relevant consultees in the same manner and again their comments are incorporated below.

5 PLANNING POLICY ASSESSMENT

Plan Policy Assessment Conform? Edinburgh HOU3 This policy requires West Lothian Council to allocate and the Strategic land for a minimum of 3,000 residential units in the YES Lothians Housing Winchburgh/East Broxburn/Uphall area. The West Structure Plan Allocations Lothian Local Plan allocates land for 3,450 new units in (ELSP) Winchburgh and 2,050 in East Broxburn (including 500 from previous local plan allocations). The application accords with this structure plan requirement. HOU4 Requires local plans to identify steps to make housing ELSP Meeting the sites effective and ensure that development can be YES Housing integrated into effective walking; cycling and public Allocations transport networks and provide for a range of housing. These requirements are reflected in the policies of the WLLP and in turn are incorporated into the master plan for Winchburgh, which shows different tiers of paths, linked throughout the settlement and into the surrounding areas. Full details of bus corridors, proposed bus stops and planned park and ride facilities are also shown, together with proposals for a railway station. Whilst the station is still dependant on national rail timetabling changes before it can become effective, the master plan presents this as an important part of ensuring the settlement is a sustainable and accessible place to live. A broad range of housing types and sizes, ranging from small town centre flats to town houses and family houses are proposed in the expanded settlement in accordance with structure and local plan policies. Plan Policy Assessment Conform? ELSP HOU5 Advises that development should not proceed beyond Infrastructure the existing infrastructure capacity of each area until the YES infrastructure improvements are provided or funding committed. The key elements of infrastructure required for this settlement expansion are water/drainage and gas/electricity connections, road infrastructure, including a junction onto the M9 and school provision at primary and secondary levels. The applicant is at advanced stages in negotiations to ensure the required service connections into the settlement; Transport Scotland has confirmed its acceptance in principle to a motorway junction and a package of financial contributions is being drawn up to ensure appropriate extensions and/or new schools are in place as the population expands. Subject to finalising the terms of the necessary legal agreements (section 69 and section 75 agreements) the proposals accord with the terms of this policy. ELSP HOU6 This policy requires financial contributions to remedy any Community deficiencies in local facilities and amenities. The YES Facilities and applicant has agreed to enter into legal agreements to Amenities finance town centre improvements (including possibly leasing and using the former Beatlie School) and provide or fund public art, together with the providing new play areas and upgrading the existing play facilities/pitches in the village. ELSP HOU7 Requires local plans to include policies to secure Affordable affordable housing. Policies are included in the WLLP YES Housing and the applicant has committed to the provision of a combination of land, finance and units to meet these policy requirements. Subject to finalising the appropriate legal agreements the terms of this policy are met. ELSP ECON2 Requires local plans to ensure that new economic land New Land for allocations are located within CDAs and are integrated YES Economic with path and public transport networks and are highly Development accessible. New employment allocations are identified in the north of the Winchburgh CDA and these are reflected in the master plan, close to park and ride and station facilities and readily accessible from the proposed M9 junction. ELSP TRAN1 This requires local plans to safeguard land for identified Safeguarding transport proposals. For West Lothian, and Winchburgh YES Land for in particular, this requires land for a railway station, an Transportation M9 motorway junction and park-and-ride/interchange Schemes facilities. The master plan shows each of these elements. Transport Scotland has agreed to the principle of a motorway junction in the location shown in the master plan, however, whilst the station land is safeguarded there are still timetabling issues to be determined. Nevertheless, this structure plan requirement is complied with.

ELSP TRAN4 Requires local plans to encourage higher densities of Density of development in the most accessible locations. In line YES Development with this requirement the application envisages a higher density and accessible town centre with rail and bus Plan Policy Assessment Conform? interchanges and good cycle/walking connections. ELSP TRAN5 Local plans are required to include policies to ensure Transport travel-generating developments submit transport YES Implications oassessments and travel plans, including the setting of New appropriate mode share targets. This technical Development information has been submitted and assessed by West Lothian, Edinburgh and Transport Scotland and the developer has committed to appropriate network improvements and financial contributions. ELSP RET5 This requires planning authorities to make appropriate Retailing provision for new local shopping facilities, particularly in YES areas of planned housing growth. A new town centre and smaller local centres are planned for Winchburgh, which are commensurate with the size of the expanded community. ELSP ENV1C Resists development that would adversely affect listed Historic or buildings and scheduled ancient monuments. The YES Built impacts on listed buildings and ancient monuments, Environment including the Union Canal, have been quantified in the Designations submitted ES and assessed by Historic Scotland. The impacts, subject to appropriate mitigation, have been determined as acceptable. ELSP ENV1D Aims to protect areas of regional and local natural Natural and heritage value from inappropriate development. YES Built Agricultural land will be affected by this proposal, Environment however, the impacts on this have been assessed as Interests part of the public inquiry into the WLLP and the mixed- use CDA allocation has been confirmed through the adoption of the local plan in 2009. In terms of this policy the impacts of the development on the surrounding countryside, on core and local path networks, on areas of archaeological interest and areas of open space within the settlement have all been defined, assessed and determined as acceptable, subject to appropriate conditions and mitigation. ELSP ENV1G This policy promotes a high quality of design in new Design of New development. The principles of high quality design and YES Development place making are central to the objectives and vision in the master plan. Detailed design codes are to be prepared in advance or in parallel with the submission of individual planning applications. ELSP IMP4 Requires legal agreements between developers and Planning local authorities to provide key infrastructure to be in YES Agreements place prior to the approval of planning permissions. Any consent(s) for this site will not be issued until the appropriate legal agreement(s) have been signed. West Lothian CDA1 and This policy requires all infrastructure to be provided or Local Plan CDA2 committed before permission can be granted. The policy YES (WLLP) Infrastructure allows for planning conditions and legal agreements to and facilities be used to secure the funding and proper phasing of for CDAs development and refers to the CDA Action Plan (appendix 7.1), which lists the requirements for each CDA. The key infrastructure requirements listed for this Plan Policy Assessment Conform? application are school provision, comprising new secondary and primary schools and an extension to the existing primary schools; road connections, including a motorway junction and local facilities including a public town centre car park, canal related facilities and library provision. Strategies for the restoration of the former Auldcathie landfill site and for the depletion and remediation of Niddry Bing are also required. The intention is to enter into two (or more) legal agreements. The initial agreement would cover the delivery of 550 houses and commit the developers to financial contributions to:  an extension to the existing primary school building  funding for non-denominational and denominational secondary school infrastructure, which will allow house building to commence prior to the opening of the new secondary school complex  the first phase of a new primary school at Glendevon  affordable housing  town centre improvements, including potential lease/use of the former Beatlie school  public art  bus subsidies  cemetery provision In addition to these contributions a serviced site for affordable housing and a neighbourhood play area, adjacent to the Glendeveon school, are also to be included in the first legal agreement. Subsequent agreements will cover the same contributions, as required for the overall development area, in addition to bringing forward a site for the partnership centre, library provision, secondary school provision and park and ride and town centre car parks. Other facilities such as the canal basin, motorway junction, parks/landscaping and employment land can be required through the use of suspensive conditions. Subject to the developers signing the necessary legal agreements the proposals will meet the requirements of this policy. As detailed in section 4 above, a redevelopment strategy for Niddry Bing has been submitted and a separate planning application has been submitted (ref: 0033/ful/07) for the remediation of the former Auldcathie landfill. WLLP CDA3 States that planning permission for the development of Employment the CDA employment sites referred to in policy EM 3 will YES allocations not be granted until developers can demonstrate that infrastructure is to be delivered in phase with the development. The submitted details, and the phasing plan, show that the employment land will be serviced prior to or at the Plan Policy Assessment Conform? same time as works are being undertaken on the M9 junction. This requirement can be made a condition of consent. WLLP CDA4 Requires that a diversity of house types, tenures and Housing mix densities be provided within the new housing YES and density developments within the Core Development Areas. Also states that affordable housing shall be provided within the Core Development Areas in accordance with council policy. The master plan reflects these requirements and allows for a range of house types from flats, terraces and town houses to detached and semi-detached and a range of densities from 20 up to 50 units per ha. CDA5 and Indicative master plan boundaries for the major CDA CDA6 schemes are shown in Appendix 7.2. These policies YES Master plans require masterplans to be prepared for these areas (or other areas subsequently agreed with the council). The master plans need to address the strategic aims of the local plan, show the proposed land use pattern and the proposed transport/movement network and reflect the design principles listed in the local plan. It states that piecemeal development within the master plan boundaries which would prejudice the successful implementation of the wider CDA proposals will be resisted. The application and the master plan have been drawn up in full compliance with this policy requirement and has been updated/amended to reflect the requirements of consultees and concerns of objectors. The applicant seeks to have the master plan adopted as supplementary guidance. WLLP CDA8 This policy sets out the key requirements of the two Winchburgh master plan areas within the joint Winchburgh/East PART and East Broxburn CDA allocation. These are: Broxburn  Funding of the non-denominational secondary school  Funding of new distributor road linking Winchburgh to East Broxburn  Funding of improvements to B8020 between Winchburgh & Broxburn  Funding of works to rehabilitate non-scheduled parts of Greendykes Bing. These requirements were anticipated on the basis that applications for both the CDA areas would be submitted within the same timeframe. Unfortunately applications for East Broxburn have only been submitted within the last year and only cover part of the East Broxburn CDA allocation. Formal agreement on funding between developers has not therefore been possible at this stage. The Winchburgh developer has therefore agreed to self fund the initial elements of the joint school and road works. However, council officers will continue to facilitate joint discussions between all the parties concerned in an effort to ensure that the final solution will be delivered equitably. Plan Policy Assessment Conform? WLLP HOU5 Requires amenity and open space provision to accord Open space with the council’s Residential Development Guide. The YES provision master plan has taken this guide into account together with the council’s open space strategy, sports facilities strategy and the views of Sportscotland. An appropriate hierarchy of play provision, parks and open space is identified in the master plan. WLLP HOU7 Encourages high quality design of new development. High quality The principles of high quality design and place making YES design are central to the objectives and vision in the master plan. Detailed design codes are to be prepared in advance or in parallel with the submission of individual planning applications. WLLP HOU8 Requires layout to facilitate low speeds and to Access and incorporate direct footpath and cycle access routes. The YES parking` master plan shows a detailed network of paths and an indication of proposed traffic calming and road speeds. These matters will be finalised in subsequent detailed applications. WLLP HOU9 Requires the amenity of neighbouring occupants to be Residential protected. Whilst this is an application in principle the YES and visual master plan gives advice on how the interfaces where (Also amenity the existing and new developments interact. Objections see section have been raised by residents in Glendevon and 6 below) Fauceldean and at Station Road and the canal concerned about the impact on their amenity. This issue is therefore addressed in more detail in the representations section below. WLLP HOU10 Requires developers to make provision for “affordable Affordable housing” and identifies general principles. Negotiations YES housing are being finalised on the exact detail of the affordable housing contribution but the principles have been established for a package of land and contributions to accord with this policy. WLLP TRAN2 Requires the transport implications of new development Transport to be the subject of a transport assessment. Detailed TA YES impacts and Appropriate Appraisal reports and a local roads assessment have been undertaken and assessed by council Transportation and Transport Scotland officers. Subject to appropriate mitigation works, including junction improvements at Broxburn and Newton, the proposals are acceptable. WLLP TRAN3 Requires developers to provide, or contribute towards, Travel the provision of travel improvements including traffic and YES improvements environmental management measures, road network improvements and measures to promote trips by public transport. The developer will fund all necessary road works and associated landscaping and appropriate bus subsidies and bus facilities have also been agreed to.

WLLP TRAN7 Encourages walking and cycling and the provision of Pedestrians safe and attractive routes. The master plan shows a YES and cyclists detailed network of paths for the expanded community Plan Policy Assessment Conform? with links to existing routes and connections to the surrounding rural areas. Extensive detail has been included covering the width and type of routes and the suitability of routes for a range of users from pedestrians to cyclists and equestrians. WLLP TRAN8 Requires priority to be given to pedestrian and cycle Pedestrians access and requires traffic calming, controlled crossings, YES and cyclists new paths and secure cycle parking. Details of these facilities have been given in the master plan but will be worked up further through the submission of detailed applications. WLLP TRAN11 Promotes the introduction of Home Zones in proposed Home Zones new housing developments. Where appropriate, and in YES agreement with Transportation officers this can be facilitated at the detailed application stage. WLLP TRAN15 Advises that contributions may be sought from Safe routes to developers towards the capital costs of the infrastructure YES school necessary to protect, or provide, safer walking and cycling routes to schools and other local facilities. The developer is aware that safer routes to schools and neighbourhood/town centre facilities will be required and details of these will be brought forward in subsequent applications. WLLP TRAN16 Developers will, where appropriate, be required to Bus services incorporate measures aimed at improving bus facilities, YES including the provision of stops and shelters. Stops and shelters will be provided by the developer and enhanced bus services in agreement with the council and bus operators. WLLP TRAN31 and Parking levels for development shall conform to the TRAN33 current council adopted standards, although lower levels YES Parking of provision will be encouraged in line with sustainable objectives, where modal evidence supports a reduction. Shared parking facilities will be required in town centres. A shared town centre car park is shown. Full details of proposed parking for each element of the development will be examined in more detail at the subsequent application stage. WLLP HER16 Applicants will be required to provide an archaeological Archaeological assessment in advance of determination of a planning YES assessment application where the council considers this appropriate. Where preservation of archaeological remains proves unfeasible, archaeological investigation and recording to the highest professional standards will be required at the developer’s expense, prior to the implementation of the development. An appropriate assessment has been undertaken and WOSAS has agreed that further work can be undertaken as part of the detailed application process. WLLP EM3 Sites for employment uses have been allocated within Employment the CDA allocations. The exact areas of development YES allocations in must be shown in master plans including a phasing the CDAs strategy to release the employment allocations at the earliest possible time. The necessary land is identified in Plan Policy Assessment Conform? the master plan and it is intended that it will come forward as work on the motorway junction is undertaken, in line with the requirements of Transport Scotland. WLLP TC11 The CDA proposals for Winchburgh are required to Retail in incorporate provision for a new town centre within the YES Winchburgh vicinity of the existing village centre. The scale of any new retail development at Winchburgh shall be commensurate with serving its expanded population arising from the planned major housing developments identified in this local plan. The council has had a retail assessment undertaken and this indicates that the capacity of the net convenience retail floorspace should be in the region of 2,200sqm. No specific floor space has been shown in the master plan though a supermarket and a main retail street leading to it are shown on indicative plans. It is intended to place a restriction on application in principle of 2,000sqm net convenience floor space for a supermarket, though this matter can be examined again in more detail as firm proposals for the new centre are drawn up. WLLP COM11 Appropriate public art will be required as part of major Public art development proposals. A public artist has been YES employed to work on the proposals for Winchburgh and a set of detailed proposals, or appropriate finance will be required before work starts on site. This will be secured through the necessary legal agreements. WLLP IMP2 Requires developer contributions towards Secondary denominational secondary school provision. A package YES school of education contributions for the first 550 houses has been agreed in principle and a commitment given to further contributions. Both are in line with the emerging updated council policy for denominational secondary school provision. WLLP IMP3 Identifies a presumption against housing developments Education where education constraints cannot be overcome due to YES constraints a lack of funding but provides for the use of legal agreements to secure appropriate developer contributions for education purposes. The package of contributions, which is being negotiated, will allow for the building of the necessary new schools or extensions and remove the existing education constraints. Conditions on this application and any associated detailed permissions will ensure that the number of houses to be built will relate to the amount of school capacity available. WLLP IMP6 Requires development to comply with current best SUDS practice on sustainable urban drainage practices. More YES detail will be given in each detailed submission, however, SEPA is satisfied that the information submitted at this stage is acceptable and in line with current best practice. WLLP IMP7 Requires a Flood Risk Assessment to be submitted Flooding where there is a suspected risk. Initial flood risk YES information was submitted and then added to following consultation with West Lothian and Edinburgh council Plan Policy Assessment Conform? flood prevention officers. The final package of information is acceptable but will be supplemented by further data as detailed applications are submitted. Conditions can be used to secure such information at the detailed stage. WLLP IMP8 Identifies a presumption against the culverting of Culverting watercourses. There is one location on the Beatlie PART drainage channel where culverting and realignment will be required and this has been assessed and agreed as acceptable by SEPA and the council. Other watercourse improvements will adequately offset the negative impact of this section of new culvert, which is needed to enable the construction of one of the core roads to the town centre. WLLP IMP9 Where necessary, requires air quality data to be Air quality provided by developers. Overall baseline and anticipated YES data has been included as part of the ES and has been assessed and agreed as acceptable by council environmental health officers. Further detailed information will be required for those subsequent applications where air quality is identified as a potential issue. WLLP IMP11 Identifies a presumption against housing being located Noise close to existing noise sources. Noise information has YES been submitted with the ES that shows mitigation will be required for any residential properties that are proposed in areas close to the motorway and rail corridors. Council environmental health officers are satisfied with the information submitted, though again more data will be required at the detailed stage. WLLP IMP14 Requires proposals to comply with all relevant SPG supplementary policy guidance (SPG). The main SPG YES against which this application has been assessed are those requiring specific developer contributions and the SPGs on planning for education and affordable housing. As already detailed in this policy assessment, a package of contributions is being negotiated which will accord with the requirements of these SPG. Other technical SPG covering noise, flood risk and drainage and health impact assessments have also been complied with through the submission of the detailed information in the ES.

Also of relevance are the council's Residential Design Guide, Open Space Strategy and SPGs. The Scottish Planning Policy Guideline (SPP), ‘Designing Streets; A Policy Statement for Scotland’ and the following Planning Advice Note (PAN) documents are applicable:

PAN 33 Development of Contaminated Land PAN 42 Archaeology PAN 58 Environmental Impact Assessment PAN 61 Planning and Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems PAN 65 Planning and Open Space PAN 67 Housing Quality PAN 74 Affordable Housing PAN 75 Planning for Transport PAN 77 Designing Safer Places PAN 78 Inclusive Design PAN 79 Water and Drainage PAN 83 Masterplanning PAN 84 Reducing Carbon Emissions in New Development

6 REPRESENTATIONS

6.1 Material letters of representation have been received from 24 parties (plus one relating to an ownership issue which has been resolved). The representations are summarised below; the full letters are attached to this report.

Comments Response 1. General A public local inquiry (PLI) into the West Lothian  Inappropriate scale of development Local Plan was held in 2006/2007 and the  Timing of application in advance of P.L.I. reporters’ recommendations from that PLI were  Contrary to existing and emerging LP published in March 2008. The reporters endorsed policies the scale of the allocation at Winchburgh, and the  Loss of open countryside/prime agricultural use of agricultural land, subject to the delivery of land the motorway junction and some individual  Should use brown field land first (eg recommendations with regard to the setting of  Auldcathie & Niddry Bing) Glendevon pond and the delivery of the  Why is this landtake necessary when new distributor road between Winchburgh and brownfield sites are coming forward at Leith Broxburn. The planning application was not Docks progressed until the WLLP was adopted. The application has been assessed against current  Council should produce master plan not WLLP policies and as detailed in section 5 above developers is generally compliant. 2. Bings and open space The master plan proposals show over 600m  Too close to Faucheldean bing (a Scheduled between the bing and the nearest proposed Ancient Monument and wildlife site): need a development. Historic Scotland is satisfied that 600m exclusion zone the proposals will not be detrimental to the  Bings should be preserved and made an setting of the scheduled bing. There is an attraction extensive network of landscaping and open  Improve open spaces and landscape space, which meets and exceeds council policy provision requirements. There are appropriate buffers  Provide buffers between new and old between new and old development, but it is also development important to have integration between new and old, so there are areas where development will have an interface with existing housing, mainly to the southwest of Winchburgh and at Glendevon. Exact separation distances and how these interfaces work will be looked at in more detail in subsequent planning applications. 3. Wildlife and landscaping Detailed survey work has been undertaken as  Impact on birds, bats, newts/fish (notably part of the submitted ES, including from the new canal basin) supplementary surveys. This information has  Impact on wildlife and landscape quality been assessed by SNH and the proposed  Spoil natural look of canal/can’t cope with mitigation agreed as acceptable, subject to increase in boating undertaking further updated surveys at the time  Need to clarify proposals for existing of submission of detailed applications. The individual trees and groups master plan layout, including the road corridors, has been developed taking into account existing wildlife habitats and to avoid particular sensitive locations such as individual badger setts. There will be inevitable impacts on some habitats, including foraging areas, but the landscape network has been developed to ensure there are linkages with new and old habitat corridors and where possible appropriate mitigation is undertaken. Existing watercourses are to be enhanced to improve biodiversity. The landscape proposals show that existing trees and groups of trees will be retained where possible but where felling is necessary, in particular along new road corridors replacement planting will be undertaken. 4. Transportation The transport impacts have been fully assessed  Without rail link only 300 houses would be and Transportation is satisfied that, subject to acceptable appropriate improvements to existing roads and  Road congestion & traffic impact (5,000 extra junctions, the proposals are acceptable. The cars) improvements will include those to the road north  Impacts on junctions at Kirkliston, A89 & A8 of the M9 and the Beatlie bridge and at existing  The roads north of the M9 are narrow and junctions at Newton, Threemiletown, Broxburn will lead to road safety issues and Uphall, which will be required as conditions  The M9 junction should be at Muriehall of consent. With these improvements the existing  The junction will impact on the setting of road network can accommodate up to 1000 Duntarvie Castle residential units and beyond this the new  Need new combined bus & rail links motorway junction will need to be in place. Bus services and facilities will be supplemented as the settlement expands and the council will continue to discuss the need for a new rail station with Transport Scotland. The reporters at the PLI concluded that because of constraints with the delivery of a rail station, an enhanced bus service would be acceptable to deliver the necessary improvements in public transport. Historic Scotland has not objected to the location of the junction in relation to Duntarvie Castle. 5. Phasing A package of town centre improvements or a  Should include improvements to village and financial contribution will be required in line with provision of low cost housing first council policy. The first phase of finance has  Start in centre and work out to allow been agreed and the developer is also monitoring by existing community (and later discussing the potential of leasing and using the provision of infrastructure) former Beatlie school as part of the improvement  Avoid long term significant impacts on package. existing populations The phasing has been amended to take into account the current economic climate and the need to deliver key items of infrastructure, such as water and drainage and reach agreements with third parties such as crossings over the canal and railway. As the start will now be focussed to the west and move eastwards this will avoid extended impacts on the wider community, which would have occurred under the initial phasing plan where works were to start in both the east and west.

Monitoring of the impacts and liaison with the community will be important and where appropriate liaison groups/meetings will be set up. 6. Provision of services As part of the proposals land will be available for  What provision will be made for doctors, post the council to develop a partnership centre. The office, police, fire, water & electric NHS health trust, police and other partners will  Level of social housing/tenure mix needs be involved in developing the centre and clarifying ensuring that the appropriate level of services are available as the community expands. Affordable housing, in the form of land and/or commuted sums and units has been agreed at 25% and will include a range of housing. 7. Health and safety issues The appropriate technical safeguards will need to  Land stability be undertaken by the developer to meet Scottish  Gas pipeline Coal/building warrant requirements with regard to land stability and HSE / gas supplier requirements with regard to work in the vicinity of the pipeline. 8. Existing pitch As part of the initial master plan the proposals  Loss of playing field showed the use of the playing field at Tippet Knowes for housing and community facilities such as a church hall and kick pitch. This proposal has now been deleted from the master plan, though it is shown as being potentially used for future community use, which could include use for the partnership centre. This, however, is not fixed and will require to be the subject of a future detailed planning application. The playing field is to be retained as part of the current proposals. 9. Town centre buildings The town centre is shown as being primarily two  Impact of buildings, (particularly 5 storey and three storey buildings, however, illustrative building) on existing canal side houses (both layouts show that there could be one or two sides) higher focal buildings. The exact impact of these on existing properties will need to be examined through detailed applications though the design and siting of higher buildings will need to ensure there is no overshadowing or loss of privacy for existing residents. 10. Extension to existing school A meeting was recently held with education and  The Winchburgh Parent Council (WPC) planning officers and the head teachers and objects to the delay in the provision of new parent council’s of both schools. schools, which will then require the existing At this meeting education set out that the Winchburgh Primary to be extended. WPC strategy for the existing building is to extend it in consider that the school is not capable of phases so that ultimately it will become a two being extended without detriment to the stream school for Winchburgh PS only. At that quality of teaching and learning stage Holy Family PS will be moved to a new opportunities. site, which is identified in the master plan behind  The building and site were designed as a the former Beatlie school buildings. single campus but now accommodate both There is currently sufficient capacity at Winchburgh and Holy Family schools and Winchburgh PS to accommodate approximately facilities other than class rooms are required 350 new houses, but no capacity at Holy Family. which the developer should pay for. A 3 classroom extension is therefore planned for Holy Family, but this is to be located in such a manner that it will allow for the long term use of the school for WPS without prejudicing the short term use of the site for the two schools. The extension proposals, which will be paid for by the developer, also include improvements to circulation /garden and entrance spaces in the school and the provision of outdoor play facilities. Both parent councils have been given the opportunity to comment on options for the extensions and improvements directly to education/construction services. A detailed application will be required for the extension when there will be further opportunity to comment. At this stage none of the proposals will prejudice the operation of either of the schools. 11. Glendevon There are three small groups of houses at  Impact on character of Glendevon area, Glendevon that are affected by the proposals: particularly existing cottages (privacy/ those adjacent to the pond, 5 properties at overshadowing) and the existing pond Glendevon Farm Cottages and 3 at Old  The proposed path network will disturb Glendevon Farm Cottages. existing wildlife including swans The reporters at the PLI confirmed that the  Crossing glendevon farm road with a new mixed-use allocation at Glendevon was road in close proximity of existing houses appropriate. The principle of housing in the area  The road is in private ownership has therefore been established through the PLI,  The Swannery agricultural holding is not where a number of residents from Glendevon recognised presented evidence. The reporters did require an  The development will impact on the water appropriate wildlife corridor to be provided supply to Glendevon pond around the pond, to protect this valuable natural resource. This requirement has been carried through in the local plan and is reflected in the master plan. A condition can also be imposed to ensure that this is incorporated in any subsequent detailed application and that path routes respect identified wildlife habitats. Additional information has been submitted to confirm that the proposals will not impact on the water supply for the pond. The amenity of the individual residents will be fully assessed with the submission of detailed applications. The master plan currently shows adequate landscape buffers around the properties adjacent to the pond and those at Old Glendevon Farm. A landscaped area is shown opposite the 5 Glendevon Farm properties, but there could potentially be rear gardens of new properties adjoining the gardens of the existing houses. It will therefore be necessary to carefully assess the details of boundaries and privacy/overshadowing implications at the detailed application stage to ensure that they accord with and, where possible, exceed council standards. There are specific objections to the new road being located to the north of the 5 houses. This is required to complete the strategic road network for the settlement, though will not be required until about year 2 or 3 of the development. The road corridor is approximately 15m wide, to take the road, a cycle path, verges and roadside planting. However, the exact location of the road is constrained by the presence of a high-pressure gas main in this corridor. If moved too far north the road would be on top of the pipeline, which is not acceptable and if moved further north still it would affect the planned primary school site. The developer has agreed to ensure that the road is moved as far north as possible with enhanced planting areas to the south to create a buffer between the houses and the road. The exact detail of the crossing of the track will need to be the subject of a detailed application. Ownership issues will need to be resolved between the developer and the relevant parties. 12. North Greendykes Cottages The new link road from Winchburgh to Broxburn Impact from new road in terms of: will run to the west of these cottages, though will  Noise not require to be completed until year 3 or 4. The  Air pollution current main road goes in front of the cottages.  Congestion Therefore the new route, which will be fully  Would ring road avoiding new & old built up landscaped, will take the majority of the traffic areas be better? away from the front of the cottages to the side, potentially improving the overall amenity for the cottages. If appropriate, noise and air quality assessments will be required as part of the detailed submission for the road and appropriate mitigation, such as bunding/planting can then be undertaken. The reporters at the PLI agreed that the line of the proposed link road was acceptable, subject to the normal mitigation measures to protect residential amenity. This can be achieved at the detailed application stage. 13. Faucheldean The proposed link road to Broxburn will pass the  The possibility of closing Faucheldean Rd west end of Faucheldean. The line of the link should be explored (note: this is not road was debated at the local plan PLI and the supported by Winchburgh residents) reporters were satisfied that the exact route of the main road and the connection between the two roads can be considered at the detailed application stage. Some Faucheldean residents support complete closure of the road, however, Transportation would prefer a connection together with appropriate traffic calming to ensure this does not become a “rat run”. Again this can be considered in more depth at the time of the detailed submission. 14. Impact on individual properties There is one property adjacent to the canal and  Loss of Canal Cottage small pockets of land that remain in private  Loss of field used and maintained for sheep ownership that may be required for the (north of West End House) development. The entire application site (other  Station Rd dwellings are being incorporated than some landscaped areas) is allocated for into the site development in the local plan and supported by  Uncertainty for affected owners the structure plan. It will therefore be for the developer to negotiate with the appropriate landowners to secure any necessary outstanding land. The Station Road properties, which are adjacent to the railway line are modern properties which will be retained and appropriate measures undertaken to protect the amenity of existing occupiers. 15. Remediation proposals A redevelopment strategy has been produced for  No plans for re-instatement of Niddry Bing which allows for the gradual Auldcathie/Niddry Bing depletion of the bing, in line with the current permitted consent, and then gives options for the long term re-use of the site. Given that the current consent allows for extraction up to 2051, even with a speed up in the current rate when development begins in the area, any future use is very much a long-term proposal and is not relevant in terms of this current application. A separate planning application has been submitted for the remediation of Auldcathie including woodland planting and potential energy generation from gas extraction. Some of the detail has recently been updated and is being assessed but is generally supported by the council/SEPA/SNH and the Forestry Commission. Suspensive conditions will be used on this master plan application to ensure that the areas closest to Auldcathie are not developed until the strategy has been approved and appropriate agreed mitigation is in place. In particular the secondary school campus cannot be occupied until the agreed restoration has taken place. 16. Consultation The developers undertook the main consultation  Report does not accurately reflect the exercise over 5 years ago. Since that time consultation exercise and responses updates have been provided for the public received. through the community council and existing school parent councils and where appropriate the plans have been amended to address concerns of residents and community groups. 17. Airport BAA has raised no objections to the application,  Implications of Edinburgh Airport Expansion subject to appropriate planting and working plans methods being employed on site. 18. Other The documents have been updated and, where  Errors/inconsistencies in documents necessary, corrected and re-notification  Illustrative only undertaken. Comments on the updated master plan and supporting information is included and addressed in this section. As this is an application in principle much of the work is illustrative, but there is also a significant amount of detail that will be used to guide the determination of subsequent detailed planning applications.

7 CONSULTATIONS

This is a summary of the consultations; the full documents are contained in the application file.

Consultee Objection? Comments Planning Response Scottish NO There shall be no impact on the Noted. The developer has Government water environment during or after confirmed that best Environment Group construction as a result of the practice principles will be development. SUDS measures shall employed for protecting the be incorporated where applicable for water environment. Overall road drainage. SEPA should be fully SUDS proposals have involved in the discussions on the been submitted with the proposals. application and endorsed by SEPA who have been consulted on the application. Historic Scotland NO Historic Scotland is content that the Noted. Agreed mitigation in ES has made a comprehensive and the form of good design / fair assessment of the impacts on the appropriate protection and historic environment, in particular on integration of scheduled the Union Canal and Duntarvie monuments and listed Castle, and is content that the buildings / structures into mitigation strategy proposed is an the development can be appropriate and practical approach ensured through the use of that accords with the advise offered appropriate conditions. by HS. Transport Scotland NO There has been a significant degree Transport Scotland’s of ongoing consultation between support of the proposed M9 Transport Scotland (TS), the junction, subject to applicant and their consultants and mitigation on the strategic West Lothian Council. This has been and local network, is due to a number of reasons not least welcomed. This will include the applicant’s preferred access mitigation at the Newbridge strategy which included the provision junction and the developer of both a new motorway junction on and WLC Transportation the M9 motorway to the north of the officers are in discussion development and a new rail halt on with Edinburgh Council to the Edinburgh – Glasgow rail line. determine the mechanism Appraisal work and policy decisions for achieving this. have been required to establish the Whilst it is disappointing principle of such a strategy and to that TS are unable to determine its operational impact on support a new railway the strategic transport network. station at this time, this is a Based on the consultation and key component in ensuring discussions I would advise that Winchburgh develops as a Transport Scotland does not propose sustainable community and to object to the application, subject to officers remain committed appropriate conditions being to an ongoing dialogue with attached to any consent granted. In TS. However, at this stage, particular no more than 1000 houses in line with the TS request, shall be occupied before the junction no formal approval of the is opened. station can be given. The The recommended conditions reflect local plan, following the the need to deliver both the reporters recommendations Consultee Objection? Comments Planning Response employment and residential zones in at the PLI allows for tandem. The provision of a new enhanced bus services motorway junction is predicated on until such time that the the delivery of a functioning mixed station is delivered. The use development. legal agreements will The appraisal work has require the developer to demonstrated that a suitable public contribute to providing transport mode share could be these services until such achieved through either enhancing time that a station is bus services or providing a new rail delivered. If this does not station. However a rail halt at happen by the time that Winchburgh would impact on the 1000 residential units have Edinburgh – Glasgow Improvements been built then the overall Programme (EGIP). The primary public transport provision objective of EGIP is to increase will need to be reassessed. service levels via all Edinburgh to Glasgow routes from today’s 5 or 6 services per hour, with a fastest journey of 50 minutes, to 13 services per hour with a fastest journey time of around 35 minutes. Based on a scenario with a potential call at Winchburgh, timetable analysis has indicated that the journey time between Edinburgh and Glasgow would increase by approximately 3 minutes. Transport Scotland therefore cannot support the proposal for a rail halt primarily due to the detrimental effect this will have on the national objectives associated with the Edinburgh Glasgow Improvement Programme. TS therefore, request that the provision of a new rail halt does not form any part of any consent granted although it was referred to in the outline planning application. Sportscotland NO As amended, to show an increase in Noted. Conditions can be the provision of sports pitches in the imposed to require the expanded settlement and particularly appropriate provision as at the school sites, Sportscotland is the settlement expands. content that the development, as Management proposals will proposed in the master plan and need to be worked up in Pitch and Play Proposals document, conjunction with the council makes adequate provision for playing to ensure appropriate fields for school and community use. school and community Conditions and/or legal agreements access. shall be used to secure the phased provision of the pitches, which shall be constructed to an appropriate standard. Provision shall also be made for appropriate management and maintenance of the pitches. Consultee Objection? Comments Planning Response SEPA NO SEPA would commend the approach Noted. Further technical taken in identifying many of the detail will be required as environmental constraints and part of subsequent welcomes the master plan’s applications and can be emphasis on sustainable required as a condition of development and welcomes the consent. commitment to employ sustainable construction methods and the use of energy saving measures. SEPA commends the consideration given to the siting of the SUDS features across the site and the diversity of regional control structures. There remain matters of detail which will require to be resolved as detailed design codes and applications are brought forward, however, overall the proposals are to be commended as an example of best practice in environmental design. Following the submission of an additional report SEPA is satisfied that it offers adequate justification for the part culverting of the Beatlie drainage channel. SNH NO Following the submission of Noted. Appropriate supplementary survey work and conditions, which ensure meetings held between the that updated survey work developer, SNH and the council, and mitigation proposals SNH is content that its requirements are submitted, where for detailed survey work, and necessary, with detailed appropriate mitigation to ensure that applications, can be the proposed development would not imposed. impact adversely on wildlife and habitats, can be taken forward through appropriate conditions/legal agreements. Particular attention must be paid to otters, bats and water voles where more work is required before detailed development proposals are drawn up. The developer will require appropriate licences where work is to take place in the vicinity of protected species. Edinburgh Council NO The council raises no objections to Noted. Edinburgh Council the application but requests that at will be notified of the the detailed stage it is given the submission of detailed opportunity to comment on the applications. transport and water management aspects of the proposals. Scottish Water NO Subject to appropriate cost Noted. The developer is in contributions for water and discussion with Scottish wastewater connections being Water to ensure that the agreed with the developer, Scottish appropriate upgrades can Water will upgrade its facilities to take place to ensure the Consultee Objection? Comments Planning Response accommodate the Winchburgh necessary service development. A separate drainage connections are available system will be required and Scottish as the settlement expands. Water supports the principle of Best practice SUDS SUDS. techniques are to be used across the development and the submitted detail has been agreed in principle with Scotland Gas NO There is a high-pressure gas The master plan layout has Networks transmission pipeline in the vicinity of been drawn up in the development. No buildings consultation with Scotland should be constructed within 16m of Gas Networks and the the pipeline and no works or developer is aware of the crossings of the pipeline shall be restrictions. The position of carried out until detailed consultation the road network and the has taken place. formation of a linear park through the new settlement area has been drawn up in recognition of the location of the pipeline corridor. HSE NO The applicant has consulted with Noted. HSE consultation HSE with a view to drawing up will be undertaken for those proposals that are compatible with detailed applications within the gas pipeline. The master plan the vicinity of the pipeline. proposals appear to meet the recommendations of HSE, though HSE can only give final advice when the detailed applications are submitted. On the basis of the information supplied HSE does not advise against the granting of planning permission in this case. Network Rail NO On the basis of the information Noted. Transport Scotland provided Network Rail has no is unable to support a new objection in principle. However, this station at this time because is based on the key caveat that the of national rail network proposed railway station can only be objectives and the lack of bought forward within the context of capacity within the national additional rail infrastructure timetable to allow. elsewhere on the network over which However, the council the applicant has no control. The continues to support this indicative station site can be element of the proposals supported, in so far as it will be and is in discussion with capable of implementation. However, Transport Scotland. the current timetable and level of service precludes an allowance for an additional stop without detriment to either the service overall or to a particular station. The support of a train operating company is also essential in order to enable a station scheme to be developed. British Waterways NO British Waterways Scotland Noted. The indicative town welcomes the approach in the WLLP centre plans show a marina Consultee Objection? Comments Planning Response that requires canal related facilities of approximately 40 berths. for the two major expansion areas at The council will ensure that Winchburgh and East Broxburn. The the advice of BWS is benefits of scale suggest that a sought in the design and single basin at each town centre assessment of the detailed would be most commercially viable application for the town and create a critical mass of interest. centre and its facilities. Marina design should be targeted at 50 berths in each centre. BWS would be keen to be involved in the detailed design stage and assist in this process. BAA NO BAA does not have an aerodrome Noted. The landscape safeguarding objection to the strategy for the master plan proposal, provided that appropriate has been developed in conditions are imposed requiring the consultation with BAA and need for landscaping and SUDS to in line with their advice. comply with BAA advice on bird The necessary hazards from amenity landscaping conditions/agreements will and building design, and that a bird be part of any consent for hazard management plan is the site. submitted prior to development starting on site. Forestry NO The proposals offer excellent scope The applicant is currently Commission for the integration of existing and new engaged in detailed woodlands. There is real scope to discussions with the link into ancient and long established Forestry Commission and woodland areas. Some changes to the Central Scotland Forest the layout and linkages could also Trust to take forward the mean that grant funding may be woodland planting available. In particular species choice proposals in more detail. and planting specifications should be The final requirements can drawn up to suit individual site types be examined further at the and ground conditions. It would be detailed application stage. useful to discuss these matters in more detail with the applicant at the appropriate stage in the planning process. RSPB NO Development proposals of this scale Noted. Much of the will inevitably lead to some birds suggested mitigation is being affected, however, RSPB included in the ES and can consider that the studies carried out be developed as the and the approach to considering landscape/open space and implications generally satisfactory. SUDS proposals are Where losses of birds are likely it is brought forward at the appropriate to consider ways in detail stage. which any proposed losses can be mitigated on site or compensated for elsewhere. This can include provision of nest boxes, development and management of ditch margins and other wet areas. Scottish Rights of NO Scotways has been involved with the Noted. The path network Way and Access developer in drawing up their access plan has been updated to Society framework and welcomes the incorporate the additional Consultee Objection? Comments Planning Response developer’s willingness to consult ROW. A condition can be and take into account views of imposed to ensure paths interested parties. Most of the remain open or diversions existing ROW and paths are shown, are in place during except LW187. We would ask that construction. access be preserved along these rights of way during the works, with diversions if necessary. WOSAS NO The desk based archaeological Noted. A condition assessment identifies a number of requiring work to be archaeological sites both within the undertaken in each application boundary and character area before work surrounding it where there is a commences in any part of moderate to high potential for that area can be imposed. unrecorded archaeological remains. The work required to assess these sites can in this case be provided for4 by the attachment of a suspensive condition that requires the submission of a programme of archaeological works. Architecture & NO A&DS commends the work of the Noted. Further work on the Design Scotland master plan team, particularly in town centre and its layout understanding and working with the and linkages will be grain of the landscape to create a submitted at the detailed place rooted in its locality. There is planning application stage. an opportunity to capitalise on the assets of the canal, railway and park to create a unique town centre that integrates the new and existing communities. Further analysis of the public realm at the detailed stage when design coding is produced would be beneficial. A&DS looks forward to reviewing the project at a more developed stage. Garden History NO The Society is satisfied that the Noted. Society proposals are unlikely to have any detrimental impact on the designed landscapes in the area (Hopetoun and Newliston) and Niddry Castle and adjacent walled garden. It is noted that the rehabilitation of Niddry bing is not included as part of the current application. The Society would request that it is notified when this element comes forward as this is likely to have greater impacts on Newliston and Niddry Castle. Scottish Civic Trust PART The Trust does not consider it Noted. The master plan necessary to adopt the master plan has been updated to take as SPG. The design codes should be some of these comments worked up in conjunction with the on board. In particular a local authority. The overall aim of the more detailed assessment codes should be to encourage of the existing village has Consultee Objection? Comments Planning Response interesting layouts and architecture. been undertaken. Improvements to the existing centre The boundaries of the should be a priority. The Trust would development have been have expected a more detailed established through the PLI appraisal of the existing character process. It is considered and appearance of Winchburgh. The that the town centre is the Trust questions whether the most appropriate location supermarket should be located in the for a supermarket to heart of the town centre as large ensure it is fully accessible structures can be detrimental to the to all the population. The intimate sense of space. It is master plan fully endorses important that all boundaries remain high quality development as shown and mark a clear change and also includes potential from countryside to built improvements for the town environment. The retention of the centre. The exact design of green corridor to the south is housing and the full details supported. There is concern about of town centre the employment allocation along the improvements will only be M9, which will add to the urban available at the detailed sprawl. The Trust is disappointed stage. For an application in with the level of information, principle there is more that improvement and integration of the sufficient information to existing village in the extension allow a full assessment of plans. The Trust would recommend the proposed expansion. that the local authority strive for good quality contemporary design. WLC NO The transportation and access Noted. The transportation Transportation principles contained in the master requirements and triggers plan are acceptable. Full have been agreed with the vehicular/pedestrian/cycle access developer and will be proposals will be required with each incorporated into conditions detailed application that is submitted. or legal agreements as Developers will also be required to required. undertake the appropriate improvement/mitigation measures on the existing network at certain points throughout the development. The number of houses that are occupied will trigger the requirement for the works. During the construction of the first 550 units the following works will need to be undertaken: Signal and direction change at Greendykes traffic lights, Broxburn, Installation of traffic signals at Threemiletown Other triggers will then need to be conditioned up to the 1000th unit, including changes to signals at Uphall and new signals at Newton. The motorway junction, the railway station (or an enhanced bus service) and appropriate park and ride facilities will need to be in place prior to the occupation of the 1001st unit. Consultee Objection? Comments Planning Response The developer will be required to pay for the promotion of traffic orders and all the associated transport works including new bus stops and shelters and the proposed path network. WLC Education NO Education has been fully consulted in Noted. The developer has the development of the master plan agreed to the required framework for the provision of new education costs for the schooling at Winchburgh, and the initial 550 houses and expansion of the existing primary negotiations are ongoing to school. There needs to be sufficient establish the exact school capacity built to provide a procurement routes for the quality education for the rising new schools and the population in the Winchburgh delivery of the required community. Education is satisfied education infrastructure that with the developer contributions which will be needed when negotiated, the first 550 houses can the development extends proceed before the initial phase of beyond the first 550 the secondary campus is opened. As houses. there is existing capacity at Winchburgh PS, the first 350 houses can also proceed before a new non- denominational school is opened. Education is satisfied that this school is capable of being developed in the location identified at Glendevon and has given accommodation schedules and briefs to the developer to assist in the design process. A catchment review will need to be carried out to establish a catchment for the new school. WLC Housing NO The proposals should comply with Noted. These requirements the adopted Affordable Housing are to be incorporated in policy, which requires land or a the initial 550 legal combination of land and finance agreement and a which equates to the delivery of 15% commitment to comply with of the total site capacity for use for the AH policy at the time socially rented housing and for the when future detailed CDA sites an additional affordable applications are submitted house contribution equating to a will be included in the minimum of 10% fully complete overall legal agreement. affordable houses. The current offer in respect of the first 550 units, which involves the transfer of land for 30 to 40 units (to be serviced within 3 years of the transfer) and a financial contribution for the remainder of the 15% requirement, plus a commitment to deliver an additional 10% completed units in the town centre, is acceptable. WLC Flood NO Initial concerns regarding flooding Noted. The requirements to Prevention downstream along the Niddry and integrate the individual Consultee Objection? Comments Planning Response Swine Burns), within the Edinburgh SUDS schemes and catchment areas have been assess them against the addressed. The submitted water overall water management management plan shows that the key plan for the site can be a requirements of: ensuring there is no condition of consent. The development within any 1:200 year developer is currently functional plain; no property is examining proposals for flooded from the 1:200 year flood the adoption and long term event and that there is sufficient maintenance of all the storage on site to attenuate the SUDS, open space, critical 1:100 year event can be met landscape and woodland, through the submitted layout. and public realm elements Further detail will be required from of the expanded the developers of individual areas settlement. Full details of about the routing of flood water and these and risk the routes from each area will require assessments, where to be integrated. There are extensive appropriate, can be above ground SUDS. The detailed required as conditions of design of these and the claypit pond consent. will have to minimise risk to the public. There will also need to be clarity about who will be responsible for the long term maintenance of these facilities. Soil sustainability will have to be carefully considered for a development of this scale. WLC NO The initial noise details in the ES Noted. The relevant noise Environmental indicated that there were a number of and air quality monitoring Health areas where closed-window noise information can be required assessments were undertaken. This as conditions of consent. is not acceptable for an assessment of noise impacts in this instance. There was also no indication, if any, of the maximum noise levels for nighttime train noise. No proposals were shown for mitigation measures to be employed to reduce noise levels at relevant residential facades. Following meetings with the applicant’s noise consultants further work has been undertaken and mitigation examined. This includes the use of flatted development adjacent to the higher noise sources, such as road and rail corridors, and the location of bedrooms away from the front facades in such locations. Subject to appropriate conditions and the submission of noise information at the detailed stage the proposals are acceptable. Real time air quality monitoring information for road traffic will be required for the submission of detailed applications, together with the incorporation of this technique in Consultee Objection? Comments Planning Response the code of construction practice. WLC Property NO No objections to the application. The Noted. Services council has a small land holding in Winchburgh, such as at Tippetknowes park and the former Beatlie School complex. Property Services is in discussion with the developer about potential refurbishment/re-use of the school buildings. WLC Contaminated NO The ES has identified all the possible Noted. These requirements Land Officer contamination sources within the can be imposed as application area, such as the bings, conditions of consent. mineral railway lines, former brickworks etc. All of these sources will require further investigation and assessment as the development proceeds. A condition should be attached at this stage requiring site investigations to be carried out for each sub-section of the development and that these be submitted with each detailed application. WLC Access NO The network of paths looks sufficient The access proposals have Officer but will need to be examined further been updated to show a as the more detailed designs for new path alongside the each area come through. Linkages to distributor road linking with Broxburn, access for horse riding Broxburn. Routes are to be groups, and connections into the extended where possible, surrounding area, are issues that subject to ownership need to be considered in more detail. constraints, to connect into Appropriate routes need to be in existing routes and place as the housing areas are built amendments have been out. undertaken to ensure there Cycle groups have suggested that are appropriate paths for there should not be through vehicular use by equestrians. access into the town centre. Through access to the town centre will be required to ensure there is adequate permeability and access for servicing/buses etc. There will be large pedestrian/ cycle areas and off road routes along the canal which will allow safe access for cyclists. WLC Sport & NO Extensive discussions have been Noted. The developer is Outdoor Education held with the master plan team with currently examining and Land Services regard to the proposed open space, proposals for the adoption play provision and sports facilities. and long term maintenance Following amendments and of all the play areas, open confirmation of acceptability from space, landscape and Sportscotland the basic layout and woodland, and public realm provision is considered acceptable. elements of the expanded Details of the maintenance and settlement. Full details of Consultee Objection? Comments Planning Response management of the facilities and the these and can be required open space will require to be as conditions of consent. submitted and the final Details of access and design/provision within each play management of the area will need to be agreed. Details community elements of the of public access and management of school sites are being the indoor facilities will also require to discussed between the be agreed with Education and sports developer and Education. management colleagues. West Lothian NO Many of the proposals in the master Noted. The health authority Community Health plan should contribute to good public and other community & Care Partnership health, such as good quality, energy partners such as the police, efficient housing, a transport network local colleges and designed to facilitate walking cycling voluntary bodies are and public transport and the working with the council to provision of recreational facilities. deliver a partnership Mixed tenure housing and good centre. If this application is quality rented accommodation and approved this will allow job opportunities are also important. further detailed discussions WLCHCP will need to work with to take place and a number partners to plan new health care and of the issues raised here to related social care provision for the be addressed. expanding community. Increased Other matters can be pollution and road traffic accidents covered by appropriate are two of the main concerns as the conditions. settlement expands. A number of specific suggestions and recommendations are made which it is hoped can be incorporated into the conditions of consent. Winchburgh NO WCC accepts the intended boundary There have been several Community Council of the development. Points for further meetings between the (WCC) consideration have been drawn up developer, council and through meetings of the WCC and community during the taking into account the views of processing of the residents and businesses. The main application. Many of the issues are: issues raised have been The footpath network should be taken into account, expanded. including improvements to High quality development should be the path network and the provided throughout and not just in requirement for a single Glendevon. partnership centre, which There should be no secluded unlit will include a health centre, areas. CIS, library and other The developer should support new community facilities and local businesses. rooms. A package of There should be one main improvements for the community centre and CIS. existing centre will be There should be improvements in the required and finance existing Main Street to attract new toward this has been businesses. agreed. How this Water quality and air quality should should/can be spent will be be monitored. something that can be Renewable energy techniques taken forward with full should be used. community involvement. Consultee Objection? Comments Planning Response A new health centre and other Detailed issues such as community facilities should be traffic calming, exact road provided at an early stage in the routing and tree protection development. can be considered at the The road from Broxburn should avoid detailed stage, though the the ROW and the woodland strips. most sensitive locations The Faucheldean Road should have been avoided as far remain a through road. as practicable. Philpstoun CC NO It is disappointing that the structure Noted. The development (PCC) plan process has not directed new strategy in the structure development to the vast tracts of plan has been driven by a dereliction around Glasgow. need to respond to However, if development pressures development pressures in are directed away from Phlipstoun the eastern side of the with this scheme then PCC will not central belt. The allocation argue against it. The master plan is has been the subject of a an impressive piece of work and detailed assessment at the reflects a desire to create a local plan PLI. settlement that will allow a rounded The current proposal does community to form and indeed not detail any expansion flourish. It is important that plans for land further to the Philpstoun does not become a west. suburb of either Linlithgow or Winchburgh. The western edge of this proposal should therefore be designed to preclude further expansion. Newton CC NO In principle NCC has no objection to Noted. The land allocation (NCC) the development. The main issue for has been assessed Newton is additional traffic. This through a PLI and could be reduced if the Scottish confirmed through the Government agrees to make the adoption of the local plan. junction 4 ways at Kirkliston. It is also The Kirkliston junction will disappointing to see land shown for be improved to 4 ways as business development right up to the part of the Forth M9 boundary. The quality of the Replacement Crossing development shown in the master proposals. The required plan must be enforced. It will be standards of design can be important to ensure contractors imposed through the operate responsibly to limit the production of design codes impact on residents. and the careful consideration of detailed proposals. A code of construction practice will be required as a condition of consent. Linlithgow CC NO The updated proposals appear to Noted. (LCC) address our initial concerns regarding traffic impacts. However, if there are any future changes which could impact on traffic movement around Linlithgow or education capacity at the Academy LCC would wish to make representation on these matters.

8 ASSESSMENT

8.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires planning applications to be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Development Plan:

Edinburgh and the Lothians Structure Plan

8.2 The development of this CDA is a key component in meeting the strategic housing land supply targets for both West Lothian and the Lothians as a whole. As detailed in the policy assessment above, the proposal has been developed in full recognition of the structure plan requirements for bringing forward the allocated development sites in order to create sustainable and robust communities.

8.3 Whilst Transport Scotland (TS) has agreed that a new motorway junction is justified as part of the proposals, unfortunately it is unable to support a railway station at this time because of national timetabling requirements. Nevertheless, the station is an important element in the overall WLLP development strategy for Winchburgh, and is identified as an infrastructure requirement in the structure plan. Therefore, dialogue remains ongoing between the council and developers and TS in an effort to obtain the necessary permissions for the station. Until such time that a station is provided the developers will meet their public transport commitments through the provision of enhanced bus services, which, where necessary, will be subsidised by the developers.

8.4 Subject to signing the necessary legal requirements and ensuring that the negotiations in respect of the station continue, the proposal is in accordance with the provisions of the structure plan.

West Lothian Local Plan

CDA Allocation

8.5 As detailed in the policy section above, the proposal is for the development of one of the allocated CDA’s and has been assessed against a full spectrum of local plan policies and for the majority is in full compliance. The local plan envisaged that there would be an element of integration between the Winchburgh and East Broxburn CDA’s, however, because of the different timescales for developers submitting planning applications, this has not allowed for the production of joint reports or the commitment to joint infrastructure. The local plan does allow for the master plan proposals to be submitted and processed separately though encourages developers to produce a strategic integration plan detailing how the joint requirements can be taken forward.

8.6 Initial discussions have taken place between the Winchburgh and East Broxburn developers and council officers will continue to facilitate further discussions to ensure that as soon as practical those elements of joint infrastructure can be delivered equitably. In the current circumstances, however, where the Winchburgh developer has agreed to fund all the necessary Winchburgh requirements, and take on board the initial burden of the joint elements, it would be unreasonable to delay the processing of this application. There is nothing in the Winchburgh proposal that would prejudice the full development of the East Broxburn CDA, therefore, subject to there being ongoing dialogue between developers, there is sufficient justification to allow this application to proceed to determination without the submission of the strategic integration plan.

Education

8.7 A key component of implementing the council’s CDA strategy is ensuring that the development of new housing land does not proceed beyond the existing infrastructure capacity of each area. One of the greatest infrastructure costs within the CDAs relates to school provision. The CDA strategy has therefore been developed in conjunction with Education to ensure the appropriate capacity comes on line at the correct time.

8.8 As a result of the scale of the planned housing development within the CDAs, two non- denominational secondary schools and one denominational secondary school are required, together with appropriate primary provision. A large proportion of that capacity is required at Winchburgh and, as a result of constraints on public sector spending, the majority of that has to be developer funded.

8.9 Accommodation schedules and briefs for the schools have been produced by Education. Agreement has subsequently been reached with the developer for contributions for educational infrastructure to allow house building to commence whilst the design, phasing and procurement of 2 new secondary schools and 2 (or 3) primary schools is progressed. This will allow for new catchments to be developed and the numbers of pupils to reach an appropriate level before the new schools are opened. The school sites and buildings will be phased and the facilities associated with each of them, such as pitches and community accommodation will also be built in phases. Conditions and legal agreements will ensure that the appropriate facilities are delivered at the appropriate times and that management systems and plans are put in place, in consultation with sports and education development officers to allow for community access to these facilities. The planned extensions at Linlithgow Academy and St Margaret’s Academy will be able to accommodate the expected number of secondary school pupils from the first phase of 550 houses.

Transportation

8.10 In the same way that the school capacity will be developed incrementally, the road, path and public transport infrastructure will need to be expanded and improved as the settlement grows. The Transportation and Transport Scotland (TS) consultations detail the network improvements and interventions that will be required as the development is built out. Conditions will ensure that housing and other built development does not proceed beyond the capacity of the existing road and public transport network.

8.11 Whilst it is disappointing that TS are unable to support a new railway station at this time, this is a key component in ensuring Winchburgh develops as a sustainable community and officers remain committed to an ongoing dialogue with TS. The local plan, following the reporter’s recommendations at the PLI allows for enhanced bus services until such time that the station is constructed. The legal agreements will require the developer to contribute to providing these services until such time that a station is operational. If this does not happen by the time that a 1000 residential units have been built then the overall public transport provision will need to be reassessed and further commitment given to improving and expanding bus services, including park and ride facilities.

Quality of Development

8.12 The master plan has been developed taking into account all the constraints and assets of the site, including topography, watercourses, road and rail locations, mining history, archaeology and wildlife. The layout has been developed as far as possible to limit development on the most sensitive locations in terms of wildlife/archaeology/geology; to avoid skyline development and keep sensitive development back from road, rail and gas pipeline corridors.

8.13 At the same time, the proposals have taken into account the best practices in terms of place making and the layout maximises the use of positive assets, such as the canal and claypit pond and the linkages into the surrounding countryside, together with the transport connections onto the road, rail and canal. There is an extensive landscaped setting to be created and a detailed network of paths, both which will be essential to delivering a quality development. The planning process will ensure that these elements are brought forward as the settlement expands.

8.14 The master plan places emphasises the importance of quality design and sustainable design in bringing forward this settlement expansion. With the recent publication of the Climate Change (Scotland) Act and the forthcoming changes to the building standards regulations, the development of this settlement gives an ideal opportunity to incorporate the most recent best practice in sustainable design and carbon reduction techniques. The developer is committed to this approach and will be required to submit design and carbon reduction statements as part of any detailed application.

8.15 A soil management plan has been submitted as part of the ES to identify the best sustainable use of soil resources across the development and give guidelines for handling, storage and replacement. A construction and environmental management plan (CEMP), incorporating a code of construction practice, will be developed for the site. This will ensure that best practice techniques for management of construction waste and soil handling are implemented. Other management plans such as a landscape/open space and habitat management plan will also be required as conditions of consent.

Community Facilities

8.16 The proposals take full account of all the requirements in the local plan for community facilities, as detailed in the policy section above. Commitment has been given by the developer to make the appropriate level of serviced land available for schools, affordable housing, a partnership centre, a canal basin, railway station, parks, open space, play and sports facilities and parking. Appropriate developer contributions have also been agreed in line with policy requirements. The main focus and challenge for the council will therefore be to ensure the delivery of the facilities at the appropriate time as the settlement and population grows. As far as possible these requirements will be incorporated into the terms of the conditions and legal agreements for the development.

Ecological Impacts

8.17 On a site of this scale there will be inevitable impacts on wildlife and habitats. However, this scale of allocation has been examined and supported by the reporters at the PLI and is now reflected in the boundaries in the local plan. Nevertheless, as detailed elsewhere the master plan team has designed the layout to avoid areas of particular sensitivity and ensure that the impacts are kept within acceptable limits. The baseline data submitted with the ES is extensive and details for example that only 12 mature trees and approximately 40 semi-mature trees will be lost as a result of the overall development. The watercourses and SUDS/open space areas, which will be incorporated within the new development, are to be maximised to improve biodiversity value and the concept of creating a “green network”, which allows wildlife to move through the corridors, has also been developed. The reporters from the PLI have also required a wildlife corridor to be provided adjacent to Glendevon pond.

8.18 The developer’s environmental consultants and the council have undertaken extensive consultation with SNH, the Forestry Commission and the Central Scotland Forest Trust to ensure that best practice in terms of biodiversity and habitat creation and linkages are built into the final landscape proposals. There will be inevitable effects on some species, such as badgers, from the new road layout. In such cases existing habitats and foraging routes have been identified and mitigation measures, which include appropriate provision for crossing roads (via tunnels) and in one case the possible re-location of a sett, are proposed. Much of the initial survey work was undertaken several years ago therefore new surveys will be required before work starts on site and where necessary licences will need to be obtained. SNH has requested that further work is also undertaken in respect of otter and water vole habitat identification. Such requirements can be imposed as conditions of a planning permission in principle, to be submitted concurrently with any subsequent detailed application.

Auldcathie

8.19 Although not a specific policy, the local plan requires the developer at Winchburgh to produce a strategy for restoring the former Auldcathie landfill site. The strategy needs to include a timescale for implementation and is to be completed and approved before development can take place on adjoining sites. The applicant group (under Cala Management Ltd) has submitted the required strategy as a separate planning application (ref:0033/FUL/07).

8.20 Relevant consultees including SEPA, the Forestry Commission, the WLC contaminated land officer and WLC Transportation officers, have assessed this application. The strategy has recently been updated to reflect current best practice for remediation and landscaping of landfill sites and, subject to final clarification on issues relating to leachate and gas treatment, it is anticipated that this strategy can be approved in the next two months. The former landfill lies to the west of the proposed secondary school campus and several proposed housing areas. No development could be approved for these sites until the final strategy has been signed off and appropriate contaminated land reports have been submitted and agreed for them. No occupation of the school site or housing could take place until the agreed remediation measures have been implemented. These requirements will be made conditions of this and any relevant detailed consent.

Representations

8.21 Given the scale of the development, a relatively modest number of representations have been submitted. These are all detailed in section 6 above and include comments on both the initial and updated master plan proposals. The objections have been assessed and responded to in detail in section 6. Council officers, and in most cases the developer, have met or spoken to the majority of objectors, either individually or in small groups. Account has been taken of objections in the amended master plan and where possible appropriate changes have been made.

8.22 There are a number of cases where the issues are mainly ownership/legal ones where the matter will need to be resolved between the developer and the interested parties. There are others regarding the scale and several transportation issues that were already raised and addressed at the PLI into the local plan.

8.23 Where issues of individual amenity have been raised these will be addressed primarily by ensuring there will be adequate separation or buffers between existing and proposed development, particularly with regard to the proposed distributor road and properties at Faucheldean and Greendykes. The full detail will, however, only be available at the subsequent application stage, though this will allow relevant parties the opportunity to comment further.

8.24 The group of properties likely to be most affected by the development are the five cottages at Glendevon Farm. Discussions have, however, been held with the developer and master plan team and a commitment given that open space and appropriate landscaping will be provided around these cottages. Again this requirement can be fully assessed and quantified at the detailed application stage.

8.25 The link road travelling northeast from Glendevon toward the new town centre will be located close to the boundary of the northern most cottage. This is required to complete the strategic road network for the settlement. The road corridor is approximately 15m wide, to take the road, a cycle path, verges and roadside planting. The exact location of the road is constrained by the presence of a high-pressure gas main in this corridor. If moved too far north the road would be on top of the pipeline, which is not acceptable, and if moved further north still it would affect the planned primary school site.

8.26 The corridor could be kept as a cycle/pedestrian route only if the connection down to Greendykes Road in Broxburn were completed at an earlier stage in the development (to ensure there is a secondary access to the new housing areas). However, the developer is unable to deliver that connection any sooner, because of ownership constraints. The developer has therefore agreed to ensure that the road is moved as far north as possible, with enhanced planting areas to the south to create a buffer between the houses and the road. This and the exact detail of the crossing of the track will need to be the subject of a detailed application, at which stage there will be more certainty in the design and residents will be able to comment further. At this stage, subject to appropriate conditions, the proposals are acceptable.

9 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

9.1 The proposed CDA development at Winchburgh has a major role to play in facilitating economic and physical regeneration in the area, as well as contributing to the housing land supply to address the continuing growth in population in West Lothian.

9.2 The aim of the CDA allocation in the local plan, and what has been reflected in the submitted application, is to create a robust and unique, sustainable urban structure that will fit into and become an identifiable part of the overall settlement pattern in West Lothian. The location and scale of the development has been carefully established to ensure that the appropriate transport, education and community facilities can be delivered by the developers as the settlement expands.

9.3 The vision for the development is that it provides a living and working environment that encompasses a sense of community, a high level of environmental quality and promotes economic success. The information and assessments submitted show that the expansion is capable of achieving these goals, but the challenge for the council is to ensure that the high quality design and environmental standards are adhered to as development commences. The adoption of the master plan as SPG is therefore an important element in achieving this.

9.4 Subject to completing negotiations on the required legal agreements, it is recommended that conditional permission in principle be granted.

10 ATTACHMENTS

 Location plan  Extract from WLLP showing CDA boundary  Proposed Character Areas  Proposed Land-Use Mix Plan  Letters of representation

CHRIS NORMAN Development Management Manager Date: 2 June 2010 L.

t.

DM COMMITTEE LOCATION PLAN Date: 2 1) 10 Appik dtlofl No. : 1 () 12 P 0 West Lothian Sca’e I 20000 Council

X,-t

‘

o-,_

c---

)

--—

te,X.

----

>-

c--L

-

-

‘3-

c

A

,-

c,

(

c

-

4

I

—

QL

I

4t-I

-

—

—

‘

—

4

f

‘P

-t

L

c

V+

bc2

-_-

c

PJ’—t

xL

_

1/

I

,

4

,

2

1-

‘---.

SLP

/005

E

nfl

I

I

I

I

I — 4& SOld Glendevon Farm Cottages Winchburgh EH52 6PX

28 September 2005

The Development and Building Control Manager Development Control Unit County Buildings Linlithgow EH49 7EZ

Dear Sir! Madam Planning application for Winchburgh West Lothian

I am writing to register my serious concerns regarding the plans for developments in and around Winchburgh. We reside in a very beautiful area called Glendevon which on the plan is shown that our cottages (which date back to 1700’s> will be totally surrounded by housing estates. Our concerns are as listed below

1. The area of which is an area of beauty and enjoyed by residents and visitors, will be ruine. Regularly there are horse riders, walkers and runners who currently enjoy this area which also is home to some amazing wijfjncIudin a Hawk. The planning for Winchburgh could continue and leave the areaflendevon as an area of beauty for all the residents of Winchburgh to enjoy.

2. The new development will fl.Qtbeij keep iththQcqgesof 1,2,3,4 & 5 Old Glendevon Cottages, which date back to the 1700’s.

3. The new development will overshadow the cottagesaffecting privacy, light and disturb the peaceful country environment, which the area currently enj

(fully understand that there is a need to provide more housing, however this should be done in conjunction with consideration for what is already existing locally. It would also make sense 3 that instead of ruining an area of beauty that this would be enhanced as a focal point for the new planned development.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours Faithfully ,@fj, ‘t

Grainne Kelly & Paul Mc Vegh

4 & 5 O:d Gndeion arm Cctas I.

\. ____

Canal Cottage West End Winchburgh, West Lothian EH 52 6011 26/9/2005

Dear Sir Ref outline planning permission for a 352HA development in Winchburgh. Cala Land Investment Ltd.

We are in receipt of neighbour notificationof the above planning application and are lodging an officialobjection

We appreciate that these plans are in outline, however the supplementary material containing artists impressions of various features of the development include a new town centre and canal side residential area. P117 of the final draft master plan makes no mention of our property, which has been completely obliterated by the proposal.

If indeed the developers intention is to work around our property and outbuildings, which includes extant approved plans for a new dwelling, rio reference is made. Such building as a five story block as is shown, would have a dramatic impact on our amenity and would completely overshadow it These drawings also assume th 11vehiculrtss to our properties would be taken away.

We further understand that the Lothian Structure Plan does provide for an expansion in Winchburgh, however these proposals appear to be excessive and are not currently in accord with the existing adopted local plan.

Until such time as there is a new approved local plan decisions on such a major development proposal must be deferred.

It is also worth saying that the time scale involved in this proposal is so lengthy that it is already causing great unceijajty for us as householders. As a result we now find we are inhibited from pursuing our proposed and approved new housing development

ln general we now find our whole property is blighted with no immediate means of mitigating or resolving the problem..

In conclusion, it is for the above reasons that we must object to thi&proposal

Yours faithfully

Derek and Valerie Gorman

kJW I tI1/ 3

2SP -k

L4r.J Gorman J Glendevon Park TJ\CHBURGF{ 1 / / IEH 52 6UE 121.09.2005

The Development and Building Control Manager Development Control Unit County Buildings LINLITFIGOW — EH49 7EZ

Dear Sir or Madam,

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT WINCHBURGH.

I write regarding the above subject, My home is to the south east of Glendevon Park, backing on to an area of natural landscaping, as well as the field I presume houses will be built on.

My concerns are that not only should the 4Lyith trees and shrubs etc be protected, they should also be to [which include deer] from any harm or loss of area due to the building of the new houses. Will an independent study be carried out to establish what the impact will be on the animal population and natural landscaping in this area?

Whilst nearly everyone I have spoken to agree that the development will be good for the future of ) Winchburgh, all have expressed concern about the ]g fQfl_cuntrsjcJe. I would hope that the council will ensure that the new houses will be built at a respectable distance from the current developments in Glendevon Park and Tippetknowes and possibly shielded by improving tree lines etc. Could the council also advise me what they would perceive to be a respectable distance between developments?

Finally I would urge council planners to remember that this development will have an iinpacn many of the current resident’s lives. Any descions taken should be considered with all seriousness’, as we all have the right to live in a clean and pleasant environment, which includes the open space Winchburgh residents currently enjoy. I understand that my comments may be viewed, but would ask that you respect my privacy and retrain from publishing my home address. Yourly,

John (pin 79 Mr

Yours

in cope into above I

I hich commuter A boatinjiarbour an spoil Winchburgh of

which

Winchburgh This unique now. development

facilities. school We acceptable The and here,

We can Providing which can’t around commute cope An residents

I Country Dear Linlithgow Development

2!

The also don’t

don’t

final Broburn,

Tippet

the

increasing

Dai

September2005

Winchburgh, have increase

have

go there

services

new with

the

Development

just

I

and find

ever

development Sir

faithfully location, should

are

alone see would

teachers. id

point. to

under

think Winchburgh

natural

noJ(

a Buildings

or development Knowes Fitzcharles

extra Winchburgh of Scotland. where now.

is to

monitored

village

it

any a

see

time, below

very

a

Madam: park

sets

work, Winchburgh.

area

will in Kirkliston.

goes in

bepyed the number

Winchburgh

Edinburgh.

like

big

Winchburgh Control

positive

the

with

A

weight

o Winchurgh

is

cc lodks

are Provide

due

the

proposed sad

have

and

and has

for

shortage average

large

to

put

Park.

ahead

population i.e.

and

facil’

goes

such

the

its

see historical

can’t

because

to to

Edinburgh,

the

of ride,

what

in, of

a

because and has

Unit

does

points, huge

number

Building

lack

lose

buses

Winchburgh. South

wildlife big more

ahead,

as

a the in

s. largest

plus

I

mail

cope

was

new

and frequent although of

also what

development

are

black

are Ospreys,_Kites getting

impact so not

of

canal population

fire

they

drivers,

to

the guarantees

in

Queensferry. background

other

there

made a

doctors much of

awful service,

school,

know of plus

with

work

about population

supply such

jjgijjaae. you Control

Winchburgh

facilities,

and

canal

the

the are

that

this

on

power

many

than

views?

I

any

into

are just

countr

hours

white, bigger as West

in don’t soiE local —

the

the

has ‘

(Winchburgh but

new

no

douT&i’t

these

of

with

newts, should

goinu

mo

Manager

an

of

an

now.

major others

rail

cuts,

post

to

taken insects and which

whis

residents Lothian.

of they

want

what Railway how

increase

attraction,

plans

side.

the

this

park

will hTTj

lines,

Pipistrelle ______

to European

You

birdlike office,

go which

then

cope work, oil

decades

have

local ins,thainTy

to

does

facilities we

village. destroy

that from

have

than

and

ahead

pipes

live

can’t

which

EH52

Station work

Health should in

after

with

been

our we environment.

below

Edinburgh it,

rides

working

ft,r

my afZ5iiiia Winchburgh.

a

andflsi

in

be

Bats

Owls and if to greater

The rare

get that

have

the local

a Winchburgh in 6LR eventually

increase

property you

successful,

seen

develop.

have

Centre

building to

we

because

avera Edinburgh

a

wouldcause

go first underground-disused Scottish

in

I

come

the that doctor’s

alreath

don’t

MP

from

are

where

Central

which impact

under

for

Airport

new canal

nest

was

promised, in

is

West value,

from?

the

being more

site

of

school ffliand have

run

boating

working

history,

but

lost

the development

the

would would

appointment

voted and the

and on

and

Scotland, population

for

new

under

Lothian I

ftirth&

not

but the

than

new

fields

due planned

road

I

limited

feed

JTEviJ1ose

service

the fields.

work

just 4th

because

expansion

get

be staff

really

may

such

on,

to

houses

Winchburgh. I

congestion, next

you

in worst

spoilt

base, problems

the new

if hasarebirds7

now, thanks

in

poor

number to

well The

I mines,

our

in

;f

the as

the

became when

within

due

public

number

plan

old

run

Central 1?

the the

developments

I

are

and

in

if size local

new

and

canal water

move,

L

plans

to

3

part

a to 4;

these Scotland),

bings, rail to

to you /‘I’ couldn’t

new

of so

to an

lack

transport

would the it

that

a

build area,

go.

of J - has

of

pressure.

is Scotland,

the lines lines

on.

work

live if

hew

nature

just

years.

of

can’t

The

the

seen

local

I

on?

that ‘

O5

to V — -__ -

- ___L/ V

- ZZJ&ZZEZZEZ — ___ -

__ _V4___WINCHBI.JRGH — V - ______VV _V

—

__Jt Z$c

___

04/C a _

_ ——-——--———EH526QA ____ -

______- L4p±d

__ 4J ______

$VV4&_VV

TEL:

Q’1’k, THE

V

&a4

trL

PI-IILPSTOUN

FIRM WEST _V

_VV__r DUNTARVIE

J&4i

cc4ó

OF

LOTHIAN day

V4c&i

0. 01506

— G.

VV•

NIMMO 834331

V i:

-—

fl/

a

22 JSLLtJ

-

cn/

d t t/4aa V

VF

Vc&4d c14sc. _

V /,

—

‘a ac/

--

atç/ f V___

VV 00 -- __ V V - V V

1J’i

Copies

Stuart

Yours

4

3

2

1

Please The

representations. that

Investments

Please arasedf&

our

3i

This

above

I

Findlay

16

352

Dear

West

EH49

Linlithgow

County

West

Development

The

refer 20Septemter200__J

Station

site

our

area

Findlay

Sincerely

Ha

house

The

Traffic

Impact

over Development

LLameoiLy,

Sirs

to

Lothian

development

note

Lothian

7EZ

note

would

neighbours

Developments Settlement

Buildings

in

the

site

development

Road

PPCA

question

CpnsukinCMLandStrucura1

along

iI

that

therefore

will

and

neighbour

on

is

appear

Council

Control

we

invariably

natural

not

should

Winchburgh

with

henrexpon.

Ltd

at

and

object

Expansion

and

Stuart

under

is

that

to

two

12

highlighted

the

Unit

notification

environment,

Building

not

and

have

delivered

and

this

increase to

others

current

the

be

essentially

the

14

been

Findlay

site

control

of

included

proposed

Station Control

Winchburgh

alongside

in

rural

to

is

dated

included

the

not

our

i.e.

of

environment

become

in

CALA

enclosed

Road

under

Manager

house

Associates 15

•

the

development

has

September

in

development

will

the

the

at

recently

urban.

part

be

16

control

greyed

will

Station

making

copy

2005

on

be

been

Engineers

Ltd

of

in

1

the

destroyed

area.

plan.

CALA

development

Road.

JA

similar

in

completed

grounds

respect

I

am

Land

2

by

sure

1

k.)

of

of

and

the

it

LbLJS J?Q7 proposal. Yours We Ground Mr Dear Country Development Linlithgow West TEL o ROYAL enclose and 01324 Sirs, Lothian faithfully, JKiSG BANK Mrs at Buildings This Hope a 471121 PT Dickson copy Cl Contact Council is 14 RIBERS. really Cottage, of a Unit letter for 4 your Winchburgh

TAIT 4 we L SOUCITORS records have PORTE FAX 2SE?2 sent

& t:an (Q(Lfr/( PREC1N, 01324 tthe at to

MACKENZIE & P.P.C.A. request ESTATE 484275 41 GRNOEMOLH of Ltd AGENTS L fli’tIflrt our regarding clients. eini1: Nj,;re their 27 tb FK3 awkairandrnackenzieco.uk September outline I SAT i planning , C 2005 DX 560722 _-( ( ))( Li ) CC

(‘N Mr A. Moncrieff, ) I 102 1Ippet knowes Road 1 Winchhurgh West Lothian EI-152 6UL

West Lothian Council. Development Control Unit, County Buildings. Linlithgow.

Dear Sir! Madam.

) Ref: Outline Planning permission : 352 HA Developmentq Winchburgh.

Having received the recent notice for Cala’s application for planning permission regarding the above development, I would like the Development Control Unit to record my disapproval of the application’s proposals.

The main reason for this development causing much concern is due to the enormous increase in traffic which will cause severe detriment to all of Winchburgh’s existing residents. An increase of 3500 houses could likely cause anflajQQrs to use the existing road network in and around Winchburgh and Kirkliston. Having attended the developer’s public meeting in February this year, it appears that very little thought has been given to this problem — even though there are 4 or 5 new planned distributor roads” and a new motorway junction. The new roads will serve only to distribute” the extra 4,000 odd cars across the newly developed area, which will result in queues and possibly tailbacks at all new and existing junctions. Currently, the road network suffers from tailbacks throughout the morning and evening rush-hours at the main junctions in ?1i!tirand at the A89. The motorway also suffers from tailbacks at the Newbridge roundabout. The A8 at Ingleston, although not severely congested, is very busy and causes tailbacks at times at the Gogar roundabout.

To introduce another possible 2,000 odd (figure reduced as not all residents will be orking in Edinburgh) cars ill result in absolute congestion and significantly increase journey times, not to mention pollution. The obvious alternative is to use public transport -- hut at this moment in time we have only been promiseL1 a new motorway junction (not really helpful!> and a new railway station7k and ride.

If Winchhurgb residents could look forward to a new bus and rail station offering a more comprehensive public transport netork thiFvoiikfErtaini ease our concern over pollution and road congestion.

\nother main concern is the type and mix or housing that is being proposed Wirn three ne neighbourhood centres being built, one ould expect a large proportion of social housing. No committed figure has been made available and therefore this gives cause for concern. As there is no commitment to build a new Police station or a fire station, (the current service in Broxburn is clearly not adequate for the number of houses being built) law and order along with public safety is another major concern.

Winchburgh, currently, is aesthetically pleasing with the lovely views and open spaces and is one of the main reasons why I moved here. This development will destroy what most residents have enjoyed whilst living in Winchburgh. Additionally, there are a number of mature trees, some solitary, others in clusters, that are a landmark in the area and noone has yet commented upon whether they will be preserved or felled to make way for a road or new houses. Already some forest areas have been removed at an obvious detriment to the wildlife that lived there.

Howeer more importantly perhaps Winchburg will lose its identit as a quiet country village to become yet another faceless’ modern town which will eventually experience all the problems associated with neighbouring towns such as Broxbum and Livingston Le. vandalism and inadequate public safety.

To summarise, I object to the development on the following grounds: • Increased car pollution • Increased risk of accidents (mainly concerning pedestrians) • Increased commuting time (No commitment yet to building the train station) • Increased risk of crime (No commitment to building a police station) • Increased noise and disturbance (construction time span over 10years) • Lack of detailed housing plans information. • Lack of proposals to retain existing trees / landmarks / footpaths etc. • General reduction of views and enjoyment of existing rural spaces. Yours/1/faithftilly, Andrew Moncrieff

Copy to: Caa Homes Malcolm M.cVittie, Winchburgh (.omm.unity Council

ii

__/• ‘

.

1

i

,

<

‘‘V{/

£:>

I

1?

/

L 11

i?

p

ç ?

- ,i’j

_

(.yf 2

.

43/-I-

/

j .11 ,

•‘ ?,

--

/

/..

?,

t

yj

U

?

//

/

6wppn9

r

i•

Z2

13 )V

.‘ —4

/

OZ

(Jl/ 7 /.J;/

J C

-

A

/

r-

1

2

)7_

(-2r

,

9

/

//(C/

///‘

‘2’

/ — 4jv42

6

Oit

Li 77-’ ‘?-7 )r?’) i; c—’?/ c/ )/; / 7))7r (‘i; L( /--.v - ?), 77r’7Y?/-7Q C? /- C’ ‘-4/t’r74 /‘ ., 7;1’:’ r ‘?:2’’’ /, I / ,i

(1 C ) )

the per

corridor. proposed

The important

2

and this details be

land use is The

With

I proposals With ltd.

Dear

EH49 Linhithgow West County Development

Cohn

Faucheldean

Size

such

required

proposed part

area

proposals

possibly could

proposals

required

regard

reference

Sir

7EZ

and

Lothian

Butter a

and

of

Building

This

for

development large wildlife

be

policy

based

or

from

to

housing

location.

using

Broxburn should

made

for

proposals

control

are

will the

scale

to

council

ENV

the around site

on

Bing

Winchburgh

too

increase above

land

of

the

also

development

development in

unit

22.

brownfield close

1thsato

link

should

the

closer

following

should

the

include

application,

road.

long

the

in

Glendevon

not proximity to

planning

size be

term,

ñoféd

This

this sites,

possibly

points.

be

is

required.

put

of

made

site

within

please area

and

forward

current as

such

application

south to

for

a

moving

would

FaucheldeaiiBing.

should

up

a

scheduled

It as

development.

be

600m

of would

or

Winchburgh

for

depIéfii

advised

good

to possibly

or

restoringthe be

the

1012/P/05,

to

looking

appear

considered

arable

8Oam

ancient

North

that

the

mean

by

at

that

exclusion

farmland, I Niddri5ing

of

wish The 2-3

monument.

alternative

Cala Aldcathie

Faucheldean. less

j)’I

approx

countryside

times

Bing

to

farmland

land

object

zone

r)

surely

is

60% in

and

landfill

investments

y

routes

a

Any

size,

locally

or

to

belt

of

using

would

more

More

green

the

Why

the

site

for

as 3 New Rail Station

It would appear that in the short term, from discussions at developers open day. that it willbe very unlikely that a rail station will be opened or be able to be included as a stop on current timetables and may not be possible until the new airport link is being

developed. Without a station, being opened I would suggest that the amount of new housing being proposed or constructed would be limited to approx 300no as a maximum without this new transport link. —

Please confirm receipt of my letter, and also note that I would be willing to speak at any meeting in the future, should it be required.

Yours sincerely

Cohn Buffer

to

I)ragon’

hae

area

until

6.

Lothian.

its

Council

on

have

who

and

5.

c1iim

the

landscape

the

4.

and

the

made,

junction,

3.

Edinburgh,

A89

the another

future

2.

considered,

Plan.

submitted

made

I. We

1)ear

11-149

County

Linlithgo

dependence

The

Development

the

proposed

Claypits

need

the

although

prospect

used

acquiesces

Newbridge

potential

to

wish

cheap

south

The

Deelopment

Much

as

Sir

problems

by

live During

need?iTiis

from

Also.

7FZ

The

to

Many

As

soullç

for

the

they

Buildings

- people

(‘ALA

open

to

that

to

there

Madam

or

despite

and

area,

of

regeneration

we

of

scale it

for

its

it

age-old

of

danger

it

submit

on

Planning

require

to

is

the

Broxburn.

another

of

area

may

to

is

Control

is

sore

duty

the

the

de

have

are

necessary

dormitory

a

non-brown-field

in

but

1.and

not will

not

its

of

our

consultation

lesser

willingness

the

elopment. the

of

&

land

on ‘remediated’. not

that

area

the

not

to destruction

the

convention

within

one

the

just

not

l3uilding

concerns

the

lnestment

few

their

[)epartrnent

future.

consider i

many

he

llowing

T nit

for

extent,

project

in

is

itself

approval

many

of

map

been

sleep Whether for

housing

thousand

the

Winchburgh

protected

over

CALA’s

dnnrctep

West

colourful

us

proposed

abandonejlandfijsj

of

period

Fhere

The

in

commuters

Control

Livingston.

about

is

seriously in

informed

there;

to

3000

for

sites,

hatexer

local

order

Lothian.

of

Ltd

coments

excessive

this

estate,

repeat

in

promise

or

cars

such

other

is

gift

as

our

there

do

new

/

the

on

not

landowners

a

way.

while

Aanager

pictures

to

and

such

for

/

that

requirement

converging

PPCA

ohjectioiIS

some

the

unharted the

on

1

aicrt

interested

if,

would

proposed’

houses

there

that

was

c

We

for

of

development

and

cannot

/

the ott

an

under

effects

working,

future

and

)

jff

/

educational

means.

future

additional

of

/

fear

0

even

drawn an

the

I.td

necessary

is out

relish!

/

covering

them

how,

to

almost

a

current

expect

WD1buj1ine

viability

territory

that

on

bodies.

to

dvelopnVhave

of

of

that

sell

greater

railway

residents

lies

by

West

Perhaps

shopping

the

the

proportion

brief

these

it

out

1

no

is

housing

conveniently

the

unanimous

rail

facilities

the

will

bottle

such

scale

legislation.

prime

development

scale

If

of

Lothian

/

should

by

station

‘

local

thanks and here.

these

objections

and

this

C-\L\ result,

a

of

plng

idding necks

—

large

to

than

agricultural to

road

schoolchildren

even

corner

the

being

not

primary

are

be

Council’s

or

the

of

agreement

once

should

that

any

outside

area

project

at

built

distract

links

already

not

I1ere a

those

present

living

can Kirkliston

provided

have

application

motorway

of

along

pTanne

again,

granted,

of

around

school

will

West

take

also

who

rural

land

and

the

Re

Local the

-

been

been

and

on

the

be

in in 7. The cjngof the project seems a hit strange at first sight. One would assume that the regeneration of the village and the provision of lower-cost housing would have a high priority and that development would start in the centre and work outwards. In this wa the Council and local residents could monitor the development and its effects and be in a better position then to decide if or by how much, future work should proceed. By starting on the western boundary with more expensive properties and on open land, CALA’s phasing proposal would prevent such an option and we would be left with rather a ‘fait accompli’. The cynical might think that this is in fact the reason for their decision.

8. There are a number of discrepancies between the substantial Environmental Report and the shorter Draft Master Plan. As the latter is more likely to be read by ordinary residents, the spin adopted tends to disguise some serious concerns for us.

9. The environmental statement goes into some detail about the effects on existing communities during all phases of the development and afterwards, These are rated as 4j,mtohihsensztzviry of long duration’ ‘szgnflcant1y) adverse , and for the magnitude of the cliii to rthFo jjetm the master plan this is not made clear; instead promises are only made to provide ‘buffers’ and for low-level units to be built back-to-back with abutting existing properties. We feel that these measures will have little effect in reducing the adversity particularly during the development phases.

10. We understand the need not to build over the gas pipeline which crosses Glendevon track but CALA is attempting to claim virtue out of necessity The proposed road over the pipe line will cut off the houses which maintain and access the track and will certainly do nothing to ‘preserve its private frel’

11. Our final concern is that the above comments and those of other concerned residents will not be taken seriously; that the Council is set to rubber stamp the proposals; that we are simply going through a pointless bureaucratic exercise, and the development will be driven through regardless on a mixture of short-term expediency, commercial exploitation and greed. It will be scant comfort for us to survive long enough to say “We told you so!”

Yours faithfully Th (_z -

HUGH MACRAE FRANCES MACRAE

3 OLD GLENDEVON COTTAGE WINCHBURGH FF1526PX 1

with cottages.

occasionS discussing crossinofglendevon proposal Linlithgow is opinion Cala the County plans urgently development Dear Wendy

Planning

the

surrounding

tarmac

homes.

Ms

job

are

Mccorriston,

buildings,

by

needed

is

Mecorriston, This

dept.

finalised of

that

it

far

going

and

government

with

at

road

this too

Winchburgh.

area

is Cala

to

the

great

this

no

road

was

be

which

people

homes

excuse Yours I

farm

road

Moving

enormous.

paid would

is

a

and

development

included

does road

may

Stewart

for are involved, Sincerely

local

for

The

like

on

by proposing

1)e the

by

not

proposal

The

to council

to

my in

the

a

excessive

have MacFarlane

a

lodge

major

our

more fact despite

neighbours

for

subject

title

the

to

a

to that

to

an

road

village detailed

provide remove

infrastructure build

deeds being

development

objection

of

a

to new

future

and

3,400

the

of

to told

proposal,

educational

it

secondary

4.

this

myself our

north

without

litigation.

to

G

on

houses

Stewart

lendevon

size.

the 6 houses.

to

of

two

\Ve%t

\Vincliburgh.

of

11152

October

absorb

to

proposed this

the

I

the

as

The

different

school

be

is

facilities

I

Mac

proposed

much

village

When

in

otliian. farm

surfaced

6PX

Farm

impact

such

my .

2V05

Farlane.

is

as

the

(ottaes.

not

a

It

on :1) 6.

4.j 5.

2.

Dear’ L UEIT[. Pc F Development Most Development fount 5.

1.

:osL

H9

nlithgus

“the

objent -

- neignbiurhood

MR

to Roads and not

areas Phasing aewt to are beg,anted the these which [he proved which far

should Local

[he Plan Too eventually i.e.

can been

in

the

I\[ [he

ii

WI\[HB[JRCFI Lot Luthian

Sir

7LZ

k existing

mainE

junnt

b

Biji

sod around

use initial made, rail case advanced application

much

application this application

hi

if’ and

many F

and

held

dl,

— be

are

category discourages

tradiction

Plan

to

Idiriqo

n

essential.

be

l\\

2° lfr

ion sin

of

fontrol

dod

arid south of

at invoLed.

good

application

therefore

the

tounci

making riot tot

discouraged

of

follow

[\0

oh

are

hrownfield town

until

he

2005

residents

comrnurii huLçij proposals

present.

I

Building

rotrway ing

before

Lnk

the

Ut

ahove

rest

given

quality built rj

APPL

onE

greatly

of

the

LL0PNENl

1

contreuninrradFruchjre

contravenes

which

is includes

Unit

i nomnunit

road

all --

the ol proposals

rig

res.

Olendevon

loss

bA

jr in

ty

adjacent

the

prematur&jUh

app

such the

ENV.9

may

the

‘ion

Rasical

shouil

resulting infrastructure

comply

fontro

I

junctions

from sites does integration

agricultural in

may

1

[O\ l concerned including

of

Environmental

[he

icafion

go—ahead.

vary leo

decisions ipart

areas

too

J

prime policy

thereafter

l\lt

Broburn

not

risk

are

r ‘i

B

be I

when

ly, first. part the

with of

many greatly

Manager

e

i

from comply

traffic

of

too

t4tA

6’

TTvr

have building

l Local

is

agricultural

npo F

shout

no

of which

the

aucheldean,

r Tirieii

until

Special

‘reserved

‘LTic on a1s5EhETirlding

vague h

land

passing

mlvrr tne

rail

ed

is West

Why approval

Local

Statement,

L\D

require from

with

motorway

Plan

the

implications romrnitted”

states

Tiowing

on

visual

Eu it

is

should or start

Lothian

to

unjUst

Agricultural

what

upth flit

it major

the

is

as

proposed

Plan

[\[ME\TS

is motorwa>

warrant

matters’ -

land

I

to

who

— established in

planning

that

impact

a Local

building 0

links

is

be onl

I

meaning

be

?

c

schools. known

of

list falls

reasons:

Inquiry c’:!

.4ould

1

for currently

in restricted

large SCANNED

altered

tH52 Faucheldean B>

Blende

1

arid

existing.

unimaginable

present

for

tted

out

7th

nibutor

Plan then

and

links

in a

nd

would

development

ri di

quantity.

permission

arid

Importance

uso

sonlose

on

development

I that

the

Lothian

Urtober

oP5 nehburgh

rail

scale

has

to -

noise

ED. °onsinq

whther should

which

on

are

farm[and

ENV.7 —

such d

be

consideration. proposed, Master

vlest

and

trn

iul

yjJTag.e

what

so

not

I

to

halts

odge

guaranteed?

too

development

d poilut

requires

how

201b

a

supposed to

other schools

if

policy

Lothian

>et

oIl

and

or

cannot

unless

into

could

ime ion

(

1

Robert

Yours

to

Our

10.

9.

8.

Contd.

.

enable

overwhelming

swans

of

comments

the

Our

proposed

development Why

is

comment

the developers,

Enclosed

Some

households.

ire

aspects

of

bodi°D

F

The

path

life

fine .tldliIe

ot’

toral

the

faithfully

M.

iuchnldean

the

now

kk

Auldcathie

current

views

is

community

road

expected

proposals

Dalgleish

2

proper effected

that

there

behind

;ijarltv

1 qricultuxil

Glendevon

planning

wildlife

it

on

letters

from

and

for

closure

find

on necessary

—

live

a

proposals

uhose

so

lhr

in

consideration

feeling

many

Leith

the

reqular

nd

the

to

both

on

of

copy

households

Could I.andfill

do

close

particular

and

even

would

disruption

on

Pond,

live

Environmental

Clendpvon

tic’

the

or

reqiderits;

not

others

boxpg

these

Docks

lind.

the

of

breed

and

to

c’ui—de—’aa’

there

is

bash.

rqurheldean

more

to

scale

beside

still

include

be

our

obstructing

have

Master

that

Site

are

Fdinhurgh

areas

have

?

irnr’rasurable

were

there

huge

the

views

of

be

strIp

What

of

;,ho

F’,

plan

sil

such

jfiU44

such

there

and

Ilinor

such

any

any

largely

present

proposals.

Plan

apparent

not

are

Impact

development,

status.

hn.’

and

monitored

atout

on

%iddr>

the

Rend

of

large

potential

Human

plans

in

notified

are

larqe

of

the

and

the

have

S.

toiced

:‘,odland

building

this

been Assessment

importance

would

bwdiversity

with

ruraL

presently

take—off

Dalrileish

scale

disregard

Consultation

lack

Rights

Winchburqh

for

scale

done

by

area

ignored.

the

a

of

health

reclamation

disturb

i.e.

mironment

of

the

and in

pref.renro

for

of

development.

this

issues

when

prposed

inclusion

and

the

too

houses

to

are

relevant

the

potentially

of

many

hazards

dinq.

?

application

present

flight

Fdinburgh the

overall field

process

many

that

18,000

if

ror

decades.

The

directly

or

hat

use

and

more tor

of

unknown

our

instance,

consenation

north

path

in

reinstatement

The

propoied

and

houses

and

af

many aoundant

views

by

was

dormitory

people

the

previous

itself

pollution

so

by

the

of

future

bird

of

west

previous

sort

factors

future?

fauct)

of post.

impact

aspects

comments,

source.

reliance

on

unsupervised,

in

149

fhe relating

Report

It

of

planning

is

small

the

previously

Again

opinion.

the

have

which

The

properly

any

in

suggested

the

the

with

feeling proposals.

The

is

It

consultation,

the

comments

that

welcomed

Consultation t11

their

input

of

and

content

The AS

I

loss

reflecting

of return

Consultation

issue,

noted

spaces is

ncit character

of

scale

consulting survey Consultation

the

local

Consul1ation

WOULD

have

the

on

Appendix

Report

FOLLOWS:—

it

the

advice

From

to

considered

application

the

of

teenage

to

beeciiricorpQrated

articulated

the

have bullet

was

wording

the been

made

that

that

is

written that development:

and

been

development

green

the

giving

allowed

provided.

community.

plan

the

data

COMMENT

integrity

comprises

too

included

or

An

use

been

the

of

supported

Report

primary

led

B the

up

the

all will

years.

returned

comments

young

point

and

constructive

Report

example

fields

compiled

—

low

the

—

of

Report

the

community

of

that

on

Report

to

recorded Primary

developer

Consultation

for

relevant

and

“There

result

34

has

the

Anoendices

to

yellow

settlement,

advises

ON

people,

believe

opportunity

—

to

of

age

of

multiple

this

228

It

the

advises

‘23%)

and

“The

represent

Hardly

by

to been

The Faucheldean

received,

is

in

convey

a

THE

the

by the

is

in

were

group

School

pages Local

in

the highly

date.

landscape under

places

as

response

is

comments

stickers

high

local

scale

has

contended

raised

the

that

comments,

village

relegated

respondents and

the

change

CONSULTATION

“The

not

a

community

a

that

responses A

Report

the

with

not

with

Plan

resnunding

in report

number

cont

2.2

as input

to

“Feel

and

a

at unbalanced

86

residents

seeks

of

the

It

scale

sufficiently

particular concerns impression

the

Road.

a

distort

incorporated

to

had

were

from

the

to

no

— (58%) features.”

development

B

pages

proposals

is

result

case.

that in

29

to

At

contained

the

the

(Appendix

but

of provide

contribution report

to

been

Draft and

considered

makes

of

to

this

a

placed

(19%)positively

the

the

comments

provided

distort

Space’ proposals.

this

50 village

endorsement

not

REPORT

on

developmept the

be

and

the

report

rlaryciooI

there

included

heading

Meetings

regard

—

that Master

the

incorporates

aspects this

made

do

withstanding

additional

information.

process

228.

strong

on

questions scale

within

in

is

A

It

forms’.

not

size pubiic

are

—

Eà

the

following and

DATED

that regarding

either

database

bigger

by

the

is

from

Primary

is

ie.

Plan

‘Other

and

meet a

of

—

concerns of

an

of

sample

exhibition

of

one

contended

ias

Consultation

the

which

It

gravely

town.”

all

the

78%

supported this

young

their

response

individual

nothing

the

change

Exhibition about

AUCUST

input

neutral

facilities

than

would

the

can

unacceptable.” 15

report

While

this

reTcard

Comments’

strongest an

School

of

extensive

concern

was

proposa1c

of

outline

reppards

The

aspirations

only

unreliable people proposals

about

we

misleading

the

the

has

more

local It

concern, and

that

supportive

omitted. panels

2005

had

restricts to

Postcards

document

is

conclude

made

number

over

the in

4.

5.

3.

2.

made

1.

the

Count

In

consultation

)impadommwi4ty

invited.

priorities

and

The

to

There

their

ten

the

It

population

should

what

employment

the

for the

phrases

response

are

in most

—

Session

60

At

A

conclusion

the

due

A

do

Consultation

‘that

Respect

A

5

ferns during

become

More

Improved

It

core

2,’

advance Draft

is

Winchburgh

by high

priorities

well

general

first

high

(24%)

people

quality

the

—

the most

not not

do

is

is

local

priorities

to

noted

about

makes

the

be

and

themes

appropriate

returned

you

noted

no

priority

better?

“Bringing

sum

phased convenient the show

Master

quality

One

a

the

important

—

A group

for negative.

built

community,

-

the

associated

transport better

town,rather opportunities.

attended.

indication

community’.

Winchburgh

having

and

38%

that Winchburgh

think

of

No

the

under

up

low

exhibition —

an

the

is

that

are

for

Report.

draft

What

local

1

the

session

growth

attendance

those

Plan

early

—

statement

number,

to

overwhelming

after

in

and asma11

for

response

local

should

facilities

the

No

(in

facilities

Winchburgh

9

taken

21

things

produce

consultation

kind

and

6.3 do

—

Master

Stakeholder

sustainable

connections

new

stakeholders

facilities

1

that

From

with

and

comment

Community

in

no

is

“Pulling

plan.

today?

the

you

a

It

response

could

when

Balancing

landscape

period

of an

place

The

rural

happen

desire

particular

these

and

a

must

is

you

that —

do

is

exhibition

the

the

like

small

place

the

inadequate

Plan

Changing

Early

individuals

returns

noted

early

and

support

do

exist

considered

—

forms

believe

to

wording,

development.

and

match

—

responses

it

tables’

‘While

No

most

first?

for

Together

including

—

The

over

with

had

place

Workshop

6

and

rural

you

then

date.

Priorities:

quality

and

The

delivery

all

peaceful

1

that (28%)

provision

are

were

improved

order)

group

submitted

around

response

the

safe

about

Winchburgh

the

would

a

period

for

need

the

need

the

Together”;

sample

in

No

and

top

of

facelift.

it

in

poor were

demand

neutral,

submitted

that

proposals

groups

and the

held

roads

1 meeting

primary

schools,

number

top

poor

can

Winchburgh

6.2

-

to

of

to peaceful

ten

like

25

village.

response

have

facilities.

of

to

proposals

asked

and

rural

—

the

widen

ten

happen

a

during

Group

atndees

on

be

Identify

—

quality

There

generated

will

schools.

wide

Winchburgh

around

satisfy

and

The

not

not

1st

assumed

10

community

on

school priorities

9.1

on

shops,

has

What

to

character

the

Session

-

(48%)

take

31st

range

range to

village.

individual

supportive

the been

are

June

today?

the

Making

identify

What

Facilities

taken

the

and

and

from

Priorities:

range

change

ticking

three

pupils

exhibition

a

by

that

Draft

a May

community

2005

positive

included

of

of

to

tables

again

rundown

lack

do

wish

long

over

Two

growth

—

—

Local

place

2005

and

comments

new

be?

words

you

any

No

No

Winchburgh

their

to

Master

is

What

top

of

the

—

of

the

time

represent,

65

and

1

improve

1 and

— to

debate following Dislike

comment

over

extensive,

Views

with adequate

—

in

in facilities

response

and

and

response

ten

Nol box

or

consultees

period

Group

village

are

combine

top

they schools

—

the Plan b

S

-ft

b

by case 3, of The at and It

West consultation arms is

Council not

the

contended

Lothian

length the

consultation

developer. are

by

Council and asked that

responding

establish

the

process

to

elected

consultation establish

to

should the

members developer

content

what

not

haa

and are

be

not proposals. and

officials the lead

been structure

core

by

extensive

the

themes

directly

developers of

any

arising

and

Master and

in

but not

any out

Plan Date:

Comments

Case

Comments

Outline

Officer:

lodged

Planning

on

Winchburgh by:

Jiei

the

Reference Permission

V Winchburgh

C The 15th Mr

Wendy

Investments

Planning

lendevon

Lothian

PA

October

Swannery

Core

and

McCarriston

No:

Mrs

EH52

for

Development

2005

Application

10121P1

the

SM

6PX

Ltd

Winchburgh

Rigby

5

SANED

Area

by

Extension

Cala

19

Lthian

OCT

Land

2005

Coincil

/

through

purpose

milam

hoiehole impact

I

5. 5.

4

main

reserved the

development En 4.

4.

view

Statement.

betxeen

impression documents. 3.

3.

n’ timeframe

\\ithin

thousand 2.! Timeframe. 2

proposals

Illo

of I

I.

L Comments: Risk I The

1

ironrnenial

Errors

scheme

ironmental The I

The

the iew

citr effects

is

The of

The

evaporation, to

‘1aster

of in the There

that EIA It

scale

is The

ibllo Application

matters,

the

documen

the the

is

pages) the

source

and Environmental

2X

a could of

Master is

the

Some of

not

Regulations.

Man

development

Public

development

might

ground

Water of

of the

are

priman Statement

day the

ini Statement

Plan inconsistencies planning

reasonable a

the

and

to be br

numerous West

document

of scheme

period

several

are

Plan

be

Enquiry.

particularly

be developed Application

is these

the

Supply the

is

typographical

‘iter developed,

aler commented too

Lothian premature.

is wore application

pond

environmental

md

is

Statement

hundred

on

cannot in

cannot

are

We

extraciio’i illustrative,

to based mistakes cuppl

many

that

related

of

Glendevon In

expect addressed

is

significant

request

in in

local

in

Glendevon this

from

has

be

is

a

on

he

with

the the

areas

objections,

upon ver for too

cannot

txt properly

respect

is

errors

judged

not this

a borehole

and summer

Plan

application.

field

inadequate

a

many planning

G

with

effects

large three

simply

different

inters

Pond.

in

been

by

ilJustrative errors

errors nJ

20n5

but

drains more

be the

Pond. the to

too

details assessed.

in

month

proofread. and

fully

is

months.

sev that

be

might

Chapter illustrative plannin

community an application in because relation

many

only

detail

way

from

in

and

era!

P6n’ the may a

assessed

left omissions

Master

keeping

,,round

extension

be

to

wrong

due planning

are

and

later the reserved

well to

.

help quite application this

to

The

more

There

reserved

to

Table showing

are

surrounding

and of

Plan. in be

the v

in

with

in

the compensate

Local

different. true

this

akr

in in

this for

its signitkantl

application

its

the serious.

Comment

are

large

breach the .

matters. There the

present assessment

magnitude

this

e’.tr’iction

I document.

l

id matters.

how wider

Plan

is

Environmental

inconsistencies

in

policies

number

comment premature

is

the

land

of

is

As the

is The

that for

state.

public

a

Schedule

under

such

risk re

The

loss overall (sex

the

and

oithe

TI Our

— of

ised

that the era!

Council

Public

rit

pathwa

the

this

Glendevon

6

foolpathIcvclewav

6.

h

the

5.3

2

1

will

Je’

area.

52

Threat

drological

pond

will

deelopment

of

eloped

Path

be

It

The

w

We

under

cause

This

on

to

would

ai

destro

We

to

Pon

Diersion

Glcndeon

Draft

have

the

is

this

includes

wildlife

sun

estimate

the

considerable

along

basis

appear

ed

written

land

on

Master ey

Countryside

*

ThisTs

aloiw

Minimum

and

the

There

Glende4

that

Order

from

part

i1l

that

Bum

that

pond

to

update

the

Plan

an

it

become

of

the

ENVIRON

disturbance.

is

proposed

No

is

this

estimated

area

and

former

deelopment

on

also

and

water

a

(Scot1nd)

pond

the

pubhc

1(1977)

the

Farm

former

that

Environmental

a

impermeable

HA

mineral

supply

risk

Faucheldean

drains

birds

footpath/cycleway

expressing

ater

roadls

right

accordingly

the

mineral

It

Glendevon

4ct

caichnient

blocks

is

an

and

and

c

railway

pond

ot

also

area

1967.

wa.

duck

have

and

raika

green Statement

our

the may

C

was

of

1iie

area

and

nest

asked

the

Farm ‘West

-

This

only

concern

land

he

established

belt.

to

of

K.

field

line

in.

contaminated

and

is wildlife

at

Winchburgh

the

Glende

them

as

Lothian

show

and

not

least

has

drains

regarding

immediate illustrated

housing

the

to

a

been

a

75

on

corridor

pathway

b

conduct

proposed

District

case.

feeding

Pond

times

West

11

selected

)tj

the

below

west

the

linking

impact

through

Council a it’s

Lothian

the

public

of

own

as

pond

If

a of 3 The Fin ironmentalStatementon page () states Proxirnit of new housing to the nest of the ponds inavpreudice flight paths to theponds”. which we strong1 agree with Yet the Drali Master Plan shows 1Pm high housing to the immediate west of GIendeon Pond. rhis pond is one of onl three rnestYothian on which mute swans breed Housing of this height ma pre4ent the swans from fl ing from the pond We request that this deelopment block C is limited to bungji1gs, which would also be more in keeping with the existing properties in the area

t 3 At present. Glende on Pond is isolated from urban de elopment. hence the wildlife is relatnel free from predation 1wdomestic cats. Cats are one of the most %ignilicarltthreats to wildlife in Britain. We request that new housing within a 5 ) i metre radius of Glende on pond is sold or rented subject to a legal obligation that preients owners or tenants from keeping domestic eats.

7. Motorway junction and railway station uncertainties

new 7 1 The traffic assessment in the Planning Apphcation assumes that the motorway junction on the M9 and new railwa station ill be builL Permission to build these infrastructures however is outside the control of the deelopers and West Lothian Council. These decisions rest with other bodies such as the Scottish Executi e the Stratç,gic Rail Authority and train operating compame& There is no exkfence to date that these parties will agree to these new infrastructures.

7,2 There is no risk assessment of the ffi.wpact without these infrastructures or an continençy pjans toa&1iesupceb4em& The Planning Application proposes that these key infrastructures are not built until well into the deeIopment phase. by which time any refusal by third parties will result in iraffic chaos.

7 3 The deelopers cannot meet the requirements of the Local Plan. CDA 1. that states that planning permission will not be granted for development of specific sites until all rele ant infrcture is rjdedifldsince they are not in a position to guarantee commitment.

S. No recognition of The Swannery agricultural holding

S. I The aricultura1 holding of The Swannerv. Glendeon. is surrounded b the proposed de elopment. This hold ingThiiienilv used for the gra/ang of sheep. There is no recognition or mention of this holding in the En ironmental Statement 6.7.3 or figure 6.3. Should the de elopment proceed this holding will become isolated and its tiabilit will be at risk This holding is situated between the B9()SOand Glendeon Pond

9. Poor community involvement

° I The Planning .\pplicalion Consultation Report does not accuratel reflect the meetings or ted back recea ed from local residents. The report states that in a poll the ast malontv of local residents ere in fin our of the deelopmenL hut the report failc to mention that this was seera1ears ao when the deelopment was to be around SOP houses The report distorts the true public opinion in seeral ways For example it relers to 15 response cards receixed fiuIloxing a public meeting, but it does not refer to the many more detailed xxrittenresponses that xere submitted instead oithe brief reply cards. The report appears as a xewht’ document. hut 750 of is de’oted to childrens’ paintings. hardl a data intensix e report. At the e\hihition. opinions xere collected h aHox ini people to rite comments on Post-its’ and stick them on the displa s This x as totally uncontrolled. a1lm ing people to “rite muiiiple comments and e en remoxe the comments of others that the did not agree with. As such this data is unreliable

9 2 A particular concern expressed b many residents at the second public meeting related to the inability of the deelopers to make an progress in the promised motonay jwction and railway station. ATitfiecxidence pointed to the fact that neither of these infrastructures would be built. The report makes no mention of this or the great Ie ci of concern The oxerall impression expressed by members ot’ the comrnunit that haxe spoken to is that much critical or negatixe feedback has been edited out by the developers.

9.3 The Stakeholders Workshop report also does not represent the facts. Mr Peter Rigbv, a member of the Scottish WildlifeTrust and part owner of Glendex on Pond was appointed to attend the Stakeholders Workshop, He was refused admission to the ) workshop by Rod Howett of Cala Ltd. No coherent reason was gien to Mr Rigb. As a result the Stakeholders Workshop report contains no comments by the SWT regarding wildlife sites or biodiersity.

10. Understatement of impact on exisling rural communities

Ii).1 In Chapter 1()of the Enxironmental Statement the impact of the development on existing rural communities has been underestimated. The impression is that the authors of the report do not underst r,p’ruaLJj,e. For example. in paragraph 10.9.8 the author writes “The field in fallow in the foreground of the view and the high number of dead and dying trees gives the impression of a slightly degraded landscape.” This is a typical urban view of the countryside, the writer does not appreciate that fallow fields are a normal feature ofthe countyj4ç and does not realise the alue of rjTies to wildlife. He clearly did not appreciate the birds and l’iifE NorRToe’he ‘i’ealisethat views such as this are in constant change ix ith new interests each dax Another example may be read on page 11() “... the relatixe lack of importance attached to the view reduces its sensitixitv as does the poor quality of the intensive agncultural character of the landscape”. We submit that the countryside of Britain. outside highland areas. is an agricultural landscape of considerable beauty.

01.2 We suggest that the authors speak directl to the rural communities and express the impact of’the development in the communities’ language and not their own.

11. Lack of safety around Claypit Pond

II 1 Page 97 of the Eni ironmental Statement states “The cla pit will be modified to improe its appearance and reduce the pcrcc.ptton oiin unsafe enxironment” The

considerable

and

of

limited 14,

13.

Plan Winchburgh

that

world.

central

West

Environmental

development

13.1 Yet

13.

increase

Glendevon

proper

is

12.3 Cadiow

tbrmerlv possibly

B.

de

does

problems.

of

12.2

by

oodlands

area

coal

Glendevon

needs

12.

o

clavpit

12.

1

the

Incorrect

rail

A

our

these

Use

as

erhanging

agricultural

another

elopment

1

Lothian

Ground

and

not

‘T’he

since

mining.

main

station

to

Areas

belt

Any The

hydrological

Page

future

to

of

Chapter

The

is

agricultural

to

much mines

piped

identitx

D

he

Draft

excessive

of

unsalè,

development

risk

earl

development

Pond

contributor

flow

is

typographical

to

in

Farm.

29

of

around

Environmental

phasing

should

drained,

are

Scotland

generations

particularly

block

of

conditions

rock

Statement

the

feed

higher,

that

Special

and

into

of

activities,

Master

through 8

the

medieval

to referred

the

of

deelopment

the

it

vet

edges.

a

these

the

be

Glendevon

survey

not

same

Glendevon

is

prime

uses.

the

spring

well

of

partially

Environmental

it

developed.

o

result and

Agricultural

in

text

Plan

be

occupies

is

the Environmental

his

on

is

er

transport

not

to the

may

vest

hut

error?

south

level

not

times.

underestimated.

Reducing

flows

on

could

agricultural

makes

30

this garden in

Assessment

in

shows

development

in

area

fully

occasionally

until Macaolv

the

well

our

mulled

of

metres

grain

of

Pond

Farm, area.

land

est

underground

miss

the

excessive There

to

importance

roundel

infditrictures

section

little

All

assessed

the

the

regret.

at

Importance.

Glendevon

crop

will

the

of

existing

but

Assessment

Glendevon

Traces

and

deep

identified

evidence

this

first

end

reference

Assessment.

Glendevon

is

underestimates

perception”

land

was

result

yi

6 to

recontoured

much

holes

feature,

of

We

phase

with

prime

s2lan

The

above.

the

of

dierted

ds..tharn.,amongsLUieThighstin

villae.

this

as

through

submit

in

to-d

such

and

climate

as

Burn, do

submerged

e

the south\Lst

House.

will

of

states

to

phase the

agricultural

or

QFc

idence

House.

appear.

ate

land

de

these

as

hydrology

mines

The

permanent

not

the

that

(‘oat

several

It

that

proposed

such

to

shows,

elopment

the

in

that

and

is

In

designated

There

get water

make

prime

potentially

of

Figure it

difficult

the

of

has

summer

potential

Some

in

Figure

development

the

cliffs

soil is

early

the

years

CilLndeon

land.

tields

Lhautcre

land unsafe

been

and

supply

will

it

motorway

agricultural

types

approi

loss

development

6.

taking

safe.

and

of

bottle

to

7.2

around

1

hvdrogeolog.

ago

this hae

be

In

in

this

mined

problems

of

serious

of

imagine is

submerged

of

particular

issue

the

identities

a

al

agriculture

sheer

the

water

b

is

place

water

the mines

significant

House

been

should

from

a

junction Local

Mr

in

of

land

eastern

folly,

source this

how

blocks

v

hidden

John

due

was

the the

in

est

in

none

the

be

of

the

to

a it

)

END

communt3

deelopment

and

phasing

necasai

the

01

itllage

chould

C’OMMEN

parties.

is

will

be

halted

changed.

IF

be

I’S

this

before

left

were

with

ctarting

final

to

pockets

happen

completion

around

of

further

isolated

the

we

eisting

deeIopment

are

communities

left

iillage

with

would

an

centre,

integrated We

hai

submit

such

e

to

that

be

that

hailed

if the

the

fact

The

studies

The

drain

field number

fed

A

underground

installed.

embankment

preventing

This

the

Section

Thank

Dear

Linlithgow

County

West

Development

Case

similar

Mrs

average

W

12 th

Winchburgh

Glendevon

The

the

report

via

developer

following

drains

an

states

Lothian

Mrs

by

engineers

Wendy

Febnian’

underground

Swannety

Officer

Lothian

you

Pt

area

21

argument

Buildings

dye

has

Re:

There

leakage

17800/GLA/600

McCorriston,

to

that

any

for

of

EF149

field

was

been

supply

tests EH52

cannot

comments

McCorriston

Calaffoines

surface

the

land

the

Council

and

2007

is

cursory

built

drains

no

or

rate

unable

copy

embankment

is

7EZ

Regulatoty 6PX

considerably

field

the

substantiate

oflèred

excavations

evidence

some

which

runoff

pond

observations of

from

by

drains

to

the

in

(East)

section

determine

regarding

100

I

the

into

from

land

above

have

to

Services

from

of

year

this

in

report

to

indicate

the

Glendevon

to

the

land

of

excess

reveal

determined

5.3ha land

report,

at

the

pond.

after

this

the

dismantled

the

the

clearly

to

west.

that

to

report:

road

true

the

the

of

the

figure

driest

the

The

I

the

presencrIrab!eneenffielddi,..

west

the

have

Pond

level

pond

shows

to

from’er

east

i3ha

report

time

without

the

pond

railway

and

considerable

of

was

Water

east

how

The

of

as

is

east.

fails

dug

the

rlbdfrom

no

undertaking

claimed

line

contour

the

The

Balance

to

yeaiu4dirqs

yst—E

longer

Clearly

and

acts

land

recognise

pond concerns

_____

field

in

map

as

height

fed

West

this continues

Report

the

a

experimental

the

drains

dam

via

drawing

Council

1

pond

section.

that

pondin

unciI allows

3FE92007

and

LothIan ______

Unlithgow

Services

this

can

to

offer

lnformaton

be

I

Council 3

drains that

November

problems, the

interruptions

its

the

borehole gross

Since

Section

the

the Section

area

The

pond

water

requirement

off

over

of

40cm

The

Section

current

clearly from

amiss flows

5.

The

The

the Section

many using

report

evaporation

extremes.

set The

Section

water

answer

the

3ha critical

include

error. and

This the

model

the

water pond

and catchment

figures CoupModel

field

over pond.

4.0

climate

2.1

from

reaches

from

pump

years an

it

model

but

totally supply? 3.1

that

year, catchment

to

error

2.5

would

is

will

2.3 established

The

primarily that

in

question

caichment

drains the

the

here

no

the

not.

of

the

the

this This

in

the Observations

prior

(groundwater).

and

rate

data always

noticeable leads

is year

second the

the

distorts

report

the

development

table

surrounding graph

results

expect

efficiency

catchment

electricity

being

Indeed

has and

by

methodology

has pond.

drainage

to pond.

is area

is

the

depends

to

2

limited never

the not

claims

be

area

method totally

surface not

week

in

indicate

the

used

a

in

any

report

question

the the

figure

very

installation

been If

drop This

significant

been

true

given

show is

supply.

more this professional area

area pump

with in

same,

land!

to that

areas?”

unrealistic.

even

upon

If significant

runoff

such

should

included.

seems

February

in

situation

that

a

3

declared,

assumption

of

this

includes is

that

by

3

the

and

unrealistic than showing

pond

larger

is calculating

a If 5.3ha. year “no”, as

less

Most

the

were

of

large

main would

switched errors.

the

this

is Given

unrealistically

answer

Grunsky 26cm

level the

sadly CoupModel

sample than

study

due pond

since than

understatement

This

were

Also development and

recently

I

the

water

that In

source

have

borehole

be were

The

the

assumptions

even

occurred.

to

this 5%

is:

case

lacking.

shown the exceeds

off surface level

to

it

the the

thy

for

ci

power

period.

way

“Does shown catchment

starts

assumed

of

respect

quote

corrected,

figures of

from a!.

with

the

how

3

case methodology

for

precipitation

varies

low,

to

the

water,

pump

the

in

pump

runoff

3

interruptions

with

the 6

the

the

land

time

did

Glendevon my

an

the

I

results

to

model

of

months

the are

the offered

variation

it

my

depth

by

pond borehole

6 on 67%,

one the model.

the

area

the

is

to

then

to

was

report

conclusions

months

considerably

into

a

water

less

very

the

pond

time

assumption would

is

true

maximum

in

of

fed

water

of

off each

for on a

with

run

the

one

than

west

30

calculating

Bum clear cannot

in water

and

water budget

pump

because

the

via

from

survive

the

each

pond

in

year

pond

year

the

show

hundred

catchment

one

and

field

surrounding

this

other

pond

which

something

are

over

very

mid year,

lower

of

switched

average

answer

is

no

in

third

study

level

ast

that

report

over

of

20cm

in

suspect.

is

water

low

much

year

is

which

the

the

than

of

of

fed

data is

Peter

Yours

Reporters,

I

concen1s

contamination

not

analysis

evaporation

I

would

am

Rigby

even

faithfully,

disappointed

ask

of

make

Cling,

that

Glendevon

that

rates

this

of

common

if

MII3T,

field

and

this

letter

with

Carl field

drainage

pond.

this

MSc,

is

sense.

also

Bro

drain

Carl

Of

BSc

placed

report

due

1

greatest

efficiency

Bro

uphold

to

report.

has

development.

before

my

concern

been

are

water

Basic

them.

underestimated

placed

to

budget

assumptions

me

This

before

is

report

the

study

the

potential

and

are

as

simply

Public

the

the

in

error,

conclusions

only

loss

increases

[nquity

or

realistic

leakage,

my do

proposed

residents?

inmtenance

which

which

Current

included catered

changes

development

We

current

walking,

completely

be

Secondly,

not

will

Firstly

There

must majority

employment

reaction

Having

Planning

Dear

Ff149

Linlithgow

County

Development Dee1opment

seen

fully

all

actually

runs

runs

be

Sir/Madam,

are

plans homes

for

proposals.

what

onto as

7EZ

road.

between

understand

cycling, attended

taken

It

is

Buildings

of

NorthSouth

without what

from

however

an

is

application

eigj1j’Glendevon.

of

of

the

and

guarantees

a

indicate

be

also

extension

What

to

will

this

genuine

long

seriously.

Control

and

Glendevon of

residents

built?

what

support

the

horse

community

our

the be

private destroying

7

established

are

some

building

the

new

that

built

is

understanding

outlying

Although

interest

through

riding

the 1012/P/05

and

requirement

Unit

are

in

this.

development

ofWinchburgh

serious

a

ro4

by danger

safety

Farm

new

in

improvement

Control

the

Cala

and meetings

place

This

We

and

hamlet

ii

Glendeon.

which

road

Cala

to

concerns

existing

implications

of

(Land

wildlife

do

and

hope

area

Winchburgh,

that

that for

endtcominunity.

becoming

will

however

Homes

Manager

of

is

and

that

and

extra

which

the

that

currently

a

Glendevon?

are

around

to

be

cominut

studies

which

high

existing

plots

having

What

quality

the

built

this

in

is

schools

of

feel

is

a

prçssure

favour

the

larger

run

of

development

this currently

crossinLthe

we

Winchburgh)

implications

parallel

would

a

that

seen

main

and

homes

land

joint

‘and

down

feel

and

village

Whilst

In

of

there

styf

the

as

will

developer

completely

responsibility

Surely we

fact.

this

to,

a facilities

used

area.

satisfactory

extensive

main

must

be

and

is

development,

of the

existingprivate

is

will

does

no

develqprnent

as

sold

any

an Winchburgh

just ft

development

runs

air.

need

a

within

rejuvenate

also

we

additional

this

development

recreation

disappear

to

South

plans

understand

tinder

of

other

to

buffer

seems

have

Glendevon

the

force

16

a

our

of

developers.

proposed

point

for this

it

Farm

access

road

and

October2005

zone

that

the

can

under

area

will

initial

these

the

can

bring that

burn

easily

the

which

Co

for

be be

Richard

Yours

We

the

that

Whilst path/footpath.

aspect

road

above

look

a

required

more

faithfully

of

we

and

forward

Glendevon

points

understand

Jill

sympathetic

at

Horsburgh

this

should

to

hearing

point,

would

the

be

approach

economic

addressed.

so

from

be

close

better

you.

should

to

and

preserved

the

social

be

existing

taken

arguments

if

this

to

settlement

existing

access

for

was

of

rural

the

Glendevon?

development,

limited

communities,

to

a

The

cycle

we

and

rural

feel that : Z:L’° One Acre \1F IJCHELDEAN West Lothian

24th October 2005

The Development and Building Control Manager Development Control Unit County Buildings LINLITHGOW 1EH497EZ

Dear Sir, / Re: Planning Application for Winchburgh by Cala Landen’ To West Lothian Council.

As a resident of 45 years standing at the above address, we wish to make known our objections to the development application on the following points.

1. The proposed new road connecting Broxburn, Faucheldean, Glendevon and Main Street Winchburgh

It is stated in the report that “Overall sensitivity of the view is considered from medium to high” .this is reduced from high as it is unlikely that long duration views wifi be gained from rear upper floor windows”

Our main living area is on the upper floor of our two-storey house and we will therefore look down on the new road which crosses the field behind our house at ‘One Acre’ Faucheldean. This will adversely affect our view which we value highly. We would therefore place the overall sensitivity to this development affecting us as HIGH. Our ‘long duration view’ from our porch and living room will be affected and we will also be adversely affected by increased noise level and pollution level from road traffic.

2. The proposed road junction west of Faucheldean

Since it is “proposed on balance” by Cala that the FaucheldE?açLc connected to the maifl çgre road from Broxburn to Winchburgh, we wish to object to this on two acourits

4.

3.

there

to

permission

We Traffic

badgers

Conservation

it?

ground

local

Under

infrastructure

done

Cala

I

when

on

which

Cala

The

Edinburgh

acknowledge

Landscaping

would

local

is

badger

Development

(ii)

but

(i)

prior

Land

access future

law,

some

badgers

will

to

badg

further

object

forage.

for

to

to

to would cul-de-sac.

choose

The

Investment

already setts

mount

evasive

the

When

Traffic

footpath.

a

Such

suffer Faucheldean

population,

debate

is

detail

proble

go

and

Winchburgh.

narrow

the

the

is

afreadv

Ecciesmachan

a

rely

residents

population

in

schemes

up

to are

surveys

wildlife

development

a

M9

Biodiversity

have

two

and

between

the calming

place

would

the

junction

planning

action

as

through

on eaten

protected

country

motorway

to

verge

vehicles

large

their

The

stressed

Ltd

to

access

in

it

such

a

of

survey

for

should

find

into

adversely

requires

junction

is

losing

majority

acknowledge

calming

measures

Faucheldean

There

and

will

survival

development Faucheldean.

to

which

too

applications

junction

road

as to

-

food,

at

are com

enable

i.e.

to

food

that

junction

give

late has

a

include

the

present

their

accommodate

would

buzz

‘Badger

a

ha

to

being

the

may

measures,

voted

car/lorry

affect

land

taken

this

will

for

sources

rise

as

be

a

to

valuable

road

cing.Oricebuimg

words

pass

mitigation. suggested

taken,

details

will

due

have

is

be that the

were

be

acceptable.

via to

are

taking

len

the

for

place

Marking

definite.

an

impossible

no

is Winchburgh

to

the

are

need

considered”.

to

“the

a

surrounding

or

a

entirely

in given

leaving

increase

and

further

be

sand

cul-de-sac.

this

of

and

potential

by

the

new

place

not,

car/tractor

planning.

loss

made.

areas

to

would

Environ

a

Survey’

manoeuvre.

flew

essential

It

the

consequently

vehicle

be

The

road with

until

would

the

of

need

unsuitable,

to

in

available considered

opportunity

of

agricultural

significant

Grass

existing

guarantee. junction

be

traffic

road

no

from

area.

Farm

traffic. Do

planning

on

should

for

and

require

inadequate.

is

foraging

appear

pedestrian

required

behalf

we

as such

verges

Broxburn

through

vehicles

for

road

it

since

are

mean

the

T’he

be further

-

is,

to

effect

traffic

to

land,

of

or pass,

from

it

to

a is

)

BILLIE

3.

AL

Yours

We

Thank

to

held

possible

We

had

concurrently

Cala

WIN If

Broxburn agreed

size

be

are,

development

object

to time

I.

costed

faithfully,

state

of you

WYLIE

WYLIE

account.

be

the

upon.

to

to

for

“Landscape

implemented”. to

and

be development

there

with

Winchburgh the

established

If

covered

Such

would

opportunity

there

being

development

an

I

framework

is

adversely

a

prior

undertaking

no

should

loophole

within

is

Although

M9 even

to

to

junction,

to voice

the

be

the

affect

necessary.

will,

ensure

in

capped development

sotmding new

in

this

the

wherever

surrounding

Phase

it

above

statement.

community the

is

until

debatable

woodland

1

reasonable,

and

objections.

the

possible

commencing.

Phase

i.e.

new

area.

as

if

“whenever

and

it

road

the

be

2 evolves.”

Cala

must

trees

implemented

new

system must

have be

road,

seen

be is I

(‘!

f9/’

7Y)

1

i—f

-4$

rY

7T

71

/

4,,

(

-Thy’

3/2 ‘

/

—

Ji

/‘

T9

uir’ryY

/2

-——-—-—--

y7

i

—

pq

f

74

p2 1L —AL’(

(

-/J f’( I/c kcrQ & *_ I (;4J1

ii

-

L ‘-

(;

k/

-

p

-

i’J

/!

(L

3&k’C,

*U

c

d

i

a

A--(

/

/- -

/ /

-Q

A

( 1J

o/L,’X

Li

/

‘

-L/L AO

P

i7/

,A

/L

!

,

—

/

‘

C

/1I

/

L

Cc_L

/A

/,

I

} I

( //cc

RFT0 Rr Oah. /

I

/‘

- 2<

L<-

/c

,

5tc-

S/(

t

,,,&

JpJ

p

1,C//lL Stflards

,ftL

(

£

- c

c%i

-1

a

-

/

-

->\AJ

:

IA *

/

-

e

C’

/

4j)

c

(

‘LcJ

icu2

-“A --t’

*

<

/

V} L

7ztL(

1Jf

4L

‘Zt/’

cY

v

//j L/(

I

/

-II /:

t’(

,

F &

?I2

4iJ

U 2

, De’&Gpniefl1 County Development

EH497EZ LINLITHGOW

Dear

Assessment We The Regulations. to have more amended setts. that species Attached

details”.

Ron Mob.e est Ron Badgers

re!

be

wish

EIA these

13144,102 Sir,

Bagnall a BagnaHe!bg considered

important

Lotniar

Buildings

potentially

in

J7366 admits

to

and

and is

by

matters

the

object

a

(EIA)

the

Control

that sheet their

(‘no,nc West

Outline

Building

373

is that

Nature

further

the

to

significant a is,

are

setts —

646

of snet

Yours complete “..

Lothian the

Unit by

fact

,that

additional

built

ito. Planning

Comments

Control

Conservation its when above

are

o EDINBURGH

that Winchburgh

Sincerely,

own

loss

into

biodiversity UK

effect protected

EtA

the future

Cala

application

the

admission, of Manager

Reference

Permission

points

Ron

plan is

agricultural

on on

plans

Land

submitted

detail

BADGER Act

the the Bagnll

Midirth 404. EHI4 Curr;e Core

by implies

which

action

from

Investments

Scotland the local Planning

wwwelbg.fsnetco.uk

on

planning

No:

incomplete,

Lanark

for

Development

‘S

the Protection need

land an

the

with the

plan. the badger 10121P105

a

grounds

beginning, destruction

R which Winchburgh

the 2004 Application

to

AND

applications

It

ad

be

Ltd..

is

population plans

in

1_

a of GROUP

therefore \jJ and

considered.

badgers

breach

Area,

that

Badgers

‘.-,

at

are not

LOTHIANS of

its

by

this

Extension,

,

at

are

just

of

Environmental

included and

rely

particularly

least

stage. Schedule

Act

considered”.

left

that

on

(1992)

26-October-2005

two

as

to

this

as

future

find

main

4

a

important

will

as

of

key

food \/

Impact

Even

badger the

need

/1

may

EIA

/

Li Badgers

protected Environmental present, development. out each sufficient Phasing

Although

Badgers

. •

•

•

by

social

A existing between Proposals corridors the time i.e. to Developers wildlife These Within plan

a

minimum and

competent

before of allow

are compensatory

greenways. and badgers territories

of for

developments

group.

Development

need aggressively development

year(

sanctuaries The

retained

ditches,

badgers badgers Assessment

badger

should permission

should

of

shouldarr çatipnient

can

be

ie

person

of 30m

December

only

Where existing

form hedgerows clans adapt within

rather free

incorporate foraging

around

should

but

territorial

a sites

to

is

Plan

access an

few to

to

granted, the

establish

should than different

badger

integrated prevent

a

wild

ac49csu1evs,

to

squareetres setts

resources

be layout is

more

and

try

April

throughout prepared

enhanced

so,

designed

areas

not

to

should

clans fj1Lc developers water

urban

in-breeding.

it as how of

when fit

have

is

network

it them developments should

are

essential

and much is

courses

in

be

environment

to

not undergrowth wildlife

known their

available

advance open of

in minimise protected

upon

have

bushes be throughout. own

each

as

includingmarkin

foraging This

that

created and

that an corridors

this

adjoining

ace

socijwffl]e

.Sui

of

can and afterthought)

a in

also the

and more

it from information

any

bait is

can the

ti-a,elvel is

areas.

be

accessible

as

runingthrouh at impact

weeds

creating

essential

so planning

detailed all marking

than a-i-o’-

then a achieved

refuges

proposal

minimum)

as

development.

(Note

on one

adjusted

to to

layouts

which

new

maintain

act Badgers.

that study layout

to for permission

social

survey

by at sites

badgers

as wildlife.

lines

to

a the

retaining

to

must

them.

to designed is

complete

mini-

plans ascertain

these

group

the

optimum

carried

ensure

and

links

of

be

travel in

as

is Swiss Lodge, Faucheldean, Broxburn, West Lothian EHS2 6PS Tel. No..01506 89045!

Development and Building Control Manager Development Control Unit 15 Jf gØ5 County Buildings Linlithgo’w I EH49 7EZ 21 October2005

Dear Sir/Madam

OUTLINE PLANNING PERMISSION FOR A 352 HECTARE SETTLEMENT EXPANSION AT WINCFIBURGH

We object to the above planning application on the following grounds.

General Objections

Objection 1

This application is premature, and cannot be considered until a decision is reached on the Finalised West Lothian Local Plan 2005. It should therefore be refused. I L (JrI’’ Objection 2 1

Para4.3.4 on page 16 of the Transport Assessment states: “The two major landowners, Hopetoun and GlendevonEstates, decidedto pool theft resources and actively promote an initiative to bring about their vision for the future of the village. These proposals were endorsed at meetings of the Community Council. They were also the subject of a Jinpezi turey which showed that local people overwhelmingly supported the ideas”. The survey carried out did indeed support develo ment but not on the scale now proposed. It was for a development of some 500 to 800 houses and not the 3,450 units now proposed. The only reason for the size of this development is because have forced the develo r to for all the infr tructure and the educational facilities. [n view of the fact that the result o t e survey gave this eve ment such impetus, it is considered that the application should not be granted as it was based on erroneous facts.

Objection 3

Figure 5. on page 28 of the Draft Final Master Plan. ;hos the e’dsting landscape ha’ing a cnmpiete path betseen Fauuheldean and UIendem Pond. Pirtfthi does not now e\ist as it vas bulldozed some years ao by the farmer of(lcndeon Fstates paths correct. are Faucheldean In is the giving aguhural of Outline It The narrow soil is a development Policy unacceptable. irreplaceable land educational option permanent from so sector The This However, where liopetoun

do

(‘ore

considered

described has

the

Winchburgh.

are

not.

land

a. b.

and

new

best not

capable

project

development

are

been

Environmental

of vulnerable

the a

ENV of

Development

there there

range

planning

productive

believe south These

loss

developments the farmland also

choosing

these

landowners Estates

loss

said

land

facilities

as

has

7

district, of to of is is

natural on that

of

shown

and states

are

Mla

an a

of

West producing

land that

areas that

crops. been the

with This

proven

permission

to

the

prime and overwhelming

west only

in

and

this

agricultural

pressures

above

this

the

that of

resource,

running

Area

by West Ochiltree

application

Statement. It

are

led approximately development

it are

the

76%

land of

two

of is

above

the would

agricultural lack landji

development

also

Land from

only intensively

Glendevon

a

the

in

land loss

Lothian

developer

examples

moderate as

and

has

the

of

south

close

thr

Union

the

exemptions

the

one too appear Use of road.

Specific should

land.

development

Agricultural

been 57% para first

should

one locational

developments.

such

conservation

start

willing

of

lies

will towards

to Clas

land

200 They

Canal

instance? of farmed

2.3.6 and the Apart

respectively.

range sought of

that urban made will

be

a

in by

result

the

not

large many

hectares

Core

unless: Objections

the refused.

Tippet

the to are

are

West

not

(Walking ueensfey),,

is

need;

highest

East

of from

it be

settlements.

sell.

in

sites coastal by

Class

yers in

easier applicable amount supposedly

be

crops

Development errors

considered

Land of

large

CALA

Lothian the

Broxburn

The Knowes

one and

permitted

this

elsewhere.

Could

3.1

loss

for

rain with

lowland

units and

adverse

in

small

of

land

(Winton)

for the

Winchburgh

Council of

motorways

prime and

Cycling),

it

consistently will

shown

of

and

until and

and

merits a some

be relevant pocket,

which

ldthcwork1.

Glendevon Areas

352

would

etfect

fringe

be

that

which

is

west

agricultural

the

highly have

on and 267

built hectare

general

results

the

of

documents states

the

of

and

argue

documents Figure alongside

and

to

is

is hectares

West

taken high

such on provision

remainder

described

be prime productive.

the and

the

expansion

in that

land

protection

that

chosen

2.8 yields

land

Lothian

eastern

the

airport.

the

As

broad

quality

of

which the

are

hut

and

easy

of is

an

as

of of

as

it

a plant The effect badgers to

In the appear and Consultation conclusions. attended It part While number public The developments development to discouraged, also It areas Agricultural proposals To strategic within Policy Special loss

is is

the

conclusion,

that

provide proposed

the

loss considered

averred Consultation of

of

be

and

there

on 1mpat

it

meetings,

already the ENV

that the

top-quali1

designated

railway —

of Agricultural

is of

the

reasons.

local

animals

of

related

eastern

County. very forms

will

hedgerows

a

additional

that

two which

Importance. 9

iliat Report number development,

and unless

badger in it states

designated

unbelievable commendable be

station

is

the

public terms

in processed,

the to the

that Report

part

considered a

farmland as

there

It

that

overwhelmingly

agricultural

presumption

land is

Importance, that

development failure

may

an

is

populations.

rely protection

and of made

would

of

meetings, therefore, the

Area

are

does various

proposed

West

visual

These

as

have

on

changes

it

greatest

it

of Community

several

an md up

that

does

these

of be

that

that is

not

the

Lothian,

been

Area

of

and

considered

areas im’ct,

hiodrersit’ Special

built.

for

intensively

out

within

against

only

proposed

appear

not seem

postcards developers the

for

It li

to

habitats.

Biodiversity

concern

in

farm these

mislaid

proven

of of

would

small

are

much Primary

the the

twenty-one

more

Special

a

are

which

Importance se

to large-scale

diversification

shown

little

areas,

area development

Involvement

that that

accurately designated

watercourses

appear

expressed

weight

to and

farmed,

or

n

could

The

than

to —

over Schools

large-scale

be

otherwise.

entc

ildlile Agricultural

the

not

they

give

comments

find on

loss

in

one

returned

be

that

should

land

much the

the

with

development the

high-quality

are

assurances

food,

of

significant

reflect

hundred

was

as

were

top

in proposals

in little

public

agricultural around

would

designated

the

will

Areas

weight

this

Wincburgh developments

en.

be In

the

may

when

from comment

Importance

consulted attention

same

the

view

given

have

area

size

interest,

and

normally

have

of

Winchburgh

traffic

that

thosikfren.

responses

over

can

agricultural

map. unless

restrictions.

Special

of

of

an

fifty

to

as

land

the

a

be forms.

the

the

is

has

impact

75%

this

at

Areas

generation,

significant

Only

Within

no people

given

in justified

M9

will

be

small

length where

been

report.

the

different

from of

accepted.

junction

should It

minor

be of

areas,

on

the

to

eastern

would

paid

these

who

on

the

the

for area. Tramline at Evening and improved Pam Tramline space the benefit that Lothians far. of Light appeared hole. set Broxburn, there The junction, could been respectively. Winchburgh drastic relevant Scottish However, proposals “planning Great This roads south restrictions speed merely speed. front the Faucheldean

several

Chapter

to

benefits

the

the

development Approval proposed 5.2.2

placed

type It would

of Rapid shelve of

It

be of

where emphasis

will

to

consequences West will route

mean This

was

News under the Executive

infrastructure the Structure 2 built

key 1. in and

the indicating

(Transport

of

should at permission

and

8 will

be

had to the run will

Transit on schools be

part development suggested - the road, is the development.

Edinburgh

of

Winchburgh road.

high-speed locations that

restricted En

M9 for in the

Transport on two

that

not a

the have

Edinburgh

risen Tramline from

is time

undoubtedly the

speed

the saving

of

with either

this 27

junction

Winchburgh they

given

however,

Plan

completion years. conducive or no

It Edinburgh’s (Tramline

and that event

development

a

September Proposals)

Haymarket of from for

project the would will

alternative clear

feeder is

that limit use

including

of 2015 to

of60 writing, area”.

in vehicles to

and provided the

sustainable

Strategic 2

and Of of development. those 20mph not Evening an

the and the

the

if

will

It impact

will will

make development. one

Accessibility). roads and this the have has

to estimated has

partly be 2)

town existing

proposed of

and the million.

However,

of be indicating encouraging projects

neither either only planned

or Airport as in will granted the options not

Tramline sum, in been Traffic i.e. before

or

more considerable new Rail the

shortened

East on leading

News

Edinburgh

both proposed

centre. the

near

Gyle transport

committed”. yet

Glendevon

run be

the

Transport

only be suggested

minor

railway Authority/Train

Finalised of cost

Broxburn

sense

allowed Strategic

It not the been fail to

Any tram have for the

an

for 30 which

transport

and

Impact that these

is

2

from The

Newbridge

some These

need of473 article to being On development

or

considered motorists for M9 approximately

to

road in

such

granted

to network link Edinburgh been to

the

materialise.

station 40

pedestrian Local cut

Policy

projects Saturday the indicated it.

Assessment junction. have Neighbourhood to

that its

West

Link for £375

CDA

roads

network CALA cost completed mph,

between

curtailment

appeared costs travel network

examined.

terminus benefit

million

the

approximately

Plan, a and

are

Iran

to Lothian from section of

million to

ring Operating

with

hr are there that with

has construction

and

Airport. help

up have 1 this use of that

even both

traffic.

In

-

of October CDA Edinburgh

one

around 27 road Broxburn to especially specific the too

to in the states thereby

the at

then addition

this

scheme,

Winchburgh plug Transport

were

would has £714 no

Local of integral the 60

if

Newbridge,

mile,

approval

much

extension

20mph Centre,

or three

1, it

road thrther the

alternative

this Companies

mph

It

Edinburgh been

“the

a

were, the

states a shelved, a

million I

will sites diminishing funding

of Plan Edinburgh partly ,000 by-pass further further

to

to emphasis will

City including

areas the but

on Winchburh to

proposed

the secured

speed

leaders

the the

the reducing provide

of

could

that until the

this (Para

houses of will

have

and

Centre

above. to stopping the

road in urban

where M9

then

reduce article

the

black

round

the road.

the

all

East

it

were has so 8.59

&

an in

the

be Assessments Great no years. There require been

Yours

Wifliam

consideration

addressed

fI

play

is

/,.

faithfully It

to

also

J.

is

be

has

considered Wilson /

7)

made for no /

been

r

properly

mention

most

has /1

/fr\

to

made

been

deliver

of

that

and the

of

of

given

the

the

roads

the

that

sufficient

full

construction

to Trip

it

surrounding

potential the

will

Generation

additional

material

Yvonne be

much

of

traffic

the

the

to

P.

more 42,000 Rates

restore increased development. Wilson

which

than

and

HGV

will the

Junction

the

traffic

Auldcathie

last

journeys

amount

/

It

tbr

volume

would

Capacity

some

suggested.

that

Landfill

appear

has

twelve

will

not

site. that I from u do and ‘-‘arious support

area In make

Glass road Faucheldean Faucheldean one was

Winchburgh This I

Community Dear Ef149 October There Linlithgow

Planning Mrs

County

have

refer

over

not

the

that

of

distributed

Broxburn included

were

as

W

Swiss

a

Mrs

already were

O(ffLINE even

which

7EZ to

P(

jbr

definitive Mini

speed 50%

it

Buildings

IvfcCorriston

of

regarding

the

Tel

finalised

Department

is,

McCorriston,

ting

others,

Faucheldean

Lodge,

know

two

Council

SETTLEMENT who

of Market

make

No

meeting

mentioned

Road. Road.

limits

5

made

to

the

minor

replies

surveys

only

were 01506

PLANNING

decision

the

where

I

it

answers

Faucheldean,

objections

am

on

my

on

in

into to

The

M9 In

you

road

questioned

from

persons

that Glass

aware a

\

my

done objections

890451 I Faucheldean

the

replies

Road iDuntarvie,,1

a

questionnaire

held

until

&

‘

cul-de-sac R’

net#

survey

road

the

road.

EXPANSION

:c

Glendevon

6u

Road

concerning

PERMISSION

to

that

at

to

preferred

plans

with

from

i 1) ‘-

irk

the

my

stay Broxburn,

Winchburgh

outside rnaiLrHThiefauta

The there

known quite

4

and

apparently

project

properties view -

for

Junction.

some

is!!

open.

or

other

residents comprising

were

espec

a

the

choice

this AT

make

is ards

Scotmid

on

lot

random

that

and

West

FOR one

From roads

the WJNCHBURGH

road three

ofpeople

ia/tv

Community

and gave

various

on,

motorists was in proposed

was

Lothian, who

A

in

particular - the my

in

choices or

because

350

12

one 352

for

an

Main

done

their

were leading

fau own

questions,

in

improvements.

overwhelming persons

19

a

by HECTARE

aol

Winchburgh cul-de-sac. Centre will

Strategic EH52

particular February

by

Street

knowledge -

reluctant the

he/dean

qf

leave corn

mys to

on

merely

the

the

in

6PS

and

to

only on

etf

the

the

Link

24th

and

2008

to jump

preserve population,

As As Farm No. against. allowed In withdraw made already Road. terms that village were the that Yours

This Winchburgh

Winchburgh,

far addition

I

we

Community

1

meeting no

road

that

Wilson

on

which a

sincerely and of

were

as

I

round

access

cul-de-sac.

being

on

have

cost, to

I -

the

any it

is

large a

will

the

to to

leaving

was

not

quiet related currently

use

Faucheldean how

no by

this

objections it What hearing

required

grass is

now

just

from

Council.

numbers

used

this

the

allowed wish

a

country

would

subway

take the these

If

to those

Glendevon

road

verges for

the

this used to

our the

from

meeting,

this

proposed restrict

be

after cycling

of members on

The

premature who as

road

is

Road objections,

by

would

a

cyclists. when

part opportunity not the to

drop recollections

horse having

live

it

which

duck

you possible

developer

the is

from

and

of

traffic

deal

Strategic concerned,

in are in

existing

their

riders

asked

pond.

in application

walking

Faucheldean,

the

heard

you

can

the

stating

with

addition,

passes.

of

ocean

then

circular

Strategic

be

heard

from

f

of

withdrawing

arguments

Link most

traffic

anyone

used

some by

access

I

is

compared would

the from

what

lots

by

road. many

of

route

by

but

of

Link.

without

livery

Cala.

the

would

ofpeople

should

the

some

we those

still

families

only both

objections.

to

my

local

want

at

You to

and

prefer

like

members for

having

members

to

Objection

not

Kirkiands

what

heard

from

from

ensure

to

from

and to

be

it

is

to

to

In

the

at

of

be 4v(i

!‘I )(i \ Catbells 1-aucheldean \ Vet Lothian E11526PS

l’elephone 01506 890707

West Lothian Council Development Control Unit County Buildings Linlithgow th25 October 2005

Outline Planning Permission Application at Winchburgh, West Lothian, made by CALA LAND INVESTMENTS Ltd

My wife and I live at Catbells the most westerly house in Faucheldean facing onto the small field that will be bisected by a proposed link road as marked on Drawings I 120/ppca!pa/0I Sheet I of 2 and I l2Oppca/paIO2sheet 5 of 6 associated with the above application

On the issue of this proposed road (north I3roxburn and Glendevon on the west side of Winchburgh) we take exception. What is the justification for this road? It would appear that this road is a feeder from Broxbum to theew WTJ wncerifre chools and the new motorway ‘al1 ways”junction on the M9. If this road is built it will in effect be a Winchburgh and Ecciesmachen bypass and will also be a commujrniduit between Broxhurn. Linlithgow and the M9 to Falkirk and Stirling at Philpstoun. This particular flow of traffic to the West and North is not considered as an impact of the proposed road link. It would also raise the traffic on the Fjiucheldean ro1 from areas south and east of Winchburgh and from Ltphalland the south west to an intolerable level. This type of road should be a part of the strategic linking roads plan at a much higher level than this outline planning application, probably the Scottish Office. [believe that this proposed road will create more problems than it will solve in terms of this application. Existing roads provide this link, This particular part of the application should be linked to likely work that will take place at Threemiletown to improve the motorway links between the M9 and M8 that, with existing roads, will provide the same function.

You know of the recent Scottish Executive’s decision with regard to the ‘all points’ junction at Burhmuir near Linlithgow and the Executives position of a” hJaiket esumption” aginst new motorwgJunctions. In view of this what is the likel outcome of the application for a new All Ways junction that is key to the success of the proposed development encompassed by this application? It is my view that without a motorway junction the need for this linking road would not he justified just to take additional School traftic. The size of any development will necessarily have to be significantly reduced without proper lmks to the motorway.

The suggested route of this road in front of our house is insensitive to the people who live in the rural environment. Roads should be planned in harmony with the local environment. The road and its construction would seriously disturb unspoiled countyside and wildlifc habitat. If constructed in this area as proposed it will introduce pollution hitherto not experienced here particularly fumes, noise and light. the amount of land reserved for this proposed road seems to U. mnre than could rcasonahk he requir:d and eacroaches on the right of sa trom (ilendevon and successful. realignment the ([have remainder consultative this The view information are views The seriously detailed If

Regards

Tom

at

feeding

not

on

application

route issue

the

of

I3ryce

of

the

records

prepared

the

end

design

the

by

of

of

tët

woodland

The

route

local

is

of

meetings of the countryside the

the

precariously

the

the from

of

proposed is

Authority.

management

proposed

to

thë1eld

residents of

successful.

this

proposed

day

accept

the

other

strip

organised

road

this

bats

and

route

in

tint this road

involved is

application close and

between route

front

to

the

Regardless of

impairment

i

of would

have

its

the

by

evening

a

to

the otu

and

Countride

route.

Winchburgh the

wildlife

road

the

Glendevon

road,

significantly

the

is

woodland

fthisapptiation

road

of through

granted skies,

area

and

as

what

groups

closed

outlined

that

oppose

Group and

Development

and

information

then Faucheldean

strip

affect is

to seriously

to

Faucheldean.

encompassed

confinn we

this

Man’gcd

in

that

through

the

the

is

would

application

has

successful?

supporting

amenity

lower

that

needs Initiative this).

established’bat

traffic.

area

want

has

by

the

The

to

of

come Vv

to

the vigorously.

This

value

be

There

hat drawings and

our

be

pt6

application

resolved

involved would

view to

property. others

of

needs

you anJbido1omes

I

our

dind1s

must

and

he

from

the

particularly

property.

to

in

th

if

unspoilt

be

majority

he

the

it

the

taken

alöii is

a

We

if

A* )

objections a West

Dear Development

352HA

Sirs,

Lothian

4)

5)

3) 2)

I

1)

settlement

as

have

Council

follows:

Control

the

application

Unit — I ______

ensure On the

suburb the will The development, mean that schools They the development will on This

development. would such rules

been

these

a

sun

village never

be

line statement

more

application

land. state

Winch

station

agreed

prohibit

like built

Winchburgh

of

for

are from

grounds.

dear through

that

reopen

particular

and The

in

to

heating

burgh

on

in

is

the

and

Cala

but

city?

Currently

make

is

vtew

isakey

is

speaking

application

fact

non—agriculturaFbuilding

“clearly

untrue.

assumes

agricultural and

Planning

it

the

Winchburgh

Land

and

at

the

is

is

note,

in

when

village

the

well

the

most

Edinburgh

Investments

to

following

supported”.

with

(j

my

sun

Statement the

should

site

EARL

known

28Th

element

become

land

of

other

will

house

at

local

is

was

Easter

October the

is

and

all

an

points/raise

Winchburgh

be

the

in

completed

chosen

does

residents,

/

regarding --

EHS2 Canalside

land

relies Living

times plan

that

area

another

rejected existing

fact

in

Cottage

station

2005

this

that

this

6PU

the

has

on

for

be

on of

to

in p

forward

Gudmund I

hope

you

to

Friis

your

will

the to towards the the the a the modelled aims. successfully heating

Jorgensen.

response.

3

consider

year.

year.

sun south.

deprive

winter.

storey

effect

is

being

Before

In

on

The

not

the building

these

As,

getting

a

on

a

more

in proposed will

building

the computer

in building

keeping

points

put

Britain,

design some proposed

environmentally

my

started

development

carefully

with

of

that

at to house

there

its

various

lmmediateiy

determine

the

environmental

is

energy

in

is

and

house

currently

shade

friendly, times

a

there

i

move

from

look

was

the

to of

in

Is time Thanks Hi something masterplan Things aspects previous and From Graeme hestate I Regards. Lastly,

hope McCorriston,

Sent: Subject: To: From:

Wendy,

• • • • •

integrate

of

my

cottages, are We there “nature which Given to then the over face said, I routed I property certainly The boundary previously boundaries. How be the

year, I that

for would

believe

of

did

to

objections

better

personal

moved

directly

above house. all the

early

get your

issues

22 Graeme

the has RE: McCorriston,

I be the do

think I

would

it think

Cala the would

need

should into

corridor” personally proposal

has December2009

in at we

prospect

years). “protect” however

there hem ‘Mnchburgh been

note

in my

and

scale

touch.

to our

are tt had

the

were above on all

“protect”

I point the

Wendy

not

potentially was to

will think some I

not

own

Couper

the

would the

below. of more the houses.

were the around

agree development.

an

new

been

of

as be I be

some a such going

of

property of

the this southern would has Wendy

open stem residents

that

the public favour

good

extent

I view aware

keen

at

going

a

year.

like the

expect

if

possible [graeme.coupersn.comJ

front

Settlement

will

I fence development, two

as and

risk

given

be the

help to

popped

The

from

aspect

idea therefore northern to 10:21

footpath

there

main

if removing

provide

be (similar

an

to children’s

in of of of about

road In

this consider

most

need in

rationale

this less

house be the significant via

the flying impact the this that

consideration for

appears

roads

over

were

in

a is

could

increased

location

road

than resubmission. and houses?

Expansion.

respect to without most to open however us variety

to

to

be

footballs

the

locations,

fields agree

the other

to is see *

all

to become

etc

for keen I

a be

bedrooms

become

got there

my cottages

Faucheldean

directly space

to to issue

dozen

nature

this the

therefore

of of removed?

the though,

(further get

options be

on a garage

the public to

options my

(certainly

of copy

scope Rigby’s

is

limited explore benefit a

for

and/or the Planning together

was

feet

latest

future join corridor) that

a cul house

from

directly all

dumping

path integration

and

of

limiting

but

and

we

proposed de

from to on

the

in the

the

scope

but

of are plans

end

plans with the

amend

in sac

in I relation as have

footfall to

greenhouses

like

Application

a have southern

northern

to

actual relevant my unfortunately the

on

of

my

front you of link

both

which the

ground

prevent we mention

to greatest

and

to this the

lounge

plot

aspect existing

opposite retrieved

road? how

mention,

influence and developers

to

carefully

garden

have

view

fact,

road

if footpath

which joining

most end

most

section.

there

for the

potential

being

Ref:

and

direct

and I

most previously impact

that

as

boundary is believe

grass

public

the and they properties

enough 3

those

means

consider

are best the

dining the new 1

cottages

light

therefore

would

so

directly whether 0121P/05 garden

northern As

additionally,

were

any more

gardens to

cuttings

end

directly

for

path

to

this that

to

you

me

that

of room

although

as existing

all queries, access.

my

of

how out.

as

them significant

is

to of impacts have

mentioned suggested, are:

I

the then

there

the

development

most

house). would

preferable

well. which garden impacted? etc.

windows

being

best

Fortunately

boundary

cul

from

already of

be boundaries

please may I

cottages.

In

That

will

those

on de potentially

to

very

directly I

this Page

live

the structural

In

above mitigate

my sac

be arrange given

that

being to

addition,

raised

close respect

don’t fields

in

could will scope

a

would

1

the

one

on

of6

the

is

to

a stay

be a Objection rear paths”) development

‘avoid

served of police authority.

our Objection

houses. Obviously master authority serious

application. comment Notice

I

Dear

County West

Development Linlithgow West

(ref

loss

write

without the

joint

of

in

1012/P)

Sir/Madam,

of

Lothian Lothian

guidelines.

my

road.

plan

by disruption

of

concerns a

Again

formally

Buildings

amenit

We

concerns.

has

rural

objection

only

house.

2 a

We

doubt

Winchburgh I

and —

safe

have

of —

now

Policy

I

our Management Council

have

that

area

Roads/access

the

and did

the

about

vehicular

the

to

a

of

had

severe In

I

there

is

large —

meeting a

local

write

would

not

enjoying

ENV you

public

particular

most

right another

outline

the

the

is

accepted amount

‘il1

plan

loss to

amended

back

planning

of

33

like

disturbing

seen

access”.

Manager

rights

arranged

ask

planning

he

access

issue —

strategy. -

must the

these new

Should

in

our

uhstantial

of as

you

countryside as

of

2005/06

that

houses

application.

master

a developments conform

and

road

recorded

Clearly

with responsible

formal

and

to

Core

application

the

Email

is

My

are

note

is

first

upsetting

the

deeloprnent

proposed

plan

disniption.

house

Development

liable

private but

to objections.

that

with

developer

and my -

with

Karen.ne

re-notification,

the

now

access

is

should

for

is

for

objections

tbremost

the

and

design

change the

panoramic to

not

the

understand

application land

ourlooking

be

middle

proceed,

not

later

or

the

I

maintenance ...

built

3

Area.

tonscottish.par1ianient.uk

trust

and

around

Glendevon

to

to

in

“(k) maintained

case.

in

to

rights

our the

to

that

of

‘iews.

development

the

given

my the

he

the

Tel

that

I

a meantime.

arguments

way other

you

terraced

section have

Winchburgh month

capable

house

of above

front

-01506

and

the

that

Farm

Ihat

may

of

way

West

by

houses

Winchburgh

studied

and upgrading

FH52 letter

to

ide

will

(i)

the

the

of row planning

note

will Cottages

or

against

discuss control

Lothian

890961

to

states

being

have

local

core local

will

of

e

was

6PX

the

my

the

be

5 would These at ride explanation one and OLjcction disrupted note meeting being house Karen master issues.

Yours

Glendevon

detailed

of

our

considered

are Newton thithfully

will decrease

plan the

objections.

with

to

my

proposals 3

be

that

assessments

given

our —

Farm

LXB

main

impacted

Core

and

development

at

severe

‘

and

every Cottages

and

is objections

our

is

Development

to

protect

to

discuss

quality

disadvantage.

will

stage. by

improve

conjoin

Alan

and

a

reveal

control

residential

major

of

matters

Newton

not should

life

the

full marketability.

Area

to

process

road

would

N19

There

mention

traffic be

fully

amenity”

in

taken

with

network

suffer.

with general

proposals will

and

I

the

into

suspect

environmental

be

them.

maxirnise

M8

situated

account that

I

loss -

will

will

it

It

clearly

the

Please

seems

of

await

is

he

value when

very

potential

trees

clearly

rigorously

will

however

impact. the very

close

the of

and

outcome

afftct

worded

our

clear

application

for

landscaping

to

Given

properties meantime

examined

residents

that

park us.

of in

The

that

our

the the

&

is McCorriston, Wendy - CV’i 1

From: GillTreadwell [gilltreadwellblueyonder.co.ukJ Sent: 04 November 2009 22:13 To: McCorriston, Wendy Subject: Planning Application number 1012/P/05 f[ 227 CLJtci

I li3: ilrent nciL.

no I s fin ;nrnrn rrrun y i’m 1 L ret: in j, idv: i rrut mccc. ir : ‘3.jr . fly ncm f fib using ievb lmer The Parent mnil bect thIs n D2&L the nas: a tnat no hiatli. re moat in an in :reaaed number of piDils within no c.t. men fin thburgh Prir ary S L o I which wiil require he a hoel to be extended o crommodfle tne additional pupils (something ye r fivid fcKirtney appeared t be aware ot) The Parent Council onsider flat the schoil at present is not capable at being extended without detrimentally efretin the quality of teahinq and the ability fi the school ‘o cinflnue t iffer the level of active learning rnd physical exercise which is being promoted by the Scottish Government. The schoo was originalty built as a single stream single campus ilcility. The denominational primary school(Holy Family) occupied a site immediately adjacent to the current school building. However, the Council considered that it was surplus to requirements due to a falling school roll and decided that there was sufficient capacity within Winchburgh Primary School to accommodate both schools and demolished the Holy Family. The Council also granted planning permission for a residential development on the site of the former Holy Family and have recently allocated the former playing fields of the Holy Family as well as an area of omen space to the north of Winchburgh Primary School for residential development.

As you will be aware, the Council have recently received the sum of £550 000 for a 2 class extension to the Holy Family as a result of a development in Kirkliston. The developer at the Community Council meeting also advised that a turher S classroom extension would be required at Winchhurgh Primary School to accommodate the first phase of the residential development. Whilst in is only right that the developers are funding the infrastructure required for tneir development, they tall to realise that the current school site has a finite amount of land on which to extend. Furthermore, the legal agreement for the Kirkliston develupment does not provide the flexibility for tnis money to be used t’r ‘b prov:s in rf :ther facilinies at the scnools. increasing Cr crmodaflrn in trn.sof nrovidinj additional ciasarcoms is only one elem’nt of mn i ucreasec schrl ri 11. The tact that the school nLZ sing was iisi ;r.ei s a single mvnptis means that: — ra ras more bnr zma will ia.cit:r .unn:im-as aw,rd ma ir’ syrs en .n/c’ n As cmIn, ;ym :c: has

LneCe itit.

n m ‘r- r ed r b a r swn’’ n r — — t t - 0, zjM 3 ) ) r’ i it I inm Oiiti’ Rfr I. Vt Il0, r ‘o t ii titi its ii— to n,i. :3; 0.0)) 0, D0 ttt D 11 Ii’ *DDI’ t) 0 t i W D. I.- iJ :i 0’ t I • zi- ott a o:r tmo-t r • kt rrap.’ .20 Ii D)t P a 011Dm D ra oe 0*10 UD ‘c bit Ifl- 1 $..L’1D) tlqQ J0.e1l1 fr 1 0’ ti: b WOOD 0

O ci ig j. t’ttg. G0) ii It 0 00 0. tAD :n COD CD pm cce 1 ) 1$ CO hOt’ t ‘4 i Ua ti. )Q. 1 (Ii, Ca Rb D 3 10 lii D tn Cr10 3 ‘teD 0’ld.DR ‘1. ‘14 r D Pip, 40,0 3 at aDOO 4 i.i C) Dliii 1-. I I ciltj)fl a. U it • C—liCD I taIl’L. or 4DD1 I ttitato I )t 4W 4’t t 3 ‘3 p o tab ioI° I- 1’ t’0D3 %%Ø Ca II tflp’) t l’ It) ti -..e rx WI 1 ‘4) v•CO ) I El’ Z 0 Sm co x: 0.D’i • CO frfl WE P to MO iQ D) 111,0W 011 U US® aw t’ ii ) ‘3 Dli taD g P Dtt) ‘.0 Ci 1111 D D l-3 t 0() to cia Mti ‘‘0mb • a i t 1< D 4W a I’ — a ‘a o .3 Ct .4 J on 3cc 3 orovision 2. core Faucheldean town Main formation General 1 1. follows: discuss application. Members We and M9 Cala Outline Dear West ee EH49 County WEST LINLITHGOW Development Manager Development Mr. 24 Date

WINCHBURGLcQMMUNITY The making The THE WCC tha’ junction, 2. November, 3. t I refer

R.R, retail paths centre; Street °ndlrg Land Sir Glendevon Lothian 7EZ amount great The The Planning The the Buildings LOTHIAN VIEWS and would to Hartland of of uses, it should Investments to application your the a views views views Winchburgh ip train town eastwards distribution effort circular Hawkhill & Control 2005 ofootpaths like being community i’ost Regulatory letter for OF area station, radiate centre of of of COUNCIL bad to a business the community desirable COMMUNITY see & 352ha of eferred should Wood; and gone Ltd to Building of 27 people to Community out park

a the — facilities, to Auldcathie; is Services ‘Welcome September,

financial from development into Land put too rot to bottom owners & Hawkhill and of councillors as ride, Standards (01506) forward smalj,— be reating the Winchburgh Around Milhonaires posh COUNCILLORS landscaping allowed - package Council of primary centre with Packs’ Wood Auldcathie parts the together suggest to planning Telephone 890262 area including Winchburgh shops Niddry the to

to met of and to being to link in receive Council the new Niddry with 9 & along on Winchburgh a secondary Brae; northwards prospects No each open

w new iiu of minimum residential, set the residents. maps special the Mains; up From three and evening area. space, bottom to

i’/( Main and existing schools for enable the categories through attention, commercial, , Niddry 20km documents, road In ow Street of of

Draft

/

I other Wednesday, the

/ density its village, / and which Mains Glendevon Niddry in members words with of nal rail Winchburgh responses, vusirg industrial, Master relating eg. should emphasis to infrastructure, Brae we Myreside. 16 from COUNCIL to West Winchburgh EH52 BROXBURN Faucheldean ‘Bellemonte’ to do to November include Pan organise to Faucheldean; tre/ Main not Myreside

4 recreational the as being Lothian 6PS one wish above Other Please the Street; including the placed an to to to reply to -J WCC — Response to the Planning Application in respect of Proposed Development in Winchburgh 24.11.05 Page 2

1. THE VIEWS OF COMMUNITY COUNCILLORS (Continued) General (Continued>

3.(Continued) Itree planting, scenic routes, etc., etc., etc. but the plan lacks the same commitment to top quality living conditions at the town centre, Hawkhill and Myreside, for example. One must ask whether the priority on the part of the developers to produce a very desirable area in which to live will be replicated in the future when the landowner has moved to another area and the staff at CALA,etc. are employed elsewhere? Will the same very high standards and consideration still prevail when it is time for other areas to be developed? Small pockets of desirable, expensive housing in each area is acceptable but one area being given special preferential treatment will be resisted. 4. Allelectricity----- cables should be underground. 5. All BT/landline cables should be underground.

6. Alleypplief hould upgrade_the system of supply to existing parts of the village.

7. When power suppliers intend to carry out underground work, they should have to contact other suppliers, e.g. Scottish Water, Scottish Power, Scottish Gas, W.L.C., etc. to arrange for work to be carried out by everyone at the same time the roads/pavements, etc. are being opened up.

8. Insufficient attention has been paid to old mine_workings. We do not want any new houses to disappear down a hole.

9. WCC does not want to see the Royal Highland Showground being sited anywhere near Winchburgh village.

10. WCC does not want to see First Bu&s new garage being sited in Winchburgh.

11. The existing community centre ed and kept as a museum/community facility,

12. The autonomy of Winchburgh should be safeguarded.

13. WCC accepts the intended boundary of the development.

14. Alltelecommunication masts to be yedaprJteputside the development boundary. No future telecommunication masts to be sited in the village.

15. A special fund should be setup to ensure there is sufficient finance available to WCC for C members to arrange for works to be carried out to mitigate the affects of development (something c;. resembling the John Kennie Fund which paid for road works throughout_the village).

16. A video record should be made of life in Winchburgh at the start of development and continue on through’2eviopment to record the changes that have taken place to benefit future generations. The visual record should be kept in a public building in Winchburgh.

17. At the start of the developmentpthian & Borders Polichould have a strategy in place to deal with the likelihood of increases in crime and idalismZRäT’dents should not have to wait until crime reaches unacceptable levels before increased Police presence is put in place.

18. There should be no secluded, unlit areas where people are afraid to walk at night or during the day

I 9 WL .0. and neveiopers should coaperate to obtafn grants for busness stauOsIn oropesed new employment areas 9. 7. 6. 8 technology, 4.

education 5. local 3. 2.

Environment 31. 29 access 28. 1. 30. family 27. community 26. 25. 24. the provision 23. 22. 21. WCC for that 20.

in proposed

1.

Tippetknowes

a Water As

WCC

Would Grey All The

WCC

VIEWS

pharmacy

There universities,

An A An An A

There A A At secure

everyone It Outdoor

flora

rights —

museum is ttle central centres crematoria dedicated

an

vacant

area advice area

area

water

Response

important

does

should

quality

applies

and

like

needs

Development early

disturbance should

should

from

etc.

environment

OF

of

for

should

should

meeting

to community

to

should fauna, not is

throughout way

plot

and

workshop

date

a

be should to COMMUNITY see

relocate.

safe.

fragmenting.

should

computer

to Park/Craigton

be

should Registry wish

bejgflj

that

enable in

to

information to

kept

adults

be

be

the

charity

there

thus Main

be the

be

areas

as

to set public

set

be

all

of

informed

use

used

preserved,

and

be

equipment Planning

see

possible

the

should making

young

wishing

continually Street Office must Winchburgh aside

aside

be

suite

collection

throughout built

of

not

toilets

new

buildings/houses

enhanced

wherever

while

integrated communiceritreto

COUNCILLORS

Park/land

be

should

for

for

within people

cause

should should be

of

it

development.

of

Application

to

provision

a

whether

are respite a

the

set

depot

paying

the

gain

wildlife

momtored

Council

bins

West

offence be Winchburgh

possible built

results up

who

be and be

rural

sources

to

or

for

put should

in

care

used put

tléirC&iii1lTax,

the

adopted

retained upgrade in

for haven..... left

Lothian

the

countryside

clothes,

Information

in

in

a

in of

in

to

north

a

in

school

respect for

central

place,

as

existing

close

place.

monitoring

be new

of

residents ‘

local

(Continued)

toilets which a

should

renewable

to provided

or

for qualifications

of

car

toys,

health

proximity

with

early reduce

water

not.

location existing

of

community

community

park

shOuld

Service

all and

etc. be

access but

of

to

residents

centre,

etc.

courses

to

or

the

set

the

air

energy, return

where

at

schools at

to store

take

turned

24.11.05

office

quality watering aside a

amount

to the

the

to

central use

centre.

dental

return

place.

to

West

equipment

Police

start

are Clay

e.g.

at

into

where

education.

which

in

which

drawn

of

of

the

practice of location.

solar

to

Pit.

Lothian

an

can

land

gardens.

the

work.

is

village.

area

residents nagerscan

surplus

energy, dib

for

in

development.

needed

order

College

and

to

the The

encourage

various

area

to

same

hydrogen

to and

Page

for

can

or

keep

burials.

gather

check

one

3

the

4

of

f:&.. WCC — Response to the Planning Application in respect of the proposed Development of Winchburgh 24.11.05 Page 4

1. THE VIEWS OF COMMUNITY COUNCILLORS (Continued)

Building Standards

1 Schools and public buildings should be designed to ensure low cost maintenance. e.g. pitched, tiled/slated rooves and materials used from sustainable sources with anti-fire properties wherever possible.

2. Deliveries of materials, etc. in areas near habitations should be between agreed set times with no deliveries on Saturday and Sunday. It is important to cut down on noise pollution.

3. All vehicles carrying loose materials, e.g. shale, sand, etc. should be covered by a tarpaulin.

Transportation

1. Would like to see ‘Tuffgrip’ road surfacing system put in place to ensure the soft surface cuts down on the amount of traffic noise by 50% - especially in busy areas and quiet outlying streets.

2. A scheme should be set up to deal with speed and other violations by construction traffic. The scheme would see haulage contractors agreeing that repeated violations would see their contract terminated or suspended for a number of months. WCC to be involved in the scheme from the consultation stage.

3. All speed bumps should be phased out and replaced with more attractive methods of deaiing with the problem, e.g. pinch points and landscaped traffic calming, etc.

4. Wherever possible, there should be no cul-de-sacs so as not to impede the progress of emergency vehicles.

5. Streets should be of a width to allow access by bin collection vehicles, emergency vehicles and

furniture vans. -

6. Sustainable road repairs should be mandatory with the use of ‘Rhinopatch’, a heat welded system to existing surfaces which will also cut down on motor cycle accidents.

7. Would like to see thet !illentotit1nw road from North Greend Gndevon.J On the plan it is too close to the right of way which is desi6id in one of W.L.C.’s brochures as ‘The Gateway to the Countryside’. It is also too close to the woodland strip that has an abundance of wildlife, e.g. woodpeckers, owls and colony of tree sparrows. Where this road meets with the Faucheldean Road, ef orts must be madeto put safeguards in place to deal with deer which cross in this area on their way south and east. -

8.A multi-storey car park should be erected in the town centre.

9. The Faucheldean Road shoulcLLemj pp_wjthogj-de-sac, and upgraded as necessary This is the wish of the majority of residents.

10. Vehicles and pedestrians should be kept separate with ‘jay walking being forbidden.

2. THE VIEWS OF THE PEOPLE OF WINCHBURGH

This information was provided in July this year, during consultations on the Finalised West Lothian Local Plan, but feel it is worthy of being considered again at this stage of consultation on the proposed development:

Q. 1 Do you support the provision of a 4way motorway junction in the vicinity of Winchburgh? Yes — 55% No — 45% WCC — Response to the Planning Application in respect of the proposed Development in Winchburgh 24.11.05 Page 5

2THE VIEWS OF THE PEOPLE OF WINCHBURGH (Continued)

Peope who said No’ to this question were of the opinion that development would never happen in Winchburgh or that it would mean more traffic in the village. It is expected that the ‘yes’ vote will increase in the future when the benefits of a motorway junction are fully understood — especially when houses are built and the employment area starts to be developed.

0.2 Do you support a railway station, with park & ride, in the vicinity of Winchburgh? Yes—89% No—11% Again, people who voted No’ stated the belief that a railway station was something that would never happen or that the park & ride was in the wrong place at Myreside. For the ‘Yes’ vote, having a railway station was seen as a very desirable facility and something that would compensate for living in a building site for years.

Q.3 Do you think Winchburgh needs a new town centre? Yes—56% No—44% People did not want this most important of streets to be overlooked and down graded to the status of a side street. Since the survey was carried out, the Post Office has been burnt down and there is ) even greater emphasis on retaining the Main Street as a major area in the village.

Q.4 Do you support the development of the Union Canal through Winchburgh? Yes—93% No—7% This was the most positive answer in the survey and saw residents being excited at the prospect of the canal being given the status they believed it deserved. People expressed great love and affection for this stretch of water.

0.5 Do you support two new secondary schools in Winchburgh, paid for by the developers, as identified in the Local Plan? Yes—88% No—12% Parents were relieved that new schools would take away the worry of whether or not their children would be able to attend Linlithgow Academy but, white they recognised that developers had to pay to provide the facilities to serve the people who would live in the houses they built, there were strong objections to the Council putting itself in the position of being blackmailed into providing planning permission for houses in order to get the facilities which, it was felt, should be provided from taxation by either the Government or the local authority.

0.6 Do you think the Faucheldean Road should be closed and a cul-de-sac created there? Yes—14% No—86% This was the only question that caused anger and brought forward a passionat.’ No’ vote. Villagers spoke with pride about this road, saying it went back to Roman times ancfhad been in existence long before Faucheldean was built or the existing 89080 constructed. Their wish was and still is that, instead of turning it into a private driveway for people living in Faucheldean, it should be upgraded and receive recognition as an ancient road down which Mary Queen of Scots rode on her way to Niddry Castle. They are proud of the roads historical links and the belief that Mary hunted in fields round about Winchburgh and Faucheldean. They feel that every road in and round about the village will be a potential ‘rat run during the next twelve years and Faucheldean should not be treated differently from anywhere else. It would be appropriate to heed public opinion and site a new pathway to run alongside the road and form part of the circular pathway around Winchburgh

Q.7 Do you support a number of new primary schools in Winchburgh, as identified in the Local Plan? Yes—87% No—13% Those against the provision of new primary schools did so because they believed the Council or Government should be paying to provide them. Most residents did not look upon this question as an noortant one as t seemed to them tc ne a -ecessar oart of the facht’es nrov ded envisaged to Traders With in account Street WINCHBURGH was wondered 3. developers option Had Q.12 Those lack terraTh associated Auldcathie community young people serious village Q. take Those Q.10 of WCC Those of old 2. Q.9 the Q.8 use road Some their

the

comment

The

11 the

the

THE

people

idea.

by

of able

there

part the

own

would

future, —

countryside.

proposed

would

people people.

VIEWS against

with against against Do with räquired Council

off-road

thought

about

Yes Yes—89%

were Do Response Yes—71% Do Do Yes—83%

Do Yes—87% becoming

loss

VIEWS

to

in

little

what

you

been

the

from

Landfill

with

to council you you low turnover youthink need you

the side

on —

when

have

of

asked

completely pay

their

area Main

73%

support

this

this the

expertise

what

OF it car survey

the support bikes?

support

the the a support It

the

Development

step

was

to

OF

caused

third

for

received

new

more on

development proposal Site

provision

sport meetings

ownership

Government

and

development?

Street Post be

BUSINESS young.

to Those

being

they

Winchburgh

vital

its

obvious

THE the

an and

comment option

provided

for

road

able an

the

duties

No No—11%

difficult West No—29% No—17% No—13%

and

Office,

in

misunderstood

thought

quite

Planning area

services.

in

club

slashed

extension to

in

managing

a —

concept

PEOPLE

thought

felt

thought Once

the to

to

it

favour

large fill in 27%

that and

in

Lothian

and is

specifically

a

organise activities.

organise

addition

there

there as

in

in has OWNERS and

future.

Winchburgh

on

likely ‘stir’

was

Community

an the

has

a it

and Application

vote

time

more

how

a

was of

of

form

begun the

It Council

to

extension

were is

its

OF

new

needed among future

Council’s

was

some

higher

a

the

the

the

as now goes

activities to

their

they

finances requests new this

understood or

and

The for WINCHBURGH

crematoria

new

Yes

people prospect

felt

enough

and cemetery?

less

WITH

to

a

were of

question

saw

road

by. own than

youngsters

the

Council

circle

to

crisis

in

that

uneven

deal

and

their

road

the was

expect view

revive

respect

elderly

of

in

to their

were amusements,

doing

average between

SHOPS

would

roads Main

No,

with

the ‘Yes’ the

of

of

number the necessary.

accepted

that

that

and should

should

confidence

being future ground

the

developers

future. suspicious such young

Council

with

extra

but

Street

when the

lead already developers

for

believed

future

bicycle/off

East

ALONG

where

will

able

their elderly

as

this

prospect be endeavour

(Continued)

traffic.

the

would to would

they

is

Maybe to eventually

built etc.

Broxburn the

of question. 24.1105

and

to being

taxes

fact

among

allow

of

children to

that

the

found

would

maintain

community

most

provide be

in THE

should

the

pay

road that

that

over

West

or

street

the

upgraded. when

noisy

them

to

way

traders for

Don’t

that people

it

and

be

it

agree

MAIN

bike have

intention

the

may

would

These

was

pay

the

everything.

a

Lothian

able in

and

but

it

to

they

Winch

coming healthy

had

ownership

which

having Know,

visit?

an

use necessary for

likely

to

along

Winchburgh were

STREET

how

to spoil

young

were

area

take They

everything

to

was

part

live

burgh? but

the

depend

that

they

profit

the

months

in

to

the

a

part

set

allowed

most in

to were

of

favour

nice

They

pay Page

people

Council

among

third

another

Main

peace

rough

separate

the

IN

aside

and

in

for

is

piece

on

asked

and

6

of

a

loss

to

are

the

in

its

for WCC for with Another trader of Your The was and office. for clients A as either while The WINCH8URGH Secretary (M.G. periodic roads situation headed should advertise Street. The back the problems do-it-yourself (Kirkliston, 3. however, In people’s sellotape, stamps, hairdressers Parking necessity. In hairdressers Post Everyone

trader,

our the the

well THE

children,

WINCHBURGH former

attractive

traders local another general butcher

Office,

faithfully

on

they —

MiNer).fri long

being view the proposed

remarked

to

and be

as

Response paper,

is

monitoring hairdresser to bubble

VIEWS and

attention who

do

keen footpaths pharmacist

than

vacant viewed

masking made are their seen

term, the PC.

Broxburn,

it

believed

and

carried Café, community

their

saw opinion desirable

as being might give

goods,

to has

out

Main

copies it

to

customers.

wrap,

there

as

Development

for

available potential solved Z5 traders that

It

building lack

OF shopping the A see

advice

of

been to Specialist

must

to

a (Continued)

be run tape,

of such

out CALA

Street:

said was that

the

COMMUNITY what major

newspapers, the

Planning and need

Bridgend

were

the of the BUSINESS envelopes, of

appropriate

provision

from

while

and

hall in

be

do parking village

which

the creation

as hammer on she that

site speed shoppers. one affects

and

was

to business

for

of already remembered problem

not

was to

the led

home.

shops Bakery,

add

construction

would

the

opposite

the

of

in a

better Application house

available

are

or

wish

they

to

problem.

post

of Winchburgh places the in

of to

loss

of needles aforementioned

Linlithgow) and

More

a

for stationery, OWNERS

construction attached.

place

and 3

construction funds for

like

COUNCIL as lay-by turndown are

As

the hair

facilities another

office

No.

part

It

Town

of

nails,

the

29-years,

lack was

the as a

seating to

doing Main

on

a

dressing that

in

legal

hairdresser,

of to

work

&

in

see P0

car areas, a

in

Pitlochry the street

Centre of

also

fancy thread,

the assist

major respect

butcher for shop

for snacks, Winchburgh,

Street

WITH in

their in

sales parking

a businesses

Main

is

traffic along

history

trade. at their

dental Winchburgh wheelchair thought

put

while

taking

itself

establishment in

good,

owners in drawback

regular

Management food

wool,

to area

Linlithgow

and

Street. forward

the

shop SHOPS

pensions,

the etc.

being

clients

spaces

be

needed

of looking practice

Shop

shopping, place. cutlery,

employment important Callendar.

(formerly

length

knickers, the turned

periods. in and etc. that

preferably

monitored

users

the

the

Another for ask

has shale

owners

is

ALONG

or

their neat a opens

on benefits,

of It mugs.

failing have people

village

following

into

to makeover

24.11.05 her

Livingston. seen

was

acted

attending

the that

the the

wallpaper

pay

industry,

and staff

It a

if

on

of point would

written

before

street

felt regularly Main Star was

she to quiet

there people

THE a and

intending

a tidy, on She

the

postal need

visit attract

proposals consultant

that

was can

as thought to &

Street 13

like

side Main the

laundrette

was

was

is

10 had out

MAIN

paste Garter)

to make

a going there to

often No.

supply requirements

and the

a.m.

to

priority hairdresser, passing discuss

their

have

street.

also created

advertising to

Street.

with

see

illegal

lack that and

shop

maintenance it

should STREET

to

elsewhere

asked to

but

or

views

more

favoured

a

brown

attract a

and

a

look

public at paint,

of

place

the

trade.

no car

as play They

A on

more

Page

the

signs

by taxi a be

appealing

more on a at

matter

the

park

buying to

paper, and post

area people

site to toilets her IN

the

are,

draw

7

rank

Main One to

park

of at

of 4.

Winchburgh Mary

Dear

village substantial The

have

presentation It other 845810

Yours

Mifler Steven

1 main Mrs may 2.

3.

4. recently

of

977 to residents areas residents. Miller cope 1353 Winchburgh. identify identified be squeezed good New sincerely. residents 1120 comments developers. Indeed, facilities Development encouraged maintained

expand changes Community

Ward

that homes

with homes taken

you Primary access CALA APPLICAnON homes

meant

these a

adequate and

specific to and this staffing would I

would

in are to would

the

I

allow are

As LAND as have

I recreational, iistc it are A by to Council ideas expansion planning Healthcare

would planned of

was time

few an

use planned you like road,

be

the planned

site expect levels \iem,her good The

on Steven healthcare afterthought.

INVESTMENTS difficult have designated easily to

me this are Branches

expect existing

the or FOR together

study

is in Oft:ce: passing 21 and to date. aware route, and Village the in

been application started Facilities years Winch of Recistered from facilitated retail comment

years for OUTLINE EHS2

both The cope the existing Main

would in Main Ward

provision With

me thereby 6 incorporated year with the ‘Disabled”

E/dinhureh, trade 1-4 and

National application

KrttiI’stoun early

ourselves 5-8

with

to

Street will application this burgh

be of a

in 9 community Pharmacy LTD on, if are: 6RU take Health Street

of

for convenient onwards PLANNING a the on Scotland this Limited be looking ensuring in

may the

new please

Pharmaceut the

should to mind provided it development

parking I.harinoak.6trr: within

all development and

by Court Centre. into avoid

be small healthcare

is in to Cala No and

feel a facilities the

the a feel for incorporate at re-locate. existing bus-stop good

a vibrant PERMISSION Lird spaces retailers,

t in

one the

existing eel 07402 free a new appIic3t:on and for

it Tel:

the

major

is rheo

N Tee selling influx the

sitting facility This to ourselves are facility important

Town facilities

community Ths

should no and

contact

The development 01506

and development Health

envisaged

short-term

E.H49 is of will

point

is was if adequate

an Centre, having these application

but vehicles

you an require be

additional 605 that me would

Centre

already for

the additional

encouraged

feel of

additional

at 890313 to the an parking

size local

but

of a car-parking. home should there struggle be and

17/1 area to site

mentions the

in

fails

of

2

shops be

place

3.200 105 300 with the are on is

able be to

to

any

is Winchburgh Winchburgh Mary I Dear village Simple difficulties Linlithgow have and letter. these steady dwindled Winchburgh to fact NHS In activities Yours outside expansion are continual Community retailers In

(Director

write

addition collect

order

planning

that low-income

Mrs prescription to

Miller

From locations with

sii as

downturn tasks

purchase

the

to

since

remaining,

normally to their

& Miller,

these drain

posting at

to regard of preserve

village Superintendent

such conversations

Council

since

are

lunch-time

investment such

Community

the these

Winchburgh

pensions BScMR

on

before

items

families

experiencing

in

area. a

income

a

to

parcels the

the

performed as

Re1istered and

level

counter

problems, book

for

campaign

the

the

posting

need

unfortunate

Pha surviving

getting

‘tenver

the we If

just

vibrant and

ongoing as that

to

residents

of

for

.ran:hes

or

rmS

Council in may

consumers

residents comply

to to

Pharmacist) sales stamps

to

benefits, the

Office letters they the

at a

The

the make the the be

Steven for post

o

Registered non-standard

character see

businesses, a

major

Pharmacy

challenges

weighed

of

same Post bus are lie a passing

closure

n are

with

21

from abroad. paperwork

a Post

toiletries,

many

6

Village

fidnburh, now

Winchburgh

\

reduction or unable

KeItil’stoun

home.

forced who

part EH52 Office,

the o

trend.

do Main

non

Office

n of Ward

vu have

of

shops trade at

of

are Disability

l

Scohanci I the routine

many the small

am a

I to have

Post letter

to

tissues our

I would

riri

to Post

to

unable fear

to Banni

in buy

village 6RU go on Pharmacy

Winchburgh

aware Street

vulnerable.

our Court,

turnover, travel

choice, be

Office

of businesses

also Limited

or

out-with

Main

banking

office more a

o

reckon

-ckhurn whom

Discrimination re-opened. Head

and

small

single

to

I

of

heard

Ln6thgrt’ to

believe

I

Street

retailers.

travel

h74h2

and

other both sundries. counter

Broxburn,

Office, but

package the have

&. that they

stamp

We

Post

complaints

more

such (owic,

of

since

community most

people Tel:

it

Without most are

are either

goods

is

Office EH$9 or

For

to

This

Act as of

essential

fortunate

cannot

Kirkliston July doing mornings to

post

businesses

them

01506

us, ours

experiencing

already send

and

6PS stocked

I

earlier

one

from

we

am

this

one

for

their

have

will

the be

have a

there attributing that

that

routine pensioners

means or

has

letter recorded

done

invested, this

use forthcoming

shopping

and

faced Linlithgow

890313

the

in

we

seen

will now

year

retailers

similar

as

16/11/05

of in

a

rely

be

the

in they

trip

to

or

a at

on

the

to

Streaks

Donna

Yours

would

I

have

4.

3.

2.

1.

sincerely

Witherspoon

Ahead

put

hope

one

trade

Lottery

the

with

and

Old

village

effectively

Re-location- and

our

Post

down

main

of

an

business

star

while

these

a

swell as

office

the café

eye

to

machine

&

street

a

move

other

points

down

few

garter

sore

or wont

—

especially

when

especially

the

library

points,

to

traders to

-

in

be

could loss

—

with

the

the

the

broxburn

the

the

or

of

village

new

which

Concerns

new

the

site

on

on

be

main

to

some

the

42

addressed

a

the the

lottery

STREAKS

development?

where

development

Saturday

post

have

concern

MAIN

I

street

sort

older

main

would

over

office

machine the

of

their

street.

clientele

will

STREET

by

meeting

01506

star

afternoon.

me

future

like

hair

to

the

there

to

regarding

&

Will

to

the

going

community

the

done.

garter

develqpments 891

see

who

place

main

be

WTNCHBURGH

there

village

this I

337

up

a

AHEAD

now

would

Will

used

chance

the

street

which

with

be

used

goes

new

the

any

council.

favor

to

like

the

has

as

would

sit

for

of

post

help

ahead

developments

a

post

osee to

has broxburn

had

Winch[gJ

existing

focal

office

with

get

became

a

office

and

this

noticeable

point

people

relocation

be

traders the

for

facility

this

re-built>

a

for

main

in

there

waste

back

has

the

the

in

effect

given

street

cost?

effected

shopping

the

village

village

ground

up

of

to

to I __

of

on proposed would the complex where proposed schools grade the traftic additional traffic addressed community, I inclusion in to Communit thunder responding 8020 County undertaken. Dear I)ev Winchhurgh; West Lini Richard

lopetoun

the to and

the

junction

north

ithgow

&huilding

a

Sir and

Lothian, A architecture

business wish A8020. coming

generated

rat from

We

We We Our

In I

to

The buildings.

the

agricultural

Hartland

am

rather

of junction

park of

the

run.

principle

as Estate. he load

hope note are

to

to village

main the

the

the

only we Council grateful I

the

provided A904

indeed

at the

avoid

and or

EH497EZ

concerned

arising than

and

railway. Manager.

West

land have

that

that Kirkliston scheme from

going

way concerns

Is

above Esq..

and

at

ride

day

through we

other

it

creating

land

the Newton

(‘ala

Duntarvie

between to

the the meeting

however

on

not

to

the

landscaping

within

from

have

and and

Mrs to

tacky

application,

you

reduce the proposals

is

between

commercial

possible Land over

new

the

are developed

train four

night.

the

McCrotsston

the

M9 no

are a could

the last East. the

house

a

cantered unsightly

Community

the

would In

village objection

the new

way

number

are

going halt

railway

new

and week.

Winchburgh

major for

esirnents

will

and

be

present

directed

designs

slips

instead so

could

enterprises

and

any smaller

community, included be

tii

of

seek

make

on that ive1OPrnC

armpit of

deviation

to

line jt1tIlt4Wton he to

Newton, tor

on

progressed improvement

the

concerns, be heading

loading

3u

persuade

the I Winchburgh

the

tough

of

and

at

the

granting 10

a could

and

area’s placed

traffic

significant two Phiipston and

within

to

proposed

highest

M9

layouts

could

the

the

with

this firstly

from

thiiiral and which confirm

to

to

at

on the likely which

and

M9.This North

me

and

the

could

be

Duntarvie.At

he

to

standards the

to

the the

that

Scottish

to

arising

development

a

various

catchment

found

prevent at

integrated impact

from Ref

the

de\elopers to (iin1mu111t\

few

the

we south

the

of 1994

countryside

present

mer2e

place

be

B8020

area

the l0l

A

hope,

points days

the

within

from

imposed

strategic Executive the

impact for

904;

side

increase 2

community.

additional

02

was

bridge

deals P1105

area present within grace

the

last a

can might

additional

November

raised as

on

HGV’s of

the

Winchhurgh

identified

around

good

studies

easily

thing

of he

the

on

solely

and

plan

in

new

from

the COUnCIl turn to

the

vehicles

from the

qualit\

traffic

of

make the

The

by as

new V

the

with this are

B

the

2005

e

as

on

the our Cc Midward. Newton. West Chairman community of consultation additional EH52 a developments incorporated

planning

the

Councillor Mary

Michael

Lothian,

6 progress

The

We

QH

By

Mulligan

Newton

loads

zaar

are

boundary

road

Broxburn,

process

Connarty in

around

aware

of

Torn

the

to

from

networks

the

ensure

Community

planning

M

Kerr.

to

application

that

is

construction

our

S

M Yours

monitor

the

P.

that

P.

communitties.

we

around

M9

consents

have sincerely

only

Council

this? We

particularly

the

no vehicles: the

appreciate

setting development direct

highest

R.

Is

3

C

there

locus

is

out

Jarnien with

standard

it being

Newton

possible

any

guidelines

in

regard

are

this

kept possibility

bound

s

are application

to

that

in

Community

the for

the

attained?

a

to

the

directive

points

of

loop

he

the

contractors

affected

as

and

appointment

we

our

be

made

have

Council

by

and

raised.

aware

a

of

)

pre.cure

However

generate

only

Community

document,

then

he

r

with

that

sprawl

significant

travelӈloiig

minor

from

land

planning

only

avble

future,

centre,

Glasgow.

development

Edinburgh

igment demand.

industrial

locals

has

This

Dear

Planning

FF149

West

Lmlithgow,

County

Case

Building

Wendy

Fo\hound

if

address

PhilpstouuCommunitv

ureat

experienced

to

be

Faucheldean

is

development

roads

Wendy

If

along

I

Officer,

Lothian,

have

the

It

This

barely

7EZ

on

developed

more

a

always

from

With

if

development

application

McCorriston,

Buildings,

is

As

resources

manifestation

that

Instead

Application

revolution

and

development

Winchburgh

reenbeit

south

Council

and

disappointing

these

external

thrpuE

been

scheme

the

‘ears

Kennels

well

deelopment

a

regard

pressures

McCorriston,

able

you

Development

Ui

find

Lothian’s

M8

west

over

put

roads

as

it

to

e

aim

if

need

to

into

feels

seeks

the

and

use

seeing

or

will

needs

to

demonstrate

Ecclesmachan

track

it

turning

at

cope

it (Glendevon

the

pressures

No.

is

areas

a

becomes

you

in

a

this

of

idea,

and

to

brown-field

Ihreemiletown

to

consume

scheme

\L\

proven

that

disadvantage

that

Structure

last

to

Scotland

nscp

the

housing

build

with

pressures rather

the 1012,05

what

Council

get

landscape

yet

over

Control,

ot

inexorably

outlined

any

few

extreme

tiomes

north,

just

attractne a

present

are

on

overwhelmingly

as

was

for

than

very

this?

develop

development

decades.

South)

land

scheme

that

towards

plan

desirable the

and

directed

over

will

the

and

land

developments

essentially

presented

in

current

at strong

Although

pressures

with

countryside

ofp

connect

demands

then

into extensioWtichburgh.

has

P

par

not

Glendevon

would

the

countr

forms

be

Edinburgh,

\u975

and

Development

the

fore

1.4.4

public

away

age not

a

horizon

into

a

sense

needs

a

suburban

place

of

bore

vast

the

not

part

a

taken

still

for

not

side’

0,

let

the

of

to

seherc

significance

from

again1

services

of

to

B8020

along

the be

within

development

tracks

alone

South

no

assist

of

given

to

BathiH1TETErevQ a

to

11w

a

being

-fie

enhance’

the

rural

in

a

live

the

Philpstoun

city

‘Winchburgh

county.

elation

wonderful

has

the

Id

opportunity

r’r

the

as

it.

what

in

the

to

is

of

Philpstoun

south

not

as

with

county

miles

si!s)

Presently,

allowed,

reducing

the

public run

the

dereliction

A

Forth.

nH

just

Linlithgow

same

for

keeping

to

is

Unfortunately

it,

B8046.

a

rede

is

at

that

proposed

from

Philpstoun

the

a

finely

with

rather

at

the

such

sweep

interest.

protection

being

It

misplacd

FUTURE’

the

rural to

West

that

development

community. is

eJu

suburban

Philpstoun

any

pace

this

direct

important

When in

a

scaled

bizarre.

end

then

\Vest

subverted.

it

of

pace

that

mimt

and

Lothian

for

scheme,

is

Does

31

Castlepark,

with

Philpstoun.

F11496RA

will

land

of

done

the

the

it

can

the

you

around

that

city

Lothian,

the

lO2OO5

will

the new )

Jonathan

Philpstoun built

adequate Yours to Winchburgh edge? appropriate Linlithgow more can that Glendevon Therefore or driven Westfield, buildings to go of document further Winchburgh. Winchburgh buildings housing documents which The the proposal surroundings. up

—At

Philpstoun

be lãiiped people)

into in

ethos

be

this

masterplan

on,

directed a

character

faithfully

struggled

ythe

resisted?

de expansion.

PhilpTThñä1fillage

the

The

is and

refined

M

schemes.

and

of

as to

present

we

is

for

to Communit}

is

County but South, you

that

Harris

master

track

create

if

includes a for

Masterplan.

a

that form

Community Planning

It

would tocreat

by

paik lower So

substantial

they

large-scale

the

zones.

is sent

also

the

There

many and

to

landscape?

there

was housing

important

Philpstoun

development

At

and

scale

a

achieve

plan on Buildings

were

edge

to

then density

expresses

cohesive like

low-density GlendJvon

very This

the

services

are

Philpstoun

indeed Process

was

Council

has

of

the

of

in

delivered Is

and

Council

landfill

many scheme,

that

this

any badly

lack

a

no

the the

recognised

housing. that4

Wc.tern

If

vacuum,

is to

very development mthaill’aroundedcommuni

may

great

a CALA

either

it

or

competince scheme settlement high

very

is

have of

reasons

desire

were,

North

reproduced

site,

detached theJyciope

Community

into

that

cohesiveness

that

impressive

flourish. jlpstoun

and

in

expectation

standard

much

through Can a

Edj

homes

has

makes the

the

the

would to

look

was

that the suggests

with

for

form

we

countryside countryside

follows

been

hi

within

need

housing with

for

developers recently the does

at

rWiric

Playing

and

this hope set

choice

is

this

piece

the

Council

connections

town

sindarçJsetuj!1the

position

the

inexorably

that between

of

a for

out

not

without

an

the

better

master well-deffned the

that

any

biggest

as the

of

granted

unlikely many planning

or become in

fields

sphere

urjtobedeigpd

field

between

belt,

well

work,

do

there community

aslowcreepofdevelopmçaL the

by

scheme

of

help

buildings,

plan

the

not

direction.

residents

field

and Winchburgh

fault boundary

linked

I

as and

planning

of

note was

a a

the area

key.

outlined

slip

tiatted

document.

suburb complete

a

influence

Linlithgow

publTc

at

relationships

boundaries,

with

possible formation

one

from

with. Winchburgh. for

back

I

to

took

a

may

So

or

accommodation.

modem

treatment

plan expansion.

permission,

have

of realm,

in

the lasterp!an

into

should

There

it Masterplan

the

brake

either.

of

go

the

golf

fhat to is

(a

of

master and

a

of

producing

important

to is çclude trouble

great

mix

the between summed

housing.

a

seems

course

it

from

it

of

Of

settled

At

be

of

is

plan

mix

the

to Jack these Academy movement Community The Linlithgow However regarding commercial,industrial,recreation Dear Yours Thank 22 County open Delopmnt Planning Linlithgow Manager ride, FAO- Ff149 West

T updated

MIs Dec.

primary matters.

Lothian Wendy

space,

7F7 sincerely

R

you

Buildings

Thompson,

McCorriston,

the

will

if

2009 Application

in Community

for

Council

there

MeCorriston

proposed road

proposals

Council Managm.nt

and

be &

your

secondary

compromised

around

are

&

in

c-mails Planning

rail

its

Winchburgh

Council future

appear 1012/P/05-

letter

Linlithgow

infrastructure,

schools

of

Secretary

changes

dated

to

Linlithgow 30th

take

and

development.

Outline

at-land Nov

24th

or

into to

retail

it

and

October

the

is

Community

including

C’c

account around

planning

considered

uses,

proposals

December

2005.

Winchurgh

I

community

the

M9

)

for

Council

S

educational concerns

that

junction,

a

and

352ha

may

will

meeting

facilities,

expressed

have

make

train

capacity dcv.

jackti1(;b1ueyonder.couk

I Ref.-pln9-04 1:-mail. El West

14

ci.

inhthgo

149

Clarendon

on

impact

representation mci. 01506

station,

Lothian

landscaping MN

by 15th

at

residential,

842817

Linlithgow Linlithgow

December

on

park Road

traffic

on

& &