AGENDA ITEM NO. fl 273 NORTH LANARKSFIIRE COUNCIL REPORT To: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Subject: PUNNING FOR PRISONS CON S U LTATl 0N D( ERC ISE From: DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Date: 14MAY 1997 Ref: PD37lOYSMcA 1 .o PURPOSE OF REPORT 1.1 The purpose of this report is to bring to the Council’s attention, the outcome of the public consultation exercise undertaken by the Planning & Development Department regarding two potential prison sites. The consultation exercise was undertaken as a result of the recommendation of the Planning & Development Committee to the original Planning for Prisons Report on 5 February 1997. 2.0 BACKGROUND The Planning for Prisons report identified the two sites within North Lanarkshire as Inchterf, Milton of Campsie and Hartwood Hospital, Shotts. The recommendation on 5 February 1997 was for the endorsement of the two sites as identified sites for prisons in strictly planning terms. The public consultation exercise was requested by the Planning & Development Committee to gauge local public opinion on the identification of the two sites. The Director of Planning and Development wrote to the Scottish Office on 27 March 1997 informing them that the consultation exercise was underway. 3.0 CONSULTATION EXERCISE 3.1 There were two methods used to bring the issue to the attention of the local population: A public notice was printed in the local press (see attached Background Papers). A letter was written to Community Councils adjacent to the sites (see Background Papers). 3.2 Consultation has also taken place with East Dunbartonshire Council. 3.3 Two Community Councils responded formally to the Planning & Development Department whilst a third (Shotts) did not respond. Queenzieburn Community Council voted at a Public Meeting on 25 March 1997 against Inchterf being put forward as a site for a prison. Kilsyth Community Council, although not formally consulted, responded to the Public Notice by stating that the job potential indicated would be welcome. b9APRISONS.SM 274 3.4 Members of the public responded as follows Hartwood Hospital Shotts There were six letters of objection, and one letter containing fifty-two signatures. One specific reason for objection was the possible problems re the unmanned train station adjacent to the site. Inchterf, Milton of Campsie. There was one letter (from a resident of North Lanarkshire) in support in light of possible job creation. Seventeen letters of objection were received (sixteen from residents of East Dunbartonshire Council). Site specific objections included an increase in trafEc/access point created at an accident blackspot on the A803, in addition to an increased risk of flooding in the area. 3.5 General reasons for objection given in relation to both sites included a decrease in house values, ‘undesirable’ prison visitors, visual impact, noise pollution, an overdevelopment of prisons in each area, fear for the safety of children, and fear of prison riots. 3.6 Whilst the majoriw of the Inchterf site is within North Lanarkshire, there is a small section (including the access to the site) which is within East Dunbartonshire. An exchange of views was printed in the local press between elected members of both Councils. East Dunbartonshire Council lodged a holding objection to the identification of the site on 10 March 1997, and considered the matter at their Planning Committee on 24 April 1997. 3.7 East Dunbartonshire Council’s assessment of the Inchterf is as follows: “The land at Inchterf is in the Greenbelt and although it extends to around 76 hectares only 9 hectares of this are brownfield. The area is liable to flooding and in 1994 appears to have been entirely inundated. Although it may be possible to construct flood protection barriers around a developed area, this could exacerbate the flood risk elsewhere on the floodplain and consequently such a development would be contrary to Govemmemt advice and East Dunbartonshire’s interests. Much of the land in and adjoining Inchterf has been designated as Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) and the whole site is overlooked by the Antonine Wall and the Forth and Clyde Canal with East Dunbartonshire. The current site access and the junction with the main road are sub-standard. Although the site does not adjoin the built up areas of Kirkintilloch, Twechar or Milton of Campsie, it is low lying and would be overlooked from a number of directions, particularly from Milton of Campsie and Harestanes. The use of security floodlighting at night could be an additional visual intrusion at this location. The detrimental effect on the image of nearby residential areas that could result from association with a prison might adversely influence economic investment decisions elsewhere in this part of East Dunbartonshire. Inchterf cannot be considered an appropriate location for a new prison even within the context of the Scottish office criteria. The site is within the Greenbelt, largely greenfield, has a number of environmental sensitivities, is overlooked by two Nationally important monuments and has a substandard access. The flood risk makes the site inappropriate for development as it would raise a number of safety concerns both for inmates and the wider communily, and could have implications for the scale of floodmg elsewhere. The potential intrusion on the amenity and image for economic investment of nearby communities could be considerable.’’ b9WRlSONS.SM 275 3.8 East Dunbartonshire Council resolved to request the Head of Planning and Building Control to noteNorth Lanarkshire Council of their strong opposition to any land at Inchterf being included in the site search. 4.0 COMMENTS 4.1 As indicated in paragraph 2.0 above, the selection of the two sites presented in my previous report was based on the physical criteria specified in the correspondence fiom the Scottish Office. Having carried out an exercise in public consultation, members may now wish to take into account the views expressed by Community Councils, residents near to the sites and East Dunbartonshire Council before determining the Council’s response to the Scottish Office. 4.2 With regard to the views expressed by East Dunbartonshire Council, I must indicate my concern that the comments on the site’s constraints would appear to apply equally to all the developments which have been identified through the Local Plan process. In the Kilsyth Local Plan the site is proposed as suitable for a range of uses that are considered appropriate for the site’s location. 4.3 A development brief for Inchterf has been prepared by DTZ Debenham Thorpe in conjunction with North Lanarkshire Council and East Dunbartonshire Council. The purpose of the brief is to promote an environmentally acceptable redevelopment of the brownfield part of the site in keeping with the greenbelt status. The technical issues of access, environmental impact and flood risk have been identified within the brief and technical solutions have been proposed following consultation with East Dunbartonshire Council’s Head of Transport, S.E.P.A. etc. The checks and balances contained within the Brief at the request of East Dunbartonshire Council and North Lanarkshire Council will enable a sensitive redevelopment of the site within a limited range of acceptable uses of which a detention centre or prison service use is just one. The Brief for Inchterf is to be incorporated as planning policy supplementary to the Kilsyth Local Plan following approval of the modifications to the Plan by the Council. It should be noted that at no time during the negotiations on the Brief have East Dunbartonshire Council precluded the principle of development at Inchterf albeit within a limited range of acceptable uses. It is also worth noting that the Brief has incorporated a detention centre or prison service use in the list of acceptable uses since July 1996 and no specific objection has been raised by East Dunbartonshire Council until the report referred to above. 4.4 East Dunbartonshire Council have previously indicated that they did not wish to endorse any specific use of the site but on no occasion during the correspondence on the Brief had objection been made to use of the site. 4.5 The objections raised by Queenzieburn Community Council and by the residents near both sites mainly raise social issues that are specific to development of a prison. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS 5.1 Based on the limited physical and economic development issues which are raised in the Scottish Office request, I would maintain my original recommendation that the sites of Inchterf and Hartwood Hospital both meet initial site selection criteria. 5.2 A possible course of action would be to recommend the two sites to the Scottish Office but also pass on to the Scottish Office, the representations received in order that the Scottish Office could take into account the social considerations. 5.3 The alternative is that for this Council to take social policy consideration into account before responding to the Scottish Office. In this context, as well as the responses to the consultation, I would remind Members of the views of the Director of Social Work, which were noted in my report to the February Planning and Development Committee. Should Members choose this option, it may be appropriate to refer the matter to Policy and Resources Committee. b9WRISONS.SM 276 5.4 A copy of my report to the Committee on 5 February 1997 is attached for reference. 6.0 RECOMMENDATION The Committee is asked to (i) note the outcome of the public consultation exercise; (ii) consider the appropriate response in respect of the previous Report to Committee on 5 February 1997 and the views expressed in this report. Director of Planninp and DeveloDment For fuither information, please contact Sharon McAlister on 01236 616248. Background papers: 1. Report to Planning and Development Committee - 5 February 1997 2.