A decision on controversial plans to build 90 homes in Neilston is expected to be made tomorrow [Wednesday], with council planners recommending approval.
Officials have said Dawn Homes’ proposals for land off Kirkton Road can go ahead but more than 1,000 objections have been submitted.
The plans went before East Renfrewshire’s planning committee in April, with councillors deciding to visit the site before coming to a decision.
READ MORE: Over 50 acres of East Renfrewshire land to be sold to housebuilders
It is back on the agenda for the first meeting of the committee since the council elections on May 5, which is being held at 2pm on Wednesday [June 15].
Neighbours insist the new housing would lead to extra noise, the loss of green space and busier roads.
However, council planners have decided the plans can be approved subject to a legal agreement relating to the delivery of affordable housing [24 homes for social rent] and payment of a developer contribution. They said the site is identified in the local development plan for residential use.
Cllr Annette Ireland, SNP, the former chair of the planning committee, said at the April meeting that she had a number of concerns, including over the noise from the nearby railway, and asked for a site visit.
Former Conservative councillor Jim Swift described the site visit as a “bit of a cynical ploy” as it delayed the decision until after the election in May. During the meeting, Jim Fletcher, the former Provost, said the site had been earmarked for development.
He added: “If we were to simply refuse this because there are a number of objectors, I think it is almost 100% certain that the developer would go to the Scottish Government reporter and the reporter would say it’s a site for development in the local plan and pass it.”
Residents in Neilston fear there is a lack of infrastructure, such as schools and shops, to support new homes and the development would impact on privacy as well as the environment.
A noise assessment found houses closest to the railway line will experience levels at night which are “likely to cause a waking event” and the council’s environmental health team said the proposal does not meet World Health Organisation standards.
But a report to councillors stated: “Given the local circumstances, it is considered that whilst there may be some adverse impact on the amenity of future residents at night time, it is not significantly different from the rest of the urban area, and therefore it would be unreasonable to refuse the application on these grounds alone.”
Planners have also said the proposal has “undergone extensive revisions” to meet the local development plan and “exceeds the affordable housing requirements”.
They added: “Through development contributions, it will contribute to local services and community facilities to serve the existing and growing community.”
