1. Download and print out our Window poster 2015.07
2. Contact us at – balernogb@yahoo.co.uk
3. Click on “FOLLOW” button at the bottom left of this page. This will notify you of every new post.
Balerno Green Belt
Campaigning for Balerno & Lanark Road
Balerno Green Belt 
This cannot be allowed to happen. The green belt should be sacred.
LikeLike
We agree wholeheartedly. It is the farmland with tree belts that gives Balerno its unique character.
LikeLike
Just like you we have a Gladman proposal for 360 homes on beautiful historic parkland on the edge of Wellington, Shropshire. Which is totally inappropriate and completely against the local plan. We need to link up together to defeat these plans. Please follow us on Twitter @haygateview email:haygateview@talktalk.net and http://savehaygatefields.wordpress.com
LikeLike
Successive Developers have been allowed to build houses all around our village and given nothing in the way of facilities to the Community in return for the profits they have made.
And our Planners don’t seem fit to oppose them, or even stick to their own Local Plans.
Balerno has become a dormitory. Just loads and loads more houses destroying the character of the village.
We need to fight these proposals or they will go through by default.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have lived in Balerno for 36 years and seen it develope from a small village to a large housing estate we do not need any more houses !! Let us keep the green belt we have for future generations to enjoy
LikeLike
We must make strenuous efforts to protect our dwindling green belt. The planned developments for Mansfield and Newmills will further erode the green belt but will also take away excellent arable land and by doing so could, in the longer term, make it difficult to sustain our growing population if this incompetent approach to planning is allowed to succeed. In the shorter to long term, the A70 cannot cope now with the commuting traffic and such large developments would make this markedly worse as the employment situation in the Balerno area is such the new residents would need to commute to work. Also the local leisure and retail infrastructure would not cope. This is a shockingly opportunistic approach by developers in an attempt to use what would be easy ground for them to develop (thus increasing profits!) to the detriment society in the wider sense.
LikeLike
Without wishing to comment on the specific developments opposed here, I’m curious to know the opinion of local residents as to where the Council SHOULD allow new housing to be built. The main attraction of Currie & Balerno is the school catchment, and compared to outlying areas like Ratho & Kirknewton, there are more local amenities. However, it is the shortage of housing which is driving prices up, making it practically unaffordable to start in, or move in to the area. The only thing that will alleviate that is an increase in the supply, as the demand will never wane, so I can understand the reasons for reconsidering the Green Belt as there really is nowhere else left to build within the corridor of the Bypass. As an aside, the Council have been incredibly short-sighted in their planning of the infrastructure etc. which is why there is no obvious solution. I currently live to the East of the city in a seaside town which is currently fighting a proposed development of 10,000 houses ! With an insufficient rail service the only route to work for many like me is via car, using the notorious Bypass, so you can guess what’s going to happen there… Getting back to my original point, my personal interest in the West side of town is that’s where my family live and where I work, and we would love to return but the only option for us is to either buy a small affordable house and aim to extend for our growing family, or to potentially purchase a new build. It’s an interesting conundrum as normally I’d be siding with you against the developers !
LikeLike
Thanks for your thoughtful comments. We do need affordable housing in sustainable locations, but the planning system is fundamentally flawed, as it is essentially developer led, not Plan (LDP) led.The government colludes in supporting these commercial interests ahead of democratically decided and professionally planned LDPs by nodding through developer proposals on Appeal, making a mockery of the whole planning system. Of course it pays more to develop big houses in Green Belt land than affordable housing in brownfield, more central areas.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have to agree with the writers above. These areas under consideration will not be ‘affordable’. Who is kidding who ? These will be big houses, or at least expensive houses, great for the developers but not great for the loads of people needing houses who can not dream of affording them, this is after we have trampled all over the green belt.
I am interested how they expect all the cars from all these houses to get out of Balerno/Currie. The road is grid locked as it is more than just at rush hour. This is so badly thought through
LikeLike
A few of the previous comments on here seem to suggest that Edinburgh Council will be OK with this. However, para 5.4 of the developers planning statement makes it very clear this is not the case. Whilst the council do have a duty to provide land for housing. It is NOT true to say that the planners do not oppose plans where they deem it inappropriate. The ongoing Kingfisher development to the south of this proposal was rejected by the council (on recommendation of the officers, and endorsed by the elected members) but overturned by a single Scottish govt reporter after the developer appealed against the refusal. As this proposed development is similarly not in the council’s approved local development plan, and is contrary to many of the council’s planning and transport policies, I would fully expect that, after full consideration of it, that the Head of Planning will recommend refusal of this one. In fact, I think the developer probably anticipates a refusal and is hoping to get lucky on appeal again. I agree 100% that we should fight the proposal, but I suggest getting the council onside rather than considering them our enemies would be a better option.
LikeLike
Thanks for your comments Andrew. I agree with your points and would not consider the CEC to be the problem here.
They are doing their best to plan wisely and sustainably, and they do regularly refuse applications that are contrary to local Plans, but commercial developers know that they can simply appeal and override the decision by appealing to an unelected and largely unaccountable Reporter. You could think of it as Planning by Appeal…
LikeLike
Definitely the time has come to make a stand on the never ending stream of new housing developments in Balerno.
The Lanark road being the main argument in the defense. There are always going to be counter arguments that additional schools, doctors surgeries etc can be added but I can see no resolution to the traffic flow & transport issues which have not been improved or capacity increased since the day of the horse & cart.
LikeLike
I have just received your poster
We live beside the railway at curriehill crossing
We have submitted a detailed objection to the planning dept against this development
Our main problems arise from continual severe flooding and water course contamination. This has all arisen from the development at Kingfisher park. The site under discussion now will have exactly the same problems as we have been having.
Damage to the railway has resulted in its occasional closure for repairs
LikeLike