Scottish Water have objected to this application as the infrastructure improvements required are beyond their reasonable cost obligations. They would not object if the applicant either bears these costs or promotes a scheme that does not compromise the quality or quantity of discharge from the existing sewerage system.
My Transportation Team Leader has no objections to this application subject to a number of conditions relating to works within the site and a series of off site measures that must be implemented.
Community Services have no objections in principle to the application but have made a number of comments. They note that a significant number of mature trees would be lost as a result of the development and recommend that as many as possible be retained and that soft landscaping be incorporated into the proposals. In addition, they have commented that the minimal amount of planting within the car park area will be robust enough to provide long term amenity to the area. They advise that Japanese Knotweed is present within the site and requires appropriate removal and disposal as a controlled waste material.
Scottish Natural Heritage have no objections subject to a habitat survey being undertaken before any works commence.
Network Rail have submitted two separate letters one indicates that they have no objections in principle to the development and encloses a copy of their guidance to developers to ensure that the development does not adversely affect the operation of the railway. Their second letter indicates that they object to the proposals as title obligations require their approval, as the previous owners, to development proposals and this has not been granted.
Strathclyde Police have raised concerns relating to the traffic lights proposed at West Cross, the width of the carriageway at Belhaven Road and at the roundabouts at Caledonia Road and the Heathery.
Transco, Scottish Power and BT have indicated that they have plant in the vicinity of the site.
Strathclyde Fire Service have indicated that they have no objections to the proposals.
Eleven letters of objection have been received 8 of which are from local residents and 3 of which are from consultants, one acting on behalf of Somerfield and another two for un-named clients. The points of objection from the residents can be summarised as follows:
The proposal is contrary to Local Plan/Structure Plan policies relating to retailing, industry and open space and there is no justification for the development. It is argued that the town centre is already in a fragile state and the development would affect the viability of the existing shops. The proximity of the service area to residential properties would result in air light and noise pollution, an increase in litter and pests. In particular there are concerns about noise from revving of vehicles, reversing beepers, plant situated on the roof of the building, compaction equipment and refridgeration units etc. It is requested that restrictions be
placed upon Tesco to limit noise pollution and that a foliage screen be
the development and the housing.
hour operations will bring disturbance to a quiet area.
The site is badly nearby houses The development the construction
undermined and ground works will lead to
excessive noise and dust at
will lead to increased traffic and congestion period and will adversely affect already
in the area particularly during busy areas at the Quarry