By John Winfield, chairman, and John Grierson, secretary, Jordanhill Community Council

IN this column last month, were were given an insight into the world according to CALA Homes, a world in which the Jordanhill community are seen as jeopardising the future intellectual and economic growth of Glasgow, a world that bemoans “more political involvement” and “unnecessary delays in the planning system”.

Yes, the prospects are good for Glasgow. Yes, Scotland has a housing shortage. And yes, Jordanhill could benefit with a developer which recognises that there is more to designing places than hard economics. Shamefully, the importance of Jordanhill Campus, a Site of Special Landscape Importance, containing ancient, long-established woodland boasting the listed David Stow building, has been forgotten by the University of Strathclyde’s principal and senate, and their preferred developer.

In 2010/11 the community honestly believed, through public participation and collaboration, we were shaping our legacy as part of the university’s Campus Plan 2. The university has reneged on statutory obligations as represented by spatial, economic and community coherence of its masterplan, which was approved by the planning applications committee subject to conditions in 2013. Subsequent “hidden agenda” legal agreements have permitted significant departures from that plan, including changes in conservation-led boundaries that define character landscape areas simply to accommodate an unacceptable increase in residential densities.

The planning decision notice of 2017 granting planning permission in principle ignores community opinions. At a time when climate change is high on sustainability agendas, the loss of open space along with the destruction of 72 protected mature trees is unacceptable.

There is a better way. That way is outlined in a Community Value Proposition produced by Jordanhill Community Council with support from Jordanhill Out of School Service Ltd, Jordanhill School Educational Amenities Trust Fund (Jseat) and neighbouring community councils. This invited constructive dialogue, but was dismissed by the university and has fallen on deaf ears from other stakeholders.

The rhetoric of the city’s new administration setting out an “agenda to revitalise Glasgow” based on “a planning system fit for purpose” already has a hollow ring. Where is our local place plan and how does it interface with the city development plan to combine in the delivery of places for the public good? At a time when there is a measured landscape skill loss from local authorities we must stop this special site becoming a sacrificial lamb to benefit future placemaking priorities. Major opportunities exist right here, right now by retaining University House and integrating a community village connecting to Jordanhill School’s South Campus, at its heart a community centre including shared spaces for nursery, pre-school education and after-school care to meet local needs.

Jseat, in partnership with local schools, sports clubs and community groups would deliver a transparent community pitches and sports pitches management plan. The current proposal, for education services to take over, offers no prospect of meaningful community design and access including sports changing provision.

Jordanhill Community Council believes that significant flaws have been exposed in the planning system worthy of serving a judicial review petition. We are not prepared to accept a bullish “business as usual” approach by the local authority that we feel undermines the legal process. We demand that community opinion be heard over profiteering. It’s time for intervention by the Scottish Government.