SO one of Glasgow’s gems, the historic Jordanhill Campus, is to be converted into a building site for the construction of 412 new dwellings (“Campaigners issue warning after judge gives green light for 400 flats”, The Herald, February 15).

Some cases may pass a certain legal test but are still simply wrong, whether economically, ecologically, environmentally, socially or for other reasons.

In the case of Jordanhill Campus, the proposed development would seem to be wrong on all of these grounds and more.

Yet such is the perverse nature of our planning system that this hugely damaging development has been given the go-ahead.

There are many questions to be answered but here are just two which for me will always defy rational explanation.

First, how can approval be given to chop down scores of mature trees when the entire site is covered by a tree preservation order?

Secondly, by what logic did Glasgow City Council approve mass demolition and construction on a designated Site of Special Landscape Importance (SSLI) when the City Plan states that “there will be a presumption against any development like to have an adverse effect on the integrity or character of a SSLI?”

Meantime, campaigners were quite correct to highlight the fact that Jordanhill has no community centre and a serious under-provision of pre and after-school care.

It remains within the gift of CALA Homes to rectify this situation and, in doing so, to strike a positive public relations blow.

After all, CALA is going to have a presence in Jordanhill for the next eight years.

Will it integrate within the community, working with local residents or against them?

William Dick,

103 Southbrae Drive,


MANY in the community of Bishopbriggs are incensed by the recent decision of the Scottish Government Planning and Environmental Appeals Division (DPEA) to grant CALA Homes permission to build 135 homes on a site adjacent to the Forth and Clyde canal at Jellyhill, Bishopbriggs.

This is despite the CALA Homes plans being unanimously rejected by East Dunbartonshire Council’s Planning Board, and being the subject of a record 569 letters of objection from residents.

This appeal decision is not just an isolated local overdevelopment issue adversely affecting wildlife, local transport and community services.

It is undemocratic and therefore ought to be condemned on a national scale.

These planning appeals are decided by a single person, the Reporter, who is appointed by the Scottish Government.

He or she has absolute power over the decision and can and does act in isolation.

The power of absolute monarchy is alive and well in Scotland, it seems.

On this occasion, the local council requested that the Reporter hold a public planning hearing due to the unprecedented strength of feeling in the local community about the proposed development.

This request was not accepted by the Reporter. Accordingly, there is widespread belief, rightly or wrongly, that this appeal process operates in favour of developers. Local residents have no such right of appeal.

Fortunately, at least one MSP, as far as I know, is seeking to do something about this injustice. Ross Greer, Green MSP for the West of Scotland, is backing proposed amendments in the upcoming Planning Bill to give communities a real voice in decisions that directly affect them more than anyone else. I hope that all MSPs get behind the proposals.

In view of the practicalities and furious public reaction to this highly controversial decision, perhaps CALA Homes should hold fast from finalising profit projections for this misguided Jellyhill canal project.

James Devine,

Birch Knowe,