Residents up in arms over woodland housing
MORAY Council are coming under fire from residents living in the former police houses on Victoria Road, who have objected to proposals contained in the new Local Plan to zone an area located in woodlands behind their homes for housing.
The site, which is known as “Clovenside or R6”, extends to approximately 1.9 hectares. It has been identified by Moray Council as suitable for a low-density development of up to 15 houses.
However, it is set within a conservation area and is colonised by young birch woodland of between 10 and 15 years old, which consultants have claimed is of no real importance, which has angered residents who claim wildlife flourish in there.
The area was formerly zoned as an environmental greenfield site, but planners have earmarked it for change in the new version of the Local Plan which would pave the way for a housing development.
Although there is no planning application lodged for the site, the “Forres Gazette” believes that developers Robertson Homes have already shown an interest in the land which is believed to be privately owned, with proposals to build 12 executive bungalows.
Residents whose homes back onto the site have objected in their droves to the new plans, claiming that it would rob them of an area of woodland of amenity value, which is providing a home for species of plantlife, birds and other animals.
Chairman of the FCWT (Forres Community Woodland Trust), Chris Piper challenged the council’s assessment that the landscape was of no amenity value, and said it was just another example of woodland being eroded to make way for housing.
“This is an area of predominantly young native birch woodland which although of no commercial value and currently under-managed, is nonetheless an important element of Forres’s green fabric and a natural extension of the town’s environmental jewel in the crown – Cluny Woodlands,” he said.
“It would seem both inappropriate and insensitive of planners and developers to be even considering such an area for housing.”
He added: “Presumably they think the woodland is an easy target for some planning gain.”
Mr Piper said the net effect would be to wreck a small but significant source of landscape amenity and biodiversity in a town with an already burgeoning housing stock, and alienate the environmentally conscious people of Forres and adjoining house owners from the local authority and developers.
“Where has the environmental conscience of planners disappeared to in instances like this?” he said.
“I think perhaps I’d better refrain from answering that, but the words “bigger” and “picture” do come to mind.”
Meantime, residents are unhappy with safety and flooding issues arising from the proposed development.
Local couple Andy and Joanne Scott, who live on Clovenside Road, are worried about the proposed access onto the site which would be next to their home near a blind corner, with a build-up in traffic from new residents and construction likely to cause problems.
The only other access could be from the back of the site, which would mean taking down a stone wall and a row of other more mature trees.
“What would the people of Forres think about this?” she said.
“A lot of people come up this road and would be horrified if they knew they were going to put a housing development in there.”
Drainage issues are also a consideration, as the site is on a slope within a boggy area, and residents claim the birch trees are currently soaking up water, which if they were felled, would otherwise find its way down to them, causing flooding problems.
“Years ago Christies used to rent the site,” said Mrs Scott.
“They had to give it up because it was so boggy.
“Another resident has told me that there was seven or eight inches of water on the site, which used to freeze during the winter and her daughter used to skate on it.
“So what is it going to be like if they take away the trees which are soaking up the water?”
She said flash flooding in Forres last week resulted in water pouring down the side of the road, which would probably be exacerbated if the trees were taken away.
She accused planners of leaving a “negative carbon footprint” on the land and causing problems for residents.
She said that although there was no live planning application, Robertsons had already been in touch with the family, wanting to discuss their plans for the proposed site.
Meantime, another resident, Margot Race, whose home on Findhorn Road also backs onto the site, is worried by the proposal. She said to change the land from an environmental to residential site is wrong.
“From the Findhorn road and looking down from Nelson’s Tower this area of trees blends in with the mature trees at the back of the site,” she said.
“I don’t know how they can say it is of no value. It is a big woodland area.”
Mrs Race said that deer frequent the area, finding shelter in the trees, with a variety of wildlife such as squirrels and birds also making a home there.
“To say the trees have no value is wrong,” she said.
“They have self seeded and are between 10 and 15 years old now. In another 10 years they will be classed as mature trees.
“A lot of wildlife is living there too.”
Another neighbour, Eunice Benn, is also among the objectors. She has identified various numbers of bird species which flourish in the habitat, including greenfinch, blue tits, longtail tits, robins, tree creepers, song thrush, goldcrest, wrens and even a nesting pair of buzzards who are living in an older tree nearby and soar over the woodland.
“Surely they cannot just suddenly change an area which is in a conservation area and say it is OK to build there,” she said.
“You have to jump through so many hoops and get so much permission if you want to do anything to your house in a conservation area, yet suddenly it is OK to build there and knock down trees.”
Local council member Iain Young has been approached by residents and has visited the area in question. He is prevented from commenting on planning applications, but acts for constituents on the matter of the Local Plan.
He said that planners have a duty to find areas which are suitable for housing, and Forres must provide land for its share of this. He said various sites have been identified, such as the Lochyhill site in Forres, and the Local Plan should clearly define where and where not developers can build.
“What I want to see is residents’ homes protected at all costs,” he said.
“I am pushing for a Local Plan which, once an area is designated as non-residential, stays like that, so developers and individuals cannot simply put an application in and it be passed contrary to policy.”
Mr Young added that at the moment anyone could put in an application to build almost anywhere, which made a mockery of the whole process which he would like to see firmed up.
Mrs Race has also been in correspondence with Moray MSP Richard Lochhead about the issue, and he contacted Moray Council on her behalf to clarify the situation.
“If I don’t do something now, then it will be too late,” said Mrs Race.
“It will only take them a couple of days to fell those trees, and it will be too late then.
“These are probably going to be executive houses probably costing two or three hundred thousand pounds each at least. Most people in Forres won’t be able to afford them.”
Moray Council said they commissioned a landscape architect to consider a number of issues on the site, which they said had determined it as suitable for development.
“The site is appropriate for development in landscape terms as it lies close to existing housing and would not disrupt the open fields which provide the setting to Drumduan House,” said chief executive Alistair Keddie in a letter to Mr Lochhead.
“The birch colonising the site is even aged and dense, and not as valuable a landscape feature as mature woodlands on the adjacent Cluny Hills, which are more prominent and visually diverse.”
He said the number of houses would be restricted due to the fact it is on a slope, and would be visible from Victoria and Clovenside Road. The report suggested 10 houses with generous gardens, and some re-planting.
Mr Keddie said because the site was on the edge of the conservation area, it was considered suitable for low-density development of up to 15 houses in a landscaped setting. He said the average density level is usually 20 houses per hectare in an urban location.
All the objections will be considered fully at the Public Local Inquiry due to be held in November.
A council spokesman said that planners had recently met with four of the local residents to discuss their objections and explain the process further, and that some of the objectors also attended a pre-inquiry meeting held last Monday in Elgin.
Meantime, Mr Piper said that the environmental fabric of the town was “under threat from development” which shouldn’t have to happen at the complete exclusion of trees.
He suggested that residents in Victoria Road could consider joining together to try and purchase the land as community woodland, just as had been done with the Sanquhar woodlands, but warned it would cost a substantial amount if the land was now deemed suitable for development.
“Woodlands are always an emotive issue,” he said.
“And the fact is that it will be desirable to developers and in the future the land will need to be managed in some way, but this seems heavy handed, to destroy an area of woodland just to build a dozen homes.”
source: timesonline