I REFER to your article on this week’s Glasgow City Council meeting ("Locked-out residents on warpath as council backs Jordanhill homes", The Herald, November 22).
I note that Bailie Glenn Elder told residents who were denied access to witness democracy in action that their concerns over the development at the Jordanhill Campus would be dealt with "fairly and in an even-handed manner". At no stage since the University of Strathclyde opted to cash in on this prime 35-acre gem, featuring ancient woodland, ponds, a sunken garden, rare habitats and the B-listed David Stow Building, has the community of Jordanhill been dealt with in a way which resembles fairness or even-handedness. Rather, this has been a sorry saga of broken promises, bureaucratic bungling and finally the misrepresentation of the electorate by a planning committee whose arrogance and contempt appears to know no bounds.
These elected representatives not only saw fit to proceed with their deliberations over a highly contentious planning application with scores of residents locked out of the meeting but then chose to overlook the fact that the proposed development breaches the City Plan on several fronts, as pointed out in many of the 900 objections which were posted on the city council's planning portal. Bailie Elder and his committee showed similar disregard for the views of the three Ward 12 councillors who spoke against Cala's over-development of this valued site.
To cap it all, they delivered their lamentable verdict while the outcome of a judicial review into the proposed development is still awaited. This is truly staggering.
I fear for the future of Glasgow's built and environmental heritage with the current planning applications committee making such decisions.
William Dick,
Southbrae Drive, Glasgow.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel