Friday, January 26, 2018

Springfield plans for 115 house on Liz's land - Bairns would have to be bussed to Auldearn Primary?

In a document submitted to the Highland Council Planning Department, the Council's own Transport Planning Team objected to the proposed Springfield development at Lochloy. It is a fairly long document and regular observers of local planning matters may find it very interesting. Please see yesterday's article for more information and links etc.

An interesting paragraph appears re school catchment areas. In that document the Transport Planning Team state:

"It is understood that the current primary school catchment for this site will be Auldearn Primary, which would require the provision of transport to and from the school given the location of the site in relation to the school. Subject to this remaining the case, it is recommended that any permission granted is required to agree a suitable level of financial contribution towards the provision of such school transport services supporting this site. The amount and timing of such contributions should be agreed with the Public Transport Team to ensure that the funds can be used in time to provide the necessary services from when units start to become occupied."


Ecowarrior said...

Very interesting, I have been following this application as well as the Morganti application, the Transport Planning team have a lot to say on there as well. These developments would have a huge impact on an already troubled traffic system, never mind the devastation to wildlife.There are only a few days left to make comment on these applications. So the people of Nairn need to make their views known by making comment.

Anonymous said...

Have a look at the NRCC objection, WOW!!! That will keep the planners busy.

Anonymous said...

So who do we go and see if we're unhappy with this, our local councillor maybe?

School's out said...

I wonder as to how the school feels about it's numbers suddenly swelling?

This just underlines the whole issue of ad hoc development, the lack of investment in local infrastructure.

This also comes at a time when Highland Council are going to have to make huge cutbacks, so will for example pupils at Auldearn primary find themselves in larger classes due to the double whammy of cutbacks and the sudden influx of pupils from the Springfield development on Cllr Liz MacDonald's land ?

Seems a pretty raw deal for the local community unless you happen to be the developer.

So far it looks to me that if the development goes ahead we may potentially have overcrowded/over subscribed schools. Heavy traffic congestion, an overworked water and sewage system and further pressure upon already stretched local healthcare services.

Is this really what the public wants for Nairn, I doubt it but what say do we have other than filing a planning objection. Ah yes, we could talk to a councillor.

school runner said...

Very interesting that while the developer (Springfield) regards this site as simply an extension of the Nairn Lochloy housing estate, and the local plan and maps show it as part of the settlement of Kingsteps.... the local authority considers that it falls within the catchment area of Auldearn Primary. Just underlines the incoherence of local planning strategy.

But the real perversity is that kids from this site (if development is permitted) will have to be transported via the residential streets of the Lochloy estate, along the Lochloy Road, through the infamous traffic light junction with the A96, and then in competition with all the other peak time traffic on the main road to Auldearn.

This long and indirect journey is hardly a safe or convenient route to school. And it is the result of the Council's failure to ensure delivery of the bridge across the railway between Lochloy and Balmakeith and the developers' and planners' apparent reluctance to provide an alternative access route from the eastern end of Lochloy to the A96 (and eventually to connect with the bypass). Meanwhile it simply adds yet more to the traffic and congestion which is already a serious issue for existing residents.

Yet another reason, among many, to object to the current planning application as misconceived and ill-thought-out.