Falkirk Council demand for planning gain makes new homes plan 'unviable'

At a meeting of the planning committee this week, councillors narrowly voted to reject a plea from developers Hamilton Brown that would allow them to go ahead without making contributions – saying that would leave the council to pick up the bill for any infrastructure work.

The developers hope to build on land to the North West of 4 Garngrew Cottage, Glenview Avenue, Banknock – an uneven and steeply sloping site close to the M80 motorway – in two phases.

The committee considered two separate applications from the first phase – one for 19 houses and one for two houses, which is partly retrospective – but members were told that the masterplan includes a further 14 new homes and the site should be considered as a whole.

Falkirk Council had asked for contributions towards the cost of a new slip road for the M80, expansion of local schools and upgrading open space in Banknock – totalling more than £270,000.

They had also originally demanded a contribution towards the DEAR (Denny Eastern Access Road) but accepted that this should not have been included.

The developers’ agent, Dan Henderson, told a meeting of Falkirk Council’s planning committee this week that the council’s demands were “excessive”.

He said the council should look at the “bigger picture” and consider that the new housing will bring more than £5.2 million of investment, create local construction jobs and build much-needed homes that will bring in council tax of about £82,000 a year.

Mr Henderson also questioned the demand for a payment towards local schools which are not at capacity and argued that once the second phase is built, it would include five one-bedroom flats that could be offered for social rent.

Councillor Brian McCabe also spoke on behalf of the developer, telling members that it was unacceptable that the planning application had taken three and a half years to be processed.

The applicant was very critical that a report by the District Valuer had not been included in full when the matter was first considered by councillors.

When asked for his opinion on the site’s financial viability by Falkirk Council, the District Valuer said that the project would not be considered viable even without the demand for contributions and recommended they be waived.

But Falkirk Council planning officers said that this could only be done in “exceptional circumstances” and they were not convinced it could be justified.

Waiving contributions, they said, would effectively mean the council would end up footing the bill for the developers’ share for infrastructure and this would set a precedent for other housebuilders.

After a narrow vote, councillors voted to support the officers’ recommendations that the contributions should not be waived for either the 19 houses or a separate application for two houses.