Bearsden Golf Club wins appeal to build homes on its ground

In October 2020 the council refused to grant planning permission for a mixed residential development. consisting of 67 homes ranging from affordable social housing to six-bedroomed properties, on behalf of Robertson Homes.

However, Scottish Government reporter Chris Norman has now published the verdict of an appeal by the club which overrules this initial decision, primarily on the basis that the land is zoned for residential use under the council’s local plan.

The original planning consultation saw hundreds of people express their views on the application and the appeal also attracted a lot of interest with 142 people writing in. Of these, 107 supported the council’s decision. As a statutory consultee Bearsden Community Council also objected to the application.

SportScotland also objected, saying a replacement golf facility should be in place before the course be redeveloped.

In the report, Chris Norman states: the development is considered acceptable and does not conflict with local policy.

One local resident, who did not wish to be named, wrote in to the Bearsden and Milngavie Herald to express their views on the matter.

The resident said: “The basis of the proposal appears to be the financial difficulties of the golf club, which, it is believed in the past, sold off land to offset an equivalent problem. Presumably, such tactics are not novel, but it raises the question whether the club will in the future attempt the same pathagain, leading to another proposal to sell off land.

“It is noted that the principle of the appeal is acceptable because the site was allocated within the EDLDP 2017. It seems strange, therefore, that the Council decided against the proposal initially and then appeared to have done little to oppose it at the appeal, presumably returning to its original 2017 policy.

“The logic of doing what it did may be that it did not support the specific initial planning proposal and then tacitly did so having seen the basis of the appeal.Its later response on appeal, despite its contradiction to the initial proposal, seems to have been a very influential factor in the final decision and effectively scuppered the opposing views fromother sources.”