Public urged to have their say on housing in Kilcreggan – then they find a plan has already been submitted

Residents have been urged to have their say on plans to develop a nature conservation site.
The option of including the Fort Road site in Argyll and Bute Council’s new Local Development Plan was debated at a public meeting on Tuesday night.
But in the same week plans were submitted to build 20 houses.
The meeting to discuss plans for housing and tourism developments including a restaurant/cafe was hosted by Cove and Kilcreggan Community Council, and chairman Nick Davies said: “The land in question is a local nature conservation site with a settlement zone.
“The landowner has come up with some fairly large proposals for what should be done with the area.”
Planning officer Mark Lodge said the if the site was included in the plan it would be as a ‘potential development area’; community councillor Sheena Edwards said there were sites already allocated for 1000 houses on the Peninsula and communities would not be able to cope if they were all developed – Mr Lodge could not supply the actual number but said he thought it was a few hundred.
Councillor George Freeman said in practice the nature conservation designation gave the area little protection, as was shown by some of the work that had already happened there.
He said when the council’s previous local plan had been implemented residents in Portkil had not been aware of what was proposed for the area.
“This opens up the potential for almost any sort of development on that site and it is important for the community to be aware,” he added.
He urged the public to submit their views via the council’s website – – the deadline is Monday.
Less than three days after the meeting, he said: “I have just received this week’s Weekly Planning List and have noted that a planning application has already been submitted for the erection of 20 houses at this location on the land north of West Shore Cottage by Mr Frank Phipps.”
The council’s list of applications can be found here:


  1. This is a blatant tactic – threaten a plan with an absurd number of houses so that their real scheme, cloaked under tourism things which would never happen, doesn’t look as bad in comparison. Don’t fall for it. Object to any development in the LDP.

  2. For the sake of clarity the site for the proposed 20 houses lies immediately outside the area within the LDP discussed on Tuesday at the Community Council Meeting and would be squeezed in between Ensign Motifs and the minimum of 15 sustainable affordable homes proposed as part of the application for a change of use. All the lands are owned by Portkil Estates (F Phipps) which already has planning consents (undeveloped) for upwards of 5 plots within the original Fort.

    • Harry it lies within the LDP area discussed as can be seen in the attched link.

      Unbelievable really. Obviously they had every intention of submitting a proposal for the 20 houses after the waffle at the meeting. I take it Argyll and Bute council were aware they were already going to submit the application for additional housing? 20 houses in Fort Road on top of the other proposals? Come on! There was an existing application for 5 houses, which was never concluded on this site, now it’s 20! This is all about housing development and nothing else. Zero concern for the nature conservation as observed by the brutalising of the nature conservation site to date.

  3. My understanding is that the previous LDP has the area shown in pink as having the potential for future housing but I could be wrong. Incidentally the planned housing development for 20 houses obliterates the established right of way from the path on the boundary of Stratharran and exiting on Fort Road. This is currently marked by a gate at the end of the path and a stile at Fort Road albeit thst the land has been fenced off.

    • Harry, If you look at the recently new LDP (current/recent one that the “Potential Additional Sites” will be in addition to) that was recenlty adopted, the SINC area is hatched in purple on the map and actually extends all the way to Ensign Motifs boundry. Although the area to the North of the West shore cottage property (a diagonal line from it’s far west fence post up to the back of the SINC area and along to the Ensign factory) did also appear to fall within the infill area for potential housing if you like as well as the SINC area. However it was still within the SINC area.

      This I believe was also the understanding of the Biodiversity officer. The last proposal for 5 houses on this same site (circa half the area of the 20 house proposal but in the same area from edge of Ensign boundry down to the road and north then stretching west towards West Shore Cottage) is still awaiting decison and has not been withdrawn.

      If you look on the associated documents for that planning application you will see that the Biodiversity officer noted it was within the SINC area and was still awaiting reports from the landowner. You will also see it is on the same area (partialy) as the new 20 house application Ref- “20443886 Consultee Response – Biodiversity Officer Thursday, November 11, 2010” “20428870 Plans – Combination Tuesday, October 5, 2010″ ” “20645452 General Correspondence Friday, August 17, 2012” you will see what I mean I think.

      Yes the access path/right of way is within the area also.

      One has to wonder… 5 house application goes dormant… council decide the area can be considered for additional potential sites for the LDP…. whamo plans in for 20 houses just prior to the additional potential sites comments period ends and after the pubilc meeting about the site…. on the same land as the 5 houses app’ and all within the potential additional site area. Hmmm.


    • FYI Harry. The “Local Nature Conservation Site” outlined in brown solid line and hatched in horizontal brown lines right across the site. As you can see it extends all the way to the Ensign Motifs boundary and across the pink area (settlemment zone) you mentioned earlier>

      All of this is the area that was discussed at the meeting (prior to the ahem suprise application for 20 houses) for the LDP potential additional sites inclusion.

      The key to the map>

      The webpage for the current local plan maps and key>

      I hope you find this useful.


  4. I was amazed that the planning officer last week didn’t know how many sites for housing were already designated – couldn’t they have sent someone who did know? Or does no one know? How can the public make comments without that knowledge?
    And I was livid that he implied villages which were not magically earmarked for expansion risk losing their schools. He tried to backtrack but the damage had been done and the threat made.

    • Couldnt agree more – veiled threat if ever I heard one. “we’ve got rid of the burgh hall, we’ve shut the library, we’re selling the community centre, we’re trying to shut the pier, we tried to close the school two years ago and if you dont let us build houses we’ll be back for that.” it stinks

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. Housing plans for Kilcreggan and Helensburgh | The Lochside Press

Comments are closed.