Planning

LCT/WLHAS Joint Response to Planning Consultation

Planning Application 0447/05 - Non-Food Retail Development
at Falkirk Road, Linlithgow Bridge

Observations

This proposal is further to the outline planning permission recently granted, despite strong local objection, particularly with regard to the likely detrimental effects on the traditional town centre shopping area and the environment of the conservation area.  The Civic Trust continues to be unhappy with this rather counter-productive and somewhat surprising decision.

With regard to the layout and design of the proposal:

  1. The layout is extremely cramped and the proposal appears to be attempting to squeeze too much development into a limited size of site;
  2. The position of the vehicular access opposite the Sainsbury's entrance, using the same set of traffic lights, is potentially acceptable, except that the entrance to the service area is much too close to the junction - cars waiting to leave the site will block the service area entrance, causing incoming lorries obstruct the whole junction - this is clearly very undesirable. As we said in our comments on application 0417/05 (Aldi Stores Ltd), there should be an overall assessment of the stretch of road along the whole frontage from the present BP filling station westwards to the Sainsbury junction so that all vehicular turning, pedestrian and cycle movements are satisfactorily accommodated in a safe and aesthetically pleasing manner, preferably in the form of some kind of boulevard which, with attractive lighting, would give a consistent and potentially impressive western entrance to Linlithgow;
  3. As with the Aldi application, the landscaping of the site frontage is poor to non-existent and should be lined with trees to form part of the above-mentioned boulevard. Working back from the kerbline of the main road, there should be a generous grassed strip planted with a line of semi-mature trees which will grow to a large size (eg fastigiate oak, not rowans or similar). Behind this should be a two-way cycle lane and a footway, then there should be a beech hedge or similar to mark the boundary of the sites. This should be a minimum requirement; standard trees should also be provided within the car parking areas;
  4. The service area is very close to housing in Belsyde Court, and this is likely to cause problems of noise and disturbance to residents. Again, this could be largely solved by relocating the main vehicular access as suggested above;
  5. No elevation plans have been provided to us for comment, but, as stated with regard to the Aldi application, design and materials should match or exceed those of the nearly Sainsbury's store.

Taking the above comments into account, it is clear that the amount of retail floorspace on the site will have to be significantly reduced to achieve a workable development which is sufficiently attractive for the site and overcomes the practical difficulties - at least two of the units should be deleted, and the layout/vehicular access should be planned in conjuction with the Aldi site to the east.

Conclusions

The Civic Trust and the WLHAS object to this proposal in its present form, particularly to the poor landscape, the inadequate vehicular access arrangements, the lack of dedicated cycle provision and the location of the service area adjacent to housing.  Both organisations wish to see a strong landscape structure including boulevard tree planting along the road frontage (which should extend eastwards along the other retail/restaurant site), the rationalisation of vehicular access, the consequent reduction in retail floorspace, and high-quality design of the buildings.

Ronald P A Smith BSc MRTPI,
Chairman, Linlithgow Civic Trust
9 May 2005