Committees
Minutes of Meeting of the Planning, Development, Europe and Tourism Committee held in the Council Chamber, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness on 28 January 2004 at 10.30 a.m.
Present
Mr A S Park, Mr A I MacDonald, Mr J H Green, Mr G M Smith, Mr D Allan, Mr R Durham, Mr R MacIntyre, Mrs V MacIver, Mr M Macmillan, Mr I MacDonald, Mr J Laing, Mr W Fulton, Mr S J Shiels, Mr J T MacDonald, Mr R J Lyon, Mr A Milne, Mr C L Goodman, Mr J S Gray, Mrs L MacDonald, Mr W Clark, Dr M E M Foxley, Mr A R McFarlane Slack
Non-Members also Present:
Mr D MacKay, Mr W A Mowat, Mrs I McCallum, Mrs I Campbell, Mr D R Munro, Mrs G McCreath, Mr C King
Representing Highland Opportunity Limited:
Mr D Owen, Company Manager
Officials in attendance:
Mr J D Rennilson, Director of Planning and Development
Mr J Greaves, Head of Development & Building Control, Planning and Development Service
Mr M Greaves, Head of Economy and Regeneration, Planning and Development Service
Mr G Robson, Head of Environment, Planning and Development Service
Mr R Shannon, Head of Planning Policy and Europe, Planning and Development Service
Mr G Summers, Principal European Officer, Planning and Development Services
Mrs R Moir, Principal Administrator, Corporate Services
Miss J Maclennan, Committee Administrator, Corporate Services
Mr A S Park in the Chair
Business
An asterisk in the margin denotes a recommendation to the Council.
All decisions with no marking in the margin are delegated to the Committee
Preliminaries
1. Apologies for Absence
Apologies for absence were intimated on behalf of Mr R Saxon, Mr F R M Keith, Mr A Torrance, Mr E C Mackinnon, Mr N A Donald, Mrs K G Matheson, Mr R Wynd, Mr A Gordon, Mr B M S Dunlop and Mrs O J Macdonald (OCD).
2. Presentation – Highland Opportunity Ltd
Mr David Owen, Company Manager, Highland Opportunity Ltd (HOL), made a presentation to the Committee on the Company's achievements. In this connection, there had also been circulated Report No. PDET01/04 dated 21 January 2004 by the Director of Planning and Development which covered the recent activities of Highland Opportunity Ltd and the company’s targets for 2003/04.
In his presentation, Mr Owen outlined the roles and responsibilities of HOL. Since its inception in 1986, a total of 955 loan awards had been granted amounting to £5.54 million, a number of these in association with the Prince’s Scottish Youth Business Trust (PSYBT). In addition, 3072 jobs had been supported which, in the Highland context, represented a significant positive boost to the economy of the Highlands. The figures available suggested that the cost per job supported by HOL offered excellent value for money. HOL worked in partnership with a number of organisations including Social Investment Scotland and the Euro Info Centre to deliver key functions, namely Financial Assistance, Business Support, Young Enterprise and Community Enterprise.
In response to questions, Mr Owen advised that HOL were reluctant to write off any loans and the policy was rather to work closely with clients to find alternative solutions. Only when all other avenues had been explored would the Board be asked to write off a loan. He confirmed that HOL worked closely with organisations such as Local Enterprise Companies and, while the latter concentrated more on the award of grants rather than loans, the two organisations did work in concert. Thereafter, the Chairman, on behalf of the Committee, thanked Mr Owen for his attendance.
The Committee NOTED the presentation and also:
a) the wide-ranging activities and achievements of Highland Opportunity
Limited during 2002/03; and
b) the continuing need for support funding in setting the Service budgets for
the financial year 2004/05, with a provisional allocation of £115,500
incorporating the prevailing inflationary adjustment.
Resources
3. Revenue Expenditure Monitoring Statement
There had been circulated and NOTED Report No. PDET02/04 dated 22 January 2004 by the Director of Planning and Development on Revenue Expenditure on the Planning and Development Service for the period to 31 December 2003.
4. Capital Expenditure Monitoring Statement
There had been circulated and NOTED Report No. PDET03/04 dated 20 January 2004 by the Director of Planning and Development on Capital Expenditure on the Planning and Development Service for the period to 31 December 2003.
Development And Building Control
5. Notice of Review
Removal of Condition 1 from Planning Consent 02/00393/FULCA Relating to a House at Earnyhillock, Valleyview, Murkle, Thurso
At their meeting held on 8 December 2003, the Caithness Planning, Development, Europe and Tourism Committee had, contrary to the Area Planning and Building Control Officer’s recommendation, approved an application seeking removal of an agricultural occupancy condition imposed on application 03/00002/FULCA, granted in March 2003.
The following Notice of Review had been received:-
“We, the undersigned give Notice of Review in terms of Standing Order 10.5 that the Highland Council’s Planning, Development, Europe & Tourism Committee, at its meeting to be held on 28 January 2004, rescind the decision of the Caithness Area Committee of 08 December 2003 to approve an application to remove Condition 1 from planning consent 02/00393/FULCA relating to a house at Earnyhillock, Valleyview, Murkle, Thurso and instead substitute a decision to refuse the application on the grounds that the removal of the condition would constitute an unwarranted departure from Highland Council policy and set a precedent which would totally undermine the current policy, PP3 in the Local Plan.
Signed:-
Mr G M Smith Mr R Wynd
Mr T C Jackson Mr R MacIntyre
Mr R Saxon Mr E C MacKinnon
Mr D M MacKay Mr R Lyon.
There had been circulated Report No C/P/293/03 dated 27 November 2003 by the Area Planning and Building Control Manager, submitted to the Caithness Area Planning, Development, Europe and Tourism Committee on 8 December 2003, and extract from the Minutes of that meeting.
Following discussion in relation to possible deferral of this item, given the imminent release of a consultation document by the Scottish Executive on revised Planning Policy Guidance on Planning for Rural Development anticipated to address issues including that of agricultural occupancy conditions, the Committee AGREED to continue and to consider the Notice of Review.
The Head of Development & Building Control explained that planning permission for the erection of a dwelling house had been granted on 19 December 2002. The applicants had demonstrated that they had an exceptional need and, in line with the policy in the Local Plan, the planning permission had been granted subject to an agricultural occupancy condition. The house was now substantially completed, but the applicants were seeking removal of the occupancy condition because of difficulties in securing a suitable mortgage.
During discussion, some Members supported the decision of the Caithness Area Planning, Development, Europe and Tourism Committee to approve the removal of the condition. The applicants had approached a bank and had received verbal confirmation that they would receive a mortgage. Work on the property had commenced, but the bank had subsequently changed its policy and withdrawn its offer, leaving the applicant relying on a bridging loan. The restrictions which such a condition had on accessing loan funding were well known and some Members were of the view that it was unfair to penalise applicants. It was suggested that it was perverse for the Council to first grant permission but then to essentially prohibit applicants from being in a position to obtain finance. Each application had to be determined on its own merits and, in this case, the decision made by the Caithness Area Committee had been correct, given that the house was located on a working farm.
Other Members stressed the need to adhere to current policy. Other applications granted permission with similar conditions attached had proceeded without difficulty. The reason to have the condition removed in this case was not a planning consideration and there was a call for consistency in decision-making. The policy was fair and worked well when properly applied and the problem lay not with the Highland Council but rather with lending organisations who had previously indicated to the Planning Authority that they would be prepared to grant mortgages under such circumstances. In addition, the situation could arise where the removal of such a condition could result in a property subsequently being sold on the open market.
After discussion, Mr A I MacDonald, seconded by Mr A R McFarlane Slack, moved that the Committee uphold the decision of the Caithness Area Planning, Development, Europe and Tourism Committee to approve the application seeking removal of an agricultural occupancy condition imposed on application 03/00002/FULCA relating to a house at Earnyhillock, Valleyview, Murkle, Thurso, contrary to the recommendation of the Area Planning and Building Control Manager’s recommendation, on the grounds that the condition was an unreasonable barrier to the applicants securing a mortgage.
As an amendment, Mr G M Smith, seconded by Mr R MacIntyre, moved that the Committee rescind the decision of the Caithness Area Planning, Development, Europe and Tourism Committee and instead substitute a decision to refuse the application, in accordance with the Area Planning and Building Control Manager’s recommendation, on the grounds that the removal of the condition would constitute an unwarranted departure from Highland Council policy and set a precedent which would totally undermine the current policy PP3 in the Local Plan.
For the Motion
Mr A I MacDonald
Mr J H Green
Mr R W Durham
Mr I MacDonald
Mr J Laing
Mr W M Fulton
Mr S J Shiels
Mr J T MacDonald
Mrs L MacDonald
Mr W Clark
Mr A R McFarlane Slack
For the Amendment
Mr G M Smith
Mr D Allan
Mr R MacIntyre
Mr M Macmillan
Mr R J Lyon
Mr A Milne
Mr C L Goodman
Mr J S Gray
Mr A S Park
Dr M E M Foxley
The MOTION was CARRIED by 11 votes to 10.
6. Audit Scotland Statutory Performance Indicators for Development
and Building Control
There had been circulated and NOTED Report No. PDET04/04 dated 21 January 2004 by the Director of Planning and Development on the Development and Building Control Performance Indicator returns for the third quarter of the current financial year, October-December 2003 inclusive, and the comparison with previous years’ figures.
Planning Issues
7. Local Plans Progress and Future Programme
There had been circulated Report No. PDET05/04 dated 20 January 2004 by the Director of Planning and Development on progress made in achieving comprehensive up-to-date Local Plan coverage across Highland and a proposed future Local Plan work programme.
Confirmation was given that the Inverness Local Plan would go forward to the Public Local Inquiry in its entirety in accordance with the decision taken at the Highland Council meeting on 18 December 2003. Following on from this, the considerable length of time taken for Local Plans to reach the Adopted stage was commented upon, as was the difficulty of then amending them before they were next due for review. Situations arose, however, where land zoned for housing did not become available and yet there was a problem identifying new allocations where an obvious need existed. It was confirmed that landowners were consulted when Local Plans were compiled and, although time-consuming and a drain on resources, adjustments could be made if it was deemed absolutely necessary. It was suggested that the possibility existed for the suitability of alternative sites for housing to be tested through submission of a planning application.
Thereafter, the Committee AGREED that:
a) a start be made on the replacement Local Plan for North West Sutherland
as soon as possible in 2004;
b) a start be made on the review of Lochaber and Skye and Lochalsh Local
Plans in 2004, subject to resources becoming available; and
c) the residual areas of Badenoch and Strathspey not covered by the
Cairngorms National Park Authority be accommodated within adjoining Local
Plans when they were next reviewed.
Operational Issues
8. Scheme of Delegation to Officers
(a) Scheme of Delegation for Development Control
There had been circulated Report No. PDET06/04 dated 20 January 2004 by the Director of Planning and Development on the Committee’s Scheme of Delegation to officers in relation to Development Control.
The report recommended the amendment of the Scheme of Delegation under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 and other relevant legislation to allow the Director of Planning and Development/Head of Development and Building Control/Area Planning and Building Control Managers to exercise the following powers and duties of the Council as Planning Authority:
“To grant (but not refuse) planning applications and issue decision notices either with or without conditions where the application is one which the Officer concerned (in consultation with the Area Planning Committee Chair and local member) considers should be granted because the application details are acceptable and/or suitable conditions can be applied to resolve satisfactorily the issues raised by third party representation and consultees. This delegation does not apply to any application that does not accord with the provisions of the Development Plan, or where the proposals are of significant scale, or controversial in nature or involve complicated issues of planning policy or principle.”
In speaking to the report, the Head of Development and Building Control pointed out that, following an examination of Area Planning Committee agendas over several cycles during part of 2003, there was a proportion of casework where:
- the proposal was straightforward and uncomplicated
- material objections had been received but these could be satisfactorily dealt
with by way of amendment of the detail, or by condition, or both
- the recommendation to approve was relatively straightforward and
uncomplicated
- the Committee accepted “on the nod” the recommendation without any
discussion.
It was estimated that in a full year there were about 200 or so such cases across the whole Highland area out of the 700 or so applications determined at Committee. If the Scheme of Delegation was amended it was estimated that, especially in the larger Area Committees, there would be significant overall savings in staff time and also the average time taken to decide such cases would be reduced.
During discussion, some Members commented on the need for Area Planning Committees to be seen to be transparent in the decision-making process and questioned the reduction of work which would be achieved by such an amendment. Objections could be of paramount importance to individuals and yet the decision on whether or not the application was submitted to Committee would be left to the discretion of an officer and the Chairman and local Member. In addition, situations could arise where an application might be situated close to a ward boundary and yet the neighbouring Member would have no input.
Other Members spoke in favour of the proposal, accepting that there would be a saving in staff time, and pointing out that, in any case, simply having applications approved by a Committee “on the nod” did nothing to enhance local democracy; it was therefore appropriate that such cases be dealt with at officer level. To avoid ambiguity, it was suggested that the additional exception “nor where either the Committee Chair or the local Member has indicated that an application should be determined by the appropriate Committee” be specified in the recommendation.
Thereafter Mr A S Park, seconded by Mrs V MacIver, moved that the Committee approve the amendment of the Scheme of Delegation under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 and other relevant legislation as recommended, with the addition to the exceptions as set out above.
As an amendment, Mr W M Fulton, seconded by Mrs L MacDonald, moved that the recommendation be refused.
For the Motion
Mr G M Smith
Mr D Allan
Mr R W Durham
Mr R MacIntyre
Mrs V MacIver
Mr M Macmillan
Mr S J Shiels
Mr J T MacDonald
Mr R Lyon
Mr C L Goodman
Mr J S Gray
Mr A S Park
Dr M E M Foxley
Mr A R McFarlane Slack
For the Amendment
Mr J H Green
Mr I MacDonald
Mr J Laing
Mr W M Fulton
Mr A Milne
Mrs L MacDoanld
Mr W Clark
The MOTION was CARRIED by 14 votes to 7.
The Committee accordingly AGREED that the Scheme of Delegation under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 and other relevant legislation be amended to allow the Director of Planning and Development/Head of Development and Building Control/Area Planning and Building Control Managers to exercise the following powers and duties of the Council as Planning Authority:
“To grant (but not refuse) planning applications and issue decision notices either with or without conditions where the application is one which the Officer concerned (in consultation with the Area Planning Committee Chair and local member) considers should be granted because the application details are acceptable and/or suitable conditions can be applied to resolve satisfactorily the issues raised by third party representation and consultees. This delegation does not apply to any application that does not accord with the provisions of the Development Plan, or where the proposals are of significant scale, or controversial in nature or involve complicated issues of planning policy or principle, nor where either the Committee Chair or the local Member has indicated that an application should be determined by the appropriate Committee.”
(b) Scheme of Delegation for Economic Development and Crown Estate Lease Consultations
There had been circulated Report No. PDET07/04 dated 20 January 2004 by the Director of Planning and Development on the Committee’s Scheme of Delegation to officers inviting the Committee to consider an amended scheme of delegation for the Council’s economic development activities and responses to Crown Estate Lease consultations.
During discussion, the costs incurred by the Highland Council during the consultation process of applications falling under S.36 of the Electricity Act 1989 and Crown Estate Lease consultations were highlighted and the fact that there was no recharging policy in place to compensate the Council. Accordingly the Committee AGREED that the Director of Planning and Development brief the Convener and Vice-Convener on the costs incurred by his Service in responding to consultations by:
- the Crown Estate Commissioners on aquaculture applications
- the Scottish Executive on applications under S.36 of the Electricity Act 1989.
After discussion, the Committee further AGREED:-
a) delegation to officers, as specified in the report, of the power to approve
grants of up to £5,000:
- from the Area Initiatives and Community Development Project Initiative
budgets, in consultation with the local Area Chairman and Economic
Development Portfolio-Holder; and
- from the Tourism Development and Marketing Initiatives budget, in
consultation with the local Area Tourism Portfolio-Holder; and
b) delegation to officers:
- to respond to Crown Estate lease consultations on small scale fish farm
modifications not going to public consultation, following consultation with
the local Member;
- to respond in urgent cases to Crown Estate shellfish and fish farm lease
consultations requiring public consultation, following consultation with the
local Member; and
- to respond to consultations from the Crown Estate as to whether or not
an Environmental Statement was needed to accompany an aquaculture
lease application and the scope of such Statements.
9. Scottish Executive Working for Families Project
There had been circulated Report No. PDET08/04 dated 20 January 2004 by the Director of Planning and Development on the Scottish Executive’s allocation of £1.2m over two years for childcare provision that would allow disadvantaged parents to get into work, training or study within the Highlands. The report advised on the actions taken to progress this initiative in consultation with partners and providers.
In response to concern expressed that the Planning, Development, Europe and Tourism Committee might not be the most appropriate mechanism to take this forward, particularly bearing in mind the pressures on its budget, it was explained that the Scottish Executive viewed this as an economic development initiative, but that the Service would work closely with partners to devise, consult on and deliver an appropriate strategy. Reservations were also expressed as to the plethora of initiatives in existence and the potential for duplication.
The Committee AGREED:
a) in principle, the Council’s participation in the Scottish Executive’s Working
for Families initiative, which would operate for financial years 2004/05 and
2005/06;
b) to homologate the emergency appointment of a specialist consultant
adviser (covering preparation of the project plan for submission by April
2004) at a cost not exceeding £7,500 plus expenses, and on a fully
recoverable basis from the Scottish Executive;
c) the provisional geographical targeting of this Initiative based on the 24
wards listed in Annex 2 of the report; and
d) that the Director of Planning & Development submit to the Executive an
outline strategy/action plan on or before 27 February 2004, following
consultation with the Chairmen of the Planning, Development, Europe and
Tourism, Education, Culture and Sport and Housing and Social Work
Committees.
10. A96 Corridor Master Plan Commission
There had been circulated Report No. PDET09/04 dated 20 January 2004 by the Director of Planning and Development seeking authority to commission consultants to prepare a Master Plan for the long term development of the strategic A96 Corridor between Inverness and Nairn, as identified in the Council’s Structure and Local Plans.
During discussion, in recognising the development potential of the A96 corridor, some Members commented that the estimated cost of preparing the Master Plan might be higher than anticipated. However, it was pointed out that the purpose of the Plan at this stage was to provide a general overview and be the first phase of the project.
The Committee AGREED to authorise the appointment of consultants to prepare an A96 Corridor Master Plan at an estimated cost of £30,000.
11. Delivering Biodiversity in Highland
There had been circulated Report No. PDET10/04 dated 19 January 2004 by the Director of Planning and Development considering the case for a second, implementation, phase of the Highland Biodiversity Project and the need for the Council to meet the biodiversity challenge for local authorities set by the Scottish Executive.
The Committee AGREED:
a) the establishment of a Biodiversity Officer post within the Council, subject
to funding;
b) an extension to the contract of the Highland Biodiversity Project Officer for
a period not exceeding 12 months, to be funded out of the Planning and
Development Service budget for 2004/05; and
c) that the Director of Planning and Development, in consultation with the
Chairman, submit appropriate applications to part fund the extension of the
contract and associated activity.
12. EU Regional Policy Debate – Highlands & Islands Economic Wealth
Indicators – Gross Domestic Product/Gross Value Added Figures
At their meeting held on 19 November 2003, the Committee agreed that a report be submitted examining:
a) how the statistical data used to justify the non-renewal of Objective 1
status for the Highlands and Islands after 2000 had been compiled;
b) the implications of recent reports indicating that this data might have been
faulty, to the area’s disadvantage; and
c) what lessons might be learned for the future, particularly with reference to
lobbying/bidding for significant levels of continued European Union (EU)
assistance to the area post-2006.
In this connection, there had been circulated Report No. PDET11/04 by the Director of Planning and Development updating Members on the latest situation concerning the economic well-being of the Highlands and Islands, as measured by Gross Value Added (GVA) figures.
It was pointed out that the figures used by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) in 1999 had shown the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the Highlands and Islands as 76.4% of the average of the European Union, the cut-off point for eligibility for continued Objective 1 funding having been 75%. As a result, the area had had to settle instead for transitional European funding, which would end in 2006. However, in 2003, the European Union had intimated that it was changing its method of calculating the wealth of regions from GDP to GVA because it was deemed to be a more accurate indicator. The new figures published by the ONS showed that the GVA of the region was amongst the lowest for the UK and that there had been a downward trend below 75% since 1996. The possibility of retrospective Objective 1 had been ruled out by the EU, but it was possible that the region could still qualify for Objective 1b post-2006, even although the EU was expected to revert to calculation of eligibility on the basis of GDP. It was therefore important for the Council and its Highlands and Islands partners to make representations to the European Commission highlighting the widening of the wealth differential between the region and the UK and to support the case for future financial assistance from the EU post-2006.
The Committee NOTED the clarifications given in the report and AGREED:
a) that the Director of Planning & Development bring a further report to the
Committee once comparable GVA figures were available for UK and other
regions in the EU, enabling a comparison to be made between the
Highlands and Islands and the rest of the EU;
b) that the Director of Planning & Development report to Committee on the
contents of the 3rd Cohesion report and its implications for the Highlands
and Islands;
c) to seek written confirmation from the Scottish Executive of their support
for the Council and the Highlands and Islands in the fight for recognition of
the declining wealth of the Highlands and Islands in the structure of the EU
Regional Policy post-2006; and
d) to bring to the attention of the relevant MSPs, MPs and MEPs the situation
in the Highlands and Islands as highlighted by the publication of the ONS
figures.
13. INTERREG Iii B North Sea Programme - North Sea Bio-Energy
Project
There had been circulated Report No. PDET12/04 dated 21 January 2004 by the Director of Planning and Development seeking agreement for the involvement of the Council in a project led by Forestry Commission Scotland on the development of a wood fuel market in Scotland.
The Committee APPROVED the Council’s participation in the North Sea INTERREG Programme North Sea Bio-Energy Project, involving a contribution of £15,000 over a three-year period, to be met from existing budget heads as detailed in the report.
14. Delivery of Highland Council Tourism Services
There had been circulated Report No. PDET13/04 dated 20 January 2004 by the Director of Planning and Development seeking approval to commission research to assess the Council's delivery of tourism services, benchmarked against other Scottish local authorities, and to assist the Council in developing its future strategy, bearing in mind the imminent announcement of the Ministerial review of tourism structures in Scotland. The report drew attention not only to the Council’s annual support grant to the Highlands of Scotland Tourist Board but also to the impact of many Council Services on tourism businesses and on the quality of visitors’ experience.
Having NOTED the position, the Committee APPROVED expenditure of up to £15,000 on a study which would assess and evaluate the Council’s current delivery of tourism services and assist the Council with planning its future approach to tourism.
The meeting ended at 1.10 p.m.