Minutes of Meeting of the Planning, Environment and Development Committee held in the Council Chamber, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness on Wednesday, 21 January 2009 at 10.30 a.m.
Present:
Mr I Ross, Mrs I McCallum, Mr G Farlow, Mr D MacKay, Mr W MacKay, Mr M Rattray, Mr D Chisholm, Mr B Barclay, Mr B Clark, Mr E Hunter, Mrs H Carmichael, Mr D Hendry, Mrs P Munro, Mr D Henderson, Mr I Brown, Mr J Gray, Ms G Sinclair, Mr J Holden, Mr T Prag.
In Attendance:
Mr J Rosie, Mr G Smith, Mr R Coghill, Mrs I Campbell, Mr R Balfour, Mr R Wynd, Mr B Gormley.
Officials in attendance:
Mr S Black, Director of Planning and Development, Mr R Hartland, Head of Planning and Building Standards, Mr G Robson, Head of Environment and Development, Mr M MacLeod, Development Plans Manager, Mr A McCann, Economy and Regeneration Manager, Mr G Hamilton, Countryside, Heritage and Natural Resources Manager, Mr K Macinnes, Economic Adviser, Mr G Ireland, Tourism Development Officer, Mr D Mudie, Team Leader, Development Management, Ms A Hackett, Project Officer, Mrs S Lunn, Business Support Manager, Mr F Rennie, Solicitor, Mrs R Moir, Principal Administrator, Mrs L Lee, Committee Administrator.
Also in attendance:
Dr K MacLean, Scottish and Southern Electricity Head of Policy Development and Public Affairs (for item 2)
Mr I Ross in the Chair
1. Apologies for Absence
Apologies for absence were intimated on behalf of Mr R Durham (OCB), Mr A Torrance and Mr J Crawford.
2. Presentation on the Electricity Transmission System and Renewable Energy Development in Highland
A presentation was given by Dr K MacLean, Head of Policy Development and Public Affairs for Scottish and Southern Energy (SSE), on upgrades required to the electricity transmission system to unlock the Highlands’ renewables potential.
The presentation made reference to a number of issues, including:
- the Government’s 2020 emissions reduction targets would be met only if demand reduced: the biggest scope for this lay in increasing energy efficiency for space heating
- currently, heating accounted for around 50% of energy use in Scotland, with 1% coming from renewable sources; transport for around 30% of energy use, with 0.5% from renewables, and electricity for around 20%, with 19% from renewables, mostly hydro-electric schemes
- in order to meet the 2020 targets, renewable sources for heating needed to rise to 10%, for transport to 10% and for electricity to 50%, with progress needed in all three areas
- producing renewable energy displaced the need to use fossil fuels, but did not replace the capacity needed to balance supply and demand – the grid required sufficient capacity to transport renewable energy away from the Highlands and Islands, and to bring in backup supply when needed,
- a number of works had been identified for future grid capacity; whilst some of these involved re-stringing existing pylons and were relatively easy to achieve, the system as a whole relied on the Beauly-Denny upgrade being in place; work needed to commence on all the projects now - around £150bn investment would be needed over the coming 11 years in the UK, much of this in Scotland
- it was anticipated that links from the Islands would be achieved by using underground and sub-sea cables, with no additional pylons being required
- beyond 2020, further sub-sea links would be needed (e.g. between Hunterston and North West England, and Peterhead and Newcastle), as by then the power stations at Hunterston, Cockenzie, Torness and Peterhead would be closed/decommissioned; it was likely that nuclear energy would be imported from England to meet the shortfall in supply.
In response to a number of questions raised, Dr MacLean advised:
- the Scottish and UK Governments worked closely together on underlying issues impacting on achieving CO2 reduction targets, regardless of which Parliament had jurisdiction in this area
- small communities would be unable to access major grid connections directly, just as small roads were not able to access motorways directly; however there was scope for community benefit in some cases
- it was recognised that tourism was a major industry in the Highlands and SSE sought lowest impact solutions to grid issues; however the Beauly-Denny infrastructure was required
- it was difficult to quantify the percentage of the renewables opportunity for Highland within Scotland, but there was significant potential for the industry through onshore, offshore, tidal, solar thermal, biomass etc
- notwithstanding any future changes to Government policy on renewable energy, additional nuclear power would need to be generated somewhere within the UK – existing nuclear plants were due to close and sufficient renewable energy would not be ready in time to meet existing greenhouse gas reduction targets
- the onshore network had to be in place before sub-sea links could be developed – it would not be possible to progress the sub-sea links without Beauly-Denny.
A number of broader questions having been raised on such issues as (a) the costs of renewables infrastructure compared with that of nuclear, oil and gas, (b) who paid for the renewables infrastructure, and (c) the role of Ofgem, Dr MacLean offered to provide a day’s presentation on these and related topics, there being insufficient time to discuss these fully at this meeting.
Dr MacLean also drew attention to the important role of local authorities in achieving the 2020 emissions targets, not only with regard to driving up energy efficiency of new properties through more stringent buildings standards, but also through the potential to install renewable solutions, such as ground source heat pumps, to their housing stock on a street-by-street basis. This latter activity would enable the installation industry to develop more easily than if this were done on an individual basis by householders.
The Committee NOTED the information given and that Dr MacLean’s offer to deliver a further more in-depth briefing to Members at a later date would be investigated; and AGREED that further policy development work be carried out on the implications of grid enhancement, in partnership where appropriate, with a report being brought to a future meeting of the Committee.
3. Tourism Project Group – Minutes 3 December 2008
There had been circulated Minutes of Meeting of the Tourism Project Group held on 3 December 2008.
The Committee APPROVED the Minutes and thus AGREED:
i. that the possibility of combining the Highland 2007 follow-up event with the
Highland Tourism Awards be investigated;
ii. that a prioritised list of iconic sites be brought to a meeting of the Working
Group as soon as possible;
iii. to request that clarification of the role of Highlands and Islands Enterprise
(HIE) in events funding be placed on the agenda for the next meeting
between HIE and the Council as a matter of urgency, and that Members of
the Group also seek individually to resolve this issue with HIE where
appropriate;
iv.that the Director of Highland 2007 bring regular progress reports to the
Working Group; and
v. that reports be brought to a future meeting on (a) improvements to coach
parking provision in Inverness, given the increase in coaches and cruise liner
excursions, and (b) activities being undertaken by the Inverness Business
Improvement District (BID) with regard to improving signage in the City.
The Committee NOTED the expectation that further information on (iii) above would be reported to the next meeting of the Project Group on 20 February 2009.
4. Revenue Expenditure Monitoring 2008/09
There had been circulated Report No. PED 01/09 dated 9 January 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development setting out the revenue monitoring position for the period to 30 November 2008 and indicating a projected net year end position of an overspend of £758,000. This was due to a shortfall in projected fee income in the current economic conditions, unbudgeted expenditure on public inquiries and the use of consultants to maintain the Building Standards service when staff posts could not be filled, together with the costs of putting in place audit recommendations in the Building Standards Service. The £758,000 figure took account of £397,000 savings, which had been realised partly through the management of vacancies and partly through not spending additional budget received to cover the costs of implementing the new Planning Act.
A number of points were raised in discussion, including:
- the importance of the role of the Planning and Development Service in supporting and assisting development during the period of economic downturn
- that, whilst it was for Members to make decisions on the grounds of what they believed to be right, they also needed to be aware of the costs of public inquiries, and of their responsibility to the Council and the electors, when making decisions that were likely to result in a public inquiry where the Council would find it difficult to defend its position; consistency in decision making was of crucial importance
- previous decisions to meet efficiency savings targets by using fee income had stored up problems for the future because of the variability of fee income – this practice should not be repeated.
In response to Members’ concerns that staff within the Service were under undue pressure, the Committee was advised that all Services within the Council were under pressure, but that staff had responded positively and there had been an improvement in morale in the Area Offices.
Members also queried the benefit of making savings on the Fishery Grant, as it attracted match funding and was important in providing support to coastal areas. The Committee was advised that the figures for the current financial year were a “one-off”, and that funding would be available in the following year.
In response to questions, Members were (a) given an assurance that consultants were never used in place of the Council’s own staff and that no new work was being passed to consultants; and (b) advised that the savings arising from e-Planning were not known as yet – management would examine all working practices following the implementation of the Act and the introduction of e-Planning and Members would be kept informed of progress
The Committee NOTED the monitoring position and that Members would be kept informed as to further discussions on how the Planning and Development Service budget was constructed, particularly in light of its high dependence on fee income, and AGREED:
i. the management action as proposed in the report; and
ii. to submit a request to the Resources Committee for a supplementary
budget estimate of £758k to balance the Planning and Development budget
for 2008/09.
5. Capital Expenditure Monitoring 2008/09
There had been circulated Report No. PED 02/09 dated 12 January 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development outlining the expenditure and income to 30 November 2008 for the year 2008/09 Capital Programme and the projected year-end position.
The Committee was informed verbally that gross expenditure to the end of December 2008 was in the region of £400,000, and that this figure was expected to increase as the financial year end approached and projects neared completion. The year end projected expenditure had fallen to around £1m. The main reasons for the underspend were given as: delays due to the Council’s high standards of community engagement, some external consultants having been slower than expected, and the impact of stringent prudential controls, particularly for core path development.
In answer to questions raised, the Committee was advised that the decision process for transferring unspent funding from projects which had come in under budget was based on the Capital Programme; in general, any such unspent funding was used to offset the cost of projects which had run above budget.
The Committee NOTED the content of the report; and AGREED that:
i. the underspends on the projects detailed in paragraph 1.3 of the circulated
report be carried forward to 2009/10; and
ii. the underspends on the completed Auldearn, Kyle and Nethybridge projects
be utilised to enhance the Brora streetscape project.
6. e-Planning Processing Centre – Staffing
There had been circulated Report No. PED 03/09 dated 13 January 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development setting out the background to and recommendations for the staffing levels of an electronic processing centre which was required for the implementation of e-planning, scheduled for late April 2009.
The Head of Planning and Building Standards summarised the report, drawing attention to the Government requirements for the introduction of e-Planning, the options looked at in locating and staffing the operation, and the requirement for the staffing proposals to be submitted to the Resources Committee. In response to questions raised, he advised that (a) the paper system would run in tandem with the electronic system for some time, (b) access to the system would be available at libraries and planning offices, (c) respondents’ telephone numbers and personal e-mail addresses would be redacted from letters prior to publication on the web, and (d) the new system would be widely publicised.
The Committee AGREED in principle to the staffing of the Electronic Processing Centre as outlined in section 3.1 of the report; and NOTED that:
i. future reports would outline progress with the implementation of e-Planning
and the benefits, including savings, being realised; and
ii. training sessions would be arranged for Members in due course.
7. Notice of amendment (Planning):
Planning Application 08/00565/FULIN – Development of a Commercial District Centre incorporating Retail Stores, Doctor’s Surgery, Public Square, Petrol Filling Station and Landscaping on land at Ness-side, Dores Road, Inverness for Tesco Stores Ltd
In terms of Standing Order 13.2, the following Members had applied for and been granted a Local Member vote: Mr F Parr, Mr N Donald.
The Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey Planning Applications and Review Committee (INBS PARC) had granted planning consent for the above application at its meeting on 2 December 2008. The following Notice of Amendment had been received on 5 December 2008:
“We the undersigned, being elected Members of The Highland Council, hereby declare our wish that the decision of the Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey Planning Applications and Review Committee at their meeting on 2 December last be reviewed at a forthcoming meeting of the Planning, Environment and Development Committee of the Council.
Signed: Mr J Holden, Mr R Balfour, Mr H Wood, Mr A S Park, Mr J MacDonald, Mr F Parr, Mrs J Campbell, Mrs P Munro, Ms G E A Sinclair”.
There had been re-circulated Report No. PLI-121-08 as circulated to the INBS PARC on 2 December 2008, together with relevant extract from the Minutes of the PARC meeting.
The Committee considered the application under the Notice of Amendment procedure.
The Team Leader, Development Management, summarised the application and reiterated the reasons for the recommendation to grant planning permission. Members were reminded that the proposals were to be considered on their merits and in relation to the Local Plan, and that the identity of the developer was not a material planning consideration. Provost J Gray, Chairman of the Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey (INBS) Planning Applications and Review Committee (PARC), commented that the PARC had approved the application by 8 votes to 4 - there was therefore, in his view, no justification to refuse the application, which met the needs of the area and complied with the Local Plan.
The Chairman invited those signatories to the Notice of Amendment present to give their views. The Convener and Mrs P Munro intimated that they were now content with the proposals and would be supporting the recommendation to approve the application.
Points raised by the signatories included that:
- the impact on local roads would be significant
- the proposed complex exceeded the maximum size stipulated in the Local Plan by 50%
- the viability of the smaller units was questionable, particularly in the current economic climate – it was foreseeable that the applicant supermarket might eventually take these over and so gain larger premises than envisaged in the Development Plan
- district centres should evolve naturally, as at Culloden; the facilities to be provided were not required; the National Health Service (NHS) had no plans to establish a doctors’ surgery at that site
- there would be loss of amenity – a site inspection should be held
- the local Community Council was opposed to the proposals; the Local Members had received many calls from the public opposed to the development, particularly on the grounds that it was too large
- the development was not in the public interest
- the development should be held back until the Trunk Link Road was completed.
Legal advice having been sought, a Member request to table without prior notice a document relating to discussions on a previous application lodged for the site was ruled out of order by the Chairman as not relevant to the current application.
In full discussion, the majority of Members spoke in support of the application on the basis that it was a good application, the community was growing, and the Committee was required to act in an unbiased and professional manner. The Vice Chair drew attention to the potential mutual benefits were the applicant to allow space within the store for use by local food producers.
Provost J Gray, seconded by the Convener, MOVED that the decision of the Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey Planning Applications and Review Committee be upheld and that accordingly the application be approved subject to conditions as set out in the report.
As an AMENDMENT, Mr J Holden, seconded by Mr F Parr, moved that the application be refused on the basis that it was too large and did not comply with the Local Plan.
A proposed second Amendment by Mr N Donald, that the decision of the INBS PARC be upheld subject to the conclusion of a Section 75 agreement covering the following issues: (a) the construction of the store be not permitted to commence until such time as the Canal crossing was complete, (b) the additional four units be not permitted to be incorporated into the store, and (c) the store be not allowed to operate on a 24 hours basis, did not find a seconder.
On a vote being taken, the MOTION received 14 votes and the AMENDMENT received 5 votes, with 2 abstentions. The MOTION was therefore CARRIED, the votes being cast as follows:
For the Motion:
Mr G Farlow
Mr D Mackay
Mr W Mackay
Mr I Ross
Mr M Rattray
Mrs I McCallum
Mrs H Carmichael Mr D Hendry
Mrs P Munro
Mr D Henderson
Mr I Brown
Mr J Gray
Mr S Park
Mr T Prag
For the Amendment:
Mr D Chisholm
Mrs G Sinclair
Mr F Parr Mr N Donald
Mr J Holden
Abstentions:
Mr B Clark Mr E Hunter
Decision
The Committee AGREED that planning permission be granted, as previously agreed by the Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey Planning Applications and Review Committee at its meeting on 2 December 2008.
8. National Planning Framework
There had been circulated Report No. PED 04/09 dated 13 January 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development providing the Committee with an overview of the content of the National Planning Framework 2 (NPF2), which had been laid before the Scottish Parliament in December 2008. It set the strategic context for development planning in Scotland and the Government had taken forward a number of the representations made by the Council on the draft Framework.
The Development Plans Manager summarised the main points of the report and advised that (a) the Council’s Highland-wide Development Plan would reflect the content of the NPF2, and (b) the Chief Planner would be attending Inverness on 20 February 2009 and the implications of the NPF2 would be discussed then.
The Committee NOTED the content of the report and AGREED that the Highland-wide Local Development Plan be prepared in the context of the strategy set out in NPF2.
9. Highland Wide Local Development Plan
There had been circulated Report No. PED 05/09 dated 13 January 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development advising that the Highland-wide Local Development Plan would be prepared over the course of 2009. It offered the opportunity to update the spatial strategy and land use vision for Highland as well as providing a consistent approach to planning policy throughout the area. It was being brought forward as one of two pilot projects in Scotland, to demonstrate effective working with key agencies such as the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA), Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH), Transport Scotland and Scottish Water. The timescale for the Plan would be challenging.
The Chairman advised that the Plan would inform development in the Highlands over the next twenty years. There would be active Member involvement in its preparation.
In answer to points raised, the Development Plans Manager confirmed that:
- there would be scope for input from the Inverness City Committee and from the Land, Environment and Sustainability Strategy Group, where appropriate
- Member training would be provided as required, although the task was challenging; work carried out for the existing Local Plans would be drawn on in compiling the Highland-Wide Local Development Plan; it was expected that current resource levels would be sufficient.
The Committee NOTED the key dates and milestones as set out in Appendix 2 to the report, and AGREED:
i. to support the ongoing preparation of the Highland-wide Local Development
Plan as a key part of the Council’s programme; and
ii. that a Main Issues Report, updated Development Plan Scheme and
Participation Statement, draft Environmental Report and Monitoring
Statement be brought to the Committee on 18 March 2009 for approval
and subsequent public consultation.
10. Business Gateway
As Directors of Highland Opportunity Ltd, the Chairman, Mrs I McCallum, Mrs H Carmichael, Mr D Hendry, Mr J Gray and Mr I Brown declared non-financial interests in this item, but, having applied the test outlined in Paragraph 5.18 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that their interest did not preclude their involvement in the discussion.
There had been circulated Report No. PED 06/09 dated 6 January 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development seeking to update Members on developments with the introduction of the Business Gateway service to Highland in 2009.
The Economy and Regeneration Manager summarised the main points of the report, including that: work on the aspects of the service to be provided by Scottish Enterprise was expected to reach some conclusions towards the end of January 2009, a draft contract was in place with Highland Opportunity Ltd (HOL), and Moray Council was keen to investigate working with Business Gateway. Every effort was being made to ensure that the resources provided by Scottish Enterprise would meet Business Gateway’s requirements in Highland.
In response to Members’ concerns that, with only two months to the handover date, there was still no agreement and no budget in place, the Economy and Regeneration Manager explained that, while new customers would be directed to the Business Gateway from 1 April 2009, existing customers would continue to be dealt with by HIE.
Members spoke in support of the new service to be offered by HOL and sought the support of the Chair in the negotiations with Scottish Enterprise regarding resources. The Chairman concurred that the situation was urgent and gave an assurance that both he and the Director were aware of the situation.
The Committee NOTED the current developments at the national, regional and local level regarding preparations for the introduction of the Business Gateway service to Highland.
11. Highland Economic Forum
There had been circulated Report No. PED 07/09 dated 12 January 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development introducing the recently established Highland Economic Forum. The report set out its role and identified which organisations were represented on it. It was proposed that the Planning and Development Service should lead for the Council on the Forum, and that it be chaired initially by the Chairman of this Committee. The first meeting was scheduled to take place on Tuesday, 27 January 2009.
Members commented that the establishment of the Forum was timely, given the current economic climate, and recommended that the good practices of the previous Inverness and East Highland Local Economic Forum, including drawing up an action plan, be built on. The list of invitees was supported. Views were also expressed that there were several Members who could make a positive contribution to the Forum and best use should be made of their talent – the Council’s presence on the Forum should not therefore be limited to one Member. However, other Members supported the proposal as in the circulated report, given that the Forum already had 25 Members, was newly established and should be allowed a period to bed in, and that a number of Council Members were in any case likely to attend the Forum as representatives of other Groups. The Chairman commented that the Council did not have ownership of the Forum, but proposed that working practices, including Member involvement, be looked at again after the Forum had been in operation for six months.
Members also discussed the means by which the Forum’s activities and recommendations could be brought to the local level, particularly in light of the Single Outcome Agreement and Community Planning Partnership requirements. The Director of Planning and Development advised that relevant models in each area would be looked at, such as local business panels and Chambers of Commerce.
The Committee NOTED the report and AGREED:
i. to recommend that the Planning and Development Service act as lead for
the Council on the Highland Economic Forum;
ii. to propose to the Forum that, subject to its approval, it be chaired by the
Chairman of the Council’s Planning, Environment and Development
Committee;
iii. that the Minutes of Forum meetings and any matters arising for Council
consideration be reported to the Committee; and
iv.that this mechanism and all other aspects of the Council’s participation in the
Forum be reviewed in six months’ time.
12. Highland Environment Forum
There had been circulated Report No. PED 08/09 dated 12 January 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development introducing the recently established Highland Environment Forum. The report set out its role and identified which organisations were represented on it. It was suggested that the Planning and Development Service should lead for the Council on the Forum and that it be chaired initially by the Vice Chair of the Planning, Environment and Development Committee. The first meeting was scheduled to take place on 19 February 2009.
In response to concerns raised, Members were given an assurance that the Forum would consider both rural and urban environments – Scottish Natural Heritage, the Forestry Commission, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds had strong urban and peri-urban interests. Members were also advised that suggestions for additional bodies to sit on the Forum, such as the Scottish Agricultural College and the National Health Service, could be made to the Forum; the Economic Forum (item 11 above refers) could also be asked to consider the inclusion of the NHS in its membership.
The Committee NOTED the report and the information given and AGREED:
i. to recommend that the Planning and Development Service act as lead for
the Council on the Highland Economic Forum;
ii. to propose to the Environment Forum that, subject to its approval, it be
chaired initially by the Vice Chair of the Council’s Planning, Environment and
Development Committee;
iii. that the Minutes of Forum meetings and any matters arising for Council
consideration be reported to the Council via the Land, Environment and
Sustainability Strategy Group; and
iv.that this mechanism and all other aspects of the Council’s participation in the
Forum be reviewed in six months’ time.
13. Historic Scotland Consultation on A Joint Working Agreement between Historic Scotland and Planning Authorities in Relation to Statutory Casework and Consultation
There had been circulated Report No. PED 09/09 dated 5 January 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development introducing a Historic Scotland draft Joint Working Agreement with planning authorities in relation to statutory casework and consultation. Responses were sought by 28 January 2009.
The Committee APPROVED the draft response attached at Appendix 1 to the report as the Highland Council response, subject to greater emphasis being placed on the importance of a closer partnership relationship with Historic Scotland allowing more constructive engagement at an earlier stage in the planning process.
14. Consultation on Scottish Natural Heritage Draft Paths Policy
There had been circulated Report No. PED 10/09 dated 5 January 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development introducing a recent Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) consultation on a draft paths policy statement. Responses had been sought by 15 December 2008 and a Highland Council response had been submitted by the deadline, following consultation with the Chairman. Members were given the opportunity to submit additional comments.
The Committee HOMOLOGATED the response already submitted on behalf of the Council.
15. Outcomes of MIPIM Conference
There had been circulated Report No. PED 11/09 dated 23 December 2008 by the Director of Planning and Development reminding Members that, at the meeting of the Committee held on 28 May 2008, a report had been presented on the background to the attendance by the then Provost of Inverness, the Inverness City Manager and two colleagues from Highlands and Islands Enterprise at the 2008 MIPIM Conference (Marché International Des Professionnels de l’Immobilier – the International Market for Property Professionals). The Committee had instructed officers to report back on the outcome of any contacts made and on the proposals for attendance at the next Conference, to be held in March 2009.
Members having welcomed the significant opportunity the conference provided to the Highlands, the Committee NOTED progress made subsequent to MIPIM 2008 and AGREED:
i. to support Highlands and Islands Enterprise and private sector
representatives attending the MIPIM 2009 Conference, as set out in the
report, at a cost of £7,000, to be met from the Service’s Economic
Initiatives budget; and
ii. that a report be made to the first appropriate Planning, Environment and
Development Committee subsequent to MIPIM 2009, detailing its outcomes.
16. Inverness Architectural Association Design Awards
Members recalled that the Committee, at its meeting on 28 May 2008, had agreed to provide sponsorship of Inverness Architectural Association (IAA) Design Awards Scheme for 2008, at a cost of £7,500, and that a report be brought to Committee at the conclusion of the Scheme in November 2008. Accordingly, there had been circulated Report No. Ped12/09 dated 9 January 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development explaining the importance of high quality design to the Highlands, describing the content of the IAA Design Awards Scheme, and detailing the outcomes of the Scheme for 2008.
The Committee NOTED:
i. the success of the Inverness Architects Association (IAA) and Design
Awards 2008 and the benefits to sustainable quality and innovative design in
our communities that the Scheme generated; and
ii. that sponsorship of the Awards Scheme was one of a number of initiatives
to be taken to improve the quality of sustainable layout and design in future
developments in the Highlands.
The Committee AGREED in principle to the sponsorship of future IAA Awards Schemes, should funds be available.
The meeting ended at 2.50 p.m.