Minutes of Meeting of the Planning, Environment and Development Committee held in the Council Chamber, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness on Wednesday, 23 September 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 R Durham, Mr A Torrance, Mr B Clark, Mr E Hunter, Mrs H Carmichael, Mr D Hendry, Mr D Henderson, Ms G Sinclair, Mr J Crawford, Mr J Holden, Mr T Prag, Mr D Fallows, Mr G Rimellm, Mr S Park
In Attendance:
Mr G Smith, Mrs I Campbell, Mrs M Paterson, Mr D Chisholm, Dr D Alston
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
Mr G Hamilton, Countryside, Heritage and Natural Resources Manager
Mr D Polson, Area Planning and Building Standards Manager, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey
Ms S Lunn, Business Support Manager
Ms A Hackett, Principal Projects Officer
Dr A Luke, Principal Contaminated Land Officer, TECS Services
Ms S Ross, Scientific Officer, TECS Services
Miss K McLeod, Principal Solicitor (Planning)
Mrs M Grigor, Finance Manager, Central Services
Mrs R Moir, Principal Committee Administrator
Ms L Lee, Committee Administrator
Mr S Taylor, Administrative Assistant
Also in attendance:
For Item 2 - 16 members of the public
For Item 3 - Mr J Lewis, Farr High School S6 Pupil – Managing Director of Farr Woodcraft; Mr H Mackay, Farr High School S6 Pupil - Production Director of Farr Woodcraft; Mr D Charnley, Link Teacher, Farr High School, Young Enterprise; Ms L Thomas, Chairman of the Highland Area Board of Young Enterprise
Mr I Ross in the Chair
An asterisk in the margin denotes a recommendation to the Council.
All decisions with no marking in the margin are delegated to the Committee.
1. Apologies for Absence
Apologies for absence were intimated on behalf of Dr M E M Foxley, Mr B Barclay, Mr I Brown and Mr J Gray.
2. Preliminaries
The Chair drew Members’ attention to the forthcoming Highland Archaeology Festival, which would run from 3 to 18 October, and to a display outside the Chamber highlighting the work carried out by the Economy and Regeneration Team.
The Committee NOTED the information given.
3. Notice of Amendment (Planning)
Planning Application 09/00231/FULIN
Erection of 64 Houses at Resaurie, Smithton, Inverness
In terms of Standing Order 13.2, the following Members had applied for and been granted a Local Member vote: Mr R Balfour, Mr J Ford and Mr R Wynd.
The Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey Planning Applications Committee (INBS PAC) had approved planning consent for the above application, subject to conditions, at its meeting on 11 August 2009. The following Notice of Amendment (Planning) was then received on 13 August 2009:
“We the undersigned, being Members of the Committee and including within our number the two Members granted Local Member votes for the application referred to above, hereby declare our wish that the decision of the Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey Planning Applications Committee at their meeting on 11 August last (agenda item 4.3) be reviewed at a forthcoming meeting of the Planning, Environment and Development Committee of the Council.
Signed: Mr R Balfour, Ms G Sinclair, Mr A Graham, Mr S Black, Mr J Holden, Mr R Wynd, Mr J Ford, Mr J Crawford. “
Accordingly, there had been re-circulated Report No PLI-55-09 by the Area Planning and Building Standards Manager for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey (APBSM), together with the relevant extract from the Minutes of the PAC meeting.
Prior to consideration of the application, the Committee was advised that a letter had recently been received from the community raising various concerns, including whether neighbour notification had been carried out correctly. The APBSM advised Members that it was his understanding that any irregularity on this point had been rectified. *Members were, however, given an assurance that the issues raised would be investigated further; on that basis, consideration of the application went ahead as planned.
(*Agreed by Highland Council 29 October 2009)
The Chair outlined the procedure for considering the application and reminded the Committee that, in order to be able to participate, Members required to be present throughout all of the proceedings. With reference to a Powerpoint presentation, the APBSM drew attention to points within the report, including:
- reference to an earlier application for 107 units, including three-storey flats, which had been refused by the INBS PARC;
- details of the current application, as set out in the report, including number and layout of units, the brownfield history of the site, the lie of the land, and the pattern and density of adjacent developments;
- the proposed conditions to address problems of contamination, flooding and to safeguard European Protected Species;
- that the Transport, Environmental and Community Services (TECS) Committee, Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) and Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) had each been provided with a copy of the report submitted to the 11 August PAC, and all had confirmed that they were content with the proposals and conditions.
The application was therefore recommended for approval.
The Chair then called on Mr D Henderson, as the mover of the successful PAC motion, to speak. Mr Henderson made a number of points, including that:
- the current application was acceptable – the developer had demonstrated willingness to work with the Council in bringing forward revised plans;
- there was a demand for this kind of housing in Inverness;
- the development would provide 16 affordable housing units;
- it was preferable to use brownfield sites than good agricultural land; and
- contamination, flooding issues and protected species issues would be dealt with by conditions.
The Chair then invited the signatories of the Notice of Amendment to speak during which the following points were raised:
- local residents remained concerned about flooding and contamination issues despite the proposed conditions – in particular, full contamination surveys had not as yet been carried out. Residents in Corby, England, had successfully sued their local Council for having granted permission for housing on contaminated land which had led to birth defects;
- there were concerns about road and pedestrian safety;
- the proposed density was too high and the development was out of character with the area, causing a loss of amenity - the photographs used in the APBSM’s presentation did not give a true picture of housing patterns in the area; a more suitable density would be around 20 – 30 houses;
- the lie of the land would mean that some local residents would be overlooked by properties on the higher section – this would be a loss of amenity;
- PARC Members had undertaken a site inspection in relation to the earlier planning application for the site but not for the current application – Members who had seen the site had voted against the earlier proposals;
- the vote at the August PAC had been very close (8 votes to 7); and
- all 4 Ward Members were opposed to the development.
Officers responded to the points raised as follows:
Flooding: the APBSM explained that the proposals were designed to ameliorate the existing flooding problems and the outcome should be an overall improvement. It was his view that should the Committee decide to refuse the application on the grounds of flooding, this would not withstand challenge.
Density: the APBSM advised that, whilst the proposals were towards the higher end of what was permitted in the Local Plan, they were nonetheless within the specified limits. There was a need for smaller houses.
Contamination: the Principal Contaminated Land Officer advised that the developer was using a consultant to carry out the investigation work, and gave assurances that: (i) the application had been dealt with as stipulated in Planning Advice Note (PAN) 33, (ii) a risk assessment appropriate to the proposed use of the site (ie housing) was being carried out and the investigations were being carried out in accordance with appropriate technical standards, and (iii) the developer would not be able to proceed with the development until the site had been fully investigated, remedial work undertaken, and this work validated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. He also clarified that the development at Corby had been built prior to new legislation being introduced with regard to use of contaminated land.
In wider discussion a number of points were raised, echoing points made above but also drawing attention to local concerns regarding the safety of children in relation to the proposed attenuation pond.
Assurances having been given that Local Members would be kept informed of progress, and that the site would be free from contamination before construction commenced, Mr D Henderson, seconded by Mr G Farlow, MOVED that the application be approved as set out in the report, subject to the strengthening of conditions to clarify that a footpath should be provided.
As an AMENDMENT, Mr R Wynd, seconded by Ms G Sinclair, moved that the application be refused on the grounds that the proposal did not respect the scale, form and density of the surrounding development and would adversely impact on the character and amenity of the community, and accordingly did not meet the requirements set out at Paragraph 67 of SPP3; and would have a significantly detrimental impact on the residential amenity of the residents of existing housing contrary to Policy G2 of the Highland Structure Plan.
On a vote being taken, the MOTION received 14 votes and the AMENDMENT received 6 votes, with 2 abstentions. The MOTION was therefore CARRIED, the votes having been cast as follows:
For the Motion:
Mr D Henderson, Mr G Farlow, Mrs H Carmichael, Mr R Durham, Mr D Fallows, Mr D Hendry, Mr D Mackay, Mr W MacKay, Mrs I McCallum, Mr S Park, Mr T Prag, Mr G Rimell. Mr I Ross, Mr A Torrance
For the Amendment:
Mr R Wynd, Ms G Sinclair, Mr J Crawford, Mr J Holden, Mr R Balfour, Mr J Ford
Abstentions:
Mr B Clark Mr E Hunter
Decision:
The Committee AGREED to uphold the INBS PAC decision to APPROVE planning permission, subject to conditions as set out in the report and a footpath being provided.
The Committee also NOTED that, following general questions raised during the debate, the Chair would discuss with the Director the submission of a report to a future meeting on the overall issue of housing requirements and design from a disability perspective.
4. Presentation – by Farr High School, Young Enterprise Scotland
(YES) Winners
A presentation was given by pupils from Farr High School who had won the Scotland Young Enterprise Scotland (YES) title for 2009 and the Young Enterprise Production Award, supported by GKN plc, at the UK finals in London, where they had gained third place overall. The pupils had successfully designed and marketed an Adirondack garden chair.
The Committee warmly congratulated the pupils on their achievement and NOTED the presentation.
5. Revenue Expenditure Monitoring 2009/10
There had been circulated Report No. Ped64-09 dated 15 September 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development setting out the revenue monitoring position for the period to 31 July 2009 and the projected year end position and exploring the way in which the Planning and Development Service was funded, with a high reliance on fee income.
The Business Support Manager advised that, whilst expenditure was 2% lower at the end of July 2009 than for the same period in 2008, corresponding income was lower by 10% due to the continuing fall in Planning Application and Building Warrant fee income. There had been a slight improvement in fee income to the end of August, but a fee income gap of £1m was still forecast for the end of the year, and expenditure on Planning Inquiries was estimated to be around £50,000 above budget. The report detailed the management action being taken to reduce the projected net overspend to £0.517m. The position would continue to be closely monitored.
The Director spoke to the report in relation to the composition of the Service’s budget and advised that the Finance Service was of the view that the budget should continue to be compiled along the current lines. Other Local Authorities also operated in this way. The Chair supported the recommendation not to alter the budget arrangements but commented that there was an urgent need for the Government to increase the level of fees.
In discussion, Members welcomed the report and accepted the reasons for fee income being included in the Service budget. However, concerns were raised that some of the Council’s priorities might not be delivered due to actions being taken to reduce the projected overspend. Some significant sums of money were involved and it was questioned whether the Committee needed to have closer involvement in the management of the budget. It was important that the Service should be in a good position to respond to economic recovery.
In response, the Chair gave assurances that management actions were geared to protecting the Service as far as possible whilst making the required savings and that a structured plan to manage the budget was in place.
The Committee NOTED the monitoring report to 31 July 2009 and the explanation as to why fee income should not be separated from the overall Planning and Development revenue budget; and AGREED the management action which had been taken to date to reduce the projected over-spend against budget to £0.517m at the year end.
6. Capital Expenditure Monitoring 2009/10
There had been circulated Report No. Ped65-09 dated 16 September 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development outlining expenditure and income to 31 July 2009, the year 2009/10 Capital Programme and the projected year-end position. The report also showed progress with projects under the Vacant and Derelict Land Fund (VDLF).
The Committee was advised that expenditure to the end of August was approximately £400,000, compared with £80,000 for the corresponding period in 2008. It was anticipated that expenditure would be in line with budget at the year end.
The Committee NOTED the report and AGREED:
i. the carrying forward of funds allocated to Dunnet Pavilion to 2010/11; and ii. that, if required before the November 2009 meeting, the Director of
Planning and Development, in consultation with the Chairman, be
authorised to consider and approve an amendment to the Vacant and
Derelict Land Fund (VDLF) Delivery Plan to enable the alternative Bridgend
Site, Alness, to be offered a VDLF grant.
7. Employee Survey
As agreed at the meeting on 23 September 2008 (Item 10), there had been circulated Report No. Ped66-09 dated 16 September by the Director of Planning and Development detailing the progress being made in terms of meeting the objectives set out in the Action Plan for the Service to address the main issues arising out of the fourth Employee Survey in 2007. A replacement page containing the previously missing Paragraph 4.5 was also tabled.
The Business Support Manager drew attention to the main points of the report, focusing on actions taken to identify and deal with stress levels and improve communication, including regular review of Personal Development Plans. The next Employee Survey was due to take place in February 2010.
Members welcomed the actions being taken in response to the Survey findings but drew attention to the problems which could be caused by stress and low staff morale. Whilst accepting that some factors were outwith the control of the Council, staffing numbers and workload should be closely monitored and emphasis given to the importance of recognising stress and of staff feeling able to talk to managers.
The Committee NOTED the report and the progress to date and APPROVED the revised Action Plan.
8. Nigg Masterplan and Accompanying Strategic Environmental
Assessment
Declarations of Interest - Mr A Torrance declared a financial interest in this item as a member of the Cromarty Firth Port Authority but, in terms of the dispensation granted by the Standards Commission, remained to participate in the discussion.
Mr M Rattray declared a financial interest in this item as a Director of Port Services (Invergordon) Ltd and left the room during consideration of the item.
There had been circulated Report No. Ped67-09 dated 15 September 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development updating Members on the outcome of the second stage Public Consultation into the Nigg Development Masterplan and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). The report commented on the proposed further modifications as set out in Appendix 1, and sought Committee approval to adopt the Masterplan and SEA with agreed alterations.
The Head of Environment summarised the main points of the report, drawing attention to key issues as set out therein. The Committee was advised that it was considered that the Masterplan underplayed the significance of Nigg - the scale of investment in North Sea projects, particularly in the renewables field, was growing faster and sooner than expected.
Whilst welcoming the progress made, Members regretted the delay in finalising the Appropriate Assessment with Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH). Officers advised that meetings were to be held in the next two to three weeks and it was anticipated that any outstanding issues would be resolved.
The Scottish Government had indicated support for the development of the Nigg site and it was hoped that its response would be swift, and that the Masterplan could be submitted to either the November meeting of this Committee or to the full Council in December, at which time a decision could be made as to whether to proceed with a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO). It was understood that the site owners, KBR, were to meet in early October to consider a business plan involving a multi-million pound investment at Nigg. * Whilst awaiting with interest any proposals that might come forward in this regard, Members emphasised the need to retain the CPO as an option and to proceed with it, as required.
(*Agreed by Highland Council 29 October 2009)
Having requested, in response to community concerns, that the Masterplan state more clearly the Council’s opposition to nuclear activity and to the dismantling of vessels containing toxic materials, the Committee NOTED:
i. the report and the information given, including:
- the outcome of the second round of public consultation;
- responses to the representations received to the Nigg Development Masterplan as outlined in Appendix 1;
- responses to the representations received from the Consultation Authorities to the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) as outlined in Appendix 2;
- that the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) had withdrawn its objections with regard to flood risk;
ii. that work on finalising the Appropriate Assessment document with
Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) was ongoing; and
iii. the importance of continuing to keep the Council’s options open,
including Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO).
The Committee AGREED:
i. to incorporate the proposed modifications to the Masterplan and SEA and
to formally approve these documents, subject to strengthening the
wording to clarify and reinforce the Council’s opposition to nuclear
activities and the dismantling of vessels containing toxic materials;
ii. that, in view of the urgency of the matter, Officers should investigate
whether it would be competent and legally acceptable for the Masterplan
and SEA to be submitted to Scottish Ministers prior to the finalisation of
the Appropriate Assessment with SNH and, if so, to take this action;
otherwise, that the approved Masterplan and SEA be submitted to
Ministers following completion and joint sign-off with SNH of the
Appropriate Assessment.
9. Town Centre Regeneration Fund
There had been circulated Report No. Ped68-09 dated 15 September 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development providing information on the second round of Town Centre Regeneration Fund applications submitted and endorsed by the Council.
The Committee NOTED the Highland applications submitted for the second round and AGREED that a further report be presented to the November meeting on the outcome of these applications.
10. Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 – Review of Local Access For a
Areas and their Membership
There had been circulated Report No. Ped69-09 dated 15 September 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development reviewing the six Local Access Fora currently operating in the Highlands.
The Committee NOTED the report and AGREED:
i. the retention of six Local Access Fora in order to retain local knowledge,
experience and input;
ii. the appointment of persons nominated to the six Local Access Fora in
Highland, as set out in Sections 2.4 and 3.3 of the paper, for a period
of three years commencing January 2010, subject to (iv) and (v) below;
iii. to the increase in Forum membership to 13, as set out in Section 4.3 of
the report, to include representation from disability organisations;
iv. in the absence of Area Committees, which had formerly approved
appointments to the Fora, that nominees be first considered by the
appropriate Ward Business meetings, with appointments then formally
approved by the Planning, Environment and Development Committee; and
v. with reference to Section 3.3 of the report, that Fora members be able
to serve for a maximum of two terms, unless there were particular
circumstances; the latter to be considered by following the same process
as at (iv) above.
11. Tourism Project Group – Minutes of 19 August 2009
There had been circulated Minutes of Meeting of the Tourism Project Group held on 19 August 2009.
The Committee NOTED the minutes, subject to the correction of a typographical error in Item 7, and AGREED that letters be sent to Lufthansa and Highlands and Islands Airport Limited expressing support for the Inverness-Düsseldorf air route and requesting its reinstatement for Summer 2010.
12. Highland Fresh Mussels Ltd – Financial Statements for the Year
ended 31 March 2009 and Progress Report
Declarations of Interest - Mr A Torrance and Mr R Durham declared non-financial interests in this item as Directors of Highland Fresh Mussels Ltd but, having applied the test outlined in Paragraph 5.18 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that their interests did not preclude their involvement in the discussion.
There had been circulated Report No. Ped70-09 dated 2 September 2009 by the Director of Planning and Development presenting the “Financial Statements for the year ended 31 March 2009” for Highland Fresh Mussels Ltd (HFM Ltd). The report also provided brief details of the activities of Highland Fresh Mussels Ltd during the current financial year (2009/2010).
The accounts showed a lower return than in previous years which was attributed to the recession. Accordingly, to protect the company during the period of low production, the level of return to the Tain Common Good Fund had been revisited. In discussion, Members commented that the current exchange rate could provide an opportunity to develop sales in Europe and suggested that consideration be given to bringing a report to a future meeting, either of the Committee or of the Land, Environment and Sustainability Strategy Group, with proposals for a structured approach to marketing the product.
The Committee NOTED the content of the report, and AGREED to accept, on behalf of the Council, the Financial Statements of Highland Fresh Mussels Ltd for the year ended 31 March 2009.
The meeting ended at 1.30 p.m.