Highland Council Nairn Ward Forum Minutes 26 January 2011

Agenda

Action Note of Nairn Ward Forum held on Wednesday 26th January, 2011 at 7.00 pm in the Chamber, the Court House, Nairn.

Attendees

Provost Laurie Fraser, Nairn Ward, Highland Council (LF)
Councillor Liz MacDonald, Nairn Ward, Highland Council (LM)
Councillor Graham Marsden, Nairn Ward, Highland Council (GM)
Councillor A S Park, Nairn Ward, Convener of Highland Council (SP)
Sheena Baker, Association of Nairn Businesses (SB)
Inspector Willie MacLennan, Northern Constabulary (WM)
William Gilfillan, Corporate Manager, INBS Highland Council (WG)
Louise Clark, Ward Manager, Highland Council (LC)
Iain Fairweather, Visit Nairn Tourist Association (IF)
Brian Stewart, Nairn West Community Council (BS)
Amy Riley, Nairn Youth Forum (AR)
Stuart Davidson, Nairn Youth Forum (SD)
Jimmy Ferguson, Nairn West Community Council (JF)
Graham Vine, Nairn West Community Council (GV)
Iain Bain, Editor, Nairnshire Telegraph
Jeanne Tolmie, Nairn River Community Council (JT)
Tommy Hogg, Nairn River Community Council (TH)
and 39 members of the public

Also in Attendance:-

Apologies:

Apologies for absence were received from Liz Bow, Nairn Community Care Forum, Debbie MacBean (East Nairnshire Community Council), Margaret Robertson (Cawdor & West Nairnshire Community Council), John Mackie, (Nairn Suburban Community Council), Rosemary Young, Chairperson, Nairn West Community Council, Edward Chambers (Council for Voluntary Service Nairn) and Christie Fullerton (Highland Council).

The first item was chaired by William Gilfillan.

William Gilfillan introduced the item on the town centre consultation. The consultation period had been extended to a total period of 18 weeks finishing on 1st February. The workshop on 22nd November had proved useful with lots of ideas coming forward. NICE had put forward proposals along with members of the public. Several more representations had been made since.

1. Nairn Town Centre Consultation (Tim Stott).

TS gave a presentation on comments to date. There was a deadline of the following Tuesday for comments:-

Went over options i.e. mixed residential/retail.
Adverse reaction to housing at previous Ward Forum.
Dimensional options at workshop.
18 written representations.
Height of buildings raised.
Housing should not be primary use.
Perceived haste.
Flats should not get private parking.
Archways not a good way of framing views/views from A96 to opened up area.
Gateway buildings.
Old Community Centre to be demolished.
Toilets to be moved off-site.
Brief to influence Co-op.
No significant loss of car parking but some control of long stay parking.
More parking.
Better signage into town centre.
Bus lay-bys on both sides of A96 - TECS happy with that concept.
Regal Bar demolished and made available for development.
Wider town centre.
Move council offices to Viewfield and transfer museum.
Co-op want to develop both sites – not themselves;
Landscaped space with local feature.
Themed trails.
NICE submitted detailed plan.
Sent to Co-op/Transport Scotland for comments.
Flexible on future uses.
Reduced access to A96.
Landmark building on Regal site.
Enough development value to generate some interest from potential purchasers.
Pizza takeaway (north side of A96) – concern if existing building in use.
Building “block” behind DE showed mixed use but this blocked off fire access and private parking which was a slight concern. Owned by a property development company in Manchester.
Co-op mixing service vehicles on tight bend and traffic. TECS considered it was not a good idea to mix both cars and service vehicles.
An extra set of traffic lights between the new town centre access and Leopold Street may not be an option due to the distance involved.
Library car park entrance - fire appliance access required to Royal Walk.
Co-op junction traffic arrangements - no right hand turn lane.
Suggested way forward:- leaving co-op service arrangements in place, Regal Bar site redeveloped rather than picture house as well; keeping King Street building; petrol station for parking; civic square - could be achieved but not as big as had been suggested; “L” shaped building, flipped round to open up views; traffic light control at Falconer’s Lane junction to get rid of lights at Library Car Park; the NICE scheme would lose 29 spaces and this one 20 spaces - difficult to achieve both aims of parking and civic space perhaps the civic space could include informal parking allowing it to be used for events; moving the “building” at DE to Council’s car park.
TS confirmed they had tried to incorporate ideas from the NICE layout.
TS confirmed “call for sites” letters would be sent out on Monday to Community Councils to get their comments. The whole of Nairnshire would be addressed.
Independent hearing on any objections. The dangers of not having a development brief in place could mean a developer appealing on non-determination after 8 weeks.
TS confirmed there had been an approach from a local company to use King Street building which would bring one building back into productive use.

TS concluded the Council was listening to the community but had to make a decision on the brief. There were risks with waiting and he believed we had to move forward. He would be reporting to the March Planning Committee and the call for sites and consultation would start in May. This would allow us to take the good work already done by the community into the wider development brief.

SP thanked NICE and the community for their efforts to date. Tim Stott and William Gilfillan would be meeting representatives from NICE and the community on 31st January. WG opened the meeting to comments.

JF welcomed what had been brought forward along with the next stage. TS mentioned the Co-op appointed development agent was interested in what was happening and they would like to see the outcome of this and next week’s meetings. They would then make decisions based on those meetings. It was thought the Co-op might sell to a developer who would align with some sort of development to co-exist with their store and the community.
JF liked the suggestion of linking into the future plan but at the same time it recognised the need for practical short/medium term solutions.
TS mentioned the detailed 3-page letter from NICE was very helpful.
Although office type use was a possibility, TS thought the public might not be in agreement. However, filling empty buildings this way in the short term was an option.
The option of roundabouts was discussed but it was thought the cost involved and space available may preclude these.
BS thought it had been a positive discussion, and the better for it. He asked if the Highland Council-wide Development Plan would provide an overall framework for the whole of the town centre? TS replied it would relate to this piece of work (development brief) and the wider town centre with a focus on areas with most change, developer pressure and community interest.
BS thought an overall vision of traffic flows should allow for the former bus station site as well as the town centre. TS confirmed the existing layout left options for the bus station site as well should a developer come forward.
SB thought the proposals improved the look of the area and by improving that, visitors would stop but they still needed parking. She was concerned at the reduced number of parking bays and asked if the new “DE” building was really required? She hoped the important issue of parking would be addressed at the meeting with NICE as businesses needed parking. SP concurred that car parking was essential and we had to watch what we did in that respect.
JT did not agree with all the NICE proposals and hoped other views would be taken into account
It was suggested this meeting should not preclude other ideas from the community with differing views. JF confirmed that NICE was open to anyone from the community.

William Gilfillan thanked the meeting and Tim Stott for their input and handed back to Provost Laurie Fraser to chair the rest of the meeting.

2. Minute of the Previous Meeting

SD asked that the minute record Amy Riley and Rowena Carlton under item 7.5. The Minute of the Previous Meeting held on 24th November 2010 was then APPROVED as a true record.

3. Matters Arising

3.1 Nairn Youth Forum

The Chairman reported that:-

Stuart Davidson had been elected Chairman of Highland Youth Voice; and
Young Quality Scots Awards - Amy Riley, Rowena Carlton and Stuart Davidson had been put forward for the Young Quality Scots Awards. All three had got through to the next round. This recognised the fantastic work they were doing through the Youth Forum, Highland Youth Voice, Scottish Youth Parliament and their community.

The Chairman extended his congratulations and wished the nominees well in the next round of the Young Quality Scots Awards.

4.0 Nairn Developments.

William Gilfillan reported:-

4.1 Town Centre - had been dealt with under the first item.

4.2 Sandown

Planning will be taking forward proposals for a Sandown Development Brief to the ext meeting of the Planning, Europe & Development Committee, on 16th March 2011. These proposals will include an indication of the timescale for this piece of work (likely to be several months from start to finish). The report will also contain some proposals for early and effective community engagement, taking on board the whole range of planning issues which affect the site, including links to adjoining land.

4.2 Sainsbury

Details of the design and layout of the store were approved by the Planning & Development Service in November 2010 under the Council’s scheme of delegation to officers. Improvements to the initial design and layout were secured through the processing of the applications with the Nairn store likely to become a model for other similar sized supermarkets within the Sainsbury portfolio

4.3 Streetscape.

LC reported that the contract was currently in the snagging period. Two items from Phases I and II would follow shortly - two information boards and a projecting clock at Castle Square. LC was due to meet representatives from the Nairn Access Panel, the Association of Nairn Businesses and Visit Nairn Tourist Association to go over content for the information boards.

In reply to a question, LC confirmed that following the gas leak on the High Street, the subsequent pavement repair was temporary and TECS had requested that the pavement be reinstated as existing.

Asked about the road works at Sandown, the Chairman replied he understood some tidying up works were still ongoing.

4.4 Nairn By-Pass.

SP reported that in relation to the A96 study to identify preferred solutions and design work which includes the Nairn By-pass and dualling of the A96 between Nairn and Inverness, Jim Smith (TECS) and Malcolm MacLeod (Planning) attended an update meeting with Transport Scotland on Monday of last week, and work is progressing well on the study.

A follow up meeting, which will involve Sam MacNaughton (TECS), is due to take place on 24th February and Nairn will be on the agenda for that meeting. The findings are still expected in spring 2011 which will define a preferred line for the by-pass, and there will be public consultation on it after that.

5. Nairn Ward Discretionary Budget

LC reported that the Ward Discretionary Budget for 2010-2011 remained at £59,659 and to date 20 projects, amounting to £26,176.93 had been agreed, which had attracted match funding of £129,471.00.

LC added that she would be happy to discuss any potential projects with individuals and groups. She was also looking at replacing the picnic tables by the Links Tea Room and more play equipment for the Leisure Park.

Graham Vine mentioned Nairn West CC’s suggestion that dog signs should be erected on the Links stating where dogs were welcome. LC noted this suggestion had been made and that some funding could be made available from the Community Council’s funds.

6. Community Safety

Inspector Willie MacLennan gave the following update covering the last 7 weeks since 1st December:-

12 domestic incidents, a slight increase from last year. Stressed it was important to report all incidences.
Drink driving – 6 drunk drivers had been charged (36 across the force area). One incident involved a provisional driver and his co- both being over the limit.
Proactive with respect to road traffic offences e.g. use of mobiles - over 65.
High Street arrest involving violent struggle which concluded with an officer off long term with a smashed ankle.
A weapons incident in the street involving a firearm being brandished at youths which was contained and dealt with it. No-one was hurt.
38 drug searches but very little seized on individuals.
Operations - farm watch in rural Nairnshire was mentioned at the last meeting and had now been set up through the Nairnshire Farming Society with the police sending information by text to Society members.

WM then introduced Ann Edwards, Principal Housing Officer with Highland Council, who had been involved in setting up Neighbour Watch schemes and community wardens.

The first step would be to gauge interest. It was arranged that Ann Edwards would attend the Nairn West Community Council meeting on 9th February to discuss a neighbour watch scheme. She also offered to attend other Community Council meetings and she would contact them in due course.

She also mentioned that she dealt with general anti-social behaviour for the Housing Service and the public may not be aware that community wardens were there to promote community safety in the whole community. By working jointly with the community and Police on short term projects, they had achieved quite a lot in Inverness so there may be scope to do something similar in Nairn, if required.

Having received complaints about car parking, particularly in the High Street, WM had applied for funding to employ a seasonal traffic warden and he was hopeful that an advertisement would appear in the Nairnshire Telegraph over the next few weeks.
Youth crime. SD asked about under age drinking. WM had not mentioned this as it was virtually non-existent at the moment but Operation Roundup with Youth Action Teams and Police on joint patrols were still ongoing. He also advised that the bottle marking scheme had been successful with two reports having gone to the Procurator Fiscal. The scheme did not run all year as short and sharp campaigns seemed to work better.

7.0 Open Question and Answer Session

Questions submitted by Graham Vine, Nairn West Community Council, on the Arms Length Organisation were circulated at the meeting.

7.1 Q. How will the Arms Length Organisation be accountable to the community? (Graham Vine, Nairn West Community Council).

A. The ALO will be accountable through a number of different mechanisms.

The Council will own and fund the company.
The delivery of services will be governed by a contract known as a Service Delivery Contract (SDC) and there will be a client officer responsible for monitoring and managing the contract.
The Council will maintain responsibility for setting service levels, deciding which buildings to operate etc. Issues relating to the services which the ALO delivers can be brought by the public to: the ALO directly; to Councillors who would be able to raise these with the ALO direct (similar to the current setup); or with the Council’s client officer post.
The Board of the new organisation will have four Councillors on it, together with eight members of the public, drawn from a geographical spread across the Highlands. Clearly, it would be in the Nairn area’s interest to encourage interested people from Nairn to apply to be on the Board.
The set up will also allow for stakeholder groups to be set up around issues close to community’s hearts, e.g. the swimming pool or library which can then feed into the Board of the new organisation. It is also within the job remits of staff to consult with the public and service users and this is currently done in varying ways from user groups and forums to questionnaires, managers speaking with customers or service users, etc. This will continue as normal.

7.2 Q. Will there be public consultation? (Graham Vine, Nairn West Community Council).

A. There has been consultation on whether to do this as part of the Council’s budget consultation. The public reaction to the consultation was broadly in favour of this kind of change, if it were to minimise cuts in front-line service delivery – which is the intention. Beyond that, in the approach to the change, staff are happy to attend community council and other meetings as requested [for example, Ian Murray’s attendance in Nairn on the 20th January]. Following the change, stakeholder groups are encouraged to form around issues of local interest [as above] to enable feedback to the new organisation.

7.3 Q. Could Highland Council still in theory sell, say, Nairn Swimming Pool even if it came under the ALO? (Graham Vine, Nairn West Community Council).

A. The Council is able to add to or remove individual elements of its service delivery changes as need and budgets dictate. This would be no different if services are to be delivered through an Arms Length Organisation. If in future, further budget reductions are necessary, the Council would enter into discussions with the ALO about how to make these savings and building closures could be an option.

No decision to proceed had been taken at this stage. The March Education, Culture & Sport Committee meeting would do that – when it examined the Business Case currently being written.

8.0 AOCB

8.1 Sandown.

Sheena Baker raised her concern that the situation at Sandown had put the Common Good into debt and wanted the Council to be mindful of not incurring more.

WG replied that a considerable amount of officer time was not charged to the Common Good and lot of work went on behind the scenes i.e. such as the Ward Manager’s time in managing the day-to-day running which was not charged.

9.0 Date of Next Meeting

The next meeting was scheduled to take place on Wednesday 25th May, 2011 at 7.00 p.m. in the Court House. The meeting closed at 8.26p.m.