• Agenda

Minutes of Meeting of the Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross Planning Applications and Review Committee held in the Duthac Centre, Shandwick Street, Tain on Tuesday 1 July 2008 at 10.30am.

Present

Mr D Mackay, Mr W Fernie, Mr G Smith, Mr R Coghill, Mr J McGillivray, Mr G Farlow, Lady M Thurso, Mr M Rattray, Mr R Durham, Mr A Torrance

Non Members Present

Mr A Rhind

Officials in attendance:

Mr A Todd, Area Planning and Building Standards Manager
Mr C Stewart, Roads and Community Works Manager
Mrs F Sinclair, Area Solicitor
Mr K McCorquodale, Principal Planner, HQ
Mr B Robertson, Principal Planner
Miss A Macrae, Administrator

Mr D Mackay in the Chair

1. Apologies for Absence and Declarations of Interest

Apologies for absence were intimated on behalf of Mr R Rowantree, Mr W Ross and Mrs C Wilson.

Mr R Durham declared a non financial interest in item 5 below, and confirmed he would take no part in the determination of the application.

Mr M Rattray declared an interest in item 3 below as a Director of the Beinn Tharsuinn Windfarm Community Ltd and confirmed that he would take no part in the determination of the application.

2. Minutes of Meeting of 13 May 2008

The Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 13 May 2008, copies of which had been circulated with the agenda, were approved.

Prior to consideration of the undernoted planning applications, Mr R Durham referred to the application 08/00038/OUTRC by Tesco Stores Ltd and advised that he and the two other local members were of the view that it was important for the Committee to view the site before the application was determined.  Therefore he suggested that Members take the opportunity to visit the site immediately after lunch with the application being considered thereafter.

The Committee so agreed.

3. Erection of a Windturbine Development Comprising Two 2.3MW Wind Turbines (99.5 Metres to Blade Tip), Access Track with Service Areas, Underground Cabling and Sub Station and Borrow Pit Adjacent to Beinn Tharsuinn Windfarm, Edderton for RockbySea and Midfearn Renewables Ltd (07/00026/FULSU)

There had been circulated Report No. PLC-24-08 by the Area Planning and Building Standards Manager recommending approval of the application 07/00026/FULSU for the erection of a wind turbine development comprising two 2.3MW wind turbines, 99.5 metres to blade tip, access track with service areas, underground cabling and substation and borrow pit adjacent to Beinn Tharsuinn Windfarm, Edderton for RockbySea and Midfearn Renewables Ltd.

The Chairman agreed that the application would proceed under the Hearings Procedure.

The Area Planning and Building Standards Manager summarised the application, the consultations carried out and the representations received. 

The Committee noted that representatives of the applicants were present and that none of the parties who had objected to the application were in attendance. 

The Planning Manager advised that one of the objectors, Mr A Chamier, Achandunie House, Ardross, had intimated that he did not wish to be heard provided assurances relating to the following matters were given.  The matters in question were confirmation of the situation regarding the integrity of the drains which run under the public road adjacent to the objector’s property after the transportation of the turbines is completed, and confirmation that the transporters carrying the turbines would be able to negotiate the bend at Achandunie House on the C4 public road from Ardross to Alness.  The Area Planning and Building Standards Manager indicated that the applicants’ representative had confirmed that a report on the condition of the drains would be furnished to Mr Chamier as he had requested.

Dr H F Christensen, on behalf of the applicants, commended the officials for the report which had been presented to the Committee and advised that the development would make use of existing spare capacity in the grid connection without having to change the existing infrastructure.  The development would create jobs and deliver additional community benefit for the community.  He said that the turbines had been placed on the lower levels of the hills to minimise their visibility, referring to their impact viewed from different locations.

Responding to a question, Dr Christensen advised that the risk of peat slide associated with the turbines being located near to a gully was low, and confirmed that the conditions attached to any permission would require the applicants to undertake further analysis of the associated risks.  The Area Planning and Building Standards Manager advised that the applicants had carried out a Stage 1 Peat Stability Assessment, and that a more detailed Stage 2 assessment would be required as a condition of permission. 

The Chairman invited the community council representatives present to address the meeting.

Mr R Ashby, Edderton Community Council, observed that while supporting the application the Community Council were concerned at the prospect of heavy traffic accessing the site via the public road between the Struie and Edderton and suggested that a condition be imposed restricting the use of this route.

Mr J Edmundson, Ardross Community Council, stated that while generally supportive of the applications the Community Council was concerned about the cumulative impact of the Beinn Tharsuinn development together with the Novar development, and any future extensions.  Access problems had been experienced with the existing Beinn Tharsuinn wind farm development, with public access being denied due to locked gates, and therefore any permission should provide for continuing public access.    Further concerns related to the impact of the transportation of heavy loads on the drainage system on the C4 road.  He also indicated that assurances should be sought from the developer regarding the timings of these loads, to avoid specific periods, and particularly to avoid disrupting the school bus service.  He suggested that a test run should be undertaken on the bend at Achandunie on the C4 public road.  He said that any proposal for permanent lighting on the hill should be subject to consultation with the local community, and that this should also apply to the conditions to be attached to any permission.  

The Area Planning and Building Standards Manager advised that Condition 25 recommended in the report addressed the issue of the timings of abnormal loads to avoid disruption to school bus services.  Condition 9 detailed in the report also dealt with the issue of permanent lighting, although he said that no approach had been received by the developer in this regard. He said that the question of restricting the transportation of heavy loads via the B1976 to Edderton road could be addressed by condition.

The applicants confirmed they had no response to the points raised.

In accordance with the procedure, the Chairman declared the Hearing to be at an end and sought confirmation that (i) there were no further parties wishing to speak, and (ii) the parties were satisfied with the way the Hearing had been conducted.  There were no members of the public wishing to speak and the applicants’ representative and the community council representatives confirmed that they were satisfied with the way in which the Hearing had been conducted. 

The Area Planning and Building Standards Manager summarised the application advising that there would be no significant detrimental impact on the environment arising from the development, stating that the conditions attached to any permission would address the concerns raised by the consultees and would mitigate the effects on the environment.  The development would make use of the spare capacity on the grid, and an additional condition could be imposed restricting the use of the B1976 to Edderton road, and that Condition 23 could be amended to require the developer to conduct a trial run in relation to the transportation of heavy loads to demonstrate that the bends could be negotiated. He therefore recommended approval of the application subject to conditions and prior conclusion of a Section 75 Agreement to cover reinstatement and a wear and tear agreement under the Roads (Scotland) Act, noting that if Members were minded to approve the application it would require to be notified to Scottish Ministers given that the proposal involves an Environmental Impact Assessment.

Members proceeded to debate the application, and the following points were made;

• While support was expressed for the application, the concerns of the objectors in relation to the potential cumulative impact were acknowledged
• The transportation of abnormal loads by the proposed route should be subject to a trial run to ensure loads can negotiate the road at Achandunie.
• Concern that the original application for the main wind farm had been reduced by the relevant Planning Committee from 20 to 17 turbines, and therefore this application would increase the number of turbines nearer to that originally proposed, referring also to the cumulative impact of a further two turbines
• The number of wind turbines approved as part of the main development had been reduced on the grounds of their visual impact.  The turbines which form part of this application would be constructed in different locations, with limited visual impact

The Committee agreed that following conclusion of an appropriate legal agreement covering reinstatement of the site and a wear and tear agreement under the Roads (Scotland) Act, the application be granted subject to: (i) the conditions detailed in the report, and (ii) additional conditions requiring the applicant to carry out a trial run on the delivery of an abnormal load along the C4 public road, and restricting the transportation of  abnormal loads on the B9176 to Edderton road.

4. Erection of Two Houses and Associated Services on Land at Nigg Ferry Hotel, Nigg for Norman F Kimber (06/00057/OUTRC)

There had been circulated Report No. PLC-28-08  by the Area Planning and Building Standards Manager recommending refusal of the application 06/00057/OUTRC for the erection of two houses and associated services on land at Nigg Ferry Hotel, Nigg for Norman F Kimber.

The Area Solicitor pointed out that Mr A Rhind had requested and been granted a local member vote in relation to this item of business.

The Area Planning and Building Standards Manager outlined the background to the site, indicating that a three house application had been refused by the Ross and Cromarty Planning Committee in 2005, on the basis that it was contrary to the Local Plan, due to the potential of a conflict of uses.  The recently adopted Ross and Cromarty East Local Plan presumed against development of housing and other uses incompatible with the industrial site at Nigg, and proposals which would prejudice the long term potential for a petrochemical development in the area.  He advised that approval would represent a significant departure from policy.

The local Members, Mr R Durham and Mr A Torrance expressed the view that the application was premature, and that once the overall development plan for Nigg, currently under preparation, had been completed and redevelopment commenced, the Committee would be better placed to consider development at the Nigg Ferry Hotel site.

A contrary view was expressed by the local Member, Mr A Rhind disagreeing that the application site was in close proximity to the Nigg Yard, the bulk of the yard lying away from the site.   He suggested that the site was an excellent location for houses, and the development would not be detrimental to the development and future expansion of the Nigg Yard, noting that the Hotel had been situated in this location for a considerable period of time.

Following further discussion the Committee agreed to refuse the application for the reasons detailed in the report. 

5. Erection of House, in Outline, on Land to East of Torvaig, Lamington, Tain for Brian Logue (06/00959/OUTRC)

There had been circulated Report No.PLC-25-08 by the Area Planning and Building Standards Manager recommending refusal of the application 06/00959/OUTRC for the erection of a house, in outline, on land to the east of Torvaig, Lamington, Tain for Brian Logue.

The Area Solicitor pointed out that Mr A Rhind had requested and been granted a local member vote in relation to this item of business.

Mr R Durham having declared a non financial interest in this item, left the meeting during the determination of this application.

The Chairman agreed that the application would proceed under the Hearings Procedure.

The Area Planning and Building Standards Manager summarised the application, the consultations carried out and the representations received, observing that the development does not accord with the existing pattern of development in this area.  He advised that part of the development site lies outwith the settlement boundary as set out in the Ross and Cromarty East Local Plan, and therefore there was a strong presumption against development over that part of the site. 

The Committee noted that the applicant was present, as were the two objectors to the application.  All parties confirmed that they understood the hearings procedure.

Mr B Logue, the applicant, explained that while he acknowledged the Local Plan position, Policy H3 within the Structure Plan stated that settlement boundaries were provided as a guideline, and were not intended to be definitive.  The Local Plan divided the application site, and the position of the house on the site had been chosen to avoid overhead power lines.  However he would be agreeable to the house being moved back on the site and within the settlement boundary if the Committee so desired.  He explained that the current proposal resulted in the proposed house being less conspicuous from the road and gave greater flexibility in terms of the access and visibility splays that could be achieved.  Currently there was no development on the site and provision of a further house would be advantageous to the area.

Responding to a question, the applicant confirmed that he would be willing to arrange for the existing power lines at the site to go underground , and to alter the siting of the house.

The Chairman noted that there were no community council representatives present and invited the objectors to state their case.

Mr A Currie referred to the neighbouring properties, including his own property, adjacent to the development, advising that these properties had never been in crofting tenure.  He made a number of points in support of his objection as follows:

• the application site formed part of one of the best fields in the area which could sustain a viable croft, explaining that it was once well cultivated, and further that a neighbour had applied to build a new croft house which would enable the croft to be brought back into active use. 
• notification had been received of planning applications for a further three houses for the remainder of the field to the west of Torvaig. The cumulative impact of such development would be to take excellent croft land out of tenure at a time when there is a great demand for crofts in the area. A large field to the west of Evelix had also been sold, and therefore there may be further applications for houses in the area.
• approval of the application could lead to further croft land being lost to the area, with at the same time the land that is not part of the settlement development area becoming overgrown and neglected.  Given the current demand for crofts and the fact the area was a crofting community, the application should be refused to prevent any further loss of croft land.
• he expressed concern about drainage from a septic tank given ground conditions in the area, and loss of the panoramic vistas to the south for which the area was well known.

Responding to a number of questions from Members, Mr Currie advised that it was his understanding that the croft would require to be decrofted to allow for the construction of the house, and that there had been no objections from the local grazings committee as it was currently in abeyance. 

The applicant responded to the various points raised advising that he had no intention of decrofting the land meantime.

In accordance with the procedure, the Chairman declared the Hearing to be at an end and sought confirmation that (i) there were no further parties wishing to speak, and (ii) the parties were satisfied with the way the Hearing had been conducted.  There were no members of the public wishing to speak and the applicant and the objectors confirmed that they were satisfied with the way in which the Hearing had been conducted. 

The Area Planning and Building Standards Manager summarised the application and indicated that the tight linear settlement boundary as set out in the Local Plan was designed to reflect the general character and pattern of development in the area, there being a strong presumption against development within the boundary.  The applicant had given an indication that he was prepared to place the power lines underground, in which case it would be possible to relocate the house within the settlement boundary.  Percolation tests for the site had been satisfactory, removing concerns about drainage, and it was for Members to consider what weight to give to the crofting issues raised.  He concluded by stating that the application in its current form was not acceptable in terms of the relevant policies.

The Committee proceeded to debate the application during which the following points were raised:

• In planning terms it would be preferable to have the house sited further down the slope, on the basis that the house would be less visible, and it would protect against ribbon development
  Crofting was not financially viable as had been claimed by the objector, evidenced by the fact the croft had been neglected for a period of time.
• Flexibility should be retained in relation to the settlement boundary, in terms of the policy.  The siting of houses further back from the boundary line would add character to the area.  
• The Committee had no option in terms of the policy but to refuse the application as submitted.  Thereafter the applicant would have the opportunity to come back to the Planning Authority with a new application.
• Members should take account of the fact that once good agricultural land is taken out of agricultural use it is lost for that purpose indefinitely.
• The Ross and Cromarty East Local Plan had only recently been adopted following community consultation and it should be supported, rather than the Committee approving developments contrary to its provisions.

Following further discussion Mr A Rhind seconded by Mr W Fernie proposed the motion that the application be deferred to allow further discussions to be held with the applicant regarding the siting of the house, on the basis that if the matter could be resolved satisfactorily, it be delegated to the Area Planning and Building Standards Manager in consultation with the local Members to approve the application, but in the event that no agreement could be reached then the matter be referred back to the Committee.

Mr G Farlow seconded by Mr A Torrance proposed as an amendment that the application be refused for the reasons detailed in the report, as had been recommended by the Area Planning and Building Standards Manager.

There being no further amendments votes were cast by roll call as follows;

For the motion: Mr D Mackay, Mr W Fernie, Mr A Rhind

For the amendment: Mr G Farlow, Lady M Thurso, Mr G Smith, Mr R Coghill, Mr J McGillivray, Mr M Rattray, and Mr A Torrance.

Accordingly the amendment by Mr G Farlow was carried by seven votes to three, and became the decision of the Committee.

6. Erection of an Additional 10 Chalets, Improvement of Access Track at Heatherwood Chalet Park, Dornoch for Heatherwood Park (08/00092/FULSU)

There had been circulated Report No.PLC-29-08 by the Area Planning and Building Standards Manager recommending approval of the application 08/00092/FULSU for the erection of an additional ten chalets, improvement of access track at Heatherwood Chalet Park, Dornoch for Heatherwood Park.

The local Member, Mr J McGillivray, expressed the view that while there was a lack of tourist accommodation in the area, an additional ten units represented too dense a development, and would have a detrimental and significant impact on amenity.  He suggested that the number of units be reduced to eight.  Furthermore he suggested that the edge of the site did not benefit from screening and two chalets would be visible, impacting on the overall appearance of the Chalet Park.  He expressed concern about light pollution and suggested that there should be a condition that there be no street lighting associated with the proposal.  He also referred to the narrow section of single track road adjacent to the site and requested that the boundary fence be moved back and the trees trimmed to improve this section of the Embo to Dornoch road. 

Further comments from Members related to the fact that the density proposed was not inappropriate for a holiday development of this nature, and whether planning gain could be used to improve the road.

The Area Roads and Community Works Manager explained that the developer would be providing an additional passing place at a cost of between five and ten thousand pounds.   He acknowledged that the road required to be upgraded, and that until such time as it could be included in the Capital Plan he would explore the possibility of moving the fence back from the road

The Principal Planner suggested that the trimming of the trees be investigated as part of the overall tree plan to be agreed with the developer.

Following further discussion the Committee agreed to grant the application subject to the conditions detailed in the report, and subject to an additional condition requiring the trimming of the trees along the section of the road adjacent to the site be considered as part of the tree plan for the development. It was further agreed that TEC Services investigate the potential for the fencing bordering the road to the moved further back from the road.

At this point the meeting adjourned for lunch and resumed at 1.30pm. 

Erection of a Retail Store with Associated Petrol Station, Car Parking and Access, in Outline, at Shore Road, Tain for Tesco Stores Ltd (08/00038/OUTRC)

The meeting resumed with an inspection of the site and surrounding road network in relation to application 08/00038/OUTRC for the erection of a retail store with associated petrol filling station, car parking and access at Shore Road, Tain for Tesco Stores Ltd.   Members present at the site inspection were;

Mr D Mackay, Mr G Farlow, Lady M Thurso, Mr W Fernie, Mr G Smith, Mr R Coghill, Mr J McGillivray, Mr M Rattray, Mr R Durham, Mr A Torrance and Mr A Rhind.

Following the site inspection the meeting reconvened at the Duthac Centre, Tain at 2.20pm, where the Members present were:

Mr D Mackay, Mr G Farlow, Lady M Thurso, Mr W Fernie, Mr G Smith, Mr R Coghill, Mr J McGillivray, Mr M Rattray, Mr R Durham, Mr A Torrance and Mr A Rhind.

7. Erection of 66 Houses and Flats at Morangie Road, Tain for Robertson Homes Ltd (07/01267/FULRC)

There had been circulated Report No. PLC-26-08 by the Area Planning and Building Standards Manager recommending approval of the application 07/01267/FULRC for the erection of 66 houses and flats at Morangie Road, Tain for Robertson Homes Ltd.

The Area Solicitor pointed out that Mr A Rhind had requested and been granted a local member vote in relation to this item of business.

Mr A Rhind declared a non-financial interest on the grounds that he is a member of Tain Community Council which had made representations in relation to this application.  Mr Rhind explained to the Committee that he takes no part in the discussion of planning matters at Community Council meetings and therefore intended to take part in the determination of the application.

The Principal Planner, HQ provided a summary of the application outlining the proposals for the site, which also incorporated proposals for landscaping, open space provision, a sustainable drainage system, underground LPG gas tanks the formation of a roundabout to serve as a permanent access to Lidl Store and the land to the north of Morangie Road, and the retention of the stone wall along the new alignment of the road.  He outlined the consultations received in relation to the application, and advised that while the site was allocated in the recently adopted Ross and Cromarty East Local Plan for housing it was intended for lower density housing i.e. 15 – 20 houses. However he did not consider this to be a significant departure from policy, and confirmed that the development will deliver 16 affordable units. A contribution of £400 per house would also be sought from the developer towards the provision of transport links in Tain.

The local Member, Mr A Rhind observed that this was a key site in Tain, and that while he had doubts over whether 66 houses was appropriate for this site, there had to be flexibility within the Local Plan, and he recognised that the developer had to ensure the development was sustainable in terms of the cost of servicing etc.  He was satisfied that the objectors’ concerns had been addressed, noting that although the report had indicated that Tain Community Council had not responded to the consultation, they had written in response.  The screening and future maintenance of the site was vital and the conditions attached to any permission must be tight in this regard, with the developer paying the Council for maintenance.  The landscaping must be of high quality, and a reassurance given that the SuDS pond would be fenced off in the interests of safety.  He requested that pavements be installed both sides of the A9 for safety reasons.  Depending on the size of the roundabout, landscaping measures for the central area should be considered. He questioned the requirement that the developer provide affordable housing and then also be asked to make a contribution of £400 per house, which inevitably will be reflected in the house prices. 

The Principal Planner, HQ reported that TEC Services had advised that no pedestrian links onto the trunk road be provided, but that all other public roads should have footpaths. The roundabout will be substantial and therefore proposals for landscaping would have to be agreed.

The local Member, Mr A Torrance, suggested that the density of the development, which he calculated as being six houses per acre, was acceptable, and suggested that the proposed width of the screening be increased, and care taken over the type of planting.  The depth of the buffer zone near the SudS area should be increased.  He also recommended that a condition be added that the roundabout, roads and stone walling should be completed prior to the commencement of the development to assist with free access in and out of the town during the construction period.

Further comments from Members related to the fact that the Council’s affordable housing policy was effectively increasing the density of developments beyond that which was comfortable or appropriate for a town the size of Tain, and prime sites of this type.  The amenity area between the houses and the bypass as proposed was threadbare and required to be strengthened.

The local Member, Mr R Durham concurred with the view that the conditions relating to amenity be strengthened, and he also requested clarification in relation to Condition 3 regarding the natural stone walls along Morangie Road, and in relation to the type of roundabout to be provided, expressing the view that something similar to that located close to the Morrison’s store in Alness would be suitable.

The Principal Planner, HQ responded to the points raised regarding the length of the stone walls to be constructed on Morangie Road, and the Area Roads and Community Works Manager responded that the roundabout would be more substantial than that provided at Alness, and that the detail of any landscaping would form part of the road construction consent.

Further discussion followed where the following points were raised:

• It was reported that a substantial amount of trees had been cut on the other side of the by pass and therefore care should be taken with the level of planting on the side adjacent to the development
• The possibility of a maintenance free roundabout being constructed should be investigated
• The screening from the bypass should be by way of good quality single trees
• The roundabout would be located at the entrance to Tain and therefore it had to be properly maintained
• Whether planning gain could be utilised to improve what was a prime entrance to the community
• People currently walked to the stores on Morangie Road, and therefore footpaths should be provided in the interests of safety
• Traffic problems could arise at the junction with the type of roundabout proposed.  The type of roundabout located in Alness allows heavy traffic to pass over it, if necessary
• To allow for the existing road network to operate efficiently and effectively during the development, the roundabout and associated works should be completed before construction commences

The Area Roads and Community Works Manager advised that a balance had to be struck in relation to the size and design of the roundabout and advised that this would be undertaken as these matters would be considered at the road construction consent stage, and confirmed that the design would be carried out with Members’ comments in mind. 

Following further discussion the Committee agreed to grant the application, subject to (i) the conditions detailed in the report, on the basis that Condition 8 be amended to provide for the roads infrastructure and road construction consent to be delivered as early as possible and in the first phase of the development (ii) further consultation with the local Members in relation to the detail of the final design of the roundabout at Morangie Road, and (iii) the conditions relating to the nature of the screening, proposals for the amenity area and landscaping and future maintenance being reinforced, in line with Members comments.   

8. Erection of a Retail Store with Associated Petrol Station, Car Parking and Access, in Outline, at Shore Road, Tain for Tesco Stores Ltd (08/00038/OUTRC)

The Area Solicitor pointed out that Mr A Rhind had requested and been granted a local member vote in relation to this item of business.

There had been circulated Report No. PLC-27-08 by the Area Planning and Building Standards Manager recommending approval of the application 08/00038/OUTRC by Tesco Stores Ltd for the erection of a retail store with associated petrol station, car parking and access, in outline, at Shore Road, Tain.

Mr McCorquodale introduced the application and advised that following the withdrawal of the Robertson Group’s application for a supermarket at Morangie Road, Tain, the objections to the application submitted by Fraser Maunsell on behalf of Robertson Property Ltd had also been withdrawn.  He also referred to two late representations which had been received.  He outlined the various consultations carried out and the determining issues in relation to the application, advising that if Members were minded to approve the application the Scottish Government had requested that it be notified in the light of the possible implications for retail proposals in Tain currently before Scottish Ministers for their determination.

During discussion a number of matters were raised by Members;

• The assessment undertaken by Halcrow Group Ltd which concluded that Tain could support another supermarket in addition to Asda, was flawed, and if the application was approved then one of the stores in Tain would be a casualty as a consequence.
• The site was not in the town centre, as claimed, and the majority of people who use the store would travel by car.  The pedestrian links from the town centre are steep and not suitable for people carrying shopping.
• There had been no community consultation regarding the proposal to significantly alter the traffic management in Tain.  Approval of the application would effectively be granting permission to have the traffic management in Tain radically altered, and expressing concern that the community should not be inconvenienced for the sake of the development.
• The traffic system works well at the moment, and this development would significantly increase the amount of traffic coming into the area, to the inconvenience of local people.
• Tesco had been invited to locate in Tain in the 1990s, and had not taken up this offer.  The motivation for the current application, at a time when there had been two separate applications for supermarkets, was questioned.
• The view was expressed that Tain had the capacity to accommodate the development, based on a 30 minute drive time catchment area and therefore the conclusions of the Halcrow Group Ltd study were supported.
• The site provided a suitable location for a supermarket.
• The report clearly advised that if the application was refused then the developer would appeal and the Scottish Government would call in the application to a Public Local Inquiry.
• The advice of the officials that it is feasible to build here should be accepted, and the potential loss of parking for existing business is not a reason to reject the proposal.
• The advice from TEC Services that the Council standards for car parking which will be applied for a similar out of town development, would not apply to this development, should not be accepted.
• The proposed changes to the road network are unacceptable, and will cause the character of Tain to change.
• The topography of the area dictates that this development is in the wrong place, and it will not link readily with the town centre. 
• Accessibility issues for the elderly were also a concern.
• The town will stagnate if development of this nature is not encouraged.
• Examples in other areas suggest that people will use pedestrian access and walk to supermarkets if the store provides what the customer wants.
• The money spent locally at these stores will be repatriated from Inverness, and additional jobs will be created.
• The development will be unlikely to result in the backing up of traffic, and indeed will cause the traffic to slow down.
• The people of Tain desire more choice, and the development will attract people into the town.  The challenge would be to find other means of getting people to stay in the town.
• The people of Tain and the surrounding area deserve the opportunity of choice and those businesses who offer the best products and attract customers will survive.
• In planning terms there were no grounds on which to reject this application.

The Committee heard from the Area Roads and Community Works Manager, who explained that it had been appropriate to apply the national guidelines for car parking as this was a town centre application, and not a greenfield site, where the risk of overspill was less.  The index capacity at the junction with the trunk road had been assessed as currently being 20 per cent of the maximum capacity, and further assessment indicated that this would increase to 30 per cent at peak times should the development be approved.  He advised that it was unlikely that traffic would back up to the junction, explaining that the development would generate an additional 200 vehicles per hour at peak times, which would not lead to traffic jams.  The traffic assessment was that access to the development would be entirely via Shore Road and thereafter it would disperse through the town.  He also noted that Shore Road would be widened, with pavements on either side.

Following discussion, Mr R Durham seconded by Mr D Mackay proposed the motion that the application be granted, in line with the recommendation, subject to the conditions detailed in the report, and an additional condition that the Council’s standards of car parking be applied to this outline application, to ensure the good traffic flow in Shore Road and the surrounding road network

Mr A Rhind seconded by Mr A Torrance moved as an amendment that the application be refused due to poor accessibility to the site for all users and the inadequate traffic management scheme proposed to solve this situation.

There being no further amendments votes were cast by roll call as follows;

For the motion: Mr D Mackay, Lady M Thurso, Mr W Fernie, Mr G Smith, Mr R Coghill, Mr R Durham.

For the amendment: Mr G Farlow, Mr J McGillivray, Mr M Rattray, Mr A Torrance and Mr A Rhind.

Accordingly the motion by Mr R Durham was carried by six votes to five, and became the decision of the Committee. 

Thereafter the Committee noted that the application would be notified to the Scottish Government in the light of the possible implications for retail proposals in Tain currently before Scottish Ministers for their determination.

9. Alteration and Extension to Former House to Dwellinghouse.  Installation of Sewage Treatment Plant and Mounded Infiltration System.  Formation of Access onto Unclassified Achavandra Muir Public Road for Mr W Murray (08/00100/OUTSU)

There had been circulated Report No. PLC-30-08 by the Area Planning and Building Standards Manager recommending refusal of the application 08/00100/OUTSU for the alteration and extension of a former house to form a dwellinghouse; installation of sewage treatment plant and mounded infiltration system; and formation of access on to the unclassified Achavandra Muir Public Road for Mr W Murray.

The Principal Planner advised that a statement dated 23 June 2008had been received from the applicant in support of the application, and he read out the full text of the statement to the Committee.  He reported that while the description of the proposal on the application form referred to the alteration and extension to a former house, the accompanying plan referred to the existing steading being retained and to a proposed house site.

Members’ comments related to the fact that the principle of house could be supported if it was based on the old footprint, and the house was a sensible family size, built on and around the site of the existing steading, the fact that the housing in the countryside policy was in urgent need of review, and the question of justifying agricultural need when there had been a house previously located on the site.  Further comments related to the definition of the site in the relevant Council records, problems with the occupiers of some properties been largely absent in some areas. 

Mr J McGillivray seconded by Mr W Fernie moved that the application be granted, on the grounds that Policy allows for the conversion of traditional buildings in the countryside and that in this case the application did not amount to a substantial conversion and alteration, subject to the extent of the conversion and other appropriate conditions being agreed by the Principal Planner in consultation with the local Members.

Mr M Rattray seconded by Lady M Thurso moved as an amendment that the application be refused in the line with the recommendation set out in the report.

There being no further amendments votes were cast by roll call as follows;

For the motion: Mr D Mackay, Mr G Farlow, Mr W Fernie, Mr G Smith, Mr R Coghill, Mr J McGillivray, and Mr A Torrance. 

For the amendment: Lady M Thurso, and Mr M Rattray.

Accordingly the motion by Mr J McGillivray was carried by seven votes to two, and became the decision of the Committee.

10. Erection of a House, Installation of Septic Tank and Soakaway System, in Outline, at Land 60m North East of Tunnag House, Pitmaduthy, Invergordon for Mr N P Morrison (08/00111/OUTRC)

There had been circulated Report No. PLC-31-08 by the Area Planning and Building Standards Manager recommending approval of the application 08/00111/OUTRC for the erection of a house, installation of septic tank and soakaway system, in outline, at land 60m north east of Tunnag House, Pitmaduthy, Invergordon for Mr N P Morrison.

The Committee agreed to grant the application subject to the conditions detailed in the report.

11. Unauthorised Track at Sallachy Estate, Lairg

There had been circulated Report No. PLC-32-08 by the Area Planning and Building Standards Manager concerning an unauthorised access track constructed at Sallachy Estate, Lairg in July 2004 and which lies within the Caithness and Sutherland Peatlands SAC and RAMSAR Site, and within the Grudie Peatlands SSSI.  The report intimates that a retrospective application for planning permission was received on 1 May 2008 and has yet to be determined, and recommends that an Enforcement Notice requiring the reinstatement of the track in accordance with advice from Scottish Natural Heritage, be served to protect the Planning Authority’s position.

The Area Planning and Building Standards Manager by way of update confirmed that the retrospective application for planning permission for the track had now been refused under delegated powers.

The Committee agreed that an enforcement notice requiring the reinstatement of the track, in accordance with the advice received from Scottish Natural Heritage, be served with immediate effect.

12. Scottish Government Directorate for Planning and Environment Appeals

The Committee noted the outcome of the following appeals;

(a) Planning Appeal 07/00383/OUTSU Erection of two houses at Kincardine
     Lodge, Ardgay for Mrs G Hart – Appeal dismissed
(b) Planning Appeal 07/00157/OUTSU 07/00157/OUTSU – Erection of House at Seashore
     Cottage, 209 Lower Talmine, By Lairg for Mr and Mrs Eisenhauer – Appeal
     upheld.

13. Delegated Decisions

The Committee noted that the list of delegated decisions of planning applications was available via The Highland Council Website.

14. Future Meetings

The Committee was asked to note that there were a number of applications in the Caithness area on which it would be expedient for decisions to be reached before the end of the recess period, and it was suggested that a special meeting of the Committee take place in Thurso on 15 July 2008 on the basis that there would be no requirement for a meeting of the Committee on 2 July 2008.

The Committee agreed that a meeting be held on 15 July 2008 in Thurso, the venue to be confirmed.

The meeting concluded at 5.00 pm.