• Agenda

Minutes of Meeting of the Planning, Environment and Development Committee held in the Council Chamber, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness, on Wednesday, 14 August 2013, at 10.30 a.m.

Present:

Mr T Prag, Mr G Farlow, Dr D Alston, Mrs H Carmichael, Mr J Crawford, Mr C Fraser, Mr J Gray, Mr M Green, Mr R Greene, Mr D Hendry, Mr R Laird, Mr B Lobban, Mr D MacKay, Mr T MacLennan, Mrs I McCallum, Mr J McGillivray, Mrs M Paterson (substitute), Mr I Renwick, Ms G Ross, Mr R Saxon, Dr A Sinclair, Mr H Wood

Non-Members also present:

Mr B Clark, Mrs M Davidson, Mr D Kerr, Mr C Macaulay, Mrs L MacDonald, Mr G MacKenzie, Mr A MacLeod, Mr G Phillips, Mr J Rosie

Officials in attendance:

Mr S Black, Director of Planning and Development
Mr M MacLeod, Head of Planning and Building Standards
Mr A McCann, Economy and Regeneration Manager
Mr S Dalgarno, Development Plans Manager
Ms S Lunn, Business Support Manager
Ms A Hackett, Principal Projects Officer
Mr A Webster, Regeneration Adviser
Mr B MacKinnon, Employability Team Leader
Mr G Campbell, Building Standards Manager
Ms M Peter, Business Gateway Officer
Mr D Cowie, Principal Planner
Dr S Turnbull, Coastal Planning Officer
Mrs R  Moir, Principal Administrator
Ms L Lee, Committee Administrator

Also in attendance:

Item 4:  Ms C Buxton, Director of Regional Development Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE); Ms A Rutherford, Senior Development Manager, Telecoms, HIE.
Item 9: Ms M Mackintosh, Chief Executive, Highland Opportunity Ltd.
Item 14: Mr D MacLeod, Agricultural Policy Adviser, Rural Analysis Associates.

An asterisk in the margin denotes a recommendation to the Council.  All decisions with no marking in the margin are delegated to the Committee.

Mr T Prag in the Chair

1. Apologies for Absence
Leisgeulan

Apologies for absence were intimated on behalf of Mr D Millar, Mr G Rimell and Mr J Gordon.

2. Declarations of Interest
Foillseachaidhean Com-pàirt

The Committee NOTED the following declarations of interest:

• Item 9 – Mrs H Carmichael, Mr G Farlow  Mr B Lobban, Mr T MacLennan, Mr T Prag, Dr A Sinclair (all non-financial)
• Item 10 – Mr R Laird, Mr A Macleod (both non-financial)
• Item 12 – Mr R Greene (financial)
• Item 14 – Mr J Gray (non-financial)
• Item 17 – Ms G Ross (non-financial)
• Item 19 – Mr G Farlow, Mr D Hendry, Mr T Prag, Ms G Ross, Mr R Saxon (all non-financial)

3. Recess Powers
Cumhachdan Fosaidh

The Committee NOTED that the recess powers granted by the Council at its meeting on 27 June 2013 had not required to be exercised in relation to the business of the Planning, Environment and Development Committee.

4. Presentation by Highlands and Islands Enterprise on Broadband Provision in the Highlands
Taisbeanadh le Iomairt na Gàidhealtachd agus nan Eilean mu Sholar Bann-leathainn sa Ghàidhealtachd

A presentation was given by Ms A Rutherford, Senior Development Manager, Telecoms, Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE), on progress with provision of broadband in the Highlands.  Ms C Buxton, Director of Regional Development, HIE, also attended the meeting.

The presentation described the work undertaken by HIE to extend the 21% fibre broadband coverage in the Highlands, which would have been provided on a purely commercial basis, to 84% (i.e. 207,000 premises) by the end of 2016.  The UK Government had provided an additional £127m which would be combined with £19.4m from British Telecom (BT) to fund the work.  Improved broadband would bring many benefits, including better access to health and well-being, education, travel, home working and e-commerce, and would support complementary initiatives such as mobile phone coverage and demand stimulation.  Without this investment, nationally priced broadband would be unlikely to reach beyond the Moray Firth area. 

To reach 84% coverage, significant improvement to “backhaul” infrastructure, including the installation of over 1,000km of additional cabling (land and sub-sea) would be required.  HIE was working very closely with BT and the relevant public/utility bodies to achieve this.  The size and complexity of the project meant that the planning process was lengthy.  Details of which communities would be included in Phase 1 of the roll-out (to be implemented early in 2014) would be published on BT’s website in October 2013, with quarterly updates thereafter.

Members welcomed the progress being made, and emphasised the importance of broadband provision to the Highlands – it was as essential as any other kind of infrastructure.  Members stressed that they would like to know as soon as possible which communities would receive broadband, but accepted the reasons why it would be October before the information was available.

In response to questions, Members were given an assurance that HIE and BT liaised with utilities companies with a view to aligning works where possible.  HIE and BT were also actively investigating ways to avoid duplication between the BT roll-out and Community Broadband Scotland schemes, the latter being an alternative route through which remote communities could currently access public funding.  Further explanation of the term backhaul was provided, and clarification given that, whereas local fibre sub-networks were in place, these had more limited capacity than backhaul.

Ms Buxton stressed the importance of increasing demand and awareness to encourage new ways of using the infrastructure, as this would help drive forward the provision of broadband.  She also reported that £250m additional funding had recently been made available by the UK Government.  HIE would bid into this to seek to improve coverage beyond the 84% project target.  Some Local Authorities had indicated that they might be willing to provide funding in this regard.

Having thanked Ms Buxton and Ms Rutherford, the Committee NOTED the information given, and that a copy of the presentation would be provided to Members.

5. Revenue Budget – Final Outturn 2012/13 and Monitoring 2013/14
Buidseat Teachd-a-steach – Fìor Shuidheachadh Deireannach 2012/13 agus Sgrùdadh 2012/13

There had been circulated Report No. PED-44-13 (38kb pdf) dated 29 July 2013 by the Director of Planning and Development commenting on the final outturn for the Revenue budget for the year to 31 March 2013, and the revenue monitoring position for the period to 30 June 2013.

The Business Support Manager drew attention to and explained variances within the 2012/13 and 2013/14 budgets, including that planning fee income for the first quarter of 2013/14 was higher than for the equivalent period in 2012/13, even after taking account of the 20% fee increase in April 2013.

In response to questions raised, Officers undertook to provide information to specific Members outwith the meeting.

The Committee NOTED the Planning and Development Revenue Budget outturn statement for 2012/13, being an underspend of £46,000 against a budget of £12m; and AGREED the monitoring report to the end of June 2013, which predicted that the budget would come in on target.

6. Capital Expenditure – Final Outturn 2012/13 and Monitoring 2013/14
Caiteachas Calpa – Fìor Shuidheachadh Deireannach 2012/13 agus Sgrùdadh 2013/14

There had been circulated Report No. PED-45-13 (144kb pdf) dated 6 August 2013 by the Director of Planning and Development outlining the Expenditure and Income to 31 March 2013 for the 2012/13 Capital Programme, and to 30 June 2013 for the 2013/14 Capital Programme.  The report also provided an update on the Vacant and Derelict Land Fund (VDLF) 2012/13 outturn and 2013/14 delivery plan.

In summarising the content of the report, the Principal Projects Officer advised that the 2012/13 underspend of just over £700,000 would be carried forward into the current financial year; and that specific projects within the 10 year capital programme would be brought to the Committee for approval over time.  With reference to the proposal in paragraph 3.4 of the report to contribute £66,000 to the River Ness Arts programme, and its specific reference to the Gathering Place / Viewing platform element of the project, she also clarified that, as the River Ness Arts Programme was under the governance of the City of Inverness Area Committee, it would be open to that Committee to specify the purpose to which the proposed budget allocation from the Inverness City Gateways project would be put.

The Regeneration Adviser spoke to the VDLF section of the report, including that the underspend from 2012/13 would be carried forward to the current financial year, and that approval had now been received from the Scottish Government for this year’s projects.  As only 6 months remained in which to deliver the projects, dialogue was continuing with the Government as to whether the full-spend deadline of 31 March 2014 could be extended.  A report would be brought to the September Committee on the outcome.  As in previous years, it was intended to compile a list of substitute projects that could be implemented should agreed projects not proceed for any reason.  Local Members would be involved in this process, and Members were encouraged to bring potential projects to officers’ attention.  In this regard, Members requested that Viewhill House and the former swimming baths site at Glebe Street, both in Inverness, together with the former mart site near Thurso station, be assessed as potential VDLF projects.

The Committee NOTED the contents of the report, and AGREED:

i.  to allocate £66,000 from the Inverness City Gateways project to the Chief
   Executive’s Service River Ness Arts Capital Programme budget; and
ii. to authorise the Director of Planning and Development, in consultation with
   the Chairman and with the agreement of the Scottish Government, to
   amend the grant sum offered to individual projects within the overall VDLF
   programme budget outwith the Committee cycle and to report back accordingly.

7. Planning Performance Framework and Quarter 1 Performance Review
Frèam Dèanadas Dealbhaidh agus Ath-bhreithneachadh Dèanadais Cairteil 1

There had been circulated Report No. PED-46-13 (507kb pdf) dated 5 August 2013 by the Director of Planning and Development advising Members on the delivery of the Development Management, Building Standards and Development Plan services for the 1st Quarter of 2013/14.  The report also set out the proposed Service Improvement Plan, which would be submitted to the Scottish Government.  One key piece of work for the current year was to speed up the delivery of planning obligations, and approval was sought for action to expedite the conclusion of outstanding legal agreements.  An amended version of Appendix 2 to the report was tabled.

The Head of Planning and Building Standards drew attention to the main points of the report.  Good progress was being made against targets in all areas, and positive feedback had been received from the Scottish Government.  The Service’s annual Service Improvement Plan would be submitted to the Government in September, and would include actions to address areas where improvement was sought, such as in reducing the time to conclude legal agreements with developers, and improved engagement with hard to reach groups, including young people.  Engaging with young people helped promote public interaction in the future, and provided feedback on how well the current plans were meeting the needs of young people.  Engagement with Local Access Panels was also useful and would be further developed.

Members welcomed the report and thanked officers for their hard work.  In response to questions, the Head of Planning and Building Standards explained that the way pressure could be applied to developers to conclude legal agreements timeously was through the potential for planning applications to be otherwise brought back to Committee, or refused through delegated powers.  This practice had already been adopted by other Local Authorities and was supported by the Scottish Government.  He also provided information on the way officer workloads were monitored – work was shared between offices where necessary.  With regard to the enforcement figures, he clarified that the overall number of complaints included those that had been found to be without base in planning terms - only legitimate complaints were taken forward.  No decision had been reached with regard to proposals that poorer performing Authorities receive lower planning fees.  A group including Scottish Government ministers, COSLA and the Heads of Planning Scotland had been set up to consider the best way forward – speed of determining applications was only one factor; other considerations, including geographical distances, had also to be taken into account in assessing an Authority’s performance.

The Committee NOTED the performance updates across the Development Management, Building Standards and Development Plans teams, and the information given; and AGREED:

i.  the Service Improvement Plan for submission to the Scottish Government; and
ii. that procedures to speed up the delivery of legal agreements be
   implemented with immediate effect by writing to applicants setting out a
   four month timescale for conclusion of all outstanding matters.

8. Building Standards Balanced Scorecard 2013/14
Cairt Sgòir Cothromaichte Inbhean Togail 2013/14

There had been circulated Report No. PED-47-13 (388kb pdf) dated 26 July 2013 by the Director of Planning and Development advising that  the Council was required to submit an annual Balanced Scorecard and a suite of new Key Performance Outcomes (KPOs) (9 in total) quarterly to the Scottish Government.  The scorecard for 2013/14 had been attached to the report, and included a Service Improvement Plan for 2013/14.

The Building Standards Manager spoke to the report in full, drawing particular attention to the verification process, the new Key Performance Outcomes, and in-house staff development and training.  As the proforma for recording performance had only recently been received, a report providing a comparison between Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 figures would be brought to a future Committee.

In response to questions, an explanation was given that the concept of a Balanced Scorecard had been adopted from National Health Service practices, which were designed to take factors such as customer satisfaction into account when assessing performance.

The Committee APPROVED the Balanced Scorecard for 2013/14, including the Service Improvement Plan for 2013/14 for submission to the Scottish Government.

9. Business Gateway
Slighe Gnothachais

Mr B Lobban, Mr T MacLennan and Mr T Prag, as Directors of Highland Opportunity Limited, Mrs H Carmichael, as Regional Chairman of the Prince’s Trust Youth Business Scotland, Dr A Sinclair, as Chairman of a group in receipt of Business Gateway advice, and Mr G Farlow, as Chairman of Northwest Highland Geopark, a body in receipt of information from Business Gateway, declared non-financial interests in relation to this item but, having applied the test outlined in Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that their interests did not preclude their involvement in the discussion.

There had been circulated Report No PED-48-13 (34kb pdf) dated 24 July 2013 by the Director of Planning and Development updating Members on Business Gateway performance targets for the first quarter of 2013/14, and the integration of Business Gateway within the wider support activity provided by the Highland Council.

The Business Gateway Officer summarised the main points of the report.  With reference to concerns raised at the May 2013 meeting, she reported that no clear reason had been identified to account for the low number of start-ups in Inverness early in 2013.  The picture had now improved locally, but remained mixed across Scotland.  She also drew attention to recent events bringing the business community and banks together, and to help that was available for small businesses to enter markets further afield and to make the best use of IT.  An application to the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) for Stage 2 funding was in the process of being finalised and approval was sought for match funding of £51k.  Approval was also sought for a £12k grant to provide support to small businesses looking to expand into international commerce.

Members welcomed the report and in particular the increase in start-up activity in Inverness.  In response to questions, the Chief Executive, Highland Opportunity Limited, advised that: at present, nine companies were in the process of moving to pipeline and account management with Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE) - these should be reflected in the next performance report and would bring the figures closer to the target; work was ongoing to encourage larger companies to develop a supply chain of smaller businesses, for example through “Meet the Buyer” events - assistance was also given to groups of small businesses to come together to bid for larger contracts; and the pipeline businesses in question were from across a mix of business areas – the energy sector (renewables and traditional oil and gas) and tourism were picking up, while the food and drink sector was doing very well.

The Committee NOTED:

i.  performance for the 1st Quarter of the operational year 2013/14; and
ii. the Business Gateway core service, its delivery and the wider business
   support provided.

The Committee also AGREED the allocation of £51,000 as match funding for the ERDF bid, and £12,000 as grant to support businesses to internationalise.

10. Employability Services: Deprived Area Fund Review
Seirbheisean Cosnaidh

Mr R Laird, as a Director of both Merkinch Enterprise and the Merkinch Partnership, and Mr A MacLeod, as a Director of Caithness Citizens’ Advice Bureau, declared non-financial interests in this item but, having applied the test outlined in Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that their interests did not preclude their involvement in the discussion.

There had been circulated Report No. PED-49-13 (64kb pdf) dated 29 July 2013 by the Director of Planning and Development containing a review of the operation of the Deprived Area Fund and identifying success as well as issues that needed to be addressed.  It proposed the implementation of a new Priority Area Fund as a successor programme with refreshed purpose and criteria as well as wider geographic benefit.  Operating within the strategic direction set, local delivery of the Priority Area Fund would be delegated to the Area Committees.

In speaking to the report, the Employability Team Leader highlighted a number of the Fund’s past achievements, while suggesting that its future operation would benefit from a degree of refresh, with a view to better alignment with the Council’s Programme, in particular its policies on decentralisation and on tackling poverty and disadvantage.  He cited as specific examples of change: the proposed revised distribution mechanism using the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) in a way that could recognise relative disadvantage within Highland; the delegation of decision-making to Area Committees; and the introduction of three-year funding commitments to improve the stability of positive strategies.  In this context, he expressed the view that the SIMD should be regarded as a guide rather than a strictly regulatory code, thus offering a framework in which the particular needs of remote rural communities could also be more effectively addressed.

During discussion, the proposed changes were broadly welcomed as improving the potential to address cycles of deprivation, and to develop community leadership, self-confidence and capacity building.  It was argued, however, that the name Deprived Area Fund should be retained, as providing greater clarity on the Fund’s purpose and context.  It was also important for clarity that emphasis should remain on the significance for funding eligibility of qualifying as an SIMD datazone.  Reference was made to the need to distinguish between deprivation and poverty and a welcome given to the focus on widening actual participation in the labour market, rather than simply improving employability skills.

Some concern was, however, expressed as to the greater geographical spread proposed and its fit with the SIMD criteria.  It was pointed out that Inverness Merkinch was ranked at 32 in the overall SIMD 2012 rankings, considerably higher than other Highland communities now to be included in the distribution scheme.  Concern was also expressed that, despite funding of this type having been expended over a number of years in Merkinch, little progress had been made in addressing the deprivation there, and a plea was made for fresh thinking in how such funds were used within that area in future, such as a greater emphasis on education and skills issues.  It was also important to recognise and address the impact of the higher level of transient population involved.

Reassurance was sought that local engagement, and the opportunity for Ward Members to contribute local knowledge, would continue to be prioritised.  In response, attention was drawn to the proposed delegation of decision-making to Area Committees, precisely in recognition of the importance of local input.  In response to a further question, it was clarified that currently there were no SIMD datazones in Sutherland.  However, it might be the case that an operational decision by the relevant Area Committees could impact on Sutherland.

After discussion, the Committee NOTED the operation and assessment of the current Deprived Area Fund; AGREED that the statement on Targeting in the draft Strategic Framework, as set out in Appendix 2 to the report, be amended to make it clear that, while allowing for flexibility where appropriate, the focus of Fund allocation should remain on those areas qualifying as SIMD datazones, with all proposals demonstrating clear fit with the criteria, outputs and outcomes for these areas; and APPROVED:

i.  proposals for a revised Deprived Area Fund with the purpose, criteria and
   targeting contained in Appendix 2 to the report, as amended, and with the
   name Deprived Area Fund retained; and
ii. the delegation of the delivery of the Deprived Area Fund to Area
   Committees, also as set out in Appendix 2 to the report.

11. New Start Highland Transitional Funding

In accordance with Standing Order 18, with the consent of the meeting, Item 18 on the agenda was taken at this point.

Members were reminded that, on 15 May 2013, the Committee had approved £29,500 transitional support to New Start Highland, comprising a three month extension (April-June 2013) to the transitional funding of £9,833 per month agreed in financial year 2012/13.  The transitional funding provided had allowed the organisation to continue to develop and to grow its services for homeless people and to provide quality training / work experience for people seeking work.  As an illustration of this, 30 of the clients of the organisation had obtained employment over the first quarter of the current year. 

Members were advised that the organisation was currently finalising an Agreement for Lottery funding, but had indicated that these arrangements had not yet been completed, with a meeting date scheduled for mid-August.  It was likely therefore that Lottery funding would not now be received until October.

Confirmation having been given that the funding requested could be contained within the Employability Service budget, the Committee AGREED to extend the transitional funding of £9,833 per month for a second quarter, July to Sept 2013, to enable the organisation to continue its activities. 

12. National Planning Framework 3 Main Issues Report and Draft Scottish Planning Policy
Frèam Dealbhadh Nàiseanta 3 agus Poileasaidh Dealbhadh Nàiseanta – Freagairt Cho-chomhairle

There had been circulated Report No. PED-50-13 (786kb pdf) dated 26 July 2013 by the Director of Planning and Development informing the Committee of the Council’s response to the Scottish Government’s Main Issues Report for the Third National Planning Framework (NPF3) and Draft Scottish Planning Policy (SPP), which had been submitted by the 30 June deadline; confirming that any additions or amendments to that response proposed by this Committee could be submitted to the Scottish Government before the end of August; and reminding Members that the Committee had held a workshop on 24 June 2013 to consider the consultations.  Members were also reminded that the Committee had responded to previous consultations in November 2012 and January 2013.

The report clarified that NPF3 set the context for development planning in Scotland and provided a framework for the spatial development of Scotland as a whole, setting out the Government’s development priorities over the next 20-30 years, and identifying national developments that supported the development strategy.  SPP was a statement of Scottish Government policy on how nationally important land use planning matters should be addressed across the country, its purpose being to set out national planning policies that reflected Scottish Ministers’ priorities for the development and use of land.  Both NPF3 and SPP would have implications for the preparation of development plans and for the determination of planning applications and appeals.

In speaking to the report, the Development Plans Manager outlined the main elements of each response submitted.  Comments raised during discussion included:

• the response should include reference to the importance of the A95 and A835 trunk roads, in addition to the A9, A82 and A96
• pressure should be maintained for the prioritisation of A9 road improvements
• care should be taken that the significance of Special Landscape Areas was not downgraded; account needed to be taken of the current value of the Highland landscape and its ongoing contribution to economic growth in terms of sustainable development
• whilst the development of district heating schemes was generally seen as more cost-effective in urban areas, it was important to recognise the potential social benefits for rural areas, notwithstanding higher costs, particularly where settlements were remote from mains gas
• the importance of developing town centre strategies should be recognised
• progress should be sought on the suggestion made that an additional Area of Co-ordinated Action be identified covering the North West Coast and incorporating key developments in Highland, Argyll and Bute and Comhairle nan Eilean Siar.

In response to further comments, Members were assured that, while no obvious areas of search in relation to shale gas exploration had been identified in Highland, this was an issue that would receive further consideration.  Attention was also drawn to a correction required at paragraph 8.8 of the submitted NPF3 response, in that the undersea electricity cable from Lewis would come ashore at Dundonnell, rather than Ullapool.

After discussion, the Committee HOMOLOGATED the Council’s response to the Draft Scottish Planning Policy and National Planning Framework 3 Main Issues Report contained in Appendix A to the report, submitted by the due date of 23 July 2013, and AGREED that additional comments raised during discussion also be submitted to the Scottish Government.

The Committee also NOTED that:

i.  a report on the Inner Moray Firth Local Development Plan would be brought
   to the 18 September meeting of the Committee; and
ii. a workshop to consider a strategy for town centre development would be
   held following that meeting.

13. Pentland Firth and Orkney Waters Pilot Marine Spatial Plan – Progress Update and Consultation Response
Plana Pìolait Sgaoileadh Mara a’ Chaoil Arcaich is Uisgeachan Arcaibh – Cunntas Adhartais agus Freagairt Cho-chomhairle

Mr R Greene, as Chair of the North West of Scotland Inshore Fisheries Group (IFG), covering the area adjacent to that under reference in this item, and also as a member of the IFG Chairs group, part of whose role included consideration of marine spatial planning issues with Marine Scotland, declared a financial interest in this item and left the room during discussion on the item.

There had been circulated Report No. PED-51-13 (84kb pdf) dated 26 July 2013 by the Director of Planning and Development updating the Committee on ongoing work with Marine Scotland and Orkney Islands Council to develop marine spatial planning in the north Highlands and in the Pentland Firth specifically.  A Planning Issues and Options Consultation Paper and accompanying Environmental Report had been produced as the next stage in developing a pilot marine spatial plan for the Pentland Firth and Orkney Waters.

The paper set out the cross-cutting themes and sectoral policy options proposed.  At this stage in the process, stakeholder and public input had been secured via well attended workshops and public drop-in sessions held in Orkney and Thurso during July 2013.  Feedback received during these sessions would also help develop the next stage, namely a draft marine spatial plan for the Pentland Firth and Orkney Waters.  Whilst the Council was part of the Working Group developing the Plan, it had also submitted its own response to the Issues and Options consultation, as appended to the report. 

In speaking to the report, the Coastal Planning Officer highlighted Marine Scotland’s lead role in the planning process, whilst reassuring Members that every effort would be made to keep the relevant local authority Committees fully involved early in each stage of the process; flexibility would however be required, as meeting schedules would not always align.

During discussion, Members welcomed the response submitted.  Assurance was given to Members that full weight was being given to Highland Council interests in the various discussion forums, alongside those of Orkney.  It was explained that the core Working Group comprised a representative from each of the Highland Council, Orkney Islands Council and Marine Scotland.  This group could also call on input from a wider advisory group of agencies and technical experts.  It was also confirmed that consultation had taken place with local fishing and harbour interests.  In particular, efforts had been made to follow up with those who had attended the local workshops / drop-in sessions.  The role of the Crown Estate was also highlighted, as was the significance of this project to the necessary diversification of the Caithness and Sutherland economies.

After discussion, the Committee NOTED the publication of the Planning Issues and Options Consultation Paper and Environmental Report as part of the development of the pilot Pentland Firth and Orkney Waters Marine Spatial Plan process; HOMOLOGATED the full response submitted by the due date of 26 July 2013; and AGREED that a report on the development of the Pentland Firth and Orkney Waters Marine Spatial Plan be submitted to the Caithness and Sutherland Area Committee.

14. Scottish Rural Development Programme (SDRP) 2014 – 2020: Stage 1 Initial Consultation
Co-chomhairle Riaghaltas na h-Alba mu Phrògram Leasachadh Dùthchail na h-Alba – Molaidhean Tùsail Ìre 1

There had been circulated Report No. PED-52-13 (87kb pdf) dated 22 July 2013 by the Director of Planning and Development on the Scottish Government’s ‘Stage 1 consultation on Scotland’s Rural Development Programme (SRDP) 2014–2020’, which had been published in May 2013, with responses sought by 30 June.  A Planning, Environment and Development Committee workshop run on 24June had provided Members attending the opportunity to contribute to the draft response before its submission.

In speaking to the report, Mr D MacLeod, Agricultural Policy Adviser, reminded Members that Stage 1 was mainly concerned with the broad principles of the future 2014–2020 Programme and outlined the main features of the submitted Council response.  He reiterated the Council’s support for the marshalling of EU funds within three ‘Scottish’ funds (competitiveness, innovation and jobs; low carbon, resource efficiency and environment; and local development and social inclusion) and recapped those articles that the Council considered should be included as priorities for funding within the 2014–2020 Programme, together with the other key issues raised in the response.

Mr MacLeod indicated that greater clarity was awaited from the Scottish Government as to how they intended to take forward delivery of the Programme.  This would assist the Council to develop its thinking and to formulate its response to the more detailed Stage 2 consultation anticipated in the autumn of 2013.  It might be appropriate to hold a further workshop for Members at that time.

During discussion, Members welcomed the response submitted.  The Council Leader emphasised the importance to the Highland economy of maximising EU funding and the need for flexibility within the Programme delivery framework to ensure that the particular needs of the Highlands could be met.

Having considered the Stage 1 consultation, the Committee HOMOLOGATED the Highland Council response previously submitted on the Council’s behalf by the due date of 30 June 2013; and NOTED that a more detailed Stage 2 consultation was anticipated in the autumn of 2013, when the Committee would have an opportunity to contribute further to the shaping of the 2014-2020 SRDP.

15. Academy Street, Inverness – Resubmission for Townscape Heritage funding
Sràid na h-Acadamaidh, Inbhir Nis – Ath-thagradh airson maoin Dualchais Baile

Mr J Gray, as Chair of the Inverness City Heritage Trust, declared a non-financial interest in this item but, having applied the test outlined in Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that his interest did not preclude his involvement in the discussion.

Members were reminded that the Council had been unsuccessful in its applications to Historic Scotland and the Heritage Lottery Fund for funding for townscape works in Academy Street, Inverness.  The Committee was, however advised that, in light of the positive feedback received, the Council would be resubmitting an application for Heritage Lottery Funding before the end of August 2013.   Work was also ongoing with Inverness City Heritage Trust and Historic Scotland regarding additional partner funding.

The Committee NOTED the position.

16. Highland Economic Forum – Minutes of Meeting of February 2013
Fòram Eaconamach na Gàidhealtachd – Geàrr-chunntas Coinneamh 27 An Gearran 2013

There had been circulated and were NOTED Minutes of Meeting of the Highland Economic Forum held on 27 February 2013 (24kb pdf).

17. Caithness and North Sutherland Regeneration Partnership – Minutes of Meeting of 18 March 2013
Fòram Ath-bheothachaidh Ghallaibh agus Chataibh a Tuath – Geàrr-chunntas

Ms G Ross, as a Board member of the Advisory Board of the Caithness and North Sutherland Regeneration Partnership, declared a non-financial interest in this item but, having applied the test outlined in Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that her interest did not preclude her involvement in the discussion.

There had been circulated and were NOTED minutes of the meeting of the Caithness and North Sutherland Regeneration Forum held on 18 March 2013 (121kb pdf).

18. Minutes
Geàrr-chunntas

There had been circulated and were NOTED Minutes of the Planning Applications Committees (PACs) for:-

i. North PAC, 16 April 2013
ii. South PAC, 23 April, 2013
iii. North PAC, 13 and 21 May, 2013
iv. South PAC, 28 May, 2013

The meeting ended at 3.00 p.m, having adjourned for lunch between 1.05 p.m. and 1.45 p.m.