Agendas, reports and minutes

Minute of Meeting of the South Planning Applications Committee held in the Chamber, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness on Tuesday 19 May 2015 at 10.30 am.

Committee Members Present:

Mr R Balfour (except Items 5.2-9.2), Mr A Baxter, Mr B Clark, Mr J Crawford (except Item 9.2), Mrs M Davidson , Mr A Duffy (except Items 1-6.3), Mr D Fallows, Mr J Ford, Mr L Fraser (Substitute), Mr M Green, Mr R Laird, Mr B Lobban, Mr T MacLennan, Mr F Parr, Mr T Prag, Mrs J Slater, Mr H Wood

Non-Committee Members Present:

Mrs L MacDonald (Item 6.1), Mrs G Sinclair (Items 6.1-9.2), Mr B Thompson (Items 6.1-6.4)

Officials in attendance:

Mr A Todd, Area Planning Manager South
Mr D Mudie, Team Leader
Ms N Drummond, Team Leader
Mrs S Macmillan, Team Leader
Mr K Gibson, Principal Planner
Mr S Hindson, Planner
Mr R Patton, Principal Officer (Land)
Mr M Clough, Senior Engineer, Transport Planning
Mr R Bryan, Senior Technician
Mr S Fraser, Head of Corporate Governance
Ms S Blease, Principal Solicitor (Clerk)
Mr P Adams, Solicitor (Planning)
Mr S Taylor, Administrative Assistant  

Mr D Fallows in the Chair

Preliminaries

The Chairman confirmed that the meeting would be filmed and broadcast over the Internet on the Highland Council website and would be archived and available for viewing for 12 months.

Business

1. Apologies for Absence
Leisgeulan

Apologies were received from Mr J Gray and Mr D Kerr.

2. Declarations of Interest
Foillseachaidhean Com-pàirt

None.

3. Confirmation of Minutes
Dearbhadh a’ Gheàrr-chunntais

There had been circulated for confirmation as a correct record the minute of the Committee meeting held on 1 April 2015 which was APPROVED.

4. Major Applications
Iarrtasan Mòra

There had been circulated Report No PLS/023/15 by the Head of Planning and Building Standards which provided a summary of all cases within the “Major” development category currently with the Planning and Development Service for determination.

In response to questions it was confirmed that:-

• With regard to the development at Delnies, Nairn, it was explained that the applicant had submitted an amendment to the access proposals which had been subject to lengthy consultation and was subsequently removed. The draft Section 75 legal agreement had been sent to the applicant’s solicitors who confirmed that they were happy with the agreement in principle. Confirmation of the agreement was now awaited from Cawdor Maintenance Trust and it was anticipated that this would be received shortly, with a decision likely to be issued within the next few weeks.

The Committee was also advised that the application for seven wind turbines at Carr Ban Wind Farm had been withdrawn.

The Committee NOTED the current position.

5. Major Developments – Pre-application consultation
Leasachaidhean Mòra – Co-chomhairle Ro-iarrtais

5.1
Description: Construction and formation of second 18 hole championship golf course including all access, drainage, earthworks shaping, planting, irrigation systems and infrastructure required. (15/01142/PAN) (PLS/024/15)
Ward: 18 – Culloden and Ardersier
Applicant: Castle Stuart Golf LLP
Site Address: Castle Stuart Golf Links, Dalcross, Inverness

There had been circulated Report No PLS/024/15 by the Area Planning Manager South on the submission of a Proposal of Application Notice (PAN), describing the site and setting out likely relevant policies and potential material planning considerations.

The Committee NOTED the submission of the PAN and highlighted the following material planning considerations they wished brought to the applicant’s attention:-

• it was hoped that the developer would make provision for concessionary fees for local people and for a cycle track, as they had done for the first golf course, and that they would consider establishing a golf club at the new club house
• assessment of the impact on the houses in Petty village was needed
• the developers would need to demonstrate that the access to the church and graveyard would be unaffected
• the potential environmental impacts on the Longman/Castle Stuart Bay Site of Specific Scientific Interest and Special Protection Area of the Inner Moray Firth would require to be addressed

together with the other material considerations identified in the report.

5.2
Description: Extraction of peat on approximately 100 hectares from existing and proposed areas, including use of an existing storage building and vehicle accessed operational area. (15/01214/PAN) (PLS/025/15)
Ward: 20 – Inverness South
Applicant: Brian Macgregor and Sons Ltd
Site Address: Land 970 Metres North East of Gloonan, Daviot, Inverness

There had been circulated Report No PLS/025/15 by the Area Planning Manager South on the submission of a Proposal of Application Notice (PAN), describing the site and setting out likely relevant policies and potential material planning considerations.

The Committee NOTED the submission of the PAN and highlighted no material considerations additional to those identified in the Report.

5.3
Description: Formation of 10 private plots and erection of 16 flats and 30 semi-detached houses. (15/01234/PAN) (PLS/026/15)
Ward: 21 – Badenoch and Strathspey
Applicant: McLeod Building Ltd
Site Address: Land 150m North West of Beachen Court, Grantown on Spey

There had been circulated Report No PLS/026/15 by the Area Planning Manager South on the submission of a Proposal of Application Notice (PAN), describing the site and setting out likely relevant policies and potential material planning considerations.

The Committee NOTED the submission of the PAN and highlighted the following material planning considerations they wished brought to the applicant’s attention:-

• the access to the development required careful consideration

together with the other material considerations identified in the report.

5.4
Description: Residential development of 160 houses (15/01283/PAN) (PLS/027/15)
Ward: 14 - Inverness West
Applicant: The Highland Council
Site Address: Land South of Golf View Terrace, Torvean, Inverness

There had been circulated Report No PLS/027/15 by the Head of Planning and Building Standards on the submission of a Proposal of Application Notice (PAN), describing the site and setting out likely relevant policies and potential material planning considerations.

The Committee NOTED the submission of the PAN and highlighted the following material planning considerations they wished brought to the applicant’s attention:-

• drainage issues, given that surface water and the network of springs in the area already cause problems at the cemetery and housing

together with the other material considerations identified in the report.

5.5
Description: Groundworks associated with proposed new housing & golf course. (15/01286/PAN) (PLS/028/15)
Ward: 14 - Inverness West
Applicant: The Highland Council
Site Address: Land South of Golf View Terrace, Torvean, Inverness

There had been circulated Report No PLS/028/15 by the Head of Planning and Building Standards on the submission of a Proposal of Application Notice (PAN), describing the site and setting out likely relevant policies and potential material planning considerations.

The Committee NOTED the submission of the PAN and highlighted the following material planning considerations they wished brought to the applicant’s attention:-

• drainage issues, given that surface water and the network of springs in the area already cause problems at the cemetery and housing

together with the other material considerations identified in the report.

5.6
Description: Erection of 13 wind turbines, height to tip 125m (Tom nan Clach Wind Farm). (15/01403/PAN) (PLS/029/15)
Ward: 19 - Nairn
Applicant: Nanclach Ltd
Site Address: Tom Nan Clach Wind Farm, Glenferness, Nairn

There had been circulated Report No PLS/029/15 by the Head of Planning and Building Standards on the submission of a Proposal of Application Notice (PAN), describing the site and setting out likely relevant policies and potential material planning considerations.

The Committee NOTED the submission of the PAN and highlighted the following material planning considerations they wished brought to the applicant’s attention:-

• cumulative impact and the effect on the Drynachan, Lochindorb and Dava Moor Special Landscape Area
• given existing problems with the local road network, the traffic management plan must be robust
• visuals enabling comparison of this revised layout with the layout previously consented will be required

together with the other material considerations identified in the report.

5.7
Description: Extend time duration of Tom Nan Clach Wind Farm from 3 to 5 years. (15/01404/PAN) (PLS/030/15)
Ward: 19 - Nairn
Applicant: Nanclach Ltd
Site Address: Tom Nan Clach Wind Farm, Glenferness, Nairn

There had been circulated Report No PLS/030/15 by the Head of Planning and Building Standards on the submission of a Proposal of Application Notice (PAN), describing the site and setting out likely relevant policies and potential material planning considerations.

The Committee NOTED the submission of the PAN and highlighted no material considerations additional to those identified in the Report.

6. Planning Applications to be Determined
Iarrtasan Dealbhaidh rin Dearbhadh

6.1
Applicant: Gael Force Marine (10/04986/FUL and 10/04988/FUL) (PLS/031/15)
Location: Land at Thornbush Quay, Anderson Street, Inverness (Ward 15)
Nature of Development: Erection of 38 Flats (10/04986/FUL) and Formation of Communal Landscaped Area (10/04988/FUL) – Update to Original Reports. 
Recommendation: Grant

There had been circulated Report No PLS/031/15 by the Area Planning Manager South recommending the grant of the application subject to the conditions detailed therein.

Before any presentation of the Report and recommendation took place, the Committee debated whether to defer the application. 

In response to questions, the Committee was advised that:-

• Merkinch Community Council had not been re-consulted since the original consultation four years ago.
• Concerns previously raised by Merkinch Community Council regarding a lack of amenity areas and increased traffic flow were still valid.
• The applications were the same as when they had been deferred at the meeting of the Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey Planning Applications Committee held on 24 May 2011.
• As they were re-submissions of previous applications, they had not been included on the weekly list of new applications presented to community councils.
• It was unlikely that a non-determination appeal would be submitted by the applicant.

During discussion, the general consensus amongst Members was that, due to the change in membership of Merkinch Community Council since the previous consultation four years ago, the applications should be deferred to allow renewed consultation as the current membership of the community council might not share the same views as its predecessor. 

A request was made for the inclusion of an advice note regarding construction hours and noise which had been omitted from the original report.

The Area Planning Manager (South) recommended that the applications also be re-advertised to invite submission of representations by members of the public.

The Committee agreed to DEFER consideration of the applications pending re-consultation with Merkinch Community Council and re-advertisement to invite submission of representations by members of the public.

6.2
Applicant: Marine Harvest (Scotland) Ltd (14/04795/FUL) (PLS/032/15)
Location: Inchmore Fish Farm, Glenmoriston (Ward 13)
Nature of Development: Redevelopment of land based fish hatchery facility - amendment to previous planning permission 13/01237/FUL granted 30 August 2013.
Recommendation: Grant

There had been circulated Report No PLS/032/15 by the Area Planning Manager South recommending the grant of the application subject to the conditions detailed therein.

Mr K Gibson presented the report and recommendation.

In response to questions, the Committee was advised that:-

• The bunding and landscaping between the building and river would provide sufficient screening for the houses directly opposite on the other side of the river.
• The provision of a bus stop at Torgoyle could be included as an additional condition.
• Discussion with Transport Scotland would be required as the bus stop would be on a trunk road.
• Local Members would be consulted during scrutiny of the final plans for the landscaping and bunding.
• Clarification could be sought from the applicant on the colour of finish on the roof of the building.
• The colour of finish on the roof had to be light in order to prevent overheating.
• Local Members could be consulted on the colour of finish on the roof.
• The recommendation contained a condition requiring the applicant to submit the specification of the external finishes of the building for agreement.
• In relation to the location of public art work local members could be consulted on this before condition 10 was discharged.

During discussion Members commented that:-

• The employment opportunities created by the application were welcomed.
• Officers had negotiated a reasonable position with regard to the screening and noise issues highlighted in the public consultation.
• The view taken by officers that there was no requirement for seven day working on site was welcomed.
• Disappointment was expressed at Transport Scotland’s position with regard to road improvements for large developments which did not seek any contribution from the developer to upgrade the road.
• The provision of a bus stop would be welcomed as it was difficult to find a connecting bus to Fort Augustus due to differing bus routes and timetables.
• Talks between the applicant and the local community regarding the potential use of a workers mini-bus were welcomed.
• A request was made for an additional condition in relation to the provision of a bus stop at Torgoyle to be included.
• The reason for using a light colour on the roof in this application was understood and the awareness by officers of the effect this had on buildings in general was welcomed.
• Discussion with the developer regarding the breaking up of the colour of cladding would be welcome.
• The one-way system for delivery lorries was welcomed as it would prevent the beeping sound caused by reversing.
• The quality of the illustrations produced by the applicant was acknowledged and was of great help in terms of visualising the proposed development.

The Committee agreed to GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions recommended in the report and an additional condition, to be drafted by officers in consultation with Mrs M Davidson, requiring the developers to provide a bus stop near to the site entrance.

6.3
Applicant: Mr Calum Boyd (14/04241/FUL) (PLS/033/15)
Location: Land 130M NE of Achnalea, Ardgour (Ward 22)
Nature of Development: Proposed dwelling house.
Recommendation: Grant

There had been circulated Report No PLS/033/15 by the Area Planning Manager South recommending the grant of the application subject to the conditions detailed therein.

Mrs S Macmillan presented the report and recommendation.

In response to questions, the Committee was advised that:-

• The recommendation included a condition requiring a six metre set back from the water course to maintain the feel of continuous woodland.
• A tree survey had been not included within the proposals as a felling licence was already in place and would secure the planting of native trees.
• Submission of full details of the proposed landscaping by the applicant in relation to the immediate site was included as a condition in the recommendation.
• Sunart Community Council’s reason for objecting on the assumption that no new housing would be permitted in Glen Tarbert was possibly based on previous development plans which had since been superseded. 

During discussion Members commented that:-

• The view of the report writer that the amount of native woodland being lost was considered insignificant was contrary to the Council’s forestry officer’s opinion that the proposed development would represent a change of land use which would require the removal of a significant area of existing woodland.
• The loss of a significant area of woodland was contrary to local and national planning policy.
• There was no significant or clearly defined additional public benefit to justify the loss of woodland in approving the development.
• It was unclear why there was a need to accommodate an individual on site to manage this particular woodland.
• The site was listed on the Ancient Woodland Inventory as "other woodlands on the Roy maps" and removal of this woodland would therefore be of low acceptability according to the Council’s Supplementary Guidance on Trees, Woodland and Development.
• The Glen was currently unspoilt and there was concern that the development would be a prominent site in the landscape.
• Tree loss could be mitigated by condition.
• Much of the woodland was coniferous and did not belong to the area.
• Should the application be granted planning permission, conditions around tree planting should be strengthened.

The Chairman, seconded by Mr T Prag, then moved that the application be granted subject to the conditions recommended in the report.

Mr A Baxter, seconded by Mr T MacLennan, then moved as an amendment that the application be refused on the grounds that:-

i. The application was contrary to the Scottish Government’s Control of Woodland Removal Policy, and Policy 52 of the HWLDP, and the Highland Council’s Trees, Woodlands and Development Supplementary Guidance, as:

(a) the applicant had not demonstrated the need to develop this woodland site or a significant and clearly defined additional public benefit to justify the loss of woodland and
(b) the development would have an unacceptable impact on inventoried woodland.

ii. The application was contrary to Policy 36 of the HWLDP and the Housing in the Countryside Supplementary Guidance as its elevated position was not sympathetic to the existing pattern of development in the area.

On a vote being taken, five votes were cast in favour of the motion, nine votes in favour of the amendment, with one abstention as follows:-

Motion

Mr J Crawford, Mr D Fallows, Mr J Ford, Mr F Parr, Mr T Prag

Amendment

Mr A Baxter, Mr B Clark, Mrs M Davidson, Mr M Green, Mr R Laird, Mr B Lobban, Mr T MacLennan, Mrs J Slater, Mr H Wood

Abstention

Mr L Fraser

The motion to REFUSE planning permission for the reasons stated accordingly became the finding of the meeting.

6.4 Applicant: Mr R C Tuxford (15/00453/FUL) (PLS/034/15)
Location: Tomdoun Hotel, Invergarry, PH35 4HS (Ward 12)
Nature of Development: Proposed alterations and change of use from hotel to house.
Recommendation: Grant

There had been circulated Report No PLS/034/15 by the Area Planning Manager South recommending the grant of the application.

Before any presentation of the Report and recommendation took place, the Committee was advised that two late letters of representation had been received and members were given time to peruse these.

Mrs S Macmillan presented the report and recommendation.

In response to questions, it was confirmed that:-

• There was no requirement within Policy 36 of the Highland-wide Local Development Plan to demonstrate marketing in this particular situation because the site was not within a defined fragile area.
• The requirement to demonstrate marketing only applied to sites within fragile areas identified by Highlands and Islands Enterprise.
• The general presumption in favour of development applied subject to criteria in Policy 36 including siting and design and whether it was sympathetic to existing patterns of development in the area.
• If the proposal was judged not to be significantly detrimental in terms of those criteria then the Policy would direct the Committee to grant planning permission.
• Members were being asked to look at the application in relation to Policies 28 and 36 of the Highland-wide Local Development Plan.
• By virtue of the site not being in a fragile area, policy relating to lifeline rural facilities did not apply in this instance.

During discussion Members commented that:-

• The number of objections was highlighted and that for many their concern was the loss of a tourism and community facility.
• The property had been vacant for a number of years and on the market for two years without success.
• Whilst the objectors viewed the hotel as a viable operation, this opinion had been disputed by the sellers.
• The possibility of a community buy-out had been investigated by the objectors and was not pursued as there appeared to be a commercial interest in the site. However, Members and the Community Council were not aware of any proposed buy-out. 
• It would be better to have a bona-fide property rather than a derelict building.
• It was likely that any appeal would be upheld and the Council would be held responsible for costs.
• Disappointment was expressed that the property could not be protected as a lifeline rural facility as it was not within a fragile area defined by Highlands and Islands Enterprise.
• The statement in the report that hotel facilities did not offer the same lifeline facilities as village shops and GP surgeries was disputed.
• The key thing about the hotel was its location and the market would not be able to provide a similar facility in the area.
• The current review of the Highland-wide Local Development Plan provided the ideal opportunity to look at the process of defining fragile communities.
• Community aspirations about buying services and facilities were growing and the opportunity for the community to make use of this facility would be gone should the application gain approval.
• The opportunity to discuss the Highland-wide Local Development Plan would be available to Members at a workshop following the next meeting of the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Committee.

Following discussion, Mr L Fraser indicated that he was minded to move that the application be refused on the grounds that:-

• the market could not replicate the hotel
• the area was fragile, even though it was not defined as fragile within the paperwork terms
• the case had not been fully made by the applicant.

Mr J Crawford indicated that he would support any such motion.

The Principal Solicitor cautioned that in her opinion these were not sustainable or reasonable grounds on which to refuse the application given that they were entirely unsupported by Council policy. 

On considering the Principal Solicitor’s advice, Mr L Fraser agreed not to proceed with his motion.

The Committee agreed to GRANT planning permission without conditions.

6.5
Applicant: O’Brien Properties Ltd (15/00405/FUL) (PLS/035/15)
Location: 71 Glenurquhart Road, Inverness (Ward 14)
Nature of Development: Erection of 8 flats (2 x two storey blocks) with associated access and infrastructure.
Recommendation: Grant 

There had been circulated Report No PLS/035/15 by the Area Planning Manager South recommending the grant of the application subject to the conditions detailed therein.

Ms N Drummond presented the report and recommendation.

In response to questions, the Committee was advised that:-

• The closest building to the perimeter of the site was approximately 22 metres away and was a residential property.
• Whilst the Forestry Officer had not been consulted, the trees currently within the site would have been part of the original garden and had not been managed.
• As the application had been treated as a brown field site there would be an opportunity for replacement planting and landscaping.
• The road markings opposite the site entrance were of a hatched design with dashed lines which whilst discouraging crossing, did not make it illegal to do so.
• The building would be inbetween the ridge line and height of the properties either side of it.

During discussion Members commented that:-

• Concerns raised previously by Ballifeary Community Council and Dalneigh Community Council regarding the lack of provision of a crossing on Glenurquhart Road were highlighted.
• The development of the West Link road could provide an opportunity for transport issues on Glenurquhart Road to be addressed.
• Concerns regarding windows overlooking other properties would be alleviated to an extent by the planting of trees.
• The site had been an eyesore for a number of years and it would be appropriate to go ahead with the development rather than leave it as a derelict site.

The Committee agreed to GRANT planning permission subject to the prior conclusion of a section 75 obligation or other appropriate legal mechanism to secure the delivery of 25% affordable housing and subject to the conditions recommended in the Report, with an additional condition requiring that the existing trees on the site be retained where possible and subject to the advice of the Forestry Officer.

7. Notification to Scottish Ministers
Clàradh Fiosrachaidh do Mhinistearan na h-Alba

7.1
Applicant: Ossian Development Ltd (14/00357/FUL)
Location: Dragons Tooth Golf Course, Ballachulish (Ward 22)
Nature of Development: Siting of 8 camping pods.

The Committee NOTED the Assessment Report and that planning permission was granted for the development on 30 April 2015 following consultation and agreement with Ward Members on conditions.

8. Decisions of Appeals to the Scottish Government Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals
Co-dhùnaidhean Ath-thagraidhean do Bhuidheann-stiùiridh Riaghaltas na h-Alba airson Ath-thagraidhean Dealbhaidh agus Àrainneachd

8.1
Applicant: RWE Innogy UK Limited (13/02441/FUL) (PPA-270-2115)
Location: 6km West of Findhorn Bridge, Glen Kyllachy, by Tomatin (Ward 20)
Nature of Development: Wind farm (50MW) consisting of 20 turbines, 110m maximum height to blade tip, associated infrastructure, access tracks and 3 borrow pits.

During discussion, concern was expressed by Members at the appeals process and decisions taken by Scottish Government Officials with regard to a number of renewable energy applications which had taken a contrasting view to that of the Committee. A request was made for the issue of local decision making and the Scottish Government’s renewable energy policy to be raised with Scottish Government and that the opportunity for Members to discuss their concerns at the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Committee should be explored.

Following discussion, the Committee NOTED that the appeal had been upheld and planning permission granted subject to the conditions set out in the decision notice.

8.2
Applicant: Loch Ness Homes Ltd (13/03694/PIP) (PPA-270-2105)
Location: Land 145M North of Smiddy Bar, Lewiston, Drumnadrochit (Ward 13)
Nature of Development: Mixed use development comprising housing, affordable housing, homes for the elderly, mixed commercial uses, health centre, public open space and associated infrastructure.

During discussion, a request was made that local planners be consulted on their approach to handling similar applications in the future when the application is submitted during the consultation phase of drawing up Local Plans.

A request was also made that all decisions taken by Loch Ness Homes in relation to the construction of the health centre be signed off in time so as to prevent any delays to its scheduled opening in October.

The Committee NOTED that the appeal had been upheld and planning permission granted subject to the conditions set out in the decision notice.

The Committee also NOTED the decision of the Reporter to award expenses to the appellant.

9. Tree Preservation Order
Òrdugh-gleidhidh Chraobhan

9.1
Confirmation of Tree Preservation Order (TPO/127/2015) (PLS-036-15)
Croy Roadside, Croy

Before any presentation of the Report and recommendation took place, a copy of the initial letter of objection received from the primary objectors’ solicitor was circulated and members took time to read this. The Committee was advised that when this letter of objection had been received the objectors were asked to submit a fuller objection to the Tree Preservation Order and this had been appended to the report.

Mr R Patton then presented the report and recommendation and asked the Committee to confirm the Order.

In response to a question, it was advised that if the Committee was minded not to confirm the new TPO 127, the earlier TPO 117 would be revoked and there would be no protection on the trees as per the Order area.

During discussion, Mrs G Sinclair expressed the following concerns:

• That the trees were not worthy of retention
• The procedure for the original Tree Preservation Order was flawed and that the Highland Council had not abided by the legal process for its revocation and replacement in respect that it had not made a separate TPO but had combined the replacement TPO and revocation of the original TPO in one Order.

In response, Mr R Patton and the Principal Solicitor confirmed that the process followed for the replacement Tree Preservation Order and for the revocation of the original Order had been lawful.

Thereafter, the Committee agreed to CONFIRM the Tree Preservation Order as it stood.

9.2 Confirmation of Tree Preservation Order (TPO/124/2014) (PLS-037-15)
Dragon’s Tooth, Ballachulish

Mr R Patton presented the report and asked the Committee to confirm the Order subject to the modification as set out in Section 4.2 of the report.

In response to questions, the Committee was advised that:-

• Officers would cooperate with the owners of the golf course to maintain the quality of trees within the riparian woodland adjacent to the club house and would not seek to be obstructive in the siting of the camping pods in that particular area.
• Whilst the area surrounding the House in the Wood did not form part of the golf course, the officer viewed it as a logical starting point for a cohesive woodland area to be covered by the Tree Preservation Order.
• Local members would be given the opportunity to see the final details of tree classifications, tree groups and individual trees within the site prior to inclusion within the Tree Preservation Order.

The Committee then agreed to CONFIRM the Tree Preservation Order subject to modification to include details of the classification of woodland, tree groups and individual trees within the site.

The meeting ended at 1.40 pm.