Agendas, reports and minutes

The Highland Council
South Planning Applications Committee

Minute of Meeting of the South Planning Applications Committee held in the Chamber, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness on Tuesday 19 September 2017 at 10.30 am.

Committee Members Present:

Mr R Balfour
Mr A Baxter
Mr B Boyd
Ms C Caddick
Mr G Cruickshank
Mrs M Davidson (excluding item 3 - 6.2)
Mr L Fraser
Mr J Gray
Ms P Hadley
Mr T Heggie
Mr A Jarvie
Mr R Laird
Mr B Lobban (excluding item 6.2)
Mr R MacWilliam
Mr B Thompson

Officials in attendance:

Ms N Drummond, Area Planning Manager South/Major Developments
Mr D Mudie, Team Leader
Mrs S Macmillan, Team Leader
Mr M Clough, Senior Engineer, Transport Planning
Mr S Hindson, Acting Principal Planner
Dr S Turnbull, Coastal Planning Officer
Ms S Blease, Principal Solicitor (Clerk)
Miss C McArthur, Solicitor (Regulatory Services)
Mr S Taylor, Administrative Assistant

Also in attendance:

Mr S Hammerstrom, Observer

Mr J Gray in the Chair

Preliminaries

The Chair 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

An apology for absence was submitted on behalf of Mr N McLean.

2. Declarations of Interest
Foillseachaidhean Com-pàirt

Item 6.2 – Mr B Lobban (non-financial)

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 20 June 2017 which was APPROVED, subject to the following amendments:-

• Item 7.1 – Councillor Hadley’s title to read Ms and not Mrs.
• Item 7.4 – the recommendation in the report was to refuse the application.

4. Major Development Update
Iarrtasan Mòra

There had been circulated Report No PLS/048/17 by the Head of Planning and Environment which provided a summary of all cases within the “Major” development category currently with the Planning and Development Service for determination.

The Committee NOTED the current position.

5. Major Development – Pre-application Consultation
Leasachaidhean Mòra – Co-chomhairle Ro-iarrtais

5.1
Description: Proposed silt storage site and freshwater lagoon including creation of 4 no. finger lagoons by extraction of rock, water pipes, electricity generation and ancillary works. (17/03576/PAN) (PLS/049/17)
Ward: 21 – Fort William and Ardnamurchan
Applicant: Aggregate Industries UK Ltd
Site Address: Land at Glensanda Quarry

There had been circulated Report No PLS/049/17 by the Area Planning Manager – South/Major Developments 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:-

• any impact, during construction, on the wider road network should be identified and discussed at the planning application stage.

together with the other material considerations identified in the report.

6. Planning Applications to be Determined
Iarrtasan Dealbhaidh rin Dearbhadh

6.1
Applicant: Cityheart Ltd (16/03329/FUL) (PLS/050/17)
Location: Land 35M North of St Marys Roman Catholic School, Fassifern Road, Fort William. (Ward 21)
Nature of Development: Erection of student accommodation block consisting of 40 no. rooms and associated car parking and external landscaping
Recommendation: Grant

There had been circulated Report No PLS/050/17 by the Area Planning Manager – South/Major Developments recommending the grant of the application, subject to the conditions detailed in the report.

At the start of the item, before any presentation of the report and recommendation took place, Members debated whether or not to hold a site visit before determining the application.  During discussion, it was felt that, in order for Members to gain a better understanding of the relationship, scale and positioning of the development in relation to the neighbouring cottages, a site visit should be held.

The Committee agreed to DEFER determination of the application pending a site visit to take place prior to the next meeting of the Committee in October 2017.

6.2
Applicants: Marine Harvest (Scotland) Ltd (17/03279/FUL) (PLS/051/17)
Location: Gorsten Salmon Farm, Ardgour, Fort William, PH33 7AH. (Ward 21)
Nature of Development: Marine Fish Farm - Atlantic salmon - Installation of 12 pens and alterations to associated pen moorings and feed pipes.
Recommendation: Grant

Declaration of Interest – As a Director of the Northern Lighthouse Board, Mr B Lobban declared a non-financial interest in this item and left the chamber for the duration of this item.

There had been circulated Report No PLS/051/17 by the Area Planning Manager – South/Major Developments recommending the grant of the application, subject to the conditions detailed in the report.

Dr S Turnbull presented the report and recommendation.

In response to questions, it was confirmed that:-

• Two objections had been received from the District Salmon Fishery Board Lochaber and Lochaber Fisheries Trust. However, no individual representations had been received from members of the public objecting to the proposed development.
• Whilst the applicant had chosen not to provide a response to the request for further details on sea lice management, sufficient information had been submitted to enable determination of the application.
• The proposed development had previously been screened for an Environmental Impact Assessment. However, the proposed changes to the existing set-up were not significant enough to require an Environmental Statement to be submitted.
• Condition 3 in the recommendation specifically required the submission of an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) including sea lice management/monitoring data.
• Whilst potential issues in relation to additional bio-mass were dealt with by Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA), any potential implications arising from the proposed development in relation to wild salmonids could be partly mitigated through an EMP.
• The applicant would be responsible for submitting the EMP, which would require written approval by the planning authority and monitoring of this would be undertaken by the Council in collaboration with other organisations including the District Salmon Fishery Board Lochaber, Marine Scotland and SEPA, as appropriate.
• Whilst the EMP could provide an indication of any potential emanation of sea lice from the proposed development, the health of the fish in the cages is managed by the Fish Health Inspectorate.
• Until any other regulatory measures were in place, the implementation of the EMP and the monitoring of salmon stocks undertaken by the Fish Health Inspectorate could help provide the necessary safeguards to address any potential impact on wild fish populations arising from the proposed development.
• District Salmon Fishery Board Lochaber had been made aware of the proposals for an EMP as part of the monitoring process and the views expressed by the Board had been taken into consideration during its preparation.

During discussion, Members’ comments included the following:-

• Whilst the physical impact was minimal, concern was expressed at the potential increase in bio-mass and the impact this could have on both wild salmon stock and the sea bed.
• Whilst the Committee was responsible for the determination of the application, the responsibility for monitoring the impact the proposed development could have on wild fish populations came under the jurisdiction of several other statutory bodies.
• It was suggested that a seminar be organised to provide Members with the additional background information on the potential environmental impacts of fish farms and to enable Members to gain a better understanding of the technicalities and planning considerations relative to fish farm applications.
• The outstanding objection from the District Salmon Fishery Board Lochaber was highlighted and, whilst some reassurance had been provided by the proposals contained in Condition 3 of the recommendation, it was emphasised that the applicant should take on board the request from the Board for more collaborative working.
• It was suggested that for any future applications of a similar nature which had been objected to by the relevant District Salmon Fishery Board Lochaber that the Council consult the Board on conditions proposed in relation to environmental protection prior to submission of a recommendation to Committee.

In response to further questions, it was confirmed that:-

• The statement made by the applicant in 8.16 of the report that “the success of the application will ensure that lice numbers continue to decline at the farm site…” had not been qualified. However, the proposed changes to the existing set-up were not deemed significant enough to warrant any objection by Scottish Natural Heritage.
• The main impacts of biomass and sea-lice were dealt with by SEPA under the ‘CAR licence’ and therefore were not a planning issue for the Committee’s consideration.
• If SEPA had deemed that the proposed development could significantly impact on the health of wild fish they would have undertaken their own assessment.
• The Council could not seek to duplicate work already undertaken by another agency under the agreement with SEPA, Marine Scotland, SNH and the relevant District Salmon Fishery Boards.
• There was currently no equivalent management plan for the existing fish farm and therefore the proposed development presented an opportunity to put in place an EMP.
• Whilst the impact of sea lice on wild fish was acknowledged, the Council as a planning authority was limited in what measures it could put in place as it was not responsible for monitoring the health of the fish in the cages.

The Committee agreed to GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions recommended in the report.

The Committee also agreed that Members be provided with further training in the future to help them fully understand the technicalities and planning considerations relative to fish farm applications.

6.3
Applicants: Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (17/03079/FUL) (PLS/052/17)
Location: Land 85M North Of Northern Constabulary Area Command Burnett Road Inverness. (Ward 16)
Nature of Development: Development of new Inverness Justice Centre comprising courts, offices and ancillary accommodation and access.
Recommendation: Grant

There had been circulated Report No PLS/052/17 by the Area Planning Manager – South/Major Developments recommending the grant of the application, subject to the conditions detailed in the report.

Mr S Hindson presented the report and recommendation.

In response to questions, it was confirmed that:-

• Whilst information on the exact number of staff using the proposed facilities was unavailable, parking standards for developments such as this were based on square meterage.
• Witnesses attending the existing court facility at Inverness Castle were provided with information on the different options available for travel to and from the site.
• The number of people attending court on a daily basis could vary significantly.
• The west elevation of the building would include the use of bespoke triangular patterned perforated powder coated aluminium cladding to shade some of the windows and make the concrete on that elevation appear less dominant.
• The building would feature four separate entrances including the main entrance at the front, a secure entrance at the rear for sheriffs, an entrance for Police Scotland and a separate entrance for prisoners appearing before the court.
• A further entrance would also be included for officers and other user groups located within the building.
• The proposed internal layout of the main entrance to the building featured a significant amount of circulation space to enable movement and to prevent direct conflict between groups of people.
• A condition had been included within the recommendation requiring signage on the approach to the building, and it was anticipated that apart from the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service logo, there would not be a significant amount of signage on the building itself as this could detract from the quality of the architecture itself of the building.
• Rose Street multi-storey Car Park had the capacity to deal with increased parking requirements as a result of the proposed development.
• The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service had sought to manage the drop-off / turning area as a “no dwelling” area; however, Transport Planning was of the view that a formal drop-off / pick up area layby was required to be provided away from the turning area and a condition had been included within the recommendation to secure this.

During discussion, Members’ comments included the following:-

• Whilst concerns regarding parking, accessibility and transportation links were acknowledged, it was emphasised that these could be mitigated by the close proximity of both the train and bus stations and also the Rose Street multi-storey Car Park. 
• It was also emphasised that the location of the proposed development was within easy walking distance of the city centre and had taken into consideration the need to retain footfall within the centre of Inverness.
• Concern was expressed that the Council could find itself taking on the responsibility for providing parking for visitors to the court due to the lack of sufficient car parking spaces within the site.
• Concern was also expressed at the potential for witnesses and the accused to meet outwith the site on their way to court.
• Whilst there was an expectation that users of the courts would park in Rose Street multi-storey car park, in practice, the people who did not use this site regularly would be more likely to park at nearby shops and warehouses.
• The proposed development represented progress over the existing court facility at Inverness Castle.
• Whilst the only alternative for building a development of this type with sufficient parking would be to build on a green field site, the proposed development made use of a prominent site that otherwise would be left derelict if all applications to develop on it were refused due to a lack of parking.
• The amount of parking spaces proposed within the application site was welcomed, in particular, as there were a number of courts in Scotland which did not currently provide parking.
• The proposed design of the building was innovative and would serve its purpose well given recent closures of sheriff courts in rural areas of the Highlands.
• In highlighting the slight majority of people from urban areas with access to a car and transport links to the application site, concern was expressed regarding access to public transport in rural areas.

The Committee agreed to GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions recommended in the report.

7. Decisions on Appeal 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

7.1
Applicant: James Colston (PPA- 270-2173) (16/00912/FUL)
Location: Land South West of Fair na Scuir, Arisaig, Highland PH39 4NU. (Ward 12)
Nature of Appeal: Erection of House.

The Committee NOTED the decision of the Reporter to dismiss the appeal and refuse planning permission.

7.2
Applicant: Mr and Mrs D Grant (LBA-270-2008) (17/00565/LBC)
Location: Old Farm, Glenmoriston Lodge Estate, lnvermoriston, Inverness, IV63 7YA. (Ward 12)
Nature of Appeal: Installation of garden room and alterations to existing wall.

The Committee NOTED the decision of the Reporter to dismiss the appeal and refuse listed building consent.

The meeting ended at 12.00 noon