Agendas, reports and minutes

Minute of Meeting of the South Planning Applications Committee held in the Chamber, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness on Wednesday 5 December 2018 at 10.30 am.

Committee Members Present:

Mr R Balfour, Mr A Baxter (excluding item 6.6), Mr J Bruce (substitute), Mr B Boyd, Ms C Caddick, Mrs M Davidson (excluding items 6.4, 6.8 and 6.9), Mr L Fraser (excluding items 1 – 6.1), Mr J Gray, Mr T Heggie, Mr R Laird (excluding items 1 – 6.4), Mr B Lobban, Mr N McLean (by video conferencing) (excluding items 6.8 – 7.3), Mr B Thompson (excluding item 6.8)

Non Committee Member Present:

Mrs T Robertson (excluding items 1- 5.1 and 6.7 – 7.3)

Officials in attendance:

Mr D Mudie, Area Planning Manager – South
Mrs S Macmillan, Team Leader
Mr M Clough, Senior Engineer, Transport Planning
Mr K Gibson, Principal Planner
Mr S Hindson, Principal Planner
Mr R Dowell, Planner
Mrs S Hadfield, Planner
Ms L Stewart, Planner
Ms S Blease, Principal Solicitor (Regulatory Services)
Miss C McArthur, Solicitor (Regulatory Services)
Mr S Taylor, Administrative Assistant

Mr J Gray 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 for absence were intimated on behalf of Ms P Hadley, Mr A Jarvie and Mr R MacWilliam.

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 23 October 2018 which was APPROVED.

4. Major Development Update
Iarrtasan Mòra

There had been circulated Report No PLS/082/18 by the Area Planning Manager – South which provided a summary of all cases within the “Major” development category currently with the Planning and Development Service for determination.

During discussion, it was requested that a site visit be arranged in relation to the seven pending planning applications for river hydro-electric schemes on Glen Etive to allow Members to consider their cumulative impact.

The Committee NOTED the current position and AGREED that a site visit be held in relation to the seven pending planning applications for river hydro-electric schemes on Glen Etive to allow Members to consider their cumulative impact. 

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

5.1
Description: Proposed housing development of up to 200 units with associated roads, infrastructure and landscaping. (18/05234/PAN) (PLS/083/18).
Ward: 19 – Inverness South
Applicant: Tulloch Homes Ltd
Site Address: Land at Druids Temple, Old Edinburgh Road South, Inverness.

There had been circulated Report No PLS/083/18 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 consideration they wished brought to the applicant’s attention:-

• Consideration of the access and the concern about the amount of extra traffic on the access into the Parks Farm development.

together with the other material considerations identified in the report.

The Committee also AGREED that the case officer would discuss the details of the application, once known, with Local Members at their ward business meeting       

5.2
Description: Phase 1 new residential development consisting of up to 200 dwelling, including landscaping, access and associated site development works. and for enabling works (roads, access, drainage and services infrastructure) for all phases of development. (18/05383/PAN) (PLS/084/18).
Ward: 21 – Fort William and Ardnamurchan
Applicant: Link Group
Site Address: Land at Upper Achintore, Fort William.

There had been circulated Report No PLS/084/18 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 consideration they wished brought to the applicant’s attention:-

• Drainage issues especially affecting the adjacent properties further down the hill
• The impact on the junction at Connochie Road and Ross Place
• Wider connectivity issues in Fort William including cycle and pedestrian routes
• The provision of open space, play areas and sports space
• The issue of contaminated land including the possibility of levels of nickel and how this will be addressed

together with the other material considerations identified in the report.

The Committee also AGREED that:-

• officers would consider whether the developer contributions in relation to community facilities can be ring fenced for this side of town to avoid cross town travel; and
• the case officer would discuss the details of the application, once known, with Local Members at their ward business meeting.

5.3
Description: New residential development of up to 400 dwelling including landscaping, access and associated site development works. (18/05381/PAN) (PLS/085/18).
Ward: 21 – Fort William and Ardnamurchan
Applicant: Link Group
Site Address: Land at Upper Achintore, Fort William.

There had been circulated Report No PLS/085/18 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 consideration they wished brought to the applicant’s attention:-

• Drainage issues especially affecting the adjacent properties further down the hill
• The impact on the junction at Connochie Road and Ross Place
• Wider connectivity issues in Fort William including cycle and pedestrian routes
• The provision of open space, play areas and sports space
• The issue of contaminated land including the possibility of levels of nickel and how this will be addressed

together with the other material considerations identified in the report.

The Committee also AGREED that:-

• officers would consider whether the developer contributions in relation to community facilities can be ring fenced for this side of town to avoid cross town travel; and
• the case officer would discuss the details of the application, once known, with Local Members at their ward business meeting.

6. Planning Applications to be Determined
Iarrtasan Dealbhaidh rin Dearbhadh

6.1
Applicant: Lochaber Housing Association (18/02761/FUL) (PLS/086/18)
Location: Site South of Tigh Aran, Spean Bridge. (Ward 11)
Nature of Development: Housing development – 20no. units.
Recommendation: Grant.               

There had been circulated Report No PLS/086/18 by the Area Planning Manager – South recommending the grant of the application, subject to the conditions detailed within the report.

Mrs S Macmillan presented the report and recommendation, during which she advised of the following corrections to the figures at paragraph 8.17 of the report for developer conditions:-

• The development sub-total for Contribution Rate (per house) should read £28,720 rather than £20,568;
• The Development Total should read £58,432 rather than £50,280; and
• The Total Per Home should read £2921 rather than £2514.

In response to questions, the following was confirmed:-

• In response to concerns regarding potential flooding in Spean Crescent, Members were advised that the responsibility for dealing with any flood event would be dependent on where the flooding occurred; however, if the flooding occurred at the culvert then this would come under the remit of Transport Scotland;
• Drainage within the application site had been designed so as to improve on the current condition and would provide a better run-off rate and storage to within the 1 in 200 year event predicted frequency; there was to be an increased sized SUDS swale which could hold water better and avoid spilling into adjacent properties;
• With regard to drainage at the site access, the entrance to the Bridge Café would be subject to a road construction consent to take it up to the adopted standards;
• With reference to the developer contribution towards an indoor training and community centre, it was confirmed that developer contributions could only be secured towards a specific project identified within the Council’s Action Plan Programme; however, should there be any change to the projects identified within the said Programme, developer contributions could be reallocated;
• Whilst no deficiencies had been identified in the provision of the play area within Spean Bridge that would necessitate a developer contribution, a further condition could be included in relation to providing further formal play areas and open space;
• Discussion had taken place with Transport Planning regarding the best way forward to discourage vehicular movements on the junction from Bridge Café onto the access road and the potential for road markings which encourage drivers to stop where the car park joins the access road could be highlighted as part of the road construction consent;
• The provision of outside drying facilities were included within the proposed development; and
• A further condition could be included to provide outside storage in addition to the bike storage.

During discussion, Members’ comments included the following:-

• In welcoming the proposed development, it was emphasised that there was a strong demand for housing for young families in Spean Bridge;
• In the context of young families being the likely buyers of the proposed houses, improvements to the amount of play space provision would be welcomed;
• Whilst acknowledging the cost to the developer of building the proposed development, reservation was expressed at the design of the proposed houses;
• In welcoming the developer contributions within the application towards the proposed indoor training and community centre, it was emphasised that the main beneficiaries from it should be the community of Spean Bridge;
• In highlighting the comments received from the community council, it was suggested that the format in which these had been presented in full within the report should be used for future reports to aid Member’s determination of applications;
• Whilst it was acknowledged that there was some local objection to the proposed development, there was a recognition by the community council of the need for housing in Spean Bridge; and
• Disappointment was expressed that the proposed boundary treatment had only been included as part of the public art provision as it was considered that a high-spec boundary treatment should be included in every development and it was suggested that the Council’s review of public art provision look at how to improve the way developer contributions were used.

The Committee agreed to GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions recommended in the report, together with an amendment to the figures at paragraph 8.17 for developer contributions and the following additional conditions:-

• A further condition in relation to providing further formal play areas and open space; and
• A further condition to provide outside storage in addition to the bike storage.

6.2
Applicant: Road to the Isles Facilities Group (SCIO) (18/04322/FUL) (PLS/087/18)
Location: West Bay Car Park, Mallaig. (Ward 11)
Nature of Development: Construction of new public toilet block.
Recommendation: Grant.            

There had been circulated Report No PLS/087/18 by the Area Planning Manager – South recommending the grant of the application, subject to the condition detailed within the report.

Mrs S MacMillan presented the report and recommendation.

In response to questions, the following was confirmed:-

• The motorhome hardstanding/grey water drainage station had been removed from the proposed development in order to prevent a delay in the determination of the application;
• The main concern which had been raised by the public in relation to the motorhome hardstanding/grey water drainage station was how  motorhome vehicles would occupy and manoeuvre within West Bay Car Park;
• The applicants were seeking an alternative location for the motorhome hardstanding/grey water drainage station and representations had been made suggesting that this could be accommodated further along the road towards the existing sewage works or through new facilities based in Arisaig.

During discussion, Members’ comments included the following:-

• A significant amount of community endeavour had gone into the application;
• Improvements were needed to infrastructure along the West Coast from Mallaig through Morar and Arisaig in order to make the visitor experience more attractive during the summer; and
• Whilst acknowledging the objections which had been received, it was emphasised that there was a strong will from the community to improve the current situation with regards to infrastructure and waste disposal.

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

6.3
Applicant: Ms Lyn McLardy (18/03148/FUL) (PLS/088/18)
Location: Land 70M NW of Upper Aultvaich, Beauly. (Ward 12)
Nature of Development: Erect dwelling and associated works.
Recommendation: Refuse.

There had been circulated Report No PLS/088/18 by the Area Planning Manager – South recommending the refusal of the application on the grounds as detailed in the report.

Mr K Gibson presented the report and recommendation, during which he advised that the second reason for refusal contained within the report had been removed.

In response to questions, the following was confirmed:-

• The operation of the business could be undertaken elsewhere and did not necessitate having a house or accommodation on site; and
• The number of man hours required to operate the animal husbandry did not justify one labour unit.

During discussion, Members’ comments included the following:-

• The removal of the second reason for refusal was welcomed as the single track ended at the entrance to the application site;
• It was acknowledged in the report that there were no issues in relation to siting and design and it was considered that the proposed house was well designed and would not intrude on neighbouring amenity;
• The proposed development was for a business that was seeking to offer courses in running permaculture and other small holding and agricultural related industries;
• People attending the courses would be able to be accommodated within the house;
• The applicant had set out a decent business plan and the proposed development would reduce their carbon footprint and preserve an active countryside;
• The proposed development would have a positive impact on the environment and it was suggested that better use of planning legislation should be made to improve the environment; and
• It was emphasised that planners in their assessment of the application had done so based on current planning guidance; however, their interpretation of planning guidance could be viewed differently by Members in their own assessment of the application.

No consensus having been reached between the members, Mr J Gray, seconded by Ms C Caddick, then moved that the application be refused for the reasons detailed in the report. 

Mrs M Davidson, seconded by Mr B Lobban, moved as an amendment that the application be granted, contrary to recommendation, for the following reason:-

• There was a clear business need to support the development on the site and therefore it met one of the exceptions under Policy 35 of the Highland wide Local Development Plan as defined in the Housing in the Countryside Supplementary Guidance.

On a vote being taken, two votes were cast in favour of the motion and ten votes in favour of the amendment, with no abstentions as follows:-

Motion

Mr J Gray, Ms C Caddick

Amendment

Mr R Balfour, Mr A Baxter, Mr J Bruce, Mr B Boyd, Mrs M Davidson, Mr L Fraser, Mr T Heggie, Mr B Lobban, Mr N McLean, Mr B Thompson

The amendment to GRANT planning permission for the reasons stated accordingly became the finding of the meeting.

It was further AGREED to delegate authority to the Area Planning Manager to impose any conditions of planning permission which were considered appropriate in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair.

6.4
Applicant: Mrs Laura Whitham (18/04719/FUL) (PLS/089/18)
Location: Land to NE of Cairnside, Westhill, Inverness. (Ward 19)
Nature of Development: Erection of shed for agricultural and storage purposes.
Recommendation: Grant.

There had been circulated Report No PLS/089/18 by the Area Planning Manager – South recommending the grant of the application, subject to the conditions detailed within the report.

Mr K Gibson presented the report and recommendation, during which he advised of an amendment to Condition 1 to delete reference to ‘house, garage and driveway’ and to replace with ‘shed’.

During discussion, Members’ comments included the following:-

• Whilst the application site was within the Culloden Muir Conservation Area, it was not located within the National Trust for Scotland part of the battlefield site but instead within the wider designation;
• The applicant had worked well with Historic Environment Scotland to avoid sensitive areas;
• Whilst the proposed development might not enhance the area, it was not considered to have a detrimental impact given its location within an agricultural area;
• The proposed development would provide a functional building to replace the existing store and caravan;
• In response to the comments received from the National Trust for Scotland, it was considered that no precedent had been set and applications were dealt with on their own merits;
• It was highlighted that the majority of objections were from individuals outwith the local area;
• Whilst supportive of the proposed development, concern was expressed that the application was located within a conservation area and that an awareness must be shown in relation to the archaeological assessment and the potential for artefacts relating to the battlefield to be removed, destroyed or damaged;
• In response to concerns raised, it was emphasised that the proposed development was not a breach of planning guidelines;
• Concern was expressed regarding the cumulative impact of applications around Culloden Battlefield and that whilst the proposed development might be considered minor, it had an effect on what was a site of national historic importance and future developments around the battlefield site needed to be treated sensitively; and
• Whilst acknowledging the concerns regarding the sensitivity of development in and around Culloden Battlefield, the proposed shed was located within an area used for agricultural and therefore agricultural buildings were likely to be required in this area.

The Committee agreed to GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions recommended in the report together with an amendment to Condition 1 to delete reference to ‘house, garage and driveway’ and to replace with ‘shed’.

6.5
Applicants: Mr & Mrs R Huston (18/00971/FUL) (PLS/090/18)
Location: Land East of Burnside, Corry, Muir of Ord. (Ward 12)
Nature of Development: Change of use of steading to residential and erection of extension.
Recommendation: Grant.   

There had been circulated Report No PLS/090/18 by the Area Planning Manager – South recommending the grant of the application, subject to the conditions detailed within the report.

Mrs S Hadfield presented the report and recommendation.

In response to questions, the following was confirmed:-

• The proposals included a screen fence which would be off-set 0.5 metres from the boundary at the lower level of the embankment and screen planting which could be conditioned to ensure that existing trees were retained; and
• Whilst the occupants of the neighbouring property had asked that the screen fencing be located at the top of the embankment, this could intrude on the amenity of the existing steading.

During discussion, Members’ comments included the following:-

• Whilst it had been suggested that the proposed fence screening should be located on the top of the embankment, it was considered that the fence could be of a temporary nature as the beech hedging would continue to grow and act as an effective screen; therefore, the proposed development was considered acceptable.

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

6.6
Applicant: EE (18/02223/FUL) (PLS/091/18)
Location: Land 290m NE of Keepers Croft, Glenlia, Foyers. (Ward 12)
Nature of Development: Erection of 30m tower, ground based equipment cabinets, electrical generator, satellite dish, ancillary equipment, formation of access.
Recommendation: Grant.

There had been circulated Report No PLS/091/18 by the Area Planning Manager – South recommending the grant of the application, subject to the conditions detailed within the report.

Before any presentation of the report and recommendation took place, Members debated whether or not to defer determination of the application.

Thereafter, the Committee agreed to DEFER determination of the application to allow further discussion with the applicant as to alternative sites and to seek clarity as to which areas the mast would cover for emergency cover.

6.7
Applicant: Cairngorm School of Dance (18/03445/FUL) (PLS/092/18)
Location: Unit 17 – 7 Spey Valley Business Park, Dalfaber Industrial Estate, Dalfaber Drive, Aviemore. (Ward 20)
Nature of Development: Change of use of Units 6, 7 and 8 from Class 4 to Class 11.
Recommendation: Refuse.

There had been circulated Report No PLS/092/18 by the Area Planning Manager – South recommending the refusal of the application on the grounds as detailed in the report.

Ms L Stewart presented the report and recommendation.

In response to questions, the following was confirmed:-

• The opportunity to explore alternative sites to accommodate the dance school had not been taken up by the applicant;
• The location of an existing café and laundrette within the industrial site and the Aviemore Orbital path were identified within the plans;
• It had been observed within the report that Aviemore was a winter resort and that the pavements within the industrial estate were unlikely to be a priority route in terms of gritting during the winter; therefore, it was considered unreasonable to justify a lack of parking within the industrial estate on the expectation that children would walk the distance from the nearest public transport link; and
• A timetable submitted by the applicant indicated that there would be eleven occupants attending on average per class at various times of the day and that this would primarily be during the afternoon after school hours.

During discussion, Members’ comments included the following:-

• Dalfaber Industrial Estate was not considered to be a traditional industrial estate and it could be argued that the proposed development was compatible with and complementary to its existing business use;
• There had been a number of shops and restaurants established within the industrial estate that might not be considered as being compatible with its intended business use;
• Whilst concerns had been raised in the report regarding child safety, there was an ice cream parlour with external seating within yards of the proposed development and therefore it was not considered an issue;
• Whilst the application had been recommended for refusal on the basis that the industrial estate should retained for industrial and business use, there were examples of other developments with the same planning designation which had recently been granted approval for change of use and were also located within the land designated for economic development;
• It was emphasised that no issues had been raised locally regarding parking provision within the industrial estate or overspill parking which could affect neighbouring residential streets;
• There was unlikely to be an issue with parking as the majority of users of the dance school would be children being dropped off for classes;
• In explaining that the main bus route that was likely to be used was located on Dalfaber Drive and not Grampian Road, it was highlighted that school children were regularly picked up and dropped off on Dalfaber Drive close to the entrance to the industrial estate;
• The close proximity of the Council’s transport depot meant that Dalfaber Drive was likely to be one of the first locations to be gritted during winter;
• The new Active Aviemore project would complement the existing network path which contained pedestrian links from the housing estate to the industrial estate;
• As there were already a number of businesses located within the estate it was not considered to be a traditional industrial estate;
• The second reason for refusal was based on the provisions of Policy 3 “Sustainable Design” of the Cairngorms National Park Local Development Plan (2015) and within the report it was indicated that one of the reasons that the proposed development was contrary to Policy 3 was due to road safety concern, particularly during the winter months;
• Industrial estates within small rural towns were used for a wide range of purposes and sympathy was expressed at officers who were having to make decisions taking into consideration the  policy and guidance in place whilst communities were seeking to make the best use of industrial estates;
• It was highlighted that within Inverness in both the Longman and Carsegate Industrial Estates there were units which were used for both leisure and amenity which sat beside industrial units, therefore the proposed development was considered acceptable in the context of Dalfaber Industrial Estate; and
• It was suggested that changing the name of an industrial estate to a trading estate could help to reflect the change of use from industrial to business and trading.

Following discussion, Mr B Lobban, seconded by Ms C Caddick, then moved that the application be granted, contrary to recommendation, for the following reasons:-

• The change of use was supported by Policy 8.1(b) of the CNPA Local Plan 2015 by way of meeting an identified community need.  It was also supported by Policy 2.2 in that it enhanced the existing formal recreation and leisure facilities and Policy 2.3 in that it supported the vitality and viability of the area.  Together, these benefits outweighed any concerns documented in the recommendation.

There being no amendment, the motion therefore became the finding of the meeting and the Committee agreed to GRANT planning permission for the reasons stated above.

It was further AGREED to delegate authority to the Area Planning Manager to impose any conditions of planning permission which were considered appropriate in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair.

6.8
Applicant: Highland Housers Ltd (18/04143/FUL) (PLS/093/18)
Location: Land on Telford Road to the rear of Rockburn Cottage, 58 Lochalsh Road, Inverness. (Ward 14)
Nature of Development: Erection of 2 semi-detached houses.
Recommendation: Grant.

There had been circulated Report No PLS/093/18 by the Area Planning Manager – South recommending the grant of the application, subject to the conditions detailed within the report.

Ms L Stewart presented the report and recommendation.

In response to questions, the following was confirmed:-

• There were no policies restricting the size of a house based on a house to plot ratio;
• Council guidelines in relation to car parking recommended that two parking spaces should be provided within the curtilage of a small housing development in an urban area;
• It was estimated that the distance between the gable end of the proposed development and the windows on the adjoining boundary of 71 Telford Road was around 3 to 4 metres and around 2 metres between the proposed development and the flats at Telford Court; and
• Transport Planning’s assessment of the application had considered the current car parking operation within the surrounding area and concluded that as the proposed development was located within a city centre boundary, there was an opportunity to relax the guidelines given its proximity to off street parking and other forms of transport such as cycle routes and public transport; and
• There were currently no restrictions over on-street parking on Telford Road.

During discussion, Members’ comments included the following:-

• Whilst the principle of residential development had previously been established, concern was expressed at the scale of the proposed development and it was considered to be an over-development in the context of a small gap site that would be better suited to a single storey dwelling;
• Parking within the street was a perennial issue for residents due to the recent development of flatted accommodation in the surrounding area;
• As Telford Road was an established residential area and not a city centre location, the expected standards recommended for car parking should not be relaxed;
• Whilst there were no formal records of problems regarding traffic movement or parking in the surrounding Merkinch area, this was a frequent issue raised by local Members and the community council and the proposed development could exacerbate this problem; and
• Whilst acknowledging the efforts of the applicant to change the fenestration of the windows facing 71 Telford Road, concern was expressed regarding the impact the proposed development could have on the amenity of the properties either side of the application site and the flats in Telford Court.             

Following discussion, Mr R Laird, seconded by Mr R Balfour, then moved that the application be refused for the following reasons:-

• The application was contrary to Policy 28 of the Highland wide Local Development Plan on the grounds that it would have a detrimental impact on the individual and community residential amenity due to (1) it being an application for two dwellings on a site better suited to a single dwelling and (2) the insufficiency of off-street parking.

There being no amendment, the motion therefore became the finding of the meeting and the Committee agreed to REFUSE planning permission for the reasons stated above.

6.9
Applicant: Mr Duncan Wink (18/04525/FUL) (PLS/094/18)
Location: Land 10m West of Daytona Court, East Terrace, Kingussie. (Ward 20)
Nature of Development: Erection of new dwellinghouse and detached garage (amendment to 16/05517/FUL).
Recommendation: Grant.

There had been circulated Report No PLS/094/18 by the Area Planning Manager – South recommending the grant of the application, subject to the conditions detailed within the report.

Mr R Dowell presented the report and recommendation.

In response to questions, the following was confirmed:-

• The roof ridge height had increased to 93.5 cm;
• The finished floor level on the lower ground floor had been raised by 55.8cm and by 69.5cm at ground floor; and
• The proposed louvre fencing along the eastern elevation walkway was considered sufficient to safeguard the amenity of neighbouring properties and occupants.

During discussion, Members’ comments included the following:-

• Whilst acknowledging the concerns regarding amenity which had been raised by residents, it was considered that the proposed louvre fencing along the eastern elevation walkway would mitigate these concerns;
• Whilst welcoming the action taken by the Council in response to the breach of planning control complaint, concern was expressed that the developer should have been aware of planning regulations and that approval of the application could set the wrong example to other potential developers; and
• In acknowledging the concerns regarding the retrospective nature of the application, the view was expressed that the application represented the best possible outcome in the circumstances.

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
Applicants: Mr and Mrs Gregory (PAC-270-2001) (18/02098/PNO)
Location: Invermoriston Holidays, Dalcraig Road, Invermoriston, Inverness-shire IV63 7YF. (Ward 12)
Nature of Appeal: Erection of agricultural shed for tractors, implements, ground/woodland maintenance tools and associated workshop.               

The Committee NOTED the decision of the Reporter to allow the appeal and grant prior approval consent.

7.2
Applicant: Mr Michael McHardy (PPA-270-2195) (17/05470/FUL)
Location: Land 120 metres north of Brooklea, Lentran, Inverness IV3 8RL. (Ward 12)
Nature of Appeal: Erect 3 houses with integral garages, installation of drainage and access.         

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

7.3
Applicants: Mr and Mrs Reid (PPA-270-2197) (17/05908/FUL)
Location: Cottage, Lower Muckovie, Inshes, Inverness, IV2 5BB. (Ward 19)
Nature of Appeal: Redevelopment to provide new house with access.

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

8. Dates of Meetings in 2019
Cinn-latha Choinneamhan ann an 2019

The Committee NOTED the following dates for 2019, as agreed at The Highland Council on 6 September 2018.  All meetings will take place in the Council Chamber, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness:-

Tuesday, 29 January
Tuesday, 12 March
Tuesday, 30 April
Tuesday, 11 June
Wednesday, 7 August
Tuesday, 17 September
Tuesday, 22 October
Wednesday, 4 December

The meeting ended at 1:30 pm