DRAFT COM­MIT­TEE MINUTES

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHORITY

DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PLAN­NING COMMITTEE

held via Video Con­fer­ence on 12 Novem­ber 2021 at 10am

Mem­bers Present:

Dr Gaen­er Rodger (Con­vener) | Anne Rae Mac­don­ald Peter Argyle (Deputy Con­vener) | Douglas McAdam Geva Black­ett | Xan­der McDade Car­o­lyn Cad­dick | Wil­lie McK­enna Deirdre Fal­con­er | Ian McLar­en Pippa Had­ley | Dr Fiona McLean Janet Hunter | Wil­li­am Mun­ro John Kirk | Derek Ross John Lath­am | Judith Webb Elean­or Mackintosh | 

In Attend­ance:

Gav­in Miles, Head of Stra­tegic Plan­ning Mur­ray Fer­guson, Dir­ect­or of Plan­ning & Place Grant Moir, CEO Emma Bryce, Plan­ning Man­ager, Devel­op­ment Man­age­ment Alan Atkins, Plan­ning Officer, Devel­op­ment Man­age­ment Nina Caudrey, Plan­ning Officer, Devel­op­ment Plan­ning Peter Fer­guson, Harp­er McLeod LLP

Apo­lo­gies: None

Agenda Items I & 2: Wel­come & Apologies

1. The Con­vener wel­comed all present and apo­lo­gies were noted.

Agenda Item 3: Declar­a­tion of Interest by Mem­bers on Items Appear­ing on the Agenda

1. Car­o­lyn Cad­dick declared a Non-Fin­an­cial Interest in Item 5. Reas­on: As an elec­ted mem­ber of High­land Coun­cil but had con­sidered her pos­i­tion and was sat­is­fied she had no con­flict so would participate.

2. Pippa Had­ley declared a Non-Fin­an­cial Interest in Item 5.

Reas­on: As an elec­ted mem­ber of High­land Coun­cil but had con­sidered her pos­i­tion and was sat­is­fied she had no con­flict so would participate.

Agenda Item 4: Minutes & Mat­ters Arising from the Pre­vi­ous Meeting

1. The minutes of the pre­vi­ous meet­ing, 24 Septem­ber 2021, held via video con­fer­en­cing were approved sub­ject to the fol­low­ing amendments:

   • a) At Para 13: Janet’s sur­name (Hunter) to be added to fol­low her first name.
   • b) At Para 33b: ​‘Muse’ to be cor­rec­ted to read ​‘Mews’.

2. Action Points arising:

   • a. Para 12i) – Closed: Con­di­tion to be added around the applic­ant being asked to sup­ply inform­a­tion on how the self-build plots would be mar­keted locally.
   • b. Para 42i) – Open: Site vis­it to Aviemore Com­munity Hos­pit­al to be arranged.

Agenda Item 5: Detailed Plan­ning Per­mis­sion 2021/0229/DET (21/03088/FUL) Con­ver­sion of build­ing into 3 No flats and erec­tion of 2 No cot­tage flats At 13 High Street, Kin­gussie, High­land, PH21 IHS Recom­mend­a­tion: Approve Sub­ject to Conditions

1. Alan Atkins, Plan­ning Officer, Devel­op­ment Man­age­ment, presen­ted the paper to the Com­mit­tee. He apo­lo­gised for the omis­sion of a site lay­out plan in the appen­dices sent out with the com­mit­tee papers.

2. The Com­mit­tee were invited to ask points of clar­ity, the fol­low­ing points were raised:

   • a) Had the design been changed with regard to access, amen­ity and garden usage? Could the dif­fer­ence between the pre­vi­ous and cur­rent plans be high­lighted? The Agent for the applic­ant gave details in his report later in the meeting.
   • b) Cla­ri­fic­a­tion of the lay­out of dry­ing areas and cycle storage.

3. The Con­vener invited Les Hutt (Agent) to give a present­a­tion to the Committee.

4. The agent explained that the lay­out had been improved dur­ing the applic­a­tion pro­cess to retain the exist­ing paths around the side of the build­ing includ­ing dis­abled access round back of Caber­feidh Hori­zons. There would be tem­por­ary dis­abled access to the front door of Caber­feidh dur­ing devel­op­ment, pro­tec­tion for the tree at the back and a park­ing area.

5. The Com­mit­tee were invited to ask the speak­er points of clarity:

   • a) Cla­ri­fic­a­tion over the ped­es­tri­an access arrange­ments. The Agent cla­ri­fied that the foot­path would be retained with access round back of the building.
   • b) Con­cerns expressed about the effect this devel­op­ment would have on the func­tion­ing of Caber­feidh Hori­zons com­munity enter­prise next door. The agent con­firmed that the lay­out design was the same as the cur­rent access and that Caber­feidh Hori­zons would still have the abil­ity to use their rear door for goods and waste, with the same tem­por­ary vehicle use as they cur­rently bene­fit­ted from.

6. The Com­mit­tee were invited to dis­cuss the report, the fol­low­ing points were raised:

   • a) It was noted that it appeared that the Caber­feidh Hori­zons social enter­prise appeared to be allowed to con­tin­ue oper­at­ing in a sim­il­ar way as it had previously.
   • b) It was good we have some pro­tec­ted afford­able hous­ing which can’t be sold on and smal­ler accom­mod­a­tion for singles and couples, a good use of an old build­ing. Revised plans will pro­tect the tree.
   • c) Com­ment that the com­mun­al out­side space could become a val­ued social area..

7. The Com­mit­tee agreed this applic­a­tion as per the con­di­tions stated in the report with the addi­tion of:

   • a) The sus­pens­ive con­di­tions requir­ing redesign of the rear park­ing area to ensure pro­tec­tion of the mature cop­per beech tree.

8. Action Point arising: None

Agenda Item 6 & 7: Detailed Plan­ning Per­mis­sion 2021/0259/DET (21/03708/S42) Sec­tion 42 Applic­a­tion to Vary Con­di­tion I (19/03944/S42), ces­sa­tion date 01/11/2026 At Coire Cas Car Park, Cairngorm Moun­tain, Glen­more, Aviemore, High­land Recom­mend­a­tion: Approve sub­ject to condition

And

Detailed Plan­ning Per­mis­sion 2021/0281/DET (21/03707/S42) Sec­tion 42 Applic­a­tion to Vary Con­di­tion I (20/01058/FUL) ces­sa­tion date 01/11/2026 At Coire Cas Car Park, Cairngorm Moun­tain, Glen­more, Aviemore, High­land Recom­mend­a­tion: Approve sub­ject to condition

1. Gav­in Miles, Head of Stra­tegic Plan­ning, presen­ted the paper to the Committee.

2. The Com­mit­tee were invited to ask points of clar­ity, the fol­low­ing points were raised:

   • a) How the term of five years was arrived at – hav­ing already had tem­por­ary per­mis­sion for two years wouldn’t 3 years be enough without any land­scap­ing in place? Head of Stra­tegic Plan­ning explained that officers con­sidered the five year term reques­ted was reas­on­able giv­en the dis­rup­tion caused by Cov­id dur­ing the pre­vi­ous two years. The applic­ant could bring for­ward a full applic­a­tion soon­er if they wished.
   • b) Head of Stra­tegic Plan­ning was asked the reas­on for tem­por­ary per­mis­sion (with no long-term land­scap­ing) being gran­ted in the first place and then this being exten­ded on tem­por­ary basis. He explained long term land­scap­ing, prin­cip­ally through tree plant­ing, would take 10 or 15 years to grow in this loc­a­tion so, there would be little bene­fit of tree plant­ing in the life time of this applic­a­tion. He rein­forced the point that this was tem­por­ary application.

3. The Com­mit­tee were invited to dis­cuss the report, no fur­ther points were raised:

4. The Com­mit­tee agreed to approve applic­a­tions 2021/0259/DET and 2021/0281/DET as per the Officer’s recom­mend­a­tions sub­ject to the con­di­tions stated in the report.

5. Action Point arising: None

Agenda Item 8: Cairn Duh­ie Wind Farm Con­sulta­tion 2021/0113/PAC RECOM­MEND­A­TION: No Objection

1. Nina Caudrey, Plan­ning Officer, presen­ted the paper to the Committee.

2. The Com­mit­tee were invited to ask points of clar­ity, the fol­low­ing points were raised:

   • a) The visu­als presen­ted in the report were dif­fi­cult to see. The Plan­ning Officer explained that was why the com­mit­tee had been sent the details and links to the inform­a­tion on the Energy Con­sent Depart­ment web­site to enable mag­ni­fic­a­tion, in advance of the meeting.
   • b) The slide show­ing low level of light and its rela­tion to light pol­lu­tion was interesting.

3. The Com­mit­tee were invited to dis­cuss the report, the fol­low­ing points were raised:

   • a) Com­ment was made that we have to work with­in the set down plan­ning sys­tem but con­cern about incre­ment­al change. If the wind farms had been a one-off applic­a­tion in the past, would we have come to a dif­fer­ent conclusion?
   • b) A mem­ber was con­cerned that in their view, the North East of Scot­land was mov­ing from a land­scape with wind­farms to wind­farms dom­in­at­ing the land­scape and that the Nation­al Park would be sur­roun­ded by windfarms.
   • c) A request was made for inform­a­tion about what hap­pens to the sites at the ​‘end of a wind farm’, as in the­ory they are tem­por­ary struc­tures. Head of Stra­tegic Plan­ning agreed, but said they are also likely to have repower­ing and refreshed plan­ning applic­a­tions on the same site, not­ing that this was Scot­tish Min­is­ters’ policy.
   • d) The Con­ven­or spoke with the Head of Stra­tegic Plan­ning about a devel­op­ment ses­sion for the com­mit­tee in the new year about land­scape effects inside and out­side the Nation­al Park. The Head of Stra­tegic Plan­ning con­firmed this was being planned for March 2022.
   • e) At what point does a site like this become a brown field site? The Head of Stra­tegic Plan­ning explained that tech­nic­ally it can’t be a brown­field site as it had to be removed. There would have to be an applic­a­tion to make it a per­man­ent site or allow oth­er forms of devel­op­ment. Peter Fer­guson, Harp­er Mcleod added that although the applic­a­tions were for tem­por­ary per­mis­sion the impacts have to be assessed as thought they were per­man­ent. The new­er sites can have lifespans of 40-plus years because of tech­nic­al improve­ments, so in a prac­tic­al sense they are per­man­ent developments.

4. The Com­mit­tee agreed to approve the Officer’s recom­mend­a­tion of No Objection.

5. Action Points arising:

   • i. There will be a devel­op­ment ses­sion for the Com­mit­tee in 2022 about land­scape effects inside and out­side the Nation­al Park.

Agenda Item 9: AOB

1. The fol­low­ing points of busi­ness were noted:
   • a) Head of Stra­tegic Plan­ning updated that the Scot­tish Gov­ern­ment had pub­lished the Nation­al Plan­ning Frame­work 4 for con­sulta­tion by 31 March 2022. There will be inform­al dis­cus­sion with the Plan­ning Com­mit­tee in the Janu­ary before officers ask the Com­mit­tee to approve a form­al response. It was a very import­ant doc­u­ment affect­ing the whole of Scotland.
   • b) The Con­ven­or thanked Peter Argyle, Deputy Con­ven­or of the Plan­ning Com­mit­tee, both per­son­ally and on behalf of the Com­mit­tee for his work as deputy con­vener of the Plan­ning Com­mit­tee. Peter Argyle thanked Gaen­or Rodger and Elean­or Mack­in­tosh for work­ing with him and expressed good wishes to Elean­or Mack­in­tosh in her new role as Deputy Convenor.
   • a) Geva Black­ett updated the Com­mit­tee on her vis­it to the Old School hous­ing devel­op­ment in Bal­later by Grampi­an Hous­ing Association.

Agenda Item 10: Date of Next Meeting

1. Fri­day 10^th Decem­ber 2021 at 9.30am via video/​telephone con­fer­ence with hope for a hybrid meet­ing when some mem­bers can come to the CNPA offices sub­ject to advice from the Scot­tish Government.

2. The pub­lic busi­ness of the meet­ing con­cluded at 11.26 hours.