220422PCMinutesV11

APPROVED COM­MIT­TEE MINUTES

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHORITY

APPROVED MINUTES OF THE PLAN­NING COM­MIT­TEE held in Spey/​Dee Meet­ing rooms, CNPA HQ, Grant­own on Spey (hybrid) on 22 April 2022 at 9.30am

Mem­bers Present:

Dr Gaen­er Rodger (Con­vener) Elean­or Mack­in­tosh (Deputy Con­vener) Peter Argyle Geva Black­ett Car­o­lyn Cad­dick Deirdre Fal­con­er Pippa Had­ley John Kirk John Lath­am Anne Rae Mac­don­ald Douglas McAdam Wil­lie McK­enna lan McLar­en Dr Fiona McLean Wil­lie Mun­ro Derek Ross

In Attend­ance: Mur­ray Fer­guson, Dir­ect­or of People & Place Emma Bryce, Plan­ning Man­ager, Devel­op­ment Man­age­ment Alan Atkins, Plan­ning Officer, Devel­op­ment Man­age­ment Stephanie Wade, Plan­ning Officer, Devel­op­ment Man­age­ment Edward Swales, Mon­it­or­ing & Enforce­ment Officer Nina Caudrey, Plan­ning Officer, Devel­op­ment Plan­ning and Envir­on­ment­al Advice Peter Fer­guson, Harp­er McLeod LLP

Apo­lo­gies: Janet Hunter Xan­der McDade Judith Webb

Agenda Items I & 2: Wel­come & Apologies

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

APPROVED COM­MIT­TEE MINUTES

Agenda Item 3: Minutes & Mat­ters Arising from the Pre­vi­ous Meeting

1. The minutes of the pre­vi­ous meet­ing, 25 March 2022, held via video con­fer­en­cing were approved sub­ject to the fol­low­ing amend­ment: • At Para 10 — the word report replaced by the word contribution.

2. Out­stand­ing Actions from Pre­vi­ous Meet­ings: 23/04/2001: A Suit­able date for the devel­op­ment ses­sion for the Plan­ning Com­mit­tee in 2022 about land­scape effects inside and out­side the Nation­al Park (mainly related to wind farms) to be arranged.

Agenda Item 4: Declar­a­tion of Interest by Mem­bers on Items Appear­ing on the Agenda

1. Car­o­lyn Cad­dick declared a non-fin­an­cial Interest in Item 5 Reas­on: Mem­ber of the High­land Coun­cil and declared for reas­ons of trans­par­ency but has not had any part in the pro­pos­al so would take part.

2. Pippa Had­ley declared a non-fin­an­cial Interest in Item 5 Reas­on: The Item was in her ward and declared for reas­ons of trans­par­ency but has had noth­ing to do with the applic­a­tion so would take part.

3. Fiona Mclean declared a non-fin­an­cial Interest in Item 6 Reas­on: As a Board Mem­ber for His­tor­ic Envir­on­ment Scot­land and after tak­ing advice would with­draw from this part of the meeting.

4. Peter Fer­guson Leg­al advisor for CNPA declared a non-fin­an­cial Interest in Item 8 Reas­on: Provided advice to the applic­ant on ele­ments of the applic­a­tion there­fore not appro­pri­ate to par­ti­cip­ate and will with­draw from the meeting.

5. It was cla­ri­fied that there would be no sub­sti­tute for Peter Fer­guson dur­ing item 8.

APPROVED COM­MIT­TEE MINUTES

Agenda Item 5: Detailed Plan­ning Per­mis­sion 2021/0305/DET (21/04332/FUL) Demoli­tion of derel­ict hotel, togeth­er with the erec­tion of 10(no) afford­able flats, and asso­ci­ated park­ing At Stru­an House Hotel, Car­rbridge, High­land Recom­mend­a­tion: Approve Sub­ject to Conditions

1. Stephanie Wade, Plan­ning Officer, Devel­op­ment Man­age­ment, presen­ted the paper to the Committee.

2. The Com­mit­tee were invited to ask points of clar­ity, the fol­low­ing points were raised: a) The widen­ing of the road was dis­cussed – would traffic calm­ing or chan­ging the road lay­out be neces­sary and if so, how would chan­ging the road lay­out be done? The Plan­ning Officer explained a Con­di­tion was required for the Applic­ant to pro­gress the scheme which High­land Coun­cil would deliv­er. The Com­munity Coun­cil would have sight of this if there was a change in road lay­out via the Roads Con­struc­tion Con­sent pro­cess of the High­land Coun­cil. b) The type of heat­ing was ​‘quantum elec­tric heat­ing’ which was cla­ri­fied as a type of elec­tric­al stor­age heat­er sys­tem. Con­cern expressed about the high cost of energy and about any stand-in heat­ing in the case of power cuts. There are photo­vol­ta­ic pan­els and homeown­ers could change the heat­ing type. c) Dis­cus­sion with ref­er­ence to the objec­tion let­ter and con­cern about any lack of day­light to the dining/​sitting room at the back of the objector’s house. The Officer explained it had been determ­ined there would be no adverse impact on the exist­ing prop­er­ties; the new prop­er­ties would be at a lower dens­ity than in oth­er areas of Car­rbridge. d) Con­cern about the pos­sible loss of day­light to prop­er­ties of North of site. The Plan­ning Officer explained the ridge height of the new build­ing would be lower than the build­ing it was replacing.

3. The Com­mit­tee were invited to dis­cuss the report, the fol­low­ing points were raised: a) It was good to see low-cost hous­ing being built in this area includ­ing one- bed­room dwell­ings, des­pite con­cern about the elec­tric heat­ing. The dis­abled access units were wel­comed. b) The cul­tur­al his­tory of build­ing being demol­ished was dis­cussed and the pos­sib­il­ity of a com­mem­or­ative plaque. This was not a plan­ning but a com­munity issue; the Plan­ning Officer would make the High­land Coun­cil aware. The Plan­ning Officer would include an inform­at­ive note of this sug­ges­tion, to the Applic­ant on the form­al decision of the com­mit­tee. c) There was street nam­ing opportunity.

APPROVED COM­MIT­TEE MINUTES

1. The Com­mit­tee approved the applic­a­tion as per the recom­mend­a­tion, sub­ject to the inclu­sion of the inform­at­ive, in the Officer’s report.

2. Action Points arising: (i) The Plan­ning Officer would include an inform­at­ive note of the sug­ges­tion of a com­mem­or­ative plaque/​information board about the demol­ished build­ing, to the Applic­ant on the form­al decision of the com­mit­tee. (ii) The Plan­ning Officer would make the High­land Coun­cil aware of the his­tor­ic nature of the build­ing to be demolished.

Agenda Item 6: Detailed Plan­ning Per­mis­sion 2022/0012/DET (22/02127/FLL) Erec­tion of six dwell­ing­houses and asso­ci­ated works At Former Rail­way Yard, Kil­liecrankie Recom­mend­a­tion: Approve Sub­ject to Conditions

1. Alan Atkins, Plan­ning Officer, Devel­op­ment Man­age­ment, presen­ted the paper to the Committee.

2. The Com­mit­tee were invited to ask points of clar­ity, the fol­low­ing points were raised: a) Query about the access behind the exist­ing build­ings? The Plan­ning Officer con­firmed the access was from the B Road as it swings round and there was no prob­lem get­ting vehicle access of any of the houses in the vicin­ity. An area of pav­ing space in front of new houses would be the ped­es­tri­an access. b) Noise issues and the prox­im­ity par­tic­u­larly of one house to the rail­way line was a con­cern. The Plan­ning Officer explained that there had been an impact assess­ment the design in place will mit­ig­ate the noise so there would not be an adverse impact. Non open­ing win­dows and mech­an­ic­al vent­il­a­tion sys­tem. This has been covered by a plan­ning con­di­tion. c) The Plan­ning Officer cla­ri­fied the dwell­ings were 1 ¹⁄₂ storey. d) Sewage sys­tem dis­cussed. The applic­ant will have to con­firm that there was capa­city with Scot­tish Water before the applic­a­tion can go ahead. It there was not capa­city this would have to be re-vis­ited and altern­at­ive means would have to be sought. e) Regard­ing the pos­sib­il­ity of the his­tory of the site, this was not part of the bat­tle­field. The bat­tle­field had already been marked. f) Con­cern about safety and the prox­im­ity to the rail­way. The Plan­ning Officer explained the rail­way was fenced off and there was an embank­ment. There was exist­ing nearby hous­ing, so no fur­ther safety meas­ures pro­posed or recommended.

APPROVED COM­MIT­TEE MINUTES

g) Emma Bryce, Plan­ning Man­ager explained that Net­work Rail had been noti­fied of the devel­op­ment. h) Afford­able hous­ing. Dis­cus­sion about com­muted sums and future mon­it­or­ing. The Plan­ning Officer con­firmed 1.5 units would be the rel­ev­ant num­ber for this site. The Plan­ning Officer- fur­ther inform­a­tion would be avail­able from Perth and Kinross Coun­cil. Con­vener noted that this would be some­thing to pick up in the future. **The Plan­ning Man­ager explained there had not been dis­cus­sion about provid­ing afford­able hous­ing on the site because of the his­tory of the pre­vi­ous plan­ning applic­a­tion on the site and a com­muted sum which would be more than what would be looked for under cur­rent con­tri­bu­tion rates.

1. The Com­mit­tee were invited to dis­cuss the report, the fol­low­ing com­ment was made: a) It was a good applic­a­tion, sens­it­ively done and the Com­mit­tee were supportive.

2. The Com­mit­tee approved the applic­a­tion as per the recom­mend­a­tion in the Officer’s report.

3. Action Point arising: i) The mon­it­or­ing of ​‘Com­muted sums’ would be some­thing to look at in the future.

Agenda Item 7: Detailed Plan­ning Per­mis­sion 2022/0023/DET (22/00029/FUL) Form­a­tion of access hill tracks adja­cent to (1) Base Sta­tion and (2) Shiel­ing At Land 1200M NE of Coire Cas Car Park, Cairngorm Moun­tain, Glen­more, Aviemore Recom­mend­a­tion: Approve Sub­ject to Conditions

1. Edward Swales, Mon­it­or­ing & Enforce­ment Officer, Devel­op­ment Man­age­ment, presen­ted the paper to the Committee.

2. The Com­mit­tee were invited to ask points of clar­ity, the fol­low­ing points were raised: a) Remov­al of exist­ing tracks – dis­cus­sion that there was no offi­cial ref­er­ence or con­di­tion? The Mon­it­or­ing & Enforce­ment Officer explained this will be asked for and received in the Con­struc­tion Meth­od State­ment – ground will be restored and there will be nat­ur­al regen­er­a­tion so that the ground would be the same as before the tracks were installed. Mon­it­or­ing & Enforce­ment Officer explained the applic­a­tion does include remov­al of tracks and this was ref­er­enced on the plans.

APPROVED COM­MIT­TEE MINUTES

b) What does ​‘ration­al­isa­tion of the track net­work mean’? The Mon­it­or­ing & Enforce­ment Officer explained that works on the funicu­lar had opened addi­tion­al routes and some are no longer required – oper­a­tion­ally they don’t need to use some of them and some need to be exten­ded. The plans out­line what would hap­pen. The tem­por­ary track would become the per­man­ent track the one in front of the Sheil­ing would be taken away. Refer to page 4 no. 5 for clarification.

1. The Com­mit­tee were invited to dis­cuss the report, the fol­low­ing com­ment was made: a) Form­al­isa­tion was good and tidy­ing up all the tracks will be mak­ing things clear­er pre­vent­ing people wan­der­ing off the tracks.

22 The Com­mit­tee approved the applic­a­tion as per the recom­mend­a­tion in the Officer’s report.

23 Action Point arising: None

Agenda Item 8: Leth­en Wind Farm Con­sulta­tion 2022/0021/PAC (ECU00002216)

24 Nina Caudrey, Plan­ning Officer, Devel­op­ment Plan­ning and Envir­on­ment­al Advice presen­ted the paper to the Committee.

25 The Com­mit­tee were happy to sup­port recom­mend­a­tion and agreed to Object to the Application.

26 Action Points arising: None

Agenda Item 9: AOB

27 The Con­vener raised the fol­low­ing: a) The Glen Shero wind farm applic­a­tion, which the CNPA objec­ted to, was refused by Scot­tish Min­is­ters. She noted the CNPA and SNH (NatureScot) objec­ted to sig­ni­fic­ant adverse effects on the Spe­cial Land­scape Qual­it­ies of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park in two spe­cif­ic loc­al­ised areas, which affected over­all integ­rity of the CNP. This would help estab­lish prin­ciples to draw on in later cases with sig­ni­fic­ant effects on the Nation­al Park.

28 The Con­vener thanked Nina Caudrey, Plan­ning Officer for provid­ing CNPA evid­ence in sup­port of NatureScot and High­land Coun­cil at the Pub­lic Loc­al Inquiry.

APPROVED COM­MIT­TEE MINUTES

29 Action Points arising: None

Agenda Item 10: Date of Next Meeting

30 The date of the next meet­ing is Fri­day 27^th May 2022 at 10am in Spey/​Dee meet­ing rooms, CNPA HQ Grant­own on Spey (hybrid).

31 The pub­lic busi­ness of the meet­ing con­cluded at 10.58 hours.