Item5AACairngormFunicular20200076DET

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Item 5 22/05/2020

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHORITY

DEVEL­OP­MENT PRO­POSED: Engin­eer­ing works for strength­en­ing funicu­lar via­duct at Cairngorm Moun­tain Glen­more Aviemore High­land PH22 IRB

REF­ER­ENCE: 2020/0076/DET

APPLIC­ANT: High­lands And Islands Enterprise

DATE CALLED-IN: 23 March 2020

RECOM­MEND­A­TION: Approve sub­ject to Conditions

CASE OFFICER: Stephanie Wade, Plan­ning Officer

CNPA Plan­ning Committee

Applic­a­tion Site

0 145 290 580 Meters

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Item 5 22/05/2020

SITE DESCRIP­TION, PRO­POS­AL AND HISTORY

Site Descrip­tion

1. The applic­a­tion site is loc­ated on the slopes of Cairngorm with­in the estab­lished ski area and is accessed by the exist­ing B970 road from Glen­more, which ter­min­ates at a large park­ing area beside the Day Lodge and Funicu­lar Rail­way Base Sta­tion. The funicu­lar rail­way via­duct runs from the base sta­tion and car park at approx­im­ately 630m above sea level, past the mid sta­tion and Shiel­ing build­ing at 700m to the Ptar­mig­an res­taur­ant at 1080m above sea level. Through­out the ski area, there are a num­ber of tracks provid­ing access to the high­er ground, allow­ing main­ten­ance of ski infra­struc­ture and provid­ing access for walk­ers. Also with­in the ski area is asso­ci­ated ski infra­struc­ture includ­ing snow can­nons, snow fen­cing and ski tows.

2. The site is with­in the Cairngorm Moun­tains Nation­al Scen­ic Area. The European sites the Cairngorm Spe­cial Area of Con­ser­va­tion (SAC) and Spe­cial Pro­tec­tion Area (SPA) sur­round the ski area, bor­der­ing it to the south, west and north sides. Water courses with the ski area are con­nec­ted to the River Spey SAC. A num­ber of Sites of Spe­cial Sci­entif­ic Interest (SSSI) over­lap the Cairngorms SAC and SPA. Τo the south lies the Cairngorms SSSI, to the west lies the North­ern Cairngorms SSSI and to the north lies the Glen­more Forest SSSI and the Allt Mor SSSI. The pro­posed site is loc­ated approx­im­ately 400m from the nearest of these designations.

Pro­pos­al

1. The draw­ings and doc­u­ments asso­ci­ated with this applic­a­tion are lis­ted below and are avail­able on the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity web­site unless noted otherwise:

http://​www​.eplan​ningcnpa​.co​.uk/​o​n​line- applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=Q7DXNCSI0CH00

Title	Draw­ing Num­ber	Date on Plan*	Date Received
Plans
Site Loc­a­tion Plan	A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/800 Rev.02	06 March 2020	23 March 2020
Sec­tion Plan- Over­all Site Plan and Lon­git­ud­in­al Section	A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/900 Rev.03	06 March 2020	23 March 2020
Sec­tion Plan- Typ­ic­al Type 2 Beam Strength­en­ing Details	A132354/CFV/PN/DWG/920 Rev.03	06 March 2020	23 March 2020
Sec­tion Plan- Passing Loop Beam Strength­en­ing Details	A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/921 Rev.02	06 March 2020	23 March 2020

| Sec­tion Plan- Pier 46 Typ­ic­al Prop Detail | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/911 Rev.03 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Sec­tion Plan- Typ­ic­al Passing Loop Pier 56 Typ­ic­al Prop Detail I | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/926 Rev.02 | 09 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Sec­tion Plan- Typ­ic­al Passing Loop Pier 56 Com­bined Strength­en­ing Details | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/924 Rev.02 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Sec­tion Plan- Pier 41 Typ­ic­al Prop Detail I | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/910 Rev.03 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Sec­tion Plan-Typ­ic­al Passing Loop Pier 55 Com­bined Strength­en­ing Details | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/923 Rev.02 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Sec­tion Plan- Typ­ic­al Passing Loop Pier 55 Typ­ic­al Prop Detail I | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/925 Rev.02 | 09 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Typ­ic­al Passing Loop Com­bined Strength­en­ing Details | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/922 Rev.02 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Plan and Lon­git­ud­in­al Sec­tion Show­ing Beam Strength­en­ing Works I of 6 | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/930 Rev.02 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Plan and Lon­git­ud­in­al Sec­tion Show­ing Beam Strength­en­ing Works 2 of 6 | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/931 Rev.02 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Plan and Lon­git­ud­in­al Sec­tion Show­ing Beam Strength­en­ing Works 3 of 6 | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/932 Rev.02 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Plan and Lon­git­ud­in­al Sec­tion Show­ing Beam Strength­en­ing Works 4 of 6 | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/933 Rev.02 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Plan and Lon­git­ud­in­al Sec­tion Show­ing Beam Strength­en­ing Works 5 of 6 | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/934 Rev.02 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Plan and Lon­git­ud­in­al Sec­tion Show­ing Beam Strength­en­ing Works 6 of 6 | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/935 Rev.02 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Plan and Lon­git­ud­in­al Sec­tion Sheet I of 6 | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/901 Rev.03 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 |

| Plan and Lon­git­ud­in­al Sec­tion Sheet 2 of 6 | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/902 Rev.03 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Plan and Lon­git­ud­in­al Sec­tion Sheet 3 of 6 | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/903 Rev.03 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Plan and Lon­git­ud­in­al Sec­tion Sheet 4 of 6 | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/904 Rev.03 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Plan and Lon­git­ud­in­al Sec­tion Sheet 5 of 6 | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/905 Rev.03 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Plan and Lon­git­ud­in­al Sec­tion Sheet 6 of 6 | A132354/CFV/PLN/DWG/906 Rev.03 | 06 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 |

| Sup­port­ing Doc­u­ments | | | | | Breed­ing Birds Spe­cies Pro­tec­tion Plan | 8502 Ver­sion 1.3 | 16 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Eco­lo­gic­al Baseline Report Part I of 2 | 8502 Ver­sion 1.4 | 16 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Eco­lo­gic­al Baseline Report Part 2 of 2 | 8502 Ver­sion 1.4 | 16 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Spe­cies Pro­tec­tion Plan: Moun­tain Hare | 8502 Ver­sion 1.3 | 16 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Spe­cies Pro­tec­tion Plan: Rep­tiles | 8502 Ver­sion 1.3 | 16 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Spe­cies Pro­tec­tion Plan: Water Vole | 8502 Ver­sion 1.3 | 16 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Meth­od­o­logy Report Parts 1 – 8 inclus­ive | Revi­sion 00 | 11 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Plan­ning State­ment | HIGH0001 | 11 March 2020 | 23 March 2020 | | Land­scape and Visu­al Apprais­al and Appen­dices | | 30 March 2020 | 31 March 2020 | | Atmos Con­sult­ing responses re: sepa com­ments | | 27 April 2020 | 07 May 2020 | | Balfour Beatty response re: sepa com­ments | | 01 May 2020 | 07 May 2020 |

*Where no spe­cif­ic day of month has been provided on the plan, the sys­tem defaults to the 1^st of the month.

1. The pro­posed devel­op­ment includes the strength­en­ing of the exist­ing Cairngorm Moun­tain funicu­lar via­duct by adding props to a num­ber of the exist­ing via­duct piers. The plan­ning applic­a­tion provides details of both the per­man­ent works that require a plan­ning applic­a­tion to be author­ised, and oth­er tem­por­ary enabling works that would be under­taken as per­mit­ted devel­op­ment under Class 14 of the Town and Coun­try Plan­ning (Gen­er­al Per­mit­ted Devel­op­ment) (Scot­land) Order 1992, if plan­ning per­mis­sion is gran­ted for the funicu­lar strength­en­ing works, as well as the res­tor­a­tion meth­ods for all ground affected on completion.

2. The struc­ture of the funicu­lar via­duct is sup­por­ted above ground by the anchor blocks and piers. The pro­posed strength­en­ing works to the via­duct will involve the install­a­tion of rein­for­cing props and con­crete bases beside exist­ing piers beneath the funicu­lar via­duct. This will involve minor earth works to allow con­struc­tion with remov­al of veget­a­tion and soils, lead­ing to a small increased in the hard sur­face area of the funicu­lar through the install­a­tion of the props’ con­crete bases on com­ple­tion. The areas for the con­crete bases would be with­in a max­im­um size of either 11m x 14m area or an Ilm x 18m area for 63 of the 94 via­duct piers. Veget­a­tion and soils would be cleared for these areas and topo­graphy would be loc­ally altered dur­ing the con­struc­tion of the prop found­a­tions. The soils would be tem­por­ar­ily stock­piled before being replaced and veget­a­tion restored.

3. Access for the deliv­ery of con­struc­tion mater­i­als to the work­s­ites would be either from exist­ing tracks, tem­por­ary access tracks or by heli­copter. The heli­copter use will involve trans­port­ing mater­i­als to piers 62 to 33. This will con­sist of a min­im­um of five hours con­struc­tion fly­ing time with an aver­age of 8 return trips per hour with a tem­por­ary helipad to be loc­ated in the Coire-na-Ciste car park.

4. The applic­a­tion is sup­por­ted by a Land­scape and Visu­al Apprais­al, Eco­lo­gic­al Baseline Report, Peat and Ground­wa­ter Ter­restri­al Eco­sys­tems Report, Hab­it­at Man­age­ment and Res­tor­a­tion Plan, and spe­cies pro­tec­tion plans for the spe­cies most likely to be affected dur­ing con­struc­tion: breed­ing birds; moun­tain hare, rep­tiles; and water vole.

5. Plans of the pro­pos­al are included with­in Appendix 1.

6. For ref­er­ence, the tem­por­ary works can be found with­in the con­struc­tion meth­od state­ment plans included at Appendix 2.

His­tory

1. There are no recent plan­ning applic­a­tions relat­ing to the imme­di­ate red line area of this applic­a­tion, how­ever there have been numer­ous plan­ning applic­a­tions with­in the wider Cairngorm Moun­tain area, which are sum­mar­ised below:

2. The ori­gin­al funicu­lar rail­way applic­a­tion was approved 1997 and dealt with by High­land Coun­cil pri­or to the form­ing of the Nation­al Park, (ref­er­ence 94/00254/FULBS). In 2002, full plan­ning per­mis­sion was gran­ted by the High­land Coun­cil to vary con­di­tion II of the ori­gin­al funicu­lar rail­way con­sent in order to retain a 3 metre wide access track for vehicu­lar use, (ref­er­ence 02/00382/FUL).

3. In 2006, plan­ning per­mis­sion was gran­ted by the CNP for the ​“erec­tion of a cam­era obscura” with­in the moun­tain garden area of Cairngorm Moun­tain (ref­er­ence 06/319/CP) and for ​“path works, dyk­ing, land­scap­ing and art works” (ref­er­ence 06/258/CP).

4. In 2014, plan­ning per­mis­sion was gran­ted at the Novem­ber CNPA Plan­ning Com­mit­tee meet­ing for the remov­al of the Shiel­ing ski-tow and replace­ment with a mod­ern rope tow of sim­il­ar length and pro­file, loc­ated beside the funicu­lar railway.

5. In 2015, the High­land Coun­cil gran­ted per­mis­sion for an exten­sion to the west wall poma ski tow beside the Ptar­mig­an and a new return wheel at the south­ern­most end of the ski tow (reference:15/01000/FUL).

6. In 2017, ret­ro­spect­ive plan­ning per­mis­sion was gran­ted by the CNPA Plan­ning com­mit­tee for the ​“reten­tion of a ski area access track” (ref­er­ence 2016/0295/DET). Also, the High­land Coun­cil gran­ted per­mis­sion for the ​“sit­ing of a snow fact­ory unit” in Novem­ber 2017 (ref­er­ence 17/04736/FUL).

7. In 2018, plan­ning per­mis­sion was refused by the CNPA Plan­ning Com­mit­tee in Octo­ber for the ​“install­a­tion of begin­ner and inter­me­di­ate arti­fi­cial ski slopes with asso­ci­ated ser­vices.” The applic­a­tion was refused on grounds of sit­ing, loc­a­tion, col­our of mater­i­al, changes to land­form lead­ing to unac­cept­able land­scape impacts in the short and medi­um term on the site and on views to the site, with the pro­posed mit­ig­a­tion not being achieved in in an accept­able time frame. Also in 2018, the High­land Coun­cil gran­ted a tem­por­ary per­mis­sion for the ​“install­a­tion of a double unit snow fact­ory” (ref­er­ence 18/05078/FUL).

8. In May 2019, plan­ning per­mis­sion was gran­ted for the renov­a­tion and erec­tion of an exten­sion to the Ptar­mig­an Res­taur­ant build­ing (ref­er­ence: 2018/0177/DET) and at the Decem­ber 2019 plan­ning com­mit­tee, per­mis­sion was gran­ted for ​“engin­eer­ing works to smooth and re-grade land” at Cairngorm Moun­tain (ref­er­ence: 2019/0247/DET). Also dur­ing this peri­od the High­land Coun­cil gran­ted per­mis­sion to applic­a­tion ref­er­ence 19/03944/S42, which sought to vary con­di­tion I of plan­ning per­mis­sion 19/01765/FUL (install­a­tion of a tube slide, zip line and play area with­in the Coire Cas car park at Cairngorm Moun­tain) and, applic­a­tion ref­er­ence 19/04135/S42 for the vari­ation of con­di­tion I of plan­ning per­mis­sion 18/05078/FUL to alter the ces­sa­tion date of the per­mit­ted snow factory.

9. The CNPA are also cur­rently con­sid­er­ing and pro­cessing two fur­ther live applic­a­tions. Applic­a­tion ref­er­ence: 2020/0097/DET for the ​‘install­a­tion of car park bar­ri­ers at Cairngorm Moun­tain’; and applic­a­tion ref­er­ence: 2020/0105/DET for the ​‘install­a­tion of two tube slides and exten­sion and realign­ment of exist­ing tube slide at the Coire Cas Car Park’.

DEVEL­OP­MENT PLAN CONTEXT

Policies

Nation­al Policy	Scot­tish Plan­ning Policy 2014
Stra­tegic Policy	Cairngorms Nation­al Park Part­ner­ship Plan 2017 — 2022
Loc­al Plan Policy	Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan (2015)Those policies rel­ev­ant to the assess­ment of this applic­a­tion are marked with a cross
POLICY I	NEW HOUS­ING DEVELOPMENT
POLICY 2	SUP­PORT­ING ECO­NOM­IC GROWTH	X
POLICY 3	SUS­TAIN­ABLE DESIGN	X
POLICY 4	NAT­UR­AL HERITAGE	X
POLICY 5	LAND­SCAPE	X
POLICY 6	THE SIT­ING AND DESIGN OF DIGIT­AL COM­MU­NIC­A­TIONS EQUIPMENT
POLICY 7	RENEW­ABLE ENERGY
POLICY 8	SPORT AND RECREATION	X
POLICY 9	CUL­TUR­AL HERITAGE
POLICY 10	RESOURCES	X
POLICY 11	DEVELOPER CON­TRI­BU­TIONS

1. All new devel­op­ment pro­pos­als require to be assessed in rela­tion to policies con­tained in the adop­ted Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan. The full word­ing of policies can be found at:

http://​cairngorms​.co​.uk/​u​p​l​o​a​d​s​/​d​o​c​u​m​e​n​t​s​/Park Authority/Planning/LDP15.pdf

Plan­ning Guidance

1. Sup­ple­ment­ary guid­ance also forms part of the Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan and provides more details about how to com­ply with the policies. Guid­ance that is rel­ev­ant to this applic­a­tion is marked with a cross.

Policy I	New Hous­ing Devel­op­ment Non-Stat­utory Guidance
Policy 2	Sup­port­ing Eco­nom­ic Growth Non-Stat­utory Guidance	X
Policy 3	Sus­tain­able Design Non-Stat­utory Guidance	X
Policy 4	Nat­ur­al Her­it­age Sup­ple­ment­ary Guidance	X
Policy 5	Land­scape Non-Stat­utory Guidance	X
Policy 7	Renew­able Energy Sup­ple­ment­ary Guidance
Policy 8	Sport and Recre­ation Non-Stat­utory Guidance	X
Policy 9	Cul­tur­al Her­it­age Non-Stat­utory Guidance
Policy 10	Resources Non-Stat­utory Guidance	X
Policy 11	Developer Con­tri­bu­tions Sup­ple­ment­ary Guidance

Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2020

1. The emer­ging Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan (“Pro­posed Plan”) which will cov­er the peri­od 2020 – 2025 is cur­rently being pro­gressed. The pro­posed plan has been through a pub­lic con­sulta­tion pro­cess and the form­al responses have been assessed and sub­mit­ted along with all oth­er rel­ev­ant mater­i­als to Scot­tish Min­is­ters for exam­in­a­tion. As the exam­in­a­tion of the Pro­posed Plan is still pro­gress­ing, its con­tents cur­rently carry lim­ited weight.

CON­SULTA­TIONS

A sum­mary of the main issues raised by consultees

1. Scot­tish Nat­ur­al Her­it­age (SNH) note that the pro­posed works are site close to the Cairngorms Spe­cial Area of Con­ser­va­tion (SAC) selec­ted for a vari­ety of spe­cies and hab­it­ats, and Cairngorms Spe­cial Pro­tec­tion Area (SPA) clas­si­fied for a vari­ety of bird spe­cies and asso­ci­ated SSSI’s. The pro­posed works are to be under­taken out­side any of the des­ig­nated sites and sub­ject to the work being under­taken in accord­ance with the described meth­od­o­logy, SNH con­sider the pro­pos­al is unlikely to impact on any of the qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures or noti­fied interests. SNH there­fore con­firm, that in their view, the pro­pos­al is unlikely to have a sig­ni­fic­ant effect on any qual­i­fy­ing interests either dir­ectly or indir­ectly and an appro­pri­ate assess­ment is not required.

2. Scot­tish Envir­on­ment Pro­tec­tion Agency (SEPA) has no objec­tion to the applic­a­tion sub­ject to the impos­i­tion of recom­men­ded plan­ning con­di­tions as out­lined below under each subheading.

a) SUS­TAIN­ABLE PEAT MAN­AGE­MENT: SEPA wel­comes the util­isa­tion of exist­ing tracks where pos­sible and acknow­ledge that there is little scope for mit­ig­a­tion in terms of redu­cing volumes of excav­ated peat with regards to the pro­posed new pier sup­ports. How­ever, there appears to be scope for fur­ther mit­ig­a­tion in rela­tion to the new tem­por­ary tracks pro­posed with a sig­ni­fic­ant volume of peat estim­ated to be excav­ated for these in table 3 of the Out­line Peat Man­age­ment Plan and SEPA there­fore request that all tem­por­ary tracks where peat would oth­er­wise be excav­ated com­prise of geo­tex­tile or plastic track mat­ting unless there is a sig­ni­fic­ant tech­nic­al reas­on why this is not feas­ible. They note that there may also be scope for micro sit­ing of the tem­por­ary com­pounds at the mid and upper sta­tions should pock­ets of peat be found in these areas- it is noted that there appears to be no details of wheth­er these tem­por­ary con­struc­tion com­pounds will required excav­a­tion nor have they been included in the excav­ated peat volume estim­ates in table 3. SEPA there­fore request peat volumes be provided for all pro­posed excav­a­tion works in the final Peat Man­age­ment Plan and that the land­scap­ing details which util­ise the excav­ated peat are provided.

b) SEPA wel­come the pro­posed mit­ig­a­tion as included in the ​‘Peat and Ground­wa­ter Depend­ent Ter­restri­al Eco­sys­tem Report’ (March 2020) and included in the out­line Peat Man­age­ment Plan. To ensure the mit­ig­a­tion measures

c) GROUND WATER DEPEND­ENT TER­RESTRI­AL ECO­SYS­TEMS (GWDTE): SEPA note from the sub­mit­ted NVC that GWDTE occur pre­dom­in­antly at the bot­tom of the site and note that the date of when the sur­vey took place is not an ideal time for sur­vey­ing ground veget­a­tion. How­ever, they wel­come the com­mit­ment for a pre-con­struc­tion sur­vey by the ECoW in the Hab­it­at Man­age­ment and Res­tor­a­tion Plan (March 2020). Whilst in gen­er­al SEPA con­sider that the planned lay­out looks to min­im­ise the impact on GWDTE, due to the pres­ence of GWDTE in the lower sec­tion (from the polma track across to the funicu­lar at two points), they request that the pro­posed new tem­por­ary track in these loc­a­tions main­tains hydro­lo­gic­al con­tinu­ity in these areas, i.e. no cut track should be used at these loc­a­tions, only float­ing track. They also request the final HMRP and Sur­face Water Man­age­ment Plan demon­strate that the risk that upgraded tracks could become a pref­er­en­tial path­way for ground water flow can be mit­ig­ated. A post determ­in­a­tion con­di­tion is reques­ted for the sub­mis­sion and agree­ment of the final Hab­it­at Man­age­ment and Res­tor­a­tion Plan.

d) POL­LU­TION PRE­VEN­TION: SEPA query the con­struc­tion site area and note that should the con­struc­tion site area be over 4ha, a Con­struc­tion Site Licence (CSL) would be required. Not­with­stand­ing this, SEPA have reviewed the Out­line Sur­face Water Man­age­ment Plan and require this to be more site- spe­cif­ic. Whilst they anti­cip­ate that a CSL will be required, they ask that the com­ments relat­ing to the sur­face water man­age­ment plan are addressed in a revised Pol­lu­tion Pre­ven­tion Plan as part of the final Sur­face Water Man­age­ment Plan.

e) WATER­COURSE DIVER­SION: It is noted that a water­course diver­sion is required adja­cent to Pier ⁴⁵⁄₄₆. As per cor­res­pond­ence with SEPA Water Per­mit­ting this will require a Simple Licence. Spe­cif­ic con­trols relat­ing to this activ­ity can be out­lined in a spe­cif­ic Meth­od State­ment which will be con­di­tioned in this licence. How­ever, it is recom­men­ded these con­trols are ref­er­enced on the final Appendix 3- Water Man­age­ment Lay­out of the Sur­face Water Man­age­ment Plan.

f) SITE WASTE MAN­AGE­MENT: In accord­ance with Policy 10: Resources, SEPA request a site spe­cif­ic waste man­age­ment plan is sub­mit­ted and agreed before con­struc­tion com­mences and this should be secured by condition.

1. The High­land Coun­cil Flood Risk Man­age­ment Team has no spe­cif­ic com­ments relat­ing to this applic­a­tion not­ing that the works will not cause any long term impacts or changes in terms of flood risk or drainage.

2. CNPA Land­scape Officer con­siders that the con­clu­sions of the sub­mit­ted Land­scape and Visu­al Assess­ment report are sound although notes that the con­clu­sions are pre­dicted on the assump­tion that all res­tor­a­tion of the exist­ing ground will be suc­cess­ful. The Officer com­ments that the Hab­it­at Man­age­ment and

Res­tor­a­tion Plan provides a good out­line to the approach pro­posed to achieve the aim of restor­ing exist­ing veget­a­tion how­ever recom­mends a plan­ning con­di­tion is attached to any sub­sequent decision notice requir­ing the sub­mis­sion of a res­tor­a­tion plan to be agreed and imple­men­ted to ensure that the spe­cif­ic details of how the res­tor­a­tion will be achieved are agreed.

1. CNPA Out­door Access Officer reques­ted the sub­mis­sion of fur­ther inform­a­tion of an out­door access man­age­ment plan detail­ing how the vis­it­ing pub­lic will be man­aged around the inten­ded works, spe­cific­ally in respect of stat­utory access rights.

2. CNPA Eco­logy Officer con­firms that fol­low­ing con­sulta­tion with SNH, the works will be under­taken out­with any des­ig­nated sites and sub­ject to the works being under­taken in accord­ance with the described meth­od­o­logy, there will be no indir­ect or direst sig­ni­fic­ant effect on the qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures or noti­fied interests of nearby sites. An appro­pri­ate Assess­ment is there­fore not required. The Officer states that if the works are under­taken there will be per­man­ent loss of Annex I qual­ity hab­it­ats (Dry and Wet Heath), along the route of the funicu­lar and the pro­pos­al would there­fore need to be sup­por­ted by com­pens­at­ory meas­ures. The Officer con­siders that the sub­mit­ted Spe­cies Pro­tec­tion Plans, Hab­it­at Man­age­ment Plan and Meth­od­o­logy Report (2020) should ensure the pro­tec­tion of mam­mals, birds, rep­tiles, amphi­bi­ans and sur­round­ing hab­it­at includ­ing GWDTE dur­ing the con­struc­tion peri­od. The HMP and Meth­od­o­logy report also includes pro­pos­als for hab­it­at res­tor­a­tion and post- res­tor­a­tion mon­it­or­ing which is wel­comed. The Officer recom­mends the fol­low­ing out­stand­ing require­ments are included as plan­ning conditions:

a) A heli­copter flight plan approved by SNH and RSPB to pre­vent dis­turb­ance to breed­ing birds espe­cially Golden Eagle;

b) Details of meth­ods used for soil strip­ping, turf stor­age and re-seed­ing as per Land­scape Advice; and

c) Details of com­pens­a­tion for loss of hab­it­ats to include mont­ane scrub plant­ing, this should be developed in con­junc­tion with Cairngorm Moun­tain and the CNPA Land­scape Advice.

1. CNPA Peat­land Officer has reviewed the applic­a­tion and notes the thor­ough­ness of the sub­mit­ted Peat and GWTE Report, how­ever requests the sub­mis­sion of a Peat Man­age­ment Plan. The Plan needs to set out how peat, turves and soils will be handled, man­aged, stored and main­tained dur­ing construction.

2. Aviemore and Vicin­ity Com­munity Coun­cil note their sup­port for the pro­pos­al although provide a num­ber of gen­er­al com­ments regard­ing: the tim­ing of the applic­a­tion pre-empt­ing the pub­lic­a­tion of the Future of Cairngorm; the lack of inform­a­tion regard­ing the dur­a­tion or poten­tial tim­ing of the works; con­cern regard­ing run­ning site traffic through the exist­ing Coire Cas Car Park; sup­port for the com­pre­hens­ive meas­ures pro­posed to pro­tect wild­life and the envir­on­ment; and quer­ies the sub­mis­sion of this applic­a­tion pri­or to the HIE pro­duc­tion of a Mas­ter­plan which was under­stood by them to include a review of options for the funicu­lar. A copy of their full response can be found at Appendix 4.

REP­RES­ENT­A­TIONS

1. The applic­a­tion was advert­ised when first sub­mit­ted. 13 let­ters of rep­res­ent­a­tion, object­ing to the applic­a­tion have been received from indi­vidu­al mem­bers of the pub­lic and on behalf of the North East Moun­tain Trust, Moun­tain­eer­ing Scot­land, Cairngorm Cam­paign and the Badenoch and Strath­spey Con­ser­va­tion Group (BSCG). The Roy­al Soci­ety for the Pro­tec­tion of Birds (RSPB) has provided gen­er­al com­ments on the mat­ter. A copy of these rep­res­ent­a­tions can be found at Appendix 3. The BSCG have reques­ted to address the com­mit­tee. The main issues raised from the object­ors are sum­mar­ised as follows:

a) Con­cerns raised relat­ing to the accur­acy of the applic­a­tion details for the proposal;

b) No Mas­ter­plan for Cairngorm Ski Area and the applic­a­tion is pre-mature to the pub­lic­a­tion of the out­come of the com­munity con­sulta­tion on ​“The Future of Cairngorm”;

c) Impact of pro­pos­al on increas­ing flood risk and its poten­tial increase water run off rates;

d) Pro­pos­al conflict’s with CNPA’s Work­ing Prin­ciples for Cairngorm Mountain;

e) Insuf­fi­cient inform­a­tion sub­mit­ted relat­ing to envir­on­ment­al assess­ment for the pro­pos­al, includ­ing peat man­age­ment, res­tor­a­tion works, con­struc­tion meth­ods, con­struc­tion mater­i­als, fuel­ling areas, eco­logy information;

f) Con­cern regard­ing the scale of works for the work­ing cor­ridor and the qual­ity of its reinstatement;

g) Request for the sus­pen­sion of the application’s con­sid­er­a­tion until post Covid-19;

h) Red line devel­op­ment bound­ary does not cov­er the whole site impacted by the pro­pos­al and the applic­a­tion is there­fore inval­id as it should be part of a major applic­a­tion process;

i) Con­cern regard­ing the sens­it­iv­ity of the site as works will cause sig­ni­fic­ant dam­age to hab­it­ats, eco­logy and landscape;

j) Tem­por­ary tracks and exist­ing track upgrades should be included with­in the red line bound­ary and con­cern is raised regard­ing the tem­por­ary nature of the tracks and their reten­tion in the future;

k) Con­cern regard­ing the accur­acy of the inform­a­tion with con­flict­ing inform­a­tion such as the num­ber of props to be installed,;

l) Props intro­duce a visu­al intru­sion to the area;

m) Use of heli­copters is incon­sist­ent with CNPA decision for the Ptar­mig­an plan­ning applic­a­tion due to the risks asso­ci­ated with pro­tec­ted birds;

n) No demon­stra­tion that the works will address the issues and fix the funicular;

○) No busi­ness case to sup­port the repair of the funicu­lar and the funicular’s con­tri­bu­tion to the loc­al eco­nomy and its viab­il­ity is queried.

1. Gen­er­al com­ments have also been provided by the RSBP who note that a spe­cies pro­tec­tion plan for breed­ing birds has been pro­duced and that the ECoW should carry out sur­veys for breed­ing birds pri­or to work tak­ing place in the area. They also con­firm that a heli­copter flight plan should be agreed tak­ing into account p to date inform­a­tion on breed­ing Sched­ule I spe­cies along the light path.

APPRAIS­AL

1. The main plan­ning con­sid­er­a­tions in rela­tion to this applic­a­tion com­prise: the prin­ciple of devel­op­ment, and the impact on the nat­ur­al envir­on­ment in respect of: des­ig­nated areas, pro­tec­ted spe­cies and hab­it­ats, land­scape impacts, togeth­er with the impact on flood­ing. The rel­ev­ant issues in determ­in­ing the plan­ning applic­a­tion are solely related to the devel­op­ment pro­posed and its impacts. The funicu­lar rail­way on Cairngorm already exists and is not a mat­ter for review in this applic­a­tion. The costs of the strength­en­ing works and peoples’ opin­ions on the value for money or use of pub­lic money are mat­ters for the applic­ant and are not rel­ev­ant to the determ­in­a­tion of the plan­ning application.

Prin­ciple

1. Policy 2: Sup­port­ing Eco­nom­ic Growth of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2015 sup­ports devel­op­ment which enhances form­al and inform­al recre­ation and leis­ure facil­it­ies provid­ing: there are no adverse envir­on­ment­al impacts; it makes a pos­it­ive con­tri­bu­tion to the exper­i­ence of vis­it­ors; and it adds to or extends the core tour­ist sea­son. Policy 8: Sport and Recre­ation also seeks to sup­port exist­ing sport and recre­ation related busi­ness activ­it­ies. Nation­al plan­ning policy as con­tained in Scot­tish Plan­ning Policy sim­il­arly seeks to pro­mote busi­ness devel­op­ment which increases eco­nom­ic activ­ity whilst also safe­guard­ing and enhan­cing the nat­ur­al environment.

2. In this regard, the prin­ciple of devel­op­ment, which is related to the con­tin­ued safe oper­a­tion of the main winter uplift infra­struc­ture and sole sum­mer uplift capa­city of the long-estab­lished Cairngorm ski centre, gen­er­ally com­plies with policy, provid­ing envir­on­ment­al impacts are accept­able. The pro­pos­al is related to the strength­en­ing of the exist­ing Cairngorm Moun­tain funicu­lar via­duct by adding props to a num­ber of the exist­ing via­duct piers to allow for con­tin­ued safe oper­a­tion at the site. The prin­ciple is bene­fi­cial to vis­it­ors provid­ing that there are no adverse land­scape or envir­on­ment­al impacts. These mat­ters are now con­sidered in more detail.

Envir­on­ment­al Issues

1. Policy 4: Nat­ur­al Her­it­age of the Cairngorms Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2015 seeks to ensure that there are no adverse effects on nat­ur­al her­it­age interests, des­ig­nated sites or pro­tec­ted spe­cies and that any impacts upon biod­iversity are avoided, min­im­ised or com­pensated. Policy 10: Resources, also seeks to ensure that dis­turb­ance to soils, peat and any asso­ci­ated veget­a­tion is minimised.

2. There are nat­ur­al her­it­age interests of inter­na­tion­al import­ance with­in the wider area, how­ever the work pro­posed is out­side the bound­ary of any nature con­ser­va­tion sites des­ig­nated for their bio­lo­gic­al or geo­lo­gic­al interests and Scot­tish Nat­ur­al Her­it­age con­firm that sub­ject to the work being under­taken in accord­ance with the described meth­od­o­logy, the pro­pos­al is unlikely to impact on any of the qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures or noti­fied interest and will sub­sequently not have a sig­ni­fic­ant effect on any qual­i­fy­ing interests either dir­ectly or indirectly.

3. Eco­lo­gic­al sur­vey work sub­mit­ted in sup­port of the applic­a­tion has been reviewed by the CNPA Eco­logy Officer who notes that the pro­pos­al would need to be sup­por­ted by com­pens­at­ory meas­ures to mit­ig­ate against the loss of Annex I qual­ity hab­it­ats (Dry and Wet Heath) along the route of the funicu­lar. The Officer con­siders that the sub­mit­ted Spe­cies Pro­tec­tion Plans, and Hab­it­at Plan and Report should ensure the pro­tec­tion of mam­mals, birds, rep­tiles, amphi­bi­ans and sur­round­ing hab­it­at. Plan­ning con­di­tions are recom­men­ded to ensure the mit­ig­a­tion and hab­it­at com­pens­a­tion meas­ures, includ­ing a heli­copter flight plan to pre­vent dis­turb­ance to breed­ing birds, are undertaken.

4. There would be a loss of peat excav­ated from the install­a­tion of new pier props and bases and there is little scope for mit­ig­a­tion of that impact. How­ever, giv­en the rel­at­ively small scale of loss of peat, it is not con­sidered to cause any sig­ni­fic­ant adverse effects. SEPA con­firm that they have no objec­tion to the pro­pos­al in rela­tion to its impact on ground­wa­ter depend­ent ter­restri­al eco­sys­tems (GWDTE) sub­ject to revised inform­a­tion being sub­mit­ted and agreed by way of post determ­in­a­tion plan­ning con­di­tions for the Hab­it­at Man­age­ment and Res­tor­a­tion Plan and Peat Man­age­ment Plan. The CNPA Peat­land Officer con­curs with the request for a final Peat Man­age­ment Plan not­ing that the details should set out how peat, turves and soils will be handled, man­aged, stored and main­tained dur­ing construction.

5. In these over­all cir­cum­stances, and sub­ject to appro­pri­ate plan­ning con­di­tions, the applic­a­tion is con­sidered to com­ply with Policy 4: Nat­ur­al Her­it­age and Policy 10: Resources of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2015.

Land­scape Issues

1. The applic­a­tion site is loc­ated with­in the Cairngorm Nation­al Scen­ic Area, the Nation­al Park and close to the Cairngorms Wild Land Area No.15. As such, it is import­ant that the land­scape impacts of the pro­posed devel­op­ment are fully con­sidered in rela­tion to Policy 5: Land­scape of the Cairngorms Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2015. This policy seeks to ensure that all new devel­op­ment con­serves and enhances the land­scape char­ac­ter and spe­cial land­scape qual­it­ies of the Nation­al Park and the set­ting of the devel­op­ment. Any sig­ni­fic­ant adverse impacts must be clearly out­weighed by social or eco­nom­ic bene­fits of nation­al import­ance and all adverse effects must be min­im­ised and mit­ig­ated. Policy 3: Sus­tain­able Design seeks to ensure that devel­op­ment is suit­ably designed.

2. In this regard, the devel­op­ment relates to alter­a­tions to the exist­ing via­duct struc­ture and will there­fore be viewed in the con­text of that infra­struc­ture. The two key con­clu­sions drawn from the sub­mit­ted Land­scape and Visu­al Assess­ment con­firm that: the effects on land­scape char­ac­ter would not be adverse and the changes are barely per­cept­ible; and regard­ing visu­al amen­ity, no poten­tially adverse effects were pre­dicted, mean­ing visu­al recept­ors were not pre­dicted to exper­i­ence a mean­ing­ful change in exist­ing views are a res­ult of the pro­posed strength­en­ing works. The Nation­al Park’s Land­scape Officer has no objec­tion to the pro­pos­al not­ing that the con­clu­sions of the Land­scape and Visu­al Assess­ment report are sound and the Hab­it­at Man­age­ment and Res­tor­a­tion Plan provides a good out­line, although requests the attach­ment of a plan­ning con­di­tion for a final res­tor­a­tion plan to be agreed and

imple­men­ted to ensure that the spe­cif­ic details of how the res­tor­a­tion will be achieved are agreed. The Officer also recom­mends that a biod­iversity enhance­ment is included in any sub­sequent res­tor­a­tion plan of con­tinu­ing to devel­op the mont­ane scrub with­in the area, which would help to mit­ig­ate the visu­al effects of the funicu­lar line itself in time, and by extend­ing the exist­ing hab­it­at of the garden to provide more nest­ing oppor­tun­it­ies for birds such as the ring ouzel.

1. Whilst the site is in the Nation­al Park, the pres­ence of the exist­ing infra­struc­ture and built form on the moun­tain already impacts on the qual­it­ies of wild­ness and remote­ness which are asso­ci­ated with oth­er areas of the park. The scale and nature of the pro­posed works mean that land­scape and visu­al effects would be loc­al­ised and on com­ple­tion, would be lead to little change from the estab­lished baseline. Dur­ing con­struc­tion, tem­por­ary access, con­struc­tion vehicles, com­pounds and con­struc­tion works would lead to more obvi­ous land­scape and visu­al impacts but these will all be tem­por­ary and