Item5AACorgarff20180350DET

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 24/05/2019

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHORITY

DEVEL­OP­MENT PRO­POSED: Erec­tion of 12 Hol­i­day Cab­ins and Asso­ci­ated Ancil­lary Plant Build­ing, Ground Moun­ted Sol­ar Pan­els and Form­a­tion of Park­ing Area at Site At Lagh­lass­er Cor­garff Strath­don AB36 8YP

REF­ER­ENCE: 2018/0350/DET

APPLIC­ANT: Blackbyre Devel­op­ments Ltd

DATE CALLED-IN: 6 Septem­ber 2018

RECOM­MEND­A­TION: Approve sub­ject to conditions

CASE OFFICER: Emma Wilson Plan­ning Manager

CNPA Plan­ning Committee

Applic­a­tion Site

0 180 360 720 Meters

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 24/05/2019

INTRO­DUC­TION

1. This applic­a­tion was presen­ted to Com­mit­tee at its meet­ing on 22 March 2019. Fol­low­ing dis­cus­sion it was agreed that Com­mit­tee should defer the applic­a­tion to vis­it the site and for the fol­low­ing mat­ters to be giv­en fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion: a) To estab­lish the water sup­ply and its effect on the neigh­bours; b) On the wood­land man­age­ment; c) Visu­al­isa­tions of the devel­op­ment site.

2. This site vis­it has been arranged for the meet­ing of 24 May 2019 fol­low­ing which the applic­a­tion will be presen­ted to Com­mit­tee for its sub­sequent decision.

3. In terms of the mat­ters to be con­sidered: a) The applic­ants have sub­mit­ted a Water Sup­ply Desk Top Assess­ment. This con­cludes that pro­posed increase in abstrac­tion from the Lagh­lass­er well will have no effect on oth­er private water sup­plies in the vicin­ity. This has been passed to Aber­deen­shire Council’s Envir­on­ment­al Health team for com­ment. They have raised con­cern regard­ing the assump­tions that have been made in this assess­ment. As dis­cussed at the pre­vi­ous meet­ing, it was agreed an appro­pri­ate con­di­tion be attached to any con­sent requir­ing that the water sup­ply issue is resolved pri­or to the com­mence­ment of devel­op­ment. b) The applic­ants have con­firmed that they are agree­able to a con­di­tion ensur­ing con­tinu­ity of wood­land cov­er over the wider site under their own­er­ship and sur­round­ing the applic­a­tion site. c) The site vis­it should offer Com­mit­tee the oppor­tun­ity to see the site and view it from ​‘the Watch­ers’ view­point. The Land­scape and Visu­al Apprais­al doc­u­ment that accom­pan­ied the applic­a­tion shows a num­ber of visu­als from dif­fer­ent view­points and the anti­cip­ated visu­al effects of the proposals.

SITE DESCRIP­TION, PRO­POS­AL AND HISTORY

Site Descrip­tion

1. The site cov­ers an area of approx­im­ately 0.54 hec­tares and lies with­in an exist­ing pre­dom­in­antly con­i­fer­ous wood­land which is loc­ated on a roun­ded land­form bounded by the River Don to the north and east and the prin­cip­al A939 road to the south and west. The site is accessed from the A939 and is a small cleared area with­in the exist­ing wood­land. The sur­round­ing land­scape is rel­at­ively open with some large areas of con­ifer wood­land inter­spersed with small groups of trees asso­ci­ated with adja­cent build­ings which lie pre­dom­in­antly on ter­races or high­er ground above the flood­plain. A key land­mark with­in the imme­di­ate land­scape is Cor­garff Castle which lies to the south west.

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 24/05/2019

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=PEOO55SI0CH00

Title	Draw­ing Num­ber	Date on Plan*	Date Received
Plan — Loc­a­tion Plan and Exist­ing Site Plan	323(GA)001 REV B	08/11/18	09/11/18
Plan — Pro­posed Site Co-ordin­ate Plan — Cab­in Locations	323(GA)002 REV B	08/11/18	09/11/18
Plan — Pro­posed Site Entrance	323(GA)003 REV D	11/12/18	12/12/18
Plan — Pro­posed Site Plan	323(GA)004 REV D	24/01/19	24/01/19
Plan — Cab­in 1, 2, 3 — Block Plan and Site Section	323(GA)005 REV C	24/01/19	24/01/19
Plan — Cab­in 4, 5, 6 — Block Plan and Site Section	323(GA)006 REV C	24/01/19	24/01/19
Plan — Cab­in 7, 8, 9 — Block Plan and Site Section	323(GA)007 REV C	24/01/19	24/01/19
Plan — Cab­in 10, 11, 12 — Block Plan and Site Section	323(GA)007 REV C	24/01/19	24/01/19
Plan — Photomontages	323(GA)022	08/11/18	09/11/18
Plan — Site Cross Sections	323(GA)023 REV A	24/01/19	24/01/19
Plan — Sec­tion­al Details	323(GA)024	21/06/18	09/11/18
Plan — Pro­posed Sol­ar Panels	323(GA)025 REV A	24/01/19	24/01/19
Plan — Pro­posed Extern­al Light­ing Plan	323(GA)026 REV B	08/01/19	10/01/19
Plan — Pro­posed Visu­al­isa­tions — Mirrored Clad­ding Option	323(GA)021 REV A	28/08/18	17/09/18
Plan — Pro­posed Visu­al­isa­tions — Cor-Ten Clad­ding Option	323(GA)020 REV A	28/08/18	17/09/18
Plan — Pro­posed Lock­er and Plant Room	323(GA)019 REV A	21/08/18	17/09/18
Plan — Pro­posed Sec­tions II — LL — 2 Bed Cabin	323(GA)018 REV A	21/08/18	17/09/18
Plan — Pro­posed Sec­tions EE — HH — 2 Bed Cabin	323(GA)017 REV A	21/08/18	17/09/18
Plan — Pro­posed Sec­tions AA-DD — 2 Bed Cabin	323(GA)016 REV A	21/08/18	17/09/18
Plan — Pro­posed Elev­a­tions — 2 Bed Cabin	323(GA)015 REV A	21/08/18	17/09/18
Plan — Pro­posed Plans — 2 Bed Cabin	323(GA)014 REV A	21/08/18	17/09/18
Plan — Pro­posed Sec­tions II — LL — I Bed Cabin	323(GA)013 REV A	21/08/18	17/09/18
Plan — Pro­posed Sec­tions EE	323(GA)012 REV A	21/08/18	17/09/18

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 24/05/2019

Title	Draw­ing Num­ber	Date on Plan*	Date Received
HH — I Bed Cabin
Plan — Pro­posed Sec­tions AA — DD — I Bed Cabin	323(GA)011 REV A	21/08/18	17/09/18
Plan — Pro­posed Elev­a­tions — 1 Bed Cabin	323(GA)010 REV A	21/08/18	17/09/18
Plan — Pro­posed Plans — I Bed Cabin	323(GA)009 REV A	21/08/18	17/09/18
Oth­er — Land­scape and Visu­al Appraisal		01/08/18	17/09/18
Oth­er — Wood­land Man­age­ment Plan	MP V2.0	01/07/16	21/11/18
Oth­er — Spe­cies Pro­tec­tion Plan	18/04/GOO/R01 V1.2	11/08/18	18/09/18
Oth­er — Drain­age Recom­mend­a­tion Report	2231⁄18 Issue I	28/09/18	31/10/18
Oth­er — Water Sup­ply Assess­ment Report	1945⁄17 Issue I	30/10/18	31/10/18
Oth­er — Main­ten­ance and Man­age­ment Plan		01/11/18	16/11/18
Oth­er — Eco­nom­ic Impact Appraisal		01/11/18	21/11/18
Oth­er — Com­pens­at­ory Plant­ing Plan		01/01/19	10/01/18
Oth­er — Con­struc­tion Meth­od Statement		01/11/18	10/01/19
Oth­er — Cor­garff Cab­ins Timeline		24/01/19	24/01/19
Oth­er — Pro­ject Deliv­ery Plan Notes		01/01/19	24/01/19
Oth­er — Arbor­i­cul­tur­al Impact Assessment		01/11/18	24/01/19
*Where no spe­cif­ic day of month has been provided on the plan, the sys­tem defaults to the 1st of the month.

1. The applic­a­tion seeks per­mis­sion for the erec­tion of 12 hol­i­day cab­ins. These are of a con­tem­por­ary angu­lar design fin­ished in a palette of con­trast­ing extern­al mater­i­als includ­ing larch boards, steel reflect­ive clad­ding pan­els and alu­mini­um fas­cia. They will all incor­por­ate sedum ​‘green’ roofs. The cab­ins will be sited with­in the wood­land, around an open cent­ral space which will accom­mod­ate car park­ing and where an ancil­lary plant build­ing and ground moun­ted sol­ar pan­els will be located.

2. Plans and visu­al­isa­tions of the pro­pos­als are included with­in Appendix 1.

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 24/05/2019

1. A num­ber of sup­port­ing doc­u­ments accom­pan­ied the applic­a­tion: a) Land­scape and Visu­al Apprais­al b) Wood­land Man­age­ment Plan c) Spe­cies Pro­tec­tion Plan d) Drain­age Recom­mend­a­tion Report e) Water Sup­ply Assess­ment Report f) Main­ten­ance and Man­age­ment Plan g) Eco­nom­ic Impact Apprais­al h) Com­pens­at­ory Plant­ing Plan i) Con­struc­tion Meth­od State­ment j) Arbor­i­cul­tur­al Impact Assess­ment k) Cor­garff Cab­ins Timeline l) Pro­ject Deliv­ery Plan Notes

2. A Water Sup­ply Desk Study has been now been sub­mit­ted to address the water sup­ply issues pre­vi­ously raised. These are avail­able to view on the CNPA website.

His­tory

1. There is no rel­ev­ant plan­ning his­tory on file for this site.

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 | X | | Policy 8 | SPORT AND RECRE­ATION | X | | Policy 9 | CUL­TUR­AL HER­IT­AGE | X | | Policy 10 | RESOURCES | X | | Policy 11 | DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS |

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 24/05/2019

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	X
Policy 8	Sport and Recre­ation Non-Stat­utory Guidance	X
Policy 9	Cul­tur­al Her­it­age Non-Stat­utory Guidance	X
Policy 10	Resources Non-Stat­utory Guidance	X
Policy 11	Developer Con­tri­bu­tions Sup­ple­ment­ary Guidance

CON­SULTA­TIONS

Sum­mary of the main issues raised by Consultees

1. Forestry Com­mis­sion states that the forest has areas of nat­ive and non-nat­ive spe­cies that are man­aged togeth­er as a com­mer­cial forest, the cur­rent man­age­ment régime provides eco­nom­ic, envir­on­ment­al and social bene­fits derived from tim­ber income, provid­ing a core area in a large Nat­ive Wood­land hab­it­at Net­work and provid­ing an attract­ive com­pon­ent in a highly vis­ible land­scape. Devel­op­ment in this forest block could have sig­ni­fic­ant impact on each of these bene­fits. Fol­low­ing cla­ri­fic­a­tion on the red line bound­ary on the site which con­firmed the site to cov­er a smal­ler area than ori­gin­ally iden­ti­fied, the Forestry Com­mis­sion con­firm that the site still lies partly with­in the Nat­ive wood­land and com­mer­cial con­ifer Forest. As such details of how com­pens­at­ory plant­ing is to be achieved should form part of this applic­a­tion. If the applic­ants are to deliv­er this then an appro­pri­ate com­pens­at­ory plant­ing plan should be sub­mit­ted as part of the applic­a­tion. It is also noted that the applic­ant has provided fur­ther details as to how the forest could be man­aged in the future if the applic­a­tion is suc­cess­ful. How­ever, this will lead to fur­ther wood­land loss.

2. Aber­deen­shire Coun­cil Flood Risk and Coastal Pro­tec­tion Team have reviewed the pro­pos­als and have no com­ment to make.

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 24/05/2019

1. Aber­deen­shire Coun­cil Roads Depart­ment states that based on min­im­um vis­ib­il­ity require­ments with­in the Council’s cur­rent stand­ards and on the design speed, a vis­ib­il­ity dis­play of 2.4 metres by 215 metres will be required. The vis­ib­il­ity east­wards from the site access is not shown cor­rectly on the site entrance plan and should be drawn to a point tan­gen­tial with the out­side of the bend in the road approx­im­ately 185m away. This will ensure that the full width of the car­riage­way is vis­ible from the site entrance to a point 215m away and will increase the impact of the splay on the site front­age. As such they main­tained a hold­ing objec­tion until this inform­a­tion was sub­mit­ted. A revised draw­ing was sub­mit­ted, how­ever Roads main­tain their objec­tion as the draw­ing includes sur­vey data for the road car­riage­way and OS inform­a­tion but there seems to be a con­sid­er­able off­set between them. The vis­ib­il­ity splay lines have been drawn extend­ing to a point on the OS date that is off­set into the field on the south side of the road. These splays need to be drawn cor­rectly so as illus­trate the impact of the splay on the site front­age. Fur­ther con­sulta­tion on a revised draw­ing has been under­taken and Roads are now sat­is­fied the draw­ing is cor­rect and achieves sat­is­fact­ory vis­ib­il­ity. Fur­ther con­di­tions are recom­men­ded in rela­tion to the vis­ib­il­ity splay at the junc­tion of the site with the A939, the gradi­ent and fin­ish of the access, the ser­vi­cing arrange­ments and vehicle man­oeuv­rab­il­ity with­in the site.

2. Aber­deen­shire Coun­cil Envir­on­ment­al Pro­tec­tion states that the applic­ants have failed to provide details of the pro­posed private water sup­ply and details relat­ing to it. They were reques­ted to provide the fol­low­ing inform­a­tion: a) A detailed plan show­ing the loc­a­tion of the source and dis­tri­bu­tion net­work, includ­ing the loc­a­tion of all sep­tic tanks and soakaways. b) Details relat­ing to the quant­ity of the sup­ply to be car­ried out by a com­pet­ent per­son. c) Sample res­ults, taken with­in the last 12 months by an accred­ited ab or if these are not avail­able the applic­ant should con­tact Aber­deen­shire Coun­cil Water Team to request a sample be taken in rela­tion to the applic­a­tion, the cost to be borne by the applic­ant. d) Details should also be provided in rela­tion to a water safety plan for the site.

3. The applic­ants have provided fur­ther inform­a­tion, how­ever the Envir­on­ment­al Pro­tec­tion team have provided the same com­ments again. Fur­ther cla­ri­fic­a­tion from the Coun­cil has been sought on two occa­sions, how­ever, they have not responded.

4. Fol­low­ing the Com­mit­tee meet­ing on 22 March 2019 the applic­ants have now sub­mit­ted addi­tion­al inform­a­tion in a Water Sup­ply Desk Study. Envir­on­ment­al Pro­tec­tion team still have con­cerns relat­ing to the assump­tions made in this report.

5. Aber­deen­shire Coun­cil Con­tam­in­ated Land Officer states that there are no issues of con­cern under con­tam­in­ated land legis­la­tion in respect of the devel­op­ment and as a con­sequence no fur­ther inform­a­tion regard­ing con­tam­in­ated land is required.

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 24/05/2019

1. CNPA Eco­logy Adviser under­took a full apprais­al of the sub­mis­sion and iden­ti­fied addi­tion­al inform­a­tion neces­sary to assess the pro­pos­als in detail. This inform­a­tion included: a) Arbor­i­cul­tur­al Impact Assess­ment – this has now been received and shows the pro­posed cab­ins have been sited to avoid tree loss. It also includes details of the impact of the install­a­tion and access for the foul water soakaway/​tanks and the likely impact of excav­a­tion works for the cab­ins. This allows a more accur­ate estim­ate of the expec­ted tree loss; b) Detail as to the design of the track and sit­ing of the cab­ins giv­en the nature of the site and slopes (sec­tions are likely to be required to show this) – this has been received; c) A new wood­land man­age­ment plan for the whole of the wood­land – this has been received, how­ever this could be revised. This shows the site being man­aged as wood­land in the long term with the aim of intro­du­cing a more diverse wood­land through replanting/​restocking in 2019. d) Plans detail­ing light­ing for the whole site have now been received; e) A Drain­age Impact Assess­ment – suf­fi­cient inform­a­tion has now been sub­mit­ted. Swales were con­sidered to deal with sur­face water drain­age but giv­en the nature of the site, soakaways have been viewed as the best option; f) A Con­struc­tion Meth­od State­ment detail­ing how works will be under­taken with­in the wooded site in such a way that impact on exist­ing trees can be min­im­ised — this has now been received; g) Amended design to the cab­ins with reflect­ive clad­ding show­ing that adapt­a­tions have been made to elim­in­ate the like­li­hood of bird strike; and h) Revised Land­scape Man­age­ment and Main­ten­ance Plan to include more detailed inform­a­tion on tree plant­ing – fur­ther inform­a­tion has been sub­mit­ted and a more accur­ate fig­ure for tree loss is now known. A com­pens­at­ory plant­ing plan provides ample mit­ig­a­tion for this.

2. CNPA Land­scape Adviser states that the site lies with­in the Cor­garff and Cock­bridge Land­scape Char­ac­ter Area with inter­vis­ib­il­ity with the adjoin­ing LCA’s of Strath­don: Upper Strath­don, The Lecht and North­ern East­ern Hills which col­lect­ively provide a back­ground to the Cor­garff and Cock­bridge LCA. The site is loc­ated with­in a wide shal­low, elev­ated glen con­tained by steep hills with roun­ded sum­mits and nar­row side val­leys. The land­scape is rel­at­ively open with the key land­mark fea­ture of Cor­garff Castle at the junc­tion of Strath Don and the A939, which is the prin­cip­al route provid­ing access to the land­scape and which and which adds to the char­ac­ter and visu­al exper­i­ence of Cor­garff giv­en its long curves undu­lat­ing with the gentle curvature of the land­form. The site is loc­ated on a key gla­cial — flu­vi­al depos­it which is now a roun­ded land­form covered pre­dom­in­antly by wood­land. There are clear long views from the A939 approach from the Lecht and short­er dynam­ic views from the south giv­en the curvature of the road. The site is dom­in­ated by man­aged wood­land placed around a cent­ral open space at the top. Around the edge, prin­cip­ally along the north­ern side, there are sig­ni­fic­ant under­ly­ing changes in the land­form where parts are rel­at­ively steep fall­ing to the floor of the flood plain adjoin­ing the River Don. The devel­op­ment will res­ult in the loss of indi­vidu­al trees and the Wood­land Man­age­ment Plan provides details for restock­ing and chan­ging its composition.

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 24/05/2019

1. In gen­er­al the prin­ciple is accept­able sub­ject to the fol­low­ing issues being addressed: a) The use of the reflect­ive pan­els and their poten­tial to be vis­ible and act as a ​‘beacon’ or inter­rupt the land­scape char­ac­ter of the wood­land from viewed from out­with the site. Care­ful place­ment and reten­tion of exist­ing trees should help mit­ig­ate this poten­tial adverse effect; b) Fur­ther detail of the sol­ar pan­el in terms of its ori­ent­a­tion and place­ment above ground; c) The com­pos­i­tion of the restock­ing raises con­cern with the increase in mixed con­ifers. This should include nat­ive spe­cies – Scots Pine, Sil­ver Birch, Aspen and Larch. d) Fur­ther details on the extent of tree loss expec­ted and the risk that thin­ning will res­ult in fur­ther loss due to wind-blow dam­age. e) Fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion on new plant­ing and expec­ted growth rates to ensure an enclosed wood­land is provided around the cabins.

2. It is con­cluded that the devel­op­ment would have a minor impact on the land­scape and visu­al char­ac­ter of the area but has the poten­tial to be addressed by appro­pri­ate mit­ig­a­tion measures.

3. CNPA Eco­nom­ic Devel­op­ment Officer agrees with the Eco­nom­ic Impact Apprais­al that the pro­posed devel­op­ment would have pos­it­ive eco­nom­ic impacts.

4. CNPA Out­door Access Officer has con­sidered the likely impacts on core paths, right of ways and the exer­cise of access rights and con­firms that these will not be unreas­on­ably impacted upon by the development.

5. Don­side Com­munity Coun­cil recog­nise that devel­op­ment of tour­ism oppor­tun­it­ies is gen­er­ally of bene­fit to the com­munity. In this case, how­ever, it would appear that the scale and loc­a­tion of the pro­posed devel­op­ment would have a sig­ni­fic­ant impact on the bal­ance of res­id­ents to hol­i­day home and lets in the area. There is also evid­ence that there would be a sig­ni­fic­ant adverse impact on the envir­on­ment and con­sequently the enjoy­ment of the area by residents.

REP­RES­ENT­A­TIONS

1. The applic­a­tion was advert­ised in the loc­al press on 14 Septem­ber 2018 and a total of 24 let­ters of rep­res­ent­a­tion have been received, these are attached in Appendix 2.

2. 4 let­ters offer com­ments, includ­ing one from the West Aber­deen­shire Access Panel.

3. 2 let­ters have been received which are in sup­port of the pro­pos­als, one from Vis­it Scot­land and the oth­er from Vis­it Aberdeenshire.

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 24/05/2019

1. There have been 18 let­ters object­ing to the pro­pos­als. The main issues raised are sum­mar­ised as fol­lows: a) Inap­pro­pri­ate and out of char­ac­ter eco ‑design with scattered, ran­dom lay­out should be tra­di­tion­al style and fit into the loc­al area; b) Con­trary to the main aims of the Nation­al Park to pre­serve the envir­on­ment and its visu­al appear­ance; c) No eco­nom­ic bene­fit to the loc­al area con­trary to Policies 2.3a) and b) of the Loc­al Plan; d) No loc­al amen­it­ies to serve hol­i­day makers in this area; e) Unac­cept­able loss of trees; f) Road safety issues. Junc­tion with A939 is dan­ger­ous; g) Unsat­is­fact­ory and unre­li­able plan for water sup­ply con­trary to Policy 10 of the Loc­al Plan; h) Inap­pro­pri­ate drain­age espe­cially out­flow from sep­tic tank sys­tem; i) No demand for this type of hol­i­day accom­mod­a­tion in this area con­trary to Policy 2.3a) of the Loc­al Plan – bet­ter solu­tion would be one or two cot­tage of tra­di­tion­al design; j) Noise nuis­ance con­trary to Policies 2.2a) and 3.1i)of the Loc­al Plan; k) Light pol­lu­tion con­trary to Policies 2.2a), 5, 7 and 10 of the Loc­al Plan in terms of the intro­duc­tion of light pol­lu­tion and the impact on the Dark Skies; l) Secur­ity issues to the adja­cent Del­nadamph Estate; m) Det­ri­ment­al impacts on rare and pro­tec­ted spe­cies, e.g. red squir­rel, roe and red deer, water vole, otter, osprey, owls, birds of prey, fresh water mus­sels and wild­cat; n) Dogs cre­at­ing a nuis­ance to live­stock and rare spe­cies; o) Loss of view; p) Too large in this rur­al area; q) Irre­vers­ible impact on wild eco­logy and scar the land­scape; r) Con­tra­dicts the spe­cial qual­it­ies of the Nation­al Park; s) Increase in traffic; t) Con­trary to Policy 1.2b) of the Loc­al Plan by intro­du­cing a dis­pro­por­tion­ate and unreas­on­able con­cen­tra­tion of hol­i­day homes which will alter the char­ac­ter of the vil­lage; u) Con­trary to Policy 3.1i) of the Loc­al Plan as the pro­posed 12 house will res­ult in a loss of pri­vacy and reduc­tion in amen­ity enjoyed by loc­al res­id­ents; v) Con­trary to Policies 2.2b) and 5 of the Loc­al Plan in terms the impact on wider land­scape views of the area; w) Con­trary to Policies 7.1c) and 5b) of the Loc­al Plan in terms of the inap­pro­pri­ate indus­tri­al ele­ments e.g. the Plant Room, Sol­ar pan­els and car park; x) Sub­stan­tially will alter the char­ac­ter of this rur­al area; y) The site will be inac­cess­ible in the winter months; z) Dis­pro­por­tion­ate scale and does not reflect the char­ac­ter of the exit­ing set­tle­ment pat­terns and build­ings – ali­en to the sur­round­ing area; aa) A Hab­it­ats Assess­ment is required; bb) Back-up for sol­ar pan­els – are gen­er­at­ors pro­posed which would intro­duce noise and emis­sions pol­lu­tion; cc) The site is not alloc­ated with­in the Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan; dd) The pro­lif­er­a­tion of this type of accom­mod­a­tion is hav­ing a sig­ni­fic­ant cumu­lat­ive effect on the cul­tur­al her­it­age of the Park; and

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 24/05/2019

ee) The deple­tion of the Cock Burn and the River Don will have a det­ri­ment­al impact on the breed­ing grounds for brown trout and salmon;

1. Three requests to address Com­mit­tee have been received. This included one from Vis­it Scot­land, how­ever they have con­firmed they are now unable to attend.

APPRAIS­AL

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; tour­ism and leis­ure based busi­ness activ­it­ies and attrac­tions; tour­ism and leis­ure related infra­struc­ture includ­ing accom­mod­a­tion, where it has no adverse impacts on the site or neigh­bour­ing areas and it makes a pos­it­ive con­tri­bu­tion to the exper­i­ence of vis­it­ors and adds to or extends the core tour­ist sea­son. The Policy also goes on to sup­port eco­nom­ic devel­op­ment that will enhance the range and qual­ity of eco­nom­ic opportunities.

2. The site is loc­ated on the A939, a prin­cip­al tour­ist route with­in the Nation­al Park and which now forms part of the highly pub­li­cised Snow Roads Scen­ic Route. The pro­posed devel­op­ment will intro­duce addi­tion­al tour­ist accom­mod­a­tion in a loc­a­tion which is likely to be able to sup­port such pro­vi­sion giv­en the high num­ber of vis­it­ors to this area. It is pro­posed to con­struct two cab­ins each year over a peri­od of six years. This will gen­er­ate con­struc­tion employ­ment oppor­tun­it­ies and in the longer term per­man­ent employ­ment for a small num­ber of staff. This in turn will sup­port the vital­ity and viab­il­ity of the loc­al eco­nomy. The prin­ciple of the pro­posed devel­op­ment is con­sidered to be accept­able sub­ject to com­pli­ance with oth­er loc­al plan policies on the issues dis­cussed below.

Envir­on­ment­al Issues

1. Policy 4: Nat­ur­al Her­it­age of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Devel­op­ment Plan 2015 seeks to restrict devel­op­ment that would have an adverse impact on pro­tec­ted spe­cies and where this can­not be avoided that appro­pri­ate mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures are provided.

2. The main envir­on­ment­al impacts res­ult­ing from the pro­posed devel­op­ment will be as a con­sequence from the loss of trees. In terms of pro­tec­ted spe­cies, a Spe­cies Pro­tec­tion Plan has been sub­mit­ted that out­lines sat­is­fact­ory mit­ig­a­tion in respect of red squir­rels and pine marten. Sur­vey work has also been under­taken for otter, water vole and breed­ing birds and although none were iden­ti­fied pre-con­struc­tion sur­veys are recom­men­ded for otter (giv­en they are highly mobile and may use the site in future) and breed­ing birds (depend­ing on what time of year of con­struc­tion works are due to take place). It was iden­ti­fied that there was no require­ment for a Hab­it­ats Reg­u­la­tions Apprais­al (HRA) in this instance.

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 24/05/2019

1. The wood­land is a com­mer­cial forest and is of rel­at­ively low eco­lo­gic­al value due to the mix of non nat­ive spe­cies and even aged struc­ture with poor under­storey. Not­with­stand­ing this, the forest has the poten­tial to incor­por­ate the devel­op­ment and bene­fit from enhance­ment to improve its diversity and struc­ture over the longer term. An Arbor­i­cul­tur­al Impact Assess­ment has been provided detail­ing the expec­ted loss of trees which is estim­ated at approx­im­ately 256. A total of 92 trees will be lost to accom­mod­ate the cab­ins and a fur­ther 164 due to the foul water soakaways. Com­pens­at­ory Plant­ing of 594 stems is pro­posed, which is in excess of the 1:1 ratio nor­mally expec­ted for the loss of low qual­ity wood­land and thus provides ample mit­ig­a­tion. This will cov­er an area of approx­im­ately 0.54 hec­tares, how­ever, this will be loc­ated on an area of land out­with the Nation­al Park.

2. The AIA details how the cab­ins have been sited to min­im­ise tree loss with the iden­ti­fic­a­tion of Tree Pro­tec­tion Zones. An exist­ing cleared area will be util­ised for car park­ing, plant, etc. It is recom­men­ded, how­ever that a con­di­tion is imposed to revise the Con­struc­tion Meth­od State­ment to include a require­ment that the TPZs are clearly defined and agreed with CNPA pri­or to works com­men­cing on site and any unfore­seen con­struc­tion inform­a­tion is also sub­mit­ted for approv­al. The remov­al of the sur­face lay­er must also be car­ried out care­fully dur­ing excav­a­tion to ensure that it can be rein­stated with min­im­al impact on the exist­ing flora. Again an appro­pri­ate plan­ning con­di­tion can be imposed to this effect.

3. The AlA states that work tak­ing place with­in the root pro­tec­tion areas of the retained trees will nev­er exceed 50% of the total root pro­tec­tion area of any tree. It is, how­ever, unclear what the impact will be on these trees the amount of com­pac­tion and impact on the trees will depend on spe­cies, soil type, root depth, pres­sure applied, etc. A con­di­tion is there­fore recom­men­ded to ensure com­pac­tion is kept to a min­im­um through the use of appro­pri­ate equip­ment and tools.

4. The sub­mit­ted Land­scape Man­age­ment and Main­ten­ance Plan indic­ates that the open area of ground will be replanted with a mix­ture of mixed broadleaves and those spe­cies will be planted around the first 2 cab­ins to be erec­ted. There is con­cern that those trees will not sur­vive in these loc­a­tions giv­en the drain­age con­di­tions there. It is con­sidered that fur­ther inform­a­tion is neces­sary in terms of tree plant­ing num­bers, sizes, loc­a­tions and plant­ing spe­cific­a­tion. It is recog­nised that such inform­a­tion will be developed fur­ther once con­struc­tion works com­mence and as such, should the applic­a­tion be sup­por­ted, a con­di­tion should be imposed requir­ing a revised Land­scape Man­age­ment and Main­ten­ance Plan to be sub­mit­ted to and approved by CNPA.

5. A Wood­land Man­age­ment Plan has also been sub­mit­ted which indic­ates the longer term man­age­ment of the wood­land and the inten­tion to intro­duce a more diverse wood­land through replanting/​restocking with a mix of con­ifers and mixed broadleaves. The long term object­ive is to cre­ate an improved, diverse wood­land with increased biod­iversity value. It is sug­ges­ted that the biod­iversity could be improved fur­ther by retain­ing those felled trees unsuit­able for com­mer­cial pur­poses on site to provide an increased source of deadwood.

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 24/05/2019

1. The CNPA Eco­logy Adviser has high­lighted the poten­tial for bird strike giv­en the pro­posed use of reflect­ive clad­ding on the cab­ins and there­fore has reques­ted that this be reviewed and adapt­a­tions made to reduce this risk. A stand­ard con­di­tion requir­ing details of the extern­al fin­ish­ing mater­i­als is recom­men­ded to ensure all mater­i­als are appro­pri­ate and if neces­sary sample pan­els are made avail­able for inspection.

2. Fol­low­ing the Com­mit­tee meet­ing on 22 March 2019, a fur­ther two con­di­tions have been recom­men­ded to address the con­cerns regard­ing the water sup­ply and in rela­tion to the long term wood­land cov­er over the wider site.

3. The pro­pos­als will poten­tially have an envir­on­ment­al impact in terms of the loss of trees on the site, how­ever, the meas­ures pro­posed will ensure these impacts are appro­pri­ately mit­ig­ated against or com­pensated for. Sub­ject to the recom­men­ded con­di­tions the applic­a­tion is con­sidered to be in com­pli­ance with Policy 4: Nat­ur­al Her­it­age of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2015.

Land­scape and Cul­tur­al Her­it­age Issues

1. Policy 5: Land­scape of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2015 pre­sumes against devel­op­ment which does not con­serve and enhance the land­scape char­ac­ter and spe­cial qual­it­ies of the Nation­al Park and in par­tic­u­lar the set­ting of the pro­posed development.

2. Policy 9: Cul­tur­al Her­it­age of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan encour­ages devel­op­ment to pro­tect and enhance the fea­ture or its set­ting and take reas­on­able meas­ures to avoid, min­im­ise and mit­ig­ate any adverse effects.

3. The site is loc­ated on a gla­cial-flu­vi­al depos­it, which lies with­in a val­ley floor and is now a dis­tinct roun­ded land­form pre­dom­in­antly covered in wood­land. From the approach on the A939, from the Lecht there are unob­struc­ted, broad views. From the approach from the south on the A939, the curvature of the road wraps around this land­form and the site and provides short­er, more dynam­ic views. Oth­er views can be exper­i­enced from a vari­ety of hill tracks, foot­paths and oth­er res­id­en­tial prop­er­ties with­in the vicin­ity. The site is dom­in­ated by a man­aged wood­land made up of a mix of spe­cies – pre­dom­in­antly Scots Pine, Nor­way Spruce with a small pro­por­tion of Larch and mixed con­ifers, all planted round the cent­ral area to the top of the site.

4. The pro­pos­al is to site the cab­ins with­in this wood­land set­ting and ori­ent­ate them towards out­ward look­ing views. This will undoubtedly res­ult in the loss of indi­vidu­al trees to accom­mod­ate their con­struc­tion and provide access to them. As such the devel­op­ment has the poten­tial to impact on this dis­tinct­ive land­form, and the wider land­scape and visu­al char­ac­ter of the area.

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 24/05/2019

1. The applic­ants have taken on board advice giv­en and provided inform­a­tion which provides appro­pri­ate mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures to ensure the pro­posed devel­op­ment does not have a sig­ni­fic­ant impact on this prom­in­ent wooded land­form and the wider area in gen­er­al. The sub­mit­ted inform­a­tion sat­is­fact­or­ily demon­strates that the pro­posed devel­op­ment will com­ple­ment and enhance the land­scape as required by policy.

2. It is good prac­tice to obtain all detailed land­scape inform­a­tion pri­or to the determ­in­a­tion of a plan­ning applic­a­tion, how­ever, in this instance this has not been pos­sible giv­en the agreed times­cales. It is recom­men­ded that a more