Item6AAGabhean20190134DET

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Item 6 28/06/2019

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHORITY

DEVEL­OP­MENT PRO­POSED: Erec­tion of hut and sit­ing of com­post­ing toi­let at Gab­hean Bad­den­gorm Wood Carrbridge

REF­ER­ENCE: 2019/0134/DET

APPLIC­ANT: Mrs Sarah Louise Kemp

DATE CALLED-IN: 29 April 2019

RECOM­MEND­A­TION: Refuse

CASE OFFICER: Stephanie Wade, Plan­ning Officer

CNPA Plan­ning Com­mit­tee 本本本 Applic­a­tion Site Bad­den­gorm Woods 木木 N 120 木 木木木 0 30 60 Meters ↑ 309 不不不 11 木 Bad­den­gorm Woods ↑ يلا CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Item 6 28/06/2019 木木木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 本木 木 木 312m K Crown copy­right and data­base rights 2019. Ord­nance Sur­vey Licence num­ber 100040965 木 夭夭 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 木 2

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Item 6 28/06/2019

SITE DESCRIP­TION, PRO­POS­AL AND HISTORY

Site Descrip­tion

1. The applic­a­tion site is loc­ated on the north­ern side of the A938 road with­in Bad­den­gorm Woods, to the north east of the set­tle­ment of Carr Bridge. Access to the site is via a shared vehicu­lar track off the north­ern side of the A938. The applic­a­tion site extends to approx­im­ately 6 acres of estab­lished Scots Pine wood­land and is under­stood to form one of a num­ber of newly formed smal­ler par­cels of wood­land which have been offered for sale sep­ar­ate from the lar­ger wood­land site.

2. Bad­den­gorm Woods is classed as Cale­do­ni­an Forest and the applic­a­tion site is included with­in land lis­ted in the Ancient Wood­land Invent­ory. Regard­ing envir­on­ment­al des­ig­na­tions, Bad­den­gorm Wood is not spe­cific­ally des­ig­nated how­ever, due to its asso­ci­ation with caper­cail­lie, the wider envir­on­ment­ally des­ig­nated areas lis­ted below are of rel­ev­ance: a) Aber­nethy Forest Spe­cial Pro­tec­tion Area [SPA] and Aber­nethy Forest Site of Spe­cial Sci­entif­ic Interest [SSSI]; b) Anagach Woods SPA; c) Cairngorms SPA and Glen­more Forest, Cairngorms, North­ern Cor­ries and North Rothiemurchus Pine­wood SSSIS; d) Craigmore Wood SPA; e) Kin­veachy Forest SPA and Kin­veachy Forest SSSI.

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=PQSIL7SI0CH00

Title	Draw­ing Num­ber	Date on Plan*	Date Received
Amended Over­all Loc­a­tion Plan		18/04/2019	06/05/2019
Site Loc­a­tion Plan			06/05/2019
Amended Site Lay­out Plan			06/05/2019
Pro­posed Floor Plan			06/05/2019
Pro­posed Elev­a­tions Plan		March 2019	06/05/2019
Elev­a­tion Plan- Soil Toi­let and Wash Basin		22/04/2019	06/05/2019
RYNO Product Sheet			06/05/2019
Con­struc­tion Details Document			06/05/2019
Sup­port­ing Information			06/05/2019
*Where no spe­cif­ic day of month has been provided on the plan, the sys­tem defaults to the 1st of
the month.

3

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Item 6 28/06/2019

1. The applic­a­tion pro­poses the erec­tion of a hut struc­ture and the sit­ing of a com­post­ing toi­let struc­ture with­in the applic­a­tion site grounds. The pro­posed struc­tures are to be sited approx­im­ately 28 metres east from the applic­a­tion site vehicu­lar park­ing area.

2. The pro­posed hut struc­ture would meas­ure approx­im­ately 3.3 metres by 4.5 metres with a max­im­um height of approx­im­ately 3 metres. The struc­ture is pro­posed to take form under a shal­low, dual pitched roof, clad in cor­rug­ated met­al sheet­ing with tim­ber clad elev­a­tions. Two units of fen­es­tra­tion are pro­posed to be installed on the east and south­ern elev­a­tions of the hut and a partly glazed tim­ber door is pro­posed on the east­ern elev­a­tion. The hut is pro­posed to be sited on a tim­ber, decked area cov­er­ing a ground area of approx­im­ately 27 square metres.

3. The pro­posed toi­let struc­ture would meas­ure approx­im­ately 1.8 metres by 1.2 metres with a max­im­um height of approx­im­ately 2.4 metres. The struc­ture is pro­posed with tim­ber clad elev­a­tions and a mono pitched roof clad with cor­rug­ated met­al sheet­ing. Two partly-glazed, tim­ber doors are pro­posed to be installed on the west­ern elev­a­tion of the structure.

4. It is under­stood from the applic­a­tion details that the pro­pos­al is to be used for recre­ation­al pur­poses (Sui Gen­er­is Use Class) by the own­er and will not be con­nec­ted to any form of mains water sup­ply, drain­age or electricity.

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

His­tory

1. There is no recent plan­ning his­tory asso­ci­ated with the applic­a­tion 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

4

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Item 6 28/06/2019

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

Hab­it­ats Reg­u­la­tions Assess­ment (HRA)

1. A Hab­it­ats Reg­u­la­tions Assess­ment has been under­taken to con­sider the effects of the pro­pos­al upon the con­ser­va­tion object­ives of the Natura Sites with­in the Strath­spey area. A copy of the HRA is included in Appendix 2. The five SPAs of rel­ev­ance are: Aber­nethy Forest SPA, Anagach Woods SPA, Cairngorms SPA, Craigmore Wood SPA and Kin­veachy Forest SPA.

2. The Assess­ment high­lighted the import­ance of Bad­den­gorm Woods to the meta- pop­u­la­tion of caper­cail­lie in Strath­spey, func­tion­ing as a ​“step­ping stone” for caper­cail­lie to move between the vari­ous SPAs and improv­ing genet­ic diversity. The HRA notes that the pro­pos­al is not dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary to site man­age­ment for nature con­ser­va­tion. Accord­ingly, increased dis­turb­ance from the use of the pro­pos­al could affect the pop­u­la­tions of the caper­cail­lie in all 5 SPAs.

3. The HRA con­cludes that the con­ser­va­tion object­ives of the SPAs will not be met by this pro­pos­al, so it can­not be shown that this pro­pos­al will not adversely affect the integ­rity of the five SPAs.

5

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Item 6 28/06/2019

CON­SULTA­TIONS

1. A sum­mary of the main issues raised by con­sul­tees now follows:

2. Scot­tish Nat­ur­al Her­it­age (SNH) object to the applic­a­tion, hav­ing assessed the details of the applic­a­tion, includ­ing the con­nectiv­ity between the Strath­spey SPAs and Bad­den­gorm Woods and con­clude that if that part of the caper­cail­lie meta-pop­u­la­tion using Bad­den­gorm Wood were to be neg­at­ively affected by this pro­pos­al, the con­ser­va­tion object­ives of the SPAs could be affected. SNH there­fore con­sider that the pro­pos­al is likely to dis­turb caper­cail­lie in Bad­den­gorm Wood and this is likely to have a sig­ni­fic­ant effect on caper­cail­lie in the five nearby SPAs. SNH’s apprais­al of the effect of the pro­pos­al has sub­sequently not shown that there would be no adverse effect on the integ­rity of the five SPAs for the fol­low­ing reas­ons: a) Erect­ing a hut here is likely to cause sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to caper­cail­lie; it is likely to make areas cur­rently used by the birds less suit­able or unsuit­able for them, and impact on breed­ing suc­cess; b) Bad­den­gorm Wood is likely to be import­ant for breed­ing, dis­pers­al and relo­ca­tion of birds with­in the Strath­spey meta-pop­u­la­tion for which the 5 nearby SPAs are des­ig­nated; c) Impacts on the birds’ abil­ity to live and breed suc­cess­fully here could there­fore have wider impacts on the pop­u­la­tions, and dis­tri­bu­tions of those pop­u­la­tions with­in the five nearby SPAs.

3. SNH con­firm that should the inten­tion be for the grant­ing of per­mis­sion against their advice, noti­fic­a­tion must be giv­en to Scot­tish Ministers.

4. CNPA Eco­logy Officer con­cludes that after under­tak­ing a Hab­it­ats Reg­u­la­tions Apprais­al (HRA) in con­junc­tion with SNH, regard­ing the development’s poten­tial impact upon NATURA sites, sup­port can­not be giv­en to the applic­a­tion pro­pos­al as it would have a likely sig­ni­fic­ant effect on caper­cail­lie pop­u­la­tions with­in Bad­den­gorm Wood­land, which in turn could poten­tially affect the pop­u­la­tions of the five sur­round­ing con­nec­ted Spe­cial Pro­tec­tion Areas (SPAs). The pro­pos­al there­fore does not meet the require­ments of the Habitat’s Dir­ect­ive for the con­ser­va­tion of nat­ur­al hab­it­ats and of wild fauna and flora (European Uni­on Coun­cil Dir­ect­ive 92/43/EEC). Because of this the CNPA can­not pos­it­ively determ­ine this applic­a­tion without approv­al from Scot­tish Government.

5. A copy of the Hab­it­ats Reg­u­la­tions Assess­ment can be found at Appendix 2.

6. CNPA Land­scape Officer notes that the pro­posed hut and asso­ci­ated toi­let struc­ture would be a new fea­ture in this por­tion of the woods and this con­sequently brings a change in nature of the use in the wood­lands. The pro­pos­al would mean that there will be occa­sions when there will be addi­tion­al car park­ing and exten­ded domest­ic recre­ation­al use over sev­er­al days and even­ings fur­ther chan­ging the pat­tern of recre­ation­al use.

6

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Item 6 28/06/2019

1. The officer con­siders that the mater­i­als and size of the hut are appro­pri­ate for the loc­a­tion how­ever the more intens­ive use of the site will be at odds with the expect­a­tions and exper­i­ence of oth­er recre­ation­al users. The Officer con­cludes that the effect of the pro­pos­al can­not be said to sig­ni­fic­antly affect the over­all char­ac­ter of the land­scape resource of Bad­den­gorm Woods. The phys­ic­al prop­er­ties of the pro­pos­al are neut­ral and do not enhance the exist­ing land­scape char­ac­ter or spe­cial qual­it­ies. How­ever, there would be sig­ni­fic­ant, but very loc­al, adverse effect upon the enjoy­ment of the woods due to the change in pat­tern and nature of recre­ation­al use. This effect is likely to dimin­ish rap­idly as the recept­or moves away from the sight and sound of the site.

2. High­land Coun­cil Flood Team has no spe­cif­ic com­ments relat­ing to this application.

3. Roy­al Soci­ety for Pro­tec­tion of Birds (RSPB) objects to the applic­a­tion due to its impact on the pro­tec­ted European spe­cies of caper­cail­lie with­in the area as a res­ult of dis­turb­ance arising from the use of the pro­pos­al. They high­light that Bad­den­gorm Woods is func­tion­ally linked to the Strath­spey SPAs and that the pro­pos­al is likely to have a sig­ni­fic­ant effect on these SPAs.

4. Car­rbridge & Vicin­ity Com­munity Coun­cil object to the pro­pos­al not­ing their con­cern of the pro­posed site’s prox­im­ity to known caper­cail­lie activ­ity not­ing their con­cern regard­ing the delin­eation of this wood­land area into sep­ar­ate blocks and the poten­tial pro­lif­er­a­tion of forest ​“hide­aways”. Ref­er­ence is also made to a neigh­bour­ing shed with­in the same wood­land which is cur­rently under invest­ig­a­tion for a breach in use. A copy of their full com­ments can be found at Appendix 4.

7

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Item 6 28/06/2019

REP­RES­ENT­A­TIONS

1. The applic­a­tion has been advert­ised and two let­ters of rep­res­ent­a­tion have been received which are included at Appendix 3. One let­ter from Badenoch & Strath­spey Con­ser­va­tion Group (BSCG) and one let­ter on behalf of the Cairngorms Cam­paign. The BSCG register their objec­tion to the pro­pos­al and request the oppor­tun­ity to address the Com­mit­tee. They note that the pro­pos­al site is with­in Bad­den­gorm Wood which is an import­ant wood­land for the Annex I spe­cies caper­cail­lie and any impacts on caper­cail­lie with­in the applic­a­tion site wood­land would be likely to have impacts on the con­ser­va­tion object­ives of the Badenoch & Strath­spey SPAs. They state that the pro­pos­al would add human dis­turb­ance with­in the wood, at all times of the day which would neg­at­ively impact on caper­cail­lie and no mit­ig­a­tion for the dis­turb­ance impacts would be prac­tic­able. BSCG also ref­er­ence the applic­a­tion site’s loc­a­tion with­in an area of semi nat­ur­al ori­gin as clas­si­fied with­in the Ancient Wood­land Invent­ory and con­clude that this resource is irre­place­able and its loss can­not be mit­ig­ated for. Ref­er­ence is also made to cur­til­ages and poten­tial impacts on pub­lic access rights in the vicin­ity of the pro­pos­al due to the pro­pos­al and its asso­ci­ated infrastructure.

2. The Cairngorms Cam­paign also wish to register their objec­tion to the applic­a­tion, not­ing their sup­port of the Com­munity Council’s com­ments and stat­ing that they con­sider the pro­pos­al is con­trary to the Nation­al Park’s num­ber I aim and that the threat to caper­cail­lie and wild­life by more intru­sion is not in line with the CNPA aims.

APPRAIS­AL

1. The main plan­ning con­sid­er­a­tions in rela­tion to this applic­a­tion com­prise: the prin­ciple of devel­op­ment, the impact on the nat­ur­al envir­on­ment in respect of des­ig­nated areas, pro­tec­ted spe­cies and land­scape impacts.

Prin­ciple

1. The aim of the Scot­tish Plan­ning Policies is to ensure that devel­op­ment and changes in land use occur in suit­able loc­a­tions and are sus­tain­able. The plan­ning sys­tem must also provide pro­tec­tion from inap­pro­pri­ate devel­op­ment. Its primary object­ives are: a) To set the land use frame­work for pro­mot­ing sus­tain­able eco­nom­ic devel­op­ment; b) To encour­age and sup­port regen­er­a­tion; and c) To main­tain and enhance the qual­ity of the nat­ur­al her­it­age and built environment.

8

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Item 6 28/06/2019

1. Devel­op­ment and con­ser­va­tion are not mutu­ally exclus­ive object­ives; the aim is to resolve con­flicts between the object­ives set out above and to man­age change. Plan­ning policies and decisions should not pre­vent or inhab­it devel­op­ment unless there are sound reas­ons for doing so. Para­graph 79 of the SPP states that Devel­op­ment Plans should set out a spa­tial strategy which, inter alia, includes policies and pro­pos­als for leis­ure accom­mod­a­tion, such as hol­i­day units, cara­vans, and huts. With­in the gloss­ary of SPP the term ​“hut” is defined as:

2. The pro­posed devel­op­ment con­sti­tutes a hut, as the applic­ant states that: it will be used inter­mit­tently for recre­ation­al pur­poses, built from low impact mater­i­als and the intern­al floor area is less than 30m². No mains con­nec­tions to water, drain­age or elec­tri­city are pro­posed in accord­ance with the SPP hut defin­i­tion. As such, the prin­ciple of devel­op­ment can now be assessed on the basis of recre­ation­al use for hutting.

3. While there is no spe­cif­ic policy relat­ing to huts con­tained with­in the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2015, this does not war­rant a reas­on for refus­al on the basis of a lack of policy. There are sev­er­al devel­op­ments, which do not bene­fit from a spe­cif­ic policy which can be assessed against. In this case, cri­ter­ia with­in Policy 8: Sport and Recre­ation cov­ers this type of devel­op­ment, being for recre­ation­al pur­poses. This policy states under cri­terion 1:

“devel­op­ments of sport and recre­ation facil­it­ies, diver­si­fic­a­tion of, or exten­sions to exist­ing sport and recre­ation related busi­ness activ­it­ies, or the enhance­ment of the qual­ity and design of exist­ing facil­it­ies will be sup­por­ted where: a) They demon­strate best prac­tice in terms of sus­tain­able design, oper­a­tion and future main­ten­ance, and where there are no adverse envir­on­ment­al impacts on the site or neigh­bour­ing areas; and b) They will meet an iden­ti­fied com­munity or vis­it­or need; and c) They main­tain and max­im­ise all oppor­tun­it­ies to link into the exist­ing path network.”

1. The pro­pos­al is under­stood to be required for a recre­ation­al use by the own­er on an inter­mit­tent basis. The devel­op­ment would there­fore have no asso­ci­ation with an exist­ing sport and recre­ation busi­ness activ­ity or facil­ity and would there­fore be con­trary to Policy 8: Sport and Recre­ation of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2015.

2. Tour­ism and leis­ure related devel­op­ment is also con­sidered with­in Policy 2: Sup­port­ing Eco­nom­ic Growth of the Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2015. How­ever, again, as the pro­pos­al does not relate to busi­ness activ­it­ies and attrac­tions for eco­nom­ic pur­poses, the applic­a­tion would there­fore be con­trary to the require­ments of Policy 2: Sup­port­ing Eco­nom­ic Growth.

9

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Item 6 28/06/2019

1. As a res­ult, the prin­ciple of devel­op­ment can­not be estab­lished, as the pro­pos­al fails to meet both policies 8: Sport and Recre­ation and 2: Sup­port­ing Eco­nom­ic Growth of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2015.

Envir­on­ment­al Issues

1. Policy 4: Nat­ur­al Her­it­age of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park 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.

2. Although the site is not loc­ated with­in any NATURA des­ig­na­tions, it has links with the sur­round­ing des­ig­nated areas due to its use by caper­cail­lie, as noted earli­er. Con­sequently, a key envir­on­ment­al issue in this case is there­fore the poten­tial impact upon the qual­i­fy­ing interests of the NATURA sites iden­ti­fied in para­graph 2 of this report. The con­ser­va­tion object­ives for the qual­i­fy­ing interests of caper­cail­lie for each of the noted Spe­cial Pro­tec­tion Areas are: a) To avoid deteri­or­a­tion of the hab­it­ats of the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies; or b) Sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies; thus ensur­ing the integ­rity of the site is main­tained; and c) To ensure for the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies that the fol­low­ing are main­tained in the long term: i. Dis­tri­bu­tion of spe­cies with­in the site; ii. Dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the spe­cies; iii. Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the spe­cies; iv. No sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of the spe­cies; v. Pop­u­la­tion of the spe­cies as viable com­pon­ent of the site.

3. For the pur­poses of the Hab­it­ats Reg­u­la­tions Assess­ment [HRA] (Appendix 2), the applic­a­tion details con­firm that the pro­pos­al is not dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary to site man­age­ment for nature con­ser­va­tion as it is pro­posed for inter­mit­tent recre­ation­al use. As con­firmed by the CNPA Eco­lo­gist, at present, Bad­den­gorm Wood is thought to be only lightly used by people and is rel­at­ively undis­turbed com­pared to oth­er loc­al woods around Car­rbridge. This is there­fore, likely to be one of the key factors that mean caper­cail­lie can live and breed here suc­cess­fully. New build­ings in wood­land would cause increased noise and activ­ity levels which would res­ult in a per­man­ent effect and dis­turb­ance to any caper­cail­lie. This dis­turb­ance can also res­ult in the reduc­tion of the avail­ab­il­ity of suit­able hab­it­at. With­in the Badenoch & Strath­spey area, there are five SPAs with caper­cail­lie as qual­i­fy­ing interest: Aber­nethy Forest, Anagach Woods, Craigmore Wood, Cairngorms and Kin­veachy Forest. The dis­tances between these SPAs are well with­in max­im­um caper­cail­lie dis­pers­al dis­tances known from the rel­ev­ant lit­er­at­ure. An impact on any wood­land sup­port­ing caper­cail­lie has the poten­tial to impact on the qual­i­fy­ing interests of all five SPAs.

4. The HRA con­cludes that three of the SPA con­ser­va­tion object­ives will not be met by this pro­pos­al. It can­not, there­fore, be shown that this pro­pos­al would have no adverse effect on the integ­rity of the five SPAs clas­si­fied for capercaillie.

10

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Item 6 28/06/2019

1. The CNPA Eco­lo­gist objects to the applic­a­tion as it would have a likely sig­ni­fic­ant effect on caper­cail­lie pop­u­la­tions with­in Bad­den­gorm Wood­land and the five SPAs and con­sequently does not meet the require­ments of the Hab­it­ats Dir­ect­ive for the con­ser­va­tion of nat­ur­al hab­it­ats and of wild fauna and flora (European Uni­on Coun­cil Dir­ect­ive 92/43/EEC). The officer also states that there are no suit­able mit­ig­a­tion options for this pro­pos­al. SNH and RSPB con­cur with the points raised with­in the HRA and object to the applic­a­tion. Regard­ing pub­lic rep­res­ent­a­tions, Badenoch & Strath­spey Con­ser­va­tion Group and the Cairngorm Cam­paign also raise objec­tion to the applic­a­tion for the same eco­lo­gic­al reasons.

2. On this basis, the applic­a­tion is con­sidered to be con­trary to Policy 4: Nat­ur­al Her­it­age and con­trary to the aims of the Nation­al Park as set out by the Nation­al Parks (Scot­land) Act 2000, as the pro­pos­al would fail to con­serve and enhance the nat­ur­al her­it­age of the area.

Land­scape Considerations

1. Policy 5: Land­scape of the Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2015 pre­sumes against devel­op­ment which does not con­serve or enhance the land­scape char­ac­ter and spe­cial qual­it­ies of the Nation­al Park and in par­tic­u­lar, the set­ting of the pro­posed devel­op­ment. The pro­pos­al would intro­duce new fea­tures with­in this sec­tion of the wood­land which in con­sequence would intro­duce a change in nature of the use of this area. The CNPA Land­scape Officer has assessed the details of the applic­a­tion and con­siders that the effect of the pro­pos­al is not con­sidered to sig­ni­fic­antly affect the over­all char­ac­ter of the land­scape resource of the wood­land, how­ever there would be sig­ni­fic­ant, but very loc­al, adverse effect upon the enjoy­ment of the woods due to the change in pat­tern and nature of recre­ation­al use, with the more intens­ive use of the site for exten­ded domest­ic recre­ation­al use being at odds with the expect­a­tions and exper­i­ence of oth­er recre­ation­al users. The officer does note though that the effect is likely to dimin­ish rap­idly as the recept­or moves away from the sight and sound of the site. The phys­ic­al prop­er­ties of the pro­pos­al are con­sidered to be neut­ral although it is noted that they do not enhance the exist­ing land­scape char­ac­ter or spe­cial qualities.

2. Although it is acknow­ledged that there would be some impact of the pro­pos­al on the land­scape con­sid­er­a­tions of the area and the user exper­i­ence, this impact is not at such a level that would war­rant refusal.

Oth­er Issues

1. Car­rbridge Com­munity Coun­cil objects to the scheme not­ing their con­cern for the impact of the pro­pos­al on caper­cail­lie with­in the area.

2. High­land Coun­cil Flood Team has no spe­cif­ic com­ments to make regard­ing the scheme.

।।

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Item 6 28/06/2019

CON­CLU­SION

1. In con­clu­sion, whilst the pro­pos­al sat­is­fies the defin­i­tion of a hut in accord­ance with Scot­tish Plan­ning Policy (2014), the prin­ciple of the erec­tion of a hut at the pro­posed site does not com­ply with Policies 8: Sport and Recre­ation and 2: Sup­port­ing Eco­nom­ic Growth of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2015.

2. Not­with­stand­ing this, a Hab­it­ats Reg­u­la­tions Assess­ment has been under­taken to assess the effect of the pro­pos­al on the qual­i­fy­ing interests of the nearby Natura sites and it con­cludes that the pro­pos­al would have a likely sig­ni­fic­ant effect on caper­cail­lie pop­u­la­tions with­in Bad­den­gorm Wood­land and the five Strath­spey des­ig­nated Spe­cial Pro­tec­tion Areas. The pro­pos­al, there­fore does not meet the require­ments of the Hab­it­ats Dir­ect­ive for the con­ser­va­tion of nat­ur­al hab­it­ats and of wild fauna and flora and there are no suit­able mit­ig­a­tion options for this pro­pos­al that would lessen its impact. On this basis, the pro­pos­al is con­trary to Policy 4: Nat­ur­al Her­it­age and con­trary to the aims of the Nation­al Park as set out by the Nation­al Parks (Scot­land) Act 2000. The pro­pos­al would also lead to a more intens­ive use of the site for exten­ded domest­ic recre­ation use which would cause a sig­ni­fic­ant, but loc­al­ised, adverse effect upon the enjoy­ment of the wood due to this change in pat­tern and nature of recre­ation­al use. The applic­a­tion is there­fore recom­men­ded for refusal.

RECOM­MEND­A­TION

1. 2.

That Mem­bers of the Com­mit­tee sup­port a recom­mend­a­tion to REFUSE the Erec­tion of hut and sit­ing of com­post­ing toi­let at Gab­hean Bad­den­gorm Wood Car­rbridge for the fol­low­ing reasons:

The pro­posed devel­op­ment is con­trary to Policy 4: Nat­ur­al Her­it­age of the Cairngorms Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan and the aims of the Nation­al park as set out by the Nation­al Parks (Scot­land) Act 2000 as the devel­op­ment is likely to have a sig­ni­fic­ant effect on the five Strath­spey Spe­cial Pro­tec­tion Area Natura 2000 sites and the pro­pos­al has not demon­strated that it would not have an adverse effect on the integ­rity of those sites.

The pro­posed devel­op­ment is con­trary to Policy 8: Sport and Recre­ation and Policy 2: Sup­port­ing Eco­nom­ic Growth of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2015 as the prin­ciple of the erec­tion of a hut at the pro­posed site does not com­ply with policy cri­ter­ia as its use is not asso­ci­ated with any busi­ness activ­ity for recre­ation, tour­ism or leisure.

The map on the first page of this report has been pro­duced to aid in the stat­utory pro­cess of deal­ing with plan­ning applic­a­tions. The map is to help identi­fy the site and its sur­round­ings and to aid Plan­ning Officers, Com­mit­tee Mem­bers and the Pub­lic in the determ­in­a­tion of the pro­pos­al. Maps shown in the Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Report can only be used for the pur­poses of the Plan­ning Com­mit­tee. Any oth­er use risks infringing Crown Copy­right and may lead to pro­sec­u­tion or civil pro­ceed­ings. Maps pro­duced with­in this Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Report can only be repro­duced with the express per­mis­sion of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity and oth­er Copy­right hold­ers. This per­mis­sion must be gran­ted in advance.

12