Item6Appendix2bRepresentationGeneral20190298DET

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 6 Appendix 2B 24/01/2020

AGENDA ITEM 6

APPENDIX 2B

2019/0298/DET

REP­RES­ENT­A­TIONS — GENERAL

Com­ments for Plan­ning Applic­a­tion 2019/0298/DET

Applic­a­tion Sum­mary Applic­a­tion Num­ber: 2019/0298/DET Address: Land 20M South East Of Spey House Cairngorm Tech­no­logy Park Dal­faber Drive Aviemore Pro­pos­al: Spey House Phase 2 — Devel­op­ment of 14 no dwell­ings includ­ing 6no ter­raced houses, 4no bun­ga­lows and 4no cot­tage flats Case Officer: Stephanie Wade

Cus­tom­er Details Name: Mr Douglas Nor­ris Address: Chair­man The Strath­spey Rail­way Com­pany Ltd Aviemore Sta­tion, Dal­faber Road Aviemore

Com­ment Details Com­menter Type: Neigh­bour Stance: Cus­tom­er made com­ments neither object­ing to or sup­port­ing the Plan­ning Applic­a­tion Com­ment Reas­ons: Comment:Strathspey Rail­way Com­pany Ltd (SRC)

Com­ments on Plan­ning Applic­a­tion 2019/0298/DET

Devel­op­ment at Spey House Aviemore

1 It is unlikely that the Devel­op­ment will increase road traffic over Dal­faber Level Cross­ing & but a traffic impact assess­ment, includ­ing ped­es­tri­an usage, should assess this giv­en cur­rent traffic levels & road user abuse. SRC are in dia­logue with the Office of Road & Rail (ORR), the High­land Coun­cil & anoth­er Developer in respect of the type of improve­ment required at the Cross­ing. Risk Assess­ments are in pro­gress. The duty hold­ers at the Cross­ing are SRC as the Rail Oper­at­or, the High­land Coun­cil as the Roads Author­ity & Asset Man­ager / Main­tain­er & ORR (Office of Road & Rail) as Rail Safety Authority.

2 In the absence of topo­graph­ic sur­vey details SRC have from their know­ledge of the area con­cerns that the devel­op­ment may restrict their loco­mot­ive drivers vis­ib­ilty of road traffic approach­ing Dal­faber Level Coss­ing from the vil­lage. At present sta­tion­ery or slower vehicles stop­ping for the cross­ing lights is a sig­ni­fic­ant safety reas­sur­ance to the SRC loco­mot­ive train crews. This safety bene­fit may be lost as a res­ult of the houses proposed

3 There are no details of the bound­ary fences pro­posed nor their prox­im­ity to exist­ing fences.

4 The most south­erly block appears very close to the SRC bound­ary. How far are build­ings from the exit­ing fences & are there risks to SRC oper­a­tions dur­ing con­struc­tion & to house hold­ers / occu­pants later. The site appears upfilled at the south west corner & per­haps the levels here will be reduced. The real­tion­ship between floor & ridge levels & the rail­way are not appar­ent on the drawings

1. Drain­age from the details avail­able on 29/10/19 appears to be dir­ec­ted away from or along­side the bound­ary & should not there­fore affect SRC

5 SRC trains presently cre­ate smoke & steam adja­cent to the site & also require to whistle / sound horns as they approach / cross the Level Cross­ing. These will continue.

D Nor­ris

SRC Chair­man

29/10/19