Item7Appendix2Objections20200105DET

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 7 Appendix 2 12/06/2020

AGENDA ITEM 7

APPENDIX 2

2020/0105/DET

REP­RES­ENT­A­TIONS OBJECTIONS

Com­ments for Plan­ning Applic­a­tion 20/01058/FUL

Applic­a­tion Sum­mary Applic­a­tion Num­ber: 20/01058/FUL Address: Coire Cas Car Park Cairngorm Moun­tain Glen­more Aviemore Pro­pos­al: Install­a­tion of two tube slides and exten­sion and realign­ment of exist­ing tube slide|cr| Case Officer: Roddy Dowell

Cus­tom­er Details Name: Mr George Allan Address: Not Available

Com­ment Details Com­menter Type: Mem­ber of Pub­lic Stance: Cus­tom­er objects to the Plan­ning Applic­a­tion Com­ment Reas­ons: Comment:I am writ­ing on behalf of North East Moun­tain Trust (NEMT), a Scot­tish char­ity (SCIO 008783) based in the Grampi­an area, which rep­res­ents the interests of hill goers and those who enjoy vis­it­ing wild land. NEMT mem­ber­ship, com­pris­ing twelve hill­walk­ing and climb­ing clubs and indi­vidu­al mem­bers, totals over 900 people. NEMT con­siders it unac­cept­able that applic­a­tions con­tin­ue to be brought for­ward for the ski area in the absence of the long prom­ised mas­ter plan. With respect to the applic­a­tion, con­sid­er­a­tion does not appear to have been giv­en to the col­our of the new tube slides. It is essen­tial that their col­our blends with the car park and sur­round­ing build­ings. If this is not the case, they will be very vis­ible from the edge of the plat­eau and the ridges to the west. NEMT asks that the plan­ning author­ity agrees a suit­able col­our with the com­pany and that this be made a form­al con­di­tion of any consent.

Com­ments for Plan­ning Applic­a­tion 2020/0105/DET Applic­a­tion Sum­mary Applic­a­tion Num­ber: 2020/0105/DET Address: Coire Cas Car Park Cairngorm Moun­tain Glen­more Aviemore High­land Pro­pos­al: Install­a­tion of two tube slides and exten­sion and realign­ment of exist­ing tube slide Case Officer: Rob­bie Calvert

Cus­tom­er Details Name: Mr Michael Dunn Address: 9 Kilpatrick Drive East Kilbride

Com­ment Details Com­menter Type: Mem­ber of Pub­lic Stance: Cus­tom­er objects to the Plan­ning Applic­a­tion Com­ment Reas­ons: Comment:No rationale is presen­ted for the install­a­tion of any play equip­ment on Cairngorm Moun­tain let alone installing more. A pro­pos­al such as this should come for­ward AFTER a devel­op­ment frame­work has been presen­ted. Assert­ing that HIE ​“has com­menced work …” on a mas­ter­plan is unac­cept­able. It is the pro­duc­tion of such a mas­ter­plan that requires ​“imme­di­ate atten­tion”, not ill-thought out stick­ing plasters (tube slides, zip wires) that do not belong in a rare, arc­tic mont­ane envir­on­ment such as this. The attempt by the applic­ant to demon­strate ​“a coordin­ated approach to devel­op­ment” are com­pletely unconvincing.

Such a doc­u­ment might argue more suc­cess­fully for the devel­op­ment of such vis­it­or attrac­tions in appro­pri­ate places in the Spey Val­ley or even Glen­more. The attrac­tion of tour­ists to Cairngorm Moun­tain in sum­mer should be for reas­ons relat­ing to its unique environment.

Cairngorms Cam­paign The Firs Crath­ie Bal­later AB35 5TJ

www​.cairngorm​s​cam​paign​.org​.uk email: cairngormscampaign@​gmail.​com Tele­phone number

Objec­tion to Plan­ning Applic­a­tion 2020/0105/DET Tube Slides Coire Cas Car Park

On behalf of mem­bers of the Cairngorms Cam­paign this is an objec­tion to the above application.

1. Des­pite claims to the con­trary by the Applic­ant, with endorse­ment from the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity (CNPA), this applic­a­tion has been sub­mit­ted as one in a whole series of plan­ning applic­a­tions on Cairngorm Moun­tain without put­ting it into the con­text of a Mas­ter Plan for the area, avoid­ing pub­lic con­sulta­tion and Hab­it­at Assess­ments. In our opin­ion both the applic­ant and CNPA are inten­tion­ally using the plan­ning sys­tem to approve the one off applic­a­tions and without regard for the aims of the Nation­al Parks (Scot­land) Act 2000.
2. Tube Slides on Cairngorm are entirely inap­pro­pri­ate for the area and are clearly an attempt to be seen to gen­er­at­ing income to com­pensate for the losses and future costs of the ski area. Giv­en the rel­at­ive sums involved this is embar­rass­ingly ridiculous.
3. This applic­a­tion is con­trary to any stated aim of the CNPA to meet cli­mate change tar­gets as it is aimed at people with fam­il­ies driv­ing to the site, look­ing at the view and then pay­ing for the ride on the slides. Such an attrac­tion, if deemed suit­able for a Nation­al Park would be bet­ter loc­ated in one of the settlements.

We real­ise giv­en the approv­al of recent pre­vi­ous plan­ning applic­a­tions on Cairngorm that the time taken to read the doc­u­ments and write this let­ter is a total waste of time as the applic­a­tion will be approved by the CNPA no mat­ter what any­one writes. In a plan­ning sys­tem that is sup­posed to involve the pub­lic this is over­whelm­ingly demoralising.

Regards Susan Mat­thews Convenor

25^th May 2020

The Cairngorms Cam­paign is a recog­nised Scot­tish Char­ity No. SC005523 and a com­pany lim­ited by guar­an­tee com­pany no.179159 The Cairngorms Cam­paign is a mem­ber of Scot­tish Envir­on­ment Link

BSCG info From:BSCG info Sent:25 May 2020 23:56:11 +0100 To:Planning Subject:2020/0105 BSCG Comments

Badenoch & Strath­spey Con­ser­va­tion Group Fiod­hag, Nethy­bridge, Inverness-shire PH25 3DJ Tel Scot­tish Char­ity No. SC003846 Email info@​bscg.​org.​uk Web­site bscg​.org​.uk/

25 May 2020 Dear Rob­bie Calvert

2020/0105/DET | Install­a­tion of two tube slides and exten­sion and realign­ment of exist­ing tube slide | Coire Cas Car Park Cairngorm Moun­tain Glen­more Aviemore Highland

BSCG objects to the above pro­pos­al and requests the oppor­tun­ity to address the com­mit­tee when the applic­a­tion is determined.

The Cas car park is the fore­most access point to the mont­ane envir­on­ment of the Cairngorms. Fair­ground style rides should have no place in this loc­a­tion, where sum­mer attrac­tions should relate to the unique moun­tain environment.

In March 2019 the Board approved the Work­ing Prin­ciples that are to ” to guide the work of the CNPA on Cairngorm Moun­tain.” The second of these prin­ciples states: ​“Any pro­pos­als should be part of a mas­ter­plan for the ski area as per the pro­posed new Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan.” This was writ­ten long before the LDP 2020 would be adop­ted and gives the impres­sion that even at that time the Policy state­ment in the new LDP is rel­ev­ant to decision mak­ing by the CNPA. As is well known, no mas­ter­plan is yet avail­able and the new LDP is now only months away from adop­tion and should be treated as a mater­i­al con­sid­er­a­tion with sub­stan­tial weight.

Fair­ground style devel­op­ment in our moun­tain areas is not what draws people to the Cairngorms Nation­al Park. Accord­ing to the CNPA’s own vis­it­or sur­vey, the most com­mon reas­ons for vis­it­ing the Cairngorms NP are beau­ti­ful scenery and coun­tryside; walk­ing; enjoyed a pre­vi­ous vis­it; and peace and quiet.

The pro­pos­al does not com­ply with CNPA LDP 2015 Policies. Policy 2 Sup­port­ing Eco­nom­ic Growth.

2.2 Tour­ism & Leis­ure Devel­op­ment. Con­trary to 2.2 a, b and c, the pro­pos­al would have adverse envir­on­ment­al impacts on the site or neigh­bour­ing areas; make a neg­at­ive con­tri­bu­tion to the exper­i­ence of vis­it­ors; and fail to add to or extend the core tour­ist sea­son. 2.3 Oth­er eco­nom­ic devel­op­ment. The pro­pos­al would fail to sup­port the vital­ity and viab­il­ity of the loc­al eco­nomy and the broad­er eco­nomy of the Park, as evid­enced by the 4 main draws for vis­it­ors to the NP revealed through the CNPA’s vis­it­or sur­vey. Policy 3 Sus­tain­able Design. The pro­pos­al would sig­ni­fic­antly detract from the sense of place that this Policy aims to ensure all devel­op­ment con­trib­utes to. The pro­pos­al also fails this Policy in terms of min­im­ising the effect of the devel­op­ment on cli­mate change in terms of sit­ing. Pla­cing a theme-park devel­op­ment with only 3 activ­it­ies all of which are short and soon over, at the end of a long road is not trans­port-effi­cient nor cli­mate change friendly. Policy 5 Land­scape. This Policy emphas­ises in par­tic­u­lar, the set­ting of the pro­posed devel­op­ment. The pro­pos­al does not com­ple­ment and enhance the land­scape char­ac­ter of the Park nor the set­ting, and the impacts on the set­ting have not been min­im­ised or mitigated.

Put­ting activ­it­ies that are jar­ringly inap­pro­pri­ate with the nat­ur­al sur­round­ings in an exposed, cold, windy and unat­tract­ive car park is not the type of devel­op­ment we should be tol­er­at­ing in our fore­most Nation­al Park. Yours sin­cerely Gus Jones Convener