CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE 
held within Nethy Bridge Community Centre 
on 5th December 2003 at 10.30am 
PRESENT 
Mr Peter Argyle 
Mr Eric Baird 
Mr Duncan Bryden 
Mr Stuart Black 
Ms Sally Dowden 
Mr Basil Dunlop 
Mr Douglas Glass 
Mr Angus Gordon 
Mrs Lucy Grant 
Mr Bruce Luffman 
Mr William McKenna 
Ms Eleanor Mackintosh 
Mr Alastair MacLennan 
Ms Ann MacLean 
Mr Andrew Rafferty 
Mr Gregor Rimell 
Mr David Selfridge 
Mr Robert Severn 
Ms Joyce Simpson 
Mrs Sheena Slimon 
Mr Richard Stroud 
Mr Andrew Thin 
Ms Susan Walker 
Mr Bob Wilson 
IN ATTENDANCE: 
Neil Stewart 
Norman Brockie 
Denis Munro 
Sandra Middleton 
APOLOGIES: 
David Green 
WELCOME AND APOLOGIES 
1. The Convenor welcomed all present. 
2. Apologies were received from David Green. 
MATTERS ARISING FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING 
3. The minutes of the previous meeting were approved. 
DECLARATION OF INTEREST 
4. Anne MacLean declared an interest in Item 7 of the Agenda. 
PLANNING APPLICATION CALL-IN DECISIONS 
Call-in Notification decisions; 
5. 03/109/CP – No Call-in 
6. 03/110/CP – No Call-in 
7. 03/111/CP – No Call-in 
8. 03/112/CP – No Call-in 
9. 03/113/CP – No Call-in 
10. 03/114/CP – No Call-in 
11. 03/115/CP – No Call-in 
12. 03/117/CP – No Call-in 
13. 03/118/CP – No Call-in 
14. 03/119/CP – No Call-in 
15. 03/120/CP – No Call-in 
16. 03/121/CP – No Call-in 
17. 03/122/CP – No Call-in 
18. 03/123/CP – No Call-in 
19. 03/124/CP – No Call-in 
20. 03/125/CP – The decision was to CALL-IN this application as the following issues 
needed to be examined in relation to the Park aims; 
The proposal involves the alteration to an existing access and the formation of a new 
access track in a countryside location. This is stated a type of development which 
will be considered for call-in in the agreed Development Control Protocol. 
In this instance, the works are of a significant scale and may have significant 
landscape and visual impacts in this prominent countryside location. It may also act 
as a precedent for other similar developments which may have a cumulative effect 
on the natural heritage of the area. As such, the proposal raises issues of general 
significance in terms of the aims of the National Park. 
21. 03/126/CP – No Call-in 
COMMENTING ON APPLICATIONS NOT CALLED-IN BY THE COMMITTEE 
22. It was agreed that comments be brought forward on applications 03/117/CP, 03/118/CP 
and 03/122/CP. 
23. The Planning Officer proposed that the following comments be submitted to The 
Highland Council on application 03/117/CP, 21 Castle Road East, Grantown-on-Spey, the 
Highland Councillors withdrew; Although the proposal, due to its type and nature raises 
no issues of general significance to the aims of the National Park, the CNPA feels that the 
design of the garage, with its large, almost flat-roof construction, is unsympathetic, and 
detrimental to visual amenity, especially taking account of its location in a prominent 
position, adjacent to the main road into Grantown-on-Spey from the north. The CNPA 
would wish to see an amendment to the design, in relation to its scale and roof 
configuration. The comments were agreed with the addition of a comment on the 
proposed door design which should reflect a domestic, not industrial appearance. The 
Highland Councillors returned. 
24. The Planning Officer proposed that comments be submitted to Aberdeenshire Council on 
application 03/118/CP Morven Cottage, 25, Viewfield Road, Ballater. The Aberdeenshire 
Councillors withdrew. The comments agreed were that; “The CNPA accepts the 
principle of a replacement house on this site. However, in order to conserve and enhance 
the cultural heritage of this part of the Ballater Conservation Area, the CNPA suggests 
that amendments are sought to the design, to reflect a more traditional character. This 
relates, in particular to, finishing materials, window type and configuration, and chimney 
position. 
25. The Planning Officer proposed that the following comments be submitted to 
Aberdeenshire Council on application 03/122/CP Morven Cottage, Chapel Brae, Braemar; 
“Although the proposal, due to its type and nature, raises no issues of general significance 
to the aims of the National Park, the CNPA feels that in order to conserve and enhance the 
cultural heritage of this part of the Braemar Conservation Area, the design of the 
extension should be amended to be more sympathetic to the scale, character and 
appearance of the existing traditional house. This relates, in particular, to the size, scale 
and configuration of the roof and the rear extension walls, and the design and 
configuration of the windows.” The comments were agreed, the Aberdeenshire 
Councillors returned. 
CONSULTATION ON 117 HOUSE SCHEME PROPOSAL IN CARRBRIDGE (Paper 1) 
26. Norman Brockie presented a paper (Paper 1) proposing comments in response to a 
consultation from the Highland Council for an outline application at Carrbridge for a 117 
house scheme proposal. The Highland Councillors and Anne MacLean declared an 
interest and left the room. NB informed the committee that there had been a previous 
application by the same developer for a smaller scheme on this site which had met with a 
great deal of local opposition. The previous application has not been withdrawn and as 
such both applications are current. 
27. It was agreed that greater emphasis be put on environmental issues in the paper and that 
comments to the Highland Council should be structured around the four aims of the Park. 
The paper was agreed. The Highland Councillors returned and Anne MacLean. 
DECISION ON PLANNING APPLICATION 03/008/CP (Paper 2) 
28. Neil Stewart presented a paper (Paper 2) for determination of planning application 
reference 03/008/CP for the erection of a dwelling at land adjoining ‘Allt Beag’, 
Dalrachney Road, Carrbridge. The committee agreed the Planning Officer’s 
recommendation to Refuse the application for the reasons stated. Bruce Luffman sought 
clarification on how drainage matters would be dealt with in called-in planning 
applications. NS advised that drainage was a material consideration and in the interests of 
environmental protection and the aims of the National Park, drainage proposals would be 
clarified prior to determination of all applications. 
SUPPLEMENTARY GUIDANCE FOR THE CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK: 
INTERIM PLANNING POLICY No.1: RENEWABLE ENERGY (Preliminary Draft) 
(Paper 3) 
29. Norman Brockie presented a paper (Paper 3) proposing draft policies to be agreed by the 
committee and then to be put out to consultation relating to renewable energy schemes 
within the CNP. The Committee were advised that at present the CNP are aware of a 
number of proposed renewable energy schemes in and around the Park. 
30. Sue Walker confirmed that SNH would be revising their zoning of sensitive areas for 
windfarm development and would take cognisance of CNPA views and policy. She 
pointed out that at present the paper does not mention transmission lines and their 
impacts. 
31. Norman Brockie advised the Committee that planning policies generally would be 
developed in conjunction with the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park. 
32. Sue Walker advised the committee that the timescale shown in paragraph 1.1 and in the 
Executive Summary relating to renewable energy requirements has now been extended 
from 2010 to 2015 by the Scottish Executive. 
33. It was agreed that Section 7 of the paper be amended to include transmission lines and 
that it should be noted that small-scale developments can have significant local impacts. 
34. The Committee agreed that policies on renewable energy schemes should be developed 
with regard to promoting more efficient use of energy that is produced both at present and 
in the future and also with regard to the potential income that such schemes may generate 
specifically for local communities. 
35. It was agreed that the final sentence of paragraph 9.2 be moved in to paragraph 9.1. 
Policy RE1 was agreed. 
36. It was agreed that policy RE2 be amended to read ‘small scale schemes’ in place of 
defining different types of scheme individually. 
37. The committee were advised that in the case where a renewable energy proposal was 
outwith the park boundary the Park would be consulted to allow assessment of potential 
impacts on visual and natural heritage amenity. It was agreed that policy RE4 be 
amended to include an assessment of natural heritage issues for example impacts on bird 
foraging areas and impacts on river catchments and their hydrology. Concern was raised 
as to the criteria upon which an assessment would be made as to whether or not a scheme 
outwith the park should be notified to the committee for consultation. It was agreed that 
this be addressed in part by the review of the Development Control protocol with the 
Local Authorities. Renewable Energy schemes dealt with Under the Electricity Act by the 
Scottish Executive, those dealt with by Perth & Kinross Council who are not party to the 
Development Control protocol, and those that are covered by Crown or forestry 
exemptions should be addressed by working practice agreements with the relevant bodies. 
38. It was agreed that Policy RE5 c) be amended to include the importance of maintaining 
both water flow and the pattern of water flow throughout the year. There was concern that 
the final sentence of paragraph 13.1 relating to policy RE5, underplayed the potential 
significance of small schemes for natural heritage issues, it was agreed that the paragraph 
be amended to reflect this. It was also agreed that the future development of existing 
schemes within the park be addressed by the policy. 
39. Policy RE6 was agreed. 
40. It was agreed that policy RE7 be amended to address the issue of reducing the generation 
of waste within the park and the value of organic matter produced by the decay of natural 
waste. 
41. It was agreed that the CNP should develop a procedure illustrating standard requirements 
that must be addressed by Environmental Impact Assessments for projects within the 
park. This should be done in liaison with partner organisations who have carried out a 
similar process. 
42. It was agreed that where policy states that no development should take place, the wording 
be changed to read that there will be a ‘presumption against development’. 
43. The possibility of zoning areas of the park for high and low sensitivity to development 
etc. was discussed, it was agreed that this be addressed at a future meeting and that the 
proposed interim policy be applied to the park as a whole at present. 
ANY OTHER BUSINESS 
44. David Selfridge requested that the planning officer clarify to the committee the function 
and scope of Permitted Development. Neil Stewart advised the committee that Permitted 
Development is development that can be classed as development but which does not 
require planning permission, there are specific Permitted Development rights for a 
number of groups including householders, railways, forestry, agriculture etc. The 
committee were referred to the paper on Permitted Development by Richard Hickman that 
was presented to the committee on their planning training day prior to the opening of the 
park, and the General Permitted Development Order 1992, which could be viewed on the 
Scottish Executive website. 
45. The Convenor reported to the committee on a meeting he had attended relating to the 
issue of the capacity of Scottish Water to provide services to settlements in Strathspey. 
He advised the committee that there is no easy answer to the problem and that reaching 
conclusions will be a long process. It was raised that this may be an issue for settlements 
across the park and not just those in Strathspey. 
46. Anne MacLean raised concern that affordable housing schemes could not justify the same 
costs as large commercial developers in relation to water and drainage systems and that 
they may therefore be at a disadvantage for future developments. 
47. Sue Walker raised the issue of water usage and pipe leakages advising the committee that 
the CNP should not be promoting the pattern of predict and provide but instead 
addressing demand management and improving system maintenance to reduce water 
usage and loss which may result in a decrease in waste water and also the pressure on 
treatment works. 
48. Gregor Rimmell raised concern that over-development may occur in areas where there is a 
greater capacity to provide water services. 
49. The Convenor advised the committee that he would address this issue with the Planning 
Gain Co-ordinator, of Aberdeenshire Council. 
DATE OF NEXT MEETING 
50. 19th December 2003, Newtonmore Village Hall. 
51. The meeting concluded at 12.30pm. 
\\Cnpahq01\Company\_CNPA Board\Committees\Planning Committee\2003 1205\Committee Minutes 051203.doc