WARNING - By their nature, text files cannot include scanned images and tables. The process of converting documents to text only, can cause formatting changes and misinterpretation of the contents can sometimes result. Wherever possible you should refer to the pdf version of this document. CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE held at The Albert Memorial Hall, Ballater on 16th November 2007 at 10.30am PRESENT Eric Baird Mary McCafferty Geva Blackett Willie McKenna Duncan Bryden Eleanor Mackintosh Nonie Coulthard Ian Mackintosh Jaci Douglas Anne MacLean Dave Fallows Richard Stroud David Green Susan Walker Drew Hendry Ross Watson IN ATTENDANCE: Don McKee Iram Mohammed Neil Stewart Karen Major Alison Lax Wendy Mitchell APOLOGIES: Stuart Black Alistair MacLennan Lucy Grant Fiona Murdoch Marcus Humphrey Sandy Park Bob Kinnaird Andrew Rafferty Bruce Luffman WELCOME AND APOLOGIES 1. The Convenor welcomed all present. 2. Apologies were received from the above Members. MATTERS ARISING FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING 3. The minutes of the previous meeting, 2nd November, held at Kincraig Village Hall, were approved. 4. There were no matters arising. DECLARATION OF INTEREST BY MEMBERS ON ANY ITEMS APPEARING ON THE AGENDA 5. There were no declarations of interest. PLANNING APPLICATION CALL-IN DECISIONS (Oral Presentation, Neil Stewart) 6. 07/423/CP - No Call-in 7. 07/424/CP - No Call-in 8. 07/425/CP - No Call-in 9. 07/426/CP - No Call-in 10.07/427/CP - No Call-in 11.07/428/CP - No Call-in 12.07/429/CP - No Call-in 13.07/430/CP - No Call-in 14.07/431/CP - No Call-in 15.07/432/CP - No Call-in 16.07/433/CP - The decision was to call-in the application for the following reason : • The proposal represents the construction of a new dwellinghouse for special needs, in an area which is designated as Restricted Countryside in the Badenoch and Strathspey Local Plan. The proposal therefore raises issues in relation to housing in the countryside, special needs housing, cultural heritage and social and economic development. As such the proposal is viewed as raising issues of general significance to the collective aims of the National Park. 17.07/434/CP - No Call-in 18.07/435/CP - No Call-in 19.07/436/CP - No Call-in 20.07/437/CP - No Call-in 21.07/438/CP - No Call-in 22.07/439/CP - No Call-in 23.07/440/CP - No Call-in 24.07/441/CP - No Call-in 25.07/442/CP - No Call-in 26.07/443/CP - The decision was to call-in the application for the following reason : • The proposal represents the construction of a new dwellinghouse, in an area which is designated as Restricted Countryside in the Badenoch and Strathspey Local Plan. The proposal therefore raises issues in relation to housing in the countryside, natural and cultural heritage, and social and economic development. As such the proposal is viewed as raising issues of general significance to the collective aims of the National Park. 27.07/444/CP - The decision was to call-in the application for the following reason : • The development proposes to increase the numbers of houses and therefore the density of development on this site which lies on the settlement edge and adjacent to the Braemar Conservation Area. It represents a significant development in the context of Braemar and it raises issues in relation to affordable housing, social and economic development, and impact on setting of the conservation area and therefore cultural and built heritage. As such it is considered to raise issues of general significance to the collective aims of the National Park. 28.07/445/CP - The decision was to call-in the application for the following reason : • The development seeks to accommodate the principle of significant levels of mixed use development, including retail, leisure, commercial, business, tourist and residential uses, on land within the centre of Aviemore. The proposal relates to other associated on-going development proposals for road networks, retail and residential developments in the area and it is considered to be important to the future development of the centre of Aviemore and its relationship with the rest of the settlement. As such, it is considered to raise issues of general significance to the collective aims of the National Park. COMMENTING ON APPLICATIONS NOT CALLED-IN BY THE COMMITTEE 29.The Members wished to make comments to the Local Authorities on the following Planning Application No’s 07/423/CP, 07/424/CP, 07/428/CP, 07/431/CP, 07/436/CP & 07/440/CP. The planning officers noted these comments and were delegated with the responsibility of whether or not to submit the comments to the Local Authorities. REPORT ON CALLED-IN PLANNING APPLICATION FOR ERECTION OF CLUBHOUSE; FORMATION OF CAR PARK AND UPGRADING OF ACCESS AT SITE OF PROPOSED GOLF CLUB HOUSE, DALFABER VILLAGE, DALFABER DRIVE, AVIEMORE (PAPER 1) 30.David Green advised the Committee that Mr Alan Ogilvie, the agent for the application was available to answer any questions the members may have. 31.Neil Stewart advised the Committee of an additional letter which had been received, the Committee paused to read the letter. 32.Neil Stewart presented a paper recommending that the Committee approve the application subject to the conditions stated in the report. 33.The Committee asked Neil Stewart questions on the application regarding the following points: a) Public access on the site. b) The current use of the building adjacent to the site. c) Issues regarding the previous permission. d) NHG comments on the original submission and why they had not commented on the revised submission. e) Flooding issues. f) Surface water treatment. g) Energy efficiency proposals for the proposal. 34.David Green invited Mr Ogilvie to answer member’s questions on proposed energy efficiency measures. 35.Members continued to ask Neil Stewart questions regarding the application: h) Whether it would be possible to add an extra condition to state that the development must include energy efficiency measures. Neil Stewart responded by advising the committee that this would be possible. 36.David Green invited Mr. Ogilvie to answer member’s questions on issues regarding the tarring of the access road to the site. 37.Members continued to ask Neil Stewart questions regarding the application: i) Whether it would be possible to add an extra condition to state that the road should be tarred up to the point where it was previously tarred. Neil Stewart responded by stating that this would be possible, although the Area Roads Manager had not requested it. j) Safety aspects regarding the storing and use of golf buggies. k) Issues relating to Access for All. l) How it could be ensured that developments wishing to use the Park Brand were involved in accreditation schemes and high quality environmental standards. Don McKee responded by stating that a link could be established. m) The current situation regarding vehicle priority on the access road. n) The access to the property adjacent to the site. o) David Green invited Mr Ogilvie to answer member’s questions regarding ownership of the adjacent property and the access to it. 38.The Committee agreed to approve the application subject to the conditions stated in the report, with an additional two conditions to cover energy efficiency measures and tarring of the access road. 39.David Green thanked Mr Ogilvie. REPORT ON CALLED-IN PLANNING APPLICATION FOR UPGRADING OF EXISTING WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS AT GRANTOWN ON SPEY WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS, GRANTOWN ON SPEY (PAPER 2) 40.David Green advised the Committee that Sharon Greene, a representative for Scottish Water was available to answer questions. 41. Neil Stewart presented a paper recommending that the Committee approve the application subject to the conditions stated in the report. 42.The Committee asked Neil Stewart questions on the application regarding the following points: a) Odour mitigation proposals. b) Vehicle access and public safety. 43.David Green invited Sharon Greene to respond to the point raised regarding odour. 44.The Committee continued to ask Neil Stewart questions regarding the application: c) Whether the footpath would be reinstated. 45.The Committee agreed to approve the application subject to the conditions stated in the report. REPORT ON CALLED-IN PLANNING APPLICATION FOR ERECTION OF SMOKERY BUILDING & WIDENING OF EXISTING ENTRANCE AT LAND TO THE SOUTH OF NORTH LODGE DINNET (PAPER 3) 46. Neil Stewart presented a paper recommending that the Committee approve the application subject to the conditions stated in the report. 47. The Committee asked Neil Stewart questions on the application regarding the following points: a) Planning Gain issues and the meaning of “Contribution to Art” phrase in the report. b) Whether condition No. 7 includes signage on the truck road. Neil Stewart responded stating that any signage proposals would be subject to a planning application for Advertisement Consent. c) Whether an extra condition could be added to specifically state that any future signage proposals must be the subject of a planning application for Advertisement Consent. Neil Stewart responded by stating that this would be possible. d) Whether the entrance wall was listed along with the adjacent building, and how the walls were to be reinstated. e) The roof colour of the proposed building. 48.The Committee agreed to approve the application subject to the conditions stated in the report, with an additional condition to state that any future signage proposals must be the subject of a planning application for Advertisement Consent. REPORT ON CALLED-IN PLANNING APPLICATION FOR ERECTION OF LUNCH HUT (RETROSPECTIVE) AT SITE TO THE NORTH EAST OF AULD CUMMERTON,BELLABEG, STRATHDON (PAPER 4) 49.Iram Mohammed presented a paper recommending that the Committee approve the application subject to the conditions stated in the report. 50.The Committee asked Iram Mohammed questions on the application regarding the following points: a) Whether the stilts from the hut in its current location were to be left behind when the hut is relocated. Iram Mohmamed stated that this could be conditioned to state that the stilts were to be removed along with the hut. b) That fact that the report stated that the hut would “help to create a safer working and recreational environment for all.” But that in reality it would only be for exclusive estate use. c) Whether the hut should be locked or kept open for public use. d) Whether there was to be a parking/turning area adjacent to the hut. 51.The Committee agreed to approve the application subject to the conditions stated in the report with an amendment to condition No. 1 to state that the stilts were to be relocated along with the hut. UPDATE ON LOCAL PLAN, SUSTAINABLE DESIGN GUIDE & AVIEMORE MASTER PLAN (PAPER 5) 52.Don McKee, Karen Major and Alison Lax presented a paper recommending that the Committee accepts the report for information. 53.Don McKee presented first briefing members on what has been happening as regards the Local Plan and advising that a summary of consultation responses on disk would be sent to members in the next week or so. 54.The Committee asked if there would be discussions with individuals who made representations. Don McKee responded by advising the Committee that we will be going back to all representees for discussion to resolve objections if at all possible. 55.Karen Major presented to the Committee on the next stages of the local plan process and the Aviemore Masterplan. 56.The Committee asked questions regarding the following points: a) The timescales involved. b) The relationship between the LP and the Aviemore Masterplan. c) How the need for a Public Local Inquiry would be established. d) Supplementary guidance. e) The importance of community engagement regarding the Aviemore Masterplan. f) The importance of maintaining a “rolling” design guide, rather than a final document. g) Clarification regarding difference between the AHR Masterplan and the Aviemore Masterplan. h) Whether the Reporters decision following a Public Local Inquiry is final. i) Community Needs Assessment. 57.Alison Lax presented to Committee on the Sustainable Design Guide. 58.The Committee discussed how they could become more involved with the process of developing the Sustainable Design Guide. ANY OTHER BUSINESS 59.Don McKee advised the Committee that the AHR Fence appeared to have been taken down to 1 metre in line with the appeal decision. 60.Nonie Coulthard advised the committee that the AHR fence issue was due to be discussed at the next LOAF meeting. 61.Richard Stroud suggested that there should be an item brought to a Committee meeting to discuss the differences between the Masterplan, Local Plan etc. 62.Duncan Bryden brought it to the attention of the Committee that there had been an application lodged with The Highland Council proposing an alternative access road to the proposed Glenkirk Wind Farm, outside the Park Boundary, but the CNPA was consulted previously on the wind farm proposal. Duncan Bryden suggested that the Park Authority should be consulted on the Road application. 63.David Green advised the Committee that the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority were making a visit on the 10th December. 64.David Green advised the Committee of a couple of events that had taken place recently organised by the CNPA, one of which was a Youth Event which was a great success and the other was a local produce event which also was a success. 65.Eleanor Mackintosh brought the success of the Park for All Conference to the attention of the Committee. DATE OF NEXT MEETING 69. Friday, 30th November at the Lonach Hall, Strathdon. 70.Committee Members are requested to ensure that any Apologies for this meeting are submitted to the Planning Office in Ballater. 71.The meeting concluded at 13:00hrs.