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 Local Plan Working Group 23/04/04: APPROVED MINUTES LOCAL PLAN WORKING GROUP MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON Friday 23rd April 2004 at 3.00pm. in Braemar Public Hall. PRESENT: Peter Argyle CNPA Eric Baird " Duncan Bryden " Basil Dunlop " Douglas Glass " Bruce Luffman " Sue Walker " Norman Brockie " Gavin Miles " Hilary Kernohan " Peter McRae Aberdeenshire Council Bill Rowell Association of Cairngorms Community Councils Alex Stewart Scottish Water Nicola Abrams SEPA AGENDA: 1. N.Brockie welcomed those present and offered introductions. APOLOGIES: 2. N.Brockie offered apologies for: Mairi Ross, Cairngorms Housing Forum; Maggie Bochel & Andrew Brown, Highland Council; Martin Wanless, Moray Council; and Jim Mackay, SEPA (for whom Nicola was replacement); and David Bale, SNH. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: Were approved, with comments by Alex Stewart on items 5 & 6. MATTERS ARISING FROM PREVIOUS MINUTES: 3. Item 8. B.Rowell noted that the final sentence should be re-worded to note that proposed changes to the pre-emption laws would actually reinforce them. 4. Item 17. D.Bale queried (by letter) whether the CNP Park & Local Plans would need to have specific housing and other development land allocations (as per normal development plans) or whether housing allocations would be covered by Local Authority plans. ~ It was noted that Local Authority plans would no longer cover the Park area, and that the CNP LP would be zoning sites specifically for affordable housing. 5. Item 18. D.Bale had suggested applying Strategic Environmental Assessments to plan policies & statements. It was agreed that this would naturally be part of our process, as the plan would be developed around the aims of the Park. PRESENTATION by NICOLA ABRAMS on SEPA’s ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS. 6. N.Abrams noted that SEPA was very much involved in the development planning process and is currently preparing draft guidance for assessing plans; SEPA would much rather be involved at the early stages of plan preparation than get embroiled later at a public inquiry. 7. There are many issues which SEPA would wish to see covered by development plans, including: sustainable development, flooding, water resources, waste water treatment & foul drainage, natural heritage, environmental enhancement, rural development and waste management. 2 particular issues were discussed in more detail, foul drainage and waste management. 8. Foul Drainage: The SEPA line is that development within an area served by a public sewerage system must be connected to the system; development which cannot be connected due to restrictions by Scottish Water should not be permitted. Restrictions may be overcome by developers funding the extension of existing public systems. Private waste water treatment systems within such areas will not be permitted. Where there is no public system (e.g. rural areas) then private systems may be allowed if there are no negative impacts on amenity, public health and the environment. The proliferation of private systems must, however, be avoided; cumulative soak-aways can result in groundwater pollution. 9. Waste Management: The Local Plan should identify sites consistent with the National Waste Strategy and relevant structure plan policies (NPPG10, s.99), and should identify sites to give assurances to communities and the waste management industry (Pan 63, s.18). Area Waste Plans/Implementation Plans which detail strategies and site locations, developed by the 4 constituent Local Authorities, should also be included within the CNP Local Plan. Existing waste facilities/sites should also be safeguarded within the plan. 10. Pan 63 (S.51 + 83) also stresses the importance for new development to provide space for the management of its waste, emphasising the importance of incorporating it within the design and layout, for communal waste recycling/composting facilities. These issues should be backed-up by policies within the Plan. 11. In summary: SEPA requires Local Plans to firstly state that planning applications for waste management will be determined in accordance with the relevant Area Waste Plan and to identify waste management sites required to deliver the Area Waste Plan upon the proposals maps; and secondly to require new developments to allow for communal waste recycling/composting facilities. 12. Feedback: 13. It was re-iterated that the lack of foul-drainage infrastructure would be a serious impediment to the Local Plan helping to deliver on housing within the Park, particularly if SEPA object to the principle of private/alternative sewer systems. This problem becomes more acute for affordable housing, where the budget cannot also allow for upgrading existing foul waste-treatment infrastructure. This is also an issue for small developments which have no sewer system/capacity to attach to. It was re-iterated that talks between the CNPA, Scottish Water and the Scottish Exec. would be vital in resolving/finding a way forward from this infrastructure problem. 14. With regard to waste management, it was noted that while the existing Local Authority Waste Management Plans should be adhered to/implemented by the CNP Local Plan, there should be an effort within the Park to raise standards and levels of recycling/waste- minimisation ~ in line with the Park’s aims. This may raise an issue of higher costs for the constituent Local Authorities to deal with increased amounts of waste/recycling. COMMUNITY PROFILE: DRAFT 2. 15. The issue of listed services, and them being accurate, was questioned. 16. It was noted that the content was now adequate, but that the style and layout had to be adjusted and assessed by ‘professional’; the language and style needed to be simpler with clear graphic presentation. 17. The context of the CNP needs more emphasis, and the document needs stronger & clearer links to the questionnaire. The profile needs to stimulate people to engage in the overall process, but first of all to complete the questionnaire. 18. It was agreed to have an editorial meeting prior to the next group meeting, as the format had to be finalised for the other profiles to be progressed. FEEDBACK QUESTIONNAIRE: DRAFT 3. 19. As noted in 16 above, there need to be clearer links to the community profile. 20. The questionnaire needs to be tested on a pilot audience for its effectiveness. 21. The housing questions need further refinement, Q4 is still confusing. 22. H.Kernohan queried whether the questionnaire could also collect info for the Park Plan consultation; this was to be looked at further although some noted that it was rather late in the process. 23. It was queried how the questionnaires would be collected/returned; some form of pre-paid postage was deemed the best solution. 24. D.Bale had noted that the questionnaire should possibly assess issues relative to the wider Park context. UPDATE ON RECRUITMENT OF COMMUNITY LIAISON CO-ORDINATORS and PLANNING AID TRAINING. 25. N.Brockie noted that 4 candidates had been interviewed for the ‘East-Park’ post and that 3 were still to be interviewed for the West, on Monday 26th April. The interview panel comprises Peter Argyle, Rita Callendar (CNPA Community & Cultural Heritage Officer), Dr.Kate Adamson (Association of Cairngorm Community Councils) and N.Brockie. 26. B.Rowell requested that Planning Aid training dates be circulated to ACCC contact members. ADDITIONAL EXTERNAL MEMBERS FOR GROUP. 27. It was agreed that Duncan McKellar be invited onto the Working Group to represent the Cairngorms Chamber of Commerce. PROJECT PLAN & TIMETABLE: DRAFT 3. 28. The purpose of the Local Plan, what and how it is to deliver, and its vision statement, all need to be developed. 29. The ‘issues to be addressed’ could be assessed under the headings of the Park aims?. 30. The circulation and ‘public availability’of the Project Plan was queried; N.Brockie noted that it would be on the Park website, possibly with an easy-read version, and would be distributed to Community Councils. 31. The language and terminology need to be simplified further, and the timetable revised. 32. D.Bale had noted that the issues facing the Park should be assessed against the conditions set out in Article 2 of the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000, looking at more than just local issues; N.Brockie to investigate; the section on Environmental Issues also needs expanded. ANY OTHER BUSINESS. 33. N.Brockie issued the Scottish Exec. consultation paper ‘Making Development Plans Deliver’, the CNPA response to which would be agreed by Board members & staff on the Working Group. DATE OF NEXT MEETING. 34. The next meetings were arranged for Friday 7th May at 9.00am in the Royal Jubilee Hotel, Dykehead, Glen Clova (a mini-meeting to discuss the questionnaire, profile and paper mentioned above in 33); the next full meeting will be on Thursday 3rd June at 3pm in Ballater, venue t.b.c. 35. The meeting closed at 5.00pm.