A Message from 'Planning Democracy

A request from PD

Inverness Courier Reports on Campus and West Link Consultation

Only Campus details on line at the moment see here

Nothing new in Flood Report

Inverness Courier reports:

INVERNESS’S provost has defended the appointment of consultants to carry out a flood investigation, despite the findings throwing up "no major surprises".

Flood plagued residents in the Culloden, Smithton and Balloch area were last night (Thurs) informed about the conclusions from a three-month study into local burns and drains. Full item here

From THC web page - Inverness East flood update (25/11/11)

Extract:

Stuart Black, Highland Council’s Director of Planning and Development informed attendees that the Council was currently consulting on the draft “Interim Supplementary Guidance: Flood Risk and Drainage Impact Assessment” and urged anyone interested to submit their comments by the consultation deadline of 2 December 2011to devplans@highland.gov.uk. He also explained the requirement on developers during the planning application process to produce Flood Risk Assessments and Drainage Impact Assessments for the development proposals.

A new information booklet published by The Highland Council titled “Managing Flood Risk in the Highlands” - was made available at the meeting – and is also on the Council’s website atwww.highland.gov.uk/flooding. This guidance explains the Council’s requirements for Flood Risk Assessments and Drainage Impact Assessments and sets a higher standard on the quality of information provided.

Full item here

Keep saying those fond farewells

Further to my last post on the latest consultation regarding the 'Inverness City Trunk Link Road - West Link', (also called 'Inverness City West Link' , also 'Phase V Southern Distributor Road)

Why not take a trawl back 10 years and have a gander at the 'extracts' below; my big problem is that the Council did not follow the same process as 10 years ago (see section I have highlighted in pink) and consult on road options as part of consultation on the HwLDP. After all, the STPR had taken place. They seem to have disconnected the consultation on the road options from the main consultation on the HwLDP - a fact I commented on in my submission to the road consultation. They are however rolling forward the housing land allocations from the ILP.

CITY OF INVERNESS & AREA PLANNING COMMITTEE

18 DECEMBER 2001

INVERNESS LOCAL PLAN -DEPOSIT DRAFT

SOUTHERN DISTRIBUTOR ROAD -PHASE V

Joint Report by the Directors of Planning & Development

and Roads & Transport

Extract;

At its meeting on 3 August 2000, the Roads and Transport Committee agreed that consultation on alternative routes for Phase V of the Southern Distributor Road be conducted as part of the wider consultation on the draft Inverness Local Plan and that alternative routes be tested through the TRANUS land use and transportation model. This section of the SDR will cross the river and canal and give a continuous route between the A9(T) and A82(T) around the southern periphery of the City.

The Consultative Draft of the Inverness Local Plan approved by the Area Planning Committee on 17 April 2001 included four alternative routes. Whilst the Inverness, Culloden and Ardersier Local Plan (1994) had previously reserved a line for Phase V, the Council's intention was to reassess all options and to consult as widely as possible about the merits of each, prior to identifying a preferred route for inclusion within the current Plan at the deposit stage.

First and foremost, the SDR is a distributor road and must meet its transportation objectives. The Council's priorities in this regard are to relieve congestion within the City by redistributing traffic, where possible, around its periphery. Maximum effect would be obtained by locating Phase V of the route where it would attract most traffic which would otherwise be dependent upon the existing cross-City network, whether locally generated or "through" traffic. This allows for major City Centre and riverside enhancement in accordance with the Local Plan. Application of the TRANUS model shows Routes C and D to be more effective.

The benefits of the very substantial investment in the SDR to date cannot be fully realised until the route is constructed to the A82(T). With no funds programmed at present and increasing budgetary constraints on the Council, a £31m or £40m route is unlikely to be achievable compared with one at £IOm. Further, the more expensive options become increasingly unlikely where their benefits are only marginal compared with the cheaper options. It follows also that the prospects of completing the SDR are increased with the capability to construct Phase V in two parts -which is only possible with Routes C and D -

since it would not be necessary to assemble the total project costs at the outset.

Recommendation:

Route C be confirmed as the preferred line for Phase V of the Southern Distributor Road and that this line be identified and safeguarded in the deposit version of the Inverness Local Plan...

FULL REPORT HERE

It is worth looking at the Report's Appendix which the summarises and responds to the representations that resulted from the consultation over 10 years back.

Land set aside for 'Route C' can be found on hatched area on the map here (takes a time to load 7.9 MB) . Written details are given as Policy 29, page 36 of ILP 'Main Text' here.

Question, what happens to the 'Safeguarding' (as below) when the ILP falls?

....Provision will be made as part of the accommodation works for the road to relocate any displaced uses within Council land at Torvean, or on land the Council will seek to secure for such purposes, including for reconfiguration of an 18-hole golf course, the rugby pitches, clubhouse and ancillary facilities associated with these activities and the rowing club, see Policy 43 below.

Policy 43

GOLF COURSE - CHARLESTON Further to Policy 29 above, approximately 55.0 ha. of land between the A82(T) and Charleston is allocated for reconfiguration of Torvean golf course, clubhouse and related parking. This land will also provide for controlled public access including the Great Glen Way, links with Craig Dunain and Torvean together with amenity planting and other habitat management consistent with the Torvean-Muirtown “Green Wedge”.

How do I know that the ILP will fall and the text will be superceded?

Take a look here at what has been sent (July 2011) to the Reporters as part of the HwLDP examination;

Extract:

"Within the Adopted Inverness Local Plan [THC 10] the following material should be superseded by the HwLDP and its associated supplementary guidance."

...Chapter 2: Policies 7, 15(i), 22, 23, 29, 38(iv), 42, 46 and 70(i) as

they relate to land within the Charleston and Ness-side allocations

as delineated on Map 5 of the HwLDP...

So they seem to have retained some of the safeguarding for the Golf Course, but what about the rugby pitches, clubhouse and rowing club; not really clear there, is it?

(Does not seem to make a whole lot of sense with respect to policy 29 falling and 43 not and reference made to 29 in 43. Oh my aching head.)

Highland Council seek views on new guidance to developers on flooding matters

The Highland Council is underlining its commitment to tackling flooding by issuing improved and more detailed guidance to developers on how to address flooding matters when they design and implement their proposals for development.

During the autumn, the Council will ask the public and the development industry to comment on a draft of this new advice, which has been prepared in conjunction with technical input from various sources including the Scottish Environment Protection Agency.

The advice has been in preparation for some time but has been augmented to reflect the outcomes of recent flood events. The purpose is to ensure that the principle of not making flooding any worse in an area post development is translated into detailed planning, construction and maintenance practice. The guidance also sets out the wider context on "who does what" in terms of flooding responsibilities which should aid the public's understanding of the role of each public agency, developers and individuals.

The matter will be discussed by the Council’s Planning Environment and Development Committee on Wednesday (21 September).

Committee Chairman Councillor Ian Ross said: “This guidance demonstrates the Council’s commitment to improving flood prevention provision. This has been in development for some time but the recent floods just highlight the importance of this guidance. We want to hear the views of communities and developers – and are keen to promote effective partnership working.

“We hope the development industry and public will respond positively to the draft guidance, which is part of the Council's wider climate change agenda, and we will welcome suggestions and further refinements once we publish the guidance in the autumn. An 8 week period will be available for comments. A copy of the guidance will be available via the Council's web site and paper copies will be available free of charge to interested parties."

He said that clearer, more detailed, technical guidance would help practitioners - chiefly developers' engineers and planning application case officers - make more informed and consistent judgements about flooding issues. One material change in policy was the suggestion for a defined no development buffer alongside watercourses within development sites. This would reduce the developable area on sites but would allow for natural changes in the alignment of burns, reduce the risk of blockages, and allow limited overtopping without damage to adjoining properties.

He added: “On a similar theme, developers will be asked to provide details of where extreme flood event water will be routed if such an event occurs. The emphasis is on working with the natural environment not against it. For example a firmer policy objective will be the retention and, if necessary, re-creation of natural watercourses and where appropriate removal of constricting culverts, with the inclusion of associated development setback. Scottish law and Highland policy already sets a robust framework on flooding issues and the guidance is very much about putting principles into practice."

Link here

Compulsory Purchase; consultation on new guidance

Guidance on the use of compulsory purchase: a consultation paper

Extract from Foreword

Compulsory purchase is a valuable tool to facilitate projects in the public interest where it is impossible or impractical to acquire the land by agreement. These are often vital schemes that can promote economic recovery and sustainable economic growth and bring real benefits to our communities. But without compulsory purchase they could not go ahead.

It is vitally important that an authority considering compulsory purchase never loses sight of the people affected. The impact on someone of losing his or her home or business can be enormous. One of the key messages in the new guidance is that compulsory purchase need not be a heavy handed process if managed correctly. Key to this is the early, ongoing and meaningful consultation and engagement with those affected.

I urge you to respond with your thoughts on the draft guidance. I welcome your
comments.

(This consultation seeks views on two draft circulars. The first contains guidance on using compulsory purchase appropriately and effectively. The second will amend the Crichel Down Rules, which set out the circumstances and basis on which surplus land that was compulsorily acquired is offered back to the former owner)

Written responses invited to this consultation paper by Friday 6 May 2011.

Link to web page and consultation doc here

Inverness Roads consultation deadlline extended

The deadline for the Inverness West Link public consultation has been extended until

Fri 11 February 2011.

Click here for details of consultation