Broadband, Flooding, Wind, Paths, and Biodiversity; Latest Planning Committee Agenda

A meeting of the Planning, Environment and Development Committee will take place in the Council Chamber, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness onWednesday 21 September 2011 at 10.30am.

(extracts)

3. Presentation on Next Generation Broadband Provision in the Highlands

8. Physical Constraints Supplementary Guidance – Post Consultation Amendments

9. Small-Scale Wind Turbine Supplementary Guidance - Draft

10. Flooding – Draft Supplementary Guidance

11. Highland Council Core Path Plan

13. Outcome of Consultation on Trees, Woodland and Development
Supplementary Guidance

14. Highland Council’s Biodiversity Duty Delivery Plan 2011-14

15. Inverness Airport Business Park – Annual Report

16. Caithness and North Sutherland Regeneration Minutes

links to agenda and hence to reports for items above here

Planning as noted in the Scottish Gov's Economic Strategy

C4: INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT AND PLACE

Our focus on Infrastructure Development and Place looks to harness the strength and quality of our cities, towns and rural areas, including coastal communities, and to ensure that Scotland is positioned to take full advantage of the opportunities offered by the digital age and the transition to a low carbon economy.

Our focus on place is also about enhancing the quality of our areas as places to live and work; by improving the overall quality of life in our communities. This is dependent upon the quality and accessibility of the facilities and environment – both physical and natural – in our communities, which will also contribute to our ambitions for a healthier Scotland.

Achieving our Purpose requires a planning system that both protects the quality of Scotland’s natural and built environment as an asset for sustainable economic growth and enables the

development of growth-enhancing activities across Scotland.

More here

A view of a planning system

"Planning is essential in order to ensure developments benefit those in most need. Thus council housing is more important than the highly profitable buy-to-rent sector.

Greenbelts and national parks are actually more important than motorways and business parks - protecting our environment and our communities ought to be at the heart of the planning process, not at the disposal end of it."

More here

Report: Scotland needs to measure planning meaningfully

A robust framework by which the effectiveness of Scottish planning system can be measured should be introduced, a report from the national spending watchdog urges today.

The report from Audit Scotland, Modernising the Planning System, urges that while the time taken to make decisions on planning applications is an important measure of how a planning system is operating, it is insufficient in measuring the quality of the system.

The report states: "Many aspects of development management are not currently monitored, assessed or reported, for example pre-application activities, community engagement and the local appeals process."

It continues: "Performance should be assessed across a broader range of measures that gives a more comprehensive view of how the planning system is performing."

The Scottish planning system was reformed in 2006 with the intention of making it more efficient, more encouraging of development, easier to understand and more inclusive of communities. The Audit Scotland report aims to assess the extent to which this has happened.

The Royal Town Planning Institute’s national director for Scotland, Craig McClaren, agreed that a "more comprehensive measurement framework" is required.

He said: "Speed of decision can be important, but there is a need to take a more holistic view of performance." He added that the RTPI supports work currently being undertaken by membership body Heads of Planning Scotland and the Scottish government that takes into consideration a wider range of factors, such as stakeholder engagement and the quality of development.

The report also showed that the speed of decision making on small applications has remained largely constant throughout the changes to the Scottish planning system. In 2004/5, 63 per cent of small applications where decided within two months, compared to 65 per cent in 2009/10, the report says.

However, the report says that the amount of time it takes to decide large applications has increased over the same period. In 2004/5 52 per cent of large applications were decided within four months, compared to 38 per cent in 2009/10.

The report says that a great deal has been achieved in modernising the Scottish system, but adds that there is still a great deal to be done before the new system is up and running.

The new system in Scotland requires all 34 planning authorities – comprising 32 local authorities and two national parks – to produce local development plans (LDPs) for their areas every five years.

It also divides 19 authorities into four city regions, which are then required to produce strategic development plans (SDPs) every five years covering matters that require cross-boundary collaboration, such as housing and transport.

Authorities have only been able to prepare SDPs and LDPs since the end of 2008.

However, the report says that almost two thirds of authorities have delayed the dates by which time they expect to submit plans to the Scottish government for inspection, and shows that 56 per cent have pushed back their submission dates within the last year.

The report also notes that the differential between the money councils earn through planning fees and the cost of processing applications has increased significantly, rising from £6.7 million in 2004/5 to £20.8 million in 2009/10.

Modernising the planning system can be read here.

Article link here

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

Civic Voice warning

Pledges made by ministers to 'put communities in control' have been swept away by the draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), according to the national charity representing civic societies across England.

Civic Voice argues in a document outlining its "key issues" in relation to the NPPF that existing guidance stating that the views of local communities should be heard in developing planning policies is "set to be lost and support for local listing of buildings and structures to be dropped, denying a voice for the very people who know their area best".

The document said that the NPPF is also "weak in valuing the community view at the very earliest stages of preparing plans and drawing up development proposals".

The charity has also called for the removal of any bias in planning policy towards economic growth.

"The default answer to development is to be yes and councils should give permission wherever possible", the document said.

"Even the policies in local and neighbourhood plans are to be drawn up to do ‘everything it can to support sustainable economic growth’. Where there isn’t a plan or there are no relevant policies there is a free-for-all and local authorities are told simply to ‘grant permission’".

The document concluded: "This isn’t fair and local communities will increasingly challenge the results and lose faith in the system."

It also said that the NPPF lacks a "strong geographical rationale" setting out the preferred locations for development.

"We fear the sprawling nature of new building that will result will add deadweight costs to the economy as the costs to the public and private sector and to communities from additional infrastructure and increased travel costs mount up", the document said.

Link here

What could be planned for your area?

Back in January The Highland Council asked local communities, landowners and developers to help it identify land in the Inner Moray Firth which should be built on and which should not. The areas of land put forward for consideration can be found at the links below:

Inverness call for sites responses here

Nairn call for sites responses here

Ross and Cromarty East call for sites responses here

Stop Press; discussion programmes for hearings now available

Highland-wide Local Development Plan Examination hearings 2011. Please click on the links below:

Highland-wide Local Development Plan Examination

Hearing Session 1 - Tuesday 27 September 2011

Maclean Room, Eden Court Theatre, Inverness

REPORTERS’ FULLER DISCUSSION PROGRAMME

[Invited participants -(taken from earlier DPEA communication here )

1. Highland Council

2. Graham + Sibbald (Dereck Mackenzie (35))

3. Halliday Fraser Munro (Tulloch Homes (57), Fairways Leisure Group (69))

4. James Barr (MacDonald Estates PLC (98)

6. Strutt & Parker LLP (Balnagown Castle Properties Ltd (229))

7. Mackay, Robertson & Fraser (183) ]

AGENDA ITEM 1

The reporters wish to have parties’ views on the relationship between the existing development plan and the proposed Highland-wide Local Development Plan, in

particular:

(a) The extent to which the plan is clear in its purpose of providing a strategic

overview as a successor to the Highland Structure Plan, and in the

structure of the plan itself.

(b) Whether the plan has the right balance of site specific proposals relative to

the forthcoming area local development plans.

AGENDA ITEM 2

Leading from item 1, this will examine the overall spatial strategy in broad terms,

focussing on the specific area of the A96 corridor. The reporters will wish to examine

the benefit of concentrating on the A96 corridor in some detail, in contrast to other

areas that are being left to the forthcoming area local development plans. Some

representations have queried the relationship between the proposed plan and the

forthcoming area local development plans in terms of site allocations and the

reporters will wish to consider this issue.

AGENDA ITEM 3

Representations have been critical of the plan’s growth projections, and resulting

housing allocations, both in terms of them being too optimistic, especially in the

current financial climate, but also in not providing adequate deliverable building land.

Taking into account guidance in Scottish Planning Policy, the reporters will wish to

look at the figures in relation to the HNDA and the GROS projections. They will wish

to examine the translation of the agreed figures into the specific housing allocations

as reflected in table 1, and the extent to which this has been followed up in relation to

the A96 corridor. They will consider individual proposals in so far as they relate to

the representations made by those participating in the hearing under issues 85 and

86.

Highland-wide Local Development Plan Examination

Hearing Session 2 - Wednesday, 28 September 2011

Maclean Room, Eden Court Theatre, Inverness

REPORTERS’ FULLER DISCUSSION PROGRAMME

[Invited participants - (taken from earlier DPEA communication here )

1. Highland Council

2. Nairn West Community Council (101)

3. Nairn Resident Concern Group (209)

4. C Stafford (272)

5. EMAC Planning (Barratt, Robertson and Scotia Homes (333))

6. Muir Smith Evans (Mr C Allenby 220))

7. WYG Planning and Design (Cawdor Maintenance Trust (325))

AGENDA ITEM 1

The reporters wish to have parties’ views on:

(a) whether, in addition to the documents listed above, there are other

documents of special significance in relation to the proposed plan; and

(b) the extent to which these documents should control or influence the

reporters when they make their recommendations.

AGENDA ITEM 2

Under this item, the reporters envisage discussion of plan proposals for:

(a) Tornagrain

(b) Croy

(c) Cawdor

(d) Whiteness

AGENDA ITEM 3

(a) Residential development in Nairn in overall terms

(b) Other development in association with residential development at Nairn as a

whole

Main Examination page here

Links to individual representations here

Links to issues ('schedule 4 form' format) here

Why we should Champion Planning

Some interesting extracts from the latest item on the 'Chris Brown Blog'

The Government** seems to be misjudging the growing pressure wave of resistance to the proposed changes in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

…the line trotted out ad nauseum by Government politicians and their big business supporters that the planning system is preventing the development of homes and the creation of jobs is just nonsense. I won’t trot out the facts about the scale of allocated sites in local plans or the pipeline of sites with planning permission but it is clear that it is currently mainly credit markets and reduced public funding of affordable housing that are contributing to the slow down in housing completions and starts.

Most rational people can see what is happening here. The planning system has gradually become slower, more bureaucratic and more expensive. The developers, who are often frustrated more by the planning policies preventing the worst of their excesses than by the system itself, are trying to use the inefficient system as a reason for removing the policies it is intended to deliver.

…fundamentally this is a problem of markets. Markets do not deliver affordable housing where the jobs are. And Governments can’t do this either. We would do better to have a rational debate about what we are trying to achieve, what the best tools to achieve those objectives are and only then about how the planning system can help achieve some of them.

I was reminded of something a planning academic once told me;

"The reason why I would always support (and indeed, I often 'champion') planning as a system/activity/profession is because without it - we are left with only the market, and with market allocation of land, land uses and all the things that come with that (goods, services etc). So, outside all the bunkum that you've no doubt read about the planning system being there to do x, y and z (which is it's purpose, of course) - really the reason we have a planning system is that we as a society decided some time ago that the use and development of land should be regulated and strategically provided for. That means that all the red tape and regulation you're currently working through is supposed to be there to ensure that land is developed in a way that doesn't just suit the landowner, but contributes something to broader social/environmental/economic goals. Now, that of course is the key question for debate - and where planning becomes very politically contested (as you know) over whether a development constitutes something that contributes to such goals, and even what the goals should be."

**NB 'English' Government

[Newsnight on taxation; first part of the programme here ]

Remember the Web Casts / 'Blogger Ejected'

Highland Council web casts council meetings. THC web page says:

As part of our commitment to making the decision making process as open and transparent as possible, we webcast public meetings that are held in the Council Chamber, Inverness.

You can watch Council meetings conducted in public LIVE or view the archived version which is available within 48 hours of broadcast and remains online for 12 months.

Apparently not all local authorities have got around to doing this yet as the BBC news item below describes:

Ruling members of a council which called police to eject a blogger recording one of its meetings are being urged to allow filming in the future.

Carmarthenshire council's executive will consider a motion calling for the public to be allowed to film meetings.

Carmarthenshire council said it has since launched a review of the use of new technology in the way it provides services to residents.

One of the issues the committee is looking at is the possibility of video streaming council meetings via the council's website.

Perhaps they should have embraced new technology sooner?

[Link to BBC page here ]

'Fast Train Coming' ...the slow way

No, not a comment on the slow pace of progress re the much needed improvements to rail infrastructure in our area, but a quick post to draw attention to a really interesting blog:

http://www.hs2theslowway.blogspot.com/

I became aware of the blog through reading the item 'Fast Train Coming' which summarises how:

Planner Tim Stansfeld walked the 170-mile route of the proposed London-Birmingham high speed rail link, talking to those affected and assessing their concerns.

Fascinating stuff.

My interpretation in a nutshell, the thought of the line's construction brings hope of prosperity to some and despair to others; so, where can I find the robust evidence on which to base an informed view?

New Inshes District Park, Inverness

Work has begun this week on the first new public park to be built in Inverness for a generation.

Inshes District Park will cover a significant area of South Inverness. 29 hectares (72 acres) in total will be developed in three phases - more here

This news made the BBC news night time bulletin and there is a slightly different take on the BBC web site

Earlier this year, a campaign began to protect one of Inverness's largest existing parks - WhinPark - from the construction of a planned new road.

The West Link aims to take traffic from the city's Southern Distributor Road to the A82, avoiding the city centre.

Several possible routes are being considered and Highland Council has been looking at responses to public consultation on the options.

Some residents started a campaign to prevent the new road crossing Whin Park.

more here

Campus application consideration

I have to admit that I am saddened by some of the more 'negative' press coverage re the Councillors decision to defer consideration on the latest Campus 'Matters Specified' application. The press seems to have forgotten that the Council fully supports this Campus project and it already has 'outline' permission.

What is so awful about elected members wanting to ensure that the decisions they take now will result in the best possible decisions on road layout being taken at some point in the future?

I suggest that readers take a look at www.invernesscampus.co.uk in order to assess for themselves just how much traffic might be generated in this area when the the SAC and Inverness College relocate and the planned new Hotel, sports and community facilities are being fully utilised. All this on a site - bounded by the main railway line and the A9 - which is in close proximity to other major employers in the area (Lifescan, Raigmore, Police, Tesco/ASDA/Other retail units) and housing.

The Council has put out the following press release

A special meeting of The Highland Council’s Inverness Nairn Badenoch and Strathspey Planning Applications Committee is to be held towards the end of October to determine the outstanding matters from the Inverness Campus proposal at Beechwood, Inverness. This follows a decision by the Committee to defer a decision at its meeting on Tuesday 30 August.

• Click here to see the report considered by the committee on Tuesday (pdf)

Stuart Black, the Council’s Director of Planning and Development, said: “The deferral of this matter by committee provides some time to discuss the outstanding concerns there are, particularly in relation to access. We recognise HIE’s aspiration to commence infrastructure works and deliver the first phase of the Campus project, but it’s also important that community views are taken fully into account. We know that HIE is planning further consultation and look forward to having positive discussions with the community over the next month.”

-ends-

HwLDP; Reporters' Progress Update for August 2011

Highland-wide Plan - Reporter's update:

"In August a fourth reporter Iain Lumsden was welcomed to the team. His wide experience will be valuable to the team members.

Work has continued in assessing the representations and how they will be handled. A large number of questions requiring additional information have been put to the council. These have all been answered quickly and comprehensively, for which the team is grateful. The first unaccompanied site inspections have been carried out, in the Nairn area. Many of the issues will not require additional information or site inspections but will be carried out on the basis of the information originally supplied of further written submissions.

It has also been decided that two hearings will be carried, looking at the overall strategy and housing requirements, and the way this has been translated into the development structure on the ground in the A96 corridor and Nairn area. These will be held in Inverness in late September, and parties invited have now been informed.

Actual writing up the reports will now actively be taking place. The team meets monthly and has agreed on administrative points to ensure matters such as consistency, format and proof reading are properly handled. The team is confident that the end of November deadline will be met."

Note here and examination page here

Examination Procedures

Examination procedures

28. The way that the examination is conducted is at the discretion of the appointed

person. For most issues, it is expected that the appointed person will be able to

reach conclusions on the basis of the information provided by the planning authority without the need to obtain any further information. However, the appointed person can request additional information from any identified person or organisation. When this occurs, the information will normally be requested in the form of a written submission, although oral evidence sessions can be held where further discussion or questioning is likely to be helpful. This is usually expected to take the form of a hearing, with a discussion led by the appointed person, rather than an inquiry.

29. In deciding whether further information is needed and what is the best procedure

to obtain it, the appointed person will take into account any opinions expressed by

the planning authority or by those made the representations. These should be

highlighted by the planning authority in the Schedule 4 forms.

[Scottish Government

Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals

August 2010

DEVELOPMENT PLAN EXAMINATIONS:

PRACTICAL GUIDANCE FOR PLANNING AUTHORITIES]

Full document here

Issues for (“Schedule 4 format”) HwLDP listed here on THC web site