Public Document Pack Argyll and Bute Council Comhairle Earra Ghaidheal Agus Bhoid

Public Document Pack Argyll and Bute Council Comhairle Earra Ghaidheal agus Bhoid

Corporate Services Director: Nigel Stewart

22 Hill Street, Dunoon, Argyll, PA23 7AP Tel: 01369 704374 Fax: 01369 705948

28 December 2006

NOTICE OF MEETING

A meeting of the BUTE AND COWAL AREA COMMITTEE will be held in the QUEEN'S HALL, DUNOON on TUESDAY, 9 JANUARY 2007 at 10:30 AM, which you are requested to attend.

Nigel Stewart Director of Corporate Services

BUSINESS

1. APOLOGIES

2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

3. MINUTES

(a) Minute of Area Committee of 5th December 2006 (Pages 1 - 8)

(b) Minute of Civic Government Hearing of 24th November 2006 (Pages 9 - 10)

4. MODERN STUDIES PRESENTATION - DUNOON GRAMMAR SCHOOL PUPILS

5. VERBAL PRESENTATION BY ALEXANDER STREET RESIDENTS

6. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

(a) Planning Application 06/01819/DET. Charles McCusker, 33 Marine Road, Port Bannatyne (Pages 11 - 16)

(b) Planning Application 06/02116/OUT, Mr and Mrs D Currie, Land South West of Lephinmore, Strathlachlan (Pages 17 - 24)

(d) Planning Application 06/02178/DET Mr & Mrs Malcolm, 5 McLennan Cottages, Shore Road, Innellan (Pages 33 - 38)

(e) Planning Application 06/02059/DET, Mr I Coates & Ms R Donnelly, 1 Abbeyhill, Dunoon (Pages 39 - 46)

(f) Planning Application 06/02104/DET, Capital Development (GB) Ltd, Land to the South of Ascog Mansion, Ascog, Isle of Bute (Pages 47 - 54)

(g) Delegated Decisions (Pages 55 - 64)

(h) Appeals Report (Pages 65 - 74)

7. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

8. COMMUNITY SERVICES

(a) Dunoon Grammar School: Achievement Report 2006 (Pages 75 - 84)

9. CORPORATE SERVICES

(a) Usable Capital Receipts (Pages 85 - 86)

10. PLACE OF SAFETY PROGRESS REPORT (Pages 87 - 88)

11. MOTION REGARDING KILMUN CEMETERY - COUNCILLORS MARSHALL AND MCKINVEN (Pages 89 - 90)

12. EXEMPT ITEMS

E1 (a) Former Cowal Resource Centre, Bullwood Road, Dunoon (Pages 91 - 92)

E2 (b) Proposed Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas (Pages 93 - 106)

E3 (c) Enforcement Reports (Pages 107 - 116)

13. CIVIC GOVERNMENT HEARING

E3 (a) Application for a Taxi Driver's Licence - Hugh MacArthur - The Hearing will commence at 2pm. (Pages 117 - 128)

EXCLUSION OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC The Committee will be asked to pass a resolution in terms of Section 50(A)(4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 to exclude the public for items of business with an “E” on the grounds that it is likely to involve the disclosure of exempt information as defined in the appropriate paragraph of Part I of Schedule 7a to the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973.

The appropriate paragraph is:-

E1 - Paragraph 9 Any terms proposed or to be proposed by or to the authority in the course of negotiations for a contract for the acquisition or disposal of property or the supply of goods or services.

E2 – E4 - Paragraph 13 Information which, if disclosed to the public, would reveal that the authority proposes-

(a) to give under any enactment a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person; or (b) to make an order or direction under any enactment.

BUTE & COWAL AREA COMMITTEE

Councillor Brian Chennell (Chair) Councillor Douglas Currie Councillor Robert Macintyre Councillor Bruce Marshall (Vice-Chair) Councillor Gordon McKinven Councillor James McQueen Councillor Len Scoullar Councillor Isobel Strong Councillor Dick Walsh

Contact: Shirley MacLeod, Area Corporate Services Manager

This page is intentionally left blank Page 1 Agenda Item 3a

MINUTES of MEETING of BUTE AND COWAL AREA COMMITTEE held in the EAGLESHAM HOUSE, MOUNTPLEASANT ROAD, ROTHESAY on TUESDAY, 5 DECEMBER 2006

Present: Councillor B Chennell (Chair)

Councillor D Currie Councillor J McQueen Councillor R Macintyre Councillor L Scoullar Councillor B Marshall Councillor I Strong Councillor G McKinven Councillor J R Walsh

Attending: Shirley MacLeod, Area Corporate Services Manager Eilidh Headrick, Area Committee Services/Information Officer David Eaglesham, Area Team Leader, Development Management Billy Dickson, Building Standards Surveyor Douglas Blades, Public Transport Officer Ken Moncrieff, Head Teacher, Rothesay Academy Alan Lothian, Area Roads & Amenity Services Manager

1. APOLOGIES

None

2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

None

3. MINUTES

(a) MINUTE OF AREA COMMITTEE OF 7TH NOVEMBER 2006

The Minute of the Area Committee of 7th November 2006 was approved as a correct record.

(b) MINUTE OF PLANNING HEARING OF 29TH AUGUST 2006

The Minute of the Planning Hearing of 29th August 2006 was approved as a correct record.

4. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

(a) PLANNING APPLICATION 06/00723/DET, MR K MASTERTON, 22 ST BRIDE'S ROAD, ROTHESAY

Motion

The application be approved.

Proposed by Councillor Chennell, seconded by Councillor Marshall. Page 2

Amendment

The application should be refused, in that having regard to the Bute Local Plan and the Council’s Design Guidelines the proposed rooflights would be out of character in the Street Scene and detrimental to visual amenity.

Proposed by Councillor Macintyre, seconded by Councillor Strong.

On the matter being put to a vote 6 voted for the motion and 3 for the amendment.

Decision

The application be approved subject to conditions contained in the report by the Head of Planning Services.

Councillor Currie wished to have his displeasure at not being allowed to speak on the matter recorded.

(Reference: Report by the Head of Planning Services dated 18 October 2006 – submitted)

(b) PLANNING APPLICATION 06/00717/OUT, PORTAVADIE VILLAGE LTD, POLPHAIL VILLAGE AND SURROUNDING LAND, PORTAVADIE

Decision

The Committee agreed that a PAN 41 Hearing, with no recommendations, be held prior to the determination of this application

(Reference: Report by the Head of Planning Services dated 24 November 2006 – submitted)

Decision

Approved subject to an additional condition that the first 5 meters of the forestry road be surfaced.

(Reference: Report by the Head of Planning Services dated 27 November 2006 – submitted)

Page 3

(d) PLANNING APPLICATION 06/01964/DET, MRS FIONA BOYD, LAND TO THE SOUTH AND EAST OF COTTAGE 3 BALLOCHYLE FARM, SANDBANK

Decision

Refused in terms of the report by the Head of Planning Services.

(Reference: Report by the Head of Planning Services dated 24 November 2006 – submitted)

(e) PLANNING APPLICATION 06/01448/DET, MR AND MRS LAUFFER, UPPER FLAT, FIRTH BANK, NORTH CAMPBELL ROAD, INNELLAN

Decision

Refused in terms of the report by the Head of Planning Services.

(Reference: Report by the Head of Planning Services dated 24 November 2006 – submitted)

(f) PLANNING APPLICATION 06/01398/DET, FYNE HOMES, FORMER 1 - 11 MANSEFIELD PLACE, ROTHESAY, ISLE OF BUTE

Decision

Having regard to the Council’s Design Guidelines and the range of external finishes in the vicinity of the site, the proposed facing brick is considered appropriate and the application be approved with the removal of Condition 2 in the report by the Head of Planning Services.

(Reference: Report by the Head of Planning Services dated 27 November 2006 – submitted)

(g) REPORT ON SIX MONTHLY DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE - APRIL 2006 TO SEPTEMBER 2006

Councillors Macintyre and Scoullar apologised and left the meeting at this stage.

The Committee heard from the Area Team Leader Development Management on the six monthly progress on performance standards.

Decision

The Committee:- i. Noted the contents of the report. ii. Congratulated the department on their achievements.

(Reference: Report by the Development Control Manager – submitted)

Page 4

(h) REPORT ON BUILDING STANDARDS PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND SIX MONTHLY SERVICE PLAN

The Committee heard from the Building Standards Surveyor on the six monthly progress on Building Standards performance standards.

Decision

The Committee:- i. Noted the contents of the report ii. Congratulated the department on their achievements.

(Reference: Report by the Head of Planning Services – submitted)

(i) BUTE & COWAL DESIGN AWARD

The Committee heard from the Area Team Leader, Development Management on the Bute & Cowal Design Award 2005.

Decision

It was agreed that winner of the competition should be the conversion into 9 flats of the former Queens Hotel, Kirn, (Applicant MC Construction Ltd; Architect G R Kennedy), and that the Bute and Cowal Area Planning Design Award for 2005 and Commemorative Certificates will be presented in January 2007.

(Reference: Report by the Head of Planning Services – submitted)

(j) DELEGATED DECISIONS

The Committee noted Delegated Development Control and Building Control Decisions made since the last meeting.

(k) RURAL TRANSPORT GRANT 2007/08

The Committee heard from the Public Transport Officer on the proposals for experimental public transport services to be funded by the Rural Transport Gant.

Decision

The Committee agreed:- i. The use of Rural Transport Grant to provide the additional public transport as detailed in the report by the Head of Transportation and Infrastructure. ii. To write to Bridget Patterson of Cowal Deserve congratulating her on gaining funding for the ongoing Deserve/Interloch community transport project.

(Reference: Report by the Head of Transportation and Infrastructure dated Page 5

28 November 2006 – submitted)

5. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

The Committee were asked a question from Craig Boreland of the Buteman on whether the applicant for the development at land North East of the Bus Station, High Road, Port Bannatyne had put in an appeal. The Area Team Leader, Development Management responded to the question.

6. COMMUNITY SERVICES

(a) SCHOOL HOLIDAYS AND IN SERVICE DAYS 2007/2008 AND 2008/2009

The Committee noted the detail on the school holiday and inservice days for 2007/2008 and 2008/2009.

Decision

The Committee agreed:- i. To endorse the final pattern of school holidays and inservice days as outlined in the report. ii. To circulate the details of the school holidays and inservice days to all schools and relevant organisations.

(Reference: Report by the Director of Community Services dated 10 November 2006 – submitted)

(b) ROTHESAY ACADEMY ACHIEVEMENT REPORT 2006

The Committee heard from the Head Teacher of Rothesay Academy on the major achievements of the school and the SQA results for pupils who sat examinations in May/June 2006.

Decision

The Committee noted the contents of the report and formally congratulated the Head Teacher, Staff, Pupils and Parents on the improvements and achievements to date and on the positive commitment to future success within the school.

(Reference: Report by the Head Teacher of Rothesay Academy – submitted)

Page 6

7. OPERATIONAL SERVICES

(a) PRIVATE (UNADOPTED) ROADS BUTE AND COWAL

The Committee heard from the Area Roads & Amenity Services Manager on the extent of private (unadopted) roads within the Bute & Cowal Area.

Decision

The Committee agreed to recommend to the Strategic Policy Committee:-

a. To provide monies in this and future years revenue budgets for private unadopted roads b. To make representation to the Scottish Executive to make a Grant Aided Expenditure calculation to fund the upgrading and adoption of currently unadopted roads.

(Reference: Report by the Roads & Amenity Services Manager dated 28 November 2006 – submitted)

(b) B836 DALINLONGART - CLACHAIG ROAD IMPROVEMENTS - REPORT TO FOLLOW

Councillor Walsh apologised and left the meeting at this stage.

The Committee heard from the Area Roads and Amenity Services Manager on the revised estimate for improvement works to the B836 Dalinlongart – Clachaig Road.

Decision

The Committee agreed to the recommendations in the report by the Area Roads and Amenity Services Manager.

(Reference: Report by the Area Roads and Amenity Services Manager dated 4 December 2006 – submitted)

8. EXEMPT ITEMS

(a) PIER HEAD OFFICE, DUNOON PIER - SHOPMOBILITY & MEETING ROOM

The Committee heard a report of a request from Shopmobility to lease part of the Pier Head Office, Dunoon Pier.

Decision

The Committee agreed to points 2.1 (a) and 2.2 of the report by the Director of Corporate Services. Page 7

(Reference: Report by the Director of Corporate Services dated 28 November 2006 – submitted)

(b) ENFORCEMENT REPORTS

The Committee agreed Enforcement Reports as follows:-

03/00069/ENFOTH – Noted 03/00084/ENFOTH – Noted 06/00122/ENFOTH – Noted 06/00124/ENFOTH – No further action

Page 8

This page is intentionally left blank Page 9 Agenda Item 3b

Minute of Civic Government Hearing held in Dunoon on 24th November 2006.

Present Councillor B Marshall in the Chair

Councillor McQueen Councillor McKinven

Attending Peter Robertson, Senior Solicitor Catherine Crowe, Trainee Solicitor Inspector Baillie, Strathclyde Police Shirley MacLeod, Area Corporate Services Manager Eilidh Headrick, Area Committee Services Officer

Application for Grant of a Window Cleaners Licence – Richard Fulton, 67 Marine Parade, Kirn, Dunoon

Peter Robertson circulated a letter received from Mr Fulton’s agent regarding Mr Fulton’s absence at the meeting. Having regard to the decision of the Committee on 5th September 2006 the Committee decided to hold the hearing in his absence. The Chairman advised that the matter of Mr Fulton’s spent convictions would be dealt with before the consideration of his licence.

Inspector Baillie spoke to the Police report on the applicant’s previous convictions.

Decision

The committee considered that Mr Fulton’s spent convictions were relevant to the application.

Members debated the issues, commenting that this was Mr Fulton’s second opportunity to speak to his application but he had once again failed to appear.

Decision

The committee refused the Window Cleaners Licence on the grounds that the applicant was not a ‘fit and proper person to hold a licence’ in terms of the relevant section of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982.

Page 10

This page is intentionally left blank Page 11 Agenda Item 6a

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Councillor R Macintyre PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 7th September 2006 Bute and Cowal Area Committee Committee Date - 9th January 2007

27 December 2006

Reference Number: 06/01819/DET Applicants Name: Charles McCusker Application Type: Detailed Application Description: Installation of Replacement Windows Location: 33 Marine Road, Port Bannatyne

(A ) THE APPLICATION

Development Requiring Express Planning Permission.

It is proposed to replace two blue-painted, two-paned, timber, vertically sliding sash and case windows in the ground floor on the front elevation of the Anchor Tavern, 33 Marine Road, Port Bannatyne with white, six-over-single paned, top opening, upvc windows.

(B ) RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that planning permission be Refused for the reason set out on the following page.

(C ) DETERMINING ISSUES AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

The proposal involves the removal of blue-painted, two-paned, timber, vertically sliding sash and case windows in the ground floor of the Anchor Tavern, 33 Marine Road, Port Bannatyne which is located prominently within the Rothesay Conservation Area. The replacement windows would be white, six- over-single paned upvc, top opening windows that would be distinctly different in material, style and method of opening.

The fenestration is a key architectural feature in this particular townscape block and the proposed windows would appear incongruous on such a prominent elevation. On this basis, the proposal is considered to contravene relevant Central Government advice; existing and emerging Development Plan policies; and non-statutory Council policies and guidance.

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning and Building Standards

Case Officer: S. Gove 01369-70-8603 Area Team Leader: D. Eaglesham 01369-70-8608

"In reaching my assessment on this application, I have had regard to the documents identified in brackets above which are available for public inspection in terms of the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985".

Page 12

REASON FOR REFUSAL RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 05/01916/DET

1. The proposed windows, by virtue of their inappropriate material (upvc), glazing pattern (six-over-single paned) and method of opening (only top sash opening), would appear incongruous on the front elevation of this building which is located prominently within the Rothesay Outstanding Conservation Area where traditional white, brown or blue-painted, two-paned, timber sliding sash and case windows predominate and are a key architectural feature.

As such, the proposal is contrary to the provisions of NPPG 18 “Planning and the Environment”; Historic Scotland’s “Memorandum of Guidance on Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas 1998”; Policy STRAT DC 9 of the Argyll and Bute Structure Plan 2002; Policy POL BE 6 of the Bute Local Plan 1990; Policy LP ENV 14 of the Argyll and Bute Local Plan (Modified Finalised Draft) 2006; the Council’s Design Guide on Replacement of Windows (1991); and the Council’s Rothesay Window Policy Statement (1995), which advocates the following policy for window replacements in this particular townscape block:

Finish - Timber Glazing Pattern - Two pane equal division Colour - Brown or White Method of Opening - Sliding sash and case (double swing in exceptional circumstances)

Page 13

APPENDIX RELATIVE TO 05/01916/DET

A. OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

(i) Site History

Not applicable.

(ii) Consultations

Not applicable.

(iii) Publicity and Representations

The application has been advertised under Section 65 and as a Potential Departure to the Development Plan (closing date 13th October 2006). No letter of representation has been received.

B. POLICY OVERVIEW

National Planning Policy Guideline 18 “Planning and the Historic Environment” advocates that, within Conservation Areas, Planning Authorities should ensure that proposals are based upon detailed knowledge of traditional building materials and methods of construction and local design characteristics. They should also ensure that development is of a high quality in terms of construction and design.

Historic Scotland’s Memorandum of Guidance on Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas (1998) states that, for development within a conservation area, the first priority should be to have regard to those special architectural and visual qualities which gave rise to the area’s designation. Thus any proposal which, either in itself or if repeated elsewhere within the area, could erode these qualities may have to be refused.

Argyll and Bute Structure Plan 2002 Policy STRAT DC 9 seeks to resist development that would damage or undermine the historic, architectural or cultural qualities of the historic environment, particularly if it would affect, inter alia, Conservation Areas.

Bute Local Plan 1990 Policy POL BE 6 seeks to prevent any deterioration in the character and setting of the Conservation Area through unsympathetic alterations to buildings.

Argyll and Bute Local Plan (Modified Finalised Draft) 2006 Policy LP ENV 14 presumes against development that does not maintain or enhance the character or amenity of a Conservation Area and advocates that new development within such an area should be of the highest quality, respect and enhance the architectural and visual qualities that give rise to the designation status and conform with Historic Scotland’s ‘Memorandum of Guidance’ and Appendix A of the Plan.

Non-Statutory Policy and Guidance

The Council’s Rothesay Window Policy Statement (1995) sets out replacement window types through the identification of distinctive townscape blocks within the Rothesay Outstanding Conservation Area. The premises are contained within Block 274; the replacement window policy states the following:

Finish - Timber Glazing Pattern - Two pane equal division Colour - Brown or White Method of Opening - Sliding sash and case (double swing in exceptional circumstances)

The windows should also be further assessed against the Council’s Design Guide on Replacement of Windows (1991). Section 3.7 states that in Conservation Areas front window replacements must match the original in all aspects of design, finish and their main method of opening. This means that the proportion of top to bottom sashes must match the original exactly and the original pattern of glazing bars. Timber should always be used although ‘modern’ type window frames may be acceptable on upper floor levels on buildings of three storeys or more or on particular elevations which have already been seriously devalued by modern type window frames.

Page 14

C. ASSESSMENT

Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires the determination of applications to be made in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case, the relevant policies are listed in Section B above.

33 Marine Road occupies a very prominent seafront location within the Port Bannatyne part of the Rothesay Conservation Area. It is a two-storey building with a Public House on the ground floor and residential accommodation on the upper floor. In terms of fenestration, blue, white and brown-coloured, two-paned timber, vertically sliding sash and case windows predominate on the front elevation.

It is considered that the appearance and character of the building are, to a significant extent, derived from the design and detailing of the windows and that alteration to the fenestration of the building can have a considerable effect upon this appearance. The Rothesay Window Policy Statement acknowledges the quality of the front elevation of 33 Marine Road and clearly identifies the type of fenestration that should be used when replacing windows. This is further supported by Development Plan policy that seeks to safeguard the integrity of buildings within the Rothesay Outstanding Conservation Area.

The subject application proposes the introduction of white, six-over-single paned upvc windows with only the top sash opening i.e. rather than sliding up and down. The proposal, therefore, contravenes the Rothesay Window Policy Statement in terms of finish, glazing pattern and method of opening. On this basis, it is considered that the proposed windows would be to the detriment of the building’s character and that of the wider Rothesay Conservation Area.

D. CONCLUSION

The proposal involves the removal of blue-painted, two-paned, timber, vertically sliding sash and case windows in a ground floor premises which is located prominently within the Rothesay Conservation Area. The replacement windows would be white, six-over-single paned upvc, top opening windows that would be distinctly different in material, style and method of opening.

The fenestration is a key architectural feature in Marine Road and the proposed windows would appear incongruous on such a prominent elevation. On this basis, the proposal is considered to contravene relevant Central Government advice; existing and emerging Development Plan policies; and non-statutory Council policies and guidance.

Page 15

MLWS

Jetty S Shingle V ingle MPs S V

Quay

S 15

Shelter 14

2 V Shingle 0 V

V V

6 V

MP 25 23

S 24

TCB's 27 31 28 V

V MARINE ROAD 33 V

S S BM 4.74m V

V V 2

32 PH 35

A V 6 4

36 V V

34 8

50 V V

48 PO

9 V

4 V

46 V V 47 PH Hotel 1 V

V 37 QUAY STREET

V 44

V V V 10

42 V V

V 3 41

V V 40 V

V 1

V 9

V 6

V 7 V

V 5 8 18 15

13 V

V 11 11

V 17

19 V 10 21 V

V 27 V V V V

V V

41 V

V 2

9 V CAS 31

TLE STREET V 3 3 V

V Bellafield 37 S 37a V V V V V Sinks V V V

Police V V H 5 Mountpark arr Station Theodor V 6 e t ta 7 V Nanz- 8 Ea e

V t villa R V Neuk V o

wVi

Corr V Linn ll V a V We a

thorn

Beech- st - G bank V B

V rook G H V V a V 1 wtho vill V Villa a V V rn V V V 5 V V V V ce Ter r a V V COMMITTEE LOCATION PLAN RELEVANT TO APPLICATION: 06/01819/DET ± 1:1,250

This map is reproduced from Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Argyll and Bute Council, licence number 100023368, 2004. Page 16

This page is intentionally left blank Page 17 Agenda Item 6b

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Councillor D C Currie PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 4th October 2006 Bute and Cowal Area Committee Committee Date - 9th January 2007

27 December 2006

Reference Number: 06/02116/OUT Applicants Name: Mr and Mrs D Currie Application Type: Outline Application Description: Erection of a Dwellinghouse Location: Land South West of Lephinmore, Strathlachlan

(A ) THE APPLICATION

Development Requiring Express Planning Permission.

• Erection of a dwellinghouse (no details submitted) on land measuring 0.092 acres to the south west of the existing dwelling known as ‘Lephinmore’ • Formation of new vehicle access onto existing private road (no details submitted) • Connection to existing private sewerage system and private water supply

(B ) RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that planning permission be Granted subject to the standard conditions and reasons and the conditions and reasons set out overleaf.

(C ) DETERMINING ISSUES AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

The site is located between an existing dwelling and the driveway to the applicants’ own dwelling with the consequence that it represents an acceptable infill site for one dwelling within the ‘minor settlement’ of Lephinmore on the eastern shores of Loch Fyne. Issues such as road safety, foul drainage and water supply can all be addressed through the imposition of conditions.

On the basis of the foregoing, the proposal is considered acceptable and to accord with both existing and emerging Development Plan policies.

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning and Building Standards

Case Officer: S. Gove 01369-70-8603 Area Team Leader: D. Eaglesham 01369-70-8608

Page 18

CONDITIONS AND REASONS RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 06/02116/OUT

4. Any details pursuant to Condition 1 above shall include a full appraisal to demonstrate the wholesomeness and sufficiency of the private water supply to serve the proposed development. This assessment shall be carried out by a qualified and competent person(s). Such appraisal shall include a risk assessment having regard to the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Private Water Supplies (Scotland) Regulations 2006 and shall, on the basis of such risk assessment, specify the means by which a wholesome and sufficient water supply shall be provided and thereafter maintained to the development.

Such appraisal shall also demonstrate that the wholesomeness and sufficiency of any other supply in the vicinity of the development, or any other person utilising the same source or supply, shall not be compromised by the proposed development. Furthermore, the development itself shall not be brought into use or occupied until the required supply has been installed in accordance with the agreed specification.

Reason: In the interests of public health and amenity and in order to ensure that an adequate water supply can be provided to meet the requirements of the proposed development.

5. Any details pursuant to Condition 1 above shall incorporate the following elements:

a) The provision of visibility splays measuring 20 metres in both directions from a point 2.0 metres back from the edge of the carriageway at the centre point of the access with no hedges, fences or walls within these splays being greater that 1.0 metres above the level of the carriageway;

b) The provision of a parking and turning area for two vehicles within the site.

Reason: In the interests of road safety.

6. Any details pursuant to Condition 1 above shall identify the installation of a communal foul drainage system that shall serve the proposed dwellinghouse and the existing dwellinghouse known as ‘Cedar House’, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the planning authority.

Reason: In the interests of public health and amenity and in order to ensure that an adequate foul drainage system can be provided to meet the requirements of the proposed development and existing development in the vicinity.

Page 19

APPENDIX RELATIVE TO 06/02116/OUT

A. OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

(i) Site History

There is none relevant to this application.

(ii) Consultations

Scottish Water (Letter dated 11th October 2006) No public sewers or public water mains in the vicinity of the proposed development.

SEPA (Letter dated 18th October 2006 & e-mail dated 12 December 2006) No objections but mentions that no detail has been supplied as to where the effluent from foul drainage system is to discharge. A new shared system to serve new and existing dwelling seems reasonable, provided the septic tank discharges to land and not the water environment.

Public Protection (Memo dated 30th October 2006) No objections subject to condition regarding a hydrologist’s report on the private water supply.

Area Roads Manager (Memo dated 1st November 2006) No objections subject to conditions.

(iii) Publicity and Representations

No letter of representation has been received.

(iv) Other Information

Members’ attention is drawn to the fact that one of the applicants is Councillor Douglas Currie, Member for the East Loch Fyne ward.

B. POLICY OVERVIEW

Argyll and Bute Structure Plan 2002 Policy STRAT DC 1 encourages small scale development on appropriate infill, rounding-off and redevelopment sites within ‘minor settlements’, which is compatible with an essentially rural settlement location.

Cowal Local Plan 1993 The site is within the East Loch Fyne Regional Scenic Coast where, under Policy POL RUR 1, there is resistance to prominent or sporadic development that would have an adverse environmental impact. POL HO 10 encourages single or small scale residential development within the Cowal countryside providing there are no infrastructure, servicing or environmental constraints. Particular attention will be paid to infill, rounding-off and redevelopment opportunities related to existing development and land form.

Argyll and Bute Local Plan (Modified Finalised Draft) Local Plan 2006

Policy LP ENV 1 When considering development proposals regard should be given to a number of criteria including impacts upon amenity and the environment; the location and nature of the proposed development; relationship to the road and public transport network; the availability of infrastructure; etc. Proposals that would have an adverse impact should be resisted.

Policy LP ENV 10 The site is within an Area of Panoramic Quality where development will be resisted if, by virtue of its scale, location or design, it would have an adverse impact upon the character of the landscape.

Policy LP ENV 19 This policy seeks to ensure that new developments harmonise with their surroundings in terms of their setting, layout and density.

Policy LP HOU 1 The site is within the ‘minor settlement’ of Lephinmore where there is support for small scale residential development unless there is an unacceptable environmental, servicing or access impact.

Page 20

Policy LP SERV 1 In all development control, zones, the development of private sewage treatment schemes will only be permitted if a public wastewater system is not present and such a system with soakaway can be accommodated.

Policy LP SERV 4 There is support in principle for the use of private water supplies where a public water supply is not available. This support is subject to the private water supply being of adequate quality and quantity to serve the proposed development without prejudicing the lawful interests of neighbouring properties or land and water users.

Policy LP TRAN 4 Where a site is served by an existing private access and considered to be of such a poor standard, the proposal may be considered unacceptable unless commensurate improvements are made.

C. ASSESSMENT

The application site (approx. 0.09 acres) is covered with scrub and vegetation. A stone boundary wall runs along the front of the site, marking the division between the plot and a single track private road. To the north east of the site lies Cedar House, which is a timber dwelling. The applicants’ dwelling, Lephinmore, is situated approximately 45 metres to the south west of the application site and the driveway to this dwelling cuts across the land between Lephinmore and the site of the proposed dwelling.

Settlement Pattern

As stated in Section B above, the cluster of buildings at Lephinmore has been identified as a ‘minor settlement’ in the Argyll and Bute Local Plan. There is a presumption in favour of small scale residential development within ‘minor settlements’, particularly on infill, rounding-off and redevelopment sites.

From a settlement pattern perspective, the application site constitutes an infill development, as defined in the Glossary of the Argyll and Bute Local Plan, between the applicants’ dwelling and Cedar House. Whilst there are some trees on the site, they are of limited value and their removal would not be of significant detriment to the visual amenity of the area.

Road Safety

In terms of access, Policy LP TRAN 4 suggests commensurate improvements where existing private access regimes are of a poor standard. The existing private track provides access to two dwellings and a former fish farm.

The Area Roads Manager has no objections to the proposal subject to conditions relating to the maintenance of visibility at the junction of the existing private road with the B8000 public road; the provision of a ‘concealed entrance’ sign to advise northbound traffic; the provision of visibility splays at the proposed access point; and the creation of parking and turning for two vehicles within the plot.

Some of the above measures are outwith the application site and, indeed, outwith the control of the applicants. Whilst an additional dwellinghouse would result in more traffic using the existing access and private road, this is likely to be negligible and there is considered to be little, if any, scope for future development served by this private access. It is therefore considered neither reasonable nor necessary to impose the off-site improvements that have been requested. It is considered that the improvements proposed (or required by condition) would be consistent with the site and location and terms of Policy LP TRAN 4.

Foul Drainage

A septic tank within the application site serves Cedar House, the dwelling to the north east. The application indicates connection to this tank; however, no information is available as to whether this tank has the capacity to accommodate a further dwelling and there is a question as to whether there would be sufficient land within the plot to ensure that the new dwelling was an appropriate distance from an existing tank that was constructed some time ago. It is considered that a condition requiring a new communal system to be installed will resolve this issue.

Water Supply

Page 21

It is proposed to connect the proposed dwelling into the existing private water supply and Public Protection has recommended a condition requiring the submission and approval of a hydrologist’s report to ensure that the existing supply is adequate to accommodate a further dwelling.

D. ASSESSMENT

The site is located between an existing dwelling and the driveway to the applicants’ own dwelling with the consequence that it represents an acceptable infill site for one dwelling within the ‘minor settlement’ of Lephinmore on the eastern shore of Loch Fyne. Issues such as road safety, foul drainage and water supply can all be addressed through the imposition of conditions.

On the basis of the foregoing, the proposal is considered acceptable and to accord with both existing and emerging Development Plan policies.

Page 22

This page is intentionally left blank Page 23

e and Boulders gl E 23m

V H Track Lephinmore V L V L

Sheepfold V V V

V V V

F V A

V V

V BM 22.38m E Track 18m

L L L F

COMMITTEE LOCATION PLAN RELEVANT TO APPLICATION: 06/02116/OUT ± 1:2,500

This page is intentionally left blank Page 25 Agenda Item 6c

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Councillor B. Chennell PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 3rd November 2006 Bute and Cowal Area Committee Date - 9th January 2007

28 December 2006

Reference Number: 06/02175/DET Applicants Name: Mr & Mrs Pearce Application Type: Detailed Application Description: Retention of raised timber decking (retrospective). Location: 311 Marine Parade, Hunters Quay, Kirn, Dunoon, PA23 8HN

(A ) THE APPLICATION

Development Requiring Express Planning Permission.

• Retention of raised timber decking (retrospective).

(B ) RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that planning permission be refused for the reasons set out on the following page.

(C ) DETERMINING ISSUES AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

The site is located within a Townscape Policy Area as defined by the adopted local plan; such a designation seeks to resist development that has a detrimental effect on the character and appearance of existing buildings. Due to the decking’s overbearing size and prominent location within the front curtilage of the property, the retention of the decking, as constructed, is contrary to both the adopted and emerging local plan.

The retention of the timber decking in its current form could not be supported due to the overwhelming effect upon the standard of privacy and amenity of the adjoining and neighbouring properties of 307 and 305 Marine Parade. The department has received three letters of representation against this application. Despite discussions with the applicant’s agent in an attempt to reduce the scale and size of the decking which in turn would reduce the privacy and overlooking concerns, the applicant wishes the decking to remain as constructed.

The applicant’s agent has submitted a rudimentary landscaping scheme in an attempt to mitigate the concerns of the department. It is not considered that landscaping would significantly address the serious privacy and amenity concerns.

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning Services

Case Officer: J. Irving 01369-70-8621 Senior Planning Officer D.Eaglesham 01369-70-8608

Page 26

REASONS FOR REFUSAL RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 06/02175/DET

1. The decking by virtue of its size, height and elevation along with its prominence within the garden ground of 311 Marine Parade and that of the wider streetscape presents an unacceptable form of development that is overbearing and at odds with the established settlement character which is typified by large Victorian villas with large, undeveloped front curtilages. The retention of the decking would be contrary to policies POL BE 9 ‘Layout & Design of Urban Development’ and POL BE 4 ‘Townscape Policy Area’ of the Cowal Local Plan 1993 (adopted 1995) and policies LP ENV 1 ‘Development Impact on the General Environment’, LP ENV 14 ‘Development in Conservation Areas & Special Built Environment Areas’ and LP ENV 19 ‘Development Setting, Layout & Design’ of the Argyll and Bute Modified Finalised Draft Local Plan 2006 as follows:

‘The Council will seek to achieve a high standard of layout and design where new urban developments are proposed. Proposals for new developments should have regard to the districts published design guidance’.

(Policy POL BE 9 of Cowal Local Plan 1993)

‘The Council will seek to protect these areas from adverse environmental change and where possible to promote high standards of design. In these areas the Council will not permit new developments or changes of use which would have a detrimental effect upon the character and external appearance of existing building and structures..’ (Policy POL BE 4 of Cowal Local Plan 1993)

‘In all development control zones the Council will assess applications for planning permission for their impact on natural, human and built environment. When considering development proposals the following general considerations will be taken into consideration; impact on amenity, access and environment, preserve and enhance surrounding character, location and nature of proposed development; relationship to access, infrastructure etc..’

(Policy LP ENV 1 of Argyll and Bute Modified Finalised Draft Local Plan 2006)

‘There is a presumption against development that does not preserve of enhance the character or appearance of an existing or proposed Special Built Environment Area. New development within this area must be of the highest quality, respect and enhance the architectural qualities that give rise to the actual designation.’

(Policy LP ENV 14 of Argyll and Bute Modified Finalised Draft Local Plan 2006)

‘The Council will expect all developers and their agents to execute a high standard of appropriate design in accordance with the design principles and development setting, development layout and density, development design…’

(Policy LP ENV 19 of Argyll and Bute Modified Finalised Draft Local Plan 2006)

2. The decking by virtue of its height, location and proximity to 307 Marine Parade and the garden ground of both 305 and 307 Marine Parade provides a platform for overlooking from which the existing level of amenity afforded to both 305 and 307 Marine Parade is seriously compromised. The conservatory at 307 Marine Parade can be clearly interlooked from the decking at a distance of less than 18 metres while the front garden ground of both 305 and 307 Marine Parade within a distance of 20 metres of the decking can be clearly overlooked.

Page 27

APPENDIX RELATIVE TO 06/02175/DET

A. OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

(i) Site History

2004 Permission granted to demolish timber lean-to and erect conservatory (04/01245/DET)

The conservatory at 307 Marine Parade was erected after permission granted in 1998 (98/00120/DET)

(ii) Consultations

Hunters Quay Community Council (response dated 20th December 2006): ‘Consider that the height of the decking was completely out of proportion with surrounding houses and represented a considerable invasion of privacy as it overlooked neighbouring gardens and afforded direct views into the next door house. Object to grant of planning permission’

Area Team Leader (Building Standards) (response dated 7th November 2006): ‘Application for Building Warrant has been received.’

(iii) Publicity and Representations

Under Article 9 neighbour notification procedures, three letters of representation have been received from the following:

Mr & Mrs Dent (letter dated 27 October 2006) 307 Marine Parade, Hunters Quay, Dunoon, Argyll, PA23 8HN. Gillian Marshall (letter dated 26 October 2006) 301 Marine Parade, Hunters Quay, Kirn. Diana Thomson (letter dated 29th October 2006) 303 Marine Parade, Hunters Quay, Argyll, PA23 8HN.

The points raised can be summarised as follows:

i. The structure is unsightly and out of character with the four Victorian villas in the immediate vicinity.

ii. The height of the decking is above the height of the surrounding walls and hedges and overlooks all neighbouring properties resulting in a loss of privacy (301, 303,305 and 307 Marine Parade).

iii. 307 Marine Parade stands to lose the privacy of its garden, conservatory and sitting room. iv. If garden ground is so unsuitable for wheelchair access, why was this not taken into consideration when the house was bought.

Comment: See assessment below.

v. Our house is adjoining number 309/11 and is not indicated on the submitted plans.

Comment: The revised drawings submitted detail this property (307 Marine Parade).

vi. This structure’s visual dominance is a serious loss of amenity by virtue of overlooking, privacy and aspect.

Comment: See assessment below.

vii. The retention of the structure may de-value our home.

Comment: This is not a material planning consideration.

viii. There must be other ways of designing lower level decking suitable for wheelchair use that would be easier to access than a decking which is higher above the hedge and surrounding area.

Comment: See assessment below.

Page 28

(iv) Applicants supporting Information (summary of letter dated 15th October 2006)

The reason for the height of the decking was to facilitate level and accessible use for my wheelchair from the driveway in front of the house. If the plans are agreed it will enable me to have independence of movement from my house to the planned area.

The decking will provide access to the garden that is otherwise on steep ground and inaccessible for wheelchair use. I was also intending to enable myself to tend plantations of plants and flowers which would be set at strategic positions on the decking itself giving me an opportunity, although limited, to do some garden work.

It was also my intention to plant and develop climbing plants and shrubs around the woodwork so that the decking will fit in as part of the garden and look less the structure as it now stands.

B. POLICY OVERVIEW

Cowal Local Plan 1993 (adopted 1995)

Policy POL BE 9 ‘Layout & Design of Urban Development’

Policy POL BE4 ‘Townscape Policy Area’

Argyll and Bute Modified Finalised Draft Local Plan 2006

Policy LP ENV 1 ‘Development Impact on the General Environment’

Policy LP ENV 14 ‘Development in Conservation Areas & Special Built Environment Areas’

Policy LP ENV 19 ‘Development Setting, Layout & Design’

Page 29

C. ASSESSMENT

Introduction

Retrospective planning permission is sought for the retention of a large raised timber deck within the front garden of 311 Marine Parade, Hunters Quay. The applicant is disabled and, given the sloping nature of the front garden, the decking is intended to provide the applicant with a level platform upon which wheelchair access is achieved. The decking projects from the driveway to approx 2.2m from the front, roadside boundary of the property. At its highest point, it measures 2.57 metres above ground level while its length is some 10.65 metres. As the decking projects towards the eastern boundary of the property it opens into a large platform. The decking is finished with a timber balustrade with metal decorative railings.

311 Marine Parade is large semi-detached Victorian villa located within a streetscape that is characterised by large villas set within generous curtilages. The established building line is set back some 20 metres from the road with undeveloped front garden ground between the buildings and road being a key characteristic of the surrounding settlement pattern.

Visual Amenity

Given the size and scale of the decking, it represents an alien form of development within a location that is characterised by traditional Victorian villas with undeveloped sloping front garden. The decking, by virtue of its overbearing size detracts not only from the overall character of 311 and 307 Marine Parade but also from the wider streetscape it is contained within. When viewed from the south of the site, the decking’s balustrade can be clearly seen above the boundary hedge: when viewed from the north the decking in its entirety can be clearly seen.

Privacy/Overlooking

The adjoining neighbouring property, 307 Marine Parade, has only limited privacy from 311 Marine Parade as its conservatory which projects from the front elevation can be overlooked from the concrete driveway of 311 Marine Parade. Notwithstanding this existing compromise, the retention of the decking would exacerbate this problem by providing a raised platform upon which the conservatory can be clearly interlooked at a greater angle, albeit at a distance of approx 15m.

The sloping front garden ground, a characteristic of 301 to 311 Marine Parade, currently ensures that front gardens are not interlooked between neighbouring gardens. The neighbouring gardens south of 311 Marine Parade (No. 301 to 307) can all be clearly overlooked from the decking. Of most concern are the nearest neighbouring gardens of 307 and 305 Marine Parade which are both within 20 metres of the decking.

Conclusion

The site falls within a ‘Townscape Policy Area’, as defined by the adopted local plan and within a ‘Special Built Environment Area’ as defined by the emerging local plan. These policies seek to achieve a high standard of development and resist those that would have a detrimental effect upon the character or appearance of existing buildings.

The department has met with the applicant’s agent in an attempt to reach an agreeable solution. It was put to the agent that a compromise could be to bring the decking platform nearer to the driveway, thereby not only reducing the visual impact of the decking but also reducing the privacy and overlooking concerns. This would still provide a level platform area capable of wheelchair access. This was not viewed favourably by the applicant who does not wish to alter the decking as constructed. A landscaping scheme has been submitted in an attempt to mitigate the concerns of the department; however, this is not sufficient to combat the aforementioned concerns.

While the department is sympathetic to the needs of the applicant, the planning system has a duty to protect the affected neighbours from unacceptable forms of development that compromise existing levels of amenity. The decking, as constructed, is not acceptable and contrary to both the adopted and emerging local plan policies quote above. Given a compromise, through the reduction of the decking, is not acceptable to the applicant, the retention of the decking is considered unacceptable so this application is recommended for refusal.

Page 30

This page is intentionally left blank Page 31

V 3

Rock L

C O 5 U Rock V U A

Un A A d Mean Low Water Springs

Rock

U U

P Rock

311

V 09 A 3

V 6.1m 307 16 BM V E V V 6.89m

V 14 V

305 S LB

BRAE V D Rock V V

V V 303

V RENFIEL V 12

V V

V 301

1 V V V 0

V Mean High V V Dunchattan

V V Wa

33 8 V V 299b V V

V 31

V 299 V V

V V 5

29 27 V

V 29 V

Hotel V V

V 297

V 5

2 V COMMITTEE LOCATION PLAN RELEVANT TO APPLICATION: 06/02175/DET ± 1:1,250

This page is intentionally left blank Page 33 Agenda Item 6d

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Councillor D. Walsh PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 7th November 2006 Bute and Cowal Area Committee Date - 9th January 2007

27 December 2006

Reference Number: 06/02178/DET Applicants Name: Mr & Mrs Evan Malcolm Application Type: Detailed Application Description: Formation of seawall defence incorporating hardstanding area for use as garden ground along with the retention of vehicular parking area (retrospective). Location: 5 McLennan Cottage, Shore Road, Innellan, Argyll, PA23 7TJ

(A ) THE APPLICATION

Development Requiring Express Planning Permission.

• Formation of seawall defence incorporating hardstanding area. • Use of hardstanding as garden ground belonging to 5 McLennan Cottage • Formation of vehicular parking area.

(B ) RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions and reasons together with a ‘Note to the Applicant’ set out overleaf.

(C ) DETERMINING ISSUES AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

The ownership of the land upon which these works have been undertaken remains unclear and the necessity for the large retaining wall to combat erosion and safeguard the applicant’s home remains questionable. However, the retention of the works that have been undertaken presents no adverse visual amenity concerns and a minor extension to existing garden ground is a compatible land use. The department has received no objections towards this application.

The development works that have been undertaken are consistent with provisions of both the adopted and emerging local plan and no adverse concerns have been raised through the consultation process. As such, this proposal is considered acceptable.

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning Services Case Officer: J. Irving 01369-70-8621 Area Team Leader D. Eaglesham 01369-70-8608

Page 34

CONDITIONS AND REASONS RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 06/02178/DET

1. Within two months following the date of this permission, the vehicular access shall be constructed as per fig. 10.16 of the Council’s Development Guidelines, unless the prior written consent for variation is obtained in writing from the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of road safety. 2. Sightlines measuring 35 x 2m from the centre point of the access shall be maintained, in perpetuity, clear of all obstructions, including walls, hedges and fences, exceeding 1 metre in height. If gates are to be fitted, they must not be able to open onto the footway

Reason: In the interests of road safety and to ensure pedestrians on the footway are not compromised. .

3. With regard to the additional garden ground hereby approved and notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 and Classes 1 (alterations, extensions, conservatories, etc.), 3 (outbuildings, garages, sheds, etc.), 4 (hard surfaces), 5 (Oil and LPG tanks) and 7 (gates, fences, walls, etc.) of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992, no development shall take place within the additional curtilage ground without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and in order to protect the privacy and amenity of 5 McLennan Cottage and adjoining residential properties.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

Road Opening Permit

The Area Roads Manager has advised that the proposed works will require a Road Opening Permit (S56). The applicant is advised to contact the Area Roads Manager (Mr. Paul Farrell, tel. 01369 703959) directly upon this matter.

As no turning area is available within the site, the applicant should reverse off the carriageway and drive back on in a forward manner.

Page 35

APPENDIX RELATIVE TO 06/02178/DET

A. OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

(i) Site History

Planning Permission 05/01277/DET was granted on 27th July 2005 for the erection of a conservatory on the side elevation of 5 McLennan Cottage. This has since been erected but to slightly different dimensions.

Prior to the construction of the conservatory the applicant erected a timber storage shed, which did not require planning permission by virtue of Class 3 of the Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development)(Scotland) Order 1992 (this was agreed by the department on 2nd June 2005).

A smaller sun porch/conservatory was erected in late 2004 which did not require planning permission by virtue of Class 1 of the Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development)(Scotland) Order 1992 (this was agreed by the department on 2nd February 2004).

There is also an associated enforcement report (Ref: 06/00161/ENFHSH) elsewhere on this agenda.

(ii) Consultations

Area Roads Manager (Memo dated 13th November 2006): No objection subject to conditions.

Crown Estates Commission: No response.

Estates Department: (e-mail dated 19 December 2006) The land affected has transferred to ACHA.

(iii) Publicity and Representations

Under Article 9 neighbour notification procedure, no letters of representation have been received.

B. POLICY OVERVIEW

Cowal Local Plan 1993 (adopted 1995) The site falls within a Local Scenic Area as defined in the adopted local plan. Policy POL RUR 1 Landscape Quality requires the application to be assessed against its environmental impact, any locational or operational need, economic benefit, and servicing and infrastructure implications.

Argyll and Bute Modified Finalised Draft Local Plan 2006 Policy LP ENV 1 ‘Development Impact on the General Environment’ requires all planning applications to be assessed for their impact on both the human and built environment and a number of other considerations.

C. ASSESSMENT

5 McLennan Cottage is the northern most cottage of five located north of Innellan Pier on the shore side of the A815. The property is a single-storey semi-detached dwellinghouse that has been subject to a number of extensions in the recent past (see planning history above).

This application seeks to retain works that have been undertaken by the owner of 5 McLennan Cottage to land and the shore headland to the east of McLennan Cottages. This land is outwith the property’s curtilage and outwith the applicant’s ownership.

The applicant has built a retaining wall on top of an existing lower seawall defence and this has been backfilled to a height level with the garden of 5 McLennan Cottage. The applicant claims this has been necessary to prevent continued erosion undermining his property. It is the applicant’s intention to erect a railing around the retaining wall and use this as additional garden ground for 5 McLennan Cottage. A parking area has also been formed at the northern end of the property that requires planning permission and this application seeks its retention also.

Page 36

Retaining/Seawall Defence

The applicant claims it has been necessary to increase the height of the seawall defence and create a higher retaining wall to prevent continued erosion to his property. The department is unable to confirm whether erosion is a problem at this location. However, it is evident that McLennan Cottages have been here for a number of years and from a site inspection there is little evidence of erosion taking place. Furthermore, none of the other cottages on the shore side of the A815 appear to be undertaking such works to protect their homes.

The visual impact of the retaining wall is considered to be minimal given its location on the shore side of 5 McLennan Cottage; it is only partially visible from land to the north of the cottage. In terms of Policy POL RUR 1 of the adopted local plan, the retention of the works undertaken present no economic benefit, while the environmental impact is considered to be minimal given its limited impact upon visual amenity. There are no known servicing or infrastructure implications and, while questions remain over the necessity for a sea defence to combat erosion, given the impact of such works are considered to be minimal and consistent with local plan policy, its retention is considered to be acceptable

Extension of Garden Ground

The use of the reclaimed land as additional garden ground presents no land use issues given it is an extension to an existing use. Furthermore there are no known amenity issues with the use of the land for such a purpose. While the land may not be owned by the applicant, this remains an entirely civil matter to be addressed by interested parties.

Since the applicant has already developed the garden ground of 5 McLennan Cottage with two extensions, a storage shed and off street parking, any additional structure or extension located within this additional ground could compromise the level of external amenity afforded to the property. As such, it is proposed to attach a condition to the grant of permission to prevent any further structures being erected upon this ground without first obtaining the written consent of the Planning Authority.

Vehicular Parking Area

This application incorporates the retention of a recently formed off-street vehicular parking area. Its retention presents no adverse amenity concerns and this aspect of the application is supported by the Area Roads Manager. Subject to appropriate conditions to ensure the roadside kerb is suitably lowered and visibility splays are maintained clear of all obstruction, its retention is considered to be acceptable.

Conclusion

The works undertaken by the applicant are considered to be consistent with both the adopted and emerging local plan. While questions remain about the ownership of the land, this matter does not concern the Planning Authority. In planning terms, the works that have been undertaken are considered to be acceptable and no letters of representation have been received objecting to the application. Given all of the above, subject to appropriate conditions, the works that have been undertaken are considered acceptable.

Procedural Matters

At the time the sea defence works were carried out, it is believed that the relevant ground was owned by the Council. As such, an intention to approve the application would have to be notified to the Scottish Ministers under the Town and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 1997 (as amended) where the development does not accord with the local plan or there has been a substantial body of objections. Although neither circumstance applies to this application, the land has in any event been transferred to ACHA in the intervening period. It is therefore considered that there is no requirement to notify the application to Scottish Ministers.

Page 37

arg ie Place

Ellenslea V V V Cloch ACE V Resthaven V View RR V V TCB V S V Craigilee V V V Oran Norwood A Cumbrae View Homlea V Carsaig V V V V V V

Killard V Osborne V V

V V Cumbrae Cottage Hotel V V Jane Villa A V Glencairn V V V Castleton V V V V V V L O

Edgeholm V Jock's Lo V A 815 V V V V V V Cumbrae V O rianan V Cottage L A815 V V F V V

V Mossgiel V V Rowantree V V

V 6 DavidsonPlace V V A V Cliff

Cottage

V P 5 LB S V la V ages vu Rock CAMPBELL ROAD V

V V 1 V V Ben V Buildings V

V NORTH PO V Mc Lennan Cott V

V 1

V V PC S TCB

Garage 7.6m

V PH E V

V Hall V

Police

G S War Memorial Station F V Rock F Bank

V O ROAD Dunadd V IER COMMITTEE LOCATION PLAN RELEVANT TO APPLICATION: 06/02178/DET ± 1:1,250

This page is intentionally left blank Page 39 Agenda Item 6e

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Councillor J. McQueen PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 26th September 2006 Bute and Cowal Area Committee Date - 9th January 2007

27 December 2006

Reference Number: 06/02059/DET Applicants Name: Mr I Coates & Ms R Donnelly Application Type: Detailed Application Description: Retention of Boundary Treatment Location: 1 Abbeyhill, Dunoon, Argyll, PA23 8FG

(A ) THE APPLICATION

Development Requiring Express Planning Permission.

• Retention of boundary treatment.

(B ) RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the following condition and reason.

(C ) DETERMINING ISSUES AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

While three neighbouring properties have objected to this application, the boundary treatment is not considered to adversely affect the wider streetscape it is contained within or that of the subject property, as the surrounding area contains a variety of fence type at differing heights.

The erected fence/wall safeguards the level of amenity and privacy afforded to both 1 Abbeyhill and the adjacent properties, the consultation process has raised no adverse concerns while it design is considered to be consistent with both the adopted and emerging local plan. On this basis the proposal is acceptable.

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning Services Case Officer: J. Irving 01369-70-8621 Area Team Leader; D. Eaglesham 01369-70-8608

Page 40

CONDITIONS AND REASONS RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 06/02059/DET

1. Within one month of the date of this permission the metal posts that support the timber fence shall be clad with wood and painted blue to match the associated fence, unless the prior written consent for variation is obtained in writing from the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.

Page 41

APPENDIX RELATIVE TO 06/02059/DET

A. OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

(i) Site History

There is an associated enforcement report (ref: 06/00164/ENFOTH) elsewhere on this agenda.

(ii) Consultations

Area Roads Manager (Memo dated 1st November 2006): No objection.

(iii) Publicity and Representations

Under Article 9 Neighbour Notification procedure three objectors have submitted five letters of representation:

Mrs M. Zielinski (letters dated 2nd October 2006 & 9th October 2006) 14 Dhailling road, Dunoon, Argyll, PA23 8EA, Aileen Benson (letters dated 4th October 2006 & 11th October 2006) Kimberly, 16 Dhailling Road, Dunoon, PA23 9EA and Christine & Arthur Pudil (letter dated 8th October 2006) 5 Dhailling Road, Dunoon, PA23 8EA:

The points raised can be summarised as follows: i. The structure is completely inappropriate for a residential area. ii. The quality of the building and design of the structure leaves a lot to be desired. iii. The applicants had complete privacy and shelter before creating the boundary treatment. iv. The natural bamboo and hedging can be grown and kept fully under control and is more pleasing to the eye.

v. It should be clearly noted that the ‘service lane’ referred to is in fact a private driveway. This appears to be an attempt to lessen the importance of the area the fence is bordering.

Comment: See assessment below.

vi. We never had a chance to object due to no consultation.

Comment: The submission of this application has allowed concerned neighbours to submit representations towards this application, this is the consultation process. vii. The improved sightlines are a poor attempt to justify this eyesore. viii. The colours chosen/applied are not natural and could only be referred to as ‘micky mouse’.

Comment: See assessment below ix. The extent of the proposed boundary replacement is contrary to planning act, clauses 526-528.

Comment: This retrospective application has been submitted in an attempt to gain the necessary permission.

Summary of applicants supporting letter dated 20th November 2006: i. The bamboo hedging that has been removed was vigorous, invasive and unsuitable for the location unless retained by a suitable barrier such as concrete, which does not exist. ii. The spread of bamboo within our property is difficult to control, some day we may eliminate it from our property. Page 42

iii. In the past neighbouring properties have cut the bamboo as if it were a private hedge. We are not against them managing the bamboo but to it must be trimmed/lowered correctly. iv. To prevent the return of bamboo, from the driveway side, a wall was considered the only likely solution. We were wrongly informed planning consent was not required for a one metre high wall with one metre high fence on top. v. The wall has been painted a colour which was the nearest to ‘Sandtex’ to match the neighbouring property. The fence is stained blue as we like the colour which we find complements the planting in our garden. vi. The fence provides essential wind shelter to our garden and restores privacy. The fence is unfinished; the steel posts will be covered with wooden cladding.

B. POLICY OVERVIEW

Cowal Local Plan 1993 Policy POL BE 9 ‘Layout & Design of Urban Development’ seeks to achieve a high standard of layout and design where new urban developments are proposed.

Argyll & Bute Modified Finalised Draft Local Plan 2006 Policy LP ENV 19 ‘Development Setting, Layout & Design’ requires developers to execute a high standard of appropriate design which should pay regard to the context within which it is located.

C. ASSESSMENT

Retrospective planning permission is sought for the retention of a boundary wall/fence that has been partially constructed at 1 Abbeyhill, Dhailling Road, Dunoon. The applicants have removed a large section of bamboo hedging and have erected a stone/brick built wall with timber fence on top that totals a maximum height of 2 metres. This has been constructed along the north boundary and partially along the western boundary of the property. There currently remains a section of natural hedging on the west boundary of the site that is to be replaced with a continuation of the new boundary treatment. The new wall has been painted brown while the fence on top has been painted blue.

The new wall/fence safeguards the amenity that was previously afforded to both the subject property and the neighbouring properties. The height of the new wall/fence is of a similar height to the hedging that was previously in situ and this ensures there are no new privacy or overlooking concerns to be addressed. Indeed the key issue in the determination of this application is of the appropriateness of the wall/fence design and its visual impact.

It is evident from the submissions received that whilst the bamboo hedging provided good natural screening the use of such a species in this location and its regular maintenance was fraught with difficulties. The department does not share the views of the objectors that the wall/fence constructed is alien to its surroundings. Within the vicinity of 1 Abbeyhill there are a variety of boundary treatments such as panel fencing, post and rail fencing, stone walls and natural hedging, all at a variety of heights.

The fence constructed does not detract from the overall character or appearance of 1 Abbeyhill or indeed the wider streetscape. However, it is considered appropriate to attach a condition to the grant of permission that ensures the exposed metal posts that support the timber fence are clad with wood and painted blue to match the fence. On this basis the proposal is considered to be consistent with the adopted Cowal Local Plan 1993 policy POL BE 9 ‘Layout & Design of Urban Development’ and emerging Argyll & Bute Modified Finalised Draft Local Plan 2006 policy LP ENV 19 ‘Development Setting, Layout & Design’.

The wall/fence has been lowered to 1 metre where it is within the required visibility splays of the road; as such the Area Roads Manager has raised no objection to this application.

In conclusion, the constructed wall/fence presents no privacy or overlooking concerns, while its design is considered to be consistent with both the adopted and emerging local plan polices quoted above. On this basis the proposal is considered acceptable.

Page 43

Page 44

This page is intentionally left blank Page 45

V 7 3 V V

V V 11 V

V V

V 1 14

8 V

6 V 10

V C

V L

V 4

V V

Coach V 6 V 1 Houses V

V 3a THE AVENUE 2a V NTER STREET V V 2

6 V

HU 4

3 V V V

V 5to7 1a V

2 V 4

1 1 V V V

V Kimbe R rly V DHAILLING V V 8 El V

1 V V 1 Sub 14

Sta V

3b V

3 V 3a

V 21.3m V 5

V E 9 Dhailling V

V 5 A V Hill 15 1 BM 21.67m

V V

V V V V V V V

V 145b

2 1 V V V V a 5 V V 4 1

V 147 V

V Blairtulloch 143a V

1to3 V

V V P 143

WOODFORD GROVE V V Hotel 5.2m E 8 to PECT AVENUE S COMMITTEE LOCATION PLAN RELEVANT TO APPLICATION: 06/02059/DET ± 1:1,250

This page is intentionally left blank Page 47 Agenda Item 6f

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Councillor L. Scoullar PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 29th September 2006 Bute and Cowal Area Committee Committee Date - 9th January 2006

27 December 2006

Reference Number: 06/02104/DET Applicants Name: Capital Development (GB) Ltd Application Type: Detailed Application Description: Erection of dwellinghouse and septic tank Location: Land to the South of Ascog Mansion, Ascog, Isle of Bute

(A ) THE APPLICATION

Development Requiring Express Planning Permission.

• Erection of a dwellinghouse • Installation of septic tank

(B ) RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that planning permission be refused for the reasons set out on the following page.

(C ) DETERMINING ISSUES AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

The proposed dwellinghouse, by virtue of its overtly modern design and its inappropriate location, would impinge to a significantly adverse degree upon the open area that sits between Gate Lodge and Ascog Mansion and would give this area a congested and cluttered appearance that would be incongruous in the context of the present character of the main building and the surrounding grounds.

In addition, the proposal cannot be justified in the context of the Argyll and Bute Local Plan Modified Finalised Draft 2006 within which Policy LP HOU 1, although not precluding development at this site, contains the caveat that it should not have an unacceptable environmental, servicing or access impact.

The proposed development would not be in the interests of public health and amenity as it identifies the connection of the proposed private foul drainage system into an existing sea outfall where there is a presumption against discharges to the water environment as advised by SEPA. Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that a land soakaway option compatible with the Domestic Technical Handbook has been investigated but discounted following adequate ground investigations (including investigation into the use of a raised mound soakaway).

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning Services

Senior Planning Officer: S. Gove 01369-70-8621 Area Team Leader: D. Eaglesham 01369-70-8608

Page 48

REASONS FOR REFUSAL RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 06/02104/DET

1. The proposed dwellinghouse, by virtue of its overtly modern design (incorporating an L-shaped floor layout; dark red stained fascia boarding; red facing brick basecourse; and covered patio area) and its inappropriate location (within the presently open area that sits between Gate Lodge and Ascog Mansion), would impinge to a significantly adverse degree upon the setting of the main Mansion building and would give this area a congested and cluttered appearance that would be incongruous in the context of the present character of the main building and the surrounding grounds.

On the basis of the foregoing, the proposal is contrary to the following Central Government guidance and existing and emerging Development Plan policies:

• Historic Scotland’s ‘Memorandum of Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas’ (1998);

• National Planning Policy Guideline 18 (‘Planning and the Historic Environment’);

• Planning Advice Note 44 “Fitting New Housing Development into the Landscape” (1994);

• STRAT DC 1 and DC 9 of the Argyll and Bute Structure Plan 2002;

• Policies HO 3 and BE 6 of the Bute Local Plan 1990;

• Policies LP HOU 1, LP ENV 1, LP ENV 10, LP ENV 14 and LP ENV 19 of the Argyll and Bute Local Plan Modified Finalised Draft 2006

• Argyll and Bute Council ‘Sustainable Design Guidance’ 2006

2. The proposed development would not be in the interests of public health and amenity as it identifies the connection of the proposed private foul drainage system into an existing sea outfall where there is a presumption against discharges to the water environment as advised by SEPA. Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that a land soakaway option compatible with the Domestic Technical Handbook has been investigated but discounted following adequate ground investigations (including investigation into the use of a raised mound soakaway).

Page 49

APPENDIX RELATIVE TO 06/02104/DET

A. OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

(i) Site History

There is no history to the particular application site. Planning permissions have been granted within the wider area and they are detailed in the Assessment section below.

(ii) Consultations

Development Policy (letter dated 11th October 2006)

Site is within settlement under emerging policy to which no objections were received during consultation period for Finalised Draft 2006.

Scottish Water (letter dated 12th October 2006)

No objections.

SEPA (letter dated 19th October 2006)

Defer comments until further information is received on foul drainage arrangements.

Environmental Health (memo dated 30th October 2006)

No objections.

Area Roads Manager

No comments received.

(iii) Publicity and Representations

Advertised under Section 65 and as a Potential Departure to Development Plan. Expiry Date: 10th November 2006. Four letters of representation have been received from:

Ronald Falconer, Hawkstone Lodge, Ascog (e-mail dated 23rd October 2006) Sue Dennis, The Pumphouse, Ascog (letter dated 31st October 2006) John Dennis, The Pumphouse, Ascog (letter dated 1st November 2006) Wallace and Katherine Fyfe, Ascog Hall, Ascog (letter dated 3rd November 2006)

The points raised can be summarised as follows:

a) The proposal will not be in keeping with the built environment in terms of siting and design and would have an adverse impact upon Ascog and the Rothesay Conservation Area.

b) Concern that Ascog is becoming overdeveloped and the current proposal would further exacerbate this situation.

Comment: These issues will be addressed in the Assessment section below.

c) The main sewage drain for a number of properties in the vicinity runs through the application site.

Comment: The proposed Site Plan identifies the approximate line of an existing drainage outfall, which runs through the site. It is indicated that the outfall from the proposed septic tank would connect into this pipe but this is essentially a legal matter between the parties concerned.

Page 50

B. POLICY OVERVIEW

Central Government Guidance

Historic Scotland’s ‘Memorandum of Guidance on Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas’ (1998) states that, within Conservation Areas, new development that is well designed, respects the character of the area and contributes to its enhancement should be welcomed.

National Planning Policy Guideline 18 (‘Planning and the Historic Environment’) advises that Planning Authorities should examine the impact of proposals upon the character and appearance of the whole Conservation Area. If any proposed development would conflict with the objective of preserving or enhancing the designated area, there should be a presumption against granting planning permission.

Planning Advice Note 44 “Fitting New Housing Development into the Landscape” (1994) advises on how improvements can be secured in the environmental quality of new housing developments in terms of their relationship to the landscape.

Argyll & Bute Structure Plan 2002

STRAT DC 1 encourages, within the main towns and the smaller towns and villages, development on appropriate infill, rounding-off and redevelopment sites.

STRAT DC 9 states that development that damages or undermines the historic, architectural or cultural qualities of the historic environment will be resisted; particularly if it would affect a Conservation Area.

Bute Local Plan 1990

Policy POL BE 6 seeks to prevent any deterioration in the character or setting of the Rothesay Outstanding Conservation Area through unsympathetic new development.

The settlement strategy for Bute stresses the need for consolidation of the existing settlements, including Rothesay. Policy POL HO 1 encourages the residential development of infill, rounding-off and redevelopment sites within existing settlements. To complement this policy, the Local Plan sought to restrict development on the periphery of settlements, thereby protecting agricultural land and the appearance of the landscape (particularly around the southern fringe of the Rothesay Outstanding Conservation Area).

The mechanism for achieving the above objective was Policy POL HO 3, which introduced the ‘Countryside Safeguarding Zone’ around Rothesay, Port Bannatyne, Kilchattan and Kingarth. Within this zone, small-scale residential development will not generally be permitted nor will it be considered as infill or rounding off. The application site is within the ‘Countryside Safeguarding Zone’ and the proposal is contrary to Policy POL HO 3 of the Bute Local Plan 1990.

Argyll and Bute Local Plan Modified Finalised Draft 2006

On the Modified Finalised Draft Local Plan, the application site lies within the ‘settlement boundary’ within which residential infill and rounding-off developments are encouraged under Policy LP HOU 1 unless there is an unacceptable environmental, servicing or access impact. The site also lies within a Conservation Area and an Area of Panoramic Quality

Policy LP ENV 1 seeks to resist development that would have a significant adverse effect on the integrity or character of, inter alia, Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas.

Policy LP ENV 10 seeks to resist development in Areas of Panoramic Quality where their scale, location or design will have an adverse impact on the character of the landscape unless it can be demonstrated that any significant adverse effects would be clearly outweighed by social and economic benefits of national or regional importance.

Policy LP ENV 14 presumes against development that does not maintain or enhance the character or amenity of a Conservation Area. New development should be of the highest quality, respect and Page 51

enhance the architectural qualities of the area and conform to Historic Scotland’s Memorandum of Guidance.

Policy LP ENV 19 requires a high standard of appropriate design in terms of setting, layout and density.

Argyll and Bute Council: Sustainable Design Guidance

The Council has very recently approved new Design Guidance for assisting in formulating new developments and assessing proposals. The most pertinent document in relation to the current proposal is Sustainable Design Guidance 3: ‘Working with Argyll and Bute’s Heritage’.

C. ASSESSMENT

Principle of Residential Development

As stated above, the application site is presently contrary to the residential policies contained within the Bute Local Plan 1990, as it is located within the ‘Countryside Safeguarding Zone’. However, it is identified in the Modified Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan 2006 as being within the ‘settlement boundary’ of Rothesay (designated a ‘Main Town’) within which, under Policy LP HOU 1 of this document and STRAT DC 1 of the Argyll and Bute Structure Plan 2002, there is encouragement for residential development unless there is an unacceptable environmental, servicing or access impact. For the reasons stated below, it is considered that the proposal would have an unacceptable environmental impact, rendering it contrary to LP HOU 1 and STRAT DC 1.

Effect upon Character of Conservation Area

The Council’s recently-approved Design Guidance (in particular the document entitled ‘Working with Argyll and Bute’s Heritage’) advocates that new infill development should respect the existing pattern of plots that contribute to establishing the historic layout of a building or settlement. Designers should consider the relationship between a development and its plot and regard should be had to the historic plot development approach and size. The relationship of development across contiguous plots as much as the ‘pattern’ of development is highly important.

Mention is also made that the location of the site and examples of local successful buildings should be used to determine the character of the development. ‘Artificial’ decorative features that are not related to the context and locally appropriate tradition should be avoided.

Ascog is at the very southern tip of Rothesay; generally, the buildings are located on the landward side of the A844 road except for two small nodes of shoreside development, firstly as one enters Ascog from the north and secondly surrounding Ascog Point.

When travelling along the A844 road, Ascog appears as a linear settlement. Its character prior to Ascog Mansion is different from that which is evident as one exits the settlement; the density of housing is higher and there is less of a ‘countryside’ ambience.

Ascog Mansion is an imposing white building set back some 90 metres from the main public road with extensive grounds. There are two lodge buildings (Seal Lodge to the north and Gate Lodge to the south) spaced approximately 40 metres apart and located directly behind the stone boundary wall that runs along the frontage of the grounds of Ascog Mansion.

The application site is located approximately 25 metres to the south east of Ascog Mansion and 35 metres to the west of Gate Lodge. It is presently an overgrown grassed area with a hedge to the immediate north that defines the boundary with the now defunct Bowling Green. Running along the southern and western boundaries of the site is the access road to Ascog Mansion.

Development of the current site would have a significant negative impact by providing a building within the undeveloped area that makes an important contribution to the setting of Ascog Mansion. It would impinge upon the open area that sits between Gate Lodge and Ascog Mansion and would give this area a congested and cluttered appearance that would be incongruous in the context of the present character of the main building and the surrounding grounds.

Page 52

In addition to its detrimental location, the design of the proposed dwelling is overtly modern and plain in appearance with an L-shaped floor layout; dark red stained fascia boarding; red facing brick basecourse; and covered patio area. Such a design is not considered to be of sufficient quality to make a positive contribution to the Rothesay Conservation Area.

Ascog has been the subject of two recent Planning Permissions for residential development – ten dwellings to the north east of the mansion (ref: 05/01800/DET) approved in January 2006; and a single dwelling (ref: 05/01527/DET) in part of an open field located to the north east of the mansion building and to the immediate north of one of the lodges (Seal Lodge) also approved in January 2006.

There is a distinct difference between the two sites mentioned above and the present application site in that the three substantial villas to the front of the northerly site (which would be the most visually prominent part of the development) would sympathetically reflect the existing forms of development on the landward side of the road at Ascog. Furthermore, it was considered that the erection of a single dwelling in the southerly site would be compatible with the settlement pattern around the immediate grounds of Ascog Mansion, which is relatively low density and characterised by the two single lodges.

For the reasons given earlier in this section, and unlike the two examples referred to above, the present proposal is not considered to follow the established pattern of development at Ascog and would not be of a design standard that would contribute successfully to the Conservation Area.

Road Safety

The Area Roads Manager has not commented on the proposal.

Infrastructure

Scottish Water has advised that there is likely to be a connection available to the public water supply subject to conditions.

From a foul drainage perspective, Scottish Water has confirmed that there is no public sewer available at the site. The application proposes the installation of a new septic tank with connection into the existing sea outfall pipe. SEPA has requested that further information be supplied as they have a presumption against discharges to the water environment unless it can be demonstrated that a land soakaway option has been investigated and discounted following adequate ground investigations.

Given the unacceptability of the site on visual impact grounds, alternative foul drainage arrangements have not been discussed with the applicant/agent. Page 53

L L E 4.6m C

Ascog Mansion H P (The Railway Convalescent Home) V P V V V

Picton Bowling Green

L Lodge C V Rock P P V H Ascog Hall P L P L A 844 Victorian FerneryP and Garden P L A844 H

V L V V BM 3.78m A V V V Rock 1 V

BAL MORY RO AD V V

V Southpark Lodge V V V E 4.4m V Rock V COMMITTEE LOCATION PLAN RELEVANT TO APPLICATION: 06/02104/DET ± 1:1,250

This page is intentionally left blank Page 55 Argyll and Bute Council Agenda Item 6g Development Services TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE BUTE AND COWAL

Application Types: ADV App.for Advertisement Consent, ART4 App. Required by ARTICLE 4 Dir, CLAWUApp. for Cert. of Law Use/Dev. (Existing), CLWP App. for Cert. of Law Use/Dev. (Proposed), COU App. for Change of Use Consent, CPD Council Permitted Dev Consultation, DET App. for Detailed Consent, FDP Forest Design Plan Consultation, FELLIC Felling Licence Consultation, GDCON Government Dept. Consultation, HAZCON App. for Hazardous Substances Consent, HYDRO Hydro Board Consultation, LIB Listed Building Consent, LIBECC App. for Consent for ecclesiastical building, MFF Marine Fish Farm Consultation, MIN App. for Mineral Consent, NID Not. of intent to develop app., NMA Not. for Non-Materail Amnt, OUT App. for Permission in Principal, PNAGRI Prior Not. Agriculture, PNDEM Prior Not. Demolition, PNELEC Prior Not. Electricity, PNFOR Prior Not. Forestry, PNGAS Prior Not. Gas Supplier, PREAPP Pre App. Enquiry, REM App. of Reserved Matters, TELNOT Telecoms Notification, TPO Tree Preservation Order, VARCON App. for Variation of Condition(s), WGS Woodland Grant Scheme Consultation

Decision Types PER Approved WDN Withdrawn NOO No Objections AAR Application Required CGR Certificate Granted OBR Objections Raised PDD Permitted Development PRE Permission Required NRR New App. Required

14 December 2006 Page 1 of 6 Page 56 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE BUTE AND COWAL

App No Applicant name, address and proposal Valid date Decision date Decision

06/02403/DET Derek Martin 20/11/2006 12/12/2006 PER Flat 2/2 7 Argyll Terrace Kirn Argyll And Bute PA23 8LR

Installation of replacement windows (retrospective)

06/02375/ADV LLoyds TSB 24/11/2006 12/12/2006 PER TSB 110 Argyll Street Dunoon Argyll And Bute PA23 7NE

Erection of internally illuminated fascia sign and projecting sign

06/02221/DET Archd Fergusson Ltd 23/10/2006 06/12/2006 PER Corner Site High Clachan Clachan Road Strachur Argyll And Bute

Erection of single storey dwelling

06/02219/DET Mr And Mrs J Green 23/10/2006 24/11/2006 PER 277 Argyll Street Dunoon Argyll And Bute PA23 7QY

Formation of dormer window and replacement of roof covering

06/02208/DET Allistair McCoist 02/11/2006 13/12/2006 PER Bungalow 2 Southern Plot South Of Admiralty St Catherines Argyll And Bute

Erection of a boat house

06/02112/DET Danny Cunningham 02/10/2006 24/11/2006 PER 45 Cromwell Street Dunoon Argyll And Bute PA23 7AX

Page 57 Demolition of existing w.c., erection of box dormer on rear roof slope and replacement roof covering and windows.

06/02108/DET Messrs Ewing, Daly, Hutton And Hopkins 02/10/2006 17/11/2006 PER Flat Ground/1, Flat Ground/2, Flat ½ And Flat 2/2 179 High Street Rothesay Isle Of Bute Argyll And Bute PA20 9BS

Installation of replacement windows

06/02107/DET C Scobie 02/10/2006 21/11/2006 PER 33 Argyll Road Dunoon Argyll And Bute PA23 8EL

Formation of new vehicular access and hard standing

06/02101/LIB Mr And Mrs N Crawford 10/10/2006 21/11/2006 PER 45 Mountstuart Road Rothesay Isle Of Bute Argyll And Bute PA20 9EB

Internal alterations and replacement of kitchen and bedroom windows

06/02040/DET Mrs Gwen Crawford 20/09/2006 13/12/2006 PER 15 Bishop Street Rothesay Isle Of Bute Argyll And Bute PA20 9DH

Installation of replacement windows.

06/02038/DET Gavin Brown 21/09/2006 30/11/2006 PER Machair Beag Letters Way Strachur Argyll And Bute PA27 8DP

Alterations and extensions to dwelling house

06/01998/DET Mr Robert McIntosh 21/09/2006 30/11/2006 PER Basement Flat Northmost 5A Argyle Place Rothesay Isle Of Bute Argyll And Bute PA20 0AZ

Formation of new front entrance door and installation of wrought iron gate and railings on boundary wall

06/01961/DET O2 Airwave Ltd 08/09/2006 29/11/2006 PER Land South Of Loch Melldalloch Kilfinan Argyll And Bute

Page 58

Installation of two 0.6m transmission dishes and associated cabinet equipment

06/01923/OUT Mrs R H Cross 05/10/2006 27/11/2006 WDN Land To The North Of Tir-Nan-Og Kames Argyll And Bute

Erection of five dwellinghouses

06/01873/ADV Strathclyde Joint Police Board 25/10/2006 24/11/2006 PER Police Station Strachur Argyll And Bute PA27 8DG

Erection of freestanding pole mounted sign and projecting sign on building

06/01832/PNAGRI Nicola Wilks 25/08/2006 27/11/2006 PDD Killail Otter Ferry Tighnabruaich Argyll And Bute PA21 2DH

Re-roofing of existing byre and outbuildings including installation of 5 velux windows

06/01825/LIB Mr M Robertson 24/08/2006 24/11/2006 PER 4 Bridgend Street Rothesay Isle Of Bute Argyll And Bute PA20 0HU

Alterations to convert auction hall into residential flat

06/01822/COU Mr M Robertson 24/08/2006 24/11/2006 PER 4 Bridgend Street Rothesay Isle Of Bute Argyll And Bute PA20 0HU

Change of use and alterations of auction hall to residential flat

06/01796/DET Mr Hewitt 08/09/2006 24/11/2006 PER Craigengower Tighnabruaich Argyll And Bute PA21 2EA

Formation of dormer window and balcony in roof

06/01793/DET Mr And Mrs MacLean 19/09/2006 08/12/2006 PER The Cottage Leachd Strathlachlan Argyll And Bute PA27 8DA

Demolition of existing house and erection of new house Page 59 06/01498/OUT Mr A MacKellar 01/08/2006 20/11/2006 PER Site To The North West Of Marianella Hunters Quay Argyll And Bute PA23 8QG

Erection of two dwellinghouses and formation of vehicular accesses

06/01496/OUT Mr A MacKellar 01/08/2006 30/11/2006 PER Site To The South Of Marianella Hunters Quay Argyll And Bute PA23 8QG

Erection of dwellinghouse and formation of vehicular access

06/01477/TPO Mr A Shackleton 12/09/2006 30/11/2006 PER 1 Ardencraig Chalets Ardencraig Road Rothesay Isle Of Bute Argyll And Bute PA20 9EP

Lopping and felling of trees

06/01454/OUT Anne Elizabeth Lamb 11/07/2006 24/11/2006 PER Calabeag Cottage Colintraive Argyll And Bute PA22 3AJ

Site for the erection of a dwellinghouse

06/01405/NID Argyll And Bute Council 28/06/2006 24/11/2006 PER Tennis Courts To The West Of Toilets Meadows Road Rothesay Isle Of Bute Argyll And Bute PA20 0ED

Upgrading of three existing tennis courts with synthetic grass surface, new drainage and installation of floodlights

06/01360/COU Mr James Johnston 26/06/2006 22/11/2006 PER 17 Ardbeg Road Rothesay Isle Of Bute Argyll And Bute PA20 0NJ

Alterations to detached villa to form two flats, construct external stair and replace windows

06/01043/DET Mr And Mrs Ian Stewart 16/06/2006 28/11/2006 WDN 6A Alfred Street Dunoon Argyll And Bute PA23 7QU

Demolition of porch and erection of side extension Page 60 06/00718/DET Mr And Mrs Oberheim 24/04/2006 04/12/2006 WDN Plot 6 Land North West Of Portavadie Farm Millhouse Argyll And Bute

Erection of two dwellinghouses

05/01629/OUT Enga Ltd 31/10/2005 27/11/2006 WDN Site To The East Of Kilbridemore Glendaruel Colintraive Argyll

Site for the erection of seven dwellinghouses, alterations to existing access and provision of private foul drainage system Page 61 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services BUILDING STANDARDS DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE

CASENO APPLICANT NAME/PROPOSAL RECEIVED VETTED DECISION DECISION AND SITE ADDRESS DATE DATE 04/01993/ERD/A Stephen D Cooper 29/11/2006 30/11/2006 30/11/2006 WARAPP

Land To The Southwest Of Cairnbaan Sandbank Dunoon Argyll

Amendment to Warrant to cover, raised decking area and access steps (amendment to Building Warrant 04/01993/ERD)

05/00823/ERD/B Mr And Mrs J Fairclough 29/11/2006 30/11/2006 30/11/2006 WARAPP

Land North Of Blairbuie Rashfield Dunoon Argyll

Amendment to Warrant, to cover relocation of access ramp and steps to conservatory. (amendment to 05/00823/ERD)

05/01511/ERECDW/A Alasdair MacDonald 12/10/2006 14/11/2006 23/11/2006 WARAPP

Vacant Plot Adjacent To Sinclair Cottage Mcarthur Street Dunoon Argyll

Amendment to Warrant, to delete an apartment, and relocate a WC room and en-suite.

06/00757/DISAB1 Head Teacher 25/05/2006 22/06/2006 04/12/2006 WARAPP

Dunoon Primary School Hillfoot Street Dunoon Argyll And Bute PA23 7DR

Alterations to primary school to form; head teachers office, reception area, additional fire escape, toilet facilities and store.

06/00798/EXTEND/A Mr And Mrs S A Carmichael 09/11/2006 24/11/2006 24/11/2006 WARAPP

4 Crawford Lane Kirn Argyll And Bute PA23 8JP

Amendment to Warrant, to change windows within conservatory.

06/00864/DEMOL Mr Michael 0'Rourke 16/06/2006 20/07/2006 29/11/2006 WARAPP

Garail 104 Bullwood Road Dunoon Argyll And Bute PA23 7QN

Demolition of former 2 storey care home.

06/01022/ALTER Mr And Mrs Todd 21/07/2006 07/09/2006 04/12/2006 WARAPP

Flat 1/2 Govandale Kilchattan Bay Isle Of Bute Argyll And Bute PA20 9NJ

Alterations to flat, to relocate kitchen and shower room and form additional bedroom

WARAPP=Building Warrant Approved WARREF=Building Warrant Refused WARWIT=Building Warrant Withdrawn COMF=Letter of Comfort issued COMFR=Letter of Comfort refused EXEMPT=Exempt Building Warrant LOCWIT= Letter of Comfort withdrawn SUPERS=Superceded by new Building 14 December 2006 Page 1 of 3 Page 62 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services BUILDING STANDARDS DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE

CASENO APPLICANT NAME/PROPOSAL RECEIVED VETTED DECISION DECISION AND SITE ADDRESS DATE DATE 06/01060/EXTEND Mr And Mrs William Wallace 26/07/2006 31/07/2006 24/11/2006 WARAPP

13 Mountstuart Road Rothesay Isle Of Bute Argyll And Bute PA20 9DY

Extension to dwelling, to form rear conservatory.

06/01162/ALTER Susanna And Mick Rice 17/08/2006 06/09/2006 04/12/2006 WARAPP

Duncreggan House Whites Brae Blairmore Argyll And Bute PA23 8TG

Alterations to provide additional bedroom, bathroom, and ensuite facilities

06/01265/ERECT Service Officer Waste Management 13/09/2006 13/10/2006 29/11/2006 WARAPP

Dalinlongart Waste Disposal Site Sandbank Argyll And Bute PA23 8QS

Erection of steel framed transfer station

06/01268/ALTER Mr John Rankin 13/09/2006 27/09/2006 21/11/2006 WARAPP

Upper Flat 27 Roslin Crescent Rothesay Isle Of Bute Argyll And Bute PA20 9HT

Alterations to upper flat, to form room within attic.

06/01319/ALTER Gail McCorquodale 21/09/2006 04/10/2006 29/11/2006 WARAPP

44 Hillfoot Street Dunoon Argyll And Bute PA23 7DT

Internal alterations to health food shop, to form two treatment rooms

06/01320/EXTEND Mr Allan Stevenson 26/09/2006 03/11/2006 23/11/2006 WARAPP

Framfield 4 Bencorrum Brae Dunoon Argyll And Bute PA23 8HU

Extension to lower flat, to provide an unheated conservatory

06/01364/ALTER Mr And Mrs D Leitch 09/10/2006 24/10/2006 04/12/2006 WARAPP

Flat Ground/2 Quarry Knowe Kilchattan Bay Isle Of Bute Argyll And Bute PA20 9NL

Alterations to ground floor flat, to relocate external kitchen door.

WARAPP=Building Warrant Approved WARREF=Building Warrant Refused WARWIT=Building Warrant Withdrawn COMF=Letter of Comfort issued COMFR=Letter of Comfort refused EXEMPT=Exempt Building Warrant LOCWIT= Letter of Comfort withdrawn SUPERS=Superceded by new Building 14 December 2006 Page 2 of 3 Page 63 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services BUILDING STANDARDS DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE

CASENO APPLICANT NAME/PROPOSAL RECEIVED VETTED DECISION DECISION AND SITE ADDRESS DATE DATE 06/01384/ALTER Arkady Ltd 12/10/2006 19/10/2006 06/12/2006 WARAPP

Garrachra Cottage Glen Massan Argyll And Bute PA23 8RA

Alterations to dweling; to make kitchen, lounge and hall open plan, and to install patio doors

06/01436/EXTEND Mr And Mrs A Don 25/10/2006 07/11/2006 24/11/2006 WARAPP

Lochwood House Lochgoilhead Argyll And Bute PA24 8AE

Extension to dwelling, to form unheated garden room

06/01511/ALTER Peter Davie 10/11/2006 24/11/2006 24/11/2006 WARAPP

4 Hill Street Dunoon Argyll And Bute PA23 7AN

Alterations to flat, to create an additional bedroom

06/01538/ALTER Derek Martin 20/11/2006 24/11/2006 29/11/2006 WARAPP

Flat 2/2 7 Argyll Terrace Kirn Argyll And Bute PA23 8LR

Alteration to flat, to reposition a bathroom wall, and replace windows.

06/01565/ALTER Mr And Mrs A Anderson 24/11/2006 29/11/2006 29/11/2006 WARAPP

173 Marine Parade Hunters Quay Argyll And Bute PA23 8HJ

Internal alterations to form first floor shower room

This page is intentionally left blank Page 65 Agenda Item 6h

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Members Councillor D C Currie REPORT ON APPEALS Councillor D Walsh Bute and Cowal Area Committee Committee Date 9 January 2007

27 December 2006

APPEAL DECISION

Reference Number: 05/02259/DET Appellants Name: Mr Hepburn Appeal Type: Detailed Planning Permission Appeal Description: Erection of dwellinghouse Location: Land to the East of Kames Hotel, Kames, Tighnabruaich

Attached to this report is the appeal decision in respect of the above development.

Members’ attention is drawn to the decision letter from the Scottish Executive Inquiry Reporters Unit dated 7 December 2006 from which it is noted that the appeal has been dismissed.

APPEAL LODGED

Reference Number: 05/02439/DET Appellants Name: Scottish Water Appeal Type: Detailed Planning Permission Appeal Description: Stabilisation of Rockface; Erection of Waste Water Treatment Works, ancillary development and alterations to existing access Location: Bullwood Quarry, Bullwood Road, Dunoon

Members’ attention is drawn to the lodging of an appeal in respect of the Council’s refusal of the above application.

Members are asked to note the above information.

Head of Planning and Building Standards

Area Team Leader D. Eaglesham 01369-70-8608

Page 66

This page is intentionally left blank Page 67 = aÉîÉäçéãÉåí=aÉé~êíãÉåí Q=qÜÉ=`çìêíó~êÇI=`~ääÉåÇ~ê=_ìëáåÉëë=m~êâ= = fåèìáêó=oÉéçêíÉêë=råáí `~ääÉåÇ~ê=oç~ÇI=c^ihfoh=chN=Nuo= = au=RRTMMR=c^ihfoh= Andrew McNab = Colliers CRE qÉäÉéÜçåÉW=MNPOQ=SVS=QRN= 39 George Street c~ñW=MNPOQ=SVS=QQQ= Edinburgh = EH2 2HN ÜííéWLLïïïKëÅçíä~åÇKÖçîKìâLéä~ååáåÖ|~ééÉ~äëLëÉáêì= = vçìê=êÉÑW=0086.1/D0016748.doc= lìê=êÉÑW= P/PPA/130/172= = T=aÉÅÉãÄÉê=OMMS

Dear Sir

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (SCOTLAND) ACT 1997: SECTION 47 AND SCHEDULE 4 PLANNING APPEAL BY MR C HEPBURN: ERECTION OF DWELLINGHOUSE ON LAND TO THE EAST OF THE KAMES HOTEL, KAMES, TIGHNABRUAICH

1. I refer to your client’s appeal, which I have been appointed to determine, against the refusal of planning permission by Argyll and Bute Council for the above development. I have considered the written submissions and made an accompanied inspection of the appeal site and the surrounding area on 13 October 2006. For the reasons explained in this letter I have decided to dismiss your client’s appeal.

2. Kames is a small settlement located on the eastern shore of the Cowal peninsula towards its southern end and just to the south of Tighnabruaich. The appeal site comprises an area of disused land of almost 0.1 hectares located to the east of the Kames Hotel and between the hotel and the shore line. The site lies on the inside corner of a sharp bend in Shore Road as it leads down to the shore line and it slopes downwards from west to east towards the shore. There is a small bungalow on the adjoining site to the south and further detached houses of various ages and styles along Shore Road further to the south. The Old Kames Pier is located to the north east of the site, where a new house has recently been built. The small beach at Kames lies to the north and north east of the site and there are numerous boat moorings in the sea nearby.

3. Your client proposes to erect a 3 bedroom bungalow, which would be located towards the southern end of the site. The bungalow would have its ridgeline parallel to the lower road to the east. There would be a pedestrian access via steps up to the western site boundary and a vehicular access located near the south east corner of the site. The cross sections show that the height of the house to its ridgeline would be 6.5 metres, although the house would be dug into the

Page 68 Colliers CRE P/PPA/130/172 7 December 2006 site so that the western elevation would be 1 metre below existing ground level and the eastern elevation would be approximately at existing ground level. At the ridgeline, the house would be between 0.25 and 0.5 metres below existing levels. The drawings do not indicate what materials would be used to finish the house, although you have confirmed that the walls would be finished in wet dash render, with cement banding around the windows and the roof would be finished with natural slate or a good quality substitute.

4. Planning permission was refused because the proposed development would be detrimental to panoramically important landscapes in Argyll and Bute and would therefore be contrary to policy Strat DC8 of the Argyll and Bute Structure Plan 2002 and policies ENV9 and ENV10 of the Argyll and Bute Finalised Local Plan 2005.

Development plan and other policies

5. The following policy of the Argyll and Bute Structure Plan 2002 was referred to and is summarised below:

Strat DC1 – Development within the settlements

The policy allows for small scale development of appropriate infill and rounding-off sites.

Strat DC8 – Landscape and development control

Development which by reason of location, siting, scale, form, design or cumulative impact, damages the key environmental features of a visually contained or wider landscape or coastscape shall be treated as non-sustainable and is contrary to this policy. Particularly important landscapes are those associated with National Scenic Areas; historic landscapes and their settings; landward and coastal areas with semi-wilderness or isolated or panoramic quality.

6. The following policies of the adopted Cowal Local Plan 1993 were referred to and are summarised below:

Policy HO8 – Infill, rounding off and redevelopment

This type of development is encouraged within named settlements, including Kames. Proposals which do not relate to the existing built form will be assessed for servicing and environmental implications. Those considered to have an adverse visual or environmental impact will normally be resisted.

Policy RUR1 – Landscape quality

Within regional scenic areas prominent or sporadic development will be resisted.

7. The following policies of the Argyll and Bute Finalised Local Plan 2006 were referred to and are summarised as follows:

PPA_130_172 2 Page 69 Colliers CRE P/PPA/130/172 7 December 2006

ENV1 – Development impact on the general environment

New development should have minimal impact on the general environment. Developments which impact on areas of panoramic quality will be resisted.

ENV9 – Development impact on National Scenic Areas

Development in or adjacent to National Scenic Areas that would have a significant adverse effect on a National Scenic Area will be refused unless it is demonstrated that the objectives of the designation and overall integrity of the area will not be compromised. In all cases the highest standards in terms of location, siting, landscaping, boundary treatment, materials and detailing will be required.

ENV10 – Development impact on Areas of Panoramic Quality

Development in or adjacent to an Area of Panoramic Quality will be resisted where its scale, location or design will have a significant adverse impact on the character of the landscape, unless it is demonstrated that any significant adverse effects are clearly outweighed by social and economic benefits of national or regional importance.

HOU1 – General housing development

There is a general presumption in favour of small scale residential development within settlements.

REC2 – Safeguarding of recreational land and important open spaces

The policy presumes against development which involves the loss of safeguarded open spaces. The latest version of the finalised draft local plan published in June 2006 safeguards the appeal site.

Summary of cases

8. In support of its decision, the council explains that the site lies immediately adjacent to the Kyles of Bute national scenic area and as such would have the capacity to adversely affect it. The development would occupy a prominent site in the Kames settlement. It would remove an area of open space and would have a significant adverse visual intrusion into the landscape when viewed from the public road, from the sea and from further distant landward areas. For these reasons and in the unanimous view of the area committee, the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on the panoramically important landscape in this most sensitive location and would be contrary to structure plan and local plan policies.

9. The finalised local plan (May 2005) is an important material consideration. The proposed development would be contrary to ENV9. The development would not offer any benefits in social or commercial terms to justify a departure from policy ENV10. The emerging local plan policies should be given precedence over the adopted Cowal Local Plan of 1993, as this is the most recent council policy statement.

10. In support of your client’s appeal, you explain that the council planning officers recommended that planning permission should be granted for the proposed development. Your

PPA_130_172 3 Page 70 Colliers CRE P/PPA/130/172 7 December 2006 client owns the site and he is the former owner of the Kames Hotel. The application site and the hotel are now under separate ownership. Previously the site had been used informally as a beer garden for the hotel, but that use ceased a number of years ago. The wider area is characterised by individual houses in large gardens. The proposed house has been designed with regard to the height of the property to the south. It would continue the roofline of the adjacent property and would not protrude above it. The house would be cut into the slope in order to minimise visual impact. It has also been designed with regard to the views from the hotel and it would not affect the hotel’s trade. The highest point of the house would not protrude above the window sills of the hotel and views from most of the rooms would be unaffected, although some rooms would lose views of the foreshore.

11. The council has granted planning permission for several houses in this area, which are all located within the area of panoramic quality identified in the finalised local plan. The new house at the Kames Pier is located prominently on the foreshore and is far more visually prominent than the proposed development would be. The appeal site is located over 2 kilometres from the boundary of the national scenic area.

12. Many of the objections made to the development by local people are not based on sound planning reasons. Many of those who objected do not live near the site and would not be affected by the proposed development. You acknowledge that the site, together with the land now occupied by the bungalow to the south, was referred to as the low field and was used for herding sheep onto ships. However, there are no statutory conservation controls on the site and it is of limited historical value. It is not listed or on the National Monuments Record of Scotland or the Historic Gardens and Designed Landscapes register. The path through the site is not a right of way, which has been confirmed by the Scottish Rights of Way and Access Society and the council’s access officer. The site was only ever used by the public at the discretion of the owner. There is a public park nearby. Your client does not intend to build another property on the site and the council would be likely to have concerns that the site was not large enough for 2 properties.

13. The structure plan supports small scale development within towns and villages. Strat DC1 allows for small scale development of appropriate infill sites. The proposed development would not be detrimental to any panoramic important landscape and it would not be contrary to Strat DC8. You acknowledge that the site lies within the regional scenic area identified in the adopted local plan and the area of panoramic quality identified in the finalised local plan. However, the proposed development would not be detrimental to these landscapes. When viewed from a distance, either inland or from the water, the dwelling would blend in with other dwellings in the village. Policy Strat HO1 supports infill housing development.

14. With regard to policy HO8 of the adopted local plan, appropriate conditioning would ensure that the house would blend into the local area. In relation to RUR1, as the site is located within an existing settlement and on a site which is one of the lowest points of the village and out of view of the majority of houses, it would accord with this policy. The objections to the finalised local plan have not yet been considered at a public local inquiry and a limited amount of weight should be given to its policies. In any event, the proposed development would accord with ENV1 and ENV10. Policy HOU1 states a general presumption in favour of small scale residential development within settlements. Policy REC2 safeguards recreational land and important open spaces and presumes against development on them. The council has decided to amend the finalised local plan to safeguard the appeal site and your client has objected to this proposed amendment.

PPA_130_172 4 Page 71 Colliers CRE P/PPA/130/172 7 December 2006

15. Kilfinnan Community Council objects to the proposed development and attaches a petition signed by 52 people, although one person subsequently asked for his name to be removed. These people are concerned because the site is of historical value; there is an established right of way through the site to the shoreline; it is the last remaining community facility; the shoreline is of outstanding natural beauty and any changes would spoil this; and any building would obstruct the view of the hotel from the shoreline, seriously affecting trade and employment in the area.

16. During the processing of the planning application the council received 6 letters of objection to the proposed development. In addition, 26 letters of objection were received during the processing of this appeal. Concerns expressed echo those already expressed by the community council and by those who signed the petition, with the addition of the following matters: the officers report to committee was not objective and omits mention of the finalised local plan policies; the view of the hotel from the sea is essential for trade from passing yachts, which make up the majority of the trade in the summer; a city style kit house would be inappropriate on this site; the house would be located disproportionately to the south of the plot, with the potential for future development for another house; and there has been huge community interest in the application and the council’s decision to allocate the site as an open space reflects this.

CONCLUSIONS

17. Section 25 of the Act requires the determination in this case to be made in accordance with the provisions of the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The development plan comprises the Argyll and Bute Structure Plan 2002 and the Cowal Local Plan 1993. I consider, based on my inspection of the appeal site and the written submissions, that the issues to be determined are whether the proposal is consistent with the relevant provisions of the development plan and, if not, whether an exception to these provisions is justified by other material considerations. I consider that the provisions of the finalised local plan and the approval of new houses nearby to be other material considerations in this case.

18. In relation to the first determining issue and policy STRAT DC1 of the structure plan, compliance with the policy depends on the appropriateness or otherwise of the site which it is proposed to develop. In this case, to the extent that the site lies within the settlement and there are no infrastructure reasons indicating any difficulty with development, the site would, on the face of it, appear to be an appropriate site. However, I do have concerns about the location of the proposed house immediately in front of the Kames Hotel. I consider that, notwithstanding the proposal to set the bungalow into the site slightly, it would no longer be possible to have an unobstructed view of the foreshore from the rooms on the ground floor of the hotel or from the terrace used for outdoor drinking and eating immediately in front of the hotel building.

19. SPP 1 – The planning system states that: “The planning system does not exist to protect the interests of one person or business against the activities of another, although in some cases private interests may coincide with the public interest. In distinguishing between public and private interests, the basic question is whether the proposal would unacceptably affect the amenity and existing use of land and buildings which ought to be protected in the public interest, not whether owners or occupiers of neighbouring or other existing properties would experience financial or other loss from a particular development”.

20. Usually, it is accepted that there is no right to a view from one property over land that is not in the control of the owner of that property. However, in this case I consider that the hotel, albeit privately owned, is used by members of the public who would no doubt obtain great pleasure from

PPA_130_172 5 Page 72 Colliers CRE P/PPA/130/172 7 December 2006 the view that can be seen from the ground floor rooms and from the terrace. There seems to be limited opportunity for tourists or local people within Kames to be able to appreciate the view whilst having a drink or a meal. I consider that this is a case where the private interests of the hotel owners in protecting the view from their property coincide with the public interest, at least for those members of the public that are customers of the hotel. I am not convinced then that the proposed site is an appropriate site for development or, therefore, that it complies with structure plan policy STRAT DC1.

21. In relation to STRAT DC8, at the moment, the Kames Hotel can be seen from the foreshore and from the sea. Although not a listed building, it is a substantial traditional building of some character, which, as a hotel, is used by members of the public and is a facility for tourists and locals alike. The area of open ground in front of the hotel contributes to its pleasant setting. Allowing the proposed development on this site would, in my opinion, detract from the setting of the hotel and would have an adverse impact on the character of the landscape in this area, particularly when viewed from the foreshore and the sea. I consider that the proposed development would damage the character of this part of the coast and that it would not comply with STRAT DC8.

22. Similarly, I consider that there is conflict with local plan policy HO8 because of the adverse environmental impact of the proposed development in relation to the view from the hotel and with policy RUR1, as it would be a prominent development in a regional scenic area.

23. Turning to other material considerations and the provisions of the finalised local plan, as the objections to the local plan have yet to be considered at a public local inquiry, I do not attach great weight to its provisions. Nevertheless, it does have some weight as an up to date statement of the council’s land use policies. In relation to policies ENV1 and ENV10, I consider that the proposed development would have an adverse impact on the character of the landscape in this area. At the moment, the Kames Hotel can be seen from the foreshore and from the sea. As I explain above, it is a substantial traditional building of some character, which is a facility for tourists and locals alike. The area of open ground in front of the hotel contributes to its pleasant setting. Allowing the proposed development on this site would, in my opinion, detract from the setting of the hotel and would have an adverse impact on the character of the landscape in this area, particularly when viewed from the foreshore and the sea. I conclude therefore that the proposed development would not comply with policies ENV1 and ENV10 of the finalised local plan. I do not consider that policy ENV9 is relevant as the site does not lie within or adjacent to the National Scenic Area.

24. In relation to policy REC2, I note that the modified version of the finalised local plan has identified the appeal site as a site which should be safeguarded against development. Although I do not consider that this land is important for recreational use, I do consider that it is important in relation to the setting of the hotel and the landscape of this coastal area. I consider therefore that it should be safeguarded from development. In relation to policy HOU1, I consider that housing development on this site would have an unacceptable environmental impact, as I have explained above, and conclude that it does not comply with this policy.

25. Regarding the other houses that have been built in this area, I consider that the bungalow at Tringa to the south of the appeal site is bland, featureless and suburban in style and character. It does not reflect the style and character of the more traditional houses located along the Shore Road further south. To my mind, the style and character of the proposed house is similarly bland, featureless and suburban and appears to be a modification of a standard house type. Quite apart from the objections regarding the location of the house I have outlined above, I consider that the unexceptional design is not worthy of its exceptional location. In contrast, the house at the Old

PPA_130_172 6 Page 73 Colliers CRE P/PPA/130/172 7 December 2006

Kames Pier seems to me to have been designed specifically for the site. Although this house is closer to the foreshore than the house at the appeal site would be, its design is such that it enhances rather than detracts from its setting adjacent to the pier. It is also located to one side of the hotel frontage rather than directly in front of it.

26. Drawing these issues together, I have concluded that the proposed development would not comply with the development plan and I have identified no other material considerations which would justify an approval contrary to the development plan policies.

27. I have taken account of all the other matters raised but find none that outweighs the considerations on which my decision is based.

28. Accordingly, and in exercise of the powers delegated to me, I hereby dismiss your client’s appeal and refuse to grant planning permission for the development to which it relates.

29. This decision is final, subject to the right of any aggrieved person to apply to the Court of Session within 6 weeks of the date of this letter, as conferred by sections 237 and 239 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. On any such application the Court may quash the decision if satisfied that it is not within the powers of the Act or that the applicant’s interests have been substantially prejudiced by a failure to comply with any requirement of the Act or of the Tribunals and Inquiries Act 1992 or of any orders, regulations or rules made under these Acts.

30. A copy of this letter has been sent to Argyll and Bute Council and Kilfinnan Community Council. Those who made representations on the appeal and those who attended the site inspection have been informed of the decision.

Yours faithfully

This was the version issued on 7 December 2006.

KAREN HEYWOOD Reporter

PPA_130_172 7 Page 74

This page is intentionally left blank Page 75 Agenda Item 8a

ARGYLL & BUTE COUNCIL BUTE AND COWAL AREA COMMITTEE

COMMUNITY SERVICES 9 JANUARY 2007 ______

DUNOON GRAMMAR SCHOOL: ACHIEVEMENT REPORT 2006

1. SUMMARY

A report on the performance of all Argyll and Bute pupils in the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) examination results was presented to the Strategic Policy Committee on 16 th November 2006.

This report, presented by the Head Teacher, Mr Joe Rhodes, outlines the major achievements of the school in 2005/6 and includes the SQA examination results for pupils who sat examinations in May/June 2006. The results are based on pre-appeal data.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS

The Area Committee are asked to note the continuing improvement in the performance of pupils and the commitment of staff in their examination successes and in the wider aspects of achievement across the school.

3. DETAILS

The details are included in the attached report from the school.

4. IMPLICATIONS

Policy: None Financial: None Personnel: None

Equal Opportunities: None

For further information contact: Mr Joe Rhodes, Head Teacher Dunoon Grammar School

Telephone: 01369 705010

Page 76

Argyll and Bute Council Community Services Education

Dunoon Grammar School Report on Achievement, 2005-2006.

IN 2002, HMI judged the overall quality of the curriculum as very good, with the overall breadth and balance and opportunities for pupil choice seen as a key strength of the school.

During the year 2005 -2006, the statement of the HMI report was continued, and was even broader than in 2002, with the introduction of several courses at Intermediate 1 and Intermediate 2 in, particularly, practical courses. Home economics, for example, had broadened its choices from hospitality (highly successful and popular) to cake decorating (again highly successful and popular) with all candidates achieving A passes. Technical had introduced courses in both practical woodworking skills and practical engineering skills

The relaxation of Age and Stage regulations allowed mathematics to present its S3 cohort for Intermediate 1, essentially a year early, and this was very successful.

Future developments on the curriculum will focus on the development of ‘A Curriculum for Excellence’, the Scottish Executive Education Department’s view of the future of Scottish Education. Launched in Dunoon Grammar School in August of 2006, this will be the framework for work over the next few years.

The school has a standing target to raise attainment for all pupils across the curriculum, concentrating on raising boys’ achievement.

Attainment in 2006 was good. Last year’s highly achieving S4 maintained their excellent performance in the Scottish Executive Education Department’s benchmark of 3+ higher grades by achieving 24%, above national standards. 35% of S4 achieved 5+ standard grades at credit or equivalent. The gap between boys and girls narrowed with more than 30% of boys achieving this figure, the best in the school so far. Very encouraging is the fact that the current S4 and S3 is potentially showing even greater narrowing of this gender gap, a national problem, which has shown itself particularly problematical in the school.

Departments which achieved particularly good results included Geography (19 A passes at Higher) and Art (12 passes at Higher), with one candidate achieving national recognition for her work in an exhibition of good practice.

Page 77

5-14 attainment in S2 in 2006

The percentage of the S2 roll attaining or exceeding the 5-14 Level E was as follows:- School Argyll & Bute % % Reading 74 71 Writing 50 58 Mathematics 65 63

SQA results 2006

The percentages of pupils gaining the National Qualifications shown were as follows:- School Argyll Scotland & Bute % % % In S4 5+ Level 3 (SG foundation or equiv.) 95 94 90 5+ Level 4 (SG general or equiv.) 72 80 76 5+ Level 5 (SG credit or equiv.) 35 37 34 In S5 1+ Level 6 (Higher) 43 45 38 3+ Level 6 (Higher) 24 25 21 5+ Level 6 (Higher) 08 11 09 In S6 3+ Level 6 (Higher) 26 28 30 5+ Level 6 (Higher) 18 18 19 1+ Level 7 (Advanced Higher) 12 13 12

In addition, the government’s National Priorities for Education framework, requires reporting on the cumulative successes of pupils by the end of S6. This analysis adds together all examination achievement of all pupils by the end of S6, i.e. an addition of all successes achieved in S4, S5 and S6. The measure is a three-year average, 2003-2006.

School Argyll Scotland & Bute % % % 5+ Level 3 (SG foundation or equiv.) 95 96 91 5+ Level 4 (SG general or equiv.) 80 86 79 5+ Level 5 (SG credit or equiv.) 43 53 47 1+ Level 6 (Higher) 42 49 43 3+ Level 6 (Higher) 29 33 30 5+ Level 6 (Higher) 18 21 19

(above data from Standard Tables and Charts, Scottish Executive, 2006, pre-appeal)

Page 78

Achievements in 2005-6

Sport

Boys and girls football ran at various levels, and with great success. In particular the under 15 football team reached the quarter finals of the Scottish Cup. The under 18s continued their good form of last season, reaching the final of the under 18s tournament. The girls’ team entered the Coca Cola football competition. Individual pupils were selected to represent Scotland at football and shinty.

At the Scottish Schools Swimming Championships, the boys’ team won gold in the Freestyle and individual Medley competition. Three pupils from the school were members of the successful Argyll athletics team which qualified for the UK final of Sports Hall Athletics.

Badminton players entered the Scottish Schools Badminton championships, as well as the Argyll and Bute championships. Trophies were won in a number of classes. A badminton club ran throughout the session.

Dunoon Grammar School won the boys’ football, swimming, and outdoor sports competitions at the Argyll and Bute S1 and S2 Youth Games. Several pupils entered the ECKO orienteering group, which has led to significant success for individual pupils over many years. As well as the various competitions held within the school, a fencing club was started.

The continued success of the school’s cheerleaders showed them at various events throughout the year, including the Cowal Games, and taking part in the Scottish National Championships at the Braehead Arena.

In the Tall Ships experience, four pupils from S6 sailed in the Prince William from Aberdeen to Greenock. . Art

All Advanced Higher students achieved Art School status, and one student’s jewellery folio was selected by the SQA as an example of good practice. There was a successful project with P7 pupils to prepare a ceramic tile project for the new school, and a successful mural was completed for the new school during activities week.

Music

The Pipe Band continued its good work by winning 12 trophies in the Highland Games circuit, at both Juvenile and Novice Juvenile grades. Three concerts were held during the year, and the wind Band retained the Spence Trophy, winning their section at the Mid Argyll Music Festival. Various pupils and groups won individual competitions. All bands were well supported by parents with various fund raising activities taking place. The wind band took Page 79

part in a concert held at the RSAMD, playing with the Junior Academy Concert Band.

At the highest level, various pupils represented the school in the Scottish Youth Pipe Band, the National Children’s Orchestra, the West of Scotland Concert Band and Orchestra, the newly formed Argyll and Bute Wind Band, and the National Youth Jazz Band. Several pupils were selected to join the Junior Academy band.

Within the school, other areas of music were catered for, eg guitar workshops taking place. A Choir was formed, for both S1 and S2 pupils, and for seniors. A marching band was formed which took part in Cowal Choral Club’s performance of ‘The Music Man’. Several other pupils from the school took part in this performance.

Charities

The school made major efforts at year group and individual level to involve itself in charity fundraising, and in all some £6,000 was distributed to various charities. The S6 Charities Committee were responsible for co-ordinating and distributing the money raised.

In particular, following the tragic death of one of our S2 pupils, a collection was held which raised £1,000, which was sent to the Fraser of Allendar Ward of Yorkhill Hospital which had supported him throughout his young life. Yorkhill also benefited from a sponsored silence.

Scotaid, Children in Need, Befrienders (Argyll), Cancer Research, Scottish International Relief, backpacks to Malawi, McMillan Nurses, Dunoon Stroke Club, the Pakistan Earthquake appeal and Oxfam were all given donations from the school.

Enterprise

The young Enterprise team, Cowal Publishers ‘n Enterprise’ continued their success by winning the best presentation at the Argyll and Bute competition. Young Enterprise in Dunoon Grammar School was recognised by winning the Argyll and Bute Award at the awards ceremony in Oban. In recognition of the school’s outstanding Young Enterprise activities over 20 years, the school was presented with a major award at the council’s Excellence awards ceremonies.

In the last two years, Dunoon Grammar School has won the Argyll and Bute best company competition, sharing the best presentation this year and going forward to represent Argyll and Bute in the Scottish Championships in Edinburgh. Young Enterprise has been a major strength of Dunoon Grammar School’s S6 for 20 years. It has led many young people to gain their first experience of business, and has led young people to go forward into business. The chairs, for example of the last two companies have entered Strathclyde University’s prestigious Business School. Page 80

Work Experience

All of S4 had the opportunity to complete a week’s work experience, usually in the month of June following the Standard Grade exams. A number of companies and organisations were involved and many took more than one work experience candidate. All have been thanked for their very kind co- operation.

What else happened?

The success of the Home Economics department has led it to take part in a number of competitions, within and outwith the school. A major Cook Off Special competition was held in the school, with teams of pupils and staff preparing meals, judged by a panel led by a former pupil and restaurateur. Thirty pupils undertook their work experience week in the hospitality department of Glasgow Metropolitan College.

A Citizenship Day was held for S2 pupils, an emergency simulation of which was acted out at the stadium and involved the new school builders, the Fire Brigade, Police, Ambulance, Coastguards, and required the visit of a Sea King helicopter, whose visit was cut short by being required to be called out on a real emergency.

Seventy S1 and S2 pupils from DGS took part in this year’s Junior Maths challenge, run by the UK Mathematics Trust. The school’s success in this competition was excellent, with 6 pupils receiving a gold, 10 pupils receiving a silver, and 28 obtaining a bronze. The very large number of golds was noteworthy, being 50% more than the national average, while the massive 40% of bronzes was double the national average.

Motivational speakers were used with S3, S4 and S5 classes to enhance exam performance and encourage positive attitudes for the future. In particular, learning and teaching classes were used with pupils and parents to look at study techniques.

The annual exchange with our partner school in Germany took place in June.

Higher German pupils visited Marburg in Germany in a German immersion exercise, while Advanced Higher French pupils undertook a similar trip to Paris. Both these trips took place under the auspices of ‘Partners in Excellence.’ All Higher German pupils took part in a whole day immersion programme at the Goethe Institute in Glasgow.

S6 organised, in co-operation with GRAB, the environmental trust, recycling boxes within the school. All S2 pupils were visited by a GRAB representative to discuss environmental issues

Page 81

Two pupils were selected to visit the Scottish Space School seminar in Inverness. One of them was then selected to spend a week’s residential course at Strathclyde University’s Scottish Space School.

SMILE is the organisation of Senior pupils who help as mentors to younger pupils in the school. As part of S6 induction, the senior pupils were trained in their roles in June. All prefects also received training in their roles, receiving Welcome Host accreditation as part of their training.

The drama department organised the annual Playfair Day, which encourages S1 pupils to be aware of anti bullying and anti racism in the school. The Playfair Day was put forward to the Authority’s excellence awards, and won a highly commended award.

The annual prizegiving took place, with the principal guest by Matthew MacIver, Chief Executive of the General Teaching Council of Scotland

Expeditions.

Eight Senior Pupils went to Costa Rica during the summer for the second year, helping in an environmental project. Three other pupils went to the British Schools Expedition Society events, this year in Peru, and to the Amazon basin. Over the years, Dunoon Grammar School has proved to be the most active of all Scottish schools and comes second in the UK in the BSES expeditions.

Six pupils went on the Tall Ships expedition, this year through the west coast of Scotland, deliberately, to get good wind. In this they were successful, coming through a Force 8 gale, happily, it appears.

Page 82

Appendix 1: Comparator Schools

This is the group of the most similar schools across Scotland. The list is derived from Principal Component Analysis (PCA) which recently replaced the previous analysis based solely on free school meal entitlement (FME). The components of PCA are: free meal entitlement; the percentage of households whose mothers have degrees; the percentage of households where the head of household has never worked; the percentage of the lowest 15% of achievers nationally are in the school; the number of pupils with additional support needs and the number of pupils living in large city areas.

The comparator schools for Dunoon Grammar School are:

Prestwick Academy (South Ayrshire ) Buckie High (Moray ) Tain Royal (Highland ) Lanark Grammar School (South Lanarkshire ) Loudoun Academy (East Ayrshire ) Keith Grammar (Moray ) Lesmahagow High School (South Lanarkshire ) Perth Academy (Perth & Kinross ) Ullapool High (Highland ) Speyside High (Moray ) Fraserburgh Academy (Aberdeenshire ) Hawick High (Scottish Borders ) Kirkwall Grammar (Orkney Islands ) Jedburgh Grammar (Scottish Borders ) Invergordon Academy (Highland ) Brechin High (Angus ) Charleston Academy (Highland ) Lockerbie Academy (Dumfries & Galloway ) Alva Academy (Clackmannanshire ) Crieff High (Perth & Kinross )

Page 83

Appendix 2: Boxplots

The boxplots show the distribution of results for our group of 20 comparator schools. The box represents the values between the lower and upper quartiles (50% of the group) and the horizontal line in the box indicates the position of the average (median) result. The diamond indicates the result achieved by the school. The vertical line represents the range of all results in our comparator group.

Boxplot 1: 5+ Level 3 by the end of S4

Boxplot 2: 5+ Level 5 by the end of S4

Page 84

Boxplot 3: 3+ Level 6 by the end of S5

Boxplot 4: 5+ Level 6 by the end of S5

Page 85 Agenda Item 9a

______

ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL BUTE AND COWAL CORPORATE SERVICES AREA COMMITTEE 9 JANUARY 2007 ______

USABLE CAPITAL RECEIPTS ______

1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 Advice has been received from the Head of Strategic Finance that arising from the disposal of assets a sum of £13,214.50 is now available to the Bute and Cowal Area Committee for allocation against projects which meet the capital criteria.

2.0 RECOMMENDATION

2.1 Members are asked to consider allocation of the available sum.

3.0 DETAIL

3.1 As agreed by the Council, Capital funds allocations must be utilised in terms of the following criteria:-

i. Any expenditure within the approved capital allocation must be approved by the Area Committee and must be fully compliant with all the legal definitions for capital expenditure by a local authority.

ii. Any expenditure proposed by Area Committees must be in accordance with –

The Council’s Goals and Values; The Council’s Strategic Objectives; and Area Committee Area Strategy/Development Plans or approved Departmental Service Plans

and in addition -

Page 86

- Must be used for the purposes of improving Council Services or their delivery, or for improving local amenities or infrastructure which are the responsibility of the Council;

- As far as is practicably possible within the agreed spending timescale, should gear in additional external funding from other agencies either in cash or in kind to support projects being promoted; and

- Will not be utilised in such a way as to reduce current or potential Council income nor to commit the Council to revenue or capital commitments beyond the current financial year.

4.0 IMPLICATIONS

Policy: None Financial: None – within appropriate financial capital allocation. Personnel: None Equal Opportunities: None

For further information contact: Shirley MacLeod, Area Corporate Services Manager 01369 704374

Date: 13th December 2006 Page 87 Agenda Item 10

Place of Safety Progress Report

To Argyll & Bute Area Committee

Background:

The Mental Health (and Care) Act 2005 makes a request on the Local Authority and the NHS to work in partnership to provide an appropriate Place of Safety for individuals certificated as requiring to be held under the Act.

In May 2006 operational managers from both the Local Authority Social Work Dept and NHS were asked to attend the Area Committee and present the reasons for the lack of progress on implementing a local place of safety in Bute and Cowal.

These included: • Lack of training for all staff involved. • No identified room/area for adaptation to comply with safety legislation for designated place of safety. • No staff resource to respond to the emergency particularly out of hours.

This usual meant that the hospital and hospital staff and Police Station were inappropriately used as a place of safety resource with patients who required 1:1 supervision. This obviously has a detrimental impact on other patients and on safety and governance requirements.

It was agreed that the respective operational managers would investigate each of the three areas (training, staffing and identified a room in each area – Bute & Cowal) and report back to the committee.

Progress to date:

Bute: • A room has been identified for adaptation to comply the Mental Health Care Acts requirements – Victoria Hospital training room. • A training programme for all related staff (nurses, GPs, support workers) will commence • There is a list of local staff/volunteers who could be on-call for a place of safety emergency – funding for this would need to be met in partnership.

Cowal: • A room will be provided within the new Primary Care Emergency Centre/Community Casualty Dept. • A training programme for all related staff will commence shortly as part of the Psychiatric Emergency Plan for Argyll and Bute • There is no local list of staff/volunteers for on-call. • There are contractual issues for existing staff.

1 Page 88

Recommendations:

1. The Committee is requested to acknowledge that progress has been made. 2. The Committee acknowledges the requirement for investment. 3. The Local Authority Operational Officers work with the NHS Operational Officers to identify joint solutions to the staffing issues and bring a proposal to the Area Committee for joint funding.

Viv Smith Locality Manager Bute & Cowal

6th October 2006

2 Page 89 Agenda Item 11

Motion to Area Committee

The area committee agree to ask the Strategic Policy Committee for funding in year 2007/08 to allow Environmental Services to replace the headstones laid flat by this Council in Kilmun Cemetery five years ago.

Proposed

Seconded Page 90

This page is intentionally left blank Page 91 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 9 Agenda Item 12a of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 92

This page is intentionally left blank Page 93 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 13 Agenda Item 12b of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 94

This page is intentionally left blank Page 95 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 13 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 96

This page is intentionally left blank Page 97 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 13 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 98

This page is intentionally left blank Page 99 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 13 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 100

This page is intentionally left blank Page 101 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 13 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 102

This page is intentionally left blank Page 103 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 13 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 104

This page is intentionally left blank Page 105 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 13 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 106

This page is intentionally left blank Page 107 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 13 Agenda Item 12c of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 108

This page is intentionally left blank Page 109 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 13 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 110

This page is intentionally left blank Page 111 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 13 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 112

This page is intentionally left blank Page 113 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 13 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 116

This page is intentionally left blank Page 117 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 13 Agenda Item 13a of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 118

This page is intentionally left blank Page 119 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 13 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 128

This page is intentionally left blank