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

Lorn House, Albany Street, Oban, Argyll, PA34 4AW Tel: 01631 5679307 Fax: 01631 570379

31 May 2006

NOTICE OF MEETING

A meeting of the OBAN LORN & THE ISLES AREA COMMITTEE will be held in the COUNCIL CHAMBER, MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS, ALBANY STREET, OBAN on WEDNESDAY, 7 JUNE 2006 at 10:30 AM, which you are requested to attend.

Nigel Stewart Director of Corporate Services

BUSINESS

1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

3. CORPORATE SERVICES

(a) Minute of Oban Lorn and the Isles Area Committee meeting held on 3rd May 2006 (Pages 1 - 10)

(b) Report by Chief Protective Services Officer in regard to Tweedale Street Car Park (Pages 11 - 14)

4. COMMUNITY SERVICES

(a) Applications for financial assistance under the Education Development Grant Scheme (Pages 19 - 22)

(b) Applications for financial assistance under the Leisure Development Grant Scheme (Pages 23 - 30)

5. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

(a) List of Building Standards delegated decisions issued by the Director of Development Services since the last meeting (Pages 31 - 42)

(b) List of Town and County Planning delegated decisions issued by the Director of Development Services since the last meeting (Pages 43 - 54)

(c) 05/02395/OUT: Mr L Pacitti: Erection of Three Dwellinghouses - Land east of Woodend, Glencruitten Road, Oban (Pages 55 - 60)

(d) 06/00202/DET: Fiona Veronica Brown: Erection of new Post Office and stores with integral living accommodation - amended design to previous approval 05/01923/DET- The Post Office, Pennyghael, Isle of Mull (Pages 61 - 74)

(e) 06/00110/OUT: Mr E Robertson: Erection of a dwelling - Land at Ardoran Lerags (Pages 75 - 88)

(f) 06/00158/DET: Mr D. Lyle: Erection of Dwellinghouse: Land South of Whin Bank, Clachan Seil, by Oban (Pages 89 - 100)

(g) 06/00219/OUT: Mr S Barton: Erection of a dwelling and septic tank - Plot 2 Deerview, Taynuilt (Pages 101 - 114)

(h) 06/00403/DET: Mr and Mrs A Black: Erection of dwelling house and septic tank and formation of new shared access - Land East of Ledaig House, Benderloch (Pages 115 - 126)

(i) 06/00793/OUT: Mr & Mrs R. Di Ciacca: Erection of a Crofthouse - Land West of Dunmore, Airds Bay, Taynuilt (Pages 127 - 136)

(j) Reporter's Decision in regard to planning application ref. 05/00713/OUT: Mo Dhachaidh, Isle of Iona (Pages 137 - 144)

(k) Report by Head of Planning Services in regard to proposed amendments to the finalised draft Argyll & Bute Local Plan (Pages 145 - 194)

(l) Report by Head of Transportation & Infrastructure in regard to National Transport Strategy Consultation (Pages 195 - 218)

(m) Report by Head of Transportation & Infrastructure in regard to winter ferry services: Coll and Tiree (Pages 219 - 220)

(n) Report by Area Roads & Amenity Services Manager in regard to effect of Coll Airfield construction traffic (Pages 221 - 222)

6. OPERATIONAL SERVICES

(a) Report by Head of Facility Services in regard to Corran Halls - cenference provision - former library areas (Pages 223 - 228)

(b) Report by Area Roads & Amenity Services Manager in regard to proposed fortnightly domestic refuse collections, alternating with paper and cardboard recycling for Lismore (Pages 229 - 232)

7. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

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 paragraphs are:-

E1 - Paragraph 6 Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (other than the authority).

E1, E3 - 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 - 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.

E1 8. ACQUISITION / DISPOSAL / LEASING OF PROPERTY

(a) Report by Head of Facility Services in regard to Oban Property Options (Pages 237 - 240)

(b) Report by Director of Corporate Services in regard to former Pennyghael Primary School (Pages 241 - 244)

(d) Report by Director of Corporate Services in regard to Bridge of Orchy School (to follow)

(e) Report by Director of Corporate Services in regard to disposal of ground at North Connel (to follow)

(f) Report by Director of Corporate Services in regard to sale of ground at Hazeldean, Oban (to follow) (Pages 249 - 252)

(g) Report by Chief Solicitor in regard to formal Deeds and Documents executed between 12th April 2006 and 18th May 2006 (Pages 253 - 256)

E2 9. ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS

(a) Report by Director of Development Services in regard to outstanding Section 75 Agreements (Pages 257 - 262)

E3 10. EADAR GLINN

(a) Report by Director of Community Services in regard to Eader Glinn (Pages 263 - 264)

LORN & THE ISLES AREA COMMITTEE

Councillor Robin Banks Councillor Ian Gillies (Vice-Chair) Councillor Allan Macaskill Councillor Alistair MacDougall (Chair) Councillor Sidney MacDougall Councillor Duncan MacIntyre Councillor Donald McIntosh Councillor Elaine Robertson

Contact: Jane Gillies, Committee Assistant - Tel. 01631 567901

Page 1 Agenda Item 3a

MINUTES of MEETING of OBAN LORN & THE ISLES AREA COMMITTEE held in the COUNCIL CHAMBER, MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS, ALBANY STREET, OBAN on WEDNESDAY, 3 MAY 2006

Present: Councillor Alistair MacDougall (Chair)

Councillor Robin Banks Councillor Donald McIntosh Councillor Allan Macaskill Councillor Sidney MacDougall Councillor Duncan MacIntyre Councillor Elaine Robertson

Attending: Kenneth Macdonald, Area Corporate Services Manager Hugh Blake, Senior Estates Surveyor Alex Taylor, Area Manager, Social Work Iona MacPhail, Area Housing Manager Douglas Blades, Public Transport Officer Ian MacIntyre, Area Team Leader, Planning Services Neil Brown, Area Roads & Amenity Services Manager Sandy MacTaggart, Head of Facility Services

The Chairman announced that Tina Ellis had retired recently after 21 years of service with the Council, latterly specialising in child care and child protection. He thanked Tina for her diligence, wished her well for her retirement and presented her with an engraved quaich to mark the event.

The Chairman ruled, and the Committee agreed in terms of Section 50B(4)(B) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, and in terms of Standing Order 3.2.2, that a report by the Head of Transportation & Infrastructure in regard to the A82 Tarbet – Fort William trunk road improvements, dealt with at item 4(s) of this minute, be taken as a matter of urgency.

1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Councillor Ian Gillies

2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Elaine Robertson declared a non-pecuniary interest in planning applications ref. 06/00219/OUT and 06/00247/OUT, dealt with at items 4(m) and 4(n) of this minute because of her husband’s position with a firm of solicitors with an interest in these matters.

3. CORPORATE SERVICES

(a) MINUTE OF MEETING OF OBAN LORN AND THE ISLES AREA COMMITTEE HELD ON 4TH APRIL 2006

The minute of the meeting of the Oban, Lorn & the Isles Area Committee held on 4th April 2006 was approved as a correct record subject to reference being made therein to the presence at the meeting of 22 members of the public. Page 2

(b) MINUTE OF MEETING OF OBAN LORN AND THE ISLES AREA COMMITTEE HELD ON 5TH APRIL 2006

The minute of the meeting of the Oban, Lorn & the Isles Area Committee held on 5th April 2006 was approved as a correct record subject to a minor typographical amendment to the name of an attendant officer.

(c) NOTE OF HEARING HELD IN DALAVICH COMMUNITY CENTRE ON TUESDAY 4TH APRIL 2006 IN REGARD TO PLANNING APPLICATION REF. 05/02410/DET: MR & MRS LYLE - ERECTION OF 30 CHALETS, DALAVICH CHALET PARK

The note of the hearing held in Dalavich Community Centre on Tuesday 4th April 2006 in regard to planning application ref 05/02410/DET: Mr & Mrs Lyle: Erection of 30 chalets, Dalavich Chalet Park, was approved as a correct record subject to reference being made therein to the presence at the meeting of 21 members of the public.

4. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

(a) LIST OF BUILDING STANDARDS DELEGATED DECISIONS ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SINCE THE LAST MEETING

Members considered and noted a list of Building Standards Delegated Decisions in respect of which approvals had been issued since the last meeting.

(Ref: List of approvals dated 12th April 2006, submitted)

(b) LIST OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DELEGATED DECISIONS ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SINCE THE LAST MEETING

The Committee considered and noted a list of Town and Country Planning Delegated Decisions which had been issued since the last meeting.

(Ref: List of Town & Country Planning Delegated Decisions dated 12th April 2006, submitted)

(c) 05/01260/OUT: MR & MRS MACINNES: SITE FOR ERECTION OF DWELLINGHOUSE, ROAD ACCESS AND SEPTIC TANK - LAND EAST OF LAGNAGIOGAN, ISLE OF IONA

Withdrawn.

(d) 05/01559/OUT: MR AND MRS P. BARR: ERECTION OF A DWELLING - PLOT 3 EAST OF MILLBRAE, BENDERLOCH

It was agreed that this application be approved as a minor departure from the adopted Local Plan subject to (a) conditions 1-2 & 4-6 as set out in the th Page 3

report by the Head of Planning dated 6th April 2006; and (b) condition 3 subject to the amendment of the first sentence thereof to read “Prior to the commencement of the development full details of all external lighting, which shall be angled downwards, to serve the development shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority.”

(Ref: Report by the Head of Planning dated 6th April 2006, submitted)

(e) 05/02070/OUT: MR AND MRS P. BARR: ERECTION OF A DWELLING - PLOT 1 EAST OF MILLBRAE, BENDERLOCH

It was agreed that this application be approved as a minor departure from the approved Development Plan subject to (a) conditions 1-7 & 9-11 as set out in the report by the Head of Planning dated 6th April 2006; and (b) condition 8 subject to the amendment of the first sentence thereof to read “Any subsequent application for the approval of the reserved matters shall include full details of all external lighting, which shall be angled downwards, to serve the development.”

(Ref: Report by the Head of Planning dated 6th April 2006, submitted)

(f) 05/02072/OUT: MR AND MRS P. BARR: ERECTION OF A DWELLING - PLOT 2 EAST OF MILLBRAE, BENDERLOCH

It was agreed that this application be approved as a minor departure from the approved Development Plan subject to (a) conditions 1-6 & 8-11 as set out in the report by the Head of Planning dated 6th April 2006; and (b) condition 7 subject to the amendment of the first sentence thereof to read “Any subsequent application for the approval of the reserved matters shall include full details of all external lighting, which shall be angled downwards, to serve the development.”

(Ref: Report by the Head of Planning dated 6th April 2006, submitted)

(g) 05/02073/OUT: MR AND MRS P. BARR: ERECTION OF A DWELLING - PLOT 4 EAST OF MILLBRAE, BENDERLOCH

(Ref: Report by the Head of Planning dated 6th April 2006, submitted)

(h) 05/02058/OUT: PAUL GALLAGHER: SITE FOR THE ERECTION OF TWO DWELLINGHOUSES - RAERIC HOUSE, RAERIC ROAD, TOBERMORY

It was agreed that this matter be continued to the next meeting to allow discussions to be held with the applicant in regard to (a) revising the Page 4

application to reflect the proposed erection of one dwelling house only; and (b) repositioning the proposed access to the main road. It was further agreed that that the Area Roads & Amenity Services Manager submit details in regard to the sight lines at this location an how these relate to the area to be covered by the 20 mph limit soon to be introduced.

(Ref: Report by the Head of Planning dated 10th April 2006, submitted)

(i) 05/02450/OUT: C HARVEY: ERECTION OF A DWELLING - ADJACENT TO LEVENGROVE, GLENVIEW, DALMALLY

Approved, subject to the conditions as set out in the report by the Head of Planning dated 10th April 2006.

It was further agreed that the Committee seek the review of Policy LP SERV5 of the Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan in respect of development and overhead high voltage transmission lines.

(Ref: Report by the Head of Planning dated 10th April 2006, submitted)

(j) 06/00070/MFF: SUBSEA SHELLFISH: MUSSEL FARM - NORTH EAST OF EILEAN NA CLOICHE, LISMORE

It was agreed that no objections be raised to the lease subject to the Crown Estate imposing conditions as set out in the report dated 13th March 2006 by the Head of Planning, and an additional condition to ensure that in the event of the cessation of operations at the site, all equipment and associated materials will be removed and disposed of appropriately.

(Ref: Report by the Head of Planning dated 13th March 2006, submitted)

(k) 06/00110/OUT: MR E ROBERTSON: ERECTION OF A DWELLING - LAND AT ARDORAN LERAGS

It was agreed that this application be continued to a future meeting to allow time to investigate (a) the possibility of identifying an alternative site for this development within the Rural Opportunity Area; and (b) the issue of a claim of occupational need being tied to the marina, rather than the farm, as the major part of the business.

(Ref: Report by the Head of Planning dated 19th April 2006, submitted)

(l) 06/00128/DET: MR M WHITMORE: INSTALLATION OF TWO WIND TURBINES - GRIANAN, SOUTH CUAN, ISLE OF LUING

Withdrawn.

(m) 06/00219/OUT: MR S BARTON: ERECTION OF A DWELLING AND SEPTIC TANK - PLOT 2 DEERVIEW, TAYNUILT

It was agreed that consideration of this application be continued to the next meeting in order that (a) the report in regard to Plot No. 1 may be taken into Page 5

consideration; (b) information can be provided in regard to the timescale for submission of the Local Plan to the Area Committee; and (c) the position regarding objections to the Local Plan from Taynuilt Community Council can be clarified.

(Ref: Report dated 7th April 2005 by the Head of Planning, submitted)

(n) 06/00247/OUT: DAVID AND LORNA MOSELEY: SITE FOR THE ERECTION OF A DWELLINGHOUSE - LAND NORTH WEST OF OLD SCHOOLHOUSE, KILMORE, BY OBAN

Approved as a minor departure from the Local Plan subject to (a) conditions 1-6 & 8 as set out in the report dated 11th April by the Head of Planning; and (b) condition 7 subject to the amendment of the first line thereof to read “Any details pursuant to condition 1(c) above shall show details of the new access (with the first 5 metres finished in tarmacadam) to the public road”.

(Ref: Report dated 11th April 2006 by the Head of Planning, submitted)

(o) 06/00327/OUT: MR K MACLEAN: ERECTION OF A DWELLING - CRAOBH MHOR. CLACHAN SEIL

Approved as a minor departure from the adopted Lorn Local Plan subject to the conditions set out in the report dated 7th April 2006 by the Head of Planning.

(Ref: Report dated 7th April 2006 by the Head of Planning, submitted)

(p) 06/00402/LIB: MR D. LYALL: INSTALLATION OF A ROOFLIGHT (RETROSPECTIVE) - 12 EASDALE ISLAND, BY OBAN, ARGYLL

It was agreed that Listed Building Consent be approved.

(Ref: Report dated 12th April 2006 by the Head of Planning, submitted)

(q) PLANNING DESIGN AWARD 2005

Members considered a display of photographs of the nominations for the Oban, Lorn & the Isles Planning Award 2005.

Decision: Page 6

It was agreed that the following nominations be published on the Council’s website to allow members of the public to vote thereon:

(a) Erection of dwelling house – 3 Benvoullin Gardens, Oban (b) Alterations and extension to dwelling house – Muircroft, Glencruitten Road, Oban (c) Refurbisment of Oban Congregational Church, Tweeddale Street, Oban (d) Construction of new ferry terminal – Railway Pier, Oban (e) Erection of dwelling house – Gramercy, The Grazings, Tobermory

(r) REPORT BY HEAD OF TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE IN REGARD TO RURAL TRANSPORT GRANT 2006-07

Members considered, and approved, a report by the Head of Transportation & Infrastructure regarding proposals for experimental public transport services to be funded by the Rural Transport Grant 2006/07.

(Ref: Report by the Head of Transportation & Infrastructure, submitted)

(s) A82 - TARBET TO FORT WILLIAM IMPROVEMENTS

Members considered, and noted, a report dated 3rd May 2006 by the Head of Transportation & Infrastructure in regard to the recent announcement of a package of measures to improve the A82 trunk Road between Tarbet and Fort William.

(Ref: Report dated 3rd May 2006 by the Head of Transportation & Infrastructure, submitted)

5. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Mr P.Robertson With reference to item 4(r) Mr Robertson asked when the Luing the enhanced summer ferry service to Luing would commence, and what the timetable would be. Councillor Macaskill advised that the matter would require to be ratified by the Council’s Strategic Policy Committee later in the month, but that subject to this ratification the service would commence almost immediately thereafter.

Page 7

The Committee resolved in terms of Section 50(A)(4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 to exclude the public for the following items of business on the grounds that it was likely to involve the disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 6 and 9 of Part 1 of Schedule 7A to the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973.

6. ACQUISITION / DISPOSAL / LEASING OF PROPERTY

(a) MINUTE OF ADJOURNED MEETING OF OBAN LORN AND THE ISLES AREA COMMITTEE HELD ON 10TH APRIL 2006

The minute of the adjourned meeting of the Oban, Lorn & the Isles Area Committee held on 10th April 2006 was approved as a correct record.

(b) REPORT BY AREA CORPORATE SERVICES MANAGER IN REGARD TO GLENSHELLACH RIGHT OF WAY

Members considered a report dated 18th April 2006 by the Area Corporate Services Manager regarding repair work required on the right of way between Soroba and Glenshellach, currently in the ownership of Highlands and Islands Enterprise.

Decision:

It was agreed to accept the offer from the Enterprise Company that they would meet the cost of repairing the right of way providing that the Council assumes responsibility for future maintenance, subject to the repairs being effected to a standard approved by the Council.

(Ref: Reports dated 13th March and 18th April 2006, submitted)

Members considered a report dated 27th April 2006 by the Head of Legal and Protective Services in regard to progress towards the disposal of Bridge of Orchy Primary School site.

Decision:

It was agreed that a report be submitted to the next meeting setting out Page 8

proposals for settlement of the outstanding issues.

(Ref: Report dated 27th April 2006 by the Head of Legal and Protective Services, submitted)

(d) REPORT BY DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICES IN REGARD TO DISPOSAL OF GROUND - NORTH CONNEL

The Senior Estates Surveyor advised Members that the potential purchaser had been asked to provide details of his intentions for the site, but that no response has yet been received.

Decision:

It was agreed that a report be submitted to the next meeting in regard to the suitability or otherwise of the site for housing development.

(e) REPORT BY CHIEF SOLICITOR IN REGARD TO FORMAL DEEDS AND DOCUMENTS ISSUED SINCE THE LAST MEETING

Members considered, and noted, a report dated 11th April 2006 by the Head of Legal and Protective Services in regard to formal deeds and documents executed between 15th March and 11th April 2006.

(Ref: Report dated 11th April 2006 by the Head of Legal and Protective Services, submitted)

(f) REPORT BY HEAD OF FACILITIES IN REGARD TO OFFICE RATIONALISATION - OBAN

Members considered a report dated 20th April 2006 by the Head of Facility Services in regard to the proposal to undertake a property appraisal for Council office accommodation in Oban.

Decision:

It was agreed that a further report be submitted to the next meeting, to focus on identifying alternative accommodation for existing staff from Kilbowie and Lorn House. It was further agreed that this report should include valuations for Kilbowie, Lorn House and Rockfield School.

Page 9

(Ref: Report dated 20th April 2006 by the Head of Facility Services, submitted)

(g) REPORT BY DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICES IN REGARD TO SALE OF LAND - OBAN

Members considered, and noted, a report dated 26th April 2006 in regard to the sale of an area of ground in Oban.

(Ref: Report dated 26th April 2006 by the Head of Legal and Protective Services, submitted)

Page 10

This page is intentionally left blank Page 11 Agenda Item 3b

ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL OBAN, LORN &THE ISLES AREA CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE 7 JUNE 2006

REDEVELOPMENT OF TWEEDALE STREET CAR PARK, OBAN - ASSESSMENT OF LAND CONDITION

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Council is examining the possibility of redeveloping the Tweedale Street car park in Oban to increase available car parking in the town. This report examines issues associated with the previous use of the site as a gas works.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 That Members note that the Councils’ Protective Services are in the process of undertaking an initial investigation of the site to identify the extent and requirement for remediation works as part of the redevelopment.

2.2 A further report will be submitted to Members detailing the outcome of the assessment under the contaminated land regime.

3. BACKGROUND

3.1 The Council is examining the possibility of redeveloping the Tweedale Street car park in Oban to increase available car parking in the town. Research into former uses made of the land, including a search of historic maps has revealed that the site occupied by the car park was previously used for the manufacture of town gas. Historic maps from 1871, 1899 and 1966 show that the site was occupied by a gas works but the 1989 and 1995 editions show that the site had been cleared of structures. Anecdotal evidence suggests that in 1979 the site was used informally as a car park prior to its development to its present condition by the Council.

3.2 Gas works are noted for their potential to contaminate the land under a site although a visual inspection indicates there is no evidence of any of contamination on the surface of the site or the surrounding area.

Page 12

3.3 The presence of contamination on a site does not necessarily mean that remediation is required, however, where there is a pathway from the source of any contamination to a potential receptor, and there is a possibility for harm to be caused to an individual or the environment, remediation of the land should be undertaken to remove or otherwise exclude the risk of harm to individuals or the environment.

3.4 An inspection of the site has not revealed any physical evidence of the effects of any contamination. The car park is hard surfaced with tarmacadam and the trees and shrubs that have been used to landscape the site appear to be in good condition.

3.5 Receptors that may be affected by any contamination that may exist on this site would include: i. humans (users of the site, workmen involved in construction work, residents of properties surrounding the site). ii. buildings (structure, foundations, services), or iii. controlled waters (groundwater, surface water courses)

3.6 At the present time, the site appears to be effectively capped and pose no risk to human receptors.

3.7 The geological formation upon which the site stands is regarded as weekly permeable. It is likely that any residual contamination left on the site following demolition would not have travelled through the bedrock, however, the surface water regime is unknown and anecdotal evidence suggests that there may be a spring on the site.

3.8 Any construction activities on the site could introduce a new pathway from any potential contamination into any existing surface waters or groundwater and prior to any construction work a full site investigation and assessment should be completed undertaken, and if appropriate, any necessary remediation.

4. CONCLUSIONS

4.1 The Councils Protective Services is undertaking an initial site investigation to identify so far as is reasonable, the extent and level of contamination on the former gasworks site. The outcome of this assessment will determine future actions for the site which may include a detailed site assessment as part of the redevelopment of the site.

5. IMPLICATIONS

Policy : Nil

Financial : The cost of the initial site investigation will be borne by the capital expenditure grant for contaminated land

Page 13

Personnel: Nil

Equal Opportunities : Nil

SANDY TAYLOR CHIEF PROTECTIVE SERVICES OFFICER REPORTS/AM/KT/4628 MAY 2006

For further information contact: Alan Morrison Tel: 01546 604292

LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS :

Page 14

3 2 3

LES ST 7 29 y HAR 0 7 r C Bk 2 4 te 15to 1 at

19 B

3to7 t r

s Posts 4 Ter STREET ost Myr

TAFFORD P S B

M 3

t 6 Ba Chy 1 6

. 9 6 1

4 Distillery 2

m Craigvarran LB House ARDC

6 l

0 ra J

a o c lm o Slipway a la L b l B i ' s V H 54 to 58 L BM 39.25m a

4 r

CP t o CP

5 2 P 9 o l P g s W ar t 13 PW nd s Du AR 4 37.5m D 2 7 C 3 ON Shingle STREET ARGYLL Hall CR Maranel Garfield

Ward Bdy 7 Hall 2 .

Depot T m

W Und T Novar A 82m E 4 . BM 6 Y 0 E 3.7m L Sub Sta D O El A R

' 3 S

E 1

S 38 Ortac Slipway 34 to T B

R R

E A

E E

2 1

8 Carm 1

o U T 3 Mona 2 E C

R H

R A 9

A N A

C A

8 OBAN 2 E N 2

6 5 Bank 15 13 4.6m Hotel 1 otel 8 H T A LB Y 1 L

6 A O

1 R 8 4

5 ' H S

L B 1 e

2 t L R i l t Rockfield o S A e

1 T E

M 7 4 m

Shingle 1 r

1 R L 9 Primary a W 13 E C o

11 E 8 Sch S G 5 M

2 School T 3 3

E 1

E R R Post

C G

A E L D

C L

P S

o o t 6

4 E a

1 T

o I

K 0 l 1 H R e F

4 R 6 4.0m d K o E

W t o C

E e 0 S PA 2 n l O l T l

a a R

S 1

' n H 9 2 2 Woodlands gl N S e E 2 T E E U V 2 1 Q E N Cra

Ban M 3 k 2 TweedaleS Street CarL WParkS LW S O The

M N 2 l 3 Mains Ard-a

2 T

5 1 R Blair V

E E m

C t

o 3

Bus t A .

r 1 8 T

0 Hotel Bank u L 8 1 Station o P El Blair Vil

C 'S Post

4 r t

2 D o Garage o Sub

o 7 t g IR 5 w 1 e Atholl Villa e r A Sta r G c S a T M T Rosslaire

A N

T E

I 3

O 5 B Manse

C M N Royal m 1 S 9 9. R . 56

O E m Hotel a 8 A 6 Kilmartin R 1 D 1 Ch

C u Court rch

6 e 1 S a ' l r D LB B 7 4 B

1 8 1 Hal a R r 4 n 1 I

t k a t 1 o A 4.6m 6 S Meml 7 t 0 o 2 9

1 5 2 A

R t 0 1 o

o 1

t L Cave

t 2 L 2 2

1 S s 1 2

i 3 Q

ur en 2 UA 2

t R

0 o

C o t

5 6

n 1

o 6

i 1

t o t

7 4

a 1 TCBs

1 C

5 4 O 4.6m 9 M R BI

A E 3 T T S

L E T

8 6 1

5 5 R C A E E o R R E

O u T 8 7 B T C ff n I

i S O c 3 L c 9 This map is reproduced from3 Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance

e il G 2 M

S s Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown copyright.

1 A T 2 1 Unauthorised reproductionBI infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil 1 7

R proceedings.8 Argyll and Bute Council, License Number 100023368, 2005.

1 E

E 4 5 6 5

E 1 L T 3

T 6 0 E A

1 2 1 E 7 N 1 - 8 R 1 1 T E S

Page 15 Agenda Item 3c

ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AREA COMMITTEE 7 JUNE 2006

OBAN ACTION PLAN

1. SUMMARY

1.1 This Action Plan was jointly commissioned with Argyll and the Islands Enterprise and Caledonian MacBrayne. The report by consultants Ironside Farrar is now complete. It sets out a strategic framework to support growth and enhance the quality of place and sustainable performance of Oban as the regional capital of the Western Highlands and the Isles. The broad terms of the report are recommended for endorsement by the Area Committee.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 That the conclusions and recommendations in the Oban Action Plan be endorsed by the Area Committee.

2.2 That the Action Plan be referred to the Strategic Policy Committee for formal adoption by Argyll and Bute Council.

2.3 That the Strategic Policy Committee be requested to consider the financial and personnel resource implications of implementing the Action Plan and to include, as the highest Council priority, appropriate amounts in future budgets which will reflect the priorities identified in the Corporate Plan and related Area Strategy.

3. BACKGROUND

3.1 The draft report was considered by the Oban Action Plan Steering Group on 19 April 2006 when various amendments were requested. These have now been incorporated into the final report.

3.2 The recommendations in Ironside Farrar’s report require Page 16

formal endorsement by the Council. There are then two key issues that require to be considered by the Council and its partners. Firstly the establishment of a delivery mechanism to take forward the Action Plan and secondly the identification, allocation and prioritisation of the internal resources required to underwrite the process.

3.3 The most immediate recommendations in the report relate to the mechanism for taking forward the Action Plan. The key recommendations are:- • Establishing full Council commitment to the Action Plan, internal staff resourcing and partnership working • Retain a Partnership Working Group working closely with the Council and Area Committee structures • Establish an Oban Expansion Group with a dedicated full-time project officer • Establish specialist Sub-Group Leaders reporting back through the Oban Expansion Group

3.4 The report recognises that consultation and stakeholder involvement will be essential in securing broad consensus. Recommendations include: • Public consultation forums • Regular review and monitoring of the Action Plan • Establishment of an Oban Action Plan web link • Consultation groups on specific issues e.g. harbour management, transportation

3.5 The Action Plan has a loose time frame of 2007 to 2017 and it is estimated that the total investment, if its proposals are carried through, will be in the order of £175 million. The public sector investment required to bring this about will be in the order of £39 million of which the Council would be required to contribute some £9 million over the life of the Action Plan. The spend profile is modest in the period up to 2008 but steepens sharply in 2009 and involves significant spend from 2010 onwards.

3.6 There are, of course a number of project related recommendations in the report that can be taken forward in the short term. The survey work for the STAG appraisal of the Development Road is already underway. The issue of the management of Oban Bay can be addressed immediately as can the issuing of a brief to test the feasibility of a private sector multi-storey car at Tweeddale Street. Other early actions that can be advanced in parallel with the main report recommendations include the rationalisation of Council offices and the production of an integrated transportation timetable. A number of key major Page 17

projects essential to the success of the Action Plan are also already committed:-

• SAMS Research Campus Expansion and Junction • Railway Pier/Calmac Linkspan • Oban Airport

4. CONCLUSION

4.1 This report and the recommendations that it contains represent the most significant opportunity for growth that Oban has had in many decades. It has been produced through an inclusive, robust and, on occasions, challenging process. Full endorsement and commitment by the Council is essential to its success.

5. IMPLICATIONS

Policy: Furtherance of the Council’s Corporate Strategy, Area Strategy and Local Plan. High level commitment to the Oban Action Plan, particularly the Development Road element, needed in the next review of the Corporate Plan

Financial: Potential Council contribution of £9 million over the period 2007-2017

Personnel: Significant officer involvement. Possible reassignment of dedicated project officer and consequent backfilling.

Equal Opportunity: None

For further information contact: Kevin Williams

Telephone 01546 604274

LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS: Oban Action Plan – Ironside Farrar, May 2006

Page 18

This page is intentionally left blank Page 19 Agenda Item 4a

ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL 7th June 2006 COMMUNITY SERVICES

EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT GRANTS 2006-7

1. SUMMARY

1.1 The Council has set the 2006-07 budget for Education Development Grants to Oban, Lorn and the Islands Area at £21,278

1.2 This report presents applications for financial assistance that meet the published criteria and require the Area Committee to decide on distribution of the sums.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 Members are recommended to consider the following applications.

Applicant Cost of Amount Recommendation Project Requested Girlguiding Argyll £3,250 £1,500 £375

TOTAL £3,250 £1,500 £375

3. CONCLUSION

3.1 The list of applications contained within this report represent projects that are eligible for assistance through the Education Development Grant Scheme. The recommendations for funding of each project reflect not only the eligibility of the scheme against the Council’s criteria but also the availability of funds.

3.2 Should members decide to accept the above recommendations, the remaining allocation of funds for Education Development Grants for 2006-07 will be £18,153

4. IMPLICATIONS Page 20

Policy: The recommendations are made within the policy for assistance to voluntary organisations.

Financial: The recommendations will allocate a further sum of £375 from the funds available for 2006-07.

Personnel: Nil

Equal Opportunity: The Assistance to Voluntary Organisations Scheme embraces the Council’s Equal Opportunities aims.

For further information contact: Tricia Slater Telephone 01631 562466

LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS:

1. Application forms and supplementary information from applicants.

Page 21 ASSISTANCE TO VOLUNTARY ORGANISATIONS 2006-07 ASSESSMENT FORM for Social Welfare Grants, Education and Leisure Development Grants

1 Details

Name of Assessing Officer Patricia Slater Have you contacted the organisation to assess this application? yes Have you checked the Auditor is independent and qualified? yes

Applicant: Girlguiding Argyll Scheme: Education Development Project Argyll and Bute wide a) Total cost of project £3,250 Title: training event for Guide b) How much is funded £1,650 leaders. from group resources? c) How much is coming n/a from other agencies d) Grant requested from £1,500 A & B Council? Grant Recommended: £375 Reason To enable Guiders to Grant awarded last year £200 for grant participate in a leadership (2005/06) training event

2 Financial Check – Have you checked the Organisation is:

a) Fully constituted Yes x No b) Has submitted a bank statement Yes x No c) Has submitted audited/signed accounts Yes x No d) Leisure and Education Development Grants: If over £2000 have you sent this grant to finance? n/a e) Social Welfare Grants: Has the grant been registered with the n/a Lochgilphead Office. f) If relevant, has the grant passed the financial check? n/a g) Have you checked that the organisation is within 50% of the costs for Social Welfare, Education or Development grants? Yes x No h) Have you checked that the Council is meeting is obligations under Yes x No Best Value in awarding this grant, for example, if the grant is awarded will the work definitely go ahead?

3 General Criteria

Girlguiding Argyll will use the funding to provide an area wide training weekend for volunteer leaders, (guiders.) Guiders will have an opportunity to update skills and share good practice, which in turn will benefit girl guides in their local units. Activities planned for the weekend include: - training in recruitment procedures, leadership qualifications, first aid, unit accounting, music, craft, international activities, and mentoring support to new guiders.

Is the activity non-political? Yes x No Is the project consistent with Council priorities? Yes x No Does the project have open membership? Yes x No Have sponsorship agreements been checked? n/a 250 leaders and How many people overall will benefit from this grant? 1 000 1 500 guides Page 22 1,000 -1,500 guides Is the organization well established? Yes x No Have you identified any training needs for the organisations This is a training committee or volunteers? activity for volunteer leaders Does the organisation have volunteer training in place? Yes x No Have you confidence in their ability to deliver a service? Yes x No

4 Policy and Procedures

If the Organisation works with a child/children under 18 or a vulnerable adult/s do they meet the following criteria?

a) Clear recruitment policies Yes x No

b) Ongoing training and support for volunteers Yes x No c) A code of conduct for staff and volunteers Yes x No d) A Code of Good Practice Yes x No

e) An Equal Opportunities Policy Yes x No

f) A Policy for Managing Confidential Information Yes x No g) Grievance Procedure for staff and volunteers Yes x No h) A Disciplinary Procedure for staff and volunteers Yes x No

Additional Information Girlguiding Argyll is affiliated to the national Girl Guide Association and operates their full range of policies and procedures. This application covers the three areas of Argyll and Bute – the MAKI area committee awarded £360 to this project , Cowal and Bute have exhausted their grants budget for 06/07, it is therefore recommended that OLI award £375

Specific Criteria Girlguiding promotes personal and social development for girls from a diverse range of backgrounds and cultures. The ethos of girlguiding encourages active citizenship through activities and events which assist young people to develop skills for life.

Signed: Assessment Officer

Date:

Page 23 Agenda Item 4b

ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL 7th June 2006 COMMUNITY SERVICES

LEISURE DEVELOPMENT GRANTS 2006- 07

1. SUMMARY

1.1 The Council has set the 2006 - 07 budget for Leisure Development Grants to Oban, Lorn and the Islands Area at £19,132

1.2 This report presents applications for financial assistance that meet the published criteria and require the Area Committee to decide on distribution of the sums.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 Members are recommended to consider the following applications.

Applicant Cost of Amount Recommendation Project Requested Oban Area Coaching £2,821 £1,410 £1,000 Committee for Shinty £700 £350 £250 Kilmelford and Kilninver guarantee against a loss up to a maximum of Community Association £250 Luing Archers £2156.55 £1078 £200 Totals £5,677.55 £2,838 £1,450

3. CONCLUSION

3.1 The list of applications contained within this report represent projects that are eligible for assistance through the Leisure Development Grant Scheme. The recommendations for funding of each project reflect not only the eligibility of the scheme against the Council’s criteria but also the availability of funds.

3.2 Should members decide to accept the above recommendations, the remaining allocation of funds for Leisure Development Grants for 2006 - 07 will be £17,682

Page 24

4. IMPLICATIONS

Policy: The recommendations are made within the policy for assistance to voluntary organisations.

Financial: The recommendations will allocate a further sum of £1,450 from the funds available for 2006 -07

Personnel: Nil

Equal Opportunity: The Assistance to Voluntary Organisations Scheme embraces the Council’s Equal Opportunities aims.

For further information contact: Tricia Slater Telephone 01631 562466

LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS:

1. Application forms and supplementary information from applicants.

Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 ASSISTANCE TO VOLUNTARY ORGANISATIONS 2006-07 ASSESSMENT FORM for Social Welfare Grants, Education and Leisure Development Grants

1 Details

Name of Assessing Officer Scott Douglas Have you contacted the organisation to assess this application? Yes Have you checked the Auditor is independent and qualified? Yes

Applicant: KIlmelford & Kilninver Scheme: Leisure Community Association Development Project Bringing a theatre a) Total cost of project £700 Title: company to the village hall b) How much is funded £350 to perform a play. from group resources? c) How much is coming £0 from other agencies d) Grant requested from £350 A & B Council? Grant Recommended: £250 maximum guaranteed against any loss incurred Reason To assist with the up front Grant awarded last year £0 for grant fee demanded by the (2005/06) theatre company.

2 Financial Check – Have you checked the Organisation is:

a) Fully constituted Yes X No b) Has submitted a bank statement Yes X No c) Has submitted audited/signed accounts Yes X No d) Leisure and Education Development Grants: If over £2000 have Not applicable you sent this grant to finance? e) Social Welfare Grants: Has the grant been registered with the Not applicable Lochgilphead Office. f) If relevant, has the grant passed the financial check? Not applicable g) Have you checked that the organisation is within 50% of the costs for Social Welfare, Education or Development grants? Yes X No h) Have you checked that the Council is meeting is obligations under Yes X No Best Value in awarding this grant, for example, if the grant is awarded will the work definitely go ahead?

3 General Criteria

Do you concur with the organisation in their assessment of need? Please supply a very brief summary:

The Community Association are confident that this performance will be well attended And that it may pave the way for further such events. They also plan to work with the theatre company again and to help them to create new performance opportunities for highland writers, actors and rural audiences.

Is the activity non-political? Yes X No Is the project consistent with Council priorities? Yes X No Does the project have open membership? Yes X No Have sponsorship agreements been checked? Not applicable 50-100 How many people overall will benefit from this grant?

Page 28 Is the organization well established? Yes X No Have you identified any training needs for the organisations Yes No X committee or volunteers? Does the organisation have volunteer training in place? Yes No X Have you confidence in their ability to deliver a service? Yes X No

4 Policy and Procedures

If the Organisation works with a child/children under 18 or a vulnerable adult/s do they meet the following criteria? Not applicable

a) Clear recruitment policies Yes No

b) Ongoing training and support for volunteers Yes No c) A code of conduct for staff and volunteers Yes No d) A Code of Good Practice Yes No

e) An Equal Opportunities Policy Yes No

f) A Policy for Managing Confidential Information Yes No g) Grievance Procedure for staff and volunteers Yes No h) A Disciplinary Procedure for staff and volunteers Yes No

Additional Information The community association manages the hall and takes charge of bookings. They are seeking to broaden the range of activities and events held in the hall and they hope that this effort to bring an award winning play to the hall may lead to further dramatic performances being offered to the local community.

Specific Criteria Rural need - to provide an opportunity for social interaction by members of the local community. To meet anticipated demand for attending high quality dramatic productions locally. Enhancing quality of life for participants. Sustainability – if this performance is well attended, the case will be made for putting on further such performances in the hall. Artistic Innovation – The theatre company intend to commission further work from highland writers and this will depend on securing support from rural communities and venues.

Signed: Assessment Officer

Date:

Page 29 ASSISTANCE TO VOLUNTARY ORGANISATIONS 2006-07 ASSESSMENT FORM for Social Welfare Grants, Education and Leisure Development Grants

1 Details

Name of Assessing Officer Scott Douglas Have you contacted the organisation to assess this application? Yes Have you checked the Auditor is independent and qualified? Not applicable

Applicant: Luing Archers Scheme: Leisure Development Project To set up and equip an a) Total cost of project £2156.55 Title: archery group for members b) How much is funded £1079 of the community on the from group resources? island of Luing. c) How much is coming £0 from other agencies d) Grant requested from £1078 A & B Council? Grant Recommended: £200 towards instructor training Reason To purchase archery Grant awarded last year None for grant equipment. (2005/06)

2 Financial Check – Have you checked the Organisation is:

a) Fully constituted Yes X No b) Has submitted a bank statement Yes X No c) Has submitted audited/signed accounts Not applicable – new organisation d) Leisure and Education Development Grants: If over £2000 have Not applicable you sent this grant to finance? e) Social Welfare Grants: Has the grant been registered with the Not applicable Lochgilphead Office. f) If relevant, has the grant passed the financial check? Yes X No g) Have you checked that the organisation is within 50% of the costs for Social Welfare, Education or Development grants? Yes X No h) Have you checked that the Council is meeting is obligations under Yes X No Best Value in awarding this grant, for example, if the grant is awarded will the work definitely go ahead?

3 General Criteria

Do you concur with the organisation in their assessment of need? Please supply a very brief summary:

This project follows a taster session at Atlantis Leisure and a six-part course in the basics of archery which was attended by several Luing residents. There are now 11 people who are keen to establish an archery group on the island and to obtain the necessary qualifications needed to provide instruction to other members of the community. Is the activity non-political? Yes X No Is the project consistent with Council priorities? Yes X No Does the project have open membership? Yes X No Have sponsorship agreements been checked? Yes X No Initially 11 then How many people overall will benefit from this grant? widened to general community. Page 30

Is the organization well established? A new organisation – formed in January 2006 Have you identified any training needs for the organisations Yes X No committee or volunteers? Does the organisation have volunteer training in place? Yes X No Have you confidence in their ability to deliver a service? Yes X No

4 Policy and Procedures

If the Organisation works with a child/children under 18 or a vulnerable adult/s do they meet the following criteria? Yes. The group is affiliated to the Grand National Archery Society and operates under their policies and procedures.

a) Clear recruitment policies Yes No X

b) Ongoing training and support for volunteers Yes No X c) A code of conduct for staff and volunteers Yes No X d) A Code of Good Practice Yes X No

e) An Equal Opportunities Policy Yes X No

f) A Policy for Managing Confidential Information Yes X No g) Grievance Procedure for staff and volunteers Yes No X h) A Disciplinary Procedure for staff and volunteers Yes No X

Additional Information Having contacted GNAS for advice, it is recommended that an award is not made until one or more members of the group become trained as an archery leader or instructor. Assistance towards doing this should however be supported.

Specific Criteria To provide an opportunity to participate in archery on Luing. To enable local residents to become qualified archery instructors. To increase participation and quality of provision locally.

Signed: Scott Douglas Assessment Officer

Date: 19/5/06

Page 31 Argyll and Bute Council Agenda Item 5a Development Services BUILDING STANDARDS DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

CASENO APPLICANT NAME/PROPOSAL RECEIVED VETTED DECISION DECISION AND SITE ADDRESS DATE DATE DATE TYPE

03/01180/ERD/A Mrs D Macdonald 19/04/2006 26/04/2006 26/04/2006 WARAPP

Land East Of Number 4 Kirkapol Scarinish Isle Of Tiree Erection of Dwelling House - Amendment of Building Warrant B(S)A 03/01180/ERD granted 23 September 2003 - Resiting of house on site and relocation of oil storage tank with external boiler

03/01416/ERD/B Mr Mrs D McAdam 12/05/2006 12/05/2006 15/05/2006 WARAPP

Land West Of Tobermory Golf Club Erray Road Tobermory Isle Of Mull Erection of dwelling house: Amendment to B(S) A 03/01416/ERD granted 25.11.03 to omit fireplace and associated chimney and relocate ramp to rear door

03/01548/ERC/A Atlantis Leisure 19/04/2006 20/04/2006 24/04/2006 WARAPP

Atlantis Leisure Dalriach Road Oban Argyll PA34 5JE

Erection of all weather pitch, fencing gates and floodlights - Amendment to B(S)A: 03/01548/ERC granted 27.08.03 to alter position of all weather pitch, drainage omitted and footpath updated as built

03/01670/EXT/A Mr Allan Strang 15/05/2006 16/05/2006 17/05/2006 WARAPP

20 Lorn Road Dunbeg Oban Argyll PA37 1QG

Erection of two storey extension to dwelling house: Amendment of Building Warrant B(S)A 03/01670/EXT granted 08/12/03 - layout of extension on ground floor altered and patio door replacing window;

03/02277/ALT/B Mr S Barton 09/05/2006 10/05/2006 10/05/2006 WARAPP

Land North Of Plot 1, Ichrachan Farm Taynuilt Argyll

Plots 3,4,6 and 7 - Amendment of Warrant B(S)A 03/02277/ALT dated 27 February 2004 for Installation of a Private Sewage Treatment Plant (Biodisc) to amend levels between manholes 8 and 5

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 19 May 2006 Page 1 of 11 Page 32 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services BUILDING STANDARDS DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

CASENO APPLICANT NAME/PROPOSAL RECEIVED VETTED DECISION DECISION AND SITE ADDRESS DATE DATE DATE TYPE

04/01131/EXT/C Iain Cleaver Hotels 11/04/2006 14/04/2006 18/05/2006 WARAPP

Dalmally Hotel Dalmally Argyll PA33 1AY

Construction of 10 additional guest bedrooms to North elevation and infill conservatory to extend lounge and extend dining room into arboretum: Amended proposal - 04/01131/EXT - Alterations to fire stair to allow sufficient space for a disabled refuge bay on floors one and two

04/01368/COU/A The Directors Of Dunstaffnage Marina Limited 29/04/2006 09/05/2006 09/05/2006 WARAPP

Dunstaffnage Marina Dunbeg Oban Argyll PA37 1PX

Change of use of marina offices to provide bedrooom accommodation: Amendment to B(S)A: 04/01368/COU granted 14 Feb 2006 for velux roof terrace in sail loft

04/01640/ERD/A Fiona Stewart + John Miller 16/03/2006 01/04/2006 17/05/2006 WARAPP

Land North Of Lochnabeich House North Connel Oban Argyll Erection of Dwellinghouse, septic tank and domestic oil storage tank - Amendment to B(S)A: 04/01640/ERD for Dressing room extended and velux added, ensuite extended WC and sink moved and shower cubicle added, raeburn and associated flue, first floor balcony added and doors altered, upper floor to garage added and stair added, main stair altered with cupboard underneath, doors to living room altered, doors to living room and kitchen omitted, shower wall and door added, utility room altered and doors altered, door to garage added and step and ramp moved, roof details to slate, timber cladding added as shown, oil tank moved, velux at garage moved.

04/01793/COU/B Val Gray 08/05/2006 15/05/2006 15/05/2006 WARAPP

47-50 Stevenson Street Oban Argyll

Change of use of store to office/shop accommodation - Amended proposal to 04/01793/COU:- retain section of non loadbearing wall at store and relocation of mechanical ventilation terminals on external wall

04/01827/ERD/B Mr And Mrs D Gibson 16/05/2006 16/05/2006 17/05/2006 WARAPP

Dunfuinary Cottage Connel Oban Argyll PA37 1PG

Demolition of dwelling and Erection of new house, septic tank and domestic oil tank; Amendment of Building Warrant 04/01827/ERD granted 23.12.04 - removal of fitted wardrobe in bedroom; subdivison of store at entrance area;

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 19 May 2006 Page 2 of 11 Page 33 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services BUILDING STANDARDS DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

CASENO APPLICANT NAME/PROPOSAL RECEIVED VETTED DECISION DECISION AND SITE ADDRESS DATE DATE DATE TYPE

04/02023/AOW Mr Mrs Derham 13/10/2004 03/12/2004 15/05/2006 WARAPP

Land South West Of Argyll Cottage Lismore Oban Argyll Erection of dwelling house: Amendment to B(S)A: 03/01400/ERD granted 6 October 2003 to extend disabled ramp and create new parking area, increase height of side windows, reposition wood burning stove and chimney and changes to foundation plan for hearth and change patio doors to french doors with fixed light

05/00284/ALT/A J Stewart 10/05/2005 22/07/2005 24/04/2006 WARAPP

15 George Street Oban Argyll PA34 5RU

Alterations to Shop layout and principal entrance door - Amendment to B(S)A: 05/00284/ALT granted 11.03.05 for upper floor structure supported by steel beams and columns

05/00286/ERD/B Fraser Properties (Scotland) Ltd 29/04/2005 02/05/2006 02/05/2006 WARAPP

Plot 1 And Plot 2 Land South East Of Sonachan House Portsonachan Dalmally Argyll Erection of 2 Dwelling Houses (Plots 1 and 2 ) biodisk units and domestic oil storage tanks - Amended proposal to 05/00286/ERD: Alterations to drainage system, exteral oil fired boilers, oil tank location and archway formed through lounge/dining room

05/00509/ERD/A Mr And Mrs J Heward 05/01/2006 17/01/2006 14/04/2006 WARAPP

Site 5 Former County Hospital Benvoullin Lane Oban Argyll Erection of dwelling house; Amendment to Building Warrant B(S)A 05/00509/ERD granted 24.08.05 - change kit to Kingspan House Tek, reduce sun space and alter roof profile.

05/00764/ERD H Mctavish And C Livingston 28/04/2005 25/08/2005 03/05/2006 WARAPP

Land South Of Druimavuic Cottage Appin Argyll

Erection of dwelling house with septic tank and associated piped infiltration bed system

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 19 May 2006 Page 3 of 11 Page 34 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services BUILDING STANDARDS DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

CASENO APPLICANT NAME/PROPOSAL RECEIVED VETTED DECISION DECISION AND SITE ADDRESS DATE DATE DATE TYPE

05/01334/ALTEXT Mr Mrs Hammick 25/08/2005 05/10/2005 24/04/2006 WARAPP

1 Cuilfail Terrace Kilmelford Oban Argyll

Erection of unheated conservatory, raised timber deck and exempt porch

05/01434/ALTER Highland Heritage Ltd 15/09/2005 25/11/2005 17/05/2006 WARAPP

Dalmally Hotel Dalmally Argyll PA33 1AY

Alteration to form ground floor office, meeting room and store within existing store area

05/01504/ERECDW Ian And Christina Taggart 04/10/2005 12/12/2005 14/04/2006 WARAPP

Arduaine Caravan Site Arduaine Oban Argyll

Erection of dwelling house and associated septic tank and drainage system

05/01560/ALTEXT Mr And Mrs E Docherty 14/10/2005 01/12/2005 14/04/2006 WARAPP

1 Lochside Inverinan Taynuilt Argyll PA35 1HH

Internal alterations and new extension

05/01585/ERECDW Mr Mrs D Rees 24/10/2005 23/02/2006 28/04/2006 WARAPP

Land East Of Timber Cottage Lochawe Dalmally Argyll Erection of 1 and 3/4 storey 6 apartment timber framed dwelling house

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 19 May 2006 Page 4 of 11 Page 35 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services BUILDING STANDARDS DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

CASENO APPLICANT NAME/PROPOSAL RECEIVED VETTED DECISION DECISION AND SITE ADDRESS DATE DATE DATE TYPE

05/01587/CONV01 Mr Douglas Graham 24/10/2005 27/01/2006 14/04/2006 WARAPP

5B Knipoch Place Oban Argyll

Conversion to form maisonette with attic space used as bedroom 4 and store

05/01594/ALTER Mr T Worlledge 26/10/2005 29/11/2005 28/04/2006 WARAPP

Arrivain House Tyndrum Crianlarich Perthshire FK20 8SB Alter existing bedroom bathroom extension

05/01622/DISAB2/A Argyll And Bute Council, Community Services 13/04/2006 14/04/2006 14/04/2006 WARAPP

Taynuilt School Taynuilt Argyll PA35 1JE

Alterations to School, principally to comply with current Disability Discrimination Act Legislation - entrance lobby reconfigured, new disbaled toilet, access path and car parking reconfigured: Amended proposal to 05/01622/DISAB2 - ramp design amended, access from drop off point/db parking to building amended

05/01628/EXTEND/A J Forteith And Sons 15/05/2006 17/05/2006 17/05/2006 WARAPP

J Forteith & Sons Glengallan Road Oban Argyll

Extension to Existing Industrial Unit for the Purposes of Food Storage; Admendment of Building Warrant B(S)A 05/01628/EXTEND granted 10.01.06 - external boundary fence to west of site revised to allow for escape route: Full thickness of insulated chiller box with racking system and additional fire escape door omitted

05/01784/ERECDW David Vick And F MacPhail 19/12/2005 21/12/2005 17/05/2006 WARAPP

Land North West Of Howmore Bridge Of Awe Taynuilt Argyll Erection of single storey timber framed 3 apartment dwelling with septic tank and associated piped bed infiltration system, and oil storage tank

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 19 May 2006 Page 5 of 11 Page 36 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services BUILDING STANDARDS DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

CASENO APPLICANT NAME/PROPOSAL RECEIVED VETTED DECISION DECISION AND SITE ADDRESS DATE DATE DATE TYPE

05/01815/ERECDW Mr D Strachan 29/12/2005 02/03/2006 17/05/2006 WARAPP

Land South West Of New Barran Farm Barran Kilmore Oban Argyll Erection of Dwelling House

06/00046/ERECDW/2 Mr + Mrs G McHardy 06/02/2006 21/03/2006 04/05/2006 WARAPP

Plot 2 Cruachan Filling Station Lochawe Dalmally Argyll Erection of dwellinghouse: Final Stage - six apartment timber framed storey and half: foundations, substructure, superstructure, external wall cladding, internal walls and their linings, electrical, ventilation, heating and plumbing system

06/00050/EXTEND Alan + Kate Hunter 13/01/2006 07/02/2006 25/04/2006 WARAPP

9 Achnafearna Taynuilt Argyll PA35 1JP

Erection of 2no. Extensions to existing dwelling.

06/00061/ERECDW Mr & Mrs M Macleod 17/01/2006 29/01/2006 04/05/2006 WARAPP

Land South East Of High Tor Laurel Crescent Oban Argyll Erection of Dwelling House and Installation of Oil Tank

06/00150/ALTER KMAP 08/02/2006 14/02/2006 04/05/2006 WARAPP

Mcleod Tv Repairs Lochavullin Road Oban Argyll PA34 4PL Alteration to storage unit

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 19 May 2006 Page 6 of 11 Page 37 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services BUILDING STANDARDS DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

CASENO APPLICANT NAME/PROPOSAL RECEIVED VETTED DECISION DECISION AND SITE ADDRESS DATE DATE DATE TYPE

06/00173/ERECDW R S Mccoll Esq 10/02/2006 24/02/2006 15/05/2006 WARAPP

Plot 5 East Of Lonruadh Cottages Tyneribbie Appin Argyll Erection of 7 apartment 4 bedroom one and half storey timber framed dwelling with integrated garage and oil storage tank

06/00185/ALTER Mrs M M Saalfeld 14/02/2006 21/02/2006 26/04/2006 WARAPP

Glenairlie Glenmore Road Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 4NB Alterations to external wall to form ground floor lounge bay window and window in first floor bedroom above

06/00227/EXTEND Duncan McPhail 24/02/2006 24/03/2006 04/05/2006 WARAPP

Lochphuil House Balephuil Isle Of Tiree Argyll And Bute PA77 6UE Rear single storey timber framed extension to house

06/00228/ALTER Mr Mrs Wardhaugh 24/02/2006 29/03/2006 26/04/2006 WARAPP

Kathmore Soroba Road Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 4JF Alterations to remove non load bearing wall between two bedrooms to form one enlarged bedroom with ensuite, and Wc compartment installed in Bedroom 1 with exisitng shower now accessed from bedroom 1, and existing bathroom to bedroom 2 ensuite by installing door across corridor

06/00230/EXTEND Mr Danskin 24/02/2006 24/03/2006 13/04/2006 WARAPP

4 Cnoc A' Challtuinn Clachan Seil Isle Of Seil Argyll And Bute PA34 4TR Installation of PVCu double glazed heated conservatory with associated works

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 19 May 2006 Page 7 of 11 Page 38 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services BUILDING STANDARDS DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

CASENO APPLICANT NAME/PROPOSAL RECEIVED VETTED DECISION DECISION AND SITE ADDRESS DATE DATE DATE TYPE

06/00254/ALTER Scottish Association For Marine Science 02/03/2006 25/03/2006 14/04/2006 WARAPP

Scottish Association For Marine Science Dunbeg Argyll And Bute PA37 1QA Office refurbishment (ARC Building)

06/00273/ALTER Mrs S Billimore 03/03/2006 05/04/2006 25/04/2006 WARAPP

Cachla Benderloch Argyll And Bute PA37 1QS

Installation of room in loft, en-suite shower room and installation of oil fired boiler and oil storage tank

06/00311/ALTEXT Mr And Mrs C Cox 13/03/2006 06/04/2006 04/05/2006 WARAPP

Duntanachan Taynuilt Argyll And Bute PA35 1HY

Two storey timber framed extension to dwelling house and alterations to play area and utility room into kitchen and family room with solid fuel appliance

06/00327/ERECT/A Elliott Group (Scotland) Ltd 11/05/2006 15/05/2006 15/05/2006 WARAPP

Land East Of Old Lemonade Factory Soroba Park Soroba Road Oban Argyll And Bute Erection of Modular Office Unit: Amendment to B(S)A: 06/00327/ERECT granted 10.04.06 for alterations to ramp construction and geometry

06/00328/ERECT/A Elliott Group (Scotland) Ltd 11/05/2006 15/05/2006 15/05/2006 WARAPP

Glencruitten Hostel Dalintart Drive Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 4EF Erection of Modular Office Unit: Amendment to B(S)A: 06/00328/ERECT granted 10.04.06 for alterations to ramp construction

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 19 May 2006 Page 8 of 11 Page 39 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services BUILDING STANDARDS DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

CASENO APPLICANT NAME/PROPOSAL RECEIVED VETTED DECISION DECISION AND SITE ADDRESS DATE DATE DATE TYPE

06/00344/ALTEXT Mr Mrs I Brown 20/03/2006 03/05/2006 16/05/2006 WARAPP

Kinloid 56 Nant Drive Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 4LA

Extension (and alterations) to dwelling house

06/00365/EXTEND Mr Mrs Strathern 22/03/2006 12/04/2006 28/04/2006 WARAPP

Elderberry Cottage Kiel Crofts Benderloch Argyll And Bute PA37 1QS Extension to dwelling

06/00369/EXTEND Mr Mrs Robertson 23/03/2006 11/04/2006 24/04/2006 WARAPP

Ferniehirst Ganavan Road Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 5TU Erection of heated conservatory

06/00425/ALTER Duncan MacNiven 31/03/2006 04/04/2006 09/05/2006 WARAPP

34 Morvern Hill Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 4NS

Extend bathroom across stairway to give extra cupboard and floor space. Open up hall and kitchen cupboards to create dining area in kitchen.

06/00445/DISAB1 Mr L Pacitti 04/04/2006 08/04/2006 13/04/2006 WARAPP

Woodend Glencruitten Road Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 4PU Single storey bedroom and disabled toilet extension to dwelling house

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 19 May 2006 Page 9 of 11 Page 40 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services BUILDING STANDARDS DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

CASENO APPLICANT NAME/PROPOSAL RECEIVED VETTED DECISION DECISION AND SITE ADDRESS DATE DATE DATE TYPE

06/00454/ERECDW Rosaleen Campbell 06/04/2006 14/04/2006 17/05/2006 WARAPP

10 Cornaigbeg Kenovay Isle Of Tiree Argyll And Bute

Erection of dwellinghouse

06/00543/ALTER C J Hughes 25/04/2006 26/04/2006 04/05/2006 WARAPP

Ferry House South Cuan Isle Of Luing Argyll And Bute PA34 4TU Alteration to external wall to replace existing window with external grade door forming access into exempt conservatory less than 8 m2

06/00574/ERECDW Highland House Development 02/05/2006 18/05/2006 18/05/2006 WARAPP

Plot 3, Land South Of Brochroy Farm Taynuilt Argyll And Bute Erection of dwelling house - Stage 1: foundations, underbuilding and ground floor slab

06/00653/INSTAL Alasdair MacMillan 16/05/2006 18/05/2006 18/05/2006 WARAPP

Plot 1 Adjacent To Gleneagle Glencruitten Road Oban Argyll And Bute Installation of pumped foul drainage system

06/00654/INSTAL Martyn Cunningham And Sarah Benfield 16/05/2006 16/05/2006 16/05/2006 WARAPP

Sanday 7 Pulpit Road Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 4LF Installation of oil fired central heating - internal combi boiler and oil tank and flue.

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 19 May 2006 Page 10 of 11 Page 41 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services BUILDING STANDARDS DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

CASENO APPLICANT NAME/PROPOSAL RECEIVED VETTED DECISION DECISION AND SITE ADDRESS DATE DATE DATE TYPE

06/00666/ERECDW Mr And Mrs G Bruce 18/05/2006 18/05/2006 18/05/2006 WARAPP

Plot 2 Kilbrannon Benderloch Argyll And Bute

Erection of 1 and 1/2 storey dwelling; Stage 1: foundation and substructure, DPM to floor Slab inc insulation

This page is intentionally left blank Page 43 Argyll and Bute Council Agenda Item 5b Development Services TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

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

19 May 2006 Page 1 of 11 Page 44 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

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

06/00980/NMA Mr Allan Strang 10/05/2006 18/05/2006 NOO

20 Lorn Road Dunbeg Argyll And Bute PA37 1QG

Non Material Amendment to 03/01697/DET - removal of all partitions on the ground floor; Replacement of window with patio doors in new location.

06/00878/NMA Mr Mrs Bowman 27/04/2006 05/05/2006 NOO

Land North East Of Scallastle Craignure Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute Non-material amendment 05/00170/DET - Erection of dwelling house and garage, installation of septic tank and temporary siting of caravan: dwelling rotated through approximately 90 degrees and moved towards the western boundary

06/00874/PNAGRI Ian Campbell 26/04/2006 04/05/2006 NOO

Taigh-A-Bhalachain Airds Bay Argyll And Bute PA35 1JR

Erection of Hayshed

06/00869/PNAGRI Mr Ian Campbell 26/04/2006 04/05/2006 NOO

Brolas Taynuilt Argyll And Bute PA35 1JW

Erection of 2 Polytunnels

06/00867/DET Mr Mrs M M Murray 26/04/2006 12/05/2006 PER

Ardmore Crannag A' Mhinisteir Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 4LX Single storey glazed extension

06/00865/NMA Mr Arkless 26/04/2006 05/05/2006 NOO

Fullarton Cottage Balevullin Isle Of Tiree Argyll And Bute PA77 6XD Amendment to use of existing external gable wall as part of proposed dwellinghouse - relative to consent 04/00443/DET - Erection of dwellinghouse

06/00845/NMA Mr Mrs P McNelly 24/04/2006 02/05/2006 NOO

Plot 2 Rowanbank Dalmally Argyll And Bute

Non-Material Amendment to Delete Windows from West Gable of Dwellinghouse Approved Under 05/00798/REM

06/00828/PNELEC SSE Power Distribution 20/04/2006 09/05/2006 NOO

New Supply On The Connel Back Road Connel OBAN

Proposed 33kv Line to New Dwellinghouse

19 May 2006 Page 2 of 11 Page 45 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

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

06/00826/DET Mrs McNeil 20/04/2006 17/05/2006 PER

Ardness Bunessan Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute PA67 6DU

Proposed Extension and Alteration

06/00772/DET Dr Anthony Raymond Charlier 17/04/2006 15/05/2006 PER

Pier Cottage Ardmor Road Salen Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute PA72 6JL Erection of a geodesic dome greenhouse

06/00757/DET Mackay's Garage 16/05/2006 WDN

Boat Park Tobermory Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute

30000 litre steel bunded fuel tank and additonal fuel berth to existing pontoons

06/00750/PNAGRI J And S Anderson 07/04/2006 11/05/2006 NOO

Kilbride Farm Balvicar Isle Of Seil Argyll And Bute PA34 4RD

Preparation of Site and Erection of General Purpose Agricultural Building

06/00648/DET John And Dolina MacDonald 30/03/2006 02/05/2006 PER

1 Achnaferna Taynuilt Argyll And Bute PA35 1JP

Extension to dwellinghouse

06/00636/DET Scottish Water Solutions 27/03/2006 10/05/2006 PER

Foreshore East Of Ferry Terminal Pier Road Tobermory Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute Erection of control GRP MCC and septicity dosing kiosk and ancillary works

06/00635/PNAGRI Andrew Macmillan 27/03/2006 18/04/2006 NOO

9 Keil Crofts Benderloch Oban PA37 1RZ

Erection of General Purpose Agricultural Building

06/00625/DET Christine Rae 28/03/2006 12/05/2006 PER

9 Lighthouse Buildings Pulpit Rock Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 4LZ Conversion of Attic (Installation of Rooflights)

19 May 2006 Page 3 of 11 Page 46 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

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

06/00613/COU Dunstaffnage Marina Ltd 12/04/2006 05/05/2006 PER

Dunstaffnage Marina Dunbeg Argyll And Bute PA37 1PX

Change of Use of Old Seawork Building to Form Staff Accommodation

06/00612/DET Dr Susan K Reed 24/03/2006 24/04/2006 PER

Site At Achnahard Ardtun Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute

Erection of a Dwelling House - Amended Design to that Approved Under 05/01440/REM

06/00607/DET Mr Mrs Robertson 05/04/2006 28/04/2006 PER

Ferniehirst Ganavan Road Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 5TU

Erection of a Heated Conservatory

06/00605/DET Mr Mrs Worthington 23/03/2006 28/04/2006 PER

Cliff View Glencruitten Road Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 4EW

Alterations and Extension to Dwelling House

06/00598/DET Catriona Munro Duncan 22/03/2006 05/05/2006 PER

North Beul An Ath Dervaig Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute

Erection of Dwelling house and Septic Tank

06/00595/PNAGRI Anthony Robin Marshall 29/03/2006 18/04/2006 NOO

Barguillean Farm Taynuilt Argyll And Bute PA35 1HY

Construction of Agricultural Workshop/Store

06/00585/DET James I M And Andrew D M Gully 24/03/2006 05/05/2006 PER

The Boat House Isle Of Shuna Argyll And Bute

Erection of Boat House with accommodation above

06/00569/DET Mr And Mrs I Brown 20/03/2006 10/05/2006 PER

Kinloid 56 Nant Drive Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 4LA

Proposed Extension and Alterations

19 May 2006 Page 4 of 11 Page 47 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

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

06/00568/DET Mr B Pennock 29/03/2006 18/05/2006 PER

Plot 8 Land At Ichrachan Taynuilt Argyll

Erection of Dwelling House

06/00567/DET Mr And Mrs MacKinnon 24/03/2006 18/05/2006 PER

Yulara Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 4QA

Erection of Garage/Store

06/00565/DET John Christlieb, Melfort Pier And Harbour 24/03/2006 02/05/2006 PER

Melfort Pier Restaurant Kilmelford Argyll And Bute

Extended Patio Area, Steps and Access to Restaurant Approved Under 05/01750/DET

06/00561/DET Mr And Mrs Granger 17/03/2006 18/04/2006 PER

Land North Of Eorabus House Ardtun Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute Erection of Dwellinghouse

06/00553/DET British Trust Hotels 17/03/2006 18/04/2006 PER

Isle Of Mull Hotel Craignure Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute PA65 6BB Leisure extension to existing hotel

06/00549/DET James Robertson 16/03/2006 18/04/2006 WDN

Land North East Of Winterton Farm Balvicar Isle Of Seil Argyll And Bute Extension to Oyster Farm Shed

06/00542/COU Mr Chaudhry 22/03/2006 18/05/2006 PER

99 George Street Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 5NR

Change of Use from Shop Class 1 to Restaurant/Takeaway Class 3

06/00541/DET Ivor Macleod 29/03/2006 10/05/2006 PER

29 Achnahard Ardtun Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute

Erection of Dwellinghouse

19 May 2006 Page 5 of 11 Page 48 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

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

06/00539/DET Superdrug Stores PLC 09/05/2006 WDN

28 George Street Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 5SB

Entrance step removed and ramp added

06/00504/NMA John A MacFarlane 10/03/2006 04/05/2006 PER

2 Buchanan Terrace Hill Street Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 5DF Non-Material Amendment for Slight Increase to Size of Shed Approved Under 05/00283/DET

06/00479/DET M W C Forster 07/03/2006 28/04/2006 PER

Former Fishermans Bothy East Of Ardchiavaig Cottage Bunessan Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute Change of Use, Extension and Redevelopment of Former Fishermans Bothy to form Single Dwellinghouse

06/00471/DET Donald MacKinnon 09/03/2006 15/05/2006 PER

Plot 1 South East Of The Sheiling Kilmore Argyll And Bute

Erection of Dwellinghouse - Amended Design for Plot 1 of 5 Plot Development Approved Under 03/02305/DET

06/00454/ADV Forrest Developments Ltd 06/03/2006 28/04/2006 PER

Land North And East Of Units 1 To 3 Lochavullin Drive Oban Argyll And Bute Proposed New Estate Sign

06/00452/DET TSL Contractors Ltd 08/03/2006 05/05/2006

Land Adjacent To Torosay Sand Pit Craignure Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute PA65 6AY 4 No. Proposed Industrial Units Adjacent to Torosay Sand Pit

06/00451/DET S E Carmichael Ltd 03/03/2006 28/04/2006 PER

Land East Of Hamilton Park Terrace Nursery Lane Oban Argyll And Bute Proposed 2 No Semi Detached 3 Storey Houses. New Vehicular Access. Car parking and New Boundary Walls and Fencing - Amended Proposal to 05/02315/DET

06/00436/OUT Mr + Mrs A M Duff 02/03/2006 24/04/2006 PER

Land North Of Traigh Uaine South Shian Argyll PA37 1SB

Development of Land for Dwellinghouse

19 May 2006 Page 6 of 11 Page 49 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

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

06/00435/DET Mr And Mrs D Currie 02/03/2006 24/04/2006 PER

Site At Craigspuir Lane Tobermory Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute Erection of Dwellinghouse - Minor Changes to Design Approved Under 04/01101/DET

06/00434/NMA Ian Cumming And Susan Macaskill 02/03/2006 20/04/2006 NOO

Plot 2 Woodend Glencruitten Road Oban Argyll And Bute

Non-Material Amendment for Additional Window with Obscure Glazing in Southeast Elevation of Dwellinghosue Approved Under 05/02015/DET

06/00430/DET Mr And Mrs B MacIntyre 07/03/2006 02/05/2006 PER

Arileod Isle Of Coll Argyll And Bute PA78 6TB

Erection of Dwelling House and Formation of Septic Tank

06/00428/DET Kate MacRae 01/03/2006 28/04/2006 PER

Plot 3 Land North Of Forestry Houses Sallachy Aros Isle Of Mull Erection of dwelling house

06/00419/DET Mr + Mrs M Campbell 28/02/2006 27/04/2006 PER

Plot 2, Lonan Plot Barran Caltum Barran Kilmore Oban Argyll

Erection of Dwelling House

06/00404/DET Emma Leigh Murtagh 27/02/2006 26/04/2006 PER

Caravan Bellachroy Hotel Dervaig Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute PA75 6QW Erection of Dwelling House

06/00400/ADV Aldi Stores Limited 27/03/2006 15/05/2006 PER

Land Adjacent To Builder Centre/Plumb Centre Lynn Road Oban Argyll PA34 4PL Erection of Free Standing Double Sided Pole Sign

06/00393/OUT Robert Barry Barlow 03/03/2006 18/05/2006 PER

Erray House Erray Road Tobermory Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute PA75 6PS Site for Erection of Dwelling House and Separate Holiday Chalet

19 May 2006 Page 7 of 11 Page 50 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

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

06/00392/DET Waterfront Co Ltd 24/02/2006 19/04/2006 PER

The Waterfront Railway Pier Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 4LW

Alterations to Public Bar and Part Change of Use from Office to Public Bar

06/00381/DET Scottish Water 06/03/2006 18/04/2006 PER

Scottish Water Reservoir Polvinister Road Oban Argyll And Bute Erection of Security Fence

06/00379/LIB McDougalls Of Oban Ltd 22/02/2006 18/05/2006 PER

28 George Street Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 5SB

Replacement of Asbestos Cement Roof Covering over Rear Single Storey Roof

06/00344/DET The Hon. M And Mrs C Shaw 17/02/2006 21/04/2006 PER

15 Balvicar Isle Of Seil Argyll And Bute PA34 4TF

Alterations and Extensions

06/00339/DET Gilbert MacKechnie 16/02/2006 21/04/2006 PER

Garden Ground Glenrigh Hotel Corran Esplanade Oban Argyll And Bute PA34 5AQ Erection of House

06/00309/OUT Mr And Mrs C Ogilby-Wood 13/02/2006 18/05/2006 PER

Site North East Of Ormsaig Tobermory Isle Of Mull Argyll And Bute PA75 6QA Site for Erection of Dwellinghouse

06/00289/OUT Amanda Karen Algar 10/02/2006 28/04/2006 PER

Field South West Of Toman Nan Eun Isle Of Coll PA78 6TB

Site for Erection of a Dwelling House

06/00263/DET Strathtyrum Trust 08/02/2006 05/05/2006 WDN

Craig Pennyghael Isle Of Mull PA70 6HG

Erection of Boat House

19 May 2006 Page 8 of 11 Page 51 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

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

06/00232/OUT Brennen R F Fairbairns 27/04/2006 WDN

Cuin Crofts (Little Cuin Woods) Dervaig Tobermory Isle Of Mull Erection of Dwelling House

06/00169/DET Gilbert MacKechnie 27/01/2006 11/05/2006 PER

Glenrigh Private Hotel Corran Esplanade Oban Argyll PA34 5AQ Erection of Sleeping Accommodation for Guests with D. U. Provision

06/00128/DET Mr M Whitmore 10/02/2006 03/05/2006 WDN

Grianan (Land South East Of Sunnybrae) South Cuan Oban Argyll Installation of Two Wind Turbines

06/00107/COU Mr Brian Donn 21/03/2006 17/05/2006 PER

Corriebeag Croft Road Oban Argyll PA34 5JN

Temporary Siting of Static Residential Caravan (Retrospective)

06/00020/REM Mr And Mrs Ross Lawrie 06/03/2006 21/04/2006 PER

Land South West Of Fir Bank Croft 3 Achosrigan Appin Argyll

Erection of Dwelling House

05/02598/DET N. Ming 21/04/2006 WDN

2 Forest Cabins Dalavich Chalet Park Dalavich Taynuilt Argyll Extension/Conservatory (Cabin 2)

05/02588/PNAGRI R And R Wainwright 23/03/2006 19/04/2006 NOO

Cliad Isle Of Coll PA78 6TE

To build an agricultural shed adjacent to the existing shed

05/02572/DET Mr And Mrs James Scott 14/04/2006 05/05/2006 PER

'Fyne' No 4 Dalavich Chalet Park Dalavich Taynuilt Argyll

Installation of Wooden Decking (retrospective)

19 May 2006 Page 9 of 11 Page 52 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

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

05/02557/COU Dunstaffnage Marina Ltd 11/04/2006 10/05/2006 PER

Dunstaffnage Marina Dunbeg Oban Argyll PA37 1PX

Siting of two portacabins (temporary) in car park at Wide Mouthed Frog

05/02556/DET Dunstaffnage Marina Limited 09/03/2006 19/04/2006 PER

Dunstaffnage Marina Dunbeg Oban Argyll PA37 1PX

Erection of canopies at courtyard and north patio of Wide Mouthed Frog (Retrospective)

05/02520/DET Mr Mrs Granger 19/12/2005 18/05/2006 WDN

Land North Of Eorabus House, Lower Ardtun Bunessan Isle Of Mull Erection of Dwellinghouse

05/02511/DET Mr And Mrs D Knox 16/12/2005 11/05/2006 PER

23 Easdale Island Oban Argyll PA34 4TB

Renovation of Dwelling House

05/02508/LIB David Knox 16/12/2005 11/05/2006 PER

23 Easdale Island Oban Argyll PA34 4TB

Renovation of Dwelling House

05/02457/NID Argyll And Bute Council 09/12/2005 11/05/2006 NOO

Oban High School Soroba Road Oban Argyll PA34 4JB

Erection of Special Educational Needs Unit

05/02147/OUT Emily And Andre Van Rhyn 24/10/2005 05/05/2006 PER

Plot 2 Land South West Of Torlochan Gruline Isle Of Mull

Site for Erection of Dwellinghouse

05/02107/DET Ian Campbell 14/10/2005 25/04/2006 WDN

Brolas Taynuilt Argyll PA35 1JW

Construction of service road and polytunnels

19 May 2006 Page 10 of 11 Page 53 Argyll and Bute Council Development Services TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DELEGATED DECISIONS SINCE LAST COMMITTEE OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES

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

05/02077/DET Angus Wilkie, Production Manager 17/01/2006 18/04/2006 PER

Land East Of Arduaine,lochmelfort Arduaine Oban Argyll

Extension to Storage Shed

05/01770/DET Mr Mrs MacDowell 22/09/2005 02/05/2006 PER

Land North Of The Fishing Gate Isle Of Coll

Erection of Dwelling House - Amended Proposal to 03/02257/DET

05/01710/DET Catriona Hunter 29/08/2005 09/05/2006 WDN

Land North East Of Machair House Cornaigmore Scarinish Isle Of Tiree Erection of Dwelling House and Garage

19 May 2006 Page 11 of 11 Page 54

This page is intentionally left blank Page 55 Agenda Item 5c

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Councillor D. MacIntyre PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 22nd December 2005 OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES Committee Date - 7th June 2006

15 May 2006

Reference Number: 05/02395/OUT Applicants Name: Mr L. Pacitti Application Type: Outline Application Description: Erection of Three Dwellinghouses Location: Land east of Woodend, Glencruitten Road, Oban

(A ) THE APPLICATION

Development Requiring Express Planning Permission.

• Erection of 3 Dwellinghouses. • Provision of services (no details given). • Formation of Vehicular Access.

(B ) RECOMMENDATION

The proposal is recommended for refusal on grounds that the proposed access would not meet current standards.

(C ) DETERMINING ISSUES AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

1 The site is included in the area subject to Policy HO 21 in the adopted Lorn Local Plan. That policy encourages infilling, rounding-off and redevelopment. The proposal is considered to be rounding-off of the group of buildings formed by Woodend, Glencruitten Road and the recently approved plots to the north of the application site.

2. The site is within the settlement zone in the Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan where infilling, rounding-off and redevelopment are encouraged.

3. The proposal is in accordance with the adopted and proposed settlement policies.

4. The outline plan shows a subdivision of the site into three plots in a line abreast. This approach is the least likely to give rise to an interesting built form and, had the roads advice allowed a recommendation of approval, I would have recommended conditions to omit that subdivision and require the submission of a comprehensive design statement at detailed stage. The street scene would be better served, for example, by a semi-detached pair on the frontage with a detached house on the approximate site designated in the submission as Plot 3.

5. The proposed plots are of a sufficient depth to allow the minimum window to window distance of 18m to be achieved in respect of the existing and approved houses surrounding the site, and I consider there to be no potential privacy or amenity issues at the detailed stage.

6. The proposed access is on the site of a previous access which has been closed off to meet a condition imposed on the planning permission reference 01/01279/DET for plots to the north of the application site as follows: Prior to the occupation of any dwelling house within the development hereby approved, the existing vehicular access shall be permanently closed off, the track grubbed up and the area spread with soil and seeded with grass, to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\1\6\4\AI00029461\2395WRRW1505061.DOC 1

Page 56

Reason: In the interests of road safety and in the interests of visual amenity in order to ensure the existing access is closed off timeously and properly reinstated.

A new access has been provided for the plots approved to the north of the application site. That access would have to be upgraded to an adoptable standard if these additional plots were served from it. It is unlikely that the gradient of that access would meet the adoptable standard. The Area Roads Manager has recommended refusal on grounds that “The proposal will create a proliferation of junctions and will not meet the required spacing for this type of road of 100 metres.” This advice refers to part 5.1.4 of the Strathclyde Roads Development Guide 1995, which is the Council’s adopted standard for road design.

(D ) CONCLUSION

On balance, and given the advice of the Area Roads Manager, I recommend refusal for the attached reason. The planning history makes it clear that a further access to Glencruitten Road in this locality is not acceptable.

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning

Author: Robert Walker 01631 567954 Contact: Ian McIntyre 01631 567951

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\1\6\4\AI00029461\2395WRRW1505061.DOC 2

Page 57

REASON FOR REFUSAL RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 05/02395/OUT

1 In the interests of road safety in that the new access drive would be 40 metres from the existing access which serves Woodend and the houses and plots to the north of the application site. This separation would fall far short of the design standard of 100 metres in part 5.1.4 of the Strathclyde Roads Development Guide 1995, which is the Council’s adopted standard for road design. As a result the proposal would present a hazard to the users of Glencruitten Road.

In addition, a previous planning permission (reference 01/01279/DET) under condition 4 specifically required that the proposed access for this site be closed off in the interests of road safety.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\1\6\4\AI00029461\2395WRRW1505061.DOC 3

Page 58

(B) OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

(a) Site History

01/01279/DET Formation of 4 Housing Plots and Formation of Associated Access Road, Sewer and Earthworks – Granted: 27/03/03

05/00364/OUT Erection of 6 Dwellinghouses – Withdrawn: 04/07/05

(ii) Consultations

Response Date Comment Area Roads Engineer 24th April 2006 Objects – see report Scottish Water 16/03/06 Formally objects, however this objection can be deemed to be withdrawn if a condition is attached requiring the applicant to submit evidence that an agreement regarding the provision of a water scheme has been reached with Scottish Water.

(iii) Publicity and Representations

Advert Type : Article 9 Vacant Land Closing Date: 19th January 2006

Representations : Yes

Name Address Letter date Mr and Mrs McNab Touchstone, Polvinister Road 14th January Polvinister Area C/o Touchstone, Polvinister Road 15th January Residents’ Association E. Callender-Cameron Cherry Tree Cottage, Old Drove Road, Glencruitten 7th January

Summary of points raised:

• Glencruitten Road is at capacity and the amount of traffic is now a danger to pedestrians and cyclists. Glencruitten Road is one of the most dangerous in the area. More than 65 houses have been built off this road in the past seven years.

Comment: The Area Roads Manager has not raised objections on grounds of the capacity of Glencruitten Road.

• The development as a whole is too dense and out of character with the essentially rural surroundings.

Comment: The development of the site could be a positive visual addition to the area if skilfully designed. `

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\1\6\4\AI00029461\2395WRRW1505061.DOC 4

Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Agenda Item 5d

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Cllr A MacDougall PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 1st February 2006 OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES Committee Date - 7th June 2006

30th May 2006

Reference Number: 06/00202/DET Applicants Name: Fiona Veronica Brown Application Type: Detailed application Application Description: Erection of new Post Office and stores with integral living accommodation – amended design to previous approval 05/01923/DET Location: The Post Office, Pennyghael, Isle of Mull

(A ) THE APPLICATION

Development Requiring Express Planning Permission.

• Demolition of existing Post Office building • Erection of new Post Office and stores with integral living accommodation

Other specified operations

• Connection to existing private sewer/septic tank • Connection to existing private water supply • Access and Parking Use of existing access from B849 using existing access and car parking area and new car parking space under the building.

(B) BACKGROUND, PLANNING HISTORY AND LEGAL ISSUES

Planning permission was granted on 22 December 2005 (Ref. 05/01923/DET) for erection of a new Post Office and Stores with integral living accommodation.

There were two procedural errors in processing the above application:-

a) It was submitted as an outline but during the processing was changed to a detailed application. b) Due to an oversight, a letter of objection from the owner of the Kinloch Hotel was not taken into consideration and material issues relating to daylight were overlooked in the report.

This application has since been subject to a challenge by judicial review in the Court of Session. The court has granted an interim order suspending the December permission. The judicial review process is at the time of preparing this report still ongoing however it is anticipated that the December permission will be found to have been flawed and that it will be declared invalid by the court. A number of letters have been received from the objector’s solicitors. They recommend that this application is not considered by the Committee until after the Court of Session case. After consultation with the Council’s legal department it is considered that the Court Case regarding the December permission and the processing of this application are separate processes and that this application should be decided now by the Committee.

The current application has been submitted in order to overcome the difficulties with assessing the above permission. Whilst it is described by the applicant as amended design to previous approval it is in this report being assessed as a new application as though no previous permission had been granted on this site.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\8\4\5\AI00029548\0202DETWRPM1004060.DOC 1

Page 62

It is recommended that planning permission is granted subject to the conditions detailed below and subject to a Section 75 legal agreement which requires that a) permission ref 05/01923/DET granted 22.12.05 is not implemented; and that b) the residential accommodation shall not be sold separately from the Post Office and shop business.

(D) DETERMINING ISSUES AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

The Proposal Detailed planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing Post Office and shop building at Pennyghael, Isle of Mull, and the erection of a new Post Office and Class 1 shop building including living accommodation above. The site lies adjacent to the Kinloch Hotel, situated on the main A849 Craignure to Fionnphort road, and is within a small, loose cluster of development to the east of the main centre of Pennyghael village. The present Post Office building is of little architectural merit, and the principle of its demolition and replacement is considered to be acceptable. The present owner of the Post Office has attempted to sell the business but has experienced difficulties in finding a buyer due to the lack of available accommodation locally for any prospective purchaser. Therefore permission is sought for a replacement building that includes integral living accommodation, which should be tied to the Post Office business.

Local Plan

The site lies outwith the settlement boundary of Pennyghael as defined in Policy HO6 of the adopted Local Plan and its associated Proposals Maps. Therefore, Policy HO8 applies, which states that in existing clusters of development the Council will encourage further housing, including infill, rounding- off, and redevelopment, where it relates to existing development, provided that there are no servicing or environmental constraints. Policy STRAT4A of the adopted Local Plan states that all proposals for single or small scale residential development in the island countryside will be examined in terms of infrastructure and servicing implications, and that in scenic areas and coasts careful consideration will be given to the design, setting and scale of development. The site is relatively restricted in nature and will not benefit from the level of residential amenity that would normally be expected for a full-time dwellinghouse. However, the justification for the development is the need for accommodation tied to the Post Office business and it is therefore considered appropriate to permit residential development on the site provided that it is occupied by persons involved in the running of the Post Office business and it is subject to a legal agreement that would prevent its sale separately from this business.

The site is within a Regional Scenic Area, where Policy RUR1A states that the Council will seek to resist prominent or sporadic development that would have an adverse environmental impact. In this area, Policy RUR2 requires proposals to be justified against the following criteria: (a) environmental impact; (b) locational/operational need; (c) economic benefit; (d) infrastructure and servicing implications. As the proposal is for a redevelopment on the site of an existing building rather than development of a new “greenfield” site, it is not considered to represent any adverse environmental impact in terms of the landscape character or settlement pattern of the surrounding area. Therefore, it is not required to justify the development against locational/operational need and economic benefit. However, the applicant has submitted a statement of occupational/locational need in support of the application, stating that the Post Office requires integral living accommodation to operate as a self- contained unit. Furthermore, Policy STRAT5 of the adopted Local Plan states that special consideration will be given to the encouragement of new development and to the provision or maintenance of services and facilities in order to maintain the viability of communities in what is considered to be a vulnerable rural fringe area. The Pennyghael Post Office can be considered such a facility that is vitally important for the local community. The proposed living accommodation can be tied to the Post Office business through the use of a section 75 agreement. This would underpin the justification for the development. There are no adverse infrastructure and servicing implications; however these are discussed in more depth below.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\8\4\5\AI00029548\0202DETWRPM1004060.DOC 2

Page 63

The Finalised Draft Local Plan identifies the site and the surrounding area as a Rural Opportunity Area. The Council’s Statutory Plans Unit have advised that no representations have been received to this designation, therefore it has material weight in determining the application. Policy STRAT DC 4 of the approved Structure Plan states that encouragement shall be given in this area to small scale developments in suitable sites which, in terms of siting and design, will visually integrate with the landscape and settlement pattern. The proposals are considered to be in accordance with this Policy.

Daylight and amenity

I have reviewed the possible impact of the proposed building on the Kinloch Hotel. Circular 42/1980, which h came into operation on 23rd December 1980, gave Planning Authorities a broad responsibility for daylighting (which had formerly been the responsibility of Building Control). The Circular expected the Planning Authority to be more flexible than under the Building Regulations and not to be concerned that individual rooms will have a specified level of daylighting. The adopted Local Plan contains no guidance on this matter. The Argyll and Bute Finalised Draft Local Plan (Appendix A), p 107 states that “when considering a site for a new house or an extension to an existing house, applicants should ensure that the house will not significantly affect daylight and direct sunlight to existing neighbouring properties. Applicants should refer to published standards Site Layout for Sunlight and daylight BRE 1991. Where a proposed development has a significant adverse effect on daylight and sunlight to existing neighbouring properties planning permission will be refused.” Some weight can be given to this plan.

One window in the east elevation of the Kinloch Hotel could be affected by the development (see objections). This is a small sash and case window which provides light to a small room with extensive coombe ceilings. The window is in the side elevation and not on the main frontage. Currently the lower half of the window is covered up and the room is relatively dark and the window looks out onto the roof of the existing shop and Post Office.

The applicant has carried out a BRE test of 25 degrees from the middle of the window. The proposals fail this test as the new eaves/roof would impinge on light to 38 degrees. This does not meet the guidance in the BRE report but this should be taken with a degree of flexibility. This is not a major room in the flat and it is not in a main elevation. It is not considered that the loss of daylight to this room is a significant matter or sufficient grounds for refusal of the application.

Design

The proposed design of the replacement building is somewhat utilitarian and not considered to be of any great architectural merit; however it is considered to be an improvement on the present building, although larger in terms of mass and form. It is two-storey and broadly the same height as the adjacent Kinloch Hotel, with marginally lower ridge height and eaves level so as to appear subservient to the hotel building, and is slightly stepped back. The design has been dictated by the constraints of the site and available land, and the applicant has advised that it is not possible to make changes that would be desirable were these constraints not present. No details have been submitted with regard to materials, however these can be controlled through the use of conditions to ensure a high quality of finish to match the adjacent Hotel. A previous planning approval on the site, reference 05/01923/DET (described in more detail in the appendix) is considered to represent a preferable design, including a more traditional gable-ended form rather than a hipped-roof design. However, it became apparent that procedural errors were made in the processing of this previous application, in particular, the issue of daylighting impacts to a window in the east elevation of the Kinloch Hotel were overlooked. The current application was therefore submitted in order to regularise the procedural errors previously made and with an amended design to take account of the daylighting issues. The present application will have an impact on daylighting to a computer/store room in the Kinloch Hotel, however it is not considered that this is sufficient grounds for refusal of the application when weighed against other considerations. This issue is considered in more detail in the appendix below.

Servicing

The existing private water supply is to be used, and the applicant has provided a full water report carried out by a qualified hydrologist, which states that the quantity of the supply is adequate, although the supply has not been subject to regular maintenance, and a water tank to serve the hotel is recommended. The Council’s Environmental Health Department have confirmed that this is acceptable but have recommended that the intake screen and dam are cleared of vegetation and

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\8\4\5\AI00029548\0202DETWRPM1004060.DOC 3

Page 64

detritus and that a programme of maintenance is implemented. Measures relating to water quality are also recommended.

The existing access serving the Hotel and Post Office is to be used, where parking is available in front of the buildings. In addition, a car standing area will be incorporated within the proposed building, in place of the existing car parking space on the site. The proposed development would not be expected to result in any significant change in vehicular use of the existing access, therefore these arrangements are considered to be acceptable; the Area Roads Engineer has raised no objections to the proposals.

(E) CONCLUSIONS

• The proposals represent a redevelopment on the site of an existing building; • The proposal accords with Policy HO8 of the adopted Local Plan, which encourages redevelopment in existing clusters of development, • The proposal is not considered to represent an adverse environmental impact and therefore accords with Policies RUR1a and RUR2 of the adopted Local Plan; • The proposal is supported by Policy STRAT5 of the adopted Local Plan, which encourages new development and the maintenance of services and facilities in order to maintain the viability of communities in this vulnerable rural fringe area. The proposal will provide living accommodation for potential future operators of the Pennyghael Post Office, and can be tied to the business through a legal agreement; • While the proposed design is somewhat utilitarian, although acceptable in this location it is nevertheless considered to be an improvement on the present building, although larger in terms of mass and form; • The present application will have an impact on daylighting to a minor room in the Kinloch Hotel, however it is not considered that this is sufficient grounds for refusal of the application when weighed against other considerations; • There are no adverse servicing or infrastructure constraints. • It is therefore recommended that planning permission is granted subject to the conditions detailed below and subject to a Section 75 legal agreement which requires that a) permission ref 05/01923/DET granted 22.12.05 is not implemented (see appendix for justification); and that b) the residential accommodation shall not be sold separately to the Post Office and shop business. • According to the Council’s Legal Department there is no legal barrier to prevent the processing of this application notwithstanding the possibility of an Interdict.

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning

Contact: Ian McIntyre 01631 567951

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\8\4\5\AI00029548\0202DETWRPM1004060.DOC 4

Page 65

CONDITIONS AND REASONS RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 06/00202/DET

1. Standard.

Reason: Standard.

2. Occupation of the residential unit hereby approved shall be limited to a person or persons solely or mainly employed in the running of the Pennyghael Post Office and shop.

Reason: To underpin the justification for this proposal and in accordance with the occupancy applied for; a house in this area not normally complying with Development Plan Policy by virtue of its lack of amenity and curtilage.

3. The kitchen window on the west elevation, the living room window on the north elevation, and the living room window on the south elevation of the building hereby approved shall be glazed in good quality double or triple glazing prior to the first occupation of the residential accommodation, and shall thereafter be maintained with such glazing in perpetuity.

Reason: In order to minimise noise and disturbance from the adjacent licensed premises that may otherwise result in low levels of amenity for residents of the residential accommodation hereby approved.

4. Prior to the commencement of development, full details of all external materials and finishes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Such details should include a roof of natural slate or good quality slate substitute, walls finished in white wetdash render, and timber-framed windows.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity, in order to integrate the development with its surroundings and maintain the character of the area.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\8\4\5\AI00029548\0202DETWRPM1004060.DOC 5

Page 66

APPENDIX RELATIVE TO 06/00202/DET

A. POLICY OVERVIEW

In terms of Section 25 of the Act the following Development Plan Policies are applicable:

Argyll and Bute Structure Plan

STRAT DC 8 Landscape and Development Control

A) Development which, by reason of location, siting, scale, form, design or cumulative impact, damages or undermines 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. Outwith the National Park particularly important and vulnerable landscapes in Argyll and Bute are those associated with:

1. National Scenic Areas 2. Historic landscapes with close links with archaeology and built heritage and designed landscapes. 3. Landward and coastal areas with semi-wilderness or isolated or panoramic quality.

B) Enhancement to landscape will also be encouraged in association with development and land use proposals.

Mull, Coll and Tiree Local Plan

STRAT 4 A presumption in favour of single or small scale residential development in the countryside except:

(i) in locations identified as being important for nature, heritage or archaeological conservation. (ii) In areas of better quality or ‘in-bye’ agricultural land. (iii) In the Tobermory, Dervaig, Lochdon and Iona settlement areas.

STRAT 4A All proposals for single or small scale residential development in the Islands countryside will be examined in terms of infrastructure and servicing implications and in scenic areas and coasts careful consideration will be given to the design, setting and scale of proposals. In addition, in the areas covered by STRAT 4 proposals will require to be justified against the following criteria:

(i) Locational/operational need (ii) Economic benefit (iii) Sterilisation of natural resources (iv) Environmental impact (v) Effect on conservation of natural and heritage resources (vi) Alternative policies and proposals contained in the local plan.

RUR 1 The Council will seek to maintain and where possible enhance the landscape quality of National and Regional Scenic Areas and coasts and areas of local landscape significance and within these areas will resist prominent or sporadic development which would have an adverse environmental impact:

(a) National Scenic Area : Loch Na Keal

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\8\4\5\AI00029548\0202DETWRPM1004060.DOC 6

Page 67

(b) Regional Scenic Areas : West and South Mull (c) Regional Scenic Coasts : North West Argyll (d) Areas of local landscape significance : (I) Tobermory Bay, Mull; (ii) Loch a’Chumhainn/Calgary, Mull; (iii) Grass Point area, Mull; (iv) Tiree (parts); (v) West Coll; (vi) certain areas of semi-natural broadleaved woodland and mixed plantation woodland.

RUR 2 Proposals for development in or affecting National Scenic Areas, Regional Scenic Areas and Coasts or areas of local landscape significance will require to be justified against the following criteria

(a) economic benefit (b) infrastructure implications (c) specific locational/operational need (d) environmental impact

HO8 Where there are existing clusters of development outwith the settlements defined in POL HO(6), the District Council will encourage further housing (including infill, “rounding-off” and redevelopment) relating to existing development, provided there are no servicing or environmental constraints.

Government guidance

Circular 42/1980: The Planning Authority should ensure that development proposals will allow a SDD advice on ‘reasonable measure’ of daylight to reach the windows of habitable rooms in daylighting adjacent dwellings in order to protect the wider character and amenity of the area.

Argyll and Bute Finalised Draft Local Plan Appendix A: Sustainable siting and design principles

Developments 14.1 Householders can legitimately expect a reasonable amount of direct Affecting Daylight daylight into all or at least some living room windows, and this should be to Neighbouring protected as far as possible in order to maintain reasonable levels of Properties household amenity.

14.2 When considering a site for a new house, or an extension to an existing house, applicants should ensure that the house will not significantly affect daylight and direct sunlight to existing neighbouring properties. Applicants should refer to published standards “Site Layout Planning For Sunlight and Daylight” BRE 1991.

14.3 Where a proposed development has a significant adverse affect on daylight and direct sunlight to existing neighbouring properties planning permission will be refused.

(B) OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

(e) Site History

05/01923/DET Erection of new Post Office and Stores with integral living accommodation (replace existing) – granted 22nd December 2005.

(ii) Consultations

Response Date Comment Area Roads Engineer 19.4.06 No objections

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\8\4\5\AI00029548\0202DETWRPM1004060.DOC 7

Page 68

Environmental Health 6.3.06, 29.3.06, No objections subject to 10.4.06 conditions

(iii) Publicity and Representations

Advert Type : Article 9 Vacant Land Closing Date: 2nd March 2006

Representations : Yes

Name Address Letter date Anderson Strathern Solicitors, 1 Rutland Court, Edinburgh, EH3 28th February, 3rd acting for Mr Charles Pease, 8EY. March, 11th April, 30th Kinloch Hotel, Pennyghael May 2006 Mr Charles Pease Kinloch Hotel, Pennyghael, Isle of Email of 14th May 2006 Mull JR and SC Morgan Craigrowan, Pennyghael, Isle of 28th February 2006 Mull Fiona Brown (applicant) Tigh na h’Abhann, Pennyghael, 7th March, 9th March, Isle of Mull 20th March, 11th April, 5th May, 12th May, 13th May 2006

Summary of points raised:

• The existing water supply is insufficient to serve the proposed development. A professional opinion from Adrian Laycock is provided, which states that the existing arrangement are not adequate for any expansion of demand without incurring water shortages, which could be expected to arise one year in three. Such shortages would have a detrimental impact on the Kinloch Hotel, which shares the supply, and consequent impacts on this business and associated employment, plus other local businesses such as B&Bs, for which the Hotel provides a social function. Due to this issue, the proposal is contrary to Policy LP SERV 4 (Water Supply) of the Finalised Draft Local Plan. • COMMENT: The professional opinion provided is expressed in the contents of a letter but no water report has been provided to substantiate the claim. However, the applicant has provided a full water report carried out by a qualified hydrologist, which states that the quantity of the supply is adequate to serve the proposed development without negative impacts on existing users, although it found that the supply has not been subject to regular maintenance, and a water tank to serve the hotel is recommended. The Council’s Environmental Health Department have confirmed that this report is acceptable, being of the standard that is normally accepted, and having been carried out by an appropriately qualified person. There is no justification for doubting its contents in the absence of a full hydrologist’s report (as opposed to a brief professional opinion) that contradicts its contents. The proposal is not therefore contrary to the quoted Draft Policy.

• The water supply to the Kinloch Hotel is direct feed and does not have any form of storage. The Pennyghael Post Office has a right to utilise the water supply but only to the point that the hotel supply is not jeopardised. The Kinloch Hotel places a considerable demand on this supply at peak season, using a large volume of water for guests, staff, meals, bar, washing and laundry, etc. The existing supply is thus inadequate to serve any further development, and the existing supply will fail if further development is to proceed, forcing the closure of the Hotel. • COMMENT: As described above, the applicant has provided a full water report carried out by a qualified hydrologist, which states that the quantity of the supply is adequate to serve the proposed development without negative impacts on existing users, although it found that the supply has not been subject to regular maintenance, and a water tank to serve the hotel is recommended. The Council’s Environmental Health Department have advised that this report is acceptable and no substantiated evidence has been produced that would refute its contents. Legal rights over the supply are a separate matter and are beyond the remit of planning control. Furthermore, the applicant has advised that she has experienced no water shortages in the past 20 years.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\8\4\5\AI00029548\0202DETWRPM1004060.DOC 8

Page 69

• Disruption caused to the Kinloch Hotel by water shortages resulting from the development would have a serious effect on the business of a local B&B, Craigrowan, and guests would have to travel further for evening meals, therefore potentially causing them to reconsider their choice of accommodation. • COMMENT: As detailed above, the water supply is considered to be adequate. Possible impacts on other local businesses are not a material planning consideration.

• The proposal is contrary to Policy RUR2 of the adopted Local Plan, which requires proposals to be assessed against locational/operational need. It is contended that no such need has been established. • COMMENT: As it is not considered that the proposal will result in an adverse environmental impact, as detailed above, it is not considered necessary for the development to be justified against locational/operational need criteria. Furthermore, the applicant has submitted a claim of need, stating that the shop and Post Office have been on the market for over 2 years but that all interested parties have withdrawn due to lack of suitable accommodation. Policy STRAT5 of the adopted Local Plan states that special consideration will be given to the encouragement of new development and to the provision or maintenance of services and facilities in order to maintain the viability of communities in what is considered to be a vulnerable rural fringe area. The Pennyghael Post Office can be considered such a facility that is vitally important for the local community.

• The proposal will have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the Kinloch Hotel. It will have a detrimental impact on the amount of privacy and light enjoyed by the owner of the hotel, who occupies a flat overlooking the existing shop. The proposed development will cause excessive overshadowing and loss of daylight due to its height and design. In this regard Appendix A of the Finalised Draft Local Plan is a relevant material consideration, which states that approval will not be granted where the siting and scale of development significantly affects the amenity of adjoining properties, and that care must be taken to avoid overdevelopment. It also states that direct daylight to habitable rooms should be protected as far as possible and developments with significant adverse effects on daylight and direct sunlight will be refused. It is contended that the present application fails to comply with this guidance. • COMMENT: This objection is covered above in the main report. There will be no significant impact on privacy and the loss of daylight to a secondary room not in a main elevation is insufficient to warrant refusal.

• The design of the proposed building is of little architectural merit, while the adjoining Kinloch Hotel is of vernacular style, architecture and design. This contrast in style will be aesthetically displeasing and contrary to SPP1, which states that design is a material planning consideration and can be justification for refusal. Attention is also brought to PAN67, which states that new housing should reflect its context, reinforce local identity, and integrate with the settlement pattern of the area, and to “Designing Places”. • COMMENT: The proposed design of the replacement building is acknowledged to be somewhat utilitarian and not considered to be of any great architectural merit; however it is considered to be an improvement on the present building, although larger in terms of mass and form. It is two- storey and broadly the same height as the adjacent Kinloch Hotel, with marginally lower ridge height and eaves level so as to appear subservient, and is also set back slightly from the Hotel. No details have been submitted with regard to materials, however these can be controlled through the use of conditions to ensure a high quality of finish to match the adjacent Hotel. The physical constraints of the site and the issue of daylighting to a window in the Kinloch Hotel (discussed above) preclude the possibility of substantially altering the design. This possibility has been discussed with the applicant who has confirmed her wish that the application be considered on the basis of the submitted design.

• The application seeks to amend a flawed planning consent (ref 05/01923/DET). Any amendment to a flawed planning consent, which is the subject of ongoing judicial review proceedings in the Court of Session, would in turn be invalid. Determination of the present application should therefore be postponed pending the outcome of the judicial review. • COMMENT: This issue is considered in the main report above. It is acknowledged that the previous consent is flawed. However, the present application has been dealt with as a full detailed application and advertised and notified accordingly, with all relevant consultees consulted. The application has not been dealt with as an amended design application, where the only issue for consideration is the design itself with the principle of development already

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\8\4\5\AI00029548\0202DETWRPM1004060.DOC 9

Page 70

established. No weight has been attached in this report to the previous application as a justification for approval of the present application. The reference to the previous permission in the description of the present application is for the purposes of clarity only, in order to make it clear that the site and nature of development is the same. As the present application is being treated on its own merits, there is not considered to be any reason to delay its determination; proceedings relating to the previous application relate only to the validity of that application. However, in view of the procedural errors made with the processing of the first application it is recommended that if Members are minded to approve the present application that this be subject to a section 75 agreement to ensure that the previous, flawed permission will not be implemented. The applicant has indicated a willingness to enter into such an agreement.

• The area designated for parking currently provides access to the rear of the hotel and to the garage of the Kinloch Hotel, and the proposed parking would therefore impede access. The proposed development would be situated on a wayleave serving the Kinloch Hotel • COMMENT: The application site is entirely within the applicant’s ownership, and any issues of access over that land is beyond the remit of planning control.

• The motives for the project are entirely financial and are without consideration for the Hotel. • COMMENT: As described above, the applicant has attempted to sell the Post Office business for over 2 years but all interested parties have withdrawn due to lack of suitable accommodation.

• Construction of the development and resulting noise, dust and general disruption would jeopardise the ability of the Kinloch Hotel to trade. It is requested that should development go ahead, hours of work are restricted to 9am to 5pm, Monday to Friday. • COMMENT: Issues arising from construction are beyond the remit of planning control.

• It is inappropriate to permit a residential property in such close proximity to a licensed bar and the passageway giving access to it. Issues of noise and disturbance may arise. • COMMENT: The Council’s Environmental Health Department have advised that the noise levels from the Kinloch Hotel would not be expected to be the same as might be expected from a Public House, and that they would have no objections provided that the residential property was tied to the Post Office business and that good quality double or triple glazing be required by condition for windows facing the Hotel. The applicant has advised that the Kinloch is generally quite and has no late license.

• In determining the previous application on the site significant weight was given to the premise that the applicant has been unable to sell the post office due to a lack of accommodation to accompany it, and that accommodation is therefore required to ensure the continued viability of the post office. It is contended that the post office plays a limited role in the local community and is not currently viable. It is suggested that the applicant’s house and the post office should be sold together as one property to resolve the issue. • COMMENT: The determination of the previous application is not directly relevant as the present application is being treated as an entirely fresh application from first principles, rather than an amendment to the previous application. Moreover, Policy STRAT5 of the adopted Local Plan clearly states that special consideration will be given to the encouragement of new development and to the provision or maintenance of services and facilities in order to maintain the viability of communities in what is considered to be a vulnerable rural fringe area. The Post Office is considered to be a valuable community facility. The application requires to be considered on its own merits and it is inappropriate and unreasonable to require the applicant’s house to be tied to the Post Office business as this was not required at the time of its approval.

• Objectors should be granted the opportunity to voice their objections at a hearing, and Members are recommended to undertake a site visit before making a determination. • COMMENT: Members are advised to note this suggestion, however it is not considered that this is essential in this instance. This is a matter for the discretion of Members.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\8\4\5\AI00029548\0202DETWRPM1004060.DOC 10

Page 71

NOTE TO APPLICANT RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 06/00202/DET

The Council’s Environmental Health Manager has advised as follows:

Private water supply

It is recommended that the intake screen and dam are cleared of all vegetation and detritus and that a programme of planned maintenance is implemented to ensure that the water flow into and out of the water catchment area is not in any way restricted.

It is strongly recommended that the applicant installs a suitable filtration unit and a point of entry Ultra Violet treatment system for the purposes of ensuring microbiological water quality.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\8\4\5\AI00029548\0202DETWRPM1004060.DOC 11

Page 72

This page is intentionally left blank Page 73 Page 74 Page 75 Agenda Item 5e

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Councillor D. MacIntyre PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 13th January 2006 OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES Committee Date - 7th June 2006

18th May 2006

Reference Number: 06/00110/OUT Applicants Name: Mr E Robertson Application Type: Outline Planning Permission Application Description: Erection of a dwelling Location: Land at Ardoran Lerags.

SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT 1

This application was continued at the May Committee to allow the Committee to consider further information concerning: a) the possibility of identifying an alternative site in the rural opportunity area b) whether a claim of operational need arising from the marina and holiday letting business could be sustained.

I have revisited the application site, reviewed the potential of the rural opportunity area, assessed alternative sites and given consideration to any possible business justification. My conclusions and recommendations are as follows:

1. The rural opportunity area includes a large area not owned by the applicant. Within the whole rural opportunity area there may be potential for further development, but there appears to be no potential within the part owned by the applicant as set out in my previous report.

2. I have visited the proposed alternative sites on the sheep fank and along the access road. These sites are in or immediately adjacent to sensitive countryside and would be prominent to the extent that I am unable to recommend their development. I remain of the view that the sensible approach here is to form a group or node of development in the vicinity of the existing house. That node should be designed to, if possible, include additional development which may be required by other family members given that I have been approached by the Applicant about his brother’s aspirations to also build a house on the farm.

3. The applicants have submitted a letter from their solicitor dated 10th May 2006 which responds to the question as to whether the marina business presents a case for operational need. This includes the need for someone on site to provide keys, deal with power cuts and change calor gas. There are three chalets on site and last year 57 boats were wintered on site. I consider that this is a small business which could be serviced from the existing house, and which does not justify a further house which would override other planning considerations. In addition, it would be difficult to provide this service from the proposed site rather than from a dwelling within the marina.

4. I remain of the view that the current application should be refused for the reasons in my May report and that there is a suitable site closer to the farm house which accords with the adopted and emerging local plans.

I consider that a departure from Policy HO 25 of the Adopted Lorn Local Plan is not justified for the reasons noted above and recommend refusal for the following reasons.

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning

Author: Robert Walker 01631 567954 Contact: Ian McIntyre 01631 567951

Page 76

This page is intentionally left blank Page 77

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Councillor D. MacIntyre PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 13th January 2006 OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES Committee Date - 3rd May 2006

19th April 2006

Reference Number: 06/00110/OUT Applicants Name: Mr E Robertson Application Type: Outline Planning Permission Application Description: Erection of a dwelling Location: Land at Ardoran Lerags.

(A ) THE APPLICATION

Development Requiring Express Planning Permission.

• Erection of a dwelling. • Provision of water supply and drainage (no details given)

Other Specified Operations

• Formation of an access way.

(B ) RECOMMENDATION

The application is recommended for refusal as a departure from the approved development plan.

(C ) DETERMINING ISSUES AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Development Plans.

The application is a departure from the provisions of the Adopted Lorn Local Plan because under Policy HO 25 development in the Oban Catchment Area permission can only be approved if it is infilling, rounding off or redevelopment or if there is a substantiated locational/operational need. In my opinion the proposed development does not meet any of those descriptions of development.

The site is within a Rural Opportunity Area in the Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan. The Development Plans team has advised as follows: “Four objections were received relating to the principle of Rural Opportunity Areas contained within the Argyll and Bute Local Plan - Finalised Draft.

Objection 1 was received from Ian Irvine and Tracey Peedle. This objection was founded on the premise that Rural Opportunity Areas would encourage sporadic, isolated and visually in sensitive development to the detriment of the rural landscape of Argyll. Following negotiations this objection in principle has been withdrawn on the condition that two proposed Rural Opportunity Areas and an area of Sensitive Countryside are re-zoned as Very Sensitive Countryside to the north east of Cladich, Lochaweside. I am satisfied that this objection can now be considered to only relate to these three areas and not to the principle of Rural Opportunity Areas across Argyll and Bute.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\2\6\4\AI00029462\0110RWWR1004060.DOC 1

Page 78

agricultural land in Appendix A of the written statement. I take the view that this objection can be overcome, in anticipation of formal modification of the Plan, through the consideration process for planning applications including assessment that concludes that no significant negative impact would result from the development on an agricultural unit, including no significant loss of better quality agricultural land or loss of access to such land.

Objection 3 was received from Scottish Natural Heritage. The objection was founded on the premise that Rural Opportunity Areas would encourage development, where they overlap, on SSSI designations and other European designations such as the Natura 2000 sites. I take the view that this objection can be overcome, in anticipation of formal modification of the Plan, through not utilising Rural Opportunity Areas as a material consideration in the consideration process for planning applications within SSSI designations and other European designations such as the Natura 2000 sites.

Objection 4 was received from Scottish Natural Heritage. The objection was founded on the premise that Rural Opportunity Areas would encourage ribbon development within rural areas of Argyll and Bute. I take the view that this objection can be overcome, in anticipation of formal modification of the Plan, through the consideration process for planning applications which specifically assess how any new development fits in to the existing settlement and landscape pattern, and detailing why it does not constitute and would not lead to an inappropriate pattern of ribbon development emerging.” The rural opportunity area in this case has not been the subject of further objections following public consultation on the Draft Plan and it may therefore be given material weight in the consideration of the application.

The governing policy for rural opportunity areas is Structure Plan Policy STRAT DC 4, and Finalised Local Plan Policy LP HOU 1, which encourages small-scale development on appropriate infilling and rounding-off sites. As noted above, the development does not satisfy these descriptions. The policy does not rule out development in the open countryside on suitable sites which, in terms of siting and design, will visually integrate with the landscape and settlement pattern, but in this case, I consider that the proposal will not be satisfactorily integrated into the landscape.

The proposed site is in a prominent position in open pasture at the head of, and above, the flat valley floor which extends inland from Loch Feochan. It is visually separate from any of the established groups of buildings, such as Lagnacille and is generally contrary to the pattern of development in the Lerags valley which is one of relatively tight clusters directly associated with the valley road. In this case I consider that the proposal is in an inappropriate location in the Rural Opportunity Area though there could be a suitable location elsewhere in the Rural Opportunity Area. In this respect the proposal fails to meet the advice given in PAN 72 which specifically states that, “Some areas are so prominent that it is accepted that any development would be detrimental to the surrounding landscape.”

I have visited the land holding with the applicant and recommended a location between the farmhouse and a stand of trees which would be practical, in accordance with policy as rounding off, and more related to the settlement pattern.

Locational/Operational Need.

The applicant has claimed that the house is needed for the management of the farm (not a registered croft) on which it would be sited. The Council’s advisor on animal welfare has said, I have examined the operational need application attached to the above proposal. I differ from the opinion of Mr Roberson’s advisors in a number of areas.

It is claimed (correctly) that cattle need particular attention at calving time, but I understand from discussion with you that the family already own a house at the marina which is in easy walking distance of the fields in which the cattle would calve and I am aware that they have been operating this enterprise for several years. This degree of proximity would be more than adequate to safeguard the welfare of the cattle (which are Highland cattle if my memory is correct-a breed which is promoted for it's ease of calving and physical toughness).

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\2\6\4\AI00029462\0110RWWR1004060.DOC 2

Page 79

The livestock enterprise consists of 20 hill cows and followers. It would appear that some form of gimmering (up to 100 head) is anticipated. This makes no demand for breeding and welfare needs and would normally be achieved by a daily inspection which would take in the cattle (including the bull which will be run with the cows for a substantial percentage of the year). Over and above this routine would be the need to provide normal care (parasite prevention, shearing etc.) I do not agree that this necessitates 0.70 of a labour unit. To put this in perspective, a commercially hired stocksperson in Argyll would normally be expected to look after 700-1000 breeding sheep (depending on breed and situation) and 40 suckler cattle.

I fully accept the traceability and recording needs identified by the SAC. I am at a loss to understand how these might be better achieved by the construction of this dwelling. They are statutory and non-negotiable. The issue of access is also one which now has a statutory basis and will probably have a seasonal impact on most coastal farms in Argyll. The economic impact analysis attached to the consultation papers for the enabling legislation did not recognise biosecurity and access as adding to the economic burden on agriculture.

The holding only extends to 68.32 ha and is relatively compact. There are therefore no exceptional monitoring requirements which might cause me to revise my opinion that the operational need has not been adequately demonstrated. It appears then that there is no justifiable claim for operational need which can be reasonably used to override the other material considerations noted above.

Access and Servicing

Access will be via an upgraded track from an existing access on C33 Lerags Road, The Roads Engineer has no objections.

Water will be a private supply (Environmental Health Officer has requested details) and foul drainage to a septic tank.

(D ) CONCLUSION

I consider that a departure from Policy HO 25 of the Adopted Lorn Local Plan is not justified for the reasons noted above and recommend refusal for the following reasons.

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning

Author: Robert Walker 01631 567954 Contact: Ian McIntyre 01631 567951

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\2\6\4\AI00029462\0110RWWR1004060.DOC 3

Page 80

REASONS RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 06/00110/OUT

1. The proposed development is contrary to Policy HO 25 of the adopted Lorn Local Plan (Second Alteration) 1993 in that it is within the Oban Catchment area and does not constitute infilling, rounding off or redevelopment and whilst a claim for agricultural need has been advanced it has not been substantiated to the extent that the established settlement policy should be overridden.

2. The proposed site is in a prominent and isolated position in a wide landscape and does not accord with the settlement pattern of this area which is one of tight clusters alongside the valley road. It is in a location which would not integrate with the landscape or the settlement pattern and would therefore be contrary to the advice in PAN 72 as it is an unsympathetic siting not integrated with the settlement pattern. and to Policy Strat DC 4 of the Argyll and Bute Structure Plan 2002 which only supports development in Rural Opportunity Areas in the open countryside where such integration is achieved. The proposed is also considered to be contrary to Policies LP HOU1 and LPENV1 and LP ENV19 of the Argyll and Bute Consultative Draft Local Plan.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\2\6\4\AI00029462\0110RWWR1004060.DOC 4

Page 81

APPENDIX RELATIVE TO 06/00110/OUT

A. POLICY OVERVIEW

In terms of Section 25 of the Act the following Development Plan Policies are applicable:

Argyll and Bute Structure Plan

STRAT DC 8 Landscape and Development Control

B) Enhancement to landscape will also be encouraged in association with development and land use proposals.

STRAT DC 4 Rural Opportunity Areas

Within ROAs encouragement shall be given to small-scale developments on suitable sites which, in terms of siting and design, will visually integrate with the landscape and settlement pattern; this may include small scale development in the open countryside.

Lorn Local Plan

HO 25 (a) Within the catchment area there will be a presumption against housing development except when it is infill, rounding off or redevelopment related to the existing built form.

Informal Council Policy

TA 5 This allows an existing private way to be used or extended to serve up to 2 new dwelling houses provided that the total number of dwellings served by the private way does not exceed 10.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\2\6\4\AI00029462\0110RWWR1004060.DOC 5

Page 82

ARGYLL AND BUTE CONSULTATIVE DRAFT LOCAL PLAN

Policy LP HOU 1

General Housing Development

(A) There is a general presumption in favour of housing development other than those categories, scales and locations of development listed in (B) below. Housing development, for which there is a presumption in favour, will be supported unless there is an unacceptable environmental, servicing or access impact.

(B) There is a general presumption against housing development when it involves:

In the settlements:

1. large-scale housing development in small towns and villages and minor settlements; 2. medium-scale housing development in the minor settlements.

In the countryside development control zones: 3. large and medium scale housing development in all the countryside development control zones; 4. small-scale housing development in the Greenbelt, Very Sensitive Countryside and in open/ undeveloped areas within Countryside Around Settlements and Sensitive Countryside.

On croft lands: 5. more than one dwelling house on a bare-land croft; or more than one additional dwelling house on an individual croft containing an existing dwelling house; or a new dwelling house proposed on a croft where this involves the subdivision of the croft.

(C) Housing development, for which there is a general presumption against, will not be supported unless an exceptional case is successfully demonstrated in accordance with those exceptions listed for each development control zone in the justification for this policy.

(D) Housing Developments are also subject to consistency with other policies of both the Structure and Local Plan. Scales Of Housing Development

Small-scale housing development will not exceed 5 dwelling units. Medium-scale housing development between 6 and 30 dwelling units inclusive Large-scale housing development exceeding 30 dwelling units.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\2\6\4\AI00029462\0110RWWR1004060.DOC 6

Page 83

Policy LP ENV 1

Development Impact on the General Environment

In all development control zones the Council will assess applications for planning permission for their impact on both the natural, human and built environment. When considering development proposals, the following general considerations will be taken into account, namely: (A) Likely impacts, including cumulative impacts, on amenity, access to the countryside and the environment as a whole; (B) The location and nature of the proposed development, including land use, layout, design, external appearance, density, landscaping, open space, safety hazards, flood risk, crime prevention measures and privacy of existing and proposed development; (C) The relationship to the road and public transport network, means of access, particularly access for the physically impaired, emergency services, parking provision, and likely scale and type of traffic generation; (D) The availability of infrastructure and relationship to existing community facilities; (E) Water resources and the marine environment (particularly pollution controlled waters by any contaminants associated with the land); biodiversity; and other land uses in the area; (F) Current Government guidance, other policies in the Argyll and Bute Structure and Local Plan and particularly those relating to the proposed type of development. In particular, the Council will resist development proposals that would have a significant adverse effect on the integrity or character, as appropriate of the following designated sites:

G) Special Areas of Conservation; Special Protection Areas; Ramsar sites; Sites of Special Scientific Interest; National Nature Reserves; Nature Conservation Sites; National Scenic Areas; Greenbelt; Marine Consultation Areas and Areas of Panoramic Quality. (H) Listed Buildings; Conservation Areas; Special Built Environment Areas; Scheduled Ancient Monuments and Historic Gardens or Designed Landscapes.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\2\6\4\AI00029462\0110RWWR1004060.DOC 7

Page 84

Policy LP ENV 19

Development Setting, Layout and Design

The Council will require developers and their agents to produce and execute a high standard of appropriate design in accordance with the design principles set out in Appendix A of this Local Plan and the following criteria: -

Development Setting (A) Development shall be sited and positioned so as to harmonise with the key features of the settlement, edge of settlement, countryside or coastal surroundings. Developments that do not satisfactory harmonise with their settings and surroundings shall be resisted.

Development Layout and Density (B) Development layout and density shall effectively integrate with the urban, suburban or countryside setting of the development. Layouts shall be adapted, as appropriate, to take into account the location or sensitivity of the area. Developments with poor quality or inappropriate layouts or densities including over-development and over-shadowing of sites shall be resisted.

Development Design (C) The design of developments and structures shall be compatible with the surroundings. Particular attention shall be made to massing, form and design details within sensitive locations such as National Scenic Areas, Areas of Panoramic Quality, Greenbelt, Very Sensitive Countryside, Sensitive Countryside, Conservation Areas, Special Built Environment Areas, Historic Landscapes and Archaeologically Sensitive Areas, Historic Gardens and Designed Landscapes and the settings of listed buildings and Scheduled Ancient Monuments. Within such locations, the quality of design will require to be higher than in other less sensitive locations. (D) The design of buildings shall be suitably adapted to meet the reasonable expectations for special needs groups. (E) Energy efficient design and sustainable building practice is strongly encouraged.

(F) Development design which is judged to be poor or “not good enough” for a particular location shall be resisted.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\2\6\4\AI00029462\0110RWWR1004060.DOC 8

Page 85

Government Advice/Guidance

PAN 72 Siting and Design of New Housing in the Countryside

The principal objectives are to encourage a more sympathetic approach to siting and a more widespread adoption of house design which pays greater regard to variations in landscape and building design within Scotland.

The principle on which the policy on housing in the countryside is based are:-

• Development should be encouraged on suitable sites in existing settlements. • Urban sprawl, the coalescence of settlements and ribbon development should be avoided. • Isolated development should be discouraged in the open countryside except where provision is made in development plans or there are special needs.

(B) OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

(a) Site History

None relevant

(ii) Consultations

Response Date Comment Area Roads Engineer None received Animal Welfare Officer 6th February 2006 No objections subject to conditions Environmental Health Manager None received

(iii) Publicity and Representations

Advert Type : Potential Departure Closing Date: 27th April 2006

Representations : None received at time of report. Any representations received prior to the Committee meeting with be reported

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\2\6\4\AI00029462\0110RWWR1004060.DOC 9

Page 86

This page is intentionally left blank Page 87 Page 88 Page 89 Agenda Item 5f

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Councillor D. MacIntyre PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 7 February 2006 OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES Committee Date - 7th June 2006

11 April 2006

Reference Number: 06/00158/DET Applicants Name: Mr D. Lyle Application Type: Detailed Application Description: Erection of Dwellinghouse Location: Land South of Whin Bank, Clachan Seil, by Oban

(A ) THE APPLICATION

Development Requiring Express Planning Permission.

• Erection of Dwellinghouse • Formation of Vehicular Access

(B ) RECOMMENDATION

The proposal is recommended for approval.

(C ) DETERMINING ISSUES AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

1. Outline permission was granted by the Area Committee for a house on this site on 14th January 2004. The present application, although a detailed application, is reasonably close to the design conditions imposed on the outline application as follows:

Outline requirements. Detailed.

a) Up to one and a half storeys. One and a half storeys to sides but a storey taller at shore elevation due to slope of the site. The ridge will be lower than the ridge of the adjacent Whin Bank houses.

b) Natural slate roofing. Natural slate roofing.

c) Pitch 35 – 42 degrees. Pitch 30 degrees.

d) Generally rectangular. Rectangular.

e) No upper floor windows to north or south. Rooflights on north and south elevations.

f) Walling stone and render. Walling stone and render.

g) Plot coverage no greater than 25%. Plot coverage 27.5%

2. The site is a narrow and difficult one, but I consider that the design submitted is acceptable in scale, form and materials. In addition this design raises no new privacy and amenity issues which were not considered or foreseeable at the outline stage. The proposal represents the rounding off of an existing group of houses and is of commensurate scale and appearance.

The site falls within the Knapdale/Melfort regional scenic area, as identified by policy RUR 1 of the Lorn Local Plan, wherein the site is to be assessed against the criteria set out in policy RUR 2. The

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\2\5\AI00029524\0158WRRW1104060.DOC 1

Page 90

site falls within the defined settlement of Clachan Seil and it is considered that the development is consistent with the existing settlement pattern and would not have a detrimental environmental impact upon this part of the regional scenic area. In this respect it accords with the advice on the siting of houses in rural areas contained in Planning Advice Note 72.

(D ) CONCLUSION

On balance I consider the proposal to be consistent with the outline permission and I recommend approval subject to the attached conditions.

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning

Author: Robert Walker 01631 567954 Contact: Ian McIntyre 01631 567951

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\2\5\AI00029524\0158WRRW1104060.DOC 2

Page 91

CONDITIONS AND REASONS RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 06/00158/DET

1. Standard.

Reason: Standard.

2. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3, Schedule 1, Class 1 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992, there shall be no enlargement, improvement or other alteration to the dwelling house on the site which is the subject of this application. Construction of any enlargement, improvement or other alteration to the dwelling house shall not be carried out without planning permission being granted, on an application made to the Council as Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to prevent any extension or other alteration to the dwelling house on this site given the restrictions of the site which could significantly undermine the privacy and amenity of adjoining residential property.

3. Prior to the construction of the roof details of the rooflights and the roof covering materials shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. No rooflights or roof coverings shall be incorporated into the building without that written approval.

Reason: To ensure appropriate materials and details in terms of the outward appearance of the building in relation to its setting.

4. Prior to the occupation of the proposed dwelling details of the external paving, walling, fencing and planting shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority and the proposed dwelling shall not be occupied until those matters so approved are executed.

Reason: To ensure appropriate materials and details in terms of the outward appearance of the building in relation to its setting.

5. The stone wall to the east of the site shall be supported as necessary during the construction to ensure its preservation.

Reason: To ensure the retention of an important landscape feature.

6. No development shall take place on the site until details of the proposed foul drainage have been submitted to the Planning Authority and approved in writing. Such details shall include the written confirmation of Scottish Water, SEPA and the Building Standards Officer that the system is feasible and acceptable to them.

Reason In the interests of public health.

7. No development shall take place on the site until the Planning Authority has received confirmation from Scottish Water that it will provide a water supply and the Planning Authority has authorised development to start.

Reason In the interests of public health.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\2\5\AI00029524\0158WRRW1104060.DOC 3

Page 92

APPENDIX RELATIVE TO 06/00158/DET

A. POLICY OVERVIEW

In terms of Section 25 of the Act the following Development Plan Policies are applicable:

Argyll and Bute Structure Plan

STRAT DC 1 Development within the Settlements

Encouragement shall be given, subject to capacity, to development in the settlements as follows:

A) within the Main Towns to development serving a wide community of interest, including large-scale development, on appropriate infill, rounding off and redevelopment sites. B) Within the Small Towns and Villages to development serving a local community of interest, up to and including medium scale development, on appropriate infill, rounding-off and redevelopment sites; in exceptional cases large-scale development may be supported. C) Within the Minor Settlements to small-scale development which is compatible with an essentially rural settlement location on appropriate infill, rounding-off or redevelopment sites; in exceptional circumstances medium or large-scale development may be supported. D) Developments which do not accord with this policy are those outwith A), B) and C) above and urban bad neighbour developments which are essentially incompatible with the close configuration of land uses found in settlements e.g. mineral extraction or development which results in excessively high development densities, settlement cramming or inappropriate rounding-off on the edge of settlements. E) Development in settlements are also subject to consistency with the other policies of this Structure Plan and in the Local Plan.

STRAT DC 7 Nature Conservation and Development Control

A) Development likely to have a significant effect on a Natura site will be subject to an appropriate assessment. The development will only be permitted where the assessment indicates that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site, or, there are no alternative solutions and there are imperative reasons overriding public interest. B) On sites of national importance, SSSIs and NNRs, development will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the overall objectives of the designation and the overall integrity of the designated area would not be compromised, or where any adverse impacts are clearly outweighed by social or economic benefits of national importance. C) Development which impacts on Local Wildlife Sites or other nature conservation interests, including sites, habitats or species at risk as identified in the Local Biodiversity Action Plan, shall be assessed carefully to determine its acceptability balanced along with national – or local – social or economic considerations. D) Enhancement to nature conservation interests will also be encouraged in association with development and land use proposals.

STRAT DC 8 Landscape and Development Control

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\2\5\AI00029524\0158WRRW1104060.DOC 4

Page 93

B) Enhancement to landscape will also be encouraged in association with development and land use proposals.

STRAT DC 9 Historic Environment and Development Control

Protection, conservation, enhancement and positive management of the historic environment is promoted. Development damages or undermines the historic, architectural or cultural qualities of the historic environment will be resisted; particularly if it would affect a Scheduled Ancient Monument, or its setting, other recognised architectural site of national or regional importance, listed building or its setting, conservation are or historic garden and designed landscape. More detailed policy and proposals for the historic environment will be set out in the Local Plan.

STRAT DC 10 Flooding and Land Erosion

Proposed development which would be at significant risk of flooding or from erosion, or which would increase the risk to other land and property, or occupy the functional flood plane, will not be in accordance with the structure plan. In some places, where it is feasible to manage the threat, suitable mitigation or other measures may be possible.

Lorn Local Plan

(a) National Scenic Area : (I)Lynn of Lorn; (ii) Ben Nevis and Glencoe (b) Regional Scenic Areas : (I) Knapdale/Melfort; (ii) North Argyll (c) Regional Scenic Coasts : North West Argyll (d) Areas of local landscape significance : (I) Loch Etive/Benderloch Coast; (ii) Loch Awe; (iii) Loch Nell; (iv) Glen Lonan; (v) Loch Avich; (vi) Glen Gallain/Loch Scammadale.

(a) economic benefit (b) infrastructure implications (c) specific locational/operational need (d) environmental impact

HO 20 This area of 0.5 hectare or over is identified for private residential development. Regard will be had to the principles set out in the Government’s Planning Advice Note 36 when assessing development proposals.

HO 22 The following are considered to be Sensitive Settlements where large scale or unsympathetic development could have a detrimental effect on the existing landscape setting and servicing.

Appin/Tynribbie/Portnacroish, Balvicar, Barcaldine, Benderloch/Baravullin/Keil Crofts/Kintaline Mill, Clachan Seil, Dalmally/Stronmilchan, Easdale/Ellenabeich, Kilchrenan, Kilmore/Cleigh, North Connel/Black Crofts, Port Appin and Taynuilt.

The Council has accordingly restricted new housing development to areas identified on

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\2\5\AI00029524\0158WRRW1104060.DOC 5

Page 94

the inset maps. It will not grant approval for a house on greenfield sites outwith these areas other than in exceptional circumstances. Applicants will be required to demonstrate an overriding locational or operational need that makes it essential for them to have a house outwith rather than within the areas identified.

Where such need has been demonstrated, special attention will be given to ensure that the actual location of the house creates the minimum adverse environmental impact. Regard will also be had to the principles set out in the Government’s Planning Advice Note 36 when assessing all proposals within sensitive settlements.

Government Advice/Guidance

PAN 72 Siting and Design of New Housing in the Countryside

The principle on which the policy on housing in the countryside is based are:-

(B) OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

(e) Site History

05/00940/DET – Erection of Dwellinghouse – Withdrawn: 14/09/05 03/01591/OUT – Site for Erection of Dwellinghouse – Granted: 27/01/04

(ii) Consultations

Response Date Comment Area Roads Engineer No response Scottish Water 20/03/06 Formally objects, however this objection can be deemed to be withdrawn if a condition is attached requiring the applicant to submit evidence that an agreement regarding the provision of a water scheme has been reached with Scottish Water. West of Scotland Archaeology Service 20/02/06 No known archaeological issues are raised by the proposal.

(iii) Publicity and Representations

Advert Type : Article 9 Vacant Land Closing Date: 2 March 2006

Representations : Yes

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\2\5\AI00029524\0158WRRW1104060.DOC 6

Page 95

Name Address Letter date Julian Taylor Ardencaple Farm, Isle of Seil, by Oban, PA34 4TN Undated Mrs Margaret Morrison 4 Whinbank, Clachan Seil, by Oban, PA34 4TW 12/02/06 Mrs S. Robinson 1 Whinbank, Clachan Seil, by Oban, PA34 4TW 03/02/06 Owner/Occupier 2 Whinbank, Clachan Seil, by Oban, PA34 4TW 03/02/06 A. MacLeod 3 Whinbank, Clachan Seil, by Oban, PA34 4TW 03/02/06 Stuart Reid Torbeag, Clachan Seil, by Oban, PA34 4TJ 02/02/06

Summary of points raised:

• The proposed two storey dwellinghouse is out of keeping with the existing area which is characterised by one and a half storey dwellinghouses.

Comment: The proposal is one and a half storeys except to the shore where it steps down to provide underbuilding to support the house.

• The proposed dwellinghouse will affect No. 4 Whin Bank by blocking off views to the south and blocking out daylight.

Comment: The proposal implies no impact above what might have been expected at outline stage with the outline conditions imposed.

• The removal of windows from the elevation facing 4 Whin Bank has been nullified by the present of windows in the roof of the same side as it will deny privacy in the garden and living room.

Comment: The rooflights on a 30 degree pitch will not allow overlooking.

• The plan indicates that waste water will go to into the private system but there is not provision for this near the site and there is also no space for a septic tank.

Comment: Waste will go to the new sewer system. If this is not possible, it is unlikely that the development could proceed.

• The proposed vehicular access to the site raises road safety concerns as it is on a bad corner which has had numerous accidents in the past.

Comment: The Area Roads Manager has not recommended refusal.

• The land is shown in the Argyll & Bute Finalised Draft Local Plan as Countryside Around Settlement which is defined as a development control zone allowing for small scale infill. This proposal does not accord with the plan.

Comment: Outline permission has been granted.

• Seil is a scenic area and the proposal will be prominent and significantly change the landscape.

Comment: The proposed house would not harm the scenic interest of the area.

• The proposal is situated in close proximity to the shoreline and may have an adverse effect on wildlife.

Comment: There is no wildlife designation in this case.

• It was understood that there was a moratorium on building properties between the road and the shore, particularly where the shoreside is narrow and already crowded.

Comment: Outline permission has been granted.

• The new plans do not show many changes to the previous application which was withdrawn. The footprint of the building is similar and too large for a very small sloping site.

Comment: The design meets the constraints imposed by the site in a satisfactory fashion.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\2\5\AI00029524\0158WRRW1104060.DOC 7

Page 96

• The proposed dwellinghouse will be 1 metre from an existing 100 year old stone wall.

Comment: This wall has not listed status but could be protected by a condition.

• The proposed dwellinghouse will have an adverse effect on the amenity of neighbouring properties.

Comment: The effect on amenity was considered at outline stage.

• “Ardencaple” owns a pre-emption right over the adjoining ground to the South and may hold a pre-emption right over the ground in question.

Comment: This is a legal issue between the respective owners.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\2\5\AI00029524\0158WRRW1104060.DOC 8

Page 97

NOTE TO APPLICANT RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 06/00158/DET

Scottish Water have advised as follows:

Planning and Development Services no longer deal with requests for location of services. Should the developer require this information, they should contact our Property Searches Department, Bullion House, Dundee, DD2 5BB.

The proposed development lies within the water catchment area for Tullich Water Treatment Works and there are capacity issues within the water network infrastructure in this area. Therefore, Scottish Water objects to this application as it may prejudice our ability to supply potable water.

Scottish Water will review the objection once we have completed the investigation into the yield issues and our investment programme has been finalised.

Scottish Water formally objects to this application. This objection can be deemed to be withdrawn if your Council, as Planning Authority, attaches the following conditions to any consent which it grants:

No development shall commence until evidence is exhibited to this Planning Authority that an agreement has been reached by the applicant with Scottish Water for the provision of a water scheme to serve the development.

There are no known public sewers in the vicinity of the proposed development. It is advisable that any septic tank should be sited in such a manner as to allow easy access for emptying by tanker.

Due to the issues involved with the proposed development, the applicant is advised to contact Planning and Development Services, at the address below, at the earliest opportunity.

If the applicant requires any further information regarding the above, he/she must not hesitate to contact Scottish Water.

You are advised to contact them direct to discuss this matter

Scottish Water Developer Services Clyde House 419 Balmore Road Glasgow G22 6NU Tel: 0845 601 8855

Tel : 0845 601 8855

The Council’s Area Roads Manager has advised as follows:

A road openings permit is required

You are advised to contact them direct to discuss this matter:

Contact:

Area Roads Engineer Transportation and Property Services Argyll and Bute Council Kilbowie House Gallanach Road Oban

Tel: 01631 562125

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\2\5\AI00029524\0158WRRW1104060.DOC 9

Page 98

This page is intentionally left blank Page 99 Page 100 Page 101 Agenda Item 5g

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Councillor A Macaskill PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 2nd February 2006 OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES Committee Date - 7th June 2006

18th May 2006

Reference Number: 06/00219/OUT Applicants Name: Mr S Barton Application Type: Outline Planning Permission Application Description: Erection of a dwelling and septic tank Location: Plot 2 Deerview, TAYNUILT.

SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT 1.

This application was reported to the May Committee and continued so that the Committee could consider further information about: a) the application for Plot1 which was refused, b) the Community Council’s response to the Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan and the extension of the rural opportunity area which covers the application site, and c) the process by which the Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan was agreed by members.

The Earlier Application.

The application for Plot 1 (04/01295/OUT) was refused at the December 2004 Committee. As with this current application, Plot 1 was outside the areas allocated for housing under Policy HO 22, and would have been a departure from the adopted Lorn Local Plan. In that case however, the Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan had designated the area as sensitive countryside and, on a consideration of the capacity of the area to absorb development, the more prominent and exposed site of Plot 1 was considered unsuitable. In addition the policies relating to sensitive countryside clearly presume against development, whilst rural opportunity areas are intended to encourage suitable development. The site of the current application sits more comfortably with the landscape and would have a significantly lesser impact than the refused scheme.

The Community Council Response.

The Community Council has objected to the Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan insofar as it relates to the village area and has not specifically objected to this rural opportunity area.

The Approval of the Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan.

Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan was approved by the Council on 6th April 2005. The Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan extended the previous boundaries of the rural opportunity area to cover Deer View on the basis of representations made in respect of the Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan by the applicant.

Conclusions

Whilst I considered that Plot 1 was inappropriate in 2004 when it was in sensitive countryside, I consider that Plot 2, which is now in a rural opportunity area is an appropriate site for a dwelling and accords with the settlement pattern.

Recommendation.

It is recommended that the application be approved as a minor departure in accordance with my report to the May Committee.

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning

Author: Robert Walker 01632 567954

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\3\6\4\AI00029463\0219RWSR11805060.DOC 1

Page 102

This page is intentionally left blank Page 103

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Councillor A Macaskill PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 2nd February 2006 OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES Committee Date - 3rd May 2006

7th April 2006

(A ) THE APPLICATION

Development Requiring Express Planning Permission.

• Erection of a dwelling and septic tank. • Formation of an access way from the Taynuilt to Kilchrenan Road. • Provision of private water supply and drainage.

(B ) RECOMMENDATION

The application is recommended for approval as a minor departure from the approved development plan subject to conditions.

(C ) DETERMINING ISSUES AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Development Plans.

The application is a minor departure from the provisions of the Adopted Lorn Local Plan because it is outside the areas designated for housing under Policy HO 22. The site is however within a Rural Opportunity Area in the Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan. The Development Plans team has advised as follows: “Four objections were received relating to the principle of Rural Opportunity Areas contained within the Argyll and Bute Local Plan - Finalised Draft.

Objection 2 was received from Ian Duncan. The objection was founded on the premise that Rural Opportunity Areas would encourage development that would result in the loss of better quality agricultural land thereby further undermining the viability of many farm units in Argyll. SEERAD and the Executive no longer require Planning Authorities to protect anything other than the best quality agricultural land classified as Class 1 or 2 of which there is none within Argyll & Bute and only small pockets of classes 3.1 and 3.2 in Kintyre and Islay. The objection was finally withdrawn on the understanding that we include reference to the protection of agricultural land in Appendix A of the written statement. I take the view that this objection can be overcome, in anticipation of formal modification of the Plan, through the consideration process for planning applications including assessment that concludes that no significant negative impact would result from the development on an agricultural unit, including no significant loss of better quality agricultural land or loss of access to such land.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\3\6\4\AI00029463\0219RWWR1303060.DOC 1

Page 104

This Rural Opportunity Area is an extensive area to the south of the A85, to the east of the junction of the A85 and the B845 Glen Nant Road. It is an undulating area rising southwards from the trunk road and has a backcloth of trees and hills, which is designated as sensitive countryside.

The application site is on an open hillside alongside an established but unmetalled track. It is within an extensive tract of rural opportunity area. In terms of the advice in PAN 72, the broader landscape context is typified by scattered small-scale development related to local topography. This settlement “pattern” is related to the valleys which are the transport routes, and development is seen both close to the road and on the higher slopes such as the pasture at Deer View. The proposal would therefore fit in with the general pattern of development in the landscape.

Considering the topography of the site itself, it is visually related to a hollow and a copse on the open hillside which would give a natural appearance of shelter. This combined with a low ridge to the north of the site would, in my opinion, mean that, subject to detailed design, the proposed house would not be prominent or dominant. The proposal would fit into and nestle into the landscape without interrupting or conflicting with the flow of the landform and, subject to detailed design, would not appear out of scale. The proposed house would not be visible from principal routes in the near or middle distance, and is likely to be seen only at some distance from higher viewpoints.

The governing policy for rural opportunity areas is STRAT DC 4 which encourages small-scale development on appropriate sites in the open countryside such as this.

The Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan Policy HOU 1 presumes in favour of small-scale development in rural opportunity areas. “Rural opportunity areas have been mapped specifically with a view to identifying areas within which there is a general capacity to absorb small scale housing development. This includes open country locations where appropriate forms of development will be in tune with landscape character and settlement pattern. Consequently there is a presumption in favour of small scale housing development…”

The Committee will note that the site is described as “Plot 2”, which denotes further development aspirations on the part of the applicant. In granting this application, the Council is not committed to further development which will have to be decided on its merits.

Infrastructure.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\3\6\4\AI00029463\0219RWWR1303060.DOC 2

Page 105

The submitted plan indicates private foul and storm drainage and water supply which are acceptable in principle. Conditions are attached to ensure that satisfactory details are obtained and the infrastructure established prior to development.

Access.

The Area Roads Manager has not objected to the application. Conditions are attached to ensure that satisfactory details are obtained. This approach is consistent with Policy LP TRAN 4 of the Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan.

Amenity.

The application raises no adverse amenity issues.

Archaeology.

The West of Scotland Archaeology Service has advised that the area is not sensitive.

(D ) CONCLUSION

Reasoned justification for the departure.

The departure is justified given the age of the adopted local plan and the imminence of the emerging new Argyll and Bute Local Plan with which the proposal is consistent because it is in an acceptable and appropriate location in a Rural Opportunity Area. In addition there have been no objections to the designation of this Rural Opportunity Area and only one objection, the points of which have been addressed.

Need for a hearing.

The departure is minor and as there has only been one objection there is no need for a PAN 41 hearing in this case.

Given the inclusion of the site in a Rural Opportunity Area in the Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan the application is recommended for approval as a minor departure from the Lorn Local Plan subject to the attached conditions.

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning

Author: Robert Walker 01632 567954

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\3\6\4\AI00029463\0219RWWR1303060.DOC 3

Page 106

CONDITIONS AND REASONS RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 06/00219/OUT

1. This permission is granted under the provisions of Article 4 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (Scotland) Order 1992 on the basis of an outline application for planning permission and that the further approval of Argyll and Bute Council or of the Scottish Executive on appeal shall be required with respect to the under mentioned reserved matters before any development is commenced:

(a) the siting, design and external appearance of the proposed development; (b) the landscaping of the site of the proposed development; (c) details of the access arrangements; (d) details of the proposed water supply and drainage arrangements.

Reason: To comply with Section 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997

2. In the case of the reserved matters specified in (1) above, an application for approval of the reserved matters in terms of Article 6 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (Scotland) Order 1992 must be made to Argyll and Bute Council no later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

4. Any subsequent application for the approval of reserved matters, as required by Condition 1 above, shall be accompanied by: i. plans and elevations of the houses (and where appropriate garages) showing dimensions and type and colour of external materials; ii. details of existing and finished ground levels, finished floor levels in relation to a fixed datum, preferably ordnance datum, cross sections of the site showing the position of any built form and full details of all under building necessary to accommodate such built form; iii. a design statement, which takes into account both the matters listed above and any other material justification for the nature of housing development that is submitted at the reserved matters stage. Such a statement shall include, an analysis of the landscape setting of the site and the relationship and response of the proposed development to the surrounding environment, both built and natural; Any development subsequently granted planning permission shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved reserved matters unless otherwise formally agreed by the planning authority.

Reason: It is necessary that such details be submitted to ensure that appropriately designed development, which is befitting and responsive to the surrounding landscape and adjacent development, is secured within the site.

5. The application to be submitted in respect of the reserved matters, as detailed within Condition 01 above, shall include full details of the proposed means of water supply to serve the development. Such details shall also include a report, prepared by a suitably qualified person, detailing the suitability, with regards to the quality and quantity of water available, of the proposed water supply to serve the dwelling hereby approved. The report shall also include, if necessary, any methods needed to improve the proposed supply. Thereafter, prior to the first occupation of the dwelling, the water supply shall be fully operational and constructed in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the planning authority.

Reason: Insufficient information has been submitted with regard to the proposed means of water supply within the application and therefore it is necessary for the above details to be submitted for the consideration of the planning authority in order to protect the amenities of other existing users of any proposed supply.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\3\6\4\AI00029463\0219RWWR1303060.DOC 4

Page 107

6. The application to be submitted in respect of Condition 01 above shall show full details of the proposed access way from the site to the public road. Prior to the first occupation of any dwelling subsequently approved following consideration of the reserved matters (as detailed within Condition 1 above) the access shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details and thereafter retained.

Reason: To ensure that drivers of vehicles entering or leaving the site from the track to/from the public road can do so in such a way so as to avoid causing hazardous movements in the highway that would be to the detriment of the safety of other users of the highway.

7. Any subsequent application for the approval of the reserved matters shall include full details of all external lighting to serve the development. The submitted details shall show the position of all proposed external lights and their illumination levels (provided in lux), together with appropriate mitigation measures to prevent light spillage and glare beyond the site boundary. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed details unless otherwise approved in writing by the planning authority.

Reason: The application site is in an area defined by a rural character. Therefore in order to protect and enhance the visual character and integrity of the area, particularly during the hours of darkness, the submission of such details is necessary in order that the planning authority could consider such matters fully.

8. Any details pursuant to Condition 1(b) above shall show a scheme hard and soft landscaping work. Such details shall include: • Location and design, including materials of any walls, fences and gates; • Surface treatment of means of access and hard standing areas; • Soft and hard landscaping works, including the location, type and size of each individual tree and/or shrub; and • Programme for completion and subsequent on-going maintenance for a period of at least 10 years. All the hard and soft landscaping works shall be carried out in accordance with the scheme approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Any trees or plants which within a period of ten years from the completion of the development die, or for whatever reason are removed or damaged shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of the same size and species, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity in order to help integrate the proposal into its landscape setting.

9. The application to be submitted in respect of the reserved matters, as detailed within Condition 01 above, shall include full details of the proposed means of foul and storm drainage to serve the development. Thereafter, prior to the first occupation of the dwelling, the drainage shall be fully operational and constructed in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the planning authority.

Reason: Insufficient information has been submitted with regard to the proposed means of drainage within the application and therefore it is necessary for the above details to be submitted for the consideration of the planning authority in order to protect public health.

10 Any details pursuant to Condition 1(a) above shall include a dwelling house: i) finished in wet dash render or natural stone or a mixture of both; ii) with a roof covering of natural slate or good quality slate substitute; iii) of no greater than one and a half storeys in height; iv) incorporating windows with a strong vertical emphasis; v) a roof pitch of not less than 35o and not greater than 42o; vi) incorporating smooth cement window and/or door bands; and vii) which is predominantly rectangular shaped with traditional gable ends of no greater than 7 metres.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\3\6\4\AI00029463\0219RWWR1303060.DOC 5

Page 108

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity in order reflect the vernacular building traditions of the area.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\3\6\4\AI00029463\0219RWWR1303060.DOC 6

Page 109

APPENDIX RELATIVE TO 05/02070/OUT

A. POLICY OVERVIEW

In terms of Section 25 of the Act the following Development Plan Policies are applicable:

Argyll and Bute Structure Plan

STRAT DC 8 Landscape and Development Control

B) Enhancement to landscape will also be encouraged in association with development and land use proposals.

STRAT DC 4 Rural Opportunity Areas

Lorn Local Plan

(a) economic benefit (b) infrastructure implications (c) specific locational/operational need (d) environmental impact

HO 22 The following are considered to be Sensitive Settlements where large scale or unsympathetic development could have a detrimental effect on the existing landscape setting and servicing.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\3\6\4\AI00029463\0219RWWR1303060.DOC 7

Page 110

The Council has accordingly restricted new housing development to areas identified on the inset maps. It will not grant approval for a house on greenfield sites outwith these areas other than in exceptional circumstances. Applicants will be required to demonstrate an overriding locational or operational need that makes it essential for them to have a house outwith rather than within the areas identified.

Argyll and Bute Consultative Draft Local Plan

HOU 1 General Housing Development

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\3\6\4\AI00029463\0219RWWR1303060.DOC 8

Page 111

Informal Council Policy

TA 5 This allows an existing private way to be used or extended to serve up to 2 new dwelling houses provided that the total number of dwellings served by the private way does not exceed 10.

Government Advice/Guidance

PAN 72 Siting and Design of New Housing in the Countryside

The principle on which the policy on housing in the countryside is based are:-

(B) OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

(e) Site History

05/01571/OUT Application similar to this current application withdrawn as premature.

(ii) Consultations

Response Date Comment Area Roads Engineer None received No objection to previous, similar application subject to conditions. Scottish Water 8th February 2006 No objections subject to conditions Trunk Roads 22nd February 2006 No objections. West of Scotland Archaeology 13th November 2006 No objections

(iii) Publicity and Representations

Advert Type : Potential Departure Closing Date: 6th April 2006

Representations :.

Taynuilt Community 21st March 2006 Objects in terms of the inability of the Council infrastructure of the village to cope with further development and the isolated location of the development.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\3\6\4\AI00029463\0219RWWR1303060.DOC 9

Page 112

Comment: The approved policy of the Council (STRAT DC 4) encourages small-scale development in rural opportunity areas. The Council could not sustain a refusal on grounds that this development would exceed the capacity of the infrastructure of Taynuilt.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\3\6\4\AI00029463\0219RWWR1303060.DOC 10

Page 113 Page 114 Page 115 Agenda Item 5h

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Councillor E Robertson PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 27 February 2006 OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES Committee Date - 7th June 2006

16 May 2006

Reference Number: 06/00403/DET Applicants Name: Mr and Mrs A Black Application Type: Detailed Planning Permission. Application Description: Erection of dwelling house and septic tank and formation of new shared access. Location: Land East of Ledaig House, Benderloch.

(A ) THE APPLICATION

Development Requiring Express Planning Permission.

• Erection of dwelling house • Installation of septic tank with soakaway. • Formation of vehicular access from A828.

(B ) RECOMMENDATION

The application is recommended for approval as a minor departure from the approved development plan subject to a Section 75 Agreement relating to access and planting and subject to conditions.

(C ) DETERMINING ISSUES AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

1. Development Plans: Settlement

The site is in the South Benderloch inset map and outside any area allocated for housing under Policy HO 22. It is therefore contrary to the adopted local plan.

The site is in the settlement zone of Benderloch in the Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan. There have been no objections to that designation and it can be given material weight.

Policy STRAT DC 1 of the Argyll and Bute Structure Plan states that encouragement shall be given to development in settlement zones on appropriate infill and rounding off sites. This proposal forms part of a group of houses at the south of the village and may be considered as rounding off between that group and the backdrop of woodland. It is therefore consistent with the Finalised Draft Plan and the Structure Plan.

2. Development Plans: Scheduled Monument.

The site is adjacent to and within the setting of a scheduled monument and is subject to Policy BE 1 of the adopted Lorn Local Plan which seeks to protect the setting of monuments. The monument in question is a cairn at the roadside, adjacent to Ledaig House.

In this case Historic Scotland has advised as follows:

“Historic Scotland has accepted that the setting of the cairn has been compromised by the insertion of modern structures. Although we would prefer to see no development within this last open aspect from the cairn, we also recognise that the proposal may represent an opportunity to improve the immediate setting of the cairn and its longer-term management.

We note and welcome the fact that the proposed new access has been moved further away from the cairn in line with (our) recommendations.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\6\4\AI00029464\0403WRRW1605060.DOC 1

Page 116

If the Council approves the application there will be archaeological implications.”

West of Scotland Archaeology has objected in terms of the setting of the monument and has stated that, “The application should be refused on archaeological grounds due to its negative impact on the last surviving rural view out from the cairn. This is an unacceptable loss to the current setting of the legally protected monument.”

In balancing these two views, I consider it significant that the monument is not in undeveloped countryside but is within a group of houses, and the proposed house will not materially change the nature of the setting of the monument. In addition the proposed house is between the cairn and trees, which is not an open aspect, and there will remain a visual link with open country to the northeast.

The monument is a low grassed mound which has little presence in the landscape, and is not available to general public viewing because it is adjacent to the trunk road. On balance the existing setting and the limited presence of the monument itself suggest that the Historic Scotland view should prevail, and that any permission be subject to a condition in respect of appropriate archaeological investigation and the establishment of an enhancement/management scheme through a Section 75 Agreement.

3. Other Material Considerations.

The application gives rise to no adverse privacy or amenity issues.

The proposed access improves the current access to Ledaig House. The Trunk Roads Authority has recommended approval subject to conditions. The existing access will be closed and this involves a Section 75 Agreement.

The design of the house is a two-storey form in keeping with surrounding development. I consider the design to meet an appropriate standard.

(D ) CONCLUSION

Justification of Departure

A minor departure is justified because of the age of the Local Plan and the imminence of the emerging new Argyll and Bute Local Plan with which this proposal is consistent. There have been no objections to this settlement zone or to this application.

Need for a Hearing.

I consider that its departure is modest in its impact and as there have been no objections there is no need for a hearing in this case.

Conclusion.

Given the inclusion of this site in a settlement zone and considering that the development is consistent with the character of that area, the application is recommended for approval as a minor departure from the adopted Lorn Local Plan, subject to conditions.

The permission must be subject to the completion of a Section 75 Agreement which achieves the permanent closure of the existing access to Ledaig House, the protection of visibility splays for the new access and the establishment of an enhancement/management scheme for the scheduled monument.

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\6\4\AI00029464\0403WRRW1605060.DOC 2

Page 117

Author: Robert Walker 01631 567954 Contact: Ian McIntyre 01631 567951

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\6\4\AI00029464\0403WRRW1605060.DOC 3

Page 118

REASONS FOR REFUSAL IF SECTION 75 AGREEMENT NOT COMPLETED IN RESPECT OF 06/00403/DET

1. The Trunk Roads Authority has advised that a new access is required to serve the proposed development. That access requires to be provided with adequate visibility which, in this case depends on the maintenance of land outside the application site. In this case, the safety of the access to the proposed development can only be secured by the establishment of a legal agreement between the relevant landowners and the Council. That agreement has not been made and the development is therefore not provided with a safe access.

2. The Trunk Roads Authority has advised that the closure of the existing access is required to secure an improvement to the safety of traffic on the trunk road. In addition that closure is required to avoid a proliferation of closely spaced accesses. In this case, the safety improvement and combination of accesses can only be secured by the establishment of a legal agreement between the relevant landowners and the Council. That agreement has not been made and the required maintenance and improvement in safety have not been achieved.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\6\4\AI00029464\0403WRRW1605060.DOC 4

Page 119

CONDITIONS AND REASONS RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 06/00403/DET

1. Standard.

Reason: Standard.

2. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3, Schedule 1, Class 1 and Class 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992, there shall be no enlargement, improvement or other alteration to the dwelling house or the construction of any building or enclosure on the site which is the subject of this application. Construction of any enlargement, improvement or other alteration to the dwelling house and the construction of any building or enclosure on the site which is the subject of this application shall not be carried out without planning permission being granted, on an application made to the Council as Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to prevent any extension or other alteration to the dwelling house and the proliferation of outbuildings on this site which could significantly undermine the setting of the scheduled monument

3. Details of the roof covering materials shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. No roof coverings shall be incorporated into the building without that written approval,

Reason: To ensure appropriate materials and details in terms of the outward appearance of the building in relation to its setting.

4. Prior to the occupation of the proposed dwelling details of the external roads, hard standing, turning, parking, paving, walling, fencing and planting shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority and the proposed dwelling shall not be occupied until those matters so approved are executed.

Reason: To ensure appropriate materials and details in terms of the outward appearance of the building in relation to its setting.

5. No development shall commence until a scheme of work aimed at the protection of the monument and its setting during the construction of the house has been submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority and subsequently, all work shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme

Reason: To protect the scheduled cairn and its setting.

6. No development shall take place on the site until the Planning Authority has received confirmation that Scottish Water will provide a water supply and the Planning Authority has authorised development to start.

Reason In the interests of public health.

7. No development shall take place within the development site outlined in red on the approved plan until the developer has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological works in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant, agreed by the West of Scotland Archaeology Service, and approved by the Planning Authority. Thereafter the developer shall ensure that the programme of archaeological works is fully implemented and that all recording and recovery of archaeological resources within the development site is undertaken to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority in agreement with the West of Scotland Archaeology Service”

Reason To ensure the preservation of archaeological resources in accordance with national policy guidance in the vicinity of a nationally important scheduled monument.

8. The new access shall be formed and the new access closed to pedestrians and vehicles prior to the commencement of any other development on the site.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\6\4\AI00029464\0403WRRW1605060.DOC 5

Page 120

Reason To achieve an improvement in the safety of traffic on the trunk road.

9. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority a visibility splay shall be provided and maintained on each side of the proposed access so that there shall be no obstruction between 1.05 and 2.0 metres above the ground to the view of a driver within triangles formed by a line extending back from the edge of the trunk road 2.4 metres along the centre of the proposed access, lines extending along the edge of the carriageway 120 metres in each direction from that centre line and lines connecting their terminations.

Reason To ensure that drivers leaving the site can see and be seen by vehicles on the trunk road and can safely join the traffic stream.

10. The gradient of the proposed access road shall not exceed 1 in 10 for a distance of 5 metres from the nearside edge of the trunk road and the first six metres shall be surfaced with a bituminous material. No drainage shall discharge from the site on to the trunk road.

Reason To ensure that road safety is not put at risk by material from the site being deposited on the road.

11. The proposed access shall form a junction with the trunk road which meets the standard described in DMRB Volume 6, section 2, part 7, TD 41/95, layout 3.

Reason To ensure that drivers leaving the site can see and be seen by vehicles on the trunk road and can manoeuvre safely to join and leave the traffic stream.

12. Prior to work staring on site full details in plan form of the access construction and visibility splays referred to in Conditions 9, 10 and 11 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason To ensure that the road safety standards required can be achieved.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\6\4\AI00029464\0403WRRW1605060.DOC 6

Page 121

APPENDIX RELATIVE TO 06/00403/DET

A. POLICY OVERVIEW

In terms of Section 25 of the Act the following Development Plan Policies are applicable:

Argyll and Bute Structure Plan

STRAT DC 1 Development within the Settlements

Encouragement shall be given, subject to capacity, to development in the settlements as follows:

STRAT DC 9 Historic Environment and Development Control

Local Plan

HO 22 The following are considered to be Sensitive Settlements where large scale or unsympathetic development could have a detrimental effect on the existing landscape setting and servicing: Appin/Tynribbie/Portnacroish, Balvicar, Barcaldine, Benderloch/Baravullin/Keil Crofts/Kintaline Mill, Clachan Seil, Dalmally/Stronmilchan, Easdale/Ellenabeich, Kilchrenan, Kilmore/Cleigh, North Connel/Black Crofts, Port Appin and Taynuilt. The Council has accordingly restricted new housing development to areas identified on the inset maps. It will not grant approval for a house on greenfield sites outwith these areas other than in exceptional circumstances. Applicants will be required to demonstrate an overriding locational or operational need that makes it essential for them to have a house outwith rather than within the areas identified. Where such need has been demonstrated, special attention will be given to ensure that the actual location of the house creates the minimum adverse environmental impact. Regard will also be had to the principles set out in the Government’s Planning Advice Note 36 when assessing all proposals within sensitive settlements.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\6\4\AI00029464\0403WRRW1605060.DOC 7

Page 122

Government Advice/Guidance

PAN 72 Siting and Design of New Housing in the Countryside

The principle on which the policy on housing in the countryside is based are:-

(B) OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

(a) Site History

05/01966/DET – Erection of Dwellinghouse – Withdrawn:

(ii) Consultations

Response Date Comment Trunk Roads 13th March 2006 No objections subject to conditions Scottish Water 13th March 2006 No objections subject to conditions. West of Scotland Archaeology Service 23rd March 2006 Objects – see report Historic Scotland 31st March 2006 No objections subject to conditions.

(iii) Publicity and Representations

Advert Type : Potential departure Closing Date: 18th May 2006

Representations : None

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\6\4\AI00029464\0403WRRW1605060.DOC 8

Page 123

NOTE TO APPLICANT RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 06/00403/DET

Scottish Water have advised as follows:

Scottish Water will review the objection once we have completed the investigation into the yield issues and our investment programme has been finalised.

There are no known public sewers in the vicinity of the proposed development. It is advisable that any septic tank should be sited in such a manner as to allow easy access for emptying by tanker.

Due to the issues involved with the proposed development, the applicant is advised to contact Planning and Development Services, at the address below, at the earliest opportunity.

If the applicant requires any further information regarding the above, he/she must not hesitate to contact Scottish Water.

You are advised to contact them direct to discuss this matter

Scottish Water Developer Services Clyde House 419 Balmore Road Glasgow G22 6NU Tel: 0845 601 8855

Tel : 0845 601 8855

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\4\6\4\AI00029464\0403WRRW1605060.DOC 9

Page 124

This page is intentionally left blank Page 125 Page 126 Page 127 Agenda Item 5i

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Local Member - Cllr Allan Macaskill PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT Date of Validity - 13 April 2006 OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES Committee Date - 7 June 2006

15 May 2006

Reference Number: 06/00793/OUT Applicants Name: Mr & Mrs R. Di Ciacca Application Type: Outline Planning Permission Application Description: Erection of a Crofthouse Location: Land West of Dunmore, Airds Bay, Taynuilt

(A ) THE APPLICATION

Development Requiring Express Planning Permission.

• The erection of a crofthouse on crofting land; • Formation of an access road; • Installation of a septic tank.

(B ) RECOMMENDATION

The application is recommended for refusal for the reasons outlined in this report.

There have been a number of objections and Committee could consider a discretionary hearing.

(C ) DETERMINING ISSUES AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Background

It is proposed to erect a new dwellinghouse on crofting land west of Dunmore, Airds Bay. While the croft currently possess a crofthouse, the sitting crofter intends to ‘retire’ from crofting to this house and de-croft its curtilage; thus there is now a claim for a replacement crofthouse on what will essentially become a ‘bareland’ croft – although any de-crofting is reliant upon approval being granted by the Crofters Commission.

The application site is reached from the Oban to Taynuilt Trunk Road by a single-track road which also serves a number of other houses along Airds Bay. In recent months a number of applications along this road have been refused due to its substandard junction with the A85 trunk road. Junction improvements highlighted during the determination of these applications have yet to take place and there is no specific programme for doing so.

Relevant Policies

The principal policies covering this application are Structure Plan policies STRAT AC 1 (development on croft land) and STRAT DC 2 (development within Countryside around Settlements) and adopted Lorn Local Plan policy HO 24 (areas of restraint).

In terms of the finalised draft Local Plan, the application site lies within the Countryside around Settlements designation, which allows for small scale infill, rounding-off redevelopment and change of use to buildings on an appropriate basis. Limited weight can be given to this draft policy.

Determining Issues and Considerations

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\5\6\4\AI00029465\0793WRDFB1505060.DOC 1

Page 128

In general, there is a presumption against development in open countryside. Structure Plan policy STRAT DC 2 requires that all development within ‘Countryside Around Settlements’ - as designated within the finalised draft Local Plan - represents infill, rounding-off, redevelopment, change of use to buildings within the existing settlement pattern, or single dwellinghouses on crofts.

Leaving aside the crofthouse issue which will be addressed later in this report, I do not consider that the submitted proposal accords with the requirements of STRAT DC 2 as it fails to integrate sufficiently into the existing settlement pattern.

The settlement pattern of the locality has evolved over the years into what is principally a ribbon form – following the access spur from the Airds Bay road. The current proposal seeks to erect a dwelling significantly removed and set back from the existing line of dwellinghouses and cannot be considered infill, rounding off or redevelopment; thus it does not accord with policy STRAT DC 2.

While STRAT DC 2 is an adopted structure plan policy, the ‘Countryside Around Settlement’ designation to which it refers is delineated in the finalised draft Local Plan which enjoys only the weighting of supplementary policy. In essence, STRAT DC 2 can be given material weight, but is ancillary to adopted Lorn Local Plan policies HO 22 (sensitive settlements) and HO 24 (areas of restraint).

Policy HO 22 of the Lorn Local Plan restricts new housing development to areas identified on the approved inset maps. It presumes against the granting of approval for houses on greenfield sites outwith these areas other than in exceptional circumstances (such as an overriding locational or operational need that makes it essential for an applicant to have a house outwith rather than within the areas identified). Given the greenfield status of the application site, and the lack of any proven crofting need, no such circumstances exist in this case; as such, the proposal fails to meet the requirements of policy HO 22.

Lorn Local Plan Policy HO 24 states that there will be a general presumption against proposals for residential development within areas of nature/heritage conservation and/or better quality in-bye land unless they meet a number of criteria.

In this particular case, the applicant wishes to erect a dwelling on land that is regarded as being good quality, in-bye croft land and the proposal must therefore be assessed in accordance with the following tests:

i) Environmental Impact: As this application is for outline permission, no design details have been submitted. My principal concern, therefore, is that the dwelling will be located outwith the settlement pattern on greenfield land, and that no matter how strong any future design may be, the site chosen is inappropriate and represents unnecessary residential sprawl.

ii) Operational/locational Need: While the applicant has claimed a crofting need on the application form, no details have been submitted and thus the application is premature under crofting policy. In applications that involve sub-division/de-crofting such as this, the Crofters Commission are consulted as standard.

The Commission have intimated that they cannot support the applicant’s request to de- croft due to insufficient details (see section below) and thus I consider there to be no operational/locational need for a crofthouse at this time as one already exists.

iii) Economic benefit: I consider this test to have little relevance to the current application.

iv) Infrastructure Implications: Both the Trunk Roads Authority and the Area Roads Manager have objected to the application on the grounds of the safety of the junction of the Airds Bay road with the Oban to Taynuilt A85 trunk road. This objection was also raised in respect of a number of recent planning applications at Airds Bay – all of which were refused or recommended for refusal and subsequently withdrawn. I consider these objections as having very significant material weight and would form one of the principal reasons for refusal.

v) Sterilisation of Natural resources: The proposed development would be sited on land regarded as good quality in-bye land. In general, such development is resisted through

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\5\6\4\AI00029465\0793WRDFB1505060.DOC 2

Page 129

STRAT DC 2 and other adopted policies unless a strong locational need is demonstrated. Bearing in mind that no strong operational/locational need has been lodged and the Crofters Commission do not yet support the applicant’s proposal to de-croft, I consider it inappropriate to approve a new dwelling on in-bye land, albeit it only a relatively small portion.

vi) Alternative Policies and Proposals contained in the Local Plan: Other applicable policies have been addressed in this report.

Operational/Locational Need and Crofting Claim

Structure Plan policy STRAT AC 1 allows for the provision of a single dwellinghouse on bareland crofts, subject to appropriate locational and operational justification. Local Plan policy HO 24 allows operational/locational crofting need to be taken into consideration, subject to environmental impact, servicing/infrastructure and other relevant tests.

The crofting need claim in this case, albeit premature and therefore contrary to policy, is as follows: the current crofter will soon retire and hopes to de-croft the existing crofthouse and its immediate curtilage so as to remain in the area. This will result in the creation of a new bareland croft, and with it the claim for a new crofthouse.

However, the Crofters Commission are yet to receive any proposals for the development/revised working of the croft land and are thus unable to comment on or support the applicant’s claims. Therefore, de-crofting cannot yet take place, a crofthouse remains in situ and the croft cannot be considered bareland.

Under these circumstances, I consider that the proposal fails to meet the requirements of policies STRAT AC 1 and HO 24(ii) and would result in an undesirable loss of crofting land; thus it cannot be supported.

It should be noted however, that should the Crofters Commission be supportive of the applicant’s de- crofting proposal in the future, a new crofthouse may well be acceptable under adopted policy subject to design, location and infrastructure constraints.

Representations

A total of ten representations have been made by members of the public. Of these, nine were lodged as objections and one a letter of support. A summary of the relevant points raised is included in Appendix B.

(D ) CONCLUSION

For the reasons outlined in this report, I consider the proposal as being contrary to adopted Council policy in terms of substandard access and infrastructure, unnecessary environmental impact, the sterilisation of in-bye land and unsubstantiated operational/locational need. As such, I cannot support the application and recommend that planning permission be refused.

Angus J Gilmour Head of Planning

Author: David Baldwin 01631 567977 Contact: Ian McIntyre 01631 567951

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\5\6\4\AI00029465\0793WRDFB1505060.DOC 3

Page 130

REASONS FOR REFUSAL RELATIVE TO APPLICATION 06/00793/OUT

1. The proposed development would intensify turning movements at the junction of the Airds Bay road and the A85 and lead to increased interference with the safety and free flow of traffic on the A85 where vehicle speeds and volumes are high. The junction of the Airds Bay Road with the A85 is substandard and would require to be upgraded using land outwith the applicant’s control in order to ensure the safety of both trunk road users and users entering and exiting the Airds Bay Road. In close proximity to the junction of the Trunk Road, there is a narrow bridge which could restrict vehicles exiting the A85 and interfere with the safe and free flow of traffic on the trunk road.

2. The proposal would give rise to adverse infrastructure implications, because it cannot be accessed in a safe fashion and is therefore contrary to Policy HO 24 of the Adopted Lorn Local Plan.

3. Policies STRAT AC 1 and HO 24(ii) require that any developments on croft land are suitably justified in terms of operational/locational need. The applicant has so far failed to submit sufficient details that would allow the Council and Crofters Commission to properly assess the need and thus the proposal fails to meet the required tests.

4. Policy STRAT DC 2 requires that any development with ‘Countryside Around Settlements’ takes the form of infill, rounding-off, redevelopment, suitable change of use to existing buildings or meets the terms of STRAT AC1. This development lies outwith the existing ribbon form, does not meet the terms of STRAT AC 1 and thus fails to meets the requirements of STRAT DC 2.

5. Policy HO 22 of the Adopted Lorn Local Plan restricts new housing development to areas identified on the inset maps. It presumes against the granting of approval for houses on greenfield sites outwith these areas other than in exceptional circumstances (such as an overriding locational or operational need that makes it essential for an applicant to have a house outwith rather than within the areas identified). Given the greenfield status of the application site, and that any extenuating circumstances have yet to be proven, the proposal fails to meet the requirements of policy HO 22.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\5\6\4\AI00029465\0793WRDFB1505060.DOC 4

Page 131

APPENDIX RELATIVE TO 06/00793/OUT

A. POLICY OVERVIEW

In terms of Section 25 of the Act the following Development Plan Policies are applicable:

Argyll and Bute Structure Plan

STRAT DC 2 Development within the Countryside Around Settlements

a. Within the Countryside Around Settlements encouragement shall be given to development which accords with the settlement plan for the area; this includes appropriate small scale infill, rounding-off, redevelopment, change of use of building development and single dwellinghouses on bareland crofts or single additional dwelling houses on individual crofts subject to consistency with STRAT AC 1 C). In special cases, a locational need or exceptional circumstance may justify a development.

b. Developments which do not accord with this policy are those outwith category a) above and development which will erode the setting of settlements or result in undesirable forms of ribbon development or settlement coalescence or result in the undesirable break-up of croft land assets.

c. Developments are also subject to consistency with other policies of the Structure Plan and in the Local Plan.

Lorn Local Plan

HO 22 Sensitive Settlements (Housing Policy)

The following are considered to be Sensitive Settlements where large scale or unsympathetic development could have a detrimental effect on the existing landscape setting and servicing.

Where such need has been demonstrated, special attention will be given to ensure that the actual location of the house creates the minimum adverse environmental impact. Regard will also be had to the principles set out in the Government’s Planning Advice Note 72 when assessing all proposals within sensitive settlements.

HO 24 Areas of Restraint (Housing Policy)

There will be a presumption against proposals for residential development within:

a. Areas identified in the Local Plan as important for nature or heritage conservation; b. Better quality (in-bye) agricultural land.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\5\6\4\AI00029465\0793WRDFB1505060.DOC 5

Page 132

All proposals within these areas will be assessed using the following criteria:

d. Environmental impact; e. Locational/operational need; f. Economic benefit; g. Infrastructure and servicing implications; h. Sterilisation of natural resources; i. Alternative policies and proposals contained in the Local Plan.

(B) OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

(a) Site History

n/a

(ii) Consultations

Response Date Comment Area Roads Engineer 18.05.06 Recommend refusal; substandard junction with A85. Scottish Environmental Protection Agency 28.04.06 No objections; comments regarding foul and surface water drainage provision. Scottish Water Public Protection Unit 04.05.06 No objections. Building Standards (Oban, Lorn & the Isles) 08.05.06 No objections; comment regarding capacity of existing septic tank and drainage arrangements. Trunk Roads Authority (Transport Scotland) 06.05.06 Recommend refusal; substandard access at Airds Bay/A85 junction. Crofters Commission 05.05.06 Do not support claim of operational need; insufficient details supplied by applicant. Animal Welfare Officer West of Scotland Archaeology 20.04.06 No objections or issues.

(iii) Publicity and Representations

Advert Type: Section 34 & Article 9 Closing Date: 11 May 2006

Representations: Yes

Objections to Application

Name Address Letter date G. Ian C. Thomson Clach-ma-Nessaig, Airds Bay 09.05.06 Taynuilt Community Council Woodend Cottage, Taynuilt 06.05.06 Daniel G. King Plot 3, Barcaldine, Argyll 26.04.06 A. V. Campbell Brolas, Taynuilt 26.04.06 Anne M. Weavind Cedarwood Cottage, Airds Bay 24.04.06 Fiona Campbell Taigh a Bhalachain, Airds Bay 22.04.06 Mr & Mrs H. P. Longbottom The Bothie, Airds Bay 21.04.06 Ian Campbell Taigh a Bhalachain, Airds Bay 21.04.06 Donald Longbottom Sandbank, Airds Bay 20.04.06

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\5\6\4\AI00029465\0793WRDFB1505060.DOC 6

Page 133

In Support of Application

Name Address Letter date Neil A Reid Airds Bay, Taynuilt 05.05.06

Summary of points raised:

• A number of applications in Airds Bay have recently been refused or recommended for refusal on the grounds of inadequate access and a substandard junction with the A85.

Comment: This is a valid concern and one I share. The state of the access road and junction are cited as reasons for refusal.

• The proposed location of the house site on the very edge of the plot suggests that room is being left for future housing.

Comment: If permission were to be granted, a Section 75 Agreement would be required to prevent further subdivision and thus prevent further development of the site.

• Subdivision and/or de-crofting is not supported by the Crofters Commission.

Comment: As explained in this report, the Crofters Commission has not been provided with sufficient supporting information to form a judgement. This means that we cannot approve the application as an operational/locational need case cannot be argued. However, should the Commission at some point in the future support the applicant, permission could be granted subject to design, location and infrastructure constraints.

• The proposed private access is irrational in terms of its route and will culminate in a narrow, substandard opening onto the Airds Bay road.

Comment: As the application is recommended for refusal, this issue has not been addressed in the report, however should at any point henceforth a similar application be recommended for approval, the access route would have to be addressed as I share these concerns.

• The Airds Bay road is of insufficient quality to support yet another dwellinghouse.

Comment: The Area Roads manager has not cited the above as a reason for refusal and as such, it is not a material concern.

• This is a bareland croft which needs a crofthouse.

Comment: The croft is not bareland as it has yet to be de-crofted. As such, policies relating to the provision of a crofthouse on a bareland croft have little weight. If in due course the Crofters Commission support the proposal to de-croft, the provision of a new crofthouse can be revisited.

• The speed limit at the junction with the A85 will be reduced to 30mph and thus negates the need for Trunk Roads to object on roads safety grounds.

Comment: This cannot be substantiated and it is for Trunk Roads to decide whether the junction poses a hazard to road safety following any reduction in speed limits. As an agency, they have objected to the application.

F:\MODERNGOV\DATA\AGENDAITEMDOCS\5\6\4\AI00029465\0793WRDFB1505060.DOC 7

Page 134

This page is intentionally left blank Page 135 Page 136 Page 137 Agenda Item 5j Page 138 Page 139 Page 140 Page 141 Page 142 Page 143 Page 144 Page 145 Agenda Item 5k

ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL OBAN, LORN, AND THE ISLES AREA COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7TH JUNE 2006

ARGYLL AND BUTE LOCAL PLAN REPORT ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO FINALISED DRAFT PROCESS and FUTURE TIMESCALE OF LOCAL PLAN PROCESS - REPORT FROM HEAD OF PLANNING

1. SUMMARY

1.1 This report identifies the main general and localised issues that have arisen following the publication of the Finalised Draft Local Plan and proposes to place on public deposit proposed amendments to the Finalised Draft Local Plan in an effort to reduce the anticipated size and scale of a Public Local Inquiry (PLI) scheduled to commence in the first quarter of 2007. The report then goes on to establish the next key milestones for the production of the Local Plan.

2. RECOMMENDATION

2.1 That Members approve, subject to any changes they deem appropriate, the proposed amendments contained within Appendices A and B of this report to the Finalised Draft Local Plan and recommend to the Strategic Policy Committee (SPC) that the Modified Finalised Draft Local Plan be placed on deposit for a six week period to allow further comments and objections to be raised against the proposed amendments.

2.2 That Members note the next key milestones in the production of the Argyll and Bute Local Plan.

3. BACKGROUND

3.1 The Finalised Draft Local Plan has attracted considerable interest from numerous stakeholders including statutory consultees, community organisations, interest groups, private companies and members of the public. In total over 4,100 representations were received during the nine week consultation period. Whilst this figure represents a Page 146

considerable increase on the 2,700 representations received in response to the Consultative Draft Local Plan approximately 64% of representations received were by way of a number of highly organised pro-forma campaigns. Other representations received contained multiple objections, requests for amendments or highly detailed comments that required a detailed response before the next stage of the Local Plan process could be progressed. It should also be noted that considerable support was also expressed for the growth agenda promoted by the plan and the need to boost economic performance, offer more opportunities for affordable housing, and counteract population loss and aging demographics.

Initial analysis of these representations has now been completed with the following main general issues being identified:

1. There was a considerable difference in opinion on the suitability, or otherwise, of the Council’s policy response to renewable energy, in particular on shore wind energy; 2. Concern was expressed with regard to the use of the rural opportunity areas to encourage rural development in the countryside; 3. There was concern expressed with regard to the amount of land being released for development in the countryside development control zones in general, particularly with regard to housing development in all its forms. 4. While many of the policies contained within the plan have attracted support the majority of the policies have attracted objections/comments on elements of their wording etc. 5. Significant infrastructure constraints have been identified that may have the potential to limit growth within Argyll and Bute;

Significant localised issues on an Area Committee basis have also been identified in Appendix C of this report.

In response to the aforementioned general and localised issues the Development Plans Unit have been analysing these representations and commencing negotiations with objectors to the plan in an effort to remove these objections, where possible, in an effort to reduce the scale and cost of the anticipated Public Local Inquiry (PLI). This negotiation process has resulted in a significant number of objections being either conditionally or unconditionally with drawn thereby reducing the size of the PLI and ultimately Page 147

the cost to the Council.

As part of this process it is considered necessary to publish a pre PLI Finalised Draft Local Plan with modifications. The modifications, as proposed, are contained within Appendix A and B of this report. Appendix A contains all modifications proposed for the Local Plan Written Statement and also proposed changes to the Action Plan and Supplementary Information and Guidance which relate to specific representations. Appendix B contains all proposed map modifications relevant to each Area Committee.

The Finalised Draft Local Plan modifications are intended to make changes to correct factual errors, to remove, where possible, elements of the plan that have been subject to significant objection, to put forward alternative sites for development as suggested through the consultation period, to further clarify issues of concern and provide updated information.

Appendix D to this report provides a breakdown of the number of potential modifications and PLI issues. It is also intended to publish in full on the Council’s web site, prior to the release of the modifications, all letters of representation received during the Finalised Draft Local Plan process that have not subsequently been withdrawn.

It is anticipated that a six week public deposit/consultation period will be held to allow further representations to be made on only the modified elements of the plan.

The Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) undertaken on the Finalised Draft Local Plan also attracted comments that are currently being addressed and will be subject to further amendment prior to the Public Local Inquiry. This will require a further report to the August SPC in due course.

3.2 In addition to the above the Policy Unit are also preparing a detailed response to all of the individual issues raised that will be made available to all objectors/representees prior to the PLI. This additional statement of publicity will help inform the Public Local Inquiry process that is due to commence in the first quarter of 2007.

Members should also be aware that the Development Policy unit has also been in discussion with different Page 148

Council services and external bodies and have commissioned various other studies to help in the justification of the Local Plan including housing and business studies for the Helensburgh and Lomond Area and flood risk assessments for all allocations and potential development sites.

4. CONCLUSION

4.1 The publication of the Finalised Draft Local Plan has generated a significant level of public interest and objection. Following assessment of the objections made to the Finalised Draft Argyll and Bute Local Plan a number of objections have either been unconditionally withdrawn through negotiation or withdrawn conditionally pending publication of modifications. These modifications, following approval by Committee, will be subject to advertisement and public scrutiny with a six week period for objection (only on the proposed modifications) being available. 4.2 For objections not withdrawn, a Public Local Inquiry (PLI) will be required. The PLI is currently scheduled to commence in the first quarter of 2007. Arrangements are currently under way with regard to the appointment of a Scottish Executive Inquiry Reporter (s), the content of the Inquiry timetable, preparation of Argyll and Bute’s Council evidence and the appointment of a programme officer to help run the PLI. At this stage it is anticipated that the PLI will consist of five elements with meetings held in each of the Council’s administrative areas to cover localised issues and another meeting to deal with general policy issues. Further details will be reported to subsequent meetings of the SPC in due course.

Members are also asked to note the next key milestones associated with the production of the Local Plan

• Approval of Finalised Plan with Modifications by the Area Committees- June 2006 • Approval of Finalised Plan with Modifications by the SPC - June 2006 • Deposit/Consultation period on modifications–June to July 2006 (six weeks) • Preparation of Council evidence and further period of negotiation to remove objections– June to December 2006 • Appointment of Reporter(s) October 2006 • Appointment of programme officer (temporary appointment)– October 2006 to April Page 149

2007(Dependant on PLI length) • Public Local Inquiry – Commencing first quarter 2007 – estimated to last for a four month period • Adoption of the Local Plan (6 months after PLI is completed)

5. IMPLICATIONS

Policy: Whilst this is a detailed development plan that focuses on land use, it is also intended to deliver on economic, social and environmental objectives. This delivery requires a particularly close integration between land use and transportation planning; investment in the latter being of crucial importance to the well-being of Argyll and Bute.

Financial: A budget of £150,000 is in place to meet the anticipated costs of the PLI including the employment of a programme officer on a temporary basis.

Personnel: There are significant personnel issues associated with the processing, delivery, review and monitoring of this plan.

Community: The report puts forward another significant opportunity for community engagement in the local plan process.

For further information contact: Fergus Murray

Telephone 01546 604293

LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS

1. The Argyll and Bute Local Plan – Finalised Plan – Written Statement 2. The Argyll and Bute Local Plan – Finalised Plan – Four Area Proposal Map Folders

Head of Planning Services

Page 150

This page is intentionally left blank Page 151

APPENDIX A LIST OF REASONS FOR MODIFICATIONS TO WRITTEN STATEMENT

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Contents Pages 1. i Change Policy LP ENV 8 title to Accuracy “Development Impact on Local Nature Conservation Sites”. 2. iii Change Policy LP SERV 2 title to Request by SEPA. “Incorporation of Natural Features/ Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDs). 3. iii Delete Policy LP SERV 5. To reflect the deletion of Policy LP SERV 5. Change LP SERV 6 to LP SERV 5. Change LP SERV 7 to LP SERV 6. Change LP SERV 8 to LP SERV 7. Change LP SERV 9 to LP SERV 8. Change LP SERV 10 to LP SERV 9. 4. iv Delete “P/” from Policy LP PG 1. Accuracy. Chapter 2 – The Settlement Strategy 5. 11 Para 2.18 – Insert “in particular tourism” to To reflect the importance of tourism in the fifth bullet point. Helensburgh area. 6. 11 Delete and replace para 2.19 – “Argyll and Clarification. Bute is made up of islands, a large rural area and part of the Greater Glasgow conurbation. In pursuing the above and recognising the diversity of the area, the Council and its Partners also aim to address through this Local Plan some of the key underlying issues affecting Argyll and Bute – in whole or in part. These include:” Chapter 5 – Environment 7. 25 Para 5.2 – Insert “access, enjoyment” after Clarification. the word “nature” in 4th sentence. 8. 25 Delete “The main environmental issues Consistency of format throughout Local Plan. have been identified through the consultation process and results from Argyll and Bute’s Citizens Panel” under para 2. 9. 26 Insert “and also local community groups Request by Helensburgh Study Group to where appropriate and resources permit” recognise the role of local groups. after 6th bullet point. 10. 27 Policy LP ENV 1 – Insert new para (A) – To provide better linkage with relevant “The development is of a form, location and Structure Plan Policies. scale consistent with Structure Plan Policies STRAT DC 1 to 6”. Renumber the following paras. 11. 27 Policy LP ENV 1 – Insert “and in particular, To avoid repetition and confused terminology the designated sites listed in (I) and (J) of with the requirements of LP Policies ENV 3 to this policy statement;” at end of para (B). 17.

1 Page 152

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Chapter 5 – Environment continued 12. 27 Policy LP ENV 1 – Delete para “In To avoid repetition and confused terminology particular, the Council will resist with the requirements of LP Policies ENV 3 to development proposals that would have a 17 (see Mod No. 11). significant adverse effect on the integrity or character, as appropriate of the following designated sites:” 13. 27 Policy LP ENV 1 – Insert “air quality” in para SEPA request. (D). 14. 27 Policy LP ENV 1 – Insert “Local” in para (I). To be consistent with the wording of LP Policy ENV 8. 15. 27 Policy LP ENV 1 – Justification – Delete the SNH request. word “and” after “heritage” in last bullet point and insert “landscape features and landscape character of the area” at end of para. 16. 27 Policy LP ENV 1 – Justification – Delete Objection: It is accepted that the criteria in LP “For example, some of the criteria would not ENV 1 should be applicable to smaller scale be applicable to smaller scale developments. developments” from fourth para. 17. 27 Policy LP ENV 1 – Justification – Delete the Accuracy words “7, DC 8, DC 9 & DC 10” from fifth bullet point and add “1 to 10”. 18. 29 Policy LP ENV 5 – Add the word “national” SNH policy advice requiring the insertion of to para (B). the word “national”. 19. 30 Policy LP ENV 6 – Delete “SIG document” To reflect change. and add “rural constraints proposals maps” to Policy Note. 20. 31 Policy LP ENV 7 – Justification – Insert para SNH request. “Development may provide opportunities for new planting. This should be in accordance with the local pattern of woodlands, thereby avoiding erosion of distinctive landscape patterns and enhancing landscape character”. 21. 31 Policy LP ENV 7 – Schedule FW 2 – Insert Objection: Amendment accepted to help under second bullet point strengthen policy. “- recreational value to local people”; “- amenity value”. 22. 32 Policy LP ENV 8 – Change Policy name to Accuracy. “Development Impact on Local Nature Conservation Sites”. Amend Contents page accordingly. 23. 32 Policy LP ENV 8 – Delete “Sites Important Accuracy. for Nature Conservation (SINCS)” and insert “Local Nature Conservation Sites” in 1st para. 24. 32 Policy LP ENV 8 – Justification – Delete Accuracy. “sites important for local nature conservation (SINCS)” from 1st para and insert “Local Nature Conservation Sites”.

2 Page 153

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Chapter 5 – Environment continued 25. 32 Policy LP ENV 8 – Justification – Change Accuracy/grammar. the word “this” to “thus” in 2nd para. 26. 32 Policy LP ENV 8 – Delete “SIG document” To reflect change. from end of 3rd para and insert “Rural Constraints Map”. 27. 33 Policy LP ENV 11 – Insert the word “either” At the request of Historic Scotland and in first para and insert “or which have been Scottish Natural Heritage – to be inserted if identified for inclusion” at end of first para. such a candidate list is generally available. 28. 33 Policy LP ENV 11 – Insert new para “Where Clarification on impact assessment and development would affect a heritage asset mitigation. or its setting the developer will be expected to demonstrate that the impact of the development upon that asset has been assessed and that adequate measures will be taken to preserve and enhance the special interest of the asset. Measures to mitigate against impact are likely to include enhanced physical access, interpretation and the provision of an open space or landscaped buffer zone, as appropriate”.

29. 34 Policy LP ENV 11 – Justification – Delete Accuracy – at the request of Historic Scotland “that date back to the Victorian era”. 30. 34 Policy LP ENV 11 – Justification – Insert Accuracy. new bullet point “The Memorandum of Guidance on Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas – Section 5 (historic Scotland) (1998)”. 31. 35 Policy LP ENV 13 – Split into two policies To relate the policy to the issue in hand and in (a) and (b) and insert (a) after number 13. accordance with emerging model policy. 32. 35 Policy LP ENV 13(a) – Delete “In To relate the policy to the issue in hand and in considering applications the Planning accordance with emerging model policy. Authority will presume against any development that will result in the demolition of a listed building or would otherwise harm its character or setting. Alterations or extensions to, and new developments within the curtilage of listed buildings must respect the original structure in terms of design, scale, materials and, where appropriate, setting”. Insert para “Development affecting a listed building or its setting shall preserve the building or its setting, and any features of special architectural or historic interest that it possesses”. 33. 35 Policy LP ENV 13(a) – Delete the word To avoid confusion. Accuracy. “generally” in 2nd para. Insert “of Guidance” in 2nd para after the word “Memorandum”. Add “(1998)” at end of 2nd para.

3 Page 154

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Chapter 5 – Environment continued 34. 35 Policy LP ENV 13(a) – Delete “Any To relate the policy to the issue in hand and proposal to demolish a listed building in accordance with emerging model policy. (whole or part) will need to be supported by a structural engineer’s report indicating that the building cannot be retained. Particular attention should also be paid to the following factors: (A) The importance of the building; (B) The adequacy of efforts made to retain the building in use, including the marketing of the building and its suitability for alternative uses, where appropriate; (C) The extent to which the community would benefit from the redevelopment.” 35. 35 Policy LP ENV 13(a) – Insert “Where Clarification on impact assessment and development would affect a heritage asset mitigation. or its setting the developer will be expected to demonstrate that the impact of the development upon that asset has been assessed and that adequate measures will be taken to preserve and enhance the special interest of the asset. Measures to mitigate against impact are likely to include enhanced physical access, interpretation and the provision of an open space or landscaped buffer zone, as appropriate.”

36. 35 Insert new policy LP ENV 13(b) and amend Clarity – much of the policy on “Impact of contents page. Development” was about demolition and this was confusing. Consistency – similar policies in respect of Conservation Areas are separated out into “Impact” and “Demolition” issues. 37. 35 Insert wording to new policy LP ENV 13(b) Clarification – to accord with the – “Proposals for the total or substantial Memorandum of Guidance, case law and demolition of a listed building will be emerging model policy. supported only where it is demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that every effort has been exerted by all concerned to find practical ways of keeping it. This will be demonstrated by inclusion of evidence to the planning authority that the building: (1) Has been actively marketed at a reasonable price and for a period reflecting its location, condition and possible viable uses without finding a purchaser; and (2) Is incapable of physical repair and re- use through the submission and verification of a thorough structural condition report.

4 Page 155

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Chapter 5 – Environment continued 38. 35 Insert para from original LP ENV 13 – “In Accuracy – this requirement had been cases where the Planning Authority is omitted. minded to grant consent to the demolition (whole or part) of a listed building it will consider attaching conditions in respect of”: Insert new para (A) – “(A) The recording of the building to be demolished, in addition to the requirement to formally notify the RCAHMS;” Renumber (D), (E) and (F) from original LP ENV 13 – “(B) Methods of demolition to be employed; (C) The conservation, retention or salvaging of architectural or other features, artefacts or other materials; (D) The restoration or redevelopment of the site including specifying that redevelopment contracts need to be approved prior to the commencement of demolition, in appropriate cases.”

39. 35 Policy LP ENV 13(a) and (b) – Justification Accuracy. – Insert “of Guidance” under 2nd bullet point. Insert “(1968)” at end of 2nd bullet point.

40. 36 Policy LP ENV 14 – Delete from the 1st para Accuracy – need to relate to the wording of the words “maintain”, “amenity” and “and”. the Act. Grammar. In line with emerging Insert the words “preserve”, “appearance” model policy. and “or its setting, or a”. Delete “s” from the word “Area” at end of para.

41. 36 Policy LP ENV 14 – Delete from 2nd para Accuracy – need to relate to the wording of the word “visual”. Insert in 2nd para “and on the Act. In line with emerging model policy. sites forming part of their settings”; “other special” and “of Guidance”.

42. 36 Policy LP ENV 14 – Insert two new paras – Clarification, accuracy and in line with good “Outline planning applications will not practice and emerging model policy. normally be considered appropriate for proposed development in conservation

areas”.

“Trees that are considered by the planning

authority to contribute positively to the character or appearance of a Conservation Area shall be preserved.

43. 36 Policy LP ENV 14 – Justification – Delete Accuracy. from 1st para the sentence “Ten Article 4 Directions restricting permitted development rights are currently in place within these Conservation Areas”.

5 Page 156

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Chapter 5 – Environment continued 44. 36 Policy LP ENV 14 – Justification – Delete Clarification. The character appraisals in the from 3rd para the word “visual” and insert SIG can be used for indicative purposes only. “other special”. For the purposes of Development Control more detailed appraisals are necessary. It is Insert the word “initial” in 3rd para. our duty under the Act to review conservation Delete the word “also” and “use these areas. The Scottish Executive expects all statements to help reassess” from 3rd para. planning authorities to have refreshed their Article 4 Directions following changes to the Delete the “e” from the word “update” and GDPO in 1992. replace with “ing”. Delete “for all its Conservation Area” from third para.

45. 36 Policy LP ENV 14 – Justification – Delete Clarification – giving SBEAs the status of “Whilst not having the concentration or potential conservation areas. continuity of quality of Conservation Areas, Accuracy – the concept of “promotion” is they do have sufficient quality to require anomalous in this context”. safeguarding and promotion as part of the development control process” from 4th para. Insert “They have sufficient quality to require safeguarding as part of the development control process and may have the special architectural or historic interest required of Conservation Areas”.

46. 36 Policy LP ENV 14 – Justification – Delete 5th Accuracy – we seek continuity and innovation para completely. in design in all our conservation areas and SBEAs. 47. 36 Policy LP ENV 14 – Justification – Add “of Accuracy. Guidance” and “(1998)” to 3rd bullet point

48. 37 Policy LP ENV 15 – Delete “Development Accuracy – in line with the legislation and involving” from 1st para and insert Memorandum of Guidance. Clarification – this “Proposals for the”. policy is about demolition. Demolition does not always arise as a consequence of the Delete “amenity” and insert “appearance” in development process so “development” does 1st para. not need to be introduced here. Accuracy – Delete “not be permitted” and insert “or it’s the word “amenity” does not appear in the setting” and “be considered as if that conservation area legislation. The wording of structure was listed – as set out in Policy LP the Act gives us the word “appearance” ENV 13(b)” in 1st para. instead. Existing guidance and emerging model policy reflect the protection of a conservation area’s setting. 49. 37 Policy LP ENV 15 – Justification – Insert Accuracy. new bullet point “PAN 71 (Conservation Area Management)”. Insert “(1998)” to 2nd bullet point.

50. 37 Policy LP ENV 16 – Delete “be resisted” Grammar. Clarification – In line with the from 1st para. Add and “s” to the word legislation and emerging model policy. setting and “Not be permitted unless there are exceptional circumstances” to end of 1st para.

6 Page 157

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Chapter 5 – Environment continued 51. 37 Policy LP ENV 16 – Insert new para – Clarification on impact assessment and “Where development would affect a mitigation. heritage asset or its setting the developer will be expected to demonstrate that the impact of the development upon that asset has been assessed and that adequate measures will be taken to preserve and enhance the special interest of the asset. Measures to mitigate against impact are likely to include enhanced physical access, interpretation and the provision of an open space or landscaped buffer zone, as appropriate”. 52. 37 Policy LP ENV 16 – Justification – Delete Accuracy. 3rd bullet point. 53. 38 LP ENV 17 – Justification – Insert new 1st Accuracy. para “Argyll and Bute contains a wide variety of archaeological features ranging from prehistoric features such as ancient forts and duns, early Christian chapels, mediaeval castles and recent industrial archaeology. Some such as the Kilmartin Glen may be of potential world heritage site status, while others are of national or more local importance. Much of Argyll and Bute’s archaeology makes an important contribution to the tourism economy of the area, and can also have nature conservation benefits”. 54. 39 Policy LP ENV 18 – Delete 2nd and 3rd Accuracy. bullet points. 55. 39 Policy LP ENV 19 – Delete from para (A) Clarity and avoidance of repetition. “harmonise with the key features of the settlement, edge of settlement, countryside or coastal surroundings. Developments that do not satisfactory harmonise with their settings and surroundings shall be resisted”. Insert “pay regard to the context within which it is located” to end of para (A). 56. 39 Policy LP ENV 19 – Delete para (F). In response to representation from Green Power. Avoidance of repetition – this section merely served to repeat the basic headline policy and added nothing to it. 57. 39 Policy LP ENV 19 – Insert “, the Council’s Accuracy. sustainable design guide” after “Local Plan” in 1st para.

7 Page 158

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Chapter 6 - Economy 58. 41 Policy LP ENV 20 – Justification – Insert To ensure communities will be involved at an new para after 1st para “It should also be early stage of the process. noted that where a developer is considering an element of public art within a project it is strongly advised that they should liaise with the local community, including the Community Council, at an early stage of the process”. 59. 46 Under Section 3. Economic Proposals – in To reflect extent of the strategy. the last bullet point insert the words “and waterfront” after “centre”. 60. 47 Policy LP BUS 1 – Insert “and waste SEPA request. management developments as defined in Policy LP SERV 6” into 1st para. 61. 47 Policy LP BUS 1 – Insert “which includes SEPA request. waste management development” into last para. 62. 47 Policy LP BUS 1 – Insert two new bullet Accuracy. points – • “NPPG 10 (Planning and Waste Management). • PAN 63 (Waste Management Planning)”. 63. 52 Policy LP RET 1 – Insert “Schedule R 1 - In the interests of clarity. Retail: Scales of Development” at end of policy. 64. 53 Policy LP RET 2 – Delete “public house or To ensure the integrity of the ‘core shopping hot food take-away use” from para (B). areas’ is safeguarded. 65. 54 Policy LP RET 4 – Change “100” to “200” To allow greater flexibility. in (A). 66. 55 Policy LP RET 5 – Insert “OR” at end of Clarity and accuracy. para (A). 67. 56 Policy LP BAD 1 – Insert “all the following Clarity and accuracy. criteria is satisfied” at end of 1st para. 68. 62 Policy LP REN 3 – Delete “In this respect SEPA request. energy generation arising from landfill, composting or large-scale incineration* within, or immediately adjacent to, settlement boundaries, is unlikely to be acceptable” at end of para. Delete footnote. Chapter 7 - Housing 69. 67 Policy LP HOU 1 – Insert in (B) point 5 In response to objection by Crofters following “croft” “unless the croft is of a Commission to allow larger crofts to be sub- size where sub-division could be divided where it is sustainable to do so. considered to be sustainable in terms of Crofters Commission advice”. 70. 67 Policy LP HOU 1 – Justification – Insert “, Clarity. the extension of the established settlement boundary” after the word “coalescence” in 3rd para.

8 Page 159

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Chapter 7 – Housing continued 71. 69 Policy LP HOU 2 – Delete the word To ensure consistency and to reflect ongoing “encouraged” from para (B) and insert discussions from the Strategic Housing “required on housing sites for 8 or more Forum. units”. 72. 69 Policy LP HOU 2 – Delete the word To reflect amendment 71. “allocation” from para (C). 73. 69 Policy LP HOU 2 – Justification – Insert To ensure consistency and to reflect ongoing new sentence at end of 3rd para “To discussions with the Strategic Housing Forum. accord with PAN 74 a contribution of 25% affordable housing provision will generally be sought”. 74. 69 Policy LP HOU 2 – Justification – Change Grammar the word “accordable” to “affordable” in 4th para. 75. 70 Policy LP HOU 3 – Delete “take account Grammar of land and” from para (A). 76. 71 Policy LP HOU 5 – Delete para (D). Too restrictive. 77. 71 Policy LP HOU 6 – Justification – Insert Accuracy the words “or townscape” after “landscape” in 2nd para. Chapter 8 – Servicing, Transport, Access and Parking Policies 78. 75 Delete 2nd last bullet point and replace To reflect current situation. with “To work with Strathclyde Partnership for Transport and Hitrans to create a Regional Transport Strategy to consider transport policy issues on a Regional and National level.” 79. 76 Policy LP SERV 2 – Insert “Incorporation SEPA request to reflect content of policy of Natural Features/” into policy heading. statement. Amend Contents Page accordingly. 80. 76 Policy LP SERV 2 – Delete “seek to SEPA request. encourage alternatives to extensive” and insert “require that” in 2nd sentence. 81. 76 Policy LP SERV 2 – Insert “are avoided SEPA request. wherever practicable and designed sensitively where unavoidable” after the word “watercourses”. 82. 76 Policy LP SERV 2 – Insert at end of para SEPA request. “Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDs) (see Glossary) provide benefits in terms of flood avoidance, water quality, habitat creation and amenity. Proposals for SuDs measures compliant with technical guidance will be required in relation to all development prior to determination”. 83. 78 Delete Policy LP SERV 5 completely. Policy indefensible in terms of science. 84. 79 Renumber Policy LP SERV 6 to “5” Accuracy: SEPA request to help comply with Delete the words “toxic” and “and other national and area waste plans. noxious” from para 1.

9 Page 160

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Chapter 8 – Servicing, Transport, Access and Parking Policies continued 85. 79 LP SERV 5 – Delete the words SEPA request to reflect current terminology. “incineration of” from para 2 and insert To help policy comply with national and area “energy from”. Insert the word “facilities” waste plans. after “waste”. Insert “unless it complies with the objectives of the Area of National Waste Plan” at end of para 2. 86. 79 LP SERV 5 – Insert the word SEPA request. To assist in the “composting” after “recycling” in para (E). encouragement of composting. 87. 79 LP SERV 5 – Insert “composting where SEPA request. To assist in the appropriate” after the word “recycling” in encouragement of composting. para (E)(i). 88. 79 LP SERV 5 – Justification – Delete from SEPA request. To reflect current situation 2nd para “involves focusing mainland with regard to waste issues. waste disposal at two landfill sites” and insert “for municipal waste management, involves segregated kerbside collection initiatives to collect recylates; community composting and the development of mechanical biological treatment (MBT) plants to process waste into composted material; with residual waste disposed of at two landfill sites within” . 89. 79 LP SERV 5 – Under Background Accuracy. Information insert new bullet point – “National Waste Strategy”. 90. 79 LP SERV 5 – Insert “(as shown on the To reflect change. Proposal Maps)” after the word “facilities”. 91. 79 LP SERV 5 – Justification – Insert the Accuracy. word “landfill” before “sites” in 1st para. 92. 79 LP SERV 5 – Justification – Delete To reflect change. “Supplementary Guidance document)” and insert “Proposal Maps)” in 2nd para. 93. 79 LP SERV 5 – Insert “and the Accuracy. National/Area Waste Strategies” at end of 2nd para. 94. 79 Renumber Policy LP SERV 7 to “6”. Accuracy. 95. 80 Renumber Policy LP SERV 8 to “7”. Accuracy. 96. 80 Renumber Policy LP SERV 9 to “8”. Accuracy.

10 Page 161

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Chapter 9 – Recreation and Community Policies 97. 80 LP SERV 8 – Insert two new paras under SEPA request. heading “Flooding” - Development on the functional flood plain will be considered contrary to the objectives of this plan. In exceptional circumstances, where land is required to facilitate key development strategies which come forward through the structure/local plan process, land raising may be acceptable provided effective compensatory flood storage can be demonstrated and the objectives of the EU Water Framework Directive are not compromised in so doing. Where redevelopment of existing brown field sites at risk from flooding is proposed, the planning authority will take into account the impact on flood risk elsewhere and the mitigation measures proposed. Guidance on the type of development that will be generally permissible within specific flood risk areas is set out below. However it should be noted that in all cases where the potential for flooding is highlighted, the planning authority will exercise the ‘precautionary principle’ and refuse development proposals where such proposals do not comply with parts (A); (B); (C); (D) and (E) as set out below and/or on the advice of the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA). 98. 81 LP SERV 8 – Insert at end of last bullet SEPA request. point under (ii) “and any such measures would not compromise the objectives of the EU Water Framework Directive”. 99. 80 LP SERV 9 – Delete “Land raising may SEPA request. also be an acceptable option” at end of para (C). 100. 80 Renumber Policy LP SERV 10 to “9”. Accuracy. 101. 84 LP TRAN 3 – Delete “countryside walks” Sportscotland request to allow greater and insert “recreational paths” at end of flexibility. para (A) 2. 102. 87 LP TRAN 6 – Change “500m2” to Consistent with Appendix C. “1000m2” in para (B). 103. 93 LP REC 2 – Delete “s” from the word Clarity. “space” in para (A) and insert “protection areas”. 104. 93 LP REC 2 – Delete “s” from the word Clarity. “space” in para (B) and insert “protection areas”.

11 Page 162

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Chapter 11 – Implementation, Resources and Monitoring 105. 93 LP REC 2 – Insert “and there is a clear To reflect advice from Sportscotland. long term excess of pitches, playing fields, and public open space in the wider area, taking into account long term strategy, recreational and amenity value and short-fall in adjoining local plan area” at end of para (ii). 106. 101 Delete and replace para 3(a) with More meaningful and accurate indicator that “Percentage of Listed Buildings removed links two former ones. from the “At Risk” Register each year through positive action”. 107. 101 Delete and replace para 3(b) with Additional, meaningful indicator. “Number of Conservation Area Reviews (including Appraisals and Management Plans) completed each year”. Appendix A – Sustainable Siting and Design Principles 108. 103 • Insert new bullet point under para 1.2 – To ensure protection of Argyll and Bute’s best “Protecting Agricultural Assets: most of agricultural land. the agricultural land within Argyll and Bute is of a poor quality, with no agricultural land classified as Class 1 or 2 and only small areas of Classes 3.1 and 3.2 in Kintyre and Islay. Nevertheless agriculture remains an important part of the economy of Argyll and Bute and also provides forms of continuous and locally sensitive land management. In all countryside development control zones, new development should not be considered where it would require the loss of better quality agricultural land or result in the fragmentation of field systems or the loss of access to better quality agricultural land”. 109. 103 Insert “s” to the word “Area” in para 2.5. Grammar. 110. 103 Delete the words “will be” and insert “is” in Accuracy. para 3.1 4. 111. 108 Insert “Where planning permission is Accuracy. required” at beginning of para 19.1. 112. 109 Insert “and is not adequately or Accuracy. appropriately screened” under third bullet point in para 19.2. Appendix C – Access and Parking Standards 113. 117 Car Parking Standards Table – Insert an In response to objection to allow greater extra column showing Argyll and Bute flexibility and a range of parking options. Minimum Parking Standards. (see Car Parking Standards Table on page 17). 114. 118 Delete “(for single person occupation)” In response to objection to provide greater and insert “(single bedroom)” in Zero clarity. Parking Provision Table.

12 Page 163

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Appendix F – Allocation and Potential Development Area Schedules 115. 125 Business and Industry Allocations – Please refer to each Area’s respective map Helensburgh and Lomond Table – modifications for reasons for insertions and Change Area (Ha) for BI-AL 3/1 to “3.5 deletions. (Net)”. 116. 125 Business and Industry Allocations – Islay Please refer to each Area’s respective map Table – Delete BI-AL 10/3. modifications for reasons for insertions and deletions. 117. 126 Business and Industry Allocations – Lorn Please refer to each Area’s respective map and The Inner Isles Table – Insert BI-AL modifications for reasons for insertions and 5/11. deletions. 118. 126 Business and Industry Allocations – Mull Please refer to each Area’s respective map Table – Delete BI-AL 6/1. Insert BI-AL modifications for reasons for insertions and 6/2. deletions. 119. 126 Business and Industry Allocations – Insert Please refer to each Area’s respective map Table for Tiree with BI-AL 7/1. modifications for reasons for insertions and deletions. 120. 127 Community Facilities and Recreation Please refer to each Area’s respective map Allocations – Helensburgh and Lomond modifications for reasons for insertions and Table – Insert CFR-AL 3/2. deletions. Delete footnote and insert “Should the new Hermitage Academy not proceed at this location it will retain its greenbelt designation”. 121. 128 Housing Allocations – Cowal Table – Please refer to each Area’s respective map Delete H-AL 2/7 and H-AL 2/8. Change modifications for reasons for insertions and H-AL 2/11 number of units to “25”. deletions. 122. 129 Housing Allocations – Cowal Table Please refer to each Area’s respective map continued – Change H-AL 2/15 modifications for reasons for insertions and Affordability Minimum % to “0%”. deletions. 123. 129 Housing Allocations – Helensburgh and Please refer to each Area’s respective map Lomond Table – Change number of units modifications for reasons for insertions and for H-AL 3/2 to “10”, H-AL 3/11 to “30”, H- deletions. AL 3/8 to “30” and the Total to “308”. 124. 130 Housing Allocations – Islay Table – Please refer to each Area’s respective map Change H-AL 10/6 number of units to modifications for reasons for insertions and “15”. Change Total to “183”. deletions. 125. 130 Housing Allocations – Mid Argyll Table – Please refer to each Area’s respective map Delete H-AL 12/13 and H-AL 12/14. modifications for reasons for insertions and Change Total to “271”. deletions. 126. 130 Housing Allocations – North Kintyre Table Please refer to each Area’s respective map – Delete H-AL 13/3 and insert H-AL 13/4. modifications for reasons for insertions and deletions.

13 Page 164

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Appendix F – Allocation and Potential Development Area Schedules continued 127. 131 Housing Allocations – Lorn and The Inner Please refer to each Area’s respective map Isles Table – Insert H-AL 5/23. Change modifications for reasons for insertions and H-AL 5/21 number of units to “40”. Delete deletions. H-AL 5/23 and change Total to “813”. 128. 132 Housing Allocations – Mull Table – Please refer to each Area’s respective map Change H-AL 6/2 number of units to “10” modifications for reasons for insertions and and affordability minimum % to “25%”. deletions. Insert H-AL 6/6. Change Total to “74”. 129. 134 Mineral Allocations – Mull Table – Change Please refer to each Area’s respective map Ref No. for MIN-AL 6/1 to “6/2” and MIN- modifications for reasons for insertions and AL 6/2 to “6/1”. deletions. 130. 134 Potential Development Areas – Bute Please refer to each Area’s respective map Table – Delete PDA 1/3. modifications for reasons for insertions and deletions. 131. 135 Potential Development Areas – Cowal Please refer to each Area’s respective map Table – Delete PDA 2/8 and PDA 2/49. modifications for reasons for insertions and Insert the word “Education” under Use for deletions. PDA 2/42. Insert PDA 2/101 and 2/102. 132. 135 Potential Development Areas – Inveraray Please refer to each Area’s respective map Table – Delete PDA 9/14. modifications for reasons for insertions and deletions. 133. 136 Potential Development Areas – Islay Please refer to each Area’s respective map Table – Delete PDA 10/22 and PDA modifications for reasons for insertions and 10/27. deletions. 134. 137 Potential Development Areas – Jura Please refer to each Area’s respective map Table – Delete PDA 11/1 and PDA 11/2. modifications for reasons for insertions and deletions. 135. 137 Potential Development Areas – Mid Argyll Please refer to each Area’s respective map Table – Insert PDA 12/31. modifications for reasons for insertions and deletions. 136. 138 Potential Development Areas – Mid Argyll Please refer to each Area’s respective map Table continued – Change PDA 12/37 modifications for reasons for insertions and Use to “Recreation/Open Space with deletions. potential for small scale enabling housing development (not exceeding 5 houses)”. Delete PDA 12/41. Insert PDA 12/83. 137. 138 Potential Development Areas – North Please refer to each Area’s respective map Kintyre Table – Delete PDA 13/3. modifications for reasons for insertions and deletions. 138. 139 Potential Development Areas – South Please refer to each Area’s respective map Kintyre Table – Delete PDA 14/62, PDA modifications for reasons for insertions and 14/24, PDA 14/25 and PDA 14/61. deletions. 139. 139 Potential Development Areas – Coll Table Please refer to each Area’s respective map – Delete PDA 4/1 and PDA 4/2. modifications for reasons for insertions and deletions.

14 Page 165

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Appendix F – Allocation and Potential Development Area Schedules continued 140. 139 Potential Development Areas – Lorn and Please refer to each Area’s respective map The Inner Isles Table – Delete PDA modifications for reasons for insertions and 5/160, PDA 5/31, PDA 5/35, PDA 5/36. deletions. Change PDA 5/108 Density to “Medium” and Affordability % to “100%”. Change PDA 5/109 Density to “Mixed” and Affordability % to “25%”. Delete PDA 5/171. 141. 140 Potential Development Areas – Lorn and Please refer to each Area’s respective map The Inner Isles Table continued – Change modifications for reasons for insertions and PDA 5/168 Density to “Mixed” and deletions. Affordability % to “25%”. Delete PDA 5/51, PDA 5/52 and PDA 5/53. Change PDA 5/54 Use to “Marina/Golf Course/Leisure”. Delete PDA 5/111. Delete PDA 5/173, PDA 5/127 and PDA 5/40. Change PDA 5/72 Use to “Tourism/ Leisure/Housing”. 142. 141 Potential Development Areas – Mull Table Please refer to each Area’s respective map – Insert PDA 6/50, PDA 6/49, PDA 6/48, modifications for reasons for insertions and PDA 6/51 And PDA 6/52. deletions. 143. 142 Potential Development Areas – Tiree Please refer to each Area’s respective map Table – Delete PDA 7/1. modifications for reasons for insertions and deletions. 144. 144 Areas for Action – Helensburgh and Please refer to each Area’s respective map Lomond Table – Remove “Iona Cottage” modifications for reasons for insertions and AFA 3/18 Location. deletions. 145. 144 Areas for Action – Lorn and The Inner Please refer to each Area’s respective map Isles Table – Delete AFA 5/9. modifications for reasons for insertions and deletions. 146. 144 Areas for Action – Mull Table – Delete the Please refer to each Area’s respective map word “Local” and insert “Strategic” from modifications for reasons for insertions and AFA 6/3 Nature of Action. deletions. 147. 145 Areas for Action – Tiree Table – Delete Please refer to each Area’s respective map the word “development” and insert modifications for reasons for insertions and “redevelopment for residential, business, deletions. commercial” to AFA 7/2 Nature of Action. 148. 146 Area for Action – Mid Argyll Table – Please refer to each Area’s respective map Delete AFA 14/1, AFA 14/2, AFA 14/3, modifications for reasons for insertions and AFA 14/4, AFA 14/5, AFA 14/6, AFA 13/3, deletions. AFA 13/1 and AFA 13/2. Insert new Table for North Kintyre – Add AFA 13/3, AFA 13/1 and AFA 13/2. Insert new Table for South Kintyre – Add AFA 14/1, AFA 14/2, AFA 14/3, AFA 14/4, AFA 14/5, AFA 14/6 and AFA 14/7

15 Page 166

Mod Page Modification Reason for Modification No. No. Glossary 149. 148 Change “Core retail area” to “Core Consistency of usage throughout Plan. shopping area”. 150. 150 Insert new para “Local community - the Clarity. population of the entire Council area, including local residents and their representative bodies such as Community Councils where active and those working in or making use of the area” after “Local community of interest” para. 151. 150 Insert new para “Local nature Clarity. conservation sites – These are shown on the Rural Constraints map, and are locally important sites for wildlife or nature interests. They have been judged to be important because: (A) the site supports a natural or semi-natural plant community(ies), and/or (B) the site supports a high diversity of floral species and contains uncommon/rare fauna, and/or (C) the site is of value for environmental education for local communities and local schools and/or (D) is a landscape, landform or rock feature identified as having a particular value for education and tourism. Local Nature Conservation Sites include: • Local Nature Reserves • Regionally Important Geological/ Geo-- morphological Sites • The former sites of important for nature conservation (SINC) • Other local wildlife sites” after “Local community” para. 152. 149 Insert new sentence at end of Key In response to representations to take environmental features para – “In account of Community Council KEF lists. addition, lists of Key Environmental Features issued by Community Councils for their area will be taken into account as material considerations”. 153. 152 Insert new para “Local Nature Reserve – Clarity. a protected area of land designated by a local authority because of its local special natural interest and/or educational value” after “Local Nature Conservation Sites” para. 154. 150 Insert new para “Natural resources – Clarity. materials that occur in nature and are essential or useful to humans, such as water, air, land, forests, fish and wildlife, topsoil and minerals” after “Natural heritage resources” para. 155. 153 Insert new para “Open Space Protection Clarity. Areas - areas of valued open space, sports pitches and playing fields as identified in the Proposal Maps of the Local Plan” after “Open country development”.

16 Page 167

CAR PARKING STANDARDS Reference to m2 is to Gross National Minimum Parking National Maximum Parking Floor Area Standard Standard Bulk Retailing Stores 1 space per 25m2 1 space per 14m2 Shops 1 space per 30m2 1 space per 20m2 Wholesale Warehouses 1.1 space per 100m2 1 space per 20m2 Business (Use Class 4) 1 space 50m2 1 space per 30m2 Cinemas (Use Class 11 (a)) 1 space per 10 seats 1 space per 5 seats Conference Facilities 1 space per 10 seats 1 space per 5 seats Stadia Not applicable 1 space per 15 seats Leisure (other than Cinemas 1 space per 22m2 1 space per 22m2 and Stadia) Higher and Further Education 1 space per 2 staff plus 1 space per 1 space per 2 staff plus 1 15 students space per 15 students Open Air Markets 1 space per 50m2 site area 1 space per 50m2 site area Restaurants (Use Class 3) Hot 2 spaces per 22m2 2 spaces per 22m2 Food Takeaways and Public Houses Housing (Use Class 9) and 1.5 spaces per 1 bedroom unit 1.5 spaces per 1 bedroom Flatted Dwellings 2 spaces per 2-3 bedroom unit unit 3 spaces per 4 or more bedroom 2 spaces per 2-3 bedroom units unit 3 spaces per 4 or more bedroom units Town Centre Housing (Use 0.5 spaces per unit Class 9) (all Scales) and Flatted Dwellings (medium to large scale) Disabled Car Parking provision A minimum of 4% of the parking spaces provided should be designated for disabled parking. To comply with Building Regulation requirements for buildings other than dwellings, parking for the disabled should be provided at a ratio at least one car parking space per 20 parking spaces or part thereof. Disabled parking spaces should be clearly marked and not be not more than 45 metres from the principal entrance of the building. Disabled parking spaces should be at least 5 x 2.5 metres, with a clear space at least a 1 metre wide along one long side to facilitate access for wheelchairs. The clear space may be shared between 2 car parking spaces.

17 Page 168

ACTION PLAN CHANGES Please note that the following amendments are as a direct result of representations received. Further changes will be made to the Action Plan to update the information in line with the emerging Written Statement.

Schedule 1 Reference Prop SI 2 Delete ‘Study for Oban Action Plan to be commissioned 2005’ Add ‘Oban Action Plan published June 2006’

Reference Prop SI 4 Add ‘Helensburgh Partnership set up Spring 2006 Add ‘Business Study undertaken Spring 2006’

Reference Rec SI 2 Add ‘Improvements announced by SE’

Reference REC SI 3 Correct ‘Initiative at the Edge has been addressed for Colonsay, Jura and Coll’

Schedule 2.2 Other Organisations : Delete ‘Westrans’ replace with ‘SPfT’

Schedule 2.3 Other Organisations : Delete ‘Westrans’ replace with ‘SPfT’

Schedule 4.1 Add – Ongoing ‘; AFA established in Modified Local Plan’

Schedule 2 Helensburgh Waterfront Add to comments ‘Helensburgh Partnership established Spring 2006’

Helensburgh Town Centre Change Priority. Delete ‘2’ replace with ‘1’ Add to comments. ‘Helensburgh Partnership established Spring 2006’

Greenbelt Change Priority. Delete ‘4’ replace with ‘1-4’ Add to comments ‘Work underway but to carry through to longer term’

Colgrain Iona Cottage/ Black Wood Rename as follows ‘Colgrain Iona Cottage/ Black Wood’

Oban – South Pier/Railway Comments. Delete ‘Included in major strategy for expansion of Oban’ and replace with ‘Oban Action Plan published June 2006’

Oban George Street/north pier Comments. Delete ‘Included in major strategy for expansion of Oban’ and replace with ‘Oban Action Plan published June 2006’

18 Page 169

Oban Esplanade Comments. Delete ‘Included in major strategy for expansion of Oban’ and replace with ‘Oban Action Plan published June 2006’

Oban Bay Comments. Delete ‘Included in major strategy for expansion of Oban’ and replace with ‘Oban Action Plan published June 2006’

Dunstaffnage Bay Comments. Delete ‘Included in major strategy for expansion of Oban’ and replace with ‘Oban Action Plan published June 2006’

Schedule 3 To undertake a town centre and waterfront strategy and action plan to assist in the regeneration of Helensburgh Reason : To reflect the full extent of the strategy

To continue to implement the Council’s Transportation Strategy with all relevant partners. Other Agencies : WESTRANS SPfT, HITRANS

To create a Joint Transport Strategy with Westrans and Hitrans to consider transport policy issues on a Regional and National level. Lead Agency : ABC SPfT, HITRANS Other Agencies : WESTRANS, HITRANS, ABC, SE Priority : 1

HELENSBURGH AND LOMOND AREA Areas for Action Schedules

AFA 3/1 Helensburgh Waterfront 1 Point 6, 6th Bullet point delete ‘-revised supermarket redevelopment options’ 2 Add to Point 6, new bullet point ‘the framework principles of the Helensburgh Town Centre and Waterfront Report, September 2004, prepared by yellow book.’

AFA 3/2 Helensburgh Town Centre 1 Add to Point 1 the following ‘1. To pursue an area for action, which will support the Structure Plan proposal PROP SI 4E) to regenerate and enhance the Helensburgh town centre and waterfront areas and take into account the framework principles of the Helensburgh Town Centre and Waterfront Report, September 2004, prepared by yellow book.’

AFA 3/5 Greenbelt 1 Delete point 7 ‘To consider the greenbelt ‘areas of search’ which have been identified by this local plan’ Reason : To reflect the current position where greenbelt ‘areas of search’ have been removed from the Finalised Draft Local Plan. 2 Add new point 7 ‘To undertake an examination of the supply and demand context for development in the Helensburgh area in order to identify the broad extent of future growth as required by SPP 21 Green Belts’ Reason : To take account of the recently published SPP 21 : Green Belts.

19 Page 170

3 Add new point 8 ‘To undertake an assessment of the northern and eastern approaches to Helensburgh in order to identify potential issues and opportunities for environmental improvement which relate to the overall aim for the continued regeneration and enhancement of Helensburgh.’ 4 Add new point 9 ‘To involve relevant key stakeholders such as local community councils, the Helensburgh Green Belt Group and local land owners in future actions within the AFA 3/5.’

AFA 3/6 Kilmahew/Cardross 1 Point 2 amend as follows ‘To consider ensure that opportunities and potential for the area to be used and accessed by the general public (particularly the Cardross community) for leisure and recreation purposes eg. a country park are realised’ Reason : To take into account representations made regarding access in this area.

Potentail Development Area Schedules PDA 3/15 1 Identified Constraints – Change Multiple Ownership tick to Yes from No. 2 Add to relevant policies the following ‘STRAT FW 2; LP ENV 7; LP ENV 8’ 3 Correct spelling ‘APPENDIC’ to ‘APPENDIX’

OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES Areas for Action Schedules AFA 6/3 Sound of Iona 1 Under ‘STATUS’ delete tick in ‘Local’ box, add tick in ‘Strategic’ box.

AFA 5/10 Cuan Sound, AFA 5/11 Easdale Sound, AFA 5/12 Lynn of Lorn 1 Under Nature of Action replace ‘Structure Plan Schedule 1 (5)’ with ‘Structure Plan Schedule 1’

Potential Development Area Schedules PDA 5/55 Connel – Saulmore Farm 1 1. Potential golf course and associated leisure facility development. 2. Enabling housing

Supplementary Information and Guidance

1 Section 19. Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation. To be renamed Local Nature Conservation Sites Note : These areas are to be shown in the Rural Constraints Map

2 In section 19 rename ‘20. Camis Eskan Glen’ as ‘20. Camis Eskan Glen (Red Burn)’

3 In section 19 add to end of list heading ‘Regionally Important Geological/Geomorphological Sites’ and add under this ‘220. Ardmore Point’

4 Section 23. Tree Preservation Orders is being amended and updated to reflect the current situation. This will be available at the end of May.

5 Section 7. Conservation Area Character Appraisals change ‘Townscape Policy Area’ to ‘Special Built Environment’

20 Page 171

5 Add note to ‘16. Population and Related Profiles’ as follows: ‘Note : Because of differences in the way the 1991 and 2001 Census figures were adjusted to allow for under enumeration, population figures are not directly comparable. However, errors resulting from the differences in methodology are deemed to be minor.’

21 Page 172

This page is intentionally left blank Page 173

APPENDIX B: LIST OF REASONS FOR MODIFICATIONS TO MAPS

COLL

Mod Map Modification Reason for No. No. Modification Coll 1 Coll Template Review of ROA’s (including ROA’s on Coll have been amended amending boundaries and taking account of recent planning deletion to be replaced with permissions granted and a jointly Sensitive Countryside). commissioned (A&B Council/SNH) detailed landscape capacity study to ensure any development is sympathetic to the wider landscape. Coll 2 Arinagour; (1) Deletion of housing allocation Owner/occupier of site does not wish to H-AL 4/1 and replaced with develop as site is vital for agricultural Countryside Around Settlement. future of croft. Coll 3 Arinagour; (1) Deletion of PDA 4/1 and Site is part of in-bye croft land which is replaced with Countryside very limited on Coll. Around Settlement. Coll 4 Arinagour; (1) Deletion of PDA 4/2 and Site is part of in-bye croft land which is replaced with Countryside very limited on Coll. Around Settlement.

LORN

Mod Map Modification Reason for No. No. Modification Lorn 1 Lorn 6; (6) Review of ROA’s within Lynn of ROA’s within Lynn of Lorn NSA have Lorn NSA including amending been significantly revised taking into boundaries and deletion and account development pressure and replacement with Sensitive SNH concerns to ensure any Countryside. development is sympathetic to the wider landscape. Lorn 2 Lorn 6; (6) Extension of ROA north of ROA extended to include area which Benderloch. could be developed sympathetically to the wider landscape. Lorn 3 Lorn 6; (6) Deletion of part of ROA north of Steeply sloping part of ROA deleted as Benderloch to be replaced with it could not be developed Sensitive Countryside. sympathetically to the wider landscape. Lorn 4 Lorn 17; (17) New ROA at junction of A816 Former zoo car park is suitable for small and Lerags road. scale development that is sympathetic to the wider landscape. Lorn 5 Lorn 18; (18) New ROA north of Kilchrenan. Former garage site and surrounding area is suitable for small scale development that is sympathetic to the wider landscape.

1 Page 174

Mod Map Modification Reason for No. No. Modification Lorn 6 Lorn 21; (21) ROA deleted east of Clachan Setting of listed Clachan Bridge and Old Bridge and replaced with Clachan Farmhouse would be sensitive countryside. adversely affected by small scale development. Accordingly development should be limited to operational need or infill/rounding-off development. Lorn 7 Lorn 24; (24) Two ROA’s deleted east of Small scale development would Cladich Bridge and replaced adversely affect the wider landscape. with Sensitive Countryside. Accordingly development should be restricted to operational need or infill/rounding off development. Lorn 8 Lorn 26; (26) ROA on east side of Luing ROA boundary extended to permit small extended. scale development that would relate to the existing settlement pattern in this location. Lorn 9 Lorn 26 ROA south of Cullipool ROA extended to permit small scale extended. development reflecting the wider landscape and settlement pattern on Luing. (NB. Should be read in conjunction with changes to Settlement Plan in Cullipool). Lorn 10 Portnacroish; (1) PDA 5/166 reduced in size and PDA reduced to protect setting of replaced with countryside category A listed church. around settlement. Lorn 11 Appin/Tynribbie; New CFR-AL 5/7 added. New Community Facility/Recreation (4) allocation added on community owned land. Lorn 12 Barcaldine; (7) New CFR-AL 5/6 added. New Community Facility/Recreation Allocation added on Forestry Commission land to facilitate a new village hall. Lorn 13 Barcaldine; (7) H-AL 5/19 reduced and Housing allocation reduced in size, replaced with countryside removing small hillock on landscape around settlement. grounds. Lorn 14 Barcaldine; (7) PDA 5/105 reduced and Housing allocation reduced in size, replaced with countryside removing small hillock on landscape around settlement. grounds. Lorn 15 Benderloch 1; (8) New BI-AL 5/11 adjacent to New Business and Industry allocation existing mineral allocation and added to facilitate relocation of existing quarry. timber processing/storage and distribution business taking advantage of this sites excellent transport links and low key environmental impact. Lorn 16 Benderloch 1; (8) PDA 5/40 deleted and replaced PDA deleted as incongruous with with extension to settlement settlement pattern. and Countryside Around Settlement. Lorn 17 Benderloch 1; (8) Settlement area reduced and Settlement area reduced in size to replaced with countryside reflect development potential of this around settlement. settlement node and the wider landscape.

2 Page 175

Mod Map Modification Reason for No. No. Modification Lorn 18 Benderloch 2; (9) Extension to Open Space Open Space Protection Area has been Protection Area opposite village extended to facilitate children’s play shop. area. Lorn 19 Benderloch 2; (9) New CFR-AL added at village New Community Facility/Recreation hall. Allocation at village hall to protect the hall and facilitate additional community development projects. Lorn 20 Benderloch 2; (9) PDA 5/31 deleted and Development of this PDA would have a replacement with Countryside significant adverse impact on the setting Around Settlement. of the adjacent Dun-na-Mara Schedule Ancient Monument. Lorn 21 Benderloch 2; (9) PDA 5/35 and replaced with Development of this PDA would have a Countryside Around Settlement. significant adverse impact on the setting of the adjacent Dun-na-Mara Scheduled Ancient Monument. Lorn 22 Benderloch 2; (9) PDA 5/36 and replaced with Development of this PDA would have a Countryside Around Settlement. significant adverse impact on the setting of the adjacent Dun-na-Mara Scheduled Ancient Monument. Lorn 23 North Connel 1; Open Space Protection Area Open Space Protection Area extended (10) extended (shore side). to ensure area of woodland and open pasture either side of bridge are protected from development, reflecting the importance of these areas to the setting of the village. Lorn 24 North Connel 1; Open Space Protection Area Open Space Protection Area extended (10) extended (Lora View). to facilitate expansion of existing recreational facility. Lorn 25 North Connel 2; Settlement area extended Settlement area extended to permit (11) around former craft centre. small scale development that will consolidate this settlement node and facilitate road improvements. Lorn 26 North Connel 2; Settlement area extended at Settlement area extended to include (11) eastern end of settlement. garden area of existing house. Lorn 27 Connel; (13) New Open Space Protection New Open Space Protection Area to Area along shore side of A85. protect the shore side from development that would have an adverse impact upon the setting and general amenity of the village. Lorn 28 Connel; (13) PDA 5/51 deleted and replaced PDA deleted as existing infrastructure is with Countryside Around likely to be inadequate; the landowner Settlement. does not wish a development of this scale, and this level of development is not required during the Plan period. Lorn 29 Connel; (13) PDA 5/52 deleted and PDA deleted as existing infrastructure is replacement with Countryside likely to be inadequate; the landowner Around Settlement. does not wish a development of this scale, and this level of development is not required during the Plan period.

3 Page 176

Mod Map Modification Reason for No. No. Modification Lorn 30 Connel; (13) PDA 5/53 deleted and replaced PDA deleted as existing infrastructure is with Countryside Around likely to be inadequate; the landowner Settlement. does not wish a development of this scale, and this level of development is not required during the Plan period. Lorn 31 Oban 3 New established Business and Established Business and Industry Area Industry Area at Oban Yachts, created to protect this valuable boat Kerrera together with an yard facility that would be difficult to expanded Rural Opportunity replicate and permits expansion; and Area. also to allow enabling, small scale, residential development/ redevelopment. Lorn 32 Oban 3; (16) Reduction in Open Space Small area of Open Space Protection Protection Area, Glencruitten. Area removed to reflect recent planning permission. Lorn 33 Clachan Seil 2; Settlement area on shore side Settlement area extended to include (27) of road extended. small infill site with existing planning permission. Lorn 34 Clachan Seil 2; PDA 5/171 redesignated as H- PDA redesignated as housing allocation (27) AL 5/23. reflecting this sites importance for delivery of development to meet housing need, especially affordable housing, on Seil. Lorn 35 Easdale-Easdale PDA 5/173 deleted and PDA deleted as any development of this Island; (29) replaced with Countryside scale would have an adverse impact on Around Settlement. the historic character of the Island. Lorn 36 Ellenabeich-Seil; H-AL 5/23 deleted but included Housing allocation deleted at the (30) within settlement boundary. request of the landowner who does not want to develop a high density development. Lorn 37 Acha-Seil; (31) Reduction of ROA adjacent to ROA reduced in scale in order to cemetery and replaced with protect the setting of the adjacent Countryside Around Settlement. cemetery. Lorn 38 Cullipool-Luing; PDA 5/111 deleted and Development of this scale would have (35) replaced with Countryside an adverse impact on the setting of the Around Settlement and settlement. sensitive countryside. Lorn 39 Toberonochy- Extension to settlement Extension to settlement reflects Luing; (37) adjacent to former quarry. planning permission granted for storage shed and allows small scale development to be integrated into this conservation settlement. Lorn 40 Arduaine; (38) Extension to settlement area. Settlement area has been extended south to allow redevelopment of former quarry to help achieve an environmental gain. Lorn 41 Kames; (39) New established Business and Two new established Business and Industry areas. Industry Areas covering the existing pier and industrial buildings utilised by fish farm to protect these valuable facilities that would be difficult to replicate.

4 Page 177

Mod Map Modification Reason for No. No. Modification Lorn 42 Kilmelford; (40) H-AL 5/21 deleted and included Housing allocation deleted as majority within settlement. of site has now been developed. Lorn 43 Kilmelford; (40) PDA 5/127 reduced in size to PDA redesignated as housing allocation take account of functional flood reflecting this sites importance for plain and redesignated as H-AL delivery of development, especially 5/21. affordable housing, to meet housing need in this area. Lorn 44 Kilchrenan; (45) H-AL 5/20 extended. Housing allocation extended to west in order to permit variation in development density reflecting the settlement character of Kilchrenan. Lorn 45 Kilchrenan; (45) Open Space Protection Area Open Space Protection Area extended extended. to the north in order to protect the setting of the village. Lorn 46 Portsonachan; Settlement area extended to Settlement area extended to include (46) east. area suitable for small sale development. Lorn 47 Ardbrecknish; Settlement area extended to Settlement area extended to reflect (47) east. recent planning permissions granted. Lorn 48 Taynuilt 1; (51) H-AL 5/18 deleted and placed Housing allocation deleted as it is within settlement boundary. expected that this development will be completed prior the adoption of this Plan. Lorn 49 Taynuilt 1; (51) PDA 5/161 redesignated H-AL PDA redesignated as housing allocation 5/18 and replaced with reflecting this sites importance for Countryside Around delivery of development, especially Settlement.. affordable housing and the development road DRA 5.7, to meet housing need. Lorn 50 Taynuilt 1; (51) AFA 5/9 deleted and replaced Site is difficult to access and offers little with Countryside Around development opportunities. Settlement. Lorn 51 Taynuilt 2; (52) PDA 5/81 deleted and replaced Adequate development land is available with Countryside Around on other more suitable identified sites Settlement. for the Plan period. Lorn 52 Taynuilt 2; (52) PDA 5/82 deleted and replaced Adequate development land is available with Countryside Around on other more suitable identified sites Settlement. for the Plan period. Lorn 53 Dalmally; (57) Established Business and Established Business and Industry Area Industry Area at auction mart deleted to permit a flexible approach to deleted and retained within the redevelopment of this site. settlement. Lorn 54 Bridge of Orchy; PDA 5/108 reduction in size PDA 5/108 reduced in scale to protect (58) and expansion to the north. the setting of General Wade’s road, a scheduled ancient monument, and in response to objections raised by the Forestry Commission as landowner. The PDA will be for affordable housing only.

5 Page 178

MULL

Mod Map Modification Reason for No. No. Modification Mull 1 Mull 3; (3) ROA extended at Treshnish ROA extended to reflect the Farm. development capacity of the landscape in this location. Mull 2 Mull 3; (3) ROA extended between ROA extended to reflect the Dervaig and Tobermory. development capacity of the landscape in this location. Mull 3 Mull 3; (3) Review of ROA’s (including ROA’s within National Scenic Area have amending boundaries and been amended taking account of recent deletion) within National Scenic planning permissions granted and wider Area and replaced with landscape impacts including results Sensitive Countryside. from a jointly commissioned (A&B Council and SNH) landscape capacity study to ensure any development is sympathetic to the wider landscape. Mull 4 Mull 6; (6) Review of ROA’s (including ROA’s within National Scenic Area have amending boundaries and been amended taking account of recent deletion) within National Scenic planning permissions granted and wider Area and replaced with landscape impacts to ensure any Sensitive Countryside. development is sympathetic to the wider landscape. Mull 5 Mull 7; (7) Review of ROA’s (including ROA’s within National Scenic Area have amending boundaries and been amended taking account of recent deletion) within National Scenic planning permissions granted and wider Area. landscape impacts to ensure any development is sympathetic to the wider landscape. Mull 6 Mull 16; (16) ROA deleted south of ROA is located in part with a Special Pennyghael and replaced with Protection Area and remainder is high Sensitive Countryside open moorland with no existing settlement pattern and as such is not suitable for development. Mull 7 Calgary; (1) Settlement area extended. Settlement area extended to south to include small area of ground which if developed would compliment the existing settlement group. Mull 8 West Ardhu; (2) New PDA 6/49 added to east of New PDA to provide significant new settlement. affordable housing. Mull 9 Dervaig; (3) New Open Space Protection New Open Space Protection Area Area designated NW of Glebe designated to protect existing recreation house. area from development. Mull 10 Dervaig; (3) Settlement area extended at Settlement area extend for consistency east end of settlement. as landscape character is similar to adjacent land designated Settlement Area.

6 Page 179

APPENDIX C OVERVIEW OF REPRESENTATIONS ON FINALISED DRAFT LOCAL PLAN

COLL

• Section of public road is missing from map. The land along this road should be zone ROA. • Comment – should areas of the east coast and islands at Cairns be designated a Very Sensitive Countryside when development has existed there in the past. • H-AL 4/1 – Objection – Owner/occupier objects to this croftland being developed as it is crucial to the agricultural future of the croft. • PDA 4/1 – Objection – delete as form, part of it is by croft land which PDA 4/2 is limited on the island.

LORN

Appin/Tynribbie

• Extension to cemetery and its car park and access, should be included in the plan. • PDA 5/95 – objection – if developed for housing will ruin Area of Panoramic Quality.

Ardbrecknish

• Objection to removal of PDA 5/96 (in Con Draft) and adjacent land along shore to north from Finalised Plan – existing leisure use and proximity to holiday homes warrants its inclusion in the settlement boundary. • Settlement zone should be extended to north and east to include recently approved housing sites.

Arduaine

• Request for extension of settlement boundary or Rural Op. Area to north and south to allow for single house for forest manager in north and to allow landscaping of quarry and small scale development.

Barcaldine

• PDA 5/101 – Northern section should be removed to preserve landscape character. Design and layout very important. • Request for extension to settlement boundary.

Benderloch

• Support CAS at Tralee road end. • Existing informal car park must be protected from development to protect Victory Hall and adjacent sports/education facilities Page 180

• PDA 5/31 – request for extension to the north and re-designation as an allocation for housing.

Bonawe

• Request Open Space Protection Area is extended to the north west to allow flat play area to be included.

Bridge of Awe

• PDA 5/107 – Support.

Bridge of Orchy

• PDA 5/163 – Support. • PDA 5/109 – Support.

Request for affordable housing.

Clachan Seil

• PDA 5/171 – Objection. o Landscape impact o Settlement character o Too large o Visual impact o Street lighting o Loss of good pasture land o Loss of trees o Road access is dangerous o Not suitable for affordable housing o Main road can’t take additional traffic o Impact on wildlife • PDA 5/43 – Objection. o No further development on this sensitive coastline o Visual impact o Road access is dangerous o Impact on wildlife o Main Road can’t take additional traffic • Request that area of settlement zone adjacent to open space protection area be re- zoned to prevent development. • Request that settlement zone be reduced north of bridge. • Request that settlement zone be reduced in the west. • Request that settlement zone be extended to include site with planning permission on shore side of road. • Request for extension to settlement boundary to allow more housing on site which had planning permission in 1980 for 6 chalets but has lapsed.

Cladich

• Objection – settlement boundary should be extended to the south. • Support PDA 5/168 but it should contain affordable housing element and be of high quality design and layout. Page 181

Connel

• Request to designate open space protection on all undeveloped ground between road and sea in Connel. • HAL 5/14 – Objection o Too Large o Lack of detail on roads and drainage o Some of ground required in ownership of Ferryfield residents o Road Safety – impinge on traffic flow Connel Bridge • PDA 5/51 – Objection o Too large o Lack of detail on roads and drainage • PDA 5/52 – Objection o Some of ground required in ownership of Ferryfield residents. • PDA 5/53 – Objection o Road safety – impinging on traffic flow Connel Bridge o Construction traffic o Too close to existing telecom mast which is a health hazard. • Objection - removal of PDA 5/52 in consultative draft. (Ferryfield Road) as wants to develop single house amongst woodland. • Objection- settlement boundary should be extended at Achaleven for low density housing.

Cullipool

• Request to have development areas identified in Consultative Draft re-instated. • PDA 5/164 – Support

Dalavich

• PDA 5/115 – support. • Settlement zone – support. • Open Space Protection Areas – support. • Concern over capacity of water and sewerage system to cope with development – any upgrading should be at developers expense. • Concern over the maintenance of the road, particularly if usage increased as a result of development.

Dalmally

• Business and industry Protection Area – Objection to removal of PDA 5/59 from Consultative Draft that was previously on this site as looking to develop for housing. • Open Space Protection Area – Objection to removal of PDA status from this site.

Dunbeg

• B1–AL 5/10 – Objection – Flooding – SEPA. • CFR–AL 5/3 – Objection – Flooding – SEPA. • General support. • Small wood should be protected. • The amount of extra housing for Oban/Dunbeg is far too great and more than our own projection requirements and water and sewerage systems can’t cope. Page 182

• A greater % of housing should be affordable. • Development will improve road safety to Dunbeg. • DRA 5/2 support – takes traffic off Ganavan Road. • PDA 5/69 – should be low density housing to avoid suburban sprawl. • PDA 5/26 – if developed for housing it is a waste – unless a prestigious development beneficial to the people of Oban is put forward. Block style apartment/town houses must be banned. The aspect of Ganavan Beach should not be compromised. • Open Space Protection Area should be re-zoned as Business and Industry Allocation to allow for expansion of SAMS. • B1-AL 5/9 – Objection. o Industrial traffic o Noise/pollution/light o Safety hazards o Damage to environment o Greenfield site on tourist route to castle o Sufficient land for B and I exists in Barcaldine but not presently used. • H-AL 5/8 and 5/9 – Comment. o Should be a rural village not suburb o Views should be preserved o Street lighting doesn’t light up the sky o Road speed limits enforced o Areas of green left between houses o Fields as well as sports areas o Suitable walks and cycle paths • DRA 5/1 – Concern o Over noise/dust during construction o Environmental impact once completed o Avoiding light pollution o Planting to reduce noise o Speed restrictions • PDA 5/172 – Support

Easdale

• Settlement Area – request extension to east to allow housing development. • Settlement Area – request extension to north to allow mixed use development, commercial/infrastructure and community facilities. • PDA 5/173 – Objection o Environmental impact o Construction Area o No need for new houses o Historic heritage o Visual impact o No service/infrastructure • PDA 5/173 – Support for housing development only. • General concern over any development on the island. • AFA 5/11 – Objection to fixed link development.

Ellenabeich

• HAL 5/23 – Objection o Too many houses and too dense o Sewerage system inadequate o Should be revised to 5 affordable houses of family size Page 183

o Part of the site is now the owners garden o Objection from landowner • Settlement Area – objection to inclusion of element on shore side of road, as obstructs views of the sea

Eredine

• PDA 5/120 – request for extension.

Inverinan

• General support.

Keils Croft

• H-AL 5/13 – support for reduced number of houses now detailed in Plan. • PDA 5/38 o Sewerage impact on potential local nature reserve o Environmental impact • Request for Nature Reserve Designation.

Kerrera

• Objection to sensitive countryside and request for Settlement Zone or PDA to allow for development at Oban Yachts.

Kilchrenan

• PDA 5/124 - Objection o Flooding SEPA o Support o General • Open Space Protection area o Support o Request extension to work o Should be deleted and more houses built o Should be reduced to much smaller area • HAL 5/20 o General support and affordability % o Objection to extension of area from Consultative Draft o Request for extension to west o Request for lower density across entire site o Request for extension to north o Objection – number of houses should be reduced to 5 to comply with policy LP HOU 1

Kilmelford

• HAL 5/21 – Objection – flooding SEPA. • PDA 5/127 – Objection – flooding SEPA. • Objection to removal of PDA 5/126 of Consultative Draft.

Page 184

Kilmore

• PDA 5/130 –Owner supports. • PDA 5/133 – Owner supports. • Request for extension to settlement boundary for 1 house. • Objection to removal of PDA 5/136 of Consultative Draft.

Letterwalton

• Objection to HAL 5/13 of Consultative Draft which has been deleted from Finalised Plan.

Lochawe

• Objection to removal of PDA 5/140 of Consultative Draft.

Melfort

• PDA 5/142 – Objection – flooding SEPA. • Request for extension fo settlement zone boundary to the east.

North Connel

• Objection to CAS – should be PDA of ROA on infill site at eastern end of North Connel. • Request to extend settlement at Cruachan Crofts. • Request to extend settlement at land north of Beechwood. • Objection to CAS North of Connel which should be re-designated ROA or settlement. • Request that Open Space Protection Area be extended to the west past Connel Bridge. • Open Space Protection Area around sports field should be extended to include potential additional facilities. • Objection to removal of and request that MU-AL 5/3 in Consultative Draft be reinstated as this could benefit road safety through road improvements. • Support for settlement boundary south of Badgers Rake. • Objection to medium and large scale developments even in special cases within the ROA, utilising the C25 road as it can’t cope with significant additional traffic. • Support for settlement boundary at Herons Reach. • PDA 5/72 – Objection to this sites designation for business use, it should be housing. • Request for new housing allocation west of H-AL 5/16. • Settlement Boundary – general objection o Ribbon development o Gaps between development must be maintained to allow access to the wildlife on Achnacree Moss o The road is not suitable for further development

• Objection to Open Space Protection Area as will preclude development of market garden/tree nursery and around jetty when this area is just an agricultural field if not a recreational facility for use by the public. • Objection to settlement boundary east of Ossians which should be reduced in size. • PDA 5/71 • PDA 5/72 Page 185

o Concern that if developed, extra traffic will cause congestion and damage to Connel Bridge. o Strip of PDA should be redesigned CAS at southern end to protect residential properties from noise and pollution. • Concern that ground could not sustain necessary sewerage plans that would be required to cope with additional housing.

Oban

• DRA 5/3 DRA 5/4 DRA 5/6 o Objection to new road for various reasons. • PDA 5/170 – Objection o Ganavan – former hospital site. o Various reasons. • Objection to the re-designation of the Golf Course from PDA’s to Open Space Protection Area. • Oban needs a marina to boost its economy. • Objection to Open Space Protection Area at Hydropathic – should be developed as recreational/tourism development. • H-AL 5/3 – General support from landowner. • Objection to CAS at Polvinister Woods request changed to ROA or PDA. • Objection to housing development around Glencruitten. • AFA 5/1 5/2 5/3 5/4 should include – o Harbour facilities for the wider community o Marine tourism/leisure policy o Temporary berthing for marine businesses • PDA 5/69 > see Dunbeg PDA 5/26 > see Dunbeg PDA 5/2 > see Dunbeg • Oban General o The amount of extra housing for Oban/Dunbeg is far too large and more than our projection requirements o Not enough water and sewerage o Adverse visual impact o Traffic • HAL-5/1 (doesn’t exist) – Objection – Flooding • B1-AL 5/4 Flooding • B1-AL 5/5 Flooding • B1-AL 5/3 Flooding • PDA 5/13 Flooding • HAL 5/4 Flooding • HAL 5/3 Flooding • HAL 5/2 Flooding • B1-AL 5/1 Flooding

• HAL 5/7 Flooding • HAL 5/6 Flooding • B1-AL 5/2 Flooding • CFR-AL 5/5 Flooding - SEPA

Page 186

Old Kilmore

• Objection – extend settlement area.

Portsonachan

• Objection – CAS – request that extend settlement area to east.

Portnacroish

• PDA 5/166 – Objection o Historical burial ground/archaeology o Historical battleground o Impact on setting of church o Loss of grazing • PDA 5/152 – Objection o Loss of crofting appearance of settlement o Ribbon Development o Sewerage difficulties • CAS – Objection o Request new PDA or settlement extension adjacent to and east of the church

South Cuan

• Request that development areas in Consultative Draft are re-instated.

Stronmilchan

• PDA 5/57 >Objection – flooding SEPA. • PDA 5/64 >Objection – flooding SEPA. • PDA 5/65 >Objection – flooding SEPA. • Request for two extensions to settlement/new PDA’s south of public road for affordable housing or 1 or 2 houses. • PDA 5/56 – support. • PDA 5/57 – support.

Taynuilt

• PDA 5/81 – support – registered croft, so development should comply with crofting policy. • CAS – Objection o Wants to convert existing nursery into house o Wants to infill a gap site o Wants previous PDA re-instated for housing development next to Golf Course o Wants housing development in central area east of school • Conservation Area – Objection- wants to infill a gap site.

• H-AL 5/18 – Objection – flooding SEPA. • PDA 5/89 PDA 5/161 PDA 5/81 PDA 5/82 Page 187

AFA 5/9 DRA 5/7 o Objection – road network and particularly in village can’t cope with additional traffic. o Water supply in ancient pipes which can’t cope with additional demands. o Existing houses with planning permission enough to satisfy need for plan period. o Will school cope. o Loss of Agricultural land. o Ecology of river. o Croft land/common grazing. • AFA – 5/9 – should become a recreation area and farmland. • All ongoing – proposed or planned development – objection – infrastructure is not able to cope with existing houses and various others. • Support for settlement zone south of station. • Settlement area Glen Lonan Road – comment – why has common grazing land been included within settlement zone? Dangerous Road.

Toberonochy

• Request that areas identified in Consultative Draft are reinstated. • Support for Open Space Protection Areas. • Need to extend graveyard – currently CAS. • Objection – quarry area should be a PDA and settlement zone as obviously a brown field site and has planning permission for workshed and is suitable for housing development. • Objection to open space protection areas as they are working piers and need maintenance, should be TPA?

DCZ’s Lorn

• Statement that site north of Kilchrenen at old garage now has six houses and so could be designated as a settlement, but doesn’t want any more development. • Objection – sensitive countryside – wants to develop on footprint of and around existing dilapidated farm steading at Moliegh south of Oban. • Request that area around Loch Nell be given stronger protection, due to its outstanding beauty, and its use as Obans water supply, and kept free of development. • Objection – Holiday development at Clan Trees is unacceptable. • Objection – boundary of ROA at Scammadale should be extended and new ROA created at Scammadale. • Request for extension of ROA to include land west of Ardenstur (Kilmelford). • Objection – wants a settlement zone designated in Scammadale to allow development. • Objection – request new ROA to east of Portsonachan to allow housing development. • Objection – request reduction at Old Kilmore of ROA as important area for nature conservation and water margin management.

• Objection – request new ROA west of main road at head of Loch Feochan to allow for single house for estate/farm worker. • Support – ROA at Taynuilt (Stan Barton’s)?. • Support ROA at Kinloch (Keil’s Croft). • Objection – CAS at Barravullin should be designated ROA near Barcaldine Castle. Page 188

• Entire Lorn Plateau should be designated very sensitive countryside to stop windfarm development. • Objection – Request for extension to ROA east of Kilchrenan to allow tourism/leisure development. • Objection – ROA N/E of Claddich should be deleted, as would be isolated sporadic development in countryside. Should be very sensitive countryside. • Request for new ROA around Old Quarry/garage north of Kilchrenan for tourism and housing development. • Request for deletions of parts of ROA and replacement additions to ROA north of Benderloch. • Support for ROA’s in Glencruitten/Lerags. • Request for new ROA north of Creran Bridge. • Request for site adjacent to Benderloch Quarry to be designated to permit relocation of timber processing/storage/distribution business. • Objection to sensitive countryside at Lerags road end should be re-designated as ROA. • Concern that ROA to west of Toberonochy is unconnected to village of Toberonochy, is alongside an historic site, and is in visible open countryside. • Request for single house site in sensitive countryside at Armaddy. • Request that DDA’s at Clachan Farm (east of Clachan Bridge?) are reinstated to allow for infill sites between existing houses, and construction of a family house, as the only house on the farm is for a shepherd. • Request that the ROA at Ardshellach Farm is too large and should be reduced. Development of the full area would have a negative impact on the natural environment. • The ROA at Acha should be deleted from the cemetery and surrounding area to allow privacy to those visiting cemetery. • The entire raised beach around Lismore (with exception of those areas designated minor settlements) should be re-designated very sensitive countryside for ecological and landscape reasons. • Within central Lismore substantially more of the sensitive countryside should be re- designated ROA. • Request for ROA as Armaddy for holiday business expansion. • Comment – request that ROA be designated between Portnacroish and Appin/Tynribbie to allow for low density housing. • Objection – sensitive countryside at Oban Rare Breeds Park should be re-designated as ROA. • New builds in Glen Euchar should be restricted to occupational need to preserve sensitive environment. • The entire site at Balvicar chalets should be designated ROA (part of the site is ROA: part sensitive countryside. • ROA east of Clachan Bridge should be removed as further development would spoil National Scenic, Panoramic and Historical Interest, etc. • Request for new PDA at Clachan Seil to allow for new house in CAS. • Objection – Sensitive countryside at Degnish should be re-zoned to allow for farm diversification.

MULL

Baile Mor - Iona

• Objection to the removal of PDA 6/24 and 6/25 in Consultative Draft from plan. Page 189

• AFA 6/3 – This AFA should be re-classified as “strategic” for harbour/breakwater improvements.

Bunessan

• Request for new allocation (not site specific) as PDA’s are not sufficient for village to grow.

Calgary

• CAS – request for extension of settlement zone to permit development of single house for agriculture use for management of farm. • Request for extension of settlement zone for development of single house for affordable housing for hotel staff.

Craignure

• Objection – Swimming Pool site at Java Place should be zoned as CFR-AL. • Request mixed use allocation in Craignure on proposed site of Community Business Centre and Recycling Workshop. • Request that the settlement area should be reduced at southern end of Craignure as it forms part of Torosay Designed Landscape.

Dervaig

• Request that the settlement zone be increased in size towards the old cemetery; north towards Cuin and east towards the old Dump. • CAS - Objection – requested extension to settlement zone. • Open Space Protection Area – Objection – Part is in private garden. • Request for new Open Space Protection Area within CAS as it’s a football pitch. • Objection to the non-inclusion of a private track on the map. • CAS – request for extension of settlement zone to allow up to 5 houses in South Dervaig. • CAS – request for extension of settlement zone to west of Dervaig – General. • Request for mare affordable housing – General. • Request for more development land for housing in Dervaig – General.

Eorabus

• CAS – Objection – Development on this land would have an adverse impact upon the environment, visual impact etc.

Lochdon

• Request for new B and I Allocation on land at the old quarry site north of location. • As there is no class 5 allocation anywhere on Mull. • AIE support proposal. • Mull and Iona community trust support proposal. • Mull and Iona Chamber of Commerce support proposal. • Request that existing quarry and old quarry be zoned as established Business and Industry. Page 190

• PDA 6/41 – Objection – partly common grazings, and chance of being released is remote. • Request for extension of minerals allocation (not presently shown on plan) to allow for adequate supply of sand and gravel for Mull. • Request for Torosay Designed Landscape. • CAS – Objection – Request re-zoned as ROA or PDA as want to expand self catering/guest house/restaurant business on this registered croft, in central Lochdon.

Salen

• Request Mull slaughterhouse site is re-designated Established B and I Area to allow for other food processing operations. • Salen should have an allocation for 12 affordable units as proposed by TSL on land north of main road in CAS to allow village to grow on site that had previous lapsed consent for hotel. • Request for CAS to be re-designated to allow for affordable housing on land south of settlement opposite old people’s home. • Request that the settlement boundary south of the gardening shop be extended in line with Mull, Tiree Plan and Consultative Draft plan. • PDA 6/18 and PDA 6/23 – Request these PDA’s be extended to allow for mixed development based on tourism/leisure facilities, housing and community facilities. • Request for extension to settlement boundary to south of council depot to allow for housing development. • CAS – Objection – request for extension to settlement zone to allow for housing development. • Request for new allocation.

Tobermory

• CAS – Objection – request for site at Erray Farm be re-designated ROA , PDA or settlement zone to allow for low density development. • CAS – Objection – to deletion of PDA 6/2 on Consultative Draft from plan at Erray Road. Want development site for housing. • CAS – Objection – request for re-designation of sites to the west and south of settlement boundary as PDA’s or settlement to allow for development of housing to support existing business and new bakery. • CAS – Objection – request for re-designation of site as B and I Allocation to allow for development of workshops and expansion of cheese business. • Request that part of Open Space Protection Area be re-zoned as CFR AL to reflect proposed all weather pitch development . • Request for PDA to the south west of HAL 6/3 to take settlement to natural boundary of ditch/watercourse.

• Request for new PDA behind Baliscate as owner is prepared to release for local housing. • PDA’s in Tobermory do not recognise land supply constraints as owners have no intension of releasing land. • The new Glengorm waste water treatment plant should be designated on Plan. • B1-AL 6/1 – is not developable as has 4 metres of peat on site – should develop outwith Tobermory. • Objection – HAL 6/2 and 6/3 – density disparity between the two sites. HAL 6/2 should be increased to 10 units. Page 191

• AFA 6/2 – should be designated for mixture of affordable and normal housing or mixture of housing and tourism – there should be no more industrial/ commercial development occurring within it.

West Ardhu

• Request for new PDA to east of settlement to allow for 50% affordable housing.

DCZ’s Mull

• Request for an extension to ROA between Dervaig and Tobermory to allow for development of art studio as existing ROA cannot get a safe access onto road. • Request for new ROA around pier to west of Bunessan to allow eco-tourism development and educational tourism facility and associated accommodation. • Objection – to ROA boundaries around Ulva Ferry – request for deletion of some areas of ROA’s – request for additions to some ROA’s. • Objection to ROA boundaries around Dervaig – request extension to ROA. • Objection to ROA boundaries around Treshnish Farm – request extension to ROA. • Objection to CAS as Aros Bridge was previously ROA – wants this reinstated. (North and South of forest track west of settlement. • Objection to all areas of ROA between coast road and sea in National Scenic Area (Loch Na Keal). • Request extension of ROA boundary westwards at Killiechronan nr. Gruline. • Request for development along road to Ulva Ferry.

TIREE

Cornaigmore

• PDA 7/1 – Objection – site falls within SSS1 and SAC.

Page 192

This page is intentionally left blank Page 193

APPENDIX D

Modifications/ and potential PLI issues to the Finalised Draft Local Plan It should be noted that modifications to the plan could give rise to additional PLI issues.

General and Policy Issues

155 modifications

18 potential issues for PLI

(Area representations)

OLI

54 (Lorn) 29 (Mull) (2 Iona) (3 Tiree) and (3 Coll); 91modifications in total

103 potential issues for PLI

(Area representations)

Bute and Cowal

18 modifications

5 potential issues for PLI

(Area representations)

Helensburgh and Lomond

11 modifications

58 potential issues for PLI

(Area representations)

MAKI

31 (Mid Argyll Mainland), 14 (North and South Kintyre), 8 (Islay), 3 (Jura); 56 modifications in total

33 potential issues for PLI Page 194

This page is intentionally left blank Page 195 Agenda Item 5l

ARGYLL & BUTE COUNCIL OBAN LORN & THE ISLES

DEVELOPMENT/OPERATIONAL SERVICES 7 June 2006

NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY CONSULTATION

1. SUMMARY

The purpose of this paper is to provide the Area Committees with an opportunity to comment on the Council’s draft response to the questions posed in the National Transport Strategy consultation.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Area Committee consider the draft answers to the questions posed in the National Transport Strategy consultation document, and pass any comments to the Director of Development Services by 9th June in order to meet the timetable imposed by the consultation.

3. BACKGROUND

The Scottish Executive are in the process of developing a National Transport Strategy – a comprehensive statement of the country’s objectives, priorities and plans for the long term. Following a number of ‘pre-consultation’ stakeholder events, the Executive has issued a consultation document which gives a wide-ranging description of transport systems within the country and poses a number of significant questions about what should be done in transport terms to make the objectives a reality over the long term.

4. TIMETABLE

Members of the Council have each been issued with a copy of the consultation document prior to discussion at the June cycle of Area Committee meetings. The Roads and Transportation working group have met and have drafted answers to all 65 questions which are contained within the document. These answers are attached as an appendix to this paper.

Following the Area Committee cycle, comments from the Area Committees will be collated by senior members and officers along with final draft answers ,

F:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\9\6\4\AI00029469\Nationaltransportstrategyconsultation0.doc 1 of 2 30 May 2006 Page 196

and considered at the full Council meeting on 28th June. Responses are due back to the Executive on 13th July 2006.

5. IMPLICATIONS

1)Policy – The National transport Strategy will provide the context for Regional and Local Transport Strategies.

2)Financial – None at present

3)Personnel – None

4) Equal Opportunities - None

5)Legal – There is a statutory duty on Regional Transport Partnerships to prepare regional transport strategies, which will have a critical linkage with the National Transport Strategy.

Dave Duthie Stewart Turner Head of Transportation and Infrastructure. Head of Roads & Amenity Services 23 May 2006

F:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\9\6\4\AI00029469\Nationaltransportstrategyconsultation0.doc 2 of 2 30 May 2006 Page 197 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION QUESTIONS AND DRAFT ANSWERS

PREPARED JOINTLY BY DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATIONAL SERVICES

CONSULTATION QUESTION 1. Are: facilitate economic growth: promote accessibility; promote choice and raise awareness of the need for change; promote modal shift; promote new technologies and cleaner fuels; manage demand; reduce the need for travel; and promote road safety the right goals for transport in Scotland?

The strategy goals should be as suggested but priority should be given to promoting sustainable economic growth, with this being identified as the key Executive policy.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 2. Do consultees consider that the aim, vision and objectives need to be amended, for example to reflect Scottish Ministers’ expectation to see Health Improvement at the heart of Scottish Executive policy?

While transport should aim to support the Health Improvement agenda wherever practicable, this should not be its main thrust. The Council considers that goals aimed to improve economic growth and social inclusion should be the key elements of national transport policy as related to rural areas.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 3. Are there areas of work in relation to local/regional transport that would merit the national dissemination of best practice examples? If so, what are they and who would be best placed to lead this?

The Scottish Executive have funded a number of trial public transport projects through the Public and Integrated Transport Initiatives, but have not followed up successful projects by promoting these and enabling other parts of the country to gain from the experience gained by broadening the applications. A programme of this nature disseminated through Regional Partnerships and Councils would be very worthwhile. Examples of good practice might be Hitrans regional branding. Transport Scotland is best placed to lead.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 4. What issues must this NTS address, to ensure that the Strategic Projects Review (SPR) which will follow it as effective as possible? For example, should the NTS identify key transport corridors, or key types of investment which are most effective at growing the economy, to inform the SPR? If so, which ones?

The Strategy should identify constraints on the transportation network and in service provision that restrict economic growth, to inform the Strategic Projects Review. For example the A82 condition has been identified as a key economic driver for the West Highlands, quantified in the recent study carried out by “TRIBAL CONSULTANCY” for HITRANS. Page 198 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

CONSULTATION QUESTION 5. Do we have the balance of investment right between spending on new and existing infrastructure and other non-infrastructure activities and between different modes of transport? If not, how should it change over time?

The Council is concerned at the emphasis within this section on the city region network. The Highlands and Islands continue to lag behind in economic development terms, and continue to be faced with issues of remoteness and peripherality. Strategic investments in air, sea and roads infrastructure have benefited some communities over the past 10 years, but in national terms, there should be recognition of the needs of the area. Balance between local, regional and national is required to ensure distribution of funding across Scotland.

In areas where public transport is not a sustainable option, investment will require to be made in other types of infrastructure to improve the overall facility. For example, the longer distances in remote and rural areas coupled with the lack of Public Transport, means that the car is essential. Investment, therefore, should be made in the roads network.

The benefits of investment in maintenance of the transportation network should be evaluated in terms of minimising whole life cost while maintaining serviceability, whereas investment in improvements should be judged in terms of economic and social benefits. The two activities have separate objectives. Best practice in whole life asset management should in time reduce maintenance costs thus allowing funding to be directed to a greater degree towards improvements which release the essential economic and social benefits.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 6. To what extent should transport spending be targeted specifically at areas with significant potential for regeneration? How should transport spending be balanced between regeneration areas and other key areas, such as rural Scotland?

Spending should be aimed to improve the economic competitiveness of the country as a whole, recognising the different challenges facing all sections of the community. The quality and cost of transport is a significant factor in the viability of rural and island communities and failure to invest in this sector will result in significant rural deprivation and further depopulation. Directing investment towards city regions to the detriment of other areas should not be an acceptable option for the Executive.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 7. What further steps need to be taken in Scotland to facilitate the development of international connectivity both by air and sea.

A transportation hub for international air travel should be created between Scotland’s airports encouraging direct passenger flights to European and other continents if Scotland is to fulfil its full potential. The facility at Macrihanish, with the longest runway in Europe, presents an opportunity for development of a Page 199 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

number of different potential airport activities, for example removing the congestion at the existing airports.

In terms of freight, deep water facility, capable of accommodating the largest container vessels should be positively encouraged with high quality links to the national rail and road systems.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 8. Do consultees consider that there are issues relating to cross-border connectivity by rail and road, and within devolved competence, that the Strategy should consider?

Any cross border policy options applied by the Executive will have to integrate with Westminster policies applied in the north of England.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 9. What view do consultees take on where there is a need for a faster Scotland to London rail service, to provide an alternative to flying in the long term?

To ensure sustainability of the Scottish economy a high speed rail link between Scotland and the London link to the Channel Tunnel is essential. This will require the construction of a stand alone high speed line offering journey times of under 3 hours, thus freeing up the existing network to cater for regional passenger traffic and freight and reducing the need for short haul air services.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 10. How do we ensure that all local authorities spend their Grant Aided Expenditure allocation for local roads on local roads? Do consultees think anything more needs to be done to ensure appropriate management, maintenance and operation of the Trunk Road Network?

Local roads maintenance is a delegated function to Councils under the present arrangements, and in terms of democratic accountability this should not change. Argyll and Bute Council has historically spent greater than100% GAE on roads maintenance, but recognises that this is not the case in other local authority areas. Indeed, the Council, due to its large, remote and rural roads network, has been forced to spend capital funds on basic roads maintenance. The Council therefore wishes to see a continued allocation of funding to local authorities for roads maintenance, related to need. The Council recognises the increasingly important role that Regional Transport Partnerships will play in transportation activity, and is committed to working closely within that structure.

The Council recognises the current backlog in roads maintenance, which is becoming more severe, impacting on the ability of communities and the economy to operate effectively. To deal with this backlog, as identified by the national road condition survey, there may be opportunities for the Executive to work in partnership with Regional Transportation Partnerships and Councils to support specific expenditure on road resurfacing by Councils in dealing with the backlog issue. Funds should therefore be ring fenced and added to challenge funding/match funding from the Executive.

Page 200 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

The current arrangement of maintenance and management of the trunk road system allows little, if any input from communities served by the network, into its operation and development. The majority of trunk roads fulfil a multi purpose role as national, regional and local distributors, and as such a mechanism must be found to ensure that regional and local users, who are the majority users, are included in the decision making processes. The commitment to change the method of delivery and local democratic accountability for management of the trunk road network, possibly with the exception of motorways, should be a commitment in the strategy.

Given the vital role played by the network in sustaining communities, Regional Transport Partnerships should be given the responsibility and the budget to manage and maintain the regional roads within their area. This must be managed to achieve a geographic balance in investment and all partners must be involve in the development of the strategy, action plan and priority activities.

The former Transport Minister Nicol Stephen has indicated in the past that he recognises the major under funding on the Local Authority roads. The third generation of trunk road contracts has now been met, which will conclude in 2011-2013. Transport Scotland representatives indicated that at around this stage it would be expected that a review of the trunk road network will have been completed. It should be recognised that there is support for the re-trunking of the road between Oban and Lochgilphead and trunking from Kennacraig to Campbeltown, given the role played by those routes in terms of the Argyll and Bute economy. CONSULTATION QUESTION 11. What are the issues relating to the management and maintenance of the road and rail networks over the long terms that the Strategy should address?

The integration of robust whole life asset management into the options appraisal and budgeting process is critical to optimum performance of both networks and must be at the centre of future management arrangements. Respective organisations, including Regional Transport Partnerships, must have clear communication procedures, joint planning structures and defined areas of responsibility. This must be communicated to all partners and the public. These organisations must be sufficiently well resourced to deliver on their responsibilities.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 12. What should the NTS say about freight, bearing in mind that a Freight Strategy is under development? In particular, what should the NTS say about meeting the different needs of freight and passengers on the road and rail network, and how to balance these competing demands?

Efficient freight transport is a key element in the delivery of economic prosperity and must be central to the development of the National Transport Strategy. Both strategies must integrate closely. While freight should be encouraged to use excess capacity during non-peak periods on both rail and road, the movement of high value perishable cargo should be given priority over non-peak passenger movement were demonstrable Page 201 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

benefit is identified. The importance of coastal shipping also needs to be recognised.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 13. What, if anything, should the NTS be saying about skills, bearing in mind the leading role that the Sector Skills Council have in reducing skills gap and shortages in the public and private sectors and the role Transport Scotland has in promulgating good practice across the industry? Is it right to integrate skills issues into the NTS?

Skills and capacity constraints in project management, design organisations, and contractors will potentially impact on the ability to deliver the desired outcomes within the period of the Strategy. It is therefore important that this is recognised as a risk within the Strategy and proposals put forward as to how such constraints will be overcome or at least minimised.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 14. Bearing in mind that investment in new transport infrastructure is not covered in the NTS, as it will be addressed in the forthcoming Strategic Projects Review, what specific steps, if any, does the NTS need to set out to support tourism?

While the Strategy will not cover specific investment in new infrastructure, it must consider the function of transport and the key areas of the economy that are currently being constrained by the existing networks and services. Tourism is a key area for growth in the economy and it is therefore important that the Strategy should identify from the transportation sector what actions should be put in place to promote this area of economic growth. The function of the Strategic Projects Review will presumably be to identify which specific projects best meet the needs identified in the Strategy, evaluated on the basis of Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 15. What are the key barriers to developing effective Demand Responsive Transport and how should they be overcome? For example, legislative, regulatory or operational barriers?

Demand responsive transport is a critical sector for the promotion of best practice in social integration in areas where commercial bus operators fail to provide adequate services, due to their lack of return in commercial terms. This is particularly true in rural areas of the country. In these areas, joint working between the public sector and community groups offer the greatest opportunity for improved social inclusion, and legislative and regulatory changes that would facilitate this partnership working should be put in place. It is vital that the voluntary services are provided with a funding mechanism that allows these services to be provided sustainably in the long term, rather than by the current.

Piecemeal, project based funding methods.

Page 202 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

CONSULTATION QUESTION 16. Where are there examples of particularly good practice in demand responsive transport?

In Argyll, the demand on the Isle of Tiree is particularly effective and continues with a growth in patronage. The Ring’n’Ride operating in Campbeltown is also effective particularly since partnership working takes place with Social Work departments to enable clients to use the bus to go shopping, and carrying out other activities.

A good example of a private Demand Responsive Transport scheme in Argyll is the “Cowal Deserve Project” operating in rural Cowal which provides an accessible on demand transport scheme for those with difficulties accessing services due to age or disability. It is particularly effective due to the high number of elderly living in the Cowal area.

All Demand Responsive Transport services in rural areas are innovative and they are providing a very necessary service, not otherwise available through regular timetabled services.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 17. Is accessibility planning something that should be considered for local or regional transport strategies in Scotland? If so, should it be compulsory, or (as at present), one of a suite of possible approaches?

Accessibility Planning as a technique is one of a number of possible approaches to properly integrate transport and land-use planning. Before fully embracing this technique, authorities and equal partnerships would require to have robust GS systems in place.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 18. How can we improve the accessibility of public transport to disabled people? For example, how far should concessions be extended for disabled people?

For those with significantly impaired mobility ‘door to door’ demand responsive transport must be the favoured option.

For those with slightly impaired mobility who wish to maintain a reasonable level of independence it is important that the normal public transport services are accessible to them whether they are ambulant or in a wheelchair. There have been significant improvements in the design of buses, trains and ferries in recent years in order to achieve better accessibility. However, it is not sufficient to have accessible buses, trains and ferries if these are not supported by the necessary infrastructure at bus stops, rail stations and ferry terminals. This may be less of a problem in urban areas but will undoubtedly prove more difficult to achieve in rural areas.

Page 203 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

With the introduction of the national bus travel concessionary scheme there should also be national criteria for qualifying for concessionary travel on the basis of disability to avoid differences which may exist between the various local authorities. Similarly, the provision of specific public transport services for the disabled should be to national criteria to avoid unfair provision.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 19. How do we make sure that transport operators and drivers follow best practice in dealing with older people, with disabled people and other groups who may have difficulties with transport? For example, should it be a condition of funding that such best practice is demonstrated?

There should be support for continued training of drivers using a modified version of the current Passenger Assistant Training Scheme. Improved awareness of the difficulties of older and disabled people using public transport should be a necessary feature of all driver training, particularly given the progress made in low floor bus design.

Information provided at bus stops, and interchanges should be lit and of sufficient font size to be read by those with visual impairment.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 20. What more could be done through transport means to tackle social exclusion in rural areas?

Community/voluntary groups should be assisted and encouraged to identify gaps in transport services in rural areas and work together with other agencies and organisations help where appropriate to resolve the problems. A funding stream needs to be identified for this sector, and again, as in Q.15 it should not be short term, project based.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 21. What do we need to consider in reflecting on the future of the lifeline air and ferry network?

Argyll and Bute Council considers this to be a fundamental question to the long term sustainability of the authority. Lifeline services must allow communities to continue to exist.

It is vital in the provision of these lifeline services, that the key objective is sustaining and developing the communities served by such services and that the central role that transport plays is properly understood, including its link with healthcare. The lifeline service must deliver this for the optimum benefit of that community in terms of affordability and frequency. This must be equitable across the islands served, tackling the economic and social inequalities currently Page 204 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

faced by islanders.

The Executive should set targets across the timescale of the strategy to achieve sustainability.

In reviewing the provision of the lifeline air and ferry network it may be useful to consider setting a minimum level of service. On the remoter islands, this may be a network which allows people to access a main administrative centre and return home in a day. Alternatives should be considered that provide best value in the long term (whole life cost of providing the service.) On more accessible Islands, such as those on the Clyde, this level of service should enable daily commuting, which is a vital component of economic sustainability.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 22. What more should be done to ensure that there are connections from outlying estates to towns and cities?

The integration of land-use planning and transport should ensure that developments are sited in the most appropriate locations and that they are served by public transport and have appropriate walking / cycling facilities into adjacent towns and cities. Some of these improvements could be achieved through making use of planning gain. It is hoped that the revised planning system will help address some of these issues.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 23. Are there any specific areas or events in Scotland where transport particularly well or particularly poorly supports access to cultural opportunities? Are there any specific societal groups disproportionately disadvantaged in accessing cultural activities because of transport issues?

This is particularly true in the evenings and at weekends when peripheral communities cannot take advantage of these because of inadequate local travel opportunities when public transport is less frequent.

As part of the National Transport Strategy, specific areas and national events throughout Scotland should be identified, to allow improved transportation links to be made with these areas. There are a number of events in mainland Scotland, which have significant transportation links serving these events. However, the peripheral communities cannot take advantage of these, because of inadequate local travel opportunities.

Page 205 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

CONSULTATION QUESTION 24. Should travel plans be required of all “larger” employers? If so, how should we define “larger” and should Travel Plans be required of all public bodies such as local authorities and Health Boards to show public sector leadership on this issue?

Employers and developers should prepare Travel Plans for all large new developments as this will encourage people to think about the way they travel. “Larger” should be defined as those sites where a transport assessment is required. However developments below this threshold may also be able to contribute towards sustainable travel and should be encouraged to prepare a Travel Plan. Travel Plans should be initially required of public sector bodies, providing an example to commercial companies.

The Consultation document, points out that there are barriers to the enforcement of such Travel Plans where Local Authorities consider that they do not have the resources to follow up the implementation of these Plans. This issue requires to be addressed.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 25. What should the relative roles of the Executive, regional transport partnerships and local authorities be in increasing the uptake and how might it be ensured that travel plans required of developers under the planning system are systematically enforced?

If there is consistency of approach across boundaries then uptake of Travel Plans should be similar, promoting a clear message to developers that Travel Plans are an integral part of the planning process.

Developers and large employers must produce plans for new developments. These should be enforced as planning conditions through strengthened legislation

CONSULTATION QUESTION 26. Should we be investing in “smart measures” to promote modal shift? If so, what degree of investment is required; what measures are most effective; and what should be the role of the Scottish Executive (for example, promotion of the concept, sharing best practice, running a scheme of funding others to run a scheme)?

With the growth in car ownership and the perceived cost advantage in the car’s ability to transport groups and families, public transport is often not seen as a viable alternative despite the down side of car transport in terms of traffic congestion and ability to park at or near the destination. We are also now gradually losing the generations who have actually had to rely on public transport and made use of bus and train as their prime means of transport. It has probably taken 40 years from the mid 1960s to reach this position and it is not surprising that those involved in the decision making processes involving Page 206 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

transportation and transport planning may have no experience of any other mode of transport than the car. In fact, there is a growing tendency amongst some sections of society to make a virtue of their reliance on the car and the fact that they do not use public transport.

If it has taken 40 years to reach this position it cannot be reversed overnight. More subtle methods are perhaps required to promote modal shift such as ensuring that planners and planning authority staff not normally directly involved with transport are compelled to consider public transport aspects of the work they are involved with. Schools should be teaching children from primary school age how to access and use public transport as well as making them aware of the advantages to society in general. Such an approach may be less costly and more effective than a multi million pound campaign.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 27. Is there a need for a single national travel awareness “brand” that the Executive, RTPs and local authorities could all use? If so, what should it be?

Yes - a single brand and positive integration would demonstrate a uniform approach as opposed to the current plethora of agencies that are essentially all attempting to achieve the same goal. The brand should be instantly recognisable and easily understood across all sectors of society. Examples include the many ‘information’ providers e.g. Transport Direct, Travel Line, National Rail Enquiries.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 28. We want to promote walking and cycling as healthy, sustainable ways to travel – what more should be done in this regard?

Greater investment in the National Cycle Network (NCN) is required to complete routes and provide linkage between routes. A “joined-up” approach between Transportation Authorities, Forestry Industry and British Waterways will serve to open up routes for leisure cycling and in some cases commuter cycling. While carriage of bicycles by rail, enabling access to routes further from home, has improved, this has not been the case on the long distance bus network. Safe and secure bicycle parking and storage is also an essential at public transport interchanges.

Time should be provided in the school curriculum to educate the pupils on the health, environmental and economic benefits of cycling and walking.

Provision of sustainable transport options should be a primary consideration when planning infrastructure around industrial and residential developments rather than an afterthought.

Employers might be given incentives to provide attractive loan facilities to encourage purchase and use of cycles for transport.

Page 207 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

CONSULTATION QUESTION 29. How can the NTS maximise its contribution to improving the health of the nation?

The health benefits (both social and physical) of active and sustainable travel are well documented. Encouraging initiatives designed to bring about modal shift in transport choices will have a positive impact upon the nation’s health. Giving these initiatives, such as school, workplace and community travel planning recognition and support, and integrating them into wider policies will help them to work effectively. In addition, by putting in place measures to make it easy and affordable for people to travel, social inclusion benefits and improved physical and mental health.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 30. How do we make buses more attractive for people to use, and therefore allow them to make a choice to take the bus rather than using their car? How do we ensure that the quality of the travelling experience is made a priority by bus operators?

Buses should be modern, clean and comfortable with a reliable frequent service which may involve the use of smaller vehicles in rural areas. Helpful and courteous drivers are vital and fares need to be set at an attractive level, with discounts for family travel so that bus travel is considered a more viable alternative to the car.

Cost and convenience are major factors when considering use of buses. The car journey is apparently much more cost effective than the bus, and this perception must be changed, by improving fare structures

CONSULTATION QUESTION 31. Is there a need for change in how the bus industry operates, or are the current arrangements working? If so, what should this change be?

Major efforts require to be made in properly integrating journeys – not only the connections, but the purchase of tickets – and not only between bus journeys but across all modes. This is particularly important in rural areas where journey premiums are low, and the social need high.

It is difficult to generalise on how the bus industry operates currently. There are differences between urban and rural and differences within those types of areas depending upon the attitude of the local authority or RTP and the number of bus companies present in the area.

It would be wrong to allow the network of bus services in an area to be controlled completely by the local authority and dominant operator or operators. There should always be room for the smaller operator to enter the market and while there are examples of where this has had a detrimental affect on the network there are also many good examples of where a niche market has been satisfied and the network improved. It is also true that the presence of smaller operators Page 208 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

will deter larger operators from trying to manipulate the market for their own ends. A degree of regeneration should be introduced to prevent clustering at peak times.

Unlike rail, the profitability threshold is much lower in the bus industry and it is better to encourage as much commercial operation as possible while still finding the right balance at which to intervene.

The generous initiatives already introduced by the Scottish Executive both by way of legislation and funding should be given time to mature and be continually reviewed to identify benefits. CONSULTATION QUESTION 32. How do we make rail more attractive for people, and therefore allow them to make the choice to take the train rather than use their car?

Increased inner city parking charges or a form of congestion charging would act as a disincentive to car use.

There is no doubt that rail and car sit together better than bus and car. Rail has a better potential to cut out some of the car driver’s mileage than bus. Free car parking at stations or free or reduced rate parking with purchase of rail ticket make this arrangement more attractive. The expansion of the rail network and more intensive use of existing resources through partnership working with other bodies such as the Highland Rail Partnership can only help to increase attractiveness of rail both in terms of improved services for regular and potential users on particular lines and an increase in available destinations for casual or business travellers. Existing arrangements will achieve this. These excellent initiatives have to be backed up with campaigns which increase public awareness of how good the network actually is. The culture of the media is usually to present rail in a negative light. This will be difficult to change.

Cost is a factor for families. Awareness of the various discount cards available such as Young Person’s Railcard, Family Railcard should be heightened. Family Railcard brings the cost down to nearer what the fuel costs for the car would be increasing the attractiveness of rail.

Fare structures must be understandable to the general public and transparent.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 33. What else should be done at a national level to support improvements in travel information? How do we capitalise on the potential opportunities created by new technologies – such as 3G mobile phones – to improve the provision of travel information?

Greater integration of information sources would aid the development of quality information.

More funding is required to promote txt2traveline scheme nationally as well as locally (mobile phone timetable information service). Additional funding for Real Page 209 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

Time Information at Key stops. Possibly make a port of the journey planner from Transport Direct available through mobile phones such as 3G which would allow information to be available on the move.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 34. Do you consider that we need to change the cost of public transport fares and, if so, what changes should be brought in?

Ferries are a necessity for island dwellers and although some discounts are available, the perception is still that fares are too high. Rail has a range of measures available to obtain discounts through railcards, season tickets and advance booking reductions. Bus travel is the area where change is necessary. Discounts are generally only available to individual travellers sometimes restricted to one route or a network of services. Advance booking discounts are available for long distance routes but again generally just for individuals. Elderly and disabled travelling are free on buses and the Executive has plans for concessionary travel for the young. As most bus travellers are either young or old there is a question over the value of this service. It will create a situation where operators are beholden to the Executive for nearly all their income. Local authorities should continue to set fare levels on the non commercial the routes they wish to provide.

The presence of the concessionary travel scheme and the large numbers of elderly and disabled making use of the scheme is an incentive for operators to have high basic fares.

Lower bus fares, especially for families, are a necessity if they are to be attracted to public transport. Short journeys for family groups are currently far more expensive than making the equivalent journey by car in most areas.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 35. If you support lower fares, would such reductions need to be funded by tax revenue, or are there schemes which consultees consider could pay for themselves through modal shift (i.e. because more people would be travelling, albeit paying somewhat lower fares)?

Fares should not be reduced from tax revenue. Operators need to be encourage to bring in their own schemes as many have done with discount cards, bulk purchase, direct debit regular payments etc including provision for families. If necessary, Local Authorities might be given the power along with additional funding to assist in the promotion of these schemes.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 36. How can we promote integrated ticketing between different operators?

To avoid competition issues, Local Authorities should be able to promote and administer such schemes on behalf of participating operators and provide them with the funding and/or resources to do so.

Page 210 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

CONSULTATION QUESTION 37. How do we promote additional modal shift from road freight to rail and waterborne freight?

Freight Facility grants are currently in place which are intended to assist in achieving this modal shift. Fundamental problems do arise however in the mis- match of costs between the highly competitive road freight market, and the emerging shipping market. These costs arise partly from increased handling costs, reflecting the off-vehicle/ on boat dimension and vice versa. Allowances need to be made for these costs, and set against the savings in roads maintenance costs, which do not appear to be fully taken into account when the environmental benefit is considered. There needs to be a presumption in favour of coastal shipping in coastal areas, with wider intervention by national government to provide the strategic facilities to allow this culture shift to take place. This would require consideration, when assessing grant assistance such as Freight Facility Grants, of the wider impact of road freight on communities and the environment, as well as roads maintenance costs, when considering modal shift to sea. Additional encouragement should be given to remote and island areas where the use of shipping has a much greater potential growth as an alternative to road freight. However, the historical move away from sea transport in favour of road, now entrenched in business planning, requires a kick start from the public sector to overcome that market bias.

The Council recognises the benefit of working in partnership to develop coastal freight shipping across Council areas throughout the Highlands and Islands and Clyde Coast. Containerisation is used in an ad-hoc fashion in many areas (agricultural supplies, construction materials etc).

In terms of rail, except for a small number of dedicated facilities, the freight infrastructure has not kept pace with technology, and needs to be revitalised by considerable investment in rolling stock and interchanges to allow the latent demand to be met. This particularly applies to rural areas and the primary resources which they provide.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 38. How do we ensure that people are safe, and feel safe, on public transport, at stations and bus stops, and while travelling by foot, bike or car? For example, what needs to be done to tackle anti-social behaviour on public transport and on our roads?

It is important that the work carried out in this area continuing particularly with regards to the provision of CCTV and lighting at interchanges. A welcoming, well- lit, manned station may allay the perception of personal security issues. British Transport Police are currently reporting reduced levels of crime. They must be resourced to be able to continue this trend.

Page 211 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

CONSULTATION QUESTION 39. Within a UK market, what, if anything, should Scotland specifically do to promote the uptake of bio fuels?

There are a number of contributions which could be made to promote bio fuels. If the pace of change is to be accelerated, market forces will be unable to achieve this without significant measures of government intervention. A starting point would be to make it financially attractive for public agencies to use bio-fuels in the transport sector but as well as this, for energy provision in new buildings, particularly in the areas which are providers of the primary product. There would be huge benefits in terms of reduced transport costs, the use of a sustainable resource, the contribution towards arresting climate change and the potential for sustainable job creation if processing of the fuel takes place locally.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 40. Where are the commercial opportunities for bio fuels in Scotland? What, if anything, is the role for the public sector in supporting commercial bio fuels developments? Are there down-sides of an increased bio-fuel market in Scotland?

In rural areas the major transport benefits of bio fuels centre around the use of the product for energy provision, rather than as a vehicle fuel. The commercial opportunities in Scotland centre mainly around forestry, the processing of the raw product and the development of the technology to expand the use of the product. Many small scale applications are reporting significant savings in the use of chipped and pelletised timber boilers against the traditional oil-fired devices, particularly against the current background of surging oil prices. As mentioned above, the role of the public sector must be to lead by example, and indeed by intervention, given the risk-averse nature of purely commercial organisations.

One of the downsides would be the fact that the technology is in its infancy in this country, and reliability of equipment as well as assurance of resource, will need to be demonstrated

CONSULTATION QUESTION 41. Within the context of a UK regulatory framework, what more, if anything, should be done to make motor vehicles in Scotland cleaner to run?

Argyll & Bute Council supports the National Transport Strategy by increasingly using cleaner vehicles and cleaner fuels, to reduce the number of harmful emissions, by specifying appropriate vehicles. In general terms, the cost of vehicles and the availability of the various types of alternative fuels can be problematic, particularly from a local/rural perspective. One issue which needs to be addressed is the high volume of aged, polluting vehicles on the road.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 42. Where are the potential gains in terms of new transport technology in Scotland? How do we capture the potential economic benefits of developing them in Scotland? What, if anything, is the role for the public sector in supporting the development of such new technologies? Page 212 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

Alternative fuel sources, and in particular those which are specifically environmentally friendly should be supported. Although there may be no reduction in the amount of traffic through this new technology alone, the resultant, cleaner air will be a benefit for all.

In order to capture the economic benefits, it is essential that appropriate financial input is provided to the sector. Although the public sector would support the development of any of these technologies, as a national issue, this should be led by the Scottish Executive or Transport Scotland.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 43. What needs to be done to ensure that parking policy – on-street parking, bus and rail park and ride and so on – is more effective in managing demand and promoting modal shift?

To discourage vehicles in town centres, there should be real incentives for using park and ride, e.g. savings if user purchases a combined parking and ticket package. This may also discourage use of the site for those that are not using the public transport service.

In general terms, car parks provided in many locations throughout rural Scotland are not provided to specifically encourage modal shift.

The availability of suitable car parks is generally outwith town and city centres, and therefore appropriate public transport between these locations must be established. The level of cost for park and ride should be cheaper than taking a vehicle into a town or city centre.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 44. How might park and ride schemes best be developed to further encourage modal shift and reduce congestion? How should enhancements be funded and what should pricing policies be?

Provide informal park and ride sites at rural locations and consistent interchanges to assist major towns and cities in reducing congestion. As 43 above, savings should be realised if people choose to park and ride.

Park and ride facilities should be operated throughout the working day, to allow these facilities to be fully utilised for all public transport services.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 45. Should we pilot new approaches to improving demand management on trunk roads network? If so, which approaches should we pilot (for example, bus priority measures, multiple occupancy vehicle and heavy goods vehicle preference, metering, more park and ride) and do you have any views about where and when they should be piloted?

There are clearly several locations on the trunk road network, which would benefit from pilot schemes being undertaken in an attempt to reduce congestion. Trunk roads need to be included in any traffic reduction policies. Page 213 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

CONSULTATION QUESTION 46. Given the difficulties in managing demand for road space by other means, do consultees agree that, in principle, national and/or local road pricing in Scotland could be an effective way to manage demand?

In principle, Argyll and Bute Council supports road pricing in appropriate location at a local level.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 47. Does the Executive need to do more to build support for road pricing? Should there be funding made available to local authorities and regional transport partnerships which wish to promote local/regional road pricing schemes. If so, what model should be used to provide such funding?

There has been no specific desire from the general public for road pricing in Scotland, but clearly there have been major benefits in London. It would be appropriate that the Executive takes the lead on this matter. Funding should be made available to both local authorities and regional transport partnerships to promote schemes.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 48. What should be the objectives of any future national road pricing scheme For example: • Should it primarily be concerned with cutting congestion levels? • Or should it also reflect environmental concerns about CO² and other emissions? • Should it be a means by which, in Scotland, we try to achieve our aspiration of stabilising road traffic volumes at 2001 levels by 2021 (see Chapter 4)? • Should it aim to reflect better the true cost of motoring (including the costs to other people, the economy and the environment), or should it cost about the same to drive overall as at the moment? In general terms, road pricing should primarily be concerned with reducing congestion levels but as a secondary benefit, reduction in emission levels should also be targeted. The aspiration to stabilise road traffic volumes is supported.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 49. If there was no UK-wide national road pricing scheme, should a Scotland-only scheme be considered?

If road pricing is to be implemented it should be based on a United Kingdom wide basis. A Scotland-only scheme should not be considered.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 50. Do consultees support the inclusion of surface transport in any future CO² emissions trading mechanisms? What impact could this have on transport’s emissions of CO²?

Argyll & Bute Council supports policies which will reduce CO2 emissions.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 51. What more, if anything, needs to be done to ensure that transport considerations are taken into account in the location decision, for example of health services and schools? Page 214 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

The sustainability of the transport requirement of these developments has to be considered from the very outset. Further integration of land-use planning and transport should be realised to make sure these developments are sited in the most appropriate locations and that they are served by public transport, have appropriate walking / cycling facilities or are sited such that the need for travel is reduced. It is hoped that the revised planning system will address some of these issues.

In addition some consideration should be given to the disproportionate power of veto that partnership agencies exercise in the decision making process.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 52. What contribution can broadband and flexible working practices make to reducing individuals’ need to travel? What else should be done to reduce the need to travel?

Employers should be encouraged to provide the opportunity for employees to work from home even if it is only for a proportion of the week. This maintains the social interaction many people feel is necessary as part of working life, but also allows a work-life balance to be achieved.

The contribution from broadband in reducing travel needs cannot be underestimated. Broadband allows access to every community throughout Scotland, and it should decrease transportation needs. The provision of such facilities is allowing niche providers such as conservancies to flourish in rural areas.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 53. We are tackling road safety and are on track to meet our targets. But is there more that should be done at the national (rather than the local) level?

There is a wide variation in standards of information and signing nationally. Consistent policies across the trunk road network should be introduced and examples of best practice disseminated.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 54. What can be done to make our streets safer and more pleasant places to be?

There have been several initiatives from the Scottish Executive over the past few years, including ‘Twenty’s Plenty’ schemes and the move to ‘Homezones’. Reducing speed limits in residential areas should be applauded, but appropriate engineering solutions should be undertaken to ensure that vehicle drivers reduce speeds without the need for significant traffic management signs. The ‘Homezones’ initiative is apparently successful, and it would be appropriate to extend the pilot scheme throughout the country.

Other issues which could make our streets safer, would include improved street lighting, wider pavements, increased pedestrianisation and increased enforcement of speeding offences.

There have been calls for the display of car insurance discs on windscreens, Page 215 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

Given the high numbers of non-insured drivers; the Executive should use its influence to support this initiative.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 55. What issues should be considered in implementing the NTS following its publication later in 2006?

The delivery of the NTS is key to economic prosperity. The commitment to delivery of transport objectives has to be built into a long term planning framework in the same way as this is achieved in the land use planning sector by statute.

The deliverability of objectives through projects has to be simplified and streamlined in order to reduce the lead-in time of strategic projects.

Investment levels in the transport network such that safeguarded against other competing government interests.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 56. Do consultees consider that “traffic intensity” is likely to be a useful overall indicator of our success with the forthcoming NTS? If not, what alternative(s) would be preferable?

Given that the UK is already significantly more transport efficient in terms of economic performance, than our major European partners, to attempt to implement measures aimed at reducing this indicator value further may suppress opportunities for economic growth particularly in peripheral areas to an unacceptable degree. An indicator that reflected the degree to which poor transportation systems suppress growth in the economy would be preferable.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 57. Are the indicators outlined for each transport goal useful? If not, what alternative(s) would be preferable?

The indicator on economic growth should not merely reflect changes in average journey times, but include a factor to reflect the level of reliability of journey times which is as important for major sectors within commerce, retail and the public as a whole. It would also, thus direct actions towards reducing congestion and promote modal shift where such actions improve better performance.

Improving accessibility is an important indicator but will be influenced as much by good quality land use planning as by transportation actions. A large degree of joined up governance will be required to obtain maximum performance in this area.

National indicators for modal shift would not reflect the different challenges faced in rural and urban areas, and it may be preferable for any such indicator to be monitored separately for both sections of the community.

Regarding Road Safety Targets the timeframe for the current targets is very short Page 216 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

and in many cases almost already achieved. It would be worthwhile if new indicators were at least identified as necessary within the strategy. Indicators aimed at reducing the numbers of pedestrian and cycling accidents should be considered as these would direct actions towards improving the safety of healthy transport options, and thus encourage modal shift.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 58. Are consultees content that the target of quadrupling cycle use should now be reviewed? What, if anything, might replace it (for example, local authority-level targets on the DfT model)?

As cycling is a local activity, the target should be reviewed and set locally. There are however, advantages in aspiring to a national target, provided appropriate counting mechanisms are in place to verify numbers. There does seem to be a reliability issue with cycle counters.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 59. Are there other measures which should be considered in Scotland which would move us towards the target to stabilise road traffic volumes at 2001 levels by 2021, recognising that significant fiscal measures would have to be agreed by the UK Government?

It is vitally important that rural areas are not disadvantaged by traffic reduction policies which are inappropriate. Rural areas depend, for their sustainability, on car borne-tourism, and would wish to see growth in this sector.

However, as identified in the answer to question 37, significant freight modal shift from road to rail and coastal shipping would play a significant part in the stabilisation of HGV traffic volumes. There may be a case for developing targets by classification of vehicles given the sensitivities of different classifications to differing measures.

Public transport can play its part in helping to achieve this target, but it is vital that fares are set at a level which drivers can compare favourably with the cost of running a car. The introduction of congestion charging has proved to be beneficial in London. This model should be replicated in cities, with the income being used to develop public transport.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 60. Do consultees agree with the proposals to:

• Continue to have stabilisation of road traffic as a high level of aspiration; • Use indicators measuring modal shift to measure how our modal shift policies are working; and • Redirect our efforts more clearly at the environmental and congestion issues which underpin the traffic stabilisation aspiration, by; • Considering new transport-related target(s) for CO² (see further below); and • Continuing to monitor congestion trends on our trunk roads as at present, and considering what further measures might be required. Page 217 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

The quality of life in rural areas will continue to be significantly influenced by the individual’s ability to access services and employment. Where other conduits for transport are not, and are unlikely to become, available, targets aimed at stabilising road traffic will significantly disadvantage the prospects for rural communities. This aspiration should be adjusted to reflect this rural dimension.

Cutting congestion over the whole transportation network across all modes should be a key aim of the strategy, and monitoring by the Executive should not be confined to trunk roads, which form a relatively small part of the overall transport network.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 61. Do consultees have any views on the idea of a move to regional traffic reduction targets in place of a national target?

There are clear benefits in establishing regional targets, primarily because of the variation of conditions across the country. These conditions range from the rural, economically inactive areas which depend, for any growth, on tourism, and car- borne visitors, where a target for traffic reduction is completely inappropriate, to conurbations where the issues are more concerned with congestion and air quality, and traffic reduction policies are entirely appropriate.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 62. Given the difficulties with the national traffic stabilisation aspirational target, do consultees agree that realistic, deliverable milestones towards its delivery cannot be put in place at present?

As above, it would be more appropriate to consider setting milestones for regional traffic stabilisation targets, where measures appropriate to the conditions can be introduced. One of the areas where this strategy might be successful would be in securing a freight modal shift to waterborne transport in the Highlands and Islands.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 63. Do consultees agree that setting a level of contribution for reductions in Scotland’s CO² emissions which are directly linked to the impact of our policies in areas which are devolved would be the best measure of the Scottish Executive’s effectiveness in tackling transport emissions?

It is important that areas which experience poor air quality through transport emissions are identified and mapped, such that reduction measures can be properly targeted, rather than applying ‘across the board’ targets to areas where there are no concerns. In this way, value for investment is better achieved.

CONSULTATION QUESTION 64. What specific reduction level(s) for CO² should be put in place for transport?

Page 218 NATIONAL TRANSPORT STRATEGY

This technical question is best answered by Executive’s scientific advisors CONSULTATION QUESTION 65. Do consultees have any views about the timing or scope of reviews of the NTS?

As the NTS covers a period of 20 years, 5 year reviews are more appropriate and in line with reviews of Development Plans.

Page 219 Agenda Item 5m

ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES AREA COMMITTEE

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 JUNE 2006

WINTER FERRY SERVICES : COLL and TIREE

1. SUMMARY

The purpose of this report is to advise the Area Committee of progress towards the continuing provision of an additional ferry sailing between Oban, Coll and Tiree during the course of the winter timetable.

2. RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that members

(i) note the contents of the report

(ii) authorise the Director, Development Services to make representation to the Scottish Executive to include the additional winter sailing in the forthcoming tender specification in accordance with the arguments detailed in this paper.

3. BACKGROUND

For many years, the frequency of the Caledonian MacBrayne winter ferry service to Coll and Tiree remained static at three services per week. Between 23rd October and 18th December 2005 (nine weeks) it proved practicable for Caledonian MacBrayne to operate an additional sailing on Sundays leaving Oban at 0645 and calling at Tiree 10- 05/1030 and Coll 1125/1135. Caledonian MacBrayne’s shortfall on operating the additional sailing was £34,778 and this was funded 50/50 by HiTRANS and the Council. The Council share was funded by diverting Rural Transport Grant from previously authorised projects.

The additional sailings were relatively successful although Caledonian MacBrayne’s opinion was that overall carryings for the months of October, November and December 2005 did not increase significantly. The house building project on Tiree did influence overall commercial vehicle carryings but this was obviously a “one off”.

Total carryings were 674 passengers, 211 cars and 43 commercial vehicles. The subsidy per passenger was £51.60. Comparing the overall picture between 2004 and 2005 there was an overall increase in traffic.

2004 2005 Passengers carried 3,130 3,698 Cars 1,080 1,266 Commercial vehicles 251 341

Overall, Caledonian MacBrayne came to the conclusion that the fourth sailing did nothing more than displace existing traffic and did little to stimulate traffic growth. They F:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\0\7\4\AI00029470\RuralTransportGrantCollTiree06OLI0.doc 1 of 2 30 May, 2006

Page 220

further concluded that in their view, the only justification for the operation of a fourth sailing is on the basis of improved choice for the communities of Coll Tiree and some enhancement to social inclusion.

However, the basic fact is that patronage did show an increase and given that this was only a nine week enhancement in one year there is reasonable grounds to suppose that over a period of years further growth could be achieved.

There had been a hope that the additional sailing would be included in the core timetable for this winter but local Caledonian MacBrayne management have advised that it can only be included on the basis that it will be paid for by Argyll and Bute Council and/or HiTRANS. However, it should be noted that the service would not be available after Christmas 2006 as the vessel allocated (Clansman) to the Inner Isles/Outer Isles is required to cover annual refits in the New Year

The funding arrangements put in place last year to secure the service will not be available this year. HiTRANS funding is not available for continued revenue support and the Council’s allocation of Rural Transport Grant is fully committed. However, the additional sailing could be considered should any windfall funding become available which can be used for revenue support.

However, it is understood that there is a possibility that the service may yet be included in the timetable to be specified by the Scottish Executive and accordingly authority is sought to make such representation. The basis of the Council’s argument being that three sailings per week during the winter is unacceptable when it can be proven that for at least part of the winter timetable period, four sailings can be operated. The Council would further argue that the basic service offered is substandard being operated on the basis of cost alone and taking no account of social inclusion. This situation leaves Coll and Tiree with the worst transport accessibility of any comparable communities in the country. The Council would look to the Scottish Executive to redress this situation by including this service in the specification for the forthcoming tender process.

5. IMPLICATIONS

5.1 Policy – Consistent with Council’s core policy of providing access.

5.2 Financial – None if service included In Scottish Executive specification

5.3 Personnel – None

5.4 Equal Opportunities – None

5.5 Legal – None.

For further information please contact B. Fletcher (01546 604190).

D Duthie Head of Transportation and Infrastructure

F:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\0\7\4\AI00029470\RuralTransportGrantCollTiree06OLI0.doc 2 of 2 30 May, 2006

Page 221 Agenda Item 5n

ARGYLL & BUTE COUNCIL OBAN LORN AND THE ISLES AREA COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES OPERATIONAL SERVICES Wednesday 7 June 2006

EFFECT OF COLL AIRFIELD CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC

1. SUMMARY

This report advises Members of damage to the B8070 Arinagour to Breachacha Road and proposals for remedial work.

2. RECOMMENDATION

2.1 That Members note the report.

3. BACKGROUND

3.1 As part of the Argyll Air Service Project, the airstrip on Coll is being upgraded to allow it to be used for a scheduled air service to Oban. This is a strategic priority for Argyll and Bute Council.

3.2 To procure the upgrading, a contract was awarded, through Transportation and Infrastructure Services, to Ennstone Thistle.

3.3 Transportation & Infrastructure Services consulted with Roads and Amenity Area staff during the project development stage and were advised that haulage would cause problems on the B8070, significant sections of which were constructed on peat. The worst affected areas were estimated as being 1km in length. It was also made clear that as well as reinstatement works at the end of the contract, repairs would have to be carried out whenever necessary to allow the road to safely carry its normal traffic. An allowance was built in to the tender to cover both these circumstances and this work has been proceeding under the direction of the site staff. 3.4 A restriction on the maximum size of haulage vehicle for use on the public road was incorporated into the contract requirements. The successful contractor proposed a variation to this through the adoption of twin rear axle vehicles, which had the effect of reducing, further the rear axle loading and this was accepted by the Council. A combination of these vehicles and tractor and trailers has been employed in transporting material between the pier and the site. 3.5 During the first half of May sections of the B8070 deteriorated to a condition that was not considered acceptable, due to a number of factors. Very heavy periods of rain caused a washout of the areas that had been repaired followed by a period of very warm weather that led to a deterioration of previously acceptable areas. The contractor has Page 222

since been instructed to undertake repairs using a combination of heavy duty geogrids and an increased depth of dry bound material and it is anticipated that this approach will satisfactorily address the temporary situation

3.6 Once all the material that is required to construct the works has been brought to the airfield site, a survey and assessment review of the road condition will be undertaken and an evaluation made of the estimated cost of final repair

3.7 Extensive resurfacing of this road was carried out fifteen years ago. Under the approved Road Maintenance Plan it would be resurfaced every seventy years, if we had sufficient budget. Reconstruction works following this contract are therefore “Extraordinary Expenses” in terms of Section 96 of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 and should be recoverable from those responsible for the damage.

22 May 2006

For further information or clarification of any matter contained within this report please contact Neil Brown on 01631 562125 or Mike Moffat on 01546 604652

Page 223 Agenda Item 6a

ARGYLL & BUTE COUNCIL OBAN, LORN & ISLES AREA COMMITTEE OPERATIONAL SERVICES – FACILITY SERVICES 7 June 2006

CORRAN HALLS - CONFERENCE PROVISION - FORMER LIBRARY AREAS

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 This paper is to brief the Area Committee on the progress of plans for the Labour Party conference in November, the required upgrade works at Corran Halls, and the utilisation of the former library areas within the building.

2. SUMMARY

2.1 Planning for the Labour Party conference is progressing satisfactorily. The planning process has highlighted internal and external areas where works are required to bring the Corran Halls up to a satisfactory standard.

2.2 The former library area is now available for letting. The first floor requires a small package of works to bring it up to a satisfactory standard for use as a conference and meeting room area.

2.3 Facility Services identified the requirement for an additional revenue budget of £20,000 to undertake works to upgrade the facility to conference standard, and to market the facility as a conference venue, within the 2006/7 budget round. This proposal was rejected. There is no identified budget to undertake these upgrade works.

2.4 There is a growing demand for the Corran Halls as a conference venue. If the facility is upgraded and is actively and effectively marketed, there is potential for the Corran Halls to be developed as a national conference venue.

2.5 The Oban Toy Library has requested the let of the former library area for 10 hours per week. Income from the Oban Toy Library would be £400/month.

3. RECOMMENDATIONS

3.1 Area Committee notes the progress with preparations for the Labour Party conference.

Page 224

3.2 Area Committee note that there is no budget provision for the costs of the Marquee Hire and to consider alternative options to fund this provision.

3.3 Area Committee note that there is no budget provision for the required Hall upgrade works and the procurement of conference furniture, and to consider alternative options to fund these works

3.4 Area Committee consider the proposed conditions of let of the former library area to the Oban Toy Library.

3.5 Area Committee consider the Head of Facility Service’s recommendation, that in light of the increasing demand for the Corran Halls as a conference facility, the proposed let to the Toy Library is not practicable.

4. LABOUR PARTY CONFERENCE

4.1 Preparations for the Labour Party conference in November are progressing satisfactorily with a meeting held in May with Party Officials, Executive and Parliamentary Officers, the Police and Emergency Services. A summary of the key action points from this meeting is at Appendix 1.

4.2 The Leisure Service agreed to meet the £7000 cost of the Marquee hire to secure the Conference. This is an unbudgeted cost.

4.3 The Labour Party officials are generally satisfied with the facilities within the Corran Halls, but highlighted the requirement for conference furniture provision and the lack of sound proofing between the Studio Theatre / Café Bar partitioning as areas of concern, as they require to run separate events within these two areas.

5. REQUIRED UPGRADE WORKS

5.1 Heating The heating system within the Café Bar / Studio Theatre is inadequate, with portable heaters required in winter months. Existing arrangements will not provide satisfactory heating for the Labour conference in November. Property Services have been instructed to provide options and costs for the heating system works by 30 June. Works will require to be completed by October.

5.2 Studio Theatre / Café The Labour Party identified the lack of sound proofing between the Studio Theatre and the Café Bar as a significant issue. This shortfall in design has been recognised by the OLI Area

Page 225

Committee previously. The works required to install doors and sound proofing are estimated at £3000.

5.3 Meeting/Conference furniture The facility requires new conference furniture for the former library areas and offices, to provide conference and “break out” rooms. The cost of new furniture is £7500.

5.4 Internal Decoration The cost to bring the internal decoration of the first floor up to standard is estimated at £2000. A small programme of works will be undertaken, in the period running up to the Labour conference, to touch up paintwork as required, in internal areas of high wear.

5.5 External Works The external painting works carried out in 2005 to the entrance and the seaward elevation have made a significant improvement to the visual impact of the building. These works have however highlighted the poor condition of masonry paintwork on the Ganavan elevation. The cost of making good these areas and “touching up” the front entrance is estimated at £3000.

5.6 External Secure Storage Container Storage is required to accommodate seating and associated stage and conference furniture. The cost of a suitable secure container is £1500.

5.7 Stage Lighting Dimmers The statutory maintenance programme for 2005/6 identified that the stage lighting dimmers are in a very poor condition. The replacement cost of the dimmers is estimated at £25000.

5.8 A summary of required upgrade works is given below:

Area Works Required Estimated Costs Studio Theatre / Café Bar Heating to be upgraded Tbc Heating Studio Theatre / Café Bar Café bar and Studio Theatre £3000 Partition partition required Conference furniture Stackable conference furniture £7500 required Internal painter works Former library areas £2000 External painter works Ganavan elevation and specific £3000 External storage container Procure external secure storage £1500 Stage Lighting Dimmer Requires replacement £25000

6. LIBRARY RELOCATION & OBAN TOY LIBRARY

6.1 The relocation of the library imposes an additional rates charge upon the operation of the Corran Halls for 2006-7. The Leisure Service requires

Page 226

to generate an increased income of £660/month to cover this additional rates burden.

6.2 The Oban Toy Library Committee has confirmed its interest in taking the let of the former library area for 10 hours (2 afternoons) per week, at a charge of £400/month.

6.3 The proposed terms under which the let of the former library area were considered were:

6.3.1 The Toy Library would agree to take 10 hours of lets per week at a charge of £400/month, with the potential to expand further lets into the early evening, to generate additional income for the Hall. 6.3.2 The Toy Library to agree to a 6-month letting agreement. 6.3.3 The Council retain the option to re-programme letting days to accommodate other facility events, e.g. conferences, meetings. The Council to provide the Toy Library with notice of any changes to the identified let days or times. 6.3.4 Toy Library provide and install lockable storage cupboards, of an approved design and in keeping with the décor, at no cost to the Council. 6.3.5 The cupboards to be no 100cm wide and 50 cm deep.

7.0 DEMAND FOR CORRAN HALLS AS A CONFERENCE FACILITY

7.1 Not withstanding the fact that there has been no active marketing of the Corran Halls to date, over the period April-May, there has been a significant increase in interest in the facility as a conference venue. In addition to securing the Labour Party Conference in November, a 5 day Scientific Conference is booked for September, the COSLA Conference has been confirmed, Strathclyde Police have booked a 2 day Convention and the STUC have indicated their interest in booking the Hall for a future National Conference.

7.2 This recent increase in demand gives encouragement to the prospect of the Hall developing as a national conference venue, if it is actively marketed.

7.3 This development has therefore given cause to consider the proposed arrangements for letting the former library area to the Toy Library. In considering the practicability of this proposal the following issues require to be addressed:

7.3.1 The proposed arrangement for the re-scheduling of Toy Library letting dates and times to accommodate future conference

Page 227

requirements, is likely to prove difficult to manage and unsatisfactory in practice.

7.3.2 While the proposed secure cupboards within the former library area are not deemed to have any significant impact upon the marketability of the room for meetings in the short term, in the longer term, their suitability within an area key to future conference business must be questioned.

For these reasons, it is considered that the increasing demand for the Corran Halls as a conference facility, make the letting of the former library area to the Toy Library, on the proposed six month basis, impracticable in reality.

7.4 The Leisure Service recognises the work that the Toy Library has expended in developing proposals with Council Staff, for the operation of the Toy Library from the Corran Halls. It is to be regretted that the changing environment and increased demand for the facility, means that their requirements cannot be satisfactorily accommodated.

8. FUTURE MARKETING

8.1 The Council should aim to capitalise on the opportunity that the Labour Party Conference and COSLA Conference present, to broaden the exposure of the Corran Halls as a future conference venue.

8.2 If the proposed upgrade works are funded and completed over the next quarter, then the Leisure Service will develop an active marketing plan and associated publicity material to support the marketing of the facility to the main political parties, Community Partners, NGOs, professional bodies and community and interest groups.

9. APPENDIX

Appendix 1 Labour Conference - Main Action Points Summary

Sandy Mactaggart Head of Facility Services

7 June 2006

Page 228

Labour Party Conference – November 2006 APPENDIX 1

Summary of Main Action Points

1. Caledonia Swallow hotel will be used exclusively for Labour Party delegates

2. Chief Inspector is the lead contact for all security arrangements

3. There will be a table top exercise prior to the conference to test security and organisational arrangements, and reactions to emergency and accident events.

4. Marquee will be erected at the Corran Halls entrance. Police will be at the Marquee until fully erected.

5. Copy of Hall and marquee plans to be given to the Police (Hall plans handed to the police - Corran Halls staff to provide further marquee and Hall plan)

6. Future meeting with council officers re parking arrangements in the town required. Members to be consulted on any proposed variation to parking charges.

7. Three car area to be identified for protected persons (this will now be at the entrance to the Marquee)

8. Labour Party will steward event. Stewards will operate scanners.

9. Labour Party stewards will be trained prior to the conference re security and fire evacuation procedures at Corran Halls.

10. Overnight security arrangements to be confirmed between Corran Halls and the BBC.

11. Labour Party to provide details of specific requirements for communications e.g. phone lines, ISDN etc, Labour Party will pay for any additional provision.

12. Council to develop contingency planning for emergency events such as:

o Electrical failure – availability of generators o Plumbing / water o Communications o Severe weather

Page 229 Agenda Item 6b

ARGYLL & BUTE COUNCIL OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES AREA COMMITTEE OPERATIONAL SERVICES JUNE 2006

PROPOSED FORTNIGHTLY DOMESTIC REFUSE COLLECTION ALTERNATING WITH PAPER & CARDBOARD RECYCLING FOR LISMORE

1. SUMMARY

1.1 This Report informs members of a proposed fortnightly refuse collection alternating with paper and cardboard recycling on Lismore. The principle of trial areas was given approval at the Strategic Policy Committee on 19th January 2006 subject to reports to relevant Area Committees. A further report on the outcome of such trials is to be brought to the Strategic Policy Committee prior to the 2007/08 budget meeting.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 Members approve a proposed trial on Lismore for a fortnightly general refuse collection service uplift alternating with a paper and cardboard uplift. Each householder will be provided with a domestic wheeled bin, a blue paper and cardboard recycling wheeled bin, and a home composting bin.

2.2 The Lismore Civic Amenity skip is removed and instead quarterly bulky uplifts are provided free by the Council.

3. DETAIL

3.1 Scottish Executive Landfill Allowance Scheme Targets.

3.1.1 The Scottish Executive has set landfill allowance targets for each local authority. These targets impose a landfill limit for each Council from 2005/06 until 2009/10 with this limit tightening year on year. After 2010, it is likely targets will be even more onerous as the Scottish Executive uses this scheme to enforce compliance with European Landfill Diversion targets. This scheme has been referred to in previous SPC Reports and most recently in the 19th January 2006 Report.

3.1.2 Fines proposed by the Scottish Executive for not achieving these landfill limits are £25, £50 and £150 per tonne in 2006/07, 2007/08 and 2008/09 respectively. To assist in achieving these targets, a move towards fortnightly general waste collections and increased recycling and composting will assist in reducing landfill, while increasing recycling and composting.

3.2 Recycling and Composting Targets.

1 Page 230

3.2.1 In addition to the Scottish Executive Landfill Trading Scheme, other recycling and composting targets that the Council aim to comply with are as follows:

a) Scottish Executive targets of recycling and composting 25% of Council collected waste in 2006 and 30% by 2008.

b) Argyll and Bute Area Waste Plan target of 50% recycling and composting of Council collected waste by 2010.

4. DETAIL

4.1 Current Refuse Collection and Recycling Facilities on Lismore.

4.1.1 In line with most of Argyll and Bute, householders on Lismore receive a weekly refuse collection. In addition there is an unlicensed Civic Amenity skip, plus glass bottle recycling banks.

The glass banks are currently the only recycling provision on Lismore. Householders have an unstaffed and unlicensed Civic Amenity Skip, no recycling collections and no wheeled bins.

4.1.2 A move to a fortnightly general waste collection alternating with a paper and cardboard uplift would allow more recycling for householders. Removal of the skip would allow a more controlled uplift and segregation of wastes for recycling on a quarterly basis while saving approximately £4000 per year on ferry costs for the skip.

4.1.3 The proposed trial would commence in the autumn of 2006 and would run at least until the end of 2006/07 financial year, with its evaluation included in SPC Report as part of the 2007/08 budget process.

4.1.4 Householders would be given a paper and cardboard recycling wheeled bin, a domestic wheeled bin, and a home composting bin. The Council has a capital budget in 2006/07 for kerbside recycling which would fund these bins.

5. IMPLICATIONS

5.1 Policy – Will assist with waste diversion and recycling targets as per the Area Waste Plan for Argyll and Bute.

5.2 Financial – The trial will assist in avoiding stringent financial penalties from the Scottish Executive if landfill allowances are exceeded, particularly in future years with penalties rising to £150 per tonne.

5.3 Personnel – Nil

5.4 Equal Opportunities – Nil

5.5 Legal – The trial proposed will assist with landfill diversion targets as per Scottish Executive Landfill Trading Scheme administered on their behalf by SEPA.

2 Page 231

For further information, please contact:

Neil Brown, Roads & Amenity Services Manager, Oban Lorn and the Isles (01631 562125)

Alan Millar, Assistant Operations Manager (Waste Management) (01546 604628)

Andrew R Law Director of Operational Services 4th April 2006

3 Page 232

This page is intentionally left blank Page 233 Agenda Item 6c

ARGYLL & BUTE COUNCIL OBAN LORN AND THE ISLES AREA COMMITTEE

OPERATIONAL SERVICES Wednesday 7 June 2006

ROADS REVENUE WORKS PROGRAMME 2006 – 07

1. Summary

This report gives details of proposals for utilising the Roads Revenue Budget for 2006 – 07.

2. Recommendations

2.1 That the Committee notes the report

3. Background

3.1 Since 2004 – 05 the Roads Maintenance budget has been allocated in accordance with the principles of a roads maintenance and asset management plan based on the document “Best Value in Road Maintenance”.

3.2 This identified funding required for each maintenance activity to be carried out at reasonable intervals e.g. on main roads ditches should be inspected and cleaned once in every three years. This allows informed decision making when allocating revenue funding between activities.

3.3 The biggest area of expenditure is drainage. If ditches, offlets culverts and gullies are kept in good order there is less water on the road. If holes are filled and surfaces are sealed by surface dressing then less water gets into the layers which make up the road and deterioration of the road pavement is delayed or prevented.

3.4 If the Road Maintenance Plan is adequately funded, the amounts spent on patching and potholing should progressively reduce.

3.5 The Roads Revenue budget for 2006 – 07 is £1,944,300. Appendix A shows how it is proposed to use this sum and also shows what is required under the road maintenance plan.

30 May 2006

For further information or clarification of any matter contained within this report please contact Neil Brown on 01631 562125

Page 234

This page is intentionally left blank Page 235

Appendix A Oban,Lorn & Isles Works Programme 2005-06

REQUIRED BY ROAD MAINTENANCE 2006-07 ACTIVITY PLAN PROPOSED COMMENTS Anti Skid Treatment 10,000 Ariogan bends, Argyll Square, pedestrian crossings

Patching 257,600 257,600 Patching and potholing is reactive work, ie if there are holes in the road they are patched. The need for this work will continue Potholing 445,000 445,000 to climb until other maintenance work can be properly funded. cattle grids 5,000 5,000

Footway Resurface/Patch 39,000 39,000 Shuna view + Airds Crescent

Remedial Earthworks 20,000 20,000

Clean French Drains 10,400

Drainage / Culverts 90,000 90,000

Grass Cutting 59,000 90,000 Extra swathe to suppress scrub growth.

Clearing ditches, culverts 570,000 260,000 These are usually carried out as a single exercise. Allows and offlets ditches to be cleared once in 8 years, culverts and offlets about once in 3 years. Weedkilling 10,000 4,000 Scrub 45,000 70,000 Linked to increased ditching and backlog. Gully Emptying 35,000 50000 Allows for emptying twice per year. Fences & Walls 5,000 5,000 Boundary walls and fences are usually the responsibility of others. Sweeping and Cleaning 0 0

Gritting 504,000 538,200 Based on last year's budget. Actual spend is determined by weather forecasts, weather and Council policy. Emergencies 7,000 5,000 Reactive.

Pedestrian Guardrail 1000 Repair/replace Damaged 1,000 1,000 Reactive Safety Fence Road Markings 20,000 20,000

Clean / replace Signs 30,000 30,000

Maint Traffic Signals 2,000 2,000

Pedestrian Crossings 500 500

Illuminated Bollards 500 500

Street Name Plates 500

Total Road Maintenance 2,362,000 1,944,300 Page 236

This page is intentionally left blank Page 237 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 9 Agenda Item 8a of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 240

This page is intentionally left blank Page 241 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 9 Agenda Item 8b of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 244

This page is intentionally left blank Page 245 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 9 Agenda Item 8c of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 248

This page is intentionally left blank Page 249 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 9 Agenda Item 8f of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 252

This page is intentionally left blank Page 253 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 6, 9 Agenda Item 8g of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 256

This page is intentionally left blank Page 257 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 13 Agenda Item 9a of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 258

This page is intentionally left blank Page 259 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 13 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 262

This page is intentionally left blank Page 263 NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 9 Agenda Item 10a of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973

Document is Restricted Page 264

This page is intentionally left blank