STIRLING COUNCIL
MINUTES of MEETING of the PLANNING & REGULATION PANEL held in the COUNCIL
CHAMBERS, OLD VIEWFORTH, STIRLING on TUESDAY 2 AUGUST 2016 at 10.30 am
Present
Councillor Margaret BRISLEY (in the Chair)
Councillor Neil BENNY
Councillor Scott FARMER
Councillor Danny GIBSON
Councillor Graham LAMBIE
Councillor Mike ROBBINS
Councillor Christine SIMPSON
Councillor Jim THOMSON
In Attendance
Jane Brooks-Burnett, Senior Planning Officer, Localities & Infrastructure
Jay Dawson, Team Leader – Development Management, Localities & Infrastructure Stephen Easton, Traffic Management Officer, Localities & Infrastructure Neil Pirie, Senior Transport Development Officer, Localities & Infrastructure Sheila McLean, Committee Officer, Localities & Infrastructure (Clerk)
Also Present
Kirsty Davison, Transport Consultant, WSP/Parsons Brinckerhoff.
Agenda
The Chair intimated her intention to alter the order of the Agenda. The items were taken in the order minuted below.
PL452 APOLOGIES AND SUBSTITUTIONS
Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor Ian Muirhead. There were no substitutions.
PL453 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
There were no declarations of interest.
PL454 URGENT BUSINESS BROUGHT FORWARD BY THE CHAIR
There were no items of urgent business.
PL455 MINUTES – PLANNING & REGULATION PANEL – 28 JUNE 2016
Decision
The Minutes of Meeting held on 28 June 2016 were approved as an accurate record of proceedings.
PL456 ERECTION OF A DWELLING, DETACHED GARAGE AND ASSOCIATED ACCESSPRINCIPLE AT LAND ADJACENT TO EAST OF HOGWOOD HOUSE, – MRS ELIZABETH K CLARK – 16/00235/PPP
A report by the Director of Localities & Infrastructure advised of an application for the erection of a dwelling, detached garage and associated access at Hogwood House, Thornhill.
The application had been referred to the Panel at the request of Councillor Martin Earl, on grounds of the current policy relating to new housing development in the countryside. Councillor Earl had further suggested a site visit and Hearing.
No further discussion took place on the application.
Decision
The Panel agreed to defer consideration of the application pending a site visit and Hearing to take place at a future meeting of the Panel.
(Reference: Report by Director of Localities & Infrastructure dated 25 July 2016, submitted).
PL457 STIRLING COUNCIL (VARIOUS STREETS, CAMBUSBARRON) (PROHIBITIONRESTRICTION ON WAITING) (CONSOLIDATION AND AMENDMENT NO.3)2015
The Traffic Management Officer introduced a report by the Director of Localities & Infrastructure, which advised of a proposal to introduce “no waiting at any time” parking restrictions along part of Douglas Terrace, Cambusbarron.
The relevant section of Douglas Terrace was a narrow road with a high stone boundary wall on one side and a public footway opposite. A bend in the road outside numbers 10 and 12, along with residential parking opposite, created a further restriction on the road space available. This made it difficult for large vehicles to access the street and also impacted on cars, with vehicles having to reverse when meeting opposing traffic. The issues around access had also led to occasions when the Council had been unable to grit the road in winter.
The street was the only access to St Thomas’s Well, Parkdyke, Broomhill Place, St Thomas’s Place and the Cemetery.
Following a public meeting held by Cambusbarron Community Council, residents were unable to agree the best way forward. Opinions remained divided.
The emergency services had been consulted and the Fire Service had indicated some concern over getting unrestricted access in an emergency due to parked vehicles.
Appendix 1 to the submitted report detailed nine options which had been explored. Eight of these had been ruled out as not being reasonably practicable, or due to land and financial constraints.
The ninth option was to introduce no waiting at any time restrictions on a section of Douglas Terrace, as set out in the report.
The Panel was invited to consider the issues and to decide whether to approve the making of a Traffic Regulation Order.
Appendices to the report contained information on the concerns of a disabled resident in Douglas Terrace, who wished to retain the ability to park outside his house. The Chair referred to a letter she had received, advising that the resident was the holder of a Blue Badge permit. Officers confirmed that he had not, however, applied for a disabled parking space, but that any application would be considered.
Whilst recognising that it was important to make a decision without further delay, Members agreed that further options be explored in relation to the concerns of the disabled resident.
Decision
The Panel agreed:-
-
to instruct officers to investigate alternative options which could accommodate the needs of disabled residents;
-
that a report be submitted to the next meeting of the Panel on 6 September 2016.
(Reference: Report by Director of Localities & Infrastructure dated 8 June 2016, submitted).
In terms of Standing Order 77, prior to consideration of the report on Murrayshall Quarry, Stirling (Minute paragraph PL458 refers), the meeting adjourned at 10.50 am to hear a presentation by Cambusbarron Community Council who had requested the opportunity to present their views on the proposals. A representative of the Applicant was present, but declined an offer by the Chair to address the Panel.
The Chair advised that, during the adjournment, no questions should be put by Members either to the Community Council or to officers.
The meeting reconvened at 11.05 am, with the same Members present.
PL458 CONTINUATION OF QUARRYING, NEW ACCESS ROAD AND PUBLIC CAR PARK RESTORATION PROPOSALS AT MURRAYSHALL QUARRY,PATERSONSLTD – 14/00742/FUL
The Senior Planning Officer introduced a report by the Director of Localities &
Infrastructure, which advised of an application for planning permission for quarrying (quartz dolerite) within part of Murrayshall Quarry, the formation of a new access from Polmaise Road into the quarry and for a public car park off this proposed access road.
The application had been brought before Members since the applicant had appealed to the Planning and Environmental Appeals Division (DPEA) of the Scottish Government as the Council did not reach a decision within a set timescale. This type of appeal was known as a ‘deemed refusal’. The purpose of the report was to seek the Panel’s decision on the position to be adopted by Council officials in respect of the appeal.
The report provided details of (a) the site; (b) the proposal; (c) previous history; (d) development plan policy; (e) assessment and (f) consultations. Members were advised that 1077 letters of comment had been received.
Planning permission had been granted in 1982, which allowed for extraction of up to 600,000 tonnes per annum. Granting of the application under consideration would potentially increase this to 900,000, which was viewed as a worst case scenario. Members noted that the demographic of the area had changed considerably since 1982 and there were now more houses and more schools than existed at that time.
In response to questions, officers advised that they had been unable to make a full assessment of the likely cumulative effect of the development as the applicant had failed to provide the necessary information. Members considered that any assessment should be based on the maximum impact of an extraction rate of 900,000 tonnes per annum. It was further considered that a request be made to the DPEA for a full public inquiry to consider the application.
Officers confirmed that they had submitted the necessary response to the DPEA within the 21 day deadline following submission of the appeal. A request for the deadline to be extended had been refused. DPEA were, however, aware of today’s meeting and the purpose of bringing the report to Panel was to seek Members’ views, which officers would then take to the appeal. The Council had not, to date, expressed a view to the DPEA, pending today’s meeting. It was confirmed that all objections received had been provided to the DPEA.
The Senior Planning Officer advised Members that, due to the complexity of the application and resources involved in its assessment, the Planning Authority had appointed Ironside Farrar as independent advisors to review the Environmental Statement submitted by the Applicant. The results of their audit were set out in the submitted report.
It was noted that all Community Councils in Ward 5 (Stirling West) had objected to the proposals. The level of work undertaken by Cambusbarron Community Council was also noted.
In summary, Members raised concerns in respect of the following:-
-
Impact on roads infrastructure
-
Traffic noise and vibration
-
Safety of pedestrians
-
Impact on local schools
-
A full traffic assessment was required
-
Environmental issues, protection of landscape and pollution
-
Effect on historic site and wider Kings Park area
-
Effect on flora, fauna and wildlife, including protected species
-
Failure of the applicant to demonstrate need for further extraction at the site
-
No financial security in place to address restoration of the site – a full restoration plan was needed
-
Appeal had been submitted on the grounds of non-determination, although the delays had been due to the Applicant failing to provide the necessary information
Decision
The Panel agreed:-
-
to oppose the application for the following reasons:
-
In the opinion of the Planning Authority the proposed development is contrary to Primary Policy 11 (Minerals and Other Extractive Industries), criterion c, since insufficient information has been submitted to enable a full assessment of the likely effect of the development to be made.
-
In the opinion of the Planning Authority the proposed development is contrary to Schedule 4 of the Town and Country Planning
(Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2011 since there is insufficient information regarding cumulative effect of the development for the planning authority to fully assess the likely
significant effects of the development on the environment. -
In the opinion of the Planning Authority the proposed development is contrary to Planning Advice Note 50: Controlling the Environmental Effects of Surface Mineral Workings since insufficient information has accompanied the planning application to fully identify the likely environmental effects of the proposal which would allow the Planning Authority to assess the possible cumulative effect.
-
-
that a full assessment should be submitted addressing the three points above. This full assessment should be based on the maximum impact of an extraction rate of 900,000 tonnes per annum and the impact that this would have on, but not limited to, hydrological and hydrogeological issues, impacts of blasting, traffic and transport, noise, air quality, recreation and access, historic environment, ecology both species and habitats (bats, otters, great crested newts, badgers, red squirrels, breeding birds, flora), landscape and visual impact, the impact on local primary and high schools.
-
to note that all Community Councils in Ward 5 (Stirling West) objected and acknowledge the work undertaken and the report prepared by the Community Council.
-
to request that the most appropriate procedure for the handling of this appeal should be by holding one or more formal inquiry sessions on specific matters.
(Reference: Report by Director of Localities & Infrastructure dated 25 July 2016, submitted).
The Chair declared the Meeting closed at 12.10 pm.