Thursday, April 28, 2011

The Cawdor Road Bridge situation - the only thing that might stop South Nairn

Before we enter the substance of what John Mackie had to say about the South Nairn development at the Suburban CC on Wednesday night up at the Academy it is worth considering a regular theme that crops up at Suburban and many other meetings in Nairn. The lack of a single Community Council prevents a co-ordinated town-wide approach to planning and many other issues in Nairn. Often the three councils have to stray into each others territory to comment or campaign on issues affecting the whole of the community. Perhaps the best example to cite is the Firhall Bridge, if Murd Dunbar had just gone away home and given up after being initially rejected by River with his ideas for improved access then that would have been it. He didn't however, and went to West and Suburban where he got support, eventually River climbed on board too and now we are seeing, perhaps, the first signs of serious movement by the authorities in regard to Murd's ideas. We need a single council desperately to campaign effectively for Nairn. Anyway back to South Nairn.

Here's what John Mackie had to say:
" South Nairn is one of the problem areas of having three community councils, myself, Dick and some of the other ones attended the consultations the developers had over the last 18 months , 2 years and now that's all gone through and they're coming forward with arguments against it. It's no going to carry an awful lot of weight because of all the consultation that went on and this is one of the dangers. If they don't participate in the consultation, and then come along at the end of it with objections they're just going to get knocked back out.
Marting Ashford then asked who specifically John was referring to.
"I think River is putting objections in," he replied. "There's nothing against them putting an objection in but there's got to be something that hasn't been covered in the consultation, otherwise the consultation will have been done and it's important if a developer comes along and there's going to be consultation and we attend the consultation and we go to raise the issues that come up then. The only issue that I can see that maybe hasn't been addressed, the Cawdor Road coming into Nairn, and I've had an e-mail back from Graham. He took the matter up with planning and that road has got to be developed before the planning or the development goes ahead. I've got reservations about that happening"

John then outlined how the difficulties at Cawdor Road had been raised prior to the construction of the hospital and one year on from that nothing had yet happened to alleviate traffic problems there.

River are of course not the only council objecting, West are now supporting them. Meanwhile a large number of objections have been received by Highland Council planners from residents in the River area, particularly Firhall.

UPDATE: worth reading the details sent in from APT sec.


Graisg said...

This in from APT sec - good reminder!

Essential reading here is Circ 4 2009 Development Management Procedures, paras 2.4 and 2.5 with respect to Pre-application consultation, it states wrt to Pre-app consult:

The objective is for communities to be better informed about major and national development proposals and to have an opportunity to contribute their views before

a formal planning application is submitted to the planning authority. The purposes

of PAC are to improve the quality of planning applications, mitigate negative impacts where possible, address misunderstandings, and air and deal with any community issues that can be tackled. The proposals, if adjusted, should benefit from that engagement and assist the efficient consideration of applications once submitted.

PAC is an additional measure and does not take away the right of individuals and communities to express formal views during the planning application process itself. Nor does it remove the need for people who wish their views to be considered by

the planning authority to make formal representations on applications. This should

be emphasised by the prospective applicant during PAC. The prospective applicant is under no obligation to take onboard community views, or directly reflect them in any subsequent application. It is important for communities and others to follow

their interest in a proposal through to the planning application stage, which

provides the statutory opportunity for individuals to make representations on proposals before the planning authority.


This point was also made in the old PAN 81

It is important to stress that communities should not disengage from the planning application process once they have taken part in the pre-application consultation. Individuals and communities should follow up on the proposals as submitted in the planning application and, if necessary, submit further comment to the planning authority on the case.

The point is also made within the latest PAN 3 2010 community Engagement:

Retaining involvement

Pre-application consultation is an additional measure and does not

take away an individual or community’s right to express views on any subsequent application. It is important that this community interest is followed through to the formal application stage.

Anonymous said...

What a waste of precious years, if I was elderly and lived in Firhall, I would look around Nairn for a more select area and move , other wise you will spend the rest of your life worrying about planning permission. Many years ago I moved for the very same reason, it makes life unbearable worrying about what might happen. I was lucky I found somewhere that they will never be able to build on, maybe I should never say never, but highly unlikely.