Councillors to consider new bus depot development

[Nwicker60]

Depot will impact on
character of area say
Janet St residents
HIGHLAND COUNCIL planning officials have recommended a Far North
bus firm’s new depot get the green light, despite objections from neighbours.
The residents, mainly in nearby Janet Street, don’t want Stagecoach’s
depot and workshop to be built on its existing site and have suggested
it should be located on the local industrial estate, instead.
Highland Council’s area planning manager, Allan Todd, has recommended
approval of the development to members of Caithness, Sutherland and
Easter Ross Planning Applications Committee, when it meets at Tain
tomorrow. (Tuesday) The application in the name of contractor, Andrew
Cowie Construction Ltd, is seeking to demolish the existing buildings
at the corner of Lovers’ Lane and Janet Street.
The objectors highlight noise, pollution and safety concerns in their
objections to the development, which, they say, will have an adverse
impact on the residential character of the area.
However, the concerns are not shared by David Barclay, who compiled the
report for councillors.
He said that the development is in an area used for
industrial/commercial purposes and there has been a bus depot on the
site for a considerable number of years.
Mr Barclay said that a complete reconstruction of the site would mean
that issues of noise, fumes and road safety “can be effectively
managed” and stresses that the new plant will be regulated by
conditions.
He observes in his report: “As the site is a redevelopment, there is
not considered to be additional risk to either to pedestrians or other
road users, as there is no increase in the scale of operations. In
fact, there may be some reduction in risk, and as all buses are to park
on the site, traffic movements will be formalised and a single access
point to the site will be formed. The redevelopment of the site as a
whole, offers the opportunity to improve the environmental quality,
sustainability, environmental management and maintenance of the
existing site, while avoiding dereliction and the creation of a
potentially, problematic, brownfield site, were it to change from its
present use.”
Mr Barclay added that a while a transfer of part of the depot’s
operations might have been considered by the previous bus owners, that
option was “hypothetical and not relevant to the present application”
which conforms to the Highland structure plan.
The use of parking bays furthermost from Lovers’ Lane and Janet Street
when buses are idling, during unsociable hours , to reduce the impact
on the amenity of neighbouring residential properties, are among the
conditions which would be imposed on the developer, is the application
is granted.
In addition, any Japanese Knotweed discovered during excavation must be
dealt with. A licence would be required to transport the weed to a
licensed disposal site.
OBJECTIONS have also been raised to a proposal by a North Sutherland
couple to build a new home west of Bighouse Farm, near Melvich.
The opposition has been tabled by 15 people, more than half of whom
live in England. They claim that Allan and Kathy Wares’ house, which
would be constructed in a dip, is of “an inappropriate design and
scale” and would have an adverse impact on the landscape. That view
found support from an unexpected ally, the council’s conservation
officer.
He was at odds with area planning officer, Mr Todd, who is recommending
that application be granted.
Historic Scotland states that the new house would have “potential
implications for the wider landscape”.
While not objecting, their spokesman states: “It would appear that this
rural landscape including the listed structures within, have developed
over time, with each subsequent development supporting the requirements
of Bighouse. This development will depart from this tradition,
introducing a modern, domestic, building in the landscape. Your
council will need to consider if this development will preserve the
setting of the listed building in the existing landscape.”
The HS concern was echoed by Highland Council’s conservation officer,
who said that the application must be considered against a desirability
to preserve and protect the open landscape of North Sutherland.
The officer continued: “The historic, natural, landscape is a key
element of the wider historic environment and makes a valuable
contribution to the wider setting of its historic environmental assets.
The council has a number of historic environmental assets recorded in
the immediately surrounding area, incorporating a number of significant
archaeological finds/features, as well as the more visually-obvious,
listed buildings. The Landscape Character Appraisal of Caithness and
Sutherland classifies this area of Sutherland as a combination of
sweeping moorland and long sandy beaches. Both of these character
types consist of open landscapes, which afford far-reaching views.
The appraisal identifies the beaches of the North Sutherland and
Caithness coasts and recognises they have a ‘magical’ quality to them.”
The conservation officer said that to allow new development to encroach
on this historic landscape would inevitably have some impact on the
intrinsic value and the setting contribution of the landscape, to the
existing dwellings and settlements of the area.
He added that the application has the potential for “negative impact”
on the neighbouring listed buildings, their setting and the wider
historic landscape in which they are located”.
Bob Robertson, who compiled the planning report for councillors,
states, however: “While it is recognised that the site does have an
historic and scenic quality, it is not considered that this will be
significantly and adversely affected by the erection of a single house
on this site. Furthermore, the proposal is not considered to conflict
with Scottish planning policy, in relation to its potential impact on
the landscape or natural heritage.”