Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

 

He advised that his first task would be to establish if the Members of the Local Review Body (LRB) felt that they had sufficient information before them to come to a decision on the Review.  Both Councillor MacMillan and Councillor Currie confirmed that they were content with the information before them.

 

Councillor Currie went on to advise that he was familiar with the site having been on an early Local Review Body which considered a case and amended conditions at that time.

 

The Head of Governance and Law advised the Members that the Applicant was contesting some of the conditions.

 

Councillor Kinniburgh noted that the Applicant had stated that Condition 3ii has been complied with and that they were not seeking removal of this Condition.

 

Councillor Currie commented that the road was in the middle of nowhere leading to a landfill site and that it was his own personal view that the road would look stupid with a pavement there.  He said that the nearest pavement would be in Tobermory.

 

The Head of Governance and Law referred to the policy background to this application and that Planning Officers have advised that they have assessed the case correctly in terms of policy which states that the road should be finished to public road standard.

 

Councillor Kinniburgh commented that on the one hand Planning have said the Applicant has to do that but they have also advised that the Applicant should consult with the Roads Officer to see what was acceptable.

 

The Head of Governance and Law read out the detail of Condition 4 and advised that Planning have indicated that what is required is a reduction from what is usually required eg. no street lighting is required.  The argument is if this is being used as an industrial site is there a possibility that people could walk to it.

 

Councillor Currie questioned the need for a pavement and advised that the nearest one was 1.5 miles away.

 

Councillor Kinniburgh advised that it was his view that the LRB should seek confirmation from the Roads Officer on why a pavement is requested at this location as there does not appear to be any other pavements nearby.  He advised that it would also be helpful to see more detailed photographs of the site and access road to the site in addition to those already supplied by the Applicant.  He further advised that the LRB should seek clarification on the safety aspect of putting in a pavement and what the likely numbers of pedestrians accessing the site would be.  He also said he would like confirmation as to whether the access to the site was off a private or public road.

 

Decision

 

The Argyll and Bute LRB agreed to request the following written information from the Roads Officer:-

 

1.    Confirmation of why a pavement is requested at this location as there does not appear to be any other pavements nearby;

 

2.    Provision of detailed photographs of the site and access road to the site in addition to those already supplied by the Applicant;

 

3.    Clarification on the safety aspect of putting in a pavement and what the likely numbers of pedestrians accessing the site would be; and

 

4.    Confirmation as to whether the access to the site was off a private or public road.

 

(Reference: Notice of Review Request, written submission from Planning Authority and comment from the Applicant, submitted)