5th Report, 2008 (Session 3)

CONTENTS

ANNEXE a: extracts from the minutes of the local government and communities committee

16 January (1st Meeting, 2008 (Session 3))

23 January (2nd Meeting, 2008 (Session 3))

30 January (3rd Meeting, 2008 (Session 3))

6 February (4th Meeting, 2008 (Session 3))

20 February (5th Meeting, 2008 (Session 3))

27 February (6th Meeting, 2008 (Session 3))

28 February (7th Meeting, 2008 (Session 3))

5 March (8th Meeting, 2008 (Session 3))

12 March (9th Meeting, 2008 (Session 3))

ANNEXE B: ORAL EVIDENCE AND ASSOCIATED WRITTEN EVIDENCE

16 January (1st Meeting, 2008 (Session 3))

Oral Evidence

Alan G Campbell, Chief Executive, Aberdeenshire Council;
Jim Mackinnon, Chief Planning Officer, Scottish Government;
David Ferguson, Head of Planning Decisions, Scottish Government;
John Swinney MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth;
Alex Salmond MSP, First Minister.

Written Evidence

Alan G Campbell, Chief Executive, Aberdeenshire Council

Supplementary Evidence

Jim Mackinnon, Chief Planner, Scottish Government

23 January (2nd Meeting, 2008 (Session 3))

Oral Evidence

Alex Salmond MSP, First Minister;
David Ferguson, Head of Planning Decisions, Scottish Government;
John Swinney MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth.

Supplementary Evidence

John Swinney, Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth
Alex Salmond, First Minister

30 January (3rd Meeting, 2008 (Session 3))

Oral Evidence

Roger Kelly, Convener, Royal Town Planning Institute in Scotland;
Alistair Stark, Immediate Past Convener, Royal Town Planning Institute in Scotland.

Written Evidence

Royal Town Planning Institute in Scotland

Supplementary Evidence

John Swinney, Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth

6 February (4th Meeting, 2008 (Session 3))

Oral Evidence

George A. Sorial, Managing Director for International Development and Assistant General Counsel, Trump Organisation;

Neil Hobday, Project Director, Scotland, Trump International Golf Links.

Supplementary Evidence

George A. Sorial, Managing Director for International Development and Assistant General Counsel, Trump Organisation

ANNEXE C: OTHER EVIDENCE

Trump Application (340KB pdf)

Notes on Call In of the Application

Parliamentary Questions and Answers

Correspondence on Rosyth Waterfront Development (664KB pdf)

Remit and membership

Remit:

To consider and report on (a) the financing and delivery of local government and local services and planning; and (b) housing, regeneration, anti-poverty measures and other matters (apart from sport) falling within the responsibility of the Minister for Communities and Sport.

Membership:

Alasdair Allan
Bob Doris
Patricia Ferguson
Kenneth Gibson (Deputy Convener)
Johann Lamont
David McLetchie
Duncan McNeil (Convener)
Jim Tolson

Committee Clerking Team:

Clerk to the Committee
Martin Verity

Senior Assistant Clerk
Jane-Claire Judson

Assistant Clerk
Ian Cowan

Committee Assistant
Fiona Sinclair

Planning Application Processes (Menie estate)

annexe a: extracts from the minutes of the local government and communities committee

1st Meeting, 2008 (Session 3), Wednesday 16 January 2008

1. Decision on taking business in private: The Committee agreed to take item 4 in private.

2. Planning application processes (Menie Estate): The Convener invited members to declare any relevant interests. The following interests were declared —

Jim Tolson as having met, in his capacity as a party spokesperson, a representative of the Trump organisation,

David McLetchie as a member of the Cross-Party Group on Golf, which had received a presentation from a representative of the Trump organisation,

Patricia Ferguson as a member of the same Cross-Party Group, and

Duncan McNeil as a member of the same Cross-Party Group.

The Committee took evidence from—

Alan G Campbell, Chief Executive, Aberdeenshire Council;

Jim Mackinnon, Chief Planning Officer and David Ferguson, Head of Planning Decisions, Scottish Government;

John Swinney MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth and David Ferguson, Head of Planning Decisions, Scottish Government; and

Alex Salmond MSP, First Minister and David Ferguson, Head of Planning Decisions, Scottish Government.

4. Planning application processes (Menie Estate): This item, which was to consider the evidence taken, was not reached.

2nd Meeting, 2008 (Session 3), Wednesday 23 January 2008

1. Decisions on taking business in private: The Committee agreed to take items 4 and 5 in private.

2. Planning application processes (Menie Estate): The Committee took evidence from—

Alex Salmond MSP, First Minister and David Ferguson, Head of Planning Decisions, Scottish Government;

and then from—

John Swinney MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth and David Ferguson, Head of Planning Decisions, Scottish Government.

4. Planning application processes (Menie Estate) (in private): The Committee considered the evidence taken and agreed to seek further evidence from the Trump Organisation and the Royal Town Planning Institute.

3rd Meeting, 2008 (Session 3), Wednesday 30 January 2008

1. Decisions on taking business in private: The Committee agreed to take items 6 and 7 in private.

4. Planning application processes (Menie Estate): The Committee took evidence from Roger Kelly, Convener and Alistair Stark, Immediate Past Convener, Royal Town Planning Institute in Scotland.

6. Planning application processes (Menie Estate) (in private): The Committee considered correspondence.

4th Meeting, 2008 (Session 3), Wednesday 6 February 2008

1. Decisions on taking business in private: The Committee agreed to take items 3 and 4 in private.

2. Planning application processes (Menie Estate): The Committee took evidence from George A. Sorial, Managing Director for International Development and Assistant General Counsel, Trump Organisation and Neil Hobday, Project Director, Scotland, Trump International Golf Links.

3. Planning application processes (Menie Estate) (in private): The Committee considered evidence taken.

5th Meeting, 2008 (Session 3), Wednesday 20 February 2008

1. Decision on taking business in private: The Committee agreed to take item 5 in private.

5. Planning application processes (Menie Estate) (in private): The Committee considered a draft report. Various changes were agreed to.

6th Meeting, 2008 (Session 3), Wednesday 27 February 2008

1. Decisions on taking business in private: The Committee agreed to take item 3, and all future items where it considers its draft report on its inquiry into planning application processes (Menie estate), in private.

3. Planning application processes (Menie estate)(in private): The Committee considered a draft report. Various changes were agreed to.

7th Meeting, 2008 (Session 3), Thursday 28 February 2008

Planning application processes (Menie estate)(in private): The Committee considered a draft report. Various changes were agreed to.

8th Meeting, 2008 (Session 3), Wednesday 5 March 2008

Planning application processes (Menie estate) (in private): The Committee considered a draft report. Various changes were agreed to.

9th Meeting, 2008 (Session 3), Wednesday 12 March 2008

Planning application processes (Menie estate) (in private): The Committee considered a draft report. Various changes were agreed to, seven by division

Record of division in private

Bob Doris MSP proposed the inclusion of the following paragraph to be included in the section of the report entitled Committee’s comments on the decision making process:

The Committee notes Aberdeenshire Council has changed its scheme of delegation in light of the perceived shortcomings following the Trump application.

The proposal was not agreed to by division: For 3 (Alasdair Allan MSP, Bob Doris MSP, Kenneth Gibson MSP); Against 5 (Patricia Ferguson MSP, Johann Lamont MSP, David McLetchie MSP, Duncan McNeil MSP, Jim Tolson MSP); Abstentions 0.

Bob Doris MSP proposed the inclusion of the following paragraph to be included in the section of the report entitled Committee’s comments on the decision making process:

The Committee recommends Local Authorities review their scheme of delegated authority on planning.

The proposal was agreed to by division: For 4 (Alasdair Allan MSP, Bob Doris MSP, Kenneth Gibson MSP, David McLetchie MSP); Against 4 (Patricia Ferguson MSP, Johann Lamont MSP, Duncan McNeil MSP, Jim Tolson MSP); Abstentions 0. The Convener exercised his casting vote to support the proposal.

Alasdair Allan proposed the inclusion of the following sentence to be inserted at the end of paragraph 151 in the section of the report entitled Committee’s comments on the decision making process:

This is a measure which is understandable in light of the confusion which their previous arrangements created.

The proposal was not agreed to by division: For 3 (Alasdair Allan MSP, Bob Doris MSP, Kenneth Gibson MSP); Against 5 (Patricia Ferguson MSP, Johann Lamont MSP, Duncan McNeil MSP, David McLetchie MSP, Jim Tolson MSP); Abstentions 0.

Johann Lamont MSP proposed to insert after paragraph 151 the following paragraph:

The Scheme of Delegation is entirely transparent and understandable. The Committee does not accept that the process was chaotic.

The proposal was agreed to by division: For 5, (Patricia Ferguson MSP, Johann Lamont MSP, David McLetchie MSP, Duncan McNeil MSP, Jim Tolson MSP); Against 4 (Alasdair Allan MSP, Bob Doris MSP, Kenneth Gibson MSP,); Abstentions 0.

Kenneth Gibson MSP proposed the inclusion of the following paragraph to be included in the section of the report entitled Committee’s comments on John Swinney’s actions in relation to the Ministerial Code of Conduct for MSPs:

As noted in above (para 144) the Committee has no power and does not intend to judge whether of not any Minister is in breach of the Ministerial Code or Code of Conduct for MSPs. The Committee did not find any evidence that Mr Swinney acted in any way other than in accordance with both codes.

The proposal was not agreed to by division: For 3 (Alasdair Allan MSP, Bob Doris MSP, Kenneth Gibson MSP); Against 5 (Patricia Ferguson MSP, Johann Lamont MSP, David McLetchie MSP, Duncan McNeil MSP, Jim Tolson MSP); Abstentions 0.

Kenneth Gibson MSP proposed the inclusion of the following paragraph to be included in the section of the report entitled Committee’s comments on Alex Salmond’s actions in relation to the Ministerial Code as it relates to planning matters and also to the Code of Conduct for MSPs:

The Committee did not find any evidence that Mr Salmond acted in any way other than in accordance with both codes.

The proposal was not agreed to by division: For 3 (Alasdair Allan MSP, Bob Doris MSP, Kenneth Gibson MSP); Against 5 (Patricia Ferguson MSP, Johann Lamont MSP, David McLetchie MSP, Duncan McNeil MSP, Jim Tolson MSP); Abstentions 0.

Kenneth Gibson MSP proposed the inclusion of the following paragraph to be included in the section of the report entitled Committee’s comments on Alex Salmond’s actions in relation to the Ministerial Code as it relates to planning matters and also to the Code of Conduct for MSPs:

The Committee did not find any evidence that Mr Salmond acted in any way other than in accordance with both codes.

The proposal was not agreed to by division: For 3 (Alasdair Allan MSP, Bob Doris MSP, Kenneth Gibson MSP); Against 5 (Patricia Ferguson MSP, Johann Lamont MSP, David McLetchie MSP, Duncan McNeil MSP, Jim Tolson MSP); Abstentions 0.

annexe b: oral evidence and associated written evidence

LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND COMMUNITIES COMMITTEE, 1ST MEETING, 16TH JANUARY 2008

submission from aberdeenshire council

1. Pre-application Stage

1a. In 2003, Jenkins and Marr, Architects and Planning Consultants, Aberdeen, made an approach to Aberdeenshire Council on behalf of the owner of Menie Estate in regard to a proposed “International Golf Course and Hotel” development. However, this was not pursued.

1b. In 2005, Aberdeenshire Council was advised by Scottish Development International (SDI) of renewed interest in a world-class development of this nature by Menie Estate and a third party (Trump International), whose identity was to be treated as confidential meantime. Jenkins and Marr continued to act on behalf of the developers. An initial meeting was held at which the issues raised by the proposed development were outlined and advice given as to the process to be followed in regard to any application. Holding pre-application meetings such as this is common practice with many planning applications and an entirely normal procedure.

1c. In November 2005, Jenkins and Marr requested a Scoping Opinion (Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999) and at this time the Council consulted a wide range of consultees and interested parties (including the Scottish Executive Development Department). In the Council’s letter of reply to Jenkins and Marr, reference was made to the fact that the proposals would “likely have a significant adverse impact on the Site of Special Scientific Interest”.

1d. In view of the national standing of the proposal, Aberdeenshire Council arranged a meeting with Jenkins and Marr and the Chief Planner, Jim Mackinnon, to acquaint him with the issues concerning the proposal which was held in January 2006. The note of the meeting highlights that while “the principle of a golf course and tourism related resort was a good fit with the inward investment goals of SDI and the need to diversify the economy of the Aberdeen area, due process must be followed by Aberdeenshire Council and the Scottish Executive to ensure that there is a clear audit trail including a transparent and rigorous consideration of the issues”. The need for the applicants to “liaise closely with environmental agencies to ensure that all the relevant issues are addressed” was also noted. Reference was also made to the fact that should the Council be minded to approve the application, it would require to be referred to the Scottish Executive.

1e. Following receipt of the planning application in November 2006, and in view of the public interest, a Briefing Note was prepared and issued to the Formartine Area Committee (one of the 6 Area Committees of Aberdeenshire Council which deal with various matters including planning applications, and which comprised 11 Councillors at that time). The Note indicated how it was proposed to deal with this and other applications that had been submitted in respect of a marketing suite and golf maintenance facility. In regard to this particular application, the Note stated: Given the level of interest, the significance and complexity of the application, and the difficulty dealing with such an application during a normal Committee meeting would present, I would suggest that a Site Visit and a Hearing followed by a Special Meeting of the Area Committee would be appropriate. However, until timescales for submission of the outstanding information and subsequently its consideration and the preparation of the Officer’s report are confirmed, it is difficult to fix the dates for these. This formed the basis of the Area Manager’s report to Committee on 24 July 2007 in relation to procedures for deciding the application.

2. Planning Application Timescales, Procedures, Representations, Consultations and Conclusions

2a. The proposed development includes:

• two 18 hole links golf courses
• a golf clubhouse
• a golf academy
• golf maintenance building and caddy shack
• a short game area and driving range
• a 450 unit resort hotel, conference centre and spa
• 36 golf villas
• 950 holiday homes
• staff accommodation
• parking areas
• access roads
• two future private residential housing areas for 500 houses in total

2b. The outline planning application was received and validated on 27 November 2006 and was accompanied by a supporting statement describing the development. However, at that time the application lacked a significant amount of the supporting information required to properly allow the Planning Service to consider the proposal, and indeed carry out consultations. An Environmental Impact Assessment, Transport Impact Assessment, Drainage Impact Assessment and Sustainable Urban Drainage Scheme along with a full Financial and Economic Appraisal were required. These were eventually received on 30 March 2007 and it was at this time that the full assessment of the proposal began, including carrying out extensive consultations.

2c. Supplementary information was received in July 2007 which was entitled “Response to Aberdeenshire Council and Statutory Consultations”. Further supplementary information including a financial and economic summary, entomological survey, over passage and wintering bird and breeding bird surveys, appropriate assessment and transportation information were also received at various times later in the process from July to October.

2d. The application was initially advertised as a departure from the Development Plan on 7 December 2006. The various supporting documentation received on 30 March 2007 was also advertised under the Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999 on 5 April 2007. The “Response” referred to in 2c above was not advertised under the Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999 at the time of receipt in July 2007. However, it was advertised at a later date on 18 October 2007 following on from the first report to the Formartine Area Committee on 18 September 2007 and allowing for any comments to be submitted prior to reporting the application back to the Formartine Area Committee on 20 November 2007.

2e. It was at this time that supplementary information relative to the Environmental Impact Assessment (entomological survey, over passage and wintering bird and breeding bird surveys and appropriate assessment), Transport Impact Assessment and Financial and Economic Appraisal was also advertised to allow comments to be received prior to reporting the application back to the Formartine Area Committee. It was the need for the advertisement of this information which resulted in the minor delay in reporting the application back to the Formartine Area Committee from early November to 20 November 2007. It is worth noting that this information could not be advertised until it was received and Officers required adequate opportunity to consider the information prior to reporting to Committee.

2f. Following the validation of the application and at all times during the processing of the application, information relating to the application was available on the Council’s website and updates on the processing and timescales involved in reporting the application to Committee were publicly available.

2g. The Planning Service met with the applicant and their agent on many occasions and letters were sent on 11 May 2007, 7 June 2007 and 8 August 2007 raising issues on which the Planning Service wished clarification or which had been raised by consultees. Meetings were also held with Scottish Natural Heritage to ascertain if there was any means by which its objection could be removed or ways in which the applicant could mitigate against the impact on the Site of Special Scientific Interest. Extensive discussions also took place with Transport Scotland with regard to access onto the Trunk Road in particular.

2h. The Formartine Area Manager presented a report to the Formartine Area Committee on 24 July 2007 outlining the process the application was likely to take in terms of reporting to Committee. With an application of this size and nature, this was viewed as an expedient way of alerting Councillors to the likely processes and timescales involved from the time the application was lodged. It had always been intended to allow the Formartine Area Committee and Infrastructure Services Committee the opportunity to visit the site and hear public views and those of consultees, again given the scale and nature of the application.

2i. The terms of the delegation recommended in the report to the Formartine Area Committee on 18 September 2007 included matters which were subsequently addressed in information submitted by the applicant and meant some of the delegated matters were removed from the subsequent report to the Formartine Area Committee on 20 November 2007.

2j. The principal planning issues in relation to the planning application were firstly, that the golf course, described in the application as the Championship Golf Course, affected part of a Site of Special Scientific Interest and was considered under Council policies related to wildlife, landscape and land resources, area of landscape significance, coastal planning, nature conservation, biodiversity and sustainability. Secondly, the residential part of the proposal is located in an area defined as countryside and not allocated for housing and was considered under Council policy relating to housing in the countryside. The relevant Development Plan comprises the Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire Structure Plan 2001 – 2016 and the Aberdeenshire Local Plan 2006.

2k. The Planning Service received a substantial number of representations both against, and for, the proposal, more extensively towards the end of the processing of the application. When the application was reported to the Formartine Area Committee on 18 September 2007, a total of 432 letters of representation had been received (105 objections and 327 in support). A 28 signature petition against the proposal had also been received.

2l. At the time of the site visit and departure hearing on 27 September 2007, a total of 1486 letters of representation had been received (148 objections and 1338 in support). When the application was reported back to the Formartine Area Committee on 20 November 2007, a total of 2835 letters of representation had been received (985 objections and 1850 in support). A schedule of 560 names against the proposal was also received.

2m. At the time of finalising the report on the application to the Infrastructure Services Committee on 29 November 2007 a total of 2999 representations had been received (1048 objections and 1951 in support). The schedule against the proposal now contained 766 names. However, the Director of Planning and Environmental Services advised verbally at the Infrastructure Services meeting that a further 57 representations in support and 67 objections to the application had been received by 5.00pm on the day prior to the meeting.

2n. Following the Infrastructure Services Committee meeting, Aberdeenshire Council has continued to receive letters against, and in support of, the application and many also relate to the decision made by the Infrastructure Services Committee.

2o. The Planning Service consulted widely on the application and initial consultations were carried out with the following 53 consultees on 30 November 2006 followed on 4 April 2007 and 9 May 2007 after receipt of the Environmental Statement:

• Aberdeen City Council
• Aberdeenshire Environmental Forum
• Aberdeenshire Local Outdoor Access Forum
• Access Panel (Central Aberdeenshire)
• Archaeology Service (Aberdeenshire Council)
• Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland
• Architecture and Design Scotland
• Association for the Protection of Rural Scotland
• BAA Safeguarding
• Belhelvie Community Council
• Botany (University of Aberdeen)
• Civil Aviation Authority
• Civil Aviation Safety Regulations
• Crown Estates (Bell Ingram)
• Defence Estates
• Economic Development (Aberdeenshire Council)
• Education Service (Aberdeenshire Council)
• Emergency Planning Officer
• Entomology (University of Aberdeen)
• Environmental Health (Aberdeenshire Council)
• Estates Service (Aberdeenshire Council)
• Finance Service (Aberdeenshire Council)
• Flood Prevention and Coastal Protection (Aberdeenshire Council)
• Foveran Community Council
• Garden History Society
• Geomorphology (University of Aberdeen)
• Grampian Fire and Rescue
• Grampian Police Crime Prevention
• Health and Safety Executive
• Historic Scotland
• Local Roads (Aberdeenshire Council)
• National Air Traffic Services
• NESBREC (Local Records Office)
• Planning Gain Co-ordinator (Aberdeenshire Council)
• Planning Policy and Environment Team (Aberdeenshire Council)
• Ramblers Association
• Royal Society for Protection of Birds
• Scottish Civic Trust
• Scottish Enterprise Grampian
• Scottish Environmental Protection Agency
• Scottish Executive Environment Group
• Scottish Executive Planning
• Scottish Natural Heritage
• Scottish Water
• Scottish Wildlife Trust
• Scotways
• Sport Scotland
• Transport Scotland (JWP Consulting)
• Transportation and Infrastructure Service (Aberdeenshire Council)
• Visit Scotland
• Waste Management (Aberdeenshire Council)
• Western Peripheral Route
• Woodland Trust

2p. The following bodies had no objection to the proposal: National Air Traffic Services, Foveran Community Council, the Civil Aviation Authority and CAA Safety Regulations, the Western Peripheral Route Team, the Health and Safety Executive, the Central Aberdeenshire Access Panel, Historic Scotland, the Scottish Civic Trust, Visit Scotland, British Airport Authority, Grampian Police Crime Prevention, Grampian Police Fire and Rescue, Sport Scotland, NESBREC, Scottish Enterprise Grampian, Scottish Executive Environment Group, Scottish Executive Planning Division and Crown Estates and the Flood Prevention and Coastal Protection Unit, Archaeology Service, Environmental Health and Waste Management Services and Local Roads Manager of Aberdeenshire Council.

2q. The following bodies suggested conditions specific to their interest or further work on the proposal: Transport Scotland, Scottish Water, Defence Estates, the Woodland Trust, the Council’s Planning Gain Co-ordinator, and officers in Transportation, Education, Economic Development, Estates, Finance and Planning Policy and Environment.

2r. The following bodies objected to the proposal: Scottish Natural Heritage, the Scottish Wildlife Trust, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, SEPA, Scotways, the Ramblers Association, Aberdeenshire Local Outdoor Access Forum, the University of Aberdeen School of Biological Sciences, the botanical consultant to Aberdeenshire Council, the University of Aberdeen Geosciences School, the Aberdeenshire Environmental Forum, the Garden History Society, the Association for the Protection of Rural Scotland and Architecture and Design Scotland.

2s. Belhelvie Community Council raised concerns about the proposal.

2t. The Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland and Emergency Planning Officer did not make any comments. The Invertebrate Conservation Trust was not a consultee but submitted comments on the application.

2u. Re-consultation with all consultees was carried out on 30 July 2007 and 3 August 2007 following receipt of the “Response to Aberdeenshire Council and Statutory Consultations” in July 2007. Only a small number of consultees chose to respond to this and all maintained their objection to the proposal apart from SEPA which removed its objection.

2v. Further to the initial report to the Formartine Area Committee on 18 September 2007 and upon receipt of the various supplementary information on 9 October 2007, additional consultation with 14 of the 53 consultees was undertaken on 25 October 2007. These were chosen on the basis of being in a position to comment on the additional information because of their specific expertise. Their views did not change as a result of this re-consultation but further extensive comments were received and reported back to the Formartine Area Committee on 20 November 2007.

2w. The Council’s Planning Gain Co-ordinator discussed and negotiated a range of developer contributions arising from the proposal. It is not normal practice to include commentary on the discussions between the Council and the developer within Committee reports although affordable housing, community facilities, education, training programmes and environmental and sustainability measures are the main areas which were discussed and were included within the recommended delegation to Members. Other delegated matters to be addressed included the setting up and operation of the Menie Environmental Management Advisory Group, provision and maintenance of open space, provision and maintenance of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS), transportation requirements identified by Aberdeenshire Council’s Transportation and Infrastructure Service, Transport Scotland and any identified by Aberdeen City Council, the submission of an environmental management plan for the resort and housing areas, the submission of a bond to cover the restoration of the area of the Championship Golf Course, practice areas and other ancillary elements and any other mitigation or conditions required or incorporation of measures into the Section 75 legal agreement as a result of the above. There were 62 conditions recommended ranging from matters relating to the use of the holiday accommodation, timing of the residential development related to the golf courses, hotel and holiday accommodation, protection of the sand dune ridge, otter mitigation plan, badger protection plan, habitat enhancement plan, public access arrangements and development of later phases of the proposal not taking place until upgrading of the A90(T) had taken place.

2x. An independent assessment of the financial and economic information was commissioned by the Council and carried out by EKOS, which is a consultancy specialising in commercial and economic advice. This assessment was circulated to Councillors of the Formartine Area Committee and Infrastructure Services Committee.

2y. The significance of the proposal in planning terms has never been in doubt and all of the issues were carefully addressed and assessed before coming to a recommendation. The recommendation to approve outline planning permission is contained in the Formartine Area Committee report of 18 September 2007. Such a significant application with so many competing facets was dealt with thoroughly by the Planning Service as has been outlined above. The national standing of the proposal and the complex issues the application raised led to an accompanied visit to the site by the Scottish Government Chief Planner on 29 August 2007. This visit was arranged by Aberdeenshire Council officers. He was accompanied by the planning officer dealing with the application and the planning consultant acting on behalf of the applicant. With this in mind it is worth noting that had the Infrastructure Services Committee been minded to approve the application, this would have been done in the knowledge that the proposal would have been notified to Ministers as a significant departure from the Structure Plan, with the potential for the application to be called-in always being a possibility.

2z. In conclusion, at all times during the processing of the planning application, the public was able to view documentation pertaining to the application and the press was kept regularly up to date with procedures and timescales. The public was also able to participate fully in the process by making representations and taking part in the departure hearing. It should be noted that the interest in the application, both for and against, has been unprecedented. A wide range of internal and external consultees have been involved in the processing of this application and their input has been significant in terms of the Council’s determination thereof.

3. The Committee Process

3a. At their meeting of 24 July 2007 the Formartine Area Committee considered the likely process and sequence of meetings which would determine the proposal – Minute Appendix 3a.

Minute of meeting of 24 July 2007 (pdf 44KB)

3b. At a meeting on 28th August 2007, the Formartine Area Committee considered a request by a media organisation to film meetings featuring the progress of the planning application. The meeting resolved that only brief filming/recording, prior to the formal business, would be permitted. This is in accordance with the Council’s normal practices set out in Standing Order 19(3) – Minute Appendix 3b.

Minute of meeting of 28 August 2007 (pdf 93KB)

3c. The principal application then featured on an agenda of the Formartine Area Committee on 18 September 2007 whereon the meeting deferred any consideration of the proposal pending a public hearing and site visit – Minute Appendix 3c.

Minute of meeting of 18 September 2007 (pdf 80KB)

3d. The site visit and public hearing took place on 27 September 2007, the former event taking place under the adopted practices of the Council whereon no views on the merits of the proposal were made but a pure information gathering exercise in the context of the physical aspects of the proposal was carried out. The public hearing which took place in the evening at Balmedie Primary School, again was very much in the context of an information gathering exercise, and a large number of parties contributed to the event, a comprehensive note of which was later made available to both the Formartine Area Committee and Infrastructure Services Committee. Members of both the Formartine Area and Infrastructure Services Committees were invited to the site visit and hearing although the non attendance of any Councillor at either of those events was not considered to debar them from any future participation in determining the proposals – Note of Meeting Appendix 3d.

Additional document 1 for item 1 (pdf 267KB)

3e. The application was thereafter presented to a Special Meeting of the Formartine Area Committee which took place on the evening of 20 November 2007 at Balmedie Primary School. After a prolonged debate and through two separate divisions, the meeting resolved to support the proposal, but given the extent of the departures from the Development Plan, the matter required to be referred to Infrastructure Services Committee in terms of the Council’s Scheme of Delegation. (D2) - Minute Appendix 3e.

Minute of meeting of 20 November 2007 (pdf 67KB))

3f. In accordance with the Scheme of Delegation, the matter appeared on the agenda of the Infrastructure Services Committee of 29 November 2007 where again following extensive discussion and two divisions, a tied vote resulted in the Chair using his casting vote in favour of refusal for reasons which were detailed by Councillors at the meeting and which would require to be referenced to various Development Plan policies for inclusion in a Decision Notice – Minute Extract Appendix 3f (attached).

3g. Although the Chair used his casting vote in favour of refusal of the application, there has been speculation as to whether the correct protocol was followed in this regard and what the position would have been had the Chair not so used a casting vote. In terms of Standing Order 17(d), it is clear that the Chair in such circumstances has every right to utilise a casting vote.

3h. The decision of the Infrastructure Services Committee was therefore judged to be in accordance with the Scheme of Delegation although almost immediately routes were being sought by Councillors to have the matter further reviewed by Full Council.

3i. Early consideration by Officers of the Scheme of Delegation and Standing Orders was overtaken by a requisition for a Special Meeting of the Council to take place in accordance with Standing Order 3(2). Such a requisition was mooted on 30 November 2007 and manifested itself early on 3 December 2007. At this time, an Opinion of Senior Counsel was sought as to means whereby the Full Council could properly reopen the matter for further debate at the requisitioned Special Meeting. Several routes suggested by Officers were duly examined. The Opinion of Senior Counsel was obtained on 5 December 2007 which indicated that as the Scheme of Delegation presently stood, there was no legitimate way for the Full Council to reopen discussion on the merits of the decision taken at Infrastructure Services Committee on 29 November2007.

3j. However, prior to this on 4 December 2007, a Direction under Section 46 of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (“Call-In”) was received from the Scottish Government, requiring the Council to refer the application to Scottish Ministers for determination, thus effectively taking the matter outwith the Council’s control and substituting Scottish Ministers for the Council as Planning Authority in final determination of the proposal.

3k. The Decision Notice arising from the meeting of 29 November 2007 had not by then been issued or even drafted, it necessarily taking some time before such an exercise could be carried out by Officers. In complex cases such as these, the reasons given by Councillors at the meeting for departing from Officer recommendations require to be referenced with relevant policies from the Development Plan. The practice in issuing Decision Notices in these circumstances can vary, it often being the case that reference to the Chair and Vice Chair and Mover and Seconder of the relative motion or amendment is sufficient whereas in other cases, it is more prudent for a Minute of Proceedings to be duly approved as a correct record before issuing a Decision Notice based on the contents. In any event, the decision of the Infrastructure Services Committee was effectively superseded by the call-in.

4. Special Meeting of Aberdeenshire Council Wednesday 12 December 2007.

4a. As indicated previously (3i), the call for a Special Meeting of the Council was dealt with under Standing Order 3(2) on the signed requisition of at least one fourth of the whole number of Members of the Council. This requisition was received on 3 December 2007 and, in accordance with the Standing Order, the meeting was duly set within fourteen days of the receipt of the requisition with the business to be transacted being set out in two principal areas. These were (a) to review the way in which the Council deals with major planning applications in the future and (b) to consider, in the context of the Council’s Scheme of Delegation and Standing Orders, the decision taken by Infrastructure Services on 29 November 2007. Also requested was the circulation of papers presented to Infrastructure Services Committee on the 29 November 2007 for the information of all Councillors.

4b. Implicit in the requisition at Item (b) was an exploration of whether there was any remit for Full Council within the present Scheme of Delegation to revisit the decision taken by Infrastructure Services Committee and, to this end, the circulation of all relevant papers would have placed the Full Council in the same position as the earlier Committees in having all material for debating the merits of the proposal.

4c. The supplementary items for the agenda involved an agreement of process to be followed in relation to the issue of the Call-in Direction and to consider an emergency Notice of Motion from Councillor Cox requesting replacement of Councillor Ford as Chair of Infrastructure Services Committee.

4d. The draft Minute of the Special Meeting deals in detail with the business transacted on the day, the first element being an agreement by the Council to commence a review of their Scheme of Delegation in relation to major planning applications, effectively giving back to the Full Council a role in dealing with applications of regional or national significance. In accordance with Standing Order 22(2) no alteration to Standing Orders or the Scheme of Delegation shall be made without notice given at one meeting of the Council to be discussed at the following one. Although the suggested amendments to the Scheme of Delegation were agreed at the first stage, there will require to be a further report to Council at its next meeting on 17 January 2008 for these matters to be finalised. It is anticipated, given the lack of dissent at the first stage of the process, that the amendments will be confirmed on this date.

4e. Thereafter, although no paper was before the meeting on this specific issue, the Committee received an oral update from the Head of Law & Administration as fully detailed in the draft Minute. The update addressed the potential, in the context of the current Scheme of Delegation and Standing Orders, for any Full Council review of the Infrastructure Services Committee decision. Reference was made to the Opinion which had been obtained from Senior Counsel which confirmed that as the Scheme of Delegation currently stood, Full Council had no locus in the matter. However, the receipt of the Call-in Direction prior to the issue of the Decision Notice effectively replaced Aberdeenshire Council as Planning Authority with the Scottish Ministers. Therefore the Council was no longer the Planning Authority for the future determination of the application in any case. The Council, it was pointed out, now had the status of an enhanced consultee and might wish to express a more general view on the application and any view it came to would be seen in that context.

4f. Thereafter, the Council, without division, agreed that the view to be communicated to Scottish Ministers was that they supported the grant of planning permission, subject to the various delegated matters, conditions and agreements proposed by the Formartine Area Committee – letter to Head of Planning Decisions of 13 December 2007 Appendix 4f (attached).

4g. The meeting went on to consider the processes to be followed in the Scottish Ministers’ handling of the proposals and supported a hybrid process whereby both written and hearing evidence could be used in a less formal and more accessible forum than at a public inquiry – letter at Appendix 4f refers.

4h. The only division of the day took place on a debate as to whether to replace Councillor Martin Ford as Chair of Infrastructure Services Committee as per Councillor Cox’s emergency Notice of Motion. The Notice of Motion was duly carried and Councillor Ford ceased to hold the office with immediate effect. A further report will be necessary to Full Council at its meeting on 17 January 2008 concerning replacement of the Chair of Infrastructure Services Committee prior to its next meeting on 24 January 2008 – draft Minute Appendix 4h (attached).

Aberdeenshire Council Standing Orders Appendix 4.1 (attached).

Aberdeenshire Council Scheme of Delegation Appendix 4.2 (attached).

5. Matters Relevant to the Call-In

5a. There were a number of telephone calls between Officers of the Council and of the Scottish Government following the Infrastructure Services Committee decision on 29 November 2007. These calls started on the evening of 29 November 2007.

5b. As would generally be expected, local MSPs and MPs are in regular contact with the Chief Executive on a range of issues. Subsequent to the Infrastructure Services Committee decision, a number of MSPs and MPs contacted the Chief Executive seeking clarification on the position in regard to the application.

5c. The Chief Planner had been maintaining a watching brief in relation to the application for some time given the potential for the matter to be notified to Scottish Ministers. The Chief Planner had been provided with copies of the various Committee Reports for his information as they were published.

5d. The content of conversations from 29 November 2007 through to the early afternoon of 4 December 2007 was as to whether the Council, following the decision of the Infrastructure Services Committee, had exhausted its processes in terms of its Scheme of Delegation, and had thus concluded its consideration of the proposal. This decision was at odds with the previous decision of the Formartine Area Committee to recommend approval of the proposal in outline subject to various detailed conditions and other delegated matters. Detail concerning the position regarding the Scheme of Delegation is dealt with in paragraph 4e and it should be noted that the current provisions had up to that point been considered entirely satisfactory following their adoption some 3½ years previously.

5e. On 4 December 2007 the Chief Executive of Aberdeenshire Council held a meeting to prepare for the Special Meeting of the Council which had been called on a requisition and which was scheduled to take place on 12 December 2007. At around 3.00pm the Chief Executive received a phonecall from the Chief Planner. The Chief Executive put the phone on loudspeaker and advised the Chief Planner that a number of colleagues were present in his office.

5f. The Chief Planner then advised the Chief Executive that he was accompanied by David Ferguson, Head of Planning Decisions, and by George Sorial and Neil Hobday on behalf of the applicant. At that point the Chief Executive indicated that he would prefer that Messrs. Sorial and Hobday were not party to the conversation and that they left the Chief Planner’s room. It sounded as though they were leaving the room and it was confirmed that they had indeed done so. A conversation then ensued as to whether the Council had exhausted its processes in regard to the application. It was confirmed by the Chief Executive that legal advice was indicating this was the case within the terms of the existing Scheme of Delegation. A written opinion was expected the following day and would require some further examination by the Council’s Law and Administration Service. Arrangements for the Special Meeting of Aberdeenshire Council on 12 December 2007 were also touched upon.

5g. At approximately 3.45pm, there was a further phone call from the Chief Planner indicating that the Scottish Government was considering calling-in the application. This was the first time that call-in had been referred to. At approximately 4.00pm a third phone call from the Chief Planner was received confirming that Scottish Ministers had directed that the application be referred to them and that the written Direction intimating that the call-in was being prepared and would be with the Council within 15 minutes.

5h. At around 4.25pm, the Chief Executive telephoned the Chief Planner’s office and spoke to the Head of Planning Decisions as the Direction had not arrived and the Council Leader and Chief Executive had already committed to attending a pre-arranged press conference at 4.30pm. It was considered appropriate to wait for the forthcoming Direction before attending the press conference.

5i. There were no further telephone calls with the Chief Planner’s office that afternoon and the Direction was received by fax in the Chief Executive’s office at around 5.00pm at which point the press conference took place.

5j. As has previously been indicated Aberdeenshire Council accepts that this proposal is one of national scale. Given the wide powers available to the Scottish Government the decision to call-in the application was considered to be properly within the powers of the Scottish Government. While such planning matters are not routine or everyday, the Chief Executive did not regard the process which the Chief Planner followed as being irregular in the way in which some observers have suggested.

Alan G Campbell
Chief Executive
Aberdeenshire Council
10 January 2008

aberdeenshire council - INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTE EXTRACT

WOODHILL HOUSE, ABERDEEN, 29 NOVEMBER, 2007

Present: Councillors MAFord (Chair), JNGifford (as substitute for Councillor WAAgnew), GJClark, JBCox, AGHowie, JMMHumphrey, PKJohnston, FMcRae, IJMollison, SWPratt (as substitute for CouncillorMBurnett), ARoss, DMStorr, ISTait and JWebster.

Apologies: Councillors W A Agnew and M Burnett.

Officers: Director of Planning and Environmental Services, Director of Transportation and Infrastructure, Area Manager (Formartine), Head of Development Management and Building Standards, Head of Planning, Policy and Environment, Head of Environmental Health and Waste Management, Head of Consumer Protection and Support Services, Area Planning Officer (Formartine), Planner (Ms L Aitken), Corporate Finance Manager, Chief Internal Auditor, Head of Law and Administration (Mr Davidson) and Committee Officer.

In advance of the meeting, the Chair advised members that due to the interest around Item 8, there would be a short break both before and after the item to allow people to enter and leave the room without causing disruption. The Committee agreed in relation to Standing Order 14 (4) that the limits on the length of time members could speak following the moving of a motion or an amendment would be exceeded.

DECLARATION OF MEMBERS’ INTERESTS

The Chair asked Members if they had any interests to declare in terms of Standing Order 2 and the Councillors Code of Conduct.

Councillor Webster declared a pecuniary interest in Item 3, as she had a potential business interest with the applicant, and left the room for the duration of the item.

Councillor Johnston declared an interest in Item 8 as he was member of the Board of Scottish Enterprise Grampian but did not feel this to be clear and substantial and would take part in the debate. He also declared an interest in Item 19 as a Director of a community co-operative.

Councillor Gifford declared an interest in Item 8, as he was a member of the Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce and the Small Business Federation but did not feel this to be clear and substantial and would take part in the debate.

Councillor Storr declared an interest in Item 8 in that she knew many objectors and supporters of the application and she was a member of the Board of Aberdeenshire Local Access Forum but did not feel this to be clear and substantial and would take part in the debate.

Councillor Tait wished to clarify that there was a Mr Ian Tait listed as an objector on one of the online petitions in relation to Item 8. Councillor Tait confirmed that this was not him.

8. OUTLINE PLANNING PERMISSION FOR GOLF COURSE AND RESORT DEVELOPMENT AT LAND AT MENIE HOUSE, BALMEDIE, ABERDEEN

(REF NO. F/APP/2006/4605)

With reference to the Minute of the Formartine Area Committee of 20 November, 2007 (Appendix 6, Item 2), there had been circulated a report dated 21 November, 2007 by the Director of Planning and Environmental Services requesting consideration of an application for Outline Planning Permission which the Formartine Area Committee had recommended for approval as a departure from both the Structure and Local Plans.

The Director of Planning and Environmental Services summarised to the Committee that Members and their substitutes were provided with copies of the reports to the Formartine Area Committee at the time of publication. Members had also been given the opportunity to attend the site visit which took place on 27 September and to attend, and participate in, the public hearing that followed. Therefore Members had ample opportunity to familiarise themselves with the detail of the application and the Director limited the introduction to the application to matters of policy and principle, these being the remit for the Committee’s consideration of the matter.

The Director highlighted that the application was for Outline Planning Permission and summarised that the applicants’ agents had confirmed their willingness to discuss the details of design, appearance, methods of construction, etc with the Council and relevant external organisations including Architecture and Design Scotland, in preparation for the submission of the various applications for reserved matters approval that would be required if outline consent was granted for this development. Members were reminded that the application had been the subject of extensive consultation and that the responses had been outlined in some detail by the Area Committee reports. In addition, the application had attracted a substantial number of representations, both giving support, and objecting, to the application and all representations had been available for inspection by Members. The Committee was reminded that the main issues arising from the proposal were the impact of the development on geomorphology and ecology, the principle of the proposed housing on land not allocated for this purpose in the current Local Plan and the overall landscape impact of the development. The proposal to build part of the championship golf course on land designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) had generated a strong objection from Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) and was the foundation of many of the objections from other consultees and those submitting representations against the proposal. Discussions had taken place with the applicants regarding the possibility of moving the golf course away from the SSSI site, and therefore removing concerns in this regard. However, the applicants had been clear that they were not willing to relocate the golf course as it was the dune location which had the potential to make it a world class facility. The Council’s environmental policies provided that development that had an adverse impact on an SSSI would only be permitted where the impact was outweighed by social and economic benefits of national importance. In relation to the housing element of the proposal, the site had not been allocated for housing in the Local Plan and it could not be considered as an enabling development which was very tightly defined within planning policy as development which would enable the restoration of a listed building at risk. Looking at the housing element in a wider context, work in relation to the new Structure Plan for the north east had identified an overriding need for a considerable amount of housing land over the next 25 years, and developing along the A90 corridor had been put forward as one of the various options within the spatial strategy. However the applicants had clearly indicated that the housing was required to cross-subsidise the golf resort and it was also proposed that it would facilitate the level of investment required to bring forward the entire development. It was highlighted to Members that there were very stringent conditions proposed within the recommendations including several to control the phasing of the development, to ensure the whole development was delivered.

The Director indicated that there was a recognised need to diversify the economic base of the Aberdeen City and Shire region and the scale of the tourism element of this proposal was considered to be significant in this context. The level of capital investment of the development was itself of national significance as was the level of spend it would generate. In addition to this, there was a national and international profile that a development of this nature would generate for the North East of Scotland and for Scotland as a whole.

Members were informed that this was an exceptional application and had required a great deal of thought from officers and their conclusion was a recommendation for a delegated grant of planning permission. Members were reminded that there had been discussion at the Formartine Area Committee on 20 November, 2007 and the Committee had resolved to include some amendments to the officers’s recommendations and therefore the recommendations included in the draft minute of the Formartine Area Committee was what Members were being asked to consider.

There then followed a lengthy debate amongst Members. The following comments were made against the application:-

• The SSSI was a site of significant importance and was the reason for many objections. It was believed that by developing on this site, it would remove the very reason why it was designated a SSSI.
• In building a golf course, the dunes would have to be stabilised and would affect the dune formation process. The wildlife and flora and fauna benefited from the shifting nature of the dunes.
• Reference was made to the RSPB consultation response on the effect to the dune system and the repercussions this would have on Scotland as a whole, due to the destruction of nationally rare habitats on an important SSSI.
• Objections had been received from a variety of groups including Scottish Natural Heritage, a statutory body, and their concerns should not be ignored.
• The housing element of the development was not considered necessary in order to develop the rest of the site.
• It was unlikely the site in question would be identified for a housing development in any future Local Plan.
• The housing was not considered to be diverse and mixed. There was a greater need for affordable housing in the area, not luxury accommodation.
• Concern was expressed over the level of access to the beach or within the complex itself for locals and visitors alike.
• The scale and size of the development was considered to be much larger than similar golfing resorts in Scotland and was too large for this location. It was not just a hotel, but included a new village which would impact on the infrastructure and resources of the surrounding area.
• The social and economic benefits of the development that were considered by officers to be sufficient in justifying setting aside the environmental protection policies were not justified as the benefits were not of overwhelming national significance.
• Concern was expressed over the economic studies that had been undertaken in relation to the application, as the studies were undertaken on information provided by the applicant and there had been a lack of independent scrutiny of the information provided.
• While economic development in the area could be welcomed, concern was expressed as employing contractors to build this development could displace other activities in the North East.
• It was recognised that tourism was of great importance to the North East but for many visitors, the reason they came to the North East was for the solitude and the natural environment and this development would be detrimental to its surrounding landscape.

In support of the application, the following comments were made:-

• Diversification was key to the long term economic future of the North East, and the economic impact of the development would be beneficial for the whole region.
• While concerns were recognised over developing the SSSI site, there were a variety of other golf courses across Scotland situated on SSSI sites and therefore there were policies and guidelines for such developments.
• It was not in the interest of the applicant to destroy the landscape as this was the very reason the site had been selected.
• In developing the Local Plan, an application such as this could not have been foreseen and the opportunity should be taken to benefit from the planned nature of the development.
• The Strategic Housing Forecasts identified that 50-60,000 houses were required within the next 25 years, therefore a variety of housing would be required to be built across Aberdeenshire.
• In relation to the scale of the development, there were comparable resorts across Europe, and the size of the development would allow it to compete in the same market.
• The application was for an Outline Planning Permission and therefore further details would have to come forward. The applicant had already acknowledged that work would be done in conjunction with the Council and other advisory bodies in the design and landscaping of the site. Work had also been done to mitigate the effects of the development through various conditions that would be attached to any planning permission.
• There was a recognised need in the North East for hotel accommodation.
• An opportunity such as this did not come twice. There was the opportunity to build a world class facility in the North East of Scotland that would incorporate the surrounding landscape and be of benefit to all.
• The facility would put North East Scotland on the map and help promote the area to tourists and businesses alike.

During discussion, Members sought clarification from officers on a variety of issues and the following comments were made. It was highlighted to members that should the application be agreed to, it was proposed that the Menie Environmental Management Advisory Group would be set up and would include Council officials, and possibly elected members, and other groups, to monitor the scientific and conservation issues on the site and to advise on appropriate mitigation measures and best practice construction and maintenance techniques. A mechanism would be devised by which to oversee the on-site development and ensure that the conditions attached to any planning permission were adhered to. In response to comments on the connection to the A90, it was explained that as the A90 was a trunk road it was outwith the Council’s ability to specify the precise nature of any new junction for this, however suspensive conditions could be attached in this regard. Members were also reminded that a full design process had yet to be undertaken and that imposing conditions on the height of buildings and other such measures could limit the design process in a negative manner.

Comment was made by Members on the process the application would follow, should it either be granted or refused. It was outlined that if the application was granted, it would be referred to Scottish Ministers as the application was a significant departure from the Structure and Local Plans and as a consequence of objections from Scottish Natural Heritage. Scottish Ministers may then decide to call in the application and there could then be a Public Inquiry. If the application was refused, the applicants could appeal to the Scottish Ministers where there may also be a Public Inquiry. In either situation the Reporters Unit would assess the decision, and could impose its own conditions, not necessarily those proposed by the Council.

Councillor Ross, seconded by Councillor Storr, moved that the Committee refuse the Outline Planning Permission for the following reasons:-

(1) there was no policy which allowed the use of profit from housing to enable other business to be set up and doing so for this development could create an unfavourable precedent,

(2) the scale of the proposal was excessive on the undeveloped coast on an area of landscape significance. No demonstration that it could sit within the site without damaging the natural and historic interest of the site had been made – rather the applicants assessment of impact was severely adverse,

(3) the development of the SSSI was not justified.

Specifically the proposal contravened policies,

Aberdeenshire Local Plan (ALP)

Env2 – National Nature Conservation Sites

Env3 – Other Recognised Nature Conservation Sites.

Env4 – Biodiversity

Env5b – Areas of Landscape Significance

Env6 – Coastal Development

Env11 – Agricultural Land

Env18 – Listed Building

Env19 – Archaeological Sites and Ancient Monuments

Env20 –Historic Gardens and Designed Landscapes

Env22 – Public Access

Hou4 – New Housing in the Countryside including the Aberdeenshire part of the Cairngorms National Park

Hou8 – Affordable Housing

Hou13 – Public Open Space for Housing

Gen2 – The Layout, Siting and Design of New Development

Gen3 – Developer Contributions

North East Scotland Together (NEST)

Objectives 5 – to protect, enhance and promote the natural, built and cultural heritage of the North East.

NEST11 – General Housing Considerations

NEST12 – Housing Building in the Countryside Beyond the Green Belt

NEST13 – Developer Contributions

NEST19 – Wildlife, Landscape and Resources

NEST20 – Built Heritage and Archaeology

NEST29 – Coastal Planning

Scottish Planning Policies (SPP)

SPP3 – Planning for Housing

SSP11 – Open Space and Physical Activity

SSP17 – Planning for Transport

National Planning Policy Guideline (NPPG)

NPPG5 – Archaeology and Planning

NPPG18 – Planning and the Historic Environment

(4) the economic benefit case did not qualify as significant on either a national or local basis.

As an amendment Councillor Cox, seconded by Councillor Howie, moved that the authority to grant Outline Planning Permission be delegated to the Head of Development Management and Building Standards subject to

(a) The conclusion of negotiations for completion of a Section 75 Legal Agreement seeking to secure the best possible outcomes to cover matters including planning gain contributions, affordable housing, training programme, details of environmental and sustainability measures, and the setting up and operation of the Menie Environmental Management Advisory Group;

(b) Details regarding the provision and maintenance of open space;

(c) Details regarding the provision and maintenance of SUDS;

(d) Conclusion of transportation requirements in consultation with the Transportation and Infrastructure Service and Transport Scotland including those which may be identified by Aberdeen City Council;

(e) The submission of an environmental management plan for the resort and the housing areas incorporating energy efficiency measures with at least 50% of overall energy requirements across the site being met from renewable sources and the on-site management and disposal of waste;

(f) The submission of a bond to cover the restoration of the area of all the golf facilities;

(g) Any additional mitigation or conditions required or incorporation of measures in the S75 as result of the above;

(h) Subject to Infrastructure Services Committee referral;

(i) The submission of a landscape bond;

(j) The conclusion of the appropriate assessment process and inclusion of any additional conditions arising from such, detailing mitigation measures in particular;

(k) Subject to Scottish Government referral; and

(l) Subject to the following conditions: -

1. That an application for approval of reserved matters shall be made to the Planning Authority within 3 years beginning with the date of this outline planning permission.

Reason: Pursuant to Sections 58 and 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

2. That the development hereby granted shall be begun on or before whichever is the latest of the following two dates:

(a) The expiration of five years beginning with the date of the outline planning permission; or

(b) The expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matters to be approved.

Reason: Pursuant to Sections 58 and 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

3. That no development in connection with the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless full details of the siting, design, external appearance and landscaping of the development and the means of access serving the development (hereinafter referred to as the "Reserved Matters") have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The Reserved Matters shall include:

(a) A masterplan for the whole development

(b) Details of all cut and fill operations in the construction of the golf courses;

(c) A detailed levels survey of the site and cross sections showing proposed finished ground and floor levels relative to existing ground levels and a fixed datum point;

(d) Full details of the proposed means of disposal of foul and surface water from the development;

(e) A phasing plan incorporating the construction of the area of future golf for the proposed development;

(f) The siting design and external materials of all buildings or structures;

(g) The details of all roads, footpaths and cycleways throughout the development;

(h) Details of any screen walls/fencing to be provided;

(i) Measures to maximise micro-climate improvements through design, orientation and planting or any other means;

(j) Details of all landscaping, planting and screening associated with the development.

Reason: Permission for the development has been granted in principle only and subsequent approval is required for the Reserved Matters in accordance with Sections 58 and 59 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

4. That concurrently with the submission of the first application for the approval of reserved matters, plans shall be submitted for the consideration and written approval of the Planning Authority showing the proposed phasing of the housing development in relation to the erection of numbers of houses, open space and other relevant development within the specified areas.

Reason: To ensure the timeous provision of different, inter-related parts of the development.

5. That the golf villas and holiday apartment buildings hereby approved shall at no time be occupied as independent dwellinghouses without the prior express planning permission of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to retain control over the occupation of these buildings.

6. That prior to the receipt of any application for reserved matters for any of the buildings, development impact assessments for foul drainage and water supply shall be submitted for the further written approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Water. No development pursuant to this planning permission shall take place until plans indicating all details of:

(a) the proposed sewage disposal/drainage facilities

(b) provision for surface water disposal

(c) the proposed water supply

(d) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Water and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency.

Reason: In the interests of public health and to prevent pollution.

7. The site shall be drained to the mains sewerage system by means of adoptable sewerage and plant agreed in writing and to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Water.

Reason: In the interests of public health and to prevent pollution.

8. That no development in connection with the planning permission hereby approved shall take place unless an overall site water management plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage. This shall include full details of the proposed foul water disposal, the proposed means of disposal of surface water from the development, full details of any water abstraction and any irrigation. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, surface water shall be disposed of via the use of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems and the development shall not be brought into use unless the agreed drainage system has been provided in association with each phase of development.

Reason: To ensure the provision of an acceptable drainage system in the interests of the amenity of the area.

9. The dune ridge and its associated body, the extent of which shall be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, shall be protected from all works associated with the creation of the golf courses, and their future management, and shall remain as such in perpetuity to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of protecting the environmental sensitivity of the site.

10. Prior to the submission of the Reserved Matters application for the second golf course, an Environmental Impact Assessment shall be prepared to be submitted along with such an application.

Reason: In the interest of protecting the environmental sensitivity of the site.

11. That as part of any application related to the formation of the Championship golf course, a full topographical survey including all engineering works, site levelling etc required for the formation of the course shall be carried out and details of the proposed levels shall be submitted for the further written approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage.

Reason: In the interest of protecting the environmental sensitivity of the site.

12. That as part of any application related to the formation of the Championship golf course, full details of the works involved in any stabilisation of the dunes system shall be submitted for the further written approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage.

Reason: In the interest of protecting the environmental sensitivity of the site.

13. That no development in connection with the permission hereby approved shall take place unless details of all of the proposed means of enclosure to be provided in the proposed development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in complete accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the visual amenities of the area.

14. That no works in connection with the development hereby approved shall take place unless a scheme of hard and soft landscaping works, linked to the agreed phasing plan pursuant to condition 3 above, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Details of the scheme shall include:

(i) Existing and proposed finished ground levels relative to a fixed datum point;

(ii) Existing landscape features and vegetation to be retained;

(iii) Existing and proposed services including cables, pipelines and substations;

(iv) The location of new trees, shrubs, hedges, grassed areas and water features;

(v) A schedule of plants to comprise species, plant sizes and proposed numbers and density;

(vi) The location, design and materials of all hard landscaping works including walls, fences, gates, street furniture and play equipment;

(vii) An indication of existing trees, shrubs and hedges to be removed;

(viii) A programme for the completion and subsequent maintenance of the proposed landscaping.

All soft and hard landscaping proposals shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme and shall be completed during the planting season immediately following the commencement of the development or such other date as may be agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. Any planting which, within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development, in the opinion of the Planning Authority is dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased, shall be replaced by plants of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted.

Reason: To ensure the implementation of a satisfactory scheme of landscaping which will help to integrate the proposed development into the local landscape in the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

15. Prior to the commencement of development, excluding the construction of the Championship golf course, a tree survey shall be carried out identifying existing tree species, an estimation of their height and spread of branches, and their location within the site accurately plotted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Those trees which it is proposed to retain or to fell or remove shall be separately identified.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to safeguard as many trees as possible on the site.

16. That no works in connection with the permission hereby approved shall take place unless the trees to be retained pursuant to condition 16 above have been protected by suitable fencing in accordance with BS5837 2005 (Trees in Relation to Construction). No works shall commence unless details of the protective fencing have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. No materials, supplies, plant, machinery, soil heaps, changes in ground levels or construction activities shall be permitted within the protected areas without the written consent of the Planning Authority and no fire shall be lit in the position where the flames could extend to within 5metres of foliage, branches or trunks.

Reason: In order to ensure adequate protection for the trees on the site during the construction of development, in the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

17. Prior to the commencement of any development and notwithstanding the details on the approved plans, no development shall take place within the area of ancient woodland or within a buffer around this zone, the distance for which shall be agreed, to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the retention of important landscape features and preserve the character of the area.

18. Prior to the commencement of the works hereby authorised full details of the grass types, vegetation and seed mixes to be used for the planting of the golf courses shall be submitted for the further written approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage and the works when undertaken shall accord with the details as approved.

Reason: In order to give further consideration to this matter and in the interest of protecting the environmental sensitivity of the site and habitat enhancement.

19. The pond identified as PN8 in the Environmental Statement shall be retained as part of the detailed design and shall be protected from all development with a 20 metre wide buffer at all times to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of protecting the environmental sensitivity of the site.

20. Prior to the commencement of any works on site, an otter mitigation plan shall be submitted for the further written approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the habitat of a protected species.

21. Prior to the commencement of any works on site, a badger protection plan shall be submitted for the further written approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the habitat of a protected species.

22. Prior to the commencement of any works on site a habitat enhancement plan for birds shall be submitted for the further written approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage.

Reason: In the interests of protecting the environmental sensitivity of the site and habitat enhancement.

23. Prior to the commencement of development of any works on site a habitat enhancement plan for bats shall be submitted for the further written approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage.

Reason: In the interests of protecting the environmental sensitivity of the site and habitat enhancement.

24. Prior to the commencement of development, a detailed habitat and plant mitigation and management plan shall be submitted for the further approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage.

Reason: In the interests of protecting the environmental sensitivity of the site and habitat enhancement.

25. No works shall take place within the development site 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, as agreed by Aberdeenshire Council 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 consultation with the Council Archaeology Service.

Reason: In the interests of recording and preserving such items of historical importance that exist within the site.

26. That prior to the commencement of any works on site in connection with this or subsequent planning applications, a detailed construction method statement to include details of buffer zones, public access arrangements during construction, signage details and car parking, shall be submitted to the Planning Authority to be agreed in writing in consultation with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage and once agreed all construction works on site shall comply with the approved method statement.

Reason: In the interests of protecting the environmental sensitivity of the site.

27. That throughout the duration of the development hereby permitted, no buildings, materials or machinery shall be stored on the site access or any other access roads serving the development. The site access and all other such roads shall be kept clear of soil, mud and stones to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the site and surrounding access roads are maintained to an adequate standard and the interests of public safety.

28. No work shall be carried out on the site unless and until an effective vehicle wheel washing facility has been installed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority prior to its installation. Such facility shall be retained in working order and used such that no vehicle shall leave the site carrying earth and mud in their wheels in such a quantity which causes a nuisance or hazard on the road system in the locality.

Reason: In the interest of road safety.

29. That dust suppression measures employed at the site will be to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority in consultation with Environmental Health.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.

30. That between the hours of 07:00 and 19:00 the noise from the proposed development shall not exceed the existing background level by more than 3dBA when measured at 3.5m from the facade of any noise sensitive premises.

Reason: To ensure that noise from the development does not result in undue loss of amenity for surrounding properties.

31. That between the hours of 19:00 and 07:00 the noise level from the proposed development shall not exceed LAeq (5 minutes) = 35 dB when measured at 3.5m from the facade of any noise sensitive premises.

Reason: To ensure that noise from the development does not result in undue loss of amenity for surrounding properties.

32. All site lighting shall be so designed and installed so as not to cause undue light pollution to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area.

33. Prior to the submission of any Reserved Matters application, and further to the access strategy contained in supporting information a new access strategy and plan, shall be prepared which shall include details of how public access shall be catered for and for paths and tracks within the golf resort, courses and housing areas to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. The plan should clearly show:

• Proposed promoted routes including information regarding ownership and potential privacy matters;
• Proposals for multi-use (cyclists, horse-riders etc) and users of all abilities;
• Details of path materials, widths, slopes and method statements for construction of new routes;
• Proposed privacy and exclusion zones, including temporary exclusion zones for competition events etc;
• Proposals for vehicle access to provide health and safety back up for community events;
• Details of ancillary matters such as car parks, information boards and waymarking;
• Details of the proposed siting of maintenance access tracks and boardwalk, specifying construction material, width, slope and permanence including a method statement for the siting or resiting of these routes along with a maintenance schedule;
• A maintenance scheme for the above routes and associated infrastructure.

Reason: In order to promote public access.

34. That notwithstanding the details on the indicative masterplan and contained in the Environmental Statement and prior to the commencement of any development, apart from the formation of the Championship golf course, a development brief incorporating detailed design and materials information for all buildings within the development site incorporating the outcome of the Design Review process, excluding the private residential dwellings, shall be prepared for the further approval of the Formartine Area Committee and once agreed all development shall be carried out in accordance with the brief. The brief shall contain guidance on:

• the height and appearance of all new structures;
• the use of appropriate external materials including walls, fences and other boundary enclosures;
• the surfacing of all new roads, parking areas and footpaths;
• the lighting of all streets and footpaths; and
• the maintenance of all open space and treed areas.

Reason: In order to give further consideration to those details which have still to be submitted.

35. That notwithstanding the details on the indicative masterplan and contained in the Environmental Statement and prior to the commencement of any private residential dwelling, a development brief incorporating detailed design and materials information incorporating detailed design and materials information incorporating the outcome of the Design Review process shall be prepared for the further approval of the Formartine Area Committee and once agreed all development shall be carried out in accordance with the brief. The brief shall contain guidance on:

• the height and appearance of all new structures;
• the use of appropriate external materials including walls, fences and other boundary enclosures;
• the surfacing of all new roads, parking areas and footpaths;
• the lighting of all streets and footpaths; and
• the maintenance of all open space and treed areas not included in private house plots.

Reason: In order to give further consideration to those details which have still to be submitted.

36. That prior to the commencement of any development, apart from the formation of the Championship golf course, to allow for an appropriate design framework, the developer shall enter into a Design Review process with the Planning Authority and Architecture and Design Scotland to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to ensure a responsive and robust design framework is created for the site.

37. Full details of the height and design of the hotel and holiday apartment buildings shall be submitted for the further approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Defence Estates and Architecture and Design Scotland.

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

38. That prior to the commencement of any development, apart from the formation of the golf courses, the developer shall carry out an Index 21 Assessment to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of sustainability.

39. That no house in connection with the development shall be built until such times as the first phase of development is complete (championship golf course, maintenance building, clubhouse, starters hut, caddy shack, practice facilities and driving range, hotel, 36 golf villas and staff accommodation) to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to ensure the implementation and completion of the non-residential components of the proposal.

40. That one of the blocks of holiday apartments shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority and agreed in writing prior to work commencing on the construction of the private residential dwellings.

Reason: In order to ensure the implementation and completion of the non-residential components of the proposal.

41. That the construction of the second block of holiday apartments shall commence prior to the completion of the 101st private residential dwelling and in line with an agreed construction programme to be submitted and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to ensure the implementation and completion of the non-residential components of the proposal.

42. That the second block of holiday apartments shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to work commencing on the construction of the 151st private residential dwelling.

Reason: In order to ensure the implementation and completion of the non-residential components of the proposal.

43. That the construction of the third block of holiday apartments shall commence prior to the completion of the 201st private residential dwelling.

Reason: In order to ensure the implementation and completion of the non-residential components of the proposal.

44. That the third block of holiday apartments shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to work commencing on the construction of the 251st private residential dwelling.

Reason: In order to ensure the implementation and completion of the non-residential components of the proposal.

45. That the construction of the fourth block of holiday apartments shall commence prior to the completion of the 301st private residential dwelling.

Reason: In order to ensure the implementation and completion of the non-residential components of the proposal.

46. That the fourth block of holiday apartments shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority prior to work commencing on the construction of the 401st private residential dwelling.

Reason: In order to ensure the implmentation and completion of the non-residential components of the proposal.

47. No public right of way or public footpath shall be constructed without the written consent of the Planning Authority. The footpath network shall be laid out so as to accord with the details contained in the submitted access strategy referred to in condition 33.

Reason: In order to maintain appropriate pedestrian links into and out of the estate in the interest of a sustainable form of development.

48. Prior to the commencement of works in association with any of the buildings hereby permitted, details of any electricity sub station or gas governor kiosks shall be submitted to and approved in writing the Planning Authority for its further written approval.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.

49. That prior to the commencement of any works on site, full details of a waste management plan incorporating on site disposal shall be submitted for the further approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Environmental Health.

Reason: In the interests of the sustainable disposal of waste.

50. Details of any micro wind turbines shall be submitted for the further approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with the BAA Safeguarding Team.

Reason: In the interests of health and safety.

51. Any plant and equipment eg air conditioning, mechanical extraction, air receivers etc must be designed and installed so as to prevent noise disturbance to adjoining properties.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area.

52. That notwithstanding the details on the approved plans, full details of the routing for the Championship golf course including reference to tracks and paths designed to avoid sensitive areas and in no way impacting upon the foredune ridge shall be submitted for the further written approval of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to protect the environmental sensitivities of the site.

53. That no works in connection with the construction of the Championship golf course shall take place unless a scheme detailing the management of areas of rough grass and planting including only the use of appropriate locally native species has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the implementation of appropriate species for creation of golf course rough.

54. That no works in connection with the construction of the Championship golf course shall take place unless a turf management plan including full details of fertilisers, herbicides and pesticides has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of protecting the environmental sensitivity of the site.

55. That prior to the commencement of any works on site a bryophyte survey and any associated mitigation plan shall be submitted for the further approval of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to give adequate protection to bryophytes.

56. That no more than 500 houses shall be built under the permission hereby granted.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in order to comply with the proposals as submitted.

57. That prior to any part of the development hereby granted coming into use, details of a proposed construction access route only within the confines of the application site, and a new access onto the existing A90 to serve the development shall be constructed, full details of which shall be agreed in writing in consultation with the Transportation and Infrastructure Service and Transport Scotland, and shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of road safety.

58. That prior to the receipt of any application for Reserved Matters for any of the buildings, the applicant shall seek a screening opinion from the Planning Authority to determine whether an Environmental Impact Assessment is required.

Reason: In the interest of protecting the environmental sensitivity of the site.

59. Prior to the commencement of any works on site a habitat management plan incorporating mitigation measures for birds shall be submitted for the further written approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage.

Reason: In the interests of protecting the environmental sensitivity of the site and habitat enhancement.

60 Prior to the commencement of any works on site, a habitat management plan incorporating mitigation measures for invertebrates shall be submitted for the further written approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage.

Reason: In the interests of protecting the environmental sensitivity of the site and habitat enhancement.

61 That no development in phases 3 and 4 as described in the Transportation Assessment shall be brought into use until such times as the A90 (T) has been upgraded and the means of access thereto from the site have been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with the Transportation and Infrastructure Service and Transport Scotland.

Reason: In the interests of road safety

62 That no soil or sand shall be removed from the site without the express written consent of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of sustainability

As a second amendment, Councillor Johnston, seconded by Councillor Humphrey, moved that the Committee defer the item to allow negotiation to take place with the applicants in order to prevent development from taking place on the SSSI.

There having been two amendments to the motion, the Committee voted:-

for the first amendment (5) Councillors Cox, Howie, McRae, Pratt and Webster.

for the second amendment (9) Councillors Ford, Humphrey, Gifford, G J Clark, Johnston, Mollison, Ross, Storr and Tait.

The second amendment was therefore carried.

The Committee then voted:-

for the motion (7) Councillors Ford, Humphrey, GJClark,

Johnston, Ross, Storr and Tait.

for the second amendment (7) Councillors Cox, Gifford, Howie, McRae, Mollison, Pratt and Webster.

There being an equality of votes, the Chair used his casting vote in favour of the motion.

The motion was therefore carried and the Committee agreed to refuse Outline Planning Permission for the reasons as detailed in the motion.

Councillors Cox, Gifford, Howie, McRae, Mollison, Pratt, and Webster requested that their dissent be recorded.

aberdeenshire council - STANDING ORDERS

(As at 17 May, 2007)

In exercise of the powers contained in paragraph 8 of Schedule 7 to the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1973, and subject to the provisions of the said Schedule and of other relevant provisions of the said Act, the Aberdeenshire Council hereby make the following Standing Orders for the regulation of the business and proceedings of the Council and of its Committees and Sub‑Committees, which Standing Orders shall operate from 27 June, 1996.

STANDING ORDERS

1. CHAIR

(1) (a) At a meeting of the Council, the Provost, if present, shall preside as Chair.

(b) If the Provost is absent from a meeting of the Council, the Deputy Provost, whom failing another member of the Council chosen by a majority of the members present, shall preside as Chair.

(2) The Chair shall, inter alia, -

(a) preserve order and ensure that every member of the Council shall have a fair hearing;

(b) if a member of the public interrupts the proceedings at any meeting, warn him or her; if he or she continues to interrupt, the Chair shall order his or her removal from the Council Chamber or meeting room; in the case of a general disturbance in any part of the Chamber or meeting room open to the public, the Chair shall order that part to be closed;

(c) decide all matters of order, competency and relevancy;

(d) decide between two or more members of the Council indicating a wish to speak by calling on the member who has first caught his or her eye;

(e) see that due and sufficient opportunity is given to members of the Council who wish to speak to express their views on the subject under discussion; and

(f) ensure that the sense of the meeting is properly ascertained with regard to any matter which is properly before the meeting.

(3) The ruling of the Chair on all matters within his or her jurisdiction as Chair shall be final and shall not be open to question or discussion.

2. GENERAL CONDUCT OF MEETINGS

(1) At meetings of the Council -

(a) every member of the Council shall stand when speaking and shall address the Chair;

(b) when the Chair rises to speak, no other member of the Council shall continue standing, nor shall any other member rise to speak until the Chair is seated;

(c) when the Chair is speaking he or she shall be heard without interruption; and

(d) in the event of any person present disregarding the authority of the Chair or being guilty of obstructive or offensive conduct, a motion may thereupon be moved and seconded to suspend such person for the remainder of the sitting; the motion shall be put without discussion and, if it be carried, such person shall leave the Council Chamber and, if refusing to do so, shall be removed from the Council Chamber (including the precincts thereof) with such force as may be reasonably necessary.

(2) Members of the Council, members of Committees of the Council and all officers of the Council are required to comply with the terms of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct issued by the Standards Commission for Scotland.

(3) The Director of Law and Administration of the Council shall maintain a Register of disclosures of pecuniary interests and other interests made by members of the Council, which Register shall be open to inspection by any member of the publi