|
Minutes of the Meeting held on May 4th 2010
Present:; Geoff Peart; Douglas Coupethwaite; Maitland Clark; Barbara Drummond, John Craigen; Edmond Mansion; Helen Rowell; Councillor Alistair Berill; Kathy Kirsop; Margaret McKechnie; Jamie Russell [McKenzie Strickland Architects] and around 50 members of the public.
Apologies
None
Minutes
Adoption of minutes of the last meeting was proposed by John Craigen and seconded by Barbara Drummond
Community Police Officer’s Report
KK had forwarded a short report on incidents in the village since the last meeting. The main items to note were an incident of vandalism at the Community Centre and a Breach of the Peace. There were also 4 road traffic offences on the A811. The consensus of the meeting was that things had been relatively quiet in the village over the last month.
Action: Noted
Myreton Eco-Lodge Development
Jamie Russell [McKenzie Strickland Architects] indicated that the proposal had not yet reached the stage of a planning application and that his presentation would form part of the pre-application consultation process with the community. He then briefly described the main elements of the proposal which was for 28 three-bedroom holiday lodges, set in existing woodland and arranged around the north side of a man-made lochan; a manager’s house and a spa/leisure complex with an outdoor pool. He indicated that the aim was to promote sustainable tourism – buildings would use natural materials with traditional finishes; reed-bed drainage and biomass heating etc. The development would be accessed off the Glinns Road and the road access into the site would be improved with road widening with passing places. The development would not be visible from the A811. It was anticipated that there would be 20 staff employed on site of whom 6 would be part-time. The lodges would be for rent and not part of a timeshare development. The estimated overall cost was in the region of £6-7 million. No information was presently available on the likely phasing of the development, nor the estimated construction period [although JR thought this might be of the order of 18 months].
A number of concerns and points of clarification were raised by members of the community. In particular, there were a number of questions relating to the access arrangements. It was stated that the development needed the consent of the owner of the private road into the Myreton site and that this would not be forthcoming [JR maintained that his client had sufficient authority to undertake the necessary works]. Concerns were also expressed about the scale of construction and operational [staff and visitors] traffic likely to arise on the Glinns Road and the unsuitablility of the access into the site, especially for Heavy Goods Vehicles and in winter conditions. There were also safety concerns about the junction with the A811 and it was understood that there was a weight restriction on the Glinns Road. [JR could not give details about the levels of traffic likely to arise but indicated that Stirling Council had not asked for any improvements to Glinns Road as a precondition of the development.] It was further pointed out that Historic Scotland had designated that part of Glinns Road which bends round the red sandstone houses as a historic path.
Various other potential impacts were identified which could have an adverse effect upon the amenity of the area. The ecological impact on the burn caused by the lochan development was considered to need SEPA/SNH approval given there were protected species at risk. The likely effect upon water supplies was also felt to have not been fully taken into account. It was considered that projected biomass operations were likely to generate considerable traffic and noise and that the proposed leisure activities may not be compatible with local farming activities, especially in relation to the control of dogs.
There were some queries about who was behind the development and what experience they had of this kind of operation. [JR was not able to divulge details but indicated that his client had substantial funds to invest and had considerable experience of business – although not of the leisure industry].
JR indicated that they hoped to conclude the pre-application consultation phase by May 24th but that it would probably be 2 months before the formal planning application was lodged. The planning issues were being handled by Iain Jeffrey of Stirling Council to whom comments should be directed. It was also pointed out that the Stirling Council website has a facility whereby comments on the pre-application phase can be logged.
Generally, disappointment was expressed that JR had not been able to answer a number of the detailed questions and on the question being put, there was no support for the proposal from the body of the meeting.
Action: Individuals were urged to write to the Planning Authority with their comments. The Community Council would take into account the views expressed in the meeting when commenting formally on the planning application.
Secretary’s Report
[1] Stirling Council Gender Equality Scheme 2010-13: Consultation Draft
Stirling Council indicated that Draft Action Plans were available on their website and comments were invited by 14th May to GES@stirling.gov.uk
Action: Noted
[2] Provost Civic Award Nominations
The Community Council has been invited to nominate individuals who have made significant contributions to the life of the Stirling Council area over the past 2 years in any of 9 activity categories.
Action: Noted
[3] Gillies Hill Campaign
The Community Council has been invited to publicise Cambusbarron’s Campaign to prevent the further loss of Gillies Hill due to quarrying by encouraging members of the public to sign their petition opposed to further development.
Action: Anyone wishing to support the campaign to contact Peter Paterson on ptpaterson@hotmail.co.uk
[4] Town Break Befriending Service
The Town Break Stirling Group is a local charity supporting people with early moderate dementia and they are seeking to extend their support to the rural area. In particular they were looking for suitable premises which would require wheelchair access and a kitchen. After discussion it was agreed that regrettably there was nothing suitable in Gargunnock.
Action: Secretary to inform the group that there is nothing suitable in Gargunnock
Treasurer’s Report
The balance of funds stood at £930. In order to ensure the continued production of the community newspaper [The Bugle] it was agreed to make available £200 to the Community Trust explicitly for that purpose.
Action: Treasurer to take the necessary action to transfer the funds.
Planning Correspondent
Over the past month there had been 3 planning applications in Gargunnock –all for extensions to existing houses which did not raise any issues for the community. It was noted that the application for a house north of Strathview had been refused. DC asked if there had been any further information on the Earlsburn Windfarm development and the Secretary agreed to pursue this matter and report back at the next meeting.
Action: Secretary to contact Steve Salt regarding progress on the Earlsburn application.
Any Other Business
[i] DC reported that the Gargunnock Estate had now got the matter of dangerous trees on the back road out of the village in hand
[ii] DC raised the need to replace the village noticeboard which was coming to the end of its useful life and MM indicated that this would be eligible for a Community Pride Grant
Action: Chairman to produce a cost estimate with a view to submitting an application to the Community Pride Fund
[iii] Councillor Berrill indicated that he had tabled a motion at the next full Council meeting seeking a delay in the development of the Community Council field for housing until proper community consultation had been carried out. This action was supported by the Community Council and the outcome awaited with interest.
[iv] DC indicated that following the last meeting Simon Gooden had forwarded the Carbon Reduction Action Plan for April which related to the installation of radiator insulator panels. Action: Community Councillors were to report on what action they had taken on this matter at the next meeting.
9. Date of the Next Meeting
June 8th ………….AGM
|
