The patience of Job . . .
COUNCILLORS are not often considered to be blessed with the wisdom of Solomon or the patience of Job, but they needed both in abundance after sitting through a five-hour planning meeting on Wednesday.
The issue of concern was an application to extend the marina at Sandbank and to build a timber jetty to the north of it, in the area formerly occupied by Hooper’s /Robertson’s yard.
The issue of the expansion, and the infilling of an area of foreshore, had already split the community, and the addition of the timber handling facility was hardly going to dampen feelings. The fact that the meeting was held in Sandbank Village Hall guaranteed a good turnout, and by the time the meeting was opened by planning committee chairman Councillor Brian Chennell there was standing room only.
He began by inviting Mr David Eaglesham to speak on behalf of the planning department. Mr Eaglesham outlined the context of the application and also what was intended by the applicant, Mr Matt Downs, and illustrated his presentation with a series of slides showing what was planned.
In terms of local reaction, there had been a total of 52 letters of objection, for a variety of reasons, including the consequences arising from the timber pier, the proposed infill, and noise and pollution.
There were 39 letters of support.
The application was in line with the Local Plan in terms of rejuvenating the area, but there were environmental concerns. There were effectively two conflicting objectives which had to be balanced.
The number of objectors and supporters indicated a high level of interest. The marina had been in operation for a number of years and created both jobs and business.
He concluded by saying: “The view from planning is that the application be granted.” This was greeted by considerable applause.
Matt Downs spoke at some length about the proposals of his company, Seavision Scotland. He said that he had bought the former US Navy base in 1999, and that the application had first been drawn up two years ago. To formulate it he had employed a design team which had actually been involved in the base itself, environmental specialists to create the environmental impact assessment, and landscape architects who had pulled together the landscape detail, which was particularly important because of the proximity of neighbouring houses.
He went into considerable detail on the growth in importance of leisure sailing and its economic impact on the Clyde. There was a crucial need to expand the number of pontoons and moorings in the estuary to meet a growing demand. There was also an opportunity to attract sailors from other areas, especially in England where it was becoming increasingly difficult to find berths for boats. As an indication of the economic importance of the business, he said, the amount of revenue generated from golf was £300m, that of marine leisure £250m; the Clyde alone was worth £80m.
An architect, Mr Jim Kennedy, outlined the proposals for the timber yard, and emphasised that both facilities would be separate from one another and would have separate entrances. He was followed by Ian Arnold, representing the Argyll Timber Transport Group, who explained that the creation of the yard would actually reduce lorry movements through the village. While there would be no reduction in timber traffic from Toward, traffic coming down the A815 from the north – which was the bulk of the timber being transported - would no longer go through the village. The existing yard could not handle future needs; if the option of the proposed yard was not available, they would have to look for somewhere else.
Next to speak were supporters of the application.
Mr Andy Thoms, whose company, the Majestic Shipping Line, operates out of the marina with one ship in commission and another fitting out, pointed out that there were 12 companies operating from the marina, employing 60 people, and that without the marina these businesses would not exist. The expansion of the marina would create more jobs, and he was speaking on behalf of these businesses when he said that “it is vitally important for Sandbank that the planning application is granted in full.”
Mr John Morris said that he was speaking as a berth holder, and said that many people lived a considerable distance away, as far off as Kent and the South Coast of England. These people were regular visitors. He and his wife had relocated to Kirn from Yorkshire because of the proximity of the marina. The marina was the major contributor to supporting water-borne tourism to the area.
Local blacksmith Finlay Currie pointed out that he was the fifth generation of his family in the village. He said that, following the departure of the Americans, the village had fallen on hard times, but that the marina development had brought leisure, pleasure and employment. He said that the expansion and creation of the timber facility was “an opportunity we can’t afford to lose out on.”
He accepted that the pier would have a significant visual impact on the Loch, but added that “we have to move with the times and move into the future.”
He sat down to loud applause.
None of the application’s opponents were against the expansion of the marina as such.
The opening speaker was Mr Ian MacNaughton, whose primary concern was the plans for infill. He also expressed concern about the difficulties over land ownership issues, and asked that if consent was granted, it should be conditional on these issues first being resolved. Cllr Chennell, however, pointed out that land ownership issues were not within the committee’s remit. Mr MacNaughton expressed concerns about possible environmental health problems arising from the infill, including possible carcinogens. He said that the approval of the pier would be “a betrayal of trust that the people living on the shore have in the planning authority.”
Mrs Wilma Cairns said that while everyone was delighted with the marina in its present form, there were real concerns about the infill, and also raised the subject of rights of way to the shore; there were also serious worries about drainage. She concluded by saying that the plans for a port and a large number of buildings “will destroy the first and finest view of the gateway to the National Park forever.”
Mr Dougie Orr said he had an issue with land ownership, as he had been legally advised that he owned the foreshore in front of his house. There were further causes for concern, not least of which was the effect on property values of 12 years of ongoing work on the site. Mr Andy Beveridge, of the Benmore Outdoor Centre, said that they had been operating yachts from a slip in the loch for 40 years, but the construction of the jetty would make their operation impossible, since the prevailing wind would drive their boats into the pier. The centre, he pointed out, brought £600,000 a year into the local economy.
Council officials were asked to give their views, and the only real cause for concern was the drainage. Only one outfall currently went right out to the loch, another three or four would require to be piped.
Mr Downs was asked about what would happen if the business failed. He said that while there were no guarantees - “no business can give you that” - the business was vibrant and it was government policy to get timber off the roads and on to ships.
Asked by Cllr Dick Walsh if the business was eligible for a freight transport grant of £3.8m Mr Downs said that this would not apply until planning consent was given; the figure of £3.8m would have applied had permission been granted two years ago, but because of the increase in timber volume it was likely to be higher now.
Prior to the final debate Mr Downs asked people with concerns over their access or foreshore rights to speak to him on the issue. He said: “We’ve had the foreshore checked by the Land Registry, but there’s nothing in the registry that details any rights of access.”
Ward Councillor Bruce Marshall, who is vice-chairman of the planning committee, outlined the chain of events leading up to the meeting, and the reasons for concerns within certain sections of the community, relating primarily to the infill, the timber yard, and the loss of access to the shore.
However, he believed that the marina had benefited the village, and since the councillors had to make a judgement in its entirety, including the port development, he supported the application as it stood.
Councillor Dick Walsh took the view that the application should be supported in principle, but the chairman and vice-chairman should meet with council officers to ensure that any loose ends were tidied up, such as traffic and drainage issues.
This was accepted, and the application was passed to loud applause; it seemed that the interests of the majority had prevailed, but there was clearly sympathy among councillors for those living along the shore whose property would be affected by the development.


Politicians out in force for Queen’s Hall meeting
TONIGHT’S meeting at the Queen’s Hall will be well-attended by politicians and councillors, following last week’s crisis meeting with the Transport Minister to discuss the continuing uncertainty over the future of the Dunoon-Gourock ferry.
A bland and guarded statement from Argyll and Bute Council was giving little away following the meeting with Tavish Scott.
The statement in its entirety reads: “At their meeting on Thursday 30 November representatives from Argyll and Bute Council and Transport Minister Tavish Scott MSP agreed to work together to ensure the needs and wishes of the Cowal community are met.
“They have instructed their officers to work up proposals which best meets these requirements.
“In the meantime the Council is pleased that the Minister has confirmed that he will continue provision of the existing vehicle ferry service until at least the completion of the tendering process.”
The wording of the statement leaves much room for speculation as to what is going on. It refers to Tavish Scott’s assurance that the vehicle ferry service will continue ‘at least until the completion of the tendering process’.
However, since no operator has actually submitted a tender, it’s logical to conclude that the process is completed by default.
A statement from the Scottish Executive said: “The Executive will continue to work closely with Argyll and Bute Council, and with Inverclyde Council, to investigate what options are available for a future subsidised service on the Gourock - Dunoon route.
“ An announcement will be made about the way forward as soon as possible.”
Councillor Brian Chennell was one of the councillors who attended the meeting with the transport minister.
He commented: “He first set on the table what was not possible under EU law, and said that the Executive was trying to finalise the options available.They are still looking at a centre to centre service.”
There were two options on the table, and the detail of one was still being finalised.
However, he did confirm - as reported in the Observer last week - that the other option was a passenger-only service.
“We have already indicated that this would not be an acceptable option,” he said.
“We are still waiting to see the wording and detail of the options. We have sought and gained an assurance that any proposals will be put out to public consultation.”
Tonight’s meeting may shed some light on the Executive’s plans, since local MSP George Lyon, who is a junior government minister, will be attending. Also attending will be MP Alan Reid, MEP Alyn Smith, and MSP Jim Mather from the SNP. Jamie McGrigor has told the Observer that he will be attending if family circumstances allow, and it is possible that his fellow Conservative MSP Dave Petrie will be there. Due to diary commitments no Labour MSPs will be present, but the party’s PPC for Argyll and Bute, Mary Galbraith, will be attending.
Oddly enough, when we spoke to Councillor Chennell on Monday, he had yet to be invited nor, to his knowledge, had any of his fellow councillors. Given the council’s central role in the ferry issue, this seems like a surprising omission. However, we understand from a member of Dunoon Community Council, which is organising the meeting, that letters of invitation were to be handed out on Tuesday.
The meeting is to be chaired by Community Council Chairwoman Ann Gabriel.
It is fair to assume that there will be pressure for the substance of these proposals to be discussed at tonight’s Queen’s Hall meeting, due to commence at 7.30pm.


CalMac reports worst weather for 15-20 years
Ferry operator Caledonian MacBrayne has described the recent run of bad weather as possibly the worst in the last 15-20 years.
Ferry services throughout the network have been severely disrupted for almost a fortnight and the current storms show little sign of abating. The company has moved to clarify its position with regard to disruption and cancellation of services.
Operations Director Phil Preston said: “Obviously we regret the disruption to services the recent run of bad weather has been causing, but these are wholly exceptional weather and tidal conditions which make it impossible to operate the timetable on many occasions. There isn’t a service which has not suffered disruption in recent weeks and we are battling the elements on all fronts at the moment. There is a combination of high tides, strong swells and very high winds which is making life exceptionally difficult”
Responding to criticism that not enough effort was being made to sail to some islands, Mr Preston said: “With the greatest of respect to customers, they are not in the best position to decide when we should or should not be sailing. The Master has an absolute right, enshrined in law, to take the decision on whether it is safe or appropriate to sail. We exist to provide lifeline ferry services and it is not within our design or wish not to sail. Circumstances dictate what happens and the Master is the only person in a position to make the decision based on all the available information and that includes sea state, cargo to be shipped, weather forecast and current conditions, both at the port of departure and en route. There is no point in putting people through an horrendous journey only to have to turn back or not be able to berth”
Winds speeds well in excess of 100 miles an hour have been recorded by ships over the past weekend and Masters with twenty years experience have been saying that they have not encountered conditions such as those being experienced currently.
The situation has been exacerbated in some areas such as Gigha by a mass of seaweed at the slipway at Tayinloan, which is preventing normal operation. Mr Preston added: “We are doing everything we can at the council-owned pier and we have stressed to the local authority the urgency of the situation. Having said that, the Erskine Bridge was closed on Monday and we successfully managed to keep the Upper Clyde services going, albeit with the Wemyss Bay to Rothesay services diverted to Gourock. Where services are diverted, we are assisting foot passengers by supplying bus services but where there are cancellations due to the weather, there is unfortunately nothing we can do. We regret the disruption caused by the interruptions in services, but customers should be assured that we are doing everything possible to maintain the published schedules. As soon as the weather abates, we will pick up as best we can and get things back to normal.”
The problems for CalMac continued into Tuesday morning when there was no car ferry service until 10.20, when the Saturn set sail. Up until then, the Ali Cat, had replaced the Jupiter which was unable to sail due to damage to the hull, caused during the storms.
There was, perhaps surprisingly, only minor disruption on the roads. Most of the damage was to verges and footpaths, with the occasional fallen tree blocking some of the more rural roads.


Strachur residents still waiting
STRACHUR residents are wondering what exactly constitutes ‘soon’ in the dictionary of Scottish Water.
Back in July the Observer raised the issue of a new septic tank which the company had installed at Baycroft as part of Scottish Water’s plans to clean up Loch Fyne.
This followed comment from a local resident. Mr Jim Nolan, who noted that, while the tank was apparently complete, the houses which it was supposed to serve were still discharging raw sewage into the loch.
There was also, he claimed some confusion over what was actually connected to the tank, since it appeared that testing to establish this had not been carried out .
“We were assured, on the front page of the Dunoon Observer, back in July.
“We were also told that they would be coming to the village to keep us up to date with what’s going on.
“We’re still waiting. What’s going on?”
He also questioned the logic of planting trees to hide the control the main sewage works at the Bay, saying that this would actually hide the view of the loch, and that planting bushes would have made more sense.
Another resident, Gordon Neish, said: “Maybe they should invest more in getting on with the job and less concocting lame excuses for their failings.
“It certainly calls into question their idea of urgency when ‘soon’ is six months down the line.”
A Scottish Water spokesman said: “We are waiting for official consent from SEPA before we can connect any properties to the septic tank at Hazeldene.
“It seems that we have taken longer than normal to submit our application for consent due to staffing/resource issues but we should hear back from SEPA in the coming weeks.
“As for bushes rather than trees, the project manager tells me there was some concern but it was resolved a while back. Different trees are being planted which allow a better view.”