£400k grant for ferry operator
Western Ferries’ plans to improve its infrastructure at Hunter’s Quay got a boost on Wednesday when Argyll and the Islands Enterprise announced that it was to provide a grant of £398,000 to help fund a £2m plan for the upgrading of the infrastructure of the terminal.
The company currently operates four ferries on the route between Hunter’s Quay and McInroy’s Point, and the most recent figures show that in 2004 it carried over 500,000 cars and a million passengers across the Firth. The company sees the route growing in importance as Dunoon seeks to portray itself as the gateway to the National Park.
AIE’s contribution will go towards development of enhanced passenger facilities, an enlarged marshalling area with improved road lay-out and a dedicated bus lane. It will also assist the company’s larger proposal to provide a second linkspan at both Hunter’s Quay and McInroy’s Point by contributing to the Cowal installation, allowing the firm to offer a consistent service regardless of weather, maintenance schedules or unforeseen circumstances.
The additional linkspans signal Western Ferries’ longer-term ambition to introduce a new generation of larger capacity ferries to the route bringing service and cost benefits.
AIE chief executive Ken Abernethy said: “AIE is keen to support Western Ferries’ proposed investment which will provide a significant improvement to the transport infrastructure of Cowal.
“Over the next few years demand for access is expected to grow as a result of the regenerating economy and an increase in visitors to the National Park. We see this firm’s proposals as providing a positive contribution to these encouraging developments.”
Managing director of Western Ferries, Gordon Ross, explained: “This is the very first stage in a rolling programme to improve services to the local community and our customers. We’re grateful for the support from AIE and look forward to improving our infrastructure in the phases we have planned for the future.”
Mr Abernethy said AIE hoped that the upgrading of Hunter’s Quay would improve travel options to and from the ferry service, and contribute to the wider integrated transport system of the Highlands and Islands.


More woes for Scottish Water
AS the last-ditch petition to tie Innellan into the planned secondary treatment plant at Bullwood Quarry gathered ever more signatures, Scottish Water’s already battered reputation elsewhere in Argyll was getting hammered yet again.
The company has breached planning laws once again, this time in Ardrishaig.
The rock armoured sewer outfall which the company built on the village’s shore is well in excess of what was agreed by Argyll and Bute Council and the council has now deemed it unauthorised.
The council also said that the original planning consent for the outflow cannot be relied upon, and to add further to Scottish Water’s woes they have been told not to apply for retrospective planning permission, since it would almost certainly be turned down.
A spokesperson for Scottish Water admitted that what planning permission was passed for and what has been built do not match up. The utility are in talks with planners at the council about what the options are, but they have been told by the council not to submit a retrospective application as it would be unlikely to get approval.
A spokesman for the council said that they were looking for a way to resolve the current problem and would be making sure that the community was involved in the process. He added that whatever came out of that would be the subject of a formal planning submission which would go before the area committee.
The water company is also in trouble in Strachur. When their contractor Biwater Leslie cleared out of the village five weeks ago, over two months late and leaving three brand new septic tanks behind, most folk thought that the job was finished. That now appears not to be the case.
A local resident said that he had a number of causes for concern, which may come as a surprise to many Strachur folk, who believed that the new system was finished and fully operational.
Firstly, he said, the new septic tank at Baycroft, designed to stop raw sewage gushing into Loch Fyne, is complete from an engineering point of view. The only problem is that no houses appear to be connected to it. The properties which the new tank was supposed to serve are still discharging their waste directly into Loch Fyne.
Jim Nolan, who lives in one of the houses which will use the new tank, said that he had written a letter to Strachur Community Council in an attempt to find a solution to the problem.
He said: “The septic tank situated at the bottom of the lane at Baycroft on the A886 was purported to be for at least five houses. The authorities adopted these houses many years ago. I believe a few other houses with septic tanks in New Baycroft have also been connected to this system.
“However, the system is to date not switched over and sewage continues to pour onto the beach from a short broken pipe.
“Speaking to workmen some weeks before work was finished I was astounded to find out they still did not know who was connected to the new system and that they think they would have to conduct dye tests. They sought advice from me but I only know positively of five houses, not what is going on in the houses in the area above me.
“It also became apparent that the council don’t seem to know whom to bill for connection to the new sewage system because of this lack of information. In other words, when proven to be connected, a sewage charge will be added to the rates.
“It therefore seems that until the day arrives when this is known the loch will continue to be polluted by raw sewage from the broken pipe.
“What sheer incompetence! I have sat silent on this affair for a number of weeks since landscaping was done in the tank’s vicinity but my patience has been tested long enough. Scottish Water must bring this to an end by getting the job done.”
At the main septic tank at Strachur Bay, Scottish Water and their partners, Biwater Leslie, promised that they would remove the old, now redundant, outflow pipe and bury the new one under the sand. Low tides have revealed that a 40 foot section of the old pipe remains, complete with jagged edges.
The new pipe is still very visible, protruding from the water and effectively cutting the bay in half.
Both pipes represent a hazard to the many small boats which use the loch and Scottish Water’s stated aim of making the bay suitable for swimming once again appears now to carry very little weight as razor-sharp shards of iron pipe lurking just below the surface are not likely to encourage a casual paddle.
A spokesman for Scottish Water said: “The project at Strachur involves three septic tanks, two serving most of the village and one at ‘Hazeldene’. The two main tanks are up and running, so there’s a great improvement in the loch.
“The tank at ‘Hazeldene’ is going through final testing and should be in service soon.”
He continued: “Regarding the old outfall pipe, I understand that the plan was always to remove this. I have asked our contractors to investigate what you described as it sounds incomplete. We will keep the community informed. The new pipe will be completely buried by sand and gravel being washed in naturally. The concrete blocks help this process. It will blend in nicely.”
Regarding the tank at Hazeldene he confirmed that dye testing was carried out to establish who is connected to what. He added: “Our contractor also has a map detailing pipes in the area. Altogether we have a good picture of who is connected to what. We are currently in discussion with SEPA, as is normal towards the end of a project, and we plan to visit the community in the next few weeks to give them an update and answer any questions.”


Windfarm opponents face a fight on all fronts
Opponents of wind farms in Argyll face a war on a number of fronts now, with the announcement that a further planning application has been lodged, this time on the other side of the river, opposite Dunoon.
An intensive campaign has already been launched via the Argyllwindfarms.com website to oppose plans for the Allt Deargh windfarm, which objectors claim will dominate the landscape for miles around.
Resistance to the positioning of windfarms in scenic areas appears to be growing. The final number of objections to Largie Wind Farm was 630. Around a third of the objectors were from Argyll, with the remainder coming from Arran, across the UK and overseas, which appears to support the concerns of those in the tourism industry that windfarms will have a detrimental effect on visitor numbers. The Ramblers Association, Scottish Natural Heritage, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, The Wetland and Wildfowl Trust and the Kintyre Society were among the objectors. The organiser believes this to be a record number of objections for any planning application in Argyll and we thank you all.
The application will be determined by the Kintyre, Islay and Mid Argyll area committee, possibly as early as August.
According to Sinclair Sutherland, who has been at the forefront of the campaign against the Allt Deargh windfarm project, there is even more opposition to it than the Largie scheme.
He commented: “As of the middle of July the website objections were well in excess of 600, and I would expect that there would be at least that number via the pro forma letter of objection.
“What’s significant is that so many people from outwith the area have chosen to object; this serves to highlight the very real threat to the tourism industry in the area.
“The fact is that the further away you are the more noticeable they are - I can see turbines on the Ayrshire coast which are 50 miles away.”
However, Mr Sutherland, who lives in west Cowal, expressed his disappointment at the response from Dunoon.
While backing the newly formed CARES action group, he said: “It seems the good people of Dunoon are concerned only about the windfarms in the immediate area.
“In fact the problem is an Argyll-wide one and projects like Allt Dearg could do more to harm tourism in Dunoon than those proposed for Black Craig or Bishop’s Seat, which would be visible mainly from Bute, Arran and the Ayrshire coast. Cowal is more than just Dunoon and anything which affects one area affects us all.
The fact that a planning application has been lodged for Leapmoor Farm, opposite Dunoon, is also causing concern.
Iain Gamage, chairman and founder member of CARES (Cowal And Renewable Energy Sense) a group that has just been established to oppose insensitive wind farm proposals in the area, said: “This planning application was lodged with Inverclyde Council last week by a Cheshire-based windpower company.
“It represents probably the most visually intrusive plan for a wind farm in any location in Scotland.
“For years the residents of South East Cowal have had to put up with the eyesore of the defunct Inverkip Power Station with its 600 foot chimney and now they have the prospect of the view of ten enormous 425 feet mega-turbines as well. These turbines are substantially higher than those at Ardrossan and residents will be able to hear them operating on this side of the Clyde, especially when easterly winds are blowing.
“The impact this would have on our area could be enormous and it is vital that the people of Cowal declare their absolute determination to oppose this dreadful and insensitive plan.
“The Community Councils at Inverkip and Wemyss Bay are 100 percent against this, and the people of Cowal need to realise that this is a priority issue which must be addressed now - or they may live to regret it.”


Councillor Curries No Favour
At a meeting of Strachur and District Community Council last Wednesday evening, East Loch Fyne Councillor Douglas Currie stoutly defended his decision to name Fyne Homes’ new development in Strachur ‘Montgomery Gardens’.
His decision over-rode the result of a competition organised by Fyne Homes among Strachur Primary School pupils, which had chosen the name ‘Smiddy Gardens’.
The strength of feeling of the community on the issue was reflected by the fact that over 20 villagers attended, far more than normally turn out for community council meetings
Councillor Currie placed the blame for the mess firmly at the door of Fyne Homes who, he said, had organised the competition without his knowledge.
The councillor, on being asked by the chair to comment, began by asking those in attendance at the meeting to raise their hands if they believed everything that was published in the ‘Dunoon Observer.’
(The implications of this somewhat bizarre opening line caused us some concern, and we contacted him, asking him to identify specifically what items of our coverage to date should not be believed.
He accepted that the previous article on the subject was ‘quite good’ and if it was one-sided it was because he never discussed dealings with the council or other officials with the press.)
He then continued: “I knew nothing about this until an official called me to say that the name had been chosen by the peculiar method of school children suggesting names, from which Fyne Homes chose a winner.”
Councillor Currie then quoted regulations giving the Cowal and Bute area Committee the right to name new developments, and he advised the meeting that that right was, in turn, passed to him as elected member for the area.
On being told by an office-bearer of the Community Council that: “You, as our professional representative, are not carrying out the wishes of this community”, the councillor said: ‘I chose the name on the understanding that no schoolchildren had been informed of the result.’
He later reiterated: ‘I was told by Fyne Homes that nobody would know the result of this competition.’
A villager said ‘It’s a shame that, after all the good work you have done for the village, you will be remembered as the councillor who took from the children.”
Councillor Currie replied: “That would be sad.”
On being asked if the name could be changed, Councillor Currie said: ‘It cannot be changed. It is already named. It has a postal address.’
A member of the public sought clarification, but Mr Currie responded: “The decision is irreversible.”
The chair called for, as a reflection of the mood of the meeting, a show of hands in favour of the name Smiddy Gardens which received 22 votes, and Montgomery Place, which received one vote.
Alan McDougal, director of Fyne Homes, said: “Fyne Homes have a history of involving the local community in the naming of developments. We see it as a way of engaging with the community, allowing children to investigate the area’s history and to be involved in a major development in the community. To date schools and the wider community have reacted positively to this approach.
He added: “We approached the naming of the Strachur development in the same way that we approach all our development namings and were aware of no problem until Councillor Currie informed Fyne Homes that he would be making the final decision in this instance.
“In order to minimise disruption, we chose not to contest this renaming, although we are disappointed at the way in which this decision was reached.
“We informed the school of this turn of events and made them a donation of £100 to use as they see fit in return for their help.”
There is precedent for renaming streets in Argyll; the US Navy estates at Sandbank, for instance, were renamed Sandhaven, having originally been called Eagle Court. Also relevant is the fact that the estate is not yet completed.
However, a council spokeswoman commented: “The name Montgomery Place was registered some time ago. To change it now may well incur some costs and cause confusion.”
She explained: “It is difficult to give an exact estimate of the costs involved, but as a change of name would include preparation of committee reports, placement of public notices and processing of responses, there is certainly considerable officer time involved. In addition consideration has to be given to the number of outside agencies involved, such as gazetteers, route finders, mailing companies and so on, who may already have taken account of the registered name.
“I would also point out that the Council has not received a request for a change of name at this time, nor, given that the correct procedure was followed, has any reason been given why it should consider such a move.”