Nairn needs a proactive planning framework
The P&J carries the story of the Sandown development, and the list of objectors is fairly diverse:
The plans have been recommended for approval despite staunch opposition from a clutch of local groups, including Cawdor and West Nairnshire and Nairn Suburban community councils, Nairn Allotment Society and Nairn Woodlands and Wetlands Association.
Objections have also been lodged by the Cawdor Estate, and Stewart Fulton, a planning adviser to the consortium Whiteness Property Group which has development interests in the area.
Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber SNP MSP Fergus Ewing has meanwhile also lodged objections to the proposals.
I think there are no basic objections to a development, as much as the fact the development being suggested is very much out of character for the town – multi-storey buildings, high density housing – not the sort of thing you’d expect to see in a traditional seaside town like Nairn. Not one looking to support tourism development.
The lack of leadership within the Highland Council itself is very disappointing – the planning committee are happy to recommend approval, despite the fact it seems to jar with other major developments around the town.
Still, when the planning department is already on first name private visit terms with developers, and Deveron have already made a point of courting decision makers in private meetings, it’s easy to be cynical about the whole process.
Of course, as the Highland Council will be eager to see their £15 million or so from the project, they are going to have to rubber stamp it with little fuss. Objections now seem futile.
The problem seems to stem from the fact that we’re left being reactive to a development, rather than being proactive in the first place.
Where’s the overall plan of how Nairn – and the A96 corridor – should develop? Where is the initiative from public servants in the Highland Council, who seem to pay more attention to the developers rather than the electorate who directly pay their departmental wages through taxation?
Sure, there’s a A96 Corridor Masterplan in the works, but by all accounts, there is little focus on Nairn as a tourism destination, and instead, simply as a low-end suburb for Inverness.
I’ve been thinking today that if Nairn really is to save itself from unwanted developments, if Nairn really is to try and leverage it’s unique appeal and assets, then there needs to be engagement with decision makers and movers before any projects are even suggested.
In short, we need to look at suggestions for an overall, flexible, general plan for the development of Nairn over the next 5-50 years, and encourage interested parties – not least Inverness and Cawdor Estates, the Highland Council planners and councillors – to sign up to such a plan, at least in principle.
Such a plan would seek to provide guidance on how the town can develop best in everyone’s interests, suggest how different parts of Nairn can be better used and integrated with future development plans, types of building construction and density preferences, and provide a coherent and co-ordinated framework on how to ensure individual developments can work better together – before they even get to the planning stage.
As for Sandown – personally, I think the plans need revising to reduce the emphasis on high-density housing – but the Highland Council’s financial interests are directly tied in with the developer’s financial interests.
Therefore as a realist it’s hard to see why local opinion will be given any weight – certainly by regional decision-makers.
Of course, if it is ruled to be against the existing Local Plan, and national politicians become involved, then objections may actually carry some real weight.
However, the original outline for the Sandown development should have presented at the time of sale of the land, and to blindly sell without a real and formative idea of how such a development could turn out simply holds the Highland Council hostage to developer whims.
That’s why we need to look at greater co-ordination between the regions stake-holders, and have a framework they can all sign up to.
That way, the next time a larger development comes under the spotlight, there’s less likelihood of locals and other stakeholders finding reasons to object. On the contrary, there’s an opportunity to reach broad census agreement, for the interests of everybody, from the very beginning.
Comments
8 Responses to “Nairn needs a proactive planning framework”
Leave a Reply
Visited 342 times, 2 so far today
My Nairn Blog- Record wet summer for Scotland
- VJ Day tribute at Fort George: Colossal Celebration of the Centuries
- Nairn on Bing Maps
- Cloned cows at Inverness?
- Rosebank School deputy dies in horse fall
- Inverness explodes!
- Harbour boats burned
- Highland Aviation Museum gets Nimrod
- New flats to replace Lodgehill Clinic?
- Highland Green Party – still very out of touch
“I think there are no basic objections to a development”
I disagree Brian. How many people who live in Nairn really want another massive housing development? It just floods Nairn with another few hundred incomers as the Lochloy development shows. OK, this might provide a few more customers for local businesses but I can’t think of anything else. Just a drain on resources for those of us that live here, and even more cars on the A96
You can see this as a NIMBY post but selling Sandown is getting rid of the family silver as far as I can see. As for the promised jobs Deveron say it will bring I am very skeptical.
The fact is that Nairn is already a significant target for development in the coming decades – we can accept that reality and try and shape it to the interests of the town – or people can fight it but simply sound like NIMBY’s.
As Nairn’s population grows, this also helps bring in additional services for the local population.
I know some people would rather Nairn be a sleepy retirement village and remain that way indefinitely, but new comers bring in extra income and taxes which can (in theory) be used to improve local services.
The only drain on resources would be a small aging population in a town with no growth – the ultimate fate of which would mean a required withdrawal of services to Inverness on a scale larger than we’ve seen so far.
Just my 2c.
If Nairn grows it has to be at a pace defined by the local population, not Highland Council or developers. Let’s build houses with gardens and plenty of space between the new schemes. Let’s keep Nairn the great place it is.
If you care about Nairn’s future get to the Planning hearing at the Community Centre on Tuesday and support the objectors!
Houses with gardens ???
Just look at the plot ofr sale in the garden of arsdale next to the roundabout that is a joke if the planning comitte gave approval to that they will give approval to anything
‘I disagree Brian. How many people who live in Nairn really want another massive housing development’?
Maybe I am being NIMBY here, but what has Nairn got in return for say the Lochloy development? A set of traffic lights that have further screwed the A96, what else? Schools, shops, services? I don’t see them. A lot of Lochloy residents seem to be retired so I don’t see taxes coming in, as for the houses themselves the architecture doesn’t reflect any local designs or materials, it could be a housing estate anywhere in the UK. Most people shop in Forres, Elgin or Inverness
More housing is giving the developers more but I really don’t see any benefits coming for anyone who already lives here and this has been true of all recent develpment in Nairn
Well, I’m living in the Lochloy development, and not only are there quite a number of young families, but also a string of businessmen who employ locals in new ventures.
The expansion of Nairn through Lochloy and other developments means an increased need for expanded services and amenities, which when implemented creates additional employment opportunities for people within Nairn, working in Nairn.
The question as to whether Nairn should expand isn’t on the table – we’re being told that Nairn forms part of the A96 Corridor Plan and will be subject to further development. The danger is that this will continue to be ad hoc.
Therefore I’m suggesting dialogue with stakeholders from the start, to try and ensure future developments are intelligent, coordinated, and sensible.
“Dialogue with stakeholders form the start”
That would be nice; in fact, good for plannng and in line with the new spirit of inclusiveness in Scottish Planning Policy.
A couple of questions:
When did the dialogue on the massive expansion that is now being proposed in the A96 Corridor start with ‘Stakeholders’?
How do you define the term ’stakeholder’?
Cathy
By stakeholders I’m referring to the various interest groups who are affected by developments, not least those who are originating developments in the first place.
So far it seems that plans are presented, then are subject to the review and approvals process.
Naively perhaps, I’m thinking it would be nice to have residential and business groups (not least in tourism for this area) have an input in the shaping of such development plans before they even hit the drawing board.