[David_Tepper]

Brian E. -

The Herald did run an article about the planning approval of the Coul Links course on June 20. The headline was "Anger as controversial golf course plans get go-ahead despite mass objections."

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16303578.anger-as-controversial-golf-course-plans-get-go-ahead-despite-mass-objections/

Mr. McAllister was not paying attention.


DT

[Niall C]

David

Did that article appear in the Herald or Sunday Herald ? One has recently hanged its tune and started to criticise the current government while the other it very much it's mouthpiece, or at least it was the last time I read it.

Niall

[David_Tepper]

"Did that article appear in the Herald or Sunday Herald?"

Niall -

I did not realize the Herald and the Sunday Herald were two different entities. Since the web article from the Herald website is dated June 20, I can only assume it appeared in the former, not the later.

DT 

[David_Tepper]

Almost, but not quite!

https://www.northern-times.co.uk/News/Scottish-ministers-extend-their-review-period-on-Coul-Links-31072018.htm

[Ian Mackenzie]

Almost, but not quite!

https://www.northern-times.co.uk/News/Scottish-ministers-extend-their-review-period-on-Coul-Links-31072018.htm

Wow...this article states:
"There has been overwhelming public support to protect the internationally important wildlife site."

Then, a few paragraphs later, this “journalist” states: “However local residents are overwhelmingly in favour of the development with the possibility of jobs and the knock-on effect of increased visitors."
Huh...?

Worth mentioning as the "journalist" above overlooked some relevant info:

1. Gail Ross, the local MSP who represents the area, is entirely in favor of the project.
2. 140 local businesses have signed a "support document" in favor of the project.

No question that the concerns of those seeking to ensure the preservation of the environment should be heard and respected. In fact, I believe the project has altered its plans on several occasions to accommodate the concerns and this has been recognized by authorities.
 
 But, what kills me is always the highly "selective outrage" with projects like Coul Links.
 
 For example, where is "Scottish Bug Life" (and others) when Sutherland seeks to land a UK "space port" and rocket launch facility to:
 
 “Provide the infrastructure needed for space tourism, though a ­regulatory ­framework for passenger trips has yet to be created. The space industry Bill cleared its House of ­Commons stages in March, paving the way for the ­spaceport. Transport ­Minister Jo Johnson said: “This puts us at the forefront of the new space race. It helps us to compete as the destination of choice for satellite companies ­worldwide.” SNP MP Dr Philippa Whitford said: “Launches are currently carried out from Kazakhstan."

 https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/science-technology/sky-limit-sutherland-wins-race-12919142
So, golf courses are bad, but space ports to launch rockets for the military are good...?Yup, selective outrage on full display.

[Rich Goodale]

If "Scottish Bug Life" existed in the past 500 years, there would today be no Edinburgh Castle, no Robbie Burns, no R&A, no Forth Bridge, no Irn-Brun, no Old Course, no Whisky, no Billy Connely and no Haggis.


FREEEEEEDOM!

[David_Tepper]

Ian M. -

The planned "spaceport" is not being well received in certain circles either.

https://www.northern-times.co.uk/News/Nature-experts-set-to-give-spaceport-plan-the-bird-27072018.htm

DT

[Kalen Braley]

I've gotta think the Trump backlash in general is working against this project as well....but thats just perception from across the pond.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Ian M. -

The planned "spaceport" is not being well received in certain circles either.

https://www.northern-times.co.uk/News/Nature-experts-set-to-give-spaceport-plan-the-bird-27072018.htm

DT

Yes and no...

"A spokesman for RSPB Scotland said: “The news that Scotland could host the UK’s first space port represents a potentially exciting opportunity for the country, but it must be done in a way that respects the incredible wildlife and habitats of this area that support numerous rare and threatened species."
Quite the contrast to RSPB's posturing over Coul.
I fear Kalen is correct.

[David_Tepper]

The inevitable has happened.

https://www.northern-times.co.uk/News/Government-calls-in-Coul-Links-plan-24082018.htm

[Tim Gallant]

The inevitable has happened.

https://www.northern-times.co.uk/News/Government-calls-in-Coul-Links-plan-24082018.htm

Thanks for sharing David. Any ideas on how long the process takes, or when a decision will be made?

[David_Tepper]

Tim -

No idea. I think Niall C. and Jon W. might have some insight on that.

DT

[Niall C]

http://www.parliament.scot/Research%20briefings%20and%20fact%20sheets/SB07-66.pdf

"A called-in planning application is not automatically the subject of a public inquiry. Scottish
Ministers must allow a public inquiry into any called-in application if this is requested by the
applicant or the relevant planning authority. However, if no such request is made then it is up to
Scottish Ministers to decide whether the Reporter appointed to consider the application will do
so through written submissions, an informal hearing or full public inquiry. "

The link at the top is a link to a Scottish Government guidance note that they issued in relation to the Balmedie proposal. Given my technological inability the link will likely not work therefore there is an extract above. I guess much will depend on whether it goes to public enquiry in which case it will be a longer drawn out affair. As far as I know there are no strict timescales to adhere to but could be wrong on that.

However that's all irrelevant as the developer had previously said they would walk away if the application was called in. Surely they weren't fibbing when they said that 

Niall

[Marty Bonnar]

The Scottish Planning process is a total dog.
Whilst it’s right that most things seek approval at the local level, anything which is likely to have national implications should be scrutinised AT THE SAME TIME as the local proceedings.
It’s a bloody wonder anything ever gets built in this Country.
F.

[Jon Wiggett]

To true Marty but then none of the elected local MSPs are against it.


This was the reaction from the developers

Following the Scottish Ministers’ decision to call in the application for a golf course at Coul Links, developer Todd Warnock said today (24 Aug):

“Whilst this decision delays bringing significant economic and environmental benefits to the area, we welcome the opportunity to set out again the compelling case to create a world class golf course in east Sutherland.

“Highland Council’s North Planning Applications Committee, as the competent planning authority, took an emphatic decision in June and, apart from a single narrow objection from Scottish Natural Heritage, the statutory bodies involved are not opposed to the plans after a comprehensive assessment.

“The project also has overwhelming support from local people. We thank them again for their help and encouragement and are sorry for them that there is a further delay in a process that has already taken more than three years.

“We have made our case consistently to anyone prepared to listen objectively and we look forward to doing so again with the independent Reporter."

Niall,


I think what was said was if it were turned down they would walk away and not appeal the decision.

[Niall C]

Jon

I'm sure there is a quote out there in the ether if you wanted to go out and look for it. Happy to acknowledge I could be wrong but I think the comment came from Mike Keiser and referred to the time and expense of going through any appeals process. I'm not sure whether there was reference to the application being called in but with regards time and expense they will spend as much money on letting it go through the reporter process as they would have on appeal, which is to say relatively not a lot since they have already spent the bulk of the money anyway. That being the case why wouldn't you let it ride ?

I'm pretty sure I posted something like that at the time. 

Niall

[Jon Wiggett]

Niall,


could be.


Jon

[Duncan Cheslett]

The opponents of this development unfortunately hold the trump card...




 

[MClutterbuck]

What a frustrating process. I feel for the developers. People (politicians) don´t realize how capital is ready at times, and not there at other times. Long processes just destroy wealth for the region as a whole. Incredible that all reviews do not happen simultaneously.

Politicians that have done little or nothing to protect that site while locally owned...

[Niall C]

MClutterbuck

Possibly the most ridiculous post since............... god knows when.

Feeling sorry for a billionaire and his millionaire business partner because their planning application got called in, something which was almost a foregone conclusion by the way, is just bizarre. As for long processes, they also help to ensure sure that the right decisions are made. It's not all about money, or golf, which golf tourists don't always appreciate or want to appreciate as it doesn't usually suit there interests.

Niall

[David_Tepper]

Niall -

Feeling sorry for billionaires & millionaires really isn't the question.

You know the planning process in Scotland probably better than anyone else of this board. Do you really think it should take 3+ years for a planning application like this to work its way thru the system before the ultimate/final decision gets made?

This is not a terribly complicated project. It is not a development in the center of a big city that might impact the lives of tens of thousands of people on a daily basis.

DT

[Ben Stephens]

Niall -
Feeling sorry for billionaires & millionaires really isn't the question.

You know the planning process in Scotland probably better than anyone else of this board. Do you really think it should take 3+ years for a planning application like this to work its way thru the system before the ultimate/final decision gets made?

This is not a terribly complicated project. It is not a development in the center of a big city that might impact the lives of tens of thousands of people on a daily basis.

DT

The UK has a rigorous planning system and this is a SSSI (Site of Special Scientific Interest) plus there have been objections from the environmental groups which means it is transferred to a higher level ie government to assess whether it should have been given permission or not.


Its like planning version of cricket when the TMO checking whether a batsman is out or not by TV review whether the umpire decision stays or it is overruled

[David_Tepper]

Ben -

Since I am the guy who started this thread 2 1/2 years ago. I am very well aware of the SSSI nature of the Coul Links site and the various levels involved in the planning process. 

That being said, should it really take over 3 years to reach a final decision?

DT 

[Marty Bonnar]

Ben -
Since I am the guy who started this thread 2 1/2 years ago. I am very well aware of the SSSI nature of the Coul Links site and the various levels involved in the planning process. 
That being said, should it really take over 3 years to reach a final decision?
DT

David,
Which is why I said the Local and National processes should run simultaneously.
This was ALWAYS going to be called in, so why they don’t have a procedure for this is beyond stupid. Oh, wait a sec, it’s politicians! Ahhh, yes.
F.

[Tom_Doak]

This was ALWAYS going to be called in, so why they don’t have a procedure for this is beyond stupid. Oh, wait a sec, it’s politicians! Ahhh, yes.

Exactly.  There's gotta be an extra round so someone can hold out for additional concessions and/or take credit for approval.  But usually that works out in the developer's favor - in that the project ultimately gets approved, it just costs a few more favors / $ to get there.


An identical application from a less wealthy developer would probably either be approved or rejected in a much shorter process, because there is no budget for concessions.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()