Minutes:
Question from Alan Kennedy, Rhu Resident
Since 2019, Residents of
Quarryknowe in Rhu have been trying to work with both Argyll Community Housing
Association (ACHA) and Luss Estates in an attempt get them to Repair, Upgrade
and implement a maintenance plan for their own individual areas of
responsibility. The main issues faced include the Residents Car Park,
surrounding pavements, walkways and walls (ACHA) and the adjoining Ardenconnel
Path which connects the top of Rhu to the bottom of Rhu through Ardenconnel
Woods (Luss Estates), both of which now present a major Health & Safety
issue to residents due to years of disrepair and neglect. Residents have spoken
with local MP’s, MSP & Councillors however to date nothing has been done to
address any of these issues. 2 residents have sustained injuries in the last 2
weeks as a result of the uneven and broken paving stones which have previously
been reported to ACHA.
Can I ask the members if they are
aware of these ongoing issues that residents of Quarryknowe are facing and what
can they do to support our voices being heard and ultimately ACHA and Luss
Estates taking responsibility to carry out upgrades and repairs which
drastically need done. Can I further ask if any of the members would be willing
to meet with residents to see the issues for themselves with a view to putting
pressure on both ACHA and Luss Estates to take on the responsibility of
carrying out these repairs and upgrades?
Councillor Penfold advised that
she was not aware of these issues. Councillor Corry highlighted that he was
fully aware of the issues and has had meetings with residents on site and
assured Mr Kennedy that he was working with the residents and the Council to
tackle the issues.
Councillor Mulvaney advised that
there has been issues in this particular area for many years adding that on
passing through recently he noted that the area had deteriorated and
highlighted that he was happy that fellow Members were working on the issue.
Question from Jackie Hood, Helensburgh Skate park
Committee
Jackie Hood, Helensburgh Skate
park Committee submitted the following question, which was read out by the
Governance Manager:-
"Once the skatepark
equipment is reinstated to allow discharge of Planning Condition 15 of the
Waterfront Development, what will happen to it? Could the council confirm what
the long-term plans are for the skatepark once the retail development goes
ahead? Will the current 20m x 30m area remain for community use adjacent to
whatever retail development goes ahead or will the skatepark become homeless?
If the latter is the case, where does the council intend to move the skatepark
to, bearing in mind the importance of it to the local community particularly
youngsters and teenagers? "
Councillor Penfold advised that
the Committee would seek clarification from the appropriate department and get
a response for Ms Hood.
Questions from Ali Mills, Kilcreggan Resident
Ali Mills asked a number of
questions in relation to the plans for the development of a new ferry terminal
in Kilcreggan. She advised that there
are 4 houses which will be directly affected by the proposals and that she
lives in one of these. She highlighted
that the outline business case had been published in 2021, stating that there
would be a public consultation carried out, which to her knowledge has not been
taken forward. She asked the Committee
to confirm why the consultation did not happen?
Ms Mills advised that further to
the initial outline business case being published there has be no further
engagement with local residents on the options for the new terminal. She highlighted that local residents have
engaged with Councillors, MPs and MSPs to raise awareness of the issue.
Ms Mills asked why it appears
that Mott MacDonald have continued to develop option 4A presented in the
Outline Business Case for over a year without any consultation or public
engagement with the community.
She noted that a consultation
exercise is now underway and that an online survey is available for completion
on the Council website. She asked the
Committee why has the current online survey not been publicised – highlighting
that at a recent meeting of the campaign group it was noted that only a small
number of people were aware of the ongoing consultation.
Further to this, Ms Mills asked
for information on the online survey and why it appears that the content of the
survey has been amended since it was first published.
Councillor Penfold advised that
the Committee would seek a response to the questions raised on behalf of Ms
Mills from the Marine Operations Manager.
It was noted that Councillor
Corry was a member of the Ferry Reference Group and was aware of the issues
raised by Ms Mills.
Councillor Hardie advised that
the Audit and Scrutiny Committee ,of which he is a Member, are currently
conducting a scrutiny review in relation to consultation processes. He advised that he would be keen to hear from
Ms Mills on her experiences which he could then input into the scrutiny review.
Councillor Howard noted that she
had been unaware of the consultation until she had seen it referenced in a
local press article.
Question from John McGall, Rhu and Shandon
Community Council
In 2017 A&BC roads authority,
in collaboration with Argyll Timber Transport Group (ATTG), under the Agreed
Routes Maps Scheme decided to classify the minor roads Station & Pier Roads
in Rhu Conservation Village as a consultation route for the purposes of the
timber haulage by large 44 ton HGV’s. In consequence a Timber Transport
Management Plan (TTMP), a voluntary agreement without legal status, was
developed by a Roads Officer and an ATTG representative in private and without
community consultation.
It authorised up to 5,000 HGV
journeys per year and included agreed pre-conditions, rules to be adhered to
including for example set periods to be avoided for school run times when
children would be walking on the road. Unfortunately the rules of this
agreement were ignored and 30 individual breaches were recorded and reported.
Residents and Councillors were
subsequently advised by a Roads Authority Manager, that the basis of this
decision was, among other things, on their understanding “there was no other
route available”.
The route has been an area of
significant concern and investigation for several years by the Council, Police
Scotland and Community Council to try and find a solution to a number of the
hazards including:-
R&SCC objected to any use of
the Pier & Station Roads in the interest of road safety as these roads were
dangerous, compromised pedestrian safety and are clearly, in our view,
unsuitable as a timber haulage route. In 2021, after Phase 1 of timber
harvesting completed, we surveyed residents neighbouring the haulage route area
(240) and 96% of those who participated (=97 people), fully supported the
Community Council’s objections.
It has recently been ascertained
that in February 2017, the Scottish Woodlands forest agent attended a specially
convened meeting with two members of our Community Council in Rhu Village Hall
where it was revealed for the first time, the intention to use Station and Pier
Roads as a haulage route.
One Community Councillor advised
these minor roads were not suitable for vehicles of that size and proposed an
alternative route east of Highlandman’s Wood across agricultural land behind
Helensburgh Reservoir, as this was a far more sensible and safer route to take
directly onto the A818. It was explained a road already existed from the A818
to the disused Water Authority Pump House behind the reservoirs, which is a
favoured doggy walk.
It appears A&BC may not have
been made aware of this alternative route when conducting their discussions
about the proposed haulage route.
The regulator – Scottish Forestry
– has expressed a desire for an alternative extraction route. Luss Estates
support this and now the current woodland agent at Scottish Woodlands also
supports this and has confirmed he is consulting with Gresham House about a new
alternative route.
At a meeting on the 16 September
2022 between our Community Council, Scottish Forestry, Scottish Woodlands and
the Argyll Timber Transport Group, all present agreed the local community have
legitimate concerns with the current haulage route provided by the council and
also agreed in principle every effort will be made for a new route that will
serve both Highlandman’s & Torr Woods and the afforestation of former
Letrault, and Stuckenduff farms, in total 1400 acres of phased tree felling
which is to be carried out perpetuity.
We have highlighted the existence
of 2014 detailed plans for a haulage route from A818 to a proposed wind farm
site east of Highlandman’s Wood which failed to come to fruition, part of which
could be used and adopted for this purpose.
We believe Phase 2 of Highlandman’s
Wood harvesting could begin later this year. In light of the foregoing
information can I ask our Councillors to ensure that proper communication and
consultation with our community will take place in good time prior to any
forestry activity and that serious consideration is given for the current
Highlandman’s Wood TTMP to be paused until the conclusion of these recent
developments are resolved in the interest of road safety.
Councillor Corry advised that he
would take this forward and would arrange a meeting between all of the
interested parties to discuss the options.