Retrospective bid for Black Isle skate bowl approval at private residence refused – but appeal instructed 'within one minute'
Register for free to read more of the latest local news. It's easy and will only take a moment.
Councillors have rejected retrospective planning permission for a skate bowl built at a Black Isle property amid a flurry of more than 30 local objections.
Taran Campbell sought to extend his house to include a games area, cinema or snug, a wellness studio and a gym as well as build a large 148 metre square shed.
But he did not wait for planning permission before building a skate bowl on his property despite council officers warning him not to proceed.
The north planning applications committee were advised to approve planning consent but instead overwhelmingly voted against it by nine to four.
Black Isle Councillor Sarah Atkin described the area of Drumsmittal as “tranquil" and the "people in the area live fairly unobtrusive, unflashy lives – they just work hard and get on with life.”
“The values are really ones of modesty and understatement so it is fairly understandable when something punctuates this tranquillity it is going to generate a huge amount of upset and controversy."
She was frustrated that the material planning consideration of change of use was "barely referenced" in the report.
She described the creation of the facility was “not a minor breach” and brought a motion to reject planning.
It argued that it “fails to demonstrate sensitive siting and fails to respect the local distinctiveness of the surrounding landscape” and that it “would prove significantly detrimental to the local character and surrounding area.”
Councillor Mathew Reiss agreed, saying: “It is not a small thing, it was a pretty substantial breach of what I assume he was told to stop doing and I actually think Councillor Atkin was slightly more charitable than myself in the way she has viewed it.
“Do we just trust the applicant’s assurance that this is a private skatepark solely for nobody else’s use – is there any other house in the Highlands with a private skatepark built in a similar manner?
“In an ideal world, being charitable, the planning for the house and the shed would probably appear to be straightforward and perhaps uncontroversial but the same cannot be said of the skatepark.”
One neighbour, Sandra Dingwall, expressed relief saying: "This is brilliant" but she fears Mr Campbell will appeal.
"To me the refusal of the whole development, particularly the retrospective installation of the skate park, is justice, in a time when retrospective planning applications are becoming endemic across the country.
"The planning policies are there to protect the character and nature of the local environment and the residents, yet they appeared to have been swept aside."
She thanked the councillors who "recognised that this proposal was a huge development for this site and held to the very laudable principles of the planning policies."
Mr Campbell vowed to appeal saying he got the "wrong advice" despite warnings from council officers not to proceed with the skate bowl.
"Within one minute of the decision, I gave my architect instructions to appeal it," he said.
"My opinion is the planning committee made their decision on emotional bias towards my neighbour rather than looking at the planning policies.
"I know now how to build one without contravening anything, but had been given wrong advice. Skateboarding is my passion and I will always have something to use at my house."
Objectors' concerns:
Knockbain Community Council objected "in the strongest possible terms" taking a "very dim view of the methods adopted by the applicant, in that we consider the ‘Retrospective Planning Application’ process is being abused."
It outlined concerns over building engineers being unable to assess the structure. They said it is out of tune with the rural nature of the area and stated "there has already been considerable stress caused to neighbours of this development and to both livestock and wild animals."
It concluded: "We would urge Highland Council to refuse permission for this development and move to have it demolished in early course. Should this development be allowed, it would clearly negate the necessity for planning controls."
Another objector, Iain Mackay of North Kessock, said it was "a travesty" the large concrete construction had been allowed to proceed to near completion.
And another, Murdo M. Grant of Rosemarkie, said it was regrettable "that with such extreme variations from the Development Plan having been recognised by council officials some time ago, legal enforcement was not immediately applied."
See public comments here.
