The Press and Journal (Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire)
Planners felt ‘pressure’ ahead of big meeting
Several councillors alleged civil servants had been lent on by politicians ahead of the area committee meeting in 2007.
The planner’s report stated the resort would breach policy – but recommended councillors approve it anyway.
Graeme Clark, one of the 14 councillors tasked with making a decision, said: “Planners were under pressure. This was something that was going to put money into Aberdeenshire.”
Debra Storr, whose professional background means she has worked with thousands of planning applications in her career, said: “I have never seen a committee report with so many adjectives such as ‘iconic development’.”
An Aberdeenshire Council spokesman described this allegation as “a matter of opinion”.
We analysed the 80-page report and found seven uses of the word iconic.
All seven mentions relate to planning terminology rather than the planner giving her own opinion.
Planning policy dictates that, if a developer is going to build something big or prominent, they should use the highest-quality materials and design available so it becomes iconic – widely known and distinctive – rather than a blot on the landscape.
Our assessment concluded the report contained 49 positive and 25 negative references.
Perhaps the only illogical part of the report concerns housing. The 500 homes were proposed for an area not suitable for housing, according to the council’s development plan.
But the planner argued that, without the houses, there would be no resort, so the area would miss out on a £1 billion windfall.
Her report said: “The (council’s) development plan could not have foreseen this proposal or its scale and the economic impacts outweigh… concerns because of this.”
She added that going against the plan could not be seen as a precedent because of the “extremely rare circumstances”.
Ms Storr said she believed politicians had instructed the planner to change the report and added: “The planners tried to do a decent job but they were being issued with instructions from higher up. There was a big political environment running quite broad and quite deep. This was political at a Scottish level.”
A council spokesman said this is an opinion and added: “All relevant policies were followed at the time.”
There were further rumblings of political interference – this time involving Anne Robertson, now called Anne Stirling.
She was leader of the council and leader of the Lib Dem group. The area committee meeting was chaired by another Lib Dem, John Loveday, who allowed her to talk first.
However, he was surprised when she immediately tabled the motion, urging her colleagues to grant the application before a debate.
Mr Loveday said: “She was basically saying she’d made her own mind up and, whatever other people were going to discuss, it didn’t matter.”
Ms Stirling said: “That is a misrepresentation. I don’t recall ever saying that it doesn’t matter what other people think.
“(Tabling a motion) does not stop a debate or putting other motions on the table.”
Mr Loveday said he understood why Ms Stirling – and any council leader – would want to grant such a project as it would make the area seem development friendly.
He added: “If you’re in that position you would be wanting it granted.”
Paul Johnston agreed. He said: “Stirling knew which way (Aberdeenshire Council chief executive Alan) Campbell would have been thinking about it.”
This was strongly denied by Ms Stirling, who said: “Never in 24 years as a councillor have I not made my own mind up about something. Any council leader will work closely with the chief executive but I make up my own mind.”