Leaderboard

The key issue is the loss of designated open space and the implications that would have for other applications relating to housing that are coming forward for the old golf course. Even though planning applications should technically be considered on their own merits and therefore can't set a precedent, Council officers will still likely be thinking about how this will affect those other applications. Noise is pretty much a non-issue: these facilities are being consented all over the country with acoustic barriers and mitigation planting which lessens the amount of noise and any effect on properties. The distributor road being so close means that noise is already present in the area, and noise from the battery facility would blend into this to a large extent. It's pretty shoddy that ILI didn't submit a noise assessment up front with the planning application, and only did so after the Council's Environmental Health officer asked for one. Nonetheless, the mitigation features could easily be conditioned as part of an approval, as the chairman has said. The non-expert members of the planning committee are more likely than not to refuse the application for this reason, however. The other issues like biodiversity loss and drainage would be easy enough to overcome as well. It looks like ILI were caught on the hop by a change of planning policy relating to biodiversity in February, and then submitted a pretty poor quality report to deal with the issue (followed by the Council's ecologist being remarkably unhelpful, going by the correspondence on the website). Again though, if the council were being reasonable this issue could be overcome through agreements with officers. Transport is not an issue as these facilities generate little need for trips other than during construction - and the distributor road is a perfectly acceptable construction traffic route. Impacts on property value aren't a planning consideration. My suspicion is that Council officers are most concerned about the loss of open space and its implications for future development at the golf course, so they are trying to load up a refusal with as many reasons for refusal as possible to reduce the chances of an appeal to the Government succeeding. The real issue with the application that was submitted is a lack of a detailed planning policy assessment justifying the scheme, and that makes me wonder if ILI are treating this application as a low priority for whatever reason (probably as there's little profit in it for them). The club must have had positive pre-application discussions with the Council, otherwise I'm not sure where their confidence and subsequent surprise stems from. I reckon they'll actually have a pretty good chance of winning an appeal as the new National Planning Framework is very supportive of developments such as this, but that might take a year and will cost thousands if they want someone competent to handle the process.

Surely the Council will condition the consent rather than refuse it? All the conditions have mitigations which the club has addressed. If it’s refused, the appeal will surely be consented. I really hope ICT succeed with this. Clearly a lot of work has gone in behind the scenes which is to be commended.

Deek taking it well… https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/20474556

I loved his antic in the box when we were beating them especially when we got the last minute goal for a draw in the Scottish Cup in Dingwall and won the replay at home. I think it was Richie Foran that scored the goal............ah the good old days

Good post from Stephen. I pretty much agree with that assessment. It strikes me as strange that we have got to this stage and the Club are surprised at the Council planners recommending refusal. I also would have expected that ILI would have had pre-application discussions with the Council which would either have led them to revising plans so that they satisfy the planners concerns, or to prepare a case as to why they disagree with the planners. The objections do, however, seem very minor and one would have thought could easily be overcome with conditions attached to an approval. I'm not sure that Ross Morrison's belated lobbying is going to help or hinder the case. There is no doubting that a technology that makes a significant contribution to meeting net zero targets is to be welcomed and obviously having a steady and significant income stream coming into the Club would be great. But the merits of the development (which are considerable) should be irrelevant with the decision being made solely in compliance with planning policy and regulations. If I were a Councillor on the Planning Committee, I don't think I would take too kindly to have my mail box full of pleas to ignore the advice of the professional planners because of the perceived benefits. It certainly won't help the relationship between the Club and the Planning department. It's a bit like having a goal being ruled offside and arguing with the referee that it should be awarded in spite of it maybe being marginally offside, because it was a good move and deserved a goal. I agree that the planners are probably most concerned about the loss of open space. Again, one can understand that the project only impinges on a tiny proportion of the open space in and around the city. However, if a precedent is set with this, the Council might find themselves under significant pressure to allow other projects on designated open space. For the sake of the Club and all the good community work the Club does, I sincerely hope the project does get passed. If it doesn't, I won't be too surprised. If it doesn't, someone at the club will have some explaining to do.

That was a helluva game, remember it well. Bring back the derbies!

Go Derek...third time lucky to get them down.

I don’t remember seeing any of the owners/ occupiers of Fairways Business Park objecting . If there are noise issues it didn’t affect the planning for the Inverness Kart Raceway which is hardly a quiet operation!

Derek is an icon. A legend. A charismatic character who will bring joy to Dingwall.

Maybe if we stopped with the "We're entitled to...XYZ, just because we're a football club" attitude, it might help. Comments made elsewhere suggesting that consultant reports in support of the application were done on the cheap, and by the Chairman's own admission, we couldn't even get all the paperwork in on time. Add in the number of local businesses who lost large sums of money from the concert fiasco, and we've not exactly been making a lot of friends the last few years. The Trust is a separate entity. Remember when our CEO and Chairman went to great lengths to point out the importance of that with the concert company? How positions on these things can change to try and work a situation in your favour! It's also comical that the club consider themselves to be so hugely focused on the community, when they can't even manage simple fan engagement. Just another embarrassing episode in the Morrison/Gardiner tenure, regardless of whether planning is given or not.

Richie Foran

We'd surely hope for Dodds. And then we'd pass them in opposite directions after the end of the season.

At the last Club AGM, a combination of the BESS system and the opportunities resulting from the stadium being within the new Cromarty Firth Freeport zone were cited as being the things which allowed the accounts to be approved on a going concern basis. In other words, these 2 factors were seen as crucial to the long term future of the club. However, the Club Chairman told the recent Supporters Trust meeting that he was struggling to see any way in which the Club could possibly benefit from the Freeport status. So yes, eggs very much in one basket. He freely admitted that if the BESS project does not get the go ahead then we will be continuing to rely on the largesse of the Directors for a sizeable proportion of the income required to keep us as a competitive full time club. I'm not sure that the Club have any more rabbits they can pull out of their hats in order to diversify the Clubs income streams. It's all very worrying indeed.