D-day is looming – yet again – in the long-running saga of an unauthorised Travellers’ site at St Cyrus.
A full meeting of Aberdeenshire Council will this week make a final determination of a retrospective planning application.
The council’s head of planning and building standards has already recommended the application for a 10-stance caravan park and a touring site of 19 pitches be refused.
The retrospective refusal was given the backing of councillors from the Kincardine and Mearns Area Committee whose comments will be taken into account on Thursday.
The specific reasons given by the Committee were in relation to fluvial and tidal flooding and foul drainage, and the impact on Eskview Farm and related policies as detailed in the officer’s report.
A report by Stephen Archer, Director of Infrastructure Services, states: “If the application is refused the Gypsy/Traveller community at this site will be living with the uncertainty of whether they will be able to use the site in the long term. If the application is refused the applicants can appeal the decision.
“If the refusal is upheld at appeal the Council would need to consider action to remedy the unauthorised development of the site.
“If direct action was taken to remove the development, this would displace the Gypsy/Traveller residents and remove the provision of a touring site for use.
“At present there are no established Gypsy/Traveller sites in the Kincardine and Mearns part of Aberdeenshire.
“This would potentially leave the community with nowhere to live or limit access to education and local services.”
The camp, which is home to more than 50 people, was built from September 2013.
A previous attempt to win permission by Northesk Investment Ltd was turned down with flooding concerns among the main reasons for refusal.
The applicant commissioned a fresh report from a consultant that claimed flooding concerns had been overstated.
However, the analysis was dismissed by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa), which has formed a view that the flooding threat at the site poses a “significant risk to lives and property”.
