June 2022 Minutes

Item

Action

PART A: INTRODUCTIONS AND PROCEDURES

Welcome and Structure

SH advised that this was a live meeting and would be testing out the pros and cons of live meetings versus digital and hybrid meetings.

SH welcomed 2 associate members (Gordon Addison and David Shearer) and noted that DS had issued a report.

SH highlighted that St Kessogs had been omitted from the agenda, although there was no update on this. AOB had also been omitted.

Recording for Minute Taker & Meeting Protocols

The meeting was being recorded for the purposes of minute taking only, and the audio recording would be destroyed following the approval of the minutes.

Apologies, Members of the public present, & Minute Taker

Apologies received from Bev Field, David King, and Crawford Bell.

Agenda Items – Declarations of specific interest

There were no declarations of specific interest.

PART B: MINUTES & MATTERS ARISING

Minutes of the previous meeting

OW advised of the following amendment to the draft April 2022 minutes “the draft minutes from March 9 ^th and March 16^th meetings were proposed”. The draft minutes were proposed by DM, seconded by JW, and unanimously approved.

Matters Arising

• New co-opted members opening

Applications had now opened for potential new co-opted members.

SH proposed inviting applications for 3 vacant posts. Following the Stirling Council Scheme of Establishment, the notices would be displayed for 4 weeks, and

applications would then be sent to Stirling Council to check residency. Once this was

Item

Action

approved, each application could be voted on by Full Members at the following meeting.

There was unanimous agreement that this should go ahead. Notices will go onto the CCC website, Facebook, the noticeboard and in the library. SH asked people to also “spread the word”.

• BoD Update

MM highlighted that “Braes of Doune Windfarm Community Fund (BoD) ” had previously been known as “Airtricity”.

She thanked Brian Luti (on behalf of the CCC) for all the work he had done over the years and for the article in the BLV.

BoD is changing the procedure for applications and now wants to have “windows of opportunity” for applications. There would be 4 per year, of 3 months each.

When a decision had been reached on any applications, successful applicants would be announced at the following meeting.

MM proposed using the existing format of documents, with any minor changes to be made as soon as possible and to go live within the next 24 hours (by Wednesday, or overnight on Tuesday 14^th June).

This was proposed by TRW, seconded by JW, and unanimously agreed. Announcement to be made on the CCC website, Facebook, the noticeboard, and library.

• Flooding Community Engagement Plan (SH)

SH noted that the public consultation would not now start until July, having been put back 1 month. SH read aloud an email she had received from Maria Lucey (ML) just prior to the meeting, containing an update:

· Shortlisting of options had taken longer than predicted

· Due to uncertainty surrounding the financial position of the Scottish Government of flood protection schemes, it had been decided to revise the community engagement schedule to ensure that the community and Stirling Council were fully informed over the coming months

· Various updates had been added to the FCEP website

· One shortlisting has been concluded. ML hoped to meet with Brian Roberts and CCC members in late June, and following that, community engagement could recommence

DM and MM had written a paper on flooding, which was read out and would be circulated to all. DM discussed the paper, which noted the concerns of local people (which had been communicated to ML), and the following basic requirements: -

· Protection, at least the 100 year flood level, for all properties at risk

· Must be in keeping with Callander’s ‘ Green Credentials ‘ and its attractions as a tourist town

· Must contribute to economic growth and enhance the environment as a conservation area

The following points were also made: -

· There were inadequacies in some of the proposals currently being considered, with some properties in Bridgend not being protected, and instead being at increased risk of flooding under some of these proposals.

· The proposed protection level was inadequate against a 25 to 50 year flood

· The wall at the Meadows Car Park added no value and would potentially

deter visitors. Footfall, therefore businesses and the wider community, would suffer.

s

Item

Action

There was a lengthy discussion, and it was generally felt that it was disappointing that Stirling Council was taking so long to progress things, and it was noted that ML had communicated there were issues with being short-staffed. DM highlighted that ML had indicated that the money currently available could potentially be at risk, the more that time went on.

SH proposed to reply to ML’s email, saying that endless delays and the lack of public consultation were the main concerns currently, and to push for a revised timetable of consultation (who, when and where was it going to take place). DM offered to help with the email/letter. SH to compile a draft and to circulate this.

TC highlighted that WSP had asked to meet him previously, but he had not heard from them again, and was not sure what they and Stirling Council had been doing.

• Roads Update

DS had submitted a report (which was circulated at the meeting). DS said he had added an extra item – he had written to Evelyn Tweed about an issue with the Sustrans footpath in Doune. SH asked for any comments. She advised that she would send them on to DS and would also circulate his report.

• Bracklinn Bridge Update

Alastair Wylie had been keeping in touch with the NP in relation to proposals for the new bridge, but there had been problems getting information from it. NP is now sending a monthly report (SH circulated this at the meeting). The rebuilding had gone out to tender, the contractors have now been appointed to take this on and their name will be made known this week. AW’s main concerns were the safety aspects and the risk of accidents was very real. AW has pushed for notices, and NP was going to put some up. AW was critical of the notices it did put up, and pushed for these to be improved, and action was taken by NP to address this.

Assurances have been given by NP that sample designs will be made available to the public, for the community to comment on. NP has been made aware that AW needs to put sample designs onto the Facebook page with a timescales, for comments. It was hoped there would be something available by the end of June, which could then be circulated for comments

A discussion followed. It was felt there needed to be consideration given to inspection and repair of the bridge going forward. It was highlighted that signs are regularly vandalised.

SH asked TC to come up with any relevant questions to put to the NP.

• LPP Update

HT spoke about the online response to the recent LPP survey. 17.5% of households responded. Most of these appeared to be from younger families, with what appeared to be an poor response from the older population (going by geo-mapping of postcodes).

HT emphasised the need for a holistic approach to future planning, and for the community to step up and be much more demanding of Stirling Council, and to take responsibility for their own future.

GA and HT agreed to work together to look at the local transport plan. HT highlighted that the pilot trundle bus would not be going ahead. There were queries about what had happened to the £100,000 funding that was previously made available.

Special Items

• Dog Fouling

Item

Action

SH and OW to lead on this. An email had been received from a member of the public complaining about the amount of dog fouling in Callander and also complaining about owners using long leads, and not being sufficiently in control of their dogs. The member of public was told this would be brought up at the next CCC meeting and was also sent some information on Stirling Council’s Dog Warden Service. Suggestions were made that the Dog Warden Service could be invited to future meetings, and also that the contact information for the DWS be put on the CCC website. OW to contact the DWS with invite.

TRW highlighted that dog fouling was particularly unacceptable on school playing fields and play areas, and that he was going to ask Stirling Council for permission to put up signs in 4 areas locally (Primary School, High School, and 2 play areas) to discourage dog fouling. He queried whether an enhanced policy was needed (in addition to information on SC’s website). Schools would need to be involved, and a meeting would need to be set up with both schools to discuss.

TRW to meet with Lesley Hawkins of Cleaner Callander (she has been looking for someone to take over her role) to discuss the possible formation of one bigger group to look at the current issues and future plans. CCC members to feed back any comments, thoughts or ideas to TRW by the end of June.

ME highlighted there had been a proposed byelaws consultation at some point, which was to include dog fouling, and specifically, making it an offence to allow dog fouling in a children’s play area. It currently is not an offence (under the Council’s byelaws). ME did not know what had happened with this consultation and said that this needed looked at and asked about. It was agreed that dog fouling is a problem everywhere. Poster campaigns involving primary schools was highlighted as having been effective previously.

• Meetings Format and Frequency

Following a lengthy discussion, it was proposed by RW, seconded by DM and voted on by all CC, that that there would be 9 CCC meetings per year, 1 AGM, and no private meetings. Meetings to take place on the 3^rd Monday of the month.

It was agreed that future meetings would be hybrid in format. Venue, equipment needs, management of meetings and rules of behaviour to be looked at, to ensure meetings go smoothly. Each meeting to be looked at afterwards to identify what went well, what did not work and to learn from this. As many people as possible to attend in person, with the possibility of people joining online if they are unable to attend in person, with the aim of having no division.

PART C: INVITED GUESTS

There were no invited guests.

PART D: REPORTS

Community Council Office Bearers Chair

Written report submitted. There were no questions.

Vice-chair

No report submitted. JW made the following 2 points: -

· Flooding on the Sustrans path had been raised again by a member of the public. JW had made the relevant contacts to try and move this forward

Item

Action

· Fly-tipping by a local householder. He was made aware of this by a member of the public, and it is now being dealt with by Stirling Council

JW to circulate some information in writing on this.

Secretary

A written report was submitted. There were no questions.

A member of the public asked for all correspondence to be read out so that it would be contained in the minutes. There was a brief discussion on this, and OW advised that reports would be made available on the website (along with minutes and agendas), but not all correspondence. It was also noted that letters cannot be shared without the writer’s permission.

Treasurer

A written report was submitted. There were no questions.

Planning

A written report was submitted. A member of the public highlighted that windows had been replaced with plastic ones at an address in Main St, Callander without planning permission. DM said he would look into this.

TC asked a question about Callander Woods Caravan Park, and DM gave clarification on this.

Website/Communications

No report submitted. MG has had some meetings with Claire in relation to Braes of Doune information on the CCC website.

Statutory Bodies Police

No report submitted. It was hoped that the police would attend the next suitable meeting.

Stirling Council

GK gave the following verbal update: -

· A new council has been elected with the following members: - 8 SNP, 7 Conservative, 6 Labour, 1 Green, 1 Independent. Labour with the support of Conservative members are effectively forming the administration

· Only 1 meeting has taken place so far. Committee meetings have yet to take place

· Training sessions for new members have been taking place

· Overall, the financial situation is that budgets were written with 2% inflation in mind, with inflation now running at 8+%, so there are potentially real problems with budgets into the future

· The Levelling Up Fund and Prosperity Fund are currently being discussed, and awaiting outcomes

MM queried the amount spent by Stirling Council on consultants with any outcomes. ME advised that he would be looking at this.

LLTNP

ME gave the following verbal update: -

Item

Action

· South Loch Venachar – ongoing review of the Loch Lomond byelaws is a major piece of work currently (although impacting directly on Callander), and the management team of been working predominantly on this

· Anecdotally – there has been an increased presence at South Loch Venachar, and some positive feedback received about litter management and parking

· The water levels have been relatively high, reducing the beach area, so difficult to get a full picture of what’s been going on. Rangers have dealt appropriately with any issues

· There is going to be a Visitor Management Plan, and this will be tied in with the Place Programme. Funding has been received to enable planning of a 5 year programme. The inevitable squeeze on revenue is going to be challenging. The NP website has some useful information on the plan

· Bracklinn Bridge update – an update was released (SH has received this). Once contractor is in place, there will be opportunity for a meeting between the Bracklinn Bridge Group and the National Park

· People camping in the Callander Meadows – this is outside the camping management zone, and there is nothing to stop someone doing this. No byelaws exist to prevent this and no permit is required. ME advised that a member of the public had raised the fact that people are occasionally camping in the Meadows, but that he was not aware of any issues.

· A big capital underspend noted from recent accounts

The former Eagle Hotel was discussed, and it was agreed that a meeting should be requested between the following: - the relevant Stirling Council officers, National Park, the 3 Ward Councillors, and the MSP to discuss the way forward.

Railings in Pearl Street were discussed. ME had sought an update from SC on 2 occasions, and SC has asked for more time. SH asked that this be picked up again and pushed forward. JW highlighted that a resident of Pearl Street had said they were in favour of the railings as they acted as a traffic-calming measure. MG had heard from a person who was against them as pedestrians are being pushed onto the road. ME advised that his understanding was there was more of a feeling that the railings were inappropriate.

A member of the public expressed disappointment in the commitment of CCC towards biodiversity in the River Teith.

Town Co-ordinator

Written report submitted. Also, see Matters Arising.

PART E: UPDATES (New Activity Only)

Camp Place Play Park

A written report was submitted. SH noted that the official opening of the newly revamped Camp Place Play Park would be taking place at the weekend. TRW thanked MM and said, ‘Well done!’