GARIOCH councillors have rejected Aberdeenshire Council's plan for a new Care Home located at St James' Place, Inverurie following their meeting this week.
The proposed 60 bed care home development - which was earmarked to replace the existing Blythewood Care Home at Port Elphinstone - by Aberdeenshire Council's Housing and Social Work Service, was deferred at a previous meeting on Tuesday, June 2 to al
low councillors to visit the site over concerns expressed regarding the suitability of the site due to its proximity to the A96 bypass.
The development had originally generated 17 letters of representation, one in support and 16 objections from seven households.
Prior to discussion by the councillors, Garioch Area Planning Officer Lesley Tierney informed them that since the previous meeting the Council's Road Services Department had conducted a closer inspection of the plans and the site and had no concerns over the development.
She reiterated that noise levels were a concern but that the building of a bund between the A96 and the site, the erection of an acoustic fence and the soundproofing measures built into the building made noise levels acceptable.
Inverurie and District Councillor Mike Raeburn commented: "I have to say that you couldn't find a more unsuitable site than this one right next to the bypass."
He added: "If the idea is for residents to be able to sit outside and enjoy the gardens, I find it preposterous. Apart from the traffic noise there is also the fumes generated by the traffic."
He compared the design to looking like a "prison or an institution", adding: "I am astounded by the elevation and the materials. Surely instead of concrete blocks, wood should be used. I am prepared to move for refusal on the grounds of the location, the noise and fumes and the design."
He concluded: "The existing care home site at Blythewood is an attractive site, and I can see no reason why the Council can't re-develop it. It is in the ideal place and I would encourage the planning service to look at it again."
Fellow Inverurie and District Councillor Richard Cowling concurred with Councillor Raeburn's comments but also noted: "A new care home is needed and it will probably become more urgent as time goes on."
Councillor Bryan Stuart, who also represents Inverurie and District, highlighted the fact that the noise survey carried out found that the noise level fell into noise level category C, and that Policy PAN56 states: "Where noise exposure category C is determined planning permission should not normally be granted."
He continued: "I welcomed the proposal but had reservations about the site as it is too small and far too close to the A96. With the bund, acoustic fence and design in my mind I have to agree with Councillor Raeburn that it resembles a prison.
"Residents with dementia require stimulation and getting outside is one of the ways to do this, making this site completely unsuitable."
Westhill and District Councillor Gurudeo Saluja said that it was in his mind to accept the proposal. He noted the urgent need for a replacement care home, and that there had been a lot of consultation between the Housing and Social Work Department and residents, families and staff over the design.
He noted that the proposed design would be much better for the support of the residents. He also noted the sound mitigation measures that had been planned, that the design was contemporary and innovative and the sustainability measures that would be included such as the ground source heat and the solar panels for hot water.
He also highlighted that while re-developing Blythewood there would be the problem of relocating residents in other homes.
Fellow Westhill and District Councillor Ron McKail commented: "I am an enthusiastic advocate for improving the care of the elderly in Aberdeenshire, and although I have no issue with the design of the building I agree about the noise factor."
He continued: "I would find it annoying if a relative of mine was placed in a £7 million building and they could not open the windows. I support the motion to refuse planning permission and the Council need to think again about it."
West Garioch Councillor Hazel Al-Kowarri commented: "I too support the motion. The site is totally unsuitable, especially when we were standing there this morning trying to hear each other. I am completely opposed to the residents not being able to get outside and enjoy the gardens, and fully support Councillor Raeburn's motion."
East Garioch Councillor Martin Ford stated that councillors had to deal only with the proposal in front of them and purely in planning terms, and on planning grounds the proposal was appropriate.
He felt that the building would not compromise the nearby Inverurie Hospital, which is a listed building; there were no grounds for rejection over land zoning. He noted that the design was a "matter of taste" and although the building did "have the feeling of an institution" he didn't believe that merited grounds for refusal.
He did agree that the site had noise problems but stated that it was within walking distance of a settlement and that despite neighbouring properties' concerns he did not think it was too dominant or would cause overshadowing. He concluded by saying that he did not think the Committee had any grounds for refusal on purely planning policy.
Councillor Allison Grant disagreed with Councillor Ford, saying: "We are talking about the quality of people's lives and this would directly affect lives. I think the site is wholly unsuitable and we cannot be responsible for creating unhappy lives."
Committee Deputy Chairman Richard Cowling, who was chairing the meeting in the absence of Councillor Martin Kitts-Hayes, noted that the proposal was "generating a lot of emotions" before Councillor Raeburn summed up noting that Council Policy 21 stated that local authorities should promote "environmentally friendly layouts".
He added: "There is nothing environmentally friendly with this site due to the noise. We do have a precedent for refusing the application with the Souterford Road flats, which were rejected partly due to noise from the adjacent industrial site.
"This is not a good site for a care home and I would encourage the Council to look again at Blythewood, even if it was something on a less grandiose scale than this."
Following a vote the Committee decided to refuse planning permission on grounds of inappropriate location and design by 11 votes to two.
