Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Committee - 10 September 2025
Argyll and Bute Council · 10 December 2025
Back to Oban Lorn & The Isles Area Committee — 10 December 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE OBAN LORN & THE ISLES AREA COMMITTEE HELD IN DALAVICH VILLAGE HALL, DALAVICH BY TAYNUILT AND BY MICROSOFT TEAMS ON WEDNESDAY, 10 SEPTEMBER 2025 Present: Councillor Julie McKenzie (Chair) Councillor Kieron Green Councillor Amanda Hampsey Councillor Willie Hume Councillor Jim Lynch Councillor Luna Martin Councillor Andrew Vennard Attending: Melissa Stewart, Democratic Services Manager Tom Murphy, Operations Manager, Roads and Infrastructure Seymour Adams, CHARTS Julie Fish, Community Development Officer Ailie Law, Community Development Officer 1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Apologies were intimated on behalf of Councillor Andrew Kain. 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Councillor McKenzie declared a non-financial interest in item 11 (Supporting Communities Fund 2025/26) due to a connection with one of the intended recipients. She remained in the meeting but took no part in the discussion or decision making. 3. MINUTES (a) Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Committee -11 June 2025 The Minute of the meeting of the Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Committee, held on 11 June 2025 was approved as a correct record. (b) Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Community Planning Group - 13 August 2025 The Minute of the meeting of the Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Community Planning Group, held on 13 August 2025 was noted. 4. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME The Democratic Services Manager advised that a number of written questions had been received in advance of the meeting. Questions were taken in the following order. Question 1 – Alison Rennie The 2019 Oban Flood Study identified the clearance of the Black Lynn including the removal of Japanese Knotweed, in particular, as significant matters of 'clearance and repair' (The Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009). At the most recent meeting of this Committee, and in e-mail correspondence subsequently, I was advised, and observed myself, that work was being undertaken to address the Japanese Knotweed infestation by limited spraying. I was also advised that additional personnel were to be trained in the Public Document Pack
Page 2
process of injecting the Knotweed. More recently I have learned that this is no longer the case and that no further work will be undertaken with regard to clearing obstructions from the Black Lynn, including Japanese Knotweed. Please could the Area Committee be given a definitive statement on this matter, specifically: does the Council now reject the recommendations of the 2019 Flood Study report; and, does the Council intend to do nothing regarding the existing Japanese Knotweed and other obstructions in the Black Lynn? The Operations Manager, Mr Murphy, advised that colleagues from the Flooding Team were no longer responsible for the Japanese Knotweed and that this would now fall within his responsibilities. A tender had been issued for the training of operatives and Mr Murphy would be meeting with contractors this week to discuss assistance with treatment including stem injection, to start within the next month or so. Regarding the flooding, Mr Murphy advised that he understood the new pumping station controls were now operational and obstacles from the Black Lynn had been removed. Mrs Rennie asked for clarification that in relation to Japanese Knotweed the clearance of would now be either put out to tender or taken on by an operative within the Roads and Infrastructure Service. Mr Murphy confirmed that this was the case. Mrs Rennie followed up with a question concerning the build-up of silt which has contributed for the Japanese Knotweed to take root. With it being an artificial waterway silt build-up would continue and require regular clearance. Is that being looked at? Mr Murphy advised a survey had been carried out on behalf of colleagues in the Design Team to see if dredging the Black Lynn would make a difference to the silt build-up. The outcome of that survey was that it would make no difference and as a result there would be no dredging taking place. He advised that this matter would be picked up in the weekly briefing in order that all Members are kept up to date with what is going on. Question 2 – Phil Hamerton Please could you provide an update on the possible development of short-term let control areas in Argyll & Bute, specifically: 1. when does the Council propose to bring forward its proposals in relation to short- term let control areas; 2. how will any proposals be consulted upon; and 3. when would any proposed control areas be expected to be created? As the relevant Policy Lead, Councillor Green advised that the target had always been Summer of next year for implementation of any potential control areas. The consultation that would proceed that would be the first half of 2026, in line with the statutory timescale, and a decision to commence that was anticipated to come at start of next year, possibly later this year. He confirmed that the consultation would involve all relevant stakeholders such as businesses, wider sector, community councils and the public.
Page 3
Question 3 – Frank Roberts As has been the case for some years now, there has been a complete failure by the Council Wardens to even attempt to enforce parking regulations at Ganavan. To all intents and purposes this appears to be a decision taken consciously, as evidenced by: • Wardens have from time to time been seen attending, usually in the morning, when they take a photograph of the car park and then drive away whilst taking no enforcement action against any of the infringing vehicles that are inevitably present. • In past years in response to enquiries from camper van occupants, wardens have been overheard advising that they may indeed stay overnight because “we never ticket vehicles that stay here”. • During this and the previous two summers, I have never seen a warden carrying out enforcement duties at Ganavan, despite widespread and obvious breach of the regulations. The Council is clearly losing significant revenues both because it is accepted by many visitors that they do not need to purchase a ticket, and so choose not to, and that vehicles parked contrary to the regulations will not attract a penalty notice. Therefore, I would like to ask: 1. Have the wardens been instructed not to attend and enforce the regulations at Ganavan, or is this a decision taken of their own initiative? 2. How many fixed penalty notices have been issued during this summer at Ganavan? 3. Has the Council ever conducted an exercise to estimate the revenues that are being lost because of non-enforcement of its own regulations? The Chair advised that she was deeply uncomfortable with questions seeking to discuss council staff at this committee given they can be identified in small communities because of the jobs they do. She noted that wardens do a mammoth task in a difficult job and that they should be congratulate. As this was an operational question, she passed the question over to Mr Murphy to respond to. The Operations Manager advised there are 8 wardens to cover the whole of Argyll and Bute. He advised that the responsible officer for provision of the number of fixed penalties issued was off on leave but that he would provide a response via the Committee as soon as he had the information. He also agreed with concerns express about failure to enforce at this forum but indicated that as it was raised he would take up this matter with his colleague, Hugh O’Neill. Mr Murphy suggested a meeting with Mr Roberts onsite to discuss what the concerns are. Mr Roberts welcomed the opportunity to meet with someone who could take action. Question 4 – Mr David Hamilton Oban Celtic Shinty Club & McAulay Cup Association In relation to point 5.4 of today’s agenda item 9, it states that “engagement has taken place with members of local sports clubs”, I can confirm that no one has engaged with the Shinty Club or the McAulay Association – why? The Chair advised that although the item would be discussed later in the meeting that she was happy to respond. She advised that she was of the opinion and impression that
Page 4
engagement had taken place and understood Mr Murphy had met with Mr McCuish from the McAulay Association, as well as other sports clubs in the town. Mr Murphy advised that he and colleagues from Estates had attended a very good meeting at with members of the Rugby Club which also involved representatives of other forums. He went on to say that he had also met with Mr McCuish at Mossfield to discuss from the Shinty perspective and with Mr Hamilton and Mr Clark yesterday in Oban. Mr Murphy stated that he believed that he had engaged with all of the people leading the future development of the sports hub. The Chair asked Mr Hamilton if he did meet with Mr Murphy, and if he could advise if the issues he wished to take forward were reflected in the paper before members? Mr Hamilton advised that the first time he had found out about the report was yesterday and if there was engagement with other clubs when was this? The Chair advised that engagement concerning Mossfield had been ongoing for years and thatthere was originally a Stakeholder Group set up, at the request of this Committee, in the previous Council. That group fell by the wayside which is why this issue was brought back to Committee to examine again. Mr Hamilton asked when it had been agreed to ring fence the money for Mossfield and stated that in his opinion the bridge was not in Mossfield. The Chair advised that the money was ring fenced at a previous Area Committee Meeting and advised that the bridge was within the grounds of Mossfield. She asked Mr Hamilton if he had feedback that he would like to provide at this point, that was not reflected in the paper? Mr Hamilton said he would like to see the money spent on secure fencing around Mossfield due to vandalism. The chair confirmed that that proposal was within the report and asked Mr Hamilton if he had figures regarding vandalism instances? Mr Hamilton advised that grounds staff often had to pick up broken glass. The Chair asked Mr Murphy to clarify the position regarding the site of the bridge. Mr Murphy confirmed that the bridge was in fact in the grounds of Mossfield and in past, it had been a major link to Mossfield for certain events. Question 5 – Mr Patrick Steeman, Oban Camanachd Shinty Club Mr Steeman referred to the Agnes Angus Bequest report stating that in his opinion paragraphs 1.1 which set out the bequest was to be used for public utility and for the benefit and advantage of the community of Oban was contradictory with paragraph 1.2, suggesting use for improvement at Mossfield Stadium. He advised that he was also of the opinion that the bridge was not within the confines of Mossfield Stadium. He asked the Committee to clarify that the funds are to be used on Mossfield Stadium? The Chair guaranteed that the money would be used within Mossfield Stadium, however, she could not say how at this point given the decision would be made later in the meeting. She commented that it had already been confirmed about the bridge and that she was confused as to where the lack of clarity on that had come from.
Page 5
Question 6 – Mr Archie Clark, Vice-Secretary of Mossfield Development Group Mr Clark advised that he had met with Mr Murphy yesterday, but not about this paper, as he did not find the paper until last night. He said he considered it had been established that there had been no dialogue with the shinty groups and asked if the employed ground staff at Mossfield, who had 50 years plus experience between them, had been approached for feedback and advice on:- a) Outstanding and long term defects of the facility; and b) Their opinion where best to utilise the £40,000? The Chair advised that she would need to bring Mr Murphy back in as the questions were relating to staffing matters. Mr Murphy advised that the ground staff reporting any defects are listened to and the repairs/replacement would be carried out under the maintenance budget from Property Services. It is a wider issue being looked at than the need to engage with staff, and he reiterated that the staff are listened to, and they do maintain the facility to the best of their ability, commenting that the maintenance levels are extremely high at Mossfield. The Chair asked Mr Murphy for clarity surrounding the figures for vandalism, as given her conversations with Police Scotland locally that they do not believe there is currently an issue at Mossfield with regards to vandalism? Mr Murphy advised that in discussions with Police there has been nothing reported since last summer, and that discussions had also taken place with the Council’s Anti-Social Behaviour Officer for feedback. He advised that yesterday, Mr Clark showed him a video of some broken glass and cans which had been disposed of on the pitch, but we have no records, and checked with our offices, and there are no instances of numerous complaints on any damage or anti-social behaviour at Mossfield. Question 7 - Mr Roddy McCuish Mr McCuish confirmed he did have a short discussion with Mr Murphy and in that discuss had stated that the bridge was a waste of time. He asked if any officer of the Council or any elected member had had a discussion with the Rugby Club about a bridge over to Mossfield? The chair advised that she cannot speak for any officers, but that she did have a discussion with the Rugby Club about a bridge when they were asked what their priorities would be for Mossfield. The Chair invited Mr Murphy to comment on the question. Mr Murphy confirmed that at the same site meeting at Mossfield referred to earlier, there was a discussion as tothe advantages that linking the Rugby Club and Mossfield by bridge could have for sports events or other major events taking place at both venues. Mr Murphy stated that he could not speak for other officers or officials from the Council. The Chair stated that she felt it was important to point out that they were not building a new bridge but reinstating of the original bridge that had been used to access Mossfield but that could no longer be used by vehicles as it had fallen into disrepair. She added that
Page 6
the Council did not have the funding to invest and that the proposal for reinstatement of an asset will improve the longevity of Mossfield, bringing benefit to the wider community of Oban. The Chair further advised that it seemed to her that there is a feeling that the council are undervaluing Mossfield here, which is certainly not the case. Councillor McKenzie stated that she had been fighting Mossfield’s corner since 2016 and was delighted that there is even a small pot of money to invest. Mr McCuish stated that he recently attended a meeting with the Chief Executive and Leader of the Council, during which it was heartening to hear that the Council want to engage more with Communities. Given what has been said from major stakeholders today he asked if the Area Committee would consider a pause in the recommendations, until further in-depth consultations had taken place with the Stakeholders of Mossfield, indicating that if it at that stage it was decided that a bridge is the outcome then that would be accepted? The Chair pointed out that Mr McCuish was well aware of how this Committee works and the governance procedures surrounding it. She advised that there was a paper on the agenda today and that if any elected Member felt the need to amend any of these recommendations, they could do so. Mr McCuish asked for clarity that any Member wishing to put forward an amendment to the recommendations in the report could do so today during consideration of the item? The Chair again confirmed that was the case. Question 8 – Mr David Hamilton Why do we need this bridge, I think the money could be spent better? The Chair advised that in her opinion matters may be clarified during discussion on the item. She advised that Mr Hamilton had made his point but that she did not hear any new questions in relation to the paper on the agenda. 5. CULTURAL HERITAGE AND ARTS ASSEMBLY FOR ARGYLL AND ISLES (CHARTS) The Committee gave consideration to a presentation by the Chair of the Cultural Heritage and Arts Assembly (CHARTS) for Argyll and the Isles. The presentation included information on the strategic aims, key projects and impact of partnership working on both regional and local areas and provided highlights of key projects throughout the Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area. Mr Adams also provided information in relation to funding streams and the benefits of the continued support received from Argyll and Bute Council. Decision The Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Committee considered and noted the information provided in the presentation. (Reference: Presentation by Chair, Cultural Heritage and Arts Assembly for the Argyll and Isles, dated August 2025, submitted)
Page 7
6. AREA PERFORMANCE REPORT - FQ1 2025/26 The Committee gave consideration to the Area Performance Report for financial quarter 1 of 2025/26 (April – June 2025) which illustrated the agreed performance measures for this period. Decision The Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Committee noted the performance and supporting commentary as presented. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Customer Support Services, dated 12 August 2025, submitted) 7. ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE UPDATE The Committee gave consideration to a report which provided links to the recent activities of Roads and Infrastructure Services. Decision The Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Committee noted the contents of the report. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure Services, dated August 2025, submitted) 8. RECYCLING AND RECOVERY PERFORMANCE REPORT Consideration was given to a report providing details on the council’s recycling and landfill diversion performance along with national policy, targets and regulations which are likely to impact on future performance. Decision The Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Committee noted the details as outlined in the report and the national policy drivers that would likely impact over the coming years. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure Services, dated August 2025, submitted) 9. DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS - AGNES ANGUS BEQUEST Consideration was given to a report on the Agnes Angus Bequest and for the accumulated funds to be used for “purposes of public utility and for the benefit and advantage of the community of Oban”. Motion To approve the report recommendations with the addition of a further decision that given that this bridge will be funded by Miss Agnes Angus’s generous bequest and will serve as a lasting piece of infrastructure connecting our community’s sports facilities, it is proposed that officers explore the possibility of naming the bridge after Agnes Angus, with placement of a commemorative plaque at project completion. This would ensure that her
Page 8
contribution to our community is permanently recognised and remembered by all who use these facilities for generations to come This was moved by Councillor McKenzie and seconded by Councillor Luna Martin, and was unanimously agreed by the Committee Decision The Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Committee agreed: 1. in principle to allocate the funding available from the Miss Agnes Angus Bequest for the purpose of installing an access bridge/culvert linking the adjacent rugby club to Mossfield Stadium; 2. that the service further assess the options available ensuring the cost and deliverability of the proposed access bridge/culvert, prior to construction; and 3. to explore the possibility of naming the bridge after Agnes Angus, with placement of a commemorative plaque at project completion. (Reference, a report by the Executive Director with responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure, dated August 2025, submitted) 10. APPOINTMENT TO OBAN AND LORN COMMUNITY ENTERPRISE - ATLANTIS LEISURE Consideration was given to a report on the current arrangements in place regarding the lease agreement with Oban and Lorn Community Enterprise Board and invites the committee to consider nominating a second representative to serve on the Board, following the resignation of Councillor Martin. Decision The Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Committee agreed to continue this item to next meeting, to allow discussions with Atlantis Leisure on the timings of their meetings. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Legal and Regulatory Support, dated 7 July 2025, submitted) Councillor McKenzie, having declared a non financial interest in the next agenda item did not partake in any discussion or decision but remained within the meeting. The Committee agreed that Councillor Green would assume the Chair during consideration of the following item. 11. SUPPORTING COMMUNITIES FUND 2025/26 Consideration was given to a report which detailed recommendations for the award of the Council’s Supporting Communities Fund (SCF) for the 2025/26 round of funding that had been made available for distribution by Council to organisations in the Oban, Lorn and the Isles area. Decision
Page 9
The Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Committee agreed that the 16 applications, marked as ‘Award’ and ‘Partial Award’ within Appendix 1 of the report, are awarded funding from the Supporting Communities Fund Budget totalling £22,500, as follows: (Reference: Report by Chief Executive, dated 28 July 2025, submitted) Councillor McKenzie resumed the Chair, thanking Councillor Green for standing in. 12. SUPPORTING COMMUNITIES FUND - MONITORING OF PROJECTS FUNDED 2023/24 Consideration was given to a report providing information on the impact and spend of funding awarded to community projects from the Council’s Supporting Communities Fund in 2023/24. Decision Ref Applicant Award/No Award Requested Amount Recommended Award 2025/26 1 Ardchatten Centre Award £1,500.00 £1,500.00 2 Oban Connecting Communities Collective/Oban Youth Café Award £1,355.40 £1,355.40 3 Isle of Lismore Art Group Award £1,500.00 £1,500.00 4 Appin Community Development Trust Award £1,300.00 £1,300.00 5 Dalmally Community Development Trust Award £1,500.00 £1,500.00 6 Tiree Makery CIC Award £1,500.00 £1,500.00 7 Avich & Kilchrenan Community Heritables (AKCH) Award £1,150.00 £1,500.00 8 An Iodhlann Award £1,500.00 £1,500.00 9 Dalmally Primary Parent Council Award £1,500.00 £1,500.00 10 Oban Badminton Club Award £1,428.00 £1,500.00 11 Appin Agricultural Show Award £1,500.00 £1,500.00 12 Lismore Historical Society Award £1,500.00 £1,500.00 13 Oban Pride Award £1,500.00 £1,500.00 14 Kilmelford and Kilninver Community Award £1,500.00 £1,500.00 15 Spotlight Musical Theatre Group Award £1,500.00 £1,500.00 16 Oban Bowling Club Partial award £1,500.00 £766.60 17 Police Scotland Youth Volunteers No award £1,500.00 £0.00 18 Lismore Community Trust No award £1,500.00 £0.00 19 Oban Mod No award £1,500.00 £0.00 20 Isle of Seil Coastal Rowing Club No award £1,500.00 £0.00 21 Oban Festive Lights No award £1,500.00 £0.00 22 Oban Camanachd Club No award £1,500.00 £0.00 23 Anamcara Fas Gadh No award £1,500.00 £0.00 24 Oban Youth Shinty No award £1,200.00 £0.00 TOTAL £35,733.40 £22,500.00
Page 10
The Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Committee noted the positive contribution of the Supporting Communities Fund detailed in section 4 and within the attached table; and that no funds were to be returned. (Reference: Report by Chief Executive, dated 10 September 2025, submitted) 13. CHARITABLE TRUST AND BEQUEST FUNDS REPORT (a) John of Lorn Bequest Fund The Committee gave consideration to a report providing information on the number of applications that have been received for support from the John of Lorn Bequest. Decision The Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Committee noted the number of awards made from the John of Lorn Bequest since the last meeting of the Area Committee in June 2025. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Legal and Regulatory Support dated 10 September 2025, submitted) 14. DRAFT OBAN, LORN AND THE ISLES AREA COMMITTEE WORKPLAN The Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Committee workplan was before members for information. Decision The Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Committee noted the contents of the workplan. (Reference: Oban, Lorn and the Isles Area Committee workplan, dated 10 September 2025, submitted)