Tag: community council

Michael Russell, Vice-chair of the Community Council writes:

Further to the meeting held on Wednesday night about the Argyll Rally, Sam Spencer from the Rally shared  the community consultation document for the 2025 Rally yesterday and I append it to this … [post as a downloadable document]

The CC has already responded, and I also give the response below [in this post]. You will see that we have taken an interim position, supporting the rally but suggesting some important changes including reducing the usage of what the Rally calls the “Kilmodan” Road and which we would call the West Road.

The CC’s next meeting is on Monday 9th September in the Glen Hall at 7.30pm and at that meeting we will decide if we should make any further response.   We will also ensure that we have representation at as many of the future meetings about this as we can.

Finally  the address to which individual responses to the consultation can be sent, is 

consultation@argyllrally.co.uk

and that should be done as quickly as possible.     You may wish to copy your responses to  Argyll & Bute Council , Motorsport UK and the RSAC which is the Scottish Motorsport body and which has a role in supervising rallies in Scotland.

Those addresses are :

Traffichq@argyll-bute.gov.uk

cao@motorsportuk.org

jcl@rsacmotorsport.comn

Finally thanks are due to everyone who came to the meeting or who emailed beforehand.  By and large there was a positive discussion and most people believed that the points being made would be useful in improving the situation for the rally and for the local community.

Best wishes

Michael

Begin forwarded message:

From: Michael Russell

To: Sam Spencer, Clerk of the Course, Dunoon Presents Argyll Rally

Subject: Rally Consultation – views from COLGLEN Community Council

Date: 23 August 2024 at 11:31:12 BST

Dear Sam

Thank you for coming to the community meeting on Wednesday night and for your very positive and thoughtful input.    The Community Council is now responding to the consultation  document you sent yesterday and this email is also being copied to Colin Moulson, of Dunoon Presents  and Hugh O’Neill  of Argyll and Bute Council  as well as to  all those who attended on Wednesday along with the links to the document you provided. 

However, whilst the  Colintraive and Glendaruel Community Council would  like this response to be considered as a formal response to the consultation we will look at the proposals in more detail at our   next  meeting due on 9th September and may add additional  information at that time.

Firstly we would want to make it clear that we are not against the rally and indeed welcome the economic benefits it produces.    What we want to see is the experience of and benefits arising from the rally improved for all residents of our area.    

We do not presently believe that those benefits have been evenly spread nor that , where they exist, information about them has been communicated  as effectively as  needs to be the case.     We are also of the view that there has been inadequate consultation with those most seriously affected by the rally (largely those whose access to, and egress from,  their homes is curtailed by the rally) .   In particular we regard the three or four week period for consultation on the detailed plans to be inadequate and we would suggest that the planning cycle for the rally be developed to allow a longer  and more meaningful consultation period. 

The ColGlen CC does of course accept that it needs to be more actively involved with the rally planning process  and will now try to be so although it should be noted that we are a very small Community Council with the bare legal minimum of 5 members. 

Turning to the  discussion at the meeting held on Wednesday night  we would make the following points:1)Allowing damage to go unrepaired for any period of time is not acceptable.    We suggest that the Rally organisers list the damage that has been done immediately after each rally and make that list available to the CC and through the CC to local residents.   The Rally must then  take an active role in ensuring that the damage is repaired speedily and completely.   

  It would also be a small but useful compensation for residents most affected if the Fearnoch and Kilmodan stretches had the road surface repaired and brought up to a much better standard.    We understand the pressure on the local authority in terms of resources but lack of attention to the road surface after each rally is cumulative and concerning. 2) The conditions applied to the organisers  within the agreed licence needed to be observed and seen to be observed.For example there needs to be  strict supervision of competitors on practice days so that access is not curtailed for residents  and dangerous speeds and road hogging are prevented.

   Emergency phone numbers  on the rally days  must be manned and responsive.   

3)  Signing for practice days needs to be put in place early and kept there.   Signage on rally days must also be clearer about what is closed and must also stress what is open.   Damage to local businesses in places like Tighnabruaich must be avoided  by making it clear that access  is always open to places not hosting closed stages. 

4) The Rally should ensure that where there is a closure that impinges on residents in terms of their accessing their homes or being able to leave, then that is confined to a single session over the two days.  That change would by itself reduce very substantially expressed concerns from affected residents.    That session should either be Friday evening,  Saturday morning, or Saturday afternoon. Whilst the Fearnoch (B886) proposal has reduced the closure  from that imposed in  2024, the proposal for 2025 for the closure of what we call the West Road and the Rally calls Kilmodan is now even more unacceptable given that the road would be closed for all of Friday evening until the early hours of Saturday morning, and then for all of Saturday – morning, afternoon and evening and we would want to see that proposal withdrawn.     Whilst they are outwith our area, we also think that more consultation is needed with the new areas included in the plans.   

We understand that a minimum mileage is required to allow  the rally to run and attract entrants, but there are alternatives in the area – for example within Cowal itself   the roads to Lochgoilhead ,Ardentinny and Inverchoalain  are not yet being used.  

5) The consultation process with local residents most affected by closures has not been good enough and we would urge you to make direct contact with residents on any stretch of road that is proposed for closure.   We are concerned on reading the information on the Motorsport UK website that there seems to be a contradiction in advice to organisers regarding consultation.   We believe local people affected have the right to be heard and with that in mind we are encouraging residents   to respond to your consultation  and to copy their responses , if they so wish, to  Motorsport UK, to the RSAC in Scotland and to Argyll & Bute Council.

I hope the above is helpful and I would stress again our aim in making these points is both to represent  the range of views made to us at the meeting and beforehand , but also to ensure that the rally is able to develop strong community support in our area , as we know exists in Mull for that long established rally.   Many people in our area already  welcome the initiative and ensuring that these concerns are heard and acted on would  we believe significantly assist the rally organisers, competitors and spectators as well as those  local residents who remain adversely affected.

Yours sincerely

Michael W Russell

Vice-Chair

On behalf of ColGlen Community Council