£30m development at hotel given green light
Perth and Kinross Council has granted planning permission in principle for a £30 million masterplan to transform a luxury hotel just outside Perth.
Opposing the plans, Cllr Bob Brawn expressed concern that approving the whole development – albeit in principle – was “signing a blank cheque” on green belt land.
Murrayshall general manager Gary Silcock described the decision as “the first step” in “a journey from challenges to opportunities”.
At a planning committee meeting on Wednesday, councillors considered plans submitted by Murrayshall Country Estate owners Stellar Murrayshall LLP to add 50 rooms to the luxury hotel, a new spa and leisure facility, up to 89 holiday units and other facilities.
Manager Gary Silcock told the committee the masterplan for the 40-bedroomed hotel was a chance to “turn challenges into opportunities” and provide “robust year-round” business rather than the current “seasonal nature” of business.
He said: “In essence, our vision is clear: to transform Murrayshall into a thriving, year-round destination of quality, value, and sustainability and provide Perth the opportunity to address a much-needed requirement of another four-star hotel.”
However, many locals expressed concern about losing so much green belt land and the impact on biodiversity. There were 217 objections and 55 letters of support. Council officers recommended the plans for approval.
The proposal includes: a spa and leisure facility; holiday accommodation - including up to 40 lodges, 19 luxury cabins and up to 30 timeshares/ vacation ownership units; an extension to the existing hotel; the construction of a central delivery hub to house deliveries; staff facilities and relocated greenkeeping services; introducing outdoor pursuits – possibly ‘zip lining’, high ropes and clay pigeon shooting; a small-scale residential development which will include the conversion of the existing greenkeepers’ compound, and associated works.
Local resident Dr Caroline Cooper raised concerns about noise.
She told the committee: “The planning application itself says “the current environment is quiet and interrupted only by birdsong” and I suggest this is exactly what attracts visitors.”
She added: “No red squirrel will remain in its drey and raise a family next to a party glamping shack, no pine marten will stay in its breeding nest surrounded by noise and zip wires.”
Dr Cooper called for the development to be built “closer to the hotel building itself, in keeping with the green belt status of the land, and to conserve the environment and biodiversity for locals, visitors, golfers, hotel guests and future generations”.
Murrayshall Road resident Stephen Hays suggested the proposal “could easily generate 1,500 additional traffic movements per day”.
He said: “Our little lanes will not cope” and added: “In the last five years I have seen five cars go through the hedge or into a ditch by my house and a dog killed. These near misses are a serious warning.”
Objector Mark Butler highlighted the “scale and depth of the objections”.
He said: “The hotel may imply that the objections are largely from NIMBYS who do not understand the bigger picture or the commercial benefits. This is not true. As local people we absolutely want to see Murrayshall thrive again.
“We believe a sustainable plan could certainly be achieved. But it would need to be a very different plan – one that is credible and has evidence to support it, one that has been developed with direct engagement and input from local communities and wider stakeholders. That should have been done this time round but has not been.”
Speaking on behalf of the developers, senior planner Alison Ewing said a “robust process” and “engagement has informed proposals”. She said the proposal had been “sensitively designed” and would generate “around 107 full-time jobs”.
She said the hotel would be “willing to work with the council and local residents on the detail as each application comes forward”.
Planning team leader Sean Panton assured councillors: “A preliminary ecological report has been done. We have not ignored biodiversity.”
Councillors were reminded the latest National Planning Framework NPF4 stipulates major developments do not just protect biodiversity but “ensure significant enhancement to biodiversity”.
Officers pointed to a string of planning conditions which include measures to protect trees, biodiversity as well as the submission of a sustainable travel plan to be approved by PKC.
When asked about development being recommended for approval on greenbelt land, planning officer Mr Panton said: “Murrayshall is already in the green belt. We cannot say to them ‘You have no room for expansion because you’re in the green belt’.”
Moving for approval Liberal Democrat Bailie Claire Mclaren was content concerns “will be addressed in later applications”.
Seconding, Conservative councillor David Illingworth said: “I think this development and investment will support business growth in urban and rural areas.”
Tabling to refuse, Conservative councillor Bob Brawn said: “What concerns me is that this is all being done in one go.
“To my mind, we are signing a blank cheque on this. I think it should be done in stages. My concern is that so much green belt is being committed here.”
He added: “I’m not against the project itself – just the way it’s being done.”
Seconding Cllr Brawn, Independent councillor Dave Cuthbert said: “It’s the scale that’s the issue for me.”
Councillors voted by seven votes to five to approve the masterplan in principle. Further detail will require to be submitted prior to any future development.
Mr Silcock said: “This approval unlocks a potential investment of around £169million across Perth and Kinross and Scotland, potentially securing 400 job opportunities.
“We look forward to bringing forward more detailed plans over the coming months.”