Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Bankfoot holiday village bid rejected

Bankfoot holiday village bid rejected

Ambitious plans to build a major holiday village in rural Perthshire have been thrown out by councillors.

Edinburgh firm Exclusive Resorts tabled a bid for 30 lodges, a network of cycle paths and woodland walks at Gellybanks Farm, Bankfoot.

But the project hinged on the company also winning planning permission for 10 luxury homes on the edge of the site. Money made by selling off the private properties would provide vital financial backing for the tourism venture, agents said.

The scheme has been rejected by members of Perth and Kinross Council’s management development committee, amid fears it could impact on water supplies, cause traffic chaos and would be out of character with the surrounding area.

Committee convener Tom Gray said: “We’ve been in a situation like this before. There’s a danger we will simply end up with 10 homes in the countryside and no development. It’s a bad idea.”

Planners agreed the development went against council policy.

Agent Lindsay Manson argued that the project would have created 20 permanent jobs and around 24 indirect posts, as well as pumping hundreds of thousands of pounds into the area through tourism.

In an effort to persuade the committee to back his plan, Mr Manson said: “The benefits to the economy far outweigh the minor planning requirements.”

The proposal attracted 11 objections from locals. Douglas Baxter, who co-owns nearby Gellybanks Farm, argued that the water from the earmarked woodland site runs into a private water supply which is used by five neighbouring households.

He said excavation and other work could have an adverse impact on the supply. Concerns were also raised about a loss of privacy and potential noise problems.

In his report, the council’s development quality manager, Nick Brian, stated: “While there will be improvements to the recreational and educational offering on the site, when taking account of the development as a while, the proposal does not adhere to the overarching thrust of the development plan.”

Councillors unanimously agreed to refuse in-principle planning consent. Developers are considering lodging an appeal against the decision.