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.

Hotel chief describes council rejection of £100 million plan as “disrespectful”

Stephen Leckie
Stephen Leckie

The man behind an ambitious £100 million scheme to expand Crieff Hydro said he is “shocked” at Perth and Kinross Council rejecting the project, describing the decision as “disrespectful.”

Stephen Leckie, chief executive of Crieff Hydro and chair of the Scottish Tourism Alliance, claimed the local authority is not sending out the right signals to attract tourists to the area.

He is most angered by the fact the decision was taken under delegated powers, claiming there was “no consultation or communication” on the issue, and states the only course of action open is to resubmit another plan, at “considerable cost.”

The £100m plan would have seen 200 holiday lodges built along with a 100-bed care home, assisted living accommodation for a further 100 people as well as a gym, swimming pool, a large farm shop and café, on a site located west of Gilmerton.

The council’s ‘delegated’ report of the Crieff East plan states: “This report recommends refusal of the application as there is a lack of environmental information to support it.

“The applicant was advised of the shortcomings and further information was invited to support the environmental statement.”

The report continues: “There is an existing oversupply of residential care home beds across Perth and Kinross and adding further supply shall exacerbate this issue.

“In relation to the retail element, the scale of development does not suggest it will be ancillary to the rest of the project as the applicant suggests. And the description of it being a farm shop is also misleading.”

The proposal has been in the pipeline for three-and-a-half years and Mr Leckie claims the council have now rejected it mainly to “clear their desks.”

“I’m shocked by this decision and find it disrespectful that this was done under delegated powers,” he said.

“There was no consultation and no communication regarding this decision, which is not conducive to a good working relationship. The council knew we were about to submit a noise impact study so why could they not have waited two more days?

“This project has taken three-and-a-half years but it seems the council have made this decision to clear their desks – basically carried it out on a whim.”

He continued: “It’s been extremely tough for us economically and we have spent a six-figure sum on the plan. However, we will now have to resubmit this plan at more cost to us.

“What happened to Perthshire attracting tourists? This gives a message to people not to come to Perthshire as we say ‘no’ to entrepreneurs.

“We’ve had a whole wave washing over us economically so we’re amazed and shocked at the speed of this decision. Crieff Hydro has a staff of 1,200, we are ambitious and this Crieff East project fits in with our expansion plans.

“We are trying our best, but this decision is such a disappointment.”

A spokesperson for Perth and Kinross Council said: “The council’s planners have, over a significant period of time, liaised at length and in detail with the applicant’s agents regarding this in principle application, including provision of all information necessary for the application to be considered and determined in line with the normal planning process.

“The expectation from national government is that local authorities will determine major applications within 16 weeks wherever possible.”

She added: “The council has made repeated requests and given ample time for the relevant information to be provided. This was not forthcoming and the agents were subsequently advised of our intention to refuse the application on that basis.

“The council is clearly not party to any discussions they may have had with their client in that regard.”