Proposals for a controversial housing development have been given the green light, despite impassioned pleas from residents.
Similar plans for the site at Beech Hill Road in Coupar Angus were rejected on two previous occasions for being contrary to local policy.
Since the introduction of the new Local Development Plan, however, the land is now considered suitable for housing.
Although the area was initially earmarked for agricultural use, changes to the settlement boundary mean it falls under residential use.
As a result, the landowner launched a fresh bid for planning permission.
During a meeting of Perth and Kinross Council’s development management committee, agent David McDonald revealed that his client hoped to sell the site.
“He is in his nineties and this is the last of his interests in the area,” he said. “He is trying to tidy up his affairs.”
Although consent was sought for five properties, Mr McDonald said he would “be happy” to follow guidance from planning officers about the final number.
The recommendation for approval came under fire from David Roche.
During a deputation made on behalf of concerned residents, he said he was “pretty surprised” that it was a favoured option.
He continued: “The application is deeply flawed.
“There will be loss of landscape quality and it is extremely unsuitable for Beech Hill Road.”
Mr Roche also highlighted road safety issues at the site, saying it would be “extremely difficult” for two cars to pass on the narrow road.
“It is a very bad road,” he added. “This will potentially add 10 to 15 vehicles to the daily traffic.
“It is just inconceivable that the road would be asked to take all that traffic.”
Councillor Alan Grant, who represents the Strathmore ward, echoed these concerns and called for the retention of a popular green space area.
He described the changes to the Local Development Plan at Beech Hill Road as “a piece of nonsense”.
Assurances were given by officers that the road could cope with an increase in traffic and councillors were also advised that detailed plans would return to the committee for consideration at a later date.
Councillor John Kellas urged his colleagues to back the proposals.
He said: “If we go against this, we might lose control over setting conditions in the future.”
He seconded a motion for approval from development management convener Tom Gray.
The arguments for the development failed to convince Councillor Dennis Melloy, however, who put forward an amendment, backed by Councillor Alan Jack, to reject the proposal on the basis of road safety issues and to protect residential amenity.
The application was approved by nine votes to four, with an additional condition to improve the surrounding landscape.