Click here to search commentonline

An Extraordinary Meeting in Pitlochry

On Friday 5 June about hundred people gathered for Pitlochry Community Council’s Extraordinary short-notice meeting at the High School. Proposed developments at the Curling Rink and town centre were the topics for discussion.

Following the recent display of plans by Upland Developments a ‘Residents Against Inappropriate Developments’ (RAID) group was formed to raise awareness of contentious issues.

The planning approval or rejection process was explained. If a planning application has more than five objections then it would be submitted for consideration by the Development Control Committee which is composed of certain elected P&K councillors. The planning department would make recommendation to approve or refuse. The councillors make the decision.

The community council affirmed that its role was to express the collective views of the community to these councillors. The question was raised of whether a community buy out of the Curling Rink might be a way forward.

Housing Credit Gain

The main concerns expressed were that there seemed to be a manoeuvring of the ‘credit scheme’ by the developers. This scheme dictates that developments of more than five dwellings have 25% affordable housing. By building a large number of affordable dwellings, a credit could then be obtained by a developer to build three times as many dwellings in Perthshire. The question being raised expressed the anxiety that Pitlochry is becoming a ‘credit gain’ town.

Local people seem disconcerted that, because the management organisation of the flats proposed for Pitlochry is unknown (whether Servite, Perthshire Housing Association or any other body), so the likely type of incoming tenant is also unknown.

School places in Pitlochry are available should child numbers increase. It was feared that a lack of play areas for the affordable flats would lead to cooped-up, frustrated children and might result in disruptive behaviour in school. The developer had said that play areas were not necessary since children would not live there. This seemed unrealistic. A mix of dwelling type was preferred. 

Criticised for meeting with the developers, community council vice chairman John Pearson defended his position as not being secretive.  He explained that he had taken trouble on behalf of the community to track down the developers to discover their intentions.

Travelodge/Tesco Threats

It was reckoned that the Curling Rink would cost £150,000 to demolish because of the asbestos components.

On the town centre Travelodge proposal, local accommodation providers felt they could not compete with £19 family rooms, and Travelodge was well known for disruptive stag and hen night events.

Deliveries to a Tesco would, it was claimed, be a major nuisance. Moreover, the developer plans to retain ownership of the building planned for the first floor of the Travelodge and the large retail space beneath. The threat of a Tesco-type store would remain, even should it not initially be the retail tenant.

One resident emphasised the view that there seems to be a ‘Trumping of Scotland’ through a ‘planning feudalism’, where developers and council behave like the lairds of old.  Such a town development, in spite of being seen as an investment, would have a ‘leaky bucket’ effect – a net drain of money out of the local economy to distant shareholders. It would also result in the destruction of Pitlochry’s distinctiveness, eroding the brand image with long term implications.

Further Public Meetings

Despite the sometimes tense atmosphere at the meeting, a constructive outcome was achieved through the arrangement of two further meetings:

• Thursday 2 July in the Town Hall at 7.30 (rescheduled from 30 June in Pitlochry School). This facilitated meeting will be an opportunity to raise objections and put forward ideas and views about desirable developments for the Curling Rink and Town Centre sites;
• Wednesday 15 July, 7.30 in Moulin Hall to meet with planners, Development Committee councillors and conservation officials

After the meeting at the High School one of those attending spoke of this all providing a rare opportunity for concerned local people to gather together to develop views on how they wish their town to be positively shaped. “This is a chance for councillors, planners and developers to hear and help the democratic voice. Generally, there is concern to provide affordable housing and also the need to development the town centre,” he said.

The question remains: Is it possible to have intelligent collaboration to create a win-win situation - an equilibrium of rights for all stakeholders?  If so, it would have long lasting benefits for all concerned, leading to authentic sustainability.