AN application to build self-catering holiday cottages in a Scottish national park has been rejected by a government official.
Proposals to build seven self-catering cabins, a toilet and shower block, and a manager’s house near Speybridge in the Cairngorms National Park were rejected by the park authority in December 2023.
That decision was appealed by the prospective developers, who took their proposals to the Scottish Government's Planning and Environmental Appeals Division (DPEA).
It was the second time the proposals had been submitted, with a redesign of the manager’s house – from two- to one-storey – among the key changes.
In their appeal statement, the family proposing the development – the MacPhersons – said they had “owned the Boat of Balliefurth Croft for over 40 years” and their field was already used as a campsite by groups canoeing along the Spey.
They argued that the development could “breathe new life into the croft” and provide “a sustainable way to keep this piece of land in our family for future generations to enjoy”.
However, a final refusal has been issued by the government official after a site visit.
Katrina Rice, a reporter appointed by Scottish Ministers, concluded that a manager’s house on site would not be needed as the campers who have used it each year since 1986 have managed without – and the main house is only 500 metres from the proposed site.
Rice further said that people would be likely to arrive at the developed camping cabins by car, changing the nature of the low-impact canoe camping which currently happens there. The existing access road, a narrow track, was deemed inadequate to handle the expected increase in vehicles.
She further concluded that the changes in use could have “significant effects” on the breeding capercaillie population in the nearby protected Craigmore Wood, as well as populations of Atlantic salmon, sea lamprey, otter, and freshwater pearl mussel in the nearby River Spey Special Area of Conservation.
Rice said that the “proposed development does not accord overall with the relevant provisions of the development plan and that there are no material considerations which would still justify granting planning permission”.
She added: “I have considered all the other matters raised, including the historic and strong connections of the appellants to the local area, the complaints from the neighbouring property about the operation of the existing campsite and the National Park Authority Planning Officer recommendation for approval, but there are none which would lead me to alter my conclusions.”
