Home   News   Article

Councillors refuse Roseisle holiday huts plan


By Staff Reporter

Register for free to read more of the latest local news. It's easy and will only take a moment.



Click here to sign up to our free newsletters!

PLANS to create eight holiday huts in a clearing in Roseisle Forest on the Moray coast have been refused.

The proposal by Millie Bothy ltd, which included the restoration of a derelict fisherman's bothy at the 7500 sqm duneland site, attracted 430 representations – 411 in opposition and 19 in support.

The environmental impact of the plan was among issues raised by objectors, while supporters said it would be a unique addition to the local tourism industry.

Under the application, the 35sqm wooden huts would have each slept up to four people and included a double bedroom, shower room, kitchen and dining/sitting area.

During a meeting of Moray Council's planning and regulatory services committee, held yesterday, principal planning officer Neal MacPherson said: "Part of the experience would see guests accessing the site on foot, having parked in the existing Scottish Forestry car park to the west."

The car park lies just under 2km from the site and a report said there would be the option of a golf buggy for less able visitors.

Mr MacPherson added: "It is noted in terms of external consultees that the only formal objection receives is from Heldon Community Council, although it is noted that the applicant has separately obtained support from Moray Seyside Toruism and Visit Scotland towards their proposal."

In their report to committee, planning officers said the development failed to comply with a number of council policies and would have a detrimental impact on the secluded character and rural amenity of the area.

It stated: "The proposal would significantly alter the character of this unspoilt dune area resulting in significant visual intrusion to the detriment of the character and appearance of the area of coastline."

Committee members unanimously followed their recommendation to refuse planning permission.



Do you want to respond to this article? If so, click here to submit your thoughts and they may be published in print.



This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies - Learn More