Park of Keir update: Not enough detail

Scant information on talks progress

Information updating locals on the progress of legal talks between Stirling Council and Park of Keir developers has failed to go far enough for some.

Local Green councillor Alasdair Tollemache and protest group RAGE say information forwarded by council planners to councillors last week has not provided the level of detail they wanted.

A bid for more transparency over the negotiations to progress the controversial Park of Keir development was unanimously backed by Stirling councillors in March.

Councillor Tollemache and Tory councillor Douglas Dodds, who both represent Dunblane and Bridge of Allan, wanted more information to be made public about the talks between the council’s planning authority and the developers.

The planned £40 million development, backed by Judy Murray, includes a tennis and golf centre, museum, 19 luxury houses plus a 150-bed hotel.

It was given the green light by the Scottish Government last August despite an independent Reporter, who chaired a public inquiry into the proposal, recommending refusal.

The Notice of Intention issued by the Scottish Government in August last year stated that Scottish Ministers were minded to grant planning permission subject to a planning obligation to achieve a number of aims.

These included: securing education and affordable housing contributions; an agreement that no further residential development will be undertaken on the wider site; and to set out arrangements to ensure the sports facilities are accessible to the general public and with a pricing structure that ensures the facilities are affordable.

Since then the council has been negotiating with Park of Keir Partners and their agents to agree the wording of the legal obligation.

Planners told councillors last week: “The parties and the Scottish ministers are currently working to a deadline of May 31 for concluding the agreement.”

They added it was expected to include that the contributions will be paid by the developer in arrears upon the completion of each unit for the first nine units. Following that, the balance of the full contribution for education and affordable housing will be paid by the developer upon completion of the 10th unit.

Also to be included is a provision which prevents the developer from constructing any further housing on the housing land, save for the 19 units that will be permitted by the Scottish ministers’ decision; and arrangements to ensure the sports facilities are accessible to the general public and with a pricing structure that ensures the facilities are affordable.

The officials added: “The council and the developer have had a discussion as to the nature of the arrangements which would be covered by these obligations to ensure the facilities are accessible. Following that discussion, the developer is working up a proposal on how the facilities will be operated on a basis which will be accessible and affordable to the general public for the council’s consideration.

“Security to ensure long term affordability and accessibility is to be achieved through enforcing the Section 75 legal agreement.

“There will be a prohibition on the occupation of the housing until the sports facility has been built out to a suitable extent, albeit the detail of this obligation has not yet been finalised.

“Subject to progress being made with the detailed wording of the Section 75, we are working towards the s75 being presented to a planning and regulation panel in early summer for scrutiny by councillors. Any slippage with this timescale may require a further short period extension to be agreed with the Scottish Ministers.”

Councillor Tollemache said this week, however, that “no deal is better than a bad deal”.

He added: “The statement we recently received has nothing in the way of detail on how these obligations are to be met and many are concerned in the community that the development will go ahead without adequate safeguards in place. I call now for proper transparency giving the community councils an opportunity to comment on any proposed agreement between the parties prior to this going to a planning panel.”

RAGE chair Inga Bullen said: “We are pleased the council have been given an update, but disappointed about the lack of detail. We were hoping for a more open and transparent process.”

We were hoping for a more open and transparent process