A contentious planning disagreement concerning a highly-rated holiday rental in the picturesque Perthshire village of Meigle has escalated to the Scottish Government, which is now tasked with finding a resolution. The dispute pits the local authority, Perth and Kinross Council, against Scotland’s primary environmental protection agency, SEPA, over the flood risk posed to the popular Airbnb property.
The property at the heart of the debate, known as the Old Smithy, a beautifully converted former blacksmith’s workshop situated in The Square, has garnered widespread acclaim from guests since it began operating as a short-term let almost three years ago. Its remarkable average rating of 4.95 stars from nearly 200 reviews attests to its popularity and the positive experiences it offers visitors to the region. The Core of the Conflict: Flood Risk and Guest Safety
The controversy stems from a retrospective planning application submitted by the property owner, Stephen Bailey, in January 2024. While Perth and Kinross Council planning officers recommended its approval, SEPA lodged a significant objection. The agency’s primary concern revolves around the property’s proximity to the Meigle Burn, located approximately 40 metres away, which they identify as a substantial flood risk.
SEPA’s objection highlighted the critical issue of safe passage for guests during a flood event. They expressed serious apprehension that there is no guaranteed flood-free route for entry or exit, potentially necessitating the rescue of occupants should the burn overflow. Proposed mitigation measures, such as providing blankets, rubber gloves, waterproof clothing, Wellington boots, and installing a flood gate at the front door, were explicitly deemed inadequate to ensure safety in a development type vulnerable to inundation.
Adding weight to SEPA’s concerns, the council’s own civil engineer specialising in flooding matters echoed the objections. The engineer pointed out that the applicant’s flood risk assessment (FRA) utilised an incorrect catchment area for its analysis and failed to incorporate a crucial climate change uplift, which is essential for predicting future flood scenarios accurately. Council’s Stance and Economic Considerations
Despite these significant environmental and engineering concerns, the planning team at Perth and Kinross Council strongly supported the retrospective application. Their rationale challenged SEPA’s demand for an additional flood risk assessment, labelling it as “unreasonable” given the circumstances. The council officers asserted that a combination of factors – including the site’s natural topography, the proposed flood gates, a clearly defined flood evacuation procedure, and crucially, ensuring that the holiday let and the main dwelling house remain under the same ownership – would offer sufficient protection to the occupants.
Furthermore, the council’s recommendation underscored what it termed the “modest benefit to the local economy” that the tourism generated by the cottage provides. This perspective suggests a balancing act between strict environmental regulations and the support for local businesses that contribute to the region’s prosperity, a common dilemma in many rural areas. The Old Smithy’s stellar reputation, evidenced by guest reviews describing it as an “absolutely charming place to stay,” further highlights its value to local tourism, attracting visitors who praise the owner’s communication and the property’s architect-designed, well-equipped interior. Owner’s Frustration and the Path to Holyrood
For Stephen Bailey, the owner, the ongoing dispute is a source of considerable frustration. He explained that the property was initially converted in 2020 with the intention of housing an elderly relative, who tragically passed away during the Covid-19 pandemic. While he secured the necessary licences for a short-term let, he was later informed that retrospective planning permission was also required. Mr. Bailey recounted having already commissioned a comprehensive flood survey in 2020. The demand for a new assessment, which incurred a substantial cost of £7,000, was met with incredulity, especially considering his main residence has never experienced flooding since 1998, and the Old Smithy stands approximately five metres higher and further away from the burn.
Mr. Bailey views SEPA’s objection as “bizarre” and a “blunt tool,” suggesting that the agency’s rigid application of regulations may not fully account for the specific characteristics of the property or the existing safety measures in place. This standoff between the council’s planning department, keen to support a successful local business, and SEPA’s steadfast adherence to flood risk protocols, unable to find common ground, has now reached a critical juncture.
Given the impasse, the decision on the future of the Old Smithy as a short-term let has been formally referred to Scottish ministers through the Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals (DPEA). This intervention signifies the complexity and significance of the issue, elevating a local planning dispute to a national level. The outcome will undoubtedly set a precedent for similar properties in areas susceptible to environmental risks across Perth and Kinross and potentially wider Scotland, as the government seeks to balance economic development with rigorous environmental protection and public safety.
The property at the heart of the debate, known as the Old Smithy, a beautifully converted former blacksmith’s workshop situated in The Square, has garnered widespread acclaim from guests since it began operating as a short-term let almost three years ago. Its remarkable average rating of 4.95 stars from nearly 200 reviews attests to its popularity and the positive experiences it offers visitors to the region. The Core of the Conflict: Flood Risk and Guest Safety
The controversy stems from a retrospective planning application submitted by the property owner, Stephen Bailey, in January 2024. While Perth and Kinross Council planning officers recommended its approval, SEPA lodged a significant objection. The agency’s primary concern revolves around the property’s proximity to the Meigle Burn, located approximately 40 metres away, which they identify as a substantial flood risk.
SEPA’s objection highlighted the critical issue of safe passage for guests during a flood event. They expressed serious apprehension that there is no guaranteed flood-free route for entry or exit, potentially necessitating the rescue of occupants should the burn overflow. Proposed mitigation measures, such as providing blankets, rubber gloves, waterproof clothing, Wellington boots, and installing a flood gate at the front door, were explicitly deemed inadequate to ensure safety in a development type vulnerable to inundation.
Adding weight to SEPA’s concerns, the council’s own civil engineer specialising in flooding matters echoed the objections. The engineer pointed out that the applicant’s flood risk assessment (FRA) utilised an incorrect catchment area for its analysis and failed to incorporate a crucial climate change uplift, which is essential for predicting future flood scenarios accurately. Council’s Stance and Economic Considerations
Despite these significant environmental and engineering concerns, the planning team at Perth and Kinross Council strongly supported the retrospective application. Their rationale challenged SEPA’s demand for an additional flood risk assessment, labelling it as “unreasonable” given the circumstances. The council officers asserted that a combination of factors – including the site’s natural topography, the proposed flood gates, a clearly defined flood evacuation procedure, and crucially, ensuring that the holiday let and the main dwelling house remain under the same ownership – would offer sufficient protection to the occupants.
Furthermore, the council’s recommendation underscored what it termed the “modest benefit to the local economy” that the tourism generated by the cottage provides. This perspective suggests a balancing act between strict environmental regulations and the support for local businesses that contribute to the region’s prosperity, a common dilemma in many rural areas. The Old Smithy’s stellar reputation, evidenced by guest reviews describing it as an “absolutely charming place to stay,” further highlights its value to local tourism, attracting visitors who praise the owner’s communication and the property’s architect-designed, well-equipped interior. Owner’s Frustration and the Path to Holyrood
For Stephen Bailey, the owner, the ongoing dispute is a source of considerable frustration. He explained that the property was initially converted in 2020 with the intention of housing an elderly relative, who tragically passed away during the Covid-19 pandemic. While he secured the necessary licences for a short-term let, he was later informed that retrospective planning permission was also required. Mr. Bailey recounted having already commissioned a comprehensive flood survey in 2020. The demand for a new assessment, which incurred a substantial cost of £7,000, was met with incredulity, especially considering his main residence has never experienced flooding since 1998, and the Old Smithy stands approximately five metres higher and further away from the burn.
Mr. Bailey views SEPA’s objection as “bizarre” and a “blunt tool,” suggesting that the agency’s rigid application of regulations may not fully account for the specific characteristics of the property or the existing safety measures in place. This standoff between the council’s planning department, keen to support a successful local business, and SEPA’s steadfast adherence to flood risk protocols, unable to find common ground, has now reached a critical juncture.
Given the impasse, the decision on the future of the Old Smithy as a short-term let has been formally referred to Scottish ministers through the Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals (DPEA). This intervention signifies the complexity and significance of the issue, elevating a local planning dispute to a national level. The outcome will undoubtedly set a precedent for similar properties in areas susceptible to environmental risks across Perth and Kinross and potentially wider Scotland, as the government seeks to balance economic development with rigorous environmental protection and public safety.