Councillors will be asked to approve a proposal to demolish much of Ayr’s iconic Station Hotel this week.

Since 2018, South Ayrshire Council has been paying around £60,000 a month to ‘encapsulate’ the crumbling building to ensure public safety after it was left to deteriorate by owner Eng Huat Ung.

In March the council commissioned a £25k report to see how it could best meet its legal obligations to make the site safe.

At the same time a separate feasibility study into the potential redevelopment of the train station has been ongoing.

Consultants Mott McDonald were tasked with developing three potential avenues to be brought to the table on Thursday. The report recommends option three to councillors.

These are:

  • Maintaining the current ‘encapsulation’ and scaffolding (£6m over five years)
  • Partial demolition and works to ‘stabilise’ the building (£7.8m)
  • Demolition of the south section of the hotel (£6.6m)

A fourth option to remove the scaffolding and create an exclusion zone for public safety was dismissed early on.

The council would also have to secure additional funding as its reserves would not cover the costs.

The case against maintaining the existing approach is primarily financial.

While maintaining the encapsulation is estimated at £6m over five years, the council would continue to be liable for costs should a solution not be found by then.

The second option involves the replacement of the roof at the southern part of the hotel with a lighter material. Other stabilisation works would be carried out as well.

Like the existing encapsulation, this is viewed as a temporary solution. The consultants also admit they don’t know whether the work would impact the stability of lower floors and walls.

The upfront cost of £7.4m would, however, be mitigated by the monthly encapsulation costs no longer being required.

The third option is the most radical, involving the demolition of the section of the building currently under the encapsulation works.

This would require to be carried out ‘from the top down’ given the proximity to the railway line and potential for harmful materials like asbestos.

The report states: “While Option 3 has significant upfront costs of approximately £6.6m, it would permanently remove the unstable section of the building, however it would be a complicated process and would result in the loss of a significant part of the historic building.”

The report acknowledges that both options two and three would cause disruption to the railway line.

Option 2 is estimated to require a six month shutdown of the trainline followed by weekend works for the roof replacement.

Option 3 is significantly shorter, with six weeks of disruption to the rail service.

Approval for these works would take around 18 months. In the meantime, the current encapsulation would need to be kept in place.

The report concludes: “It is recommended that Option 3  is considered the most appropriate, as it permanently addresses the unstable aspects of the building and puts a fixed cost to the safety works required.

“If agreed, a notice would be served on the building’s owners, ordering them works that are necessary to remove the danger and a time period for doing so.

“If the owners fail to carry out the works the owners are guilty of an offence under the Act and the council may require to carry out the work necessary to complete the work required by the notice and may recover from the owner any expenses reasonably incurred by it doing so.

“Given the lack of previous response from the owner of the building, there is every likelihood that the council may, though not legislatively required to, carry out the necessary works required under the notice ie. demolition of the Southern Section.”

The report acknowledges that, in the current financial situation, the council does not have enough in its reserves to fund the proposal and would require to seek additional funding.

Councillors will also be asked to extend the current encapsulation payment of £207k until March 2023.