Bid to remove land near Abbotsford from list of potential housing sites fails

A bid to prevent future development on land near Tweedbank and historic Abbotsford House has failed.
Netherbarns, next to Abbotsford.Netherbarns, next to Abbotsford.
Netherbarns, next to Abbotsford.

Councillors approved a local development plan drawn up by Scottish Borders Council officers listing sites in the region deemed to be potentially suitable for future housing developments at a full meeting of the authority held via video-link yesterday, September 25, .

Among the land so earmarked in that plan is Netherbarns, a hillside opposite Abbotsford, and it’s been given an indicative capacity of 45 houses.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Abbotsford was built for novelist Walter Scott after he bought land there in 1811 and it remained in the hands of his family until 2007, when ownership passed to a board of trustees following the death of Jean Maxwell-Scott.

Nearby Netherbarns has been at the centre of a series of planning disputes for over a decade.

In 2008, following an application for a housing development and subsequent appeals, Scottish Government ministers ruled “that there would be an increased visual impact on Abbotsford as a consequence of any urban development of Netherbarns”.

A government reporter also ruled against a proposed development of 45 houses in 2014, saying: “It appears to me that cultural and landscape considerations combine to provide an asset which should remain free of the impact of the suggested allocation and any subsequent development of Netherbarns.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

At yesterday’s meeting, Galashiels councillor Sandy Aitchison proposed an amendment to the development plan removing Netherbarns from the list of potential housing sites included.

Mr Aitchison, also depute leader of the council, said: “There is a statement in the local development plan that this is a new housing site, but it is hardly new.

“Developers have attempted to build here many times since 2006 and, with the agreement of four Scottish Government reporters, have been rejected.

“The lower levels of the site, which are more sensitive to the views of the house, will be free of housing, according to the developer, but for how long?

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“Once a developer is in the field in question, I consider it would be very difficult for any future planning committee to refuse further housing, and it’s worth stating that the number of houses is indicative. Anyone who has served on the planning committee knows these numbers are frequently exceeded.

“Successive reporters have agreed that this is not a site which should be developed because of its potential impact on Abbotsford House, its grounds and the concept that Walter Scott developed for the house itself and the outlook of the house, as well as the area beyond.

“It was part of a masterplan and is something which deserves to be protected.”

Kelso councillor Tom Weatherston begged to differ, saying: “I respect the opinions of my fellow councillor and the members of the public who wish to remove Netherbarns from the plan, but on this occasion I’ll have to respectfully disagree.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“I think our officers have worked very hard on this and they’ve come up with a proposal that can be supported by members, protect the landscape and provide housing where there is a clear housing need.

“At a site visit earlier this year, I was standing in front of the house and my personal opinion was that I could not see how housing on the other side of the river, separated by a mature wad of trees, would stop visitors from enjoying the attraction.

“Everyone agrees Abbotsford House is vitally important to the Borders’ tourism industry and should be protected.

“I don’t know anyone who visits famous landmarks who says they’re not going back because they can see real living life way in the distance.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“This proposal isn’t for things to be stuck way up in the air, or for a sewage works or a prison. It’s for houses for people to live in.

“We’re talking about a glimpse of these houses behind some trees at certain times of the year.”

Mid Berwickshire councillor Mark Rowley seconded Mr Aitchison’s motion, telling the meeting: “I think officers have gone through the right processes but have simply made the wrong judgement.

“It’s a finely balanced judgement but they’ve just gone in the wrong direction.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“There’s a lot of building going on in Gala at the moment and there is already allocation for 1,100 homes, many of those affordable, many of those supported by the council such as Beech Avenue. This won’t hold Gala back.

“We’ve had the usual stock objections to Abbotsford’s view. It’s alway paraphrased as ‘the trees will hide it, no one will stop coming, it’s only relevant some of the time, what’s all the fuss about?’

“Well, I’ve read in detail the 92 individual references that relate to Netherbarns. The case that it is irrelevant and isn’t going to affect visitors is wrong, wrong, wrong.”

Despite that objection, councillors voted by 11 votes to 18 to dismiss Mr Aitchison’s amendment and retain Netherbarns in the plan as a prospective housing site.