Long-established businesses in the centre of Melrose could be forced to close if councillors approve plans for a multi-million pound retail centre with 70-bedroom hotel in nearby Tweedbank, it has been claimed.
Meanwhile Scottish Borders Council's own landscape architect has lodged a written submission which is heavily critical of proposals to chop down scores of mature trees to clear space for the scheme. The local authority's ecology officer has already warned against the mass felling of over a hectare of woodland on the site.
Melrose & District Community Council has told the planners it is strongly against the development of the so-called Borders Gateway centre close to Tweedbank railway station.
In a written objection the community council claims:"The proposal includes a retail outlet which Melrose & District Community Council strongly oppose as we feel this will further dilute the shop and hotel businesses on the High Street of Melrose.
"We need to support what is one of the few
still strong vibrant High Streets in the Borders. Most of our shops are
occupied making Melrose somewhere people aspire to stay and shop".
The Melrose submission goes on to warn that there is a strong
possibility that some long-established businesses will be forced to close as has
happened in Galashiels and Hawick if the proposal is given the go
ahead.
It continues: "At present we have one
closed hotel hopefully getting refurbished with plans to re-open and one
reopening under new management. We cannot support anything which will affect this
fragile economy.
"This proposal contravenes
Planning Policy as it is placing this retail development on land retained for
Commercial Business having denied previous retailers the opportunity to develop
a retail outlet on this land SBC must stand by this.
Not Just Sheep & Rugby has already reported on the misgivings over the loss of so many trees at the Tweedbank location as expressed by the ecology officer and by Scottish Natural Heritage. Now council landscape architect Siobhan McDermott has weighed in with a critical written contribution.
Over a hectare of woodland is "protected" by a Tree Preservation Order, imposed by the council in 2006. But given SBC's track record on chopping down protected trees at Tweedbank in 2016 the TPO is unlikely to be allowed to stand in the way of development.
Ms McDermott points out: "The woodland was planted at the time the Industrial Estate was developed in the
1970s alongside the development of Tweedbank village as a residential area.
Tweedbank Village, Industrial Estate and Tweedbank Business Park were developed
within a scheme of structure planting that aimed to create a woodland framework
into which development would fit. This structure planting approach was also
adopted at the Borders General Hospital site continuing this design
philosophy.
"The resultant structure
woodlands and woodland belts have helped to reduce the visibility of development
in an area that lies within the Borders Strategic Green Network that is ‘a network of green spaces and green
corridors through, within and around settlements, linking open spaces within
settlements to the wider countryside, which can assist in enhancing the
biodiversity, quality of life and sense of place of an area."
In a withering comment on the felling proposals. Ms McDermott writes: "I consider the proposed development turns the SG Development Vision on its head
– proposing the removal of the woodland which will result in the landscape
screening being lost, the uninterrupted visibility of the development and does
not comply with the SG Development Vision aspiration to develop an internal
principal frontage along the western side of the site.
"I acknowledge that there might be scope to remove a portion of the internal edge
of the woodland to increase the developable area but I do not consider this
proposal gives due consideration to the visual amenity that the woodland
provides".
The landscape architect goes on to list specific concerns:
1 I suggest that the proposals amount to over development of the site and this has
required the removal of the majority of the screening woodland. The requirement
for car parking exacerbates the requirement for woodland removal as does the
assumed desire for visibility from the surrounding road network.
2. I suggest
the southern elevation of the retail store, and petrol filling station, seen as
they will be, entering Tweedbank do not achieve the high quality built
environment that meets the design standards aspired to in its
development vision.
3. The scale
of the hotel- with a roof height of more than 15 metres - is likely to dominate the
immediate area, with only a small number of trees retained to reduce the visual
impact and with not much more than a dozen trees, beech hedge and some
ground cover planting proposed.
4. The
Planting scheme does not compensate for the woodland removed. The planting of 45 standard trees (some native but the
majority horticultural varieties of native species) along with ground cover and
beech hedging will not adequately screen
or soften the proposed elements of the development. As a
planting scheme it seems more appropriate for the interior of the Business Park
but falls short of achieving key landscape screening as per the Development Vision
Ms McDermott concludes her report:"I would
welcome the developer reconsidering how a much greater proportion of the
woodland along the east and south boundary could be retained whilst achieving
some visibility through the existing structure planting.
"Given my
above concerns and the precedent that the almost complete removal of the largest
block of TPO woodland would create, I cannot support the application as
submitted".
No comments:
Post a Comment