Council plans could threaten special area of conservation - report

EXCLUSIVE by DOUGLAS SHEPHERD

An assessment completed by Scottish Borders Council in 2017 confirmed that housing developments on the Lowood Estate near Melrose could have a significant impact on the designated River Tweed Special Area of Conservation [SAC] which lies close to where hundreds of new homes are planned.

It has been revealed in a response to SBC's Main Issues Report [MIR] which forms part of the preparation of the Borders' second Local Development Plan, that the potential effects on the SAC were pinpointed in a so-called Habitats Appraisal Record or HAR produced by the local authority.

The HAR was assembled long before The £11 million deal (including fees) between SBC and Lowood's previous owners was concluded late last year. The council now owns 109 acres, much of it attractive parkland, together with a large country house and a collection of other properties.

The Tweedbank Masterplan for the area includes provision for residential developments on Lowood by private builders. But, as we have already reported, it is claimed the local housing market does not warrant house-building on such a grand scale.

A detailed report by consultants Jones Lang Lasalle (JLL) attempts to unpick the council's arguments for allocating the prime site as a future housing area. JLL represents Middlemede Properties whose Upper Pavilion salmon fishery adjoins Lowood. The consultants say in their submission that they acquired a copy of the HAR via Freedom of Information.

According to JLL: "It (the habitats appraisal) confirmed that housing development at Lowood would be likely to have a significant effect on the SAC's conservation objectives (thereby triggering the need for an appropriate assessment [AA] of the proposed plan to allocate the site for housing to be carried out) but then concluded that there would be no significant impact because unspecified mitigation measures would be put in place to offset the risk of what is then described as "potential minor effects".

"It is self-evident from the foregoing, that the Council has failed to carry out an AA and as part of that process set out the mitigation measures that would be needed to ensure that an adverse effect on the River Tweed SAC did not occur. The Council consequently also failed to consider whether the implementation of mitigation measures would impact on our client's riparian interest.

"Critically, in terms of its assessment of the effectiveness of the site (both in terms of site capacity and additional infrastructure cost), it has no information before it which would allow it to conclude that there would be no HRA (Habitats Regulatory Assessment) obstacle to planning permission for housing development on the site being granted. 

"Without information on whether the anticipated adverse impact can be properly mitigated, it follows in turn that the Council is currently unable to assess the cost involved in providing the appropriate level of mitigation and the impact which that additional cost may have on the overall viability of the site. This may include the payment of compensation."

JLL also claim  It is self-evident that in the absence of a properly modelled FRA (flood risk assessment)  the Council has no idea of the extent to which the Tweedbank site falls to be regarded as forming part of a functional floodplain. This in turn undermines assumptions made about net developable areas and housing numbers.

And the report concludes: "The Council now has an opportunity to address this serious matter with regard to Lowood, by acknowledging at this stage that the site’s proximity to sensitive national and European environmental designations, combined with the commercial viability and deliverability issues, all set against a very weak housing market dynamic, provide justification for not allocating the site an effective allocation in LDP2, in favour of more sustainable and deliverable alternatives."

NEXT: WHAT EXACTLY DID THE H.A.R SAY?