Overpaid PFI dividend made 'in good faith'

EXCLUSIVE by EWAN LAMB

The partnership which operates Scottish Borders Council's controversial Public Finance Initiative secondary schools project needed to recoup £120,000 from its Luxembourg-based shareholders after a financial error "overstated the company's available distributable profits", it has been revealed.

Since the arrangement with the council was set up in 2009, Scottish Borders Education Partnership [SBEP] Ltd. has racked up millions of pounds in operating profits on the expensive PFI school buildings in Earlston, Eyemouth and Duns.

The newly published 2021 accounts for SBEP shows the partnership's finance debtor - the Borders local authority - is due to pay £58.129 millions over the remaining period of the agreement which runs until November 2038. The outstanding sum stood at £60.168 million at the end of 2020.

The PFI Borders project logged an operating profit of £1.121 million last year for the ultimate parent company BBGI Global Infrastructure with its headquarters in Luxembourg. Annual turnover of £4.485 million included interest totalling £3.528 million received from SBC.

According to the report dividends paid to the BBGI shareholders amounted to £460,000 in 2021, up from £197,000 the previous year.

A detailed account of the dividend overpayment explains: "The directors approved that the company paid dividends of £580,000 in total during the year. After the balance sheet date analysis showed that the financial model and related accounts which had supported an interim dividend payment of £217,000 in December 2021 had overstated the company's available distributable profits.

"Consequently, the payment of the interim dividend had resulted in the company having negative reserves of £89,000 at the balance sheet date. When this was brought to the attention of the Board it was agreed that shareholders would reimburse £120,000 to the company".

It was noted the Board 'acted in good faith' in relying on the original financial model, and that lenders and shareholders were kept fully informed and supported the corrective action taken.

"The directors (Albert Naafs and Frank Schramm) do not expect this to have any adverse financial consequences for the company. The Board have reviewed the processes which resulted in the overpayment of dividends in the year.

"They are satisfied that suitable steps have been taken to ensure that similar issues will not arise again".

The latest figures showing the £1.121 million operating profit for 2021 means profits accruing to SBEP since Borders councillors signed the original deal in 2007 now exceed £11.5 million.

It is noted in the latest accounts: "The project continues to perform generally in line with the modelled expectations, and management of the scheme both logistically and financially remains under control. The directors remain confident that the company will maintain the current level of performance and keep meeting the obligations under the contract".

Borders advocacy service up for grabs

by DOUGLAS SHEPHERD

The charity which has provided support for thousands of vulnerable individuals on a range of issues since 2005 could be replaced next year when Scottish Borders Council invites bids for a £900,000 independent advocacy contract in another of its procurement exercises.

Borders Independent Advocacy Service (BIAS), a registered charity and a company without share capital which is based in Galashiels currently receives £190,000 a year from the council and NHS Borders which allows its team of seven staff including five specialist advocacy workers to deliver the service. The payment to BIAS has not increased since 2017.

On Friday the local authority published a so-called Future Contract Opportunity which confirmed the intention to expose the advocacy service to bidders. The process will begin in earnest early in 2023 when a new three-year contract with a two-year extension option will be offered. The estimated value of the deal is given as £970,000 (exclusive of VAT).

A short description of the procurement which forms part of the 'opportunity' notice states: "Independent advocacy is when people are supported to speak up for themselves by a person who is only there for them and has no ties to the other agencies or people in their lives. The Scottish Independent advocacy Alliance (SIAA) Code of Practice describes independent advocacy as a service that: puts the people who use it first; is accountable; is as free as it can be from conflicts of interest; is accessible".

Then a more detailed account explains that The Independent Advocacy Stakeholder Group intends to procure a provider that will deliver a high quality independent advocacy service for adult users of health and social care services in the Scottish Borders.

"The service should offer support for multiple service user groups including: Older people; Mental Health; Learning Disabilities; people with autism; generic health; Alcohol & Drug services; and Adult Protection; parents with these issues.

"The service will also be accessible to other users of health and social care services including the homeless, asylum seekers, offenders, carers. Support should be prioritised around the Mental Health Act, Adults with Incapacity, and Adult Protection."

The council document says the independent advocacy service should aim to improve the quality of life of those seeking support as a result of increased knowledge, understanding and active involvement in their care. The number of clients annually has ranged from 250 – 300 over the last 5 years.

However, the current BIAS workload appears to be higher than that, according to the charity's latest annual report which was published in August.

It shows there were 328 new referrals in 2021/22 while successfully concluding 365 referrals. The report states: "In total we worked with 562 unique individuals. All of them have a health or social care need and the issues for which they seek support are very broad. Many are the subject of statutory interventions under the Mental Health Act, Adults With Incapacity Act or Adult Protection".

Among the issues dealt with by BIAS are homelessness and access to health care. Confirmation had been received from SBC and NHS Borders of a further roll-over of the contract with BIAS to March 31st 2023.

The council's information for potential bidders says: "Key outcomes include: people have increased control regarding care arrangements; people have more choice in their care arrangements; people are more able to assert their rights in making change happen; increased knowledge and understanding of Self Directed Support and Independent Advocacy to stakeholders."

In their annual report BIAS trustees said the council and the health authority would be conducting a service review in the course of 2022 to inform the writing of a new specification for independent advocacy which reflects the needs of the Scottish Borders.

"It is not known at this stage whether there will be a full procurement exercise. We have been advised that the service will go to public procurement in due course".

And the report goes on to explain that in the event of not being awarded the new contract then BIAS staff working on core contract would transfer to the new provider.

 

Financial woes continue to plague Borders IJB

by EWAN LAMB

The joint organisation which integrates health and social care services in the Scottish Borders failed to meet seven of the eight national performance benchmarks during the last financial year as the pressures on the local health authority and the council continued to grow, resulting in a £4.7 million over-spend.

A delayed annual report from the Scottish Borders Integrated Joint Board [IJB] for 2021/2022 shows the scale of the issues facing health and social work professionals in the region as the proportion of elderly residents requiring care continues to grow.

The document shows the Borders IJB performed better than the national benchmarking system in a single area - "more people reported that they were able to look after their health very well or quite well".

But the report goes on to state: "We performed worse than the national benchmarks in the remaining eight National Health and Wellbeing outcome areas: Fewer adults who were supported at home agreed that they are supported to live as independently as possible. Fewer adults receiving care than the national average would rate the care they receive as excellent or good 

"Fewer people had a positive experience of care at their GP practice than the national average. Fewer adults supported at home agreed that their services and support had an impact on improving or maintaining their quality of life. Fewer adults supported at home agreed that they had a say in how their help, care or support was provided. Fewer adults supported at home agreed that their health and social care services seemed to be well co-ordinated. Fewer carers felt supported to continue in their caring role. Fewer adults supported at home agreed they felt safe."

Under a heading Performance Analysis, the annual report concedes: "It is important to note that due to the pressures that we have faced over the last year, we have seen a significant deterioration in local Health and Wellbeing Outcomes in 2021/22. This is very much reflective of the feedback that we have received from our service users, staff, unpaid carers and partners about the significant pressures that they are under, about the challenges of being able to provide or access key services in a timely manner, and in the higher levels of risk being experienced across the whole health and social care system."

In 2016 Ministerial approval was given under the Joint Working Public Bodies (Scotland) Act 2014 to establish the Scottish Borders Integration Joint Board (IJB) between NHS Borders and Scottish Borders Council. The IJB is a separate legal entity set up to integrate the planning and commissioning of health and social care services in the Scottish Borders. The IJB is responsible for the strategic planning of hospital services most commonly associated with emergency / unscheduled care.

The IJB has struggled financially from the outset. And it appears those financial issues will continue to confront the Board in future.

According to the annual report: "Financial outlook - The IJB continues to face significant financial challenges and both of its partners are facing challenges in meeting the demand for health and social care services within the financial quantum available. The Scottish Government budget outlined resource commitments for a single year pending the medium term spending review in May 2022. 

"The IJB budget is therefore presented on a one year basis in line with SG planning assumptions. Within the IJB, the key barriers to managing the financial position arises from demographic pressures of demand, together with capacity to plan and deliver required levels of transformation and efficiency savings. The significant growth anticipated in the number of older people and their need for suitable services, requires innovative solutions to allow services to be provided within funding levels available and, the ability of the partnership to transform services to help meet this demand."

 In his management commentary, Chris Myers, recently appointed chief officer of the IJB, says in his first five months in post he had heard from many people who use the services, from unpaid carers, and from people delivering health, social care and adult social work services that the pressures they are experiencing are unlike anything that they have ever faced before. 

"This certainly also rings true from my perspective. The prolonged impacts of Covid-19 have been felt by everyone in the Scottish Borders, and this is reflected in our health and wellbeing outcomes. It has also led to pressures in the health, social care and adult social work services commissioned by the Integration Joint Board. In addition to Covid-19, we are faced with meeting increased levels of need and dependency, in the context of significant financial challenges and workforce challenges. 

"The Integration Joint Board will continue to renew its focus on partnerships, on engagement, and on working with our communities to enhance how we strategically commission to best improve the outcomes for people living in the Scottish Borders, in these challenging times. By taking this approach, the Integration Joint Board will support improved outcomes while supporting a more sustainable future health, social care and adult social work landscape, with the people of the Scottish Borders at the front and centre of everything we do."

The accounts will now be examined by public spending watchdog Audit Scotland. In its audit plan for the Borders IJB Audit Scotland states: "There remains uncertainty around financial sustainability as the wider impact of Covid-19 is not yet known. In addition, there is a projected shortfall of £6.3 million against the required efficiency savings of £9.2 million agreed as part of the 2021/22 budget for the IJB. There is a risk of added financial pressure in subsequent years as budgets become increasingly constrained."

Borders council to outsource £12 million day services

EXCLUSIVE by DOUG COLLIE

Private businesses are being invited to provide day services for Borders adults with learning disabilities who currently receive support from the local council or a charity, a move which aims to save the authorities £350,000.

A notice published by Scottish Borders Council is seeking bids for contract lots estimated to be worth £12 million [exclusive of VAT] over the next five years. The outsourcing move has been set in motion despite some reservations which were expressed in a report to councillors in July.

The five lots are based on the locations in which the day services are currently provided by either SB Cares - formerly an arms length company set up by SBC, but which had to be taken back in-house when it encountered serious difficulties - or the Cornerstone charity which operates in the so-called Eildon area, based on Galashiels.

A procurement description accompanying the invitation to tender states: "The requirement is for day service provision for Adults with Learning Disabilities (AWLD) and/or autism across the Scottish Borders. Day services provide tailored activities and development opportunities for AWLD in a safe environment with the aim of supporting them to develop their social skills, employability, to gain new experiences, and live independently in the community. 

"Importantly, day services also provide respite for carers and family members. The day service is a mixture of buildings-based support and outside activities. Time limit for receipt of tenders: 7th November 2022."

The background to the proposed outsourcing is set out in a report prepared for members of the Scottish Borders Integrated Joint Board (IJB) which also has input from NHS Borders.

According to that document from officers Simon Burt and Chris Myers: "Purpose: To seek approval to recommission the Learning Disability Day support services currently provided by SB Cares and Cornerstone (existing providers) from ‘The Market’. 

"Recommendations: The Health & Social Care Integration Joint Board is asked to: Agree to issue Direction to Scottish Borders Council to recommission the Learning Disability Day support services from the market. Personnel: Existing staff will be eligible to TUPE [Transfer of Undertakings Protection of Employment] across to new providers."

The report claimed the project will have a positive impact on carers as the day support services provides a dual purpose in that it also provides respite for carers and family members. 

"Engagement with carers took place through 2020-2022 and this has informed the model to be commissioned. A small number of families are actively working with us in establishing the evaluation criteria for tender submission and will participate in formal interviews at evaluation and selection stage. Financial: A savings target of £350k is attached to this project and is reported through the Council’s Fit for 2024 programme board."

But the authors also outlined the risks which might come to light during the outsourcing process.

They warned: "The commissioning process may not attract suitable applicants to deliver any or all of the contract. In this scenario SB Cares and the current independent sector provider will need to continue to reshape while the Learning Disability Service re-visit and consider reshaping the model further.

"A lack of suitable applicants will place the financial savings target at significant risk. Currently £200,000 has been saved recurrently. However this reduction, in the event of there being no suitable applicants for contracts, is unlikely to be sustainable as services remobilise from the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. 

"Out-sourcing the 5 existing day services run by SB Cares may attract adverse public, Trade Unions and impacted staff commentary."

The IJB was told the last significant review of learning disability day services was in 2011 with a shift to more localised support, disinvestment in some buildings based support, and reinvestment in Local Area Coordination support. 

"We now need to continue on the journey of modernisation of locally based services by commissioning a refreshed model of support that maximises the independence of individuals, ensuring there are some buildings based services for those with the most complex needs and providing services closer to home.  Our focus needs to continue to shift towards meeting people’s outcomes in a variety of settings within a model of support that can respond flexibly."

The service needed to deliver more financially efficient services to manage within allocated budgets and cope with increasing demand, primarily driven by increasing complexity of support needs rather than numbers of service users.

A total of 187 individuals were receiving day support pre-Covid in a range of settings. Cornerstone (charity) provides day opportunities for 32 people in the Galashiels area. SB Cares caters for the needs of 59. Within the scope of the review were services provided by Scottish Borders Council: · Green Gardens – Peebles (Tweeddale) · Katherine Elliot Centre – Hawick (Teviot) · Rutherford Square – Kelso (Cheviot) · Lanark Lodge – Duns (Berwickshire) · Jedburgh Day Service (Cheviot); provided by 3rd sector · Cornerstone – Galashiels (Eildon).

"Scottish Borders Council have agreed to make a building available in the Teviot, Cheviot, Tweeddale and Berwickshire localities for new providers to use as there is currently no suitable alternative building space available. This will ensure that people have access to the appropriate environment with required space and equipment and no lengthy delay in service provision. The provider in the Eildon Locality is expected to source a suitable building space."

"Moving forward we recommend that contracts be a minimum of 5 years with the option of extending by another 2 years."

Three more reporters for Borders plan

by EWAN LAMB

Scotland's national planning authority has appointed three more reporters to work on the forthcoming examination of Scottish Borders Council's Local Development Plan [LDP] which means the local authority faces a sizeable bill to have hundreds of outstanding issues resolved.

The initial appointment of Nick Smith as the reporter for the examination means the Borders council will have to pay £400 a day for his services.

But now it has been confirmed that Philip Barton, Malcolm Mahony and Alison Kirkwood will also be involved in the process. It is likely their fees could amount to £290 per day plus expenses.

As we reported previously the Borders LDP contains dozens of development proposals including housing allocations for each of the area's settlements. A consultation exercise prior to SBC's request for an examination of the plan attracted a total of 1,043 representations from members of the public, community groups, local and national businesses and organisations.

Following analysis of the representations, there are unresolved issues linked to 1,008 of these submissions. These have been organised into 76 groups.

The examination will determine which of the council's proposed housing allocations for each Borders settlement should remain in the LDP.

In its representation, for example, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) has requested that four of the proposed sites for housing developments should be removed from the document because of the perceived risk of flooding. In addition, the environmental watchdogs is seeking amendments to housing plans in a substantial number of cases.

A large number of the proposals in the LDP are the target for challenges from local residents and from community groups, many of them clearly opposed to further housebuilding in their area.

There have also been submissions which express views and criticisms on policies including the development of more wind farms among the Borders hills. 

These projects are among the most contentious, and there is a widely held view that the region already has more than its fair share of turbines while the renewable energy lobby takes an entirely different view.

The council states in its introduction to the wide-ranging LDP: "It sets out a series of policies and proposals indicating where development can or should not take place and provides guidance on the future provision of a range of subjects including housing, business and industrial use, transport, infrastructure and recreation. It seeks to deliver sustainability and promote a low carbon economy, promote health and wellbeing, promote economic growth, regenerate town centres and give protection to the built and natural heritage.

"In preparing the LDP consideration must be given to the changing context and challenges of a range of planning related matters within the Scottish Borders which must be identified and addressed."

And in a section of the LDP which looks at the impact of Coronavirus the planners claim: "A high performing planning system will have a critical role in supporting our future economic and societal recovery. The LDP must address these issues and policies within the LDP allow contemplation of a range of material considerations at any given period. 

"Consequently, implications Covid 19 may be having on, for example, the economy, performance of town centres, business recovery, house building, health and well-being will be addressed as part of the decision making process for relevant planning applications."

The document's comments on 'Planning for Housing' include the following: "The LDP incorporates a generous supply of housing land for a range of users. Although there have been limited annual completion rates for mainstream housing, there has been a significant increase in housebuilding by Registered Social Landlords (RSLs) which has offered greater opportunities for affordable units. 

"Given the limited take up of allocated housing sites, the high land supply within the current adopted LDP and the limited number of new houses required for the Scottish Borders as identified within HNDA2 [Housing Needs and Demands Assessment], the LDP promotes an appropriate number of new housing sites to reflect the level of demand."

Borders housing numbers depend on "strong growth"

by DOUGLAS SHEPHERD

Scottish Borders Council is the only local authority in south-east Scotland to rely on a 'strong growth' scenario when estimating the levels of new housebuilding in the region over the next 20 years despite the distinct possibility of an economic recession.

The other five councils - City of Edinburgh, East Lothian, West Lothian, Midlothian and Fife - have adopted a more cautious  approach, using a 'steady growth' tagline in assessing future house numbers.

By deciding on the 'strong growth' level the Scottish Borders is forecasting the development of 3,827 new homes between now and 2040, 738 more than under a 'steady growth' scenario.

The facts and figures are contained in the south-east region's third Housing Needs and Demands Assessment (HNDA) which was prepared by a project team and has now been signed off by the Scottish Government and by senior officers in each of the six councils.

A series of reports and tables linked to the HNDA explains that local authorities are required through legislation to develop a HNDA on a five-yearly cycle, providing an evidence-base for housing policy decisions in Local Housing Strategies and land allocation decisions in Development Plans.

The purpose of the HNDA is to estimate the future number of additional housing units to meet existing and future housing need and demand by housing market area, based on a range of scenarios rather than precise estimates.

Factors behind the Borders' strong growth scenario are listed in the report like this:

"More people move to Scottish Borders from Edinburgh and the Lothians, making use of the links to the City by rail, in particular to the council's Northern HMA (Housing Market Area) and parts of Central HMA. Tourists are attracted to the area with Tapestry opening in Galashiels, and a wider Masterplan relating to the town centre, with Destination Tweed continuing investment in biking facilities in the Tweed valley. Central Borders Innovation Park expands and redevelops and the expansion of Tweedbank for housing and commercial development is underway. High levels of investment lead to improved digital connectivity, opening opportunities for businesses in rural areas of the Scottish Borders, and the new railway station at Reston provides more development opportunities on the East Coast."

And these are the elements put forward for a Scottish Borders 'steady growth' situation:

"The Borders continues to see moderate levels of in-migration from Edinburgh and the Lothians, particularly in the Central and Northern HMAs. Tweedbank expansion is progressing at a steady pace. The Borders Railway feasibility study is completed, and planning has commenced to ensure delivery. New and improved business units are provided in Coldstream and Hawick."

The report makes it clear that Scottish Borders Council subsequently advised that the 'Strong Growth' scenario was most appropriate in their case.

A section of the report dedicated to social housing says: "While wider housing policy decisions will be considered in determining housing supply targets, the analysis shows differing levels of housing delivery across South-east Scotland over the last decade, with the least provision of housing in Scottish Borders, both proportionately and numerically."

So far as the condition of the existing housing stock is concerned, the report notes that around 243,000 dwellings across tenures in the region do not meet the Scottish Housing Quality Standard [SHQS], particularly impacting on the City of Edinburgh and Scottish Borders.

"SHQS non-compliance is most prevalent in owner-occupied housing in East Lothian and the City of Edinburgh; social housing in Scottish Borders; private rented housing in Fife. Significant work will be required to ensure existing properties in the social and private sectors are retrofitted to improve energy efficiency and decarbonised heat to meet new zero emissions targets."

Other interesting data: Second homes - across South East Scotland an estimated 5,320 dwellings are second homes, the highest level of these being in Fife (West & Central) with 1,893 second homes, followed by the City of Edinburgh and Scottish Borders with 1,809 and 968 respectively. However, Scottish Borders (1.6%), Fife (1.3%) and East Lothian (1.1%) are shown to have the highest percentage of second homes as a proportion of housing within area."

 And "Energy efficiency ratings - of the six local authorities, Scottish Borders has the poorest ratings at 60.7 and East Lothian at 64.5. Above average ratings are shown in West Lothian (69.4), Midlothian (66.8), the City of Edinburgh (66.7) and Fife (65.8)."

Using that 'strong growth' scenario it is estimated Scottish Borders will require 335 new homes per year between 2021 and 2025. Then the numbers fall to 134 per annum from 2026 to 2030. Between 2031 and 2035 an annual figure of 150 is shown with a total of 147 new homes required each year from 2036 to 2040. 

As reported here recently the new Scottish Borders Council Local Development Plan - including allocation of housing sites - is about to be scrutinised in an examination to be conducted by Scottish Government planning reporter Nick Smith.

 

A thousand issues for £400 a day Borders examination

EXCLUSIVE by DOUG COLLIE

An examination of Scottish Borders Council's proposed Local Development Plan [LDP] will get underway later this month following the appointment of a Government reporter who is expected to look into over a thousand unresolved issues across 52 of the region's 93 towns and villages.

The council has been told it will have to pay £400 per day for the services of  planning reporter Nick Smith with the possibility of additional reporters being appointed 'to aid the speedy delivery of the (examination) report'. Any administrators assigned to the project will require a £160-a-day fee from the local authority.

The LDP contains dozens of development proposals including housing allocations for each of the area's settlements. A consultation exercise prior to SBC's request for an examination of the plan attracted a total of 1,043 representations from members of the public, community groups, local and national businesses and organisations.

Ian Aikman, chief planning and housing officer at SBC states in a letter to the Scottish Government's planning division: "Following analysis, there are unresolved issues pertaining to 1,008 of these representations. These have been organised into 76 groups."

That appears to constitute a formidable task for Mr Smith who is due to start work on the Borders examination from September 26. Some of the issues are both complicated and controversial including the LDP proposals on housing at Netherbarns, Galashiels opposite the Abbotsford home of Sir Walter Scott. The Netherbarns section of the document attracted scores of letters of objection from around the world and from the Abbotsford Trustees.

There were objections too in the case of the council's plans for 300 houses and associated developments on the Lowood Estate, near Melrose, which the local authority purchased in 2018 for more than £10 million, including professional fees.

An initial planning application has been submitted to SBC (by SBC) for permission to start the long and costly process of developing infrastructure on Lowood. It is not clear whether the application for road building at the site will be affected by the LDP examination.

One of the objection submissions came from Ian Lindley, former director of planning and economic development at the Borders local authority. His written representation covered a number of settlements including Lowood/Tweedbank.

Mr Lindley claims the north eastern extent of the proposed mixed use area at Lowood breaches existing and even the limited proposed tree screening and extends to the very edge of the Tweed. 

"Why bring mixed use to such a public focus on the edge of land designated of special landscape value and in sight of the iconic Listed Lowood Bridge in such a sensitive valley setting, immediately alongside the protected River Tweed and encroach upon an area subject to flooding?", he asks. "Where also is the contingency planning for Climate Change?  Reference is made to a possible replacement for Lowood Bridge and to the alignment of any Waverley route extension, but no clear indication of either is shown.

"How and where will existing roads link to any new bridge alignment? What are the impacts on the proposed site plot layout, screen planting and future responsibilities? How will buildings be arranged to address the edge of any new road or railway? How will railway land-take affect the above, (including creation of wider embankments to achieve rail headroom clearance over main roads)? How will the impact, on existing or proposed planting, of associated tree-free zones (as required by rail operators to ensure clearance between trees and overhead electric catenary supplies) be assessed/planned and implemented?"

Mr Lindley warns that without clarity on such issues, a series of uncoordinated ‘discoveries’ around these related issues is likely which would lead to the development of "another low quality/anywhere town industrial site, but in the middle of the Borders scenic gem and tourist hot spots."

Middlemede Properties Ltd., the owners of salmon fishing rights on the Tweed right next to the Lowood Estate say the Lowood site has failed the effectiveness test and has not been deliverable within the set Scottish Government timeframe for the allocation. One of the fundamental factors is the problem with development viability relative to the considerable infrastructure constraints that exist, according to the company. There has been a failure to address a delivery mechanism given the considerable infrastructure requirements.

Middlemede's agents state: "It is considered the Council has failed to carry out a proper Appropriate Assessment of the potential impact of this development on the River Tweed SAC [Special Area of Conservation] because it had not considered what mitigation measures it proposes to apply.

"Integral to this exercise and indeed to our client’s interests in the river will be the need for a new bridge and flood protection works to be considered and costed. The work involved in the creation of a new bridge at Lowood is the work that has the potential to create the greatest adverse impact on the habitat so this needs to be established at this stage as part of the overall planning process."

There is an objection too from the Scottish Government Planning and Architecture Division to the Lowood plans.

Included in their submission is the following passage: "The ‘Site Requirements’ should include any required transport interventions that have been identified through a cumulative transport appraisal including sites from within Galashiels that do not have planning permission, to fully understand the potential cumulative impact of the developments.

"It is not considered appropriate to include a large development site without fully understanding the potential transport implications, how the site can be accessed sustainably and how the site will accord with the National Transport Strategy travel hierarchy."

But SBC is sticking to its guns. Its reaction to the Tweedbank representations is that there should be  'NO MODIFICATION TO THE TWEEDBANK SETTLEMENT PROFILE AS SET OUT IN THE PROPOSED LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN'.

The reasons given are that it has already been established that the site is deliverable hence its allocation for development with an indicative capacity of 300 units through the process of the Council’s Supplementary Guidance on Housing. This was approved by the Scottish Ministers.

"The allocation of this site for mixed use development has therefore been accepted within the recent past. The SPG [Supplementary Planning Guidance] confirms adequate infrastructure would require to be provided in order to deliver the site. It is not suggested that the indicative number of units will all be built within a 5-year period. 

"Typically, a site of this size in the Borders may take some time to be completed notwithstanding the fact the Council remains clear the site will be a highly popular option for potential house builders and house purchasers. The Council’s Housing Land Audit 2019 programming shows that 30 dwelling units would come forward in 2023, 50 in 2024, 50 in 2025, 50 in 2026 and 120 post 7 years. This is an effective and deliverable site which should remain within the Local Development Plan as a mixed use allocation."

And the council argues that the transport issue raised by the Scottish Government has already been addressed.

A transport assessment commissioned by the authority "found that the movements associated with the 300 residential units at the site would not be expected to be significant. As an average, the maximum number of 157 two-way vehicles from the development would add less than three vehicles every minute to the road network."