Council's waste management 'funders' worth nothing at all

EXCLUSIVE by LESTER CROSS

Over 3,200 investors who placed £220 million in the offshore fund which was meant to bankroll a £23 million waste treatment plant for Scottish Borders Council have been told the value of their shares is "nil" and will cease to exist following the formal dissolution of the company.

The devastating confirmation that the New Earth Recycling & Renewables Infrastructure Fund [NERR] is a completely worthless entity follows a seven-year investigation on the Isle of Man by joint liquidators.

A number of compensation claims have been lodged in the courts amid allegations the entire NERR operation was a scam of massive proportions. But the insolvency experts have concluded that it will not be possible to recover any assets for the victims.

Their money was being used to prop up penniless New Earth Solutions Group (NESG), the waste treatment outfit handed a £80 million contract by SBC in 2011, including the construction of a 'cutting edge' incinerator at Easter Langlee, Galashiels.

After five years during which time the council was strung along with a series of excuses for repeated delays by NESG and NERR the treatment plant scheme was abandoned after costing local taxpayers more than £2 million without a single brick being laid. The chosen technology would not function properly while NERR could not come up with the cash.

The NERR fund disaster has also cost the Isle of Man Financial Services Authority (IOMFSA) many thousands of pounds as the regulator has funded the entire liquidation process since the appointment of an insolvency team in 2016.

This week, in an update report for creditors and investors, joint liquidators Alex Adam and David Craine say their role had been to investigate the reasons for the failure of NERR, determine whether liability for the failure could be attributed to one or more parties, and then consider whether there were viable claims which could be brought against those parties. 

The report explains: "As you will be aware from previous updates, the Liquidators have been investigating potential claims against one or more third parties with the objective of issuing proceedings to recover value for the liquidation estate.

"Since our last report, the Liquidators have obtained detailed legal advice, including from leading Counsel, on the prospects of successfully bringing legal action against two different parties. Unfortunately, while the advice does suggest there is merit in relation to both potential claims, it has also highlighted a number of significant challenges which mean that the overall opinion is that it is more likely than not that the Liquidators would be unsuccessful should they pursue such claims." 

The liquidators have provided full details of the investigation IOMFSA as the Isle of Man Treasury had funded the costs of the liquidation to this point. 

Investors are told: "In light of the legal advice received, the FSA has recommended that Treasury withdraws funding other than as required to bring the liquidation to a conclusion. The Liquidators have considered whether there are any alternative sources of funding available to them however, in the circumstances of this case, have concluded that there are no realistic options."

The liquidators will now apply to the Manx court for orders that the liquidation be terminated and that the Company be dissolved. 

And the report concludes: "We are aware that many investors have been unable to fully write down the value of their investments in [the fund] while a possibility of a return from the liquidation estate has remained. As there is no longer any prospect of a return to investors, the liquidators can confirm that the value of all shareholders’ investments in [NERR] is nil and that the shares will cease to exist following the formal dissolution of the Company."

NERR provided significant finance to support and back the start-up and expansion of the UK-based NESG companies over a number of years. These investments were made into loss making activities and the development of operations which ultimately proved to be unsuccessful. 

As the loans made by NERR were unsecured at the date of the insolvency of NESG they ranked equally with the other unsecured creditors and behind the bank debt which was secured. 

At the date of appointment of the administrators, NESG and its associates had secured bank debt outstanding of £41.8 million. And yet Scottish Borders Council appears to have been blissfully unaware of the New Earth group's insolvent state. The New Earth administrators noted in their report that there were insufficient funds to repay even the secured bank debt in full.

A so-called sworn statement of affairs by the directors of NERR as the fund went under indicated equity investments of £60.8 million in NESG together with loans totalling over £128 million.

NERR investors were told in 2016 that potential recovery options included misfeasance, fraudulent trading, and fraudulent disposal or concealment of assets. But it seems none of those possible avenues resulted in success for the liquidators.

An observer of the NERR scandal told us: "I could have predicted that the liquidation would result in zero recovery back in 2016. Even as the life offices were continuing to list NERR on their platforms for the scammers to use, the tell-tale signs that the funds were worthless were obvious.

"It is, indeed, an absolute tragedy. For 3,250 investors who have lost every penny of their £220 million worth of investments. And this liquidation has been a complete waste of time, energy and hope for the victims."

'Lowood House should be retained' - 2021 council report

by DOUGLAS SHEPHERD

The surprise disclosure that Scottish Borders Council may decide to bulldoze a £1 million mansion house as part of a major development project means the local authority will need to ditch its own Design Guide for the scheme, produced as recently as June 2021.

Last week we reported that Borders councillors were to be updated on proposals - estimated to cost £108 million - to extend Tweedbank village by building hundreds of houses on Lowood Estate, near Melrose, acquired in 2018 by SBC at a cost of £11 million.

A report drawn up by council officers for discussion this Thursday includes a section on the future of Lowood House, currently costing taxpayers £20,000 a year in upkeep while it stands empty. Critics of the controversial Tweedbank expansion were shocked to learn that demolition of the house was now considered to be the best option after a number of other possibilities were examined and discarded as unviable.

These included converting the house into a hotel, turning it into residential apartments, or marketing it with a price tag of £1 million.

An individual who contacted Not Just Sheep & Rugby after our coverage of the report commented: "There is no mention in the document of the fact that selling or developing the big house was to be one of the financial contributions to investment payback. Now it is to become a cost and not a benefit."

Thursday's meeting will be told that total demolition of Lowood House, long-time home of the Hamilton family, would cost the council more than £400,000.

The Design Guide referred to earlier was published by SBC just 21 months ago with the lengthy title of Tweedbank - Vision for Growth & Sustainability. A Community for the Future. Delivering Development Quality.

There are numerous references to Lowood House and its environs in the document which was to be used as a guide by developers.

For example: "Planning applications should demonstrate that account has be taken of landscape, visual and heritage matters which address the importance of the surviving buildings, structures, boundaries, landscape and estate character, and their contribution to the site’s character and setting. 

"Notwithstanding this, the following prominent features of the site are considered to be important to the estate and parkland character of the site and must be protected and enhanced: • Lowood House • Cluster of predominantly stone with some harled cottages and outbuildings • High stone boundary walls, giving a strong sense of enclosure, and the hierarchy of other historic boundaries on site. Historic driveway giving a carefully curated sense of arrival to Lowood House". 

The guide makes it clear that development must seek to protect and enhance those features that contribute to the historic estate and parkland character of the site and seek to secure positive enhancements for biodiversity. 

"The relationship between the key natural and built assets on the site should be retained, and views preserved where possible within, to and from the designed landscape. The estate’s existing buildings are attractive and valuable historic structures which should, wherever possible, be retained within their existing uses or re-purposed appropriately. Developers should identify innovative uses and ways of conserving these structures as faithfully as possible."

But that is not all the Design Guide had to say about Lowood House.

The Tweedbank report included in its 'vision statement' the following: "The historic heart of the site provides a strong neighbourhood centre and acts as an anchor point for new placemaking. Together the historic estate character and high-quality designed landscape offer an existing unique sense of place which provides a creative springboard for placemaking."

And under a section headed Conservation of Existing Heritage: "The historic buildings and spaces in the area contribute greatly to the character and identity of Lowood. The key buildings and spaces should be conserved and enhanced as part of the development, including contributions made by their settings. Proposals for the area should be based on a proportionate understanding of their special interest and character. 

"The hierarchy of buildings and associated spaces in the area should be retained, with Lowood House retaining primacy, and the service buildings and cottages retaining their relative subservience. Historic service buildings should be sensitively repaired and converted in a manner that retains the character of their original use. This relates to their overall form and materials, but also their relationship to the road and other buildings, surviving features, and any surviving evidence of use that contributes to their overall character and/or patina."

MOD's fears for Eskdalemuir 'array'

by DOUG COLLIE

The Ministry of Defence says it has proved the construction of a 45-turbine windfarm close to the highly sensitive Eskdalemuir Seismological Recording Station would have an adverse affect on the crucial monitoring centre, and planning permission for the project must be rejected.

A closing submission from the MoD follows a lengthy public inquiry in which Scottish Government planning reporter Claire Milne has heard from objectors and supporters in the controversial Faw Side wind farm proposals which would occupy sites in the Langholm-Newcastleton area.

CWL Energy Ltd. is promoting the Faw Side facility, and has claimed in evidence to the inquiry the impact on this largely unspoilt stretch of countryside which includes hundreds of historic sites and monuments, would be minimal. The company had also challenged the MoD's evidence concerning the monitoring station.

The Ministry's position is that Faw Side wind farm will have a significant and detrimental impact on the operation and capability of the Eskdalemuir Station ("the Array"). The MOD say the proposed development would cause the Eskdalemuir threshold (also known as the Eskdalemuir noise budget and referred to as "the Eskdalemuir threshold") to be exceeded.

The inquiry was told that as part of its obligations under the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty [CTBT], the MOD is required to keep in place seismic equipment which monitors and detects nuclear-test explosions as part of the International Monitoring System network under the CTBT. The network is part of the CTBT verification regime and consists of 321 monitoring stations, of which the Array is the only one in the UK."

If the MOD failed to safeguard properly the Array and protect it from interference as a result of wind farm development, the UK would be in breach of this international obligation to protect global peace and security.

Since it started operations in 1962, the station has detected approximately 645 P-wave signals associated with (presumed) underground nuclear test-explosions occurring up to 15,000 km from the Array. The Array has detected P waves from many smaller underground chemical explosions, for example an announced chemical explosion equivalent to 100 tons of TNT detonated in Kazakhstan during August 1998. The Array has detected P waves from all six nuclear tests announced by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea since 2006.

In the newly published closing submission to the inquiry, Ruth Crawford KC, for the Ministry, says it is necessary to set out the changing position of the applicant [CWL Energy]. 

"The changing position is relevant because it casts doubt on the weight that should be attached to the expert evidence led by the applicant; puts in proper context the suggestions made in the course of cross-examination of the MOD’s witnesses that the MOD had failed to engage with the applicant, a suggestion which, in context, has no basis and; reduces any confidence that the further investigations proposed to be carried out in the suspensive condition will provide a sound scientific basis to enable the Scottish Ministers to dismiss the MOD’s precautionary approach and instead defer to the local planning authority to assess the impact on the Array and thereafter reach an informed decision on that key issue."

Ms Crawford argues that the applicant has now departed from its original Inquiry Statement. The applicant no longer offered to prove that Faw Side could be accommodated within the Eskdalemuir threshold. 

Instead, in its Supplementary Inquiry Statement the applicant was seeking consent subject to a so-called suspensive condition. That condition was to enable the applicant to carry out further investigation of the effects of Faw Side on the detection capabilities of the Array, report on the results to the local planning authorities who should consult with the MOD and thereafter seek to discharge the condition on the basis that Faw Side would not have an unacceptable impact on the detection capabilities of the Array. 

"It is worth noting that some five years after the application for consent was submitted the applicant remains unable to demonstrate that Faw Side would not have an unacceptable impact on the Array. That inability, of course, reflects the lack of scientific certainty and can only justify that a continued precautionary approach is taken. 

"What does the suspensive condition mean? The effect of the suspensive condition is to put the local planning authorities in the place of the MOD and its international obligations under the CTBT to protect the Array. Leaving aside the likely lack of resources that may be available to the local planning authorities to properly do so, they are (obviously) not designated as the appropriate National Authority for the purposes of the CTBT."

The submission concludes: "The applicant accepts that based upon the MOD’s current predictive model Faw Side would have an adverse impact on the Array. The applicant has not addressed that objection. The MOD’s objection has been established. There is no good reason to reject the MOD’s objection."

 

£1 million Borders mansion may be bulldozed

by EWAN LAMB

A large country house now owned by Scottish Borders Council, and valued at £1 million could be demolished at a cost of over £400,000 after other options for the property were examined and discarded by officials and a firm of specialists.

The local authority took possession of Lowood House last year after a £10 million deal to acquire the mansion and 110 acres of the adjoining estate for development, including sites for up to 400 houses.

But original plans for the 190-year-old home of the Hamilton family included the possibility of conversion to a boutique hotel where tourists could stay during visits to the Borders. One of the main regional visitor attractions, Abbotsford House, home of the author Sir Walter Scott is situated a short distance away.

Now, however, the hotel option has been dismissed as unviable in a report which will go before a full meeting of SBC next week.

The report says Lowood House, which dates from 1830, has been extended a number of times and requires extensive modernisation. With the exception of the original east wing the house is characterised by small irregular shaped rooms that do not easily lend themselves to redevelopment.

" Annual running costs are approximately £20,000 but this assumes that no major repairs are required. A range of options for reuse of the house have been considered".

The officers together with consultants Savills considered a Conversion to Flats Scheme designed for eight 2-3 bedroom flats. But the gap between cost of conversion and likely sale price exceeded £1m, so this was deemed not a viable development proposition.

According to the report: "Private House Use - Savills advise possible sale price of up to £1m but the limited market for this type of property is slowing. A sale to this type of use would not be recommended as the house is at the heart of development and a sale would result in a loss of control of a key area. 

"Hotel/ Hospitality Use - Uncertain market conditions and small size of premises will only interest small-scale operators. The high cost of conversion will impact on price. Recent increases in the cost of living, energy costs will also have a negative effect on this market. No guarantee of any real interest in the current market.

"Educational Use - SBC worked with Borders College during 2022 to look at the potential for redevelopment as training space for catering and hospitality, however at approximately £3 million cost this was not financially viable. 

"Institutional / Community Use - Savills advise that there is occasionally demand from institutional users or well funded community groups for this type of property however the cost of conversion is likely to have an impact on demand and viability.

"Demolition of Part or Whole - Cost estimated at £310,000 (part) or £440,000 (whole). Demolition of the whole house will increase additional land for development and amenity use. Whilst the east wing of the house is attractive and could be retained, the additional cost of modernisation is unlikely to make this a viable option. This is considered the preferred option."

Lowood House comes complete with wine cellar, swimming pool and servants' quarters.

A confidential valuation report prepared prior to the council deal in 2018 included details of the attractive property by the banks of the River Tweed. This extract outlines the accommodation:

"Ground Floor – Vestibule, entrance hall, drawing room, dining room, conservatory, library, study, kitchen, utility room, old kitchen, 3 pantries, cloakroom with toilet and a further toilet. Wine cellar. First Floor – Landing, 4 bedrooms (1 en-suite) and family bathroom. Housekeeper’s Flat – Lounge, 3 bedrooms, kitchen and bathroom.

"Traditional stables are within the partially developed stable block to the west of Lowood House. These are of stone and slate construction and house 12 traditional loose boxes with part cobble, part concrete floors. Garage/workshop".

The surveyor's inspection report of the house's interior, included the following passage: "Internally, the property is well presented but is in need of modernisation and upgrading. The majority of the ground floor is well maintained with the exception of the old kitchen which is largely unused save mainly for storage. The first floor accommodation is well presented too with the exception of a bedroom to the south east which was in the process of being upgraded. Double glazing would be beneficial and the property may need rewiring."

Delivery plan for Tweedbank expansion requires £108 million

by LESTER CROSS

The largest single development project to be promoted by Scottish Borders Council since its formation over 25 years ago faces a range of issues and challenges including a £108 million price tag, councillors will be told next week.

And over four years after the local paid around £11 million to purchase the Lowood country estate near Melrose, a revised Business Plan for the Tweedbank Expansion project will be required to deal with radical changes in market conditions.

It is now expected that between 300 and 400 new homes will be planned on the land which was acquired from the Hamilton family in 2018. But the overall scheme, including the construction of a new bridge over the Borders Railway, will need to attract large sums of external finance. There is still no firm indication where that money will come from.

The vast project requiring extensive investment in infrastructure before housebuilding and other construction can start has been criticised in some quarters. It has been claimed the concept is flawed given the relatively low demand for new homes in the Central Borders.

The new document from John Curry, Director of Infrastructure & Environment at the council, says: "The report sets out the key deliverables that the project seeks to deliver over the next 15 years providing further explanation summarising work recently undertaken as well as providing analysis on the impact of the current economic climate and market conditions. The report maps out a delivery plan, setting out a series of proposed actions to build momentum and deliver a project that contributes to our ambitions for the Scottish Borders to be a green, fair and flourishing region."

It has been revealed that SBC obtained Marketing and Development advice from property experts Savills as part of the process. They undertook an assessment of planning guidance alongside an analysis of the housing market and prices in Tweedbank area in August 2022. 

Mr Curry's report states: "This assessment reached the following conclusions: The market will be stable in coming years given the attractive rural area, good connections and a lack of new housing. Average house prices will still be relatively low compared to other areas closer to Edinburgh which will still be preferable to volume housebuilders.

" A phased approach to development that adapts to changes in demand and market conditions is recommended and more desirable to private builders and smaller scale developers. The cost of the infrastructure is expected to be significant recommending an ‘Infrastructure First’ approach where SBC undertakes these works addressing existing market failure, making sites more viable and desirable for private sector development."

Council members are presented with this warning: "Since the Savills report was prepared, the economic climate has continued to remain uncertain. There has been continued and significant inflationary increases on construction costs, alongside rising interest rates, making borrowing and servicing debt more challenging. Both factors have consequentially impacted the housing market hampering action to accommodate increasing demand for homes across the Scottish Borders and in particular in the Central Borders."

According to Mr Curry, it is recognised that to enable development to progress, Scottish Borders Council need to take action with public sector partners to de-risk development by forward investing in key infrastructure. 

"On greenfield development sites, the logistics and costs of enabling infrastructure is a significant factor in development appraisals, typically accounting for 15- 25% of the overall development cost. 

"As development progresses, design of the remaining access road will need to be developed. This will include a bridge connection over the railway to Essenside Drive to provide a strong link with the heart of the established Tweedbank village. The nature and design of the crossing will be determined as part phasing and programming but may include vehicular access and measures to encourage and support active travel." 

At the same time, an appraisal is being undertaken of the utility requirements for the initial development zones to the eastern part of the overall Tweedbank expansion. It is intended that details of utility requirements will be accommodated within the access road construction. There are some capacity issues with the waste water treatment works in Galashiels and discussions are ongoing with Scottish Water.

A section of the report headed Meeting Housing Needs claims the challenges and the effects of insufficient homes are being reported more frequently by businesses and communities.

"These include: Lack of suitable homes in the right locations; Lack of homes that are affordable in price or in running costs; Old housing stock with poor energy efficiency and subsequent health and net zero issues; Pressures on homelessness services; A need for greater diversity of housing types and tenures; and key workers finding it difficult to find homes to enable us to deliver vital services, adding to recruitment challenges for private and public sectors. 

"Successfully tackling these issues is key to our success and the delivery of good quality homes at Tweedbank provides us with significant opportunity. To unlock economic opportunities in the Sottish Borders it is essential that people are able to find the homes they need, both for those already in the region and to attract new people, helping to tackle the need for more working age people." 

The report makes clear that due to the size, scale and nature of the project, the Council will retain control of the development. But it is recognised that this will need dedicated resource focused on delivering the huge scheme.

"It is expected that there will be a phased approach, responsive to market conditions, that maximises opportunities, optimises market interest, and manages risks. It is proposed that we commence the development of a procurement strategy in order to secure a development partner.

"The first stage is likely to include a detailed access and transport assessment, site investigations, utilities and servicing strategy and will lead to development project plan and phasing strategy, cost plan and finally a revised business case."

Councillors are told the revised business case is necessary due to the change in market conditions and to support any future funding bids given the significant funding shortfall. Once approved by Scottish Borders Council, the revised business case will be submitted the Edinburgh & South East Scotland City Region Deal and is likely to seek funding support towards business and housing infrastructure.

So far as the financial implications are concerned, most recent estimates for likely costs of delivering the Tweedbank Expansion Project which includes homes, care and community facilities and infrastructure indicate full costs of £108 million. The programme will rely on significant external investment. and further development of this programme will require updated financial forecasts to take account of the current market prices.

Mystery of 'Avocet's' £4 million patents deal

by OUR BUSINESS STAFF

The liquidator of a company which preceded the now insolvent Avocet Group of "ground-breaking" fuel and agricultural businesses has revealed that the full cash consideration in a £4 million intellectual property sale has still not been paid eight years after the deal was brokered.

It is understood a so-called Deed of Assignment was signed some time after AFS Ventures Ltd. allegedly sold its collection of patents to Avocet Infinite Ltd. in December 2014. Ventures was then placed into a solvent voluntary liquidation in early 2015, overseen by insolvency experts Eric Walls and Wayne Harrison.

Since then Mr Walls has produced a series of so-called Progress Reports recording the liquidation's tortuous process. But in March 2021 that process was converted to a Creditors Voluntary Liquidation after it appeared AFS Ventures was, in fact, insolvent.

The original Declaration of Solvency was signed by Martin Frost, the now bankrupt businessman who also served as a director of Ventures and of Avocet Infinite, the flagship of the Avocet Group. After changing its name to Omega Infinite, that company was the subject of a court order which placed it in compulsory liquidation.

In his latest report on the AFS Ventures liquidation - the document is publicly available on the Companies House website - Mr Walls records that the sole receipt during the 12 months from January 2022 was 53 pence in respect of bank interest (gross).

The report states: "The only remaining asset detailed in the Statement of Affairs [SoA] was in respect of the company's intellectual property (IP) which had been sold to Omega Infinite PLC which is in compulsory liquidation, albeit the final level of consideration in respect of that sale has not been paid".

Mr Walls explains that in a previous report he had said he was of the belief that the title of the IP had not transferred. He had referred to the non-payment by Omega of the full consideration due in respect of the transfer of the Ventures IP rights, and confirmed the situation was under review.

Mr Walls says: "I have been advised and acknowledge that there was no formal retention of title detailed in the Deed agreed at the time of the transfer of the IP.

"However, the company retains all of its legal rights for non-performance of the legal obligation. At this stage, it remains unclear as to whether any further funds will be realised in respect of the company's IP due to the complexities of this matter and the compulsory liquidation of Omega.

"Matters remain subject to ongoing review in respect of the sale of the company's IP and monies outstanding in respect of that sale".

Mr Walls goes on to confirm that he has complied with his obligations under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986. But the Department for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy has requested that the contents of his report submitted under the Act remain confidential.

"Our review of the affairs of the company remains ongoing and therefore I am unable to comment any further as certain matters may become subject to further or legal action".

The report mentions a sum of £175,000 for trade expense creditors. It is also stated that a claim has been lodged by His Majesty's Revenue & Customs (HMRC) in the sum of £100,650.

A business and financial expert who has taken a keen interest in the collapse of several 'Avocet' companies told us: "I note that AFS Ventures is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Loch Lomond Heritage [LLH], a Frost family company.  Until very recently, Mr Frost was a director of both of these companies, and Executive Director of Avocet Infinite.  In January of 2015 Ventures apparently sold assets, including the AFS air-to-fuel patents, to Infinite for £4 million.  

"So, it seems Mr Frost acted on behalf of all three companies in the transaction. Mr Frost has recently acknowledged that Avocet’s IP, which would include these purchased air-to-fuel patents, is worthless. 

"LLH is the same family company that Infinite, under Mr Frost’s leadership, also purchased a derelict jetty from, at a cost of £200,000.  The jetty was later disposed of at its real market value of £22,500. 

"If shareholders are wondering where their investment went, I believe that we are starting to get a very good idea."

Quarry will have "exceptional adverse visual impact"

by DOUGLAS SHEPHERD

A Scottish Government planning reporter has shocked activists seeking to block the development of a large quarry in rural Peeblesshire by giving the controversial project the green light despite its unanimous rejection by local councillors.

In a 38-page decision notice issued today, David Bullya has allowed an appeal by sand and gravel minerals company Stonepack Ltd. against Scottish Borders Council's decision to refuse quarrying on the 30-hectare site at South Slipperfield, near the village of West Linton. 

It means Stonepack can now embark on material extraction which is scheduled to take place over 14 years. Site preparation is predicted to take six months and final restoration, a year. The extraction would have six phases and is anticipated to produce an average of 100,000 tonnes of material each year, giving a total output of approximately 1.4 million tonnes.

A council report prepared by Borders planning officers last year concluded that the application was in “contravention of national objectives and Local Development Plan policies on securing additional reserves and extraction of minerals, whilst ensuring that the environmental impacts are either acceptable with mitigation and/or outweighed by the demonstration of significant public benefit”. The planning committee unanimously supported the recommendation to refuse the application.

The council claimed: “The proposed site for the quarry at Slipperfield is within the Pentland Hills Special Landscape Area and the primary reason for our decision was the unacceptable impact that the proposed development would have on the landscape and the setting of the Roman road."

But those arguments which were backed by many local residents represented by a quarry action group have not been accepted by Mr Bullya.

He concludes: "I have concluded that that the proposal would provide an important source of materials for the construction industry and that the site is appropriately located with regard to likely centres of high future demand for its products. 

"Other than the significantly adverse landscape and visual effects that I have identified which would be localised, it would avoid any significant harm to communities or the environment. The proposal would create five new jobs on the site and there would be economic benefits from the appellant’s proposed investment in the facility. 

"Securing a steady supply of sand and gravel for the appellant’s own business and for the construction industry more widely is a positive socio-economic consequence of the proposal. Financial benefits to the farming business that is operated by the site owner could also potentially have wider spin off effects. When balanced against these benefits, the adverse effects I have identified are insufficient to overcome the presumption in favour of approval that arises from my finding that the proposal accords, overall, with the development plan. I therefore conclude, for the reasons set out above, that the proposed development accords overall with the relevant provisions of the development plan and that there are no material considerations which would still justify refusing to grant planning permission."

Earlier in his decision notice, the reporter concedes that within the site there would be temporary and permanent alterations to the fabric and character of the site. Temporary changes would include a soil storage mound and a low bund along the north western site boundary along with the ever-changing effects of ongoing soil stripping, extraction and restoration processes as the development moved through its six proposed phases. 

"The landform changes that would be brought about by the extraction and restoration works would be far more significant. The fabric and character of the landscape would be affected by the physical works to the ground, and its existing rural character would be affected by the presence of industrial machinery and vehicles."

 According to the Edinburgh Geological Society, the site and other land nearby represent some of the finest glacial and geomorphological features in southern Scotland. 

Mr Bullya says: "Bearing this, and what I saw when I inspected the site, in mind, I regard the sensitivity of the site to changes to its fabric and character as high. In combination with the high magnitude of change that I predict, I conclude that, during the operational period, the effect of this proposal on the fabric of the site would be of exceptional adverse significance. 

"The extraction and restoration operations would also transform the character of the site landscape from an open and peaceful grazing field into a busy industrial operation. This would have a high magnitude of impact on the character of the site and a consequent exceptional adverse (significant) effect. I also disagree that the impact magnitude here during operations would be medium. 

"During the first phase of extraction, works would be taking place immediately adjacent to the path, separated only by a fence and low bund. And as works moved further away, they would remain very prominent and intrusive. Views of the quarry processing plant would remain throughout the phases. Overall, I would assign a high level of impact magnitude during the operational phases, leading to an exceptional adverse visual impact."

A number of local residents had expressed concern that this part of the A702 road was known for excessive vehicle speeds and that this could pose a threat to road safety if slow moving vehicles were joining the trunk road at this point. 

But Mr Bullya noted there has been only one recorded personal injury accident in the last five years on this stretch of road, which was categorised as ‘slight’ in severity. This did not suggest that the road had a poor safety record at present. 

"Taking all factors into account, I find no reason to conclude the proposals would have any significant adverse access or transportation effects."

In dismissing the council's concerns for adverse impact on the Roman road adjacent to the quarry site, Mr Bullya states: "Unlike some sections of the Crawford to Inveresk Roman road (of which the council advises this section is a part), this section of Roman road is not a scheduled monument. Roman roads are not uncommon throughout the UK; scheduling appears to be confined to the most important sections. 

"Often such routes remain in use long after the Roman withdrawal, as this section appears to have done, and their form may alter over time to reflect changing requirements. I do not agree with the council’s assignment of regional value to this part of the Roman road, which appears to rely upon other sections along the route having been scheduled. There is no evidence before me as to why this section of road is undesignated, but the fact that it has no formal recognition of having a high level of cultural significance tends to suggest it should be regarded as having low sensitivity to development that could affect its setting."

Mr Bullya allows the appeal and grants planning permission subject to 34 conditions listed at the end of the decision notice.

 

 

No need for more Borders housing land - council

by DOUG COLLIE

An annual land requirement for the construction of 480 new houses would be acceptable for the Scottish Borders over the next ten years, planning officers for the region have told their counterparts in national government.

A minimum need for 4,800 housing plots during the coming decade has been set by the recently implemented National Planning Framework (NPF4) although critics argue that figure is too low to have a significant impact on regional economic growth.

But Scottish Borders Council, in a submission to government planning reporters examining the area's proposed Local Development Plan (LDP) has outlined the reasons behind its thinking on future housing land requirements.

NPF 4 states: “LDPs are expected to identify a Local Housing Land Requirement for the area they cover. This is to meet the duty for a housing target and to represent how much land is required. To promote an ambitious and plan-led approach, the Local Housing Land Requirement is expected to exceed the 10-year Minimum All-Tenure Housing Land Requirement (MATHLR) set out in NPF4”. 

The council explains that the Housing Land Requirement [HLR] set out within its proposed LDP needs to be updated to take into consideration NPF4, specifically the MATHLR. The land requirement, as it is a minimum, can be revised upward as LDP’s are prepared, where evidence justifies an increase. 

According to SBC: "However, NPF4 has been recently adopted and the evidence base is recent and up to date. Therefore, it is considered that an annual Local Housing Land Requirement of 480 units per annum (4,800 over a ten year period) would be acceptable for the Scottish Borders. It should be noted that this takes into account 30% flexibility allowance for a rural area. 

"It is not considered that there is a need to apply an increase to the MATHLR figure that is set out within the NPF4, at this point in time."

The proposed HLR figure contained in the proposed LDP is 383 units per annum, which includes 10% flexibility. 

"Therefore, it is acknowledged that the proposed Local HLR figure, 480 units per annum, exceeds the  figure contained within the proposed plan. It is considered that this adjustment, takes into account NPF4 and reinforces the Council’s ambition for growth in the economy within the Scottish Borders."

The submission also points out: "It should be noted that the council did not consider that the initial default figures circulated by the Scottish Government, prior to Draft NPF4, were realistic and were considered to be too low (175 units per annum)."

SBC considers that there remains a sufficient housing land supply, to meet a local HLR of 480 units per annum and 4,800 units over ten years. After various adjustments the land supply figure totals 8.348 units. 

"It is not considered that NPF4 or the proposed adjustment to the local HLR alters the council’s previous position, in respect of ensuring that there is sufficient housing land allocated within the proposed plan to meet the ten year local HLR."

At least one submission to the LDP examination suggests a HLR figure of 8,000 units over the next ten years should be adopted. 

But other parties point to the relatively low level of house completions in the Borders over recent years while arguing that land already allocated for development is more than adequate to cope with future demand.

The team of Scottish Government reporters working on the proposed Borders LDP may decide to arrange a public hearing to gain the views of various stakeholders on the region's HLR. 

Borders housing policies savaged by national agency

by EWAN LAMB

Homes for Scotland, the body which represents housebuilders and social landlords, has attacked Scottish Borders Council's housing policies, claiming the region is missing out on positive development opportunities, while the construction industry can have "zero faith" in the local authority's latest land audit.

The allocation of land for future housebuilding is proving to be a highly contentious issue during the current examination of SBC's latest draft Local Development Plan (LDP) by Scottish Government planning reporters.

A recently approved National Planning Framework set the Scottish Borders minimum all-tenure housing land requirement over the next ten years at 4,800 units. But there have already been suggestions that this figure should be radically increased with a land requirement for 8,000 new homes being advanced by some professionals. 

SBC's 2020 Housing Land Audit [HLA] showed that the total number of completions in the past five years had peaked at 373 completions. Within the 2020 audit, there had been a decrease of 21 completions since the previous audit. 

"The completion rates overall within the Scottish Borders have been much lower than the pre-recession rates, with many of the sites under construction within the Borders at a slow rate or stalled, due to lack of developer/mortgage finance. This demonstrates the current generally weak market within the Scottish Borders, despite the large number of established sites available for development. 

The audit stated: "It should be noted that in recent years there are very few local housebuilders developing sites within the Scottish Borders. The above demonstrates the direct impact upon rural areas including the Scottish Borders as a result of the current economic climate and Covid pandemic recovery."

Those sentiments have not gone down well with Homes for Scotland (HFS) given that the trends outlined in the Borders HLA form the basis for future land allocations in the new LDP.

In a hard-hitting newly published written submission as part of the LDP examination, HFS which represents 200 member organisations, calls for an overhaul of current SBC housing development policies.

HFS warns: "Affordable housing delivery currently exceeds market housing delivery in the Scottish Borders Council area. Care must be taken in setting housing targets across various tenures, so as not to drive away private housing investment."

The scathing attack on SBC's land audit for 2020 claims it was very important to note that HFS considered the document was prepared in a wholly unacceptable manner. 

"HFS engage with 27 HLAs across Scotland each year. Scottish Borders Council was unique last year in that there was no provision for a back-and-forth between the Council and HFS following the initial submission of our comments. 

"Local authorities are encouraged to consult widely with the house building industry and infrastructure providers in the collation of the annual audit to enhance the accuracy of the data and thus its usefulness. For the 2020 HLA, the Council did not provide for a back-and-forth between the parties following the initial submission of our comments, rather seeking to publish a "finalised" audit post-haste without any further engagement. 

"Such an approach inevitably leads to less accurate programming, and an audit that the development industry can put zero faith in, in terms of its projections and transparency. As such, the development industry can ascribe no weight to the outcomes of the 2020 HLA."

The submission adds that HFS has, for some time, strongly disagreed with the Council on its approach to housing land supply. 

"Fundamentally, our concern goes beyond any analysis of numbers, to the way the Council perceives and deals with its history of seeing limited take up of site allocations. 

"As we have previously alluded to, if the Council is to see a better match between household need and demand for homes, and the supply of new homes in the future, it will need to review the cumulative impact of its policies on build costs, initiate a shift in its approach to land release to realign its suite of allocations with the market interest that does exist and introduce a more flexible land release policy that can respond not just to a technical shortfall in the land supply but to any issues arising in association with the delivery of allocated sites and other sites already in the established supply. 

"To this point, the Council has not provided a detailed analysis of the effectiveness of the remaining sites which are to be carried forward. The Council is thus missing out on positive development opportunities by not exploring in more detail the reasons behind the low take up of existing sites. Limiting the release of new sites is only an appropriate strategy if the Council has sufficient confidence those sites already allocated will be delivered in this plan period."

HFS also attacks what it describes as "the incredible position the Council has taken with regards to their strongly disputed 2020 HLA, which seeks to claim a programmed delivery of over 1,000 units for a single year within the next five years. Such a claim further undermines the validity of the Council’s HLA process. The supposed estimated level of completions represents an inconceivable figure in practical terms."

Overestimation of the potential of the effective supply will reduce the amount of additional land allocated and therefore reduce the flexibility available in the supply to address market fluctuations and other constraints to the delivery of housing, according to HFS. It adds: "There can be no confidence in the accuracy of the HLA."

 

Ludicrous claim by bankrupt businessman

by OUR BUSINESS RESEARCH UNIT

The joint president of a company whose annual accounts are eight months overdue has accused the owner of Not Just Sheep & Rugby of being "criminally liable for untruth dissemination" after we published information from a report which is freely available on the Companies House website.

In correspondence circulated to investors in Genfro Ltd. - purportedly a business manufacturing chemical products - and dated March 1st, Martin Frost, the bankrupt former chairman of numerous companies in the Avocet group also accuses this blog's boss of being a spokesperson for Emma Porter, the insolvency expert currently dealing with the financial collapse of one of his failed outfits.

Earlier this week we carried an article based on the contents of a progress report issued by Ms Porter in her capacity as the administrator of Orrdone Farms Ltd., another Avocet concern which failed to market anything before its demise. Instead, it left in its wake more than 160 creditors claiming to be owed at least £11.3 million.

Unfortunately, the true position of Orrdone's multi-million pounds disaster has yet to be established three years after Ms Porter's appointment, thanks mainly to the non-cooperation of the firm's directors who included Mr Frost.

In his capacity as self-appointed joint president of Genfro - he shares the vaunted position with Dr Bob Jennings, another Orrdone director - Mr Frost tells shareholders:

"Borders journalist makes himself criminally liable for untruth dissemination.  "Dear Colleague, "Emma Porter’s and Aileen Orr’s spokesperson, Borders journalist Chisholm, confirms by inference that Aileen Orr misled Emma Porter who in turn conned many to adopt Aileen’s propaganda. As shall be seen, these people caused the demise of Orrdone Farms Limited. "To prove their dishonesty, some 500 pages of evidence is provided in ‘Report Two - The Consequences of the Conduct of Insolvency Practitioners and their Associates’ which was lodged on 28th February 2023." No indication is given as to the destination of the 'evidence' although there have been countless promises by Mr Frost over the past few years that legal action was pending against Avocet's "naysayers". It is not clear whether Mr Frost has assembled the evidence himself or has commissioned an investigator to compile the vast document. Meanwhile investors in Genfro, and another company by the name of Avocet Natural Capital have been told by Mr Frost that they will soon benefit from payments from Israeli organisations who plan to acquire the group's intellectual property, a formula for a "revolutionary" green fuel. At one point Mr Frost claimed the lucrative deal was supposedly being brokered by the mysterious Tim Carter, UK representative of PCH Holdings although a number of disillusioned shareholders claim Carter does not exist. He has not been mentioned in recent despatches. Genfro, which was launched in September 2020, had almost 300 shareholders with some 19 million shares between them when management last lodged a confirmation statement at Companies House in December 2020. But the Registrar of Companies' records show Genfro's first accounts made up to September 30th 2021 should have been sent in by June 30th 2022. As of today, there is still no sign of them. At the same time an updated Confirmation Statement due by January 10th 2022 remains more than a year behind schedule. Failure to file accounts on time is a criminal offence under the Companies Act 2006.