The Planning and Building Standards Committee were scheduled to meet on 8 September 2025 to discuss planning applications, appeals, and reviews. Among the applications to be discussed was a proposal for the Ditcher Law Wind Farm, and a request to vary the conditions of a planning permission relating to Blinkbonny Quarry. The committee was also scheduled to consider a briefing note on appeals and reviews.

Ditcher Law Wind Farm

The committee was scheduled to consider the proposed Ditcher Law Wind Farm, located on land north, south, east and west of Vineleaf Cottage, Oxton. The application, submitted under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989, sought permission for the erection of eight turbines with tip heights of 180 and 200m, a 30MW Battery Energy Storage System (BESS), plus ancillary infrastructure.

The report pack noted that the Scottish Government is the determining authority for the application, and that Scottish Borders Council is a consultee as a 'relevant planning authority'. The report pack included a recommendation from the Chief Planning and Housing Officer, John Hayward, that the council should not object to the proposed development.

The report pack noted that the original application sought consent for a nine turbine wind farm, but that the proposal had been revised, with the deletion of one turbine, and the relocation of two others. It also noted that the proposal would have a generating capacity of 52.8 MW of renewable energy, and that the BESS would have the capacity to store up to 30MW of electricity.

The report pack stated that the council's Archaeology Officer had no objection to the proposal, but recommended that impacts on the wider historic landscape could be mitigated through the development of a Historic Enhancement Management Plan. The council's Ecology Officer also had no objection, but recommended conditions seeking agreement of a Habitat Enhancement and Management Plan, Species Protection Plans, a Construction Environmental Management Plan, and the appointment of an Ecological Clerk of Works. The council's Environmental Health department had no objection, subject to conditions relating to noise limits and construction noise. The council's Landscape Architect raised concerns about the impact of the proposal on sensitive receptors in and around Oxton, but on balance, had no objection. The council's Roads Planning department had no objection, subject to an appropriate design for the crossing of the minor public road (D47/5) northwest of Hillhouse Farm, and a Traffic Management Plan for all construction traffic.

The report pack assessed the proposal against the National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and the Scottish Borders Council Local Development Plan 2024, and concluded that the proposal was in accordance with both. It noted that NPF4 Policy 11 requires that significant weight be placed on the contribution a development will make towards renewable energy targets, and that the proposal would make an important contribution to meeting these targets.

The report pack also considered the economic and socio-economic benefits of the proposal, and noted that it was forecast to provide £6.62 million Gross Value Added (GVA) and 112.79 job years within the Scottish Borders during the construction phase, and £790,000 GVA per annum with 12.5 jobs created within the Scottish Borders during the operational and maintenance phase.

Blinkbonny Quarry

The committee was scheduled to consider an application to vary condition 4 of planning permission 17/00457/MIN for Blinkbonny Quarry, Kelso. The application sought to increase the maximum floor depth of the quarry from 150 metres Above Ordnance Datum (AOD) to 138 metres AOD.

The application was submitted under Section 42 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

The report pack noted that Blinkbonny Quarry is an established hard rock quarry located 3 miles south of Gordon, and 4 miles north of Kelso. It also noted that the site is not designated as a Special Landscape Area and is not within prime Quality Agricultural Land, but that Lurgie Loch is an SSSI located 200m beyond the northern boundary.

The report pack stated that the application was to dig basalt to a depth of 138m AOD in three phases of extraction, and that a quarry restoration plan had been provided showing the proposals for a water body (a lagoon) to be filled to the depth of 176m AOD.

The report pack noted that one neighbour was notified and adverts placed in the Southern Reporter, but that no representations had been received.

The report pack included a recommendation from the Chief Planning and Housing Officer, John Hayward, that the application be approved subject to conditions.

The report pack noted that SEPA had initially objected to the proposed amendment on the grounds of potential impacts to the Private Water Supply of Whitehill, but that this objection had been removed subject to conditions requiring a new sampling borehole, a Site Monitoring Plan and an Annual Monitoring Report . The council's Environmental Health Officer also required a condition to be applied that would place a requirement for an Emergency Response Plan in the event that mitigation measures fail to secure a sufficient piped supply of wholesome water to nearby properties.

Appeals and Reviews

The committee was scheduled to consider a briefing note by the Chief Planning and Housing Officer, John Hayward, on appeals to the Scottish Ministers and Local Reviews.

The briefing note provided details of appeals and local reviews which had been received and determined during the last month.

The briefing note stated that no planning applications, enforcements, or works to trees appeals had been received. It also stated that there was one appeal previously reported where a decision was awaited, relating to land south of Deanburnhaugh, Hawick.

The briefing note stated that two review requests had been received:

• Reference: 24/01142/PPP - Erection of 3 no dwellinghouse with access and associated work and associated works at North Of Vre House, Carfraemill, Oxton, Lauder. The reasons for refusal were that the proposed development was contrary to National Planning Framework 4 policy 17 and policy HD2 of the Scottish Borders Local Development Plan 2024 and Supplementary Planning Guidance - New Housing in the Borders Countryside 2008, and that it would result in a development which does not have appropriate connectivity with the surrounding area.
• Reference: 25/00499/FUL - Erection of boundary fence (retrospective) at 24 Lauriston Gardens, Selkirk. The reason for refusal was that the development would be contrary to Policy PMD2 of the Scottish Borders Local Development Plan and Policy 14 of NPF4 in that it would constitute a prominent and incongruous form of development that would have an adverse impact on the character and aappearance of the surrounding area.

The briefing note stated that three reviews had been determined:

• Reference: 25/00104/FUL - Section 42 application to modify Condition 2 of Planning Permission 24/00556/FUL pertaining to the occupation of dwellinghouse at Land At Field No 0009, Caerleebank Wood, Innerleithen. The reasons for refusal were that the proposed variation of Condition 2 of Planning Permission 24/00556/FUL would, in this particular case, not satisfy Policy 17 of National Planning Framework 4, or Policy HD2 of Scottish Borders Local Development Plan 2024 or New Housing in the Borders Countryside Guidance 2008 in that it would permit occupancy of the house by persons unrelated to the business it is required to support, potentially undermining its sustainability and also risking conflict with its operation in this particular case.
• Reference: 24/01045/FUL - Siting of residential caravan and associated work at Land West Of Lamancha Home Farm, Lamancha, West Linton. The reasons for refusal were that the development would be contrary to Policy HD2 of the Local Development Plan 2024 and New Housing in the Borders Countryside Guidance 2008, and Policies 9 and 17 of the National Planning Framework 4 because it would constitute housing in the countryside that is not well related to a building group, with insufficient economic justification to support the development, and because it would be of a design and appearance that would not be visually sympathetic to the sense of place and character of the surrounding area, further conflicting with Policy PMD2 of the Local Development Plan 2024. The decision of the Appointed Officer was upheld.
• Reference: 24/01395/PPP - Erection of dwellinghouse and associated work at Land North Of Hollybank, Broomhill, Selkirk. The reasons for refusal were that the development would be contrary to Policy HD2 of the Local Development Plan 2024 and New Housing in the Borders Countryside Guidance 2008, and Policies 9 and 17 of the National Planning Framework 4 because it would constitute housing in the countryside that is not well related to a building group and with insufficient economic justification to support the development. The decision of the Appointed Officer was upheld.

The briefing note stated that there remained 12 reviews previously reported where a decision was awaited, relating to sites at: Land North Of Burnbrae Cottages Nenthorn, Caravan Auld Bridge Farm Newcastleton, Garden Ground of Balmar House Main Street Ancrum, Land Northeast Of Oakwood Station Road, Land North Of Seaneuk Coldingham Sands Eyemouth, 44 Glebe Place Galashiels, Land East Of 8 Ferniehill Court Kelso, Land South Of Muirfield Farm Hawick, Tweedside House Greenside Peebles, 25 The Green Swinton Duns, Former Sawmill The Greens Southeast Of Newcastleton, and Garden Ground of Balmar House Main Street Ancrum.