The Planning and Building Standards Committee of Scottish Borders Council met on Monday 01 June 2026 to discuss several planning applications. The committee resolved to object to the Glenburnie Wind Farm proposal due to concerns over its impact on scheduled monuments and insufficient information regarding its grid connection. They also resolved to refuse the application for the Monashee Farm wind farm, citing significant adverse impacts on landscape, visual amenity, and cumulative effects.

Glenburnie Wind Farm

The committee considered an application for the Glenburnie Wind Farm, a development comprising up to 12 wind turbines with a maximum blade tip height of 220 metres, and a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS). The application was submitted under Section 36 of the Electricity Act, meaning it was determined by the Scottish Government's Energy Consents Unit (ECU), with the council acting as a consultee.

The council resolved to object to the proposal for two primary reasons:

1. Impact on Scheduled Monuments: The proposed development was deemed contrary to National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) Policies 7h) ii and iii, and Policy 11e), as well as Scottish Borders Local Development Plan (LDP) Policy EP8 Part A b) and c) and Policy ED9. The objection cited that the siting and scale of the turbines would dominate key views from, and have unacceptable adverse impacts on the intervisibility between, the Addinston, Longcroft, and Glenburnie hill forts (Scheduled Monuments SM362, SM372, and SM4473 respectively). This was considered to result in significant adverse effects on the integrity of the setting of these scheduled monuments. Despite the reduction in the number of turbines from the original proposal, the impacts were not considered to be outweighed by the benefits of the wind farm development, and no exceptional circumstances were demonstrated to justify these impacts.
2. Insufficient Information on Grid Connection: The proposal was also considered contrary to NPF4 Policy 11e) and LDP Policy ED9 due to insufficient information provided to demonstrate whether project design and mitigation could address the environmental effects arising from the project's grid connection. In the absence of this information, significant weight could not be placed on the wind farm's contribution to renewable energy generation and greenhouse gas emission targets, as required by NPF4.

Councillor Sandy Scott recorded a dissent against the officer's recommendation to object.

Land at Monashee Farm

The committee considered an application for a wind farm development at Monashee Farm, comprising three turbines up to 180 metres high, with associated access, landscaping, and ancillary works.

The committee resolved to refuse the application as per the officer's recommendation, citing six reasons for refusal, all of which were contrary to Scottish Borders Local Development Plan 2 (2024) Policy ED9, National Planning Framework 4 Policy 11 e), and the Scottish Borders Council Renewable Energy Supplementary Planning Guidance and Landscape Capacity and Cumulative Impact Study. The primary reasons for refusal included:

1. Significant and Unacceptable Adverse Change to Landscape Character: The scale, form, layout, and location of the development were considered to represent a significant and unacceptable adverse change to the existing landscape character of the area, particularly impacting the Platform Farmland / Eye Water Platform Landscape Character Area (LCT 9), The Wooded Upland Fringe Valley / Middle Whiteadder LCA (LCT 28i), and the Rolling Lowland Margin – Eye Water Lowlands LCA (LCT 16i). These impacts were not outweighed by the benefits of renewable energy generation, greenhouse gas reduction, or net economic benefits.
2. Significant and Unacceptable Adverse Visual Impacts: The scale, form, layout, and location of the development were deemed to result in significant and unacceptable adverse visual impacts across a significant area, extending beyond localised levels.
3. Unacceptable Visual Impacts on the A6112 Road: The development was considered to have significant and unacceptable visual impacts on receptors travelling on the A6112 road, harming the visual scale, appreciation, and character of the surrounding landscape.
4. Unacceptable Visual Impacts on Recreational Receptors: Significant and unacceptable visual impacts were identified for recreational receptors at Edin's Hall Fort and Broch, and those using Core Path 85, harming the scale, appreciation, and character of this recreational attraction and route.
5. Significant and Unacceptable Cumulative Impacts: The cumulative impacts from the introduction of large-scale turbines close to the Bunkle Edge were considered a step change from the current pattern of wind turbine development, introducing prominent industrial-like development into a landscape that is generally simple, limited in vertical punctuation, and expansive. These impacts were compounded by the turbines drawing more distant turbines into the foreground, contributing to a perception of a turbine landscape.
6. Insufficient Information on Grid Connection: Similar to the Glenburnie Wind Farm application, insufficient information was provided to demonstrate whether project design and mitigation could address the environmental effects of the grid connection, meaning significant weight could not be placed on the development's contribution to renewable energy and greenhouse gas emission targets.

Councillor Orr declared an interest and left the chamber during the discussion of this application. Councillor Scott voted against the officer's recommendation to refuse.

Primary School, Ettrick, Selkirk

The committee agreed to approve the application for alterations and a change of use of the former Primary School in Ettrick to form a community hub with a bunkhouse, museum, and multi-use space. The approval was subject to nine conditions and four informatives, covering aspects such as the commencement of development, adherence to approved plans, restrictions on bunkhouse occupation to holidaymakers for periods not exceeding four weeks, details of external materials, a flood evacuation plan, protection of trees, provision of an adequate water supply, post-construction ecological enhancements, and details of external bin storage.

Land Northwest of Hillhouse Oxton

The committee agreed to approve the application for the installation of a meteorological mast up to 100 metres in height, a renewal of a previous consent. The approval was for a limited period of two years and was subject to five conditions and one informative. The conditions included the removal and reinstatement of the mast after the two-year period, the use of bird deflectors on guy wires, the fitting of infra-red aviation warning lighting, and the submission of documentary evidence to the Ministry of Defence regarding the mast's details for aviation safety.

Revocation of Planning Permission - The Bungalow, Eastcote, Hawick

The committee approved the recommendation to make an Order revoking Planning Permission 10/00757/FUL, which had granted retrospective permission for the change of use of domestic garages to a knitting contract workshop and the erection of a storage shed. The applicants, who owned the site, confirmed they would not oppose the revocation due to ongoing health issues preventing them from continuing the business. The revocation was considered to have minimal financial risk and no significant impact on sustainable development goals or climate change.

Appeals and Reviews

The committee noted that there were no new appeals received or appeal decisions received during the past month. Three appeals remained outstanding, relating to Sapphire House in Jedburgh (enforcement) and a store at 11 Bourtree Terrace in Hawick. The committee also noted that seven review requests had been received, and two had been determined, with the decision of the appointed officer being upheld in both cases. Three further reviews remained outstanding.