Wellington School visit over controversial housing plan appeal

The site of the former Wellington School, near the village of Howgate.

Midlothian councillors refused planning permission for housing at the former Wellington School, near the village of Howgate, earlier this month after Covid restrictions stopped them from visiting the site.

At the time one councillor said it was like having a “gun put to their heads” as they were told to make a decision without seeing the site first hand.

Now the Scottish Government Reporter has said he will visit the site as part of his investigation into the decision after developers appealed to Scottish Ministers to overturn the refusal.

He has ruled an unaccompanied visit to the rural spot will be carried out before he makes any decision over the application.

Lochay Homes want to build 46 bungalows at the former school.

The council’s planning committee delayed a decision over the application in November last year so members could visit the site after receiving objections from local residents.

However a meeting of the committee earlier this month heard the visit had been cancelled due to Covid restrictions.

Despite planning officers recommending the application be approved, councillors raised concerns about giving the go ahead without seeing the land first hand.

And they expressed dismay that an appeal had been lodged by the developer who urged the Reporter to rule citing non-determination by the local authority.

The Lochay Homes proposals for the school were first lodged with planners in February 2020, just weeks before the first lockdown, and several extensions were granted by developers to Midlothian Council to make a decision.

The Wellington Action Group, set up by locals opposed to the plans, described the new housing as creating an “isolated commuter desert”.

Concern over the impact of the new estate on Springfield Moss – a peat bog lying partly on the land, and moves to remove 15 matures trees in a protected zone to create a new access from the A701 were raised by objectors.

However developers argued the land was a brownfield site and pointed out it was included in the local authority’s Local Development Plan as an “additional housing” site.

At the planning committee eight councillors voted against the application with four councillors supporting it and four members abstaining due to a lack of site visit.

Minutes of the meeting were submitted to the Reporter to set out the council’s view on the application.

The minutes included a note of concerns over the timescale given to councillors stating: “The committee also agreed to express its’ disappointment regarding the timescale set for the council to respond, particularly as no allowance appeared to have been made for the Festive holiday period nor the restrictions in place as a result of the ongoing Coronavirus pandemic, forcing members to have to come to a view without the benefit of having visited the site.”