A LEADING opponent of a controversial housing development in Peebles is confident the community will grasp the opportunity to show its disapproval for the project at a public meeting this month.

Resident Cliff Scupham is one of the loudest voices to speak out against proposals to build 130 houses on parts of Rosetta Caravan Park.

Scottish Borders Council gave planning permission in principle in April despite opposition from the community council, Peebles Civic Society and 400 residents who signed a petition.

Community leaders’ concerns prompted the decision to arrange a public meeting which will take place at the St Joseph Community Centre in Rosetta Road on Tuesday, September 15 at 7pm.

The community council this week confirmed that two SBC officers are expected to attend to explain the reasoning behind the decision.

“I am sure a lot of people will be coming along - it’s the last chance that we have to make our voices heard and let Scottish Borders Council, the developers and the councillors know that we don’t want this development,” said Mr Scupham, who organised a petition against the plan.

“I opened up a Facebook page called Rosetta Park and Dalatho Bridge Action Group and within a few days I had about 100 likes - and I am sure a lot of these people will be going to the meeting.” Optimism remains high that the development will not get off the ground with SBC requiring the developers Aberdeen Asset Management to build a bridge over Eddleston Water linking Rosetta with the main Edinburgh Road.

“There is still some hope for us as residents, as the bridge and link road will have to be approved before the plan can go ahead,” said Mr Scupham. The council is being asked to consider whether to relax its affordable housing rules for the new development to enable the developer to fund and complete the new bridge and road link before the housing is commenced.

“As the community has said all these houses will exacerbate problems that already exist there and we need to know what’s going to be done to address these major issues.

“As well as access to local schools and doctors, we have raised the issue of traffic congestion.

“What we should do now is to contact the transport authorities to try and discuss some of the main issues around the traffic in Rosetta and Dalatho.

“These are the busiest roads in the area and the new entrance to the development will be coming in at a point which has been busy at peak times which, due to congestion, if the bridge goes ahead, will be exacerbated, so we can’t see why it’s being allowed. Another transport study should be undertaken as the previous survey time did not take into consideration the traffic at peak time, and for the crossings only.

“What about Rosetta, Kingsland and Dalatho? Residents have also raised concerns about the infrastructure and how this development will affect schools, doctors and other local services.

“People are already having to travel to Rosetta road to take their kids to school, and there is already few local places left, you can’t get appointments at the GP and the traffic is absolute chaos at peak times.

“We understand the need to move with the times, but I don’t think they looked at the details in the Peebles infrastructure. Some residents have said they already have a lot of traffic coming up and down the roads and are worried about the extra traffic this could bring. If they lived here, they would know how bad it is.

“The residents feel it’s already over-developed with the Violet Bank development which has now applied for planning permission for a further 16 houses.

We’ve all seen the increase in car ownership, and the roads everywhere are much busier but when the SBC transport officials don’t raise any objections, there’s very little we can do except stand up and be heard.

“At the moment the world has gone crazy with developers trying to cash in and Scottish Borders Council planning department has failed in its job to protect us.

“I would add that we are sure that in the spirit of openness - which the developers profess to promote - that they will agree that the local community should have the fullest possible information to enable them to give a reasoned response to any proposal which they may make.

Another resident, who asked not to be named, said the application had “more holes in it than Swiss cheese”.

The traffic survey carried out on one day in February 2013 was “unscientific” and a Primary 3 schoolchild could have done a better job, he claimed.

“It is ironic that Aberdeen Asset Management claims that, by paying for a bridge it would be unable to afford its contribution to eduxcation and yet the road leading to the bridge would pass by a school and two nurseries, thereby creating an unnecessary safety hazard,” he said.

“The applicant also requested to forego its obligation to provide 25 per cent affordable housing but the original application (long before the bridge was discussed) for 172 houses appeared to make no provision for affordable housing.

“It appears that enough pressure was applied to SBC’s planning department to allow it to approve planning permission in principle. Had it been rejected SBC’s decision would almost certainly have been overturned at Scottish Government level.”