COMMUNITY leaders are planning a public meeting for September as they continue the battle to block a controversial housing development in Peebles.

Residents have bombarded the community council with complaints after Scottish Borders Council’s planning committee gave planning permission in principle for 130 houses to built on parts of Rosetta Caravan Park.

And the community council is setting up a meeting for a weekend in September with a preferred venue of Halyrude Primary School.

Community council planning chairman Crick Carleton said: “The primary purpose of any meeting should be to provide clarity as to the procedures associated with this application, the decision-making processes involved, and the timeline of actions required to progress the application.

“It should also provide a forum to discuss the various issues associated with this application, and to provide an additional means to capture the range of views held within the community on this specific development.” Scottish Borders councillors representing the Tweeddale area and members of council’s planning department have indicated their willingness to attend.

Halyrude School has been put forward as the venue for the meeting as that is the closest for those most affected by the proposals.

An evening meeting is deemed the best time to allow more residents to attend and scheduling after the summer holidays when people have fewer commitments.

The community council is also holding a poll on issues associated with the development, using its Facebook page, as a means of testing wide (beyond those directly impacted by the proposals) community views on the subject.

Mr Carleton said: “Views expressed from the community to the community council, and endorsed by the community council, are that developer contribution, including the affordable housing requirements, should not be weakened.

“To accept large-scale construction of housing that is neither needed nor welcomed by the community, and then to also forego the construction of affordable housing (or alter obligations to contribute to the costs of roads, schooling, etc.), is perverse.

“All views received by the community council are that the applicant should be required to meet the full requirements of policy on developer contribution (affordable housing and contribution to town infrastructures), plus the costs of constructing the new bridge.”