CAMPAIGNERS have hailed Scottish ministers' "unprecedented" decision to stop a house being built on Culloden Battlefield.
The plans were rejected after ministers said the move would "suburbanise" the Jacobite site due to the “national historic significance” of the battlefield.
A dilapidated farm steading near the battlefield had been planned to become a family home – complete with zen garden and chillout zone – sparking a battle with conservationists who were furious about the proposals.
The site at Culchunaig, Scottish Highlands, lies near to a section of battlefield owned by National Trust for Scotland (NTS) and is within the battlefield boundary.
It was the scene of major fighting during the battle in April 1746 between the Jacobites and British forces.
But the bid was rejected by Scottish ministers who have now refused planning permission after disagreeing with a number of points made by the Planning Reporter.
Dr David Learmonth of the Group to Stop Development at Culloden (GSDC), which campaigned for the government to intervene, said it "warmly welcomed" the decision.
He said: “This is a momentous turnaround of events, and one that we sincerely hope marks a new dawn for the protection of the battlefield especially with still four live applications awaiting determination, including a holiday resort.”
Dr Learmonth thanked Professor Christopher Duffy and Andrew Grant McKenzie of the Historians’ Council on Culloden who researched the significance of the Culchunaig site.
Professor Duffy earlier described the development plans as an “appalling intrusion on this national war grave”.
Neither Historic Environment Scotland (HES) or NTS objected to the plans.
HES said that the new home would not significantly change the character of the battlefield while NTS said that the development of an existing rundown steading could be appropriate.
But Scottish ministers said that the development, which included three new outbuildings and space for six vehicles, represented an "overdevelopment of the site in what is a very sensitive part of Culloden Battlefield".
The decision letter stated: “Ministers consider the redevelopment of this site, as proposed, would have an unacceptable suburbanising effect upon the existing countryside near to the core of Culloden Battlefield.
"Ministers consider that the area has high sensitivity to all types of development due to the national historic significance and cultural associations of the battlefield.
"Ministers consider that the Proposed Development would result in cumulative negative visual and landscape impacts upon the local character of this part of the battlefield and would have an adverse effect on the character and appearance of the Culloden Muir Conservation Area."
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel