Farmer’s housing plan rejected at struggling Westfield

A farmer’s plan to breathe new life into the struggling village of Westfield has been overturned by councillors who voted to reject new homes.

The plan to build 15 architectdesigned family homes had been supported by local Labour councillor Andrew McGuire and was backed at the meeting of the Development Management Committee by SNP councillors.

But while the committee rejected the plan the debate raised broader questions about the viability of another long-standing proposal to build 550 homes on the site of the former Westfield Paper Mill.

Farmer Charlie Miller wants to build the 15 new homes on the edge of one of his fields in the village. His agent Anne Cunningham read a letter in support from councillor McGuire.

Mr McGuire told the committee: “Westfield is a great community with great community spirit, but it is being left behind. It has had no new development in the last 30 years.”

Anne Cunningham added that the village shop had closed and the development proposals would help stabilise the village by bringing in new families. The plans have been largely backed by the villagers and the application received 35 letters of support.

Calling the plans a“respectful low key and modern, which would play its part in the village”, she added:“Please heed the people, to allow this wee bit of development in this forgotten village”.

The stumbling point for the proposal is that it is on land not earmarked for building- a point returned to by Councillor Willie Boyle who said other proposals on the edge of similar areas had been given the go ahead. He was critical of policy that had concentrated on larger town development which had left small villagers to wither.“We need to reverse that trend”, he told committee.

Fellow councillor David Tait also supported the proposals adding:“I don’t think there’s cat’s chance of the paper mill site ever coming forward.”

He echoed earlier criticism by Provost Tom Kerr, who was also sympathetic to Mr Miller’s plan, and critical of the mill site proposals where, despite permission being granted, no development was coming forward. Such inactivity was creating a logjam up for other development, he suggested.

Despite this, the committee voted against an SNP amendment crafted in favour of the application and it was rejected by five votes to three.