THE National Trust for Scotland may seek a judicial review of how a planning application for a harness racing track on the Bannockburn battlefield was handled after it was narrowly approved.
Concerns have been raised about the legality of the “perverse” decision to give the green light to the development.
The plans were pushed through by the Labour-Tory Stirling Council on Tuesday but a decision is yet to be official as ministers will now have 28 days to further assess the impact on the historic battlefield and they are being strongly urged to intervene.
It took a casting vote from the Tory chair of the committee, Rachel Nunn, to push the application through with councillors split down the middle on the proposals.
Concerns have since been raised the National Trust for Scotland (NTS) – which runs the nearby visitor centre – was not initially made aware of the plans by the council and only found out about them through an SNP councillor.
Gerry McLaughlan said he brought the application to the attention of the NTS when he spotted the charity had not commented on the plans when they were made public.
READ MORE: Bannockburn battlefield: See the exact site of the planned horse track
The NTS has confirmed it was not initially notified as a neighbour and had limited time to share its "extensive" concerns.
It is understood that when the NTS did eventually have chance to comment on the plans, the council claimed this had been submitted too late to be factored into the report, prior to it being presented to the first meeting of the planning committee in May.
The NTS has said it is focused on making a "strong case" to Scottish ministers asking that the development be refused but if this is not successful, the charity may consider seeking a judicial review.
McLaughlan said: “The crucial thing here is the officers’ report was prepared without the National Trust being able to contribute. When it was brought to their attention, the officers refused to change the report.
“When it came back to the hearing yesterday, the planning officers repeatedly said a mistruth because they said they only became aware of the National Trust not being contacted after the first planning meeting which wasn't true."
An NTS spokesperson said: “The National Trust for Scotland has concerns about the process that was followed in this case. We were not initially notified as neighbours and had limited time to share our extensive concerns about the impact this development will have on this last fragment of the site of one of Scotland’s most important battles.
"Our focus is now on making a strong case to Scottish ministers asking that the development be refused. We may have to consider seeking a judicial review, depending on that decision.”
It was decided after an initial meeting in May that a site visit needed to be carried out by the planning committee.
But even though two members of the committee were not able to attend the site visit, a decision was made anyway, a move SNP councillor Scott Farmer said he did not agree with.
He also questioned whether National Planning Framework 4 had been taken properly into consideration, which states that development proposals affecting a nationally important historic battlefield will only be supported where they protect and, where appropriate, enhance their cultural significance.
“I think it was a perverse decision and there are serious questions over the legal validity,” he went on.
READ MORE: Scotland's net zero transition needs 'significant investment'
“It is beyond me why they [the council] allowed the planning panel to be constituted when there were two members of the original planning panel that were unavailable for the site visit.
“I do not have any objection to the sport and I would support an application in an appropriate setting. I do not think this is appropriate for a gambling institution to be setting up their premises.
“[The idea] a racetrack with gambling facilities, with noise, with dust, with traffic, is going to enhance the historic battlefield quite frankly beggars belief.”
There is a history of harness racing in the area. Corbiewood Stadium in Bannockburn had been home to the Scottish harness racing community since 1966 but it was demolished in 2022 to make way for a housing development.
The sport is a form of horse racing where a two-wheeled cart or chariot is pulled by a horse.
But the plans for this new trotting track have been met with widespread backlash, with the NTS saying the proposal will “fundamentally alter the experience of the site”.
The Battle of Bannockburn, fought in June 1314, famously saw Robert the Bruce and the Scots defeat the English troops led by King Edward II.
Former SNP councillor Andy Doig, who is originally from Stirlingshire but now sits on Renfrewshire Council, said on Twitter: “This is absolutely shocking. What on earth is the Stirling Council Planning Board thinking about.
“No other country on earth would allow this desecration of a valued historical site.”
The plans were lodged by a Mr H Muirhead for the land west of New Line Road and south of Fairhill Road.
The site is around 8.7 hectares in size – about 14 football fields – and is currently green field agricultural land.
The application proposes erecting a trotting track and a building to be used for toilets and a bar and takeaway for hot food and drink.
Competitor and spectator vehicular paths/footpaths would also be built as well as parking areas.
A Stirling Council spokesperson said: “The Scottish Government has already issued a Direction in respect of this application. It would not be appropriate to comment any further at this time.”
Councillor Henke has been contacted for comment.
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