I WRITE to correct two inaccuracies in the excellent article by David Steele on Sundrum Estate (January 3).
First, the land belonging to Mr Watson's company only amounts to around 84 acres, not 300 as stated.
Permission has now been given for a total of 60 houses - 17 of these houses are to be built along the narrow estate drive; a further nine are to be built in front of the castle, obliterating the parkland shown in the middle ground of your photograph.
Secondly, Mr James Goddard was not ``given'' a new house when the development began. He and his family were sitting tenants when Mr Watson's company bought the castle and, as such, were fully entitled in law to be rehoused.
This is the developer's third planning application. Objections were made by Scottish Wildlife Trust, Scottish Civic Trust, and Scottish Natural Heritage. Caveats were received from the roads department and the Garden History Society.
My major concern, however, is the way in which Kyle and Carrick District Council have handled this matter from the beginning. In particular, the refusal to allow objectors, or their professional representatives, sight of Mr Watson's companies' financial information and cash flow projections.
There is no question of commercial confidentiality here. It is neither a tender nor a competitive situation and the planning applications have all been ``enabling'' ones.
The castle, after more than three years, is still lying open to the elements with little or no evidence of restoration work.
Interestingly, Historic Scotland seems to have a different view of the companies' financial position.
Kyle and Carrick District Council, officials and councillors, are public servants. Historic Scotland is a public body and its #541,000 grant is to be made from public money. Why are the financial details being deliberately concealed from the public at Mr Watson's request?
Last but not least Mr Watson's project will not save Sundrum Castle for the nation. He intends to divide it into three luxury residential apartments and his latest planning application was supported by a letter from a prospective buyer - in London.
Rosemary Sloan,
East Burnside Cottage,
Sundrum, Ayrshire.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article