A DESIGN for the repair and possible replacement of a collapsed retaining wall on the main A72 road in Walkerburn will be drawn up by Scottish Borders Council officers in the New Year.

But that news, conveyed to last week’s full council meeting, does not mean the protracted dispute over who is responsible for the structure and who will pay for the required restoration has been resolved.

For the local authority is still insisting that the legal onus for maintaining the wall – damaged when struck by a car three-and-a-half years ago – lies with the owners of the adjacent properties at 34-41 Galashiels Road.

These owners have, in turn, denied responsibility and, through their insurers, have appointed an Edinburgh firm of solicitors to represent them.

Patience, however is wearing thin at the impasse amid fears that further deterioration of the wall – which runs the length of Galashiels Road – could result in the closure of the only road through the village.

That frustration was evidenced at last week’s meeting in an exchange between Councillor Stuart Bell, whose Tweeddale East ward includes Walkerburn, and Councillor Gordon Edgar, SBC’s executive member for roads and infrastructure.

Mr Bell said he welcomed the recent legal agreement struck between the council and the owners of a hotel in Selkirk to restore a similarly crumbling wall in that town.

That restoration, after a three-year legal wrangle, is due to start next week with the council, it is understood, footing the bill.

Mr Bell said Walkerburn had a similar problem.

“It could be argued that as this wall in Walkerburn holds up the council’s road – the A72 – then it is the council’s responsibility to repair and restore it,” said Mr Bell.

“When will the council either repair this wall or constructively engage in mediation or arbitration to settle responsibility for repairing it?”

Mr Edgar said it remained the view of council officers that SBC was not responsible.

“Under the terms of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984, the responsibility for maintaining and repairing retaining walls which support adopted roadways falls to the owners of the particular wall,” he stated.

“Ownership of the wall and, therefore, legal responsibility for repairing it lie with the owners of the adjacent properties.

“This responsibility is denied by the homeowners who, through their insurers, have instructed solicitors to act in this matter. Council officers have been in discussion with these solicitors and, as part of that discussion, the matter of instructing an independent third party to settle the dispute has been raised.

“Council officers have offered to refer the matter to a third party expert for independent resolution but, so far, this offer has not been taken up.

“Council officers continue to monitor the state of the wall and, as a result of a review of the most recent inspection reports, it is proposed the council’s asset management section commences the design of the repair/replacement solution to the damaged wall in the New Year.

“On completion of this process, the council will commence the legal process to have the wall repaired/replaced by the owners of the wall.”

Mr Bell said he understood that while the homeowners’ insurers may be prepared to pay for a ‘like-for-like’ replacement of the damaged section, the council was asking for a higher standard of repair.

He asked Mr Edgar to ensure a discussion took place with the owners to “allow for a pragmatic and practical arrangement to resolve this issue”.

Mr Edgar said he was unaware that the council was requiring extra works to a higher standard, adding: “Until a full assessment is carried out in the New Year, the full costs will not be known.”