CONCERN has been raised after it was revealed that the cost of demolishing an eyesore building in the centre of a Borders town had spiralled by £100,000.

When members of the council’s decision-making Executive Committee met on Tuesday (September 13), they agreed to allocate funds of £2.2m for demolition and replacement of a former ground floor hair salon and upper floor flats at the corner of Jedburgh's 12 Market Place and 2 High Street.

Those costs incorporate £2.1m for a replacement building and £100k to meet additional demolition costs after issues emerged that were “not envisaged”.

It has also now been disclosed that although demolition work is set for completion early next year the replacement building on the site may now not be completed until 2025.

The prominent building has been covered in scaffolding since 2015 after being judged dangerous due to falling masonry.

The council had been unable to secure the co-operation of the early 19th century’s category C-listed building’s six absentee landlords to have it brought down.

In August last year Scottish Ministers gave the local authority ownership after a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) was agreed.

Works have started on dismantling and redeveloping the site for housing on the upper floor and retail and community space on the ground floor.

Committee members agreed to allocate the £2.2m from the council’s second homes council affordable housing investment budget in relation to “abnormal costs in relation to demolition and the replacement building”.

Kelso councillor Simon Mountford asked officers if “lessons could be learned” from the protracted process.

READ MORE: Galashiels drug dealer, 26, remanded in custody after guilty plea

He said: “It is several years since this project first came to planning committee and we authorised enforcement proceedings in order to get the building up to standard.

“My concern is whether there are any lessons to be learned about future projects of this kind in which the council needs to take action to bring buildings which are derelict back into economic use or else be acquired and demolished, whether we can speed that up by learning lessons. This has cost a lot more money than we originally intended.”

John Curry, the council’s director of infrastructure and finance, said he would hold discussions with officers to establish whether such lessons could be learned.

In his report to the committee Mr Curry said: “The approved budget for the dismantling costs is £512k, with £188k of this spent in 2021/22 and the remaining £324k budgeted in 2022/23.

“Works on site have been progressing during 2022/23, however, during the dismantling the works have had to react in several instances to conditions that were not envisaged at the time of going to tender. This is largely attributable to the inability to get access to areas of the cellar and of the mutual gables with High Street and Exchange Street.

“As a result of conditions encountered, and changes that have had to be made to the sequence of the dismantling, the works are now forecast to conclude in February 2023 and at a total cost of £612k. This is £100k above the approved budget.”

Edinburgh-based architects Gray Macpherson have been appointed to design the replacement building, which will contain on the upper floor a mix of either three or four one and two bedroom flats allocated for affordable housing to be undertaken by Selkirk-based Eildon Housing Association.

Discussions are still ongoing over the allocation of the ground floor and completion of the development is now expected in 2024/25.

Mr Curry added: “It is noted this will mean that there is a period of time after the completion of the dismantling works before the new replacement building commences. Officers will endeavour to minimise this period in the interests of the visual appearance of the town centre.

“The forecast of the new replacement building are at £2.1m, based on the most recent cost plan and delivery programme. It is proposed within this report that this cost will be met from the second homes council tax affordable housing investment budget.”