Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

‘Oops… we didn’t mean to approve Culloden homes’

Highland councillor Andrew Jarvie at the site of the proposed housing development at Viewhill Farm
Highland councillor Andrew Jarvie at the site of the proposed housing development at Viewhill Farm

The decision to allow a controversial housing development was thrown into doubt last night after it emerged two councillors might have voted the wrong way.

The scheme for 16 houses near Culloden Battlefield, already the target of a petition and protests, could now be challenged.

Highland Council confirmed last night that the vote will stand pending a possible appeal but for now it remains binding.

The drama unfolded at the South Planning Committee in Inverness yesterday, where councillors had the choice of allowing the work to go ahead or sending the developer away to carry out a redesign.

Inverness South councillor Andrew Jarvie proposed a motion for the redesign and was supported by Ron MacWilliam.

Committee chairman Jimmy Gray then proposed an amendment that would pass the application, backed by vice chairwoman Carolyn Caddick.

But there was apparent confusion between the motion and amendment, and the vote passed five to three.

One councillor, who did not want to be named, said: “I voted the wrong way and I believe that one other councillor voted the wrong way.

“I know of two other councillors who were not entitled to vote – but if they had been permitted then they would also have voted the wrong way.

“It has been a mix-up as far as democratic desire goes and it was officially the wrong decision, so it definitely needs to be looked at.

“I believe there could well have been enough votes to alter the decision in terms of Andrew Jarvie’s motion and, yes, that would be to reject the design.

“I think it was a mistake – there is enough doubt about this decision to invoke procedures to amend the voting.”

With so few members involved in the decision, two mistakes would be enough to swing the outcome to a redesign. Last night, council officials were understood to be considering whether an appeal was appropriate.

However, Ms Caddick said: “I believe that there was one councillor who misunderstood and may have voted incorrectly at the time.

“This would not have changed the outcome as the chair would have had the deciding vote and he voted to approve.”

Mr Jarvie said: “I am bitterly, bitterly disappointed that an error led to the wrong outcome.”

Earlier, the Conservative councillor warned the plan for the homes was too generic and fell foul of directives laid down in Culloden Conservation Area guidelines.

Addressing the chamber Mr Jarvie said: “Kirkwood Homes is a fairly large national developer with a fairly good reputation but this is a total joke, do they really think we are stupid?

“I just couldn’t believe it when I saw what came through that not only was it small embellishments but it only applied to a third of the houses – it is absolutely breath-taking.”

The housing plan has been fraught since first being granted permission in 2014 by the Scottish Government on appeal after being turned down by the Highland Council.

Campaigners maintain that the site at Viewhill farm encompasses part of the battlefield and as such should be respected as a war grave, claims denied by the owner and developer.