ITEM NO: 8 - EADC MEETING CUPAR - 21 MAY 2002

APPLICATION FOR FULL PLANNING PERMISSION REF: O1/03170/EFULL

SITE ADDRESS: KINGSBARNS GOLF LINKS KINGSBARNS ST ANDREWS

PROPOSAL: RECONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONS 6 AND 7 ON CONSENT 08/97/0029D (REGARDING CLOSURE OF COASTAL FOOTPATH AND ALTERNATIVE ROUTE DURING SPECIFIED PERIODS)

APPLICANT: KINGSBARNS GOLF LINKS KINGSBARNS FIFE KY16 8QD

CONSULTATIONS

Transportation Service

Refusal. Closures would be detrimental to health, safety and convenience of all route users.

Kingsbarns Community Council

Refusal. Footpath not closed during competition in 2001 and was successful. Would set precedent, footpath is important to whole Coastal Path network.

Scottish Natural Heritage

No response.

Fife Ranger Service

Only acceptable if temporary alternative route is proposed. If not then refuse.

REPRESENTATIONS

Seven letters of representation have been received regarding this application, one of which is from the Community Council and is summarised above. Two are from the applicant’s Health and Safety Advisor and the event organisers themselves and are summarised below. The other four letters have been received on the following grounds:

- Proposal will seriously affect public enjoyment of the Fife Coastal Footpath.
- Interaction between use of course and coastal path is no more incompatible with golfing activity during competitions than during the remainder of the year.
- Increased signage provision and stewarding during organised events such as Dunhill Cup would suffice without closing paths.
- Importance of path was recognised at time of original application and therefore there have been no changes in circumstances to justify any relaxation in conditions at any time, especially when it was deemed safe at original application stage.
- No specified periods have been enclosed.
- Will set precedent for closure of coastal paths elsewhere.
- Safety issue should not be used to grant permission, as concerns were raised during early planning stages. If safety is an issue then year round protection is required.
- Without any alternative routes being offered then proposal is unacceptable.

The two letters of support from the Health and Safety Advisor and organiser are as follows:-

- Safety of public should where possible follow the recommendations of the Guide to Safety at Sports Grounds (issued by Stationery Office)
- Safety of public rests with owner of the ground, promoter of the event and with the Local Authority - all should reflect a culture of Safety whenever possible.
- Use of Coastal footpath by public during competition and other golf tournaments could present a hazard to the public outwith the control of the management (especially in respect to injury, crowd management, emergencies and conflict of vehicle movement and pedestrians).
- Walkers in area are in danger from wayward golf balls, and indeed even certain areas are roped-off to paying spectators.
- Players and walkers can be unaware of each other’s presence thus increasing the potential hazard.
- Detailed Risk Assessment has been carried out, and organiser must minimise that risk whenever possible.
- Entry to Championship is controlled for commercial and security reasons. Likely threat is minimal (eg Vandalism, theft) rather than, and more regrettably, “major” (eg terrorist threat).
- As Dunhill Links Championship is largest prize fund competition on European Tour it attracts international field (golfers, businesses and entertainment) and is broadcast live world wide therefore controls are even more relevant as event attracts world wide attention.

STATUTORY POLICIES AND APPROVED GUIDANCE

National Guidance

NPPG11 Sport, Physical Recreation and Open Space (1996)
NPPG14 Natural Heritage (1999)
PAN 43 Golf Courses and Associated Developments (1994)
PAN 60 Planning for Natural Heritage (2000)

Fife Structure Plan (1994)

Policy E15 Encourage Countryside Access
Policy E16 Develop Long Distance Coastal Walk

Finalised Fife Structure Plan (2001)

Policy C3 Sport, Recreation and Open Space
Policy H3 Countryside Access and Access

Adopted Largo and East Neuk Local Plan (1995)

Policy EV13 Public Access to the Coast

PLANNING SUMMARY

1.0 Background

1.1 This application is for a reconsideration of Conditions 6 and 7 of application 08/97/0029D which was for the formation of Golf Course and Access Road (Amended Scheme), approved by East Area Development Committee on 28 November 1997 subject to certain conditions. This application seeks permission for the temporary closure of both the Fife Coastal Path and the alternative route to members of the public for the duration of the “Dunhill Cup” Competition (the dates for 2002 are as yet unspecified).

1.2 Condition 6 states that “The Fife Coastal Path route shall be fully accommodated within the site as identified on the stamped approved plans. This provision shall be to a minimum width of 1 .8m, and shall be surfaced in accordance with details to be agreed in writing by this Planning Authority prior to the commencement of works on site. The route shall remain unobstructed at all times and the developers shall lodge exact details of direction/information signage for the prior approval of this Planning Authority. Landscaped bunding shall be incorporated within a buffer area of minimum width of l0m to the landward side all of which shall be subject to the prior approval in writing of this Planning Authority”. The reason for the condition was “To ensure that the Fife Coastal Route is not impaired and that access for the general public is enhanced, formalised and adequately protected for the future”.

1.3 Condition 7 related to the “Alternative Route’ and states that “The alternative footpath shall be provided concurrently with the coastal route and shall be subject to the same standard of surfacing, access, maintenance and signage, all to the satisfaction of this Planning Authority”. The reason for this condition was “To ensure that a full and accessible network of footpath provision is made available in and around the golf course.

1.4 The current proposal does not provide for any alternative routes during the applicants’ request to temporarily close both the coastal or official alternative route. The Coastal Path is a public right of way.

2.0 Planning Assessment

2.1 The key issues in assessing this application are based on the original 1997 consent and the reasons for including these two routes in the conditions themselves.

2.2 The Fife Coastal Footpath is a recognised, formalised and well advertised recreational facility with an effectively continuous route round the Fife Coastline. The importance of achieving such an accessible and continuous route is such that its inclusion in the 1994 Fife Structure Plan (Policy E16) “to develop a long distance coastal walk” aimed to develop the strategic element of this footpath network and prevent adverse environmental impacts was included to protect the then proposed route from any unnecessary breaks.

2.3 The Finalised Fife Structure Plan (2001) contains two policies of particular relevance. Policy C3 “Sport, Recreation and Open Space” relates to protecting recreational facilities from adverse development and one of the three scenarios where such losses would be permitted, is if alternative facilities are provided in the area. This proposal does not provide for any alternative routes during the proposed temporary closure of both routes.

2.4 The finalised Fife Structure Plan (2001) also includes Policy N3 “Countryside Recreation and Access”. This policy seeks to “maintain and extend both strategic long distance (including the Fife Coastal Path) and local path networks for walking”. The proposed closure, even for a temporary period, by virtue of not including a temporary “alternative” to the two established routes would not “maintain” the coastal network, but instead create a temporary break.

2.5 The Largo and East Neuk Local Plan (1995) also makes reference to Rights of Way and the consideration of proposals which would affect such facilities. If an existing Right of Way is to be affected a requirement must be made for an adequate and acceptable diversion. In this proposal an adequate and acceptable diversion, even for a temporary period, is required but again this has not been part of the proposal.

2.6 Overall this proposal could also, if approved, create a precedent for other landowners and Golf Clubs to apply for similar temporary closures or even longer term route diversions, which could fragment the route, contravene the above policies and may ultimately destroy the hard work and painstaking negotiations with landowners in helping form the Fife Coastal Footpath in the first instance.

2.7 In respect of the letters of representation, all relate to the impact on the Fife Coastal Path even for a temporary period as proposed and how no alternative route has been proposed. Indeed, many quite rightly point out that the routes are acceptable during the remainder of the year without the need for closures. They also stress that the competition was held in 2001 without the need for closures. In fact many have suggested that additional stewards on site could help both users of the routes and golfers competing co-exist without the need for disruption or a break in the overall network.

2.8 Essentially, there are 2 issues to be considered. Firstly, the principle of closing the coastal footpath route along this stretch, albeit for a short period and secondly the lack of alternative provision which would be made. In respect of the former, this could be considered acceptable if sufficient justification was put forward. The applicants cite the staging of a major golf tournament and the associated safety and security issues. However, the same tournament operated in 2001 without a closure of the route nor indeed any incidences of accidents, through the use of extensive stewarding. In addition, the golf course is operated throughout the year with the coastal footpath fully open and unrestricted.

2.9 In respect of the latter, even if sufficient justification was given for the closure, there would be a requirement for a convenient and accessible alternative route to be made available for the temporary closure period. No such provision has been proposed, indeed the alternative route provided under the original consent is also proposed for closure, thus leaving this stretch of the coast with a missing link in the otherwise continuous route.

2.10 When the approval was granted for the golf course, an important element of the proposal was the network of pedestrian routes which would be accommodated. The alternative route provides an inland choice to enable a circular route to be followed. However, the inland route was never envisaged as a complete alternative or replacement of the coastal route. To close the coastal route therefore would deny this continuous route but to close the alternative inland route would effectively block the use of this stretch for the duration of the tournament. Pedestrian use by the public would, as a result, be forfeited for the tournament proposed.

3.0 Conclusion

3.1 This application proposes the temporary closure of both the coastal and alternative routes within the area of control of the applicant. Insufficient justification has been put forward for a closure of the coastal route and no alternative temporary routes have been proposed. The application therefore contravenes the above policies. It is considered to be unacceptable to close the routes with no alternative provision made and therefore refusal of the application is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION:

Refuse for the following:-

Reason(s):-

1. Insufficient justification has been put forward for a temporary closure of the coastal footpath and the closure of this route, together with the closure of the approved alternative route would be contrary to the terms of the Largo and East Neuk Local Plan 1995 (Policy EV13), in that the integrity of the coastal route would be damaged and the lack of a temporary alternative route would detrimentally affect the provision of a recreational facility, set a precedent for other Golf Clubs and Land Owners whose land includes sections of the Fife Coastal Path.

2. The proposed temporary closure of the Fife Coastal Path and Alternative route within the control of the applicants is contrary to Policies El 5 and El 6 of the Fife Structure Plan 1 995, Policies C3 and N3 of the Finalised Fife Structure Plan 2001, Policy EV13 of the Adopted Largo and East Neuk Local Plan 1995, and to the advice of Central Government (NPPGs 11 and 14 and PANs 43 and 60) with respect to closures and even temporary closure of such recreation facilities such as these can only be acceptable if suitable alternatives are provided. The Planning Authority sees no over-riding reason to depart from these policies without suitable acceptable alternatives.

BACKGROUND PAPERS

The documents, guidance notes and policies referred to in “Statutory Policies and Approved Guidance”.

Report prepared by Chris Smith, Planner