Town's golf courses near capacity, inquiry told

The Courier, 24 November 2000

Pressure on St Andrews Links Courses - particularly the Old Course - will increase if a £25 million golf and leisure project near the town was given planning consent.

This was stated yesterday by the chairman of Fife Council’s east area development committee, Councillor Frances Melville, who also expressed “grave concern” over the economic viability of the project at Scooniehill.

Councillor Melville was giving evidence during the third day of a public inquiry which will determine an appeal against the refusal of consent or a 460-acre site to the south of St Andrews.

The applicants, the International Golf Club of St Andrews Ltd, want to build two golf courses, a club house, leisure facilities and residential lodges.

The application was thrown out by Councillor Melville’s committee earlier this year in the face of a recommendation for approval from council officials.

Councillor Melville said that there was pressure on St Andrews links from a proposed development and a more recent one now being constructed.

She said that St Andrews Links Trust felt that it would be inappropriate to comment on any individual applications, but it had set up a working party to look into the capacity of the links.

The conclusion reached, said the witness, was that some courses had nearly reached capacity and that the rest of them had only a few more years before capacity was reached.

“There is no doubt that these large developers who incorporate St Andrews into their name are playing on the international golfing reputation of St Andrews.”

Turning to the economic viability of the project Councillor Melville said she felt that the expectations of the applicants were unrealistic.

She said that from recent experience in St Andrews a new project that had relied upon gaining international memberships had failed dramatically in that it only sold £43,000 worth when the target had been £1.5 million.

While accepting that the Gateway project referred to was a different concept, Councillor Melville said that concern and doubt had been raised.

She said that if the proposed 80 residential units were not viable there was a fear that an alternative use would be sought for them.

On the subject of traffic impact the witness said that much play had been made on controlling movements of people through the use of mini buses or coaches.

She said, however, that this would be difficult to monitor and control - and that the car would still be used by visitors.

“People like to feel free to come and go as they please, especially if they have paid a considerable sum of money to enjoy the benefits of the development,” she said.

Traffic generated could be significantly above predicted levels, said Councillor Melville, and she added that St Andrews traffic - especially in the summer - was already at a level which caused congestion.

Under cross-examination by Bruce Smith of Aberdeen-based Paull and Williamsons, who is leading the applicants’ case at the appeal, Councillor Melville accepted that in terms of pressure on the Old Course any members of the new club would have to enter the ballot in the same way as everyone else.

She added that in terms of economic viability it was suggested by Mr Smith that a legal Section 75 agreement between the applicants and the council would have tight controls and provision for a “restoration bond.”

This bond, he said, would have to be put up by developers at the start of the project and would be available for restoration of the site if the development failed.

Councillor Melville, however, replied that from recent past experience councillors were suspicious of bonds and of the provisions of Section 75 agreements.

Evidence also came from Doctor Ian Goudie, a statistician who is the convener of the planning committee of the community council.

Dr Goudie addressed the subject of likely traffic impact of the development, and he said that the objective observer could have “little confidence” in the conclusions of a traffic impact assessment which had been produced for the developers.

He said that baseline data for the study failed to take into account a development already in the pipeline, and that the approach taken to traffic growth showed no awareness of local demographic factors.

Dr Goudie went on to say that perhaps the most serious error in the assessment was a failure to provide a correct assessment of the status quo position.

This, he said, was crucial for the validity of the exercise.

Elizabeth Williams, representing the St Andrews Green Belt Forum, told the inquiry that there was apparently “relentless growth” in St Andrews and that this put immense strain on the historic core of the town.

The important rural hinterland, she said, was now threatened by considerably larger developments which sought to exploit the golfing fame of St Andrews. Any planning decision taken from now on, said Mrs Williams, should reflect the green belt principle, and the aims of green belt planning policy.