Golf plan at St Andrews rejected

Gordon Berry, The Courier, 28 February 2001

Plans for a £25 million golf and leisure complex south of St Andrews have been rejected by a Scottish Executive Reporter, who decided approval would contravene approved Fife Council policies.

The council’s own planning officials had recommended approval for the project, on an extensive site at Scooniehill.

One of the main reasons given for the decision by Reporter Iain Lumsden relates to the "unduly prominent and conspicuous location" of the planned clubhouse complex in an area of great landscape value and on the skyline above the medieval town.

Although accepting there could be economic and tourism benefits, he concluded that other factors - such as loss of agricultural land, development in the countryside, and protection of the landscape - are more important.

Applicants, International Golf Club of St Andrews, sought planning consent for development of two golf courses, a clubhouse, residential lodges, and car parking at Scooniehill.

Last night it was made clear that they were bitterly disappointed at the decision.

The application was rejected by members of the council’s east area development committee despite positive recommendation from officials, and there was a subsequent week-long public inquiry in St Andrews at the end of last year.

The plans ran into substantial opposition from local and national conservation bodies, and there was also heavy opposition from St Andrews Community Council.

Support for the project was also expressed, however, with representatives of the community council most affected, Cameron Community Council, and local councillor Peter Douglas backing the scheme and its potential for job creation.

Mr Lumsden reported that it had been indicated in the structure plan that the overall approach in the St Andrews area was to ensure development was controlled and gradual and took account of "considerable environmental and infrastructural constraints."

These included a need to retain the attractiveness of the area by conserving the town’s high quality environment and landscape setting.

The new clubhouse complex would be in "an unduly prominent and conspicuous position on the skyline" clearly visible from a number of streets in St Andrews and from the Old Course and West Sands. It would be much more obtrusive on the open hillside than the existing steadings.

"In this case we are dealing with a large building on the skyline in a prominent position within an area of great landscape value that forms an important component for the setting of St Andrews.

"I am also aware the various landscape assessments suggest this is an area which is particularly sensitive to any form of new development," said Mr Lumsden.

He also referred to news that Fife Council has accepted the need for a green belt around St Andrews, and the fact there would a presumption against development in that green belt where there would be "intervisibility" between the site and the town’s historic core.

"While I recognise that this policy has to be considered and approved by Scottish ministers and the detailed boundaries would have to be defined in a subsequent local plan . . . I do not consider that any support for your client’s proposal can be drawn from this policy."

On the subject of the 80 accommodation suites planned for the site, Mr Lumsden said this was a use that would not normally be acceptable, and he was not persuaded that they must be located in the countryside. In principle, he said, the proposed golf courses would be acceptable.

Mr Lumsden reached his decision in spite of accepting in his report that in general terms St Andrews offered a major opportunity to increase jobs and generate additional income.

On the evidence available he was satisfied the development would have economic benefits for the area, and would assist with economic development and the tourist industry.

"However, the presumption in favour of tourist developments contained in these policies is clearly subject to the proposal being consistent with the plan’s overall strategy and its other policies."

When considered against environmental and other policies, he said, development would contravene policies relating to use of prime agricultural land, development in the countryside, and the need to protect areas of high-quality landscape.

Last night Alastair Doig, a spokesman for the applicants, said he had not yet received notification of the decision from the Scottish Office, but added, that he was "gutted" by the news, and that no further comment would be made at the moment.