By Claire Warrender

PLANS FOR a major housing development on a popular Fife beauty spot have been given the go-ahead, despite the concerns of local residents.

Taylor Woodrow Developments have been given permission to build 132 houses on the 18-acre site at Balbirnie Burns, Markinch.

Fife Council received 22 objections to the work, raising concerns ranging from the impact on the local economy to fears about the possible destruction of the historic park.

Community council secretary John McCluskie claimed the park was not a suitable location for a modern housing development.

Mr McCluskie said, “There are also issues relating to access constraints in that the public have long accessed this site which lies adjacent to existing residences, bridle path, golf course, ancient woodlands and an archaeological trail.

“The development will be built in a section of Balbirnie Park immediately adjacent to the A92 and, while it will not prevent the A92 being upgraded, it will result in the removal of the sort of green corridor that is necessary alongside a major trunk road and which the local plan seeks to protect and enhance.”

Planning section team leader Bernard Whittle said that since permission had been granted for a similar development on the site in 2004, the latest proposals were deemed acceptable.

The earlier permission was for 146 houses.

Mr Whittle said the site lay within the Inventory of Gardens and Designated Landscapes in Scotland boundary, and that it ought to be protected from adverse development proposals.

However he added, “The site is included in the inventory, but it has to be accepted that in 2004 it was agreed that a development of 146 houses would not have any adverse affect on its character.

“A reduction in the number of houses and minor alterations to the layout do not represent changes which are significant to suggest that the application will now adversely affect the character of the landscape.”

Addressing the concerns of the community council, Mr Whittle said, “The previous granting of planning permission established the principle of development on the site and this must be taken into account as a material consideration in the determination of this application.”

Concluding his report he said, “It is considered that the changes to the extant planning permission which the applicant and new owner of the site wish to make only relate to a change in house types, a minor alteration to one cul-de-sac and minor changes to the layout.

“The amendments to the application are considered to be satisfactory, and will result in a reduction in the numbers of houses on the site.

“The proposals accord with the terms of the development plan and there are no material considerations which would suggest that the terms of the development plan should be laid aside.”