By Gordon Berry

THE ARCHITECTURAL Heritage Society of Scotland has poured scorn on claims St Andrews could benefit from the re-establishment of a rail link, or that such a scheme could be viable.

Yesterday, the society’s east Fife representative Glen Pride said the capital costs of establishing a branch connection to the main east coast line would be disproportionate.

He said it would require the acquisition of land for the construction of a line, new river and road crossings and the building of a terminal and other infrastructure.

There is no likelihood, he said, of the many millions required being provided in the current financial situation.

Mr Pride added, “There is no sustainable market, and trains would be running nearly empty most of the time.

“In this age of the car it will be a minority group that wishes to travel to St Andrews by rail.

“Most people who come to St Andrews for a day out will always want to jump into their cars and drive.

“With the restoration of the branch railway line, visitors who opt to travel to St Andrews by rail would have to wait for a connection to the branch line then travel to a new station at St Andrews, which could only be located near its boundary.

“They would then have to take a taxi from the edge of the town to hotels, boarding houses and other destinations.

“The comparative, present arrangement is to take a taxi direct from Leuchars to St Andrews.

“This would not be much more costly, and provides an instant door-to-door service.”

He added, “Apart from the beginning and end of university terms, it is difficult to imagine what advantages the new branch line has to offer and, if its trains are time-tabled to meet every main-line train, how viable would it be?

“There will never be the volume of passengers for this to be done—you can’t run trains back and forward on a branch line in the hope that a few passengers might want to travel back and forward to St Andrews,” he said.

Mr Pride said the society can see no justification for such an enterprise when its contribution to the solution of current road traffic problems would be, at best, minimal.

He acknowledged traffic congestion in St Andrews is a major problem, and he said the society maintains solutions to traffic congestion in the town could follow the broad example of some other historic university towns—for example, Cambridge.

“There, ring-roads divert through traffic, well-organised peripheral car parks are served by an excellent park-and-ride bus service and the historic centre is pedestrianised, and is thus safe, spacious and unfestooned by closely-packed parked vehicles,” he concluded.