By Gordon Berry

ADMINISTRATION COUNCILLORS in north-east Fife appear to be shaping up to a confrontation with their colleagues on the central Fife Council planning committee over the way Areas of Great Landscape Value (AGLV) have been treated in the latest version of the proposed local plan.

Amid criticisms of a recent consultation exercise carried out by external consultants, and claims that carefully argued submissions from concerned bodies had been ignored, members of the north-east Fife area committee have unanimously decided to oppose the suggested removal of a number of current AGLVs.

Areas affected include land around the foot of the Lomond Hills, land to the south and west of Wormit, and parts of St Andrews that may also fall within the boundary of the long awaited green belt.

The cross-party view came from Liberal Democrats, including Fife deputy leader Councillor Elizabeth Riches, two Conservatives, and the two Independent members of the committee.

Signs that there are differing views within the Liberal Democrat administration members at local and central level came with the unusual appearance at the committee of Fife’s planning committee vice-chairman, Lib Dem David Herbert (Inverkeithing and Dalgety Bay).

He obviously touched a nerve with the area committee when he told members that they had to be married to the rest of Fife, but might not like that happening.

He also provoked annoyance by referring to a draft consultant’s report which has not been seen by many north-east Fife councillors, or by groups and individuals who took part in the consultation, and is not yet in the public domain.

The mood of the area committee was summed up by its chairman, Andrew Arbuckle, who said that neither councillors nor the community had seen any justification for the changes proposed from consultation that had “not been deserving of the title.”

Mrs Riches said there were big problems over how the consultation was carried out and Tory councillor Roger Guy said that what had happened appeared to confirm that no matter what comes out of consultation, the views of councillors and the public at large are ignored.

Senior council official Bill Lindsay, however, said that the study carried out had met Scottish Natural Heritage guidelines and it was commending the Fife process to other councils.

In relation to AGLVs, Mr Lindsay said there was a need to separate the green belt issue from that of the AGLVs, that green belt did not depend on AGLV designation, and that the council applies different planning policies to protect natural heritage whether in or outwith AGLVs.

He also pointed out that there would be further opportunity for consultation as the local plan progresses.