By Gordon Berry

THE DECISION to put plans for the western expansion of St Andrews back into the melting pot has been described by its preservation trust as a “triumph for democracy.”

The reaction has come from the trust’s planning policy convener, David Middleton, in the wake of this week’s meeting of Fife Council’s central planning committee.

The committee discussion opened the way for consideration of sites other than those currently proposed through the joint venture between a local housing developer, developers, landowners and the university.

Councillors and St Andrews organisations are concerned about the land allocation at St Andrews West, and officials had already taken steps to pare back outer land, particularly where views from the town centre could be affected by development.

Mr Middleton said the trust welcomes the planning committee’s unanimous agreement to support the views of north-east Fife members and rethink the locations for proposed development.

He said, “Our local councillors deserve our appreciation for the effective way in which they have championed local opinions and insisted upon a rethink of plans, which would have permanently destroyed important aspects of the town’s landscape setting.

“It should be remembered that these plans have been subject to hundreds of objections at every stage of the public consultation, but most of these objections were effectively ignored.

“The government’s modifications to the structure plan also left the enormous development proposed for St Andrews virtually unchanged, despite studies by landscape consultants for the council stating that the St Andrews landscape could not accommodate this amount of development without suffering serious damage.”

Mr Middleton said Fife residents could not question the “doubtful logic” of the proposals because the Scottish Government denied requests for the structure plan’s assumptions to be examined in public.

He said that the more than 1000 houses proposed for St Andrews will have to be accommodated somewhere, and the local plan can only seek to reduce the damage done by identifying the least sensitive sites.

“It has now emerged that there was prior agreements about the sites to be developed between a consortium of builders and the university in liaison with Fife council planners,” he said.

“These plans have never been subject to public scrutiny but are now being presented as reasons for building on these locations, which are some of the most sensitive in the countryside surrounding St Andrews.

“Unless the structure plan which sets the number of houses can be effectively challenged, St Andrews will suffer from a deterioration in its natural environment... which will detract from its carefully nurtured reputation as the most historic small town in Scotland.”