Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Controversial new A91 link road in St Andrews to be considered

An aerial view of the site.
An aerial view of the site.

A proposed new link road and roundabout in St Andrews has been deemed “acceptable in all regards” by planners ahead of the issue being considered by councillors on Wednesday.

Consent is being sought for the new route from the A91 through the North Haugh to the proposed St Andrews West expansion, although the fact that more than five objections have been received means it will have to go before North East Fife’s planning committee for approval.

The planned link road.

The plans are considered key as the proposed route would serve as a northern access point for the St Andrews West Strategic Development Area and also serve the long-awaited planned replacement for Madras College at Langlands.

However, 24 letters of objection to the proposal and 20 letters of support have been received – so it could prove a contentious one for elected members next week.

One of the most prominent objections has come from St Andrews Community Council, who maintain there is a better alternative route shown which to them is more favourable due to its shorter length which would be safer for school children, pedestrians and cyclists.

They also consider the proposed toucan crossing on the A91 is an inadequate solution to meeting the needs of those groups and have suggested that an underpass or overbridge be provided instead.

In his report to committee, case officer William Shand acknowledged that the development would have a large impact on trees and would result in the loss of trees within an arboretum which are considered special specimens, and also has the potential to impact on local ecology.

However, he added: “The proposed mitigation would ensure that there was no significant adverse impact through the level of replacement planting and would deliver a high quality publicly accessible environment with enhanced arboretum.

“There would be no other significant impact from the development in terms of transportation, flood risk, built heritage or residential amenity.

“An area of open space would be lost, however this would not be significant and would be more than compensated for through the improved landscaped area.

“The development is considered acceptable in all regards.”