Councillors have claimed a request for cash to fund controversial affordable homes in Crail that they rejected has added “insult to injury”.
A proposal by Stewart Milne homes to build 48 terraced houses on land adjacent to Pinkerton Farm, Balcomie Road, was unanimously rejected by the North East Fife Planning Committee.
The affordable housing proposal had drawn 82 objections, with one objector claiming that it would create an “overdeveloped ghetto” and another describing the homes as “boring, ugly, repetitive, cramped dwellings”.
The developer appealed on the grounds of non-determination and was given the go-ahead by a Scottish Government reporter.
A report before members of the executive committee sought support for increased borrowings for lending to affordable housing projects.
It asked that the council lend up to £1.5 million relating to the project in Crail and a separate scheme in Rosyth.
The request drew an angry response from councillors who also sat on the North East Fife Planning Committee.
Tay Bridgehead councillor Tim Brett said: “It was a unanimous decision on the North East Fife committee. This really adds insult to injury. I can’t support this.
“There was a very, very strong view in Crail that this type of housing was not appropriate. We know we can do much better than this and now we’re being asked to put money in to support it.
“I want affordable housing but in this instance I can’t support this.”
Fellow North East Fife Planning Committee members Bryan Poole and Dorothea Morrison aired their concerns.
Mr Poole said: “The style of housing has raised huge concerns. The concern is that we begin building houses that used to be built in the 1960s and ’70s that were bad housing.”
Ms Morrison said: “I think every single councillor is really in favour of having far more affordable housing, but we also have to be aware that it has to be a house that somebody wants to live in.”
Committee chairman David Ross said: “Clearly the committee report was prepared prior to the overturning by the reporter of the planning permission.
“Given the history of the situation and that there isn’t a clear answer today, we should defer for further clarity on that position.”