Drumoig plan refusal was ‘unreasonable’

Developers want to expand the exclusive golf resort and village
Developers want to expand the exclusive golf resort and village

The exclusive golf resort and village at Drumoig could undergo a significant expansion if an appeal by its would-be developers is upheld.

Parkhill Construction Services and Drumoig Developments has lodged an appeal against a decision by north east Fife planning committee to turn down their application for planning permission in principle to build 35 houses and a shop.

They had also wanted to extend the existing Drumoig Golf Hotel to include three guest lodges, a children’s play area, commmunity orchard and leisure and recreational facilities.

The development would have been carried out in four phases, starting later this year.

But the application was turned down by councillors last October on the grounds that the proposal amounted to overdevelopment, despite planning officers recommendingapproval.

Now the application will be decided by a Scottish Government Reporter .

A separate appeal has also been lodged against the committee’s decision to refuse peremission to build a house for the manager and owner of the newly-established Drumoig Golf Centre.

The would-be developers say that at present Drumoig consists of three separate and isolated housing estates which are arranged in cul-de-sacs around the golf-related facilities.

They say that the village has no community facilities or focus and lacks usable public open space, and that their plans would create a residential environment that most of the residfents of Drumoig want to see.

They insist that the proposal complies with the local development plan and that the reason for refusal was neither ‘justified nor reasonable’. They point out that the Local Plan allows for an estimated 30 houses on the site and say that the councillors’ perception of overdevelopment was ‘completely unfounded.’

Parkhill Construction and Drumoig Developments, based in Drumoig, is also claiming expenses against Fife Council, saying it should not have been necessary for the application to go to Scottish Ministers for determination.

It accused the council of ‘acting unreasonably’ in turning it down.

“We would contend that the council’s reason for refusal is irrational and unsound,” says the appeal document.

“It is not based on a reasonable or justified assessment of the relevant planning matters.

“Furthermore the reason for refusal is imprecise in its terms.”