Green Belt Forum label St Andrews development plans 'totally inappropriate'

Two rival plans setting out the future redevelopment of St Andrews have both been slated by local green lobbyists as causing "irreparable damage" to the town.

The Green Belt Forum has also criticised the "new town, bolted on to our west and north west boundaries" — put forward by the St Andrews West Partnership, principally the university and Headon Developments — as "totally inappropriate.''

They claim that the plans would "make a mockery of Fife Council promises, after years of delay, to give St Andrews the green belt we need."

The option of "a similar conurbation, straddling the Craigtoun Road" — the proposals put forward by Macdonald Estates and Mount Melville — would also "involve irreparable damage to St Andrews' landscape setting," the Forum say.

A third option, proposed by the Forum, involves developing brownfield sites within the burgh "and then, and only then, those greenfield sites within the Headon and Macdonald proposals that propose no threat to St Andrews' landscape setting."

Sam Taylor, chair of the Forum, told the Citizen: "Our proposal complies with the Structure Plan requirement for around 1000 houses by 2026.

"It allows considerable room for essential university planning but, crucially, it prevents irreparable damage to our natural heritage."

Read the full story in this week's Citizen