Controversial plans for St Andrews care home rejected

Developers had been seeking permission to turn a house on Hepburn Gardens into a 38-bed care home, adding two extensions, which would have allowed the residents of Gibson House to be moved into a purpose-built facility – and lead to Gibson House being turned into the first Scotsman Hotel outside of Edinburgh.

Fife Council officers had recommended that the care home plan be approved.

However, councillors voted in favour of refusing approval – the second time plans for the care home have been rejected this year.

In February, councillors refused plans for a 40-bed care home on the site, a decision which was later upheld by a Scottish Government reporter.

CAF Properties had made changes to the plans, such as cutting the number of beds by two, reducing the size of the buildings, lowering the height of the extensions and reconfiguring the car park.

The first application had been refused because concerns had been raised about a loss of privacy, noise from parking, insufficient parking, and light pollution being brought into a residential area – the question councillors were faced with this time was, were the changes enough to address these concerns?

One of the major concerns for councillors was the noise levels.

The report put to the councillors noted that an acoustic fence would be added to cut noise levels, but Cllr Tony Miklinski questioned whether this would be enough.

“A hedge isn’t an effective barrier to noise,” he said. “The level of difference between what the residents have now, and what they would have, is significant.”

Cllr Linda Holt said the issue regarding the scale of the development, which would have been located inside a conservation area, “had not been solved”.

There were also concerns about the how support comments had been secured for the care home plans.

In total, 437 comments of support were made for the plans, with 429 being submitted in just one week. Concerns had been raised at the time about the impact this had on the planning process.

Cllr Miklinski said: “I have serious concerns about the tactics of the 437 support comments and the way they were achieved. It’s a distortion of the balance of the opinions of the people out there.”

However, councillors were told it was up to them to decide what value to place on the comments.

St Andrews councillor, Dominic Nolan put forward a motion to refuse planning permission, citing a number of concerns about the plans, including the adverse impact the development would have on the conservation area, the impact on the residential amenity, and the size and scale of the building.

He said he “appreciated” the improvements and the changes that had been made to the plans, but said that these did not “allay my fears” about approving the care home.

His motion was seconded by Cllr Miklinski.

Cllr Tim Brett put forwarded an amendment for the plans to be approved.

Eight councillors voted to refuse the application, while three voted to approve it.