Click here to search commentonline

Planning & Politics

Political Lessons Should Be Learned from St Andrews Tourism/Housing Development Decision,

reckons Linda Sinclair of Garth Lodge, Fortingall

The Scottish Governments has interfered on a local planning decision in the interests of short term gain for Scotland. When I voted for the SNP I hoped we would have a different form of government – one that allowed decisions that affected local areas to be made at the local level.

I can see why at first glance this and other developments might appear attractive to the Scottish Executive because it brings in more tax revenue much needed by a small country with an uncertain possibly independent future. However short term gain could mean paying a high price in ways some of which we can only imagine now and I am surprised and disappointed that this Scottish Executive does not appear to have the vision to understand that. It is indeed ironic that on the same news programme I heard of this decision I also heard that the Spanish government is planning to demolish buildings on the Costa del Sol in an attempt to restore the coastline.

I will not go too deeply into the environmental impact of such a development and will leave that to the experts and, anyway, from recent experience, have learnt that protection of species and the environment is meaningless when it competes with economic interests. Words like carbon footprints and miles are also meaningless for the same reason.

But it may be sensible to direct an independent report be carried out on the environmental impact of such a development with possible knock on effects on the coastline to make sure the Executive does not shoot itself in the foot in the future. There is a reason the sand dome is there and with future rising seas the possible impact of allowing this development may not only be a burden the taxpayer will have to carry in terms of building coastal defences but the SNP may also pay a political price for lack of vision and forethought.

The housing market at this time is in a period of decline and to allow so many houses to be built in this sensitive area may have a negative impact on the existing housing stock perhaps making it difficult for present owners to achieve the prices they could have hoped for when they have to compete with shiny new houses.

I have seen this type of over-development when I lived in Texas and witnessed the negative impact it had on existing stock. It may be argued by some that the development will make the area more desirable viz St. Andrews. This is unlikely. St. Andrews is unique with history and a reputation that Mr. Trump will find impossible to compete with. Other golf courses have gone out of business in the last few years and the only reason these houses are being proposed is to recover the construction costs of the golf course and hotel and make the development more viable in economic terms.

It may also be argued that it will bring jobs to the area although why local people would suddenly want to work in this complex when they do not appear to want to work in other service industries in Scotland is hard to imagine.

Tourism is one of our most important industries and relies very much on keeping our wild places wild. People come here to escape the stresses of their busy lives and this should be one of the ideas we promote. As this island becomes more densely populated then people will more and more seek an escape from that density. Building over these places will eventually turn Scotland into an executive housing estate and what will be lost will be lost forever.

It is time for visionary government, time for a discussion to take place between politicians and the people as to what we want our countryside to look like 50 years from now and time for politicians to think of posterity rather than the short term financial and political gain of now.

This proposal seems symptomatic of what is happening all over rural Scotland and there is deep unease in rural areas about the insensitivity and siting of what is viewed as inappropriate development because it changes the character and ecology of the countryside. Politicians continually appear to ignore the opinions of rural communities and will ignore this particular head of steam that is building up around these issues at their peril.