Below is a copy of the objection lodged by St Monans Community Council in the application to build 57 houses west of the manse. If you wish to add your own objection, or support, the required reference number is shown below.
The Community Council’s objection is split in to two distinct areas. The first relates to the consultation process for this planning application, the second relates to characteristics of the proposed development plans submitted.
In terms of consultation processes, we believe that the Community Council should have automatically been deemed to be a statutory consultee, without us having to ask as we believe that this development would affect the amenity in the area of the CC.
In the “Design and Access Statement” under Public Involvement it states that “Fife Council advised that they would discuss the vehicular link connection through to Queen Margaret Street with the Community Council……. “. This has not happened.
In terms of the actual development and submitted plans we have objections on a number of grounds:
The proposed vehicular link through Queen Margaret Street is unnecessary and has been objected to unanimously by the Community Council and everyone present at the recent and previous public meetings. The impact this will have far outweighs any potential integration aspect this link would supposedly foster.
There are already noted traffic issues in this area of the village, and further traffic calming measures will not alleviate this. “In the evenings, the streets are congested with on-street parking, which is extremely hazardous to navigate, especially on Queen Margaret Street….” The “Transport Statement” states in the Conclusions at 8.2.4 “It was found that the development could be served by a single vehicular access from the A917 and under all tested scenarios the development will have a negligible impact etc.” This link road would mean the loss of garages which would further exacerbate the parking problems. The route would cut straight through the playpark in this area, which is a valuable asset to the local area and, with the introduction of family oriented housing within the development, this amenity would itself do more to foster integration between the new development and the existing village (and local community) than the proposed link road despite the ethos of ‘Designing Streets’. As a result of the link road the playpark would obviously need to be resited and nothing is shown on any plan or drawing as to where this would or could be. It beggars belief that anyone would think that this link road is a good idea when it is opposed by every village resident who has expressed an opinion, the local police representative who attended a previous meeting, where it was discussed, and indeed by the developer.
In summary, we believe this vehicular link is not required and a footpath through the existing playpark would provide sufficient social integration and access to and from all local amenities whilst having a lesser environmental impact in terms of traffic, loss of a greenfield site and a well used local amenity. When people walk to and from locations they engage with those around them and become more aware of the area and those in it, the same cannot be said for those undertaking car journeys.
We have concerns about the capacity of the sewerage systems and their abilities to cope with the extra usage. There are already problems with the pumping stations and with blockages and we feel that unless some upgrades are envisaged, these problems can only get worse.
Concern has also been expressed by some residents about the sight lines from some of the houses with driveways joining the A917, directly.