INVERKEITHING residents have hit out at Taylor Wimpey after the developers launched a fresh bid to build on a controversial “gold mine” site in the town.

The firm had plans to build 450 homes at Spencerfield and despite having the proposal thrown out by Fife Council and the Scottish Reporter, have put in yet another application.

The greenfield land was among eight sites removed for housing under the FIFEplan local development plan in September 2014 – but in November, Taylor Wimpey submitted a screening option to build 300 homes at the site.

They have now applied for planning permission in principle but resident Myrna Venters, chair of Take a Pride in Inverkeithing, said locals were “fed up and angry”.

She said, “The plans have been thrown out but as a developer Taylor Wimpey will continue and continue – they won’t even accept that the Scottish Reporter has said no. That site is a gold mine for a builder and they will continue with this until they get the answer they want.

“Taylor Wimpey don’t give a hoot. They don’t care if the land is greenfield or if there’s wildlife.

“They claim the houses are going to bring so much into Inverkeithing but I’ve spoken to business people within the town and even they don’t want it.

“How many times do people in Inverkeithing have to say no before Taylor Wimpey listen?” She added, “There are other sites that can be built on, like the harbour, but they’ve made all these excuses about it being a flood area or the ground is not good.

“The doctor’s surgery is chock-a-block and you’re already waiting two weeks for an appointment. The school is full and it can only take so many pupils.” A Save Spencerfield group started up to fight the previous plan and Dalgety Bay and Hillend Community Council is also opposed to development.

Chairman Colin McPhail underlined that the site was not in the FIFEplan and said, “Our concern is coalescence.

“There has to be a proper breathing space and a greenbelt between the two communities.

“I know there are brownfield sites for development in Inverkeithing. That should be a priority for development rather than greenfield sites which are easy work for developers.” In 2013, Fife councillors unanimously refused Taylor Wimpey’s application to build up to 450 homes at Spencerfield, the plans having already been knocked back by the west planning committee and recommended for refusal by planners.

Taylor Wimpey lodged an appeal which was not upheld by the Scottish Government, the Reporter concluding that the plans would “harm the character of the countryside in conflict with the adopted Local Plan and SESplan”.

Andrew Roberts, Taylor Wimpey’s strategic land manager, said the plans would “go some way to helping Fife Council address its critical shortfall of over 8000 homes”.

He said, “Where there is a housing shortfall and an out-of-date or deficient local development plan, SESplan and Scottish Government policy states that sites for greenfield housing development proposals may be granted planning permission to maintain the five-year effective land supply.” He said public consultation feedback and the Reporter’s recommendations had been considered and the new planning application “aims to deliver a new scheme that sits well in the local landscape and offers a good solution for the area”.

Mr Roberts said they had looked again at parts of their previous plan that were considered “unacceptable” by the Reporter.

He added, “Following this appraisal we have reduced the number of houses from 450 to 295, 25 per cent of which would be affordable, as well as the amount of land to be developed.

“Council officials have consistently proposed the site at Spencerfield should be released for the provision of new homes and we believe our revised development proposals can provide the much-needed increase in supply of new homes, whilst offering Inverkeithing the opportunity to secure levels of investment and an increased population that can have a positive effect in sustaining public services.

“We would encourage everyone with an interest to view our masterplan report to fully understand how this application differs from the application made in 2012.”