THE developer of 18 luxury flats in the centre of Dunfermline won't have to pay £56,000 to Fife Council after a successful planning appeal.

Hunter and Turnbull, who are converting the B-listed former Carnegie Clinic into apartments, had agreed to pay but later said the cash demand was "unnecessary" and took their case to the Scottish Government.

And the ruling went in their favour, with the council told they were wrong to ask for a £54,000 contribution for affordable housing and £2,666 towards improvements at St Margaret's Primary School in Dunfermline.

The Government reporter, Paul Cackette, stated: "Reading the development plan as a whole, I conclude that the policy of the council is to exempt conversions, particularly listed buildings, from the requirement to make a contribution by way of a planning obligation."

He added that imposing planning obligations in respect of affordable housing and education was "therefore contrary to the development plan" and that it was "not in my view a reasonable requirement".

The building, completed in 1912, had been declared surplus to requirements by NHS Fife in 2013 and was put up for sale later for offers over £275,000.

Planning permission to convert the former clinic in Inglis Street into the Carnegie Apartments – 18 one-and two-bedroom luxury flats that range in price from £170,000 to £345,000 – was granted by the council in September 2020.

A legal agreement setting out the financial contributions for affordable housing and education was agreed and signed by both parties but Mr Cackette noted it was "not subsequently registered".

In February of this year, Hunter and Turnbull asked the council to scrap the agreement, arguing that it was "unnecessary" and that they had only signed it as they were sure "Fife Council would refuse their application" if they did not.

A supporting statement on their behalf said: "Hunter and Turnbull are taking this iconic disused listed building at the heart of Dunfermline and transforming it into new homes by the sympathetic refurbishment of the fabric of the structure providing for its sustainable and long-term use (and maintenance).

"It is extremely disappointing that Fife Council, rather than acknowledging the investment and commitment to deliver a development of this nature, are seeking to penalise the development by seeking to apply additional costs which are unrelated to the development and any realistic impacts arising and which run contrary to current FIFEplan policy and related requirements."

In July, the council refused their application, stating that the developer had "failed to provide sufficient evidence to set aside the requirement to provide contributions".

An appeal was made the following month to the Government's planning and environmental appeals division.

The developer's appeal quoted from FIFEplan, the council's local development plan for what can be built and where, which states that no planning obligations should be sought for "the conversion or renovation of an existing building, particularly if it is listed”.

Mr Cackette agreed and concluded the planning obligations "appear to me not to be necessary in order to make the development acceptable in planning terms".