Royal Burgh of St Andrews Community Council
Agenda - April 1999
(ver 8:32 31/3/9)
There will be a meeting at 7pm Monday 5th April 1999 in the Burgh Chambers, Queens Gardens.
0. Election of Chair
Donald Macgregor has submitted his resignation as Chair (see statement Appendix D). An election will be held for his sucessor.
1. Apologies for Absence
Received: Ken Crichton, Lindsay Murray, Sheila Hill
2. Contributions from Members of the Public
(for anyone wishing to address the meeting on a matter relevant to St Andrews. Please contact the Secretary or Chair at or before the meeting.)
2.1. Police Report
2.2. Cathy Adamson (NHS Trust) on Joint Assessment
2.3. James Rattray - Scenic Maps Ltd
See Appendix A
3. Minutes of 1st March Meeting
(read for corrections of substance - harangue the secretary for minor (spelling etc) mistakes outside the meeting).
4. Matter arising from previous meetings
5. Reports
5.0. Chair (outgoing)
5.1.1. Ohtawara Trust
Letter from David Robertson seeking a representitive from CC,
5.1.2. Botanic Gardens
Archie Strachan and Donald Macgregor attended the opening of the new Orchid House on Tuesday last (30/3/99).
5.1. Chair (incoming)
5.2. Treasurer
5.3. Secretary
5.3.1. Organisation of May Meeting
5.3.2. Printer - arrived
5.3.3. Correspondance
6. Matters Raised by Committees
(for reports and decisions by full council)
6.1. General Purposes
No meeting
6.2. Golf
6.3. Finance
6.4. Millennium
6.5. Planning
Appendix E - draft letter on Canongate Traffic Calming
6.6. Publicity
see appendix B
(location for April meeting)
6.7. Recreation
6.8. Youth
7. Matters Raised by Fife Councillors
7.1. Frances Melville (West)
7.2. Sheila Hill (South)
7.3. Jane Ann Liston (South East)
8. Other Matters of Public Concern
(for community councillors to raise new business and points of information)
Appendix A - Scenic Maps
From James Rattray's letter of 23/3/99:
"We'd like to consider St Andrews for a Scenic Map. Scenic Maps specialise in producing maps in conjunction with local councils, this allows us to ensure the map accurately portrays the town, with the correct emphasis on the various characteristics of the area.
"In Scotland there are Scenic Maps at Pitlochry and Callander produced with their respective Community Councils and four Scenic Maps in Stirling produced with Stirling Council.
"At your meeting on 5th April I will introduce the Scenic Maps concept, bring examples of our work and answer any questions the meeting may have."
Minutes of a meeting of the Publicity Committee held on 15th March at 7:30 pm
Present Dr F.G. Riddell, Mrs H. Lawrie, Mr P. Lindsay
Apologies Mr C Barrett, Ms C. Lesurf
1. Lapel Badges. The lapel badges prepared by Frank Riddell and Graig Barrett were approved for distribution at the next Community Council meeting.
2. Chairman's badge of office. Frank Riddell had again been in contact with local jeweller David Martin. It seemed that the cost of an enamelled badge (ca 4" x 3") bearing the coat of arms on a silver base with a chain could be as high as £1000. The cost of a comparably sized badge in embossed silver would be in the £200 300 region. Agreed to get a quotation from David Martin for consideration by the next Community Council meeting.
3. Notice Board. Helen Lawrie would contact Henderson Fabrication at Scooniehill to see if they could construct an appropriate notice board. It would be recommended to the Community Council that any decision to purchase a notice board should be accompanied by a request for some assistance from the Common Good Fund
4. Newsletter. Decided to recommend to the Community Council the titles of either "Our Town" or "The Town Crier". Recommend that publication should be quarterly and that the editorial panel should be Frank Riddell and Pete Lindsay. Advertising should be sought and so an advertising manager was needed. Typical advertising rates could be XXXZZZ YYY XXX ZZZ. Pete Lindsay agreed to contact the manager of the local free sheet to see if they could distribute.
5. Children's library window. Frank Riddell agreed to contact the children's library to enquire about public access to the window.
Appendix C - Treasurer's Report
Meeting of Council on 5th April 1999
1. The following alterations to the management of the Council funds have been made:-
a) Tree Planting Sub Account closed and balance of £204.89 transferred to the Cash & Bank Account 16/2/1999.
b) Quiz Book Sub Account closed and balance of £55.14 transferred to the Cash & Bank Account 16/2/1999.
c) 850 Anniversary Sub Account renamed the Millenium Sub Account.
d) Newsletter Sub Account closed and balance of £48.00 transferred to the Cash & Bank Account 16/2/1999.
e) St.Andrews Day Account (previously operated as a separate bank account) closed 29/1/1999 and balance of £365.39 transferred to the Cash &Bank Account now operated as the St.Andrews Day Sub Account.
f) Senior Citizens Xmas Party Account (previously operated as a separate bank account) closed and balance of £2,208.33 transferred to the Cash & Bank Account now operated as the senior Citizens Xmas Party Sub Account.
2. Funds as at 31/3/1999 (unaudited)
Main Operating Account
| Cash & Bank Account total |
£9,400.56 |
| Sub Accounts breakdown | |
| Administration Sub Account |
£ 1,749.61 |
| General Sub Account |
£ 556.07 |
| * Millennium Sub Account |
£ 700.00 |
| * Youth Committee Sub Account |
£ 50.00 |
| * St.Andrews Day Sub Account |
£ 365.39 |
| * Senior Citizens Xmas Day Party Sub Account |
£ 2,244.33 |
| * Bandstand Concerts Sub Account |
£ 3,339.81 |
| * Upper Arlington Sub Account |
£ 235.00 |
| * Coat of Arms Sub Account |
£ 160.35 |
|
£ 9,400.56 |
3. The audited Statement of Accounts for 1998-99 will be presented to Council in due course.
A S Strachan
Treasurer
Appendix D - Resignation Statement by Donald Macgregor, Chair
I have decided that with the elections imminent it is the right moment to step down from the office to which you were generous enough to elect me. Throughout my three terms in the chair over the period since 1986 - with an eight year break during which I served on the District Council - I have with your help done what I could, firstly to get through the business without alienating too many of the members or sending those present to sleep, and secondly and more seriously to keep the council's collective mind focused on what was best for St Andrews. People of all political persuasions have supported the other officers and me as we have tried to make the correct decisions and transmit accurate views. That co-operation, on a wider scale, is what I wish for North East Fife,for Fife as a whole, and indeed for Scotland - the last of these the least likely in the immediate future.
The Royal Burgh of St Andrews Community Council has changed considerably through its 25 years' existence. Its responsibilities (considerably) and its powers (slightly) have increased. I look forward to the day when St Andrews and other historic burghs of Fife once again have their own democratic voices in Scotland. St Andrews lost its way when control of its own affairs was taken from it. What was once one of Scotland's great seats of power can no longer administer itself and now houses only a branch office of a very large council, something which would unheard of in countries like France or Germany. I am not among those who believe that big is necessarily beautiful, and look forward to the day when smaller councils are restored, and the citizens of St Andrews can once again determine what is to happen to their town.
Thank you for having tolerated me so long as your chairman, and I wish my successor and indeed all of you well.
Donald Macgregor
Dear Mr Arroll,
Canongate Traffic Calming, St Andrews.
I write on behalf of the Planning Committee of the Community Council to register our strong objections to both the way in which this matter has been handled, and also to aspects of the scheme itself. It is unacceptable that changes of this magnitude to the road network should be implemented when most residents of the neighbourhood, and in the town in general, not only have not indicated any support for the scheme, but are in fact completely unaware that any such changes are imminent. As far as I am aware, no intimation of the intended work has yet appeared in The St Andrews Citizen.
The construction of four mini-roundabouts and the introduction of cycle lanes is a matter of legitimate interest not only to the Canongate School Board and householders affected by the construction of the roundabouts but also to the community at large. The approach that has been adopted conflicts not only with the umpteen press releases on good consultative practice that the new Council issued during its first year, but also with previously established procedure. The traffic calming scheme for Lamond Drive was subject to detailed public scrutiny well before its implementation, and a similar approach should have been adopted here.
As it is, we are left with the impression that the very real dangers from traffic at Canongate School are being used as an excuse to slip through a number of other measures. The installation of the mini-roundabouts at the junctions of the Canongate with Drumcarrow Road and Broomfaulds Avenue can reasonably be expected to have some impact on traffic speeds near the school, but those at the junctions with Learmonth Place and John Knox Road are of little direct relevance to the school's traffic problem, and there is a danger that local people will decide that Fife's Road Service is going over the top. Whatever timetabling difficulties may be created by the end of the financial year, it is always good politics to govern by consent and to keep the local community on board.
The first time at which members of the Community Council learnt that this scheme was to go ahead was at the meeting at the start of this month, the local member having been handed the plans that afternoon. The customary full agenda of the Community Council means that meetings have to proceed in as fast and purposeful a manner as is possible, and any expectation that a body of that size could give a considered view on detailed plans shows a woeful lack of understanding of the nature of the forum. Not surprisingly, the Community Council interpreted the supply of information in this way as an attempt to bounce it. It now appears that Fife Council had in fact already commissioned the work. The description of the scheme refers to a press release at the start of February under the heading "Further consultation", but it is clear that this is only going through the motions of consultation, since it adds that "it is intended that construction of the scheme will go ahead in early March 1999." In fact, it was reported to last night's meeting of the Planning Committee that some of the road markings are already in place.
One aspect of the scheme, the use of advisory cycle lanes along the Canongate, was publicly aired three years ago at the time of the Ross Silcock report, but Fife Council has on record, in my letter of 12 February 1996, the unfavourable reaction of the Community Council to the idea. We said 'The Ross Silcock report does nothing to remove our doubts about advisory cycle lanes. Its advocacy of such lanes is tentative, and paragraph 10.14 suggests some of the lanes should be viewed as a trial. We are mindful that lives are on the line in any such trial, and the figures quoted in the report indicate that there are good grounds for caution. For mandatory cycle lanes it is required that the remaining carriageway (not including the cycle lanes) "should be sufficiently wide for motor vehicles to pass each other safely; usually 7.3 metres". Only advisory lanes are possible in St Andrews since the total width of Bogward Road and the Canongate is given as 6.8 metres, and John Knox Road as 6.7 metres.'
None of the information we have since received does anything to allay our reservations about these cycle lanes. Particularly pertinent are some of the comments in the publication Cycle Friendly Infrastructure: Guidelines for planning and design, endorsed by the Department of Transport, the CTC, the Bicycle Association and the Institution of Highways and Transportation. This publication does suggest that advisory cycle lanes may be useful on roads as narrow as 6.0m., but, even in that extreme scenario, it does not envisage lanes as narrow as the 1m wide ones that you intend to install in the Canongate. It says that "Cycle lanes on links should be a minimum of 1.5m wide and 2m wide wherever possible. ...Widths below 1.5m give cyclists little room to manoeuvre around debris, potholes and drainage grates which tend to be concentrated in this part of the carriageway. ...Widths down to 1.2m may be valuable in specific circumstances,... but for short stretches only".
Your notes on the Canongate scheme say that the cycle lanes "will provide additional traffic calming by narrowing the carriageway". There would seem to be a real danger that such lanes will give cyclists an unwarranted sense of security, particularly in the case of child cyclists. As the lanes are only advisory, your specification acknowledges that, if required, "vehicles can drive and park in them". The guidelines referred to above note that "If ...significant amounts of parking occur, the cycle lane will be of little value and an alternative arrangement should be sought."
We are particularly concerned about the position of cyclists at your intended mini-roundabouts, where cyclists are given no special provision and will have to contend with the rest of the traffic. The above publication says 'Cyclists should not be "used" as traffic calming devices - for example, as a means of slowing motorists at a road narrowing by leaving insufficient room for the two to pass through at the same time. Even if drivers will behave considerately, cyclists will feel intimidated in these situations, particularly by large vehicles.'
The Community Council is keen to support sensible measures which will encourage cycling. We see it as unfortunate that most of the measures taken to date in St Andrews are merely concerned with signposting and painting lines on roads. We continue to believe that the provision of off-road routes for cyclists is the only way to encourage any significant reduction in car usage. Clearly this requires investment on a larger scale than we have yet seen. It is also important that, unlike most of the proposals under the Kingdom of Fife Millennium Cycleways Initiative, the routes should be chosen to meet local rather tourist need.