Community sports hub at Land South Of Thistle Court, Crossgates

“Application for Full Planning Permission Ref: 25/01457/FULL Site Address: Land South Of Thistle Court Crossgates Proposal: Erection of community building (Class 11) with ancillary cafe (Class 3) and office space (Class 4) including formation of spectator seating (class 11) and sports pitches, installation of flood lighting, formation of car park and associated works…”

“The proposed development would comprise of the primary community use building within the centre of the site. This building would have a footprint of approximately 730sqm as well as spectator seating (approximately 120m2 total) to the rear/west of the building overlooking the multi-use pitch (approximately 8,500m2). The pitch would be bounded by a 6m acoustic blanket boundary wall to the north and 2.5m wall to the east, west and south.”

“Background 1.1.1. This application relates to an area of non-prime agricultural land (approximately 1.98 ha), situated to the south of the Crossgates settlement boundary and within the countryside as defined by the Adopted FIFEplan Local Development Plan. The site is bounded by residential properties (Thistle Court and Southknowe) to the north, the B981 road to the east and non- prime agricultural land to the south and west.”

“For the avoidance of doubt this item was previously considered by Members of the West and Central Planning Committee at the 22nd April 2026 meeting. At that meeting, Officers recommended refusal of planning permission for the following reasons: • Residential Amenity: The proposed development was considered likely to give rise to elevated and unacceptable noise levels, resulting in a significant adverse impact on the residential amenity of nearby properties, contrary…”

“After deliberations Members resolved that the item be continued in order to allow the applicant the opportunity to further investigate and address these above amenity matters. In response, the applicant has submitted revised proposals, including amendments intended to achieve acceptable noise levels and additional information relating to the design and appearance of the proposed acoustic barrier.”

“The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in meeting the terms of NPF4, FIFEplan, other relevant national policy/guidance and Fife Council Customer Planning Guidance. The proposal is compatible with the area in terms of land use. Furthermore, no significant impacts would arise in regard to residential amenity, design/visual impact, road safety, drainage, natural heritage, land stability/contamination and low carbon/sustainability.”

“It is accordingly recommended that the application be approved subject to the following conditions and reasons:”

“The nearest residential properties to the site are contained within Thistle Court and South Knowe, approximately 14m to the north. A Noise Impact Assessment was submitted as part of this application, which initially assessed the proposed development on the basis of a 3m high acoustic fence along the northern boundary of the site.”

“Fife Council’s Public Protection team were consulted on this application and initially raised concerns given that the nature of the noise levels from the proposed activities tends to be impulsive in nature, and therefore whilst the average noise levels within garden grounds may be acceptable, the peak noise levels can be considerable and irregular.”

“25/01457/FULL - LAND SOUTH OF THISTLE COURT, CROSSGATES The committee considered a report by the Head of Planning, Climate and Sustainability Services relating to the erection of community building (Class 11) with ancillary cafe (Class 3) and office space (Class 4) including formation of spectator seating (Class 11) and sports pitches, installation of flood lighting, formation of car park and associated works.”

“Decision The committee agreed to continue consideration of the application to a future meeting of this Committee to allow for discussion between the agent, applicant and Officers in relation to the detail requested by Officers outlined in the report. 308.”