Owner objects to Fife Council’s move to buy derelict site in Dalgety Bay

DERELICT and unused land in Dalgety Bay could be purchased by Fife Council – despite objections from its owners.

The authority submitted a compulsory purchase order (CPO) in August which would see it buy a section of Hillend and Donibristle Industrial Estate which has been bare and empty since 2013.

The plot includes the site of the former Maxwell building on Beech Way and has been included in Fife Council’s Vacant and Derelict Land Audit for more than 20 years.

However, its current owners, United UK Propco 2 Ltd, a development company based in London, say that the CPO is “unnecessary” as they have been pursuing development proposals and are open to discussions over what could be done with the land.

The council says it would remediate the site, including removal of existing concrete hardstanding and creating access provisions, and believe the extent of work needed is what has left the area undeveloped.

It also claims that it had expressed interest in purchasing the plot at market value, but says that offer was turned down.

An objection to the order says this was because: “The landowner had not carried out its own options appraisal on the site and was not therefore in a position to decide the market value.

“In addition, the landowner did not have appetite to dispose of any land or industrial assets as it continues to seek to expand the portfolio by acquiring further and developing its own sites.”

Further, it states that the statement of reasons provided by Fife Council is, in the view of the current owner, “inaccurate and misleading” and “fails to provide full information on the circumstances of the site and the surrounding area”. It continues: “It also contains multiple assertions without any reference to supporting data or other evidence. For example, there is no reference to the Fife Employment Land Audit 2021, published by the council on 7 June 2022, which is highly relevant; also, the statement indicates it is the view of the council that there would be ‘strong demand for serviced employment plots at this location’, but no data is provided to support that opinion, other than anecdotal evidence about sales/ marketing of other sites.”

The council said its reference to the ‘strong demand’ was because it had been “successful in securing tenants for the small industrial units that were recently completed” nearby at West Way.

The local authority explained that its plan would be to overhaul the land and market it to businesses to create employment opportunities, similar to its work at a site at Ridge Way in Dalgety Bay, which is now “under offer to a developer who proposes to build small industrial units which will be made for lease”.

The purchase of the land, Fife Council says, has been carefully considered under the Human Rights Act 1998. It says that there are no current occupiers, so there would be no disruption to existing businesses, or dwelling houses, so no residents would be affected.

However, the owners say they would be “deprived of the order land which would affect their ability to implement their own proposals for the re-development” and that they would be entitled to compensation equivalent to market value.

They say that Fife Council have “failed to prove that the CPO is necessary” however, in a response dated October 4, the authority said that development would be “in the public interest and for public benefit” due to a lack of available employment land in Dalgety Bay and did not withdraw the order.

It stated: “The council will not withdraw the CPO or agree to sist the CPO procedure at this time. Should the landowner submit a planning application for development which falls within the current allocated use in terms of FIFEplan along with a commitment to develop the CPO Land then the council would reconsider its position.”