A little off-topic, but it would appear Road Sense aren't the only people
trying to "protect" areas by delaying proceedings with appeal after appeal, all paid for by the taxpayer! A woman is taking her "Save St Andrews" challenge to the Supreme Court, having been thrown out of the Court of Session. She has a PCO for £6,000 at the Supreme Court, it seems. One of the comments on the Scotsman there would seem to be very applicable to the AWPR case:
This case partly raises the question of "just how many appeals can one case have". Miss Uprichard has already followed due process to challenge the Plans, and has also lost TWICE in the Court of Session (the highest court in Scotland - if we were independent her case would now be over). But she's now permitted to go the the UK Supreme court, and possibly has a a challenge in the European courts. Is this too many appeals for just one case, especially as there doesn't appear to be massive public support for the challenge?
For what it's worth, I can somewhat understand that many may be against such a rapid expansion of St Andrews, as is being proposed, but then again, the housing situation in St Andrews is pretty dire, and new homes are needed. Apparently their campaign has also been against things like the pay and display parking meters though - I do find it funny that people get so uppity about things like that. (P&D seems infinitely preferable to the strange old voucher system, to me.)