Category: Forth

Granton Improvement Society’s SHAERON AVERBUCH bemoans Edinburgh planners’ lack of vision … 

Last Thursday (14 May), I went to see the proceedings made by the Edinburgh Planning Committee regarding the final approval of the Local Development Plan (LDP).

It was very impressive to see how many residents groups and community councillors were clearly against the proposed plans for further housing allocations in their areas. This was for good reason in the main, although all acknowledged the undeniable need for housing to meet the rapid city growth. However, none of the parties – with the exception of the Willie Black who represented the Granton Improvement Society – wanted the new homes in their areas, mostly because there was not the road infrastructure to deal with the extra traffic that this would incur, particularly in the Brunstane and Barnton areas.

The other resounding fact raising concern by the majority of the groups presenting a deputation against the LDP was in regard to the majority of proposed new housing eating into the remaining green belt areas, particularly in the west of the city and again the Brunstane and Cammo areas. Gilmerton and Moredun also seemed to have great reservations.

Questions were raised by the various deputations asking why the brown field sites could not be utilised for housing instead. Willie Black of the Granton Improvement Society was vociferous in his demand to welcome further development for the area he represented and another representative from a different ward again emphatically stressed that the Edinburgh Planning Department, after a very lengthy assessment process, had granted permissions to Forth Ports PLC when set up as such to undertake a vast amount of housing under a phased development plan and why was there not further actions on this.

A further clear question asked by members of the various deputations was around whether it was correct that Councillor Frank Ross should be present on the Planning Committee when he was also on the board of so many of the cities development holding companies.

A series of other legal questions were raised by a Mr Kelly, Professor of Law at Edinburgh University as to whether the LDP was on par and could meet the scrutiny set out in the guidelines of the Scottish Governments SES Plan. More on this can be found online.

In another capacity as a member of the JUMP (Joined Up Master Planning) Group I would like to take the opportunity to add my personal opinion and that is that the City itself has identified the north area of the city as having the most scope for further regeneration.

Housing is a significant part of that. However, so much has already been compromised along the Edinburgh waterfront and there is nothing that has given anything back to existing communities or to compensate for loss of heritage, green space and natural habitats. No one can deny that what has happened in Leith Docks and Newhaven is only part of a longer term phased plan.

This is one reason why the previously mentioned Granton Improvement Society had proposed a three part plan for the historic walled garden at Granton, hoping instead to preserve the garden and establish an international garden festival, outdoor swimming facilities and artisans village to complement the other activities and create a destination on an otherwise derelict and forgotten area of the city.

This three part project would wash it’s face financially, genuinely offering jobs and training opportunities for young people and others and as a social enterprise, give back a percentage of the profits to support or start other projects in the area. So what’s not to like? https://grantonimprovementsociety.wordpress.org

Perhaps in the newly adopted LDP the City could take the bull by the horns this time round to ensure that – when further development does take place in the Waterfront area that it is done sensitively and that other planning criteria might possibly be introduced and applied, ie., aesthetics, design and scrutiny of building materials and a very strong cultural plan that also encompasses or encourages the creation of natural habitats and public access to enjoy recreational activities. Schools, shops and visitors centres are also required.

We need to demand more from our City Councillors, who not only hold the purse strings and the permission to transfer assets to communities should the situation arise. Well at least that is what all we community groups are hoping for under the new Community Empowerment Act legislation. Will this even scratch the surface of Edinburgh’s tough, tougher and toughest, overtly anti-community empowerment SKIN!!

My final comment is that Edinburgh is a world class city with UNESCO world heritage status. The Edinburgh Waterfront area and those linked to it must be recognised to be capable of international merit and to be valued more by local people.

The City of Edinburgh NEEDS a Cultural Plan. It should be applying to be City of Culture and to have an EXPO in the North Edinburgh Area. The City should be looking at other world class small cities with waterfronts and waterways and doing all it’s power to literally catch up with competitors and show a new stronger identity delivered through added value, people power, contemporary culture, ecological  sensitivity and an understanding of urbanism requirements for the 21st Century and beyond.

Lets stop Edinburgh getting it wrong and start getting it right!

Shaeron Averbuch, Granton Improvement Society