Greener Leith has recently learnt that Forth Ports have submitted a revised Outline Planning Application for the redevelopment of the docks area and that the planning department is accepting public comments once again. Neither Forth Ports nor the City of Edinburgh Council seem to have publicised this at all, and indeed the council web portal wrongly states that comments are not being accepted. Remarkably, it is an important Tern colony that has forced a rethink on Forth Ports proposals. More details, in this Scotsman article and here.

Greener Leith got involved in this issue too late to submit comments to the first application. However, now that we all have a chance to comment on the Forth Ports regeneration proposals we have expanded on what we wrote previously, and put in many hours of volunteer time to put together a more detailed submission for the planning department. 

Greener Leith is asking the Council and Forth Ports to:

• Increase the amount of play, sports and allotment provision in the Forth Ports redevelopment area, to meet national standards.
• Adopt alternative proposals for a larger seaward extension to Leith Links, that will provide the amount of green space needed by a development of this scale. 
• Ensure developers pay to upgrade the facilities on Leith Links, paying attention to the outcomes of our consultation - the Leith Links Ask
  
• Ensure active travel modes are prioritised throughout the development, and linked to public transport.
• Not to allow any buildings taller than 10 storeys.
• Incorporate the latest energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies in the development.
• Ensure that affordable housing is distributed throughout the redevelopment, and not clustered on the least desirable areas.
  

Read the on-line version of our submission in full here. 

If you agree with what we say, then this is your chance to support our campaign. We'd strongly encourage you to write or email to the planning department in support of our campaign, and possibly your local councillor too. Whilst you are welcome to use this draft letter that we've put together for you - we'd recommend that you edit it and use your own words, as this may carry more weight with the planning committee. The person to send your emails to is kevin.ryan@edinburgh.gov.uk. Comments need to be in by the 15th of July, 2008.

June seems to have bought a huge rush of activity and we've been struggling a bit to keep up with all the meetings we feel we should be going to. However, we're pleased to post a couple of meeting summaries below to keep you informed of what's been going on.

Leith Neighbourhood Partnership Meeting 

Public Consultation on Draft Bonnington / Jane Street Development Briefs

Another draft planning brief has been released recently. Greener Leith has received a copy of the Council's Draft Waterfront Promenade Design Code. It's a big document,  best downloaded in sections from the council  web page. The promenade, projected for completion in 2038, will run for 17 kilometres along Edinburgh's coastline. It is split into a series of sections, with 'nodes' (significant points) along it.

The plan envisages different types of nodes. These range from 'economic' to 'aesthetic' or 'circulatory' (where different transport routes meet at on the promenade). Key questions that the consultation seeks to answer are:

• What surface treatments are most appropriate?
• Are the node(s) in the right locations?
• What should be in the node(s)?
• What street furniture is needed?
• What should the signage look like?
• Are the transport connections adequate?
• And,  What other issues should we be aware of?
  

Here's our initial thoughts on the proposals:

First of all, we're pleased to see that the corridor should be at least 8m wide. The proposals acknowledge that some parts of the promenade that have been built recently, like the section along the edge of the Western Harbour, do not meet these specifications. We feel it is important the sections that are to be built by private developers are built to the same standards as the public sector, and that the planning committee rigorously enforces this principle.

In terms of surfaces the code proposes that natural caithness granite flags are used at 'nodes' and allows for lower quality surface options in less high profile areas. Ideally, Greener Leith would like to see the code favour granite stone finishes throughout the length of the path, with wooden boardwalks used where 'design solutions' are required to bridge or widen particular areas. Wooden boardwalks work well along the Water of Leith in similar situations. If this is not possible, a small number of appropriate surface finishes should be specified by the final code as this will help to give the route an identity along it's length.

The report notes that many similar pathways in Europe have no rail or wall between the path and the sea. In the UK 'health & safety' apparently  requires the path to have some sort of railing or wall on the shoreline side. Whilst the design code proposes that new sections include railings that are 'visually permeable' to encourage a feeling of openness, Greener Leith would like to see a  reassessment of the route to identify sections where no railing or wall is required on the shoreline side. We believe this would make the path much more attractive, and encourage a more natural link with the shoreline.

The design code does little to specify the street furniture, simply recommending that it should take account of the 'local character and promenade environment'. Whilst there should be local distinctiveness along the route, we wonder whether this specification should be more detailed, especially, as the design code may be adopted as 'supplementary planning guidance?'  

Turning to the specific Leith area of the promenade, we note that no mention of the footpath link to Leith Links is made at points F/F1. Greener Leith has campaigned to improve this link, and we feel that it should be considered a 'minor circulatory node,' in the design code. Furthermore, any design solution that may be required to deliver the section E-F& F1 should consider this.

Section G1-G2 of the promenade could be an area where a shoreside barrier may not be required. This will help to preserve the views and open aspect of the path as it is.

We note that at Node 10 (section G -G3), where the proposed seaward extension to Leith Links meets the promenade, this study proposes a 'park/activity' node. This node needs to be carefully thought out, so that the activities proposed in this plan match those in the seaward extension design study. That study, proposes a football pitch located at the seaward end of the extension. The promenade design code proposes a plaza, with cafe, toilets, shelter, public art and so forth. Greener Leith prefers the promenade design code proposals (with the football pitches located further in land), although the node should also take account of the fact that this space will need to accommodate a potentially busy cycle path junction too.

At node 11 on the same section, the code identifies scope to develop an Ecological node. Could the code make more of a commitment to provide better interpretation at this node, to explain the local natural heritage? Could the 'black rocks' section of the path be another section where a shoreline barrier may not be required?

With regards to section I-I1 which is the section by Newhaven Harbour, Greener Leith wonders whether there would be scope to provide a site for an outdoor market, where wind protection can be put in place?

Lastly, where the promenade runs through the area to be regenerated by Forth Ports, we hope that some thought will be given to the uses the promenade will be put to, integrating the path with the wider regeneration or the area. For example, where the promenade passes through mixed use areas, perhaps the path specifications need to be wider than 8m to allow for cafes to put chairs and tables out on the path, without impeding passers by? It would be an unfortunate outcome if private developers met the promenade specification, but delivered a path that was in fact disconnected from the wider development. The path along the Western Harbour (section I-I1) has this feel, with few connections into the development itself. It does little to encourage local residents to use it, and in turn this does little to foster local 'ownership' of the path.  

 Do you agree with us, or are we completely wrong? Please comment on what we've said, as we will take account of your views before we submit our thoughts to the planning department. Comments don't need to be in until the 17th of July and should be sent to kate.evans@edinburgh.gov.uk

Members of Greener Leith attended a planning meeting at St Mary’s Primary School last week, to find out more about the design proposals for the Leith Links Seaward Extension. Members of the Planning Department as well as Landscape Architects, the Paul Hogart Company, were on hand to explain the design proposals. Sadly, there were only about 15 members of the public and 2 councillors present.

A number of people we spoke to felt that the meeting was poorly attended because the council did not promote the meeting well enough. Whilst the council did contact us with details of the meeting which we then promoted on this site, it is perhaps telling that the city of Edinburgh council neglected to inform the Leith Links Allotment Site Rep of the meeting. Given the impact the proposals will have on the allotments, we're in no doubt that some of the allotment holders would have liked to have attended this meeting.

At the meeting, a key issue that emerged was the subject of the total amount of green space in the Leith Docks Regeneration Plans. It seemed that people in the audience felt that it was hard to judge the value of the Leith Docks Design Framework without more information on the proposed designs and uses of other  open spaces in Leith Docks.

One fact that we did glean from the officials was that the only new playing fields that are proposed in the whole Leith Docks redevelopment proposals will be the ones in the Leith Links Seaward Extension. Furthermore, these playing fields will also be required for use by the new secondary school planned for the development. No guarantees were given over the management arrangements for the new proposed playing fields, so there is a chance that these pitches could be fenced off from the public and only available to the public for restricted use outside school hours. Given the shortage of free public sports facilities in the docks development this is a situation that appeared unacceptable to Greener Leith volunteers and many of the others in the room.  

However, Greener Leith volunteers felt that many of the points we raised were taken seriously by both the landscape architects and the planners, in particular the points we made about 'designing out' anti-social behavior. We hope now that the planning committee will also heed them, and ensure that the design proposals are reviewed accordingly.

Interestingly, the proposals do hold out some hope for improvements to the cycle path links to the east of Leith Links. The construction of a new fire station that will border the South East end of the extension, could see the replacement of the steps up to the cycle path with a ramp into the first stage of the extension. As Greener Leith has previously campaigned for ramp access to this path, this is a  component of the proposal we are particularly keen to see completed.

Much of  this development will not take place for another 10-15 years, and the area on which this park is to be built is currently industrial land. However, it is important to raise any concerns you may have now about the design, as you may not get another chance!

You can download the consultation document and read Greener Leith's submission to the consultation here.

The Planning Department has contacted Greener Leith with news of two draft development briefs that have been put out for consultation. You can download both consultation documents from these links:

• Steads Place/Jane Street Development Brief
  
• Bonnigton Development Brief

The Planning Department would love to hear as many views as possible on these plans. You can submit these by email to Ian Tame whose email address is ian.tame@edinburgh.gov.uk by 27th of June 2008.

There will also be a public meeting held in Bonnington Primary School scheduled for 7.00pm Wednesday 11th of June.

Whilst Greener Leith is broadly supportive of the proposals to develop more active frontages, better footpath links and mixed uses in the area we note that only two options are presented in the Steads Place/Jane Street Development Brief for the footpath linkage from the North East of Pilrig Park to Leith Walk. Neither of these options are particularly satisfactory.

Greener Leith would like to see this path (as in option 4b) follow the route of the railway embankment from Pilrig Park as much as possible. However, option 4B proposes that path ends in steps down to Leith Walk, which does little to promote sustainable transport. We see no reason why a ramp cannot be constructed to give access up to the path. This could be dug into the southern side of the embankment. This solution would retain public access to this neglected, underused bit of greenspace (see the photo above), whilst at least leaving the option open for  the further development of a 'green travel route' linking the North Edinburgh Cycle Network, Pilrig Park, Manderston/Gordon St and Leith Links/Cycle Routes from Easter Rd.

We note that the brief rules out any hope of bringing back a bridge over Leith Walk from the embankment on the West side to the East side of Leith Walk. Even if this possibility seems unlikely today, we feel the Steads Place/Jane St design brief should not rule out this option for the future by permitting private development of the embankment now.