@ Morningsider - I may nick that comment as well.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Roseburn - Canal link (new Dalry route)
(651 posts)-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
@SRD and @Rosie - please do.
Posted 3 years ago # -
https://theedinburghreporter.co.uk/2020/12/green-space-in-gorgie-campaigners-say-it-is-under-threat
Until a week ago few people were even aware of these trees. Now it has been named and is even getting its own “Friends Of” group set up.
Posted 3 years ago # -
From link -
“
We are not engineers, but the impression on the site is that greater use could made of existing paths and gradients at the front of the site, including the road at Sauchiebank, to reduce destruction of trees further back. At the very least we would like reassurance that these options were fully explored before recommending the destruction of the woodland.”
“
Think last sentence is reasonable, and should be easy to confirm(?)
Posted 3 years ago # -
... the destruction of the woodland.
What are we talking here? Hellfire missiles? Napalm? Or...no...could it be - a swing park, community garden and landscaped path?
Posted 3 years ago # -
Woodland? Scrubland?
Posted 3 years ago # -
"a new welcoming public notice board to be installed"
Oh come on - it's not even a public space!
"precious woodland"
I'm sure that Cllr has campaigned for this 'precious' area for many years. Oh, right, she only realised it existed a week ago.So many of these comments read like the designers have deliberately tried to destroy as many trees as possible and that there's a secret, alternative, perfectly feasible plan with no tree damage sitting there.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Wouldn't a new design require a new Sustrans bid, which will be rejected because it no longer funds shared use projects?
Posted 3 years ago # -
I had to look at the map to be sure they were talking about the same bit of wasteland I thought they were.
Those are weeds, not trees. I'm fully in favour of trees and woods and forests but that wee patch is just overgrown. Benefit of carving through it and replanting some better looking trees far outweighs the loss of sycamore.
Posted 3 years ago # -
@Rosie: I do wonder how the tree people gained access. You used to be able to climb over at Sauchiehall Bank but there's a sturdy fence there now, presumably installed to stop people camping.
There is a gate at the north end of the fence along Saichiehall Bank, where it turns right to go behind the industrial units. On the Google Streetview photo captured in July last year that gate is clearly secured by a padlock. When I passed by earlier today the padlock was no longer there, so I assume it's currently fairly straightforward to get access through the gate. When the padlock was removed, by whom or why is another question, of course.
If what jonty says (that the trees self-seeded while the area was sat waiting to be used for the exact purpose for which plans have now been drawn up) then that would rather undermine my sympathy for the tree lovers in this instance.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Access from Duff St Lane looks a good bit easier:
https://goo.gl/maps/svAj2bEAeXZzM7TA7
Then skedaddle up the bank.
Or:
https://goo.gl/maps/jgxDS3FbCSz9n51BA
Also: Interesting number of vehicles in the lane that look like they haven't moved in a very long time
Posted 3 years ago # -
Sycamore are pernicious weeds. My neighbour has a massive sycamore that blots put the sun. The helicopters seed and every summmer Mrs Garto takes great delight in pointing out the saplings that I then have to dig out. Not easy.
dr Tree Person seemed to return to her bike on Russell Road.
Posted 3 years ago # -
From that “Trees of Edinburgh” blog:
A local resident alerted Trees of Edinburgh to its imminent destruction for the creation of the Roseburn-Fountainbridge cycle link
I wonder who the “local resident” was - certain “local residents” have history with spurious objections to cycle paths.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Will Local Resident turn up carrying a chainsaw and claiming to be a lumberjack just like us?
Trees Not Paths.
Posted 3 years ago # -
@neddie: That gives access to the green bit on the other side of the Mid Calder Railway, referred to in the planning documents as Duff Street Woodland. There is currently no (legal) route between that and the Sauchiebank safeguarded area/'wood' because that railway's in the way, hence the need for a bridge, which - because it has to go over a railway that goes over the road, needs be quite a bit higher up than the street level shared use foot/cycle way by which access will be gained from the current end of the NEPN on Russell Road. Hence the need for a ramp on the Sauchiehall bit.
@Rob: I assume that what chdot means by the bridge "across the rail tracks at Haymarket" is the old railway bridge that carried the Caledonian Railway's Granton branch over the main North British Railway Edinburgh-Glasgow line, between the two halves of the Haymarket depot:
I'm not aware of any other past bridge over the main line in that area.
I suspect BR took that bridge out as soon as the Granton Branch was closed in in the mid-1960s. Structures like bridges on closed lines were generally regarded as a liability, requiring maintenance to stop them falling down while contributing nothing to revenue.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Yes I fear the lovely tree people have been interfered with by PG Tips and in their naivety have agreed to interfere with this plan to annoy the council.
Shame that , the tree people are normally a bit smarter than that
There is an organisation I would like to help Solidarity with displaced humans. But I can’t because he is their treasurer.
Posted 3 years ago # -
“I suspect BR took that bridge out as soon as the Granton Branch was closed in in the mid-1960s.“
RailScot says 1967 -
https://www.railscot.co.uk/locations/C/Coltbridge_Junction/
Haymarket Viaduct still there in early 70s.
“Structures like bridges on closed lines were generally regarded as a liability, requiring maintenance to stop them falling down while contributing nothing to revenue.“
Indeed.
Posted 3 years ago # -
“
Maintaining a consistent turnover of trees is fundamental to maximising carbon capture. In new research released in September, it recognised that young trees capture carbon quickly enough to make a difference.
“
Posted 3 years ago # -
Presumably the wood needs to be used for something long term for cut and replant to be good for carbon capture. Chip and burn is obviously bad but what about chip and mulch?
Posted 3 years ago # -
some tough questions being asked here, politely but clearly
https://twitter.com/PeterTBBrett/status/1336272474913247234?s=20
(am watching and waiting to see response, rather than piling on).
Posted 3 years ago # -
As predicted, the Tories are desperately keen to preserve these vital community woods.
Posted 3 years ago # -
This was extremely naive of the tree people. Maybe they are also tories?
Posted 3 years ago # -
Possibly extremely naive of the Tories??
Time to stop all road building, HS2 etc etc?
Posted 3 years ago # -
Posted 3 years ago #
-
How do the Tories always manage to get some sort of special access to the Local Democracy Reporter a.k.a the intern at EEN?
Posted 3 years ago # -
Until yesterday, I had never heard of Sauchiebank Woods...
... I just hadn't realised you could visit this small woodland...
Erm, you can't. It's fenced and gated-off and that gate is normally locked.
http://craftygreenpoet.blogspot.com/2020/12/do-we-need-to-destroy-area-of-woodland.html
I suspect the "aggressive" fencing went in when the advertising hoardings went up, to prevent people from tampering with them.
Posted 3 years ago # -
On the plus side, there is no such thing as a "late objection" in the Scottish planning system. There is a 21 day period for representations to be made to any planning application. Miss that and you have missed the boat.
You can lobby councillors about an application up until decision day, assuming the decision isn't being made directly by officers. A Councillor who sits on the planning committee cannot express a view on an application before a decision is made - if they do then they cannot participate in that decision.
These campaigners might be able to create a minor social media stink and attract anti-cycling politicians, but process is our friend here. The development strongly accords with development plan policies, which means it should be approved. Objections have far less impact on planning decisions than they do in TROs/RSOs.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Do none of these people see the utility in connecting up 3 of Gorgie's rare unbuilt-on spaces for walkers (and cyclists), 2 of which are currently normally utterly inaccessible? It's an instant linear park.
I also wager 90% of those who have recently 'discovered' Sauchiebank would never go there regularly due to safety fears over its seclusion and its overgrown nature.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Lesley Macinnes’ full statement. The EEN’s choice of editing was done to provoke a reaction:
https://twitter.com/lmacinnessnp/status/1336309997513437185?s=21
Posted 3 years ago # -
https://twitter.com/GDCC_/status/1336314282502483968
Gorgie/Dalry community council are also unimpressed...
Disheartening to read comments from a Councillor suggesting that the public were not notified of this plan. As the local Community Council we worked really hard over the summer and autumn to encourage as many residents as possible to read and comment on the proposal
Posted 3 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
