CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

Illegal gated-community development blocks access to WoL (Juni Green)

(60 posts)

12

  1. neddie
    Member

    The developer of the former bathrooms warehouse at Baberton Loan, Juniper Green (just off the Water of Leith walkway) installed a solid electronically controlled gate across Baberton Loan a couple of years ago to create a gated community, without planning permission. He has now been served with an enforcement notice and has put in for retrospective planning permission for the gate.

    The planning application is 17/05343/FUL which you can find by searching for 17/05343/FUL here: https://citydev-portal.edinburgh.gov.uk/idoxpa-web/search.do?action=simple&searchType=Application

    This solid steel gate blocks access of the former roadway down to the Water of Leith Walkway, where access was previously available. The alternative accesses provided by the developer are substandard.

    The developer proposes a path to the right of the gate for pedestrians, cantilevered over the old stone retaining wall; but the dimensions are well below any standard:
    a) the path is to be only 1.5m wide, bounded by a 1.8m timber fence on the north side and a 1.1m “timber fence/balustrade” on the south side (i.e. no flexibility);
    b) the path takes a 90 degree turn near the bottom, so the 1.5m width would be inadequate even to turn a wheelchair let alone a bicycle;
    c) the path is to have a “gravel” surface.

    The developer did provide an alternative access to the WoL path by driving a new path from the hairpin bend of Baberton Loan straight down to the WoL path. It’s unacceptable for a number of reasons: too steep; poor, slippery surface; a longer way round if heading from, say, Baberton Avenue to the footbridge over the river.

    According to the original plans in 13/01525/FUL, there was to be a footway of standard width (2m?) all the way down, curving round at the bottom, and with an outlet to the WoL path at the end. This would have been fine, but is now barred by the gate.

    The other alternative access from St Margarets is also narrow, overgrown and feels unsafe due to the high fence that has been constructed.

    Please object if this concerns you. Deadline is 22nd Dec

    Posted 6 years ago #

  2. neddie
    Member

    Baberton Loan barred by the gate by Ed, on Flickr

    ^^^ Note the fine tarmac carriageway, and footway of adequate width; note footway is on opposite side from what was proposed in the 2013 plans. Pic can’t show how the gradient is easier because of width of the hairpin curve; note that fence on right would form the boundary of proposed extended footway.

    “alternative" spur track from the hairpin of Baberton Loan by Ed, on Flickr

    ^^^ The developers’ “alternative" spur track from the hairpin of Baberton Loan direct to the WoL path. The pic shows the state it’s in but not how steep it is - at least 1in10, hence beyond the maximum recommended (1in12)

    "St Margaret’s" track further east by Ed, on Flickr

    ^^^ "St Margaret’s" track further east, which runs from opposite Woodhall Drive down to the WoL path. In their 2013 p/a the developers touted this as the ‘alternative’ and promised to upgrade it. Note a) it’s not on their land; b) the upgrading post-2013 consisted of erecting the 1.8m timber fence visible in the pic, and clearing some trees at the top end. The effect of the latter has been to let in the nettles, which totally obscure the path in summer. The fence means the path is not visible from the WoL path or anywhere else - hence users can feel insecure; c) the route would be a significant diversion for users coming from, say, Baberton Ave and heading for the footbridge over the WoL, i.e. the most likely source and destination; d) there is no signage to this path, at either end; e) there is no hard surfacing - path muddy when wet; f) the gradient of steepest part is greater than the maximum recommended by, e.g. Sustrans, i.e. greater than 1 in 12.

    Posted 6 years ago #

  3. urchaidh
    Member

    The location plan appears to show a different, curved route for the path.

    Posted 6 years ago #

  4. Frenchy
    Member

    The location plan appears to show a different, curved route for the path.

    I think that's the path referred to in nedd1e_h's first post (third last para). It's either not been built, or is inaccessible sue to the gate (or both!).

    Posted 6 years ago #

  5. urchaidh
    Member

    That original routing was part of the landscape plan submitted (and approved I presume) as part of condition of the initial application.


    4. A fully detailed landscape plan, including details of all hard and soft surface and boundary treatments and all planting, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before work is commenced on site.

    5. The approved landscaping scheme shall be fully implemented within six months of the completion of the development.

    6. Notwithstanding the approved plans, the two metre high close boarded timber fence adjacent to the Water of Leith walkway is not approved.

    So it would appear they are in breach of several conditions of the original application.

    Posted 6 years ago #

  6. chdot
    Admin

    “So it would appear they are in breach of several conditions of the original application.”

    No surprise there.

    CEC has admitted it doesn’t have enough staff to check everything.

    Too often it seems it doesn’t do much even when things are pointed out.

    At least this is back for a second chance for councillors to rule on better(?)

    Posted 6 years ago #

  7. neddie
    Member

    When I was a kid we used to play in the Water of Leith at this location (yes, in the river) and using this road as access.

    No parents. No mobile phones. No way for your mum to tell you to come home if you were late for dinner. "Play" used to include moving objects around the river, jumping over rocks, getting stuck in "quicksand" and of course falling into the river (usually that resulted in an early dinner!).

    By creating these gated-developments and blocking access to unstructured and unsupervised play, we are denying children an important aspect of their development.

    We are teaching children that 'play' is dependent on being driven everywhere to 'events' by parents and attending structured (and usually paid-for) classes, or going to designated play areas, etc.

    And parents wonder why they are so busy and having to be "Mum's taxi" all the time...

    Posted 6 years ago #

  8. miak
    Member

    Never understood that if it is there without permission why cant the public just remove the gate. If it doesn't have planning permission legally it isn't there so removing it could not be an offence? ? Any lawyers out there?

    Posted 6 years ago #

  9. jonty
    Member

    Do you have to rebuild it impeccably overnight if they're granted retrospective planning permission?

    Posted 6 years ago #

  10. miak
    Member

    Surely it didn't exist as that would be an offence blocking a public right of way ?

    Posted 6 years ago #

  11. Rosie
    Member

    Two hideous words:- "Gated community".

    Posted 6 years ago #

  12. jonty
    Member

    Ragingbike: unfortunately the law is flexible enough to take into account that something can both exist and not be fully legitmate. If you failed to get proper permission for an alteration to your front door, would it be okay for me to walk in?

    It's particularly irritating in cases where responsible access has been blocked, but even then as far as I understand there needs to be clear evidence of an attempt to resolve the situation amicably before access can be established forcibly.

    Posted 6 years ago #

  13. Ed1
    Member

    On Edinburgh councils December 2017 list of adopted roads Baberton Loan is listed as private, was it previously adopted and then unadopted? Is Baberton a public right of way? I would imagine in my ignorance it could be argued it is or at least it was until recently enough to be considered one. However with the barrier up it won’t be terribly long before it would cease to be considered a public right of way. I guess objections such as “ I” have walked this way for 30 years before barrier/wall was installed. I would guess the developer is trying to claim a right they did not purchase, one of exclusive access,(If it had pre-existing implicit access/right of way) and in doing so claiming the associated value increase, with Edinburgh council efforts to protect the right that may exist to travel/play/ that way well, not sure Edinburgh council is the most efficient

    Posted 6 years ago #

  14. neddie
    Member

    What Rosie said. The whole "gated community" concept disgusts me.

    Posted 6 years ago #

  15. crowriver
    Member

    "I would guess the developer is trying to claim a right they did not purchase, one of exclusive access,(If it had pre-existing implicit access/right of way) and in doing so claiming the associated value increase"

    Exactly. Alas, unless a farmer needs to access fields or an organisation like Ramblers. CTC or suchlike decides to pursue an action to maintain access, then all the advantage lies with the landowner.

    See here for a primer:

    https://www.morton-fraser.com/knowledge-hub/obstructing-access-route-gate

    Posted 6 years ago #

  16. neddie
    Member

    If it doesn't have planning permission legally it isn't there so removing it could not be an offence?

    It would be more fun to weld it or jam it shut. Teach em a lesson or two...

    Posted 6 years ago #

  17. unhurt
    Member

    What @Rosie and @nedd1e_h said. Am objecting.

    Posted 6 years ago #

  18. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    The uncle of a mate of mine lives in a gated community and he's a [Rule 2].

    They are an abomination in practice, theory and principle.

    Posted 6 years ago #

  19. gembo
    Member

    There is nothing to stop people getting down to the river. If people want to play in it. Concern about what the guy is doing with the other land to the west formerly known as the gipsy camp. Quite a high spec design. Think the developer lives in one f the flats. You can see n heir Windows from WoL path. They have nt manage to shift the townhouse at the top where Xmas trees used to be sold. The original brick shed was perhaps a bus garage?

    Posted 6 years ago #

  20. Rosie
    Member

    They are an abomination in practice, theory and principle.

    Totally hideous. Mini strongholds, as if you lived among bandits. Utterly uncivic and vile. Exactly what a city shouldn't be.

    Posted 6 years ago #

  21. neddie
    Member

    The Community Council have allegedly been bought out, so they won't be making an objection...

    Posted 6 years ago #

  22. Ed1
    Member

    They wont be making an objection? I wonder why no objection if the route that has been used for generations is now blocked

    Posted 6 years ago #

  23. gembo
    Member

    The new route down on either side of the development is inferior but will doubtless allow the developer to prevail he has been crafty.

    Posted 6 years ago #

  24. miak
    Member

    Thanks @jonty

    Posted 6 years ago #

  25. urchaidh
    Member

    Retrospective application refused with enforcement of the original plan.

    The proposal does not comply with the development plan. The proposal is contrary to policy Tra 9 of the Edinburgh Local Development Plan as the vehicular and pedestrain gates obstruct a public right of way and the replacement footpath does not meet the council's standards in terms of width, surface and alignment.

    Posted 6 years ago #

  26. Frenchy
    Member

    Good news.

    Posted 6 years ago #

  27. SRD
    Moderator

    Nice!

    Posted 6 years ago #

  28. Trixie
    Member

    Excellent. I've only been down that steep hairpin once and it tested my brakes to the max*. They passed but I'm not doing it again.

    *I was not aware quite how steep until I was upon it or I'd have walked.

    Posted 6 years ago #

  29. gembo
    Member

    The original road is not much less steep.

    Presumably he has to open the gate whilst making the new road wider with a better surface.

    It is plenty wide, there was a car on it tonight as a person has been reported missing and lot of police activity.

    The surface of the new access is poor, as I stated up stream in this thread.

    Posted 6 years ago #

  30. neddie
    Member

    A new planning application has been submitted for these gates:

    18/05069/FUL electronically-controlled timber gates across Baberton Loan.

    https://citydev-portal.edinburgh.gov.uk/idoxpa-web/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=PE9NLUEWMN300

    It doesn't look like they've changed anything to improve the access, so I would suggest re-objecting if you objected to the previous application.

    Deadline 5th Oct

    Posted 6 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

12

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin