Apparently for the National Gallery extension.
https://mobile.twitter.com/edinspotlight/status/1053013035592368129
*rule 2*.
CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 15years old!
Well done to ALL posters
It soon became useful and entertaining. There are regular posters, people who add useful info occasionally and plenty more who drop by to watch. That's fine. If you want to add news/comments it's easy to register and become a member.
RULES No personal insults. No swearing.
Apparently for the National Gallery extension.
https://mobile.twitter.com/edinspotlight/status/1053013035592368129
*rule 2*.
That is so very bad
what a barren featureless grassy knoll it looks with no trees
Wait, have they felled ALL of them along to the Scott Monument? I understand losing some to put in ramp access but this seems like huge overkill.
I suppose it's no surprise they didn't consult on this.
Is there a way to get the bottom of where/when this decision was made? It must have gone through a committee, surely...?
Tom Parnell says the plans were available for years:
https://twitter.com/ArchHist/status/1053185346027118593
Ben Cooper says the tree cutting aspect was well buried.
Is there a way to get the bottom of where/when this decision was made? It must have gone through a committee, surely...?
Went through the Development Management Sub-Committee on 20th June. Papers should be available here: http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/meetings/meeting/4422/development_management_sub-committee
You'd hope that individual members of the public wouldn't need to pile in to prevent 50 mature trees from being chopped down and ultimately replaced by 22 possibly doomed saplings and 'semi-mature' trees. But then again, you'd think that about putting in a 60s gyratory in the middle of a city like Edinburgh too
Planning permission is here - https://citydev-portal.edinburgh.gov.uk/idoxpa-web/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=P0WMM8EWG4J00
The removal of the trees to create ramp to the lower gardens is hard to argue with, but the argument for removing the trees at the front to restore/improve the view feels much more tenuous.
@Arellcat
"But the plans were on display..."
"On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."
"That's the display department."
"With a flashlight."
"Ah, well, the lights had probably gone."
"So had the stairs."
"But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?"
"Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."
@chrisfl a spokesman is quoted as saying "These views were part of the architect William Henry Playfair's original vision for this world-famous location." All very well and good, but why was a comparable argument with regards Andrew Carnegie's intent ignored when the council made the decision about the gap site behind the library?
@jdanielp - Arthur also had to travel 4 light years to Alpha Centauri to view those plans? (well first his house was getting knocked down for the ring road but then the whole planet was going for the inter space highway)
When they Hitchhike on the Vogon constructor fleet His pal Ford Prefect explains that the race known as the Dentrassi supply the inflight catering for the Vogon. But they hate the Vogon so make them terrible food. HOwever if you go to the Dentrassi staff canteen the food there is good. Arthur and Ford then go to the vending machine in the Dentrassi staff canteen and eat the food which is vile. Ford then says a line that has popped into my head about once a month since about 1983
These Dentrassi must really hate the Vogon
I've had a proper read through of the planning application, and the case is pretty good for removing the big tree at the front. Outrage level is stand down.
Perhaps this is operational land?
I'm sure Playfair would be touched by the concern for his original vision given what Council projects have previously wreaked on the output of other long-dead architects.
I'm sure Playfair would have not been pleased by the gardens having a railway running through them.
Resistance to the pollution and noise caused by railways meant that trains got no further than Haymarket for years.
Sometimes this still happens :-)
Play fair steps still well closed without explanation
While I don't know enough about this situation to have an strong opinion on it, it does remind me of how a reluctance to remove trees or tarmac over "natural" paths can cause more problems than it solves.
I think in this day and age of climate breakdown and rising CO2 levels, a mature tree trumps a view. Every time.
I'd go so far as to call for a moratorium on felling trees over a certain age unless an undeniable case can be made for removal.
The tree felling in Princes St may have been overzealous and mature trees might absorb more C02 than new trees (I don't know). And yes it looks quite ugly right now.
I'm interested in why some trees seem more valuable than others. Compare the thousands of mature trees felled for the Queensferry crossing, was there a proportional outrage there? Are sufficient trees being replaced?
Sorry for getting philosophical, I want to try and find some perspective in the context of the entire planet.
The ability of land plants to hold CO<sub>2</sub> is miniscule compared to that of sea plants and the effects of commercial forestry dwarf this felling every minute of the day.
I think the point here is amenity and agency. We liked the trees and had no power to save them.
I wonder if they consulted with the International Brigade (and the Spanish?) about the removal (and then reinstatement) of the memorial. (Actually given that the NGS didnt even know it was there, I'd be surprised).
I can exclusively reveal that the NGS is an introverted organisation. It does not look outwith its walls very often or very hard.
Sorry for getting philosophical, I want to try and find some perspective in the context of the entire planet.
I read a study which suggest urban are trees have a far higher positive impact on the mental health of individuals than rural forests. So from a mental health pov the removal of a few dozen trees will have a far greater impact than the clearing for the QC.
I'm always torn on commercial forests being clear fallen, there is a certain interest in the decimated landscape left behind, probably more so than the dull (and swampy) areas off the paths. But the initial hit after coming round corner and finding nowt but stumps is a bit jarring.
@steveo somebody made the argument at the Scottish Green Party Conference at the weekend that tree thinning leads to far greater output over a comparable time period than mass felling, while leaving the landscape looking nicer.
@stevo yep, it does makes sense in this situation to value the trees for their civic value, from its aesthetics, drainage and even air pollution scrubbing (though I'm sceptical about this effectiveness compared to removing the source of pollution).
The Leeds iTree project looks interesting. 800 trees removed 11 tonnes of C02 and 250kg of pollutants per year. The average UK car seems to produce about 1-4 tonnes of CO2, but I'm not sure how much other pollutants are produced, let alone the buses.
I'm usually delighted to see commercial forests felled. Cold lifeless monocultures. The industry paid some lip service to the idea of mixed species forestry a few years ago, but I've not seen any evidence of that being put into practice.
You're lucky you've got trees in your main street at all. We have to make do with an artificial tree substitute pollution filter thing here in Musselburgh.
The road through the Forest of Castle O'er is beautiful at this time of year when the larches are turning gold.
Nice Brain Pickings article about a book I just finished:
https://www.brainpickings.org/2016/09/26/the-hidden-life-of-trees-peter-wohlleben/
The book made me sad for the amputated lives of urban trees though. They can't communicate, mostly, and they all die young!
You must log in to post.
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin