Appendix 2
-
CRAIGMILLAR URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK DRAFT
CONSULTATION (10.01.05 - 09.04.05)
RESPONSES
Item Organisation
No.
Scotways
1
2
Date of
Response
1711105
The Craigmillar 1811 1104
(received
Partnership
Topics
Council Response
Comments/Suggestions
~~
Rights of Way
Sent map with rights of way in area.
a) Boundary of UDF
Although it is understood that the Joint
Venture Company’s Business Plan is
limited to the JV’s operational area,
reference should also be more strongly
made to the wider planning area. Issues
of tenure mix, density, transportation etc
should be set within the wider context,
including areas such as Newcraighall, the
Jewel, Cleekims, and similar
neighbourhoods to the east. The recent
consent for the Brewery site on Peffermill
Road will introduce a further 240 one- and
two-bedroomed flats into the area.
b) Densities of
Housing
Serious concerns raised over the urban
form proposed, the design, the density and
the mix of the housing proposals. These
were highlighted in earlier responses in
Accepted.
Already on Council Records.
Noted.
Framework should be adjusted to
improve reference to wider
context.
Noted and accepted.
Framework is too prescriptive and
detailed in this regard. This
asDect will be re-examined.
1
2001 and to the Craigmillar Interim
Planning Framework on 12 May 2003.
The case for four-storey flats the length of
Niddrie Mains and Greendykes Roads is
not acceptable. Buildings of that height
may be acceptable at corners and
occasional points but not uniformly along
these lengthy roads. Three storey should
be the maximum height in redeveloping
Craigmillar. The existing housing and
other buildings on the south side of Niddrie
Mains Road, and on the east (Niddrie
Marischal-side) of Greendykes Road are
already less than four-storey. To line the
other sides of these roads with uniform
four-storey housing would not provide
balance.
Noted. Not accepted.
Framework states that four storeys
is maximum height. The Town
Centre could accommodate four
storeys and this may reduce
eastwards of town centre. Will not
be uniformly four storeys. Highest
densities are most appropriate for
places near major public transport
corridors and therefore this usually
means ‘main streets’ such as
Niddrie Mains Road.
Similarly, the ratio of flats to houses is
Noted.
high. Agreement was reached with the JV The Framework is a guide and is
for the needs of the present community to
flexible, but is overly prescriptive
be met first, and the clear local preference on this point. This reference to be
is for the form of housing currently in place omitted.
at the Hays to extend westward throughout
Niddrie Mains. Other, more flatted,
developments with higher densities may
take place later in the programme, after
the needs of the local community have
been met in Niddrie Mains and
Greendykes.
2
The current planning application for
developing the Peffermill Primary School
site proposes a mix of houses and flats,
two- and three-story, with an overall
density of 50 units per hectare. This is a
more appropriate design and density for
Craigmillar and should be reflected in the
UDF.
Noted.
The Framework allows
opportunities for similar densities
as redevelopment progresses.
The South East Local Plan as modified
refers to the need for higher densities in
relation to the Greendykes allocation
(HSGI) the new land to the south of
Greendykes. HSGI referred to 810
houses in 20 hectares, a density of 40.5
(since modified to 30 hectares). HSG 2,
the existing Greendykes site had a
capacity of 362 on 16 hectares, a density
of 22.6. HSG 4 (Niddrie Mains) has a
capacity of 1,230 on 25.8 hectares, a
density of 47.6. These may change
slightly with the passage of time, but still
fall well short of the density of 80 per
hectare proposed in the UDF. Again, the
new development adjacent to the Green
Belt may sustain higher densities still, but
these are not appropriate in the existing
neighbourhoods of Niddrie Mains and
Greendykes.
Partly accepted.
Framework needs to be consistent
with SEELP. Reference to 80ha
density will be removed from
Framework and replaced with
appropriate text. But it should be
noted that densities in SEELP are
only a guide of minimum densities,
not a maximum figure.
The needs of displaced residents who
have the Right-to-Return must be met.
Noted.
Not a Plannina matter. This is
3
~~
This requires a further review of the
number and type of housing necessary to
meet these needs. An increase in the
proportion of family housing may be
necessary.
Housing Department or PARC
responsibility. Reference to be
removed from Framework.
Provision should be made for some larger Accepted.
family housing to sustain the new schools. Framework to be revised.
A range and balanced mix of housing
types should be sought to cater for the
needs of different population groups,
including people with restricted or impaired
mobility (as in Modification SEELP 18:
Policy H8 Housing Diversity).
The new social housing must meet the
Noted.
housing needs of those people with a
Not a Planning matter.
right-to-return and members of the wider
community.
(Tenure Balance)
c) The means by
which to ensure the
best quality of
architecture and
design.
- Community
Facilities
The ultimate tenure balance of 50%
private and 50% rented housing is
approved.
Commitment to delivering best quality in
design and architecture welcomed but the
aspiration for the harder “urban form” and
high-density building not accepted. The
design and layout should meet the early
needs of the local community, with a more
traditional mixture of housing and layout as
seen in the New Housing Partnership
developments in CraigmiIlar.
Higher densities and urban form may
Noted.
Noted.
This is the form of development
required to meet current design
standards and provide sufficient
accommodation for the target
population. Framework allows for
a variety of forms.
4
become more acceptable and relevant in
later phases which turn towards the
parkland and “new Meadows” to the south
of Greendykes.
d) The proper
location of the
secondary school in
relation to the “town
centre” and means
by which the “town
centre” and local
centre might be
strengthened.
Concerns continue to be raised over
proposals for shared gardens and
communal back greens - past experience
has shown that these arrangements often
lead to disputes, problems of management
and general dereliction of the area.
The JVC must convince the community
that this would not happen again. Safety,
security and general amenity demand the
provision of proper front gardens for
houses around 3.5 metres.
Noted.
PARC have been asked to provid
more thinking on future
management of spaces. Detailec
arrangements will be addressed t
planning application stage. No
change proposed for front garder
size, as this is fundamental to the
basic design concept.
There is a pressing need for early
agreement between the community and
Council on the siting of the new community
high school with a clear programme and
timetable. Current proposals have
departed from the previous idea of a
“community campus”, with a range of
facilities close by. Concerns about playing
fields apart from the school, shared
parking with a supermarket, and fewer
facilities within the school. Earlier
proposals had the school in a main street
position, contributing to the town centre.
The former idea is considered superior.
Noted.
Further views sought from
Education. In any case detailed
design could address some of
these concerns, e.g. frontage
along Niddrie Mains Road and
location of library.
5
e) The provision of
community facilities
the land on which tc
build them and the
timing of their
provision.
Agreed that community facilities can be
attached to the new school(s) However,
some experience of schools delivered
under PPP have led to doubts over
affordable and reasonable access being
available. Also need to maintain a range
of facilities throughout the area, including
at the Jack Kane Centre. It is not only the
schools which should be provided but
other community facilities too. Explicit
recognition of this should be made.
Noted.
Text of Framework can be
amended (e.g. “...schools and
community facilities at the same
time.. .”)
f) The provision of
parks and green
space
Whilst recognising that housing and other
developments will take place on greenfield
sites to the south of Greendykes, the
community values its open space. The
new parkland before the new Bio-Medi
Park is welcomed, and the JV must reflect
the letter and spirit of the existing policies
for preserving and improving (and
replacing) open space and environmental
amenity.
Comment welcomed and noted.
Framework to be revised to
incorporate more on open space,
and include the parkland within th
Framework boundary.
g) The means by
which home zones
might be encourage
on a wide scale and
the dominance of th
car reduced,
particularly on
Niddrie Mains Road
Home zones welcome in asserting the
primacy of residents over cars in
Craigmillar. Quality bus corridors and
Tram Line 3 also welcomed to reduce carbased transport in favour of improved and
affordable public transport.
However, existing stresses on Niddrie
Mains Road are unacceptable and
continue to worsen. We are disappointed
Support welcomed.
Further views obtained from
Transport and text to be adjusted
in Framework.
6
that no major proposals to relieve the
congestion on Niddrie Mains Road.
h) The linkages of
Craigmillar to the
wider city
The Partnership continues to favour
improving links with the rest of Edinburgh.
Need to integrate transport proposals
within the South East Local Plan, South
East Wedge and related developments.
Specific reference must be made to the
proposals relating to the extension of Fort
Kinnaird
The JV has always made assurances that
it would exceed all established Council
policies, and the Partnership welcomes
these assurances. Adherence to these
established policies should be the
minimum standard set in the Framework.
i) The alignment of
the Framework with
the broad spectrum
of established
Council policies from
energy efficiency and
waste reduction to
the provision of cycle
routes and
allotments.
Timetabling / Phasing Timetabling of the regeneration (and
Business Plan if necessary) must meet the
needs of the existing community. If there
are to be early demolitions in the rest of
Niddrie Mains then the provision of rented
housing should be brought forward to cater
for the needs of those whose homes are
demolished.
Noted.
All appropriate reference will be
added.
Noted.
All planning applications must
consider Local Plan Policy and
supplementary planning
guidelines.
Noted.
Not a Planning matter. Comment
passed to PARC and Housing
Department.
~
Economic
Development
Document says little about economic
development and business issues.
Noted.
Framework provisions are in line
7
with current predicti
Identifying sufficient land for business
demand for busines
space, especially workshops, is crucial to
encourage business growth in the area.
The existing business area around Peffer
Place should be retained and expanded.
Office development should follow the
Town Centre, should it move eastwards.
Greater attention must be paid to
promoting economic development locally
as well as linking to the wider opportunities
around CraigmiIlar.
3
SEPA
9/3/05
Consultation &
Regeneration
Whilst welcoming the consultation period,
the Partnership hopes that the Council is
able to expedite redevelopment. Many
families have been displaced for over a
year, some for several years already, with
no current prospect of returning to a new
house. We must ensure that our
community benefit, and soon, from the
regeneration.
Noted.
Comments passed
General
Good overview for the potential to develop
this area balancing new development with
open space, recreation, landscaping
including the rehabilitation of the Niddrie
Burn in a new wildlife corridor through the
site.
Positioning of the school sites should not
encroach on the river corridor.
The land earmarked for the school sites is
squeezing the corridor width, which is not
Noted.
Schools
Figure 2.4
Noted and agreed.
Accepted.
Framework to be ac
8
~
Community Facili
Recycling FaciIiti(
Waste Minimisatii
during constructic
Parks & Green
Space
in keeping with the principle to retain a
natural corridor width of a minimum 40
metres. It is recommended that these
school sites are pulled back so that the
development does not encroach on the
river corridor.
Provision of community facilities in terms
of waste recycling facilities.
The provision of Community recycling
facilities should be adequately addressed
by identifying suitable areas of the site for
such facilities, and give an indication of the
nature of the facilities to be provided in line
with the Council’s strategy on this matter.
Recycling facilities lend themselves to be
positioned in areas where people regularly
go, such as schools, libraries, health and
community centres.
The framework should also reflect the
need to integrate waste recycling facilities
into the new development itself (as in
current Plannina Policv).
Waste minimisation has three main
benefits for Industry and Customers detailed comments attached.
The Niddrie Burn diversion and associated
river corridor should be kept free from
development encroachment.
Noted.
Text change proposed tc
Council policy on waste
facilities.
Noted. Suggestion welc
Add text to Framework.
existing Council Policies
Noted.
Reference to be added.
Noted.
Not Planning issues.
AcceptedIAgreed.
9
Parks & Open Spacc
SEPA supports the intention to provide a
new open hver corridor with flood storage
capacity built into the design of 'Meadow
Park' but it is important that this does not
include the creation of on line ponds as
part of the river channel.
Noted.
Details being fed into Niddrie Burr
Project design.
Niddrie Burn
It is SEPA's understanding that the Niddrie
Burn will be diverted into a single new
channel through the Biomedical Park to
meet the proposed route of the Burn
through the Meadow Park. This should be
reflected in figures 7.3 and 9.2 as currently
they show the Biomedical Park
development on the proposed Burn
corridor.
Noted.
Diagrams to be amended.
Design requirements of the Niddrie Burn
Waterside Park supported (section 7.6.1)
however the word "soft" should be added
in front of engineering.
Accepted.
Text to be adjusted.
'
3 Bullet point - extensive areas of
woodland planting may be appropriate
from an ecological point of view and
should not be ruled out at this stage.
Noted.
This provision must recognise
requirements of river corridor
design.
Provision and appropriate location of
ponds - detailed comments.
Noted.
Further consideration to be given
to SUDS guidance and included in
Framework.
SUDS
10
~
The approach in figure 9.1 in terms of the
Surface Water Management Train is
supported but concerns about ‘swales’.
SEPA would request further opportunity to
comment on SUDS relating to the scheme
as a whole.
Noted.
Framework to be amended
accordingly. SEPA to be kept
informed.
Foul Drainage - SEPA emphasises that
connection to the public foul sewer is the
only acceptable option for dealing with foul
drainage from the proposed development.
This should be acknowledged in the
document with a statement form Scottish
Water that a sewer connection will be
possible. If it transpires that there are
sewer capacity restrictions, sewer
infrastructure will need to be provided
possibly through developer contributions
and in which case, planning agreements
would need to be in place to ensure that
public sewerage infrastructure is provided
before development proceeds on site.
Noted.
PARC has been asked for further
comments.
Transport
Provision of an adequate public transport
system, limitation on private parking areas,
and good access to public facilities such
as schools by walking and cycle ways
would all ensure less reliance on the car.
Noted.
Framework aims to achieve this.
Further adjustments to be made.
Movement
Provision of an integrated transport system Noted.
should be a key element, and system
As above.
being in place to serve new development
Infrastructure &
Drainage
11
as it comes forward. Limitation on private
parking and good access to the town
centre, community facilities and schools by
walking and cycle ways would ensure less
reliance on the car.
~~
4
Kintry Housing
Partnership
(representing
Canmore,
Castle Rock,
Edinvar and
Link Housing
Associations)
22/3/05
General
Welcomed.
Endorse the principle of a co-ordinated
approach to the regeneration of
Craigmillar.
~
Welcome the publication of and
consultation on the UDF. However,
concerns of possible adverse impacts on
the regeneration programme if there are
disagreements and protracted discussions
over the UDF.
Noted.
In last seven years the associations and
their partners have developed 830 new
homes: 530 for affordable rent and 300 for
low cost home ownership.
Noted.
In second half of 2004, for the first time in
that seven year period, there were no new
build projects on site in Craigmillar.
Amendment and approval of the UDF
should be speeded up to facilitate further
Noted.
12
progress with the regeneration of
Craigmillar.
____~
Note of detail
Page 25, third paragraph: Link has been
omitted from the list of housing
associations.
Accepted.
Text to be amended.
Boundaries
Content with the boundaries.
Some consideration has to be taken of
Craigmillar’s surroundings and linkages.
E.g. south east wedge, medipark, Queen
Margaret University college relocation and
expansion of retail facilities at Cameron
Toll and Fort Kinnaird.
Noted.
Additional references to be
included.
Densities
The associations have largely developed
low rise terraced housing with a majority 01
front and back doors and defensible
space. There is a clear local preference
for this type of development, and a
resistance to common stairs and gardens
of which residents have negative
experience.
Noted.
Concerns that the proposed densities are
driven by the desire (or need) to maximise
land values, rather than how a sustainable
community can best be arrived at.
Noted.
Densities reflect national plannin
guidance and need to create a
sustainable population in
CraigmiI lar.
Noted.
Further consideration to be giver
to guidance on sizes of residenti
In particular, if there are to be three
schools in the Niddrie Mains area then
these would be best served by being
13
located within an area of predominantly
family housing rather than one or two
bedroom flats.
units.
Such designs would fit better with the new
schools, the recently built housing
developments, and the heritage buildings
which remain in the area (Richmond
Church, the former Craigmillar Primary
School, and the Community Centre).
To attract people to move to Craigmillar
something extra is required. In the wider
Edinburgh context, there is a shortage of
affordable family housing (both for rent
and sale) and there would be benefits in
developments aimed at this market rather
than a preponderance of flats aimed at first
time buyers and renters. E.g.
consideration could be given to the needs
of key workers at the hospital and
medipark.
Noted.
Additional planning guidance on
affordable housing to be included.
We do not oppose higher density or higher
storey developments. There will be a
place for these, but the balance should be
in favour of family housing, some of which
could be town houses, rather than flats.
Noted.
Text should be adjusted to be less
prescriptive.
Link have planning approval for developing Noted.
the Peffermill Primary School site, with a
As above.
mix of two and three storey houses and
14
~~
flats, overall density of 50 units per
hectare. This is a more appropriate design
and density for Craigmillar and should be
reflected in the UDF.
Architecture &
Design Quality
Location of
The associations are committed to
meeting the needs of displaced residents
who have the Right-to-Return. We believe
there should be several hundred more
properties for social rent to help tackle
Edinburgh’s housing shortage.
Noted.
Not a Planning issue. Comments
passed to Housing and PARC.
We are content with the proposed ultimate
tenure balance of 50% owner occupied
and 50% rented housing. However, we
understand that the best estimate is that
there would be 3,692 (57.7%) owner
occupier properties and 2,817 social
rented properties. On this basis there is
clearly some scope to increase the
proportion of properties available for
affordable rent.
Noted.
Tenure is not a Planning issue and
Framework will be adjusted
accordingIy .
We support the aspiration to have high
quality buildings in a high quality
environment. There is a benefit in
undertaking larger developments through
partnering agreements, rather than
competitively tendering smaller
developments, and we would endorse this
approach.
The associations welcome the emphasis
Welcomed.
Detailed implementation
arrangements are not a Planning
matter.
Comments passed to PARC.
Welcomed and noted.
15
secondary school in
town centre and
means by which the
town centre and local
centres might be
strengthened
on improving local schools. Quick
progress on these would send a positive
message about the overall regeneration
programme. There is an urgent need for
early agreement on the site and general
form of the proposed new community high
school. This would help create confidence
in the school becoming a reality, but would
also allow housing developments around
the school to be sympathetic towards it
and supportive of it. Generally support for
a “community campus”, in a central
location close to Niddrie Mains Road.
Community Facilities,
the land on which to
build them and the
timing of their
provision
The “community facilities” it plans to
deliver are largely those that meet the
needs of the local authority viz schools
and library.
The associations would welcome a
broader approach, and an early indication
of what more other and/or more local
facilities are planned. If these are not
embedded in the original proposals they
will not happen.
Noted.
Framework makes provision for
proposals for community facilities
should these come forward. This
is considered adequate.
We welcome the proposed “new heart for
Craigmillar”, but are concerned about
deterioration of the current shopping
parade on Niddrie Mains Road.
Immediate action needs to be taken to
retain adequate shopping provision in a
reasonable environment.
Noted.
Comments passed to PARC who
propose to improve shopping
environment in the short term.
Parks and Green
Space
Welcome the proposals for high quality
green spaces in and around Craigmillar.
Would urge that sustainable and effective
management and maintenance
arrangements are agreed and
implemented at the earliest possible time.
Noted.
Further consideration to be given
to this. Detailed management of
private space will be dealt with at
planning application stage.
Support for home zones, but there is a
significant degree of car ownership and a
preference by car owners to have cars
parked close to home. Proposals for car
parks on the boundary of home zones may
be problematic, and should be addressed.
Our experience of developments in
Craigmillar is that eliminating routes
through residential areas, and traffic
calming measures at junctions, has
worked well in reducing the hazard and
nuisance caused by cars to residents.
Noted.
Further consideration to be given
to this.
We welcome the proposed tram route, but
are increasing concerned about the area
that will be taken up by the road and
tramway. In particular there will be a large
sterile area along both Greendykes Road
and Niddrie Mains Road for almost a
decade before any trams run on it.
Noted.
Further consideration to be given
to this point.
Niddrie Mains Road divides Craigmillar.
Concerns expressed by community
members over safety and pollution. Whilst
Noted.
Further views obtained from
Transport and text mav be
17
3e8te
22/3/05
we understand the constraints, we are
disappointed that the UDF contains no
major proposals to relieve the congestion
on Niddrie Mains Road.
adjusted.
Linkages of
Craigmillar to the
wider city
The associations are convinced of the
need to improve links with the rest of
Edinburgh, and to re-integrate Craigmillar
into the city. Need to integrate transport
proposals within the South East Local
Plan, South East edge and related
developments. Specific reference must be
made to the proposals relating to the
extension of Fort Kinnaird.
Noted.
Text to be adjusted to make this
clearer.
Alignment of the
Framework with the
broad spectrum of
established Council
policies from energy
efficiency and waste
reduction to the
provision of cycle
routes and allotments
We welcome assurances from CJVC that it Noted.
will exceed all established Council policies, Text in Framework should be
amended to incorporate reference
and believe that adherence to these
to (other) Council policies.
established policies should be the
minimum standard set in the Framework.
Business Areas
(concerns)
We and the Craigmillar District Business
Association (CDBA) are concerned about
lack of protection of existing business
areas in the Framework, and lack of
control over land outwith CEC ownership.
Noted.
Framework is in line with local plan
policies. No change proposed.
Not sufficient land set aside in the UDF for
Noted.
18
business space, hence stifling business
growth in the area.
Framework provisions are in line
with current predictions on
demand for business space.
The existing business area in and off
Peffer Place should be retained and
expanded, not reduced.
Noted.
As above.
Only office development has been
considered in the Framework.
Noted.
References in Framework will be
amended.
There is no mention in that plan of
workshop space, for which there is a
proven high demand.
The Framework allocates enough
space to satisfy small business
development.
Replacement accommodation needs to be
put in place for "fall out" from the Blindcraft
site, and from Holyrood Business Park
should theses sites be redeveloped.
It is understood Blindcraft will
remain in its existing location.
The Framework allocates enough
space to satisfy small business
development .
Transport links to north and south to be
retained and improved - Craigmillar Castle
Road must be retained, improved or
replaced.
Framework makes no comment on
this.
Existing traders to have priority in
purchase or lease of retail units in any
redevelopment of Centre or District
Centres.
Not relevant - not a Planning
matter.
Business Areas
(welcome)
Accept.
Document seeks to achic
See comments above re
workshop space.
Suggestion of balanced community where
people can not only live but a percentage
will work locally in the commercial
property to be constructed including
much needed workshop space.
~~
Office space being created in the Town
Centre. The proposal to build good quality
office space close to the Town Centre as
possibly to allow staff to shop and use the
facilities in Town Centre. If the Town
Centre moves east so should the Offices.
Accepted.
To be considered further
Keep Niddrie Mains Road open with traffic
calming measures and not create a
pedestrianised Town Centre.
Accepted.
Framework makes provi:
this.
Changing the priority of Niddrie Mains
Road and turning the main road south into
Greendykes.
Welcomed.
The creation of District Centres
Welcomed.
The suggestions for improved public
transport including the tram (now in
jeopardy) and rail stops.
Welcomed.
The improvements to access around the
roads of Craigmillar.
Welcomed.
The suggestion of a small to medium
sized Supermarket to allow a good mix of
Welcomed.
Reflected in Framework.
20
other local traders to include individual
Post Office, Pharmacy, Bank, Newsagent
etc.
Craigmillar Econc
Development
Strategy
Completion of Peffer Industrial Estate to
include redevelopment on the site of the
CraigmiIlar Hearts club, after relocation,
further phases of workshop units beyond
last phase constructed in 2001.
Noted and accepted.
Cre8te forecast a requirement for a
minimum of 4645 square metres (50,000
sq ft) of small workshop space in next 1015 years.
Noted.
Consideration to be given to this
Castlebrae Business Centre should be
replaced by 3716 square metres (40,000
ft) of new economic rent business space,
or as a listed building be completely
refurbished.
Noted.
Further consideration being give
to this.
Within PARC’s plans for the new Town
Centre are proposals for office suites over
shops. This is presently being quantified
and will add a further supply of office
accommodation to the area as well as
business activity in the Centre.
Noted.
The above business space requirement is
in addition to the figures assumed in the
Framework.
Noted.
Further consideration to be giver
to this.
21
~
0t her relevant
matters:
There is an error in Fig 7.4.
Density & Community The assumption that a Community High
School is desired by the community is
High School
driving the plans for 17,000 population
which in turn requires a high density of
housing in a suburban setting. The
community appear to be saying that they
would prefer a lower density even if the
school had to be sacrificed.
Viable Community
Craigmillar
Books for
Babies
29/3/05
New landmark library
location &
design
- its
Accepted.
Plan to be adjusted.
Noted.
Framework is based on reestablishing the target population
in Craigmillar to create a
sustainable community.
Not enough focus on making Craigmillar a Noted.
viable community where residents can live, This is a planning document to be
used as supplementary planning
work and play.
a uidance.
Noted.
Particularly interested in the plans for a
new landmark library in Craigmillar as part
of the regeneration of the area.
Over the last two years library membership Noted.
among under threes at Craigmillar Library
Comments passed to PARC for
has increased from 11 in 2002 to 51 in
consideration in detailed design.
2004. One of our priorities is to see this
trend continue. Designs for a new
landmark library in Craigmillar must take
into account this ever-growing group of
library users. Regular events and
activities at the library contribute to the
belief that the library is a safe, enjoyable
and accessible environment for families
with young children.
22
Proposed plans for
new landmark library
We welcome the inclusion of the library
with our other community services in a
common and centrally located area, within
reach of all members of the community.
But we have concerns over the proximity
of the high school and the implications that
this may have in terms of shared access
and ownership of the library.
Noted.
Concerns to be dealt with at
detailed design stage. Comments
passed to PARC.
Pedestrian crossings e.g. from the medical Noted.
centre to the library, free parking facilities, All these concerns will be dealt
with at detailed design and
accessibility for prams and wheelchairs,
planning application stage.
and public transport links.
NB: All Council buildings have to
be fully accessible by wheelchair
and to conform with DDA Act.
Several comments about detailed design
requirements.
7
CraigmiI lar
Communiversity
16/3/05
Consultation
1. An extension to the consultation
process and to widen the consultation in
Craigmillar. That the UDF should seek for
a real partnership rather than a limited
consultation with the residents.
Welcomed.
Passed to PARC for consideration
in library design brief.
Noted.
This is not the first consultation in
the process. Fortnightly
stakeholders' meetings were held
in preparing the Framework. In
any case, consultation was
already extended to 3 months (I0
Jan - 9 April 2005). Community
representations were involved in
the development of draft
Framework.
23
____
2. That every household in Craigmillar
should receive a simplified version of the
document that details the proposals.
Should this prove too complicated to do
then at the very least a letter of intent and
where plans and model can be viewed and
groups that can be contacted.
Partly accepted.
This is a planning document and
has to be written with this purpose
in mind. However, a summary
could be produced in simpler,
clearer style of English.
Open Space
3. That Cairntows is not built upon.
Noted. Framework makes it clear
that it should only be built on in
certain circumstances.
More text to be added to explain
the process.
Consultation
4.To go back and reconstruct the UDF
which would be based on participation and
not just a limited consultation. With the
same level of participation as The
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR ACTION
(1976) published by Craigmillar Festival
Society.
Not possible. Regeneration needs
to start soon to :
- to meet local needs; &
- to meet 15 year lifetime of PARC
Consultation/model
5. We request that a model is made and
that this model display in Craigmillar
Library and various venues for six months
so people can be add there opinions. In
particular using sticky labels, so people
can add comments to the model. The
model is a standard practice in many
planning community processes worldwide.
PARC already has a model, but it
would be inappropriate for this
type of participatory exercise at
this stage of the regeneration
process.
24
6. That planning workshops are created,
not just consultation meetings. These
planning workshops are half day, evening
and weekend events are constructed that
allow residents to develop own concepts
and ideas with developers, professionals
etc.
Workshops took place at the
public meetings and Craigmillar
Community Council organised a
Participatory Appraisal process.
7. That the current document does not
reflect the social caring and social action
history of the area.
The document is a physical
planning document. It will facilitate
other actions through physical
regeneration.
8. That the current document should
reflect the artistic tradition of Craigmillar
which is highly regarded world wide.
Noted, but there appear to be no
planning implications arising from
this.
9. That Art should be at heart of the
consultation and the framework. That Art
should be central in the regeneration
process. This was currently stated in The
Scottish Parliament Enterprise and Culture
committee report into “Arts and
Community” where it stated that “Art
should be at the heart of Community
planning”.
Noted.
There are examples of Art in the
community and their will be
opportunities over the
regeneration lifespan to include Art
- e.g. Niddrie Burn.
IO. That an artist be employed to help
Noted.
This is a planning document to be
used as supplementary planning
guidance..
Noted.
refocus this document.
11. That a per cent for Art scheme
25
8
Mrs P CI:
29/3/05
introduced. That 1% of regeneration
budget be allocated to Arts. This is similar
to current regeneration projects in UK.
However, not Council
Framework to make r
planning guidance on
12. That there should be a visual identity
for the area that is rooted and supported a’
grassroots level.
Noted.
This is a challenge foi
liaison with the comm
13. That the Communiversity submit its
own blueprint which is based on
Craigmillar’s cultural and social caring
t radition.
Noted.
Attended the workshops last June run by
Llewelyn Davies - impression was that
Framework was already agreed.
Noted.
Attended public meetinglworkshop in
Richmond Church March 2005 - did little
to inform, was rushed and people left
early.
Noted.
This was the first me€
Subsequent meetings
these concerns.
Density
The proposed close proximity of homes to
each other together with the uniformity of
the 4 storey blocks, do not allow for
personal space or privacy. This seems
more like a transient camp than a
community.
Noted.
Density reflects currei
guidance. But more t
included in the Frame
open space and parki
than a density figure.
Schools
There is no need to move the high school.
Close proximity to shopping centre not
advisable during break periods.
Noted.
Community High Schc
component in regenei
Consultation
26
centre.
Town Centre
The shops on the main road are adequate
and the supermarket is already in situ on
the main road allowing for passing trade
as well as local trade.
Noted.
But Framework has to provide
facilities for a future enlarged
population.
Town
Centre/Transport
The main road should be made more free
flowing with more thought given to the
public service vehicles.
Noted.
Bus lanes proposed.
Business/Home
Zones
Units for small shops and community
facilities would be placed in the Home
Zone areas.
Noted.
Home Zones are for residential
only areas.
Business/lndustrial
area
The Industrial Estate is growing and
Cameron Toll and Fort Kinnaird offer job
opportunities in plenty.
Accepted.
No change needed.
River
Restoration/Schools
The proximity of a burn to two primary
schools is ill conceived an accident waiting
to happen “should be enclosed”.
Noted.
Comments to be addressed in
Niddrie Burn project.
Open Space
Cairntows Park is used by dog walkers
golfers and football teams and is a nice
entrance to Craigmillar. The demand for
office suites is not so great and park
should be retained.
Noted.
Cairntows Park will only be built on
if there is no other space for
offices and if the football pitch and
open space can be reprovided.
Additional text to be added.
Housing/Buildings
The recent new buildings are pleasant and
the remaining space should be developed
Noted.
The aim of the Framework is for
27
in a similar way.
Craigmillar to work as a cohesive
whole, but with some areas of
higher density to secure the
desired target population.
~
~
Lothian and
Borders Police
4/4/05
Framework/Business
Plan/consuItat ion
The framework seems to be motivated by
Profit.
The regeneration vehicle is
through PARC and this cannot be
changed.
CraigmiIlar/
Framework/Housing
Craigmillar could be a nice residential
suburb of Edinburgh, a Town it is not and
the contents of the framework do not makf
it so.
Noted.
Comments as above.
Housing/
Communities
To secure quality, sustainable places
where people choose to live. More
emphasis needs to be placed on the
design and on the need to encourage
higher standards. Designing for
community safety is a central part of this.
Noted.
Housing/Buildings
Recommend the adoption of “Secured by
Design” criteria for all new and refurbishec
developments. Detailed comments
included about relevant criteria.
Accepted.
This should be part of detailed
planning application stage.
Framework should cross-refer to
Planning Guideline on Community
Safety and make reference to
“Secured by Design”.
Lighting
Lighting is a vital feature of Community
Safety. This should meet the
requirements of BS 5489-1:2003. Higher
Accepted.
Statement to be included in
Framework.
28
crime risks require higher levels of lighting,
and this has been a proven crime
reduction tool. Also, whiter light provides a
clearer colour definition for colour CCTV
cameras, compared to sodium lamps, and
is proven to increase the public perception
of safety.
Parking
The initiative “Safer Parking Award” exists
in tandem with “Secured by Design”
offering similar design guides that have
proved successful in reducing auto-crime,
and improving public fears of crime. For
example, underground car parking
facilities are useful and can provide a
suitable safe storage area, but there are
some drawbacks in relation to security.
Noted/
Details to be considered for
inclusion.
Local Parks
A park should be a safe place for all
people to use, but actual crime or fear of
crime can reduce the use of any area.
The various problems/crimes associated
with parks are: anti-social behaviour;
thefts; assaults; indecencies; and
vandalism.
Comments noted.
To be addressed in detailed
design. Text in Framework to be
adjusted accordingly.
There is a problem with youths riding
motorcycles around the Jack Kane
Centre/Hunters Hall area and other
footpaths within the Craigmillar area. I
would recommend that the public parks be
enclosed with suitable fencing/walling or
Comments noted.
To be addressed in detailed
design.
29
other barriers to prevent the unauthorised
entry of motor vehicles. The footpath
entrances must have suitable barriers
installed to prevent motorcycles gaining
entry.
~
Local Parks/Play
Areas
Local “play areas” within the housing
developments need careful consideration
regarding the provision of suitable robust
play equipment, appropriate [to the]? age
group of children that the play area is
intended for. These areas should be
enclosed by a fence, high enough to keep
out dogs, etc but low enough to maintain
natural surveillance.
Noted.
Comments to be addressed in
detailed design.
Dwelling Security
Building design should be kept as simple
as possible to eliminate areas that may
assist the criminal. A number of detailed
comments included.
Comments noted.
To be addressed in detailed
design.
Building layout
Boundaries between private and public
space should be clearly marked.
Wherever possible, a strip of defensible
space should be incorporated to provide
some separation. Landscaping can help
here.
Accepted.
Text in Framework to be added.
Landscaping
Detailed comments on design of
landscaping.
Comments noted.
To be addressed in detailed
design.
30
10
Framework/General
In general, SNH are supportive of this
document and its objectives, in particular
its aims for parkland and openspace, and
improved access and recreation.
Support welcomed.
Niddrie Burn
We support the principle of the Niddrie
Burn river restoration proposals as well as
the principle of the new parkland.
However it is noted that although the river
restoration is included in the phasing of thc
works, there is no mention of the parkland
and its implementation. The status of the
park proposals should therefore be
clarified within the framework.
Support welcomed.
Comments accepted.
Framework to be amer
Framew0rk/generaI
The production of this long needed
development framework is welcomed.
Noted.
Natural
Heritage
11
The Cockburn
Association
7/4/05
Local CentredNiddrie The Association strongly supports the
three centre development concept, and the
Mains Road
redesign of the junction of Niddrie Mains
Road and Greendykes Road in favour of
local traffic and the development of the
proposed Greendykes Centre.
Views to Arthur’s
Seat
The report correctly stresses the
importance of maintaining the views
towards Arthur’s Seat from within the
framework boundaries, but omits to
mention the obverse - namely the great
need to study the composition of the whole
framework area laid out in prospect from
Noted.
Noted.
Accepted.
Some further work beir
out on this.
31
the high ground of Dunsapie and the
eastern flanks of Arthur's Seat Edinburgh's earliest sites of settlement.
Landscape
Inonsidering this landscape, the variation
in topography(from the lowest ground west
of the Royal Infirmary up to the crown of
Edmonstone Ridge and northward over
the whole of Craigmillar) is of critical
importance. We therefore ask that all the
master and phasing plans in their next
reprinting should have the contours
marked on them so that the proposals as
they are worked up in detail, may be
carefully checked against the flow of the
landform.
Noted.
Further consideration will be give
to this, but it may be inapproprial
We stress the importance of maintaining
the broad sweep of round crowned oakdominated native woodland along the
whole East to West length of the South
East Wedge, as achieved by Olmstead in
his Boston Emerald Necklace.
Noted.
Appropriate reference to be
included in the Framework.
We assume the arboretum proposed
would exclude coniferous species. On the
Edmonstone Ridge these will look out of
place.
Noted.
Comments passed to PARC for
inclusion at detailed design stagc
Treatment of the three North to South
corridors across the green wedge at
Craigmillar Castle Road, the tramway
Noted.
Appropriate reference to be
included in the Framework.
32
leave and the Wisp will need particularly
careful treatment to maintain effective East
to West open space connections.
We strongly recommend the framing and
adoption of strict resident proindivisio
shared responsibilities for all local open
space within each of the proposed housing
enclaves in order to ensure high standards
of design and maintenance.
~~
NHS Lothian
Primary and
Community
Division South East
Edinburgh
LHCC (Locality
Health Care
Co-operative)
Received
12/4/05
Noted.
Comments passed to PARC a
Department of Culture and
Leisure.
~
We note that there is no mention of future
rail connections with Craigmillar along the
North boundary of the framework area. We
suggest consideration be given to
safeguarding North to South pedestrian
movement to such connections and also to
the means of reducing the present
dangerous trespass over the railway line to
Bingham and The Jewel.
Accepted.
More text to be added.
Health Impact
Assessment
A Health Impact Assessment (HIA) has
been carried out for Craigmillar. An
executive summary of the draft findings as
well as recommendations arising from this
submitted.
Noted.
Key points of the
In terms of health and social car service
AcceDted.
33
assessment
planning there is an urgent need for
representatives from Parc, NHS Lothian,
the City of Edinburgh Council and
community health and social care groups
to identify what will be needed in future
years. The Framework mentions potential
for a branch GP surgery in Greendykes
and options for accommodating
community projects. The detail of these
proposals needs to be addressed. We
also have similar concerns about the lack
of provision for under 5s day care.
Further input on details can still be
provided in time to be incorporated
into the Framework. More details
requested.
Our main concern relates to potential for
increased health inequality between the
socially excluded community in Craigmillar
and the incoming population. We have
concerns the problems associated with the
vulnerable population already living in
Craigmillar may not improve but will be
masked or distilled within the larger
population. We would encourage Parc
and the city council to ensure that
adequate community resources are in
place as development progresses and that
health improvement policies receive
continued support.
Noted.
Comments passed to PARC for
further discussion with NHS
Lothian.
The Framework is a welcome development
as are the sustainable development
principles. Investment in schools, public
transport, employment, open space and
Welcomed.
Report awaited. Working
arrangements to be considered
further.
34
neighbourhood design as well as provision
of good quality, energy efficient homes are
all good for population health. Support for
the ongoing redevelopment. As the LHCC
transforms into a Community Health
Partnership, we look forward to a
productive working relationship with Parc
and the city council planning team to
ensure the success of redevelopment in
Craigmillar. A detailed report is being
finalised about the health impacts of the
UDF.
Tie
28/2/05
Linkages
Meetings with PARC regarding the
integration of the tram in the CUDF
proposals are continuing. Discussions are
concentrating on the alignment on
Greendykes Road, in the vicinity of the
Thistle Foundation, and near Wauchope
Square. Account should be taken of the
work to date.
Noted.
The Framework in Outline (plan). The
tram route should be identified as running
to Newcraighall, and it should show as
interfacing with the heavy rail cross-city
link. There are also proposals to link this
line to the south (The Waverley Route).
There should also be two tram stops
identified as being in the vicinity of the ERI
- one at the eastern end, and one to serve
Moredun to the west.
Accepted.
Framework to be amended.
35
Town Centre
Fig 2.3. Design Concept. It is
disappointing that the Town Centre has
not been designed to be within a 5 minute
walk of the Craigmillar Tram stop, althoug
this is identified as relating well to the
Community Centre.
Density
The tram offers a high capacity transport
system, and would support a dense level
of development. It is suggested that it
would support a greater level of
development than the two storey
properties seen elsewhere in Craigmillar.
Not accepted.
Town Centre moved as close as it
could be to Tram stop.
~~
____
Noted.
Already addressed in Framework.
____
Lighting
Lighting should be integrated wherever
possible with poles supporting overhead
wires for Tram.
Noted.
Detailed design matter.
Town Centre/ Niddrie
Mains Road
It is important that any junction
realignment at this location is undertaken
with a check that it will still work for the
tram alignment.
Noted.
Detailed design matter
Fig 4.8
This figure should only represent the
section to the west of the
GreendykedNiddrie Mains Road junction.
This arrangement will not work for the trar
alignment.
Accepted.
Boulevards
Figures 4.9 and 4.10 are not achievable,
particularly with regard to the tree plantinc
Noted.
Further discussions to resolve this
____~
36
which is too close to the track. Detailed
comments, but support in principle for
boulevards.
design matter. Framework to be
adjusted accordingly.
Parking
The provision of the tram - a high quality
capacity transport mode - should enable
general parking provision in the area to be
reduced. Tie would support the provision
of some limited parking around the tram
stops for tram users.
Noted.
Discussions ongoing about
appropriate parking provision.
Town Centre
Noted.
Missed opportunity in the masterplanning
But Framework represents a
process not to move the proposed town
realistic and practical compromise.
centre closer to the tram stop. As shown
on the plan, the Craigmillar stop will be just
outside the 5 minute walk from the
proposed centre. As the text notes it is
important to move the centre of gravity
eastwards to serve more of the local
population, but this does not seem to have
been carried through into Fig 5.3. There is
a significant risk that the population to the
east of the area in Niddrie will find Fort
Kinnaird a more convenient location. Also,
by keeping the centre away from the
Niddrie Mains Road/ Greendykes junction
as identified in 5.3 means that it does not
connect well to the significant development
area to the south at the RIE and bio-medi
park - another missed opportunity.
Meadow Park and
The tram would run throuah Dart of the
Agreed.
37
Tram route
Meadow Park. The text makes reference
to footpaths and cycleways which will
circulate through the park however the
tram will cross the park too. Reference to
this should perhaps be made, noting the
opportunity to integrate alignments and the
requirement to identify crossing points.
Framework to be amended.
Tram Stop
7.6.2 refers to “the main central tram stop”.
Is this stop going to be any different in
style or function to either Greendykes or
any of the other stops to the east? This
supports the suggestion above that if this
is the centre of the redevelopment area,
then it is where the town centre should be
located.
Noted.
Text to be tidied up for
consistency.
Tram Design
The Craigmillar Framework should make
reference to and defer to the tram Design
Manual with respect to the design of the
tram system.
Accepted.
Text to be adjusted.
Timescales
Of major concern is that the Design
Framework is coming forward, before the
detailed study and recommendations from
the Niddrie Burn River Restoration Project.
The conclusions from this Study are critical
in establishing the precise areas for
development purposes as well as
informing the more detailed design
parameters. In effect the Urban Design
Framework is premature. This is
Noted.
The Niddrie Burn is part of
Craigmillar regeneration. The
Framework sets out the
development framework, includir
context for the restoration of the
Niddrie Burn. It is important to
have clear strategic principles.
But the amount of detail will be
reduced.
~
14
.
Halliday Fraser 8/4/05
Munro
Planning
Submitted on
behalf of
Persimmon
Homes (East
Scotland)
Limited
38
particularly applicable in terms of road
layout, number of river crossings, service
provision, primary school location, and the
requirements for open space.
___
Policy Status
The Framework states that it should
“provide for choice in the future”and “must
allow for changes in how things are done,
and the order in which they are done”. It
should also be flexible and allow for
choices to be made in future years
(Paragraph 1.14). However, it is of
particular concern that it is the Council’s
intention to adopt the Framework as
supplementary planning guidance and will
therefore constitute a material
consideration in the assessment of
planning applications. This will inevitably
result in the Framework being less flexible
in its application.
Noted.
The Framework will be flexible.
Supplementary planning guidance
is guidance and thus it can be
flexible too. This could perhaps be
made clearer.
Further clarification and justification is
required with regard to the relationship
between the stated design principles of
distinctiveness; sociability, peopleoriented; sustainability and quality
(Paragraph 2.3) and the components of
the design and layout which are being
promoted within Chapters 3 to IO.
Accepted.
Text to be adjusted accordingly.
Of particular concern is the proposed form
of the develoDment lavout and desian
Noted.
Framework proposals conform
-
Housing Layout and
Design
39
templates, with flatted development,
townhouses and perimeter blocks being
promoted. It is noted that this approach
takes its model from inner city schemesfor example Crown Street in Glasgow. The
extension to the Greendykes area is
however an ‘edge of city’ location and
therefore differs significantly in that it has
limited public transport arrangements
currently in place and very few social or
community services which are necessary
in order to support this proposed urban
form.
with CEC’s Urban Design
Standards, which base its
principles on national policy.
Public transport routes will extenc
into Greendykes (public transpor
link and tram) and Niddrie Mains
Road is already a busy public
transport route. Block form is
considered sufficiently flexible.
Family Housing
In addition, there is general agreement
that Edinburgh seriously lacks mainstream
family housing, witness the exodus to Fife
and the Lothians. Indeed, it was noted at
the Committee meeting in December 2004
that only 20% of residential properties
within Edinburgh have children,
significantly below the national average.
This is surely an untenable situation that
needs addressing by release for additional
family units.
Noted.
Block layout can accommodate
family housing, e.g. terraces.
Framework could be adjusted to
include target figure for family
housing.
Flats/ Houses Ratic
The proposed development for the whole
of Craigmillar, with two-thirds flatted units
and the remainder as townhouses, will in
no way address this problem. Together
with the City’s other major development
area, the Waterfront, this will seriously
Accepted.
This is too prescriptive.
Framework to be amended to be
more flexible.
~
40
overload provision for this sector of the
market and will inevitably lead to the
current “unbalanced housing mix” which
the Framework proposes to address. It is
also of some significance that the
Framework considers that its proposals will
“give awide range of choice of type of
home”.
Flatted accommodation does not appeal to
or meet the needs of the majority of
families and consequently the population
will be heavily skewed towards smaller
households. Limited choice of housing will
inevitably lead to an area which will not
produce the mixed, balanced community
to which the Council aspires.
Noted.
Text to be adjusted to focus 01
quality of residential environml
rather than proportion of flats :
houses.
All parties are in agreement that the
Craigmillar area is in need of major
investment and an image ‘make-over’. If
however the Greendykes site cannot be
marketed because of limited housing
types, or is indeed slow to develop
because of lack of demand, the investment
required to contribute to the wider area will
not be available and the Council’s aims will
not be achieved.
Noted.
See above - Framework has t
sufficiently flexible to adapt to
changes over a 15 year
regeneration period.
The Council is attempting to restrict the
use of private transport and to this end is
proposing a car parking ratio of 100%
Noted.
Not accurate. Some parking v
be permissible in courtyards.
-
Parking Standards
41
~
within the area; moreover it is proposed
that this should all be on-street. This
principle, however, does not sit happily
with one of the Framework’s general
principles of street design that “it is
important that vehicles are not allowed to
dominate the public realm.
Underground parking will also be
encouraged. Off-street parking is
acceptable in Home Zones.
Parking standards to be reexamined here.
In addition, proposed parking provision
does not address demand. The City has
countless examples of areas where on
street parking has created severe
difficulties for residents within high density
developments, Marchmont and Bruntsfield
to name but two. If an acceptable form of
parking is to be achieved, and one which
takes account of the preferences of future
home occupiers, there must be provision
for off-street parking.
Partly accepted.
Framework to be adjusted to
address more fully the design
issues relating to parking and
open space.
The lack of alternative transport,
particularly a railway station, the
uncertainty surrounding the feasibility of
the proposed tram line, distance from the
city centre and the current concentration of
employment opportunities to the north and
west of the city all increase the probability
that car use will be higher than anticipated
by the Framework. Greater provision will
have to be made for secure, additional
parking areas in close proximity to new
housing.
Noted.
Framework to be adjusted to make
reference to railway station. Other
comments as above.
”
~
42
15
sportscotland
19/4/05
Conclusion
To conclude, Persimmon Homes (East
Scotland) Limited is a key stakeholder in
the regeneration of the area but currently
has major concerns as to the deliverability
of new housing on a key part of the site
within the current guideline parameters.
Noted.
Concerns being address
through ongoing discuss
Jack Kane
CentreIHunter’s Hall
football training
centre - community
facilties
In relation to sport, the most significant
development proposal for Craigmillar is the
proposed indoor football training centre
and velodrome at Hunter’s Hall. This
development is supported by
sportscotland and the Scottish Executive
as part of the National and Regional
Sports Facility Strategy.
Welcomed.
Framework to be adjuste
reference to this.
In addition to the new indoor facilities, the
playing fields at Hunters Hall will be
upgraded. Although there may be a
reduction in the number of sports pitches
on the site, this should be more than
compensated by an improvement in the
quality of the pitches, including the
provision of indoor and outdoor synthetic
grass pitches.
Noted and welcomed.
The proposed new football centre will
serve a regional function for Edinburgh
and beyond, as well as providing access
for the local community. It will not serve
the same function as the existing Jack
Noted and accepted.
(Same as CEC policy on
open space.)
Further discussions takin
with Culture & Leisure to
-
43
Kane centre. The needs of the local
community for sports pitches should be
fully taken into account when allocating
land for sport and recreation. The southwest corner of the existing playing fields is
allocated for housing development in the
Urban Design Framework, which will
reduce the number of pitches which can
be provided. The South East Local Plan
states that the inclusion of part of Hunters
Hall public park within the housing
allocation is conditional on its replacement
with in the retained Green Belt. The
existing pitch at Cairntows is also
proposed for redevelopment, although
there is a separate proposal to replace this
at Castlebrae. sportscotland strongly
advises that the need for formal sports is
fully taken into account when considering
the design of the replacement open space.
The findings of the Edinburgh Sports Pitch
Strategy should also be relevant.
revisions to the Framework.
Should the Jack Kane Centre be
redeveloped, there will be a need to
provide a replacement sports hall to serve
Craigmillar. The scope to incorporate a
swimming pool in any new facility should
also be considered. A sensible solution
would be to provide enhanced sports
facilities in the proposed new secondary
school to serve both school and
Noted.
Partly accepted.
Further consideration and
discussions with Culture & Leisure
and PARC taking place.
44
community use. The Urban Design
Framework should allocate sufficient site
area for the new school to accommodate
such facilities. The nature and scale of
new sports facilities should be influenced
by the level of population increase which
will result from the new housing
development.
16
Midlothian
Council
15/4/05
South East Wedge
sportscotland supports the concept of
creating a linked network of attractive
green spaces which will encourage higher
levels of physical activity in the form of
walking, cycling and informal play.
Welcomed.
General - scope and content for areas in
South East Wedge in line with SEW
Masterplan. Detailed proposals for the
Wedge element of design framework
should feed into the final document. This
would be consistent with other sections of
the Masterplan.
Noted.
This could be considered if
timescales permit.
Document will have to reflect post inquiry
SEELP Mods. High density development
at 80 dpha may conflict with objectives for
quality environment/quality and amount of
public space in urban areas. High ratio of
houses to flats may restrict socioeconomic mix and stability of regenerated
community.
Accepted.
Already agreed that text will be
adjusted to take account of the
Modified Plan.
45
Drainage
Drainage - concern that foul drainage not
mentioned despite known issues with
capacity of Eastern Interceptor Sewer and
Seafield treatment works.
Noted.
PARC giving further consider:
to these constraints. Framewc
to be adjusted accordingly.
Housing
House numbers - not clear what will be
built in each zonelsector. Need to relate
numbers to local plan sites and indicate on
indicative layouts.
Accepted.
Framework to be adjusted to
include more on the
implementation.
Densities
Densities - Densities in Greendykes area
roughly 30 dwellings per hectare above
that suggested in SEW Masterplan. This
may increase the overall numbers for
HSGI above the 810 allocation in the local
plan or would reflect a more compact
development pattern due to ground
condition and landscape screening
constraints. Clarification needed on this.
Accepted.
Amend Framework once more
detail is known.
Retail
Retail - Would not want to see the amount
of local retail in Greendykes go beyond the
1 or 2 corner shop type operators as
suggested. Also would not want more
than local provision within the revamped
town centre area due to potential impact
on Shawfair town centre development
prospects.
Accepted.
Local centres may include othc
facilities such as community/
health. Unlikely to be a clustei
shops and likely to be 1 or 2 IC
corner shops.
Listed Buildings
Some of the buildings in the Framework
area which have statutory protection are
identified. In addition to those identified in
Accepted.
Framework to be amended.
~~
Historic
Scotland
14/5/04
46
Figure 2.2, Historic Scotland suggests that
in the interests of clarity the following
should also be detailed:
A and B -listed Buildings at Thistle
Foundation: A-listed Robin Chapel and
B-listed - 11 & 14-18 Queen’s Walk 1 19 Chapel Court, 1-23 West Court
Scheduled Ancient Monument and Blisted: Wauchope Tomb near Niddrie
House Drive
Scheduled Ancient Monument:
Craigmillar Castle
Inventory of gardens and Design
Landscapes: Craigmillar Castle
Non-statutory C-listed: Burial Ground,
Greendykes Road
Non-statutory C-listed: Ice house,
Hunter’s Hall Public Park
The Framework document should discuss
in some detail the positive contribution
these features make to the area, and the
importance of their setting. It should
actively encourage their retention and
integration into any proposals for the area,
in line with local and national policy. For
instance, Historic Scotland is aware,
through informal discussions, that is hoped
to conserve and find a new use for the
White House, however, no mention of this
is made in the Framework document.
Accepted.
Framework text to be amended.
47
The prominent location of the Craigmillar
area means that any proposals for the site
should take careful account of important
views across the city. The significance of
this wider context could perhaps be
discussed in greater in detail, in order to
ensure any views and vistas are not
compromised.
~
Mr & Mrs
Duffield
~~~
Received
12/4/05
Accepted.
Reflected in draft Framework but
more text to be added on context
and views.
Partly accepted.
We note the proposal to extend the built
up area to the South onto what is currently The principle of development in
Green Belt in this area is already
farmland. Historic Scotland has
agreed
in SEELP. Area
commented in the past on such proposals
and would advise that, as an erosion of the immediately adjacent to
rural character of this area, this will have a Craigmillar Castle will not see
housing development. But the
detrimental impact on the setting of
Craigmillar Castle. NPPG5 states that
principle of protecting the setting
“Development which would have an
of the Castle should be
adverse impact on scheduled monuments highlighted.
or the integrity of their setting should not
be permitted unless there are exceptional
circumstances”. We would therefore
recommend that this element of the
proposals should be abandoned.
Housing
Strong objection to the building of 3000
houses in Niddrie and Craigmillar. We
have enough problems with traffic and
vandalism without adding to it.
Noted.
Not accepted.
The principle of housing on this
scale has already been agreed in
the Local Plan and in the setting
up of PARC.
48
Wildlife
Craigmillar
Castle
15/4/05
We have a wealth of wildlife in the area
and to destroy this would be a sin.
I Noted.
Policies are in place to prevent
this.
The principle of housing on this
scale has already been agreed in
the Local Plan and in the setting
up of PARC.
Generallhousing
Go build somewhere else.
Cairntows Park
Serious concerns have been raised at
recent meetings of the Craigmillar Castle
Regeneration Group (CCRG) regarding
the proposals within the Craigmillar Urban
Design Framework to build on Cairntows
Park. This park is a well used and very
popular local amenity, and residents are
worried that as the Park has few direct
‘neighbours’, the local community will not
get an opportunity to raise their concerns
when a detailed planning application is
lodged.
Noted.
Such a proposal will be contrary to
the Development Plan and any
planning application for this
proposal will be advertised and
available for viewing on the
Planning Portal
(www.edinburgh.gov.uk) and at
CEC offices. Comments can be
made once the planning
application has been registered.
This is a particular concern of the CCRG,
but we have also contributed to the
detailed response submitted by the
Community Regeneration Forum, and
would like this letter to support that
response.
Noted.
The Niddrie Marischal Neighbourhood
Association (NMNA) has made a
contribution to the response produced by
the Community Regeneration Forum
Noted.
~
20
Niddrie
Marischal
Neighbourhood
14/4/05
Response - see CRF
49
(CRF).
Association
Noted.
This issue will be reassessed ir
relation to open space needs
generally within Craigmillar and
the Framework adjusted
accordingly.
Library - existing
CraigmiIlar Library
site
One issue we feel so strongly about we
have decided to make a separate
response. Part of the plan of the Joint
Venture Company (JVC) is to build a new
library in the Craigmillar area to replace
the one currently situated off Niddrie
Marischal Gardens. This would ultimately
free land occupied by the present library.
There is very little spare land in the Niddrie
Marischal area, and a distinct lack of
facilities for all but the very youngest
children. The library plot should be left
free so that a play area for older children
(7 - 15 yr olds) can be put on this site.
The final draft of the Urban Design
Framework has this site designated as
housing.
Community Facilities
(for older children)
The NMNA has been involved in producing Noted.
a Neighbourhood Agreement on Antisocial Further detailed input would be
Behaviour with the Council and other local welcome.
landlords. This Agreement deals mainly
with the symptoms of such behaviour and
can do little to tackle the causes. One of
the main causes is older children with little
or nothing to occupy their minds, and
hands. The Association, in recognition of
this, is very keen to find a way to provide
some facilities for these older children and
improve the quality of life for all in the
50
~
neighbourhood.
CraigmiIlar
Regeneration
Forum (CRF)
Received
15/4/05
Introduction
The Community Regeneration Forum is an
umbrella group of 10 neighbourhood
associations in the greater Craigmillar
area. A group of 22 residents volunteered
to critique this document on behalf of the
Community Regeneration Forum. This
group were divided in to three groups,
each meeting on 3 occasions for up to 3
hours per meeting where the CUDF was
evaluated on a page-by-page basis. A
further joint meeting was held of the three
groups to agree a report to the CRF.
Noted and welcomed.
Representative from Planning
attended meeting in support of
this.
Summary
(Housing - mixed
tenure & affordable)
The Community Regeneration Forum
welcomes the regeneration of Craigmillar
and is generally supportive of many
strands in the Framework. In particular we
think the mixed tenure approach to
housing is essential to create a mixed and
sustainable community. The proposals for
‘affordable’ housing do not guarantee that
this will remain affordable as the
programme progresses, e.g. market forces
may push prices up faster than anticipated
and result in houses for sale in Craigmillar
not being any more affordable than the
rest of Edinburgh. We would like to see
opportunities for other models to deliver
affordable housing e.g. more houses for
rent or possible shared ownership
Welcomed.
Framework should be adjusted to
provide greater clarity on
affordable housing but needs to
focus on planning aspects. More
detailed suggestions passed to
Housing Department.
51
schemes.
Schools
The proposals for new schools are
welcome, although this appears to take up
a large proportion of the budget. Would
like to see more financial input from the
Education department of the Council.
Welcomed.
It is understood that the CJVC, no
the PARC regeneration company,
is responsible for funding the
school. Not a planning matter.
Framework progress
& consultation
The CRF recognises that this is not a
detailed planning application and that each
phase will be consulted as the framework
progresses. It is essential that this
consultation is carried out in a meaningful
way, with discussion with neighbourhood
groups at the heart of the process. In
particular the proposal regarding
Cairntows Park should have extensive
consultation beyond neighbour notification.
Noted.
Comments passed to PARC for
further consideration. Any
proposal for development at
Cairntows Park will be subject of a
planning application which will be
advertised (contrary to
Development Plan).
Implementation
Care should be taken to ensure a coordinated approach to develop and install
infrastructure e.g. telephone poles
removed sooner rather than later so that
any requirements for underground cables
can all be laid at one time. Concern was
also expressed about ensuring that the
use of existing infrastructure will meet the
future demands put upon it.
Noted.
Ongoing discussion with PARC re
infrastructure. Comments passed
to PARC to consider further.
The CRF welcome plans for the
community parkland and arboretum, but
there are concerns that these will precede
Noted.
Timing issue, but it is likely that
housing will commence first. From
~
~~
I
Open space - park &
arboretum
52
Movementnraffic
housing development. This would be seen
as sending a negative message to the
existing community on where the priorities
lie. It is also essential that no plans are
progressed on this without proper
consideration as to how they will be
maintained to a standard that will keep
them as safe, secure and free from
vandalism as possible.
a planning perspective it is
important that open space and
landscaping progress at the san
time as housing.
Although there are some plans to improve
traffic and movement for Craigmillar, there
are doubts about whether full
consideration has been given to the impact
that will be made on the extended
development of Fort Kinnaird, Queen
Margaret College being sited just beyond
Newcraighall, the development of 5000
houses in the South East Wedge
(Shawfair) and a doubling of the
Craigmillar population (potentially at least
double the cars). This could be further
exacerbated if the park and ride facility at
Newcraighall is not sufficient for future
demand. It is recognised that a by-pass is
not currently being considered, but results
of any traffic impact assessment should be
shown to have considered all of the above
before coming to a conclusion.
Agreed.
These matters are relevant
Planning guidance for related
sites. Further consideration to b
given to cross-references to that
guidance and other text revision
As part of this regeneration programme, a
‘community chest’ should be established to
Innovative suggestion.
Noted and ideas passed to PAR
___
Community Facilities
53
help pay for community benefit e.g.
revenue costs for community facilities,
developing future schemes etc for the
advantage of Craigmillar. This should be
well thought out to ensure that it is
sustainable and at least partially
implemented as plans progress, to allow
maximum opportunity for the community to
take ownership of developments.
for further consideration. Views of
Department of Culture & Leisure
also being sought.
This is not clear in some of the diagrams
and assurances are needed that this
action will not result in flooding in the
future. It was also noted that this work
would probably go ahead anyway
(irrespective of a UDF for Craigmillar) and
there were concerns that this project may
hold up the progress of other work e.g. the
PSV road to the ERI. If this work is seen
as part of a bigger strategy then funding
should not be required from the JVC
business plan.
Partly accepted.
All development in Craigmillar
cannot, under national planning
policy guidance, contribute to
flooding. The brief for Niddrie
Burn Project ensures that account
will be taken of flood risk. The
Burn and public transport link to be
designed compatibly. Text needs
to make this clear.
The replacement for this facility seems to
be in the middle of nowhere. It must be
located in an area that people can access
informally and should not have to be
booked prior to use. There are concerns
that a like for like replacement is not what
is being offered (currently Cairntows Park
attracts a lot of informal use and is well
overlooked giving a sense of safety). The
Noted.
Any replacement should be
subject of community consultation.
Text to be adjusted to make this
clear and comments passed to
PARC for action as and when
appropriate.
54
proposed facility will not be well
overlooked and is likely to need revenue
funding therefore making it unlikely that it
will able to be used informally and at no
cost to the community.
Noted.
Building height not necessarily 4
storey maximum. Framework
suggests these should be nonhousing uses.
Landmark Fe;
What will these be used for? They should
not be any higher than 4 storeys and
should have a purpose. There is no
recognition of existing ‘landmark buildings’.
A review of all existing and proposed
landmark buildings should take place and
some clarity is needed for the rationale of
how a ‘landmark’ building is required and
decided upon.
Town Centre:
This would be better if it were given a
Accepted.
name as the town centre is generally taken Text to be adjusted to refer to
to mean Princes Street.
“Craigmillar Centre” or similar.
The proposed car parking for the town
centre is mostly within the car park for the
Supermarket and this is also used to meet
the needs of the schools. We need to
know how many car parking spaces there
are and the estimated need for each of
these elements. The proposal needs
clarity on how many public parking spaces
are free for general use and how many are
allocated.
Noted.
Proposal will have to comply wit1
current parking requirements of
the Council. Details will only be
provided at planning application
stage.
Other questions do not appear to be
Noted.
55
answered within the document e.g. will the
existing shops be upgraded and when will
this work be carried out? Why is there no
provision for public toilets in the town
centre? Can the Hearts Club be
accommodated in the town centre? It was
agreed that existing businesses should be
encouraged to stay and be developed as
progress on the Town Centre is made.
Further discussions taking place
with PARC and Framework will be
updated with as full information a5
possible.
Existing Planning
Applications/
Proposals (out-with
the JVC):
These do not seem to be taken in account,
e.g. Historic Scotland have proposals for a
car park for 100 cars in Craigmillar Jubilee
Park, and the ex Craigmillar Primary
School development of a 'social' enterprise
centre & arts centre. There is also a
proposed Care Home on the ex
.Greendykes Primary school site. In
addition there is a development of over
240 flats for sale on the ex Brewery site
and a substantial development of flats and
houses for sale by Castlerock/Lothian
Homes on the ex Peffermill Primary School
site. The Thistle Foundation is also
undergoing major regeneration that
includes a significant number of new build
flats. There is also a major change in road
layout intended as part of the Kinnaird
Park extension.
Accepted.
It is not always appropriate to
include details of all recently
approved applications but
Framework will be updated to
make reference to most of these
proposals.
Local Centres:
There is no clarity on how these will be
made up and what purpose they have. Is it
Accepted.
Likely to be 1 or 2 corner shops
56
Office Development:
just one shop or several shops or a shop
and a small community centre? What
needs do they meet and are all the needs
being properly addressed?
and some community facilities.
Additional text to be included.
The CRF feel that an additional ‘local
centre’ is needed in Niddrie Mains to serve
the neighbourhood, enterprise centre and
primary schools.
Noted.
Framework already makes
sufficient provision for local shops.
There is a long-standing desire, which has
been expressed by local neighbourhood
groups for some years, to develop
buildings for community use within each
local neighbourhood. To build a
successful, sustainable community, new
community members need somewhere
local to meet the existing community. It is
crucial that new local centres are
developed at the same time as the
housing and where possible existing
centres are upgraded.
Noted.
Framework makes provision for
these, but as yet there are no firm
proposals.
It is not clear whether there is a proposal
for one office development or several
smaller office developments. Will it include
enough car parking spaces or will it require
using the central supermarketkchook car
park? The CRF generally welcome the
concept of a new office development but
would like to see a sound justification for
the need to use the Cairntows Park
Noted.
One office block proposed - only
on Cairntows Park if no other town
centre site available. More detail
as appropriate will be added. See
comments as above, on Cairntows
Park.
57
proposal.
Sustainability:
Maps:
The CUDF does not go far enough. Therc
is more to sustainability than SUDS -we
would like to see proposals for the use of
sustainable building materials and ensure
that good quality soundproofing and
insulation is used throughout the
development. Provision of recycling bank
in every area and innovative ways of
encouraging their use e.g. some
underground, a variety of types (glass,
fabric, metals etc.).
Accepted.
There is existing CEC
supplementary planning guidar
which covers much of these iss
and all developers should cons
them. Cross reference to be
included.
There is also an absence of drying space:
especially for flats, which will therefore
require the use of tumble dryers. As this i
not energy efficient, gardens etc should bc
big enough for this kind of use.
Noted.
Accepted.
Appropriate text to be added.
There is a need for larger family homes to
allow for a natural progression for families
to grow without moving out of the area,
and to sustain the schools, the proposal
for at least 213 of the homes to be flats
does not meet this need.
Accepted.
Framework is flexible and coulc
accommodate more family
housing. Target figure to be
added.
Several of the maps used are inaccurate
e.g. neighbourhoods are not sufficiently
defined e.g. Niddrie Mill does not include
The Hays; Niddrie Marischal does not
include Niddrie House and Peffermill is
Accepted.
Framework to be amended.
58
actually the Peffers.
Movement:
What are the long-term plans for
Craigmillar Castle Road? Proposals for
Niddrie Mains Road do not show what
impact the increase in population i.e.
double over the next 15years will have. It
does not take in to account the proposals
to increase Fort Kinnaird, Queen Margaret
College moving to the other side of
Newcraighall, the Shawfair development in
the South East Wedge and the Public
Service Vehicle (PSV) road being opened
up to the RIE. When is work on this road
going to start? Do we know what the
projected traffic flows in and out of
Greendykes will be once the development
has been completed? Is there a danger
of rat runs developing e.g. to avoid the
junction at Niddrie Mains Road and
Greendykes Road.
Noted.
Concerns raised with Transport.
Text to be added about
requirements for transport
improvements which will be linked
to planning applications.
Third tramline -what contingency plans
are in place? When will a decision be
made on whether or not land should be
reserved for a tramline? Is there any other
contingency e.g. guided bus lanes in place
of the tramline? What impact does the
immediate loss of the tramline have on the
UDF? If the tramline is to go ahead in the
future, the necessary infrastructure
needed should be in place as soon as
Land is already safeguarded for
Tram Line 3. Bus lanes proposed
for Niddrie Mains Road. There is
no proposal to ‘lose’ this Tramline.
Other matters noted but too
detailed at this stage.
59
possible to minimise future disruption for
residents. There are concerns that the
PSV road/ tramline/SSR could result in
some neighbourhoods e.g. Greendykes
becoming a very big car park i.e. residents
could lose parking to commuters. Are
there any plans to have the area
policed/traffic wardens?
South Suburban Railway (SSR) opening to
passengers - this should be encouraged
and would assist in alleviating some of the
expected congestion, but car parks would
have to be built now, so as to avoid
residents ‘losing’ car parking space to
commuters.
~~
Welcomed.
Premature to build station car
parks just now as exact station
locations not confirmed yet. But
points being discussed with
Transport.
~
There does not appear to be enough
Accepted.
priority given to cycle ways. Is it possible to Framework to be amended.
show on a larger scale diagram where the
cycle ways linkages are?
Is it possible to show a diagram large
enough to show the priorities etc on
roads? This should also show whether or
not traffic could enter home zones from a
boulevard, which would reduce the safety
of home zones. Crossings for all roads
should be shown in more detail e.g. the
width/ frequency/design along a road.
Noted but not accepted.
Detailed elements of design not
appropriate for Framework.
~~
The proposals for a new road layout along
Noted.
60
Newcraighall Rd and at the Wisp should
be shown in the UDF.
Further consideration will be given
to these in relevant part of
Framework.
It would be good to consider bus/tram/train Not a matter for the Framework.
Already an aspiration of Tram
tickets that are interchangeable/
proposals.
transferable.
Communities
Neighbourhoods &
Housing:
I
The City of Edinburgh Council has already
identified the need for 10,000 affordable
homes over the next ten years and intends
to demolish and replace a further 4,000.
Craigmillar could meet a sizeable
proportion of that need, but the CRF are
concerned that there is still a greater need
for sociaVaffordable housing within the
area than is expressed within the CUDF.
The CUDF does not take in to account
plans for housing for sale already identified
in other planning applications, making the
final split of social housing/housing for sale
even greater, probably more in the region
of 14.5%:85.5%.
Noted.
Accepted that Framework is not
clear about Affordable Housing.
Text to be adjusted to set planning
position out clearly and say less
about Housing issues.
A general concern is that the ratios of
houses: flats do not meet the aspirations
of the existing community i.e. the
Greendykes and Niddrie Mains
communities have already been in
negotiations for some time and their
understanding is that more houses than
flats will be built for social rent.
Noted.
Framework is too prescriptive on
this. Text to be adjusted
accordingly.
61
There is also anxiety that the number of
social houses being built will not allow for
a natural extension of the community who
live in social housing i.e. children leaving
home to set up their own homes and being
able to choose to live in social housing
within the Craigmillar area where there is
family support.
Noted.
Amount of social housing not a
planning matter. Comments
passed to Housing to consider.
There is also a fear that social houses will
be lost as part of the right-to-buy
programme, which is retained by existing
tenants.
Not a planning matter.
Housing responsibility and
comments passed to Housing
Department.
It would be useful if the UDF showed what
the density of an existing area is e.g.
Niddrie Marischal so that people have a
better opportunity of understanding what
the figures mean.
Accepted.
Text to be adjusted to include
figure.
~~
There is real concern about thenumber of Framework is flexible and will
4 storey blocks that are proposed and a
permit variation over time to reflect
feeling that more of a mix of lower rise
demand. Issues relating to RTR
housing would give greater confidence that and overcrowding are a Housing
this proposal could work (past experience
responsibility and these comments
of tenements in Craigmillar is that they
passed to Housing Department.
haven’t worked). Detailed comments
about the right-to-return (RTR). There are
already some families living in
overcrowded conditions under other social
landlords that have no prospect of moving
62
because their landlords do not have
suitable houses to offer them.
Community Facilities
Community facilities should be grouped
according to usehsers to aid identifying
gaps in provision. There is a strong feeling
that schools are not necessarily
community facilities that are available to
the community without expensive costs
being incurred and/or at times that suit. All
‘community assets’ should be reviewed
and appraised as to their suitability in
terms of accessibility, both physical and
denominational (non religious).
The role of the Framework is tc
out physical development in a
ordinated way. It will identify si
for the buildings, but there are I
proposals at present. These
comments passed to PARC for
action.
The Niddrie Marischal Neighbourhood
Association has identified the existing
library site as a potential site for
developing a youth facility e.g. a kickabout area once the current library has
relocated. Currently facilities for children
and youths in the area are confined to a
couple of play-parks suitable for children
up to 8 yeas old. The CUDF has reserved
this area for 4 storey blocks of flats. It is
felt that re-allocation of this land would
meet an identified need in the area
Already addressed above.
To be considered as part of the
open space needs work.
There are several anomalies in figure 6.3
e.g. there are two no.5’~. Several existing
facilities are not listed e.g. the proposed
new Niddrie Mission and existing shops in
Accepted.
Framework to be amended
accordingly.
63
~
Niddrie Marischal, Niddrie House and
Niddrie Mill. The proposed Care Home on
the ex Greendykes Primary School site as
well as community space planned for
Hunters Hall Housing Co-op are also
omitted.
House height &
diagrams
It is essential that community facilities
should be built in conjunction with the
housing developments and consideration
should be given to the need to develop the
sense of ownership required to make them
successful. Each neighbourhood has its
own requirements and it is essential that
these should be identified through
consultation with the communities
involved, and care taken to ensure that
these are delivered.
Noted and agreed.
Comments passed to PARC for
considerat ion.
A central, modern and dedicated purposebuilt Community Centre is required and it
should not be seen as acceptable to ‘bolton’ community use to other facilities.
Noted.
It is understood this would be par
of the function of the Community
High School.
The keys in some of the diagrams are
Noted.
ambiguous - 2/3 storey and 3/4 storey These diagrams although
this is ambiguous, and could result in more indicative could be considered
4 storey than would be acceptable. A
either too prescriptive or
definite height should be specified for each misleading. This aspect of the
block, and it would be good if numbers of
Framework should be simplified.
units for each block/phase of development
could be shown etc.
64
__
Parking
It is not clear how the parking regime
would work to ensure that every home has
at least one parking space. Also what
arrangements are there for visitor parking?
Clearly unless the allocated car parking
space for each unit is within the garden
there could be a tension if families have
more than one car and/or visitors use an
allocated parking space. How would
resident only parking be policed? Are there
plans for contingency e.g. could the
communal spaces at the rear of blocks be
used?
Noted.
Proposed parking is in line with
current Council requirements.
Home Zones
Home zones are a good idea and there
should be more of them throughout including the possibility of introducing them
in some of the existing areas.
Noted.
Communal Space
Communal space should be designed in a
variety of shapes and sizes and parks
should have a purpose that is clear so that
people know what the park will/can be
used for.
Suggestion welcomed. More
thought is being given to this.
Gardens
Consideration should be given to offering
alternative ‘gardens’ i.e. paved areas for
those people who have no wish for a
garden but may still require a ground floor
flat or a house.
Noted.
This is a matter for detailed desic
stage.
65
The Morrison
Partnership
(Edinburgh
Office)
19/4/05
Greendykes Multis
The result of the feasibility study for the
high-rise blocks in Greendykes is not yet
known and, if the decision is to demolish
them, there is a possibility that additional
housing will be needed to accommodate
residents.
Housing responsibility.
Framework should be sufficiently
flexible to be able to deal with thi:
issue should it emerge.
Show People Site
There is no provision for the relocation of
the Show Peoples site currently owned by
the Taylor family despite it being shown as
retail/housing as part of the Town Centre.
Noted.
Discussions are ongoing. If any
conclusion, this will be
incorporated into the Framework.
Relocation of
Families
There are currently 26 families that need
to be relocated within Craigmillar. These
families are seen as part of the Craigmillar
community and their needs must be
addressed
This is a Housing matter not a
planning matter.
Overview Population
Numbers of residents is obviously a key
factor in the sustainability of local and
community services. There has been a
very substantial reduction in the local
population over recent years. From
conversations with local businesses that
reduction in population has had a
desperate impact on the viability of their
business. There will need to be a
substantial increase in the population if the
terminal decline in local business is to be
avoided. Beyond that I suggest that local
serviceslbusinesses should be
concentrated in one area to reinforce that
Noted and accepted.
The current version of the
Framework already addresses
this. Hence strengthening of tow1
centre and business concentratio
in Peffer Place.
66
enterprise dimension but focusing
customers into one area where they can
find a diversity of services and choice.
Overview Interaction
Overview Environmental
Improvements
This area is no more isolated or remote
from the City than many other areas.
Many of those areas having been derived
from earlier villages which were
subsequently absorbed into the City still
retain a sense of self-identity. Craigmillar
should be no different.
Noted.
In speaking with many locals there is a
very clear sense of local identity. If there
is any sense of isolation it is more likely to
be within the wider City and possibly be
derived from the perception or reputation
of Craigmillar. That being the case
challenge is to change the perception of
the area within the wider City.
Noted.
This is one of the aims of PARC in
the regeneration of Craigmillar.
There is already a strong sense of
community and a strong sense of place.
Many attempts over the years to improve
the environment have failed due to lack of
care by individuals and/or vandalism. Until
such time as there is an overwhelming
dominant sense of care for the green
spaces then added provision could be
counter productive in a variety of ways.
Noted.
Framework should be adjusted to
address maintenance and
management of open space.
Discussions ongoing on this issue.
From our knowledae of other areas we
Noted.
67
have seen how over-provision of green
space can result in those spaces
dominating the residential spaces, large
groupings of youths (well intentioned or
otherwise) take over the open spaces and
potentially give rise to control or
intimidation within the area. It is important
that the dominant elements at all times are
the residential areas and that they are
arranged in small groupings that make self
policing inevitable and effective.
Comments passed to PARC for
further considerat ion.
The suggestion is that redevelopment sites Noted.
The Framework seeks to address
should include open spaces plus roads,
this.
footpaths and cycle ways to connect with
existing networks.
As stated above self policing of areas is
imperative if residents are to have any
chance of creating and maintaining a
sense of identity, community and
lawfulness. Development must therefore
be designed in a way that helps achieve
those goals. Make reference to the design
parameters set out in "Secured by Design"
standards applied by the Police.
Accepted.
More text to be added to
Framework about Secured By
Design and safety.
Large open spaces and a proliferation of
through routes can cause problems.
Layouts where housing dominates and
controls are more successful therefore
avoid large open spaces and
Noted.
Home Zones do not need to be
through routes. Strategic links,
e.g. footpaths and cycle ways are
important connections to the city/
68
other part of city/ neighbouring
area.
interconnecting routes.
~
We have heard residents express
unhappiness about having been movec
from now demolished flats into terrace
houses. The impression given was tha
they still wish to live in an upper floor fl;
for greater security and personal safety
within the home.
Noted.
It is clear having inspected many housc
in the area that personal safety is an is:
Noted.
More text to be added about s a
issues in Framework.
A high population figure is important on
sustainable, economic and social grour
It is also important in helping to instil a
greater sense of self-policing which in t
helps to improve and generally help
perception of the area.
Welcomed and noted.
The existing linear arrangement of this
road is alien to what appears to be the
future philosophy of development groul
and presumably micro communities.
Surely a more meandering line for this
road would help to reduce traffic speed
and create different points of focus alor
its route allowing the residents to beco
dominant.
Eastern part of Greendykes Roi
is to be a major public transport
route - linking into the new link
RIE and in future for Tram.
Therefore, width and straight
a1ignment required.
I
69
1 -
Framework
Proposals to create yet another shopping
centre in the area will serve only to dilute
the market and compromise both the
existing and future commercial fabric of
the area. There has to be some inherent
and viable commercial framework for the
commercial sector to survive and grow.
Surely the best chance for survival is to
create a single commercial centre.
Anything less results in low grade,
unsustainable services offering little or no
choice.
Framework proposes to
strengthen the Town Centre which
has well used and good provision
of basic goods. Local centres
would be based on a corner shop.
Text to be adjusted to make this
clear.
To create a traffic bypass of Craigmillar
would exacerbate any sense, either within
Craigmillar community or outwith that
community, that is connected to and an
integral part of the City. Through traffic is
important in maintaining that sense of a
link and interaction with the wider city. It
may also help to create an added sense of
security along the arterial routes simly by
the fact that there are more people around
- many of whom have no connection with
or any involvement with daily events within
raigmillar. If the commercial area of
Craigmillar continues to be grouped
around the main arterial route through
Craigmillar there may be the secondary
benefit of passing trade.
Agreed.
I
Craigmillar local
I The suggestion is that many of the corner
Noted.
70
Centre - Local P
shops are closing due to redevelopmeni
Another suggestion is that they are closi
due to their being uneconomic - in part
because they cannot offer selection or
competitive pricing. As stated previousl>
the commercial centre needs to be
developed and enhanced to create
sufficient critical mass to encourage a
stronger attraction to customers. Only I:
increasing and maintaining that strong
customer base will the commercial centi
be successful and from that will follow
increased investment, diversity,
sustainability and employment.
See comments on previous page.
Framework
Any re-provision of open space must rethink the whole format of such a facility.
doing so it must be of a scale that is not
too large - better compact areas that loc
busy and vibrant. That perceived succe
attracts people and heightens security.
contrast large open spaces with the saw
number of people present will look
relatively deserted and therefore less
attractive. In addition open empty spacc
the dominant element and with it a
diminished sense of safetykecurity whic
results in fewer people using the space,
which in turn gives rise to unacceptable
gatherings which can result in antisocial
behaviour.
Noted and agreed.
Further work being undertake and
additional text to be added.
71
In Conclusion
From experience of the area, personal
safety both out of doors and while in the
house, is obviously a major issue. All
aspects of redevelopment within the area
must therefore see this as a primary
objective if there are to be improvements
in so many other areas of the community
and its wider public perception. Until those
goals are achieved then surely
regeneration and development of the area
as a natural self-fulfilling process will not
happen.
Welcomed.
See comments above. More text
to be added regarding security in
redevelopment.
23
Hunters Hall
Housing Co-op
Ltd
18/4/05
Housing
Noted.
Petition of 110 signatures of
TenantdMembers of Hunters Hall Housing This is a detailed proposal in the
Co-op strongly objecting to the proposal to Framework. To be reassessed in
build new houses in the park to the South
the light of these comments and
wider open space needs.
of Niddrie House Avenue. “We value the
open space and the view and we use the
park frequently for e.g. dog-walking,
playing football, our Gala Day.”
24
Rt Hon Gavin
Strang MP
14/4/05
Housing
Concerned about the density levels being
proposed, the high percentage of flats
compared to low-rise traditional housing,
and also the imbalance in favour of private
houses for sale over rented
accommodation. The minimum house
prices proposed at €85,000 may be
affordable at Edinburgh prices, but
certainly not for local Craigmillar people,
where 64% of the population live in
-
Noted.
However the regeneration model
adopted for Craigmillar requires
reliance on private house sales.
Framework to be refocused on
planning and design matters.
72
25
Edinburgh
Sustainable
Development
PartnershiD
29/4/05
Parklands
Strongly opposed to the proposals for
commercial office development on
Cairntows Park, and housing
developments on Huntershall Park near
the Jack Kane centre. Over the last few
years, there has been a gradual erosion of
publicly accessible open space in the
Craigmillar area in favour of house building
and I believe that it is now time to reverse
this trend.
Noted.
Cairntows Park would only be
proposed for office development if
no other town centre location
available. There will be an
opportunity to object to proposals
at planning application stage.
Proposals for development at
Hunters Hall Park are however set
out in Local Plan and must be
reflect in the Framework.
Community Facilities
The Framework document is very vague
on what actual community facilities will be
provided as part of the overall plan, for
example, no youth facilities or centres for
the elderly seem to be included. I propose
that a proper range of community facilities,
should be included in the plan, fully costed
and funded. Surely we do not want to
repeat the mistakes of the past in building
thousands of houses and precious little
community facilities.
UDF offers suggestions as to
where community facilities could
be located. As a planning
document it cannot make
suggestions for such facilities in
the absence of proposals.
Council Policies
The ESDP would ask you to bear in mind
the Council’s commitment to developing a
sustainable city as detailed in “Edinburgh’s
City vision: Building A Better Edinburgh”
Noted.
These strategic principles are
implicit within current document
but additional text to be included.
73
and Sustainable Design Guide Handbook.
This vision is as follows:
By 2015 Edinburgh will:
Lead the most successful and
sustainable city region in Northern
Europe
0
Sustain the highest quality of life of any
UK city competing with the best in the
world
0
Keep and attract the people needed to
drive it’s talent and knowledge
economy and provide every citizen
with the best personal opportunities for
work, education and development
0
Be a safe and tolerant, creative and
connected city, promoting the
wellbeing of both people and place.
(ESDP)
Consultation
With regards to this specific proposal we
are pleased to note the efforts which have
been made in involving the local
community and wider range of
stakeholders in the development process
to date. We are particularly appreciative of
the people-first “pedestrian” focus of the
proposals and would be interested in your
plans to maintain and build upon this as
the development process evolves.
Welcomed.
Council Policies recommendations of
the Sustainable
How do you plan to utilise and incorporate
the recommendations of the recently
launched
~.Sustainable
- Design Guide
Noted.
Consideration to be given to
incorporat-appropriate
-
~
~
~
I
74
Design Guide
16/5/05
Landscape structurallwoodlands
(Hedgerows)
published by the Council.
1
additional text.
The Council has been making great efforts
to ensure that the new Council HQ building
is developed in as sustainable a manner
as possible and we would be keen to see
this replicated in wider developments
across the city. The scale of this
development is such that it could exert
significant positive influence on a wide
range of supply chains involved to
encourage increased sustainability of
design, manufacture, supply, etc.
Noted.
As a Council development greater
control could be exercised over
this. Comments to be passed to
PARC for further consideration.
Concern that hedgerows all appear to be
for the chop in the UDF. Although it’s
something that I raised at previous Urban
Design meetings with everyone, including
the landscape architects and CEC
planners, I got the impression they didn’t
take my comments seriously.
There is a network of hedges, particularly
in the Greendykes area of Craigmillar, [i.e.
Greendykes Road - from Castlebrae
School to the bottom of the hill, Thistle
hedgerow - along Greendykes Avenue,
the trees and shrubs along the Niddrie
Burn (just before it gets to the built-up
area), and the hedges between the high
rise flats and the Jack Kane park. They’re
all quite mature and mostly made up of
native species (lots of Hawthorn, some
Noted.
Framework should be adjusted to
take account of historical
landscape issues.
75
Elder and Wych Elm, with numerous
species of ground flora). The amount of
birdlife these hedgerows support is really
significant .
At least one of the hedgerows has local
historical value - the rather tatty
Greendykes Road hedgerow was once
known as the Skinny Woods, where kids
used to play. Admittedly, these days it‘s
more likely to be used as a dumping
ground - but this is an issue of
maintenance.
Landscape
All the pictures of the lovely ‘new’
Craigmillar have an abundance of mature
trees and plants, which we all associate
with nice, healthy places to live. In this
case, it would seem a crying shame to get
rid of the mature vegetation that’s there,
along with the wildlife that it supports,
especially as it seems to be increasingly
difficult to establish new plantings in the
new-build areas, due to vandalism.
Noted.
As above.
Landscape structL
There seems to be very little provision of
greenery filtering into the neighbourhood
(the emphasis currently being on the parks
at the periphery of the development). As
the whole urban design framework
appears to be founded upon the doctrine
of ‘New Urbanism’, this lack of greenery
also doesn’t reallv bear out the central
Noted.
As above.
76
tenet of the ‘urban-to-rural transect’.
Therefore, keeping the hedgerows and
doing them up would be a good way to
rectify this.
27
Rhona Cleland
12/4/05
Hedgerows
The distinct presence of Hawthorn hedges
along many borders between the built
environment and the current green belt
around Craigmillar/Newcraighall seems to
be one of the marked characteristics of the
area. Maintaining these would be a good
way of preserving the character and
pastoral feel of the area keeping a link with
the past use of the land.
Noted.
As above.
Consultation
Disappointed when the UDF meeting at
Bristo Church was cancelled. Unable to
make meeting on gthApril.
We feel we have not been given enough
opportunity to voice our views on what the
UDF have planned for Craigmillar and
urge you to address this situation.
Noted.
Cancellation of this meeting was
regrettable, but 4 other public
meetings were held.
Cairntows Park
I would like to raise my concerns about
Cairntows Park, I would hate to see it built
on, it would be a huge loss to our
community, we need more green areas not
less.
Noted.
Cairntows Park would only be
developed for office if no other
town centre site available. Any
planning application will be
advertised and there will be an
opportunity for further comment at
that stage. In any case,
replacement open space to meet
77
local needs would be required.
Craigmillar
Community
Council
May 05
Boundary
The Framework should redraw the
boundary to reflect the ward boundary
which will include Fort Kinnaird Retail Park
and the high proportion of existing private
housing to the East of Niddrie Mill
Crossroads.
Noted.
Reference to these adjacent areas
should be included in more detail,
but boundary of framework should
remain focused on Craigmillar.
Housing
The Framework should:
Ensure that at least 1/3 of new housing
be for rent
Schedule 100 new homes for rent per
year
Reduce the number of new flats built to
1/3 of total new homes
Include 20% of private homes as low
cost, locally affordable
Limit average density to not more than
60 houses per hectare
Explicitly address housing needs for
older people and those with disabilities
Discard the central concept of
‘Homezones’ and ‘Perimeter Blocks’ in
favour of traditional and locallyconsistent design.
Noted.
Framework should be amended to:
remove references to tenure
mix as this is not a planning
matter
remove references to ratio of
flats to houses as this is too
prescriptive
Include more detail on
planning aspects of affordable
housing
focus on design matters to be
addressed rather than density
figures.
Council policy is to promote
the Home Zone concept
(Movement and Development
p 35, para 7.81) and
reintroduce perimeter blocks
(Edinburgh Standards for
Urban Design, p 26 and 27)
Other matters are housing matters
not olannina issues.
78
Transport
Noted.
The Framework should:
Framework should be amended to:
Ensure that bus lanes and/or guided
say more about bus lanes/
bus ways be introduced along the
public
transport corridor along
length of Niddrie Mains Road, through
Niddrie
Mains Road (reference
to Newcraighall and the new Queen
already included)
Margaret University campus
make reference to the detailed
Prioritise traffic on Niddrie Main Road design issues to be addressed
and scrap the proposed junction at
at Greendykes Road/ Niddrie
Greendykes Road
Mains Road junction
Ensure integration with the planned
make
reference to link with
road improvements at Fort Kinnaird
Fort Kinnaird proposals
Instruct a traffic impact study to identify
South East Edinburgh
the potential for a bypass to the north
Transport Study did carry out
or south (or both) of Craigmillar.
initial work, but this was
terminated due to lack of
resources. In the absence of
this, the Framework will make
reference to the need for
proposals to address Transport
impacts.
Community Facilities
The Framework should:
0
Retain or suitably replace existing
facilities at the Jack Kane Centre
0
Include facilities for young people
0
Provide a new neighbourhood centre
for the Niddrie House and Greendykes
areas
Retain and refurbish the White House
Pub as an unlicensed community
facility
~
Noted.
Framework should be amended to:
0
make reference to proposals at
Jack Kane Centre (input to
come from Culture and Leisure
Department)
0
adjust text regarding the White
House to allow for a range of
possibilities.
Other comments requesting
79
0
Retain existing under-5’s provision and provision of specific community
facilities have been passed to
expand as the population rises
PARC for their consideration in tt
Ensure all proposed community
facilities are properly accommodated in Business Plan.
the business plan.
Town Centre
The Framework should:
Redevelop the town centre on its
existing site
Prioritise refurbishment of the existing
homes and businesses within the town
centre
Instruct a full consultation process with
regard to the siting of the new
Community High School.
Parks & Environment
The Framework should:
0
Explicitly protect existing parks and
green spaces -with no commercial or
housing developments on them
0
Give more attention to the creation of
green spaces within Craigmillar - as
opposed to outlying areas on the
periphery of residential areas.
Noted.
Town Centre should move to a
more central location, but further
consideration to be given to what
is achievable in practical terms.
Other comments are for PARC tc
consider further. Children &
Families Department has already
completed a consultation proces!
on school location.
Consultation of the principle of
moving the High School to town
centre location took place in 200:
and was favourable received. A
statutory consultation will need tc
take place by Children and
Families Department.
Partly accepted.
Agreed that more attention to be
given to open space needs for
existing and new communities ar
should be met.
Framework will be adjusted to tal
account of this. However, existin
open spaces may need to chang
as a result of that work. Until the
80
they are protected by Local Plan
Policy. And those open space
changes contained in the Local
Plan need to be implemented in
accordance with the provisions o
the Plan.
~~~
Tony Clapham
10/4/05
Noted and welcomed.
Redevelopment
Understands the necessity of
redevelopment. Applauds the breadth of
the Framework in identifying a wide range
of different topics of concern. Believes that
significant improvement can take place in
the community through the proposed
redevelopment process.
Looking forward to seeing: the improved
parkland and botanical gardens; the
improvements to the waterway running
through Craigmillar; the improvements to
housing quality; the new amenities,
businesses and social resources being
brought into the area.
Concerns Consultation
Disappointed at the low numbers of people Noted.
who attended the public meetings. Few
Consider these points in any futL
folk had the opportunity to read through
consultation exercises.
the consultation document. Presentation
of the meetings - a great assumption was
placed upon residents having an
awareness of the content of the framework
prior to the meetings, if there was to be
much expectation for them to be able to
engage with the consultation meaningfully..
81
For many, it was the first time they had
opportunity to see more of the detail of the
proposed redevelopment plans, and a 2hour discussive exercise is simply far too
short a time to possibly gain insight into
the breadth of the document’s purview
Density
Noted.
To propose a new average density of 80
Agreed that Framework too
homes per hectare without giving
consideration to the population density that prescriptive and detailed in tk
may result is extremely misleading and led regard. Framework to be
to ambiguity simply because the proposed amended.
population was not clarified: there is a vast
difference between a density of 160
people living in a hectare (2-person homes
versus 5-person homes), and the different
mix of social amenities required to sustain
these two extremes.
Lessons to be learned from the history of
Niddrie and Craigmillar. To pack families
together like sardines -whether in houses
or flats -without providing amenities and
resources for children, particularly Primary
4-7 year-olds, would be a great mistake.
This underlies concern at the proposed
housing densities. Look forward to seeing
detail in the final draft to show these
genuine and legitimate concerns are
unfounded and the fears behind them
groundless.
82
Housing
I understand the aim is for a final
community housing ratio of bought to
rented houses close to 50:50 once the
development is completed, and welcome
the economic and social stability that this
is designed to bring to the area. However,
given that Edinburgh’s market economies
are creating a significant affordability
problem, building a greater number of
houses for rent, maybe as many as 250
more than currently planned, would be
appropriate. Suggest partnership with the
proposed Edinburgh Housing Association
in providing this.
The economic argument used by PARC
for justifying the delay in building RSL
homes in favour of building a greater
proportion of private houses first is
artificial, as all the houses need to be
bought, whether by private home-owners
or by RSLs, and the finances would still be
raised either way. No compelling reason
why more RSL homes cannot be built
sooner.
Maybe 2 or 3 housing developments would
be taking place at any one time in different
parts of the Craigmillar community, and a
proportionate mix of right-to-return homes
could be built as part of those
developments. Ian said at a public
meeting that right-to-return homes could
be spread out throughout the community
Noted.
Comments already with Housing
Dept. Also passed to PARC for
consideration.
1 and be indistinguishable from any other
homes.
It must be possible to fulfil these criterion
whilst at the same time building more righl
to-return homes sooner than suggested in
the CUDF proposals. The first 5 years
could cause significant unrest and illfeeling Planners should consider revising
the development plan to provide a buildinc
schedule more favourable to providing
homes for right-to-return and decanted
families, as they already have links with
the area. Additionally, a number in
Greendykes are living in intolerable
conditions. Requiring them to wait as long
as 10 -12 years for a settled and goodquality home is unreasonable in the
circumstances.
Little attention given to the significant
transport problem. It seems certain that,
without a more coherent and radical
overall transport strategy to divert nonlocal traffic from using Niddrie Mains Roac
the proposals contained in the CUDF will
only serve to ensure almost perpetual
gridlock along Niddrie Mains Road.
While an overall transport strategy is muct
bigger than the purview of the CUDF, a
meaningful reference to a more widereaching transport strategy, and the way it
Noted. Framework to be amended
to address this point, making
reference to a commitment to
reducing congestion on Niddrie
Mains Road and ensuring that
individual applications address
fully the transport impacts.
84
plan, should be made in the CUDF.
Concern to local residents that Niddrie
Mains road is already completely saturated
and grid-locked at times due both to the
popularity of Fort Kinnaird Shopping
Centre and to commuter through-traffic
morning and evening, in spite of the fact
that car ownership in Craigmillar is
currently among the lowest in Edinburgh.
A significantly expanding Fort Kinnaird and
the intention to attract more homeowners
to live in the community will increase the
proportion of car ownership in the
community and to attract more cars from
outwith the area.
Noted. Commitment to tram Line
Improved public transport services will be
3 remains, but comments being
welcomed. In the absence of any
commitment to Tram Line 3, a commitment given further consideration.
to considering guided bus-ways as an
attainable and feasible alternative to a
tram-link would be useful, as the tram-link
corridor has already been set aside and
would be most effectively used as a
guided bus-way. This would remove the
need for dedicated bus lanes along Niddrie
Mains Road that, if implemented, would
only serve to aggravate the local transport
problem.
Flooding and 5
A co-ordinated approach to improving local Noted/Accepted. Agreed that
flood defences is welcomed. Concerned
chapter on SUDS requires some
85
Play Facilities
to see on Fig 9.2 (pl15) what appears to
be two drainage “holding ponds” to the
north of the picture adjacent to the heavy
rail freight line. More thought should be
given before this section on SUDS is
adopted.
additional work to address this i
other issues.
Niddrie Marischal currently has a poor lac
of provision of play facilities for older
children in the area. Little within CUDF to
suggest that children’s play facilities will
definitely be improved in the new
developments. Keen to see conditions
being placed on contracts awarded to
developers that would ensure that play
facilities would be provided for older
children (Primary 4-7) as well as for
toddlers and young children. Particular
attention should be placed on play faciltie:
being local to where children stay: parent:
would not welcome “centralised” facilities
that would require children travelling
unreasonable distances from their homes
in order to get to play facilties, and thi sis
the main problem concerning the play
facilities at the Jack Kane Centre.
Noted. Framework to be revise1
after further work completed on
open space needs. All planning
applications will have to comply
with current planning guideline (
“Open Space and Ancillary
Facilities in New Developments’
The CUDF has earmarked the existing
Craigmillar library site for housing
development. Given that CEC allowed
various developers to build in Niddrie
Marischal usina an uncoordinated
Noted. This issue should be
reassessed in relation to open
space needs generally within
Craigmillar and the framework
adjusted accordingly.
86
I
“piecemeal” approach in the past few
years, the result has seen lamentably few
play facilities being built for older children;
the resulting high boredom levels of
children has led to frequent instances of
juvenile anti-social behaviour and
vandaIism.
The library site, once the Library has been
relocated, would be the last remaining site
where a meaningful older children’s play
and kick-around area could be located in
the area. Serious consideration should be
given to seeing if such a facility could be
provided, instead of building more houses
here.
87