Protestors opposed to the cutting down of trees at Canonmills appear to be running rings around a confused City of Edinburgh Council.
Below we reproduce unedited and in full a reply to the protestors' letter of Monday 21 November. It is from David Anderson in City Development, and reads like a rather flat-footed reassertion of intent whilst facts are checked frantically in the background.
Then we reproduce, unedited and in full, a courteously eviscerating response by the protestors in which they point out a further serious discrepancy between Lagan's proposed works and the terms of their planning permission. They point out also that, had an intention to felling the trees been clear at the public consultation stage, greater public concern would surely have been voiced. And they go on to question whether – even if the currently proposed works can be carried out legally – there is any real need to cut down the trees to complete them.
We know from personal experience that Planning is a difficult subject into which amateurs should tip-toe at their peril, but the Canonmills protestors have clearly found one or more individuals with the necessary confidence and expertise to argue their case.
If the Planning permissions in this case are as woefully inadequate and misunderstood by contractors and officials as they appear to be, heads should roll at the Council before trees tumble at Canonmills.
--------------
Email to the protestors
Thank you for your email addressed to the Chief Executive. This has been passed to me for response.
The cutting down of 11 sycamore and willow trees on the east side of the Water of Leith between Canonmills and Tanfield has been suspended by the Council’s Head of Transport, pending confirmation that all necessary planning conditions have been conformed with by the contactor (Lagan Construction) and Flood Scheme Designer (Arup).
The Council has carried out a detailed environmental assessment for the Flood Scheme and arrangements are being supervised by responsible Environmental Clerks of Works employed by the contractor and the designer.
The removal of the trees in question is integral to the current Flood Scheme design.
Tree removal will be consistent with the extent of the engineering operations taking place. A detailed landscape plan for the location is currently being assessed which will include a replanting schedule. Replanting will involve extra-heavy standard trees (girth 18 - 20 centimetres). The trees proposed are alder and ash, native species suitable for the location.
If you require any further information, please contact John Wharrie on 0131 469 3474.
Dave Anderson
Director of City Development
Protestors' latest response
Dear Mr Anderson,
Thank you for your reply. It is appropriate that tree felling has been suspended pending confirmation that the necessary Planning Approval is in place.
My previous email noted that the Planning Approval for the work adjacent to Howard Street (Application No: 08/04025/FUL) did not appear to include approval for the removal of mature willows from the riverbank, and highlighted that other planning conditions did not appear to have been met.
A further apparent discrepancy has now emerged. Lagan’s Construction Manager, on site on 21 November, explained that the work included piling along the gable elevation of Howard Street yet the Planning Approval provides only for a platform under the windows for accessing flood shutters.
This further suggests that the work is being carried out without proper authorisation.
The work as now detailed by Lagan necessitates the removal of the trees for access, whilst the work specified in the Planning Approval does not. Had the full scope of the work and the removal of the mature willows been explicitly specified in the Planning Application then the outcome of the public consultation might have been rather different. The Approval mentions a petition of seven signatures, whereas the current petition now stands at nearly 1,100.
Your assertion that “the removal of the trees in question is integral to the current Flood Scheme design” is debatable. The design approved under the Water of Leith Public Enquiry Final Report (2004), which allowed the trees to be retained, differs from that granted Planning Approval only in that the existing wall is to be replaced rather than an additional wall built on the landward side of the existing wall. It is unclear how this makes tree felling unavoidable whereas previously it was possible to work whilst protecting the trees.
At nearby Warriston Crescent, our understanding is that the working rigs will sit within the adjacent gardens and a 1.5m platform will be laid on the river side of the existing wall to facilitate the works. As the Planning Approval does not allow for piling to the gable, the work as set out in the Approval could be carried out in the same manner. The substantial willows lie between two and four metres from the boundary wall, providing sufficient clearance for a 1.5m platform with just some removal of lower branches.
I would be interested to hear your views on this apparent disparity between the approved work and that which Lagan intend to carry out.
It is understood that lost trees are to be replanted in due course with native species, but in this instance the replacement with younger trees fails to compensate for what will be lost. These willows are an iconic feature of the local area, appreciated as much by the many visitors who pass on their way to the nearby Royal Botanic Gardens as by local residents. Stating that a detailed environmental assessment has been carried out for the Flood Scheme in general fails to address the specific issue of the loss of these mature, healthy trees at this particular location without full public consultation.
We continue to call for the removal of the trees to be halted completely. These trees are of critical importance and significant value to the townscape, streetscape and landscape of this Conservation Area on the edge of a World Heritage Site. It should be possible to carry out the flood prevention works without destroying these trees, as indeed the Public Enquiry found.
Yours sincerely,
Cc
Chief Executive of CEC, Sue Bruce
Convener of Planning, Jim Lowrie
Council Leader, Jenny Dawe
Head of Planning, John Bury