« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Application form
Please make sure you have read all the notes carefully before you start to fill in the application form. This application form can either be completed by hand or electronically - it is available on the Planning homepage at www.scotland.gov.uk/planning. Please complete all five sections. The deadline for submitting applications is 8 September 2006. An acknowledgement letter will be sent to the person who has completed this form.
1 Please provide a name and contact details of the lead organisation responsible for this work.
Name | Barbara Cummins |
Job title | Group Leader, Planning and Strategy |
Organisation | The City of Edinburgh Council |
Address | 1 Cockburn Street Edinburgh EH1 1BJ |
Telephone | (0131) 529 3442 |
Fax | (0131) 529 3717 |
Email | barbara.cummins@edinburgh.gov.uk |
2 If this is a joint application, please list the other partners who had a key role. You should also inform your partners that you are nominating the project for an award.
1 BL Developments | 2 Broadway Malyan |
3 CFS P'ship & MMCD Arch | 4 Cockburn Assoc |
5 Pilrig Assoc | 6 Macdonald Rd Comm Co |
3 Tick the category of nomination
Title of entry | Public consultation exercise for development site at Shrubhill, Edinburgh |
Please complete the form on the following pages by providing a brief summary of the piece of work you have entered. You must also conclude with a key reason as to why you think this work merits an Award. Only the two A4 pages supplied here can be used and your text must fit within the boxes. The font size should be no less than 12pt.
The judging criteria are set out below. Please tick only the key criteria relevant to your entry:
You must describe, in your written submission, how the criteria which you have ticked relate to your project.
Description of project
The planning process involved in dealing with the proposal to redevelop a former bus depot and office on a major and contentious site close to the city centre. |
Context - describe the background to the project
An application to redevelop the same site had been the subject of a previous controversial application which had been the subject of much local interest and was subsequently determined at public inquiry. Subsequent to the public inquiry, a brief for the site prepared by the Planning Authority, was prepared to secure and guide development on this important edge of centre site, while reflecting the comments of the Reporter and local input. The Cockburn Association (The Edinburgh Civic Trust) supported the Council's objections with its own professional representation at the public inquiry and suggested alternative ways of looking at the site. The developer who then took over the site was faced with a situation where there was a potentially hostile attitude to development on the site with a well informed and engaged community. |
What are the aims and objectives of the project?
The developer wanted to avoid the mistakes of the past - to engage the public and interested parties in a genuine and positive way - to fully understand their concerns and problems with development on this site and to do this before a detailed proposal was fully developed and submitted for pre-application discussion and subsequent planning application with the Planning Authority. From day one, the developer wished to marry the interests of the heritage lobby with a regeneration and renewal agenda in a non-confrontational manner and on a scale that had not been achieved in Edinburgh in many years. The planning authority encouraged the developer to engage with the community, to try and produce a quality scheme that could be processed quickly and without contention. |
Timescale - over what timescale has the project been developed?
Early meetings identified the key interested parties - Pilrig Association, residents, Broughton Community Council, the Cockburn Association. This started informally in February 2005 with public meetings subsequently in May/June 2005. The application was submitted in September 2005. During the processing of the application, public consultation by the developer continued with displays at the McDonald Road Library and e-mail updates to all parties. |
Action - explain the process and action taken
Early informal meetings with key players were followed by wider public consultation. This involved twinning meetings, where presentations were followed with a second meeting once the public had had a chance to think about what had been presented. The first meeting in May introduced the developer team and re-introduced the Council's objectives for the site and asked for a response and issues at the follow up meeting. The public were provided with 'feedback forms' to return at the follow up meeting. These were analysed and accommodated where possible within the proposals. This pattern of open and genuine consultation continued. A parallel process took place with the Cockburn Association. The Cockburn Association also attended the public meetings and kept the dialogue flowing - asking leading questions and providing their own agenda of actions they wished to see on the site, including: appropriate scale of buildings; the retention of trees; a positive dialogue with the local community; appropriate reuse of the listed buildings and sufficient open space. All public meetings were held in the local library - in the community directly affected. The public knew right from the start of the timeline and therefore knew there was sufficient time given for input. |
Explain the role of the key partners
The developer was interested in genuine engagement - not lip service - the director of the development company attended all meetings and took a transparent approach answering all questions, including those not relating to planning. Residents were already engaged through their previous experience and had a clear idea of what they wanted for their community. The Cockburn Association met with the developer within days of the site having been purchased. As a result of having participated in the public inquiry, the Cockburn Association realised that it had valuable open space, heritage and architectural research knowledge on the site that could contribute to a positive development of the site. This was conveyed through several meetings between the developer and voluntary experts and staff at the Association. |
Results - what results were achieved?
The community embraced the proposals. There were few representations when the application was submitted (a total of nine and only six of these raised any objections). At the application stage the planning process was quick for a proposal of this scale and complexity. The application was approved at Committee when first presented, with Committee commending the approach of the developer and agents. The Cockburn Association set out a ten point agenda for the site at its initial meetings with the developer. Every single issue was tackled by the developer. As a result of this, the Association wrote a letter of support for the planning application as well as providing an opportunity for the developer and openly championed the proposals. |
Conclusion - in summary, why does this piece of work merit an Award?
- Involving the community in a genuine and positive way to influence a development proposal when previous proposals had resulted in controversy.
- Time scales were long enough for genuine and effective consultation.
- Innovative consultation techniques, e.g. twining meetings i.e. listening first, followed by debating.
- The Cockburn Association fully supported the planning application because the developer had shown a genuine interest in developing a qualitative scheme through interaction with all parties concerned.
- The Association believes that this consensus building planning process is of National importance.
|
Date
« Previous | Contents | Next »