Land charity could root out solution to Craighouse row

By ADAM MORRIS
Published on Saturday 18 February 2012 14:52

ACTIVISTS fighting against development on a city beauty spot could be gifted a stretch of woodland in a bid to smooth over the row.

Friends of Craighouse Woods have spearheaded a well-supported campaign to safeguard land on Craighouse Hill, which is earmarked for blocks of flats.

Now it is proposed that a deal involving the charity Fields in Trust – which has 1300 sites across the UK – could guarantee some community space and allow developers to press on.

Activists, however, are urging caution, warning it should not be used as a makeweight allowing for the destruction of the rest of the site.

Rosy Barnes, founder and spokeswoman of the group, established to safeguard Craighouse for the public, said the development could be interpreted either way.

She said: “The Friends would welcome any measure that would protect this important site. But it’s important the site isn’t salami sliced, with the protection of one part becoming a ‘deal’ that allows excessive development over the rest.”

Locals are furious at proposals to build flats at Craighouse Hill – owned partly by Edinburgh Napier University – which sits between Morningside and Craiglockhart and boasts some of the best views in Edinburgh.

They want any changes to be sympathetic, and think current plans for the £300 million initiative, which would see 200 new homes created, are out of keeping with the area and could create a gated community. Land access is also a fiercely contested point, with fears that, once homes are built, freedom to roam could be compromised.

A petition against the plans has already gathered more than 4000 signatures from locals, who point out the site has been used by the public for decades.

The university, which hosts many of its communications and music departments at Craighouse, sold the site to the newly-formed Craighouse Partnership last year.

That consortium is run by organisations including Sundial Properties, Mountgrange and the university itself. Proposals are currently in the pre- planning application stage and should come before councillors before the end of the year.

Council leader Jenny Dawe has now made contact with Fields in Trust to see if gifting a stretch of land would be possible, and it is understood it is keen to work in the area as it looks after four other sites in the city.

Alan Dickson, chairman of Craiglockhart Community Council, said: “This is a healthy development. My understanding is it would be a piece of land of no real use to the developers.”

Fields in Trust specialises in securing areas of land for the community in the face of major property developments.

Colin Rennie, manager of the trust in Scotland, said the proposal would be looked at by the organisation, adding: “We would be concerned if something intended for green space could be lost to development.”

Comments

There are 10 comments to this article

Order by:

• Newest first
• |
• Oldest first

Page 1 of 1

• 1
• Show all

10

andrew23

Monday, February 20, 2012 at 05:42 PM

Donaldson College is yet another excellent example of a site that received planning consent for an over-ambitious development by a property developer, and then fell vacant due to lack of funding. So, Donaldson College shows that giving planning permission for excessive development at Craighouse leads to a very high risk of another failed development project. So, thank you #8 for adding that new example to our list of sites that received planning consent for "enabling development" only to be abandoned by developers who could not fund their schemes.

• Report Unsuitable

9

andrew23

Monday, February 20, 2012 at 05:37 PM

The Friends have not said there should be no development. The Friends are merely calling for policies to be upheld on protected green space, and that any proposal be reasonable, realistic and achievable. There are bigger risks of the site going derelict than Mountgrange not getting their way. Excessive development leads to funding collapse and failure as we have seen in other sites, which is a far more likely cause of dereliction. We have merely asked for evidence from the partnership for their claims. On maintenance, on successful examples of a sustainable model and on track record they have been unable to justify what they are presently proposing. We are hopeful that the partnership will realise that sustainable goes with words like modest, realistic and achievable rather than words like excessive and controversial.

• Report Unsuitable

8

the ball is round

Monday, February 20, 2012 at 03:40 PM

sadly, Napier Uni have already stated clearly they need to leave Craighouse Campus, as the old buildings, magnificent as they are, do not lend themselves to 21C university use. so, if they go, and there is no development of the site, the Friends of Craighouse had better have either 1) very deep pockets to maintain the buildings or 2) a skilful ability to hold their nose and turn a blind eye to decay as the land and buildings lose their lustre pretty quickly once unoccupied (see Donaldsons College for an analogous situation). The real story here is people who say "no" without thinking what the alternative is.

• Report Unsuitable

7

thelocal

Monday, February 20, 2012 at 01:35 PM

#6 - The nature of Napiers remaining financial interest in the site is, at best, unclear. They were not declared as a member of the development company in the original sale briefings, they slipped into it later on, without publicly briefing the fact. They have been described at various times as having "a retained financial interest in the site", and having " no retained financial interest". It may be assumed that the price they finally get will depend on the nature of planning permission the site receives. In my opinion, that's a potential conflict of interest as on the one hand they say they "see ourselves as custodians of the site preserving it for future generations", and on the other hand they may stand to benefit financially from building all over it.

• Report Unsuitable

6

noodle doodle

Monday, February 20, 2012 at 11:55 AM

#3 napier still has a big share in the company set up to carry out this development so will be hoping to make money from it

• Report Unsuitable

5

thelocal

Sunday, February 19, 2012 at 12:35 PM

#4 - yes the very same ones, albeit they say they are different ! The old company was Mountgrange Capital, their plans for Caltongate failed when Bank Of Scotland withdrew lending support - in other words Mountgrange never had the money to do the development in the first place ! The new company is Mountgrange Real Estate Opportunity Fund. However, I believe both businesses were headed by the same two people, Martin Myers and Manish Chande. Caltongate triggered a vocal community campaign and was opposed by numerous bodies, including Edinburgh World Heri-tage and the Cockburn Association. The development was widely blamed for triggering a Unesco investigation into Edinburgh's world heritage status. However, it was backed by Historic Scotland, and the Scottish Government approved it without ordering a public inquiry. There's a very effective campaign group opposing the Craighouse development, Friends of Craighouse Grounds & Wood, find their website by searching at friendsofcraighouse.com. This is a campaign aimed at protecting the green space and woodland on one of " Edinburgh's famous 7 Hills". Edinburgh as a whole needs to wake up to ensure our precious green space is protected. Councillors take note !

• Report Unsuitable

4

Thomas the Tank

Sunday, February 19, 2012 at 10:04 AM

#3 - Mountgrange of Caltongate infamy? - isn't that also the outfit who hired the ex-Dear Leader of the c00ncil, Donald Anderson, MSP (Failed) as some kind of 'consultant' spin doctor? It all 'stacks up' like a huge stinking pile of manure!

• Report Unsuitable

3

thelocal

Saturday, February 18, 2012 at 07:13 PM

The £300 million quoted in the article is completely wrong and does not relate purely to this development . £300 million is the total of an investment fund raised by Mountgrange ( yes - them of Caltongate fame ). Their aim is to " take advantage of current depressed valuations in order to make opportunistic investments across a number of market segments. These include identification of and investment in under-performing assets or portfolios and acquisitions; strategic land opportunities, where Mountgrange can add value either through the planning process...." In layman's terms - buy it on the cheap, push through planning permission, sell it on or build loads of houses on it, ruining our beautiful and protected green space in the process ! Napier bought this in 1994 for £9 million, spent £14 million refurbishing it ( with public money ) , and have sold to Mountgrange 17 years later for just £10 m !!! How does that stack up ?

• Report Unsuitable

2

nickedinburgh

Saturday, February 18, 2012 at 06:32 PM

£300 million for 200 homes. So that's £1.5 each then? Anyway, please let's not have another theft of public land by greedy self-interested developers, robbing the rest of the community of the use of this beautiful place forever, just so they can get even richer. The Council should be on the side of the community, not the privileged few at the top. There's far too many cases of greed winning not to suspect there are 'favours' going the other way in return.

• Report Unsuitable

1

Saturday, February 18, 2012 at 02:35 PM

Please leave Craighouse Woods as they are, and not to be raped by developers, we are losing to much of our beauty spots as it is without this happening. pigswill_trumpet.

• Report Unsuitable

Order by:

• Newest first
• |
• Oldest first

Page 1 of 1

• 1
• Show all

Logged in as:

Comment here. Start typing your comment here:

Post comment

Please adhere to our Community guidelines

Your view

Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.