Portobello PONGS

DAY 8 / FINAL DAY: THURSDAY 18 FEBRUARY

Today was the final day of the public inquiry into the application for the waste transfer station at Sir Harry Lauder Road. All three parties made closing submissions to a packed room, summing up their case for or against the development.

First, Suzanne McIntosh, for the Joint Action Group, read out Douglas Armstrong QC's closing statement (all 40 pages of it!) which summed up all the evidence put forward by the Joint Action Group against the proposal. JAG's case was summarised up as follows: "there is no justified need for the proposal, it will have a detrimental effect on the character and setting of the conservation area and the setting of listed buildings, it will increase HGVs coming into Portobello and will have a negative impact on the amenity of the area. I respectfully invite you to find that the appeal proposal is contrary to the Development Plan and that there are no material considerations which warrant a departure from the Development Plan".

Next Alastair Burnet, advocate for the Council, summed up their case. His statements were at times equivocal rather than a robust defence of the Council's position of having refused the plan. They actually agreed with Viridor on one or two points and one was left wondering whose side they were really on. Mind you, we have been wondering about that since the very beginning of this process.

Lastly, Mr McLeod, Viridor's solicitor, put their closing submissions, brazening it out on the points on which their evidence had been shown to be clearly lacking. He read some extracts from a speech by Lord Clyde about crucial factors to be taken into account when determining a planning appeal, just in case the Reporters had forgotten how to do their job. He even managed to add in a few extra paragraphs hastily cobbled together whilst he listened to our closing submissions. This is allowed apparently.

If you wish to read the closing submissions in full, they will shortly be posted on the DPEA's website (www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk, reference number PPA-230-1061).

Finally, the Reporters drew the proceedings to a close, remarking on how well-behaved and good-natured (on the whole!) everyone had been. They said they would try and reach a decision as soon as possible but this would be unlikely to be announced until early summer at the earliest. So now after all the excitement and hurly-burly of the inquiry we must wait patiently, catch up on cleaning, washing and other mundane necessities.

We would like say a huge thank you to everyone who has supported the campaign in whatever way. Without your support we would not have got to this stage.
I think everyone who saw our QC and our planning consultant in action agreed that they were worth every penny. We have done our very best to stop this plan from blighting our lovely urban village by the sea - let's hope that justice prevails.

DAY 7: WEDNESDAY 17TH FEBRUARY

Well, we are on the home straight now, with the final day at the public inquiry into the waste site tomorrow, Thursday 18 February.

It was the site visit today and tomorrow will bring the closing submissions from all parties: the Joint Action Group, the Council and Viridor, in that order. Mr Armstrong, our QC, has written a statement summing up all our arguments against the waste transfer station and it will be read out by our planning consultant, Suzanne McIntosh. The session starts at 9.30 am in the Royal British Legion, Baileyfield Road.

This is our last chance to show the Reporters the local strength of feeling about these plans so let's make sure we have a full house.
Don't miss it!

DAY 6: TUESDAY 16TH FEBRUARY

Please note that the site visit will start at 10 am tomorrow, Wednesday 17 February, leaving from the British Legion. Please wear appropriate footwear as part of the route is muddy. All welcome but no lobbying allowed.

Closing submissions are on Thursday 18 February, British Legion, starting at 9.30 am. Each side will sum up its case before the inquiry closes, starting with the Joint Action Group, followed by the Council and then Viridor. This will be an interesting session, so please do come along. Let's make it a full house.

Today, we heard from our elected representatives and the council.

Kenny MacAskill was first, explaining that the application for the waste site had been universally opposed and mentioned all of the concerns that his constituents had raised with him, including the possible impact on local businesses should visitors stop coming to Portobello because of this waste site, which would be a blot on the landscape. Mr McLeod, Viridor's solicitor, wanted to know whether Mr MacAskill was speaking as a Scottish Minister or as a representative of his constituents. Luckily, he replied that it was the latter or we might have been treated to a three hour grilling about how Viridor's plans for world domination would be the saviour of the Scottish economy and that we should allow developers to do what they want where they want when they want, a la Trump.

Next up was Conservative Councillor Joanna Mowat who moved for refusal of the plans at the planning committee hearing back in July 2007. As the planning committee councillors went against the officers recommendation to approve, the council did not put up any officers to give evidence, instead leaving Councillor Mowat with the unenviable task of facing Viridor's fire alone. Mr McLeod cross-examined Cllr Mowat on the reasons for refusal put forward by the council; there was discussion of views and the impact on the conservation area. Interestingly Cllr Mowat said that more information had been provided by the Joint Action Group on the potential visual impact of the proposals than had been presented by Viridor. Mr McLeod implied that the traffic officers' opinion that there would be no problems should have been slavishly followed by the planning committee and that they were not up to the job of determining planning applications. Cllr Mowat explained that as Viridor kept changing their information during the four hour hearing and their three experts' information was inconsistent, it would have been extremely risky to give planning permission to the proposal.

SNP councillor Mike Bridman was next on the stand, enumerating Viridor's unfulfilled promises, inconsistent data and the concerns about the impact of traffic on residents' health and safety, particularly children. He felt that Viridor's inept showing at the planning committee hearing had raised serious doubts about their ability to run a massive waste facility. Let's hope they never diversify into brewing. Cllr Bridgman finished by saying that Millerhill was a better site and the Viridor's application was a commercial venture which would see waste from other areas trucked into our streets.

Labour councillor Maureen Child explained that she is on the cross-party Zero Waste steering group. She again emphasised that Millerhill was a more suitable site, revealing that, despite their previous reservations, Viridor was interested in bidding for contracts at Millerhill. She emphasised that the planning committee had made the correct decision, putting weight on the quantity and quality of objections and that the recommendation by officers was, by their own admission, "finely balanced".

Liberal Democrat councillor Stephen Hawkins gave some background to the development of Portobello and explained how industry had moved away from existing cheek-by-jowl with residential use. He talked about the visual impact the site would have on the conservation area, challenging Ms Beauchamp's (Viridor's visual impact expert) assessment and saying that the public view across Brighton Park was the best way to appreciate the fine architecture of East Brighton Crescent. He mentioned the poor quality of the consultation undertaken by Viridor, listing the things they had undertaken to do but had not. He also mentioned that rat-running on roads such as the Milton Link was a concern. Under cross-examination by Mr McLeod he explained that even for planning applications for minor things like dormer windows, the applicant usually provides some kind of visual representation of what it will look like, so why could Viridor not do the same for such a major development?

A discussion about planning conditions followed (this is standard practice and should in no way be seen as an indication of the outcome of the inquiry), focussing on issues such as hours of operation, noise and odour attenuation, landscaping and screening of the site, lighting, etc. This reached surreal proportions during a discussion about night working (to which we said we were totally opposed) when it was said that the council might ask Viridor to do occasional work at night, at which point Viridor would have to ask the council for permission to do this! It was concerning that we would have to rely on the council and SEPA to enforce any infringements of the conditions and experience seems to indicate that there may be some wishful thinking involved here.
The inquiry closed for the day with a reminder to bring your boots for the site visit.

THIS WEEK AT THE INQUIRY
Just a reminder of what is happening at the public inquiry during w/c 15th February. Please note that it may be subject to change:

Monday 15 February - the inquiry will not sit.

Tuesday 16 February, start time 9.30 am - precognitions from Kenny MacAskill MSP, Cllr Joanna Mowat for the City of Edinburgh Council, then local ward councillors, Mike Bridgman, Maureen Child and Stephen Hawkins. There will also be a discussion about planning conditions. This is standard practice and should not be taken as any indication of the outcome of the appeal.

Wednesday 17 February - site visit - probably AM - please check the website for details. Anyone can come on the site visit but we are not allowed to lobby the Reporters, although we can point out factual things. If you intend coming, please wear appropriate footwear as part of the route is quite muddy.

Thursday 18 February AM - closing submissions. Each side will sum up its case before the inquiry closes. This will be an interesting session, so please do come along. We discussed doing closing submissions by e-mail but the Reporters thought it was more appropriate to hold them in public as there is so much interest in the case.

It would be good to see some children at the inquiry so please do pop in (as it is the half-term break), even if it’s only for a few minutes.
Hope to see you there for another fascinating week.

Day 5: FRIDAY 12TH FEBRUARY
Friday was another riveting and entertaining day at the inquiry with a great turnout from local residents.
In spite of the seriousness of the consequences should this inquiry go against the community and Council's wishes, there were the odd moments of levity. One such was when Mr McLeod, getting a tongue-in-cheek dig at our QC said, "Mr Armstrong [our QC] is correct for once", in the full knowledge that Mr Armstrong had spent the week correcting Viridor's witnesses' errors. The assembled audience, as one, let out a loud "Ooooooooo" as if at a pantomime performance. In the spirit of this brief interlude one Reporter added "Now then, now then", before the serious questioning resumed.

John Hughes, a third party witness who has family in the area, gave the inquiry the visitor's perspective of how this proposal would blight the area and what a shame that would be, given all the life-enhancing things that go on around here. He gave us statistics about how open space benefits people's health and wellbeing and how our open spaces in Porty would be compromised by this development. He had visited a similar type of waste operation and described the smell as "odious". This seemed to rattle Mr McLeod's cage (Viridor's solicitor), as he then gave Mr Hughes the third degree about what exact type of waste facility he had visited.

Next, it was fourth time lucky for the noise man, Mr Raper, who it was rumoured had had to go to Matalan for an emergency supply of shirts and underwear as he thought he was just up for the day on Wednesday but had to stay until Friday. His demeanour was still cocky but our QC, Mr Armstrong, using the corrected figures, demonstrated that there would be a far greater noise increase at quieter times than had previously been indicated by Mr Raper's information. So does that mean there will be no quiet times at all if this goes ahead?

Then it was back to the Joint Action Group's evidence with John Lauder, secretary of the parent council of St John's RC school, speaking on their behalf, also supported by Towerbank primary and Portobello High School. His main concerns were that the additional traffic would encourage rat-running, thereby posing a greater risk to the health and safety of local schoolchildren on their way to and from school.

A resident of the Christians, Diane White, spoke next and explained how the residents there feared that the quality of life in their tranquil corner would be spoiled. She was concerned that they would not be able to do things we all take for granted, such as sitting in their gardens, hanging out their washing or opening their windows, if the waste site was built. The Christians would become an island surrounded by heavy traffic.

Donald Canavan, a local architect, then spoke about the sustainability of the plan, pointing out that the sustainability assessment of the plans had been carried out only on the office building, which represents a mere 3.5% of the total floor area of the plan! The proposed photovoltaic panel on the roof would only produce enough power to boil a kettle and, by Viridor's calculations, the building would only use around 8 kw of energy. So it could, in fact, be powered by a cat, which produces 9 kw of heat and considerably more when chasing the increased vermin that the site would harbour. In other words, a load of greenwash.

Suzanne McIntosh, our planning consultant, was next on the stand, outlining all the planning policies that this proposal does not comply with. She talked about the potential cumulative impacts of the plan and how it relied on a continuance of landfill when national waste policy aims to cut landfill dramatically. Mr McLeod, Viridor's solicitor tried to lead, and at times mislead, her down several paths but what Suzanne doesn't know about planning could fit on the back of a very small postage stamp and she calmly rebutted all his points. After lunch, another tea dance had started which prompted former East of Scotland jive champion Mr Arthur Jeffrey to ask the Reporters if their preference would be for a tango. They declined to answer.

The sparring between Mrs McIntosh and Mr McLeod continued, with Mrs McIntosh emphasising that the need for this facility had not been demonstrated, this site was not designated for such a use in the local plan and managing to bring in Millerhill as a potential alternative. By this time Mr McLeod was a broken man, as each line of cross-examination was effectively stopped off, at which point he said he would "leave it there" or "leave it to the Reporters to decide". Sensible man.

Day 4: THURSDAY 11TH FEBRUARY

Tomorrow's start time is 9.30 am!
Another fascinating day at the inquiry and a lot of public interest with over 100 people attending.
To start off with we had Ian Michie (Viridor's planning witness) back to clarify a few points.
Then, Joint Action Group witness on visual impact, local architect Juan de La Pena, who with the aid of his 3D model and his photomontages, showed how the waste transfer station would loom over the conservation area and spoil views - both public and private - in the vicinity. Viridor's solicitor tried to give him a rough ride, implying his images were not a correct representation of what impact the building would have but our QC compared some of Juan's images with those presented by Viridor's witness on visual impact and demonstrated that they were in fact showing the same thing. The Reporters will have the opportunity to judge for themselves when we have the site visit, or "tour", as our QC called it tonight.

Mr Brignall (Viridor) was called back to the stand to clarify some more information and answer questions about the Sustainability report which Viridor had not lodged but asked to be considered. It turned out that there were errors on one of the plans and the building was described as "a large open shed". Joke of the day from our QC was: "when is a building not a building? When it's a shed". Maybe you had to be there.
Poor Mr Raper (Viridor), the noise and air quality man, had got his figures wrong again so will be called back tomorrow for further cross-examination.

Peter McColl then resumed the charge for the Joint Action Group, putting up a robust case, outlining the concerns of the Community Council. i.e. the lack of trust between Viridor and the local community, as they had not done several things they had promised they would, traffic, noise, smell, visual impact, etc.

Diana Cairns then spoke on behalf of PONGS, again outlining similar concerns and emphasising the queues of traffic and attendant air pollution which would be generated by this development. She was rather disappointed not to get a grilling from Viridor's solicitor who had perhaps given up by then.

John Stewart explained PAS's view of the proposal, spoke eloquently about how important the conservation area around the Brightons was and what detrimental impact the shed would have on the area. Viridor's solicitor had perked up again by now and subjected John to some grilling against which he stood his ground splendidly

Franny Wraith on behalf of the Brightons and Rosefield Residents' Association, or BRRA as she said, which brought smiles to everyone's faces, completed the day with an impassioned plea for this area of Portobello not to be spoiled. She had done a survey of local residents and said she had asked participants to rank their concerns "in order of ghastliness" which rather got the point home. She ended on a rather sad note, saying that the erection of this facility would spell the end of an era.

Come along tomorrow to hear our planning witness, sustainability witness, a representative of the school council talking about rat-running and safe routes to school, a resident of the Christians and finally Mr John Hughes, a regular visitor to Portobello, to give an outsider's view of Viridor's outrageous proposal.

Read about yesterday's proceedings in the Evening News: http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/Targets-row-over-waste-plant....

Day 3: WEDNESDAY 10TH FEBRUARY
Another very well-attended day at the inquiry today.
We heard the final three of Viridor's witnesses, although some of them have to return later to clear up unresolved matters.
First of all, we had Stuart Turnbull speaking about Viridor's traffic assessments and trying to justify why they "overestimated" the traffic on the first one. He insisted that Viridor had based their traffic estimates on the worst case scenario but then admitted that they had based their information on five days' worth of weighbridge data at Powderhall, seemingly overlooking the fact that Powderhall works seven days a week. He seemed to be saying that the increase in HGVs in our area would be relatively insignificant - until our QC pointed our from Viridor's data that there would be a 29% increase in the AM peak and a 111% increase in the PM peak. It was pointed out that this development
would bring HGV traffic to Portobello that would not otherwise be here. Yesterday, Viridor agreed to a limitation on the amount of waste that could be handled at the site (300,000 tonnes per annum) and said today that they would be amenable to restricting the number of HGVs into the site - it will be interesting to see what figure they come up with.

Mr John Raper then spoke about noise and air pollution. It turned out that different versions of his noise figures had been lodged at the inquiry which only served to confuse people - how can this have happened? He said that one of his scenarios assumed that the door
would be open all the time - funny that when we have been continually told that everything would be contained within the building. He dismissed the broken promise he had made to a local resident about arrying out seismic monitoring on their property, saying that he had not deemed it necessary. Pity he didn't bother to communicate this to the resident. He was unable to tell us how He had worked out the split
between bin lorries (RCVS) and HGVs. This is important, as they produce different levels of noise. He was also unaware of the potential traffic noise increase at the Baileyfield Road Cottages which had not been assessed. Overall, not a reassuring performance.

Mind you, he may have been distracted by the tea dance next door. Yes, it was Wednesday afternoon and there was a coachload of tea dancers next door. It was like going back in time five years to the superstore inquiry only no-one asked the Reporter up to dance, probably because there are two of them and he didn't want to offend one of them. What with the strains of the can-can, the bingo and a punter serenading the barmaid coming from next door, the noise pollution rendered the poor man unable to think!

Finally came Mr Ian Michie, Viridor's planning witness who had a discussion with our QC about why, if this site is so suitable for a waste transfer station, it is not mentioned in the new local plan and why they are seeking to try and subvert the local plan process with
this planning application and appeal. Our QC suggested that the lack of mention of Portobello for a waste site in the local plan sounded the death knell for this plan - let's hope he is right!

Day 2: TUESDAY 9th FEBRUARY

Please see coverage of the PLI on the BBC website by following this link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/8504048.stm

Another fantastic turnout at the public inquiry today with around 60 people attending over the course of the day.
Start time is now 9.30 am for tomorrow as witnesses took longer to give their evidence than anticipated and we are trying to catch up on time.

This morning we had Gill Beauchamp (last seen defending the plan to put massive electricity pylons through some of Scotland's most scenic landscapes) speaking on behalf of Viridor about the visual impact of the proposed building - something the Council told us we had not to worry about as it would not be seen. However, Ms Beauchamp had produced a number of visuals, some of which show the shed looming over the Brightons in the conservation area. Despite saying that the visual impact would not be significant due to the alleged dense band of vegetation around the site (a lot of which has been cut back recently), our QC got her to admit that, as Viridor do not own the land on which these trees stand, they had absolutely no control over whether they remain or not. She insisted that the visual impact would only be very slight and only on a tiny fraction of the conservation area and anyway, we already have the power lines. So that's all right then. When asked by our QC what the architectural merit of the proposed building was, she replied, "its simplicity"! Architecture students take note that in the eyes of a landscape architect a crinkly tin shed has merit. May the Highlanders fear what will follow in the shadow of the Beauly to Denny power line.

Later on we heard from an authority on pongs, Mr Steve Fraser, who told us he had predicted the worst case scenario but could not tell us whether the building would have an airlock, saying that we would have to wait until a detailed design was brought forward (they have been working at this for four years so why have they not resolved this yet?). This was in contrast to what David Brignall said yesterday who clearly stated that there would be no airlock on the building. Mr Fraser's worst case scenario shows the odours reaching as far as the golf course, Sir Harry Lauder Road and the Christian Path. On being shown a map with routes taken to school by local children and asked if he was concerned about the effect odours might have on them he replied, "no" bluntly. Mr Fraser said that there should be a condition set for the odour not to travel beyond the boundary of the site and for an odour management plan to be put in place. If thereafter there are any problems, SEPA will sort them out . Pity SEPA are having their funding cut.

Tomorrow we shall hear from Viridor's traffic expert, noise expert and possibly their planning witness. Joint Action Group witnesses will start on Thursday, possibly in the morning or could be the afternoon depending on how long the remainder of Viridor's witnesses take.

MONDAY 8TH FEBRUARY - THE PUBLIC INQUIRY BEGINS!!

First of all, some info about arrangements. We were told this morning that the inquiry will now start at 10 am each day and will finish about 4.30 - 5 pm. There is tea and coffee available in the morning but not in the afternoon. The lunch break is from 1-2 pm.

A good start to the inquiry today with around 70 people attending over the course of the day, aged from 18 months to 80+! Let's keep it up - please tell friends, family and neighbours. It should hot up as the week progresses and the evidence from the Joint Action Group witnesses on Thursday and Friday will be expressing all the concerns that the community has raised over these plans.

The inquiry started with the precognition of David Brignall who was talking about the need for the facility. Viridor also produced a last minute document which claimed to explain how the alleged 40% saving in
carbon emissions would come about from the use of rail to send waste from Portobello to Dunbar. Our QC soon made short work of this, getting Mr Brignall to admit that there was an error in the documentation about amounts of waste they claimed would be transported down to Dunbar, declaring Viridor's information appropriately enough to be rubbish! It was agreed that, as it was unclear where the waste would be coming from, it was impossible to calculate any potential carbon savings. Mr Brignall admitted that nowhere in any waste strategy or waste plans was the need for this facility identified. He
acknowledged that actually the application was there to serve Viridor's commercial need and get them an advantage in the market place should a need to replace Powderhall arise. Exactly what we have said all along.

Tomorrow the Viridor witnesses continue with precognitions on visual impact, odour and possibly traffic if time allows.