An E Mail Shared is........

Today we received a copy of an email in response to a query about the wrongful use of "bank stabilisation" in the title of our planning application which was refused by the councillors, despite a recommendation for approval from the planning officer. At the planning meeting, one councillor Mr Craig Statham spoke at length to say that the bank had not been stabilised and he was "shocked" at what he believed were trees sliding down the hill. I was pretty shocked that he thought we had applied to stabilise the bank. But then......it was in the re worded application....re worded??? Yep - it was re worded. Was it then changed back? No it wasn't but maybe someone thinks it was - from the e mail today it does suggest it was changed back, but it wasn't. Gosh it's so confusing.

I used to sign of "Change Controls" for the pharmaceutical industry as the QA Manager and a change in the title of a change control would really require another change control!!!!

I like Planning, it reminds me a Change Control and of all the elements in a QMS, Change Control was my favourite. I know, I know, I'm sad......

Here is the e mail sent in by a person who lives in Ironmills Park. I have taken the liberty of deleting the telephone number and address although it is probably public information since the letter was sent to the council.The dates don't seem to make much sense, I think where it has Jan 2010 it should be Jan 2011 and the e mail cannot possibly have been written on 18th July 2010 as the e mail was sent on 18/1/2011 and the application referenced in the e mail didn't exist on 18/7/2010. I think someone typed July and meant January.

It's was tough being in QA - makes it so hard to not nit-pick other peoples mistakes. I get dates wrong as well so lets live and let live with these small errors. Since I retired I no longer wear a watch so now I don't know the time of day any more, I never know the date and sometimes I even have to think what year it is.

Wondering if I have taken leave of my mind? wait until you read on..................



From: WILLIAM BOWIE
Sent: 18 January 2011 16:46
To: Peter Arnsdorf
Subject: 10/00694/DPP RP9

Ph                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Iron Mills Road
Dalkeith 
                                                                                                                                                                        EH22 1JP
                                                                                                                                                                        18th July 2010
 
For the attention of Mr Peter Arnsdorf / Mr Kingsley Drinkwater
 Dear Sir,
 Planning Application  10/00694/DPP  for RP9
 I request that the closing date for comment on this proposal is extended t give a greater time for consideration of the works. The basis of this request is that the scope of work being considered for approval is not clear from the documents currently available to the public. viz:
The description of the works given in the advertisement in the Midlothian Advertiser of 13 January 2010 is at variance with the wording given ‘On Line’. For example the ‘On Line’ edition does not include, “works to stabilise banking”. I am informed by your colleague that only matters that are described in the wording of the application document will be considered during the planning approval process. e.g. such items as the bin store, the original (smaller) viewing platform (previously called wood-store) and the significant amendments to the house “RP9” do not form part of this application. 
Can you please confirm that the extent of the works considered for planning approval in respect of 10/00694/DPP are limited to those covered by the wording in the ‘Application Document’.
Apart from a sketch, there appears to be but one other drawing. This drawing (site plan, location plan and elevations) was removed from the On Line’ site and then replaced yesterday. This is a very convoluted drawing and needs careful examination to ascertain what work is being offered for approval. Because of the removal and replacement the drawing needs to be re-examined to see if changes were made yesterday. The drawing is not dimensioned and thus it is difficult to ascertain the relationship and distance of one structure to another. There is an indication the scale is 1:150, but this is meaning less as it cannot be used when the only copy of the drawing is ‘On Line’, since computer pictures are not scaleable without special programmes. Yesterday I visited your office and asked to have sight of a paper copy of the drawing, but was told this does not exist.
The plan drawing is referenced as being, “site plan, location plan, and elevations”. However the drawing would appear to be incomplete since there are no elevations or a location plan shown. Can we have sight of the missing information?
The drawing is strewn with small circles (approx 43No.) each containing a number. A small arrow attached to each circle. Such a symbol is sometimes used to denote a photograph. The number being the reference of an accompanying photograph and the arrow used to indicate the direction in which the photograph was taken. There are photographs accompanying this application (circa 68 No.), but they do not appear to relate to the numbered circles on the plan and indeed here are many more photographs than numbered circles (43/68). The Photographs attached to the application are not referenced in anyway; by numbers or other wise. Thus it is impossible to correlate the photographs with the work for which the application is made.
A brief examination of the photographs shows a number are taken from the same location. It is also clear that some are current and some are considerably older. (Just what relevance photographs of Iron Mills Park taken in the 70’s might have to a retrospective application for works carried recently, is open to conjecture). However, the real issue is that any photograph supporting a retrospective application needs to be annotated with words that say what the photograph shows and how it is relevant. Also in order to make an informed judgement it is necessary that the photographs are dated so that the reader can ascertain whether the photo was taken before or after the work was carried out. It would also be usual to follow the convention and reference each photograph to the plan showing the position from which it was taken and the direction the photographer was facing. 
I am reliably informed that the application for planning approval for the works covered by 10/00694/DPP was submitted after a separate department (Estates) of Midlothian Council had delivered a letter to the owner of “RP9” asking him to remove items built in contravention of the Feu burden placed on the owner of “RP9”.These works include the work covered by 10/00694/DDP. Would it not be economical to await the outcome of this legal action before  considering works that are the subject of legal action (for removal) by the Council? Should the Council be successful the result would likely be that the works be taken down and the land reinstated?
 
Yours sincerely


William R B Bowie.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply from the planning department

Dear Mr Bowie,

I can advise that the description has been amended to its original wording. I had changed this as it was slightly misleading regarding the works to the footpath that runs along the top of the embankment. The works are principally for making the footpath safer and wider, and are not really stabilising the bank. However to avoid confusion it is now as it was when advertised. Nothing has changed in terms of what is proposed. The works are retrospective and they are what they are.

The site plan you mention was removed temporarily in order to make it more accessible to the public as in its original form there were some problems viewing it. this has been resolved. The replacement plan was recorded under the incorrect title and this has now been corrected.

With regards to the bin store, his is principally made up of the fence, though it should really be included as a separate item for completeness. This is likely necessitate the application being re-advertised. In the meantime assume that it is part of the application.

There are no elevation drawings submitted by the applicant. As the application was in retrospect, it was agreed prior to submission that photographs could be submitted rather than drawings, so long as there was a site plan to refer to. This has been done. I am trying to improve the description of the various documents so that those images that show proposed elevations are labelled as such.

Many of the photographs has been submitted as supporting information, and not all are directly relevant to the application. I shall be able to determine those which are material to any decision.

I hope that this has answered your enquiry. if not please let me know and I will answer any further questions you may have.

regards

Kingsley Drinkwater

Senior Planning Officer

Corporate Resources

Midlothian Council

Fairfield House 
8 Lothian Road

Dalkeith               

EH22 3ZN



And the e mail we received today

Gerry,

I have done that now. my apologies for the delay.

I have found the attached note which I came across. Also, I had initially taken it upon myself to change the description, but one of the objectors subsequently complained about the description being changed (see attached correspondence). I was later advised that it should revert back to its original registered description, which I then did.

The members were not directly advised of your concerns with the description. The report however does clearly explain what is proposed, as does your own supporting statement. As had been advised to you earlier, the description in the title was an attempt to simplify the description of the proposed works.

Yes Kingsley and I also gave you the throw away line "they are what they are" after losing the will to live when I raised the concern of calling these works bank stabilisation. I note you used this line in your reply to Mr Bowie and interestingly I never knew about Mr Bowies letter 'til now and I had only e mailed you around the time of his letter to state my disgust at the planning web site holding a letter from Janis Neil stating we did not have approval for the house. I did wonder why your reply strayed into "bank stabilisation" at the time but really couldn't be bothered to ask why.

Here is the correspondance at the time of the "bank stabilisation" debacle. I only asked about a "Small Thing" and got a reply that included concerns about the the works to the path.

Kingsley

Appreciate your focus and I couldn't agree more. Can you pass it up the line ( I am copying to Ian J - maybe he will take some action now) to put the EAS secretary right with the planning permission for the house because this is just not acceptable. We are ignoring all the other sorts of issues but this one has tipped the balance.

Do what you need to with regard the works to the path - they are what they are.

Regards

Susan

Suisan,

My report should make everything very clear. Of course the house has planning permission. I understand that perhaps you are still awaiting a completion certificate from Building Standards and someone has perhaps got the two mixed up?

regards

 Kingsley

From: Kingsley Drinkwater <Kingsley.Drinkwater@midlothian.gov.uk>
To: susan goldwyre <susangoldwyre@yahoo.co.uk>
Sent: Wed, 16 February, 2011 11:53:50
Subject: RE: Small Thing

Susan,

Thank you. I appreciate that all sorts of issues may be getting aired, but I am trying to focus simply on the few items that you have applied for in your planning application. I shall also be making it extremely clear as to what the works to the path are despite the arguable description in the title of the application.

regards

Kingsley

From: susan goldwyre [mailto:susangoldwyre@yahoo.co.uk]
Sent: 15 February 2011 15:24
To: Kingsley Drinkwater
Cc: Janis Neil; Mike Armstrong; David Binnie; Donald Marshall; Edythe murie; Edythe Murie; Oliver Haas; Tony Galloway - Iron Mills; Tom Stevenson; Grant O'Connor
Subject: Small Thing

Dear Kingsley

Would do please phone or e mail Janis Neil (or Mike Armstrong) to tell her that the house as shown has planning consent. It is really OK to have an opinion about things and make comments about planning applications but the community in Eskbank and Midlothian is being fed the line that we do not have permsission for our house. That's just not acceptable and so damming we are considering further action against the EAS committee.

I'll cc this e mail to them and the committe as I think it might be but I would prefer if you would call them or e mail in order that they hear it directly from you. I don't have e mail addresses for all, certainly none for Kate Duthie and some may be out of date.

Regards

Susan

So here we are - a planning application that raised so many ridiculous comments I began to wonder at the time if I was part of the same human race. The audacity to state that our house didn't have permission (this was in a letter from the EAS signed by Janis Neil), from a society that purports to "Foster a Good Community Spirit" - That's in their constitution.....I gather one of their committee resigned in Februray when the letter stating the house didn't have approval was written. Interestingly, and since I am on the subject, when we obtained FOI papers last year, our neighbours daughter Dot Dryden had written to the council some months previously after speaking with Ms Neil (at my request) and stating that we were the sort of people who built without planning permission because she knew that the extension on the cottage never had approval back in 1994. I e mailed Dot a copy of the approval for the cottage extension. She claims she never received neighbourhood notification but she was on the list. She never got back to me after I called her. Oh her letter to the council was supposed to have been "In Confidence".....well.......and her letter also stated that "We mix with influential people". I leave you to draw your own conclusions if you haven't already gone to sleep reading this.

Then Dot's allegation appeared in another letter, this time from Mrs Bowie in Ironmills who re stated the allegation that we might build without permission. At least at this point in proceedings a wise councillor stated that there was evidence of "collusion".

It's nice to air all of this for anyone bothered to want to read it. I have had this info for a long time and it really is now all about what to do with it. I have a life and have no wish to stray in the negative. I get something out of every situation in life. So maybe this is what I will take from all of the above;

A councillor is stating that a bank had not been stabilised when we never applied to stabilise a bank. We protested as some length about the inclusion of these words in the title but mothing was done to amend. Despite the report and our own support statement, it was clear to me at the planning meeting that some councillors talk rather than read reports. And so it came to pass that a bunch of councillors decided to reject a planning application (recommended for approval) on the basis that trees were sliding down the hill, that a woodland was in some way damaged (have you read the recent mangement report) and a bank had not been stabilised. But we applied for a sitting out area/store, a fence, path broadening and steps for access.

Woodland Management and Donald Rodger

Well one of the most highly respected individuals in the tree world, the person who wrote The Hertiage Trees of Scotland, has been to review my woodland management plan at the water tower wood. This book is a must for tree lovers.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Heritage-Trees-Scotland-Donald-Rodger/dp/0904853063


Woodland Management Plan for Water Tower Wood Dalkeith Midlothian

for and on behalf of

Mr and Mrs G Goldwyre
House RP9
Cemetery Road
Dalkeith
EH22 3DL


by 


Donald Rodger Associates 
Arboricultural Consultants



May 2011
 

---------------------------------------
Woodland Management Plan
Water Tower Wood, Dalkeith, Midlothian


                                                                                                                      
1. INTRODUCTION

This management plan relates to an area of woodland known as Water Tower Wood, located on the south bank of the River North Esk in the town of Dalkeith, Midlothian. It was commissioned by the owners, Mr and Mrs Goldwyre, with the purpose of ensuring its long-term and sustainable management. The report is based on site inspections carried out on 13 and 24 May 2011.

A management plan was previously prepared for the site by woodland consultant Donald McPhillimy in December 1999. This provides some useful background information regarding the site and this is not reproduced here. The management prescriptions, however, are largely superseded by this report.

 
4. The recommendations relate to the site as it exists at present, and to the current level and pattern of usage it currently enjoys. The degree of risk and hazard may alter if the site is developed or significantly changed, and as such will require regular re-inspection and re-appraisal.

5. The report relates to the area of woodland growing in the clients’ ownership. Trees outwith the survey area were not inspected. 

6. Whilst every effort has been made to detect defects within the individual trees inspected, no guarantee can be given as to the absolute safety or otherwise of any individual tree. Extreme climatic conditions can cause damage to even apparently healthy trees.

                                                                                                                  
2.  WOODLAND DESCRIPTION

2.1 Site Characteristics

The entire site extends to approximately 0.5ha (1.23 acres). This is entirely wooded, with the exception of a small plot at the eastern end which accommodates a new bespoke dwelling (this area has historically been open ground). 

Access is off Cemetery Road, which forms the eastern boundary. The River North Esk defines the northern boundary with tennis courts and a former railway cutting (currently used as a public path) adjoining to the south. The topography is characterised by very steep and largely inaccessible north facing slopes down to the river, with more level ground to the south. The woodland forms the eastern extremity of a contiguous belt of mixed woodland which clothes the southern bank of the river, and partially encloses an area of public open space lying to the north of the river known as Ironmills Park. 


2.2 Woodland Description 

The woodland is of mixed species and age and is part of a long-standing landscape feature on the steeply sloping ground to the south of the river. Beech, sycamore, horse chestnut and ash predominate, with lesser amounts of sweet chestnut, silver birch, goat willow, oak, laburnum, elm, lime and
hornbeam scattered throughout. A well developed understorey of holly and occasional yew is present across parts of the site. The site therefore supports a broad range of tree species which tend to be primarily broadleaved in character and common to the area. The ground flora is well developed and
consists of a range of grasses and herbs, along with woody shrubs, such as elder. A few small localised clumps of Rhododendron and snowberry are present. Whilst these species are non-native, they do not seem to be spreading and small clumps can be tolerated. Natural regeneration of tree species is profuse where canopy conditions are more open. The woodland is of mixed age and of varied structure. Several scattered mature specimens of horse chestnut, beech, oak and sycamore are present and these form the dominant landscape trees. These are set within a younger matrix of varying age, from young trees to those approaching early maturity. The overall effect is to create a varied and dynamic woodland of mixed age structure and species composition, with a well-developed understorey. 

With the exception of the small area occupied by the house, canopy cover is largely complete across the site. Two small gaps are present where a wayleave has been created (by Scottish Power) under overhead power cables to the east of the site and where surface water run-off from the adjacent tennis courts has resulted in a localised area of soil erosion. Both of these aspects are outwith the direct control of the owners. Replanting carried out by the owners and natural regeneration is rapidly infilling these areas.

The woodland plays a valuable role in stabilising the steep river banks and providing valued shelter and seclusion to the new property. It is probably of ancient or semi-natural origin and the varied and diverse woodland structure provides an attractive wildlife habitat of good biodiversity value. 


2.3 Woodland Condition

The woodland is generally in good condition overall. It represents a vibrant and dynamic ecosystem which has been functioning successfully for manyyears with little obvious intervention by man. The good diversity of age class and species, coupled with a well-developed understorey and successful natural regeneration, is a desirable state and one which augers well for the future. The woodland has developed well in its own natural way. 

An inspection was carried out of all mature trees to identify problems or defects which may have safety implications. Two middle-aged sycamores were recorded on the southern edge adjacent to the railway path with serious basal decay and hollowing. It is recommended that these trees are felled for
safety reasons (they have been marked with a pink paint dot to aid identification). 

The recent construction of the house at the east end of the site has had minimal impact on the woodland as a whole. Of low-impact, ecologically-based design, this sits comfortably within the treed environment. The construction of internal woodland paths to permit access for future management has also been sensitively undertaken, using natural materials and construction methods which do not impact on the tree cover, or cause any soil disturbance or deterioration. 

The excess surface water run-off from the adjacent tennis court has resulted in a localised problem area. This has caused an area of soil erosion within a small gully, which has removed some of the ground vegetation and created a small gap in the canopy cover. Unless this drainage issue is remedied, this will always restrict levels of tree regeneration. Despite this, repeated planting efforts by the owners appears to be proving successful. 

The wayleave for the overhead power line to the east of the site has historically been maintained by Scottish Power. This has largely involved the indiscriminate cutting of encroaching woody growth. The overall effect of this work has been to create a rather unsightly scar in the woodland canopy.
Tree regeneration, coupled with replanting by the current owners is, however, rapidly becoming established in this area.  

Several wood piles have been created in the wood, on the advice of the previous management plan. This is beneficial in providing wildlife habitat. 


2.4 Tree Planting

Significant tree planting has been undertaken by the current owners in recent years. This has focussed on gaps in the canopy at the erosion site and under the power lines, as well as in the immediate vicinity of the new house and associated woodland garden area. A wide range of native tree species have been established, including hawthorn, gean, bird cherry, ash, alder, birch, rowan, oak, holly and blackthorn. These are generally developing well and are appropriate to the site and setting. Most display fairly rapid growth rates and will close canopy over the next 5 year period. Planting of a range of native woodland plants is taking place on the open area of ground immediately to the west of the new house.


2.5 Summary

The woodland, as a single entity, is currently in satisfactory health and condition. It forms an attractive landscape feature of ecological and wildlife value. It benefits from a good and varied species composition, with native species well-represented. Sycamore, however, is becoming predominant in places and may need to be controlled. Age structure is also good and varied, with a range of age class from young sapling to mature tree. The steep topography severely limits access on the northern edge of the site adjacent to the river, however the creation of a naturalistic path has permitted access into some of these areas.

The recent construction of the new house and associated paths has been sensitively and sympathetically undertaken, and has not had any adverse impacts on the woodland as a whole. Potential problem areas are present at the tennis court run-off and the power line wayleave. While outwith their direct control, these are being addressed by the current owners to mitigate the effect on the landscape. Recent tree planting undertaken by the current owners is appropriate and is establishing well, and will rapidly restore full canopy cover.  

 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES


Aim: To manage the woodland on a sound and sustainable basis, principally for landscape and wildlife. 

Objectives:

" Manage the woodland in a sensitive and sustainable manner to retain
canopy cover at all times; 

" Minimise risk to public safety;

" Promote and encourage diversity in terms of species composition and
age structure; 

" Promote and encourage the regeneration process to ensure long-term
continuity of tree cover;

" Promote the predominance of tree and shrub species indigenous to the
area;

" Maintain and enhance the woodland as an attractive feature in the
wider landscape;

" Maintain and enhance the nature conservation and biodiversity value
of the woodland.
4. MANAGEMENT PROPOSALS

4.1  Long Term Strategy

As noted previously, the woodland as a whole is in satisfactory condition and is developing well under its own auspices to form an attractive and dynamic ecosystem. This approach should continue and as a such a low intervention, or ‘light touch’ management policy is advocated. The following management strategy is therefore recommended. 

" Retain woodland and canopy cover with the adoption of a low intervention, sustainable management policy, thereby minimising disruption to the landscape and ecology. Allow the existing woodland to develop naturally;

" Retain and manage the mature tree population for as long as it is safe to do so. Mature trees will only be removed or made safe if and when they are deemed potentially hazardous. This will be assessed as part of an annual arboricultural inspection. Where feasible, rather than fell these to ground level, surgery works could remove the upper portion of the crown to retain a large standing stump for wildlife habitat;

" Utilise and promote natural regeneration as the principle means of providing succession and continuity of canopy cover. Continue to carry out replanting using a rang of native tree and shrub species, where desirable; 

" Promote a wider range of tree and shrub species native to the area to enhance biodiversity and wildlife value. Control potentially invasive tree species, such as sycamore, by selective removal;
                                           
" Resolve issues of surface water run-off from tennis courts. Continue efforts to replant this area to restore full canopy cover;

" Maintain vegetation under overhead power cables by instigating a regime of regular cutting back and pruning to maintain an appropriate clearance. This is preferable to the rather brutal and indiscriminate wayleave practices carried out by Scottish Power and will have less impact on the landscape; 

" Enhance wildlife value and biodiversity by retaining standing and fallen deadwood, where this is safe to do. The creation of habitat piles of timber and branch-wood is beneficial and this practice should be continued;

" Instal bird, owl and bat boxes at appropriate locations.


4.2 Short Term Proposals

Little management input is required over the next five year period. The following is recommended.

" Fell two decayed and potentially dangerous sycamore trees adjacent to railway cutting path (as marked on site);

" Resolve surface water run-off from tennis courts;

" Continue to maintain new planting and replace failed trees as necessary;

" Cut back and maintain vegetation under power line wayleave; 

" Carry out annual tree safety inspection.


So all is well in the wood.

I'm really pleased with the area under the power line this year as it has regenerated so well. Hopefully this area will never have to be cut again by Scottish Power, certainly I will be able to manage it to prevent that need, but what about the next generation of owners of this wood? they just need to read the plan and this blog to realise the history and maintain the growth in order that nothing becomes so tall that there has to be a way-leave cut.
Even although I own this ground, some years ago now Scottish Power sought permission for their way-leave cut from the council who amazingly said "Oh yes, go ahead" - somehow not remembering that they sold the ground! I came back from work that night and couldn't believe my eyes. Gerry got them back to at least attempt to tidy up the felled wood but it has been an uphill struggle to clear this ground. After the power line was moved there was even more dead wood to clear. But all comes good in the end.

Compare these photos to those posted last year of the same area.

From the top down...........

From the bottom up...............

Community Council Monday 23rd May 2011

I'm treasurer of the local community council and really keen to see more local folks come along. It's not all crime and traffic lights and last year we had a talk from the Forestry commission who manage the woodlands at Newbattle Abbey. Now the management of these woodlands was contested by the community council because new paths planned to go through Lord Ancrum's wood looked as if they would detract from the real woodland feel of the place. I have visited since the new paths have been created and despite my earlier reservations the paths are an improvement. The edges will mellow with time and hopefully all the water channels will work well. I do also hope they don't become a route for motor bikes. If they do then the community council will probably be involved again. That's the point though. Its a changing world and we all need to communicate together. Come to your local community council and have your say.

The meeting is usually attended by our elected representatives for the area. Usually Lisa Beattie or Kate Moffat. I bumped into our 3rd representative Peter Boyes last night in the Sun Inn and reminded him of our meeting (he hasn't been to any that I have attended). He seemed unsure of our meeting place although he came to our hustings event in the same place.

For anyone interested in coming along its at 7pm in the Westfield Hall. Monday May 23rd.

One For Janice

http://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/en/visit-woods/news/Pages/misty-miller-tiptoe-through-the-bluebells.aspx

Something Different

This was me in 2005 when I discovered a paid plasma donor facility in Tulsa. Gerry was waiting in the car, not prepared to get out and worried that I might not come back! I was amazed that people were queueing to give blood. I called in to see what was going on and realised they were paid for the donation; $25 for the plasma. That meant that they take their blood, spin it in a centrifuge, and then return the red cells to the recipient. Keeping the plasma. You get twice as much than the amount of plasma from a whole blood donation because the recipient can make up the plasma volume quite quickly compared to the loss from a whole blood donation. Paid plasma donations are pretty controversial stuff, but that's a very long story. Money changing hands for a body fluids doesn't seem clever to me and once money is involved in a process (any process) it always brings added complications. Blood supplies in Scotland are all from volunteer donors but what about blood products? well they can be manufactured from paid donors and Scotland now buys in its blood products instead of making them here.


I only came across this photo today whilst taking a wee rest from planting in the woodland. I don't miss my old job other than the some of the people who are special to me. They know who they are.

Scottish Designer Home Award for RP9

The house has been shortlisted for an award. It's 1 of 5. So pleased for Gerry who is still trying to fathom out the political process that interferes with planning! Honest Guv, we don't have the missing 200 votes for the Lothians List. Congratulations to the SNP in Midlothian (and Scotland) though.

Here's our list!

Designer House of the Year Finalists 2011
ARKA/OMI Architects - Ochilview House, Brightons, Falkirk
E.C. Architectural Design - The Boat Lodge, Isle of Skye
Gerry Goldwyre - RP9, Eskbank
goodburn baillie architecture ltd - Broomieknowe, Dean Path, Edinburgh
W Burrell Homes Ltd - 9B Hillcrest, Carmunock

The winners will be announced at the black tie Awards Ceremony and dinner on Thursday 9 June at the Edinburgh International Conference Centre.

And the result is........

New Woodland Sport Perhaps?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13247021

Could make an interesting planning application for the route through the woodland.I had a shot of these "vehicles" in Miami a few years ago and it was great fun.

Proof......

Excuse this short post, I have visitors this week and I'm being pulled into playing a lot of golf. Gullane No 2 today - wish me luck.