»

[pogofish]

Originally Posted by Tubthumper

The bypass idea isn't new. Kimy. This has been going on for years.

It has been kicking around in one form or another since the Colquhist Plan of 1952. Which stopped being official policy around 1992 (although elements of it have been retained) The reference library should have a copy you can inspect & the last time I saw one was in the RGU library at Garthdee. It is worth a look, if only to have your jaw hit the floor at the vision of what a future Aberdeen might look like.

Shows you how good our council can be at avoiding a decision when they want to & the main sticking point has always been the area north of the Dee crossing. Not because of Myrtle/Camphill - the Steiner architects had factored that route into their planning as long ago as the 1970s & kept a corridor through the estate, but because of the opposition from the residents north of the Deeside road. Who include some of the people whose activties have gone a long way to create the current mess & who have benifited significantly from the growth of this city. Plus no small number of current & former councillors as well.

[Bigsby]

Originally Posted by pogofish

Shows you how good our council can be at avoiding a decision when they want to & the main sticking point has always been the area north of the Dee crossing. Not because of Myrtle/Camphill - the Steiner architects had factored that route into their planning as long ago as the 1970s & kept a corridor through the estate, but because of the opposition from the residents north of the Deeside road. Who include some of the people whose activties have gone a long way to create the current mess & who have benifited significantly from the growth of this city. Plus no small number of current & former councillors as well.

Of course, it's all a big conspiracy and Camphill were in fact all for it. I must have dreamt that whole massive "Save Camphill" campaign.

Save Camphill Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route campaign

[pogofish]

Nope, they were certainly not happy about it but had lived & planned round the eventuality for many years. As had many others who lived in the area, my own family included - the reserved road corridor also stretched from Blairs Ferry to Portlethen & almost everyone submitting all but the most minor planning applications along it faced problems of one sort or another. Especially if it involved a change of use.

However the campaign did not initially involve the management of the estate. In fact, they maintained the "we are working fully with the authorities & engineers" line throughout & went to some lengths to dissociate themselves from it but could do nothing (& probably didn't want to) to stop residents or members of staff from organising & getting involved in a personal capacity. This may well have changed when the current route was annonced? They certainly moved that banner on to their land (it was previously sited on corridor land owned by them but leased to a 3rd party) fast enough.

From the outset, I would say the campaign really reflected the interests of other folk, who had been preparing for this for years but knew they would be less likely to get an easy ride in the publicity. After all, special needs kids vs local fat-cats/gentry - Who gets your sympathy?

[Bigsby]

Originally Posted by pogofish

However the campaign did not initially involve the management of the estate. In fact, they maintained the "we are working fully with the authorities & engineers" line throughout & went to some lengths to dissociate themselves from the campaign but could do nothing (& probably didn't want to) to stop residents or members of staff from organising & getting involved in a personal capacity.

Not quite, but it's a bit of a confusing set up, Camphill has lots of different branches, the Camphill Estate (west of the Murtle route, behind the Waterwheel) took the "working fully" line, but the Camphill Newton Dee people launched the Save Camphill Campaign. After a while the Camphill Estate people startied supporting it too.

It's a fun theory to suggest that the road was moved because of the rich folk in the big hooses, but it's not borne out in fact I'm afraid, one reason and one reason only why it was changed - the Save Camphill campaign. There's plenty of rich and important folk on the new route but their campaign is doomed to failure.

[pogofish]

The Save Camphill Campaign may well have focused attention & precipitated the current fudge but you would be quite wrong to suggest that the rest have not had considerable influence. Not least because the planners feared the whole proposal could be mired in the courts by them. Which has been a major & consistant factor in the non-progression of this scheme since my grandparents were involved in fighting it in the 60s & 70s - Long before Save Camphill came along.

The reaction of the Myrtle management said it all to me I'm afraid.

[Bigsby]

Originally Posted by pogofish

The Save Camphill Campaign may well have focused attention & precipitated the current fudge but you would be quite wrong to suggest that the rest have not had considerable influence. Not least because the planners feared the whole proposal could be mired in the courts by them.

Nah, if that was the case they would be in the same boat with the current route, just as much cash to pay lawyers' fees there, probably more so.

[Cloud]

With Camphill, the thing that I've said all along is simple - they are potentially sitting on a goldmine if the bypass runs far enough from their estates to be unheard, yet close enough to make access onto it a doddle. It's probably a certainity that any route in that area will be soundproofed to a large degree - again, driving up the value of any land located nearby but not next to.

I actually wonder how many miles of extra road will be built as a result of the Save Camphill campaign - looking at the route map now, it seems that there might have been no need for the Stonehaven 'fastlink' if the original Murtle route had been chosen.

[pogofish]

Originally Posted by Bigsby

Nah, if that was the case they would be in the same boat with the current route, just as much cash to pay lawyers' fees there, probably more so.

The only thing different there is that Hollyrood are now in charge of the project. Which maybe reduces the "big fish in a little tank syndrome" a bit. Which is probably why it has made any progress at all TBH. If the council were still the main authority, I think they would be finding any excuse to shelve it again for another few years.

Some of those folk are, or were senior lawyers or well enough off to make serious legal action a very real possibility. In addition, there used to be certain residents who the planners viewed with extreme trepidation - That retired builder for one, although he shuffled-off a few years back.

[pogofish]

Originally Posted by Cloud

they are potentially sitting on a goldmine if the bypass runs far enough from their estates to be unheard, yet close enough to make access onto it a doddle.

The Myrtle route went through a land corridor between two active parts of the estate & passed very close to some of the buildings. For Camphill, the proposals are still a bit unclear (last time I looked anyway). They seem to suggest it will be close to the route existing road but possibly on the other side from the estate, however it may yet encroach on the wooded area shown below.

Google Maps

I really don't think Camphill are going to be the sort to view at this as a commercial opportunity as the schools/estates today are the result of several decades of very hard work by some very committed people. Its just that even though I've no liking for the plan at all, the Myrtle route seemed the lesser evil - least damaging & wasteful of all of them & it was the one the estate management had planned for over the years. Which IMO, made the opposition akin to those who buy a house near a church, then complain about the bells.

[Bigsby]

Originally Posted by pogofish

The only thing different there is that Hollyrood are now in charge of the project. Which maybe reduces the "big fish in a little tank syndrome" a bit. Which is probably why it has made any progress at all TBH. If the council were still the main authority, I think they would be finding any excuse to shelve it again for another few years.

No, the reason it's made progress is because the Scottish Executive agreed to fund it in 2003. The council(s) were never the "main authority", they were just trying to convince the government to come up with the cash, but even as recently as the turn of the century the then Transport Minister Sarak Boyack was saying there was "no realistic prospect" of the government funding it:

Scottish Parliament - Official Report