A community participation exercise carried out

by

2005-2006

This project was supported by:

Contents

Acknowledgements:....................................................................................................... 2

Aim .................................................................................................................................. 5

Why participatory appraisal?......................................................................................... 5

How it was done ............................................................................................................ 6

Getting started ................................................................................................. 6

Training the team............................................................................................. 6

Who participated?............................................................................................ 6

Gathering the information ................................................................................ 7

Organising the information............................................................................... 9

Feeding back the information to the community ............................................ 10

Leaflets .......................................................................................................... 11

What the community said… ...................................................................................... 12

Top ten likes...................................................................................................................................... 12

Top ten dislikes ................................................................................................................................. 14

Top ten suggestions for change...................................................................................................... 20

Conclusion.................................................................................................................... 24

Appendices All comments: Likes All comments: Dislikes All comments: Suggestions for change

Page 2

Acknowledgements: Thank you to everyone in Queensferry -- residents, groups, workers, visitors and businesses -- who participated in helping to create this “Vision for Queensferry”. To the team of volunteer facilitators who gave up masses of time to train and carry out the work, and to those who helped type it up. To Agilent Technologies for generously helping with photocopying. To local supermarkets, and the library, for hosting displays. To the City of Edinburgh Council Local Development Council, Forward Scotland and The Local Health Care Co-operative (North West Edinburgh) for supporting the work with funding. To Community Education for organising the use of the ordinance survey map of the area. To Queensferry Parish Church and the Priory Church To all the local schools. To GreenFerry for providing insurance. To the Queensferry Gazette for additional publicity. Without all this help and support, we could not have done all this work.

Copyright

Ordnance survey maps ©Crown Copyright 2005. All rights reserved under Edinburgh City Council Licence. Photographs © Vision for Queensferry

Definition of the area

Whenever ‘Queensferry’ is mentioned in this report, we mean to include Dalmeny and the surrounding areas which define our community. It would be clumsy to go on repeating ‘the Queensferry area’ or ‘Queensferry and Dalmeny District’ but that is most certainly what is meant.

Format and style

One of the decisions we took as a team was not to follow the style and conventions of formal reports. We have opted instead for a report which loosely follows familiar structures. We have also chosen to write in Plain English. As well as this report we have also made a four page summary report. Everything will be available, including a complete record of all people’s views, on a CD-ROM at the Library and on-line at http://www.queensferrycommunitycouncil.org/

Page 3

South Queensferry – a Short History

A statistical account of Scotland (1791-99) tells us how Queensferry, a former Royal Burgh, got its name:

"Queensferry (the passage of the Queen) derives its name from Margaret, Queen of Malcolm Canmore, …celebrated for her charitable and beneficent virtues. She frequented the passage much, and was a great patroness of the place; hence the name…certainly originated."

Situated on the south shore of the Firth of Forth, Queensferry has been a ferry port since the 11th century when pilgrims travelled to St Andrews and to Dunfermline, the burial place of St Margaret. The town grew in importance through the centuries. It played a key part in Scotland's commercial success and enjoyed an important role in Scotland’s transport network. (It was a major stopping point on the ferry route north from Edinburgh until the Forth Road Bridge replaced the ferry service in 1964.) In the 17th century, Queensferry traded with Europe and still has many interesting buildings from that time. Plague, piracy, smuggling, witch trials, Covenanters and Oliver Cromwell have all featured in Queensferry's fascinating past. However, by the 18th century, Queensferry's prosperity had started to decline and the town did not recover until some important new events marked its history: the building of the Forth Railway Bridge in the 1880s; the discovery of shale oil at Dalmeny; and the establishing of a naval base at Port Edgar. Today, Queensferry is a picturesque old town with well-preserved historic buildings but also attracting a "state of the art" technology company and some facilities for tourists. Those who live here enjoy Queensferry’s attractive location by the water, its closeness to Edinburgh, easy access to the M8 and M9 motorways, and the fact that we are within easy reach of Edinburgh Airport. Residents are now a mixture of local families going back many generations, and more recent inhabitants some of whom commute to the capital or to other areas. The town is within the City of Edinburgh Council area. The last census records (2001) show that the population of the Queensferry ward was 9,035 with people living in 3,555 households spread over an area of 694 acres – just over 1 square mile/2.8 square kilometres.

Page 4

Introduction Background to the project In 2003, when the Scottish Executive announced their wish to make changes to local government, they effectively began the process of handing back responsibility for local communities to local communities. Queensferry people were not slow to recognise what this meant for them, and there was a sense of excitement in the air. Some kept an eye on where Queensferry might be placed in the grand new scheme of things while others set about gathering information which might be helpful for anyone making decisions about Queensferry’s future. Who knows a community better than the people who live there? The challenge was to get all that local information into the open, to look at it collectively. Thus began one of the biggest participation exercises ever carried out in this community. Participatory Appraisal (PA) is an approach which recognises the knowledge and values which already exist in an area. It is an informal, open, and transparent process, very often carried out by local people, and it is quite unlike most surveys and questionnaires. Participatory appraisal is about not making assumptions about what local people are interested in; it recognises their ability collectively to think about what it’s like living in the area, and to come up with their own solutions. At the time we started, no-one knew what would emerge – and that was important too. We did not want to pre-judge the outcome. So the information in this report was gathered by local people talking to other people locally and recording everything that was said. In the end, we spoke to around 1400 people and recorded what we have estimated to be over 6,000 comments. What we have now is an impression (and we think a very good one) of the concerns of the people who live or work in Queensferry, and who KNOW what it is like to be here. This is a community which feels engaged and empowered. Stakeholders (that horrible word meaning anyone at all who has a good reason to be interested in Queensferry) can now use this information to take forward any ideas which have emerged. Some, who were aware of what was going on at an early stage, have already done so, and we are pleased to have created something which will help bring about positive changes and improvements. One thing is sure – the summer of 2005 in Queensferry was an exciting one, significant in its history, and, we hope, important to its future.

Page 5

Aim The focus of the work was to ensure local views were heard as part of the new community planning process. If changes were to be made in local government, then local people wished to be a part of that, to have a say in their future.

Why participatory appraisal? In order to understand how people feel about the area and find out what they would like to see happening, we needed an approach that would let people share their views about what they thought about the area, and make suggestions about what could be done to change or improve it. Participatory appraisal recognises that the people who live in the community have the knowledge and experience to comment on it, and specifically encourages reaching out beyond the “usual suspects”. It encourages people to share their ideas and knowledge about life and local conditions. It tries to involve as wide a cross section of local people as possible, and make sure there is equal representation. This means that those whose voices are not often heard or valued -- “the hidden voices” – are heard. PA recognises that people’s lives and ideas and experiences are different and sometimes complex. So it reaches out to as many members of the community as possible, and does not try to create averages or demand that everyone is the same. A single comment may be highly significant and very useful. The use of visual methods enhances and encourages participation. These provide a structure, and act as a focus for discussion and analysis. Flexible materials make sure that there is scope for further discussion, revision and change. Chambers, 2002 defines PA like this: ‘Participatory Appraisal is one of a family of approaches, methods, attitudes and behaviours that enable people to share, enhance and analyse their knowledge of life and conditions, and to enable them to plan, act, monitor, evaluate and reflect.’ If you would like to know more about this method of working, contact Vikki Hilton of Hilton Associates1 All the outcomes in this study are based on what people have said, and we have recorded them all as important.

1 3 Priory Grove, South Queensferry, West Lothian, Scotland. EH30 9LZ. vikki@hiltonassociates.com

Page 6

Total Tracking by Age

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

5-1

1

12-1

5

16-1

7

18-2

4

25-3

4

35-4

4

45-5

4

55-6

4

65-7

4

75-8

4

85+

Male

Female

How it was done

Getting started

We did not base our team on a set of invited members or ‘well kent’, key people in the area. The idea for consulting local people was certainly started off by The City Edinburgh Council and taken up by the Queensferry and District Community Council, but it was taken forward by a smaller team of local people whose first job was to vote themselves into existence and establish their independence. Three members of the Community Council remained with the new team but most were found by advertising locally. And this is how we came together -- a set of people who knew the Queensferry community, had mostly lived there many years, and cared about the area’s future. Thankfully, the West Local Development Committee (West LDC) saw the enthusiasm which was building, and approved a grant to support this project. The Corstorphine Health Co-operative and Forward Scotland also gave small additional amounts of money. The funding was in place. The next job was to set about training.

Training the team

We engaged a trainer in Participatory Appraisal (PA), Vikki Hilton, who lived locally and who also knew the area. She trained our 16 volunteers in participatory methods and remained with the team until the end of the process. We were lucky that people volunteered from all over the local area and from the age of 15 to over 80. The participatory method ensured that we took an open and informal approach which helped us to identify a range of views which we might not have heard in a more formal survey. The richness of the outcomes is shown in the results.

Who participated?

The team spent many days working as a group, in pairs and individually to encourage people to share their ideas and opinions about the area. This took place from May through to September 2005. Local people participated as individuals, or as part of a small group. We tracked the age range and numbers of people we were talking to, to make sure that we had talked to all age groups. Later in the project, we made a point of finding young men in the 18-24 age range, whose views, at that stage, were not well represented.

Page 7

We also tried to make sure we talked to people in different areas so we plotted out where the people lived. (See map right.) By the end around 1400 people had participated with a good range of ages and a fair geographical distribution. Many more young people took part than we had originally anticipated. They were keen to be heard, the High School staff were keen for us to come in, and this resulted in a large number of young people’s voices being heard. We make no apology for this – by this stage in the project, it was becoming clear in the village that many adults were concerned about the younger members of the community so it made sense to spend some time with them and record their concerns too.

Gathering the information

This work was carried out from May to September 2005. The team went out at different times talking to great numbers of people during the day, evening or at weekends, to make sure a wide range of people participated. The team used PA mapping methods and a visual diagram called an H-diagram. These are open methods that enable people to share the ideas and solutions they have to what it’s like in the community. The key question was “What do you think of the Queensferry area?” This encouraged people to reflect on what it’s like in the area, what they like about it, dislike and could be changed or improved. This way people could record whatever was important to them. This approach is different to surveys and questionnaires with pre-defined questions. We also had the benefit of good weather, which meant more people were out and about in the area. We started with a drop-in event at the local Parish Church which we promoted with posters, by networking, through schools and meetings and an article in the paper. The team also involved people at other community events such as:

• coffee mornings • playgroups • local businesses

• local schools & events • pubs • on the doorsteps

• outside shops • local churches • inside people’s houses

• at the library • sheltered housing • local events & meetings

Page 8

At the drop-in event everyone put a dot on

a map to show where they lived and a tick to show what age they were. This was to make sure we reached a wide range of people, young to older, women and men, girls and boys from all over the Queensferry area.

People recorded there ideas and solutions as groups, with families and friends, or as individuals. We also went out to meet people out and about, at supermarkets and shops …

and in local pubs.

The team met up frequently to check how things were going …

and we met to work out how we would feedback all the ideas to the community.

Page 9

Together we planned the written reports …

and gradually brought it all together.

Organising the information

All the ideas people shared meant we had a vast amount of information, and we had to manage it in some way. The team had gained some initial impressions of what local concerns were and we discussed these amongst ourselves. Pictures became words, and we worked the information down to three layers. The first layer was the broad area of concern (for example, the issue of Access to South Queensferry); the second pointed towards something a little narrower (for example Transport or Paths); and the third category looked at more specific things (such as the Bus Service.) In some cases, there were so many comments in one area that we had to sub-divide it. (For example, we split up the area of ‘General Recreation and Leisure’). Those who were comfortable with computers (with some additional help from volunteers outside the team) began typing the comments into an excel spreadsheet. Then we sat down to look at it all again, and reflect on the shape it was beginning to take. This led to some re-sorting and re-arranging. What mattered was the general impression we were getting and this became clearer every time we looked at the comments. Inevitably, in organising the information, we ran into challenges. Had we grouped the ideas in the best way? Were we interpreting the information fairly? We considered rearranging and regrouping things but concluded that whichever way we framed the information, there would always be difficulties. For example, comments about ‘Shops and Shopping’ were a matter of ‘Recreation and Leisure’ for some, but ‘Amenities’ for others. Some ‘Site Specific’ comments about the bridges could also be put down as an ‘Aesthetic Feature’ of the town. Comments about ‘General Transport’ seemed to direct us to look at bus and train services, and comments about ‘Access’ seemed to be linked to our ‘Geographic Location’.

Page 10

Whichever way we looked at the information, there might have been different ways of categorising it, so we have let some apparent anomalies stand. This does not invalidate the process, the engagement, or the results, which, in the end, we are confident give a good impression of what the people of Queensferry think of living in Queensferry, and what changes they would like to see – and that was our aim. And distinct impressions were beginning to emerge – for example, we could not fail to notice that our young people did not feel included. They often talked of being ‘bored’, and called for better recreation facilities. The adult comments reinforced this. Traffic management also stood out as a very serious concern.

Feeding back the information to the community

One of the features of Participatory Appraisal is to give prompt feedback to the community, and this we tried to do. We arranged initial displays on two sets of display boards which we moved around the Ferry. We put the displays up during the Ferry Fair, which seemed a good time to catch a vast number of people. Many remembered taking part and giving their views. They were delighted now to see it all come together. Then we moved the display boards to the local supermarkets where they stood for a full week at each one. After that, we put the displays up at the library, then Agilent Technologies, and finally, we put up an outdoor display at “It’s a Knockout” – an event which was running at the High School later in the summer and involving children and parents from all four primary schools.

Page 11

Leaflets

We then put together an A3-sized printed leaflet with a summary of the results. We distributed this widely at the Ferry Fair, the library, schools, churches, shops, and around the neighbourhood. Finally, we prepared this report and organised two feedback sessions for local people and key stakeholders. Keen to ensure that the process is also transparent, we have now made all the information available to everyone on a CD held in the library, and a printed copy will be available there too. As much as possible is also on-line at: http://www.queensferrycommunitycouncil.org

Additional publicity From the beginning to the end of this project, we have enjoyed (and appreciated) excellent support and publicity from our local newspaper, The Queensferry Gazette, and the Ferry Focus. Vision for Queensferry appeared more than once on their front pages.

Page 12

What the community said… Here, then, are the results of our participation exercise. The top ten likes, dislikes and changes are summarised here, but all the comments that people made are in the appendix which we would encourage you to read. It makes a fascinating read.

Top ten likes

1. Community Spirit

Community spirit easily topped the list of things people like about living in the Queensferry area. There was much talk of ‘good neighbours’ and ‘friendly people.’ The relatively small size of the community seemed to play a part in this, and many commented on the ‘village feel’ and ‘good atmosphere.’ There was a clear recognition of what local groups did to help provide this. Care in the Community, Church groups, the art groups, and the many environmental groups were mentioned by name. Events such as the Ferry Fair and the Raft Race were often mentioned. One comment seemed to reflect a common feeling: ‘It’s a fantastic place to live – who would live anywhere else?’ In total, there were 213 comments about the good community spirit here, and it figured highly in the group comments too.

2. Food, restaurants, hotels and pubs

This came second in the top ten. Local people appreciated the variety of good restaurants, and the vast choice of places to eat. They also liked the fact that these were ‘within walking distance’. Young people mentioned that they liked the fast food outlets. In total, 204 comments were made by local people in praise of Queensferry’s restaurants, hotels and pubs.

3. Aesthetic features

Queensferry is undoubtedly an attractive town, and many comments showed appreciation of this. Many commented on the ‘picturesque’ nature of the place, and some picked out specific features – the bridges, the views, the waterside location, the terraces, the harbour, the architecture, the cobbled High Street, the flowers, and the green spaces. All age groups seem to enjoy this aspect of Queensferry.

Page 13

4. Shops and shopping

Both supermarkets were singled out for praise. Locals appreciated having these on their doorstep as well as their small local shops. There were some comments about the need for a greater variety of small shops but these appear later under ‘Dislikes’.

5. Education

Local schools will be delighted to know that they too figured in the top ten. One described the schools as ‘superb’. Many times over, comments were made about the ‘good schools’ to choose from in the area – and this was also the view expressed by the children themselves. People also expressed positive attitudes about pre-school and nursery education. Queensferry was thought to be well served in this area too.

6. Site specific

Interestingly, there were many comments about specific places in and around Queensferry. It appears here as the sixth on the list though some of these comments might easily have been recorded along with ‘aesthetic features.’ Beaches figured highly, the water, the bridges, harbour and promenade. Someone even mentioned how much they liked their own street!

7. General environment

In terms of the general environment, Queensferry was felt to be ‘a nice place to live’. People thought it ‘a nice neighbourhood’, ‘a good place for walks’, and ‘well maintained.’ The work of local environmental groups was appreciated, and there were some positive comments about the work of the council. One disabled person said she appreciated the help she got from the council to maintain her common garden area. Compared with other areas, Queensferry, it seems, is ‘relatively free’ of vandalism.

8. Geographic location

The situation of the village with good links to Edinburgh, Fife, West Lothian and Glasgow stood out as a significant factor. People found Queensferry a good place to commute from to the capital. They appreciated that many attractions were nearby. Queensferry was considered conveniently close to the motorway (the specific reason that one business chose to locate here) and people enjoyed the fact that it was close to water, surrounded by woodland, and offered open spaces and wildlife.

Page 14

9. General transport

Some commented on the ‘good transport links’ Queensferry had – two motorways, the airport nearby, access to the train, bus routes, even the cyclepath was mentioned. Many thought Queensferry well served, and appreciated the variety of transport options available.

10. Recreation and leisure

Due to the sheer number and the variety of comments, the data from this section was split into two general columns with separate columns for some types of recreational activities. Looking beyond the general appreciation of recreation and leisure facilities, there was specific mention of the marina, the swimming pool, and the recreation centre. This is not to say there were not criticisms, and a great many requests for improvement to recreation facilities– but certainly there was an appreciation of what is there.

Top ten dislikes

1. General recreation and leisure

Interestingly, the need for better facilities also came out very strongly. Although many had made positive comments and appreciated the existing facilities, there were, quite simply, not enough, or existing facilities were inadequate. Over 400 comments were critical of the lack of recreational facilities -- including affordable activities for teenagers – and it was not only the teenagers who made these observations. Recreation and leisure stood out then as the number one priority for the area. Some of the young people’s comments are worth repeating: ‘The only place to go is fast food restaurants.’ ‘In the winter/bad weather we can’t go anywhere.’ ‘We are stuck in our houses.’ ‘There’s nowhere indoors to socialise.’ One older resident commented, ‘We had more in the Ferry 50 years ago for a much smaller population – cinema, rowing club, two dance halls.’ It is easy to see why the fast food outlets are popular. Aside from that, comments were also made about the cost of recreation facilities. ‘All things cost money’, said one. Another wished the astro turf could be free.

Page 15

The local swimming pool attracted much criticism. Many reminded us it was ‘only available to the community for limited hours’ and it did not cater well for the elderly. We apparently ‘pay the same as for Edinburgh but don’t get the same access.’ . Since the pool is only accessible out of school hours, this denies many people the opportunity to swim during the day – a point which was strongly made. And one person also mentioned the water was too cold particularly for the elderly. There was also a call for non-sports activities with one saying there was ‘nothing for teenagers to do unless you’re sports minded.’ Lack of recreation and leisure facilities was linked to safety concerns as well as cost. Because there was ‘nothing to do at weekends’, some people were travelling into Edinburgh which was ‘potentially expensive’. And potentially unsafe: one parent expressed it well: ‘There was nothing for my boys here, where they could be safe and not have to go into Edinburgh.’ Much of this boiled down, then, to lack of facilities available at a time when people wanted to use them, along with the high cost of these, and the increased danger particularly to young people who went out of the town to enjoy leisure pursuits. Recreation, then, was a key concern. Children themselves pointed out almost endlessly that there was ‘nothing to do’ or that life was ‘boring’ and we recognised that we are in danger of alienating the young people in our community if we ignore this. One elderly resident also missed the lunch club at the church as a recreational facility.

2. General access

177 separate comments arose about traffic congestion in and around the area, and a significant number called for the traffic on the A8000 to be dealt with. Drivers complained of not being able to get out of the town because of the volume of traffic especially from the bridge Non-local traffic, it seems, has a huge impact on local people. The High Street was identified as a black spot. A significant number commented on the serious traffic jams there especially during the evening rush hour. They were also concerned about tour busses coming through the High Street in the summer and adding to the problem Traffic management was a major concern of local people. The condition of some roads elsewhere in the area, with many potholes, was also highlighted.

Page 16

3. Shops and shopping

‘Not a lot of decent shops’ was a frequent comment and young people were quick to identify a lack of shops which they would want (clothes, shoes, etc) The impact of supermarkets on the community had created something of a dilemma. While people appreciated big shops and supermarkets, others noted the impact this had had on the High Street, particularly the removal of the Post Office there. ‘The High Street was killed with the loss of the Post Office’ said one. And, another observed there is only one bank. ‘Take the bank away and it will kill the off High Street’. There are some concerns then that Queensferry may lose its central focus on the High Street. So, too many small shops had closed down, the High street was ‘ruined’, and this had left behind a ‘lack of variety’ of good shops. Shopping facilities for disabled down the High Street are not particularly good, it seems, and the bank was singled out as a particular problem with its two steps creating difficulties for wheelchair users. There was no disabled access ramp, and no handrails, and this made it difficult for the elderly and disabled to make use of banking services in the High Street. Shop prices drew some attention and the way some traders ‘rip off tourists’. It was thought that some businesses put up their prices up when cruise liners came in. One trader had concerns about the high rates – higher sometimes than in Edinburgh. Away from the High Street, and still on amenities, we found that ‘Scotstoun shops are a dump’. ‘There are not enough shops at Scotstoun,’ and ‘Too many shops have closed down there’ leaving that area in real need of some attention. ‘No local shop in Dalmeny’ was also noted.

4. Buses

One observation was that the bus service was ‘excellent in morning; unreliable in evening.’ The bus was also thought to be expensive for families travelling into town. Some thought there was little integration of buses with trains, and it was also difficult to get information about bus times. And there was some comment about ‘a lack of genuine alternatives to bus service monopoly’. Some highlighted a lack of attention to requirements of the elderly regarding public transport services. Waiting at cold bus stops was ‘no fun’. Many noted there was ‘no run-around bus to move tourists and villagers around.’ Older school children wanted it known that they had to pay adult prices for buses when they are essentially students. We also noted that while they were educated in the community, many had friends outside the community and thought the Kirkliston bus link lacking: ‘Only two busses an hour to Kirkliston.’ ‘457 not frequent enough’. ‘A long time to wait for busses particularly to Kirkliston.’

Page 17

(We thought some of these comments may be linked to those about traffic on the A8000.) The many comments young people made about the bus service revealed the slightly different social network which they enjoy. Transport costs also figured quite highly -- possibly because people had to go into Edinburgh for recreational facilities, and this draws attention once again to the lack of good recreational facilities locally.

5. Litter

Litter, litter, litter, litter, litter. That column was ‘littered’ with this single word. Litter was a matter of great concern. ‘Not enough bins’ was a frequent comment. There was ‘litter all the way from McDonalds’ through the nearby estate, the beach area was thought dirty, and the esplanade lacked proper, well-designed bins. The Hawes area was identified as particularly bad. And, encouragingly, many teenagers commented on the litter too, and they also disliked it.

6. Safety

Personal safety emerged as an issue for all age groups. Younger people voiced concerns about a ‘yob’ culture, antisocial behaviour, ‘neds’ or ‘chavs’. There were ‘Too many neds and drunks on street corners’ and some people were unhappy with ‘vandalism, drugs, and yobs hanging around under the bridge at the Crossroads’. Our attention was drawn to ‘Chavs at Echline Park’ and younger people themselves felt threatened by this. Older people reinforced what younger members had said. Independently, they commented on ‘young people hanging around in groups.’ It was clearly a matter of concern along with the likelihood of drinking and (some) related vandalism. It was also felt that the block of flats at Hill Court was getting to be a ‘run down’ place where young people gathered to drink or take drugs. Residents there were quick to point how the open access there contributed to this and made them feel unsafe. It appears the stairwell is used as a public toilet. Because of the open access, it is accessible to anyone including ‘druggies’. Boarded windows give it a poor visual appearance, it is ‘overgrown with weeds and moss’, and ‘needs painting’. In short ‘Hill Court is considered an unsafe area due to poor maintenance and security, which leaves residents, particularly elderly residents, feeling intimidated. We also included road safety in this category. Queensferry lacked crossing points for people with buggies and wheelchairs at busy roads. One person pointed out there were no crossing points on Station Road. Parked cars also made it difficult to cross some roads. Some wanted us to draw attention to ‘boy racers’ causing a disturbance and possible hazard. Motorbikes around the dark entrance at Dalmeny also caused a nuisance.

Page 18

7. Maintained green spaces

There was an issue about play parks – not enough of them. Local children and their parents mentioned the lack of good parks and swing parks. Children commented how their parks were wrecked, had been vandalised, or were spoiled with broken glass. (Echline playpark was an example.) There may a link here between groups of teenagers hanging around, vandalism of the play parks, and the lack of recreational facilities identified earlier. There was also some concern that the children’s park at Echline may be removed. A young visitor pointed out that there were no parks for visiting children to play near the front – at Hawes area or near the High Street. Generally, it was felt there were not enough open green spaces for children to play in, and local children also observed that ‘the grass isn’t cut often enough for us to play.’ More than one adult commented that ‘gardens are not as well kept as when we were under West Lothian’. More attention was needed to flowerbeds, and seating areas were not thought to be well maintained. The Vennel’s old playpark was identified as a neglected area that needs some attention. Many of these comments, then, centred around the behaviour of people in the community (litter, dog mess, vandalism), as well as maintenance issues.

8. Parking

Parking is a well-known local issue. There was the problem of parked cars at primary schools, parking in the High Street, not enough parking (especially for tourists). Some mentioned the difficulties of parking for the bank. The Hawes area was also a considered a black spot with parked cars. Elsewhere in the village, parked cars on the pavement obstructed pedestrians, was inconvenient, and this added to safely concerns. Parking issues also arise at the Parish Church on the Loan when events are on there. Traders mentioned that visitors to their office found it hard to park, and welcomed parking restrictions. All in all, it was recognised that there was limited parking in South Queensferry for the public, and this needs to be sorted both for the locals and if we are to ‘realise tourist potential’.

Page 19

9. Housing

Young people as well as adults drew our attention to housing issues. Comments ranged from ‘We don’t want any more housing development,’ and ‘Too many houses are being built,’ to comments about the architecture. (‘Ugly houses.’ ‘New developments lacking in character.’) Small children noticed they’re ‘building houses over places we play in’. And this encroachment onto green spaces was noticed by adults too: ‘Shame they are building on open green spaces.’ ‘Too many houses – we’re losing green spaces.’ ‘Houses going up on every spare bit of ground.’ ‘There’s little or no control over house-building.’ This idea was repeated many times. We were also warned that ‘Queensferry is in danger of becoming too big’ and ‘We have to be careful that we don’t over populate it.’ And we were made aware of ‘pressure to build on any available space’. Others could see the implications of over-building in terms of amenities: ‘We’re overgrown with dormitory housing without the services to match the community of 10,000.’ ‘We’ve heard rumours of more building – can the infrastructure accommodate this?’ ‘Too many houses are being built for the amenities available. Not enough facilities.’ And one commented, ‘Queensferry is at the right size. There’s no need for any more houses.’ Some comments pointed to ‘too many expensive private houses, not giving fist-time buyers a chance’ and this comment usually appeared amongst Queensferry’s young single population. In short, there was a perception of over development, housing which did not meet local needs, serious concern over the loss of green spaces and playparks, and concerns about the lack of amenities for the size of the population. There was also a complaint about the ‘lack of proper consultation on housing transfer’ with ‘no time to apply for ownership’.

10. Dog mess

It is a sad fact that priorities in so many communities surround this issue. There were 45 comments about dog mess in our list of things people most disliked. The cyclepath was singled out as a problem area, with no dog bins or bags available. ‘You have to carry doggy bags for miles before you see bins on the cyclepath.’2 Irresponsible owners came under attack for carelessly discarding of bags where they were used. Some pathways and playing fields were deemed unsuitable for children due to the dog mess. Morrison Gardens was identified as a problem area, as was Lovers’ Lane. And one comment from a disabled person spoke for itself: ‘Dog mess sticks to wheelchair wheels.’ It doesn’t take much imagination to work out what happens after that.

2 Dog bins have now been put along the cycle walkway as part of the Ferry Glen improvements.

Page 20

Top ten suggestions for change

1. General recreation

The sheer number of requests (over 1000) for better recreation and leisure pursuits was so overwhelming, we broke it down. Even so, recreation and leisure facilities still made it many times into the top ten list of suggestions for change, and so it sits here at the very top. Young people are the ones who mostly commented on the lack of facilities They asked for ‘fun facilities for teenagers and not just kids,’ ‘a bigger leisure centre’, and definitely ‘more sports facilities’. Adults suggested involving teenagers themselves to bring about changes. People wanted better facilities for all generations, as well as a better community centre. Both pensioners and teenagers who lived in Dalmeny wanted ‘more to do’ there.

2. Leisure: cinema

241 separate comments (and not all of these from young people) called for a cinema in South Queensferry, and pointed to Ferrymuir, near Tesco’s, as a likely spot for this. One suggested this might be combined with a small theatre or arts centre – Queensferry easily has the population for this now.

3. Shops and shopping

Many comments reflected the need for a greater variety of shops -- a fish shop, butcher’s, baker, deli, clothes’ shop, sports shop, DIY. And there was mention of a shopping centre or small shopping mall, and room for another bank.

4. General access

‘Sort the A8000’ was often repeated. (Happily work on this has now begun.) Some suggested bigger roundabouts may help the traffic flow. We could have traffic lights at the Tesco roundabout, if only at peak times. A second road bridge also gained some local support.

Page 21

The High Street was another area of concern in terms of traffic. There were many suggestions for improving this – a one-way system if only for the summer months; restrictions to coaches; signs to show that Queensferry village centre was not suitable for large vehicles; remove the pincer points where traffic is held up and creates noise, pollution and general nuisance. On other roads, there was an idea to widen Station Road or Burgess Road. And someone suggested that mirrors be sited at point where they are needed to help drivers deal with blind spots. Speed-reducing measures were suggested at other points -- speed bumps mostly – in Dalmeny and Standingstane Road. And some wished for a way of reducing traffic noise -- possibly by planting more trees to screen off traffic. Lack of sign-posting throughout the village, for example, from Dalmeny Station was considered ‘lamentable’ and this included the need for signs on the cyclepath. Better general road maintenance and the need for resurfacing some roads was also mentioned. Though not directly an access, issue, this is related if it contributes to accidents, slows the traffic etc.

5. Buses

People had a lot to say about bus routes. They wanted, ‘more routes to different places other than Edinburgh.’ ‘buses to more places in Edinburgh’ and ‘a new route across the bridge/to Dunfermline.’ One wanted a bus link to Hopetoun. House. Many wanted the frequency of the service improved (and this has already happened since we started this exercise). Some wanted to see the return of Lothian buses and more competition introduced to improve the service. One bus user had quite a lot to say on the subject: ‘I would like to see fairer fares for the people of The Ferry. LRT are able to include towns to the East of Edinburgh in their routes. Why is South Queensferry not included? We pay Edinburgh rates but we don't get the same benefits. If LRT won't run buses to The Ferry, fares to the other bus companies should be subsidised to compensate for the lack of LRT buses.’ Bus users would also like better information about bus timetables – possibly in supermarkets if not at bus stops themselves. An improved local link to Kirkliston and a later service there was suggested to cater better for young people. And many would welcome a run-around circular minibus to carry both tourists and local people, including the elderly, around the area, not forgetting the estates. One wanted a proper bus station for South Queensferry.

Page 22

We also included coaches here -- some wished coaches to be banned altogether from the High Street with passengers dropped off to explore the area on foot, and this may well relate to the concerns about Queensferry losing its focus in the High Street.

6. Leisure: bowling

The call for a bowling alley was almost as strong as the call for a cinema, and seemed to reflect the views of young people who wished for more facilities to keep them better occupied.

7. Leisure: swimming pool

The present swimming pool was thought dull and in need of upgrading, or a new one built. A larger pool, with flumes, a slide, diving boards, a toddler pool, and a sauna, would be popular. Some residents are travelling into Edinburgh to find these facilities -- to Linlithgow, the David Lloyd Centre, or Bubbles (Livingston) – and presumably adding to their costs. One suggested the temperature be turned up. Better cleaning of the pool would also be appreciated, and there was a call for separate shower cubicles for males as a matter of equality, so that they could have the same privacy as females.

8. Food, restaurants, hotels and pubs

Queensferry, it seems, still has room for more fast food outlets offering food different to those that already exist. This possibly reflects the perceived needs of younger people on limited budgets since these comments came mostly from that age group. McDonald’s would do well to think of an entrance at the front for wheelchairs. (Generally, from comments made, wheelchair users find some restaurants in South Queensferry difficult to gain access to.) Young people would also like an internet café, or a youth café. There was also a suggestion for a ‘healthy restaurant’, a restaurant serving organic food, fair trade food, or seafood – and, a country style pub or restaurant may serve the people of Dalmeny. There might also be more entertainment on offer in local pubs and restaurants.

9. Maintain green spaces, including public gardens

Queensferry people care about their public open spaces and parks. They asked for ‘more open spaces for children to play’, ‘a country park’, ‘an adventure park’ and ‘bigger parks for older children’ – all revealing the needs of younger people identified earlier.

Page 23

The Ferry Glen, Rose Gardens, and Back Braes were seen as areas in need of attention. Some want better access to Hopetoun Wildlife Site under the crossroads, better signage, and better seating. It seems we could improve the area at the Binks, and improve the playpark behind the Vennel. Hedgerows could be better kept, and better care taken of parks and gardens. There was a suggestion that Queensferry should have its own gardening team: ‘How about our own dedicated parks team for green spaces. There's easily enough to keep them going here.’ ‘Bring back Queensferry’s own gardeners.’ More generally there are, according to one, ‘so many areas of waste ground that could be improved’. And one wanted more planting and flowers near to where the ferry boats land so that tourists and visitors would have a good first impression of the town.

10. Litter

Most suggestions here related to more bins and bins being emptied more frequently. People identified specific locations -- the cyclepath, the promenade, the top shops, and the crossroads -- and said we needed also to ‘spruce them up on the outside’. One also suggested a better design of bins: “We need more bins with windproof lids’. Some bins are old and need replacing such as those at Dundas Park and the Leisure Centre. Many called for more frequent street cleaning so that litter did not lie around, as well as more careful street cleaning with a brush to reach difficult corners and avoid weeds taking hold. The area in and around Queensferry High School, and Lover’s Lane, were thought to be particularly bad. Better education about litter and similar issues was suggested. Litter was also related to the economy of the area: ‘It's a touristy place. More people will return if it's clean.’ And to sort out the problem of dumping at Hill Court would help enhance this area’s appearance and start to tackle safety issues there.

Further Information

The list of likes, dislikes and changes is, of course, much longer than we have detailed here. We would strongly recommend that you read all the comments. You will find them in full in the appendix, or at the library on a CD ROM, and on the Community Council webpage.

Page 24

Conclusion Vision for Queensferry carried out this work so that the people of Queensferry could be part of the community planning process, and have their voices heard in decisions which will affect them. We think we have given a good account here, of the concerns of our community. We have uncovered an astonishing amount of information which makes for interesting and useful reading. It is an excellent starting point for anyone who has to consider making changes which affect the area, and we would direct you now to read those detailed comments, which speak for themselves. One last point: we feel quite strongly that any ‘solutions’ now must also involve local people, and we would like those who take this information forward to continue the participation process which we have begun here. As a result of this exercise, we are confident and pleased that more people than ever are talking about Queensferry, more care about its future, and more feel genuinely involved. And yes, it was hard work. Was it worth it? That depends on what happens to this information now.

Sources Fairley, A 1981. The Queensferry Companion: A Short History and Guide, Albyn Press, Edinburgh Queensferry History Group, 1991. Doon the Ferry. Queensferry History Group, 1992. Back Doon the Ferry.