Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.

Bridgend Farm House Options Appraisal September 2013

Prepared by: Sandra Macaskill, CaskieCo, E Sandra@caskieco.com, T 0131 657 3473 W www.caskieco.com

Contents 1. Introduction2 2. Options for consideration5 3. Appraisal of options..7 4. Consultation Event.....17 5. Appendices..18 5.1 Brief.18 5.2 Questionnaire18 5.3 Position from City of Edinburgh Council20 5.4 Position from Field in Trust..22 5.5 Craigmillar Castle Park history23 5.6 Stakeholder consultation feedback.25 5.7 Community Consultation Views.32

Learning, eating and exercise

"Study nature, love nature, stay close to nature. It will never fail you."
Frank Lloyd Wright

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

1. Introduction 1.1. Bridgend Inspiring Growth (BIG) is a small voluntary organisation and Scottish Registered Charitable Organisation (SCIO) which has come together to work towards the renovation of Bridgend Farmhouse for community ownership, use and benefit. 1.2. Bridgend Farm House and gardens stands on the north western edge of Craigmillar Wood, a community woodland created as part of the Millennium Forest Project. It was bought by the City of Edinburgh Council in 1997 as part of that project with a view to being used as a base for Park Rangers, Enable and the Urban Forest Trust. In 2009, the NHS and BACHIP (Bridgend Allotment Community Health Improvement Project) drew up plans for a major Health and Well-being Centre but none of these projects was successful in securing funding to move forward and the farmhouse has since fallen into disrepair. 1.3. There is now an opportunity for the community to develop the farmhouse into a more modest facility to provide local services and in 2010 BIG was formed to try to save the building and re-open it as a community facility with emphasis on the environment. BIG has a membership of 150 people drawn from the local community, interested groups and organisations and funding has been secured from Investing in Ideas to look at options, test their feasibility and prepare a business plan. The overall aim to achieve the above aspiration is to: Restore the building Create a community kitchen Provide a workshop for special needs groups Open a base for outdoor education, exercise and sport Rent the upper rooms to environment organisations and firms Link the opportunities of Craigmillar, Inch, Gilmerton, Moredun and Prestonfield to the woods and their history

1.4. An Architectural Feasibility Study has recently been carried out by Malcolm Fraser Architects where a number of possible developments have been identified. The cost of restoring the building has been estimated at 345,0001. 1.5. The options appraisal takes the Just Enterprise report2 produced by Forth Sector as a starting point. This study draws together the various strands of previous activity to explore development of the site. The CaskieCo options appraisal aims to build on previous studies by consulting extensively with the community and key stakeholders to determine the preferred future use options for the farmhouse. 1.6. Consultations took place over the summer of 2013 by means of an electronic survey questionnaire and interviews this report presents and appraises the options together
1Malcolm Fraser Architects. Architectural Feasibility Study. August 2013 2Prepared by Forth Sector

with presenting some ideas for how they can be realised. The options were presented to a community event on 7 September for discussion and scrutiny and feedback form this meeting is included in section four.

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

2. Options for consideration 2.1. The Architectural Feasibility Study referred to in 1.4 above presents a number of options for the physical regeneration of the farmhouse building including indicative costs and an assessment of the state of the building. A further study carried out by Hannelore Christianes3 as part of an MSc in Advanced Sustainable Design provides further perspectives on the options for how the physical building and site can be developed. This study focuses on the potential use(s) for the building informed by the community consultation and how BIG can progress to achieve them. 2.2. The three organisational options are being considered for the future use of the farmhouse are: Option One Working in partnership with one or two local anchor organisations to provide a place with a strong ecological theme based around healthy eating and living for those with learning disabilities or mental health issues Option Two BIG working with a wider range of organisations to offer multi-functional space to enable outdoor education, healthy eating and living activities linked to the park and the allotments. Option Three Establish a multi-agency management group to deliver a larger development based around the farmhouse providing heritage/exhibition space, kitchen/caf with a variety of workshops around the courtyard.

2.3. The project should deliver positive outcomes for the identified stakeholder groups, in line with local and national priorities which can be summarised as follows: A safer, closer community Local people of all ages and backgrounds are more engaged with their community and the area Local people are more aware of and gain enjoyment from the local environment and undertake activities to protect and conserve it Young people and young people with learning disabilities have improved life chances through opportunities for social interaction, learning, training and employment People are healthier and make healthier life choices and are more active

3The images of sustainable architecture a refurbishment case study: Three renovation proposals for an environmental education centre
located in Bridgend farmhouse, Edinburgh. Hannelore Christianes. August 2013.

2.4. The farmhouse is owned by City of Edinburgh Council and has been the subject or regular meetings and correspondence with BIG over the years a statement of their position at the end of 2012 can be found in appendix 5.34. The Council has yet to make a decision regarding the future of the building but a recent meeting suggested that they might be amenable to at least a temporary lease to BIG on presentation of a feasible development plan. Fields in Trust also has an interest in any future plans for the site and have expressed support for BIGs proposed development of the farmhouse (see appendix 5.4)

4See appendix 5.3 Letter to Cllr Burns from Craig Lamont, Property Management and Development, CEC

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

3. Appraisal of Options 3.1. This section goes on to consider the results the community/stakeholder consultations and the emergent themes presenting an assessment of various ways forward for the development of the farmhouse building and its site. A consultation over the summer of 2013 resulted in 59 parties responding to the online questionnaire (see appendix 5.2) with a mix of organisations and individuals giving their views. 95% (55 respondents) support the renovation of the farmhouse with 5% (3 respondents) not in favour of development. Many saw potential for very exciting and welcoming space bringing together a range of interests. 3.2. Only 11% of respondents were currently members of BIG with 89% not currently signed up. 85% would like more information and to be kept informed about developments showing considerable interest in and support for the development of the site. 3.3. 57% favoured option two - BIG working with a wider range of organisations to offer multi-functional space to enable outdoor education, healthy eating and living activities linked to the park and the allotments, 28% option three (a multi-agency management group) and 16% option one (one or two local anchor organisations). (See Figure 1).

Figure - Preferred option for development of farmhouse

3.4. Considering the options in terms of their implications for BIG is helpful in determining the way forward. BIG is currently constituted as a SCIO with approximately 150 members and a very low turnover. Taking on the farmhouse building and developing it would require that BIG develop its organisational

structure to enable it to own and manage assets and potentially a social enterprise(s). It may be necessary to consider becoming a company limited by Guarantee with charitable status and setting up a wholly owned trading subsidiary as the organisation grows and becomes responsible for an increased turnover of funds and trading activities.

Option One

3.5. Working in partnership with one or two anchor organisations to provide activities would require identifying bodies which share a common purpose to develop the activities with a full assessment of potential partners in line with BIGs ethos and objectives to ensure that an appropriate partnership was being entered into. A full partnership agreement should then be explored, documented and entered into as a legally binding contract. This would be particularly important if joint funding was to be sought or trading activities entered into. Partnership agreements can be very complex to negotiate and agree as organisations have different governance structures and systems of accountability not to mention potential conflicts of interest. Another way to approach this could be BIG taking on the building and development then leasing or sub leasing (depending on tenure) accommodation back to the anchor tenants/partner organisations. This would require that BIG carry all the risk associated with the venture rather than potentially sharing the risk with partner organisations if in full partnership. The latter option provides BIG with control over the project.

Option Two

3.6. BIG working with an range of organisations to offer multi-functional space for activities the most practical way for BIG to achieve this would be the second option above i.e. BIG takes on the responsibility for building and developing the project then leasing or offering space to other organisations for use in line with their purposes. Clear themes of activity and ethics of operation can be put in place to ensure they are in line with BIGs objectives. There can be challenges with such a model as organisations can come and go requiring careful management to ensure income streams. This is not much different to the situation may voluntary organisations and social enterprises find themselves in.

Option Three

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

3.7. Establishing a multi-agency management group to deliver a larger development based around the farmhouse and activities could involve a multi-agency partnership similar to that on option one with many partnership agreements with different bodies or simply a management committee with representation for all groups. This could be very complex and could result in difficulty in making strategic and business decisions potentially holding back the work of the project, depending on the priority given to the project by the external agency(ies) and their knowledge and support of BIGs activities.

3.8. A Plus Minus and Interesting (PMI) analysis of the options for BIG assesses and scores the merits of each from an organisational perspective.

Plus, Minus and Interesting Analysis Plus Minus Option One- partnership with one or two anchor organisations
Several organisations coming together share skills and objectives +3 Requires due diligence and written partnership agreement(s) - 4 Can be more attractive to funders +2 Can require input to funding applications from all parties -1 Can build a stronger brand image e.g. ecology and people with disabilities +2 BIG can lose control or may have to water down objectives -2 BIG shares the risks of the development and delivery of the project +3 Can be seen as exclusive to those organisations and therefore not get wider community buy in -2

BIG would be required to invest in driving the project -2 Total + 10

Total -11 Overall total Plus +10 Minus -11 Interesting + 6 = +5

Option Two- work with a wide range of organisations

BIG retains control over the project +3 BIG carries all the risks of the project 4 Diversification of potential users so if one moves on another can be brought in +3 May have lots of short term, part time users making administration and management time consuming 3 Can bring different communities and groups together with a sense of purpose +2 BIG would be required to invest in driving the project -2 Can be more attractive to funders +2 Can build a stronger brand image e.g. ecology, outdoor education people with disabilities +2 Total +12 Total -9 Overall total Plus +12 Minus -9 Interesting + 3 = +8

Option Three- establish a multi- agency management group

Appearance of strong diverse management group +1 Challenge ensuring buy in and commitment from all agencies -3

BIG can lose control or may have to water down objectives -2

Can be a nightmare to manage diverse interests and styles 2

Require to run as a social enterprise ethos of which may not suit all agencies involved -2

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

Total +1 Total -9 Overall total Plus +1 Minus -9 Interesting +7 = -1

Using any model which applies scoring when appraising options can be difficult (or considered subjective), but the PMI model above gives some indication of the pluses and minuses of the various options being considered when deciding on the best model for BIG to take forward. Model two scores +8 according to the criteria considered and as such is the most favoured model.

Anchor organisations

3.9. Two organisations have expressed interest in exploring the role of anchor organisations Community Ability Network (CAN), which was originally set up with similar aims but due to pressure for advice work current premises are no longer able to deliver this5 and CAPRO (Craigmillar Adventure Project) is a community based social enterprise which develops outdoor and environmental education for young people. Its priorities are:
Personal and social skills development. Inclusion Accreditation. Recreation and fun. Encouraging active and healthy lifestyles. The Curriculum For Excellence for Outdoor Learning

Both currently work in the local Craigmillar area. The potential for developing these partnerships should be considered in detail more during the next phase of development, including a comparison of their aims, objectives, values and ethics to see how they sit with those of BIG. 3.10. Many other organisations (47) expressed interest in using the facility at Bridgend Farmhouse if developed, it can therefore be assumed that there would be a number of organisations interested in working with BIG in a framework such has option two or option three. Key Activities

5Awaiting further information from project on potential future development here

3.11. A core ethos of health, well-being and ecology was a common theme from most respondents with six possible activities suggested: Usage Healthy eating Activity Kitchen/cafe Healthy outdoor space Outdoor education

Accommodation

Exhibition space

Social enterprise

Growing food on allotments and cooking it in the caf Primary school curriculum activities Selling fresh produce from allotments (and potentially elsewhere) A place to have a cup of tea and cook healthy food from allotments Nowhere locally (other than Cameron Toll) to get refreshments No large or training kitchen which can be used by groups in area Link to wider park land (inch and Craigmillar) Access for those with learning disabilities Access for those with mental health issues Access for community groups and more vulnerable groups Learning for school groups (environment, ecology, growing food) Active Schools keen to seen development for school groups using the outdoors CAPRO keen to develop outdoor education activities with youth groups and young people in the area (John Muir Awards etc) Caf space Kitchen space (group access) Meeting and teaching space (schools and other organisations) Workshop space and storage space linked to the heritage of the farm (dairy and garden centre) ecology sustainability income from hiring space, exhibitions and cafe

Many of these themes have been discussed previously but the benefit for the community consultation is in confirming that they are currently seen as potential development possibilities for the building and site. Other factors such as City of Edinburgh Councils future priorities around adult health and social care services place a high priority on the provision of opportunities to learn about living well and

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

practical help to maintain health and wellbeing 6 as part of service delivery and could well form a plank of BIGs offer. Using the Farmhouse and site 3.12. 87% of respondents said they or their group would use the new facility. 13% said they wouldnt. 53% said their group would like to hire space to run their own activities. When asked what would help them to use the facilities: A warm, welcoming and accessible (wheelchair and generally) venue Access to IT (wireless, computer) Cooking facilities, a training kitchen and a place to get a cup of coffee after exploring the park Classroom space, conference facilities, multi- purpose space for groups from 15 to 100 Social space which can also be used for yoga, dance and BYOB events Exhibition, heritage and art space Toilets serving the allotments, park (Inch) and woodland Washing facilities and a boot store Place to store allotment tools (for BIG members), outdoor Kit (Green Team) and bikes A community green grocer or farm shop where people could sell their produce in season

Some groups said they had no funding to pay for lets but would be happy to share expertise in local history for free lets. An important consideration in evaluating the building options for the site is the potential use by groups and the above list provides a good shopping list of what people are looking for. Activities on site 3.13. One respondent summed up their idea for the actual use of the site very well when they said:
I think that BIG are key stakeholders and have instigated the re-development project thus far. It would be great to extend the ethos of the allotments and home grown produce to promote healthy eating and provide demonstrations and related activities as well as outdoor education. I also like the Idea of some space being used to record the history and heritage of the site and the farm. In time, the kitchen/cafe idea (again using homegrown produce) could also be implemented to generate some profit and attract visitors.

This view echoed many others, a sample of which can be found in appendix 5.7. The general consensus is that the site is developed for learning, eating and exercise all of which support healthy eating, living and wellbeing agendas. A wide range of users including schools (particularly primary), agencies working with adults with learning disability and mental health issues, older people, adult learners, those with long term
6A Market Shaping Strategy 2013 2018. Edinburghs adult health and social care services

health conditions or criminal justice issues and the Green Team are all keen to see similar activities on the site. The vision of a farmhouse developed as a hub to provide access to and support a diverse range of activities is emerging; a place in the city where you can hire a bike and cycle though the woodland (like a mini Glentress accessible to everyone in Edinburgh with adapted biked for all to use), a place where you can get a nice cuppa and perhaps some home baking after a walk in the woods or a day on the allotment, a place where the heritage of the area as nursery land of the castle and latterly as a farm can be celebrated, a place where school groups come and learn about growing food, cooking and eating it as a sustainable aspect of life and then where they can do some off road cycling to keep fit and get fresh air whilst learning about the various other inhabitants of the woods (bugs, birds, trees etc), a place where families can come for a day out during weekends and holidays to do all of the above and study nature, love nature, stay close to nature7. Procurement of the building and site 3.14. The farmhouse and surrounding land are owned by CEC and a 12 month lease has been mooted to get the project started. This could act as a catalyst for galvanising support and encouraging volunteer effort around the development in the short term. A longer term tenure will, however be required to make future development viable as funding bodies such as the Big Lottery Growing Community Assets will only consider supporting projects which own buildings or have significant leases. The Inch Park Community Sports Club has secured an 80 year lease on their site in Inch Park from CEC subject to Parks Department regulations. They have secured investment from Sports Scotland, Social Investment Scotland, CEC and the Robertson Trust among others to enable the development of their new build building and programme. Lambhill Stables8 a similar development project in Glasgow, visited during the options appraisal bought their original stables building and land from British Waterways for 75K with a grant from Glasgow City Growth Fund. The White House project in Craigmillar, similarly has secured a lease with rent incentive from PARC (CEC) and gone on to capitalise the development of their social enterprise activity through other sources including a soft loan from another community organisation. 3.15. Each community project of this type is unique and requires to develop its own solution. It is possible that BIG could present a viable proposal to CEC which would enable a partnership arrangement (long term lease, rent incentive or transfer of the asset) which could act as a catalyst for the community securing funding to realise the wider development of the project when the local authority is unable to do so in the current financial climate. The ideal location bordering the allotments, on the edge of the park and woodland provides an exciting opportunity to achieve the original aspirations presented by BIG. Planning Issues

7Frank Lloyd Wright 8http://www.lambhillstables.org/

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

3.16. Planning permission will be required for the option agreed and this will require going through the usual channels which require time. It is anticipated that CEC would support any eventual development and Fields in Trust have already given outline support to the type of development propose (see appendix 5.4). There is a planning issue related to a proposed tram route which has yet to gain approval form the Scottish Government but the architects plans take account of this in their drawings. NB the sustainable design plans (Hannalore Christiaens) do not take account of this so this should be borne in mind when considering options for building on site. Costs of options 3.17. The main cost of developing the farmhouse and site will be the capital cost of refurbishing the building and depending on the final choice of development (see architectural and sustainability options) this could vary. Current estimates for this suggest 345,000 including contingency for the building works up to phase 2 (the farmhouse itself). This includes fixed furniture and fittings but does not include decoration which it is anticipated could be completed by volunteers. The development of additional space such as workshop space as proposed in the architects plans would be additional but costs are not specified. 3.18. There would be further costs involved in the establishment of social enterprise activity to deliver sustainable project to achieve the outcomes intended. Such costs would include: business development to realise the business plan; prepare funding applications to secure the building and to buy any equipment to enable operation. Whilst it is anticipated that volunteer effort could play a significant role in the delivery of the operation, staffing to support this operation should also be considered. All the projects referred to above (13.13) have opted to use volunteers and some paid staff to ensure the success of their ventures. A budget of approximately 100K would be necessary to fund the revenue element of setting up the enterprise, this would be further qualified as the feasibility study is carried out and the business plan prepared. 3.19. The benefits of establishing the project could be huge, realising a long held vision for the regeneration of the building and opening up new opportunities for a range of users. An initial stakeholder analysis for a Social Return on Investment (SROI) Forecast suggests that there could be 13 major stakeholder groups which could benefit from using the building, up to 275 people per day with a further 30 plus organisations. The full forecast has not yet been completed so it is not yet possible to determine the full SROI.

Management of the project 3.20. Earlier sections of the options appraisal assessed the different models for BIG to manage the project. This is a matter for the board to consider as they weigh up the tasks involved in progressing towards their goal of developing the farmhouse. Whether the board decides to take on the responsibility on their own or to build a partnership with one or more organisations is a key question to be answered before

moving on to the next stage of the development. It is likely to take several years of effort to put funding in place and to achieve the necessary permissions (at minimum). The Inch took 17 years to come to fruition, Lambhill Stables was conceived in 2006 and the White House will be trading four years after the initial feasibility study was undertaken. 3.21. The establishment of a development trust to take the project forward has also been proposed. There are an increasing number of development trusts now operating in urban areas with the Community Alliance Trust (CAT) in Craigmillar an example working to the ends of promoting the regeneration of the area at a time when organisations traditionally charged with this role are not so well placed to carry out this work; namely the local authority. BIG should certainly explore seeking this status particularly if they move to change status from being a SCIO as they could adopt a memorandum and article of association which recognise this role. The Development Trust Association Scotland (DTAS) http://www.dtascot.org.uk/ can provide further support in this. Development trusts are community owned trusts which: are owned and managed by the local community aim to achieve the sustainable regeneration of a community or address a range of economic, social, environmental and cultural issues within a community are independent but seek to work in partnership with other private, public and third sector organisations aim to reduce dependency on grant support by generating income through enterprise and the ownership of assets. All trading surpluses are principally reinvested in the organisation or the community. Marketing of opportunities 3.22. The marketing or the opportunity to use the facility once developed would initially be to the stakeholders and groups referred to under the SROI above, a significant market in its own right, but if sports and outdoor education activities were made available on the edge of the city using the woodland park they could attract a much wider audience of people who could take the bus to go for a health giving walk or cycle though the park. There is huge potential to make Bridgend Farmhouse a destination for a range of activities from healthy eating to healthy living and sport with a heritage aspect reflecting the history of the area and giving it a real sense of purpose for the 21st century. Flexibility and services offered 3.23. The above sections describe a very flexible offer based around the themes of learning, eating and exercise. It is envisaged that the actual development of the building will provide a flexible resource which can be used in many different ways by different groups. The farmhouse is an old domestic building and even if restored will still have those dimensions although any additional new space can add new character and potential. There is still fluidly to the offer and it is advisable to maintain this until the final business plan is prepared, even then this will have to be

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

flexible enough to respond to changing markets and needs in the neighbouring communities and partner organisations. Environmental Impact 3.24. The environmental impact of any development of the site would be an important consideration given the ecological focus of the development. Assessment of such impact should be carried out on an on-going basis and could in fact provide an early on site activity to engage young people/ school pupils in the actual measuring and monitoring exercises in tandem with any specialist agencies. Use of volunteers/training opportunities 3.25. Use of volunteers has already been referred to above and will be seen as a major plank of the way forward for BIG. The Board has a wide range of skills from journalism and youth work to community engagement and accountancy. They also have a wealth of links to all the key agencies and stakeholder groups they would like to see involved. There is huge scope to include more and wider types of volunteer opportunity as the project develops including site clearance and maintenance, environmental impact assessment. A volunteering policy with training and safeguards is desirable (may already be in place?) to ensure that this valuable resource is accessed, developed and valued. Advice from the Inch Park Community Sports Club was to encourage and value volunteers as they are what keeps a project like this going, staff should enhance the role of volunteers. Colleagues at Lambhill Stables offered similar counsel when getting the blend of volunteers and staff right to deliver their objectives.

4. Community Consultation Event 7 September 2013 4.1. Approximately 25 people9 attended a community consultation event on the site beside the farmhouse on Saturday 7 September. The three options considered during the appraisal were presented as were the drawings for the renovation of the building produces by Peter Virtue at Malcolm Fraser Architects. Suggestions for ensuring the sustainability of the building developed by Hannelore Christianes as part of her MSc in Advanced Sustainable Design were also presented. Everyone took part in a discussion of the options with an opportunity to give gives in a variety of ways using post its, table clothes and good old 1:1 chat. There was a very favourable buzz from those present with the general view that option 2 offered the best route forward.

Will and Anna describe the drawings

4.2. The following quote summed up the mood of many: I like option 2 I live across the road and have done for 14 years. I havent heard about the proposals until last week. Im sure the local community would take more interest if they knew more. If I havent heard about it, half the community havent. There is enough natural resource in the area the learning/ healthy eating/ exercise is something the community could benefit from. There is a huge church community make a connection with them and there is a huge amount of people who may be interested in supporting you sharing skills. Dothie Fielding

4.3. Other ideas put forward

9There was some disappointment expressed that so few people attended given the huge effort made to publicise the meeting

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

Discussions and home baking!

Propose a cycle and pedestrian crossing on Dalkeith Road at the Farmhouse to enable access (Ursula Busch) Present findings to Bridgened Allotments AGM on Sunday 22 September Introduction to Gardening Courses Trading /swapping of produce space for allotment holders and games space for table tennis, bowls and other games Healthy frozen food made from local produce to supply Meals on Wheels Richmond Caf in Craigmillar do ready meals with fresh ingredients from the co-op (Chris) Four Winds Inspiration Centre in Inverleith Park. Carol Fraser delivers all sorts of arts and crafts Treefest?? BIG would have more clout if joined with other organisations as well as being able to draw on the skills and experience brought by other members f the group Jupiter Art Land (Dalmeny) example of funding Carr Gomm interested in social prescribing as well as community gardens for growing (working with Edinburgh College on this) Eilidh MacDonald Access issues? Architectural considerations, archaeological survey results? Set up something in Cameron Toll shopping centre for members Huge historical potential e.g. farming in the past. Reminds you of rural heritage in this area (retain old buildings as a museum like sites of old dairy, stables) Upper level; not overly wedded to existing layout and perhaps opening structure by knocking down some of the walls would provide more options and better usage of space for groups/exhibitions and for storage etc. Perhaps development for a later stage once site is secured. Dont mind a more sustainable aspect would perhaps garner more interest from local groups? Like the idea of an anchor but depends on strong relations, buying in for a number of years and their considerations for potential use. "Get grand designs involved!" Restoration programme cycle racks/storage sustainable power-wind fan? wood-burning stove

solar panels Large windows - if south facing. And made it's a more community-based workshops for disability and mental health problems within the community. Health eating cafe. Try and accentuate the historical element and the building by tying it into the surrounding gardens i.e. are there any tress that have been here since the farm was built?

Considering the drawings

4.4. Support for the three options When it came to voting on the three options Option 2 was favoured by most who took part, suggesting it as the starting point for the next stage of the development of plans the feasibility study. 4.5. The next step is for the BIG board to decide who they wish to proceed!

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

5. Appendix 1 5.1 Brief for the options appraisal Options appraisal that includes a select few distinct and clear options, presented with advantages and disadvantages and a system for assessment and analysis of each option (e.g. list of 10 key categories for examples; cost, size, services offered, planning issues, flexibility, environmental impact, etc) 5.2 Questionnaire for community consultation Bridgend Inspiring Growth Bridgend Inspiring Growth (BIG) is a Scottish Charitable Incorporated Organisation set up with the mission to: Acquire and renovate of Bridgend Farmhouse in Edinburgh on behalf of the people and place of Bridgend and the surrounding communities of Inch, Moredun, Liberton and Craigmillar, with the intention that the facility becomes a multi-purpose centre for environmental education, training and sustainable living directed and run by the local community. Bridgend Farmhouse was once the focal point of a local farm, but has not been used for a number of years and is now in a state of disrepair, it sits on the edge of Bridgend Allotments and Craigmillar Park with easy access from Dalkieth Road. Three options are being considered for the future of the farmhouse: 1 Working in partnership with one or two local anchor organisations to provide a place with a strong ecological theme based around healthy eating and living for those with learning disabilities or mental health issues 2 BIG working with a wider range of organisations to offer multi-functional space to enable outdoor education, healthy eating and living activities linked to the park and the allotments. 3 Establish a multi-agency management group to deliver a larger development based around the farmhouse providing heritage/exhibition space, kitchen/caf with a variety of workshops around the courtyard. BIG is consulting local communities and other stakeholders over the summer to find out what they would like to see the farmhouse restored as and whether they would use the facility. Please take a few minutes to complete our questionnaire/online survey and tell us what you would like to happen to Bridgend Farmhouse. 1. Do you support the renovation of Bridgend Farmhouse for the benefit of the community (as described above)? Yes No 2. Which of the three options would you like to see on the site? Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 3. Please tell us why?

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

4. Would you/your group like to use the new facility?

Yes

No

5. Would you/your group like to hire space to run its own activities? Yes 6. Would you/your group like to run its own activities?Yes 7. No

No

What facilities/resources/materials would enable your organisation and participants to use and utilise this building?

8. Please tell us a bit more about what you/your groups accommodation needs i.e. what do you need space to do, cook, eat, meet, other

9. If we were to have a temporary lease of the site would your organisation being interested in contributing to renovation work or meanwhile developments/events? If so, what?

10. Are you a member of BIG?

Yes

No

11. Would you like more information on BIG/to be kept informed about developments? Yes No 12. Would you like to attend the community consultation event being held in September 2013 locally? Yes No 13. How can we contact you about this event? (email/text/ post)

14. Any other comments about the proposed development

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

.
BIG/Survey3.1/SM/17July13

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

5.3 Position from City of Edinburgh Council CEC aspiration for Bridgend farmhouse The aspiration for this property from the outset was to create a gateway into the Country Park, providing visitor and local facilities. The BIG proposals keep this hope alive in potentially being able to deliver a gateway, providing community facilities which would fulfil the Councils initial intentions for this property.10
Dear Cllr Burns, This Council has entered into regular correspondence with Mr Golding and has met with him and colleague Sally Swann to discuss the Bridgend Inspiring Growth (BIG) proposals. Many of the groups intentions for the property align with the Councils initial aspiration for the farmhouse, which was to create a gateway into the Craigmillar Country Park. In answer to Mr Goldings questions: Whilst I am awaiting detailed cost information, it is confirmed that works to keep the property secure, wind and watertight have been carried out during the last five years. The aspiration for this property from the outset was to create a gateway into the Country Park, providing visitor and local facilities. The BIG proposals keep this hope alive in potentially being able to deliver a gateway, providing community facilities which would fulfil the Councils initial intentions for this property. The feasibility report states that the site is located within Edinburghs Green Belt and this is confirmed by Planning, who inform that the Edinburgh City Local Plan (ECLP) policy Env 10 applies. This permits development for the purposes of agriculture, woodland, forestry, horticulture or for a countryside recreational use compatible with an agricultural or natural setting. The policy allows for changes of use or small scale extensions to buildings with architectural or historical merit. The proposed use as an environmental education and training centre could meet the criterion if it demonstrates it will have functional links to countryside recreational use, agriculture, horticulture, woodland or forestry. Similarly, its reinstatement or replacement to a residential use could also be supported given that it would not have a detrimental impact on the green belt. Further details on the limitations of this policy are best researched by reading the policy document itself. The policy can be accessed by clicking on this link: Env 10 . A report to the Services for Communities Senior Management team on 19 March 2007 considered the future of the farmhouse. Limited funds were available through the European Regional Development Fund however these monies were only sufficient to make the property secure, wind and watertight. Renovation of the farmhouse is not included in the Councils Capital Expenditure programme and the recommendation was that the farmhouse be disposed of. The Council is therefore not currently in a position to enter into a partnership to help fund the project. Comments have also been sought on the likelihood of EDI becoming involved. The future remit of Council owned Property Companies was reviewed at Council last week and the future remit is for strategic property development. It is therefore doubtful that this renovation project will fit within this remit. The Services for Communities Department continues to be supportive of BIGs proposals, however with no Council funding allocated to this project there is little additional support that can be offered. For your further information, with the farmhouse being located inside the boundary of the Craigmillar Country Park it comes under the auspices of Fields in Trust, whose consent is required to dispose of any part of a park. Legal Services are corresponding with Fields in Trust to request that the farmhouse is extracted from the park boundary so that a disposal may be possible. Until this consent is forthcoming, sale of the farmhouse or its gardens is not possible. I trust that the above answers Mr Goldings queries. Regards, Craig Lamont, Estates Surveyor Property Management & Development. 20 December 2012.

10Craig Lamont, Estates Surveyor Property Management & Development. 20 December 2012 letter to Cllr Burns CEC.
See appendix ? for full text

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

5.4 Fields in Trust letter

John Knox Bridgend Inspring Growth (BIG) EH16 5RX. 25 July 2013 Dear John, Lease of Bridgend Farm House, Craigmillar Park Fields in Trust, Scotland fully supports BIGs plans to renovate the above farm house and convert it to a Environmental, Education and Training Centre on condition that would be no restriction on any planned membership (anyone could join) or restriction on public access. Fields in Trust believes that your project would bring back to a useful life an important building and that would bring benefits to current and future park users. To that end Fields in Trust, Scotland is fully supportive of The City of Edinburgh Council leasing the premises to your organisation to allow renovation work to begin. I trust that clarifies our position. Best wishes for success with your project. Yours sincerely, Colin Rennie Colin Rennie Manager

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

Appendix 5.5 Craigmillar Castle Park history

Craigmillar Castle Park including Hawkhill Woods

Name Address Postcode Telephone Email Facilities

Craigmillar Castle Park including Hawkhill Woods Old Dalkeith Road EH16 4TE 0131 529 2401 naturalheritageservice@edinburgh.gov.uk Natural Heritage Service Guided walks Interpretation panels Orienteering Play area Seating Mountain bike trail (proposed) Craigmillar Castle Park is a natural heritage park with areas of mature and young woodland, grassland and old quarries. In 1997, over 40,000 trees were planted as part of the millennium forest for Scotland project. This park provides an excellent place to walk, cycle or jog on many different paths to explore the different habitats. The park has been awarded a Green Flag since 2010, in recognition of it being a quality greenspace. Craigmillar Castle Park is set against the backdrop of Craigmillar Castle . An enormous baronial structure famously associated with Mary Queen of Scots, was built in the 15th century by Sir John Preston. It passed from the Prestons to Sir John Gilmour (a distant relative) in 1660 and remained with that family until 1946 when it passed to the state and then onto Historic Scotland who manage it today. The area is a mixture of open parkland with groups of veteran trees; mature woodland located around the fringes of Craigmillar Hill; and recently created woodland established on the fields on the north and western edges of the Hill. The young woodlands at the north of the park are made up of many different native species: alder, birch, oak, ash and hawthorn are just some. These trees are excellent places to see and hear the many small birds that live in the park, such as bullfinch. Watch for the buzzards soaring over the grasslands in the park. They make a mewling cry as they call to each other. The range of grasslands and woodlands means there are plenty of rabbits and voles for them to eat. Find out how to organise an event in Edinburgh's parks Craigmillar Woods Action Group Natural Heritage Ranger Service Since 2010

Background

History and heritage

Wildlife

Organise an event Getting involved Other useful links Green Flag

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

Location map

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

Appendix 5.6 Stakeholder Consultations Organisation Capital Skills Contact Bob Rudge Manager Capital Skills Inch Park Old Dalkeith Road EDINBURGH EH16 4SU T 0131 672 3540 E bob.rudge@edinb urgh.gov.uk Keith Logie CEC Parks T 0131 529 7916 E keith.logies@edin burgh.giv.uk Response Capital Skills, (a CEC project) provide training in hard and soft landscaping (a mixture of construction and horticulture) for those seeking work. They are currently preparing to deliver a new Employability Fund project (Scottish Government funded) and are recruiting trainees for this. It is due to start on 26 August 13. There is a strong emphasis on personal development of their trainees. The cannot do private work but deliver a range of projects for Council Departments where they charge for materials and transport (not labour/instructors) with a 10% levee to cover costs. They are always interested in real work experience for trainees and would be interested in potential collaboration with Bridgend on the redevelopment of the farmhouse. I initially spoke to Alan Bell who referred me to Keith as he has had previous involvement with BIG and the farmhouse redevelopment. Will contact him on his return from leave. NB David Jamieson, Parks and Green space Manager is his line manager and Will and I have already opened discussions with him regarding potential lease of the farmhouse.

Capability Scotland

Currently on leave, back 19 August 13 Stuart Thomson Initial response went to Laura Thomson, whom I have spoken to and Services Coexplained what BIG is doing. She has referred me to Stuart and I have ordinator left a message to arrange to speak to him. 11 Ellersley Road EDINBURGH

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

EH12 6HY T 0131 347 1067 E stuart.thomson@c apabilityscotland.org.uk Ali Wylie Operations Manager/ Suzanne Laing Community Development Manager 277 Gilmerton Road EDINBURGH EH16 5UD T 0131 664 3511 E ali@inchpark.org

Inch Park Community Sports Club

Met Suzanne and Ali on Tuesday 20 August to discuss: Their experiences in launching a new community facility in the area The programme they offer Any gaps in local provision Any potential for partnership with BIG They have an 80 year lease on their site (from CEC) subject to Parks regulations. They are very supportive of BIGs idea and are also trying to build links with the local community but see a role for everyone. Their priority is to work with young people through sport and are exploring working with people with disabilities, creating a place for older people and those with literacy and numeracy needs. They have two youth workers starting in September. The Bike Club which encourages cycling in the city was also mentioned as worthy of contacting. They like the sound of a kitchen and cycle hire as possible activities. Their advice is to borrow kit (table chairs etc or have them donated from those no longer requiring them e.g. Edin University. Would also advise encouraging volunteers as they keep projects going and any paid staff should be used to enhance the role played by volunteers. Managing people and understanding genuine partnership is also important. They have two companies Inch Park Trading (social enterprise trading element) and Inch Park Charitable Trust. Things cost what they cost so any enterprise must wash its face, financial benching marking is essential and a good balance between using the good nature of volunteers and running a business (nurture them).

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

Inch Community Education Centre

Heather Muchamore/ Margaret Faichney Inch Community Education Centre 225 Gilmerton Road EDINBURGH EH16 5UF T 0131 664 4710 E heather.muchamor e@ea.edin.sch.uk Maragert.faichney @ea.edin.sch.uk

Heather Responded to questionnaire. Spoke to her and she requested an email to send to her boss Douglas Jeffries re a CLD response. Heather delivers adult education in the area and is always looking for free venues, ideally with comfy seats and a purpose built crche! She mentioned a number of important points for consideration: Getting to the building is difficult across a busy main road Inch CEC doesnt have very good cookery facilities so scope for developing something for groups to use there and work in partnership Heritage funding around the idea of local peoples former working lives (fruit growing etc) could be a useful theme to pursue Bridgend falls on the boundary of two community councils and two neighbourhood partnership areas which will be an important consideration in getting buy in from either or both Met with Margaret, who emphasised that there is no caf at the Inch Centre and there are no toilet facilities at the Park. Outdoor Sports and nature trails could be very useful activities e.g. Hunting for the Bear. She also mentioned the Royal Mail SE Delivery Office as a potential source of customers for the caf. Emailed request for view from CLD (Douglas Jeffries) no response so far Currently provide training for those with learning disability in Inch Park. CEC is not funding such projects directly after this financial year, so it is unlikely they will be operating form this site. A final decision will be taken on this in September. Also spoke to Business Manager who outlined plans to develop a social enterprise based on horticulture with a farmer on the other side of the city so further development on the Inch site is unlikely.

Enable

Paul Harvey 46 Old Dalkeith Road EDINBURGH EH16 4TD T 0131 672 1541 E

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

Bangholm Sports and Outdoor Education Centre

paul.harvey@enab Forestry Commission used to fund them to do work in Craigmillar le.org.uk Park clear paths, bracing, tree management etc but no longer happening (cutback?) speak to park rangers about what is happening Vince Connor here Business Manager T 0131 663 9427 E Vincent.cornnor@ enable.org.uk Cliff Smith Provide a wide range of outdoor activities across the city and always Bangholm Sports looking for venues to do kayaking, climbing, cycling etc and Outdoor Education Centre Happy to be kept informed about developments in case there are any 23 Craighall future opportunities. Gardens EDINBURGH EH6 4RJ T 0131 551 4368 E Cliff.Smith@edin burgh.gov.uk Penny Radway The Green Team CEC Tynecastle High School EDINBUGRH EH11 2 ND

The Green Team

The Green Team is based at Tynecastle High School and frequently uses outdoor spaces in country Parks etc so would use training facilities for up to 100 young people. They have a new group in the Inch which will be using the Power Pod11 and Gorilla Cinema (Woodcraft Folk). They are happily based where they are but could also use minibus parking and storage for kit (tents etc). They dont have much budget for paying for hire of spaces etc

11A mobile educational tool for demonstrating renewable energy

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

OWL Project

T 0131 337 7227 E penny@greenteam .org.uk Scott Christie Scott has expressed interest in the project, but was away on leave. He The Green Team was contacted again on 29 August and a message left. CEC Tynecastle High School EDINBUGRH EH11 2 ND T 0131 337 7227 E scott@owl.org.uk Graeme Morrison Unit 23A Castlebrae Business Centre 40 Peffer Place EDINBURGH EH16 4BB T 0131 652 1557 M 0771 3635141 E graeme@capro.or g.uk E gzmorrison@btint ernet.com

CAPRO

CAPRO are currently operating as a social enterprise and are very interested in exploring future collaboration with BIG to do outdoor and youth activities and work with people with disabilities. They currently work in partnership with organisations such as Dunedin Canmore, Castlebrae High School and Epilepsy Scotland securing funding to deliver youth challenge activities and accredited programmes.They currently offer John Muir Trust Awards and Leadership Courses at Gracemount and are keen to find neutral venues to deliver outdoor and environmental activities. Graeme is very keen to discuss possible collaboration particularly in relation to supporting youth activities in the area.

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

The Forestry Commission

John Ogilvie Beat Forester T 07887 822525 E john.ogilvie@fore stry.gsi.gov.uk Kirsteen Torrance The Bike Club Youth Scotland Balfour House 19 Bonnington Grove EDINBURGH EH6 4BL T 0131 554 2561 E kirsteen.torrance @ctc.org.uk

The Bike Club

The Forestry Commission dont own the woodland and as such dont have any jurisdiction, they do however sometimes get involved in woodland projects they dont own e.g. forest enterprise (recreation/tourism etc) and forest conservation. There could be potential for volunteering, employability and rural skills development. Ive dropped John and email and he will discuss further with colleagues and get back to us. Spoke to Youth Scotland / The Bike Club. NCYG have previously been involved with them (Aug 12). Waiting for Kirsteen to get back to me.

Community Ability Network

Ron Carthy Manager Community Ability Network 94 Niddrie Mains Road EDINBURGH EH16 4DT T 0131 661 6677 E Ron@can-

Ron responded to Will and the survey indicating that they are looking for a facility to expand their activities. Left telephone several messages so far.

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

Community Payback Work Officer Criminal Justice City Wide Services

disability.org.uk Jimmy Hewitt City of Edinburgh Council Community Work Team Central 2- 4 Grindlay Street Court EDINBURGH EH3 9AR T 0131 469 3408 E James.Hewitt@ed inburgh.gov.uk

Received an email from Jimmy explaining that they are going through as restructuring process at present and they should know better after 5 September if they could get involved. He will pass on our contact details for the manager to cover South Edinburgh to contact us.

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

Appendix 5.7 Community Consultation Views

This is the best fit for our purposes. We are a primary school (Niddrie Mill) which is currently working to promote outdoor learning and healthy eating so we would value opportunity to use the allotments for growing food and then utilise the farmhouse building as teaching accommodation. Most appropriate for the space and wider purpose of the allotment site as a neighbour but not involving the allotment owners, who did not sign up to any 'linked' involvement as part of their use of the site. Also the other two options (2 and 3) are not specific enough in their stated objectives and therefore pose a risk to the allotment users. I feel that either Option 1 or Option 2 would be most beneficial as these appear more targeted to individuals / groups who would benefit from this new venture. I ticked Option 2 as it included educational opportunities. A focused group of organisations (or reps from these organisations) with a strong interest in the overall themes & issues of BIG may be more effective than Option 3, which may be too big & ambitious initially. CAN was originally set up with similar aims but due to pressure of demand for advice work current premises no longer available. Would be interested in exploring being an "anchor" partner To improve the health of people with learning disabilities and mental health issues. Option 2 could be used by by the option 1 client group therefore reaching out to more people. A kitchen cafe could also be included in this option using food grown on the allotments to promote healthy eating and activities. I like all 3, and think perhaps scope for more flexible use of space if possible. I like option1 best as it is focused on a specific health issue, providing a suitable environment to support the 2 vulnerable groups identified. I think it will be easier to sustain financially from specific funding support for those vulnerable groups. Option 2 I feel suits me better as a youth worker to have the space to support education work - but think it might be challenging to keep it sustainable if it is at mercy of agencies being able to be involved. I like the idea of a larger development but also with elements of option 2. There is so much potential for a very exciting space. I think 1 or 3 would work best. The local anchor orgs of option 1 would provide stability, direction, identity, reliability. The flexibility/permeability of the space of option 3 would be a huge asset. Having kitchen, cafe and exhibition space that is open to everyone (even if not all the time because it's being used by specific groups/workshops what have you) feels very welcoming and special - it makes people want to pay a visit and tell their friends about the new place that's just opened up down the road! I think a multi agency approach offering a variety of opportunities will benefit the community. Also if you can establish income through hiring exhibition space, providing cafe or catering it will mean the project can develop as a social enterprise leaving it less reliant on funding. As the farm house is situated next to BIG and the park this seems to be an ideal option. However, this does not have to exclude features of option 1 and 2. For instance, it would be great to have a heritage/exhibition space that links to the history of the farm/park etc. The idea to have a kitchen/cafe promoting healthy eating is great, too. Limited social/learning opportunities for people affected by LD/MH. Important to be part of broader inclusive development with multi-functional/cultural activities/space - core ethos: health / wellbeing / ecology. As a school we would greatly look forward to the outdoor education opportunities that this would provide. As an Active School Coordinator I believe that a hub for outdoor education/healthy eating and other physical activities would be of huge benefit to the local community and local schools. Getting children outdoors is a huge focus for us within education and the South Edinburgh area lends itself to so many positive outdoor opportunities.

Bridgend Inspiring Growth Options Appraisal 2.1

I think it is not so easy for local people to access across busy road unless crossing put in place, it probably needs a bigger push to bring in usage by different agencies. Can be used for training, weekend courses etc to draw in income? Having seen Lambshill Stables in Glasgow and how the caf works there, it is critical to building healthy eating directly from land the community is involved with working. This option to me would offer the widest use of the building to all sorts of groups. I currently manage a project within Inch House and we would love the opportunity to use some of the rooms/cafe on a regular basis. Having two main agencies having two agencies as main users would potentially limit the available space and opportunities. The more agencies that use or have links to the project the better for the community. I also support the idea of a cafe perhaps staffed by service users & volunteers from the agencies involved & using produce grown on the allotments so that the plot holders can donate their surplus produce giving something back to the community in which the allotments are placed. Also the provision of toilet facilities. I prefer option 2 as I like the idea of linking with the park and allotments, hopefully that would encourage more local groups to be involved I would like it to be accessible to as many as possible but worry a cafe would either a) totally change the integrity of the building and b) end up being poor quality offering which would be disheartening (needs to be guaranteed to be more Earthy & less Greggs/ greasy spoon). So because of those concerns I'd say option 2 although I like the idea of the workshop space in the other barns too. multi-agency group control invariably lead to erosion and eventual loss of community accountability I think that BIG are key stakeholders and have instigated the re-development project thus far. It would be great to extend the ethos of the allotments and home grown produce to promote healthy eating and provide demonstrations and related activities as well as outdoor education. I also like the Idea of some space being used to record the history and heritage of the site and the farm. In time, the kitchen/cafe idea (again using homegrown produce) could also be implemented to generate some profit and attract visitors. I actually think all of the options could be joined up more, offering the widest range of opportunities available and the Farmhouse become a Natural Environment Hub to the local communities.

BIG/OpAp/SM/17Sept13