by

NTBCC minutes Monday 9 May 2022

Minutes of New Town & Broughton Community Council’s ordinary meeting, held via Zoom, on Monday 9 May 2022 at 7pm

NTBCC’s minutes secretary apologises for the late publication of these minutes.

Actions and decisions are red italic. ND (‘no dissent’) means that no-one spoke or voted against a decision.

Edinburgh Council has stated that ‘CCs can approve minutes, and take other decisions, remotely’, as so long as they ensure that ‘remote meetings are as accessible to members of the public and (as) well-advertised as possible’.

1 Technology check

The meeting opened online at 6:45 pm to enable all attendees to connect before the start of business.

2 Welcome/Admin/Apologies/Well-being

2.a Attendance

Annick Gaillard NTBCC Alan Welsh NTBCC
Laura Graham NTBCC Peter Williamson NTBCC, Picardy Residents
Deirdre Henderson NTBCC Bruce Ryan Minutes secretary
Stephen Hajducki NTBCC Alan McIntosh Broughton Spurtle
Simon Holledge NTBCC/EACC Cllr Jack Caldwell Leith Walk ward
Jack Hugh NTBCC Cllr Claire Miller City Centre ward
Stewart Mills NTBCC Cllr Max Mitchell Inverleith ward
Susan MacInnes NTBCC Cllr Joanna Mowat City Centre ward
Richard Price NTBCC William Duncan George St Association
Nick Reid NTBCC ~7 residents/visitors
David Renton NTBCC

2.b Apologies

Mike Birch NTBCC, RRCTMA Cllr Margaret Graham City Centre ward
David Clarke NTBCC Cllr Hal Osler Inverleith ward
Ken Lochrie NTBCC Deidre Brock MP Edinburgh North & Leith

3 Minutes of monthly meeting held on 11 April 2022

Approved as-is (proposed D Renton, seconded Alan Welsh, ND)

3.a Matters arising

none

4 Police report

See text of report in appendix 1 or PDF on NTBCC website

4.a Update on discussions with Police Scotland on report content

  • It was noted that the report still did not meet NTBCC’s needs, and that other CCs receive more informative reports. Statistics need to be provided in comparable formats if they are to be useful.
  • W Duncan noted that George St Association also receives a report. There has been antisocial behaviour in GSA’s area.

5 Engagement and communication

5.a George Street & First New Town – latest discussion from NTBCC George Street group

  • Following on from the discussion on this at the April NTBCC meeting, the NTBCC sub-group has drafted a response the wider issues with the latest proposal which has been circulated to NTBCC members. This document lays out some key issues that need further consideration e.g. legal obligations to produce Equality Impact Assessments, travel priorities, safety for women amongst others. (Post meeting note : this was posted on the NTBCC website on 17th May).

5.b George Street Association (GSA) – welcome / overview

W Duncan of George St Association reported

  • There is currently another round of engagement with the business community. This will then feed into creation of an operational plan (OP). The OP may determine the level of opposition to the TROs, which are due to be issued in the autumn, if they are approved by CEC’s transport and environment committee (TEC).
  • There is resignation to GS becoming mostly pedestrian/cycling, but essential vehicles will need access.
  • There is the separate Meadows to GS MTGS) project, so southern Hanover St will feed into a difficult GS junction. WD has been pressing for join-up between the MTGS and GS projects, which are being progressed separately. Configuration of cycle paths and bus stops in southern Hanover St has big implications for this junction. I understand that Hanover St will remain an important north-south route, so that vehicles on this route will have priority over those traveling east-west on GS. This may lead to conflict with cyclist’s wishes for improved cycle-ways.
  • CEC’s position on festival events on GS is unknown. Hence there are questions on infrastructure, space, effects on cycle-ways, bus-routes, etc, which will impact the OP. Engagement with CEC officials over the GS design is good; engagement CEC officials over MTGS project is improving.

5.b.i Q&A

  • A Welsh: What is GSA’s position on taxis on GS? Without taxis (and buses), disabled people may well be unable to use GS.
    • We want taxi access that is not time-restricted, for example to support hotel customers and church-goers. Also, CEC is not yet able to enforce such restrictions. GS has a night-time economy, hence requires safety features such as taxis.
  • B Ryan: what is the point of GS being an apparently isolated cycle-way? Where is the connectivity with other areas?
    • The 2019 plans separated the cycleway and the road. The current plans combine them, leading to GS becoming a very slow street due to traffic-lights etc. There may even be a 15mph speed-limit. If pavements are widened, vehicles must be slow to allow street-crossing. Hence the balance between cycling and other uses is important.
  • S Holledge. With thanks to D Henderson, NTBCC has produced a detailed response (now on NTBCC website).
    • D Henderson: it appears that CEC has not undertaken the required equality impact assessment (EIA) for the GS plans. Use-planning (including ongoing EIAs) should precede detailed design. Impacts on people with protected characteristics are highly likely, and there has been no EIA on the current plans. Hence GS may well become a tourist street, not a place for residents. For example, disabled people may not be able to access GS. There has been no assessment of impact on surrounding communities, e.g. due to effects on buses traveling through the city centre.
    • W Duncan: I concur – some key factors remain unresolved. For example, the current plans somewhat pre-empt a forthcoming review of city-centre buses. This may be one reason why the detailed OP has been delayed. When the OP is revealed in the autumn, interest-groups may well need to be vocal. GSA recognises that GS is changing, e.g. retail use is declining and residential use is increasing. Hence GS does not campaign for the status quo, but for a future-proofed, flexible design. I fear that the nicely completed work will then be dug up for future utility work.
    • D Renton: the Equalities Act requires that people with protected characteristics are not disadvantaged. There is no legal mechanism for enforcing speed limit on bikes.
  • R Price: there was a consultation on the OP ~2 months ago. Was this discussed at the last GS stakeholder meeting?
    • W Duncan: the relevant minutes are not yet available. I hope the next GSA meeting (19 May) will respond. The consultation was about a lot of options, not a [single] clear plan. Making the questionnaire sensible took much work.
    • W Duncan: I have been assured that floating bus stops on Hanover St will not be like those from Spaces for People, which are not safe. I have asked for detailed designs for the forthcoming bus stops. These stops (and those to be introduced on the Mound), and the intended traffic-lights, are likely to lead to major congestion which would block Princes St. Also, the bus-gate at the top of the Mound will make other traffic go onto Market St: it is not clear where such traffic should then go.
    • W Duncan: the timetabling of the different projects is important: for example we do not know when North bridge works will finish. Traffic from there is being diverted onto George IV Bridge and Hanover St, yet TROs are due in May.
    • S Holledge: CEC hopes that stakeholders will contribute ideas this month, while CEC finalises the OP. That should be available at the start of June.
    • W Duncan: the composition of the post-election TEC may well determine some aspects of the OP.

6 Licensing

See also report in appendix 2

6.a Edinburgh Council Short Term Let (Licensing) consultation (open now, runs until 10 June)

A Gaillard reported:

  • CEC applied to the Scottish Government to make Edinburgh an STL-control area in February. The next stage is to introduce a licensing scheme. Alive consultation covers which types of property to license, eligibility etc. is open on the Council’s Consultation Hub until 10 June. I have drafted NTBCC’s licensing’s response, taking into account in part PLACE Edinburgh’s response covering all of Edinburgh, not just the city centre.
  • There will be an NTBCC licensing meeting about this on Thursday – all members are welcome to attend or email input.
  • C Nimmo: there have been over 50 applications for retrospective changes of use to STLs.
    • D Henderson: the proposed licensing scheme could be a mechanism for controlling STLs that have operated without planning permission.
    • Cllr Miller: the 10-year rule (things which have operated for 10 years without Council enforcement (driven by residents’ complaints )are deemed acceptable means that operating STLs without planning permission is likely to be rewarded, in that these applications are not for permission but recognition of what has happened.
    • R Price: this rule is in general planning regulations, so affects more than just STLs. I agree that licensing may help here, being a separate process.
    • A Welsh: there are legal requirements for HMOs, e.g. fireproof doors. STLs should not differ materially from HMOs in this way.
    • P Williamson: Edinburgh Civic forum will be meeting on Thursday (12 noon to 1pm) to develop a pan-city response.
    • D Henderson: the proposed national STL licensing scheme would treat STLs much as HMOs for fire safety.
    • Cllr Mowat: the 10-year loophole has existed for over 15 years: Scottish Government is now catching up. Certificates of Lawfulness are not new, and little can be done to prevent them being issued. The STL licensing scheme will be a safety scheme. Planning is about where STLs are.
    • D Henderson: the Edinburgh Council consultation is about what local options there will be. The national licensing has been agreed, like a toolbox of options, with some national requirement, like fire safety.In Edinburgh any commercial STL will need planning. first, which is why the STLs are all coming out into the light. So the licensing consultation is about what tools Edinburgh uses for licensing.
    • S Hajducki: The licensing board should consider every application carefully, and not be swayed by historical uses. If places are unsafe, they should not receive STL licenses.
    • R Price: The NTBCC submission should state that licensing is a separate consideration to planning.
    • Cllr Caldwell: NTBCC could link with LCCC and OTCC (& perhaps the West End ?): the vast majority of 10-year applicants are in those CCs’ areas.
    • A Gaillard: HMOs are now inspected every 3 years, not annually. STL inspections should be the same as HMO inspections. It will be interesting to see what evidence CEC will require for 10-year rule applications.
    • A visitor: there have been no HMO inspections recently, due to COVID.

7 Planning

See also report in appendix 3. All points by R Price unless otherwise noted

7.a Current Short Term Let (Retrospective) planning applications – current position – to agree

  • There is concern about the number of applications, and how CCs can respond to them. CEC’s process seems to have decided what is acceptable based on current policies and the results of appeals to the Scottish Government (SG) reporter. The reporter has given clarity on how to apply policies. However the 2016 local development plan (LDP) was meant to last until 2021, so it is out of date. The new LDP (City Plan 2030) has undergone consultation, but does not yet have Scottish Government approval. While City Plan 2030 has clearer, stronger policies, it is not yet in force.
  • The list of applications on 2nd May shows that the majority are on behalf of a company that sells properties as investments, which this company then manages as STLs. Whole addresses are being STLed. So these properties look more like hostels or aparthotels. The Cockburn Association discussion on Thursday will help to decide NTBCC’s position – NTBCC has until late May 20th or 27th) to respond to these applications.
    • A Welsh: Blocks designed as flats have common stairs, i.e. public access. Divided houses may well not have stairs that are suitable for this purpose, leading to potential health and safety issues. A relevant condition should be imposed via the STL licensing scheme.
    • D Henderson: concerning whole-block STLs, noise will come through walls and affect neighbours. This has been shown by some Scottish Government (DPEA) refusals. Hotels have staff to help with issues at all times – such STLs do not, leading to potential problems.

7.b 27 – 29 Beaverhall Road (HUB) planning application (open until 13 May) – to discuss

  • The pre-consultation process has happened, and now the full application (for ~200 build -to-rent (BTR) units, including 25% affordable units and some ground-floor commercial space) has been submitted. General view is that overall there is an architectural improvement, including green space and residential use. However, the overall height being proposed could raise concerns from adjacent residents and proposed roof design seems a little I suspect the major concern is from current occupiers of the building (being a major hub for creative space locally). There are ~20 objections so far – NTBCC is keen to hear these concerns. NTBCC has a short time to make a submission.
    • A Welsh: the architecture is good, but I question how the development will fit into the area. This large development will need infrastructure, e.g. public transport, schools, playgrounds. These questions apply to many large projects.
    • D Henderson: is parking incorporated into this development?
    • R Price: parking would be minimal. Most of the ground floor has been set aside for businesses that were there before (although worth noting that due to flooding concerns, no residential use would be permitted on the ground floor) – however, this is much less than the existing building.
    • Cllr Caldwell: my concern is that the Dunedin St / Beaverhall Rd junction has no dropped-kerb, so is not fully accessible.

7.c Powderhall (Phase III) Waste Transfer site : pre-consultation – to note

  • Phase 1 was the stable block. Phase 2 was the bowling green. Phase 3 is a large CEC-owned area, which CEC wishes to develop. Selling part of it to finance the remainder seems sensible. There would be 230 to 250 flats, with 35% affordable (to match ‘City Plan 2030’). Most affordable flats would have social rents, not mid-market rents. There will be an online consultation – details TBC. NTBCC has pushed for an in-person event in the stable block as well as the online consultation.
    • D Henderson: I support building of new homes, but there will now be over 400 new homes in the area. Can the local primary school and medical services cope?
    • R Price: CEC is likely to assess educational needs. There is a requirement to look more at healthcare needs. I agree there are many new properties being built in this area.
    • A McIntosh: City Plan 2030 mentions building medical facilities in Jane St.
    • Cllr Mowat: There are processes to assess what facilities are needed for individual developments. Lothian Health Board has been slow to say what facilities are needed. Jane St has problems with funding medical facilities and moving the businesses currently present. Jane St not particularly close to Beaverhall.
    • A Welsh: the market will decide: people will look to see what facilities are available. The site is on contaminated land. CEC sold several school sites, now needs more schools.
    • D Henderson: many people are desperate for affordable homes so will not consider facilities.
    • R Price: worth noting that several GP practices ae reducing the areas they cover.

8 Environment

8.a Communal Bin Hub latest including Leith Central Community Council presentation update

  • R Price: in summary, there were many excuses for the unsmooth roll-out. Outwith the N1 area (most of NTBCC is in that area or the controlled parking zone), bin-hub installation has started. There are currently insufficient bins to populate the hubs, so old ones are being left. Hence people do not know where to put rubbish. CEC has insufficient HGV drivers for its waste vehicles, so not all bins can be serviced, hence rubbish is piling up in some places. There have been global supply-chain issues, but the impression is the scheme has been too big and too ambitious, so residents are convinced the new scheme is an improvement: CEC should have got small areas right first.
    • Cllr Caldwell: glass recycling bins outside ground-floor flat’s windows were a major concern. I am seeking flexibility on this: CEC doesn’t want to force people to cross roads to use bins, but this can lead to problems.
    • D Renton: the current glass recycling bin (outside a shop) is already noisy. It would be worse if next to a flat.
    • R Price: in Royal Crescent/Fettes Row, bins are across the street from flats. CEC plans to change this. There has been little consideration of disabled access to bins. Currently this is not good, but it appears there has been no EIA.
    • D Renton: for wheelchair users, location and heights of bin-apertures above pavements are important.
    • C Nimmo: a pause in roll-out had been agreed, to examine other solutions. The scoping document has now been circulated – NTBCC will respond.

8.b Picardy Place

  • P Williamson: there are new no developments about this: progress is slow and lacks clarity. A project group will decide how to progress, but this is shrouded in secrecy.

9 Transport

See also report in appendix 4.

9.a Discussion on items of interest from the Transport Committee report

  • C Nimmo: ‘Travelling Safely’ plans for Broughton have not yet been published. NTBCC will make a participation request.
  • C Nimmo: traffic at Picardy Place has slowed considerably due to tram-works. Broughton St and York Place are open in both directions, but access to Leith Walk and London St is slow. Lothian Buses has pushed for changes to signals and routes, to avoid use of Annandale St and Broughton St, but there has been no change so far.
    • Public-realm work on Elm Row and Gayfield is about to start, leading to unmitigated road-closures over the summer.
    • The next CCTT/TT meeting has been postponed. It will cover the handover from contractor to CEC.
    • D Henderson: Albany St, Abercromby Place and Dublin St have now reverted to their previous traffic flows.

10 Treasurer’s report and forthcoming June AGM

  • R Price: NTBCC finances are in good shape because of online meetings. Accounts will soon be signed off.
  • C Nimmo: the AGM will be on Monday 9 June, hopefully hybrid, using in the ‘Sanctuary’ at Broughton St Mary’s church.

11 Any other business & news from local Residents’ Associations etc.

  • A resident: thank you to the CEC councilors who attended tonight. How will councilors react to concerns about consultation processes?
    • C Nimmo: there was a resolution by CEC for better consultation and transparency, but this was not implemented. Consultations should not be about simply getting popular consent for decisions CEC has already made.
    • Cllr Mowat: it is clear there is lack of transparency – this is not new. Following the election, discussions on who will form the CEC administration are ongoing. Once this is decided, a governance document will be created – probably for August. The last administration ceased community working and neighbourhood partnerships. It removed known community officers. Consultations are not being used to work with communities. These matters, as well as actual consultations, are important. Such matters were in most parties’ manifestos.
    • S Mills: the bin-hub consultation was appalling, spending much money on things people do not want.
    • Cllr Miller: should CEC cllrs work with CC members to work out what is needed? People may be using the same words differently. There is much scope for improvement. While the CEC administration is being formed, there is an opportunity to work out NTBCC’s desired forms of engagement. This could then be used as a pan-Edinburgh model.
      • D Henderson: co-production is needed.
      • S Mills: consultations too often have leading questions and limited options. There should be more opportunities to input open text, to enable citizens to feel that engagement is worthwhile. I would join the process Cllr Miller suggests. Should NTBCC also engage with neighbouring CCs?
      • B Ryan: is there a role for CEC engaging with Edinburgh Association of CCs? EACC has been pushing for this.
    • S Hajducki: the incoming administration should consider taking back control from officials who act ultra vires.
    • A Gaillard: this should extend to comments on planning applications, a form of consultation. Powderhall/Beaverhall is a call for Leith Walk cllrs to jojn NTBCC meetings – thanks Cllr Caldwell!
      • B Ryan: the outgoing set of Leith Walk cllrs was invited. Action: B Ryan to update website and mailing list.
    • A Gaillard: are CEC officials working at home or in the office?
      • Cllr Mitchell: More officials are returning to the office.
    • P Williamson: CEC needs to provide information much more openly. FOI requests have been poorly treated. Planning is fragmented – about individual development. It needs to be treated holistically.
    • A resident: CEC has consulted well about transport in Leith. Over 90% of people were satisfied with the bus service – so CEC decided to introduce trams!
  • Williamson: there have been complaints about noise and rubbish because a hotel in Forth Street is operating as an STL – with remote entry and no onsite management presence.

12 Appendix 1: text of police report

12.a April 2022

12.a.i Looking Back

Throughout April, your local officers have been assisting with Operation Verbeia, which was set up to prevent and detect anti-social behaviour from youths within the city centre. With the Easter school holidays, there was a large increase in the number of youths within town, leading to some dangerous practices such as ‘tram-surfing’ (hanging onto the external door of a tram whilst in motion). Enquiries are ongoing in identifying those responsible. The Community Alcohol Partnership also sponsored an initiative where we spray painted a message re proxy sales on the pavement outside the city centre off license premises to remind persons not to be duped into buying drink for those under age.

We have been dealing with a couple of noisy flat complaints in the new town to tackle repeat offenders, we were able to track down a landlord and speak to him about his flat and complaints that had been coming in to reduce complaints and calls to the police. Noise complaints can be tricky to tackle as they typically come in when police resources are stretched and as they are a lower graded call, are sometimes not attended as quickly as we would all like. Community officers can look into these matters after the event where required in tandem with partners at the Council.

Thankfully this month there have been no domestic house breakings or even attempts. There was a theft from a building site at Wemyss Place, with tools to the value of £3000 stolen overnight. This has been an emerging problem again with the amount of building sites in town and the high value of some of the equipment stored and there has been a crime prevention and “neighbourhood watch” type push to try and tackle this form of crime.

12.a.ii What We’re Noticing

Another usual spate to make you aware of is that persons from an eco-warrior group calling themselves “The Tyre Extinguishers” have been letting down tyres of larger SUV style vehicles in the New Town and other parts of the city. They leave a note on the windscreens of those cars targeted explaining their logic and concerns re the environmental damage being caused by such vehicles and no damage is being caused. However it could prove dangerous if you don’t realise its happened so please be vigilant.

Levels of footfall in the town are almost back to normal levels with all of the pubs clubs and theatres thankfully back in business. Our call levels have escalated as would be expected, especially in relation to the nightime economy. The new St James Quarter has also seen a rise in footfall in the New Town Broughton area and ongoing tram works and ever changing roadworks bring some traffic issues and headaches for local in this respect.

12.a.iii Looking Forward

If there are any issues which we feel you should know about, we will of course update you in the forthcoming newsletters, but if there is anything you would like us to address, or crime prevention information you would like us to provide, please let us know and we will tailor the content accordingly.

Kind Regards, City Centre Community Policing Team

12.b Advice and Support

(This section contained some images with text that was too small to OCR.)

12.c Useful contact numbers

12.d About Us

  • Local Area Commander: Chief Inspector Murray Tait
  • City Centre Community Policing Team – West End Police Station:
    • Inspector David Duthie
    • Sergeant Cameron Walker
    • Sergeant Bob Richardson
    • Plus 8 officers allocated to community issues in Edinburgh’s City Centre.

12.e Contact Us

13 Appendix 2: licensing report

13.a Edinburgh Council Short Term Let (STL) and their Licensing consultation (closes 10th June)

Short Term Lets 2022 – Introduction – City of Edinburgh Council – Citizen Space

Submission drafted.

Will seek input (timeboxed to 15 mins!) from NTBCC members at public meeting on 9th May, then aim to consolidate comments with NTBCC Licensing committee members on Thursday 12th May 17:30, after a meeting midday with the Cockburn about the recent increase in (retrospective) Planning applications for Certificate of Lawfulness (CLE) or Change of Use (FUL).

If anyone would like to contribute outside the public meeting, please make yourself known 

13.b Alcohol licence registers (Licensing Board)

13.b.i 38-39 St Andrews Square

(Gleneagles) applied for 3x consecutive Occasional licences (473026, 473027, 473028) for the period 23rd May to 3rd July 2022.

Objected to Onsales hours running until 02.00, and recommended for these to be reduced to 22.00 as per the Council’s normal policy. This would also appear to be consistent with their neighbour at 42 St Andrews Square (The Register Club).

13.b.ii 80 George Street

monitoring for any application(s) in relation to the new proposed ‘Oche’ darts themed restaurant and pub
22/01207/FUL | Change of use from Class 1 (Retail) to a mixed Class 3 (Restaurant), Class 11 (Leisure) and Sui Generis (Public House) unit with associated internal and external alterations.

Will seek to object on the basis of over-provisioning – Appendix 2 of alcohol-licensing-policy-november-2018 (edinburgh.gov.uk) refers.

13.b.iii St James Square

monitoring for any application(s) in relation to the next proposed outdoor event
22/02035/FUL | Erection of temporary structures and enclosures, including Spiegeltent and bar, and other associated works to facilitate use of St James Square as an external events space.

Will seek to object on the basis of over-provisioning – Appendix 2 of alcohol-licensing-policy-november-2018 (edinburgh.gov.uk) refers. (again)

map showing George St – item 13.b.ii above map showing St James – item 13.b.iii above
George St – item 13.b.ii above St James – item 13.b.iii above

13.c Civic licence registers (Licensing Sub-Committee)

13.c.i Outdoor area (AKA Tables & chairs) permits

  • The register is out of date, only 1 permit is listed for the area Baxter’s Place / Greenside Place / Picardy Place / Antigua Street at the top of Leith Walk;
  • Will also seek to understand guidelines with regards to allowable footprint & markings – permission gets granted by the Road Authority (for occupation of public roads & pavements)

13.c.ii HMO licences

  • register remains out of date; out of the small sample monitored one licence that was received in April 2021 is now showing, but another one known to have been continued around the same time still isn’t showing.
    The requirement for timely accuracy with this register is particularly relevant, in the light of the forthcoming licensing of STLs, similarly to HMOs.

13.c.iii Late hours catering

monitoring for any applications in relation to the newly approved 21/05443/FUL | Change of use of premises from class 2 (bank) to class 3 (restaurant) (restricted) at 6 Picardy Place, reserved as the next Taco Bell in Edinburgh.

Will seek to object to hours matching its sister venue, and recommend for these not to exceed 22.00-23.00 – i.e. similarly to those in the local area, St James Quarter included.

13.c.iv Public entertainment

monitoring for any application(s) in relation to the new proposed:

  • ‘Oche’ darts themed restaurant and pub at 80 George St
  • Outdoor Festive event at St James Square

13.c.v Market operator

monitoring for any application(s) in relation to the new proposed:

  • Outdoor Festive event at St James Square

13.d NTBCC Licensing mailbox

This is licensing@ntbcc.org.uk

13.e AOB

13.e.i Amplified music

will seek an update from Licensing Board (when re-appointed) on nuisance condition

Prepared by Annick Gaillard, 09 May 2022

14 Appendix 3: planning report

14.a Agenda Items

14.a.i Current Short Term Let (Retrospective) planning applications – current position

As highlighted both by NTBCC & the Cockburn Association – the recent Weekly List (2nd May Bulletin) contained s plethora of retrospective Short Term Let (STL) applications – 55 in NTBCC’s area, the vast majority being lodged by Destiny Scotland (https://www.destinyscotland.com/our-apartments/edinburgh/) who describe what they offer either as ‘hotel apartments’ or ‘serviced apartments’. Again, the majority of these applications cover either the entire use of a particular building or the majority of the apartments within the building. These are essentially investment properties, owned by many individuals but bookable / managed through Destiny Scotland.

Currently, any STL application (whether retrospective or not) are assessed through the adopted 2016 Local Development Plan and associated non-statutory guidance (Guidance for Businesses) – although given the 2016 LDP is now more than 5 years old, a further consideration are the 13 principles (all very general) as outlined under the Scottish Planning Policy document. The City Plan 2030 which although is now the ‘settled view of the Council’ has not as yet been approved by the DPEA but does have more prescriptive policies, for example, the reintroduction of the ‘Loss of housing’ policy. However, this is not considered as yet to be a relevant consideration. The timetable for this to be adopted is unclear at the moment.

Besides the wider discussion as to the impact of STLs – the soon-to-be introduced licensing measures & Edinburgh Council adopting a city-wide STL Control Area (which NTBCC submitted a representation in support) may help to a degree; there are a number of issues in the short term.

  • The sheer number of applications poses an issue for NTBCC and other amenity bodies to handle.
  • It will put an excessive strain on the current Planning system
  • It’s not clear whether the sui generis class use being applied for covering some of the whole property applications is the correct approach.

NTBCC will take part in a discussion organised by the Cockburn on Thursday to see if there’s a sensible route forwards. The majority of the applications from the 2nd May Weekly List have a final date for comments as either 20th May or 27th May.

14.a.ii 27 – 29 Beaverhall Road (HUB) aka ‘Beaverhall House planning application (open until 13 May)

There was a pre-consultation for this in September 2021 & a presentation both to the NTBCC Planning committee as well as the full community council in December 2021.

The full planning application has now been submitted for a mix of Buy to Rent (currently very much in vogue) the and 25% Affordable Housing (~200 units in all) as well commercial space to (re)-accommodate some of the businesses in the current building.

The general view overall is that the proposed architectural proposal is a significant improvement on the current building although some concerns have been raised with the overall height and roof treatment. The application is open for comments until Friday 13th May and currently there are 20 comments (all objections). NTBCC have not been contacted directly by residents voicing concerns but would appreciate anyone who has a view on the proposal to contact us.

NTBCC have requested an extension to the final date for comments & that has been granted (until Wednesday 18th May).

14.a.iii Powderhall Waste Transfer site (Phase III)

Pre-consultation starting for the final phase & most significant phase of the development.

The proposal includes 230 – 250 flats of mixed tenure including a 35% Affordable housing target (with some of it being set at Social Rent rather than Intermediate Rent). The affordable housing and infrastructure will be delivered first, with a serviced plot created for private sale.

Although the final dates / times / location for the consultation are not yet available, but the main events will be in W/c 12th June – this is stated to include both a virtual element as well as an in-person event at a location to be confirmed. There was some initial confusion in the lodged documents regarding an in-person event but following enquiries from NTBCC, the full documents are now available on the planning portal (under ‘165 Broughton Road’ somewhat confusingly).

The full description is ‘22/02348/PAN – Residential led development comprising housing of mixed tenure (Social rent, Mid-Market rent and Private Sale) with associated Energy Centre, Sub-station, Roads and Landscaping at 165 Broughton Road’

The project team have also offered to present to a future NTBCC meeting – any interest?

Prepared by Richard Price, 9 May 2022

15 Appendix 4: transport report

15.a Travelling Safely

The expected Experimental Traffic Orders have not been published yet for the Canonmills to Broughton Street corridor. We will follow up with the newly elected Councillors and the Active Travel team to establish the latest plans.

15.b Active Travel Participation Request

Following discussion with the Council, we have revised our participation request to more clearly describe the scope of the Outcomes we are seeking to influence. Again we will follow up with the newly elected Councillors and the Active Travel team to confirm their response to this request.

15.c Tram Works

Most of the temporary traffic management arrangements required for the removal of the York Place tram stop and the track laying at the top of Broughton Street have now been removed. Further temporary traffic management changes have been made to allow work on the London Road junction to proceed, which has had an adverse effect on traffic flows around Picardy Place resulting in further bus diversions. We continue to monitor the impact of these changes.

15.d Electric Vehicle Charging Places

Work has continued with the installation of the EV charging points on Heriot Row and East London Street. The Council has updated its website with information about the costs for use of the new chargers which are due to be operational by the summer. We will be contacting the EV Charging team to discuss the next phase of the rollout of chargers in our area.

15.e East London Street

As noted above the latest temporary traffic arrangements for the Trams project have exacerbated the problems with traffic congestion around Picardy Place as a result more buses are using East London Street further adding to the noise and vibration being experienced by residents on this street. If time allows we will look to include an opportunity for East London Street residents to share their observations and ideas for improving the situation during the June meeting.

Prepared by Mike Birch, 5 May 2022