Minutes of New Town & Broughton Community Council’s ordinary meeting, held via Zoom, on Monday 10 March 2025 at 7pm

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

URLs have been added by the minutes secretary.

1 Welcome and apologies

1.a Attendance

Fiona Banatvala	NTBCC	Richard Price	NTBCC	Cllr Margaret Graham	City centre ward
Mike Birch	NTBCC	Nick Reid	NTBCC	Cllr Finlay McFarlane	City centre ward
Annick Gaillard	NTBCC	David Renton	NTBCC	Cllr Mowat	City centre ward
Stephen Hajducki	NTBCC	Alan Welsh	NTBCC	Alan McIntosh	Broughton Spurtle
Simon Holledge	NTBCC	Peter Williamson	NTBCC	~14 residents/visitors
Joe McAdam	NTBCC	Bruce Ryan	minutes
Susan Macinnes	NTBCC	Cllr Jack Caldwell	Leith Walk ward

1.b Apologies

Ken Lochrie

NTBCC

2 Approval of minutes of February 2025 meeting and matters arising

2.a Approval of minutes

Approved as is (proposed A Gaillard, seconded M Birch, ND)

2.b Actions from February meeting

	Item	Actor	Action	Status
1	2.a.i row 3	R Price	Liaise with Leith Central CC over Calton Square issues	Complete
2	2.a.i row 7	M Birch	Circulate report about bus-noise on East London St	Complete
3	2.a.i row 10	NTBCC	Respond to the RBS consultation in due course	Complete
4	2.a.i row 3	NTBCC/ S Holledge	Arrange meeting after 27 January to develop NTBCC’s response to Waverley Valley consultation	Complete
5	2.a.i row 5	M Birch	Ask current NTBCC members which meeting options they prefer, then also ask ‘externals’ – after the election. Then book Broughton St Marys for March, if appropriate.	Held over
6	2.a.i row 10	NTBCC	Revisit committee membership when it next decides its office-bearers	Held over
7	2.a.i row 12	NTBCC	Members to volunteer to take part in Broughton St site-visit	Complete
8	2.a.i row 13	M Birch	In advance of actual submission, email that NTBCC has concerns about Rose St and Thistle St cycle-exceptions	Complete
9	4.a	P Williamson	Follow up on EWH oversight group	Complete
10	4.a	Cllr McFarlane	Probe about EWH oversight group	Complete
11	4.a	NTBCC	Discuss concerns about lack of engagement with/by EWHT	Complete
12	4.b	P Williamson	Resend elections poster to the Spurtle	Complete
13	4.c	P Williamson	Via B Ryan, circulate proposal about research by Edinburgh Napier University students	Held over
14	6.b.i	A Gaillard	Attend 3 March hearing about 5 Picardy Place (Taco Bell)	Complete
15	7.a	NTBCC	Meet online to develop its response to the consultation on draft ‘listed building’ guidance	Complete
16	7.a	R Price	Attend relevant EACC meeting	Complete
17	8	Cllr Graham/ M Birch	Action: to meet, then take forward air-quality reporting issues

3 Chair’s report

All points made by P Williamson unless otherwise noted

3.a CC Elections

• NTBCC has 15 valid nominees for membership (9 current members, 6 new people), and 6 local interest groups representatives, who are also voting members. There are 2 more places for LIG representatives. 8 out of Edinburgh’s 47 CCs were not formed, including Old Town CC.
  • Action: B Ryan to share his analysis of election results.
  • NTBCC does not yet have contact details for some of the new members, so could not invite them to this meeting. There was discussion of how to welcome the new members.

3.b Princes Street and Waverley Valley Strategy consultation response

This is now on CEC’s website. It was co-signed by West End and Old Town CCs. The Cockburn Association has a similar position to NTBCC, i.e. that serious work is needed to create a real strategy because the street is in a poor state.

3.c Edinburgh World Heritage Trust follow-up

• I have now asked EWHT three times for engagement, but have received no reply. I know my emails were received. This is despite EWHT having stated in September 2024 ago that it wishes to engage with local residents. In November 2024, CEC planning approved the management plan for the site, provided that the oversight group was established. This has not happened. Such lack of function is very concerning.
  • A resident: an interest/working group should be reconvened. No information about the new governance documents is available. Most street representatives were appointed in 2006. Many of them have now retired and/or died. We have tried to replace our representative to no avail. (Our previous one died.) The process to replace representatives is very complicated. EWHT needs to be pressured. Legal support may be needed. Issues are with the governance set-up, not with individuals.
  • Cllr Graham: EWHT has been in flux due to absences and illness, but I will get in touch with Megan Veronesi, the interim director.
  • S Holledge: the sudden disappearance of Wendy MacAdie implies that EWHT has issues.
  • Cllr McFarlane: CEC planning had suggested a workshop on 18 March to clarify the matters about the oversight group. However, no meeting was added to my diary. I will enquire with the relevant CEC officer.
  • Cllr Mowat: the 18 March meeting suggestion also reached me but no meeting was arranged. Given the sudden departures, would it be better to wait until recruitment is complete. I will probe about timescales.
  • Action: P Williamson to organise a stakeholder meeting, using the existing lists of stakeholder group members. Governance issues will be on that agenda.

3.d Edinburgh Napier University Communications project

• M Birch: I will meet this week with the students, who are investigating ways to improve engagement between CCs and younger people and other demographics. Unfortunately they could not attend this meeting.

4 Planning matters

4.a Planning Guidance consultation (closes 03.04.25)

• R Price: these consultations were discussed at the Edinburgh Civic Forum.
  • P Forissier: CEC has revamped some of its policies around the city plan, and made a good effort to clarify its guidance so that they would benefit both applicants and the public/law people. There is welcome clarification of material concerns, which will also benefit CCs. However, there are omissions, namely guidance on short-term lets and built-to-rent. There have been issues due to different interpretations of plans and accompanying guidance.
  • P Williamson: it has been difficult to reconcile some planning decisions with previous versions of such guidance. There is a commitment to review some decisions as a form of quality review. In theory, the guidance should match local plans but it may not do so yet. NTBCC should respond to this consultation.
  • M Birch: the consultation on guidance on student accommodation closes in May, so should be handled separately.
  • Action: P Williamson to arrange a meeting to formulate NTBCC’s response.

4.b Current applications to note

4.b.i 25/00469/FULSTL – 7/8 Baxter’s Place

• A Gaillard: it would help a lot if applications were trackable by address. Currently it may not be possible to fully understand properties planning ‘histories’. (I have been able to do so for this property.)
  • There has been a 2-week delay to neighbour notification for this application, but CEC states that this is now complete. (Similarly, there has been no notification about 11 Marshall’s Court.) Neighbours appear to be neutral about the application, despite a history of impacts from STL use. It is not clear how the building would be serviced, in part because relevant parking places on Leith Walk have been closed. Servicing via Greenside Valley would add to congestion there. The new owners are trying to use a loophole based on the property never being having normal residential use – they say its last use was as a social club. However, the top floor has been had residential use – ii was the club’s caretaker’s home. Hence this application would remove a dwelling from Edinburgh’s stock. The arrangements for reception staff lack toilet, kitchen and sleeping facilities.
  • Action: R Price to submit NTBCC’s objection.

5 Transport and environment matters

See report on NTBCC website. All points made by M Birch unless otherwise noted.

5.a Communal bin review – Phase 6 consultation

• CEC is issuing weekly progress updates. NTBCC encourages residents to submit their bin-type choices. However, CEC’s communication could be clearer – streets earmarked for gull-proof bags (GPBs) have received no information about them, only information about communal bins. CEC’s current offer is either for communal bin-hubs or a full GPB service to maintain kerbside collections. Red boxes will no longer be used. There are polarised opinions, some of which based on misinformation.
  • P Williamson. CEC had offered a much more participatory approach but this has not materialised. Current data-gathering is not fit for purpose – it omits some options. There is no clarity about choices and the decision-making process. NTBCC had offered to facilitate proper information opportunities. My residents’ association is very unhappy. It is idiotic that Broughton St was zoned for GPBs, but CEC has now decided it will have communal bins in Picardy Residents’ area despite what these residents might wish. The whole piece needs to be rethought.
  • A Welsh: There are some streets that are completely for GPBs because these properties have no place for storing them: residents will dump their waste in other street’s bins. Decision are just being imposed by CEC.
  • A resident: the GPB forum will meet tomorrow evening. This could be opened to a wider audience.
  • M Birch: NTBCC has been working with CEC to investigate waste and recycling collection alternatives for 3 years. Moving to green GPBs has significantly increased recycling rates and reduced on-street rubbish. There are some streets that do not suit GPBs, so the merits of different collection methods should be considered for each individual street. Proposed solutions have not just been dreamed up, but come from collaboration between CEC and NTBCC. It is frustrating that this collaboration has not been carried through into this consultation phase.
  • F Banatvala: the solution that has been trialled will work for most (but not all) streets, including the ones mentioned by A Welsh. Changes back to bins have let to fly-tipping etc. It is very frustrating that CEC is ignoring the successful trials, not informing residents, and not implementing the promised weekly collections.
  • M Birch: NTBCC should organise a separate meeting to hear other opinions and avoid polarised arguments.
  • F Banatvala: it is too late to change the consultation – it’s already in progress.
  • P Williamson: NTBCC should engage with the consultation results once they are published, organise a separate discussion, then put the results of that to CEC.
  • A resident: I was told this evening that matters would go to CEC in June. CEC documents discuss weekly GPB collections. I’d like to hear more from those taking part in the trials. CEC has not yet decided bin-hub locations.
  • F Banatvala: bin-hubs would be every 100m. There is a map of proposed locations. Collections of food-waste and landfill would be weekly but it has not been decided whether recycling collections will be weekly or fortnightly.
  • R Price: the map only shows decided bin-hub locations, but not which streets would have GPBs. Some would be ~120m apart. Carrying rubbish this distance is not a good idea.
  • M Birch: this post on NTBCC’s website may have led to confusion. CEC has agreed to relocate 150 bins (~10%) that were installed previously, but this will require TROs, so will not be quick.
  • Action: P Williamson to arrange a meeting this week or early next week.

5.b Transport and environment committee (06.03.25)

5.b.i Tables and chairs permits, East London Street, Edinburgh bus station

See report for M Birch’s comments.

• Cllr Mowat: city centre Cllrs met this morning, and urged CEC officials to prioritise ELS. We will continue to pressure.
• Cllr McFarlane: ELS is 4th on the list of setted streets to repair but there are strong reasons to bring it forward.
• M Birch: ELS residents have met with Cllr Graham to look into restricting access to ELS for heavy vehicles.

5.c Trams to Newhaven project update

See report. The number of issues listed in the very recent report is significantly higher than previously disclosed.

5.d Other transport and environment matters

• A Gaillard: Cllr Jenkinson should be at NTBCC’s April meeting. NTBCC should prepare questions for him.
• M Birch: this may be difficult because April will be the new NTBCC’s first meeting, and June is likely to be its AGM.
• P Williamson: we should still invite Cllr Jenkinson to the April meeting. We will start the meeting early.
• Action: M Birch to confirm invitation to Cllr Jenkinson, and canvas discussion topics.

6 Licencing matters

6.a Licensing Board applications to note

• A Gaillard: there has been a meeting to update on the overprovision appendix in the statement of policy. It was not clear whether the board wishes to retain this policy.
  • Cllr Graham: there are mixed feelings, so the board is still trying to reach a consensus
  • A Gaillard: a consultation on this is due soon. I think the policy has value, because applicants must justify their applications, leading to higher standards. Recent examples include various sites on Rose St.
• A Gaillard: an application for the Sainsbury’s on St Andrews Square has been refused. This may be due to fears of people buying alcohol here then drinking in the park or Princes St gardens.

6.b Civic Licensing applications to note

• A Gaillard: the key item here is Taco Bell application for late catering. NTBCC object for the reasons aired in NTBCC’s February meeting. There was a suggestion that the agent wanted to continue the application, and communicate with NTBCC but this has not happened. The agent requested shorter sales hours: finishing at midnight instead of 2am or 3am. This has been granted for 1 year, and environmental health has been tasked with checking on the fumes issue. The nearby supermarket now closes at 11 because it had been a magnet for antisocial behaviour.
  • Licensing permissions are given to applicants, not properties. New applications go to committee but applications for renewal are decided by officials under delegated authority.

7 Culture and communities matters

See report on NTBCC website. All points made by S Holledge unless otherwise noted.

7.a Drummond Community High School playground access

• M Birch: a local resident has raised concerns about this playground now being locked outwith school hours. The school parent-teacher association (PTA) says that parents have not raised any concerns about this.
  • A McIntosh: young people should not be criminalised. It has been used for sports for many decades. It is a safe, well-lit place for young people to meet. There have been a few noise issues, but these have generally been settled smoothly. This decision was not made transparently. The school estate is part of a public-private partnership, so many people should be part of such decisions. I doubt whether the lock-out will make any difference. However, drug-dealing may have started here. The all-weather football pitch was funded by Sport Scotland, with a condition that there should be unrestricted community access.
  • Cllr Caldwell: there should be access outwith school hours. The decision was made in December. I plan to attend tomorrow’s PTA meeting. There is a shortage of nearby sports facilities, so I have submitted a question to CEC about this. The school head supports the lock-out but I will try to get more information.

7.b Report on Culture & Communities committee meeting (27.02.25)

7.b.i Consultation on park management rules

• Cllr McFarlane: rules are displayed at entrances to public parks. CEC has the power to enforce such rules. CEC has a duty to regularly refresh these rules.
  • Cllr Mowat: park entrances redirect people to the full rules. CEC owns the land and so can create rules. Currently, barbecues and fireworks may be banned in parks, but enforcement is patchy. I will look into how the rules arose.
  • Cllr Caldwell: rules are enabled by the Civic Governance (Scotland) Act 1982. CEC’s rules are out for consultation. The issue is capacity for enforcement.
  • S Holledge: lightweight drones may be legal. The draft rules run to 7 pages, and so may not be displayable in full.
  • Cllr Mowat: while such drones may be legal, CEC can still make rules about where they are flown.

7.c Big wheel in Princes St Gardens

• M Birch: NTBCC has received notice from CEC events of an application to erect a big wheel in these gardens from June to October. There would be a short remembrance day pause, then the wheel would come back into use. NTBCC has limited time to comment on this. The planning permission situation is unclear – it was approved for the winter festival but not for this length of time.
  • R Price: permission was granted in 2024 for late October to early January, so permission for these dates is needed.
  • S Hajducki: this is meant to be a tourist attraction, but the city centre doesn’t need more tourists, so the wheel should be in Leith docks.
  • Cllr McFarlane: the application was by Unique Assembly. Hence there is a ‘due process’ consultation.
  • A Gaillard: any static fixture lasting > 28 days needs permission. There may be better ways to use this site, and divert them to other places in Edinburgh.
  • Action: M Birch to draft NTBCC’s response to this consultation.

8 Any other business

• F Banatvala: should NTBCC apply for a grant for kit to run hybrid meetings.
  • Cllr Mowat: there was a motion that allocated such funding. NTBCC’s alternate in-person/online meeting arrangement is the best. Hybrid meetings are a nightmare: remote participants may be excluded. I will look into what the offer is.