The council’s Development Management Committee unanimously decided to reject the application by Allan Park Ltd to demolish a house to form a roadway to the brownfield site behind.
The Edinburgh Reporter spoke to campaigners and their supporters after the meeting. The developer opted to give us a comment off camera which you can read below:
The objectors filled the public gallery in the Dean of Guild Court Room at the City Chambers, almost leaving no room for their own supporters or the small group of representatives from the site owners, Allan Park Ltd. Such was the strength of opinion some stood throughout the meeting which lasted more than two hours.
The objectors were delighted with their win today but recognise that this was just another hurdle in a fight which has already lasted for six years. The Managing Director of Allan Park Ltd said during the meeting that they would appeal any decision today if it was not favourable to their plans.
The committee based their decision on planning policies relating to housing, open space and transport contained in the existing and emerging Local Development Plans.
The Managing Director Sean Black told The Edinburgh Reporter after the meeting: “As you can imagine I am extremely disappointed in the planning committee’s verdict today. The director of planning has recommended approval of the application for good planning reasons, which is supported by a number of third party reports, including transport, environmental as well as the City’s Local Plan, the secondary plan and Scottish Planning policy.
“Furthermore, the city Health and Social Care department have identified this development would fulfil a gap in the local community as well as provide much needed family accommodation.
“The development would benefit from the creation of 50 local jobs, supply local businesses and cater for many vulnerable people in need of care. However it has been argued today by committee and the residents’ association these issues do not hold weight over the opinion of few in context to the the city of Edinburgh and Scotland as a whole.
“On top of this it is a brownfield site within the urban area and is supported by fundamental Scottish planning policy and local plan objectives. It will deal with a site that has lain vacant for years and improve residential amenity and appearance.
“This is further supported in the SESplan of July 2015. I refer to two of the key visions of success:
“new development is intergrated with existing communities and in accessible locations on transport corridors”
“ walking, cycling and public transport account for an increasing proportion of all journeys”
“I am passionate that our development will benefit the city.
“By Allan Park’s own admittance over 38000 people viewed their social media campaign in which only 4% (c.1650 people) of those chose to object to the proposals, this represents less than 1% of Edinburgh population however, sadly the weight of these numbers has prevailed over the city of Edinburgh’s own planning policy.
“These people were misled by false information provided throughout the objection campaign. It is important to consider whilst public objection is an important consideration it needs to be based on legitimate policy and material matters rather than weight of numbers. Many locally will support and benefit here.
“I refer to the Facebook statement from Allan Park in the aftermath of today’s hearing which is a prime example of the disingenuous and misleading information the Save Allan Park campaign has provided throughout.
We are delighted that common sense has prevailed and our planning committee have unanimously refused this application. A…
Posted by Allan Park Residents Association on Wednesday, 4 November 2015
“Sadly whilst I conducted myself professionally throughout and presented on facts today, Save Allan Park continue to resort to personal slurs and misleading information which contradicts Scottish planning policy.
“I will now consult with our property and legal professionals and intend to take the application to the inspectorate of planning and environmental appeals.”
There is already a planning permission in place for a 60+ bed care home, but the new application included a downsized care home with 14 townhouses.
The supporters were many and all were heard except for Joanna Cherry QC MP and Jim Eadie MSP who had both sent their assistants to deliver their statements verbally. The committee would not hear the representatives sticking to a decision made a while back. They did however take a short break to read the statements provided.
We live tweeted the proceedings of the meeting which you can follow here:
Founding Editor of The Edinburgh Reporter.
Edinburgh-born multimedia journalist and iPhoneographer.
On the face of it this looks like a triumph for nimbyism, so I will need to go away and review the details of the committee’s decision before I draw any firm conclusions on the motivations of the objectors.
I did however find two things wryly amusing. Firstly one of the local councillors objecting on the grounds that these were to be expensive houses rather than affordable housing, for which there is most demand. So houses yes, big houses no. This despite many of the objections being on the grounds that extra traffic would jam up the road junction at Slateford Road. 14 more houses in an estate of around 200 and traffic chaos ensues…
I wonder what the reaction would of both locals and the planning officials would be if a new application was made for 60 three bedroom flats, with the attendant real effect on transportation and schools.
Secondly the committee’s comment that the proposed demolition relates to a property that is not in poor repair, when no more than a mile away we have Redhall House being left to moulder by the Gold Brothers whilst the council wrings its hands and does nothing, waiting until it gets so bad that the only way to save it is to waive the conditions on the original planning permission and allow the Golds to do what they like.
Comments are closed.