The planning application for the Famous Spiegeltent already constructed in St Andrew Square was heard by the council’s planning department on Wednesday morning and approval was retrospectively given.
Council officers had recommended it would be granted but the matter was discussed by councillors clearly concerned about tree protection measures and also the lateness of the application which ran “roughshod” over council process.
Consent has been given subject to the condition imposed that “a tree monitoring report shall be submitted twice a week during the operation of the event to the planning authority, confirming all tree protection measures are installed and maintained on site and that no generator shall be positioned within the root protection areas” by a narrow vote of 6 to 4.
The site has been operating since the end of June hosting events in the Jazz and Blues Festival and now during the Fringe despite the lack of consent. It will be open until 12 September 2025 to allow for take down.
The committee considered the impact on the local heritage and also a great deal of the discussion focused on the trees. Cllr Mumford looked at the tree protection plan and asked about the oversight by council officers during the build. The planning officer said it was up to Essential Edinburgh as “owner of the site” to liaise with the company behind the Spiegeltent. Some confusion arose around who owns the square, cleared up by Cllr Mowat who explained that the garden is owned by the “frontagers” or owners of buildings in the square and then sub -leased by the council to Essential Edinburgh to manage on its behalf.
Cllr Joanna Mowat who represents the City Centre said this is not the first time that an applicant has made a late application, but “things have improved since the days when that used to happen more often”. She asked for some work in the future to ensure that officers are not determining applications as the build is taking place. She said: “Given the information we have in front of us today I have got to the point where I can support officers’ approval of this but can we take this away and ask what conversations do we need to have with ourselves and the festival industries about what happens if things come in very late again.”
Cllr Kumar was also concerned about the lateness of the application. She said: “I’m a bit perplexed by this application, so it was submitted on the 11th of June for construction at the end of June, and construction has now completed without approval. I appreciate the retrospective elements of this, but there is a deficient application, deficient monitoring. It’s really concerning that there is almost no regard for due process.”
Cllr Tim Pogson agreed with Cllr Mowat that he had sufficient information to approve the consent, but said: “I think we need to make sure that festival producers take what their responsibilities are in this regard and make sure that they comply with all the regulatory requirements within the law. And I know that’s more than just planning, so just I want somehow for this committee, or this council, to send a very strong message to all festival producers through the fringe office, or whoever it is, to say, Look these the deadlines we needed to comply with. Just you know, sort yourselves out and do that.”
In the report before the committee it was stated that: “There are a number of trees within the application site which are within close proximity to the proposed structures. Limited information was submitted at the time of submission, but a Tree Report and Tree Protection information has since been submitted.”
The senior planning officer mentioned that the temporary nature of this development and the economic benefit to the city overrode any impact on the listed buildings surrounding the square, or the World Heritage Site more widely, especially as the buildings are of a “modest scale”.
The planning officer showed councillors some photos to illustrate the number of trees and also a diagram showing the proposed root protection areas for each – which they said were adequate although the council’s tree officer does still have some concerns – again overridden by the temporary nature of the Fringe event space and the economic benefit to the city.
The planning officer admitted that “Quite a few objections have been raised” and the works were effectively unauthorised.
Festival producers UniqueAssembly have denied that this application has anything to do with them. A spokesperson said: “Following this morning’s Council Committee meeting regarding The Famous Spiegeltent attraction in St Andrew Square, it has been brought to our attention that documentation created and owned by Unique Assembly has been submitted as part of their planning application without our knowledge or permission. Unique Assembly are not associated in anyway with the attraction in St. Andrew Square and have asked City of Edinburgh Council to remove documents owned by Unique Assembly from this application.”
The council officer explained that matters had changed for the better in relation to the trees since the first application: “The initial proposal showed the bar and dressing room constructed very close and really tight into the root protection areas and very close to the trees. We got these moved outwith such a sensitive area. It is still not great but the proposals were submitted so late in the process that I think we have got to a level where it is acceptable.”
Cllr Mowat asked if any monitoring of the trees had been going on while this development has been on site and she asked if the council is aware of what is happening at the moment. The council officer said that she was not aware of any monitoring reports submitted since 30 June. This will have to change now due to the condition on twice weekly monitoring reports applied to the consent.
Cllr Ben Parker asked for the consent to be refused completely but this amendment was defeated and the consent approved by 6 votes to 4.
