Skip to main content

EYRE PLACE STUDENT HOUSING

Submitted by Editor on

COUNCILLORS TO DETERMINE APPLICATION NEXT WEEK

At the next meeting of the Development Management Sub-Committee on 11 January, councillors will consider CA Eyre Place’s application to build student housing at 72–4 Eyre Place (22/03834/FUL). For background, see Issue 321.

The 3–6 storey proposal comprises 142 studio units plus ‘amenity social space’ (social lounges, gym, private dining spaces and games rooms).

Eyre Place 1

Officials recommend in their Report that the application be granted. They are unpersuaded by 398 objections from amenity groups, an MP and residents whose 64 material points (see Report, pp. 10–11) include:

  • Excessive height, scale and massing
  • Cumulative impacts of existing student housing
  • Over-concentration of student housing
  • Inadequate social housing
  • Adverse impact on the New Town Conservation Area and Edinburgh World Heritage Site
  • Loss of daylight to neighbouring properties.
Eyre Place

Officials instead conclude:

‘The application for development is acceptable with regard to Sections 64 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 and complies with relevant policies contained within the Edinburgh Local Development Plan.

'Nonconformities with the relevant non-statutory guidance in relation to daylight, cycle parking and use of land for student housing are justified. The proposals preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area. There are no material considerations which outweigh this conclusion.’

Some 416 people have also objected to the proposal in a petition, while there were 25 notes of approval. Spurtle understands those opposed to the plans will continue their remarkably well orchestrated campaign leading up to and during the subcommittee meeting on Wednesday.

An associated application by the same developer to build 9 town houses along part of Eyre Place Lane (22/03833/FUL) has been comparatively uncontroversial. It attracted 30 objections and 45 letters of support. Officials again recommend granting planning permission on 11 January.

UPDATE: On 11 Jan, the DMS voted to consider the proposal at a formal hearing, the date of which has yet to be confirmed. See Issue 325 (forthcoming 1 Feb) for further details.

EPth

-------------------------

Canonmills
V
MIX
UP
UP
URBP
CRITS
MOTIVES
WP
vvv
vvv
Craigmillar
ver
monkey
wonder
versus
twe
against
AGAINST
tweet against
tweet against
tweet in favour
tweets
Topics
Location