An eagle-eyed Forth Street resident last week spotted busy people with theodolites in the car park on the north side of Broughton Street Lane.
He approached the surveyors, asked questions, and was told that building would most likely begin here in the new year.
We suspect but cannot yet confirm that this is the latest spasm in a development proposed by Prosper Holdings Ltd which began in 2007 (Ref. 07/01631/FUL). The proposal – for 11 two–three bedroom residential units in two-storey terraced mews houses (without car parking) – was consented in September 2008.
You can see what it would look like here.
That permission was extended in November 2013, subject to a legal S75 agreement being reached between developer and City of Edinburgh Council (Ref. 13/01217/FUL).
A further extension of three months to reach the legal agreement, and three years to begin development, was granted in April last year. We’ve found nothing in the Council paperwork to suggest that a legal agreement has yet been signed. But the evidence on the ground suggests that things may finally be moving.
The gapsite was for sale in July 2014 (see Issue 231), but remains in the possession of Prosper Holdings, based on the Isle of Man.
No-one relishes losing open space close to their property, particularly in an already congested city centre. Some Forth Street residents are understandably concerned. However, this development looks better than many we’ve seen over recent years, and is surely an improvement on the four-storey warehouse which stood here before 1980.
UPDATE: See Letters (16.12.15).
----------------------------
@theSpurtle I wish Broughton could just stay the same. Bad enough with all the rabbit-hutch new houses in Bellevue.
@Richard09366558 @theSpurtle those houses are warm, spacious, home to 36 families, and integrate what was derelict land into the area
Richard Cristóbal @Richard09366558 @david_raine @theSpurtle They're ugly and out of character for the area. Not sure what your idea of spacious is, but they're not.
@david_raine @theSpurtle @Richard09366558 They're eyesores.
@LillyLyle @david_raine @theSpurtle Spot on.
@theSpurtle I would hope that they only approve new city development if it has car parking. Street parking is already over-subscribed.
@hackonteur Meant to encourage people to live without cars, relying instead on sustainable transport. But shame no spaces for ponies/llamas.
@theSpurtle You'd have to be a mountain goat to live in those houses! Why don't they make them wider and divide by floor instead ?