Locals opposed to plans for redeveloping 154 McDonald Road as flats have contacted the Spurtle following news that the New Town & Broughton Community Council (NTBCC) is backing the proposal (Breaking news, 19.8.13).

'I think that the NTBCC is way off with their assessment,' said Lindsay Law, former chair of the Broughton Primary School Parent Council.

Responding to yesterday's online coverage, she continued: 'The picture of Stockbridge [below] shows the overlooking flats, but clearly also shows a boundary wall separating them from the playground. At Broughton there is no such wall, there is simply access to the playground directly from the flats through fire and maintenance exits. The wall is the flats. There is no precedent in the whole city that we have found for that kind of arrangement.

'It's really disappointing to read because it suggests the NTBCC didn't visit the site or get in contact with parents to understand their concerns.'

Annette O'Carroll from Leith Central Community Council (LCCC) also got in touch. Although geographically just outwith its remit, LCCC had commented on the proposal in order to represent the interests of the many people living in its area whose children attend the adjacent Broughton Primary School.

Dr O'Carroll attached a list of the LCCC's objections, in which there are points of similarity to the NTBCC's stance – particularly concerning potential parking pressures and the application's classification as a Local Development. On the latter point, NTBCC arguably went further, stating that 'We believe this has created a worrying precedent that future developers may well be eager to exploit'.

The two community councils diverge over child safety and the proposal's compatibilty within more strategic Planning policy. On the latter, NTBCC did not see fit to comment at all.

Notably, LCCC takes a distinctive political line on the dubious wisdom of selling off Council property when the school attached next door is short of space.

We reprint the LCCC's objections in full below.

Leith Central Community Council objects to planning application 13/02458/FUL (154 McDonald Road) to convert the former Broughton High School building to 73 studio flats. 

 

1. We deplore the lack of consultation with parents and the fact that the application was submitted when the school is closed for the summer holidays. Although the applicants were in discussions with CEC officials in April 2013, parents were not apparently informed until June 2013, thus compromising the ability of the Broughton school community to respond to the application. In addition, given the sensitivity of this application, we are surprised that it was classed as a Local Development and thus not subject to a full consultation process. This is particularly regrettable since there are obvious conflicts of interest here, with City of Edinburgh Council both attempting to sell off the building and being the body that would recommend planning permission be granted. 

 

2. We question the need for a development containing 73 Studio flats (of 30-35sq metres), particularly in this area of Edinburgh where one bedroom tenement flats are available for sale for less than the development's proposed selling price of between £100,000 and £110,000. Essentially this application provides inflexible accommodation which is sized below current Edinburgh Design Guidance standards. We believe that the application does not comply with Development Plan Plan Policy Hou2 (Housing Mix) which requires a mix of housing types and sizes, with the intention of creating mixed and sustainable communities. We suggest that it also is not compliant with Local Plan Policy Hou3 since the communal provision of open space is clearly inadequate, being virtually non existent. We also believe that the "Urban Key' concept does not provide genuinely affordable housing as the communal facilities, concierge service and CCTV apparently envisaged must inevitably, on top of an already relatively high purchase price for the size of the accommodation unit, result in a high annual service charge for owners. 

 

3. We believe that the proposal does not comply with Policy Hou5 (Conversion to residential use). Here the housing envisaged is not compatible with nearby uses since the proximity of the proposed development to Broughton Primary School premises would lead to significant loss of privacy and possible child safety issues due to the degree to which it overlooks the Infants playground. This is of particular concern because the school playground is designated as an open playground for children in the area to use out of school hours as well as during the school day.  

4. In addition (re Policy Hou5), the developer's claim that the young professionals envisaged as target purchasers will not want to own cars (nor presumably have visitors who own cars) is simply not realistic. Hence the provision of no on-site parking will inevitably lead to unacceptable parking pressure in surrounding streets. 

 

5. We are particularly concerned that this building, which we believe had previously been used as an annex to Broughton Primary School is being sold for conversion to housing at a time when pressure on school places in the area is such that there is apparently a need to provide 4 modular classrooms to cope with rising numbers. The siting of these will also limit the amount of playground space in the school.

What do you think? Tell us by email spurtle@hotmail.co.uk on Facebook Broughton Spurtle or Twitter @theSpurtle  

 

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

Reaction

Wendy King A disgrace.