Planning Consultation Jock’s Lodge, Edinburgh

POSTED ON September 2, 2022

We acknowledge that this may be a suitable site for student accommodation and that such developments can bring many associated benefits. However, we do not support the current proposals as it stands and, without significant amendments, we are likely to object to the associated planning application when it is lodged.

We acknowledge that this may be a suitable site for student accommodation and that such developments can bring many associated benefits. However, we do not support the current proposals as it stands and, without significant amendments, we are likely to object to the associated planning application when it is lodged.

Support the Cockburn

Donate
Join Us

Planning Consultation Jock’s Lodge, Edinburgh

Posted on:

We acknowledge that this may be a suitable site for student accommodation and that such developments can bring many associated benefits. However, we do not support the current proposals as it stands and, without significant amendments, we are likely to object to the associated planning application when it is lodged.

We acknowledge that this may be a suitable site for student accommodation and that such developments can bring many associated benefits. However, we do not support the current proposals as it stands and, without significant amendments, we are likely to object to the associated planning application when it is lodged.

Cockburn Response

Canongate Student Housing

Posted on: May 20, 2022

We are supportive of this scheme’s intention to maintain the character of this historic gasworks site through the retention of key features such as the perimeter wall and workshop.

We are supportive of this scheme’s intention to maintain the character of this historic gasworks site through the retention of key features such as the perimeter wall and workshop.

Cockburn Response

We have lodged a neutral comment on this application.

We are supportive of this scheme’s intention to maintain the character of this historic gasworks site through the retention of key features such as the perimeter wall and workshop.  Although attention to detail during the implementation  of this scheme will be crucial to its success.

And we also accept that this appears to be a suitable location for student accommodation.

However,  the number of recently built and consented student housing schemes across the city is a concern.  An updated socio-economic impact assessment is now urgently required to understand the actual or potential impact of existing and future student housing development on local residents and neighbourhood civic life and to provide a complete context for the assessment of new applications.

Image: taken from planning application, copyright may be protected.

Fringe venue in the Meadows

Posted on: May 19, 2022

We believe this development is inconsistent with Local Development Plan policies and with the Council’s obligations to manage Common Good Assets for the public benefit. Read more below.

We believe this development is inconsistent with Local Development Plan policies and with the Council’s obligations to manage Common Good Assets for the public benefit. Read more below.

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association would wish to offer the following comments on this application.  We do so in the context of the previous consent for use of the site by the same applicant (21/02736/FUL), which was the first ever formal planning decision for the use of the Meadows for a major event.  That consent was issued for a short duration only and in the context of the Covid emergency.  In discussing that application, the Development Management Sub-Committee expressed reservations about the use of such a soft-surfaced public park, although it did approve the application. 

 We would wish to object this application. 

As the direct impact of Covid begins to recede, we continue to believe it is essential for the local economy get back on its feet and to get the iconic Festivals back in operation.  However, we do so in the context of our continued opposition to the use of public parks and gardens for “gated” heavy infrastructure events such as this.  

The Cockburn acknowledges that the applicant has erected similar infrastructure on this site having secured a contract from the City Council to do.  The “Lady Boys of Bangkok” operated from here for several years.  Other events such as the Meadows Festival and Moonwalk use the Meadows, and historically, the 1886 International Exhibition of Industry, Science and Art was sited here where a temporary dispensation to the erection of buildings was allowed. 

However, until last year, no planning consent had been sought for their operation in The Meadows despite it being a very clear Change of Use to Class 11 (Assembly and Leisure) and operates for longer than the 28 days in any year.  We continue to believe that the implications of such a change of use are considerable.  It would permit large wholly commercial developments to use a public open space year-round and could set a dangerous precedent for other open spaces in the city.  

Covid has also demonstrated the critical need to preserve open spaces for well-being, both physical and mental.  The enclosure of a sizable part of the Meadows will have a material impact on space available for informal recreation and enjoyment, and should be resisted.  

Fundamentally, the Cockburn believes that soft landscaped areas should not be used for events that require heavy infrastructure due to the damage that they cause.  The proximity to trees causes further concern due to the potential compaction of root systems leading to long-term decay or even loss.  We dispute the assessment by the applicant that no trees are affected by the application.  Root systems at both Middle Meadow Walk and Boy’s Brigade Walk will be affected, especially the former with the hospitality elements located adjacent to the existing avenue.  We also understand that a Noise Impact Assessment has been requested by the Council but is not included in the application documents.   

We note that the Edinburgh Improvement Act of 1827 expressly stipulates that no buildings may be erected in the Meadows or Bruntsfield Links.  The Meadows are also Common Good Assets, requiring the Council to manage them for the benefit of residents.  We believe that this development is contrary to the spirit, if not fact, of the 1827 Act and to the use as an enclosed, exclusive event space is not consistent with Common Good land.  Also, section 104 of The Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 requires the local authority to consult with the local community when it is planning to dispose of common good property or change its use. Additionally, the local authority must publish details of the proposed disposal or change of use of common good property and notify and invite representations from community councils and community bodies.  This suggests that a s.104 consultation needs to take place before any planning decision is taken.  

The Marchmont, Meadows and Bruntsfield Conservation Area Character Appraisal notes that the Meadows is the largest urban recreational parkland in the city and affords panoramic views to the north and east. It also notes the importance of the recreational open space at Brunstfield Links and Meadows as one of the premier open spaces in the city.  The appraisal indicates that it is designated a Millenium Park, which means that the Council will ensure that the park is protected in perpetuity as community open space. The appraisal also notes the occasional use by festival temporary venues. 

The Cockburn continues to believe that there are other sites in the city more suitable to this event.  Festival Square and the related Conference Square provides a hard surfaced area more than capable of hosting this event this year, close to Princes Street and a variety of public transport corridors.  Large car parks such as Meadowbank Retail Park might also be alternatives.    

In addition, we strongly advocate that pop-up food and drink facilities should be deleted from the proposals.  It is more important that established, permanent year-round neighbouring pubs and restaurants benefit from any trade associated with this type of use.  Almost half the site is given over to its use as a licensed premise.  We liken this to be similar to a cruise ship – self-contained with the objective of reducing off-site sales to a minimum.  Whilst this might be good for the operator, it does little to support the local economy. 

Relevant development plan policies are: 

Policy ENV 6 – Conservation Areas (Development) states, “Development within a conservation area or affecting its setting will be permitted which: a) preserves or enhances the special character or appearance of the conservation area and is consistent with the relevant conservation area character appraisal b) preserves trees, hedges, boundary walls, railings, paving and other features which contribute positively to the character of the area and c) demonstrates high standards of design and utilises materials appropriate to the historic environment.” 

Our view – the CACA makes it clear that its character is an open space and its appearance is as an open parkland.  The erection of a temporary building to host a commercial event with gated access is not consistent with its special character. 

Policy ENV12 Trees states “Development will not be permitted if likely to have a damaging impact on a tree protected by a Tree Preservation Order or on any other tree or woodland worthy of retention unless necessary for good arboricultural reasons. Where such permission is granted, replacement planting of appropriate species and numbers will be required to offset the loss to amenity.” 

Our view – the development is likely to have a damaging impact on the root systems of trees along Middle Meadow Walk and is therefore inconsistent with this policy. We do not agree with the assertion made by the applicants that there will be no damaging impact on the trees to the east and west of the site.  

Policy ENV18 Open Space Protection states, “Proposals involving the loss of open space will not be permitted unless it is demonstrated that: a) there will be no significant impact on the quality or character of the local environment and b) the open space is a small part of a larger area or of limited amenity or leisure value and there is a significant over-provision of open space serving the immediate area and c) the loss would not be detrimental to the wider network including its continuity or biodiversity value and either there will be a local benefit in allowing the development in terms of either alternative equivalent provision being made or improvement to an existing public park or other open space or e) the development is for a community purpose and the benefits to the local community outweigh the loss.” 

Our view – The proposals will result in the loss of open space due to its restrictive enclosure.  We believe that it will have a significant impact on the Meadows overall and will reduce its use for amenity and recreational activity as a result.    

Policy ENV22 Pollution and Air, Water and Soil Quality states, “Planning permission will only be granted for development where: a) there will be no significant adverse effects for health, the environment and amenity and either b) there will be no significant adverse effects on: air, and soil quality; the quality of the water environment; or on ground stability c) appropriate mitigation to minimise any adverse effects can be provided.” 

Our view – there a substantial negative impact on soil compaction and therefore soil quality.  it is clear that the turf is struggling to regenerate over much of the area covered by the application despite no activity in 2020.  

The Association is therefore of the view that the proposed development is inconsistent with Local Development Plan policies and with the duties of the local authority to manage these Common Good Assets for the benefit of the public. 

Should the Committee be minded to approve this, we would strongly advocate that any consent be time limited for this year only and be made personal to the applicant only.  Independent monitoring processes should form part of conditions for approval, and include tree and noise management as key elements.  This could then inform any future policy or guidelines for the use of public space in their area.  

Commercial Hospitality Space at 36-38 Victoria Street

Posted on: December 16, 2021

Our comments objecting to an application to erect a commercial hospitality space on the Common Good land in the Old Town.

Our comments objecting to an application to erect a commercial hospitality space on the Common Good land in the Old Town.

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn has considered this application and would wish to OBJECT to it on the grounds that it would involve the quasi-privatisation of public urban space; would affect the wider amenity of neighbouring residents and businesses; is poorly designed in the context of the specific location and negatively impacts on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

We have no objection to the current tabling licensing system in place, whereby a small number of tables are placed discretely beside the operator’s premises.  Licensing conditions require tables and chairs to be removed each evening, restoring the area back to unfettered public use.  This flexible and temporary system works well.

Our concern lies with the erection of a PERMANENT structure, which would effectively privatise a portion of the Common Good land in Edinburgh’s High Street.

It is also important to recognise the likely cumulative impacts of this application if other neighbouring businesses seek to do the same in front of each of their properties too.

A senior Council officer recently reported their concerns about these structures to the Council’s Regulatory Committee (2 Dec 2021). This officer suggested that some of these permanent trading areas could potentially start “limiting the ability to stage” certain civic and cultural activities and events in the city.

The officer went further, noting that once granted a permanent license to operate these new trading areas, “the license holder would have protections” that “exposes the council to the risk of legal challenge” if the local authority requested the business owner to remove the structure and cease trading there.

We set out our own concerns about this type of commercial development in greater detail below.

Overall context – The Cockburn has outlined its general concerns about the unregulated proliferation of outdoor seating developments on numerous occasions while also noting the context of COVID and COVID recovery for hospitality businesses.

We continue to sympathise with businesses that have struggled during the periods of prolonged lockdown, unexpected social distancing and other necessary public health measures. We are not surprised that some traders now hope to permanently retain structures that were put in place temporarily and that other traders are coming forward with applications for entirely new structures.

These newly built ad hoc decks, gazebos and sheds significantly expand each premise’s trading area and, with the current uncertainty over the rapid spread of COVID variants, provide a timely extension to existing indoor operations, in addition to any previously licensed outdoor seating.

We accept TEMPORARY spatial and regulatory extensions to existing licensing footprints that keep businesses trading and the public safe. However we are opposed to PERMANENT planning permissions being granted for ad hoc BUILT structures that:

  • Permanently alter access rights to and other existing uses of public lands,
  • Potentially impact pedestrian movement through the streetscape,
  • Radically alter the character of conservation areas,
  • Negatively affect residential amenity,
  • Potentially inhibit access for necessary service and emergency vehicles.

Need for unified, design-led approach – Being a novel introduction to the city’s streetscape, Edinburgh Street Design Guidance is largely silent on these outdoor seating areas, although many broader principles apply including the need to reduce street clutter and the importance of uncongested, clear from obstruction pedestrian zones.

The Cockburn believes that interventions into Edinburgh’s streetscape, especially within Conservation Areas across the city, must be unified (i.e., consistent across a wider area), design-led and developed in such a manner as to enhance the character of streets. It should not be left to individual businesses to create their own visions for the public realm.

A revised and updated policy framework is required that takes on board all the City of Edinburgh’s Council’s pledges and commitments.

Street Clutter – At a recent meeting of the City of Edinburgh Council, Councillors reaffirmed their support for Transport for All’s Equal Pavements Pledge. This acknowledges that being able to move around the urban environment freely is a right that should be allowed to all those who live in, work in and visit Edinburgh, including those with complex needs. Outdoor seating areas such as that proposed here complicates the facilitation of free and unfettered access across the city.

We note the abolition of A-boards across the city as an example of the Council’s commitment to unimpeded pedestrian access.

Privatisation/Appropriation of public space – The Cockburn has frequently voices concerns about the ongoing privatisation of public spaces across the city. We have spoken out against the trend of the City of Edinburgh Council increasingly using the city’s existing public spaces, parks and green spaces to raise funds, by making their land available to private companies who charge for ticketed events and restrict access to parks and green spaces for extended periods.

We are not against all use of public and quasi-public spaces, particularly parks and greenspaces, for events and associated activities. But such events and pop-ups for al fresco dining and drinking, including those on and in association with streets, must be assessed and open for review and comment within a relevant and up-to-date policy and regulatory framework. Edinburgh lack such a policy framework currently.

Wider Amenity Impacts – We note that at recent meeting of the City of Edinburgh Council councillors agreed that the Council would write to the Scottish Government to ask for powers to deal with problems associated amplified busking and street entertainment across the city and to facilitate the engagement of residents who are concerned about related noise disturbances.

This suggests that the policy and practice framework relating to the consideration of noise from on-street eating and drinking installations is likely to be subject to change and be the subject of restriction in the near term, certainly that the Council is minded to take a more restrictive view of actions, activities and potential sources of street noise such as on-street eating and drinking facilities.

We have no objections to the current table licensing arrangements that require their removal at the end of each trading period, partly in order to reduce potential negative impacts on nearby residents. Permanent structures that provide 24 hour cover and seating facilities, however unintentionally, are already causing repeated anti-social problems for central Edinburgh residents as these structures become gathering places for after-hours drinking and eating, once business owners have long-since locked up and headed home. This will only increase in the spring and summer months.

Assessment of outdoor seating against current LDP policies – Notwithstanding the comments above, it is our view the city’s current planning policy framework does not support on-street al fresco dining and drinking as uncoordinated individual planning applications.

In our view, the proposals are not consistent with Policy ENV 6 – Conservation Areas (Development), Policy ENV18 Open Space Protection, Policy Del 2 City Centre – Development, Policy Des 1 Design Quality, Policy Des 5 Development Design – Amenity,  and Policy Des 8 Public Realm and Landscape Design.

Commercial Hospitality Space at 119 High Street

Posted on:

Our comments objecting to an application to erect a permanent commercial hospitality space on the Common Good land of the High Street.

Our comments objecting to an application to erect a permanent commercial hospitality space on the Common Good land of the High Street.

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn has considered this application and would wish to OBJECT to it on the grounds that it would involve the quasi-privatisation of public urban space; would affect the wider amenity of neighbouring residents and businesses; is poorly designed in the context of the specific location and negatively impacts on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

We have no objection to the current tabling licensing system in place, whereby a small number of tables are placed discretely beside the operator’s premises.  Licensing conditions require tables and chairs to be removed each evening, restoring the area back to unfettered public use.  This flexible and temporary system works well.

Our concern lies with the erection of a PERMANENT structure, which would effectively privatise a portion of the Common Good land in Edinburgh’s High Street.

It is also important to recognise the likely cumulative impacts of this application if other neighbouring businesses seek to do the same in front of each of their properties too.

A senior Council officer recently reported their concerns about these structures to the Council’s Regulatory Committee (2 Dec 2021). This officer suggested that some of these permanent trading areas could potentially start “limiting the ability to stage” certain civic and cultural activities and events in the city.

The officer went further, noting that once granted a permanent license to operate these new trading areas, “the license holder would have protections” that “exposes the council to the risk of legal challenge” if the local authority requested the business owner to remove the structure and cease trading there.

We set out our own concerns about this type of commercial development in greater detail below.

Overall context – The Cockburn has outlined its general concerns about the unregulated proliferation of outdoor seating developments on numerous occasions while also noting the context of COVID and COVID recovery for hospitality businesses.

We continue to sympathise with businesses that have struggled during the periods of prolonged lockdown, unexpected social distancing and other necessary public health measures. We are not surprised that some traders now hope to permanently retain structures that were put in place temporarily and that other traders are coming forward with applications for entirely new structures.

These newly built ad hoc decks, gazebos and sheds significantly expand each premise’s trading area and, with the current uncertainty over the rapid spread of COVID variants, provide a timely extension to existing indoor operations, in addition to any previously licensed outdoor seating.

We accept TEMPORARY spatial and regulatory extensions to existing licensing footprints that keep businesses trading and the public safe. However we are opposed to PERMANENT planning permissions being granted for ad hoc BUILT structures that:

  • Permanently alter access rights to and other existing uses of public lands,
  • Potentially impact pedestrian movement through the streetscape,
  • Radically alter the character of conservation areas,
  • Negatively affect residential amenity,
  • Potentially inhibit access for necessary service and emergency vehicles.

Need for unified, design-led approach – Being a novel introduction to the city’s streetscape, Edinburgh Street Design Guidance is largely silent on these outdoor seating areas, although many broader principles apply including the need to reduce street clutter and the importance of uncongested, clear from obstruction pedestrian zones.

The Cockburn believes that interventions into Edinburgh’s streetscape, especially within Conservation Areas across the city, must be unified (i.e., consistent across a wider area), design-led and developed in such a manner as to enhance the character of streets. It should not be left to individual businesses to create their own visions for the public realm.

A revised and updated policy framework is required that takes on board all the City of Edinburgh’s Council’s pledges and commitments.

Street Clutter – At a recent meeting of the City of Edinburgh Council, Councillors reaffirmed their support for Transport for All’s Equal Pavements Pledge. This acknowledges that being able to move around the urban environment freely is a right that should be allowed to all those who live in, work in and visit Edinburgh, including those with complex needs. Outdoor seating areas such as that proposed here complicates the facilitation of free and unfettered access across the city.

We note the abolition of A-boards across the city as an example of the Council’s commitment to unimpeded pedestrian access.

Privatisation/Appropriation of public space – The Cockburn has frequently voices concerns about the ongoing privatisation of public spaces across the city. We have spoken out against the trend of the City of Edinburgh Council increasingly using the city’s existing public spaces, parks and green spaces to raise funds, by making their land available to private companies who charge for ticketed events and restrict access to parks and green spaces for extended periods.

We are not against all use of public and quasi-public spaces, particularly parks and greenspaces, for events and associated activities. But such events and pop-ups for al fresco dining and drinking, including those on and in association with streets, must be assessed and open for review and comment within a relevant and up-to-date policy and regulatory framework. Edinburgh lack such a policy framework currently.

Wider Amenity Impacts – We note that at recent meeting of the City of Edinburgh Council councillors agreed that the Council would write to the Scottish Government to ask for powers to deal with problems associated amplified busking and street entertainment across the city and to facilitate the engagement of residents who are concerned about related noise disturbances.

This suggests that the policy and practice framework relating to the consideration of noise from on-street eating and drinking installations is likely to be subject to change and be the subject of restriction in the near term, certainly that the Council is minded to take a more restrictive view of actions, activities and potential sources of street noise such as on-street eating and drinking facilities.

We have no objections to the current table licensing arrangements that require their removal at the end of each trading period, partly in order to reduce potential negative impacts on nearby residents. Permanent structures that provide 24 hour cover and seating facilities, however unintentionally, are already causing repeated anti-social problems for central Edinburgh residents as these structures become gathering places for after-hours drinking and eating, once business owners have long-since locked up and headed home. This will only increase in the spring and summer months.

Assessment of outdoor seating against current LDP policies – Notwithstanding the comments above, it is our view the city’s current planning policy framework does not support on-street al fresco dining and drinking as uncoordinated individual planning applications.

In our view, the proposals are not consistent with Policy ENV 6 – Conservation Areas (Development), Policy ENV18 Open Space Protection, Policy Del 2 City Centre – Development, Policy Des 1 Design Quality, Policy Des 5 Development Design – Amenity,  and Policy Des 8 Public Realm and Landscape Design.

Application for change of use in Grassmarket

Posted on: December 15, 2021

Our objection to a proposal to introduce a new leisure and bar operation in the Grassmarket which we believe will negatively impact the amenity of local residents

Our objection to a proposal to introduce a new leisure and bar operation in the Grassmarket which we believe will negatively impact the amenity of local residents

Cockburn Response

The Association has been approached by a number of members and stakeholders about this development.  We note that a similar scheme in 2019 had been withdrawn.

The Grassmarket is an area of the city that has been subject to intense pressures from the tourism/hospitality sector for some.  It is essential, therefore, that any proposed Change of Use and development scheme be considered in the context of the cumulative impact on local residents.

These pressures have been so significant that the viability of the Grassmarket as a residential community could be seen to be under threat.

The property has a long history of retail of use.  We appreciate the challenges in marketing such premises during a global pandemic and note that it has been available since February 2019.  Nevertheless, we believe that a change from Class 1 to Classes 3 & 11 as proposed on the grounds that would affect the amenity and to an extent the viability of the Grassmarket as a mixed community.  In addition, it would create additional late evening footfall, adding to existing noise and intrusion in the area.  In this, we note that at recent meeting of the City of Edinburgh Council councillors agreed that the Council would write to the Scottish Government to ask for powers to deal with problems associated amplified busking and street entertainment across the city and to facilitate the engagement of residents who are concerned about related noise disturbances

Policy Hou 7 Inappropriate Uses in Residential Areas – states that developments, including changes of use, which would have a materially detrimental effect on the living conditions of nearby residents, will not be permitted. It notes that the intention of the policy is firstly, to preclude the introduction or intensification of non-residential uses incompatible with predominantly residential areas and secondly, to prevent any further deterioration in living conditions in more mixed-use areas which nevertheless have important residential functions.  We believe that this proposal is inconsistent with this policy.

The proposed City Plan 2030 proposes new policies aimed at protecting residential amenity.  These reinforce HOU7 and might be considered a material consideration.

As such, we feel that the proposals are inconsistent with Policy Des 5 Development Design – Amenity in that it fails to meet the first criteria namely “the amenity of neighbouring developments is not adversely affected and that future occupiers have acceptable levels of amenity in relation to noise, daylight, sunlight, privacy or immediate outlook.”

In summary, whilst we appreciate the challenges in marketing retail premises during a pandemic, the intensification hospitality and leisure developments in the Grassmarket will have a negative impact on residents and would result in further deterioration of living conditions.

The Cockburn, therefore, OBJECTS to this application.

Commercial Hospitality Space at 23 Elm Row

Posted on: December 7, 2021

Our comments objecting to a proposal to erect a wooden gazebo structure and decked area on the public footpath at Elm Row.

Our comments objecting to a proposal to erect a wooden gazebo structure and decked area on the public footpath at Elm Row.

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn has considered this application and would wish to OBJECT to it on the grounds that it would involve the quasi-privatisation of public urban space; would affect the wider amenity of neighbouring residents and businesses; is poorly designed in the context of the specific location and negatively impacts on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. 

We have no objection to the current tabling licensing system in place, whereby a small number of tables are placed discretely beside the operator’s premises.  Licensing conditions require tables and chairs to be removed each evening, restoring the area back to unfettered public use.  This flexible and temporary system works well. 

Our concern lies with the erection of a permanent structure, which would effectively privatise in the region of two-thirds of the current public space available to this business into its control.

It is important to recognise that the possible cumulative impact if other neighbouring businesses seeking to do the same. 

We set out our general and detailed views on this type of development in greater detail below.

Overall context – The Cockburn has outlined general concerns about the proliferation of outdoor seating developments on numerous occasions but notes the context of Covid and Covid recovery for hospitality businesses. We continue to sympathise with businesses who have struggled during the enforced lockdown period. However, with the ongoing easing of Covid restrictions, the reasoning for such relaxation of licensing and planning restrictions is also diminishing. Where on-street out-door eating and drinking installations have already been put in place under a relaxation of planning restrictions, we understand that the temporary arrangement for such provisions is coming to an end. 

We are not surprised that some traders wish to retain structures that are already in place and that other traders are coming forward with applications for entirely new structure. This increases the number of covers available and with the current uncertainty of Covid and government guidance, provides a basis for continued, safe operations. 

Need for unified, design-led approach – Edinburgh Street Design Guidance is largely silent on these outdoor seating areas although many broader principles apply including the need to reduce street clutter and the importance of uncongested, clear from obstruction pedestrian zones.

The Cockburn believes that interventions into Edinburgh’s streetscape, especially within Conservation Areas across the city, must be unified (i.e., consistent across a wider area), design-led and developed in such a manner as to enhance the character of streets. It should not be left to individual businesses to create their own visions for the public realm.

A revised and updated policy framework is required that takes on board all the City of Edinburgh’s Council’s pledges and commitments. 

Street Clutter – At a recent meeting of the City of Edinburgh Council, Councillors reaffirmed their support for Transport for All’s Equal Pavements Pledge. This acknowledges that being able to move around the urban environment freely is a right that should be allowed to all those who live in, work in and visit Edinburgh, including those with complex needs. Outdoor seating areas such as that proposed here complicates the facilitation of free and unfettered access across the city. 

We note the abolition of A-board across the city as an example of the Council’s commitment to free access. 

Privatisation/Appropriation of public space – The Cockburn has frequently voiced its concern about the ongoing privatisation of public spaces across the city. We have spoken out against the trend of the City of Edinburgh Council increasingly using the city’s existing public spaces, parks and green spaces to raise funds, by making their land available to private companies who charge for ticketed events and restrict access to parks and green spaces for extended periods. 

We are not against all use of public and quasi-public spaces, particularly parks and greenspaces, for events and associated activities. But such events and pop-ups for al fresco dining and drinking, including those on and in association with streets, must be assessed and open for review and comment within a relevant and up-to-date policy framework. Edinburgh lack such a policy framework currently.

Wider Amenity Impacts – We note that at recent meeting of the City of Edinburgh Council councillors agreed that the Council would write to the Scottish Government to ask for powers to deal with problems associated amplified busking and street entertainment across the city and to facilitate the engagement of residents who are concerned about related noise disturbances. 

This suggests that the policy and practice framework relating to the consideration of noise from on-street eating and drinking installations is likely to be subject to change and be the subject of restriction in the near term, certainly that the Council is minded to take a more restrictive view of actions, activities and potential sources of street noise such as on-street eating and drinking facilities.

Assessment of outdoor seating against current LDP policies – Notwithstanding the comments above, it is our view the city’s current planning policy framework does not support on-street al fresco dining and drinking as uncoordinated individual planning applications.   

In our view, the proposals are not consistent with  Policy ENV 6 – Conservation Areas (Development), Policy ENV18 Open Space Protection, Policy Del 2 City Centre – Development, Policy Des 1 Design Quality, Policy Des 5 Development Design – Amenity,  and Policy Des 8 Public Realm and Landscape Design.

For completeness, we have no objections to the current table licensing arrangements subject to the adherence of the guidelines associated with any specific licencing conditions. 

Commercial Hospitality Space at 45 Cockburn Street

Posted on:

Our comments on an application seeking to permit construction of a private commercial structure on publicly-owned Common Good land

Our comments on an application seeking to permit construction of a private commercial structure on publicly-owned Common Good land

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn OBJECTS to this application on the grounds that it would involve the quasi-privatisation of public urban space; would affect the wider amenity of neighbouring residents and businesses; is poorly designed in the context of the specific location and negatively impacts on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. 

The platform area extends into the existing street making access to service vehicles and pedestrians complex and difficult. The existing table licensing area (to which we have no objection) compounds this issue, making the pavement narrow, affecting pedestrian flow.  We also note that the development, which has been erected, has timber panels erected to the height of the roof, meaning that the drawings do not reflect what has actually been built.

It is important to recognise that the impact on this location is potentially increased by other neighbouring businesses seeking to do the same. The cumulative impact of similar proposals needs to be considered first and foremost and whilst we accept that an individual applicant is only concerned with their proposal, the potential total impact is significantly greater on a streetscape level.

We set out our general and detailed views on this type of development in greater detail below.

Overall context – The Cockburn has outlined general concerns about the proliferation of outdoor seating developments on numerous occasions but notes the context of Covid and Covid recovery for hospitality businesses. We continue to sympathise with businesses who have struggled during the enforced lockdown period. However, with the ongoing easing of Covid restrictions, the reasoning for such relaxation of licensing and planning restrictions is also diminishing. Where on-street out-door eating and drinking installations have already been put in place under a relaxation of planning restrictions, we understand that the temporary arrangement for such provisions is coming to an end. 

We are not surprised that some traders wish to retain structures that are already in place and that other traders are coming forward with applications for entirely new structure. This increases the number of covers available and with the current uncertainty of Covid and government guidance, provides a basis for continued, safe operations. 

 Existing tabling licensed areas – We have no objection to the current tabling licensing system in place, whereby a small number of tables are placed discretely beside the operator’s premises.  The addition of a separate platform placed apart from the licensed area causes additional concerns with the need for service staff to cross through pedestrian areas to service the extension.  In some instances, especially where the separating space is small, this creates not along a significant impediment to pedestrian flow but creates a psychological barrier as well, suggesting that the public are crossing an area of semi-private space.  

Need for unified, design-led approach – Edinburgh Street Design Guidance is largely silent on these outdoor seating areas although many broader principles apply including the need to reduce street clutter and the importance of uncongested, clear from obstruction pedestrian zones.

The Cockburn believes that interventions into Edinburgh’s streetscape, especially within Conservation Areas across the city, must be unified (i.e., consistent across a wider area), design-led and developed in such a manner as to enhance the character of streets. It should not be left to individual businesses to create their own visions for the public realm. A revised and updated policy framework is required that takes on board all the City of Edinburgh’s Council’s pledges and commitments.

If outdoors seating extensions are to be acceptable, streets with site specific challenges like Cockburn Street with its sloping topography, busy footfalls and parking and servicing challenges require a bespoke solution which all proprietors would need to conform and which would need to respond to the total streetscape environment, not just what is outside a businesses’ door. The amenity and welling-being of residents must be respected.

Street Clutter – At a full meeting of the City of Edinburgh Council councillors recently reaffirmed their support for Transport for All’s Equal Pavements Pledge. This acknowledges that being able to move around the urban environment freely is a right that should be allowed to all those who live in, work in and visit Edinburgh, including those with complex needs. Outdoor furniture for al fresco dining has only further complicated the facilitation of free and unfettered access across the city.

We note the abolition of A-board across the city as an example of the Council’s commitment to free access.

Privatisation/Appropriation of public space – The Cockburn has frequently voiced its concern about the ongoing privatisation of public spaces across the city. We have spoken out against the trend of the City of Edinburgh Council increasingly using the city’s existing public spaces, parks and green spaces to raise funds, by making their land available to private companies who charge for ticketed events and restrict access to parks and green spaces for extended periods.

We are not against all use of public and quasi-public spaces, particularly parks and greenspaces, for events and associated activities. But such events and pop-ups for al fresco dining and drinking, including those on and in association with streets, must be assessed and open for review and comment within a relevant and up-to-date policy framework. Edinburgh lack such a policy framework currently.

Wider Amenity Impacts – We note that at recent meeting of the City of Edinburgh Council councillors agreed that the Council would write to the Scottish Government to ask for powers to deal with problems associated amplified busking and street entertainment across the city and to facilitate the engagement of residents who are concerned about related noise disturbances.

This suggests that the policy and practice framework relating to the consideration of noise from on-street eating and drinking installations is likely to be subject to change and be the subject of restriction in the near term, certainly that the Council is minded to take a more restrictive view of actions, activities and potential sources of street noise such as on-street eating and drinking facilities.

Assessment of outdoor seating against current LDP policies – Notwithstanding the comments above, it is our view the city’s current planning policy framework does not support on-street al fresco dining and drinking as uncoordinated individual planning applications. 

Policy ENV 6 – Conservation Areas (Development) – Development within a conservation area or affecting its setting will be permitted which: a) preserves or enhances the special character or appearance of the conservation area and is consistent with the relevant conservation area character appraisal b) preserves trees, hedges, boundary walls, railings, paving and other features which contribute positively to the character of the area and c) demonstrates high standards of design and utilises materials appropriate to the historic environment.

Cockburn view – the use of timber decking material and the associated fencing undermines the character of the area and does damage to the visual integrity of the street.  The creation is enclosures with associated fences undermines the open character of the High Street, the historic marketplace for the city. The attempt to create a level platform on a sloping surface further exacerbates this incongruity. We note that the existing “shop-side” tabling noted in the application simply places tables and chairs on the sloping pavement. The proposals fail to preserve the main feature within contributes to character of the area, namely to the sloping street and does not demonstrate a high standard of design.

Policy ENV18 Open Space Protection – Proposals involving the loss of open space will not be permitted unless it is demonstrated that: a) there will be no significant impact on the quality or character of the local environment and b) the open space is a small part of a larger area or of limited amenity or leisure value and there is a significant over-provision of open space serving the immediate area and c) the loss would not be detrimental to the wider network including its continuity or biodiversity value and either there will be a local benefit in allowing the development in terms of either alternative equivalent provision being made or improvement to an existing public park or other open space or e) the development is for a community purpose and the benefits to the local community outweigh the loss.

Cockburn view – Fundamentally, streets are open spaces with the city. The proposed use as an outdoor extension of a pub or restaurant is not public use, although we can appreciate the ambience and vibrancy that a café culture can bring to areas. This emphasises the need for a civic design plan that goes beyond the interests and boundaries of individual businesses.

Policy Del 2 City Centre – Development which lies within the area of the City Centre as shown on the Proposals Map will be permitted which retains and enhances its character, attractiveness, vitality, and accessibility and contributes to its role as a strategic business and regional shopping centre and Edinburgh’s role as a capital city. The requirements in principle will be for:
a) comprehensively designed proposals which maximise the potential of the site in accordance with any relevant development principles, development brief and/or other guidance
b) a use or a mix of uses appropriate to the location of the site, its accessibility characteristics and the character of the surrounding area.
c) Where practicable, major mixed-use developments should provide offices, particularly on upper floors. At street level, other uses may be more appropriate to maintain city centre diversity, especially retail vitality on important shopping frontages.
d) the creation of new civic spaces and traffic-free pedestrian routes where achievable.

Cockburn view – It is our view that none of the al fresco drinking and dining installations which have come forward in recent month and which continue to proliferate across the city centre can be said to maintain and enhance the character of the city centre. All applications coming forward should clearly demonstrate how, if granted planning permission, their proposed installations would add to the quality and character of the centre.

Policy Des 1 Design Quality and Context – Planning permission will be granted for development where it is demonstrated that the proposal will create or contribute towards a sense of place. Design should be based on an overall design concept that draws upon positive characteristics of the surrounding area. Planning permission will not be granted for poor quality or inappropriate design or for proposals that would be damaging to the character or appearance of the area around it, particularly where this has a special importance.

Cockburn view -All applications coming forward should clearly demonstrate how, if granted planning permission, their proposed installations would create or contribute towards a sense of place. It is not clear to us how any of the installations which we have seen coming forward actually achieve this. The positive additional character benefits from proposals should be clearly demonstrated.

Policy Des 5 Development Design – Amenity – Planning permission will be granted for development where it is demonstrated that:
a) the amenity of neighbouring developments is not adversely affected and that future occupiers have acceptable levels of amenity in relation to noise, daylight, sunlight, privacy or immediate outlook.
b) the design will facilitate adaptability in the future to the needs of different occupiers, and in appropriate locations will promote opportunities for mixed uses.
c) community security will be promoted by providing active frontages to more important thoroughfares and designing for natural surveillance over all footpaths and open areas.
d) a clear distinction is made between public and private spaces, with the latter provided in enclosed or defensible forms.
e) refuse and recycling facilities, cycle storage, low and zero carbon technology, telecommunications equipment, plant and services have been sensitively integrated into the design.

Cockburn View – All al fresco drinking, and dining proposals should clearly demonstrate that they do not adversely impact upon the amenity of their neighbours. Residents and other local business must have their rights to amenity and well-being respected. Again, we highlight the Council’s expressed wish to curtain acoustic pollution and to facilitate the engagement of residents on this issue.

Policy Des 8 Public Realm and Landscape Design – Planning permission will be granted for development where all external spaces, and features, including streets, footpaths, civic spaces, green spaces boundary treatments and public art have been designed as an integral part of the scheme as a whole, and it has been demonstrated that:
a) the design and the materials to be used are appropriate for their intended purpose, to the use and character of the area generally, especially where this has a special interest or importance.
b) the different elements of paving, landscaping and street furniture are coordinated to avoid a sense of clutter, and in larger schemes design and provision will be coordinated over different phases of a development.
c) particular consideration has been given, if appropriate, to the planting of trees to provide a setting for buildings, boundaries and roadsides and create a robust landscape structure.
d) a satisfactory scheme of maintenance will be put in place.

Cockburn View – It is difficult to understand how potential negative impacts arising for proposed on-street installations can be mitigated or avoided in the absence of a relevant policy framework, monitoring regime and enforcement structure. Again, we highlight the Council’s commitment to providing safe, accessible streets and walkways for City residents, workers, and visitors. 

Commercial Hospitality Space at 34 Cockburn Street

Posted on:

Our comments on an application seeking to permit construction of a private commercial structure on publicly-owned Common Good land

Our comments on an application seeking to permit construction of a private commercial structure on publicly-owned Common Good land

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn OBJECTS to this application on the grounds that it would involve the quasi-privatisation of public urban space; would affect the wider amenity of neighbouring residents and businesses; is poorly designed in the context of the specific location and negatively impacts on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. 

The platform area extends into the existing street making access to service vehicles and pedestrians complex and difficult. The existing table licensing area (to which we have no objection) compounds this issue, making the pavement narrow, affecting pedestrian flow.  We also note that the development, which has been erected, has timber panels erected to the height of the roof, meaning that the drawings do not reflect what has actually been built. 

It is important to recognise that the impact on this location is potentially increased by other neighbouring businesses seeking to do the same. The cumulative impact of similar proposals needs to be considered first and foremost and whilst we accept that an individual applicant is only concerned with their proposal, the potential total impact is significantly greater on a streetscape level.

We set out our general and detailed views on this type of development in greater detail below.

Overall context – The Cockburn has outlined general concerns about the proliferation of outdoor seating developments on numerous occasions but notes the context of Covid and Covid recovery for hospitality businesses. We continue to sympathise with businesses who have struggled during the enforced lockdown period. However, with the ongoing easing of Covid restrictions, the reasoning for such relaxation of licensing and planning restrictions is also diminishing. Where on-street out-door eating and drinking installations have already been put in place under a relaxation of planning restrictions, we understand that the temporary arrangement for such provisions is coming to an end. 

We are not surprised that some traders wish to retain structures that are already in place and that other traders are coming forward with applications for entirely new structure. This increases the number of covers available and with the current uncertainty of Covid and government guidance, provides a basis for continued, safe operations. 

Existing tabling licensed areas – We have no objection to the current tabling licensing system in place, whereby a small number of tables are placed discretely beside the operator’s premises.  The addition of a separate platform placed apart from the licensed area causes additional concerns with the need for service staff to cross through pedestrian areas to service the extension.  In some instances, especially where the separating space is small, this creates not along a significant impediment to pedestrian flow but creates a psychological barrier as well, suggesting that the public are crossing an area of semi-private space.  

Need for unified, design-led approach – Edinburgh Street Design Guidance is largely silent on these outdoor seating areas although many broader principles apply including the need to reduce street clutter and the importance of uncongested, clear from obstruction pedestrian zones. 

The Cockburn believes that interventions into Edinburgh’s streetscape, especially within Conservation Areas across the city, must be unified (i.e., consistent across a wider area), design-led and developed in such a manner as to enhance the character of streets. It should not be left to individual businesses to create their own visions for the public realm. A revised and updated policy framework is required that takes on board all the City of Edinburgh’s Council’s pledges and commitments.

If outdoors seating extensions are to be acceptable, streets with site specific challenges like Cockburn Street with its sloping topography, busy footfalls and parking and servicing challenges require a bespoke solution which all proprietors would need to conform and which would need to respond to the total streetscape environment, not just what is outside a businesses’ door. The amenity and welling-being of residents must be respected.

Street Clutter – At a full meeting of the City of Edinburgh Council councillors recently reaffirmed their support for Transport for All’s Equal Pavements Pledge. This acknowledges that being able to move around the urban environment freely is a right that should be allowed to all those who live in, work in and visit Edinburgh, including those with complex needs. Outdoor furniture for al fresco dining has only further complicated the facilitation of free and unfettered access across the city.

We note the abolition of A-boards across the city as an example of the Council’s commitment to free access.

Privatisation/Appropriation of public space – The Cockburn has frequently voiced its concern about the ongoing privatisation of public spaces across the city. We have spoken out against the trend of the City of Edinburgh Council increasingly using the city’s existing public spaces, parks and green spaces to raise funds, by making their land available to private companies who charge for ticketed events and restrict access to parks and green spaces for extended periods. 

We are not against all use of public and quasi-public spaces, particularly parks and greenspaces, for events and associated activities. But such events and pop-ups for al fresco dining and drinking, including those on and in association with streets, must be assessed and open for review and comment within a relevant and up-to-date policy framework. Edinburgh lack such a policy framework currently.

Wider Amenity Impacts – We note that at recent meeting of the City of Edinburgh Council councillors agreed that the Council would write to the Scottish Government to ask for powers to deal with problems associated amplified busking and street entertainment across the city and to facilitate the engagement of residents who are concerned about related noise disturbances. 

This suggests that the policy and practice framework relating to the consideration of noise from on-street eating and drinking installations is likely to be subject to change and be the subject of restriction in the near term, certainly that the Council is minded to take a more restrictive view of actions, activities and potential sources of street noise such as on-street eating and drinking facilities.

Assessment of outdoor seating against current LDP policies – Notwithstanding the comments above, it is our view the city’s current planning policy framework does not support on-street al fresco dining and drinking as uncoordinated individual planning applications. 

Policy ENV 6 – Conservation Areas (Development) – Development within a conservation area or affecting its setting will be permitted which: a) preserves or enhances the special character or appearance of the conservation area and is consistent with the relevant conservation area character appraisal b) preserves trees, hedges, boundary walls, railings, paving and other features which contribute positively to the character of the area and c) demonstrates high standards of design and utilises materials appropriate to the historic environment.

Cockburn view – the use of timber decking material and the associated fencing undermines the character of the area and does damage to the visual integrity of the street.  The creation is enclosures with associated fences undermines the open character of the High Street, the historic marketplace for the city. The attempt to create a level platform on a sloping surface further exacerbates this incongruity. We note that the existing “shop-side” tabling noted in the application simply places tables and chairs on the sloping pavement. The proposals fail to preserve the main feature within contributes to character of the area, namely to the sloping street and does not demonstrate a high standard of design.

Policy ENV18 Open Space Protection – Proposals involving the loss of open space will not be permitted unless it is demonstrated that: a) there will be no significant impact on the quality or character of the local environment and b) the open space is a small part of a larger area or of limited amenity or leisure value and there is a significant over-provision of open space serving the immediate area and c) the loss would not be detrimental to the wider network including its continuity or biodiversity value and either there will be a local benefit in allowing the development in terms of either alternative equivalent provision being made or improvement to an existing public park or other open space or e) the development is for a community purpose and the benefits to the local community outweigh the loss.

Cockburn view – Fundamentally, streets are open spaces with the city. The proposed use as an outdoor extension of a pub or restaurant is not public use, although we can appreciate the ambience and vibrancy that a café culture can bring to areas. This emphasises the need for a civic design plan that goes beyond the interests and boundaries of individual businesses.

Policy Del 2 City Centre – Development which lies within the area of the City Centre as shown on the Proposals Map will be permitted which retains and enhances its character, attractiveness, vitality, and accessibility and contributes to its role as a strategic business and regional shopping centre and Edinburgh’s role as a capital city. The requirements in principle will be for:

a) comprehensively designed proposals which maximise the potential of the site in accordance with any relevant development principles, development brief and/or other guidance
b) a use or a mix of uses appropriate to the location of the site, its accessibility characteristics and the character of the surrounding area.
c) Where practicable, major mixed-use developments should provide offices, particularly on upper floors. At street level, other uses may be more appropriate to maintain city centre diversity, especially retail vitality on important shopping frontages.
d) the creation of new civic spaces and traffic-free pedestrian routes where achievable.

Cockburn view – It is our view that none of the al fresco drinking and dining installations which have come forward in recent month and which continue to proliferate across the city centre can be said to maintain and enhance the character of the city centre. All applications coming forward should clearly demonstrate how, if granted planning permission, their proposed installations would add to the quality and character of the centre.

Policy Des 1 Design Quality and Context – Planning permission will be granted for development where it is demonstrated that the proposal will create or contribute towards a sense of place. Design should be based on an overall design concept that draws upon positive characteristics of the surrounding area. Planning permission will not be granted for poor quality or inappropriate design or for proposals that would be damaging to the character or appearance of the area around it, particularly where this has a special importance.

Cockburn view -All applications coming forward should clearly demonstrate how, if granted planning permission, their proposed installations would create or contribute towards a sense of place. It is not clear to us how any of the installations which we have seen coming forward actually achieve this. The positive additional character benefits from proposals should be clearly demonstrated.

Policy Des 5 Development Design – Amenity – Planning permission will be granted for development where it is demonstrated that:
a) the amenity of neighbouring developments is not adversely affected and that future occupiers have acceptable levels of amenity in relation to noise, daylight, sunlight, privacy or immediate outlook.
b) the design will facilitate adaptability in the future to the needs of different occupiers, and in appropriate locations will promote opportunities for mixed uses.
c) community security will be promoted by providing active frontages to more important thoroughfares and designing for natural surveillance over all footpaths and open areas.
d) a clear distinction is made between public and private spaces, with the latter provided in enclosed or defensible forms.
e) refuse and recycling facilities, cycle storage, low and zero carbon technology, telecommunications equipment, plant and services have been sensitively integrated into the design.

Cockburn view – All al fresco drinking, and dining proposals should clearly demonstrate that they do not adversely impact upon the amenity of their neighbours. Residents and other local business must have their rights to amenity and well-being respected. Again, we highlight the Council’s expressed wish to curtain acoustic pollution and to facilitate the engagement of residents on this issue.

Policy Des 8 Public Realm and Landscape Design – Planning permission will be granted for development where all external spaces, and features, including streets, footpaths, civic spaces, green spaces boundary treatments and public art have been designed as an integral part of the scheme as a whole, and it has been demonstrated that:
a) the design and the materials to be used are appropriate for their intended purpose, to the use and character of the area generally, especially where this has a special interest or importance.
b) the different elements of paving, landscaping and street furniture are coordinated to avoid a sense of clutter, and in larger schemes design and provision will be coordinated over different phases of a development.
c) particular consideration has been given, if appropriate, to the planting of trees to provide a setting for buildings, boundaries and roadsides and create a robust landscape structure.
d) a satisfactory scheme of maintenance will be put in place.

Cockburn view – It is difficult to understand how potential negative impacts arising for proposed on-street installations can be mitigated or avoided in the absence of a relevant policy framework, monitoring regime and enforcement structure. Again, we highlight the Council’s commitment to providing safe, accessible streets and walkways for City residents, workers, and visitors. 

New burn and wet meadow at Cammo Estate

Posted on: December 6, 2021

Our supportive comments for a de-culverting project to create a new burn and wet meadow at Cammo

Our supportive comments for a de-culverting project to create a new burn and wet meadow at Cammo

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association SUPPORTS this application for the creation of a new burn section and a wet meadow with a boardwalk on the Cammo Estate.

Similar projects at Inverleith, Figgate and Lochend Parks, and at many other sites around Scotland, have already  resulted in the low cost and sustainable delivery of multiple social and environmental benefits and it is highly likely that this proposed project for Cammo will be equally beneficial.

Such projects represent of deliverable, popular and low maintenance solutions to the growing imperatives of sustaining the city’s biodiversity, adapting to a changing local climate and to the mitigation of carbon emissions.