Erection of purpose-built student accommodation – Willowbrae

Posted on: December 13, 2023

We see no reason why the approved residential development should not be progressed

We see no reason why the approved residential development should not be progressed

Cockburn Response

We do not support his application.

We note that an application for residential apartments , including affordable  apartments, has already been approved for this site.  We see no reason why the approved development should not be progressed.  The approved development would offer a range of residential types, including affordable housing, which are entirely suitable for the site and location and would support the need for more residential accommodation in Edinburgh outlined in the recently declared ‘Housing Emergency’.

This proposal appears to be part of an ongoing trend to substitute approved residential developments with student accommodation of a broadly similar design to that already approved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

Use of existing derelict warehouse to form student housing development

Posted on:

This proposal makes good use of a challenging and restricted site

This proposal makes good use of a challenging and restricted site

Cockburn Response

We have taken time to understand the current proposals for this difficult, restricted and complex  site and we support this application.

We do not believe that this site is suitable for full-time residential accommodation because of unavoidable  restrictions in terms of  aspect, amenity, greenspace and the nature of the listed structure. 

However, with these restriction in mind we consider  that the relatively small student student development which is being proposed makes a good use of the site.

The listed structure which will be used for this development is clearly in a very poor and precarious condition.  This development will conserve/rebuild much of the remaining external walls.   We accept that the modern set-backs  proposed for the front facade are required to facilitate the well-being  and privacy of future student residents.

We note that the developer has a ‘Phase 2’ project under development on an adjoining site.  We would encourage this be brought forward as soon as possible.  The current proposal and the future ‘Phase 2’  project taken  together are an example of successful site masterplanning on  a smaller scale – the benefits are the development of both sites to the locality being greater than the individual elements in isolation.

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

Residential and PBSA Student Development – Salamander Street

Posted on:

We also consider that the location is too remote from any educational campus

We also consider that the location is too remote from any educational campus

Cockburn Response

We recognize that design team have made significant changes to earlier iterations of the design proposed for this site in consultation with city planners.

However, we remain unconvinced that this scheme does not have the potential to negatively impact  on the amenity of existing neighbours  while adding only limited additional amenity benefits to the surrounding area.

We also consider that the location is too remote from any educational campus, particularly in the context of the recently declared ‘Housing Emergency’ and given the local demand for permanent residential housing.

Specific consideration should be given to the current concentration of existing or approved student developments in the  area,  to the balance of of PBSA and non-PBSA accommodation in the proposed development, to the undesirable prevalence of studio flats in the design and to the the lack of accessible accommodation, and accessible parking  in the design.

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

Proposed flatted development – Canonmills

Posted on: November 15, 2023

We do not believe that this is a suitable development site for the volume of development proposed

We do not believe that this is a suitable development site for the volume of development proposed

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association has to objected to this proposal on the grounds that it impacts negatively on the character of a conservation area and is deficient in both form and context.

Firstly, we do not believe that this is a suitable development site for the volume of development proposed. The lack of usable amenity space and very tight boundaries amounts to overdevelopment with subsequent impacts on amenity, daylighting, and overlooking.

Architecturally, the overall disposition is clumsy and with little design merit. The ‘blockiness’ of the scheme and overly simplistic form results in a building with no effective bottom, middle or top. The change of materials on the upper storey does little create a discernible roofscape and only emphasises the blandness of the proposals.

A much smaller proposal with a significantly higher degree of design input might address these objections but in this context it is unlikely.

As such, we oppose this proposal on the grounds that it does not conform to Local Development Plan Policy Des 1 (Design Quality and Context); Policy Des 4 (Development Design – Impact on Setting) and Policy Des 5 (Development Design – Amenity and Policy).

In addition, the proposals fail Policy ENV6 (Conservation Areas – Development) in that the scheme neither preserves nor enhances the character of the Inverleith Conservation Area and and does not demonstrate high standards of design and materials appropriate to the historic environment.

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

26 Inverleith Row – Parking Space

Posted on: November 11, 2023

Gardens are vital spaces

Gardens are vital spaces

Cockburn Response

Back to Listings

Proposals for Italy House, East London Street

Posted on: November 9, 2023

We have no objection to the repurposing of London House to form a new Italian Consulate and Cultural Institute

We have no objection to the repurposing of London House to form a new Italian Consulate and Cultural Institute

Cockburn Response

This application has been brought to our attention by several local stakeholders.

We have no objection to the repurposing of London House to form a new Italian Consulate and Cultural Institute.

We do have concerns with the proposed security arrangements, specifically the 2.4m high fence that will circle the building and associated land.

Firstly, no details are included in the application so no assessment of impact or suitability is possible. Given the interface with this street, we do not believe that it is proper for this to be addressed by condition – details should be made available for public scrutiny. Any substantive, visually impermeable structure should be avoided.

Secondly, we question the need for such a perimeter fence especially along East London Street in the first place. Consulates such as the American one on Regent Terrace and Russia’s on Melville Street (both subject to potentially much higher levels of security requirements) rely on 1.2m Georgian railings. Many others are the same. We can see no special need here.

Should such significant counter-terrorism structures be required, we would question the suitability of this location, directly opposite St Mary’s Primary School and near the Central Mosque.

In addition, we have some concerns with the impact on the setting of Gayfield House, a Category A-listed building.

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

Proposed Student Accommodation Dunedin street

Posted on: November 8, 2023

There is an ideal opportunity here to engage residents in the preparation of a Local Place Plan

There is an ideal opportunity here to engage residents in the preparation of a Local Place Plan

Cockburn Response

 

This part of Edinburgh is in danger of being redeveloped through ad hoc market driven development.

 

There is an ideal opportunity here to engage residents in the preparation of a Local Place Plan to enable the local community to submit ideas and proposals for their own local area. Introduced by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019, Local Place Plans are a way for communities to think about how to make their place better, to agree priorities, and to take action to make change happen.

 

In preparing their own community-led Local Place Plan, the local community in this part of Edinburgh could express its aspirations and priorities for the future through the submission of ideas and proposals for the development or use of land and buildings.

 

Once registered, the Local Place Plan could then be taken into account by The City of Edinburgh Council a material consideration when planning applications are being considered.

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

West Tollcross Student Accommodation

Posted on:

In terms of use, we accept that a PBSA scheme is a suitable use here

In terms of use, we accept that a PBSA scheme is a suitable use here

Cockburn Response

The Association has had several discussions with the developer and their professional team, including a presentation of the proposals to our Policy & Development Committee recently. We acknowledge this positive engagement for this important yet relatively hidden site.

The Cockburn accepts that this is a development site. Despite its interesting and varied history, none the buildings proposed for removal have significant merit or haven’t been substantially altered over the years. We also acknowledge the impact that the 1960s and 70s traffic engineering schemes have had in the local area.

In terms of use, we accept that a PBSA scheme is a suitable use here. Unlike very many schemes coming in the market, the location is very well placed for a number of institutions. Whilst we would prefer a mixed-use/tenure scheme, the site is both constrained in size and context as to make this impractical.

Overall, we are content with the scale and massing of the proposals. We welcome the proposed active frontage and support the small space being provided. In due course, we hope that significant changes to the road layout might mean greater area is give over to the open space.

We have some concerns with the use of brick on this site, particularly from an embodied carbon management perspective. Brick is one of the most carbon-heavy materials due to its manufacturing process and going forward, such carbon assessments should form part of the decision-making process per NPF4’s objective in climate change mitigation. We therefore advocate that a condition be imposed requiring low carbon alternatives (eg baked v fired brick) to be considered.

We note the proximity to one of the city’s busiest fire stations. Noise management will be crucial in making this a successful scheme and whilst mostly the domain of the building regulation system, the amenity of the proposals relies on ensuring sufficient building mass to address this external noise source.

Finally, the use of the site as a music venue/nightclub over many years has created an interesting part of the intangible heritage of the city. Bands such as U2, The Clash and Pink Floyd have performed here early in their careers. We would therefore advocate an interpretation strategy in the proposed open space to mark this fact.

 

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

Ocean Drive Residential and Student Accommodation

Posted on: October 20, 2023

The proposed student and BTR accommodation may do little to meet community expectations

The proposed student and BTR accommodation may do little to meet community expectations

Cockburn Response

The shift from office to residential development is desirable in this location.

However, the proposed student and BTR accommodation may do little to meet community expectations in this part of the city for truly affordable housing and for social housing.

The proposed PBSA accommodation, notwithstanding the availability of public and active travel opportunities, is still comparatively remote for many higher education campuses.  This seems to work against 20-minute neighbourhood principles in respect of potential student residents who will, of necessity, have to travel considerable distances to their places of work and study.

The quality of design and materiality of the proposal  is very disappointing – exciting and innovative design is an increasingly rare commodity in  Edinburgh.

And more could be done to activate the developments at first and second floor levels and to integrate with planned greenspace and access routes in such a way as to create active and  welcoming greenspace and amenity areas for the proposed new residents and for the  wider community.

 

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

West Edinburgh Placemaking Framework – Cockburn comments

Posted on: October 18, 2023

West Edinburgh Placemaking Framework support and comments

West Edinburgh Placemaking Framework support and comments

Cockburn Response

Planning background & City Plan 2030

The WEPF specially addresses the City Plan 2030’s Place Policy 16 (PP16)– West Edinburgh.  In our comments on CP2030, we said, “PLACE 16 – West Edinburgh We are concerned with the growth strategies for West Edinburgh and therefore require clarification of the mitigation measures which will address the negative environmental impacts identified in the Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report related to this development expansion.”

NPF4 is currently the primary development plan for Edinburgh until such time as City Plan 2030 is adopted.  The primary objectives of climate change mitigation and biodiversity enhancement in NPF4 need to be fully worked into the proposals.  Our initial reading of the framework suggests some areas of concern resulting from the developments themselves.  This will be addressed below.

Background

The WEPF covers new development proposals in and around Edinburgh Airport and land at West Craigs/Maybury.  It also includes the consented scheme known variously has the “Garden District” or East of Milburn Tower with PPP for 1,350 units.

However, it does not look beyond this or south of the A8.  This framework should be better connected to the wider strategy.  The vision of WEPF should be expanded to include the Gyle and the wider Edinburgh Park Area.  We are aware of proposals to restructure the Gyle Centre akin to proposals at Ocean Terminal.  Also, other western areas of the city are undergoing change on a piecemeal, ad hoc basis.   The WEPF should provide positive connections with these areas, and this will be crucial for its success.

Some approvals and projects in pipeline

Schemes adjacent to WEPF area

Cammo Meadows – 665 homes (approved)

West Craigs – 1,650 homes approved; further extension of NW section (Rosebery estates)for further housing but no application yet.

Edinburgh Garden District/East of Milburn Tower – major Green Belt release with up to 9,000 houses (1,350 consented) with major commercial and office space & up to 1,150 hotel rooms.

SAICA site (aka Maybury Quarter) – Early discussions with presentation to EUDP; no firm scheme but city plan suggests 1,000 houses with new Primary School.

Edinburgh Park (south end) – c.1,750 new homes with commercial and 170bed hotel.

TOTAL – Potential 14,000 new homes

 

WEFP Area (land south and east or Airport bounded by A8 and railway; includes Gogar Designed landscape)

International Business gateway (IBG) phase one – PPP call in with 10000m2 office & 400 homes.

IBG phase 2 or WEST TOWN – shift from mixed-se to  largely residential with no specific housing numbers but can assume c.5000 or so.

Crosswind (Turnhouse runway) – 2500 homes and 43,000m2 commercial with 170-bed hotel.

TOTAL – potentially 7,900 new homes.

 

IBG – Phase one has essentially been granted and includes 400 new homes.  However, the developers have now argued that the wider commercial aspirations of the IBG are no longer viable, so propose a major shift to housing across the later phases.

 

Cockburn Comments

General

The Association believes that a “total development” approach is required, including the fundamental infrastructure of water and waste in addition to net zero and energy generation/conservation. Indeed the interrelationship of energy, water and waste management are key issues in driving overarching principles of ecology and good environmental standards. These should feature very clearly in this framework document and should have ambitious environmental targets that go beyond current regulatory requirements.

Similarly, it would be good to see ambitious environmental targets being sought through both the creation and ongoing management of this new area of the city. The framework should also have clear statements on delivering very high levels of accessibility including public and active travel routes both to the city and countryside.  Detailed design codes for sub-neighbourhoods are required, which would then form the basis of contracts with developers.

One good example of a large-scale masterplan incorporating guiding principles of ecology and sustainability can be seen at Hammerby Sjostad in Stockholm.  Here, a large c10,000 homes extension to the city was designed and built as a self-contained ecosystem. CaBE wrote it up as a case study in 2006 and this should be available for reference.

A Strategic Approach

The framework and masterplan should be considered as an extension of Edinburgh but as a new settlement/town.  This is due, in urban design terms, by the fact that the area of land is bound by very hard boundaries, not well or easily connected to other areas and very isolated.  Therefore, its planning will have to include all the amenities and uses associated with a new settlement/new town and not designed as an extension of Edinburgh which it clearly is not.

The TCPA new settlement network and “Healthy new towns network” may be useful reference points for addition to the WEPF.

Environmental Constraints

There are several significant environmental constraints associated with the framework area key of which are the environmental issues of placing a residential led development adjacent to an international airport.   This is not the context of a normal green field site, as aviation pollution and noise can be a health risk and the airport safeguarding requirements can influence the urban design both built form and green spaces.

Connectivity

There are major challenges in forming strategic connections and facilitating public access and linkages to and from the wider context given the framework area is isolated and  bound by hard physical edges including the airport.    The difficulties of integrating the tram route with future development particularly is important as the tram is currently running at capacity.  The developers’ assumptions that “there is a tram so everything’s OK” must be fundamentally challenged.

Also, critical access travel routes to the Gyle will be essential.  The A8/Gogar roundabout poses major barriers in both physical access terms but also in wider integration of facilities.  The Gyle remains a key comparison shopping centre for the area.

Heritage and Landscape

There are several historic assets both on and near to the site.  The use of the historic assets/environment as a key principle/design tool in the framework is essential.  These assets include Castle Gogar (A-listed with its designed landscape), Castle Mains (a scheduled ancient monument) and Milburn Tower (designed landscape).

The design of a strategic blue green network including the possible realignment of the Gogar Burn will be crucial to the success of any major development.  The contribution that these make towards positive place-making objectives and climate adaptation is direct.  Also, a strategic level approach to other environmental/community facilities is needed including burial grounds, sport and leisure facilities, community growing, play space etc.

Climate Emergency

In general, there is insufficient emphasis and weight has been placed in the framework requiring development coming forward to address the climate emergency.  The requirements of NPF4’s emphasis on biodiversity and climate mitigation are not strongly enough articulated in the WEPF.

The concept of embodied/embedded carbon must form a key focus on sustainable construction. The normal palette of concrete and brick materials should be challenged, as these are hugely carbon and energy intensive in production.  Nett zero should embrace a total development concept, not just operational.

District heating and local energy production should be built into the WEPF aimed at reduction of energy importation into the area.  This goes well-beyond passivehaus design standards with an expectation that all buildings should aim to be contributors to local grid, not just neutral.  For example, all roofs should be solar collectors, extensive use of micro-wind built into the local landscape and linkage with blue networks with ground/water source heat pump distribution technologies.

Place-Making

In general, we welcome the importance of establishing clear placemaking guidance.  Greater clarity of the proposed heights and densities is needed as it is unclear in the framework.  More detailed and localised studies and view analyses will be required.  Fundamental to this is the need to ensure a “total development” vision rather than leaving to individual developers and their design teams to determine what is, or is not, acceptable.

We support the general thrust of the place-making principles, and in particular welcome the ambition to create “a collaborative, multi-disciplinary, master plan led approach to creating a high density, mixed use, urban extension to the city, compact in form with a sense of place and community attractive to residents, workers and visitors.”

SUMMARY

There is much to commend in the West Edinburgh Place-making Framework.

The approach to development here should be the creation of a new settlement rather than extension to the existing western fringes of Edinburgh.

A “total development” approach to net zero carbon and energy is required, which includes the embodied energy/carbon of materials rather than just operational targets.  The framework area should aim to be self-sufficient in energy production and generation.  A new baseline for sustainable development needs to be set.

The exploitation of existing heritage and landscape assets to inform development is key, which must also integrate and compliment new blue-green networks.  Increasing biodiversity whilst offering localised climate impact mitigation strategies should also be a strategic objective of development.

Back to Listings