Tynecastle Community Urban Farm

Posted on: November 5, 2021

Our supportive comment on planning application to create a new community garden on part of the site of the former Tyncastle High School grounds

Our supportive comment on planning application to create a new community garden on part of the site of the former Tyncastle High School grounds

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn SUPPORTS this application. The creation of an extensive community garden will greatly add to making the reuse and regeneration of the former Tynecastle high School site a success.

It will provide and facilitate opportunities for LOVE Gorgie Farm to work with new and existing local residents in a variety environmental programmes based around the proposed community garden with its associated planting beds, a shelter, storage space and greenhouses.

The proposal has the potential to support and encourage old and  new generations in the community in creating a more sustainable and climate-ready neighbourhood and to be a model of good practice that can be replicated elsewhere across the city in furtherance of the city climate costs and in support of the recommendations in the Civic Charter of the Scottish Climate Assembly which is supported by the City of Edinburgh Council.

St James Square “Alpine Village”

Posted on:

Our submitted comments on a planned commercial venture that has already been built in St James Square before the permission deadline has event passed

Our submitted comments on a planned commercial venture that has already been built in St James Square before the permission deadline has event passed

Cockburn Response

NEUTRAL COMMENT

The Cockburn Association is concerned that this  proposed temporary ‘alpine’ village of 12 party shacks in St James Square, behind the new St James  shopping centre, has already been built in advance of the deadline for planning comments on the related  planning application on the Edinburgh Planning Portal.

In effect, residents and stakeholders in the City of Edinburgh have been denied any meaningful opportunity to comment on this application and to have their comments duly considered with the expectation that, if deemed appropriate,  this application will be approved, rejected or modified to reflect relevant or legitimate comments expressed.

The  fact that this installation has been built before a planning decision has been made can only undermine the legitimacy of the planning process in Edinburgh and this practice must not be allowed to continue going forward.  Such ‘pop-up’ food and drink installations are becoming more prevalent in public and quasi-public spaces and places across the city at all times of the year.  Appropriate and meaningful consideration of their wider impacts to residents and to all those who use and benefit from public spaces must be provided by the City of Edinburgh Council. This  does not appear to be happening at present.

Regarding the specifics of this application. It is the Cockburn’s view that planning permission must only be awarded, if it is awarded, for one year.

A full monitoring scheme must be put in place. And this should certainly include an assessment of its acoustic impacts undertaken under the guidance of a suitably qualified acoustic engineer. Directly related to this, we note that the council is to 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 suggest that the policy and practice framework relating to the consideration of noise from all aspects of street entertainment is likely to be subject to change and restriction in the near term, certainly before the 2022 Christmas season.

“Edinburgh’s Christmas” 2021 – Three applications

Posted on: October 20, 2021

Our submissions to the three separate applications connected to this year’s “Edinburgh’s Christmas” provision by Underbelly. We have grouped each of them here in one post for ease of reading.

Our submissions to the three separate applications connected to this year’s “Edinburgh’s Christmas” provision by Underbelly. We have grouped each of them here in one post for ease of reading.

Cockburn Response

We note that the application is for this year only and that the provision of Winter Festival activities will be subject to a tendering exercise to be conducted by the City Council shortly.

We also note that other cities such as Leeds, London and Newcastle have decided to cancel their Christmas Markets or major holiday celebrations this year due to concerns about Covid and the management of large-scale events during the continued pandemic.  Whilst we appreciate the comments made by the applicant in the Design Statements on the need to adhere to government rules and guidelines, we have some concerns for the un-caveated support given to the event (and by extension, these applications) by City of Edinburgh Councillors as reported in local media outlets, without any reference to the City Council’s responsibilities to managing civic spaces during the pandemic.

It is instructive that in Newcastle, local traders have also cited unfair competition from the pop-up hospitality and retail provisions in their local Christmas Market as a significant point of concern for them.  The Cockburn realises and sympathises with the challenges that local businesses have faced over the past 20 months.  It is therefore essential that any festive activity aims, first and foremost, to increase activity for the brick-and-mortar businesses in the city.  In our discussions with local businesses, this a real concern for them.  As such, the Cockburn believes that a local economic study should be required as part of any consent (should it be given) to quantify the level of economic spillage outside the city.

On 19 May 2021, the Cockburn responded to the consultation held by the City Council on the future of the Winter Festivals.  Here, we recognised their popularity and their contribution to the vibrancy of the city in past years.  However, we also noted that they are major commercial events rather than cultural activities and that  the Christmas Market has changed from the German Market that occupied the Mound with largely authentic products and produce to a disruptive, generic event that imposes significant restrictions on local residents, mainly targeting the tourist market with 2018 figures indicating that less than 50% of attendees to the Christmas Market were locals (falling to just 20% for Hogmanay).

In due course , we called for a dispersal of activities noting that the significant problem with the Winter Festivals pre-Covid was the desire of commercial operators to concentrate activity is a small area.  With the Christmas Market, this meant East Princes Street Gardens which were unable and unsuitable to cope with an ever-increasing activity.  The Cockburn therefore strongly advocated the creation of a Christmas City Centre Trail using sites across the City Centre in various locations for markets which could bring additional benefits to those areas. we suggested that this should include existing markets, such as those in Stockbridge, Castle Terrace Car Park and the Grassmarket, as part of this trail as well as Festival Square and Conference Square which could also provide an excellent location for the Winter Festivals which could be coupled with The Mound/Waverley Bridge and the possibly the High Street to form an excellent offer.

As such, we are pleased that the concentration on East Princes Street Gardens alone has changed.

Overall, the Cockburn has recognised a lot of movement since 2019 and the unlawful erection of the massive space deck.  We remain concerned with the proposals as they stand, and believe that greater efforts in terms of dispersal, further reduction in use of soft surfaced areas and a greater need to support local businesses is required.

We note that these applications are for this year only and should be seen in the context of re-opening up the city to its citizens.

We offer specific comments on 21/04950/FUL – George Street below.

The Cockburn OBJECTS to this application.

The Cockburn has no objection to the use of George Street for a dedicated ice rink with ancillary functions such as toilets and changing facilities. However, we cannot support this application as no details of the actual structure to be erected have been submitted with the application.  There is no way of ascertaining the impact on the neighbouring businesses or listed buildings and Conservation Area without these details , and we strongly advise that no consent be issued until this information has been submitted.  It is essential that any development here respects the qualities of George Street and the World Heritage Site.

No information on the management of support infrastructure is provided.  We are concerned with the impact of generators, etc on the immediate environment.  Similarly, we are also concerned with the lengthy periods required for set up and take down of the temporary structures and the disruption that this will cause for pedestrians and businesses alike.

The site boundary runs up the curb line on both sides of the street.  The current relaxation for outdoor seating has seen many of the hospitality businesses exploit the opportunity with substantial outdoor dining arrangements especially on the north side of the street.  The implication of Underbelly’s application is that these facilities will need to be moved before the erection of the ice rink can begin.  As it seems likely that the relaxation of licensing will continue, this needs to be clarified as a matter of some urgency.  In addition, the potential crowding of restricted pavement space seems likely, and could make crowd management more challenging.

The Cockburn would wish to object to the proposed pop-up bars and retail shacks within the ice rink enclosure.  As already noted in our general comments, we believe that these represent unfair competition to existing businesses who are struggling to recover from the past 20 months of restrictions.  We understand that these views are also shared by the George Street Association which represents a wide of local interests.

We offer specific comments on 21/04953/FUL – East Princes Street Gardens & The Mound below.

The Cockburn SUPPORTS this application.

Firstly, we have no specific concerns in regard to the use of The Mound for the Christmas Market.  This has been used for several decades now and if properly managed should present no issues.

We do have concerns with pop-up bars, preferring trade to be given to permanent businesses who operate year-round.

With regard to the upper terrace in East Princes Street Gardens, we would prefer this to be deleted from the proposals and possibly moved to Waverley Bridge.  This would avoid damaging the soft surfaces and permitted other activities such as the remembrance garden greater time to be enjoyed.  It must be said that we have little confidence in either Underbelly or the City Council in restoring the area of ground post-damage or in preventing it in the first place

We offer specific comments on 21/04954/FUL – West Princes Street Gardens below.

The Cockburn SUPPORTS this application.

This is a new use for WPSG and one for which we have significant concerns.

The application suggests that only the blaise area will be used but the site plan shows that the soft area of landscape is proposed for use as the maze and maze entrance.  We are concerned with the impacts that will be caused to the area of ground which has not been subjected to high use levels in the past.  It is therefore highly susceptible to damage and should not be used for this type of activity.

Traditionally, WPSG closes at dusk.  Whilst we appreciate the desire for this part of the Christmas Market to be open later (10pm according to the Design Statement), the implications of this need careful consideration.  Will this result in the erection of a barrier across the Gardens to prevent access to areas to the east of the Ross Fountain?  How will it look?  Will it be staffed, and by whom?  This could present an unsightly and aggressive barrier which would affect open access during normal hours or would at least impact on the openness of this most important civic space. No information on this has been provided on this and should be before any consent is considered.

The use of St Cuthbert’s Graveyard for operational servicing should be avoided.  Experiences of other events recently suggests too great a conflict between vehicles and pedestrians.  The management of the graveyard in the dark hours is also issue that requires attention.  There is no reason why it could not be made attractive.

No information is provided on the location of generators, etc. This needs clarification.

Victoria Swing Bridge

Posted on: October 15, 2021

We welcome this application to conserve and restore a significant piece of Leith’s built heritage

We welcome this application to conserve and restore a significant piece of Leith’s built heritage

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association WELCOMES this application to conserve and restore the Category A listed Victoria Swing Bridge in the Port of Leith.

The Victoria Swing Bridge is an important and rare example of a 19th century counterweighted swing bridge. The clear span of the bridge was the largest yet attempted in the UK at the time of construction in 1871-74 and it remains the largest counterweighted swing bridge in Scotland. It is very prominently located, forming a key part of a wider grouping of industrial landmarks at Leith Docks, Scotland’s largest contiguous wet dock complex.

In the 1990s the Cockburn Association recognised its importance as an invaluable part of Scotland’s industrial heritage and of the Port of Leith’s inheritance and successfully fought to save it from demolition.

Its proposed restoration back into active use is a testament to the dedication and commitment of local activists who have steadfastly worked to bring this about. Forth Ports is to be commended for its investment in repairing and refurbishing the A-listed Victoria Swing Bridge to serve as an outdoor community space.

Cammo Housing Development

Posted on: October 8, 2021

Our submitted objection to the proposed housing development on Edinburgh’s Green Belt at Cammo

Our submitted objection to the proposed housing development on Edinburgh’s Green Belt at Cammo

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn OBJECTS to this application for planning permission in principle to build on this 59-acre site west of Maybury Road and north of Craigs Road.

The area is currently designated as greenbelt in Edinburgh City Council’s local development plan, which places strict constraints on what can and cannot be built on greenbelt land.  Any argument drawn from the increasing historical and outdated 2008 Edinburgh Green Belt Study that this specific site is “of low intrinsic scenic quality”, and so should be considered for development, should be rejected.

The 2008 Edinburgh Green Belt Study is increasing irrelevant to the lived reality of life for many residents in this congested part of the city where a number of significant housing consents have been granted in recent years against the expressed wishes of local residents who value the retention of existing greenbelt provision in the immediate vicinity of their existing residential development and its associated infrastructure.

The proposed inclusion of 50% of affordable homes, trees and parkland should not be accepted as justification for the loss of existing greenbelt and greenspace which has become increasingly valued during the current Covid-19 pandemic.  There is a particular demand in Edinburgh for social housing, but it is unclear in the planning in principle application what percentage of the proposed affordable home will be available for social rent.

Policy Env 10 (Development in the green belt and countryside) of the local development plan sets out those circumstances where development would be permitted in the green belt. The application clearly does not meet any of the criteria listed under this policy.

Non-statutory guidance on “Development in the countryside and green belt (February 2019) provides more detailed guidance on where other development in the green belt would be acceptable. This makes clear that while new development, consistent with Policy Env 10, can bring several benefits assisting farm diversification, supporting the local economy and making beneficial use of an existing resource.

None of these justifications are relevant to this applications. But the guidance also affirms that the countryside and green belt need to be protected from unacceptable development which would weaken from the rural character and landscape quality of an area.

 

Former Tynecastle High School

Posted on: October 1, 2021

Our submission to planning on this significant development at Tynecastle.

Our submission to planning on this significant development at Tynecastle.

Cockburn Response

This is a significant, well-connected yet potentially challenging site in relation to its location next to a distillery, stadium, and the Western Approach Road. In particular, the proximity of the distillery and road raises substantial design questions regarding the site’s environmental quality, safety and amenity for future residents. However, the successful redevelopment of this site would bring it back into active use and contribute to the neighbouring community.

Given that this is not a straightforward site to develop, we understand why its repurposing as student accommodation is considered both a viable and desirable option. If this application is approved, it should be considered the upper limit of what the local residential area can tolerate without seriously undermining its social fabric and cohesion. No further student accommodation proposals should be considered in this community.

If the application is approved. This should not be developed, in any sense, as a gated community. Residents from the surrounding community should be able to access new open space/ greenspace recreational opportunities proposed the site. The access to green and open spaces is seen as a priority by many as part of the ongoing recovery from the Covid 19 pandemic. The potential engagement of the charities LOVE Gorgie Farm and People Know as operators for community garden and community facilities on the site, should planning permission be granted, is a positive step in this regard.

Although we welcome the retention of the B listed main school building and janitor’s house.  We do not accept the assessment used to justify the demolition of the workshop block, which pre-dates the school and is of some historic significance and crucial to understanding the site.  These would seem to be ideal for repurposing as community facilities, on-site shops, bikes stores, storage areas or a wide variety of other utility functions associated with the proposed student development.

We are aware of the local community’s interest in the potential of the site for social, multigenerational and co-housing development and of its concern regarding the potential over provision of student accommodation in this community and of the potential dis-benefits associated with this. If this development represents over provision of student accommodation in this community, then the opportunity to provide a mix of uses, including business and community use, which could assist with integrating the site into the community should be reassessed in consultation with the local community.

Dunard Centre in St Andrew Square

Posted on: September 23, 2021

Our statement of support for the revised plans for the proposed Dunard Centre in St Andrew Square

Our statement of support for the revised plans for the proposed Dunard Centre in St Andrew Square

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association has studied and discussed this revised application by David Chipperfield Architects).  As with the earlier proposals (2018), we welcome and support these ambitious plans to create Edinburgh’s first purpose-built concert hall in over a century.

This project has potential to make a positive contribution to the artistic life of the city and to act as a transformative catalyst for the economic, social and artistic revitalisation of the streets, lanes and businesses that surround it.

Within the constraints of the available site, the proposed concert hall continues to use the space in a an effective manner.  It provides the opportunity to link the new St James Quarter into not only to St Andrews Square but the wider city centre.

Our comments are predicated on the above support, and we hope that further refinements to the design will continue.

Site and Context

  • The opening of access through the site, including outside the operational hours of the concert hall is an important objective. We believe that it would be appropriate to put in place a legal mechanism to ensure the public permeability through the site is secured in the long term.
  • We remain of the view that it is essential for the floorscape around the new concert hall be integrated with the Registers and wider environment. This should respect the limited palette of paving materials in the New Town and be designed so that the pedestrian environment appears seamless to users who will approach the building from the various access points.  Linkages to St James Quarter should follow this approach if possible.
  • We continue to advocate that access to the several garden areas by the Registers of Scotland be undertaken at the same time (although we appreciate that there seems some reluctance on the RoS to do so). This could be through a discrete new opening in the existing wall (for the Physician’s Garden) and possibly through a new gate in the railings (for the small grassed area to the south).  In essence, there is an opportunity to create a new, interesting and intimate pedestrian quarter, which places the concert hall in the centre of it.
  • The single mature beech tree currently extant on the site is most likely a remnant of the former garden landscape of Dundas House and should be retained.

Building

  • We have been unable to access the site due to neighbouring construction work so have not been able to assess how well the original test panels have weathered (if they are still on site). Our understanding is that the same highly finished concrete panels are proposed.  Based on our discussions with the architects at the time of the first application, we accepted this material given the uniqueness of the proposals and the very high specification of finish proposed.  We would therefore suggest that a suitable condition against any planning consent be applied here to give the Planning Authority long-term control over this.
  • With the original proposals, the elliptical concert hall itself is shown to have a distinctive façade modelling different from the “edge” blocks. We welcomed this as it helped break down the mass of the building and created additional visual interest within what will be an intimate pedestrian environment.  However, as the scheme has contracted and simplified, this juxtaposition has been reduced also, especially at the north-east where the angle is very obtuse.  Greater distinction between the elliptical hall section and the northern “edge” block would be beneficial. As such, this appears unresolved, as does the treatment of window openings and the junction of eaves and ground floor levels.
  • Similarly, the views to the building from the western entrance to the St James Quarter are important. The blank façade with vertical striations from almost top to bottom and virtually not fenestration presents a hostile frontage from this perspective.  Further work is needed to address the massiveness here.

Wider Opportunities and issues

  • Unlike the original scheme, the physical connection with the Category A-listed Dundas House is direct and substantial. Whilst we acknowledge that this doesn’t affect the original 18th Georgian property, it is a more significant impact to the listed fabric.
  • We continue to believe that consideration should be given to the creation of a ‘processional route’ through the current RBS building with the long-term objective being the integration of Dundas House into the centre, providing all the necessary “front of house” facilities required by a modern concert hall.
  • In the wider context of performance venues in the city, we acknowledge that this proposal will not address the needs of the festival and events sectors. The Council have prepared in the past an assessment of need – this should be renewed.
  • The use of the hall once built may generate traffic impacts on neighbouring areas including the residential New Town to the north. Large volumes of private vehicles using these streets after the 6:30pm Zone 2 parking restrictions end could result in negative impacts.

SUMMARY

The Cockburn Association continues to support this proposal.  The creation of a new cultural building is welcome, and we acknowledge the skills of the design team in integrating the sizable building into a very constrained site. We recommend some further revisions and believe especially that the wider floorscape needs to be developed to include the Registers and connections into St James and St Andrews Square, and beyond.

Demolition and Replacement of Rosebery House

Posted on: August 25, 2021

Our objection to the demolition and replacement of Rosebery House in Haymarket with a bland, taller and wholly inappropriate new office block

Our objection to the demolition and replacement of Rosebery House in Haymarket with a bland, taller and wholly inappropriate new office block

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn OBJECTS to this application.

It is the Cockburn’s view that the current proposals are too tall, too bulky, bland and inappropriate for its largely residential context on the edge of the city centre.

The absence of any evidence in the application relating to the potential to refurbish rather than demolish an apparently functional office building is unacceptable, particularly in the context of Edinburgh’s high profile carbon neutrality targets. Evidence should be provided that the existing office block cannot be reconfigured to meet modern office working requirements and cannot be brought up to an acceptable energy performance standard so avoiding the significant carbon implications of demolition and rebuild.

Refurbishment must now be the starting point of any significant office redevelopment if Edinburgh’s commitment to tackling the climate emergency and achieving carbon neutrality by 2030 is to have any meaning. Successful refurbishment and reuse may have the potential to deliver some or all of the stimulus to the growth of the local, regional and national economy and  opportunities for employment in Edinburgh which are claimed for this redevelopment.

The developer appears not to have sufficiently considered the scale and setting of their proposed building and appears to be  attempting the maximise the amount of office accommodation that can be crammed onto  limited and constrained development footprint.

The developer’s assertion that the proposed building’s design will enhance the relationship of the site with the New Town Conservation Area and the Old and New Towns of Edinburgh World Heritage Site is, we believe, difficult to justify.  We believe that, for example, the architectural language of the New Town or of the remaining industrial heritage of Haymarket is not, as asserted, significantly evident in the  proposed design.

We are also concerned that the height and mass of the proposed building will create a ‘canyoning’ effect on adjacent approaches to Haymarket Station which will exacerbate existing noise, and particularly, air quality issues.

If the principle if demolition is accepted (and we believe that there is  insufficient evidence to support this) then redevelopment in this location should be limited to around four stories with a sympathetic roof structure in keeping with the surrounding cityscape, rooflines and residential character of much of this area.

The proposed design does improve some aspects of the public realm, particularly in relation to the local trams stops. But on such a constrained site it has clearly proved impossible to provide significant accessible greenspace  at street level.  Moreover, it is our view that the design overall is too tall, too bulky, bland and inappropriate for its largely residential context. As such it will significantly detract from the local area’s public realm and create an incongruous  point of arrival into the Haymarket area and city centre and will negatively impact on views to and from the city centre.

Juniper Green Telecoms Mast Installation Application

Posted on: August 20, 2021

The Cockburn Association supports local stakeholders’ considered objections to the proposed installation of a telephone mast in an Edinburgh Conservation Area

The Cockburn Association supports local stakeholders’ considered objections to the proposed installation of a telephone mast in an Edinburgh Conservation Area

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn OBJECTS to this application.

This application has been brought to the Cockburn’s attention by concerned local stakeholders. The proposed telecommunications equipment would result in excessive visual clutter within the streetscape.

The proposal would have a harmful impact upon the visual quality of the wider street scene and so detract from the amenity and special character of the conservation area as a whole. It is our view that the application is not consistent with Policy Env 6 Conservation Areas – Development as it does not preserve or enhance the special character or appearance of the conservation area.

This application should certainly be refused if it is determined that the benefits of the proposed installation are deemed not to outweigh the harm caused  to the conservation area and if there is insufficient evidence that alternative sites or mast sharing opportunities have been adequately explored.

In consultation with local stakeholders the proposed apparatus should be located in a more inconspicuous location.

 

Subdivision and building of a new house in Joppa Terrace

Posted on: August 13, 2021

Our objections to a proposal that will lead to an unacceptable loss of local garden space, local greenspace and community amenity in Joppa

Our objections to a proposal that will lead to an unacceptable loss of local garden space, local greenspace and community amenity in Joppa

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association OBJECTS to this application.

Local stakeholders have made contact with the Cockburn Association in relation to this application and we are aware that similar proposals for this site have been refused in the past.

If is our view that this proposal represents an unacceptable loss of local garden space, local greenspace and community amenity and would detract from the distinctive Victorian character of the terrace. The loss of this local urban greenspace would also be incomparable with the Council’s stated aims of increasing tree cover and addressing the Climate Emergency.

In these circumstances Policy Env 18 (Open Space Protection) and Policy Env 6 Conservation Areas – Development should be considered relevant to the application site.

It must also be the case that approval of this application will help to set a precedent for the loss of similar spaces in the neighborhood and across the city.