Sample letter of objection

Please feel free to use all or parts of this sample letter of objection to send to David Shepherd. Remember you can also e-mail your letter to david.shepherd@edinburgh.gov.uk. Your letter of objection has to be submitted by Friday, April 16th!

From: add your name
and address

To: David Shepherd
Business Centre G2
Planning
City of Edinburgh Council
Waverley Court
4 East Market Street
EDINBURGH
EH8 8BG

April 2010

Dear Mr Shepherd,

I am writing to make objections to the revised version of planning application 09/01873/FUL for 1 Slateford Road, Edinburgh. Please note that any previous objections I have made have not been taken account of in the revision, and therefore all my original objections still apply to the revised version. My objections to the revised application are as follows:

Context and Height – The proposed buildings make no attempt to integrate with the surrounding dominant architecture which is Victorian ‘colonies’ terraced houses. The proposed high rise flats of 5 storeys with a flat roof are much too high when compared to the colony houses of 2 storeys (with a third attic storey in their pitched roofs). At one end of Primrose Terrace, the development is higher than nearby tenements on Slateford Road thus towering over the existing colonies on Primrose Terrace. This height difference will cause over-shadowing and loss of light and privacy to existing area residents.

Materials and building design – The proposed building materials are also entirely inappropriate and insensitive to the historic surroundings. The surrounding buildings are all built of Victorian stone with pitched slate roofs. The development is steel-framed, flat-roofed and built of glass, multi-coloured brick, reconstituted stone and concrete with wood cladding. In addition, the overall structure, shape and form of the proposed buildings’ features, e.g. windows and roofs, are not sympathetic to the local architectural styles.

Density and effect on existing community – The development does not comply with the Council’s Policy Hou 4 on Density (Chpt 6, City Local Plan). The density of proposed dwellings is far too high for the existing area and there are excessive numbers of a particular type of resident (students) who are transient in nature. Thus the development will not support a varied community and will drastically affect the social makeup of the Flower Colonies ‘urban village’. There has not been a proper assessment of the impact of this student housing on the locality as in para 6.38 of the City Local Plan; ‘In assessing the degree of concentration of student accommodation the Council will take into account the nature of the locality in terms of mix of land use and housing types, the existing and proposed number of students in the locality and evidence of problems in rapid population turnover and less stable communities...’

The proposed student buildings on Primrose Terrace are largely 5-7 bedroom dwellings, and so would contain a much higher number of residents than existing colonies ‘cottage flats’. This would greatly reduce the amenity of the Colonies’ quiet streets with its existing very low numbers of pedestrians and vehicles. The massive increase in students living on the terrace is also likely to lead to unacceptable levels of both noise and light pollution. The revised plan moves the main pedestrian entrance more centrally into the terrace which will cause further noise disturbance for existing residents.

Open space – following revisions, it still seems unlikely that there is sufficient open space in the development for 104 dwellings (as defined in Policy Hou 3 and Chapter 6 of the Council’s new City Local Plan). ‘The provision of well-designed and integrated landscaped areas is crucial to the success of higher density, flatted schemes in particular and in making these attractive to a wide cross-section of the public.’ (Para 6.15, City Local Plan).

Vehicle parking – the development removes existing car parking amenities from Primrose, Laurel and Violet Terraces. Parking within the development is insufficient (and has actually been reduced in the revised plans) which will result in further pressure on existing limited numbers of car parking spaces in Shandon. The revised plans have replaced the vennel at the end of the student block through to the development with a new unit. This means that the visitor parking provided on Primrose Terrace can only be accessed directly by the students. Additionally, it is not clear from the revised plans whether there is sufficient bicycle parking which would be required, particularly by the 40 student flats.

Transport – The only vehicle access for the development is inappropriate as it is based on taking away the private mews lane belonging to Laurel and Violet Terraces (which does not belong to the Council) and, in any case, it is too narrow. It would create road safety dangers for existing residents and also for vehicles and pedestrians on Slateford Road.

There is no traffic assessment for the new development (as required in para 9.7 of the City Local Plan) - particularly for the vastly increased vehicle usage created both by new residents and the commercial unit when entering and exiting in relation to Slateford Road. There is no transport assessment of the needs of the students to travel to the nearest universities (Napier and Heriot Watt) which are a substantial distance away.

Waste disposal – the revised application shows reduced and insufficient space for waste. There is only one bin space for 104 dwellings with a possible extra space of unknown dimensions underground. There is no mention of recycling facilities for the increase in population.

Consultation – minimal and inadequate effort has been made by the developers to consult with the local community. Residents were not notified regarding the student residences at the consultation stage. The inclusion of the student accommodation block is integral to this application as it defines so many requirements of the development, most notably the quota of affordable housing and parking. To have omitted it from the public consultation shows how derisory the actual consultation process was. The City of Edinburgh Council’s new Local Plan highlights the importance of holding a meaningful consultation process from an early stage but this has been ignored for this development. ‘Proposals should emerge from a design process that includes an appraisal of the local context and of public views and aspirations.’ (Para 3.6, City Local Plan).

In summary, the development is a gross overdevelopment of a relatively small site, in an architectural style and manner completely inappropriate to its surroundings, and with insufficient account taken of important considerations such as transport issues.

Sincerely, yours