Edinburgh planning: Controversial Leith serviced apartments recommended for approval
Officials advise go-ahead for scheme despite 40 objections to plans
Councillors have been recommended to approve a controversial Leith development despite 40 objections to the plans.
Developers are seeking to convert several properties near the tram line into a 35-unit serviced apartment development with retail space. Councillors will consider the plans at a Development Management Sub-Committee meeting on Wednesday, November 4.
The sites are located at 111-115 Constitution Street and 18-25 John’s Lane. The buildings – former stables and garages – now appear to be used for industrial purposes and storage.
Plans would see 115 Constitution Street demolished while the other structures would be converted into apartment units.
The new flats would comprise a mix of studios, one-beds, and two-beds – with nearly half being studio apartments. About 53 square metres of retail, professional and other services space is also proposed at the site of 111 Constitution Street.
Locals have submitted a flurry of comments, many of which called for affordable accommodation rather than “holiday lets”. Some worried the plans would impact listed architecture, in reference to the property on John’s Lane.
A council report describes the current buildings as “unremarkable” and of “limited historical and architectural significance” with plans causing few conservation concerns. It claims neighbour amenity would be unchanged and the plans would not impact the character of the area.
One member of the Leith Links Community Council “strongly” objected, saying it would contribute to “intensification” of non-residential housing in the area.
Their objection stated: “The council must properly consider the extent and nature of non-residential uses within the immediate vicinity. I personally live in a terrace of 13 properties where almost half of the houses now form parts of hotels, with one of those properties having been residential as recently as 2016.”
A neighbour commented: “Our community is already full of holiday lets, we need more affordable housing for people who live here.”
Another said: “It will have a detrimental impact on neighbour amenity and the local community. You need to put a stop to these developments.”
The report states that “preferences for uses that are not being applied” – such as residential flats – are considered “non-material” complaints, which officials cannot take into account when making a planning decision.
Several objectors were also frustrated by a perceived growing amount of “temporary accommodation” nearby – concerns which in this case the council also deemed non-material.
The report states: “18 to 25 John’s Lane is not currently occupied, and a large proportion of the site is effectively a yard.
“When compared to this, a 35 unit serviced apartment has the potential to make a greater contribution to the local economy first through construction and then by employment and visitor spend.
It acknowledges that car-repair services provided at one of the sites would be lost but says there are “sufficient range of alternatives” nearby.
Since the site is located within 250 metres of the tram line it is “obliged to contribute” a sum of £122,000 “based on 35 serviced apartments in place of the existing operations”, according to the report.
The report prepared by council officers recommends councillors approve the plans on Wednesday, November 4.