Edinburgh planning: Residents object to addition of nearly 600 student accommodation spaces at city-centre housing development
Residents living close to what is proposed as Edinburgh's biggest city-centre housing development for a decade are objecting to a change in the plans which would see nearly 600 student accommodation places added to the site.
The former Royal Bank of Scotland site in Dundas Street was originally to have 350 new homes on the site - a mix of build-to-rent, private residential and mid-market rent - along with new offices and commercial retail space.
But developers Ediston Real Estate now want to change the build-to-rent element to purpose-built student accommodation (PBSA) - which would be developed, owned and managed by Fusion Group - and change the office building to more homes.
The result would be 593 student bedspaces and a reduction in the number of homes to 315.
Iain Mackenzie, of Eyre Place & Canonmills Residents Association, said people wanted to see the site developed, but were unhappy about the latest change of plan.
He is due to present the residents' case at a hearing on Wednesday, December 17, by the council's development management sub-committee.
He said: "There is an issue with the sheer density - it is already a huge increase in the local population of the immediate area and that comes up against local services which are already full."
He cited GP services and dental practices and said the development proposals included no increase in such provision.
"And this new amended plan adds a huge extra number of people they want to cram onto the site, so the issue of overwhelming local services is massively exacerbated.
“The original proposal was a balance with a mix of different uses, which was in line with the new City Plan 2030 where the whole ethos is about building sustainable local communities and 20-minute neighbourhoods, whereas this shift to this very dominant PBSA - the second biggest ever built in Edinburgh - goes completely against the principles just adopted."
A report by officials for Wednesday's meeting says the housing element of the proposal falls 10 per cent short of the number set for the site in the City Plan 2030, but says it is "acceptable" because of the wider development proposals.
.jpeg?trim=33,0,34,0&crop=&width=640&quality=65)
Meanwhile, the Cockburn Association is calling on the sub-committee to defer approval of the amended proposal until a council review of PBSAs is completed. It indicated it would prefer the developers to proceed with the original scheme.
The Cockburn said the switch away from the original plans and the inclusion of so many student spaces was “a fundamental departure from the approved masterplan and risks undermining the long-term vision for a mixed, sustainable city-centre community".
It continued: "The proposed PBSA units would dominate the residential component of the site, representing a significant imbalance in tenure mix and undermining the opportunity to create a socially mixed and inclusive urban quarter."
It said there was a risk of "seasonal under-occupation" which might "affect the vitality of the area and limit support for local businesses".
And it added: "We also emphasise the importance of long-term adaptability. Given the evolving nature of student housing demand, any PBSA consented at this site should be capable of relatively straightforward conversion to mainstream residential use."
Ediston development director Ross McNulty said the proposals for the site had been carefully planned to create a vibrant and thriving residential area all year round, in place of what had been a redundant site for a decade.
He said: "The area already contains a significant number of students living in flats, and whilst the proposals increase the proportion of students living in the area, it will remain residential in nature.
"Student tenure under the management of Fusion are generally around 51 weeks of the year, maintaining a stable population.
"This is one of the biggest residential developments in the city centre in many years, and we are presenting the only viable way of delivering the kind of high-quality proposals that we and everyone else wants to see."