Edinburgh councillors accuse developers of 'jumping the gun' as they reject plans for 200 homes on Seafield waterfront

Developers who failed in their bid to build more than 200 new homes at Seafield have been accused of “jumping the gun” by attempting to gain permission before the council’s wider plans for future development of the waterfront are finalised.

Edinburgh councillors sitting on the planning sub-committee threw out the early stage application on Wednesday (October 5) despite officials recommending approval.

One furious member said he was “really angry” at the bid put forward by Manse LLP which asked the council to green-light the principle of up to 220 flats on the site of an exiting car showroom at 24 and 25 Seafield Road East.

Local councillors also strongly objected saying the proposals “undermine” work ongoing between the authority, communities, developers and land owners on a ‘masterplan’ outlining future regeneration of the Seafield waterfront area.

The coastline, currently largely occupied by car dealerships, is likely to be earmarked in the council’s new ‘City Plan 2030’ for a housing-led development linking Portobello and Leith with more detailed proposals for the area expected by the end of 2023.

Councillors Alex Staniforth and Danny Aston who represent Craigentinny/Duddingston, and Kate Campbell from the neighbouring Portobello/Craigmillar ward, said in a joint statement the masterplan is being drawn up to ensure the site “will be developed in a way provides the greatest strategic benefit for local communities and for the wider city”.

They added that despite the application only being for the principle of the development rather than seeking full planning permission, its approval would “open the door to the kind of piecemeal development that the local community, council officers and many of the other landowners and developers in the area have been working hard to avoid”.

Edinburgh Councillors have rejected plans for 200 new homes at the Seafield waterfront between Leith and Portobello.

Hal Osler, convener of the planning sub-committee, said as councillors discussed the plans it was “disappointing that a developer has jumped the gun”.

She added: “We have gone out there to the public in good faith to go and ask them to take part in a masterplan and this does work against it.

Cllr Chas Booth said: “I’m really angry that this developer has put this application in.

“The community councils in this area have put an awful lot of time – their own volunteer time in – to try to develop this masterplan and the developer comes along here and tries to pull the rug from under them.

“That is completely unacceptable.”

Mr Booth added there were “major problems with this application”.

Planning officers highlighted a number of issues with the site including potential for residents to be disturbed by barking from the nearby Edinburgh Dog and Cat Home, although they proposed mitigating this by only allowing work to begin if the animal shelter relocated in the future.

However, the Home has no current plans to move to a new site and councillors pointed out the proposed solution was contradicted by another condition specifying that, if granted, work on the new flats should begin within 18 months.

Cllr Osler said planners had tried to “fit a square peg into a round hole”.

She added: “I feel we’ve got to put in contradictory conditions to allow it to go through and my concern is how those contradictory conditions are going to be used and utilised for the future.”

It was also noted in a report that smells from the Seafield sewage treatment plant could be a problem, but planning officers said existing residential properties are closer and argued it would be “unreasonable” to refuse permission on this basis.

Councillor Neil Gardiner said: “I do support development of the Seafield area but that would be on a masterplan-led basis and I feel that this site needs to contribute to transport and education.

“Putting this through the system early doesn’t make this happen and it makes the development difficult to implement if there’s not capacity in the local schools. I consider this application premature.”

The application was refused 6-2, with Councillors Tim Jones and Jo Mowat voting in favour.

Cllr Jones said: “It is a very complicated proposal. I think it’s slightly unfair to refer to these developers as ‘jumping the gun’.

“They have not done anything that is contrary to our regulations.”

And he added the development could be “adjusted to the city plan” one it is complete.

Cllr Mowat said: “I don’t really have a problem with putting a red line on a map and saying this area is suitable for housing.”