57 Constitution Street - Appeal Form and Grounds

8/3/2019 57 Constitution Street - Appeal Form and Grounds

1/28

Derek Scott PlanningChartered Town Planning and Development Consultants

Our Ref: ep355/letOOI/DS24 th January 2012

Directorate for Planning & Environmental Appeals4 The CourtyardCallendar Business ParkCallendar RoadFalkirkFKIIXR

Dear Sir/MadamApPEAL TO THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS AGAINST THE REFUSAL OF AN APPLICATION FORPLANNING PERMISSION BY THE CITY OF EorNBURGH COUNCIL FOR THE PROPOSED

CHANGE OF USE FROM A SURGERY AND OFFICES TO A GUEST HOUSE AT 57CONSTITUTION STREET, LEITH, EDINBURGH EH6 7AF

We write on behalf of our client, Mr. Kamran Akbar (The Cameron Guest House Group) tolodge an appeal against the decision of the City of Edinburgh Council to refuse an applicationfor planning permission for the proposed change of use from a surgery and offices to a guesthouse at 57 Constitution Street, Leith, Edinburgh.Please acknowledge receipt and registration ofthis appeal at your earliest convenience.Thanking you in anticipation for your assistance.

Derek Scottene.ee. City or Edinburgh Couneil

Mr. K Akbar

21 Lansdowne Crescent, Edinburgh EH12 5EH Scoilond T: 01315351103 F: 01315351104 E: [email protected] at

Unit 9, Dunfermline Business Cenlre, Izall Avenue, Dunfermline KY11 3BZ T: 0 13B3 620300 F: 01383 B44999 E: [email protected]: www.derekscollplanning.cam

Partners: Derek Scali MRTPI MIPI, Irene G Scoll ACIBS


2/28


3/28

STATEMENT OF APPEALYou MUST state, in full, why you are appealing against the planning authority's decision (orfailure to make a decision). Your statement must set out all matters you consider require to betaken into account in determining your appeal. Note: you might not have a further opportunityto add to your statement of appeal at a later date, so it is essential that you produce all of theinformation you want the decision-maker to take into account. You will though be entitledto comment on (i) any additional matter which may be raised by the planning authority in itsresponse to your appeal, or (ij) any representations the Scottish Government might receive fromany other person or body.State the reasons for your appeal and all matters you wish to raise here. (If necessary, this canbe continued or provided in full on a separate document.)

(Please refer to attached appeal statement)

NoYesHave you raised any matters which were not before the planning authority at the Dt ime the decision you are appealing against was made?If yes, you should explain in the box below, why the matter was not raised at that t ime and whyyou consider it should now be taken into account.

List of documents/evidenceProvide a list of all documents, materials and evidence which you have provided with yourappeal and intend to rely on in support of your appeal. (If necessary, this can be continued orprovided in full on a separate document.)

(Please refer to attached appeal statement)

Page 2


4/28

APPEAL PROCEDUREThe person appointed to determine your appeal will decide the procedure to be used. In general,a decision will be made based on your appeal documents and the planning authority's response.In some cases the appointed person may require further procedures to gain more information onspecific matters before reaching a decision. This is your opportunity to indicate what procedureyou think is most appropriate for the handling of your appeal. (See Notes for Appellants)1 02 3 4050

Review of all relevant information provided by yourself and other parties only, withno further procedureInspection of the land subject of the appealFurther written submissions on specific mattersHolding of one or more hearing sessions (i.e. round table discussions) on specific mattersHolding of one or more formal inquiry sessions on specific matters

* You can suggest a combination involving more than one further procedure, i f necessaryIf you have marked boxes 3, 4 or 5, please explain here which of the matters (as set out in yourstatement above) you believe ought to be subject of that procedure, and why. (If necessary, thiscan be continued or provided in full on a separate document.)

We reserve the right to respond to any submissions on the appeal as made by either the Councilor third parties.

Site inspectionIn the event that the Scottish Government Reporter appointed to consider your appeal decides toinspect the appeal site, in your opinion:

Yes NoCan the site be viewed entirely from public land?Is it possible fo r the site to be accessed safely, and without barriers to entry?

If there are reasons why you think the Reporter would be unable to access and view the appealsite alone, please explain here:

Page 3


5/28

OTHER APPEALSHave you made any other appeals to Scottish Ministers concerning this land? DYes 1ZI NoIf yes, please give details, including our appeal reference numbers (if known):

CHECKLISTPlease mark the appropriate boxes to confirm you have provided all supporting documents/evidence relevant to your appeal:

Full completion of all parts of this formFull statement of appealAll documents, materials and evidence which you intend to rely onApplication to planning authority, including all plans/drawings and other documentsrelevant to your application which is now subject of this appealPlanning authority's decision notice (if any), which is the subject of your appealWhere application/appeal relates to an earlier consent (e.g. approval of matters specifiedin conditions; variation of previous conditions), the application, approved plans anddecision notice f rom that earlier consent.f)(l The Report of Handling prepared by the planning authority in respect of your application,

L6J where one exists (see Notes for Appellants)The Scottish Government routinely publishes all documents relating to each appeal on itswebsite at www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk. You must advise DPEA i f there are particular reasons whyyou think any document you have provided cannot be published.DECLARATIONI appeal to the Scottish Ministers as set out on this form and supporting documents. I confirmthat I have today sent a copy of my appeal to the planning authority.Signed

This form and all supporting documents should be sent to:E-mail: [email protected]: Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals4 The CourtyardCallendar Business ParkCallendar RoadFalkirkFK11XRFax: 01324 696444Contact Tel: 01324696400

August 2009Page 4


6/28

ApPEAL STATEMENT11101867/FUL

PROPOSED CHANGE OF USE FROM A SURGERY AND OFFICES TOA GUEST HOUSE

Al

57 Constitution StreetEdinburghEH67AF

Prepared by

Derek Scott PlanningPlanning and Development Consultants

21 Lansdowne CrescentEdinburgh EH12 5EHTel No: 0131 535 1103Fax No: 0131 535 1104E-Mail: [email protected] behalf of

THE CAMERON GUEST HOUSE GROUP(MR. KAMRAN AKBAR)


7/28

Executive Summary57 Constitution Street - Leith - Edinburgh - EH6 7AF11/01867/FUL- CHANGE OFUSE FROM OFFICES AND SURGERY TO GUESTHOUSE

The application premises are located at the junction of Constitution Streetand Mitchell Street in Leith, Edinburgh and comprise of a four storeyCategory B Listed Building which is presently occupied on the ground floorby a dental practice and on the other three floors by offices. Two of theoffice floors are presently vacant and the third is being used temporarily byour clients as an office in association with their guesthouse and hotelaccommodation business.

The vacant parts of the premises have been vigorously marketed for officeuse by J & E Shepherd - Chartered Surveyors but without success. The planning application submitted to the Council seeks permission to find anew use for the building as a guest house accommodating eleven suites forpatrons and an additional suite for a resident manager. There are a total of

thirteen bedrooms proposed within the guesthouse (which includes one 2bedroom suite). In addition to a bedroom(s) each suite contains a living areafitted with tea/coffee making facilities and a bathroom/shower room.Communal facilities including a dining area, laundry room and guestkitchen are also proposed. The proposed guesthouse will be aimed at the tourist and business marketsgiven its prominent position within the centre of Leith and ease ofaccessibility to the city centre. The provision of such accommodation inLeith is supported by the Council's Local Plan. The application premises are located in an area which is mixed use in nature

containing bars, restaurants, offices and residential properties whereambient noise levels are high throughout the day and at night. The luxurious space standards proposed, aiming at the high end of thetourist market and business clients, combined with the mixed usecharacteristics of the area will ensure that the residential amenity of nearbyresidential property occupiers will not be adversely affected. The application premises are located on one of the principal transportationcorridors between the city centre and the waterfront and as such are wellserved by public transport facilities.

Derek Scoff Pla/millg - 2/ LlIII,ftlowlle Crescelll- Etlillbllrgh - EH / 2 JEH


8/28

A total of five car spaces are proposed in association with the proposedguesthouse. Whilst this number of spaces complies with the Council 'sParking Standards our client's experiences with other guesthouses in thecity demonstrates that the number of spaces proposed far exceeds the actualrequirement as the vast majority of patrons to establishments of this naturetravel via either public transport or private taxi.

Derek Scott PIll/millg - 2 I Lall.wlowlle Crescelll- Edillbllrgh - EH12 5EH


9/28

ApPEAL STATEMENT11101867/FUL

PROPOSED CHANGE OF USE FROM A SURGERY AND OFFICES TOA GUEST HOUSE

At

57 Constitution Street - Edinburgh - EH6 7AF

TABLE OF CONTENTS1. Introduction2. Location & Description of Site 23. Description of Proposed Development 44. Planning Policy 85. Comments on Reasons for Refusal 146. Summary and Conclusions 17

Appendix 1 - Copy of Historic Scotland's Listed Building Description for 57 ConstitutionStreet, LeithAppendix 2 - Copy of planning application and supporting information submitted to the City

of Edinburgh Council.Appendix 3 - Copy of Letter from J& E Shepherd - Chartered SurveyorsAppendix 4 - Copy ofDecision Notice relating to Planning ApplicationAppendix 5 - Copy of Committee Reports relating to Planning Application dated 09 1h and 23'd


10/28

Appendix 6-Appendix 7-

November respectively

Copy of agreed minutes from meeting ofDevelopment Control Sub-Committeeon 09111 November 2011Copy of notes and observations from meeting ofDevelopment Control SubCommittee on 091h November 20II as taken by architectural agent - CovellMathews


11/28

ApPEAL TO THE SCOTTISH MINISTERSON BEHALF OF TIlE CAMERON GUESTHOUSE GROUP(MR. KAMRAN AKBAR) AGAINST THE REFUSAL BY THE CITY OF EDINBURGH COUNCILOF ANAPPLICATION FOR TUE CHANGEOFUSE FROM OFFICES AND SURGERY TO A GUESTHOUSE (AS

AMENDED) AT 57 CONSTITUTION STREET, EDiNBURGI-1 EH6 7AF UNDER PLANNINGApPLICATION REFERENCE NUMBER 11101867/FUL

1. INTRODUCTION1.1 This statement has been prepared by Derek Scott Planning, Chartered Town Planning and

Development Consultants on behalf of our client, the Cameron Guest House Group(Kamran Akbar). We dispute, on behalf of our client, the decision of the City ofEdinburgh Council to refuse a plalming application which sought planning permission forthe change of use from offices and a surgery (dentists) to a guesthouse (as amended) at 57Constitution Street, Edinburgh and wish to appeal that decision under the terms ofSection 47 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

'Appeal Premises'

Derek Scott Platlllitrg


12/28

2. LOCAnON AND DESCRIPTION OFSITE2.1 The application site is located at the junction of Constitution Street and Mitchell Street inLeith, Edinburgh and comprises of a four storey Category B Listed Building. Thepropelty was originally built as Leith Post Office in 1875 continuing as such until the

1980s. A copy of the listed building description is contained in Appendix 1. It presentlyaccommodates a dental practice on the ground floor; with offices accommodating thebasement, first and second floors. The basement and second floors have been vacantsince June 2010 and May 2002 respectively whereas the first floor is temporarilyoccupied by our client having been vacated by the last tenants in November 2005. All ofthe vacant floors in the building have been unsuccessfully marketed by J & E Shepherd -Chartered Surveyors for the past two years and without success as evidenced inAppendix 3. The property benefits from a small courtyard to the rear which is used andavailable for parking purposes.

, Locatioll Plall'

Derek Scott Pltlllllillg 2


13/28

2.2 The general character of the area within which the site is situated is mixed use incharacter containing residential, offices, public houses and restaurants. The property islocated within the Leith Conservation Area.

,Mixed Use Area'

Derek Scott PllI/willg 3


14/28

3. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT3.1 The planning application submitted and determined by the City of Edinburgh Council

(See Appendix 2) sought permission to change the use of the propelty from a dentist 'ssurgery and offices into guesthouse accommodation. A total of eleven suites availablefor public use along with an additional manager's suite are proposed within the building.Nine of the eleven suites proposed will accommodate a single bedroom; bathroom orshower room; and living area; one suite has a living room, bathroom and two bedrooms;and one suite is a studio with an internal living/sleeping area. All of the suites will befitted with tea/coffee making facilities. The manager's suite which is accommodated onthe basement floor contains a living room, bedroom and shower/bathroom. A receptionarea, laundry room and communal dining room with a guest kitchen are accommodatedon the ground floor. The internal alterations required to facilitate the conversion of theproperty to a guesthouse were granted listed building consent under Listed BuildingConsent Application Reference Number 11/0 I866/LBC on 20th July 20II .

P_m_car parfdngilfTangemcnl ror S

co....

Ilvn)

MANAGERSUITE .....L-..,-,---r-..JI(_______ ---'---_-J-J=J..----f

'Proposed Basemellt PIa'"

SUITE 3

/] lI,t09l>edl

1.6> ... 1

- - L . . . . . l . I - - - - - J ~ L ~ 3.2 A total of five car parking spaces are proposed at the rear of the building in association

with the change of use which will be accessed through an exist ing pend off MitchellStreet.

3.3 Excluding the manager 's accommodation the proposed guesthouse will operate with 24hour on-site management presence on the basis of a maximum of twelve lettablebedrooms as indicated on the proposed plans.

3.4 Given the building's prominent location within the centre of Leith, with good transportlinks to both the centre of Edinburgh and Leith's own attractions the guesthouse will beaimed at the tourist and business markets.

Derek Scott Phll/lIllIg 4


15/28

livingSUITE 5 ",

II.,I

I/

receptiono

", \ IJ 1 \ '-.,I .J,,

living

bed 1

, ,, ,t 10.,.:0 t

SUITE 4~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : : : , ' . . - - : - \ ;:::::::::;.,guest L..,--,dining/breakfast"-,,,IIII ,

. -1.. I ,

'Proposed Groul/lf Floor Plol/'

bed 1

living

'Proposed First Floor Plol/'

Derek Scott PIOIlllil/g


16/28

living

:I-, - - - -I __ l e ~ pOInt

II I..J

.............

' 1 - - - IIIII bed 1II1 II I /- -I I /I I I : :~ f = R = ~ r i ? ~ = = - I IL _ _ -ISUITE 10

I -r-------------------,-,l I3Ct cowl through roof

c, I

I

-, \ \

I

IIbed 1:II

Itea $

pointILD

'Proposed Secolld Floor Phm'

'Existillg PelldOffMitchell Street'

Derek Scott Pla/millg 6


17/28

3.5 It is worth noting in the context of the appeal proposals that our clients operate a numberof guesthouse and serviced holiday apartment accommodations at various locationswithin the City as outlined in the table below employing a total of some 70 staff. Withthe exception of one guesthouse it is more than signi ficant to note that none of the otherguesthouses offer parking facilities for guests.Address No. of Rooms No. orear WebsiteParkingSpaces

27 YOl'k Place - Edinburgh 18 3 (0 for guests) www.yorkhouseedinburgh.co.uk

10 Links Place - Edinburgh 33 5 www.abbotshouseedinburgh.co.uk

7 Links Gardens - II 0 www.adelphiprivatehotel.co.ukEdinburgh

6 Hermitage Place - 11 0 www.linkshousehotel.co.ukEdinburgh

24 Shaudwick Place - 23 apartments 0 www.shandwickapaltments.co.ukEdinburgh 20 rooms

10 Johns Place - Edinburgh 15 rooms I

Table 1 - Existillg Gllesthollses oWl/eel a/lfl operateelill Eelil/bllrgh

3.6 In addition to the guesthouse accommodations refelTed to above we would further addthat our clients have recently opened a 4* hotel with 48 bedrooms known as 'The Place'at 34-38 York Place (www.theplaceedinburgh.co.uk) and have also recently securedplanning permission for a high quality guesthouse providing 31 bedrooms at 20-30Cockburn Street in the City. It is again significant to note that neither property wasrequired to provide off street car parking facilities.3.7 The appointed Reporter may, as part of his or her site visit, wish to visit and inspect therecently opened hotel at York Place (The Place) to see as an example of the quality ofaccommodation which our client is aiming to provide in the appeal premises atConstitution Street.

Derek Scott Plallllillg 7


18/28

4. PLANNING POLICY

4.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) statesthat:'where in making any determination under the planning Acts, regard is to be had to thedevelopment plan, the determination shall be made in accordance with the developmentplan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. '

4.2 Tn the context of the above it is worth making reference to the House of Lord'sJudgement on the case of the City of Edinburgh Council v the Secretary of State forScotland 1998 SLT120. It sets out the following approach to deciding an applicationunder the Planning Acts: identify any provisions of the development plan which are relevant to thedecision; interpret them carefully, looking at the aims and objectives of the plan as well asdetailed wording of policies; consider whether or not the proposal accords with the development plan; identi fy and consider relevant material considerations, for and against theproposal; and assess whether these considerations warrant a departure from the developmentplan.

4.3 The relevant development plan for the area comprises the Edinburgh and the LothiansStructure Plan 2015 and the Edinburgh City Local Plan 2009. Other materialconsiderations in the detel11lination of the application include the Council's non-statutoryguidelines; consultation responses; and representations to the application from thirdpatties.Edinburgh and Lothians Structure Plan4.4 The Edinburgh and the Lothians Structure Plan 2015 was approved by Scottish Ministerson 17 lh June 2004. It provides the strategic framework for the determination of planningapplications and the preparation of local plans. However it contains no specific policiesor proposals of direct relevance to either the site or the proposed development.City ofEdinburgh Local Plan4.5 The City of Edinburgh Council adopted the City of Edinburgh Local Plan on 28 1h January20 IO. The Pol icy considered to be of most relevance to the appeal proposal is Pol icyEMP5 on 'Hotel Development.' Whist the policy relates to hotels as opposed toguesthouses of the nature proposed by our client both uses fall within Class 7 - 'Hotelsand Hostels' of The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Scotland) Order 1997.The policy as worded in the Plan states the following:'Hotel development will be permitted:aJ in the Central Area where developments may be required to form part ofmixeduse schemes, tfnecesswy to maintain city centre diversity and vitality,especially retail vitality on important shopping/rontages

Derek Scott PIIII/I/il/g 8


19/28

b) in accessible locations in Granton Waterfront and Leithc) on main approach roads to the city centre within the urban area. '

4.6 As the application building is located within Central Leith and is located on one of themain transport routes between the City Centre and the Waterfi'ont area it is consideredthat the principle of the building accommodating a guesthouse is supported by the termsof Policy EMP 5. We would also, in SUppOlt of our client's application, wish to draw theappointed Reporter's attention to the text supporting Policy EMP 5 which in our opinionlends further support for the proposal. Paragraph 7.21 of the text referred to states thefollowing'Tourism is the third biggest source oj employment in Edinburgh, providing jobs for31, 000 people. Maintaining and developing this key sector in the city's economy reliesupon sufficient provision oJhigh-quality tourist accommodation. In 2006 a study lookingat tourist accommodation demand and supply was commissioned by the Council andothers. The study identified the particular importance oj hotels to generating economicbenefit /i'om growth in tourism and satisfying the main sources of demand foraccommodation. It found that room occupancy levels are currently high, even after twodecades ofgrowth in the total number oj hotel rooms in the city. 171e study identified atheoretical requirement Jor 4, 000 new hotel rooms in Edinburgh by 2015 to help meetpredicted growth in demand. The city centre is the preJerred location Jor most visitors,but Leith and Granton watel:(ront have potential as hotel destinations. '

, Royal YallgfltBritallllia & Oceall Termilwl'

Derek Scott Platlllillg 9


20/28

4.7 Other polices considered to be of relevance to the application proposal include PolicyHou 8 on 'Inappropriate Uses in Residential Areas' and Policy TRA 4 on 'Private CarParking'4.8 Policy Hou 8 on 'Inappropriate Uses in ResidentialAreas' states the following:

'Developments, including changes ofuse, which would have a materially detrimentaleffect on the living conditions ofnearby residents will no t be permitted. '

4.9 The explanatory text accompanying the policy (Paragraph 6.31) states the following:'The intention ofthe policy isjirstly, to preclude the introduction or intensification ofnon-residential uses incompatible with predominantly residential areas and secondly, toprevent anyfurther deterioration in living conditions in more mixed use areas whichnevertheless have important residential/unctions. '

4.10 The application site is clearly located within a mixed use area contall1l11g bars,restaurants, offices, guest houses and residential properties. As a consequence of this thearea is relatively busy with high ambient noise levels throughout both the day and at nighttime. Given the characteristics of the area and the nature of the proposed guest house useit is not considered that the amenity of nearby residential properties will be in any wayadversely affected as a result of the proposed change of use.

4.11 Policy TRA 4 on 'Private Car Parking' states thefollowing:'Planningpermission will be grantedfor development where the carparkingprovisionto be made complies with and does not exceed the parking levels set out insupplementGlY planningguidance. Lowerprovision will be pursuedsubject toconsideration ofthe following/actors:a) whether, in the case ofnon-residential developments, the applicant candemonstrate through a travel plan that practical measures can be undertaken

to significantly reduce the use ofprivate cars to travel to andfrom the site.b) whether there will be any adverse impact on the amenity ofneighbouringoccupiers, particularly residential occupiers through on-street parking aroundthe site andwhether any adverse impacts can be mitigated through control ofon-street parking.c) the accessibility ofthe site to public tramport stops on routes well served bypublic transport, shops, schools and centres ofemploymentd) the availability ofexisting off-street parking spaces that could adequately cater

for the proposeddevelopment.e) whether the characteristics of the proposed use are such that car ownershipand use by potential occupiers will be low, such aspwpose-built sheltered or

student housing and 'car /ree' or 'car reduced' housing developments andothers providing car sharing arrangements.f) whether complementmy measures can be put in place to make it moreconvenient/or residents not to own a car, including secure, coveredcycleparking, car sharing orpooling arrangements, including access to the city'scar club scheme. '

DerekScofl Plallllillg 10


21/28

4.12 We have demonstrated below that the five parking spaces proposed complies with theCouncil's standards for parking levels as set out in its supplementary planning guidelineson the subject. In addition to this our client's experiences with the similarly operatedestablishments to the one proposed demonstrates that the vast majority of guests (9095%) arrive via public transport or taxi and are not, with the rare exception, arriving viaprivately owned or rented vehicles. Our clients are also more than willing to prepare atravel plan which will identify measures to encourage customers to avail of the excellentpublic transport services existing along Constitution Street.4.13 There are a number of other policies contained in the plan relating to Listed Buildingsand Conservation Areas but since there are no external alterations of signi ficanceproposed in association with the application and in light of the fact that listed building

consent has previously been granted for all physical alterations proposed they are notconsidered to be of any paJ1icuiar relevance to the proposal under appeal.4.14 In view of the above considerations we are firmly of the opinion that the proposeddevelopment complies in its entirety with the terms of the Edinburgh City Local Plan andtherefore with the terms of the Development Plan.

'Scottish GOI/emmellt HlliMillg at Victoria Quay - Leitl,/

Other Material Considerations4.15 As noted previously in addition to the development plan due cognisance must also begiven in the determination of planning applications to other material considerations.

Derek Scott PIlI/millg II


22/28

These are addressed below and include the Council's Guidance on Parking Requirements;Consultation Responses and Third Party Representations.Parking Standards for Development Control4.16 The Council's Car Parking Standards which were approved in December 2009 define thelevels of parking that the Council will permit for new development. The application sitelies within an area defined as Zone 3a which is described as follows:'Existingpublic transport corridors and tenement areas/areas with good access to localshops and services. Goodpublic transport accessibility, on-streetparking, controlled orlimited. '

4.17 Whilst there are no guidelines for guesthouses those for hotels, which as noted previouslyfall within the same class in the Use Classes Order, require one car parking space per 1.5-2.5 bedrooms which equates to a minimum provision of 4.8 (5) spaces and a maximumprovision of 8 spaces. As five car parking spaces are proposed within the area at the rearof the building the proposal complies with the terms of the Parking Standards. This isconfirmed in the Transpoltation Department's comments on the application when theystated the following:'On the basis of our meeting on the 30'11 August 2011 and the agreement that theapplication is for 13 bedrooms the additional 2 no spaces proposed in the pend equaling5 in total meets our parking standards. 'Consultation Re[,ponses

4.18 Insofar as we are aware the Council's Planning Department undertook consultations withits Services for Communities Department and TranspOltation Department on theapplication. The Services for Communities Department whilst acknowledging that therewere residential properties in addition to other uses located within the vicinity of theappeal premises noted that the area was reasonably busy with high ambient noise levelsexisting throughout the day and night and as a consequence noise from the use of theguesthouse from patrons was unlikely to be significantly noticeable or detrimentallyimpact upon the existing levels of amenity. They further added that there is unlikely tobe any significant levels of kitchen odours affecting surrounding propelties.4.19 The Transportation DepaJtment raised no objections to the proposed planning applicationbut suggested the payment of a financial contribution to the Edinburgh Tram of 6,256 in

line with the approved Tram Line Developer Contributions Report; a financialcontribution of 2000.00 for the improvement of public transpOlt infrastructure (toaccommodate movement needs associated with the development in the vicinity inaccordance with LTS policies and the approved transpolt contributions report); and thesubmission of a travel plan. Whilst our client has no objections to the submission of therequired travel plan we would question the relevance to the development proposed of thefinancial contributions sought as the Council has now decided to terminate the tram routeat St Andrew's Square and as such will not directly benefit the application site.

Derek Scoff Plal/I/il/g 12


23/28

Third Party Representations4.20 It is understood that a total of sixteen representations were submitted to the Council inopposition to the proposed development. A summary of the representations made and

our responses to them are outlined below: Over-provision o fguestllOuse accommodation in the area.Response - It is unclear from the objector's comments where exactly they consider thereto be an over-provision of guest house accommodation. Irrespective of that we disagreeentirely with the comments made as there remains an unmet demand for suchaccommodation in Edinburgh reflected by the fact, as referred to previously, that PolicyECON 5 of the Council's Local Plan SUppOitS the provision of additional touristaccommodation in the Leith Area. Lack o.fCar ParkingResponse - We have demonstrated above that the number of parking spaces proposed inassociation with the proposed development complies with the Council' s parkingstandards. FUlthermore based on our client 's experiences with other guesthousesoperated by them in the City the number of spaces far exceeds demand as the vastmajority of customers travel to such establishments via public transpOlt or by private taxi. The guest house is not the true intended use of the property.Response - The planning application documentation submitted on behalf of our clientsclearly demonstrates that the proposal being applied for relates to the change of use of thebuilding to a guesthouse serving the tourist and business markets in the city. Any otheruse would require the submission of a fresh planning application. As noted previouslyour clients operate a number of guest houses in the city and their intentions as far as thisproperty is concerned are entirely genuine. Increased noise ami nuisancesResponse - As noted previously the application premises are located within a mixed usearea containing bars, restaurants, guesthouses, offices and residential propelties wheredue to the nature of these uses the levels of ambient noises are high during both the dayand at night. Giving the quasi residential nature of the proposed use we refute again inthe strongest possible terms any allegation that the proposal will result in increased noisesand nuisance levels detrimental to the amenity of nearby residential propelties. Proposal will damage fnuleResponse - Whilst this is not a material planning consideration Policy ECON 5 of theCounci l' s Local Plan clearly implies that there continues to be an unmet demand fortourist accommodation within the city. Loss of dental practice

Derek Scott Plal/ning 13


24/28

Response - As noted in the planning officer's report this should not be regarded as amaterial consideration in the determination of the planning application. In any eventthere are other propelties within the general area which are entirely suitable to operate adental practice from.

'Cruise Ship Docket! fit Leitlr'

4.21 Having assessed the proposed development against the terms of the development planand other material considerations in accordance with the requirements of Section 25 ofthe Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) we are firmly of theopinion that there are no grounds for refusing our client's planning application.

, Tire SllOre, Leitlr'

DerekScott PlflIlllillg 14


25/28

5. COMMENTS ONREASON FORREFUSAL

5.1 Our client' s planning application was refused by elected members of the City ofEdinburgh Council's Development Management Sub-Committee against arecommendation to approve by the Council's professional planning officer. Copies of thedecision notice and the Committee Reports are contained in Appendices 4 and 5respectively. A copy of the approved minutes from the meeting on 09 01 November 2011are contained in Appendix 6 and a copy of notes taken by our client's architectural agentare contained in Appendix 7. We note from the Committee Report considered byelected members on 23 rd November 201 I that the Committee were minded to refuse theapplication at its meeting on 09 1h November 2011 for reason of:(I ) Overprovision of guesthouses in the area and impact on residential amenity; and(2) Pressure on car parking.At the subsequent meeting on 23 rd November 2011 the Committee were presented withsuggested reasons for refusal by the same officer who had previously recommended theapplication for approval. The reasons for refusal and our comments on them are outlinedbelow:1. The proposal is contrQ/Y to Policy Hou 8, Inappropriate Uses in ResidentialAreas, in that the use is expected to lead to a loss ofadjacent residential amenity.Response - Comparing the reasons for refusal as expressed in the decision notice withthe recorded minute of the meeting on 09'h November 2011 it would appear that theCouncil do not now consider there to be an overprovision of guest houses in the area asno reference is made to this in either reason for refusal. The Council is respectfullyrequested in its submissions on this appeal to confirm if this is the case. If this is not thecase the Council is respectfully requested to provide us with an Inventory of the existingguesthouses and the extent of the area to which they are referring so that we can commentobjectively on the allegations made.As far as the alleged impact on the residential amenity of the area is concerned we havepreviously outlined that the area within which the site is located is mixed use in naturewith high ambient noise levels. Given the nature of the use we refute any allegation thatthe residential amenity of nearby residential occupiers will be adversely affected by theproposed guest house. This is a view which is shared by both the planning officer whorecommended the application for approval and by the Council's Services forCommunities Department. The Council is respectfully requested in its submissions onthis appeal to clearly outline why it considers that the proposed use is 'expected to lead toa loss of adjacent residential amenity for reason of noise and disturbance' and to citereferences to problems associated with existing guesthouse establishments in the areainsofar as general residential amenity considerations are concerned.2. The proposal is contrary to non-statutmy guidelines on Parking Standards inthat the required number of parking spaces would exceed the jive spacesillustrated. '

Derek Scott Plal/I/il/g 15


26/28

Response - We have previously demonstrated that the number of car parking spacesproposed in association with the use of the property as a guest house complies with theCouncil's Parking Standards. We would again fUlther add that based on our client'sexperiences with other guest houses operated by them that the five spaces proposed farexceeds the actual requirement from customers; the majority of which travel via publictransport or private taxi having arrived in the city via air, rail or bus transport. We wouldfurther add that Constitution Street is one of the major rotes connecting the city with thewaterfront area and is exceptionally well served by public transport services. TheCouncil is respectfully requested to advise in its submissions on this appeal the precisereasons why it considers the proposal to be contrary to the Parking Standards and why thenumber of spaces proposed are inadequate in number to service the proposed use.

Derek Scoll P/WI1Iillg 16


27/28

6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

6. J Having considered the proposed development against the terms of both the developmentplan and other material considerations we are firmly of the opinion that the appeal shouldbe upheld and that planning permission should be granted for the proposal. We wouldsummarise our client's case in the following terms: Th e application premises a re located a t the junction of Constitution Streetand Mitchell Street in Lei th , E di nb ur gh a nd comprise of a four storey

Category B Listed Building which is presently occupied on t he g ro un d floorby a denta l practice an d on the o th er t hr ee floors by offices. Two of th eoffice floors ar e presently vacant a nd t he th ir d is being used temporarily byou r clients as an office in association with their guesthouse an d hotelaccommodation business.

Th e vacant parts of the premises have been vigorously marketed for officeuse by J & E Shepherd - Chartered Surveyors bu t without success. Th e planning application submitted to th e Council seeks permission to find anew use for the build ing as a guest house accommodating eleven suites for

patrons an d an addit ional suite for a resident manager. There ar e a total ofthirteen bedrooms proposed within th e guesthouse (which includes one 2bedroom suite). In addit ion to a bedroom(s) each suite contains a living areafitted with tea/coffee making facilities an d a bath room/shower room.Communal facilities including a dining area, laundry room an d guestkitchen ar e also proposed.

Th e proposed guesthouse will be aimed a t t he t ou ri st a nd business marketsgiven its prominent position within the centre of Leith an d ease ofaccessibility to th e city centre. Th e provision of such accommodation inLeith is supported by the Council's Local Plan.

Th e application premises a re located in a n a re a which is mixed use in naturecontaining bars, restaurants, offices an d residential properties whereambient noise levels ar e high throughout th e day an d at night.

Th e luxurious space standards proposed, aiming at the high end of th etourist market an d business clients, combined with th e mixed usecharacteristics of t he a re a will ensure that th e residential amenity of nearbyresidential property occupiers will not be adversely affected.

Th e application premises a re located on one of the principal transportationcorridors between th e city centre an d th e w ate rf ro nt a nd a s such ar e wellserved by public transport facilities.

A total of five ca r spaces ar e proposed in association with th e proposedguesthouse. Whils t this num be r of spaces complies with th e Council'sParking Standards ou r client's experiences with other guesthouses in th ecity demonstrates that the number of spaces proposed fa r exceeds the actual

Derek Scott Plal/I/il/g 17


28/28

requirement as the vast majority of patrons to establishments of this naturetravel via either public tr-ansport or private taxi.6.2 In summary we do not consider that there are any justifiable reasons for refusing ourclient's application and having regard to the above, it is respectfully requested that thisappeal be upheld and that planning permission be granted for the change of use of thepropelty trom a surgery/offices to a guesthouse. We reserve the right to expand on theseGrounds of Appeal once the Council has established its position and provided itsStatement of Observations.

Signed Derek Scott

Date 24 1h January 2012

57 Constitution Street - Appeal Form and Grounds

Documents

Transcript of 57 Constitution Street - Appeal Form and Grounds