Elm Row resident urges objections against Gateway Theatre demolition plan

Recently we wrote a blog post alerting local residents to a revised planning application for the Gateway Theatre site that lies behind Elm Row and Montgomery Street. 

We acknowledged that if you live next door to the site, you may not be entirely delighted by the prospect of 155 students moving in next door, but concluded that, overall, the revised application was probably an improvement on the previous plan which already had planning approval. 

Last week, one Elm Row resident, Megan Richardson, got in touch to share her concerns over the proposal. She had these concerns about the proposals. She says: 

The area will not increase greenspace in edinburgh and will further urbanise the area.  This area should be redeveloped into a community greenspace and not flats for 155 students.

The proposed development:

•       Is between 3 and 5 storeys high
•       Will house a large number (155) of students
•       Is not in keeping with the existing 19th century buildings and will be constructed of poor quality and modern materials
•       Has a large gym, social area and cinema for student use which increases the size of the development
•       With glass curtain stairwells and many windows will overlook your flat
•       Will overshadow the existing buildings on Elm Row, Montgomery Street and Brunswick Place
•       Once built and housing 155 students will be noisy particularly at unsociable hours and there will be light pollution from the proposed  buildings and new street lighting
•       Will create additional rubbish and waste and associated problems with seagulls and vermin
•       Has a large waste/rubbish area situated against the wall of the existing flats which will create problems with waste and noise when the rubbish is deposited there by students and collected
•       Will exacerbate the problem of parking in the area which will become even more congested
•       Will result in several existing trees being cut down
•       Is not made of sustainable materials and has very few in built sustainable measures
•       Will result in a long period (estimated at 2 years) of demolition and construction which will cause noise, increased levels of light pollution, dust and a lot of disruption to local residents
•       Will offer no community benefit to local residents

She has shared the full text of her objection letter, which you can read and download below. 

11/02696/FUL Objection Letter

If you agree with Megan, and would like to send in an objection to these plans, you can do it online here.

Comments

[gavin]

This will benefit the area 155 students would bring a young and vibrant nudge to the community (I was going to say kick) As long as the architecture and quality of living space is of a high standard I would have no objections at all. Noise pollution may be a factor but we live in the city centre and as long as it was not too disruptive I am ok with this. I would hope that there would be a mechanism for complaint and compensation.

As a bin man I am well aware of the value of a quality nights sleep and my alarm goes off at 4:30 in the morning.
For shift working residents such as nurses it could cause problems but the end project would surely benefit the community as a whole?

[Charlotte]

Tattie Shaws are also in favour of this development. It should bring much needed footfall to Leith Walk

[gavin]

I am perhaps concerned about the incongruence of the architecture, so it should at least try to fit in with the surrounding buildings.