Portobello Community Council

Community Council Response to Brunstane Planning Application 16/04122/PPP

Posted on: November 1st, 2016

To: Planning Dept
City of Edinburgh Council

1 November  2016

16/04122/PPPProposed residential development (including class 8 residential institutions, class 9 houses and sui generis flats) primary school (class 10 non-residential institutions) local centre (including class 1 retail, class 2 financial services, class 3 food and drink, class 10 non residential institutions and class 11 assembly and leisure ), green network, access and transport links, infrastructure and associated ancillary works. | Land 445 Metres North Of 103 Newcraighall Road Edinburgh


Dear Sirs,


I write in connection with the above referenced planning application. Following a period of consultation with residents, Portobello Community Council would like to register an objection to the application. A summary of the consultation and the responses received is set out below.

Portobello Community Council received notice of the planning application on August 30, 2016.

We published details of the application on our website and further notified the community by circulating information on our Facebook page, Twitter feed and email mailing list. Materials were also available in Portobello Library.

With funds provided by EDI under the terms of the Edinburgh Planning Concordat, we published and distributed a leaflet to 5,000 homes in the PCC area.

And we used a portion of funds to pay for Facebook advertising to further raise awareness of the matter.

The below screenshot shows a promoted post on Facebook, with a total reach (number of people who saw the post) at 19,890. Of those, 2,458 clicked on the post with a further 84 reactions, comments and shares.


During the period of the consultation, which ran from August 30 to 24 October, the consultation page on community council’s website was viewed 1,340 times.

A total of 160 responses were received via the online consultation form, with a further 6 responses received by letter or email. Of those, 141 were objections, 12 comments and 13 responses in support.

The majority of responses received were from respondents living in the PCC area, with a significant proportion from those living close to the proposed development.



The overarching concern of respondents was in relation to the impact of such a development on the immediate area.

Chief among these was concerns around traffic impact – increased congestion on roads, how existing traffic flows could be adversely affected and how changes to the roads layout would affect existing residents. Parking, road safety and pollution were also mentioned as related areas of concern.

Loss of greenbelt land was also frequently mentioned as an area of concern, as was the loss of green space and the fear of coalescence with Musselburgh. Threats to wildlife and local biodiversity were also raised.

A further area of impact mentioned by respondents was on local services like doctors’ surgeries, dentists and the local high school, along with concern that existing public transport infrastructure would be put under further pressure.


Yours faithfully,

Geoff Lynn


Portobello Community Council


Letter (PDF version)

Full comments