City planners pull plug on housing plan

Council officials had recommended that the 100 million plan to create more than 700 homes, health facilities and community space at the former ScottishPower site in Portobello should be approved.

But councillors on the planning committee rejected BL Developments' proposals amid concerns about the scale, height and design of the plans.

The Edinburgh-based developer has become the latest one to fail to get approval to build on the site.

Previous plans for a supermarket were approved by the council but rejected at a Scottish Government public inquiry.

Residents said today said that they would like to see the developer come up with new plans for a housing development that takes their views into account.

However, BL Developments warned that it will not be able to make a scheme viable with fewer houses – and said that the decision makes it more likely that other uses, including a supermarket, could happen instead.

John Stewart, chairman of Portobello Community Council, said: "We are very much in favour of this sort of mixed development with housing on this site.

"But we have particular concerns with this application; the main one being about the density. We were also concerned about the height of this proposal."

However, he added: "We would like BL Developments to come along with revised plans. We were in favour of the mix, but it seemed that it went from their original plan of 300 houses up to 739 then 700."

The plan would have included 700 homes, a GP, dental surgery, pharmacy, artist studios and performance space, as well as the relocated Royal British Legion.

Councillors spent more than two hours debating the application but voted 7-5 against it.

The site, on the corner of Portobello Road and Portobello High Street, was bought by BL Developments four years ago. Philip Myerscough, managing director at BL, said that the firm needs to now decide whether to sell the site to another developer.

He said that he has companies "knocking on our door every week" about buying the site for a supermarket development.

Other options include appealing the decision, submitting new plans for a similar scheme or taking a new approach.

He said: "We cannot reduce the number of units and still have a viable scheme. If the community council cannot support a viable scheme, I as a developer will not support an unviable scheme."

The proposals had been supported by planning leader Jim Lowrie. He said: "I did support it because it has a lot of good aspects, but the height didn't appeal to most members and there were over 700 units, so it was felt the density was too high."