Why not join us on Wed 26 Nov at 19:30 to discuss matters of local importance?

Agenda for MSCC meeting on We 26 Nov 2014 at 7:30pm

Marchmont & Sciennes Community Council will hold its November meeting on 26 October 2014, at 7:30pm.  

The meeting will take place in our usual venue of St Catherine's Argyle Church halls on Beaufort Road/ Grange Road. 

This will be our third meeting of 14/15.  There will be no meeting in December.  We will resume our regular practice of meeting on the fourth Wednesday of the month on 28 Jan 2015 (until Jun 2015).

All who live or work in the area are most welcome to attend 

A G E N D A

 1            Sederunt and apologies

 2             Draft Minutes of last meeting, 22 Oct 2014 and matters arising (not otherwise on Agenda)

·      food recycling

·      MSCC leaflet

·      Cycle route consultation submission

·      Cemetery cheque

 3             Police Report

 4            Update on Meadows from Mike Shields 

Items for discussion

 5            New planning applications (?)

 6            Council Budget challenge

 7            Tarmac over setts

 8            Youth and criminal justice consultation

 9            HMO review

10           Christmas tree event preparations

11           Installation of new noticeboard

Items mainly for information

12            Update on Christmas tree lighting ceremony

13            Treasurer’s report

14            Reports of meetings

                        students in the community funding for projects

                        cycle routes/ CC liaison

15            Sciennes in pilot of school streets scheme

16            AOCB

17            Date of next meeting: 28 January 2015

Forthcoming meetings of the Marchmont & Sciennes Community Council

The meeting on 8 September will be a panel led discussion about local projects concerning gardens and back greens.  It will feature presentations by:

* Mandy Rathjen - Edinburgh Garden Share Scheme
* Anne Leith - Green Banana Gang

* Mike Shields - CEC Parks Dept

The meeting will be chaired by Cllr Mark McInnes.

The meeting on 13 October will explore issues arising from shared tenemental living in our diverse community. Three speakers, with special knowledge and understanding of the issues, anxieties and pleasures of `tenement life' will make short introductory statements about their organisations. There will then be an opportunity for questions and discussion.  The three speakers will be

• Jennifer Jones from the Licensing Department
• Derek Brown from Homeworks
• Richard Pontet from Edinburgh Stair Partnership

The meeting will be chaired by Cllr Ian Perry.

Both meetings will start at 7:30pm and will be held at St Catherine Argyle Church Halls, 61 Grange Road.

Do you need to contact a private landlord?

Contact details are available on the all-Scotland public register of private landlords.  


If the relevant flat is not covered please e-mail the City of Edinburgh Council Landlord Registration Team.  


More information on the public register and how it is managed for Edinburgh is available at the City of Edinburgh Council website.

Are you a private landlord?

As a recently received communication from City of Edinburgh Council reminds us, private landlords must be on a public register of landlords if they wish to avoid paying a penalty fee of up to £5 000. 


Registration must be renewed every three years. 


More information is available from the landlord registration pages on the City Council website.

South Central Neighbourhood Partnership Meeting - 11 Jan 10 at 7pm

The South Central Neighbourhood Partnership will meet in public on Monday 11 January 2010 at 7pm (till 9pm) in the Business Centre, City Chambers, High Street, Edinburgh. There will be a public discussion of the proposals from the sub-group established to consider regulation of Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs).

For more information please contact: Donald Burgess (Partnership Development Officer). The MSCC rep on the neighbourhood partnership is Alastair Philp.

Update (30 Dec) - Papers now available

· Go to Council Papers online.

· Click on "go to committee search"

· Pick "South Central Neighbourhood Partnership" as committee name and "11 January 2010" as date.

· Click "search"

Website giving contact details for registered landlords

Tina points out that the recently delivered Edinburgh Outlook South features a website where you can search for contact details for (registered) landlords.

Scottish Parliament to consider petition on Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs)

As many know, HMOs is a cause of major concern in the Marchmont and Sciennes Area. MSCC are involved in a Short Life Working Group set up through the South Central Neighbourhood Partnership by City of Edinburgh Council. The working group has highlighted the conflict through regulation between planning and licensing. This is a national problem and MSCC have also been cooperating with Sustainable Communities Scotland (Suscoms) on a petition to the Scottish Parliament (PE1261):

"Calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to promote better regulation of houses in multiple occupation by (a) giving licensing authorities clear powers to refuse to grant HMO licences where this will affect the amenity of the local area or breach planning policy or the requirement for planning permission; (b) ensuring planning permission is a prior condition for all HMO licensing; and (c) introducing more rigorous enforcement of penalties for illegally operated HMOs including powers of closure and substantial financial penalties to contribute towards the cost of enforcement. "

The Petitions committee will consider this petition on Tuesday 6 October at 2pm. Anyone interested can book a place on the Petitions Committee from today (29 Sep 09) by e-mailing emailing sp.bookings@scottish.parliament.uk or contacting the visitor centre at 0131 348 5200. It will also be broadcast on the internet (www.holyrood.tv/committee.asp). Seats will be limited.

Further details on MSCC objectives on HMOs as background to this petition are available.

Next South Central Neighbourhood Partnership meeting will be on Mo 12 Oct 09 at 7pm

The next meeting of the South Central Neighbourhood Partnership will be on Mo 12 Oct 09 at 7pm. The location has not yet been advised.

I imagine that the agenda will feature reports from the sub-group on HMOs and an update on the Meadows Manifesto.

Neighbourhood Partnership meeting to include discussion of HMOs and approach to events on the Meadows

The South Central Neighbourhood Partnership will meet on Monday 10th August at 7pm in the City Chambers Business Centre.

The matters to be discussed include:

· A progress report from the short-life group on HMOs (set up following the NP meeting in Feb 09)

· Dissolution of the short-life group on events on the Meadows and replacement with a management group (now that an approach - albeit controversial - has been formulated).

All the papers for the meeting are available.

· Go to Council Papers online.

· Click on "go to committee search"

· Pick "South Central Neighbourhood Partnership" as committee name and "10 August 2009" as date.

· Click "search"

If you have points you wish raised please contact marchmontsciennes.commcouncil@googlemail.com

Student and other residents' perceptions of the communities they live in

Thomas Graham from Edinburgh University Students' Association presented research, commissioned from ibp Strategy & Research, on student and other residents' perceptions of the communities they live in at our last meeting. This has now been published.

What topics from Student Community Relations Survey of most interest?

At the next meeting of the Community Council on 10 Jun 09, Thomas Graham (President of Edinburgh University Students Association) will give a presentation drawing on the recent survey of students and other residents' experiences of living in Edinburgh communities (including Marchmont & Sciennes).

If you have particular issues that you would like him to comment on he would welcome advance warning so he can pull out the relevant data and asks that these be sent to him at external@eusa.ed.ac.uk.

test: HMO papers online

I am trying using googledocs as a way of making key documents such as these

• MSCC submission to City Council (via Neighbourhood Partnership) on HMOs
  
• City Council response to MSCC submission
• Anne's response to the response
• City Council answers to questions posed by Tollcross Community Council

available to the marchmontsciennes e-mail group in a controlled way.
[Follow the link that was e-mailed to you or create a google account and e-mail me your username.]

If you find this helpful please post a comment on this blog or e-mail marchmontsciennes.commcouncil@googlemail.com

HMOs at the NP board - 23 Feb 09 at 7pm - City Chambers

The South Central Neighbourhood Partnership Board will meet in public at the City Chambers, High Street Edinburgh at 7pm on Mo 23 Feb 09.

The major item of business (for public discussion - about 7:30pm to 8:30pm) will be Licensing of Houses of Multiple Occupation (HMOs).

Marchmont & Sciennes Community Council will present a paper and this will be discussed. MSCC wish the City of Edinburgh Council to prepare a response to their earlier submission that addresses the key points we made. Please come along and add your views and support.

For further details of the matters to be discussed (or to raise any other matters) please contact the MSCC rep on the NP - alastair.philp@gmail.com; 0131 275 6679.

Minutes of meeting on 10.09.08

Minutes of Ordinary Meeting held on 10 September 2008,
St Catherine’s Argyle Church Community Hall, Grange Road

Sederunt :
Susie Agnew(Chair), Anne Laird (vice chair), Sarah Marchbanks (Treasurer),Alastair Philp (Neighbourhood Partnership)
Lindsay Thomson (Lothian and Borders Police), Mike Shields (CEC Service for Communities), Tina Cumming, Sarah Sandow, Melanie Main, Dorothy Ryle, (Grange Association), Clare MacGregor, Pam Masters (FOMBL), Charles Stewart, Judith Stewart, Cherry Ledlie (JGPS Safer Routes to School) Cllr Mark McInnes, Julie Odell,

Apologies:
Cllr Alison Johnstone, Cllr Gordon McKenzie, Cllr Cameron Rose, Anne Laing, , Susanna Lacey(secretary); Mahmoud Malik, Cllr Marilyn McLaren

Minutes of previous meeting
Proposed Sarah Marchbanks, seconded Anne Laird

Matters Arising
None.

Police Report
Lindsay Thomson reported that Housebreakings were down in comparison to last summer Over the four month period there had been 16 in total.
Vandalism – there had been a spate in May but decreased over the summer – only a total of 8 incidents reported in the last three months. However the community should be aware that graffiti tags were appearing on plain vans – a new trend.

Cycle thefts continue to be a problem and there will be a police presence in Freshers week to educate the students on security.

She also drew members attention to a missing person who has been seen in the area and asked anyone seeing him to get in touch with the police.

She reported that Operation Artisan over the summer was very successful. The operation meant there was a more visible police presence in George Square and the Meadows over the summer period. Officers were instructed to react in a friendly but robust way. The majority of offences were dealt with by fixed penalty notices. Despite crowds of between 14,000 and 30,000 reported incidents were down 83% and there was a marked decrease in anti social behaviour with a number of youths known to the police staying away. The police also discouraged street drinkers. The reasons for the success will be the subject of analysis and it is likely that the operation will be repeated in the future.

Proposed closure of Warrender Park Post Office

Susie Agnew brought the meeting up to date with the work that had been done in this regard. Considerable effort had firstly been put into making people aware of the closure and preparing style letters and distributing these. Shoppers and businesses were targeted on the first Saturday and thereafter Homeross House Homeroyal House Warrender Baths and James Gillespie parents were targeted.The second phase drew attention to the public meeting on 9 September. This was very well attending with 340 people attending including a number of people who had made a great effort to get there – despite mobility problems. The meeting however did not result in a feeling of confidence that we had made our case to keep the post office open and further work needed to be done. We required to find out whether the facts gathered by the Post Office were accurate.

A lengthy discussion followed between those present as to how best to present our case.

The following was agreed:

Cllr Mark McInnes agreed to check the number of residents in Marchmont from the voters roll and to see if he could get numbers of parking permits to demonstrate car ownership; He will also arrange for an emergency motion before the full council to try to get grant funding in place for the alterations to ensure disabled access.

Anne Laird would prepare a questionnaire which could be used to gather information to demonstrate who used the post office and for what and why their business could not be conveniently done anywhere else.

Alastair Philp undertook to contact the Student Representatives to see if they would support the campaign


HMO Meeting/ Neighbourhood Partnership
Anne Laird reported on the meeting on 11 August. The meeting was lively and it was of concern that so many people reported problems with HMOs and with anti social behaviour. Some people reported having severe problems. A submission was made on behalf of the MSCC which dealt in depth with possible solutions to the problems and the Neighbourhood Partnership will ensure that the licensing committee consider this.

Neighbourhood Partnership
Alastair Philp reported that in addition to the discussion on HMOs, the meeting in August had also heard about: the Neighbourhood Partnership Work Plan; changes in refuse uplifts; Post Office Closures; Pedestrian Safety near construction sites and roadworks; and Edinburgh’s plan for Older People.

Community Health Partnership
Alastair Philp and Ruth Stroud had attended a discussion meeting of the Edinburgh Health Inequalities Standing Group to consider the priorities in Making Edinburgh Healthier. These were agreed as Food and Health, Physical Activity, Social Capital and Healthy Environments.

Ruth Stroud will continue to be involved in the South Edinburgh Patient Public Partnership forum which is being restarted.

Meadows Update

The meeting expressed concern at the overuse of the Meadows. The use of the Meadows for prolonged periods over the festival by the Lady Boys of Bangkok and other events had caused a lot of damage to the grass which will take time to repair. The suggestion was made that big tented events should only be allowed for a week maximum before being asked to move their tents. Friends of the Meadows and Bruntsfield Links are a proactive group who have constantly highlighted the problems of overuse. However their concerns are not being addressed by the CEC. Their efforts need support and it was agreed that MSCC should raise this at the Neighbourhood Partnership.

Alastair Philp and Mark McInness will ensure this is raised at the Neighbourhood Partnership.

Lunch Club

Linda Smith with Mahmoud Malik has been taking this forward for the MSCC. Marchmont St Giles have been unable to host this because their facilities are fully committed. The Gilles Centre have advised that their facilities are also committed. St Catherines Argyll are considering whether they can host the lunch club.

Minute Secretary

Rebecca will not be returning due to family commitments. The Meeting wished her well and were sorry that she would not be returning. The post will be advertised in the Meadows Directory and the Shuttle.

AOB

Tina Cumming and Cherry Ledlie reported that the Christmas Tree Lighting had been arranged for Saturday 13 December and there would be a raffle again this year

The meeting was reminded that the fabric carrier bags with logo were now on sale in the Marchmont shops for £1.50

Date of next meeting 8 October 2008

INTRODUCTION TO SUBMISSION

SOUTH CENTRAL NEIGHBOURHOOD PARTNERSHIP
MSCC represent areas which contain predominantly tenement property and are constantly being asked to help in relation to problems with HMOs.
On figures provided by the Council:
Ward 10 Southside/Newington and Ward 15 Meadows/Morningside have between them almost 54% of the total HMOs licensed in Edinburgh.
96% of these HMOs are authorised by the licensing authority
The predominance of HMOs in a tenement or area results in:
wear and tear on the property,
increased noise and disruption where people with differing lifestyles live together and
the drift of a individuals and families to other areas.
reduces the diversity of the population needed to sustain the community as a whole.
The Licensing Authority consider that their only remit is to ensure the safety of tenants. Their policy takes no account of the impact too many HMOs make on individual tenements or areas. This is completely at odds with the way they deal with any other licence application. The community have no difficulty with supporting a policy which ensures the safety of tenants and assures the quality of the accommodation. They do however have a problem with a policy which does not support diversity and sustainability in the community and continues with a policy which denies the importance of these in any community. These areas have benefited from the extra diversity and type of population which occupy HMOs and are aware that they fulfil a need for rented accommodation. However the present policy pays no heed whatsoever to controlling the proportions of HMOs in any tenement or area despite the difficulties this causes to other residents. The Community Councils feel very strongly that this policy is harming the future of their communities. As a community council we are of the view that they are failing in their duty to the community as a whole (and here I included tenants landlords and proprietors) if they do not do change their policy to use the powers they have.
We ask them to review their policy use the powers under the Housing (Scotland) Act 2006 and the The Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 to consider the suitability of the property and the impact of the amenity on surrounding properties when granting a licence for an HMO. They will do this in relation to any other licence they grant – why will they not use these powers in relation to HMOs. We have researched the legal issues and are in no doubt that they have the authority to do so. We also want the licensing authority to enforce the conditions attached to an HMO and prosecute where these are breached. Lack of enforcement is a major problem.
The submission which we have prepared gives the details and I ask the Partnership to use their influence to ensure that the Licensing authority give serious consideration to the issues involved and the problems caused by their present policy. The full submission is attached.
Anne Laird
Marchmont and Sciennes Community Council

SUBMISSION TO NEIGHBOURHOOD PARTNERSHIP MEETING

FROM MARCHMONT SCIENNES, IN RELATION HMO LICENSING

The Community Councils represent areas which contain predominantly tenement property and are concerned that the Licensing Authority are not using the full power given to them in the Housing (Scotland) Act 2006 (2006 Act)to protect the amenity and sustainability of the communities in which they live. The Licensing Committee narrowly construe their remit and predominantly consider the safety and security of tenants. They have a much wider responsibility to the community as a whole and as a licensing authority have the power to exercise that responsibility.
The communities concerned are fully aware of the need for safe regulated affordable rented accommodation and, in particular, are aware of the concerns of the student population who require to rent shared accommodation. The communities welcome the diversity and vibrancy that such accommodation brings to their areas. However the need for rented accommodation should not affect the sustainability of any particular community and should not be focussed on a few areas of Edinburgh. It should be distributed throughout the city and a balance struck. Tenement living in particular is community living and where there is a predominance of HMO accommodation in one block or area this leads to overpopulation, tension among residents and a deterioration of the diversity in type of population which is needed to maintain a vibrant and lively popular and sustainable community. The predominance of HMOs in a tenement or area results in , wear and tear on the property, increased noise and disruption where people with differing lifestyles live together and the drift of a individuals and families to other areas. The housing stock requires the input of owner/occupiers to ensure that it is maintained. Individual owners put considerable effort into ensuring the tenement property in which they live is properly maintained and become isolated and disheartened if the effort is entirely theirs and they do not get support for their efforts from landlords or tenants. Properties which have a majority of HMO can be easily distinguished by the lack of care and maintenance. We therefore ask the licensing committee to review their policy and have due regard to the following when considering a licensing application.
1 Suitability of Accomodation
(a) Section131(2) of the 2006 Act empowers the authority to determine whether accommodation is suitable in relation inter alia to location and type and number of persons. Similar provision in The Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 Schedule 1 Paragraph 5(3) lists the reasons a licence may be refused “5(3)(c) - the premises are not ... suitable or convenient for the conduct of the activity having regard to ... (i) the location ... (ii) the nature and extent of the proposed use, (iii) kind of persons likely to be in the premises, (iv) the possibility of undue public nuisance. This provision has always been used to consider the effect on the amenity of neighbouring properties and to allow refusal if the amenity is affected. This interpretation has been supported by case law viz Leisure Inns (UK) Ltd v Perth & Kinross District Licensing Board 1991 SC 224. The Opinion in that case stated that the question of amenity can properly arise under s 17 (1) (b) where reference is made to "having regard to their location" and when considering "location" loss of amenity to surrounding properties would be a relevant consideration". Too many HMOs could lead to considerable loss of amenity in the neighbouring properties or other flats in the tenement.
These powers are at present ignored when deciding on the suitability of granting an HMO licence. The licensing authority should use the powers given to them in the legislation to look at the suitability of the property in relation to the area in which it is situated and not confine their remit to ensure it is safe secure living accommodation. Looking at the numbers of HMOs in any one tenement or area will result in a more sustainable community.
(b) In particular the Licensing Committee should have due regard to planning guidance which defines an area as sensitive when the number of HMOs exceeds 30% of the total number of households. Similar guidance requires to be adopted for tenement properties where an HMO licence is required. As explained above the effect of this density of population has a much greater impact in a tenement. The Licensing Committee should not undermine the stated policy of the Planning authority by ignoring these guidelines when they have the power to adopt and apply similar guidance. The Communities expect “joined up Government” from their representatives. They do not expect a different policy to be applied by the Planning authority and a contradictory policy by the licensing authority. The Licensing Committee should consider evidence of the density of HMO’s in the tenement block and in the immediate area when considering the suitability in relation to location and type and number of persons for which the license is to be granted. Where the density in a stair or in a block exceeds 30% then the Committee should invoke the powers given them to refuse a licence.
(c) When considering the number of people for whom a licence is to be granted the Licensing Committee should make it a condition that any occupation of a box room as either living space or a bedroom will be treated as a breach and enforcement action will be taken. A number of 2 bedroom properties are adapted to enable the accommodation of three people and this should be considered when the suitability of the property is assessed as a whole. Changing traditional layout to ensure more rooms and more tenants should also be taken into account when assessing suitability. The properties are often listed buildings which are being altered solely to ensure greater density of population. This does not protect the housing stock or the sustainability of the property in the area.
2 Granting of a new licence where one is already in existence
The 2006 Act makes specific provision for the existing licence lapsing when the property changes hands. The Licensing Committee should make it clear that where there is an application for a new licence the location and type and number of persons will be looked at afresh in accordance with the above policy. This should prevent existing licensed premises becoming a marketable commodity which might add to their value and add to the problem.
3 Enforcement
At Community Council meetings it has become apparent that one of the major concerns is lack of enforcement and meaningful prosecution where conditions are breached. For this reason the following policy should be adopted:
(a) Where there is any breach of conditions of licence and in particular where there is no licence and a licence is required the Committee should prosecute and demand the maximum fine. There is some concern that if the grant of licences is limited in some way that landlords will not make application. It should be sufficient deterrent to any law abiding landlord that there is a real risk of prosecution. With the publication of the Register required under the 2006 Act members of the public should be encouraged by way of a publicity campaign to help police the situation and report suspected breaches of licence conditions or lack of licence. .
(b) The 2006 Act allow some flexibility in the information to be contained in the HMO Register. This should be used to ensure that relevant information is included. The content of the Register should disclose the number of HMOs in a particular tenement with the number of occupants so that this can be used either to identify properties breaching the conditions of licence or as information to be used by the Licensing committee when ascertaining the suitability, density and location for licensing purposes. Residents will also be able to check on the information to decide whether an objection should be made to granting the licence give. The Register should be organised so that it is easy to extract information in relation to a particular street or tenement.
4 Consultation
We are of the view that if the Licensing Committee used their powers as outlined above it would make a considerable contribution to supporting sustainability in our community. However we are aware that no consultation process was carried out prior to the present policy being adopted. Therefore we also suggest that the Licensing Committee consult on their present policy and allow the views of the community to be heard. There are residents who have extreme difficulties where there are too many HMOs in the stair. They should be given the opportunity to put their experiences to the licensing committee so that the committee has a better understanding of the problems in the community. This submission does not deal with anti social behaviour which can also be a problem in some instances but even where there is no anti social behaviour difficulties occur if there are too many HMOs in a stair or area. These range from difficulty in maintaining the property to too much noise because of the number of people using the stairs to access HMO properties at unsocial hours. There is also a problem where the rooms in HMO accommodation have been altered from their original use. This leads to living accommodation being situated above bedrooms and disturbance with neighbours either above or below trying to sleep while others are playing music cooking etc. Once the balance tips one the community loses diversity. We are of the view that a consultation process would enable the committee to get a realistic grasp of the problems involved.
Anne Laird
Marchmont and Sciennes Community Council
11 August 2008

Public Meeting with Guest Speaker David Middleton

MSCC Public Meeting with Guest Speaker David Middleton
11th June 2008

If MSCC are looking for a solution to local social problems then perhaps it would be useful to consider the situation in St Andrew’s. While the residents of St Andrew’s accept the importance of students to the economy and know that students like to live as part of the community, there are problems brought about by the concentration of HMO’s in certain areas.
In St Andrews half of the students live in halls of residence while 3500 live in the community in the historic core of St Andrews. This has led to a deterioration to the fabric of these buildings. HMO’s tend to pack together leading to 100% HMO’s in some areas. Those who would carry on the historical spirit of the area are no longer there. The student community is transient bringing no sense of identity to the area.
This is not confined to St Andrews but occurs also in Glasgow. To accommodate more people, landlords here have repositioned kitchens and bathrooms and the noises from formica type flooring presents a problem for neighbours. In conservation areas where there is no limitation to HMO’s this results in a degradation of the area rather than an enhancement.
Government has recognised that there is a problem and SPP3 looks at housing in general. In Northern Ireland the law on HMO’s has changed. There could be fines of £20,000.
SUSCOMS makes the sensible suggestion of the need for sustainable communities to avoid the adverse cumulative effect of development.
There are 180,000 students in Scotland, i.e. more than the population of Dundee.
No one is taking responsibility for this group of people. Planning departments just take a guess at how many purpose built properties for students are required.
We need to analyse the situation and estimate properly the numbers required for purpose built accommodation. It is not helpful to victimise one group be they students, landlords, developers or planners.
What does sustainable communities mean? Does it mean families? Certainly families should have the option of living in the same area. HMO’s increase the value of properties and tend to price out young families and first time buyers. The rent obtained from an HMO is not a practical rent for a young family.
Other factors of concern include
a) the clash of lifestyles of young people and families. A group of well behaved students one year may be followed by a differently behaving group the next year.
b) If an area is predominately HMO the shops change
c) In St Andrews, an area of social housing built in the 1930’s is now predominately HMO. This has exacerbated the problem of homelessness in St Andrews making it the highest in UK
d) New tenants do not have the right to buy

So what is the solution. Suggestions are:
1. Build more accommodation.
2. Ecofriendly area, socially inclusive
3. Glasgow partnership with social landlords
4. St Andrews student association, properties owned by the students
A reminder that if HMO’s are restricted, it is not the students who are made homeless.

DISCUSSION
We can see this non-sustainability occurring in Tollcross area. When a new HMO application goes forward there should be a list of neighbouring HMO’s made available. Fife Council are forced to provide this information under Freedom of Information. Dundee have the licensing and planning informatiion available on the internet.
In Edinburgh there is the problem of lack of enforcement. The licensing department need to consider the needs of the whole community.
People have the right to object to a license but councils usually very resistant.
Planning should deal with the concentration of HMO’s but there is no law to control the planning process. Complacency will result in there being no change in the effect of planning regulations.

In Edinburgh there are 41,000 FT students. There is some dedicated student accommodation but when landlords overstep the rules, council do not enforce the regulations.
Family homes are for families. We have to determine if University is still expanding or static. Then purpose built accommodation in the right location is the way to go. On a campus is good, part of the University enabling social interaction.
There has been a soft touch approach to enforcement. The concordat has been discredited because no risk assessment included. We must encourage all lanlords to have a license. If no enforcement we need a risk assessment.
If we restrict HMO’s, we will depress the property price. Some residents will be concerned that we depress their asset.
What will be a suitable percentage sugested to allow a good mix in an area.
Other issues discussed were requirement to maintain gardens , clean windows and stairs. Historic properties should be looked after.
There should be a survey to find out what do students want. ?? Eco villages, co-operative housing, stand alone groups of houses. Instead of this we have historic buildings destroyed, fireplaces ripped out.

Students comments
1.Purpose built accommodation provides no privacy and the rooms are of minimum size.
2.Some students are at University for 8-9 years.
3.Students understand the concerns of residents and suggest compulsory carpets to reduce noise
5. Private landlords often more responsible than University accommodation.
6. One problem for overseas students is that university accommodation is too expensive. It is cheaper in private sector. This may be because University pays council tax whereas private landlords do not.

Discussion
1. Student grant should cover cost of accommodation and council tax. Council obtains finance from landlords via licensing fee. This fee should cover cost of garbage collection and other council activity.
2. The licensing scheme should be financially self supporting. We have a low licensing fee which is not properly enforced. There is a direct connection between the level of the licensing fee and the level of enforcement.

We suggest an increase in the license fee which should include a requirement for stairs and gardens.
Should it be through licensing or planning??
If planning system is to be used as suggested by government, then we need to make changes.
Planning permission should be required for all HMO’s even if there are only 3 residents. Houses need to be brought into the scheme as well.