Short-term let conversion at Flat 4 5 Ramsay Garden, Edinburgh

Summary of planning committee decision

Decided by Edinburgh Development Management Sub-Committee on 5 Aug 2026.

26/00825/FULSTLRefused

What was proposed

The application sought to change a two-bedroom flat from residential use to a short-term let, with no internal or external physical changes.

“The application is for the change of use of the property from a flatted dwelling to short term let (STL). No internal or external physical changes are proposed. The application is not retrospective.”

“The applicant has provided a planning statement and invoice from an STL company to support the application.”

Officer report

The site

The flat occupies the top two floors of a six-storey tenement, sharing a communal entrance and stairwell in a predominantly residential area.

“The application site relates to a flat on the top two floors of a six-storey tenement block at 5 Ramsay Garden, off Castle Hill. The approximate floor area of the property is 92 square metres (sq m). It comprises two bedrooms, a sitting room, kitchen and two bathrooms. Access is via a communal entrance and stairwell shared with other flats.”

“Ramsay Garden is built around a communal courtyard and shared garden. It is accessed from Ramsay Lane, with Mound Place to the north and Castlehill to the south. The Esplanade of Edinburgh Castle is located to the rear of the application site. Whilst the property is located close to commercial activity, Ramsay Garden is a predominantly residential area.”

Officer report

Earlier applications and enforcement

An earlier retrospective application was refused, a later application was withdrawn, and an alleged unauthorised use was followed by compliance with the notice.

“23/04438/FULSTL Flat 4 5 Ramsay Garden Edinburgh EH1 2NA Retrospective change of use from flat (sui generis) to short-term let (Sui Generis). Refused 19 June 2024”

“Alleged breach of planning control: Alleged unauthorised change of use from residential to short-term lets.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the short-term let would harm neighbouring amenity, remove housing without sufficient justification and breach planning policies.

“The proposal is acceptable with regard to Sections 59 and 64 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 as it will preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area and will not have a detrimental impact on the special architectural or historic interest of the listed building, its setting, or the setting of neighbouring listed buildings.”

“The change of use of this property to a short term let (STL) will have an unacceptable impact on neighbouring amenity. The loss of the residential accommodation has not been justified. Whilst it is recognised that there is an economic benefit to the City as a whole from the provision of tourist accommodation, in this case it does not outweigh the adverse impact on residential amenity or the loss of residential accommodation.”

Officer report

The main planning concerns

The change of use would increase visitor movement and activity, while estimated economic benefits did not outweigh the loss of residential accommodation.

“The planning statement submitted with the application references an economic report which includes an analysis of the economic and fiscal benefits of STL use of the property in comparison to the residential use. The analysis suggests that the gross value added, number of jobs and local fiscal benefits could be greater than the residential use. The statement also provided estimated spends of guests who stay at the property.”

“Given the declared housing emergency and pressures on residential accommodation in Edinburgh, in addition to the economic and societal benefits that residential accommodation in the City brings in terms of people being able to live, work and contribute to their community, significant weight has to be given to the retention of existing residential accommodation.”

Officer report

What people said

Supporters cited location, tourism and economic benefits, while objectors raised amenity, safety, housing, parking, community and heritage concerns.

“- Property is not suitable for residential use. - No parking required. - Well-located. - Economic benefit. - Provides tourist accommodation.”

“- Negative impact on amenity, including safety and security concerns. - Parking concerns. - Negative impact on listed building, conservation area and world heritage site. - Negative impact on community. - Loss of housing.”

Officer report

The committee’s decision

The committee refused planning permission for the reasons set out in the report.

“26/00825/FULSTL - Report by the Chief Planning Officer To REFUSE planning permission for the reasons set out in section C of the report by the Chief Planning Officer.”

Minutes

Sources

  • Edinburgh Development Management Sub-Committee minutes, 5 August 2026
  • Agenda and papers (council website)

Source: Plota analysis of Edinburgh's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.

Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API

The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.

See the API →

At the meeting

Council
Edinburgh
Date
Wednesday 5 August 2026
Recommendation
Officers recommended refusal
Committee decided
Refused
Minutes
The council's minutes
Meeting
Agenda and papers (council website)

This committee's year

289 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 3 against officer advice.

Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.

Every decision by this council's committees →