Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Drink Driving, Don't Risk It!

Peer accuses council of selling off Edinburgh's heritage

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 29 May 2009
A PETITION with almost 2,000 signatures will today go before a major public inquiry into plans for a 17-storey hotel on the edge of Edinburgh's World Heritage Site.
Among the signatories are high-profile protesters such as former judge Lord McCluskey and Sir David Steel, a former presiding officer of the Scottish Parliament. Lord McCluskey – who lives near the site of the proposed tower at the Morrison Street
goods yard next to Haymarket station – is to appear before the inquiry next week.

Critics of the £200 million development, designed by award-winning architect Richard Murphy, say it will dwarf surrounding buildings and blight the Edinburgh skyline.

In a strongly-worded statement to the inquiry, Lord McCluskey criticises Edinburgh City Council for abandoning its long-standing skyline policy on the eve of granting planning permission to the developers.

"The underlying truth about the apparent changes of … policy by the City of Edinburgh appears to be the excessive cost of the tramway (including cost overruns), plus the massive cost of complying with the recently restated law requiring equal pay for men and women, have created a serious financial problem for Edinburgh, and the council is prepared to sell our heritage to find the necessary funds."

He adds: "Tourists do not come to Edinburgh for the weather or to stay in hotels that would better grace Sharm El Sheikh or Lloret de Mar. The city's skyline policy inevitably affects the whole city. To change it in the ad hoc way that has been adopted in this instance is to create a precedent that could do untold damage to the city centre."

A two-week inquiry into the development, which also includes a three-storey hotel, offices, shops and restaurants, began on Monday. Critics, including the Cockburn Association, Edinburgh World Heritage and residents' groups, say they do not oppose redevelopment of the site, but that they are concerned about the tower overshadowing surrounding buildings.

The plans were backed by the council, but were later "called in" by the Scottish Government because the site was previously owned by the council.

Yesterday Andrew Munnis, a partner of Montagu Evans chartered surveyors, highlighted the fact the petition included signatures from overseas tourists.

Businessman Ken Murray, who organised the petition, and Sir David last night said visitors to Edinburgh were entitled to an opinion on the city's architecture and historical heritage.

Mr Murray, chairman and chief executive of Blue Planet Investment Management, is due to give evidence to the inquiry today. "It is absolutely stupid to say that only the opinion of people living in Edinburgh should be taken into consideration," he said.







Page 1 of 1

 
1

Buttress,

29/05/2009 00:08:49
This development would adversely affect the adjacent World Heritage Site. That belongs to all the people of the world. That's why it's called WORLD heritage.
2

Buttress,

29/05/2009 08:27:51
"The plans were backed by the council, but were later "called in" by the Scottish Government because the site was previously owned by the council."



The list of reasons for the public inquiry is here:-

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/212606/0079309.pdf
3

bluehead,

edinburgh 29/05/2009 11:30:50
didn't know that there was any heritage left to sell!
poor auld Edinburgh has been turned into a cross between a concrete jungle and a gigantic human sardine tin
what a dump it is now, compared to what it used to be
why not try privatising the city council ?I'm sure there is room for great improvement,if we got rid of that lot that are there at the moment
4

Incandescent,

29/05/2009 12:50:31
£200 million! Eh? Will it be clad in platinum?
5

Rap,

29/05/2009 20:00:10
Less than 2% of the signatories were from outside Edinburgh. And since we are building hotels for tourists I assume they have a say in where they want to visit?
6

Buttress,

30/05/2009 08:14:06
Montagu Evans isn't covering itself with glory is it? That's the firm which also said it was OK to demolish the auditorium of the Odeon cinema. Another report commissioned by Historic Scotland said not.

7

GrahamH,

Edinburgh 30/05/2009 11:48:12
How much is the contribution to trams, to cover that overspend, in this one?

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Are Edinburgh’s planning regulations too strict on the city’s business community?
Yes - everything should be done to help businesses in a recession
Yes - they pale into insignificance when compared to the tram works
No - the city’s heritage and appearance can’t be compromised


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.