Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Wednesday, 15th October 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Edinburgh Evening News site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

Councillors back Caltongate plans



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: 06 February 2008
By Alan Roden
VITAL elements of the controversial £300 million Caltongate scheme today received the go-ahead from city councillors.
At a stormy meeting of the council's planning committee, various plans for a new five-star hotel, conference centre, plus dozens of homes, shops and offices in the Old Town, were supported by a majority of the 14 politicians.

However, contentious proposals to demolish all but the facade of historic Canongate tenements were put on hold, and the developers Mountrgange have been asked to look at ways of retaining the buildings for affordable housing.

The lengthy meeting, which carried on until 7.15pm, was attended by a large number of protesters, who regularly heckled the councillors.
Green councillor Steve Burgess and the SNP's Colin Keir opposed many of the separate plans for the Old Town site, but Lib Dem convener Jim Lowrie spoke out in support of the scheme.

The project will now progress to Scottish Ministers for a final decision.




The full article contains 162 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 06 February 2008 8:12 PM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Caltongate development
 
1

Peter Wyngarde,

06/02/2008 21:46:12
Well thats that then, another bit of Edinburgh happily allowed to be destoryed by our toon council, who have demonstrated once again that they really haven't got a damned clue as to what is best for Edinburgh.

YES the site needs developed, but NO this is not the correct scheme and will jar with everything else around it, apart from their own new nasty HQ building...

Its about time some professional people were put in charge of Edinburgh before these numpties, elected by the people to rub this city for the people and not for developers like Mountgrange or for the tourists, once again the views of the local citizens of Edinburgh have been pushed down the list by the council trying to make a quick buck, its the ransacking of princes St and St James Center all over again...

Clowns...

2

Pilrig.,

Livingston 06/02/2008 21:52:19
Legoland comes to the auld toon.
World Heritage Site ? Yer havin a laugh !
3

Gordie,

06/02/2008 22:04:42
So the Nat-trot alliance led by Colin Fox knows what is best for our city. I think not.

On balance, I think the Caltongate proposals are good for the old town, good for the city and good for our country.

Congratulations to the planning committee, in managing to work through the heckling and disruption.

Well done
4

no more roads,

Edinburgh 06/02/2008 22:18:56
well, if theyd rejected it John Swinney would have called in the plans anyway.
5

Jayess,

Edinburgh 06/02/2008 22:23:00
We are advised that - "However, contentious proposals to demolish all but the facade of historic Canongate tenements were put on hold, and the developers Mountgrange have been asked to look at ways of retaining the buildings for affordable housing."

So that takes the pressure off then, and when things calm down, the developer and planners can start adjusting specifications, by discovering good cause for changes with no requirement for publicity or consultation.

Just as they have done for Quartermile and most other major developments in Edinburgh over the past ten years, the essentials of which were 'outlined and agreed' long before being brought to public notice.


6

Buttress,

06/02/2008 22:38:36
So they can ride roughshod over national planning policies for listed buildings and conservation areas get away with it?

Surely now UNESCO will have to look carefully at WHS status. These plans are terrible and all on the council who voted yes should be ashamed.

See:

http://independentrepublicofthecanongate.blogspot.com/
7

Gordie,

06/02/2008 22:47:23

Great website......

"Just for the record the Save Our Old Town campaign is not against having a hotel on the empty site. It is only against the knocking down of listed buildings and evicting residents from their homes in order that the hotel can have their frontage!"

Congratulation must be given to them as they have achieved their objectives with the the developers Mountrgange have been asked to look at ways of retaining the buildings for affordable housing.


Well done - everyones a winner!
8

Buttress,

06/02/2008 22:50:51
All the buildings - including the listed Canongate Venture and the Sailor's Ark?

Both of those are listed. Should be protected from demolition.

The McCrae temnements are not the most important buildings here.

The rest of the development is grim too. Clone town stuff.

Hope for a call-in.

9

Peter Wyngarde,

06/02/2008 22:51:48
I'm still fuming! They will review the plans for the listed buildings, decide that yes they need to demolish/knock 7 bells out of, and the cooncil will say, thank you, go ahead, oh is this brown envelope for me???

What worries me even more is what they plan to do to Jeffrey St and spoil that lovely curving view of Calton Hill with another of those cheap modern 60's revival steel, concrete, glass and reconstituted sandstone buildings, its historical and architectural butchery of our fine city...

Clowns, the lot of them!
10

COLINTON.MAINS,

Oakville Ontario 06/02/2008 22:52:00
the fools would not listen kick them out
11

Gordie,

06/02/2008 22:53:17
I'd rather hae a carry out
12

COLINTON.MAINS,

Oakville Ontario 06/02/2008 22:55:06
tell mountrgrange to pack up go back to england
13

Buttress,

06/02/2008 22:55:12
I hope that UNESCO will now pay a visit. Time it did.


'If passed, SAVE is strongly concerned that these proposals will set a precedent for future development, sending the message to developers that they can set briefs for their architects to ignore historic and architectural context, ignore that which makes Edinburgh special and attractive and ignore normal precepts of conservation. Edinburgh is at an important point in its development and it is key to get it right now rather than make the same mistakes that are currently being made in other cities such as Liverpool and London. These are mistakes which will almost certainly be rued in a decade (some are being rued now) and cannot be undone for many years...

Concern at the proposals for Caltongate have been voiced by a wide range of organisations and individuals both within and without Edinburgh, reflecting a very genuine concern at the future of the City.'

Extract from objection from Marcus Binney MBE on behalf of SAVE Britain's Heritage.

14

Gordie,

06/02/2008 22:56:07
Is that England, Ontario?
15

Buttress,

06/02/2008 22:57:57
See also:

http://www.eh8.org.uk/
16

Arthur X,

06/02/2008 23:16:11
Shocking decision. Liberals oppose community interest wherever they get a chance.
17

James (1),

06/02/2008 23:31:11
What was it I said again? Oh yes, THIS WAS A DONE DEAL!
This is why visitors come to Edinburgh to see new buildings.
18

turn10,

06/02/2008 23:40:53
Fantastic news, well done the planners!!!

A brilliant sensible decision taken by the Planning Committee, they at least saw sence.

Lets face it the area as it stands is grim and what does it contribute to the city? Nothing. Good on the developers to inject some vitality and interesting architecture to the old Town, been needed for a long time.

At least some people can see the bigger picture.

19

Beachcomber,

Edinburgh 06/02/2008 23:46:17
This development was never going to be rejected, it was
all sewn up with COEC Officials/Planning Committee (with the exceptions of Cllr Burgess/Cllr Keir & Cllr Beckett). Eric (Teeth) Milligan/Weasle Lowry (is this guy the full shilling???) and the remainder of the Gutless Councillors are more interested in Economic Development - the £££ signs where in their
eyes, positivley drooling at the gob.

20

Buttress,

06/02/2008 23:58:55
So now anything can be demolished if it's claimed 'economic justification'... even if listed?

Interesting architecture this is not - it's dreadful stuff, with no place in a World Heritage Site.

Anyplace, clonetown tat, by those who simply want to make cash.

'The new build proposed for the site is unashamedly modern in its design. While it is possible to successfully design buildings in a modern idiom in historic contexts, the most successful examples are those which work with that context, not against it, particularly when the context is as strong as it is in this site – the Old Town presents a panoply of verticals (against the horizontals of the New Town), which architects and builders have successfully responded to in the past without distracting from the overall effect of the whole. These proposals are “loud” – that is they seek to draw attention to themselves over all the other buildings in this part of the Old Town through their horizontal architecture and different materials. The resulting impact on listed buildings and the conservation area in general will be negative – the proposals will distract from the beauty of what is already there. Modern architecture can be easily designed to respond to the materials, rhythm and scale of the Old Town – existing buildings, structures and spaces should not be viewed as an obstacle to development, rather it is a challenge that can be met with imagination.'

Marcus Binney.





21

Buttress,

07/02/2008 00:14:07
See also:
http://news.scotsman.com/edinburgh/Listed-buildings-in-Old-Town.3752344.jp#2454048
22

Peter Wyngarde,

07/02/2008 00:30:31
#18, think you are one of the ones obvioulsy not seeing the big picture, think St James Centre as it is now, thats the level of disaster we are facing here, the area needs to be developed, but not by the first Tom, Dick or Manish that comes along with a generic plan to fit any city, this is Edinburgh Old Town here, we need a development that enhances and reflects what has gone before, not more generic boxes that could be anywhere...
23

Buttress,

07/02/2008 00:35:56
The bigger picture is that the World Heritage Site status brings vast numbers of visitors - the economic loss from that status could be huge.

The threat of removal is real.

See links at the bottom of the page:

http://www.ewht.org.uk/Home.aspx

24

Kitti Kat,

Newtown Square 07/02/2008 00:39:40
World Heritage site? Not for long!
25

awfyvexed,

ROYAL MILE 07/02/2008 00:39:48
I'd like to know which councillors voted for this development in it's present form.
26

awfyvexed,

ROYAL MILE 07/02/2008 00:50:02
As for Alan Roden...congratulations on your article...so you can be an impartial journalist when it suits you,eh??
Circumstances not warrant your usual bias??
'Course not,your pals at Mountgrange got a good result but that was expected.
Still your previous articles can't have harmed their cause!!
Be champagne at the Balmoral the night,eh, instead o'a cup o' coffee in a cafay on the mile!!
Mind an' no choke!!
27

COLINTON.MAINS,

Oakville Ontario 07/02/2008 00:50:56
no england in ontario thank god
28

Buttress,

07/02/2008 00:55:43
See letters also here:

http://news.scotsman.com/letters/Cash-comes-before-culture-in.3747323.jp#2451044
29

Terr2,

07/02/2008 01:05:58
#5 talking pish as usual
30

Think Tank,

07/02/2008 01:13:39
#20 Marcus Binney's comments reflect a much wider stream of illogical planning over the last two decades. What he is proposing in his flowery language is to HIDE any new building in the landscape of the old town. To produce clone-like sandstone boxes so as not to detract from the frankly disgustingly rundown buildings that currently occupy the site.

It's complete lunacy but has been the blueprint for uninspiring Edinburgh development in the last two decades. Very few buildings from this period will be looked upon in 50 years time as anything of interest with this policy.

The new Caltongate scheme produces what I believe are 2 iconic building at opposite ends of a new public square. I would love to see more iconic designs in the plans but for an Edinburgh development two such buildings is a frankly unheard of level of success. The hotel plans look simply stunning with a modern interpretation of a pillared castle type look. The office block with its interrupted glass cube design is equally impressive.

I remember hearing similar moans when the Quartermile developments were approved. I challenge anyone to walk past the newly opened iconic glass office development on Lauriston Place (1 Quartermile Square) and not be impressed with its beautiful, unashamedly modern and outstandingly functional design.
31

Buttress,

07/02/2008 01:25:34
Iconic?

Clone town, anytown architecture. Nothing inspirational or iconic. Pillared Csatle?!!

Nor is the square public - it is still to be privately owned. It will be in shadow most of the year anyhow.

It is possible to build well in a contemporary idiom and fit a historic setting. This scheme is clone town tat. The hotel will block historic views also.

Listed buildings should not be demolished to suit a hotel chain's desires.

Malcolm Fraser had the nerve to talk about carbuncles in this week's Building Design. He should be ashamed.




32

Iain fae Elgin,

London 07/02/2008 07:26:19
"The office block with its interrupted glass cube design is equally impressive."
#30, I normally try to be objective in my critisism, but in this case all I can say to you is 'what a d!ck'.

Will we never learn?
33

Jingsitsme,

EDINBURGH 07/02/2008 09:33:46
Glad to see it has passed. Too much holding on to past buildings and the past.

A mixture of old and new will make a vibrant city where people will come to visit rather than dreary where time stands still.

The old town protesters and historic scotland old foggies should move with the times and look forward.
34

Mr H 2u,

Embra 07/02/2008 09:35:58
As we suspected, the new shower as just as useless and deviant as the old shower. I hope you all remember this at election time. Perhaps we should get a band of like minded independents together for the next election to stand on a platform for change.

In the meantime, why not stick it to them by asking for Embras World Heritage status to be removed. Contact the Director - Mr Francesco Bandarin and tell him what they're up to. If no-one complains, how will they know - F.Bandarin@unesco.org
35

Buttress,

07/02/2008 09:44:28
33 is so ignorant of what has happened doesn't realise that, shockingl, HS backed the scheme! In the pocket of Mountgrunge?

Visitors flock to see World Heritage - not anyplace clone town third rate developments such as this Vibrant my ****.
36

Beachcomber,

Edinburgh 07/02/2008 10:36:02
#25,

Apart from the Planning (unelected) Officials who had basically rubber stamped it.

Cllr's Lowrie/Dundas/Hart/Hinds/McIvor/Milligan/Morris/Mowat/Munn/Paisley/Peacock/Rose/Thomas

Never vote any of them again.

37

Buttress,

07/02/2008 10:59:17
Thank you.

Hopefully at a call in those unelected paid officials will have to justify why they felt ignoring national planning policy and the views of heritage and community organisations was such a great wheeze.
38

Jingsitsme,

EDINBURGH 07/02/2008 12:02:28
35 - I am not ignorant and therefore dont judge me as perhaps you judge yourself!

Change happens and is happening for the good. Yes some new builds are awful but so are some of the old!!

there are new builds and hopefully more that will bring a sense of vitality and growth and forward thinking to Edinburgh.

Embrace change - you can if you have the right attitude but many of you decided against before it was even at the drawing board.

New builds can bring in new ideas, design, material of our times not mentioning the skills of young people highly skilled in their field.

Embrace with attitude - you might just like it! Think about change has been around since Edinburgh Castle evolved!!

So I repeat what I said in 33!
39

Buttress,

07/02/2008 12:18:52
Look at the World Heritage Site management plan, agreed with the council.

This is the demolition of listed buildings and conservation area buildings.

UNESCO is now very likely to put Edinburgh on the WHS danger list.

It deserves it.

Far too much inappropriate and unsympathetic development, and poor quality designs which are simply not good enough for this most sensitive of sites.

It will be interesting to hear the justification for this at an inquiry. As the council is up to its neck in this and the outcry is national if not international, there must be a call-in.



40

Think Tank,

07/02/2008 14:29:28
#32: "I normally try to be objective in my critisism, but in this case all I can say to you is 'what a d!ck'. Will we never learn?"

Roughly translated: "I don't like modern architecture so would rather have a massive dirty hole in the old town rather than accept ANY new building".

Face it- whatever the plans submitted you would MOAN about them- it's what people like do with every story that encompasses change.

#34: "Perhaps we should get a band of like minded independents together for the next election to stand on a platform for change."

I REALLY hope you do. PLEASE, PLEASE DO IT.

Because on the basis of 300 objectors and a couple of dozen protesters I think it's the only way you'd realise just how little the wider people of Edinburgh appreciate your attempts to block progress in our city. AND through your pointless organised objections, just how much of OUR TAXPAYERS money you waste on worthless "due process".


41

Buttress,

07/02/2008 17:43:43
No-one is blocking progress - but surely any development should take heed of its surroundings and the fact this is a WHS? This is so wrong it's unbelievable it ever got this far.

Demolition of listed buildings is against national policies.
42

mad moo,

edinburgh 07/02/2008 19:23:46
'Embrace change - you can if you have the right attitude but many of you decided against before it was even at the drawing board.

New builds can bring in new ideas, design, material of our times not mentioning the skills of young people highly skilled in their field.'

Heritage - led and community - led development is much more successful at providing opportunities for local young people to develop skills.
There is a massive shortage of skilled workers and tradesmen in the construction industry and this is in part due to the lego style construction and building practices used today in modern architecture. Any 'skilled' jobs are likely to go to workers drafted in from overseas because the construction industry can get away with paying them less on temporary contracts or unskilled construction teams from England.
Most of the workers on the Council Headquarters were labourers (not time served tradesmen) from Manchester who stayed in temporary bed sits and went home every weekend.

As for objectors being against it before it was on the drawing board how could they ....no one even knew about the plans until well after they had been agreed in secret by previous councillors.

The masterplan which was first displayed to the public in Sept 2005 had been submitted to the council with the off market offer to buy the common good land etc on East Market St. in June 2005.
The plans and the business case/development appraisal were kept secret from the public (even to residents in the flats to be knocked down) because it was commercially confidential.
Even the local Councillor knew - but only begrudgingly admitted the plans included demolition of homes and listed buildings to the community council and residents from the flats the day before they were to be displayed in the St James Centre.
When the planners recieved the application for the demolition of the bus depot they said no plans for redevelopment had been submitted ( also in June 2005)
They recommended approv

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


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.