Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


London, New York, Manchester . . they all object to Caltongate

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: 30 January 2008
THE controversial £300 million Caltongate development for Edinburgh's Old Town has attracted opposition from as far away as New York, the Western Isles and London.
Visitors, former residents and ex-students from towns and cities including Glasgow, Aberdeen, Nottingham, Bristol, Manchester, Banbury, Melton Mowbray and Leamington Spa have written to the city council to protest against the scheme.

Around 350 individuals and organisations have between them lodged more than 1800 objections to various aspects of the project.

While the bulk of the letters came from Old Town residents, representations were also made by city architects and Edinburgh University staff and students.

And the council was also sent correspondence from prominent groups, such as the International Council on Monuments and Sites, Friends of the Earth Edinburgh and the Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland, as well as local community organisations.

The Caltongate plans involve a cultural quarter, a five-star hotel and conference centre, office blocks, 200 homes, bars, restaurants and cafés, as well as a new street linking Princes Street to Holyrood.

The scheme has won the backing of council officials, but councillors will have their say next week. Officials are obliged to consider all letters of representation, no matter how far they have travelled.

Among those to officially register objections is Erica Murray, from Marietta in New York, who wrote: "I pray that all those involved in this will re-think the project and go back to the drawing board to come up with a design that will enhance, rather than destroy, the Old Town."

Closer to home, Ray Burnett, a historian from Torlum on the Isle of Benbecula, said: "The design of the Caltongate scheme is entirely out of character with the historic, social and cultural essence of the High Street-Canongate area."

While Edinburgh architect James Simpson OBE added: "These applications contradict the principles by which development in the World Heritage Site should be managed and controlled."

Bill Cowan, spokesman for the Old Town Association, said opposition was growing ahead of the crucial meeting. "The architecture proposed is simply not good enough for a World Heritage Site."

The main areas of objection include fears over the loss of heritage and character, as well as concerns about the proposed flagship building and the demolition of two listed buildings.

Richard Slipper, chief planning adviser to Caltongate developers Mountgrange, said the number of objections was "not unexpected" for a such a complex project.


. . AND THOSE IN SUPPORT

SOME of Scotland's key business and tourism organisations have come out in support of the contentious Caltongate scheme.

Scottish Enterprise Edinburgh and Lothian has written to the city council, offering its backing for the "wider objectives" of the plans.

Ben Carter, area director at VisitScotland, has also submitted a letter of support.

He said: "VisitScotland would support the development of a flagship hotel as part of the Caltongate development on the understanding that the development takes cognisance of the importance of Edinburgh's Old Town retaining its World Heritage Site status."

Sue Stuart, chief executive of the Edinburgh Convention Bureau, added: "

The (proposed] hotel and conference centre will help achieve the national ambition to grow total tourism revenue by 50 per cent by 2015."


WEB LINKS

www.edinburgh.gov.uk

www.caltongate.com

Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 30 January 2008 2:17 PM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Caltongate development
 
1

Buttress,

30/01/2008 12:25:47
Good heavens - an article not written entirely by Mountgrange!


It made the Guardian today:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jan/30/communities

Last week, in a closing submission for English Heritage at a public inquiry into proposals to demolish and redevelop Smithfield Market in London, their QC had this to say:

H:Conclusions
1.These applications are an attempt by the applicant and the City to drive a bulldozer preceded by a ball and chain through national and local heritage policies. This decision will be a test of the Government’s commitment to its heritage policies and a development plan led system of planning. It will also be a test of its commitment to participatory decision making. It will also be a test of its vision. It raises the question of whether the City is in effect, in the belief of which it appears to have acted, a plan free office zone. It is a decision which will be closely watched by landowners and developers. They will not view consents as unique but as a precedent.

2.If a well funded landowner with a substantial local estate such as the City of London can, with impunity, flagrantly flout national and local policies then local authorities throughout the kingdom, most of whom are subject to far greater financial pressure, will seek to do the same. Developers will seek
to make secret agreements of this kind. Landowners will neglect historic buildings in the hope of enjoying similar benefits.

Substitute London for Edinburgh - what's the difference, apart from the fact Historic Scotland seems to have forgotten what it exists for?

2

Buttress,

30/01/2008 12:33:11
See also:

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

Sign the petition


and

http://independentrepublicofthecanongate.blogspot.com/

for details of the plans, the objections, and tonight's Stop the Demolitions meeting.


These plans must be stopped. This is a World Heritage Site.
3

The Independent Republic of Section N,

30/01/2008 12:54:38
How the hell is someone who lives iN new York allowed to make an official objection?!?!?!?
4

Buttress,

30/01/2008 12:59:55
It's a World Heritage Site... why not?

5

Old Town Resident,

edinburgh 30/01/2008 13:02:54
#3 they can object because you can be any age, any nationality and live anywhere to comment on a planning application....just as someone like Trump from the US can make a planning application and Manish Chande of Mountgrange who lives in London has made over a dozen applications for Edinburgh, in which he wants to vandalise another country`s capital. We should be pleased that folk overseas care enough to object. Aren`t they the very ones that Sue Stuart, chief executive of the Edinburgh Convention Bureau, is talking about when she says The (proposed] hotel and conference centre will help achieve the national ambition to grow total tourism revenue by 50 per cent by 2015."
Visitors will not return to look at a mall they can see at home.
www.independentrepublicofthecanongate.blogspot.com
6

The Independent Republic of Section N,

30/01/2008 13:05:55
#5 I don't disagree with her views however I would suggest it has absolutely nothing to do with her.

7

Embra boy,

Edinburgh 30/01/2008 13:14:47
#6 World Heritage Site, designated by UNESCO, a global organisation initiated by the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Heritage_Site

The lady in New York (and anyone else for that matter) is free to object if she chooses.
8

Buttress,

30/01/2008 13:14:58
So world heritage has nothing to do with anyone except those who live in Edinburgh? So ICOMOS should not have objected either?

'Sue Stuart, chief executive of the Edinburgh Convention Bureau, added:

"The (proposed] hotel and conference centre will help achieve the national ambition to grow total tourism revenue by 50 per cent by 2015."'

Yup - what they really want to see is er... ugly hotels and shops? Not historic buildings and areas? Foot shooting really. Where do they get these people?





9

raythebear,

edinburgh 30/01/2008 13:26:14
the quality of the architecture in the heritage site has already been eroded by the construction of the new council headquarters, with manholes sticking 2 inches above ground on the footway, what chance has the rest of the city got if they cant get it right there
10

Buttress,

30/01/2008 13:32:59
Time then, to stop the rot before it spreads any wider.

11

SeriouslyAmused,

Ayr 30/01/2008 14:09:34
I've watched the presentation on the new development, and it would be fine in a town that required a modern development, but it does not do anything other than pay lip service to the historicity of Edinburgh. I am not from the city, but love visiting it, primarily for its old buildings and sense of time - the new development will not add to that, and may indeed wreck it. Visitors visit Edinburgh for what it is, not for crappy space fillers like this.
12

Buttress,

30/01/2008 14:13:04
Yes, despite major objections from heritage organistaions including the EWHT

www.ewht.org.uk

and ICOMOS

http://icomos-uk.org/

which advises UNESCO on World Heritage Sites

the chief planner apparently thinks these plans enhance the World Heritage Site, and that demolition of listed buildings is retaining the heritage of the city.

Is he delusional?

I hope he will have to defend those views at a call-in, should be interesting.


13

Gastric Antral Vascular Ectasia,

30/01/2008 14:53:55
I think people should stop posting URLs on this site and quote the relevant bits from them. Otherwise, they're just lazy and should spend time in prison.
14

Buttress,

30/01/2008 14:56:22
The URL's are to websites which have more relevance than simply small quotes.

Those who wish to look them up may do so. Those who are too lazy...
15

D Baikie,

30/01/2008 15:10:35
YAWN! Darned communist agitators in Dumbiedykes making a bruhaha as usual. Fools.
16

alex patersön,

embra 30/01/2008 15:22:55
I'm glad people post URLs to share information. That's what the internet is for.
17

alex patersön,

embra 30/01/2008 15:23:51
#14

What a horrid complaint that is by the way.
18

,

30/01/2008 15:35:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
19

Buttress,

30/01/2008 15:43:17
No, we just think the person is as daft as the council planners and clearly has nothing of value to say on the subject of Caltongate...

20

Heather W.,

Winnipeg 30/01/2008 15:50:45
I don't understand why anyone would want to put up such an out-of-place eyesore in your beautiful city. Edinburgh is a precious and beautiful jewel that should NOT be recut just to fit modern ideas.

The history of Edinburgh is its foundation and its attraction.

New development is necessary for any city, but in Edinburgh's case any new development in the historical areas should be in keeping with the surroundings.

New buildings should resemble the historical ones.

There is nothing more heart-breaking than seeing something as out-of-place and in my opinion, ugly, as say - the parliament building - ruining the elegance and charm of a beautiful city. Some people just don't know what they have until they loose it.

The extra cost of creating buildings that resemble the existing ones will be worth it in the long run.
21

rabmataz,

30/01/2008 15:59:47
#20 Why don't you concentrate your anger on those deserving of it instead of us message board ninjas whose only objective is to get a rise out of folks like you?
22

Buttress,

30/01/2008 16:09:50
21 I disagree - I think the parliament building a fine one, a one-off of international importance, and that new build should not ape the old, but be of its own time, which is really sound conservation philosphy in this country. That's how places evolve.

However, the old should be respected, this is a world Heritage Site - the plans here are for demolition of nationally important buildings, facade retention of others, and historic views ruined.

This is an incongruous, out of scale development, with clone town any place architecture, which will simply be for the maximum profit for the developers, and sit very ill in its surroundings.

The new Director of the Edinburgh World Heritage Trust had this to say last week

'The World Heritage site is both architecturally and historically of the highest order of importance, but it is also a living city with a strong identity. It must be seen as a spur to creative and respectful answers to further development, not a barrier to change.

Edinburgh World Heritage has a strong proactive role to play in protecting and promoting the enduring values of the World Heritage Site.


Respectful these plans are not. They do not respect the city or the site or the local community.

23

gus1940,

Edinburgh 30/01/2008 16:30:08
Why can't THE EEN give the same publicity to those who oppose the crazy tram project?
24

rabmataz,

30/01/2008 16:47:36
crazy trams would be cool, we're getting normal ones
25

Deacon Brodie,

Lawmnmarket 30/01/2008 18:55:54
I think the figures in article say it all.
350 people register more than 1600 objections.
My maths make it approx 5 objections each.
Aye right ,organised or not ,Guess by whom.
26

,

30/01/2008 19:35:47
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
27

Buttress,

30/01/2008 19:40:02
The plans have been submitted as a bunch of separate applications. They have to be objected to on an individual basis.

Do the maths.

There are over 1,000 signatures on the petition, and serious conservation organisations - including the Edinburgh World Heritage Trust (funded by the Council and Historic Scotland), the Cockburn Society, the AHSS, and ICOMOS UK have objected.

That's alongside local campaigners and individuals worldwide.

All letters are public domain - go and ask to see them.

28

Smackhead,

30/01/2008 20:04:08
#26
I saw you hanged in 1788. Great to see you back though...
29

COLINTON.MAINS,

Oakville Ontario 30/01/2008 22:23:10
CANADA.OBJECTS.TO.STRONGLY/DEMOLISH.COUNCIL.FIRE.THEM
30

COLINTON.MAINS,

Oakville Ontario 30/01/2008 22:26:48
EDINBURGH/THE.CRIES.ARE.BEING.HEARD.AROUND.THE.WORLD
31

COLINTON.MAINS,

Oakville Ontario 30/01/2008 22:28:45
*Please enter your comment*
32

COLINTON.MAINS,

Oakville Ontario 30/01/2008 22:55:59
NUMBER21/HAS.WROTE.WHAT.THE.WORLD.EXPECTS/LISTEN
33

COLINTON.MAINS,

Oakville Ontario 30/01/2008 22:56:50
*Please enter your comment*
34

Kitti Kat,

30/01/2008 23:59:20
agree wtih #21. Yes, all cities must keep up with the times, but why destroy the beautiful city and history along wit h it? Surely developers can come up with plans for buildings that fit it with the wonderful old buildings that exist. Visit Scotland is way off base. Tourists don't want to see ugly modern buildings, shops etc. We come for the history and to see and marvel at your old buildings. Re-hab them by all means, but please don't demolish what you have. That's what happens over here and we don't have half the history of old Edinburgh. Visit Scotland should check with tourists and ask wha t we come to see. It sure isn't that ugly parliament building!!!This is all greed by developers and corporations. Not in the best interest of Edinburgh and her citizens.
35

turn10,

Edinburgh 31/01/2008 00:19:11
Personally I like it! Edinburgh needs to move with the times. Remember it's ELECTED councillors that take the decision, the planners are just doing their jobs. Wild accusations about their ability / backhanders etc is just childish. It's interesting that so many of those objecting can't even be bothered to write a personal letter of objection. Relying on a standardised letter which only requires a signature is a bit pathetic if you feel that strongly surely?
36

Buttress,

31/01/2008 00:52:27
If Edinburgh 'moves with the times' to spoil the World Heritage Site - and that's what this development, in its present form will do - then that's not going to be very good for tourism, which is a major part of the economy of the city. It's also a development which ignores local needs and local residents.

Many have written detailed objection letters, including leading Scottish architects and conservation organisations.


Planners should be writing reports based on local and national planning policies, and this development goes against those.

I doubt in the end councillors will take the decision. As the council is financially set to gain from this, and ignoring national policy, as well as the World Heritage Site Management Plan, to which it is a signatory, I strongly feel there will be a call-in and a public inquiry. If not, it will be a national disgrace. If Scotland cannot look after a World Heritage Site,,and treat it far more sympathetically, it is in danger of having such status removed.


37

T,,

Bathate, West Lothian 31/01/2008 07:48:19
The St James' Centre should be a warning to anybody developing anything in Edinburgh, and not all people love the handgun-decorated parlimentary buildings!
Nobody else would be allowed to demolish listed buildings, never mind ones in a world heritages site so why should this happen here?
38

Miss Moggy,

Toronto 01/02/2008 00:37:27
I can't believe that this is a proposal that is even open for discussion. Can something somewhere knock some sense into these developers, and have them see that wherever they have heaved their heavy pockets to knock down historically sensitive areas, it has almost always ended in some disastrous eyesore that is incongruent with the surroundings, out of step with the public opinion, and poorly constructed (Scottish Parliamentary building, St. James Centre)?

The developers have no other interest than in lining their pockets. The condominiums that will spring up will boast a splashy address, but will be so poorly constructed as to end up costing as much again in repairs and reconstruction. The area will be irreversibly altered, so that years and more money will be spent in trying to salvage what is left, then the debate will rage ad nauseum about what should have been done to stop is all in the first place.

So what if there is a 'hole' as one looks down from Calton Hill? The last thing I want to be seeing when I am up there looking across towards the Pentlands is another ugly series of architectural mistakes. Just leave well alone!

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Should the Old Town’s Caltongate development be revived in its original form?
Yes, it was an innovative and stylish proposal
No, it was not in fitting with the Old Town
Yes, but it needs to be done more cheaply

Featured Advertising



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.