Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Burning Issue: Does Caltongate's approval show heritage issues aren't important?

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: 19 June 2008
Yes

JAMES SIMPSON,

conservation architect and vice-president of ICOMOS UK, an advisory body to Unesco
THE International Council on Monuments and Sites, which is responsible for monitoring the UK's World Heritage Sites, has been extremely concerned about the decisions taken on the Caltongate development to date.

One of the main issues of conce
rn is that there is no extra protection for World Heritage Sites provided under the current planning system in Scotland.

We hope that will be addressed under the new planning act which is going through the Scottish Parliament at the moment so that World Heritage Sites have specific guidelines for protection over and above other areas.

The main problem with Caltongate is that the decision to demolish two listed buildings has effectively allowed the developer to greatly expand the size and scale of their scheme.

One of the great principles of urban conservation in Edinburgh, dating back to the time of Patrick Geddes, is that any interventions into the existing landscape should be kept as small as possible and not be too overwhelming.

Unfortunately, that is what we feel will happen with the Caltongate development, which we feel is simply not good enough for Edinburgh's World Heritage Site.

We have been living through an era where there has been high development pressure in cities such as Edinburgh and it does seem as if heritage concerns have been neglected.

The city council does seem to have been going for a more competitive approach to development in recent years.

However, our view would be that the balance has swung too far.

No

RON HEWITT
chief executive, Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce


THERE is no indication that heritage interests are threatened by development. As a city, Edinburgh should welcome a developer offering to invest more than £300 million, create more than 2,000 jobs, and make something useful and inviting of what is currently an eyesore in the heart of one of Europe's most beautiful cities.

As has been well articulated by Historic Scotland, heritage management is about more than preserving old buildings. It's also about balancing economic and social need with the attractiveness and utility of the built environment.

The Caltongate proposals offer housing, including affordable homes, offices and retail, start-up units, and a welcome stretch to Edinburgh's hotel beds and conference space.

In the process it will connect the east end of the city centre and Holyrood, bringing new life to an area where it is most needed. No great heritage buildings are suffering.

Removing two C-listed buildings, the Canongate Venture (an old school and low-cost business premises) and the Old Sailors' Ark (largely under-utilised and scarcely fit for purpose) and replacing them with double the floor area of affordable business premises has been approved by the council after considerable consultation and debate. Ministers' decision to endorse the council's move shows considerable scrutiny and probity has been adhered to.

What developer in their right mind would want to destroy buildings in the city worth preserving, when it is the very quality of the built environment and the society it supports that attracts them here in the first place?


Comments: We are experiencing technical difficulties which mean some visitors to scotsman.com may be unable to post a message on our comment threads. Our digital support team is working to resolve this problem. Apologies for the interruption in service.




Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 19 June 2008 3:14 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Guga II,

Rockall 19/06/2008 01:26:06
Brown envelopes, brown envelopes, brown envelopes.
2

Pilrig.,

Livingston 19/06/2008 05:44:49
The gentrification of the Auld Toon continues. The removal of the Dumbiedykes scheme and it's residents will be on the future agenda
3

St. Helena,

Peebles 19/06/2008 06:39:42
Bulldoze all of it. Edinburgh is a worn out old city. Let's build a new and beter one.
4

St. Helena,

Peebles 19/06/2008 06:40:34
And, while we're at it, let's learn how to spell the word 'better'!
5

donald,

glasgow 19/06/2008 07:30:56
And I thought Embra had been moved to England, except for the Island of Holyrood?
6

Buttress,

20/06/2008 16:58:23
Now - is this working again or not?
7

Buttress,

20/06/2008 17:06:55
Hooray! Not of course a consipracy to silence us over Caltongate...

Well Mr Hewitt, what expertise have you actually got in heritage protection and conservation?

None. What have you spent your career doing? What are you now - the mouthpiece for the Chamber of Commerce. That's the Chamber of Commerce which has Mountgrange as holder of its property portfolio I believe? That's the Caltongate developer? Doh! No of course you aren't biased!

Gosh yes - as far as Malcolm Cooper of Historic Scotland is concerned, its seems Historic Scotland is now about bending over backward to allow listed buildings outside the bus depot area to be demolished. But he's an archaeologist, and maybe HS is now realising it's not exactly hired the right man for the job?

In fact HS didn't exactly enthusiastically endorse the demolitions, and urged that certain conditions be satified before the Listed Canongate Venture was demolished (in line with national policy. And what it is to be repaced with isn't exactly lovely.

Now how about telling us why some parts of this site - school, arches, market etc - have been flogged to Mountgrange and no-one else given a chance to buy them? The EU recently found that illegal in England.











8

Buttress,

20/06/2008 17:19:46
The Canongate School is listed as it's a building of great charm and beautiful craftsmanship - and part of the history of the area, unlike the bland conference centre to be built.

Now - fit for purpose. What purpose? It could have been adapted for another use - instead of being mostly demolished and facaded as part of the nasty new hotel (as with the tenements also). Authenticity of the World Heritage Site? Yer having a laugh.

Under utilised? Well now, if people aren't exactly encouraged to use it... and the owners don't maintain it... how about the tenements then? People put out of their homes?

What developer in their right mind? Well, none, but then we have Mountgrange, aided and abetted by you, and GREED GREED GREED all the way. It doesn't give a monkey's about the city - PROFIT is all it cares about.

Consultation? Carefully manipulated, and heritage groups such as the World Heritage Trust and local people ignored.

You should be sacked for this - but no doubt, as with A.N. Other, Mountgrange would find you a cosy new job -maybe with its PR firm.

Scrutiny? Joke. Ministers scared of an inquiry, hearing all the evidence. They know it doesn't add up.

World Heritage Site? Edinburgh Council should hang its collective head.

The architecture is uglay and second rate, no major international figure is involved, and it's looking sad and out of date before it's even built.

That's if it ever gets built... will Mountgrange sell the land on, now it has permission?






9

Buttress,

22/06/2008 12:53:33
How does this ruling relate to the disposal by the council of land and buildings?


Land Securities' Stratford plan dealt blow by EU ruling
Ben Cook, Regen.net, 28 April 2008
Developer Land Securities' hopes of signing an agreement with Newham Council to extend a shopping centre in the borough have been dealt a blow by a European Union ruling.
The property company has, over the last four years, been developing plans for a mixed-use extension to its 350,000 square foot Stratford Centre in east London. The extension would have involved the development of land owned by Newham Council.

But an EU ruling on a case in France means Newham Council has been forced to put the contract out to full tender.The ruling - which related to a case involving Roanne town council - has established the principle that public development agreements are bound by EU procurement rules. Previously, such development agreements were not considered to be work contracts falling under EU procurement legislation.

Land Securities says it was close to signing a deal with Newham Council and the London Thames Gateway Development Corporation to work on the project, but now the contract has been put out to tender via the Official Journal of the European Union.

The Stratford Island Regeneration Project will consist of an extension to the shopping centre as well as educational facilities for the University of London.

A spokesman for Land Securities, which owns the shopping centre, said the company was "disappointed" with the ruling.

He added: "The Stratford centre has development potential and we will take a view on what is the best way forward."


10

Martin Hetherington,

24/06/2008 16:12:02
Another attempt by avaricious developers to turn Edinburgh into Milton Keynes. Obviously, 'listed' status no longer has any meaning. Whereas, money talks.
11

Buttress,

24/06/2008 16:31:31
Absolutely. And the links beween the developer and the Chamber of Commerce, which has supported this all the way, stink.


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


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.