Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


T in the Park

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 The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

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

Sign In
Register

Shops plan to defy economic crisis



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: 05 December 2008
.



WORK on the biggest retail development in Edinburgh city centre since the opening of Harvey Nichols is set to get under way within weeks, The Scotsman has learned.

Despite the impact of the economic downturn, the Australian-owned developer Stockland has confirmed that demolition work at a huge site on St Andrew Square will begin in the new year.

Two parades of shops are to be created by either knocking down or refurbishing several buildings previously home to the headquarters of Scottish Provident, which have been lying empty for several years. The £50 million development is due for completion in the summer of 2011, well before the nearby St James Quarter is scheduled to be finished.

Property experts in Edinburgh say the start of work on the scheme is crucial, because it is likely to be one of the few developments due for completion in the city centre in 2011.

It is hoped there will still be significant demand from retailers, despite the economic downturn, with the site having the added benefit of overlooking St Andrew Square Gardens, which were opened to the public earlier this year.

No major new retail space has been created in Edinburgh since the unveiling of the Harvey Nichols store on St Andrew Square, and the adjacent Multrees Walk, in 2002.

The developers of the nearby St James scheme have only just submitted their first planning application for the vast site, with demolition not due until 2011.

Planning permission for the new St Andrew Square scheme was approved by the city council in March 2007.

It is hoped between eight and ten two- to three-storey shops will be created, along with office space on the upper floors, and several rooftop apartments.

A spokeswoman for Stockland said yesterday:

"Works have started in preparation for demolition early next year, and we are in the tender process for our main construction contractors, with a site start anticipated in the summer of 2009."

Tom Buchanan, economic development leader on City of Edinburgh Council, said: "This is fantastic news, especially in the current economic climate. The continued commitment and investment in this development sends an extremely positive message to businesses across the city."

Cameron Stott, director of the property firm Jones Lang LaSalle in Edinburgh, said: "It's a very important development for Edinburgh, because it's going to be completed well before the new St James Quarter.

"Most research suggests the economic downturn is going to continue through most of next year and possibly into 2010, but this scheme will ensure there is a good supply of retail and office space in the pipeline."





The full article contains 440 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 05 December 2008 1:33 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

sjs,

Edinburgh 05/12/2008 01:00:55
No mention of the fact two of the buildings are listed and had their facades preserved in the 1950s or 60s. Yup. The time when demolition was common to put up concrete lumps. Shows how much more enlightened we are now... just blitz them down.

Edinburgh needs more full-size windows and to demolish any port hole ones ... that is all windows predating 1990 :)
2

,

05/12/2008 06:20:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
3

eric,

05/12/2008 07:33:25
Really blends in .ugly
4

ddmc,

05/12/2008 08:06:50
#2 & 3 yes, plus the supposed outrage of salmond, in 2 places I've worked everyone had to reapply for their jobs, knowing full well that the number of places & contract changes were going to happen, it's a common practise to cull jobs & get rid of specific staff for various reasons.

#4 they could do with better graphics, it does look ugly!
5

Seb,

05/12/2008 09:26:51
Looks great! And thank the lord the Scot Prov building is being refurbed rather than demolished as Abby Nat wanted.
6

Buttress,

05/12/2008 09:29:05
What is happening with these buildings demonstrates why facade schemes are, in the long term, very bad news.

Once most of the building is gone, then it's so easy for a developer to argue the case, a few years' down the line, that the building is no longer worthy of its listed status, it has lost its integrity and authenticity, and can go.

(And yes, it is ugly.)

Waverley Gate - give it 20 years.

Caltongate - how long before the hotel is outdated, and facades kept are then not deemed to be worth keeping also?

And how many other buildings???
7

,

05/12/2008 09:32:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
8

Mcsnagpile,

05/12/2008 10:07:51
The age of the shopping Mall is over. Time for radical thinking.

No2 The Scotsman has the most honest comment Blogs in UK.
9

Seb,

05/12/2008 10:13:02
RBS at the West End of Princes St.
Debenhams.
Lady Glenorchy's Church.
North side of St Andrew Square.

And only the latter is of real significance.

10

Buttress,

05/12/2008 10:45:22
Oooh - I made a comment about the 'economic development leader' which has been removed!

From past spoutings I have to say (I choose my words carefully) I am far from impressed. Seems he will support anything and everything, as long as it's development.

Plums in a cake, Seb. The make-up of the cake adds to the whole.



11

Seb,

05/12/2008 14:46:24
Well, if you like bland baking I suppose you'd keep those facades. Fortunately cities are not the results of recipes and are ever subject to change through losses and gains.
12

Buttress,

05/12/2008 15:38:50
Sure, I don't need to be preached at, but there used to be some purpose to listing buildings and having conservation areas.

I do recall the sort of arguments you like to use being made with some of Princes Street and St James's Sq.

This isn't anything very exciting as architecture, but the rot set in in St Andrew Sq a long time ago and continues. Sadly, Edinburgh seems doomed to accept anything a developer wants to provide. It has lost its pride. So Seb... you work in conservation? Maybe part of the problem ;-)


13

Seb,

05/12/2008 16:26:13
lol when exactly did the rot set in to St Andrew Sq? It's a fantastic set with contributions from many of Scotlands great architects.

And c'moan, you're really just here for the banter! It keeps you young at heart.
14

Buttress,

05/12/2008 16:47:43
Struth - banter? Better places than this!

Anyhow - I'm still in my prime.

The rot though - I think the final straw was that coffee thingy with the halo.

The clutter around the monument - oh dear. It could have all been so much better. And no, I seriously don't like that lot in the pic. It is ugly. Now Malcolm Fraser might like ugly, but there's ugly and there's ugly.

That lot looks like a mish-mash of outdated ideas. Why can't we have something good to look at? Something worthy of a WHS? :-(
15

Seb,

05/12/2008 16:56:57
Funny how the "prime" of one's life gets later and later.

As the resident WHS expert you know that "being good to look at" isn't an OUV. What's an up-to-date idea to you? Surely you're not suggesting EMBT would be appropriate here! Ah, you mean good old pomo Terry...

Have a good weekend Buttress, and try and be positive, it'll do you the world of good.
16

Buttress,

05/12/2008 17:20:11
I'm not that old - old enough to have seen it all before though.

No, I apprecciate WHS and OUV etc, (I have even read and digested the Vienna Memorandum) it's just this looks - well, tedious, really. No joy in it. I like a bit of joy. I'd like something that was original.
17

Think Tank,

05/12/2008 18:50:29
I think this is a fantastic scheme and so refreshing to see the retention of the 60s portion ahead of its older counterparts that are being replaced.

Seb- I would ignore Buttress- there's very little evidence of her supporting any new build in Edinburgh. The pretence of understanding conservation issues and architecture is somewhat shattered by a failure to understand subjective opinion. And rather 'odd' beliefs such as glass being an unsuitable building material for a northern city.

The architect least likely to create a 'timeless' building is the one trying to build such a structure. Architecture is inherently of its time- and in every generation there are 'timeless' successes and hopeless failures. Sadly, it's only this generation that has created the "conservationist", who deems it appropriate to meddle with the process that they claim to support.

In doing so they moderate architecture- perhaps preventing a handful of disasters but equally blocking the development of 'timeless' structures. It's a moderation to the averageness and blandness that conservationist approved schemes tend to.

True "clone town" architecture.

The gradual breaking of these shackles is most welcome. Most opinion leaders in Edinburgh are now highly suspicious of the merits of the spread of conservation groups' opinions into new buildings, regardless of the pretence that politics requires.



18

Buttress,

05/12/2008 23:47:33
Oh yawn Septic. As ever, last minute, lost the plot, and a load of silly stuff without you having the first idea what you are talking about.

Only this generation which has created the 'conservationist'?

Do some research dear. Your ignorance is showing again. And your pretence of knowing folk in high places is laughable.



19

Buttress,

06/12/2008 00:28:16
Linda Fabiani: Saving our heritage is about more than castles in the air

Date: 05 December 2008
A progressive approach to the legacy of our past must have a sound economic basis, writes LINDA FABIANI

IT CAN be easy to view Scotland's historic environment only as a magnificent collection of spectacular ruins, castles and grand houses.

However, the sites and buildings – across the country – that mark the impact and achievements of 10,000 years of human occupation of Scotland are much more than that, instinctively they help us understand who we are as Scots.

They are vital assets for education, regeneration of places and communities, and tourism.

We are also coming to realise just how important our traditional buildings are in reducing Scotland's carbon footprint. Keeping older buildings in use is very resource efficient. The energy used by the people living or working in a building throughout its lifetime is a fraction of the energy used in its construction.

Many leading Scottish architects have drawn inspiration from past heritage. Castlemilk stables restoration in Glasgow, which was a joint winner of this year's RIAS Doolan Award, is, for instance, an excellent example of a contemporary design approach to adapting historic buildings for present-day community use.

Through our archaeological and built environment we can see Scotland's links across the world and the arrival here of many influences and different peoples in the distant and the recent past. This makes a valuable contribution to the vibrant mix that makes Scotland such a dynamic and interesting place to live, work and visit.

Scotland's historic environment has a key part to play in the Scottish Government's central purpose: to focus government and public services on creating a more sustainable country, with opportunities for all of Scotland to flourish, through increasing sustainable economic growth.


Towards our central purpose of sustainable economic growth we are simplif
20

Buttress,

06/12/2008 00:28:54
cont
simplifying and streamlining the public-sector landscape – putting in place systems to balance sustainable development while protecting what is precious. We are reducing the number of public bodies and have broken down the silos of the old Scottish Government departments to make cross-cutting policy development the norm.

New streamlined policy for the historic environment and for planning was launched at the Planning Summit on 28 October. We are developing a new, mature relationship between national and local government.

There are two main pieces of legislation that we use to protect and manage the historic environment. The 1979 Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act identifies nationally important "scheduled monuments" – archaeological sites and ruined buildings; carved stones and ancient settlements – where the aim is to maintain them as far as possible in the state that we have inherited them.

The other is the 1997 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act, that identifies buildings of "special architectural or historic interest". The listed-building consent process, which is led by local authorities, is intended to keep listed buildings in appropriate active use, while ensuring that what makes the building special is protected.

Most importantly, the legislation is about managing appropriate change, not about saying "no".

A handful of high-profile cases, where there is disagreement about the future of a monument or building, conceals the fact the system works very well. In the past 12 years only 17 out of 2670 applications for scheduled monument consent have been refused, with only one refused and one referred to a public inquiry in the past two years.

The Scottish Government does not want to impede sustainable development or to burden local government by imposing unnecessary new statutory controls and duties, when we can see that a lighter-touch approach is a better way of improving things.

That is w
21

Buttress,

06/12/2008 00:30:22
cont

That is why I announced to Parliament that Scottish Ministers will consult next year on a draft Bill to amend the existing heritage legislation. We will make the existing system more effective and efficient by introducing a Bill in the Scottish Parliament with tightly focused amendments to the 1979 and 1997 Acts.

We have already made improvements to the administration of the system – removing duplication of effort, devolving and clarifying responsibilities, developing capacity and understanding, and setting a clear, concise policy framework.

There is agreement across the UK that the current law to protect our rich marine heritage is not effective. The 1973 Protection of Wrecks Act is heavy-handed and inflexible. We have already consulted on new, flexible and proportionate provisions for the management and protection of the marine historic environment to be included in the Scottish Marine Bill. We believe that the marine historic environment is best managed in a holistic way, as part of a joined-up approach to the seas, rather than attached to a terrestrial heritage protection system, as is happening in England and Wales.

This Government wants what is best for Scotland – and that means finding a good balance between protecting what is important in our heritage with the need for Scotland to make its way in the world. We intend that our reforms in the management of the remains of our past will help demonstrate educational and economic value, and, of course, inspire those generations which will come after us.

Next spring, we will consult with the nation on how to amend heritage legislation in Scotland. During this process, we will establish dialogue with the Scottish public, heritage bodies, charities, local authorities, businesses and individuals to look at how we can improve the management of our Heritage.

Then we can introduce a Bill which considers – with real understanding –Scotland's historic environment.

• Linda Fabiani MSP is minister
22

Buttress,

06/12/2008 11:32:38
http://www.independentrepublicofthecanongate.blogspot.com/

Worth reading today.
23

,

06/12/2008 14:04:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
24

,

06/12/2008 14:40:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
25

Think Tank,

06/12/2008 14:40:23
cont...

The great irony is of course that the independent blogspot mob will support the MSP in her "green vision" of reusing old buildings and then apparently support Duany's vision of no local shops and increased car travel into a city centre. It's bizarre hypocrisy that dogs the conservation brigade at every anti-development turn.
26

,

06/12/2008 15:11:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
27

,

06/12/2008 17:52:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
28

Buttress,

06/12/2008 17:59:43
"1) How could anyone interpret the meaningless twaddle by Linda Fabiani as "Newsflash - Government to Save Canongate Buildings?" is beyond me."

By the way - it's called irony. A sene of humour is clearly something you don't possess.

And I have heard strong rumours too about Mountgrange, from various sources. Possibly you should get out more, Septic.
29

,

06/12/2008 18:26:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
30

,

07/12/2008 14:02:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
31

Think Tank,

07/12/2008 14:02:10
The great irony is of course that the independent blogspot mob will support the MSP in her "green vision" of reusing old buildings and then apparently support Duany's vision of no local shops and increased car travel into a city centre. It's bizarre hypocrisy that dogs the conservation brigade at every anti-development turn.
32

,

07/12/2008 14:02:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
33

Buttress,

07/12/2008 14:08:59
I note Septic, that you have recopied stuff already removed. Every word you say is pointless, worthless, and completely ill-informed.

So why do you bother? You know nothing, you are so off bean it's laughable you simply vent spleen, and it's clear from everything you write you are making it up as you go along.
34

Buttress,

07/12/2008 14:12:23
But yes - I agree with you - you are an ass, and also a liar at times.
35

Buttress,

07/12/2008 14:21:59
However - I suggest anyone who is still reading this looks again at the www.eh8.org.uk site, and the blog, and read for themselves, then it will become clear that Septic cannot comprehend the written word in its context, click on the appropriate links, but I'm sure that the people who write the rather fun, irreverent and wry blog will be delighted with all the extra hits the site will be getting as a result of Septic's bilious attacks!

And the fact that there were strong rumours is a fact, but then you don't have much of a way with words, do you? Do give over, it's tedious!


36

Buttress,

07/12/2008 14:43:17
Oh - the scheme you hugely approve of above, has had a vast amount of 'input' from those you deride!

37

Think Tank,

08/12/2008 19:31:29
There's no point debating anything with you Buttress, because you can't tolerate any opinion but your own. Why don't you just try and read back your various contributions to articles such as this.

Please note how others (including myself) try to address and debate the points that you raise...e.g. in this article I commented on the Independent Caltongate blog, the Linda Fabiani piece and the Duany commandments on the blog. These are addressing your agenda.

In exchange you don't debate, but merely make sneery comments about being "intellectual" and "not understanding". If you're so sure of your point of view, why not have the convinction to debate- to answer the points that I raise.

I'm frankly bored of raising valid issues only to see you either

a) hit the report button to remove the post (a great irony when every single one of your posts regarding me could be deemed insulting and reportable for using the term "septic")

or

b)ignore my points, insult me, and then fire off more of YOUR agenda (often copied and pasted articles and links to elsewhere) at a complete tangent to the crux of the ongoing debate.

Do you not realise how condescending 95% of your posts are? I'm saying this for your own good- you are clearly an articulate person with passionate viewpoints. But you have a serious attitude problem. And that severely hampers your ability to persuade others of your point of view.
38

mad moo,

edinburgh 09/12/2008 11:26:16
Mr Tank
Can you explain
"Most opinion leaders in Edinburgh are now highly suspicious of the merits of the spread of conservation groups' opinions into new buildings, regardless of the pretence that politics requires."
Do you mean big business and elected representatives are opinion leaders?
The critisim of some new buildings is not just about the design but the proposed uses and much of the critisim comes from other groups not specificly involved in 'conservation'
Should we just get rid of any dissent, in particular the new policies/rules for greater accountability by decision makers and the right for people to comment on planning issues?
Certainly if we did away with the 'pretence' of consultation the planning process would be much quicker..........oh wait was that not the system we had a hundred years ago before universal sufferage.
I thought planning was developed to seek to improve society by giving due consideration to the public interest and public costs or benefits of development.
You may find Butress to be annoying as you dont like her views on Conservation Architecture but your view that the views of 'opinion leaders' should take precedent over those who live and work in an area (because they 'know' better) sounds quite condescending to me !
39

Buttress,

11/12/2008 21:33:57
Septic can't explain anything - hence no response to your post. Septic doesn't actually have any idea, it's just a mish-mash of ill-digested nonsense posted.

Not sure though who those 'opinion leaders' are supposed to be - maybe Septic can name names? Seems Mr Tank hobs nobs with them, eh? ;-)

I'm frankly bored - of Septic. I note that some of my posts have been removed from here, so that puts paid to Septic's weird theories that all posts are removed by me pressing the report button.

Shame that a post where Septic called me something other than my posting name has also been removed...

'I'm saying this for your own good' ... oh dear, who can take this person seriously with posts like that?



40

Buttress,

16/12/2008 23:23:54
Still nothing from Mr Tank I see, must be trolling elsewhere.

It's all so formulaic. They all say the same things in the end.

 

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.