Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
The hunt is On.
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?

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

Caltongate clears last hurdle with green light from Ministers



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: 24 September 2008
By ALAN RODEN
City Council Reporter
THE controversial £300 million Caltongate development today cleared its final hurdle after Scottish Ministers gave the green light.
The Government has ignored pleas from campaigners and MSPs to hold a public inquiry, despite warnings that the project could cost Edinburgh its World Heritage status.

The news ends several months of uncertainty over the plans, which involves the
biggest development of the Old Town since the 12th century.

Ministers came to the same conclusion in June this year, but a major administrative blunder effectively annulled that decision. Council officials were forced to write back to all 350 objectors, asking them to present any new evidence to another meeting of the planning committee.

But in August, councillors once again approved the scheme – and the plans were sent back to the Government.

Critics said the investigation launched by Unesco into the future of the World Heritage status awarded to Edinburgh's Old and New Towns in 1995 should make Ministers think again about the project.

However, a Scottish Government spokesman said: "We have today returned the Caltongate application to the city council for determination."

The final decision rested with Ministers because of the level of opposition and the fact that the council has a financial interest because it owns the archways in Market Street.

Today's decision is a major blow for the hundreds of campaigners and heritage groups from around the world who objected to the scheme, which was the most contentious proposals to come before councillors in years.

The plans include a new five-star hotel, conference centre, and scores of shops, offices and homes.

It also involves the demolition of two C-listed buildings – the Sailors' Ark and the former Canongate Venture school. As soon as legal agreements between the council and developers Mountgrange are signed, work can begin.

City leader Jenny Dawe said: "The Caltongate development will play a huge part in securing the economic, social and cultural life of the city centre and I am pleased that we can now take this matter forward."






The full article contains 343 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Howard Moon,

24/09/2008 13:03:47
Uh oh. Come on then, let's be having you. Who's first?
2

PaulB,

Edinburgh 24/09/2008 13:16:51
Good - at last the derelict site will be utilised - and not before time. I think Buttress must have fainted!
3

,

24/09/2008 13:39:20
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
4

Randan,

24/09/2008 13:40:58
#2 It was only a derelict site because the council let them bulldoze it. It could have remained and been used as a car park.
5

,

24/09/2008 13:43:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

The Geniune Mario Antionette,

24/09/2008 13:45:44
whatever happeneed to the corruption scandal involving Balfour Beatty & Edinburgh Council ?
7

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 24/09/2008 14:50:37
#2 PaulB,Edinburgh

"Good - at last the derelict site will be utilised - and not before time. I think Buttress must have fainted!"

PaulB, I couldn't agree more, after all that messing about it will be nice to see another respectable development go ahead in what was becoming a very rundown and dismal area.

As for this WHS nonsense, I wonder if the UNESCO's freeloaders have cancelled their travel bookings?

Re Buttress, I'm going to get my telescope out tonight as she has probably gone into orbit - should be some sight.
8

Rap,

24/09/2008 15:31:08
Peter,
Why on earth do you live in Edinburgh, particularly in the Old Town if you think the way it looks, and has looked for years is so terrible and needs changing? All you do is whinge about it, and how it needs new carbuncles.

And WHS nonsense? Would you rather Stonehenge was flattened to allow the A303 to be widened, or Macchu Pichu had a MacDonalds installed?
9

Edinburgh 100,

Musselburgh 24/09/2008 15:36:06
City leader Jenny Dawe said: "The Caltongate development will play a huge part in securing the economic, social and cultural life of the city centre and I am pleased that we can now take this matter forward."

What utter c##p from Jenny Dawe she needs to get her heed oot her a##e.

PS, is there any main road, street, path, lane, walkway in Edinburgh that doesnt have a b####y traffic diversion, traffic cone, utilities digging it up, council digging it up, TIE digging it up. If anyone knows of one please keep it to yourself as it is a rareity.
10

Buttress,

24/09/2008 15:40:59
I don't work at all in the paid sense. So those who make those sort of silly accusation just make me chuckle.

Sad day but unsurprising. Two fingers at UNESCO then J Dawe?

You've altered your tune. But then you are a politician, two faced seems to go with the territory.

It's a cr*p development passed by a cr*p council. Far too full of the intellectually challenged schmoozed by developers. And the worst of it is, the Planning Convenor Lowrie sits on the Board of Directors of EWH and then votes this through.

He should resign.

www.eh8.org.uk

Read the blog today.

11

Buttress,

24/09/2008 15:42:42
"The final decision rested with Ministers because of the level of opposition and the fact that the council has a financial interest because it owns the archways in Market Street."

Alongside common good land and the Canongate Venture - listed Grade C.

12

Buttress,

24/09/2008 15:47:00
However - will Mountgrange be able to find the cash?

I heard rumours...
13

,

24/09/2008 15:48:25
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
14

Buttress,

24/09/2008 15:52:32
That's the second post today from Peter suggesting violent action is acceptable against people who show him up for the fool he is.

15

Rap,

24/09/2008 15:52:56
Oh my, so I get splattered by a V2 and Stonehenge all in one day? You are in a bad mood - PMT?

I have lived in a "working city/town" that was all but wiped out in the war. It is now an ugly vile place to live, with no local pride. The way a city looks has a very significant impact on a city's population and trying to retain those cities which have something to contribute to British history and culture is no bad thing. Imagine flattening Bath's Regency terrace just to build a couple of hotels?

Try debating the issue instead of making personal attacks, eh?
16

Buttress,

24/09/2008 15:54:26
Peter thinks he's amusing. He's not, and nor is he well-informed, but it keeps him from wider mishchief posting here I suppose.

A nasty turn of mind though, don't you feel?
17

Buttress,

24/09/2008 15:55:21
But isn't Mountgrange going to struggle to find the cash for this piece of rubbish?
18

Buttress,

24/09/2008 16:00:51
Read this on the

www.eh8.org.uk

site just now - so maybe there is truth in the rumour:

"Breaking News
3pm Weds 24th Sept 08
It has just been bought to the republic`s attention that Caltongate Developer Mountgrange are rumoured to be pulling out of Caltongate.
Instead it is being suggested that they are to demolish the listed buildings and homes, and sell on the cleared site with the planning consents......"


19

Rap,

24/09/2008 16:05:35
Yes, some very nasty bones in his body. So glad guns are not easily available in this country.

Well, the credit crunch is one thing to hold on to. I'm hoping offices and hotels aren't looking such a big attraction right now, particularly with HBOS moving into a single office in Fountainbridge, leaving lots of empty offices behind.
20

Rap,

24/09/2008 16:07:57
Oooh, really? A vague rumour or some reliable info? And if no-one else buys it it will still be empty.
21

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 24/09/2008 16:08:48
Looks like Buttress and Rap are bad losers and are finding it hard to swallow their pride and are having to lick their wounds.

Buttress, I certainly wouldn't put a lot of trust into reports on the EH8 site.
22

Buttress,

24/09/2008 16:11:48
I haven't lost anything Peewee - the City of Edinburgh has. And lessons will have to be learned.


I have heard from other sources things about Mountgrange.


I have found a great deal on the eh8 site to be pretty reliable in the end, actually.





23

Rap,

24/09/2008 16:14:24
Peter, Edinburgh has lost, not us. And that includes you, whether you realise it or not.
24

Buttress,

24/09/2008 16:16:22
We are in the biggest recession we have known in years. I suspect Mountgrange has pulled the wool over the eyes of the council, I gather that agreements are far from favourable for the city and its coffers, it has fooled the idiots in charge into believing that flogging off land and buildings way outside the original site is vital, and then when those are flattened... whoops, it has a large land bank to flog on in future.

Sad but it was always thus. The really talented tend not to work for councils, and the councillors with brains tend to speak into the wilderness.


25

Buttress,

24/09/2008 16:24:18
I doubt Peter gets out much in reality, so maybe it won't worry him. Not a great thinker I feel. From much of what he posts on this site, I think he plays indoors with his telescope, if he can get it erect these days of course.


Ministers are handing this back as it's a can of worms, a mess CEC has got itself and the city into, and certain failed politicians have a great deal to answer for.

Another conference centre, yet more offices, a hotel, a load of flats of no architectural interest at all, which few local families could afford, and a bleak square in which to sit and drink Starbucks in the rain. Great eh? Oh I forgot about the 'arts quarter' in the arches. Yeah, really exciting. More tartan tat shops I fear!


26

Howard Moon,

24/09/2008 16:25:21
Of course, it's easy to be critical but harder to propose a better alternative.

Do you think it's time to reconsider Bern Balfe's proposals? Buttress, any thoughts?
27

Ecco Warrier,

Embra 24/09/2008 16:26:00
3 in a row from Buttress. Is it a record or a clone.
I think Buttress is a major contributor to EH8.
Hope to god Mountgrange have the cash, no one I hope would prefer a gap site for years.
28

Buttress,

24/09/2008 16:31:41
Why not ask those who were involved with those proposals? I have no doubt you could contact them.

I think you only found out about them today.

http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/internet/attachments/internet/environment/planning_and_buildings/planning/development_frameworks/caltongate%20masterplan/Planning_Workshop_Report.pdf

It's still called the Canongate, by the way.

However, it's all rather late now, isn't it?

Mountgrange couldn't even get the names right of those organisations whom it wanted to plant this crass cesspit of a development on. Do you think it will give up now? It went through the process of a sham consultation (read the recommendations at the end) and bulldozed its way through the planning system.

But the Chamber of Commerce is on the Side of Mountgrange, and supported it all the way. That's of course as it holds the C of C proprty portfolio.

It's not called corruption, just it's not very palatable is it?


29

Rap,

24/09/2008 16:33:45
Howard, no-one would ever claim that good civic design is easy. It's just that the CEC Planning section seem a little too keen to grab the first thing on offer.

For Tiger Towers they finally realised the previous plans that approved a couple of years ago was actually bad design, and were so happy they had a way out that they grasped desperately at Murphy's plan. And that hindsight happened in a pretty small time period, not over several decades.
30

Buttress,

24/09/2008 16:34:42
27 - not a great intellect then? Wrong. Amusing though.

Actually, Mountgrange has to landscape the site if the work doesn't go ahead.

31

Buttress,

24/09/2008 16:52:48
The really great scandal, however, is the failure of the government to call a public inquiry. Anywhere south of the border (where, laughably, Chande of Mountgrange serves as a Commissioner for English Heritage!!!) where something is as major as this and which goes against so much national planning p[olicy, would be decided at a public inquiry.

What is the purpose of legislation, if it is not used?

Democracy? Salmond - don't make us laugh. Instead, Embra is becoming a laughing stock as far as planning is concerned.

32

Howard Moon,

24/09/2008 16:53:18
#28

Not sure I follow. You answer my question about the merits of a proposal by saying I should speak to the people who made the proposal (why?), and suggesting you know when I found out about the proposal (what?) then quote back to me a report I linked to in a post yesterday, then start up with the ranting and paranoia.

#29, I agree with you entirely. That's why I named one of the few alternative proposals I am aware of, to see whether that was considered preferable to the most vociferous critics of this plan.
33

Buttress,

24/09/2008 17:01:21
32 Howard Moon - then maybe (she suggests gently) you haven't the intellect to understand, as those proposals have not been followed up it's pointless now speculating, although if you feel you are in a position to bring those plans forward again I suggest you discuss with the 'architect' of the proposals. If you knew of them earlier, it's the first time you have raised that issue.

But I note the silly comments about me again. As nasty a mind as your alter egos Septic Tank and Peewee, eh? ;-)





34

Buttress,

24/09/2008 18:07:57
Those with a genuine interest in history, architecture, World Heritage and Scotland may wish to attend some of thes, one of which is about Edinburgh's WHS:

http://blog.icomos-uk.org/2008/09/24/scottish-world-heritage-sites-in-the-wider-european-context/

35

Buttress,

24/09/2008 21:01:45
The rumours that Mountgrange is pulling out are, however, firming up.

36

Think Tank,

26/09/2008 20:13:52
Read and learn Buttress:

http://www.edinburgharchitecture.co.uk/edinburgh_world_heritage_status.htm

http://www.edinburgharchitecture.co.uk/unesco_world_heritage_site.htm

37

Buttress,

27/09/2008 00:18:34
Ah - Septic - I have read. Ages ago. Do keep up! Who is Paul Tanner anyhow? It's just ranting.

All a bit futile and pointless really. So much not quite accurate either, and way, way out of date and touch. In fact, the stuff by Dunlop which appeared last year in the AJ, is so off beam it's caused a great deal of amusement in many places.

World heritage is bigger than Adrian Welch and his little website.

38

Buttress,

27/09/2008 00:41:39
But what's your purpose Septic? You've been a nasty running sore on this site for a long time, taking umbrage at various people and clearly becoming obsessive. You're so ill-informed on so much, yet never seem to realise when you are being lead along by the nose to expose your lack of in-depth knowledge.

Now - back to the story.

Mountgrange - credit crunch - ouch?

Have you booked for the Allan Murray themed tour yet?

http://www.independentrepublicofthecanongate.blogspot.com/



39

,

28/09/2008 13:23:56
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
40

Buttress,

28/09/2008 15:22:18
Well, if that's the way you read it so be it.

No argument to lose - it's true.

Much of it out of date and in places wildly inaccurate. Laughable. So what? Who cares? I think UNESCO is bigger than some silly person of whom I have never heard with an axe to grind.

But I'm not interested in 'debating' with you as it's a waste of time as you are such a one-trick pony, a with aansty mind, who has no in-depth information. You simply have a strange obsession with me. I seem to cause you such a lot of consternation.

If you want to talk to SOOT, the contact details are on its website. I'm very much impressed by SOOT, but I'm not a member.

www.eh8.org.uk

As for the rest - as usual your 'knowledge' of the law is risible. Have you read the release? Probably not.



41

Buttress,

28/09/2008 15:49:52
However - I have heard strong rumours about Mountgrange from a variety of sources also.

I do hope that the rumour they haven't the finances to build their appalling scheme is true, I also hope the rumour they will wait until the council has handed over, at a song, buildings and land before pulling out and selling on cleared land with planning permission, isn't true.



42

,

25/10/2008 18:19:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
43

bluehead,

edinburgh 16/11/2008 11:25:33
so now Edinburgh is to be destroyed even more than it has been done already,what a dreadful mess this city has become,it has changed from being a lovely atmospheric city into vast concrete shanty town,
what a dump it has become.
44

Think Tank,

28/11/2008 19:23:19
Ah, another Buttress assassin's red line for my previous post #42.

Far be it from me to speculate, but it's now 2 months on from SOOT's "press release" to the nation of their "strong rumours" that Mountgrange were about to pull out.

Care to enlighten us on the accuracy of the SOOT release Buttress?



 

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
 
  

 
 

More Edinburgh planning issues

More Edinburgh planning issues >>

Today's Vote

Is a Government watchdog right to criticise the planned new hotel on Princes Street?
Yes, it’s totally out of keeping with the setting
No, we need some fresh ideas in the city centre
It’s no worse than a lot of the buildings there already

Web Links:

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.