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 The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

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

Sign In
Register

Capital to retain heritage status



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: 17 November 2008
By Jane Bradley
EDINBURGH'S status as a World Heritage site looks to be safe, after Unesco inspectors revealed that controversial developments were unlikely to put the city's position in jeopardy.
A group of inspectors paid a three-day visit to the capital last week after receiving hundreds of letters from groups protesting about four construction sites.

But inspector Dr Mechtild Rossler, European chief of cultural World Heritage sites, sa
id that the developments, which include the demolition of the C-listed former Canongate School and part of the Old Sailors Ark building as part of the Caltongate project in the Old Town, were exceptions and would not threaten the city's World Heritage title.

Although her official report will not be issued until next year, Dr Rossler said at the end of her visit to Edinburgh: "We are unhappy about demolition wherever it happens, and we said very clearly that listed buildings shouldn't be demolished, and when it can be proved they have not a very high value, this should be the exception.

"These are C-listed buildings and there are examples by the same architects and of the same period close by. I don't believe the World Heritage committee likes the idea, but it's a very unusual situation."

Edinburgh Council planning leader Jim Lowrie said: "I am delighted that the Unesco team have seen for themselves just how much we value our heritage and how much emphasis we put on striking the right balance."





The full article contains 245 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/11/2008 08:31:47
Funny that. Just exactly what most people with half a clue have been saying ever since the desperate anti-development folk started spreading the false rumours about "risking" WHS. There was no risk to Edinburgh's status from the current or recent developments, and I hope those involved in whipping up this unnecessary bit of nonsense will crawl back under their rocks now.
2

Buttress,

17/11/2008 09:48:29
I hope you crawl back under the stone you came from.
Let's recall that Historic Scotland invited UNESCO here as it had concerns about the developments and possible risk. UNESCO is certainly unhappy about what is happening, but it's all too late in the day now that permisson has been given. This is a rehash of a rehash of another report following the press call on Saturday and have you considered that it might not actually have been waht was said?

UNESCO has criticisms of various schemes, and has sid it hopes to work with the council to resolve them. That's how UNESCO operates.

Let's also remember that those being critical include Edinburgh World Heritage. Its sound professional objections were ignored by Mountgrange, UNESCO has been critical of Mountgrange and its failure to properly consult.

Caltongate is a poor commercail scheme, developer driven. Had conservation been at the heart of it at the outset it could all have been so much better.


3

Rap,

17/11/2008 10:08:52
Duncan, Duncan, Duncan,
Why must you persist with half-truths?

This is not about anti-development vs development, it's about good, necessary development vs economic greed regardless of the long term impacts. Ok? Do we really need to go over this old territory yet again?
4

Buttress,

17/11/2008 10:17:24
" 'I would very much like to acknowledge the passion and immense efforts local communities and stakeholders put in to provide information to the commission team,' Rossler added. 'I think they care very much about the World Heritage status which has immense impact on the economy.' "

5

Buttress,

17/11/2008 10:20:08
Rap - it's because Duncan is only here for the argument.


http://www.davidpbrown.co.uk/jokes/monty-python-arguement.html
6

Old Town Resident,

edinburgh 17/11/2008 10:23:59
Another piece of balanced reporting. This reporter rang Save Our Old Town for comment, no sign...why is that Jane?
7

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/11/2008 10:37:21
#3 Where did I say it was about anti-development vs development? And you accuse me of half truths!

I said that the hysteria whipped up about Edinburgh potentially losing its WH status was nonsense. And it was. There was no risk whatsoever of losing WHS over the minor impacts from Caltongate or the other schemes mentioned.

The fear of this was whipped up by people who have lost the argument and were looking to open up a new front. There is nothing substantially wrong with Caltongate, or the new hotel at Haymarket. Let's just hope that the unnecessary delays caused by interfering "heritage" junkies haven't put the kybosh on these important developments.
8

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 17/11/2008 10:53:59
It had better be a comprehensive and inclusive report since it won't be published for about another year.

I wonder if it will offer solutions or just list a litany of problems with no viable ways to remedy the ills that have befallen Edinburgh and its ageing buildings and the greedy progress of land developments and their greedier owners.
9

Rap,

17/11/2008 11:12:25
Duncane,
"Just exactly what most people with half a clue have been saying ever since the desperate anti-development folk started spreading the false rumours about "risking" WHS"

And you think the Scottish government are wrong to call in Haymarket do you? Because you think it's okay, they must be wrong? My, must be very reassuring to be right about everything and not have all those politicians and their advisors listening to you.



10

Buttress,

17/11/2008 11:33:15
The whipping up was done by the press, with little understanding of the role of UNESCO or why it was here, not by those with concerns about developments. It's pretty clear that Duncan has little idea of what happened which brought UNESCO on its visit, the trail of events, the report to the World Heritage Committee by ICOMOS. But he just likes stirring it Rap - he really isn't very well informed.

UNESCO will be reporting initially in January. Naturally it will be working with all authorities concerned (including the UK government which is the State Party) to see how concerns can either be dealt with, or for lessons to be learned in the future.






11

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/11/2008 11:39:46
#9 I think the current Scottish Government are wrong about a whole lot of things. Apparently you find the fact that I hold opinions difficult to accept. Poor you.

I think the planning system generally works best if central government don't poke their noses in, though I accept that on occasion they are needed to rein in silly decisions. I think that Edinburgh planning do a good job, and that the people who nit-pick and raise silly, petty and overblown concerns at every turn do their own cause a great deal of harm.

What would the Caltongate opposition do if someone came along who actually did want to do serious harm to the streetscape? How would they raise their rhetoric beyond the hysterical level it is currently at to signify a genuine problem? Every time people raise this sort of objection to a perfectly reasonable scheme they actually erode the opportunities for genuine issues to receive a genuine hearing.
12

fresian,

edinburgh 17/11/2008 11:41:44
All it means is thet a few broon enveloped were passed. nothing more.
13

,

17/11/2008 11:42:40
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
14

Buttress,

17/11/2008 11:47:09
13 Yawn Duncan. So ill-informed.

Try to write with a little less hyperbole.
15

Rap,

17/11/2008 11:48:14
Duncan,
It's called democracy. It's difficult enough for the person on the street to find out what's going on, and get involved (you don't trip over the planning portal by mistake) as it is. But they have a right to object you know, by law. And it's not rhetoric, they have used every channel available to them, legally available to them. You might want to consider the media's rhetoric about the situation.

And you might want to consider what the average person on the street faces in the way of trying to object to such big developments. Hardly a fair fight. And yet you like the fact it's not a balanced fight? Well, let's hope you never have to fight anything like this, wouldn't want you getting all upset as well, would we?
16

Buttress,

17/11/2008 11:53:02
By the way - Edinburgh World Heritage was a main objector to the Caltongate scheme.

That's the body which is sponsored by Historic Scotland and the Council.

UNESCO has already expressd surprise that objections were not properly listened to. Shame that professional advice on this was ignored, a far, far better development could have ensued. There are developers and architects who can work in historic plces, with sensitivity, stitching the new in with the old, shame that Mountgrange isn't one of them.

The only one who seems to be hysterical is Duncan. Stop screeching, do.



17

Buttress,

17/11/2008 11:54:05
EWH has objected to the Haymarket Tower too.
18

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/11/2008 11:59:00
#16 There are indeed developers and architects who can work in historic places, with sensitivity, stitching the new in with the old. And you, Buttress, have criticised every single one of them with your usual aloof dogma. You are your own worst enemy. You and your ilk have cried wolf so many times that when a seriously flawed application does come in, you will have no further hyperbole to draw upon.

The buildings being lost in the Caltongate scheme are simply not worth all the wailing and gnashing of teeth. God help you if anyone ever actually wants to demolish a decent building. Of course, since we have a perfectly rational and logical planning department in Edinburgh Council, it wouldn't happen anyway.
19

Buttress,

17/11/2008 12:05:24
Utter over inflated and inaccurate rubbish Duncan, and you have not a clue about who I am and what I have and have not done, you do stop the hyperbolic rubbish.

I'm on the side of EWH. I think they know what they are about.

Glad to see them sticking up for the listing system and conservation areas. No listed buildings needed to have been lost if there was a better developer involved.

There are architects beyond Edinburgh, you know.

20

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/11/2008 12:13:26
So you're saying that none of Edinburgh's conservation architects are any good are you? Honestly, you make no sense. But I'm sure Jimmy Simpson is quaking at your dismissal of some of the most celebrated conservation architecture in the world. You're right, I have no clue who you are, and you have no clue who I am, but I know what you've said, over and over and over again, and it is dogmatic, blinkered demagoguery which will never effect any of the change you are looking for because it delights only in finding fault, never in embracing success.
21

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 17/11/2008 12:19:37
13 Duncan in Edinburgh

I heartily agree with your sentiment and it seems that she thinks we are ALL fools unless we agree with her.

She must have a job in town planning or an avocation involving such.

But her constant insults and putdowns to any and all are offputting and ultimately self-defeating because it make her appear almost bitter and disillusioned with - well, who knows what?
22

Buttress,

17/11/2008 12:24:05
Of course. Conservation architects - Simpson and Brown - world class. JS is currently in Calcutta spreading the conservation message.

EWH employs an excellent conservation architect also. But none of the conservation architects in Edinburgh have been employed for Caltongate.

Last time I talked to JS he was dreadfully sad about the proposed demolition of the Venture. He thinks it a fine building. But what can he know, eh, Duncan? ;-)


23

Buttress,

17/11/2008 12:25:24
Tim not in Ottowa - it's up to you how you spend your time of course, but I think you are really wasting bandwidth and making yourself sound daft. Give over there's a good lad.
24

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 17/11/2008 12:59:48
23 Buttress

It is spelled "Ottawa" and not "Ottowa" and quite a beautiful city and a renowned tourist destination and very adjacent to the international and sophisticated French-Canadian city of Montreal.

Ah, the food and the nightlife there!

The only one who is sounding "daft" is you because of your persistent nitpicking to everybody you disagree with and your flagrant "arrogance" as delineated by Duncan in Edinburgh.

Surely everybody is not your intellectual inferior - or maybe you fantasise that.
25

Buttress,

17/11/2008 13:11:05
I'm not feeding you Tim in Granton. Or Leith. Or wherever.
26

Rap,

17/11/2008 13:14:53
Tim, I don't think you can be very adjacent to anything, you either are or you aren't.
How would feel about a 17 storey hotel in the centre of old Quebec? Still be so supportive of knocking down buildings in a WHS, or would you still be sniping at buttress instead?
27

Buttress,

17/11/2008 13:37:16
Well, if you could have read some of the obscenities he posted over the weekend aimed at me he's clearly got a mind which doesn't soar very far, so I suspect 17 storeys is way too high for his mind to contemplate.

Possibly he could tell us more about the buildings in Ottawa he admires?


28

Rap,

17/11/2008 13:39:57
Well the tallest building is lower than Tiger towers would be, so no new soaring skyscrapers then :-

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=placedevilleiitowerc-ottawa-canada
29

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/11/2008 13:45:31
#26 That would be a fair question if anyone were suggesting building a 17-storey hotel in the centre of either the old or new towns. But they aren't, are they. They are proposing building one in Haymarket, outside the WHS, in an undistinguished area, which many feel will be uplifted by a new building of this quality.

It really makes me laugh when people talk about preservation in Haymarket. Have they ever even driven past it?
30

Buttress,

17/11/2008 13:54:02
Buffer zone Duncan. WHS buffer zone. OUV's iconic skyline and all that.


Surely you must know these things?

Still, you can argue your views at the public inquiry.
31

Rap,

17/11/2008 13:54:29
Duncan, as well you know, if CEC had implemented the buffer zone around the WHS, as requested by UNESCO in 2006, then Tiger Towers would be right in it. Along with the a listed station, the real gateway to the city.
You can't have a perfect coiffured little city and hulking great skyscrapers round on the edge, because if it blocks key views in and out of the WHS then the WHS is devalued.

Oh laugh all you want about Haymarket, because people aren't talking about preserving Haymarket, they are talking about a building which is fitting of the surroundings.
32

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 17/11/2008 14:09:44
27 Buttress

Glad to oblige you about the buildings I admire in Canada's capital:

The restored Library of Parliament, Notre Dame Cathedral, The Supreme Court of Canada (that architect also designed deceased Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau's home in Montreal), The Bank of Canada Building, The Fairmount Chateau Laurier Hotel, the Anglican Church of St Alban the Martyr, the Polish Embassy, the French Embassy on the Ottawa River (it has a room completely panelled in Canadian Pine), the former Embassy of the USA on Wellington Street, the National Gallery of Canada, the Canadian Museum of Civilisation just across the river in Gatineau, Quebec, the Post Office Building on Sparks Street opened by George VI in 1939 just as the Supreme Court Building was opened by Queen Elizabeth (subsequently HM Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother) in 1939, Library and Archives Canada Building on Wellington Street, the East Block of the Parliament Buildings (currently being restored), the Centre Block and Peace Tower of the Parliament Buildings here, many of the heritage buildings on Sussex Drive, Rideau Hall (the home of our Governor-General)on Sussex Drive, the new War Museum, etc.

As you can see, most of the buildings are "heritage" so I am in accord with you in preserving the past and retaining the vistas that allow them to be viewed from a distance.

The NCC (National Capital Commission) here even has legislated about 20 vistas or approaches to certain historical buildings and sites that cannot be blocked by developments.

And to that poster about erecting a tall building in Quebec City - of course not. That city is also a World Heritage Site - the old part of the city, that is - and so is our Rideau Canal.
33

Buttress,

17/11/2008 14:12:51
By the way - what the mission actually said at the press call was that although the WHS status is safe (at least for now!) they wold not be happy with the demolition of listed buildings in a WHS.

If I was CEC I would take some note.

34

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/11/2008 14:17:01
#31 Ah yes, the famous buffer zone, and the one elevation render which could be constituted as impinging on the WHS skyline. I think it's a pretty weak argument. But the point I made was in response to your comment, and I quote, "How would feel about a 17 storey hotel in the centre of old Quebec?"

"In the centre of", you see. Was this mere hyperbole? Are you trying to prove my earlier point?
35

Buttress,

17/11/2008 14:20:18
Duncan has gone very quiet about the Venture...

I gather we will have Coun Lowrie spouting on TV news this evening. Hope he gets his facts right. The UNESCO mission wasn't here to take away WHS status.

But not happy about demolitions....

36

Buttress,

17/11/2008 14:22:03
I think Duncan you are now confusing the arguments. Calm down, and I think we've done the word hyperbole to death now.

37

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/11/2008 14:30:09
#35 Sorry dear lady, what was it you wanted to hear from me about the Canongate Venture building? That its brick construction makes it an anachronism in the area? That its design makes it unsuitable for repurposing? That no viable scheme for implementing the aims of the Masterplan could be implemented without its demolition? That you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs?
38

Buttress,

17/11/2008 14:36:49
Actually Duncan dear boy, it's built from stone. Only you and Peter seem not to know that.

It has already found a new purpose.

The masterplan needed rethinking. But then it wasn't a conservation based approach, was it?



39

Rap,

17/11/2008 14:51:52
Calm down duncan, I can imagine you hyperventilating now, flapping your lace hanky around.
Ok, you want preciseness, a 17 storey tower on the buffer of the Quebec WHS site. Answer still the same?

The 17 storey tiger Tower reaches the base of the Castle building, so same height as castle rock. That's weak? Well, good job UNESCO have more considerate thinking of what consituties impinging on the skyline then. And the Scottish Exec planners, which gave that as the reason for calling it in. But, yes, you are still correct, of course.

I'm told that France has produced an atlas of all of it's WHS sites, and buffer zones. Unlike the Froggies to be so organised, but they seem to take their culture more seriously than we do. We can't even get the CEC to put a buffer zone in place. Still, that's one of the benefits of having the UK sign up as a signatory but Scotland taking responsibility (or not) for following the guidelines. How convenient.
40

Ecco Warrier,

Embra 17/11/2008 14:56:39
37# Enough Duncan ,stop bating the Dogs of War.Enough hyperbole. Bring on the bulldozers.
41

Rap,

17/11/2008 15:01:26
I like to think of myself as a glossy Weimaraner. What about you Buttress?
42

Buttress,

17/11/2008 15:03:36
Well, in England the DCMS is still trailing behind, although it has belatedly been doing things like declaring conservation areas for WHS and consulting on other issues. The Heritage Proection Bill seems stalled though.

But it's all because it's been seen that there are actually no real policies with teeth in the UK to protect WHS. Edinburgh isn't the first city to have been seen to have problems. Maybe though HS is finding that it isn't just an accolade. It's expected that those who have signed the WH convention will actually look after the sites,and protect the OUV's.
43

Buttress,

17/11/2008 15:04:43
Me? Just a bit of a mongrel! With sharp teeth... possibly part terrier.

44

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/11/2008 15:51:23
#38 It's built from red sandstone brick, making it stand out like a sore thumb. It's not an unpleasant building, neither is it in any way outstanding, and its utilitarian school design is very difficult to repurpose. It is, in fact, a typical example of the sort of building that gets preserved by heritage bodies and then run down through lack of usability, making it into a sinkhole for grant funding which is paid out by the HLF or the taxpayer.

Sometimes its better to start afresh. When they built it a hundred or so years ago it was just because they needed a primary school. Now we don't. Let it go.
45

Buttress,

17/11/2008 15:56:05
Its actually grey stone with red dressings. Sigh.


It was of course not at all run down and being re-used successfully as the Canongate Venture until the occupants evicted to flog on the site.

Plenty of school buildimgs around the UK have found new uses. Not all needed HLF.
46

Buttress,

17/11/2008 16:03:13
Pictures:

http://www.eh8.org.uk/what_will_be_lost
47

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 17/11/2008 16:44:34
#27 Buttress

You ungrateful wretch! :o) (JOKE ONLY!, JOKE ONLY!)

I go to all the trouble to list the buildings I admire as YOU requested and you have not even acknowledged my posting at #32.

If you go to "OTTAWA" at WIKIPEDIA they have an updated and quite comprehensive and accurate history and demographic of Canada's capital.

The entry also has some "IMAGES OF OTTAWA" that include many of the historic buildings - and others - that I have cited.

I hope you find time to reap the fruits of my labours.
48

Buttress,

17/11/2008 16:52:36
Thank you Tim. Apologies and thank you for your trouble, but I have been rather busy this afternoon.

When I get a chance this evening I will enjoy looking at the sites you mention. I have no doubt that this will be interesting.

In return I offer you a UK - Ottawa architecture connection:

http://property.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/property/article617191.ece





49

Buttress,

17/11/2008 19:23:47
News tonight:

http://www.stv.tv/news/Council_claims_Edinburgh_heritage_statu_081117181255971
50

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 17/11/2008 19:35:53
#48 Buttress

Thanks for your prompt reply to my posting.

I sincerely apologise for all the postings I posted with reference to you.

I was going through a bad patch - three women I know were diagnosed with breast cancer, my sister had double knee replacement, my Black Labrador Retriever needed emergency and VERY expensive treatment, the weather turned cold and bitter and wet, etc., etc., ad tedium.

I realise this is no excuse but could we PLEASE agree to disagree POLITELY and without rancour on my part?

I know I can be a PROPER! BITCH! at times but I do read your postings and they are sometimes so full of informed information that I have to read them twice and cross-reference your references.

Like you, I do not suffer fools gladly and, speaking for myself, I am no fool.

Pax vobiscum and I WILL get to your citation because I am currently entertaining a close friend with Stolichnya Vodka and orange juice.

I presume to detect that your job or specialty or avocation has to do with city planning, architecture, or archaeology.

I know it is a bit early here to start "entertaining" - around 2:30 p.m. Eastern Canada - but who knows what the outcome will be.

Hope does spring eternal.

By the way, I prepared some dynamite hors d'oeuvres based on duck and Canada Goose (it is hunting season here) and they lessen the impact of the booze somewhat. DAMN!

My training at the Cordon Bleu School here (just five blocks away) really pays off at times. I can whip up a souflee in no time flat and it WILL NOT fall.

Alas,I have babbled on long enough - BLAME THE VODKA!

 

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.