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 Scotland On Sunday site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

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

Sign In
Register

Capital's world heritage status safe as Unesco gives the nod to demolitions



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: 16 November 2008
By Fiona Gray
THE threat of losing one of Scotland's five world heritage sites was averted last night after Unesco delegates announced the capital's status was safe.
Inspectors visited Edinburgh last week to investigate the planned demolition of two listed buildings. But the status of the Scottish capital was declared to be out of danger after Unesco said the demolition was an "exceptional" situation.

Dr Mecht
ild Rossler, European chief of cultural world heritage sites, said she was satisfied with the controversial plan to demolish two C-listed buildings in a £300m development near the Royal Mile. Although she will not issue a report until next June, Rossler believed she "could not say this case damages the world heritage value", though she added the developers, Mountgrange, had ignored people's concerns about the project.

The Old and New Towns of Edinburgh, prime examples of medieval and Georgian architecture, were added to Scotland's world heritage sites in 1995. The other sites are the heart of neolithic Orkney, the 18th-century cotton mill in New Lanark, St Kilda, and the Antonine Wall, the most northerly rampart of the Roman empire between the Firth of Forth and the Clyde.

Rossler and Professor Manfred Wehdorn were sent to Edinburgh after the Royal Heritage Committee received reports that developers had been given permission to demolish the former Canongate School and part of the Old Sailors Ark building, both in Canongate, without their consent.

"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," said Rossler.

"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."

A spokeswoman for Save Our Old Town, a group fighting the Caltongate development, said the group had sent Unesco 400 letters. She did not believe the delegates could allow listed buildings to be demolished.

But an Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce spokesman said: "We can't just keep history for its own sake, it's got to be of value to the people. These buildings will be replaced by much better facilities."





The full article contains 389 words and appears in Scotland On Sunday newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 15 November 2008 7:10 PM
  • Source: Scotland On Sunday
  • Location: Scotland
  • Related Topics: Edinburgh planning issues
 
1

Buttress,

16/11/2008 00:14:32
http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.2468286.0.the_end_of_heritage.php
2

Buttress,

16/11/2008 00:29:33
It isn't an exceptional situation - it's just it was all carefully manipulated by Mountgrange and its pals.

Too late to do much about the demolitions now, once Historic Scotland paid eleven grand in May this year to a commercial outfit to say it's all OK. he who pays the piper...

It's not.

www.eh8.org.uk

The Chamber of Commerce of course would say that, being hand in glove with Mountgrange the developers. Caltongate is going to be the St James' Centre of this century. Just think what your developer chums could do if they demolished that old castle! A giant Tesco possibly?

These people are not worth listening to.

The listed buildings to be demolished include the handsome Canongate Venture, a former school, a substantial building of architectural interest and social history interest.

I think UNESCO knows it's not right; it may be immoral but not unlawful.

I'm glad the farce of a consultation was recognised.

I wouldn't crow too loudly Jim Lowrie and the rest of the clowncillors who voted for this; you have been held up and found wanting. You may think heritage groups and you are all pals really, but there is a growing chasm and you really need to do something about it.

And UNESCO came to look at Caltongate, Leith, St James' Centre and the Haymarket tower too. No mention of those?

Sunday Herlad article interesting.



3

Buttress,

16/11/2008 00:32:12
No idea who the 'Royal Heritage Committee' is though.

Plesae can someone get rid of the Chamber of Commerce's Ron Hewitt and Graham Birse before their developer chums damage this city any more?

4

Buttress,

16/11/2008 00:39:26
Yes folks - Historic Scotland paid Drivers Jonas a large sum of our cash to back up the decision it had already made about the Venture. The report is pretty risible but... he who pays the piper etc. Well, it says we need more hotels and conference centres so that's OK!

It is rumoured that Malcolm Cooper of Historic Scotland and Manesh Chande of Mountgrange are friends.

So where will it end? The council has been prepared to flog off to a commercial developer listed buildings to be demolished for a crass commercial scheme of little architectural merit.

The thin end of the wedge.






5

Douglas,

Bathgate 16/11/2008 00:42:08
I wonder what the going rate for an "exception" is.
6

Buttress,

16/11/2008 00:55:57
Well, I don't blame UNESCO, I put the blame very, very firmly on Historic Scotland and the council.

There's a paper trail which 'proves' it's all above board, but then what's the point of listed buildings and conservation areas if you then allow commercial developers to cynically destroy them? UNESCO's ears have been very bent by HS this week, and there is a report by HS has backed it all up. Well it would wouldn't it? Make a duff decison and then cover your *rse.

Lets recall the councillors no longer in office who pushed this with chums Mountgrange.

UNESCO really has its hands tied. Glad it has recognised the failures regarding consultation.

It's none of it good and a few heads should roll.

But the Chamber of Commerce is now I think being seen for what it is.
7

Buttress,

16/11/2008 01:02:50
Let's name and shame too the hotel chain - Sofitel.

Boycott them folks. Destroyers of heritage.

8

Buttress,

16/11/2008 01:13:02
And also - the protection of listed buildings in Scotland is far less effective than in England. Planning policies are not as robust.

Why is this?

9

Buttress,

16/11/2008 01:19:46
"'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.' "

Quite. More so than the Chamber of Commerce and the council.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/nov/16/scotland-heritage

10

Howard Moon,

16/11/2008 02:37:43
The Sunday Herald article is fairly interesting, Buttress, I agree.

Why didn't they speak to you though? Oh, that's right...

400 letters. You don't even represent 400 people. A bizarre obsession. Even your last hope, the UNESCO 2, didn't buy it.

I can imagine them being driven through the chaos that is pre-tram Edinburgh, amazed at the state this city has got itself into. And then even more so, as they are shown the miserable, historically insignificant buildings which are to be cleared to make way for Caltongate:

"Is that it?"
11

Draco Was a Wimp,

Edinburgh 16/11/2008 08:38:07
Am I living in a different Edinburgh? What's been lost? A scabby old hostel, an even scabbier old bus depot and a school you could see duplicated around town,like Royal Mile primary just a few 100 yards away. Some of the 1950s and 60s monstrosities at the botom of the Canongate should also be culled. The internationally sigificant Jenny Ha's pub building for example. No wonder the Weegies slag us off. Sometimes this town's preserved in aspic, and not for the better.
12

FTH22inarow,

16/11/2008 09:48:30
11 and the parliament building fits nicely into its surroundings as well, disgraceful
13

eric,

16/11/2008 09:54:56
The floodgates are open.im an edinburgh person,GET ME OUT OF HERE.
14

Old Town Resident,

edinburgh 16/11/2008 10:01:46
"A spokeswoman for Save Our Old Town, a group fighting the Caltongate development, said the group had sent Unesco 400 letters. She did not believe the delegates could allow listed buildings to be demolished."

Well the actual facts are UNESCO did receive over 400 letters but this spokesperson did not say they were sent by the group, and they said they did not believe that the UNESCO delegates would be saying much more than they had enjoyed their visit and would be reporting on their findings early next year. This has been council spin helped along by lazy journalists.


15

H Callahan,

16/11/2008 10:18:41
so much attention on altering these C-listed tenements on the Canongate, but what about the entire street of B-listed Victorian terraced houses on Chalmers St knocked down to suit Quartermile?
16

daveserviceman,

edinburgh 16/11/2008 10:24:58
its high time some people on here moved out of the 16th century and into the 21st I think all old buildings should be demolished for more efficiant ones
that cost less to run old grey building reflect the people dowdy amd miserable I would like holyrood palace to be demolished and the castle, heres to the 21st century and my economical and efficient buildings
17

Old Town Resident,

edinburgh 16/11/2008 10:29:55
#15 Yes that was awful, and what can be done? Listing is as useful as a chocolate teapot it seems. We live and have always done with folk with the money and power calling the shots. We can all do our bit but strength in numbers, and giving one another support as divide and rule is what they like. No part of town is more important than others, we all live and get about relying on the other parts as well as our own.
But views like mine are ridiculed as they are not coming from a business person`s mouth. None of us at the end of the day matter unless we are helping those rich get richer. There is no balance.
18

bluehead,

edinburgh 16/11/2008 11:20:08
was this the scottish people once again having to get permission from foreigners before do what they want in their own country?
Jings!!..Micty Me!!.Wid yi beleive it!!!?
Per auld Scotland's goan doon thi drain like the rest of this miserable country
19

Buttress,

16/11/2008 11:29:49
I agree re the spin. I also know how UNESCO works - quietly and with diplomacy. It's had many people giving them views this week, some formally, some informally. It will be interesting to see now what it comes up with in its reports on Bath and Edinburgh.

It will also be interesting to see how the credit crunch will affect all this.

17 One thing which has come out of this - once the stone was lifted it was interesting to see who and what crawled out. (Some of the slugs are apparent here...) I think many people are now rather more politicised, and a darned sight wiser.

In the Guardian/Observer article there is quoted criticism of the failure of Mountgrange to properly consult. That failure was right across the board. Its consultation exercises were carefully stage managed farces, and of some thirty thosuand questionnares sent out (all carefully worded) it got a few hundred replies ... many NOT in favour - so 400 letters sent to UNESCO is pretty good really. It also failed to heed the body who is officially there to look after Edinburgh's World Heritage Site.

That was a rather foolish mistake I feel.

In fact, A, B or C listed - and conservation areas - the point is these should all have been protected, and the inadequacies of Scotland's heritage protection system has been exposed. What to do? Work on that.

(Howard Moon just doesn't get it does he? ;-) Never mind. All quite amusing!)




20

Buttress,

16/11/2008 11:30:43
18 - do some research about World Heritage and UNESCO, before making daft posts.
21

Buttress,

16/11/2008 11:43:02


"At the end of a four-day visit, Unesco officials said that while they had reservations about some details relating to various aspects of the projects, they were overall very happy with Edinburgh's passion and commitment to heritage conservation.

Edinburgh was awarded World Heritage Site status in 1995 because of the unique contrast and quality of architecture between the medieval Old Town and the Georgian New Town. However, an inquiry into the city's status was launched this summer following concerns over the demolition of listed buildings and changes to the skyline and historical architecture of key areas.

Dr Mechthild Rossler of the Unesco World Heritage Centre, and Professor Manfred Wehdorn of the International Council on Monuments and Sites, studied the state of conservation within the city, plans for each of the proposed projects and their potential impact.

The developments include the £300m Caltongate project, which will see two listed buildings demolished to make way for a five-star hotel on the site of the old bus garage and gasworks; the Haymarket Tiger Development, which involves the construction of two hotels, offices and retail space on land derelict for 40 years; replacement of the St James Shopping Centre with a new retail arcade, two hotels, 250 flats and a new multi-storey car park; and the redevelopment of Leith Docks, which, although outside the World Heritage Site, could affect the Edinburgh skyline.

'The World Heritage Committee was concerned that the Caltongate development was approved prior to the committee looking at it more closely. That's why the mission was ordered,' Rossler said.

'I think we got a really good insight into the issues connected with the development projects we looked at. We also looked at the overall state of conservation which is absolutely fine. On behalf of Professor Wehdorn and myself, I can assure you that Edinburgh is not in danger of losing World Heritage status.'

The inspectors will present pre
22

Buttress,

16/11/2008 11:45:11


The inspectors will present preliminary findings to the Edinburgh authorities for comments in the new year before making a final report to the World Heritage Committee at its meeting in Seville next July. Rossler said that while there were some concerns surrounding each development she was certain that compromises could be found.

The city council has said it is fully aware of the need to balance redevelopment with efforts to complement and conserve existing historic buildings in the city.

'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.'


Adam Wilkinson, director of Edinburgh World Heritage, which invests more than £1m a year on projects throughout the city, said: 'World Heritage status reflects the intense pride of generations of Edinburgh residents as well as values we share with other World Heritage Sites across the globe - authentic and unique places that have had an impact on the development of all humanity.'


The objections by EWH to the demolitions and the Caltongate development are worth reading.

23

,

16/11/2008 11:51:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
24

Buttress,

16/11/2008 11:55:29
Really? Shows how little you know. I got off my behind about heritage issues many years ago.

No, I won't give it a rest, yes I care. And yes I do things sbout it.

So - hardly trolling is it? Unlike you? ;-)

UNESCO has been , it has seen and it has concerns. But it works not with a big stick.





25

Just another cyclist!,

16/11/2008 11:58:42
Believe it or not, I agree with what you say. It's just that the sheer volume of posts you make on these issues come across in the wrong way...you seem near demented. I'm not sure what good could come of it.
26

Buttress,

16/11/2008 12:04:26
It gets information across - you'd be surprised who reads it all with interest.

When you can't rely on the press in Edinburgh to report things with accuracy what else can be done?

27

H Callahan,

16/11/2008 12:21:09
no.17
I tried to make a small internal alteration to a B-listed building, but was knocked back. In the meantime B-listed Chalmers St is knocked down and Caltongate is given the go-ahead.

If you have millions you can do what you want, if not then forget it.

I think the Council's decisions on alterations to listed buildings are now so disproportionate and corrupt that they are worthless, so should be null and void.
28

Buttress,

16/11/2008 12:23:52
You might also like to read this today, some other people who got off their backsides to try to do something:

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


www.eh8.org.uk
29

Buttress,

16/11/2008 12:29:15
27 - the problem is (and I point out I wouldn't read all that's in the report above as being an accurate report of what UNESCO said) that in Scotland if you can claim that there is some wider financial gain to be had, like jobs, then it's an argument you can use to demolish.

So naturally the 'regeneration' benefits of Caltongate were puffed out of all proportion.

The fact is the listed buildings could and should have been re-used in any new development, but big business, aided by certain buddies on the council and the C of C, has had it rather all its own way.

There's stronger protection in England, not perfect, but better.



30

Buttress,

16/11/2008 13:37:14
Nice piece:

http://news.scotsman.com/opinion/Joyce-McMillan--Capital-gains.4697408.jp#3445001

31

Pilrig,

Livingston 16/11/2008 14:45:47
Caltongate with all the charm and character of, say, St James Centre.
Embra = pearls before swine.
32

,

16/11/2008 15:26:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
33

Buttress,

16/11/2008 15:53:26
Yes Pilrig, I agree, it's not exactly going to enhance the Old Town, is it? But I wonder now if yet another hotel, conference centre and a heap of flats will really be economically viable for the forseeable future?





34

lordmelville,

16/11/2008 18:14:38
Its not just the Calton area thats changing. What about the 2 "B" listed buildings shortly to disappear on the south side of St Andrews Square?
35

Buttress,

16/11/2008 18:53:21
Are those the ones 'facaded' in the past, so it's now argued that they aren't worth keeping?

Yes, it's all rather a mess in Edinburgh, and it carries on being so.
36

lordmelville,

16/11/2008 19:46:56
thats them but the 70's mess to the west of them aparrently is worthy of retention!
37

Buttress,

16/11/2008 20:28:47
This is the problem with facade schemes. It may seem a solution in the short term, in the long term it gives an excuse to demolish the rest of the building.

Expect more of this in future...

Eventually so much of Edinburgh will have vanished all that will remain is the street patterns!

How long for Waverley Court (as it is now)?
38

lordmelville,

16/11/2008 21:18:50
Facade retention is not necessarily a bad thing.Look at the Old PO building - now Waverely Gate. The reality is that the driving force behind redevelopment is the opportunity to make money.Some facades through there floor to floor heights lend themselves to retention as they can accomodate the floor to ceiling heights that modern serviced developments require. Others unfortunatley do not. Unlike Edinburghs city centre there are a lot of othet towns and cities out there where all sorts of short life span materials are being used. How will they fair after even 30 years of scottish weather? The flip side of facade retention will evolve - facade replacement where other wise sound buildings will need to have the facades replaced most likely in the design style of the day and so the arguement will continue.
39

Buttress,

16/11/2008 22:21:26
But Waverley Gate is a bad thing - becauae it is no longer of interest apart from the facade. It isn't authentic. So how many years before the interior is outdated and then someone decides they want to demolish the entire thing? Little to prevent it.

I appreciate the history of the building, I know that some of the better parts of the interior were ripped out in a previous era of 'modernisation' but it's a dilemma now faced by many buildings.

The application to demolish the listed buildings on Princes Street for - heaven help us - a glass fronted hotel make those same arguments. There, the argument is that the facade is beyond economic repair. The truth is that certain developers have no interest in history or architecture.

Little by little, historic buildings are being whittled away. It's not good conservation.
40

,

16/11/2008 22:36:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
41

Buttress,

16/11/2008 22:42:01
Your juvenile, offensive, abusive and foul-mouthed and filthy minded posts have been recorded, are being collected, and reported to the police as internet harrassment.

The editorial team are responsible for the removal.

They know who you are.

I think most posters here are not really interested in your games, but are genuinely interested in discussion of issues.

42

Seb,

16/11/2008 22:54:44
Buttress, would you ever agree to a listed building being demolished or can that not be countenanced?
43

Buttress,

16/11/2008 23:02:56
It's eleven o'clock, I've had a long day, and I have an appointment with a glass of wine.

So you will excuse me Seb if I don't join in with basic philosophy of conservation discussions with you to which there is no simple answer, as you well know. I can of course quote both Scottish and English planning guidance on the matter, if that helps. As indeed I am sure can you.

The night may be young for you however, and maybe you can enlighten the multitudes with your views...

(I can however point out buildings condemned to certain death according to their would be developers and their historic buildings advisors, enginners etc etc which have proved, having had to defend those at inquiry, not to be quite as robust as they thought. Sadly, only a fraction of buildings get taken to inquiry, as the financial odds are stacked in favour of the rich who want to get more so. Have you been to the Midland Hotel at Morecambe by the way? Amazing what Urban Splash has done there.)

44

Buttress,

16/11/2008 23:05:04
Sorry - the reports not the buildings have proved to be not robust!

45

AVRENIM,

Montvalent 16/11/2008 23:15:19
Did UNESCO approve the building of theSt James' Centre or the Government monstrosity at the end of Castle terrace. We are not so much worried about old unnatractive buildings coming down, but more so about ugly grey concrete replacements
46

Buttress,

16/11/2008 23:22:56
They were there long before this was a WHS.

UNESCO certainly has been looking at the plans to replace the St James' Centre, at the invitation of Historic Scotland. However, its remit as to what it can do is limited.



 

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.