Ground Control Author in Edinburgh

GROUND CONTROL Seminar, Edinburgh
Saturday 17 July 2010
1pm to 4pm
Edinburgh World Heritage Trust, 5 Charlotte Square, Edinburgh

As a lead-in to the Patrick Geddes Autumn Meeting on the theme of 'Re-thinking the City' to be held in October, Edinburgh Old Town Development Trust and Edinburgh World Heritage Trust are hosting a seminar led by Anna Minton on Saturday 17th July on the themes raised in her book Ground Control: Fear and Happiness in the 21st Century City - see below.
Aimed at Edinburgh-based community activists, this will be a rare opportunity to focus on issues affecting all communities in the city, and a chance for citizens to articulate what kind of city they want to live in.

how to book see Edinburgh Old Development Trust Website


GROUND CONTROL
Fear and Happiness in the Twenty-First Century City
ANNA MINTON

www.annaminton.com

Capital News

Someone bought the following to the republic`s attention, which is an excellent summary on recent events in the capital. It is from Wilson`s Weekly Wrap which appears in Architecture Scotland.

"Thinking out of the box, or just out of the box?
Like buses, you can go a long time without seeing anything in the Scotsman that is even vaguely about architecture and then – lo – two features in one week. Well, not so much features as opinion pieces by a duo of well-known architects stationed on separate sides of the Caltongate divide. The first, by Malcolm Fraser, sought to articulate the protagonists’ position and whilst it made a bold case for seeing the proposed architecture as a continuation of Edinburgh’s strong urban traditions, it lapsed early on into a justification of the kind of statistics so well-loved by politician and, by default, developers – the supposed number of jobs created in construction and the predictions of total jobs established as a result of the finished development itself.

The trouble with this argument is that developers are not actually in the business of creating jobs but, more fundamentally, in the business of making themselves piles of dosh. If the development equation most profitable to them also responds to outdated political imperatives, all well and good, but this usually equates to those aspects of their projects they can pre-let to others who actually are in the business of front-line employment. No pre-lets, no development finance: precisely the problem that brought down Mountgrange, the developer for Caltongate – put simply, nobody else saw commercial benefit in their project just at the time when the company most needed them to.

The question is whether or not the scheme that proved so seductive to the City of Edinburgh Council and the Chamber of Commerce will, when the economy begins to recover, prove to be quite as enticing. In any case – and Malcolm surely understands this all too well – the number of jobs created is never contingent upon the quality of the architecture proposed and any project for this site could just as easily max out the figures to suit its case for political approval. Whether or not the scheme is – as Malcolm asserts – hugely better than previous proposals for the site will no doubt be the subject of ongoing debate given that these predecessors were simply (as it was for Caltongate before the crunch) the most financially beneficial for the developers of the day. None were perfect, none were based on any assessment of the actual civic needs of Edinburgh.

So to James Simpson, an architect who, by virtue of the long tenancy his practice previously had in an office just off the Canongate, knows the Old Town just as intimately as Malcolm. As a noted conservationist, James makes the case for a more Geddes-ian approach, albeit less specific since he is not fronting an alternative project. James is spot-on in one respect though – history does show that times of high economic pressure are often bad for historic cities, although whether or not the principles espoused by Patrick Geddes could provide an alternative funding scenario for the Caltongate site is not a question likely to be tested by the City of Edinburgh Council.

The prime movers of the anti-Caltongate cause, however, has been SOOT (Save Our Old Town), a loose agglomeration of local residents and others that, in the wake of Mountgrange’s demise, has boldly initiated the formation of a ‘Canongate Community Development Trust’ to consider and promote an alternative vision for the site. Nobody should doubt the intentions or the energies of this group – they have been far sharper in generating press and public support than the aforementioned Mountgrange, despite the latter’s considerable investment in marketing and public relations. But the real question for this large city centre site is one the Council long ago abrogated responsibility for: the need for a proper civic vision that transcends the development imperatives of specific interest groups whichever sector they happen to come from.



Realpolitik in Charlotte Square
Given the way the tectonic plates of local politics have been shifting of late, it was probably bound to happen, so the only surprise is that it’s taken so long for Edinburgh’s World Heritage Trust (EWHT) to be banned by its two principal funders from commenting on major developments in the city. Not wishing to be seen to be wielding the big stick themselves, the city’s Council and Historic Scotland appointed consultants who – shock, horror - came to the conclusion that the Trust was “too adversarial” and was responsible for “considerable tension” with the two partner bodies that until now have provided it with £1m plus of public money per year.

The City of Edinburgh Council has, as the Wrap has mentioned before, always found itself confused by the World Heritage Site status awarded to its Old and New Town areas as a result of an application to Unesco by Historic Scotland in 1995 and consequently has tried to accommodate it in the only terms it understands - tourism and commercial benefit. Giving the EWHT carte blanche to veto duff planning applications certainly wasn’t part of that agenda, and there can be little doubt that the Trust’s acerbic comments on the Council-approved Caltongate project was the straw that finally gave the municipal camel the hump.



Not that it admits as much – no, Jim Lowrie, the current chair of planning, insists the Council is simply trying to “streamline” the planning process in the capital. What streamlining means in this instance is a requirement that the Trust direct its energies towards the promotion of the World Heritage site to tourists, to work with schoolchildren and to develop projects to restore historic buildings and monuments. The latter has a particular piquancy, given that the Council and Historic Scotland have long since ceased to allocate the levels of funding to the Trust that facilitated useful grant aid to building owners. And just to confirm it’s got the message, an EWHT source is reported as saying that “we’ve been told to keep our heads down or face substantial funding cuts…it was very much a case of take it or leave it.”

In days gone by (and surely that’s the world most loved by the EWHT board?), political pressure of this sort would not be tolerated and from the chair down, mass resignation would be the order of the day rather than be seen as the patsies who succumbed to totalitarian stricture. Not so, it seems: as chair of a now revisionist EWHT, Charles McKean has simply commented to the effect that ”the recommendations made reflect a change of emphasis towards more targeted grant-giving (sic), project work in the public realm and interpretation of the World Heritage site. That may well be the case, Charles, but it does make the rest of us wonder what the last 14 years of street-by-street, building-by-building combat by the Trust have really all been about. "

Demand continues to Call-IN Caltongate

Latest News is that yes, the plans have been rubber stamped this afternoon!

Hear the city`s design champion Sir Terry Farrel speak of the problems facing Edinburgh on the BBC Radio Good Morning Scotland programme from earlier today Listen at 2 hrs 22 mins

STV will be covering it on thier local news programme Scotland Today at 6pm

BBC coverage

Groundhog Day at City Chambers

This afternoon the Caltongate Applications go to committee once again, six months late due to yet another council error!! It has been recommended again they be rubber stamped then referred to ministers once more. With the increased awareness of the potential damage to the capital from Caltongate and other proposed developments, the ministers will surely see reason and Call the Plans in. Otherwise its bye bye Athens of the North. See yesterdays post on repeated call-in request by Msps.

This excellent letter from Jim Johnson an architect for close on 50 years, and former Director of the Edinburgh Old Town Renewal Trust sums up why the plans should be called- in-

Alex Salmond MSP
First Minister
The Scottish Parliament
Holyrood
Edinburgh 20 August 2008


Dear Minister,

Caltongate Planning Applications: 07/01287/FUL, 07/04400/FUL, 07/01237/FUL, 07/01288/FUL, and 07/01241/FUL.

I received a letter from the City of Edinburgh dated 6 August giving the opportunity to objectors to make further representations about this application. A number of mistakes have been made by the planning department during the consultation and processing of these applications. Circumstances have changed since the Council made its decision. The importance of the site, the complexity of the issues and the conflict of interests between the Council as a partner in the development and as the planning authority, clearly shows the need for an independent, impartial review of the whole masterplan process and the subsequent determination of the planning applications.

I request that the applications be called-in by the Scottish Ministers for the following reasons:

1. The international concern over the potential damage to the Edinburgh World Heritage site has been demonstrated (subsequent to the determination of the applications by the City Council) by the decision of UNESCO to send a delegation to examine the position in Edinburgh. UNESCO has expressed concern that the Council may have acted wrongly in approving the development without referring to UNESCO before taking a decision. The threat to the City’s World Heritage status was highlighted by many who opposed the masterplan and the detailed planning applications, but their view was steadfastly rejected and rubbished by the Council. The objectors have been proved right.

2. The Council’s justification for the departure from the statutory Structure Plan and national planning policies is that the development will achieve economic and employment benefits. But the benefits listed are purely speculative and remain untested by any impartial expert assessment. Most of the benefits are based on highly contentious information provided by the developer and consultants employed by him. There is no evidence that they have been tested or analysed in any detail by the planning authority. Given the downturn in the economy since the original applications were lodged, the claimed benefits have become even more questionable and need to be re-examined.

3. The developer has demonstrated no commitment to a genuine consultation process. He has repeatedly stated that the scheme (particularly the hotel, its most contentious and damaging element) is an “all or nothing” development, and refused to consider a phased approach to this very large site. In addition, the setting up of a “consultation group” (invited and administered by the developer) only sought to manipulate the consultation process to the developer’s advantage and avoid the implementation of the National Standards for Community Engagement. The City Council has acquiesced to this sham.

4. The government’s commitment to a more sustainable future for Scotland (eg. by cutting carbon emissions) and the City’s aspirations to become an exemplar for sustainable city life, are both undermined by the Caltongate proposals. As presented the scheme is very far from an example of sustainable “best practice” despite the claims in the developer’s Sustainability Appraisal, which is no more than a “green wash” over the design (I submitted a detailed critique of this appraisal to the Council dated 7 May 2006). I can only conclude that the planning department lack the resources (or time) to analyse the veracity of the submitted proposals.

5. The Council claims the Caltongate development is “is of outstanding design quality” I would dispute this. I have been in practice as an architect for close on 50 years, latterly as Director of the Edinburgh Old Town Renewal Trust. I am not a “preservationist” - I believe that new developments in historic cities should be in a contemporary style, reflecting modern requirements and materials. But this proposal falls well short of the standard that should be aimed for in Edinburgh. I have rarely seen a more banal overall design, and am at a loss how the City can consider that “the quality of the urban design solution will enhance the Conservation area, the Edinburgh World Heritage site and the setting of listed buildings” – particularly as the developer intends to demolish the listed buildings!

Yours faithfully,

Jim Johnson
Dip. Arch. ARIAS

This excellent letter is in today`s Scotsman 27 Aug 08

Stand firm against those who would sacrifice capital's heritage status

I am disappointed by reactions to Unesco's comments about proposed developments within the designated world heritage site in Edinburgh (Focus, 26 August). I would have expected some fervour, yet have heard none.


We are talking about a world heritage site – not a Lothian heritage site nor even a British one – of such importance within the built and natural heritage of this planet that it has been picked out for an accolade and recognition as being among the finest things in the world. Yet to hear current debate it would appear little more than a nuisance.

I can imagine the clamour were other world heritage sites to come under such ill-considered attack. The Macchu Pichu Hilton? Go-karting amongst the chicanes of Stonehenge? BMX parks over the pyramids?

Yet here we are happy to see a prime site let to commercial developers in a way that would be hardly acceptable in a minor provincial town. This, too, with defence from the city fathers and the Chamber of Commerce. Members of the chamber, I would suggest, do not all work in offices, but are interested to see the premium visitors and companies attracted here because Edinburgh is still well worth visiting and living in. What Chamber has to say 25 Aug 08


Edinburgh is a lived-in and living city, and must never be frozen in time. It must, however, recognise that it is, like Prague and Florence, greater than the sum of its parts. To begin to erode and then to replace with dull, pedestrian – but no doubt commercially viable – buildings is not only cruel, it is shortsighted and shows a total misunderstanding of this place.

We should be proud of this city; it is unique. While current attitudes to Unesco's observations prevail, we can hardly complain about the tatty tourist shops, unweeded pavements and traffic chaos. These could be settled at a stroke. Beginning the destruction of a world heritage site in the name of commerce is no less than authorised vandalism and I am astonished that we are not out in our thousands marching to save our beautiful city from yet more misguided and substandard "developments".

There always is a stronger commercial argument, but many cities have recognised that this can be short-term gain for a very long-term loss, and have master-planned to save the blight.

Edinburgh more than justifies its Unesco recognition, and to many of us this matters. We are tenants of this city, not owner-occupiers; let's try not to mess it up too much for future generations.

DAVID GERRARD Spylaw Park Edinburgh


The pro-active role of the Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce in promoting the development Caltongate Developer Manish Chande is head of the Chamber`s property portfolio group and in the past in The Evening News Ron Hewitt of Chambers Roots For Caltongate

But as we all can see from this Article Ron Hewitt likes writing fiction --

"It sounds bizarre, but Ron Hewitt, who took over the reins at the chamber earlier this year, writes novels about a murderer of paedophiles in his spare time."

Edinburgh World Heritage

NEW methods of providing funding for conservation charity Edinburgh World Heritage are to be investigated by the council.

Changes to the council's accountancy practices have meant that it is no longer able to provide EWH with the same level of funding as in previous years, around £617,000 per annum.

Adam Wilkinson, director of EWH, has written to the council asking it to reconsider the changes, which will see the local authority cut grant funding by around £500,000.

In a report to the council's planning committee, Dave Anderson, the council's director of city development, said there were a number of options which the council should explore for funding.

And he stressed the council's commitment to finding funds for EWH."The funding of EWH is affected as a result of changes to accounting procedures that imply all funding to EWH must become revenue funding," he said. "This puts pressure on already restricted revenue budgets."He added that the council would be best to re-examine the funding issue after an ongoing assessment of the management of world heritage sites undertaken by EWH.

Evening News 5th Aug 08

The following is from the minutes of EWHT 55th Board Meeting May 2008

Full Minutes Here

Future funding of EWHT

Item 21 onwards

The Finance & General Purposes Committee had discussed funding issues raised
by Alan Henderson’s letter of 14 March 2008 at its meeting immediately
preceding the board.

The Committee recommended that EWH should make a direct approach to
politicians at an appropriate level (rather than to City officials) to explain the
impact of the proposed cuts.

They needed to be made aware that such a
significant cut in funding would have a profoundly detrimental impact on the
city, which would reflect badly on its WH status and cause embarrassment. The
Committee proposed that EWH should ask for continuing financial support from
CEC & HS until there was a steady income stream from repayable grants. EWH
would need to support the proposal with a strategy and statistics on the
anticipated income and timescale of repayments.

The Director was due to meet Cllr Jenny Dawe and it was suggested that this
should be followed by a more formal meeting with the Chairman.

The Director was also due to meet the new Director of City Development.
It was agreed that EWH should pursue the question of receiving funding from a
different Council budget, other than the City Development Department, which
had received a significant cut in funding.

Will Garrett suggested that EWH might become involved in restoring CEC owned
properties, for which there could be funding.

The board highlighted the following points for raising in future discussions:-

• The need to meet UNESCO requirements to preserve Edinburgh as a
WHS (not referred to in Alan Henderson’s letter)
• [reserved as confidential business]

• CEC needs to be made aware of the long lead time required to
generate applicants’ interest. If funding withdrawn it would be difficult
to regenerate enthusiasm (‘Grangemouth syndrome’) [reserved as
confidential business]

• Larger projects need long-term commitment. [reserved as confidential
business]. A 3-year rolling programme is essential. UNESCO recommends
5 years needed to plan ahead with confidence. (Management
Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Sites, p.5)
• The difficulty of fitting work into a rigid timetable.
• If CEC funding withdrawn, it might have profound effect on HS funding.

• EWH should show examples of the excellent work and additional value
achieved by its grant schemes and projects.

• Demonstrate shift to focus on regeneration.

• Bear in mind that small projects can generate a lot of interest and bring
added value (eg event to mark restoration of Duke of Buccleuch
memorial)

• The proposal to raise funds on a project by project basis might not work
as a spread of prospective schemes was needed to achieve
results/spend. In particular, if EWH is increasingly looking at supporting
areas of regeneration these are harder to get going.

It was noted that Edinburgh and Lothians Greenspace Trust operates on a
project by project basis and it might be worth speaking to them.

It was confirmed that HS was awaiting the recommendations in the Tribal report
on EWH and the City Heritage Trusts before taking a decision on future funding
and the continuation of a three-year funding programme. However, it was
noted that HS supported the work of the Trust as a whole, rather than identifying
areas of work in response to bids.

The recommendations of the Finance & General Purposes Committee were
agreed. The Director was asked to produce an outline paper on funding,
including fund-raising and lobbying, for the Board meeting on 14 July. The
Chairman proposed that board members should be allocated tasks at this
stage. Detailed proposals would be discussed at the awayday in the Autumn.
Action

A report following the Grants & Projects Committee on 7 May had been
circulated. This showed the severity of the effects of cuts in funding by CEC and
Historic Scotland and the uncertainty of the future of the Conservation Funding
Programme.
It cited examples of a few of the many projects which would not be carried out
if continued funding was not secured [reserved as confidential business].
Action

Edinburgh Under Investigation

Unesco to investigate if Edinburgh should lose world heritage status

Read Caltongate Calamity piece by Conservation architect James Simpson which gives the overall damage that Edinburgh faces if Caltongate was to go ahead.


Published Date: 07 July 2008 By BRIAN FERGUSON The Scotsman

Article in Evening News and BBC TV Coverage STV News

AN INVESTIGATION has been ordered into Edinburgh's World Heritage Status, The Scotsman has learned.

An official inquiry, which may lead to the capital being stripped of the title by Unesco, was launched yesterday at a summit of the world heritage committee in the Canadian city of Quebec.

Delegates said they were particularly concerned about the potential impact and handling by the Scottish Government of Caltongate, a massive new development in Edinburgh's Old Town, which was approved despite around 1,800 objections being received.

The Scottish Government, which approved the scheme last month after dismissing demands for a public inquiry, has been condemned for failing to consult Unesco before coming to a final decision on the scheme, which will see two listed buildings demolished to make way for a five-star hotel.

The inquiry will also examine the proposed redevelopment of Leith's docklands over the next 20 years and the planned revamp of the St James Centre.

A team of Unesco inspectors will visit Edinburgh later this year to assess its "state of conservation".

The Scottish Government has been ordered to submit its own dossier by February of next year. The 2009 Unesco summit in Seville will then decide if there is enough evidence for Edinburgh to be placed on the "at risk" register.

A spokesman for Unesco's world heritage committee said: "The committee voiced concern at the potential impact of the Caltongate development and were also deeply concerned that it was approved by the state government in June without complying with the operational guidelines for world heritage sites.

"The Scotsman understands that Unesco officials are adamant Caltongate fell under the category of "major restorations or new constructions which may affect the outstanding universal value of the property".

According to its guidelines, Unesco should be consulted before any such development is ruled on.

The opening of the inquiry into Edinburgh's world heritage status, which Unesco awarded to the Old and New Towns in 1995, will be a major concern for the city council and the Scottish Government.

Councillors have come under mounting pressure from their own officials and business leaders in the capital not to turn down major developments amid claims Edinburgh is losing out on investment to Manchester and Glasgow. However, heritage and conservation groups have repeatedly warned that Edinburgh's heritage status is being put at risk by over-development of sensitive sites.

About 2,000 jobs have been promised by Mountgrange, the developer of the £300 million Caltongate scheme, which involves the creation of a hotel and conference centre, 200 homes, a public square, office blocks and a new arts quarter.

Councillors approved the vast majority of the Caltongate scheme at the first time of asking. The same happened last month when a 17-storey hotel at Haymarket was approved despite claims it would ruin views from as far afield as the Dean Gallery and Inverleith Park.

Liverpool is already being investigated by Unesco amid concern over the scale of development at its waterfront, while a separate inquiry is under way into the impact of new skyscrapers near the Tower of London.

Historic Scotland endorsed the Caltongate development, but has been fiercely critical of the proposals for Leith Docks and the St James Centre.

Historic Scotland declined to comment yesterday, but culture minister Linda Fabiani, who is responsible for the agency, said: "I'm confident that when the Unesco mission visits our capital, it will see a vibrant, growing city which embraces its cultural and architectural heritage as well as managing an improvement in development that benefits Edinburgh as a whole.

"Steve Cardownie, Edinburgh's deputy council leader, said: "I don't think we'd be too perturbed over this. It's fairly commonplace for Unesco to re-evaluate World Heritage Sites and that kind of scrutiny goes along with the title. I don't think Edinburgh has done anything to devalue its status."The St Kilda archipelago, New Lanark and Orkney's "Neolithic Heart" are among Scotland's other world heritage sites.

Manish Chande of London Developers Mountgrange who are behind Caltongate. Will this image of him pulling a "Braveheart" bull come back to chase him out of the city as fast as he dragged it in.

See what will be lost here www.eh8.org.uk

SAVE To Help Fight Caltongate

The threatened Canongate Venture building

Todays Scotsman tells how Save Britains Heritage the leading campaign group in the country has written a letter to the City Of Edinburgh Council. In it they condemn the planned demolitions of the two listed buildings to make way for Caltongate, and warn of the impact the scheme will have on Edinburgh`s Historic Heart.

Edinburgh World Heritage will shortly welcome Adam Wilkinson (pictured above) as its new director. Adam will join in EWH April from the campaigning organisation SAVE Britain’s Heritage, where he has been Secretary for the past seven years.

The piece also mentions how the Scottish Government is facing demands to call in the development and order a public inquiry amid fears Edinburgh riskd losing it World Heritage Status. ICOMOS Press Release