Andrew Holmes slates UNESCO

The former director of city development who is out to pasture in Perthshire, continues letter writing

His latest letter below is in today's Guardian -

"Jonathan Glancey in his article refers to the Caltongate development in Edinburgh. This involved the demolition of a disused bus garage on the site of a former gasworks, a 1950s council car park and a turn of the 19th-century former school. Only the school had any statutory listing, and that the lowest category, and its removal was agreed by Historic Scotland. The whole development conformed to long-established and sensitive height limits for the area and would have created a powerful regeneration focus.

I was the then director of development for the city of Edinburgh council throughout the planning process up to the recommendation to grant consent and the endorsement of that recommendation by the council planning committee. At no time in that process did Unesco approach me or seek to obtain any meaningful information regarding the proposals. The concept of world heritage sites is eminently supportable. The policing by a self-appointed elite with communication limited to its own coterie is not. The failure to proceed with the development is, like so many others, down to the market and not the views of Unesco."

Andrew Holmes
Pitlochry, Perthshire

Now I wonder if Mr Holmes can help answering these questions? Now he's got so much free time on his hands...

1. Complaints have been made to both the Competition DG and the Internal market DG of the EU Commission, because of the extent that Mountgrange Caltongate Ltd may have been provided with privileged access and offered exclusive consideration in pursuance of its commercial objectives, it follows that competing bidders, both actual and potential, have been unlawfully discriminated against, and public resources unlawfully exposed to risk in this case. Caltongate Given A Black Mark

2. A clear breach of Article 7 of the applicable code of conduct as set by the Standards Commission (Scotland) in the case of Planning Committee convenor Jim Lowrie.The code states that a breach has been committed where a planning committee member expresses a prior public view ahead of a decision being taken, or where a member has lobbied, either overtly or covertly, for a particular interest group or to the commercial benefit of a particular applicant. In Article 11th Oct 07 it says

“City planning leader Cllr Jim Lowrie said: "I really don't feel that we are that far behind Glasgow in terms of the speed of the planning process, but the problem in Edinburgh is the number of historic buildings and the need to address heritage concerns. "However, we don't want to fall behind and it's very important we listen to organisations like the chamber. "We have to get big developments like Caltongate up and running as soon as we can."Given the views expressed by Councillor Lowrie in the Edinburgh Evening News of 11th October 2007 there was clear evidence of such a breach in the public domain, and in the circumstances the convenor should have been removed from his office with immediate effect. The Council’s failure to apply article 7 of the code in this instance would appear to call into question the validity of the vote and subsequent award of the planning consent to Mountgrange Caltongate Ltd, and should be reviewed as a matter of urgency. The economic relationship between the council and the developer in this case has the characteristics of an institutionalised public-private partnership.

3. The recent report in The Times about Mountgrange`s donation to the Labour Party,Mountgrange donate to Labour Partywhich questions the fact that the Department of Trade and Industry, when it was being headed by the present Chancellor, Alistair Darling, assisted with the funding for an investigation into the project’s proposed heating system

.4. The statements of Historic Scotland chief inspector, Malcolm Cooper given his relationship with Mountgrange’s Mr Manish Chande Historic Scotland and Caltongate

. The actions of Donald Anderson during his period as council leader should also be scrutinised, given his individual relationship with Mountgrange’s Mr Manish Chande.Champagne Donation Under Fire

6. The very real prospect of the loss of World Heritage status for the city, see Dresden’s recent experience, arising from a proposal to build a bridge over the River Elbe.More Here

7. And a question that so many people are asking - why is it that one architect, Allan Murray, seems to be involved with virtually every key project within the World Heritage Site, as well as Caltongate?Caltongate or Edinburgh Must Die

8. The pro-active role of the Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce in promoting the developmentMountgrange`s Manish Chande is head of their property portfolio group see page 4 of their magazineChambers Magazine and in Evening News Today Ron Hewitt of Chambers Roots For Caltongate

Malcolm "award winning hypocrite" Fraser

You can imagine our surprise when we read that one of Caltongate's architects, Malcolm Fraser is hitting out at his own inconstistency in approaching green building.....

Read article here -

headline -

Malcolm Fraser hits out at his inconsistent approach to "green building"

Then we read again and he was hitting out generally at green building approaches, which he must feel has nothing to do with him.

"Particular scorn was reserved for the practice of demolishing existing buildings, often justified by touting the sustainable credentials in their replacements, but this was rubbished by Fraser who said: “the idea that you take a 100 year old building, cowp it in a landfill site replace it with cardboard and that will save the planet is extraordinary”.
Oh, the cheek of the man....does he think people have short memories...

you were all for knocking down this 100 year old building and putting it in a cowp!

Canongate Venture to be demolished for conference centre

remember this green building he was going to dump on the the world ?

Remember the buildings he was supporting the demolition of and the views he wanted to ruin? see here

Perhaps if Mr Fraser admitted his past intentions and ate a piece of humble pie, perhaps people would believe his words he so freely spouts nowadays, now that the hey day of anything can be demolished in the name of economic benefit is over and attending developer's champagne receptions..

RMJM's Gazprom Tower in St Petersburg

RMJM's Gazprom Tower in St Petersburg

Sad news from St Petersburg, read the full story here on what is a great blog for keeping up to date with people and buildings under threat from the monster they call progress.

Below you can read this skewed justification by Tony Kettle of RMJM the article appears here in Architects Journal

UNESCO should realise that special sites require a special architectural response, says Kettle

I have been pretty clear in the past about my views on UNESCO’s intervention in RMJM’s Okhta Centre project for Gazprom in St Petersburg, Russia. The plans we have drawn up are for one of the world’s tallest buildings in one of the world’s most horizontal cities, where only special buildings are allowed to break the grain.

These special buildings include 30 churches, the Peter and Paul Cathedral, the Admiralty and the TV tower (which is the height of the Eiffel Tower). Each is special in its own right. A city needs a hierarchy of buildings so that the ordinary and the special work with each other. If every building attempts to be special, then they will all become ordinary; so there needs to be a good reason for a building to be out of the ordinary.

The issue of energy is the central concern of our time and Gazprom, as the largest supplier of energy in eastern Europe, is one of the reasons for Russia’s wealth and rebirth, putting it into the ‘special’ category.

The Okhta Tower must symbolise rebirth for Russia and the city of St Petersburg, while demonstrating that an innovative, low-energy building is possible in the extremes of the Russian climate. UNESCO has never disputed the quality of the design, nor the fact that the tower sits some 6km from the historical centre. But it feels it cannot allow one project to break the city’s height limits, potentially opening the gates to a ‘free-for-all’ of new development in the city. In this case, there is no latitude in its thinking, no allowance made for creation of the ‘special’.

Back in my home town of Edinburgh, UNESCO has reviewed proposals that have already been approved and has expressed concern over two in particular, which have the potential to change the city. The sites fall into two categories, the ‘ordinary’ and the ‘special’.

The ‘ordinary’ is Caltongate, a scheme which builds on the urban grain of the past. It does what any good urban design should: it repairs, it removes the bad,

Macrae tenements on the Canongate that are to be demolished

replaces with the good

Malcolm Fraser's brave new world for Jeffrey St

and creates new spaces that will benefit the city.

Caltongate's mostly in shadow for the day wind tunnel

There is not much to argue about as it is an obvious solution, which will improve a sadly neglected part of the city.

Richard Murphy's Haymarket Tower

The ‘special’ is the Haymarket site, a location which marks the entrance to the historical city centre. This is indeed a site for a gateway building, one which will give a sense of arrival. The proposal is for a 17-storey slab block containing a hotel in a form which tries to be special.

But its use, size and commercial drivers do not allow the building to be other than ordinary. UNESCO has criticised its height and suggested a buffer zone be created to stop new development close to the city centre. Surely it should have been recognised that a special site requires a special response?

The fundamental issue is not about banning all development because it is new, but instead asking whether developments really celebrate place and realise the full potential of each individual site.

Tony Kettle is group design director of RMJM
comment@architectsjournal.co.uk

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. "

The Mark of the Republic

We don't have Zorro in the Independent Republic of the Canongate but we have the next best thing we have a community and people who care - we don't need a masked man (though at times it would have been nice) to humiliate and deal with venture speculative developers, councillors and their officials who were duped by the lies and promises of big business.

Today The Republic heard that Mountgrange Capital has gone down the tubes. Read more here.

Pundits, sycophants and supporters of this Toy Town scheme mocked all of those who raised questions about the financial logic of this development based on ever increasing land prices and free and easy credit from the banking system, once those two things crashed the project was doomed. Caltongate was based on artists impressions of a architect's dystopian fantasy and those architects names must be etched on the tomb of Edinburgh's real disgrace - such as Richard Murphy, Allan Murray and Malcolm Fraser. Hopefully this Shakespearean tragedy will not be replayed over and over again.

The council used public money and council taxes to facilitate a big business plan for yet another Old Town development without looking at the needs and desires of the community.

The protesters and campaigners have been called liars and trouble makers for genuinely raising our concerns about lack of sustainable development and ignoring the community! More links here

Anyway to celebrate the defeat of Caltongate, the Independent Republic of the Canongate have launched a competition.

Do you have a caption for the following? - Manish Chande, Director of Mountgrange with his spin doctor side kick Mark Cummings on hearing today's news. Best caption will be given freedom of the Canongate.