Demand for Public Inquiry for Caltongate

You may or may not have received a letter dated 6th August from Alan Henderson, Head of Planning, City of Edinburgh Council. See Evening News 7th Aug 08


Even if you did not object first time around, or receive this particular letter do take this opportunity to make your voice count. The more emails that the council and government receive, the more they can`t ignore the obvious mass public objection to Caltongate. And remember you can write even if you don`t live in Edinburgh, you can be any age, nationality and live anywhere to comment on a planning application and remember World Heritage Sites are everyone`s to enjoy and protect.

The Canongate Community Forum (CCF) suggest that you email the following people letting them know your views on the scheme, our letter is below which we have sent to the council and government.

You can take guidance from this, although do not just copy and paste, put what you feel is important , you are welcome to say that you support the points raised by the Canongate Community Forum in their letter to ministers and council officials, in response to Alan Hendersons letter of 6th August 2008.


People to Email


All Cabinet Ministers includes Alex Salmond, use the following email address and mark top of email for attention of all Scottish Ministers. Remember to include your name and postal address in the body of this email otherwise it may get ignored or lost.

scottish.ministers@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

and copy c.c. this email to the Director of Planning in Scottish Government, CEC head of planning, CEC Caltongate case officer, the leader of council and the Forum , emails below -

jim.mackinnon@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

alan.henderson@edinburgh.gov.uk

bruce.nicolson@edinburgh.gov.uk

jenny.dawe@edinburgh.gov.uk

canongatecommunityforum@yahoo.co.uk

then send the same email to

The following MSPs who have already expressed the need for a public inquiry.

shirley-anne.somerville.msp@scottish.parliament.uk
margo.macdonald.msp@scottish.parliament.uk
robin.harper.msp@scottish.parliament.uk


You should also write to your own Msps, MP and MEPS use this link Write to them Scottish ones are listed even although it doesn't say on home page, you just enter your postcode and they will appear)

Letter to Scottish Ministers

The Canongate Community Forum
19th August 2008

Dear Minister


Caltongate Call- In


The Canongate Community Forum received a letter dated 6th August 2008 from Alan Henderson, Head of Planning and Strategy of CEC.

This letter should have been sent immediately following the Planning Committee’s decision on the 6th February 2008, not six months later.

As objectors to the Caltongate planning applications, we have been invited make comments on whether we consider our previous comments were properly dealt with, to provide comments on the statements of reasons for approving the applications and present any new evidence we believe should be considered.

The omission of the final consultation/feedback on statement of reasons is only one example of the mistakes made during the consultation and processing of these proposals (e.g. applications were never advertised as developments potentially contrary to the Development Plan) and demonstrates the lack of suitable resources and expertise of CEC to deal with such a large and complex proposal.

In light of this latest council error we demand that the proposed demolitions be halted. The notices are now void as they were applied before this part of the process was carried out. So the council should revoke these demolition notices as soon as possible. Given the current economic climate the demolitions could go ahead, whilst work on this particular scheme not undertaken. Only when the economy picks up the developer may sell on this cleared site with full planning consent?

The Statements of Reasons provided by the council do not provide adequate planning justification to breach National Planning policy and best practice (for listed buildings and conservation areas in particular).

The Canongate Community Forum would therefore like to take this opportunity to request the CALL-IN of the Caltongate Planning Applications.



Why a “Call – In” of Caltongate Plans by Scottish Ministers is required

The complexity of the issues and the ongoing conflict of interests between the Council as a developer and as the Planning Authority clearly demonstrate the need for an impartial independent review of the whole Caltongate masterplan process and subsequent determination of the planning applications. This can only be done through a Public Inquiry or Hearing undertaken by Reporters.

Reasons why -

1. The Planning Authority, The City of Edinburgh Council has a significant financial interest in the proposed development and as such cannot maintain the level of impartiality required to make an unbiased decision.

2. There is international concern. The Caltongate plans are potentially so damaging to the World Heritage Site that UNESCO decided at their Quebec Meeting in July this year, to send a delegation to the capital. UNESCO has expressed concern that CEC may have acted wrongly in agreeing to the development without, referring it first of all to UNESCO before a decision was taken. The proposed demolitions and design of replacement buildings will have a significant negative impact on the World Heritage Site and has been highlighted by many experts from impartial heritage organisations as well as the general public.

3. The land to be sold on East Market Street was not subject to fair and open competition and was sold for less than market value. The land on Calton Road was not identified as surplus to requirements by the council or offered on the open market for housing (which would have also required a contribution of 25% affordable housing in line with existing policy). 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. The office of the Secretariat-General of the European Commission, the executive branch of the EU are to decide shortly whether to start an "infringement procedure" – which could lead all the way to the European courts.

4. Private gain seems to be taking precedent over the legitimate public interest.

5. The total demolition of the Grade C Listed Canongate Venture is against planning policy.

6. Edinburgh World Heritage Trust believes that this was a development which should not happen, and CEC is a signatory to the Management Plan for the World Heritage Site. Historic Scotland and CEC are both represented on the Board of Directors of Edinburgh World Heritage - conflict of interest?

7. Facade schemes are not in accordance with sound principles of conservation and remove much historic and architectural interest from a building, and so the claimed benefits could as easily be gained by a far more sympathetic development, retaining listed buildings and thus the authenticity of the World Heritage Site.

8. It is suggested in the statement of reasons that the justification for departing from the statutory Structure Plan and National planning policies and guidance is the achievement of certain benefits – but the economic and employment benefits listed are purely speculative and remain untested by any impartial expert assessment. Most of the benefits highlighted are based on highly inaccurate information provided by the developer and not through detailed analysis or research undertaken by the Planning Authority.

9. The Planning Authority cannot be seen to have behaved impartially - they have not given equal weight to material objections raised from numerous community and heritage organisations and objectors but have chosen to favour the heavily biased opinion, and purely speculative benefits, provided by the developer and a local business organisation shortly after the developer Manish Chande was appointed Chair of their Property Policy Group (Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce).

10. No consideration was given to any alternative plans, either during the Council's consideration of the developer's masterplan or at the detailed planning application stage, despite requests from local stakeholders to allow consultation on alternative proposals.

11. No consideration was given to emerging local or national policy regarding growing community assets, the shortage of affordable workshops space and start up business premises in the city, heritage led development policies, community led development planning and policy, or to alternative funding streams available for public realm improvements and traffic management.

12. Many of the benefits attributed to the proposed development could be achieved through retention and development of public assets, and would be required of any development in the area which adheres to existing and emerging statutory plans and policies.

13. The provision of affordable housing does not address the needs of the area (particular lack of larger, 3 and 4 bed family housing) and what has been proposed has been offset to publicly owned land on Calton road rather than being met on site by the developer.


14. There are no safeguards in place (or conditions imposed to ensure the controlled phasing of development) to ensure the masterplan area is developed in such a way to ensure the suggested benefits will be fully realised (or even delivered) should a recession slow down development.

15. The developer has demonstrated no real commitment to the consultation process by repeatedly stating that the scheme is an all or nothing development and a phased approach to this enormous site is not an option. In addition, the setting up a 'consultation group' (administered by the developer and had membership limited to those stakeholders invited 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.

16. The size location and facilities required (including direct access to a public square and the close proximity to exclusive luxury residential properties) by the hotel have been clearly stated as being key to securing a specific client for a hotel, however all applications require assessment against approved and adopted policy. No planning justification has been provided to warrant setting aside National Policy and Guidance with regard to the demolition of structurally sound listed and unlisted buildings in an Outstanding Conservation Area.

17. Senior members of CEC's Planning Committee and Planning Department have mishandled various elements in the processing of both the masterplan and the applications, ignored expert advice and opinion, behaved inappropriately and at times with prejudice towards members of the community and local community organisations.


18. The development does not accord with the Development Plan and was never advertised as a potential departure.

19. The decision is potentially prejudicial to the emerging Local Plan - it was identified in the finalised draft of the City Local Plan, due to be considered later this summer, following a request for Caltongate to be included in the emerging local plan by the developer. Its inclusion has sparked a significant number of objections to the inclusion of this oversized planning application as a Local Plan policy/proposal and objectors have also raised concerns that the finalised local plan has insufficient protection for listed buildings and the World Heritage Site.

20. The size and complexity of the technical information requires detailed analysis which is not available within the existing resources of CEC City Development Department. An Inquiry would allow evidence to also be presented from impartial and independent expert witnesses.

21. The plans conflict with National Policies NPPG18, NPPG5, SPP2, SPP1 and SPP3 and also memorandum of Guidance for Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas

22. The processing of the supplementary guidance (masterplan) and the planning applications is not in accordance with advice contained in PAN41, PAN81, PAN 82, PAN 71, or PAN 74

I look forward to your acknowledgement of our letter and your subsequent call-in of these detrimental proposals for our capital.

Yours sincerely
Sally Richardson
Secretary
Canongate Community Forum

Another Caltongate Council Error!

The Canongate Community Forum the body behind Save Our Old Town Campaign have written to the head of planning Alan Henderson (pictured above) who is due to retire any day now. They received a reply from Henderson who talks about a letter dated the 21st July 2008 not the 6th of August as referred to in the Forum`s letter!!

Dear Mr Henderson

I am writing in response to your letter entitled Notification of intent to grant planning permission dated 6th August 2008.

The Canongate Community Forum is requesting an extension to this the latest round of consultation on the Caltongate Planning applications. This round is one which should have been carried out immediately following the Council Planning Committee’s decision on the 6th February this year.

This would have allowed the public to give comment on the statement of reasons for these applications being approved by the committee, on the recommendation of the planning department.

As this is clearly a council mistake it is only right that the time period for people to respond to the letters received in the last few days is extended. There are many reasons for this, people are confused, exhausted, on holiday etc

Reasons to extend consultation –

In this letter it is stated that only the minimum period of 14 days will be allowed to submit any further comment on the statements or on any views on the processing of the applications

I received mine and the one on behalf of The Canongate Community Forum on Friday 8th, (letter dated the 6th) and have been notified by others that they only received theirs today or haven’t as yet.

The council has a significant financial interest in all the applications.


At this time of the year you will be well aware that most people are on holiday, The Scottish Parliament is in recess, and most councillors are on holiday, schools, colleges, universities and so on are on holiday. And you may have noticed that the city is playing host to the biggest Arts Festival in the world. Many people are away from the city at this time, and do not always check their emails, or local press when away.


This oversight in the consultation process should not have happened and should have been picked up earlier in the following process, so it is unfortunate that there will be delays to the developer, but the consultation should not be restricted to 14 days (the minimum) in order just to benefit the developer.

It should be more than the ordinary minimum time as this situation is out of the ordinary.

We are dealing with Scotland’s capital city and part of her World Heritage Site, which is everyone’s to cherish worldwide A Unesco mission will visit Edinburgh towards the end of this year to evaluate its status as a World Heritage Site. An official inquiry was launched in July at UNESCO`s meeting in Quebec amid concerns about the potential impact of Caltongate, which won planning approval despite over 1,800 objections.
Article Here



As a result of this mistake by the council decision notices for the demolitions have been issued prematurely and must therefore now be void, so I request that you must assure The Canongate Community Forum and others that there is no way that these demolitions will take place before the whole process has been carried out in its proper order and without bias.


Many members of the community have not been opening their latest letter as they were flooded with the demolition notices in the last few weeks and thought this another, so its vital extra time is given to alert these people and press coverage given.


The local Community Council does not meet in August and will be unable deal with this consultation before September.

We therefore request you extend this consultation to run for 6 weeks from the date of the letter, thereby allowing reasonable time for all those concerned to find out its actually going on and to allow them time to write to the appropriate people with their concerns if any over the councils reasons to approve the Caltongate Applications back in February this year. You have to take in to account that over 6 months have passed since this decision was taken. So you must allow more than a few days for people to revisit this whole subject, which is complex as well as controversial.

I hope to receive an early response to this email.

Yours faithfully
Sally Richardson
Secretary
Canongate Community Forum

Council`s Reply

Dear Ms Richardson

CALTONGATE PLANNING APPLICATIONS

You have written requesting additional time to reply to our letter of 21 July 2008.

As that letter states, this is an opportunity to make further representations to the planning authority and to Scottish Ministers if you do not consider that your views have been properly dealt with. This forms a procedural review of your engagement with the process rather than an opportunity to raise new issues or repeat issues already presented.

This is a process that all planning applications where the Council has an interest and the application requires to be notified to Scottish Ministers will have to go through. All applications require to be dealt with in the same manner. As this is a review and not a new consultation, I do not accept that there is a justification for an exception in this case.

As such, I am not prepared to agree to your request to extend the period for comment. I look forward to receiving your comments by 21 August.

Please note that this process only applies to planning applications, it does not apply to applications for listed building consent or conservation area consent.

Yours sincerely


Alan Henderson
Head of Planning and Strategy

So looks like they don`t want to know, next stop Scottish Ministers....so check back tomorrow

A letter in yesterday`s Evening News
It's time to speak up over Caltongate
It would be great it the council's incompetence over the Caltongate planning application actually put the project at risk (City's major blunder, August 7), but for some reason the SNP and the Liberal Democrats seem determined to bulldoze people's homes and a Victorian school building for Trevor Davies's grotesque vanity project.Shirley Anne Somerville is always keen to express her reservations about it: perhaps she could speak to her colleagues in the Cabinet and get them to call the public local inquiry they should have agreed to months ago. Or is her opposition pure cynical positioning? James Mackenzie, Marchmont Street, Edinburgh

The Councils` New Masterplan

Only 4 days to go until Caltongate decision...www.eh8.org.uk
Come and join the protest outside The City Chambers on The High St, The Royal Mile from 9am, Weds 6th Feb EveNewstoday

Adapted from Hans Christian Andersons`

The Emperor`s New Clothes

Not so long ago there lived a council who cared so much for fancy schemes, they spent all the city’s money upon them, and on junkets and on rebranding the city and the like. They gave no thought to their citizens or to the affairs of their city. They had a new idea for every hour of the day and spent most of their time in the pages of the local papers so that everyone might see their wonderful projects.

One day there came to the city a carpetbagger called Manish Chande who had set himself up as a developer. He said he knew how to build the most wonderful development in the world. The materials and the architecture were marvellously beautiful, he said; but this project could not be seen by anyone who was stupid or unfit for their office.

"We must have lots of developments made from these materials and architecture," thought the council. "When the people see the development, we shall know the clever people from the dunces. That developer must be brought to us at once."

So the developer came to the city chambers. The council offered him a land deal so that he might begin his work without delay.

The developer immediately set to work. They called for the worst architects, materials and the dodgiest PR firm they could find. They then worked steadily at convincing the city of their terrible plans.

Day after day the council could hear the rattling of the PR machine. They became very curious to see the wonderful masterplan and they decided to send someone to find how the developer and architects were getting on. But they remembered that no one who was stupid or was unfit for his office could see how marvellous the development was.

"We will send our faithful old Leader Donald Anderson to see it," thought the council. "He is a very clever man, and no one is more worthy of his office than he."

So good old Donald went into the room where the developer and architect sat with the masterplan. He stared and stared, and opened his eyes wide.

"Mercy on us!" he thought. "It’s monstrous” But he said nothing at all.

"Come a little closer," coaxed the architect. "Is not this a beautiful masterplan? And the buildings- are they not magnificent?" And he pointed to the concrete blocks. Poor old Donald put on his spectacles and bent over the plans, but he could see only a vision from hell!

"Mercy!" he said to himself. "Is it possible that I am unfit for my office? Certainly no one must know it. Am I a dunce? It will never do to say that I cannot see the beauty!"

"Well sir, what do you think of it?" asked the developer.

"Oh, it is charming - beautiful," said Donald, as he peered through his spectacles. "The buildings are gorgeous and the layout is very fine. I shall tell the council that I am much pleased with your work."

"We are very glad to hear you say so," said the developer and architects. And they went on talking of the masterplan. They had named it Caltongate, and described the peculiar layout. Donald listened carefully, for he wished to repeat to the Council all that was said.

Soon the developers began a consultation on the masterplan. It was a sham but it was useful to say they had done it.

The council then sent an official Alan Henderson and the chair of the planning committee Trevor Davies to see the masterplan. But these men fared no better than their leader. They stood before the monstrous masterplan, and looked and looked and looked, but they didn’t see a beautiful development fitting for the World Heritage Site.

"Is this not magnificent masterplan?" asked the developers. And then they praised the gorgeous architecture and explained how it was a once in a generation opportunity for the city, which it certainly was not.

"Dear, dear!" thought Trevor and Alan. "Surely I am not stupid. It must be that I am unfit for the council." But they did not want to appear so and they praised the beautiful Caltongate.

"Ah!" said Trevor. "The design is most unusual; and the architecture is marvellous. I shall tell the Council what fine progress you are making."

Then all of the council knew that they must view the marvellous masterplan.

They went to view it along with Trevor, Donald and Alan, who thinking that the others would see how monstrous it was, all began to cry out at once, "Look, everyone, do you see the beautiful design? And the buildings- aren’t they gorgeous?”

"See!" the developer said. "There are the beautiful buildings! Here is the economic argument! It’s an all or nothing deal. You may act as if this will not affect the world heritage status. That is the beauty of it."

"What is this?" thought the Councillors. They could only see a monstrous development not right for the world heritage site! “Are we not fit to be councillors? Am we dunces? If that were known, we should be deposed."

"Yes, yes, it is very pretty," said the councillors aloud. "We could not be better pleased!" They smiled and nodded their heads, and stared at the horrific masterplan.

Their officials too, looked and looked, but saw only what the others saw.

Yet they all cried, "It is marvellous!" And the planners recommended that the council planning committee approve the Caltongate Masterplan.

Soon everyone in the city was talking about Caltongate. Mountgrange placed ornamental cows around the city with their name on them so everyone could see what wonderful developers they were.

So then the people in the city were allowed to gaze at the masterplan for they too wanted to see the magical Caltongate

"How handsome the Councils Caltongate is!" they all cried. "What a perfect fit for the World Heritage Site! What marvellous architecture"

"But it is horrible!" cried a resident in the Old Town.

"The resident tells the truth," said her neighbours quietly.

And the people began to whisper to one another what the resident had said. "It is horrible! A resident says it is horrible!"

Soon all the people and the city’s heritage bodies were saying aloud, "But it is horrible!"

And the Council, hearing what they said, shivered, for they knew that their words were true. But it would never do to stop the process; and so they held themselves stiffer than ever. And behind them, their officials held their heads higher than ever, and took greater pains to justify the Masterplan.

As the day of the committee came nearer, the PR team worked with might and main. They were never out of the local press. They filled the pages with empty statements and the airwaves with spin.

The Planning Committee’s 15 councillors looked again the masterplan, and then they held their hands high in the air and approved it. They did not dare let it be known that they saw a vision from hell.

The developers then pretended to listen again, to the local community, while they drew up the detailed plans. They sent out more promotion all over the city. They wined and dined whoever they had to and Alistair Darling gave money towards their underground heating although this will not serve the peoples housing.

"How well the city will do with this new development." says the Chamber of Commerce? "What a becoming style! What beautiful economic arguments! They are indeed fit for the world heritage site!" The Chamber gave the developer Manish Chande a key position, and the architect was told he could redesign the entire city.

In the following year after the masterplan was approved, Donald and Trevor were not re-elected. But alas Trevor carries on his love for Caltongate in the local press from time to time and Donald now works for the developers’ infamous PR firm PPS.

Alan Henderson is still in office and has just recommended that the new planning committee approve the individual plans on the 6th of February.

Will this new planning committee join in the cries of the people or continue with the pretence………….to be continued

***********

***Today the 2nd of February yet another Caltongate Lies Letter has slithered through over 28,000 letter boxes ***