S.O.S UNESCO!

It has been brought to the Republic`s attention that someone or some people have been out calling on UNESCO`s help by leaving messages on the boardings around the empty bus depot site.

It was found here

The UNESCO delegation leaves Edinburgh tomorrow.

Planning Convenor Jim Lowrie in The Scotsman today

Haymarket Horror Called In!

Now why not Caltongate????

and finally HAPPY 60th BIRTHDAY Charles, like us here in the Republic he gets stick for daring to speak up and question the sometimes egotistical architecture of present and recent times ....and the mindless race to make all cities the same.

Ministers to CAll - IN Caltongate?

Can these buildings be spared the wrecking ball?


"Lothians Green MSP Robin Harper, Scottish Nationalist Shirley-Anne Somerville and independent Margo MacDonald are all urging ministers to order an inquiry rather than rubber stamp the £300 million scheme when it comes before them."



Sounds familiar? Well, because it is -Remember This?


"The call for a public inquiry comes as councillors prepare to consider the plans once again tomorrow. A blunder by officials meant objectors were not given their statutory 14 days to comment on the council's decision earlier this year to approve the scheme."
Full article here - Eve News 26th Aug 08

Why a Public Inquiry is Needed

Caltongate Halted!

Hold your horses or your heritage status is at risk,

says the man from Unesco

MAJOR developments in the capital should be halted until an investigation into Edinburgh's World Heritage status is completed, the head of Unesco warned yesterday.

If you haven`t written to the Scottish Ministers yet, then do mention this in your letter and demand the demolitions notices be revoked, and a public inquiry be held. See yesterdays posting on what to do.

Koichiro Matsuura, the director-general of the UN cultural body, believes no more decisions should be taken on key projects like Caltongate and Haymarket until the results of a year-long probe are published.

A team of inspectors will visit the capital in November after Unesco's world heritage committee ordered an investigation into Edinburgh's World Heritage Site.

A report, due to be published in the spring, will recommend whether Edinburgh is placed on Unesco's official "at risk" list of endangered sites.Mr Matsuura told The Scotsman there was mounting concern with Unesco about the impact of major developments in the city and the impact they would have on its skyline.

He said: "Edinburgh's World Heritage Site is very important and it is crucial that its outstanding features are preserved and protected.

"The main trigger for the probe was the city council's decision to approve the £300 million Caltongate scheme, earmarked for land on and around the site of a former bus depot, in the Old Town. Two listed buildings face demolition to make way for a five-star hotel and conference centre, which will have an entrance on the Royal Mile.

Final approval has yet to be given by the council and the Scottish Government.

Just weeks before Unesco's world heritage committee was due to meet, council planners approved the £200 million Haymarket scheme, which involves the creation of a 17-storey five-star hotel development.

Unesco also made clear that its investigation would cover the proposed redevelopment of the St James Centre, which the council is due to rule on for the first time later this year. Widespread fears have been aired about the impact a new landmark building will have on the skyline.

Mr Matsuura's trip to Edinburgh was announced just weeks after the probe into the capital's World Heritage Status was launched. Mr Matsuura said: "I am a bit concerned about the Caltongate development. I saw for myself the site of the development during my tour and was told not to worry too much about the impact it will have, but the big concern will be how it affects the historic skyline.

"The debates about new developments are not just happening in Edinburgh, but we are opposed to anything which would impact on the city's skyline. Modern high-rises should not be built in historic city centres or in areas where they would have a significant impact. Nothing else should be decided on these schemes until our inspectors have visited and reported back.

"A spokesman for Mountgrange, Caltongate's developer, said: "We're not supportive of unnecessary delays in the planning decisions that hold up major investment decisions being made that are important to the economic health of Edinburgh and Scotland.

Haymarket Hotel

"John Nesbitt, managing director of Haymarket developer Tiger, said: "Our proposals have been referred to the Scottish Government following approval from the council in June. Historic Scotland, the agency charged with safeguarding the nation's historic environment, had no objections."

A council spokeswoman said they wanted to keep details of the discussions confidential.

John Graham, Historic Scotland's chief executive, said: "We don't feel we have a part to play in this process any more." Full article by Brian Ferguson here Scotsman 20th Aug 08

The Press Association

Historic Scotland & Caltongate

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

Caltongate Battle Not Over Yet

Trump at Menie Links

Worth a watch tonight is a half hour show 10.35pm BBC1 Scotland. It all sounds too familiar doesn`t it? Except this time its in a rural setting with an American waving a chequebook.

"A unique landscape, the power of the dollar, and a billionaire used to getting his own way. These are the ingredients for a documentary which investigates the feud surrounding Donald Trump’s bid to create “the best golf course in the world”.
Issues of planning consent; the balance between progress and environmental destruction; and the emotional attachment to the land are all explored in TAKING ON TRUMP"
Campaign Menie Not Money

Chande in Edinburgh`s Princes St Gardens

Well, its definitely not the campaign`s press releases that get printed word for word in the paper, its very difficult to get much in at all....we don`t have Donald Anderson`s heavyweight PR firm PPS Group behind us for a start, only the wish to fight for the best for the city. Below is what is in the Evening News today and following is the full press release sent out last week.

Caltongate fight 'will go on' Evening News

PROTESTERS fighting against the controversial Caltongate development have vowed to continue their campaign despite the final piece of the jigsaw being approved.
Save Our Old Town, the action group which has fought against the huge redevelopment project since the outset, has reaffirmed its commitment to taking its protest to the highest level.
They are also hoping for a public inquiry, they said.
A spokesman for the campaign said: "It is far from over.
"The plans have to go to the Scottish ministers for a final decision.

"Independent MSP Margo MacDonald, SNP MSP Shirley Ann Somerville, Green MSP Robin Harper and architect James Simpson are among the many individuals and organisations calling for greater scrutiny of the plans and this could mean a public inquiry."

Campaign Press Release

"Caltongate Battle Not Over Yet" say Edinburgh World Heritage Site campaigners

Most of the controversial Caltongate development won support from Edinburgh City Council at the planning committee last month. This came as no surprise to objectors considering the council has a major financial interest in the project. The land deal between the council and Mountgrange was only to go ahead on the granting of planning permission.

The Committee had asked developers Mountgrange to come back with an alternative to the destruction of all but the facades of the Canongate tenement buildings.

So when developer Mountgrange altered the application to propose retaining the "majority" of the front and rear elevations of the McRae tenements as well as preserving the buildings at 221-223 on the historic street, the city's planning committee approved the plans yesterday.

Save Our Old Town campaigner Sally Richardson said today

"The whole tenements thing was a carefully stage managed sideshow, a smokescreen to hide amongst other things, the demolitions like that of the listed Canongate Venture , the building of the controversial Malcolm Fraser block that will ruin Jeffrey Street and the overall total inappropriateness of the architecture, for the World Heritage Site"

She added " Its also to distract from the many legal concerns such as the complaints that are currently been investigated by the EU Commission, due to the extent that Mountgrange may have been provided with privileged access and offered exclusive consideration in pursuance of its commercial objectives; Mountgrange`s donation to the Labour Party; the actions of Donald Anderson during his period as council leader should also be scrutinised, given that he is now director of the developers PR firm PPS Group; the clear breach of Article 7 of the Standards Commission (Scotland) code of conduct in the case of Planning Committee convenor Jim Lowrie, because of his views expressed in the Edinburgh Evening News of 11th October 2007, and these are only a few"

John Thompson another campaigner added "I have seen it all before - they'll just tell us its progress, like the St James's Centre, but money was made there and money will be made from its demolition and replacement, by no other than Caltongate`s main architect Allan Murray who it seems has been made Edinburgh makeover king"

But it is far from over; the plans have to go to Scottish Ministers for a final decision. Independent MSP Margo Macdonald, SNP MSP Shirley Ann Somerville, Green MSP Robin Harper and Conservation Architect James Simpson are among the many individuals and organisations calling for greater scrutiny of the plans and this could mean a Public Inquiry.
"We'll keep fighting' says SOOT.

Questions That Demand Answers

Save Our Old Town Campaign

After yesterdays misleading article, The Evening News has at least printed part of the other side, which isn`t fuelled by Mountgrange`s PR machine headed by former council leader Donald Anderson Calls continue for Caltongate public inquiry

But here are some of the questions that need to be raised and which could be answered at an Inquiry What You Can Do Here

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 Party

which 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


5. 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 development
Mountgrange`s Manish Chande is head of their property portfolio group see page 4 of their magazine
Chambers Magazine and in Evening News Today Ron Hewitt of Chambers Roots For Caltongate

Each daily blog we will try to highlight a campaign or two locally or nationally..

Todays campaign has my 5 year old son`s favourite car mad Jeremy Clarkson supporting the campaign to stop a demolition in Devon Brunel Builing Totnes

Where are the big names for Edinburgh when she needs them?

Public Inquiry for Caltongate?

Save Our Old Town Campaign

Swinney asked to call in Caltongate application

Today Monday, 25 February 2008 this article appears in the Scottish Parliament`s

Online Holyrood Magazine

Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth John Swinney has been asked to call in Edinburgh’s Caltongate planning application or hold a major inquiry by opponents of the scheme, including one of his party’s own MSPs.

Architect James Simpson wrote to Swinney late last week, stating that City of Edinburgh Council’s material interest in the site proposed for development and the high number of objections meant that a ministerial decision was appropriate.

Simpson, who is vice-president of the UK committee of the International Council for Monuments and Sites, funded by bodies including Historic Scotland and Edinburgh Council itself, also called for a public local inquiry. He asked Swinney to consider the views of the Reporter in such an inquiry before coming to a final decision.

Lothians SNP MSP Shirley- Anne Somerville has also written to the Cabinet Secretary asking him to call in the application with a view to addressing a number of concerns.

She said that she wasn’t necessarily against the development, but was against the actual plan that had been put forward. Meanwhile, Green MSP Robin Harper is calling for a public local inquiry and Independent MSP Margo MacDonald indicated in a recent column for the Evening News that she would support such moves.

In his letter to Swinney, Simpson says that the ‘Caltongate’ project was strongly backed by the previous administration on the council in a way which “verged on the improper”.

“It was simply inappropriate, in my view, for the council to encourage at the masterplanning stage, the demolition of a listed building in its ownership, which it had a statutory duty to protect.”

However, he stressed the main issue was the impact of the proposed project on the historic Canongate, the Waverley valley, iconic views of the Old Town from Calton Site as a whole.

“The suggestion that this particular development, and others like it,are essential for the wellbeing of the city is, frankly, bizarre. It is surely self-evident that it is the sheer quality and consistency of Edinburgh in architectural and planning terms, which are the foundations of Edinburgh’s greatness,” Simpson explained.

The Architectural Heritage Society for Scotland said that it hadn’t yet decided if it would write to Swinney, but that it was certainly considering it as there were “grounds for a public inquiry”. Grassroots group the Canongate Community Forum is asking people on its website to write to the Cabinet Secretary requesting a public inquiry.

However, a spokesman for developer Mountgrange said that there had been a four year process of consultation and dialogue, and that there was two to one backing for the scheme amongst members of the public.


“Historic Scotland, the nation’s heritage watchdog, has given support and the council has approved the masterplan and six out of seven of the applications. The democratic will of the people of Edinburgh is being followed, but it is a decision for Scottish ministers.”

Now lets see what truth if any has been uttered by Mountgrange`s spindoctor..


"four year process of consultation and dialogue"

The Caltongate Masterplan was unveiled to the public in October 2005, so that makes around two and a half years, not four...

and as for "consultation and dialogue" these words have been banded around for the two and a half years but their meanings never enacted..

"two to one backing for the scheme amongst members of the public"

Now from Mountgranges Caltongate News Jan 2008, that was posted to over 28,000 addresses within a one mile radius of the proposed Caltongate, they say

"Almost 700 (692 infact) residents returned questionnaires to the independent market research company to express their views on the proposed redevelopment of the site of the now demolished former bus depot and surrounding area. By a majority of 2 to 1, respondents said that they believed that the 300 million Caltongate project will improve Edinburgh`s Old Town."

So that equates to 346 members of the public, hardly anywhere near 224,312 members of the public, half the population of the cit, that they are implying ... (population of Edinburgh 448,624 at the 2001 Census)

Now that hardly compares to the thousands who have signed the online and paper petitions against the scheme? And of course the hundreds who have objected to the individual planning applications.

As for Historic Scotland that will be explored in tomorrows blog........

How You Can Stop The Wrecking Ball

Save Our Old Town Campaign

what would be lost

To Stop Caltongate individuals and organisations need to

1. Write to the following Scottish Ministers urging them that Caltongate be called in and determination sought through a public inquiry

Cabinet Secretary John Swinney Minister for - Finance & Sustainable Growth

Linda Fabiani - Minister for Europe, External Affairs Affairs & Culture

More on their responsibilities here Scottish Government

you can email them at this address marking your letters for the attention of each individual minister scottish.ministers@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

Write to them at
St Andrew`s House
Regent Road
Edinburgh EH1 3DG

2. You should also write to your constituency and regional MSPs find them here MSP FINDER by your postcode urging them that Caltongate should be called in and a Public Inquiry held.

3. You can also write to your MP and MEPS Find MP and MEPS (Scottish ones are listed even although it doesn’t say on home page, you just enter your postcode and they will appear)

4. You could also write to your local councillor(s) (although yours may be one of the planning committee that voted the plans through on the 6th Feb! (check here) asking them to write to The Scottish Government to press for for call in and determination through the Public Inquiry System.

All councillors emails or write to them C/O The City of Edinburgh Council, City Chambers, High Street, Edinburgh, EH1 1YJ Find your councillors

Among points you could make are the following, do add your own and include any material you feel important, especially if you think it hasn`t been considered, and do let others know they can do this too.

It is understood that all the Caltongate Planning Applications must be sent to ministers under the Notification of Applications procedures for a number of reasons -

1. The council has a significant financial interest in the proposed applications and stands to receive financial payment on the delivery of planning consent.

2. The proposals ( in particular the demolition of structurally sound, in use buildings, both listed and unlisted in an Outstanding Conservation Area and World Heritage Site) conflict with key policies contained in the approved Structure and Local Plans and as such is a significant departure from the Development Plan.

3. There have been a significant level of objections received from community organisations and heritage groups in addition to the numerous individuals.

4. New legislation, policies, planning guidence is at a crucial stage and the proposals could set a dangerous precedent which would prejudice the effectiveness of these new policies.

5. The Caltongate Masterplan has been imbedded in the Finalised Local Plan for the area which has provoked many objections which have been requested to be heard at a LPI. The protection of listed and unlisted buildings, reference to the World Heritage Site, protection of housing and has yet to be tested through the Development Plan process.

6. The consultation process has been heavily critisised as not being inclusive, balanced or transparent and conflicts with new government guidance on growing community assets, partnership working, and community engagement.

7. The site lies in an area with international importance, a World Heritage Site.

8. This is a crucial time to send out the right message to developers.

9. The claimed economic benefits of the scheme could equally be made for a far more appropriate scheme, retaining homes and listed buildings, and with a far less detrimental impact on the WHS.

You should also write to ICOMOS UK as its ICOMOS who advises UNESCO

International Council on Monuments & Sites UK, 70 Cowcross Street, London, EC1M 6EJ

Email
admin@icomos-uk.org

You could also inform UNESCO

The List of World Heritage in Danger is designed to inform the international community of conditions which threaten the very characteristics for which a property was inscribed on the World Heritage List, and to encourage corrective action.

Edinburgh`s Inscription

Edinburgh World Heritage Trust

Private individuals, non-governmental organizations, or other groups can draw the World Heritage Committee's attention to existing threats. If the alert is justified and the problem serious enough, the Committee may consider including the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

To inform the World Heritage Committee about threats to sites, you may contact the Committee's Secretariat at:

E-mail: wh-info@unesco.org

World Heritage CentreUNESCO7, place de Fontenoy75352, Paris, 07 SPFrance