Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Heritage body hits out over visual impact of 17-storey capital hotel

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

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

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 27 May 2009
WORLD heritage body Unesco has strongly criticised plans for a 17-storey Edinburgh hotel, saying it would have a "major visual impact" on surrounding buildings in the capital.
A public inquiry into the £200 million project heard that the UN body had "considerable concern about the height of the proposed hotel in the Haymarket development".

A two-week public inquiry into the project at the disused Morrison Street goods y
ard near Haymarket railway station which includes two hotels, offices shops and restaurants, began on Monday.

Critics, including the Cockburn Association, Edinburgh World Heritage and residents' groups, say they do not object to the site being redeveloped, but insist the height of the 17-storey, five-star hotel, located at the edge of a World Heritage Site, is out of scale with buildings in the surrounding area.

The plans were originally backed by Edinburgh City Council but were "called in" by the Scottish Government because the site was previously council-owned. Unesco officials visited the city on a monitoring mission last November, raising fears that the city would lose its heritage status.

In its report to be presented to the World Heritage Committee meeting in Seville next month and released to the inquiry yesterday, they raise strong concerns about the hotel which Tiger Developments wants to build for its client the InterContinental Hotel Group. Unesco wrote: "The proposed 17-storey hotel would have a major visual impact on the property and dominate the St Mary's Cathedral towers from several key viewpoints."

The officials also said there was a need for a "declared buffer zone" between the proposed development and the heritage site, adding that current planning mechanisms seemed unable to deter proposals such as that for a 17-storey hotel.

The need to raise awareness among potential developers and stakeholders about the "outstanding universal value" of the city's Old and New Towns and what this meant for future development was also highlighted.

Commenting after the inquiry finished for the day, Maria Kelly, of the Dalry Colonies Residents' Association, one of the project's opponents, said: "We feel vindicated by the Unesco report. We were led to believe by the developers and the council that they would not be interested because it was outside the World Heritage Site."

At yesterday's public inquiry Ken Williamson, partner at Hurd Rolland, chartered architects, on behalf of the developers, was questioned by John Campbell QC, acting for the Cockburn Association, about part of his written submission.

This stated that in recent years objectors in Edinburgh to individual proposals that have undergone the full scrutiny of the statutory planning process had "sought to bring additional external pressure from the World Heritage Committee, in the form of threatening inclusion in the list of World Heritage in Danger or indeed removal from the World Heritage list".

Mr Campbell, QC, asked him: "Aren't there very strict criteria for inclusion." Mr Williamson relied: "Yes, very vigorous".

Mr Williamson also maintained the hotel would "signal the main gateway into Edinburgh" by creating a landmark building.





The full article contains 514 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Buttress,

27/05/2009 00:06:40
Developers know about WHS status, but ignore it.
2

Buttress,

27/05/2009 00:10:41
The plans were called in for a a variety of reasons, the design and height of the tower being a key one.
3

RDavis,

Vienna 27/05/2009 07:34:39
What are the town Planners doing?
4

Buttress,

27/05/2009 07:50:59
Passing anything that makes cash for developers.
5

Buttress,

27/05/2009 08:01:07
The reasons for the inquiry, and the possible failure of CEC over planning issues, is here:

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/212606/0079309.pdf

6

dba,

HAYMARKET 27/05/2009 08:10:58
1; The size and cost of this development is matched only by the egos of every archictect involved in it!
2: The BIGGER the dvelopment the HIGHER the fees they receive.
3: NONE OF THEM actually live within or even near the 'footprint' of the site
4: GIven that we are in the worse recession in modern history - where do the developers think all the five star customers for the new hotel are going to come from...Edinburgh has a plethora od good quality hotels with several being planned...
5: SURELY the views of the citizens who will be dramatically and detrimentally affected by this scheme SHOULD be given primacy. (As opposed to the developers and their archictects who have attempted to ignore those views and force the scheme through.)
7

Buttress,

27/05/2009 08:15:34
Indeed.

"Residents living immediately north of the development, notably on Grosvenor Place, have objected due to loss of privacy, daylight and amenity because of the height and design of the 5* hotel. Some windows on adjacent properties failed sunlight tests due to overshadowing from the development. The photomontages submitted with the application indicate that this building will be visually dominant from several vantage points around the Haymarket."

"The photomontages illustrate that the hotel building will be visible in many key views in and out of the city, and prominent in some of these. Whilst the building will be visible from many locations around the city, the views from Craiglockart Hill and from the north – Inverleith Park, the Royal Botanic Gardens, the Dean Gallery and along Ferry Road – are of particular note due to the proximity of the
proposal to St Mary’s Cathedral spires . The building would also appear close to sightlines to Edinburgh Castle in some views from the West of the city. [Note: In viewing the photomontages, it should be borne in mind that the image presented is a wider field of view than would be perceived when looking towards the site from these locations. As a result, the development would take up a greater part of a person’s field of view – and therefore appear more prominent – than may be suggested by the photomontages.]"


8

Edinburgh Ian,

Edinburgh 27/05/2009 08:38:46
The Council only back the project because of the contributions that will be made to the trams. Giving planning permission for this shows just how little respect the Council have for this City.

The waste of over £500m on trams is a bigger disgrace than the MPs expenses scandal.
9

Buttress,

27/05/2009 08:45:55
"The processing of the current application

The council’s Development Management Sub-Committee undertook a visit to the site, then held a hearing to which its Director of Planning presented the application followed by presentations from the Cockburn Association & Edinburgh World Heritage, Dalry Colonies Residents’ Association, West End Community Council and the applicants. The Reports to the Committee covered all the issues relevant to the application, and copies of all representations were available to Committee members. The Committee therefore had the opportunity to consider the merits of the proposal and the views of all interested parties.

The Council’s Guideline for the Protection of Key Views was approved by the Planning Committee on 19 June 2008. The Development Management Sub Committee held its hearing into this application on 25 June. The Committee Report covered the impact of the 5* hotel on the key views identified in this document, but without specific reference to its own detailed policy guidance on how the impacts on these views should be considered. Nor is there reference to the special qualities and characteristics which define the World Heritage Site and the Conservation Areas adjacent to the site. In relation to the local impacts of the hotel, the Report does not address in any detail the townscape impact of the hotel from locations close to the site such as Grosvenor Place and the Haymarket junction.

The consultation draft of the Haymarket Urban Design Framework states that its development principles are the first step in articulating how a successful gateway to the city can be achieved at Haymarket, and that further detailed briefs for Haymarket will be required. In considering this application, the Committee was aware that the emerging Framework had been approved for public consultation on 15 May, but there is no analysis in the Committee Report to demonstrate whether the application is consistent with the principles in the Framework."
10

Rap,

27/05/2009 09:11:19
Ah yes, the Haymarket Uban Design Framework, whose public consultation period closed 2 months after the decision was made on this significant site. I do so hope CEC get a hard time about that. For two days we have been hearing what an important place Haymarket is because of'e gateway position from the west, sher amount of traffic, 2nd busiest station, etc, and yet it's not so important that it's worth waiting a while to finish the framework draft before making the decision on a site which overlooks this sodding gateway.
11

Leila,

Edinburgh 27/05/2009 09:27:40
#8: "The Council only back the project because of the contributions that will be made to the trams."

Surely the council can no longer insist on developer contributions to the tram from anyone, now that they've let the Princes Street hotel developers off making any contribution.
12

Rap,

27/05/2009 09:31:31
The Council have yet to be called in this inquiry Leila so I do wonder if this topic may come up. I suspect if any planning approval is actually granted by the Scottish Ministers it will be a conversation held behind closed doors, away from our prying eyes.

I would say that I don't think the planners only approved this scheme because of the £ for the trams, but I do think it was more an economical decision than an architectural one, which I thought was outside the scope of the planning dept.
13

Buttress,

27/05/2009 09:50:04
Oh, but it was backed by the Chamber of Commerce. They love anything new and shiny, and will claim the council is putting off developers and 'investors' if plans are not enthusiastically greeted. Nothing else matters.

14

Rap,

27/05/2009 09:56:32
I am looking forward to hearing Graeme Birse in person to see if he is as I imagined.
15

Buttress,

27/05/2009 10:13:38
Oh, I am sure he is as you imagined... sincere and with the best interests of the city at his heart, not his membership and his job... was a journalist I seem to recall, an honourable and noble profession...

16

Concerned Citizen,

Edinburgh 27/05/2009 13:12:47
What the hell , the developers have paid their bribe to the Council's pet Tram project. Oh ,let them get on with ruining the city heritage.

Who in the council actually cares for the heritage of the city any longer ? Money, Money , Money for the trams is the driving force these days. What can we do as citzens ? Nothing.

The World Heritage Status means nothing to the Council. Trams , Trams and more Trams is more important. Who cares ?

Building anything in Edinburgh and pay for our trams.

Anything goes. Citizen's of Edinburgh do not complain as we , the council, will pretend to listen and will totally ignore you all.
17

Billy the Fish,

Edinburgh 27/05/2009 17:57:34

There is a real danger if this flawed scheme goes ahead that Edinburgh will lose its world heritage site status.
18

animmo,

27/05/2009 18:29:40
Edinburgh doesn't deserve it's World Heritage status as it is. Look at our main thoroughfare, Princes St. It's absolutely awful. A hotch-potch of sub-standard buildings from every decade of the last 150 years, none of which compliment their neighbours. It's about time Edinburgh went back to the drawing board, literally, but the haymarket development is not the way forward
19

Rap,

27/05/2009 18:30:03
Billy, I'm not sure this one development would lose Edinburgh the WHS, but the precedent this development would set to other egotistical architects and their buildings around the WHS might.
20

Pilrig,

Livingston 27/05/2009 18:57:50
3 - they're playing 'Monopoly'
21

Rap,

27/05/2009 19:25:12
I think it's more like Sim City. For real.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Are Edinburgh’s planning regulations too strict on the city’s business community?
Yes - everything should be done to help businesses in a recession
Yes - they pale into insignificance when compared to the tram works
No - the city’s heritage and appearance can’t be compromised

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.