Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Saturday, 7th November 2009 Change Date

Debatable listings 'will stop us building for city's future'

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 Edinburgh Evening News 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: 16 July 2008
IT is supposed to be the guardian of Scotland's most precious historic gems, protecting them from irresponsible and overzealous development.
Yet Historic Scotland has been accused of "casting a shadow" over the future of Edinburgh by granting protected status to buildings that don't deserve it.

One member of Edinburgh's influential council planning committee today hit out at the Govern
ment watchdog, saying it threatens the regeneration of the Capital.

Councillor Cameron Rose, a retired police inspector who represents the Southside and Newington, questioned the A-listed status handed to the Royal Commonwealth Pool (RCP).

He also pointed to the Caltongate project, where two C-listed buildings – the Sailors' Ark and former Canongate Venture school – within the Old Town site threatened to curtail the £300 million development.

A quick trawl through the list of the 4500 protected buildings in the Capital produces plenty of examples that may raise eyebrows, including Gilmerton's Mechanic Arms pub, The Crags bar on Dalkeith Road and a former stationery warehouse in Sighthill Industrial Estate.

The Capital has more listed properties than any other similar sized area of Britain. Anyone who wants to demolish, extend or make even minor alterations to a listed building must receive special permission to do so.

Cllr Rose said: "A lot of what Historic Scotland does is very good, but a number of buildings seem to be listed simply 'because we can', rather than because they are valuable.

"One could very legitimately ask the question why the RCP is A-listed. It's debatable whether it has (historic] significance. Regarding the Canongate Venture, one has to ask whether (its status] was worth it in the context of creating a new living community. Caltongate could have fallen over that issue.

"There needs to be a legislative look at Historic Scotland in relation to listings."

A Historic Scotland spokeswoman said: "We are certain that the Royal Commonwealth Pool is fully deserving of its category A-listing.

"Listing helps ensure that decisions about proposed change can be made on the basis of a full understanding of a building's merit. As was the case with the Caltongate development, where having carefully considered the case Historic Scotland did not object to the proposed demolition of the Canongate Venture building."

She added: "Cllr Rose's comments are extremely surprising – and do not, we suspect, represent the views of the council or its administration – as we explained to him last month that Historic Scotland assesses the architectural and historic merit of all historic buildings, against published criteria."

City planning leader, councillor Jim Lowrie, said: "The right balance between old and new is important. I think that Historic Scotland takes a realistic approach, helping to ensure high standards but supporting development where appropriate.

"In Edinburgh we do have a challenge because of how many listed buildings there are, and that means taking longer and greater care in processing planning applications, but overall they definitely enrich the city."





The full article contains 493 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 16 July 2008 12:20 PM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Edinburgh Council
 
1

P I Staker,

16/07/2008 12:27:29
If Historic Scotland wanted to give Cooncillor Rose's bicycle an 'A' listing I don't think he would object.
2

alex paterson,

edinburgh 16/07/2008 12:33:11
Councillor Rose is good at pedaling,but not on a cycle.
3

Jingsitsme,

EDINBURGH 16/07/2008 12:39:36
Historic Scotland need a facelift themselves or we will have no historic scotland in the future.

Time some of on the board retired taking their old ideas etc with them and make way for younger blood who are the future.
4

the good doctor,

waiting for buttress 16/07/2008 13:02:22
the commonwealth pool is a perfect (and too rare in edinburgh) example of modernist architecture at it's best you philestine phool!
5

Statsman,

Edinburgh 16/07/2008 13:12:27
Yes Cameron. Let's give you the right to ruin Edinburgh so you can get all the money for your beloved trams.

"There is an established principle of developers contributing to the tram scheme and we need to ensure that is followed through to its full extent." - Councillor Cameron Rose.

http://www.redorbit.com/news/business/1111726/forth_ports_poised_to_sink_millions_into_trams/index.html

Historic Scotland are simply an obstacle. They make it difficult for pro-tram councillors to raise money for trams.
6

FamilyMan,

Edinburgh 16/07/2008 13:13:05
God help us with councillors like C Rose making planning decisions from a position of uninformed arrogance. One basic rule of etiquette, let alone good design practice (of which as a member of the planning committee he should be a guardian) is not to state lazily: I don't like it, but to explain WHY one does or does not like a building or design. Just as Historic Scotland explains in great detail why buildings are listed.
7

Jams,

Edinburgh 16/07/2008 13:28:46
Cameron Rose - proving once more just how much noise an empty can makes.

Agree with #4 - RCP is an iconic piece of modern architecture which sits well with its older cousins. Unlike another modern building which sits next to Holyrood Park !
8

PaulB,

Edinburgh 16/07/2008 14:13:51
A story about acrchitecture mentioning Caltongate - where's Butress? The debate needs you! For what its worth I cannt believe the David Hume Tower is listed - it ought to be demolished - what an eyesore!
9

stef.s,

16/07/2008 15:15:11
#8. DHT, what about Appleton tower?
10

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 16/07/2008 15:24:05
"The Capital has more listed properties than any other similar sized area of Britain."

Yes, it's called snobbery.

There are far too many over-protected piles of rubble in this town. If organisations like Historic Scotland, etc want these things protected, let them pay for it out of their own 'budgets' and not by using public funding raised from the tax payer.

11

Louis Catorze,

16/07/2008 15:32:04
Listing doesn't seem to protect buildings from neglect or developers, so what's the problem having so many listed?

12

Jed Smith,

Moscow 16/07/2008 17:52:18
Good story here by Alan Rodent. He really gnaws away at the truth and stuff, yeah?
13

Buttress,

16/07/2008 18:22:41
Give him his answer at the ballot box - man's a fool.

What can you say to idiots like this?

Of course, the Canongate Venture and the Sailor's Ark threaten nothing as the council has given permission for them to be demolished, and they could have been incorporated into the development anyhow, if the Masterplanner had been any use.

Peter dear - Historic Scotland's cash is public funding, but it's the owners who pay for the upkeep of listed buildings. But you know that.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

14

Buttress,

16/07/2008 18:31:41
Here's his website folks - he says you can contact him to give him your views:

http://www.cameronrose.org/

And this gem from his blog last week::

'Fifth heritage site for Historic Scotland
Historic Scotland, based at Longmore House in Salisbury Place have led the charge to have the Antonine wall canonised as Scotland's fifth World Heritage Site. Coming amidst a flurry of concern as to whether the Caltongate (and other projects) have jeopardised the World Heritage Site status of Edinburgh's Old and New Towns, it remains to be seen whether, in the long term, World Heritage Status is a good thing.'

Yes Cameron Rose it is. It's about the celebration of some of mankind's greatest cultural achievements. Clearly you are not amongst them.

But today's exciting entry on your blog, showing just how on the ball you are as a representaive of one of the most beautiful and historic cities in the world:

'Did you see this bike theft on Sunday
An orange Airo bike was stolen from the roof of a car in Newington Road outside Peckhams on Sunday 13th July. See here for a picture of this very distinctive bike and for contact with the loser.'

So folks - you can make direct contact with the loser via an e-mail link from his website, and tell him where to get off.






15

Buttress,

16/07/2008 18:41:16
Oh Mr Roden - Historic Scotland isn't a 'watchdog'.



16

Graham P,

Edinburgh 16/07/2008 18:59:20
Peter #10 would appear to be very ignorant and very prone to opening his mouth to let his belly rumble, as well as being "very disappointed/concerned". He says "If organisations like Historic Scotland, etc want these things protected, let them pay for it out of their own 'budgets' and not by using public funding raised from the tax payer" - their own budgets coming, of course, from public funding raised from the taxpayer.
17

Buttress,

16/07/2008 19:22:44
Peter is trolling. Don't worry about him. It's an adopted persona and he makes it up to suit the story. He tells me he lives in a B listed building in the Canongate...

But worry abour Mr Rose, and worry about the fact Historic Scotland lost its way over the Canongate Venture, and is happy to see the Sailor's Ark be facaded - terrible conservation. What a farce to have this, and the council tenements facades, as the front face of a five star hotel. Hope the new residents of the Sofitel, in Embra to see the historic sights and savour the local character, appreciate the irony.

The Canongate Venture (School) is a good, handsome building eminently capable of continuing in use. In fact it was in use, as valuable business start up units, but it's going to be simply bulldozed, for a building of nothing like the quality. They don't build 'em like that any more, sadly. In reality, no permission should have been given. There was no overriding case for flogging it off, indeed it may well be an illegal deal, as no-one else has been given the opportunity to buy it.

HS simply didn't put up a fight. Worth asking why. Its pals at the Chamber of Commerce seem to know though. It's ceratainly scared now to be seen to be 'standing in the way' of development.

English Heritage is bad at times, but when co-erced will put up a struggle. Historic Scotland needs to be a watchdog - it's not at present, but you can see the fine political line it's having to tread, with idiots like this in charge of planning.


Mike Wade in the Times last week:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article4289882.ece

Caltongate:

www.eh8.org.uk

and the blog.


18

is it me?,

Edinburgh 16/07/2008 19:51:31
I still can't believe the apparent apathy about the George St statues being removed, "temporarily" (they won't go back, at least not in the same place, it's been known for years that traffic nabobs saw them as a hindrance to traffic flow. They'll be replaced by mini roundabouts).

19

Buttress,

16/07/2008 19:55:39
With people like this in charge of the city, what hope?

20

Julian.,

edinburgh 16/07/2008 22:09:39
Not exactly building a strong case there Cameron. You complain of c listed buildings which have actually been passed for demolition...not much of a hiderance there.

And as for the Commonwealth Pool...Yes, it's not exactly the Taj Mahal but, as has been said, it's a good example of modern architecture. Built in the late 60's, could you even give me a better example for that period in Edinburgh?
21

Buttress,

16/07/2008 22:30:33
More:

http://www.edinburgharchitecture.co.uk/commonwealth_pool.htm

Tha architect also designed the Hume Tower, and British Home Stores...

Ah well. The Commonwealth Pool is stunning, I agree.


22

Think Tank,

16/07/2008 22:55:10
As has been debated ad nauseum on this site, architecture is a purely subjective experience. I think there is an issue with the number of listings towards the "C" end of the scale- it seems rather a waste of public money for many buildings that have no inherent heritage value.

I firmly disagree with the article with regard to the Commonwealth Pool which undoubtedly deserves its listing. It is a sadly rare example of modern Edinburgh architecture that hasn't been constrained by a desire to be "hidden" amongst the older buildings. The new Parliament building is another fine example of this, but there are very few other such projects within the centre of Edinburgh.

I've always firmly believed that the best way of enhancing the world heritage site is for key sites (NOT every gapsite) to build unashamedly modern buildings, rather than unimaginative Edinburgh sandstone identi-kit constructions. Sadly the latter seem to predominate simply because developers know it's easier and cheaper to not get into a fight with the various heritage organisations that (in my opinion) confuse "heritage" with "old".

The result is a terrible swathe of unimaginative "nothing" architecture.

23

Buttress,

16/07/2008 23:09:34
Really, you haven't much idea though about 'heritage' organisations, simply a load of oft-repeated prejudices.



24

Buttress,

16/07/2008 23:12:39
By the way - what waste of public money is there in listing buildings at Grade C?

Do explain.
25

Howard Moon,

17/07/2008 10:43:53
Unlike some others, I have no vested interest at all in this specific story or in any other aspects of it, but I'm extremely surprised at the tone of some of the language here. I think some people maybe need to take a step back and consider whether or not this is an issue worth getting so angry and aggressive over.

From what I can see, Councillor Rose is questioning the listed status of certain buildings in a measured, responsible way, and is avoiding 'arrogance' and hyperbole. Surely, even if you disagree with him, he is entitled to do this (at least he doesn't seem to have a problem with people passing comment, unlike most of his contemporaries). The Commonwealth Pool is not fit for purpose (regardless of the merit or otherwise of its architecture, which as has been said is subjective) and needs to be rebuilt or completely renovated. Mr Rose would be right in my opinion to be concerned as to whether its listed status threatens attempts to do this.

I, like most Evening News commentators, love a good gripe and moan as much as anyone, but to attack a good, honest, hard-working councillor like Cameron Rose (yes, there is at least one) in the way some have here seems to be taking it too far.
26

Buttress,

17/07/2008 10:59:25
Yet he's talking a great deal of nonsense - and it's worrying, part of the ongoing anti-heritage agenda becoming rather prevalent in the city. This man is on the planning committee. I wonder, too, where and when he 'hit out' - did he simply contact this paper for a gripe? If so, is it right to be able to use his position as a councillor in this way?

Also, why should the pool not be listed at Grade A? It's a stunning piece of 20th century architecture, and listing isn't preventing a major renovation and upgrading programme from taking place. It's a pool eminently capapable of continuing use.

I have no vested interest either. I simply don't think what he says is true, and I think that Caltongate is several demolitions too far.

Pictures at

www.eh8.org.uk



27

Buttress,

17/07/2008 11:21:56
Additionally - the comparison with other parts of Britain is not sensible. The listing system in Scotland is not the same as in England and Wales, which is why there are so many Category C buildings - local interest. In England and Wales, those tend to be covered by Conservation Area legislation, which gives some protection from unwarranted demoliton, and also local listing.

It seems to me that a historic capital city would have a large number of listed buildings.

It additionally seems to me that some of the suggestions made in this article were hardly measured -

'Yet Historic Scotland has been accused of "casting a shadow" over the future of Edinburgh by granting protected status to buildings that don't deserve it.'

'One member of Edinburgh's influential council planning committee today hit out at the Government watchdog, saying it threatens the regeneration of the Capital.'

The idea that buildings are simply listed 'because we can' is risible.

This is almost as daft as the Allan Murray 'Caltongate or Edinburgh must die' article printed here recently.

Listing should be seen as a spur to sensitive regeneration, not a block.









28

Howard Moon,

17/07/2008 12:42:35
Fair enough Buttress. I understand what you're viewpoint is. I happen to completely disagree, and feel that Edinburgh's complete inability to embrace that which is new because of fear that this will some way render obselete that which is old has held this city back for far too long. Walk down the Royal Mile today. Sure, some of it is impressive, and bears witness to a fascinating rich history we are fortunate to have. But much of it is not. Parts of it are awful, and the streets cutting across it are almost uniformly horrendous. South Bridge? Compare this with other cities. Leeds, Manchester, London, these cities are growing alongside the historical interest, not on top of it. We're more concerned with trying to protect a 'skyline'.

As for the RCP, you say 'its a pool eminently capapable of continuing use'. Do you honestly believe this? Are you aware of what regulations are demanded of competition-standard swimming and diving centres?

Anyway I have no wish to get involved in a debate and I'm sure you don't either. I would say to you, be careful who you criticise though. Cameron Rose is the only councillor who I could be with any certainty hold to be 100% honest. It might not mean he's always correct IMHO, but it's all I ask for in my elected officials.
29

Buttress,

17/07/2008 13:05:39
Edinburgh has at its heart a World Heritage Site.

London has only small portions, and there is mounting concern regarding those, Leeds and Manchester are not WHS and much of what is happening in those cities (which most certainly have not the long history of Edinburgh) isn't particularly sensitive either. There's a vast amount of dereliction still, too.

WHS and listed buildings should be seen as a spur,and certainly it's not any hindrnace, as I said, to sensitive regeneration, not daft overblown schemes like Caltongate, which are simply bad, clone town stuff, and what is happening to historic buildings there is a disgrace. Conservation and listing and World Heritage Site status should mean that any developnment is of the highest quality. When it's gone though it's gone, and can't be brought back.

I think that Edinburgh has a magnificent skyline worthy of protecting from inappropriate tall buildings, too, and that's under discussion. Consider how future genrerations might not thank you for spoiling some of what makes the city special for commercial greed and architect's egos.

Of course the pool is able to be re-used - it's just been given a vast pot of cash to refurbish it. Not everyone who uses it requires competition standad facilities, of course.

Honesty is one thing - but I suggest he gets his facts right, or he risks sounding just silly, which is worrying in a member of the planning committee, and I still wonder where, in what official arena, he voiced his opinions? Or was it a personal call to this paper?

The article doesn't say.
30

Buttress,

17/07/2008 13:12:30
http://news.scotsman.com/commonwealthpool/5m-pool-grant-enables-city.4284621.jp
31

Buttress,

23/07/2008 20:12:03
Our anti-heriatge campaigner strikes again:

A tendency to control!
Over the last year or so the tendency of government bodies to want to take control where it is not strictly necessary, has impressed itself on me. This is especially so in the area of planning.

For example, Edinburgh now has thirty nine Conservation Areas. Conservation Areas do serve a useful purpose - but I am concluding we have gone too far. A recent attempt to extend the Grange Conservation area was prevented after I learned that the occupants of the homes to be included in the extension were against the move. Thankfully that proposed extension was defeated. These controls sometimes increase the value of homes and certainly work towards preservation of character and history. But they can also be costly to residents and prevent legitimate change.

I recently spoke to a reporter from the Evening News about the sometimes unintended consequencies of the culture of control. This article, which concentrates on historic Scotland's listing of buildings resulted.

Posted by CR at 21:19 0 comments

From Cameron Rose's blog.

Bet he's so pleased with himself!





32

Buttress,

23/07/2008 20:20:58
'Architect Peter Wilson has something to say on Rebus Rose Rantings

Thorny Subject
Still in Edinburgh, Planning Committee member, Councillor Cameron Rose, has taken it upon himself to expose the architectural and urban design credentials that made him an obvious choice for the job. The retired police inspector feels a “legislative look” at Historic Scotland’s listing policy should be taken, a viewpoint formed from his bewilderment that a building such as the Royal Commonwealth Pool by RMJM could possibly merit it’s A-listed status.
Showing a commendable appreciation of 1960’s architecture, Councillor Rose feels that “it’s debatable whether it has historic significance”. His real beef, however, is with a listing process that allowed two C category buildings to impede the Council’s eagerness to appease the developer of the Caltongate site next to its new headquarters. As with so many of his colleagues, he is happy to repeat the public relations rhetoric that the proposed project is “creating a new living community” in the heart of the Old Town, encouraging the thought that perhaps it is the city’s Planning Committee itself that merits a legislative look at some of its recent decisions.'

Article in Architecture Scotland


Link:

http://www.independentrepublicofthecanongate.blogspot.com/



33

Howard Moon,

28/07/2008 16:38:33
Thanks for the running updates on Councillor Rose's blog, Buttress. Interesting that you choose to do that rather than actually comment on the blog yourself. Having looked at it, it doesn't seem as though Mr Rose is 'pleased with himself' at all, rather that he is simply doing what all of our councillors should be doing and letting us know what it is he is up to, and why he's up to it. Doesn't look like he would be a hard man to track down and speak with either, so why don't you just give him a call or meet him somewhere and actually talk sensibly about your learned concerns, rather than getting yourself so hot and bothered on these comments pages?

Again, I'd respectfully ask that you actually go for a walk through the Old Town, and decide whether or not you think there is scope for any improvement whatsoever. If you don't think that there is, then we are living in two different cities.
34

Buttress,

31/07/2008 14:41:06
Well, it seems to me Coun Rose is possibly rather abusing his position as a councillor in contacting the press to speak out in this manner.

I would suggest Coun Rose might be better informed if he took himself along to meet Historic Scotland before contacting the press, and discussing matters with that body.

I'm not 'hot and bothered' - are you?

Of course there is scope for improvement - but it needs to be in sympathy, not demolishing historic buildings and building clone town architecture of dubious architectural merit.



 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

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.