Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Friday, 3rd July 2009 Change Date

Which is the greatest game your team has ever played?

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.

The big idea for Haymarket that got a little bigger



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: 02 May 2008
Developers behind new £200 million hotel next to station reveal plans for 17th storey.


VISIONS of a towering hotel next to Haymarket Station have already become the most controversial attempt at altering Edinburgh's skyline in recent memory.

But the developers behind the £200 million project are now set to ruffle more feathers by bidding to add another storey to the massive building.

Revised proposals for the site of the former Morrison Street goods yard have been submitted to the council, following months of negotiations with city planners.

The council officials have urged Irish developer Tiger to boost public facilities at the leaf-shaped hotel's ground level, such as adding another cafe or sandwich bar and providing a main entrance facing Haymarket Station.

With an additional floor at the foot of the five-star hotel, the building would be extended by nearly six metres to 17 storeys.

The unusual move will anger critics such as the Edinburgh World Heritage Trust, which has already warned that classic views of the city are under threat.

Normally, developers hoping to build tall buildings in Edinburgh propose a maximum height early in the planning process, then lower the structure in the face of expected opposition. But award-winning architect Richard Murphy, who is leading the design team, today made no apologies for the changes, which also include reconfiguring the hotel to be slimmer and more "elegant".

"We do want to see this building – in the same way that we want to see St Mary's Cathedral," he said.

"We're not pretending we won't be able to see it – this is another hotel like the Balmoral and will take its place among the civic buildings of Edinburgh. The city is not frozen in time and can accept new civic buildings."

The developers insist the plans will not impact on views of landmarks such as the Castle by meeting requirements outlined in the council's study of Edinburgh's skyline.

Councillors are set to discuss the scheme at a planning committee next month.

Other changes submitted today include boosting the number of bedrooms in the main hotel from 180 to 192. Luxury chain InterContinental – which has only one hotel in the UK – is set to run the complex, which includes a swimming pool on the 15th floor, a major public bar also at the top of the hotel and conference facilities with views of the Castle.

The overall project, called "The Haymarket", also includes a neighbouring three-star, 246-bedroom Travelodge, offices, shops and restaurants and cafes.

The main elements of the masterplan remain largely unchanged, but the tower's landmark roof, upper floors and façade have also been re-modelled in the wake of discussions with council officials.

Other changes include more public and pedestrian space outside the five-star hotel, the entrance to the Travelodge has been re-modelled, and the north and south ends of the office block facing Morrison Street have been re-designed to better match with the architecture of adjoining buildings.

A cafe-lined boulevard through the centre of the site extending from Morrison Street to Dalry Road, creating a major pedestrian thoroughfare linking Haymarket and the financial Exchange, remains a key part of the scheme. Around 335,000sq ft of office space is still proposed.

John Nesbitt, managing director of Tiger, said today: "We have always believed that the process of consultation stretched beyond the submission of the planning application last August.

"The purpose of this extensive consultation with the local authority, the community and other key groups was to listen and take on board their views and this has been extremely productive.

"The amendments demonstrate how serious we are about re-developing this site and these changes will ensure the very best solution for this challenging area of the city.

"We look forward to Edinburgh City Council considering our proposals in due course."

Mr Murphy added: "The modifications to the five-star hotel have improved the proportions of the building.

"The hotel will now be more closely integrated with Haymarket Station and the wider area.

"We have always been conscious that a site of such significance requires a thoughtful and careful approach involving key stakeholders at every opportunity.

"The amendments reflect our commitment to designing a scheme of the highest quality."

Tiger hopes to begin work on The Haymarket next year, with an estimated completion date of 2012.

Last year, the Architecture and Design Scotland (ADS) quango highlighted concerns about the design and location of the main hotel, while the Edinburgh World Heritage Trust recently said it would "overshadow the existing buildings and townscape".

The Cockburn Association, Edinburgh's Civic Trust, also objected and local residents said the scheme was "ghastly".

But Historic Scotland has put itself at odds with critics by giving its endorsement, saying the project is a "marked improvement" on previous plans for the gap site.

CHANGING VISION FOR GOODS YARD

THE former Morrison Street goods yard has lain nearly derelict for around 40 years and at one point was considered as a home for the Scottish Parliament.

In 2002, plans were unveiled by EDI, the council's development company, to build offices, shops, restaurants, bars, new public squares and thoroughfares.

The plans were turned down by councillors in November 2003. EDI then made a series of changes to its plans and won planning permission in August 2004, but objections triggered a public inquiry. In December 2005, ministers approved the £70 million scheme. However, the whole proposal was sent back to the drawing board in 2006 when EDI was forced to put the site on the market because of the council's decision to use the firm's assets to help finance a massive equal pay settlement.

The sale sparked a bidding war, with a final price thought to be £41.5m.

Tiger Developments beat off competition from 13 other bidders, and unveiled its masterplan last September.





The full article contains 984 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 02 May 2008 10:50 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Alasdair,

02/05/2008 11:16:22
Looks rotten.
Would it be at all possible for developers to propose something that doesn't feature plastic panelling and staggered fennestration please?
2

Brian Hill,

Edinburgh 02/05/2008 12:20:25
The design looks very good. I would suggest to planning that they insist That the materials used should be of the highest quality.

This would be far more important than height in this particular part of the city.

I've seen modern buildings in unfashionable cities like Denver and Toledo which can only be described as art forms because of the high quality of glass and fascia used.

This could be a major asset to the city. One thing is clear, all new projects should be on as grand scale as possible, if only to try and keep up with 'desert' economies like Dubai.
3

,

02/05/2008 12:26:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
4

Dunc,

Edinburgh 02/05/2008 12:28:40
I think either Lego or Megablox.
5

Seb,

02/05/2008 12:30:12
An aged, soft cheese preferably.
The panels are sandstone and the roof is copper. Good enough?
6

badger464,

02/05/2008 12:32:48
eh? two days ago they were going to dig a big hole there to make the station three times bigger
7

Niadh,

Edinburgh 02/05/2008 12:32:51
Is that not where the car park currently is?
What's going to happen to that or is this another plan by the Council to decrease the number of cars coming into the city?
8

Jenny MacArthur,

02/05/2008 12:41:54
It looks better than some contemporary designs. But I wish that architects would pay more attention to including at least references to traditional local vernacular style when designing for this very distinctive city. Saltire Court on Castle Terrace is an honourable rare exception that does, echoing its surroundings. But most atrocities are pure architects' self-pleasuring exercises that could be in London, Bucharest, or Brisbane, with zero imagination from the idiot architects. Our local planners should do more to preserve local identity, but they themselves are far too obsessed with 'international' (i.e. bland, characterless) fashion and they're too stupid to think for themselves.
9

Arrow,

edinburgh 02/05/2008 12:46:16
Denver unfashionable? says who (or whom)? cracking place and its "tram" runs along the main shopping street stopping at each block.
see http://ymtram.mashke.org/usa/denver/denver_5_en.html

is that Toledo in Spain or the US?
high buildings, good architecture try Singapore.

the building is too high, fussy and would be better placed down at the Waterfront alongside all of the other high-rise crap.
10

Scotish Exile,

02/05/2008 12:51:51
a lot more pleasing on the eye than the scottish parliament.
11

Unimpressed one,

02/05/2008 13:00:20
"A lot more pleasing on the eye than the scottish parliament."

That's an unfair comment. Almost ANY new development is more pleasing on the eye than the heap of rubbish at the foot of the Royal Mile, and I'm not referring to the palace.
12

Scotish Exile,

02/05/2008 13:04:37
truth hurts??
13

Seb,

02/05/2008 13:08:09
Saltire Court vernacular? please, no more tacky PoMo.
14

Annoyingboi,

Edinburgh 02/05/2008 13:09:11
It looks bloody awful and right out of place in the area. Bit by bit Edinburgh is being ruined.

#2 Edinburgh keep up with Dubai, you are having a laugh! Ha ha
15

,

02/05/2008 13:12:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
16

Sister H,

02/05/2008 13:14:22
Great. As if the original 16 floors didn't look bad enough
17

,

02/05/2008 13:24:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
18

Seb,

02/05/2008 13:30:16
Certainly beats the bland deferential stuff we're used to. EN readers need to travel a bit more to see how contemporary and existing architecture are combined on the Continent. We try and make the new invisible which is becoming depressing.
19

,

02/05/2008 13:41:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
20

Nuska,

02/05/2008 13:49:11
I cannot see what is significantly or special about this building. The use of sandstone and dark grey detailing can be seen in abundance at this end of Edinburgh and the effect is not to make one feel uplifted (as all really good buildings should do) but to create a monotony that is easily ignored. This buildings height may be distinctive, but the design of the building is bland and repetitive. The lack of detailing and absence of human scale at street level mean that it is also further unlikely to contribute to a sense of place.
21

alec splode,

Edinburgh 02/05/2008 13:53:08
Heartening to see the architects have designed the Hotel with local vernecular in mind... only this is the language of Martello, Pennywell and the "banana flats" moved closer to EH1.
22

Seb,

02/05/2008 13:54:25
"is not to make one feel uplifted (as all really good buildings should do) but to create a monotony that is easily ignored"

There goes a lot of the New Town then - have a proper look at Queen St.
23

dba,

Edinburgh 02/05/2008 13:56:31
WHAT, on earth are the designers, smoking, drinking oir inhaling...YES Haymarket DOES need redevelopment but NOT to such a size, scale or design.
INSIDE the traditional 'Georgian' gateway to the centre of town a SEVENTEEN storey monster that would dwarf and overshadow the entire area! Come on, I know the development company is Irish but this really does take the buscuit or the guiness...this is obviously being driven by land proces and the need to make as many bucks ( or euros) per square metre as possible...
The Edinburgh City Planning Dept and court are charged with protecting the city and it's citizens from planning abuse and if ever there was a potential abuse... this one fits the bill!
NO, NO a thousand times NO!

24

Dragonlord,

02/05/2008 14:35:36
What clown decided to build this WITHOUT an entrance at the station?
25

Dan.D.Nong,

02/05/2008 15:10:28
Ugh. Take away the designers computers. What's with all these bright colours. A child could design these ugly buildings. They do not fit, age quickly and get dirty.
26

,

02/05/2008 15:16:37
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
27

Loki - The Scourge of the Schemies,

EH1 02/05/2008 15:16:51
The artist impression shows shadows from cars falling right to left yet the 17-storey proposed structure apparently casts no shadow. Brilliant! This is exactly the quality of architect the city needs.
28

Grumpy,

02/05/2008 16:12:07
I recall something that Prince Charles said years ago about modern architecture making things look like a giant carbuncle. I scoffed then. I don't now.
29

Andrew,

02/05/2008 16:16:16
Looks like a "plook on a plinth" award & will probably get one too!! Totally out of keeping with the area around St Mary's Cathedral and all those gracious terraces etc! WHAT AN EYESORE! Looks like a V2 launching pad for a roof!!
30

Andrew,

02/05/2008 16:17:55
Yes, I know, "Doodlebugs" were V1s! It still looks like a rocket-launcher of some sort!
31

Andrew,

02/05/2008 16:20:33
29/30! Maybe that's the idea!! BLAST folks in capsules from Haymarket towards Glasgow and we won't need a High Speed Electrific Rail Link or a Maglev as they'll arrive in a few seconds!! (but where??)
32

Goat Boy,

02/05/2008 16:50:54
Wot! No trams!

Is this a sign?
33

Pilrig.,

Livingston 02/05/2008 17:12:18
"the horror, the horror...."
34

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 02/05/2008 18:58:39
If TIger is going to present plans, could it at least employ an artist who understands perspective.

The current design when analaysed in comparison to the existing buildings would need each of its 17 floors to be no more than about 4 feet tall!

How about "Edinburgh hotel targets dwarf market" as the next headline?
35

Heartfelt,

EDINBURGH 02/05/2008 18:59:12
Mockup graphics are never how the end result looks. Anyone else notice that the graphics for this hotel don't feature the enlarged Haymarket station and the Haymarket station video doesn't show the hotel? Joined up thinking?
36

Buttress,

02/05/2008 22:18:03
Absolutely vile - just like most recent development in the city.

I include as vile St Andrew's Square Gardens and the new council offices - is there anyone employed in planning who isn't a total incompetent?



37

Darren :-),

Edin city but on ma way to ibrox 02/05/2008 22:49:07
absolutly gorgeous building!
38

Kitti Kat,

PA 02/05/2008 23:14:06
Another ugly bu8ilding going up in Edinburgh! How sad that those who approve this buidling don't try to conform to the area and build something that would fit in with the wonderful old buildings. It can be done. Why not erect something that would fit in with the old yet have all the mod-cons. Edinburgh is looking more and more like an ugly city over here.
39

Parsley Flowers,

Edinburgh 03/05/2008 00:10:45
Only only one floor added? - that is a shame.

Edinburgh needs iconic buildings - especially in this part of the city which is .........bland.

I agree though with some of the posts: why use 'stick on stone panels'? what does that add? - there are plenty of poor examples of this sham idiom on the many commercial developments at Fountainbridge and also opposite John Lewis. Why bother?

If we are going to encourage top class architecture, we need to throw away the 'democratic' Medusa 'style' so favoured by the meek and scared Planning Department.

Make it bolder, and more progressive - Make a real statement and don't listen to the mamby pamby idiots who would rather see Edinburgh decline into some sort of theme part museum!

#8 - I agree that Slatire Court is ok and deserved to win a prize, but it's style is not the correct idiom to use here.

Buttress - have you ever in you life tried to 'create' anything? - it is far easier to be a critic than actually try and design something really challenging - trust me, I know.

Seb - I figure you are an architect? - and good on you for speaking your mind.

Edinburgh needs fantastic architecture - some of it WILL be controversial, and some will not work completely - but does this really matter in the long run? - Ruskin HATED the New Town - Robert Louis Stevenson HATED Marchmont...............I personally do not like the sham Victoriana West End - but see no reason why great buildings (this proposal is not quite 'great' yet) should not be able to sit along side what we have already in Edinburgh.

Edinburgh has a rising aged population and a decreasing birth rate. We are going to slip into the second division of Cities VERY soon if we don't encourage inward investment - so - don't mess around!!!!!!!
40

WJohn,

West Lothian 03/05/2008 00:36:41
It will be the best hotel in Edinburgh to stay in.
Only from there will you not see this eye-sore.
41

Buttress,

03/05/2008 11:11:52
Yes, I have tried to 'create' a number of things. I'm quite a 'creative' person, with a highly developed sense of aesthetics. But it's really not hard to see why much of what is being built in Edinburgh isn't great design.

And these project have cost a fortune and it doesn't take a genius to see that they don't enhance the city. Also - 'iconic' buildings don't have to be tall. It's an idea that greedy developers have put about. The idea that people want a backwards looking theme park museum is a simplistic notion too. There needs to be respect for the city as a whole, and not anyplace architectural 'statements' which have little to do with the type of materials the city is built from, and the appropriate scale.

The council offices are unbelievably ugly. They didn't need to be so. The St Andrew's Square Gardens cost a fortune also, and the lack of symmetry, the materials chosen and the ghastly Coffee Republic kiosk are not, sadly, an enhancement in my view. I can't think the 'reflecting pool' was needed, its upkeep will in the end cost the city dearly (blossom floating is one thing - dead leaves and litter quite another). Less is more - something the council seems not to recognise.

Let's not forget - the St James' Centre and the Jury's Inn were once considered bold dynamic statements, those saying 'but hang on there people - these are ghastly...' were of course derided for holding the city back, being namby pamby, lacking in vision, etc etc.

The place is being seen by developers as one ripe for plucking at the moment, city planners and councillors scared to say no... the Emperor has no clothes and it shouldn't be development at any cost but the right sort of development. Development should also be wrapped around what is there, not destroy, as the Caltongate development will - the little gem of a Canongate School to be demolished? That should not be happening, although the EU ruling this week has brought home the possible illegality of the council's deal
42

Buttress,

03/05/2008 11:12:39
dealings with Mountgrange.

Should be interesting to see how that pans out.

And I love the Parliament building. That one is a gem too.


43

Buttress,

03/05/2008 11:15:02
'The lack of detailing and absence of human scale at street level mean that it is also further unlikely to contribute to a sense of place.'


I agree totally with this too. It's the same with Gherkin.

44

Billy the Fish,

Edinburgh 06/05/2008 13:32:32


This scheme is madness.

Edinburgh planning committee take note:

our architectutal heritage brings in millions of pounds of tourist revenues each year. Don't kill the goose that lays the golden egg.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


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.