Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Wednesday, 7th January 2009 Change Date

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.

Hotel scheme aims to add a real touch of glass to Princes Street



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: 09 September 2008
DRAMATIC images were unveiled today of how a Georgian building would be encased in glass to become the first new hotel on Princes Street in five decades.
The unusual architectural style, popular in Berlin, is set to become a major talking point over the coming months.

City leaders today hailed the £40 million development as a chance to kick-start hopes of regenerating the historic thoroughfare. Backers also claimed the hotel would act as a catalyst for future retail schemes.

The 103-bedroom hotel, including a bar and restaurant looking towards Edinburgh Castle, would be built at 121-123 Princes Street. The site has been smothered in scaffolding for around five years and is currently home to a string of three souvenir shops at ground level, with the upper floors empty. Womenswear firm New Look has already signed up to replace these shops at the lower levels.

The Deramore Property Group said its use of "glass treatment" – similar to Edinburgh's Festival Theatre – would "retain and revitalise" the historic infrastructure. The glass could be illuminated for special events, such as Hogmanay.

Concerns have been expressed about the loss of historic buildings, with a B-listed property earmarked for demolition but city economic leader Tom Buchanan said the hotel would "re-enforce" the council's "string of pearls" concept, under which Princes Street will be divided into sections, such as high street shopping, boutique stores, al fresco dining and a cultural quarter.

"Deramore's proposals send out a strong signal of investor confidence not only in Edinburgh's city centre, but also in the west end of Princes Street as a retail destination," he said.

"It is also encouraging that Deramore is committed to investing in high quality design – this will vastly improve upon the current physical amenity of this part of Princes Street and also help set a benchmark for other major city centre development proposals."

The last hotel to be built on Princes Street was the Mount Royal in 1955, and the last major development to get the go-ahead, in 2002, saw the former Burberry and C&A department stores knocked down and replaced.

The plans for the new hotel have been drawn up by SMC Hugh Martin Architects – the firm behind the Waverley Gate office development in Edinburgh's former GPO building.

Planning consent is already in place for the demolition of properties on Rose Street Lane South, one of which is C-listed, with the upper floors on Princes Street earmarked for office use. Permission is needed to alter this.

Under the new proposals, the Georgian building at 123 Princes Street would be largely retained, but the B-listed Victorian building at 121-122 Princes Street would be lost, with the exception of the gable ends and chimneys.

Local SNP councillor David Beckett said he has "reservations" about the building's demolition.

"The developers seem to be trying to do something different, so I'm prepared to consider that," he said. "Although they tell me it wouldn't be economically viable to keep the building they want to knock down, I'll be speaking to Edinburgh World Heritage about that."

The views of Edinburgh's heritage bodies will be key, but representatives from Historic Scotland and the Cockburn Association said they could not comment at this stage.


The full article contains 554 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

,

09/09/2008 11:48:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
2

Amenemhat,

09/09/2008 11:52:39
Oh my giddy aunt
3

Angus Mcdonald,

Edinburgh 09/09/2008 11:52:49
This looks like an absolute mess. What we need on Princes Street is historic Georgian Archtecture-the same style as Jenners and Frasers, Not this type of rubbish which can be found anywhere on earth
4

Ganjass,

09/09/2008 12:03:31
Seen similar efforts in Berln, and looked pretty good.

Lets face it Princes Street has been the same way for years, and is an absolute disgrace, it should be Edinburgh's answer to Glasgow's Buchannan street, but it's not. There needs to be a catalyst to start the ball rolling for something better, and I'd support this.

Lets face it buildings like BHS and the old Littlewoods are a travesty that people have become used to, so why couldn't something like this be embraced, look at the Omni as an example of such a development done well!!
5

World class concrete,

09/09/2008 12:03:34
Please will someone explain what on earth is the point of encasing a Georgian building in glass??
6

The Chief,

09/09/2008 12:07:31
Last time I looked Edinbrgh is not in Germany.

Yeah, lets make Edinburgh's main street look like any other street.

I like how they put one of those 300million glorified buses in the artists impression just to make me more angry.
7

alex paterson,

edinburgh 09/09/2008 12:10:42
What a waste of a lovely building,lets see how long the glass stays in one piece.
8

Angus Mcdonald,

Edinburgh 09/09/2008 12:13:36
#4,#5 and #6 well said. There is absolutely no point encassing a Georgian building in glass, take the example of georgian buildings on Heriot Row, Abercromby place, drummond place and moray place!do any of them have glass fronts?do any of them stick out like a sore thumb? we need consistent and uniform buildings on prices st not mish mash tacky cheap and nasty rubbish
9

World class concrete,

09/09/2008 12:15:58
Absolutely awful. Glass glass glass - is that the best they can come up with? There's no attempt to create a beautiful building, no sign of craftsmanship, just glass. I despair.
10

Edinburgh Mum,

Edinburgh 09/09/2008 12:20:50
What an absolute mess. Encasing a georgian building in GLASS!!! Why not try restoring it to its former beauty. All these building on Princes St need is cleanign up and brought back to life and in some casees given a new lease of life. NOT encased in glass. Oh my god I've seen it all now. I think I need to go and lie down. This is too much for a Tuesday afternoon.
11

Louis Catorze,

09/09/2008 12:23:27
Just another develper/architect combo only concerned about their CV.

Have we learned NOTHING from previous developments and demolitions?
12

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 09/09/2008 12:23:42
It is to be hoped that reinforced glass is used in the construction of this building as I hate to think of it falling apart when the 1 o'clock gun lets fly!
13

Louis Catorze,

09/09/2008 12:26:20
OH yeah...and the development style that's popular in Berlin.....ever thought why it may be popular there?

Because we flattened most of the city during WW2. Given the choice I'm sure they'd rather have their old edwardian/georgian/victorian buildings back....
14

Layabout MSP,

09/09/2008 12:26:49
Princes street is an embarrassment - the only good thing about it is the view of the castle.

The sooner new investment is found for it the better, otherwise it will continue to be a last resort shopping destination - trams or no trams!

If the posters on here that are complaining about proposed new developments and investment think they can do better, why dont you put your money where your mouth is?
15

fruitmachine,

Edinburgh 09/09/2008 12:28:42
#3, Angus

I Think you'll find that Jenners is Victorian and Frasers a lot more recent than that.

We shouldn't reject new development out of hand - otherwise neither of these stores would exist - but need to judge it on its merit. In my opinion, this proposal doesn't have any merit!
16

Bigwull,

edinburgh 09/09/2008 12:28:54
clear out the tartan tat first.
17

Foresight,

By the Water of Leith 09/09/2008 12:32:52

Why not commission some, head in the clouds, Spanish atchitect to design some upturned boats that cost ten times more than one could imagine !!!! Currently Princes Street is a mess and it is time someone with a real vision stepped forward to preserve its historical architecture within a modern idiom.
18

,

09/09/2008 12:32:59
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
19

ST170,

09/09/2008 12:37:01
More glass the better. I'm a window cleaner.
20

Tentwo,

09/09/2008 12:37:19
That's right. The city planners complain about a shop sign in the High Street but allow this monstrosity to proceed.
21

Howard Moon,

09/09/2008 12:39:50
Some funny comments here - Berliners missing their 'Edwardian/Georgian/Victorian buildings'? I know we had an Empire at one point but I don't think its influence ever reached that level.

'What we need on Princes Street is historic Georgian Archtecture-the same style as Jenners and Frasers'.
When you're finished with the time machine, can I have a shot?

Come on folks, lets get real. This isn't some Berlin-exclusive design feature, it's just the reporter went on a weekend break there, noticed some buildings and so mentions it here in an attempt to sound clued up about architecture.

Don't compare this to Jenners, that's ridiculous. Compare it to BHS and H and M. It's amazing that the same people who moan and groan about Princes Street all year, are the first to gripe when any attempt is made to improve it.
22

LUVMACITY,

EDINBURGH 09/09/2008 12:41:46
You just need to look at the glass building that replaced C & A's to see how hideous it will be. Remember the Edinburgh planners gave approval to that other monstrosity at the foot of the Royal Mile. Are they hell bent on ruining this great city?
23

Tentwo,

09/09/2008 12:50:02
#21 Howard - your spaceship awaits your return to the moon. It must be some mess up there.
24

Sarcasm,

09/09/2008 12:55:03
However on the plus side we get a New Look.
25

techpunk,

09/09/2008 13:02:04
the building is victorian, not georgian.

having been in the upper floors of this property (the areas the shop punters don't see) i can safely say that any scheme to improve should be welcomed. the building is fit to collapse due to years of neglect.

whilst we are at it, the council should also encase the scott monument. preferably in black glass.

;)
26

Joe Smith.,

Moscow 09/09/2008 13:04:21

This building will only add to the greenhouse effect. Good for growing a giant marrow, bad for global warming
27

Duncan in Edinburgh,

09/09/2008 13:07:14
#25 Couldn't agree more. The Scott Monument is hideous.
28

Rap,

09/09/2008 13:11:15
"Under the new proposals, the Georgian building at 123 Princes Street would be largely retained, but the B-listed Victorian building at 121-122 Princes Street would be lost, with the exception of the gable ends and chimneys.
"
It doesn't sound as if much that currently exists will be encased. And if you think about the pavement, the glass could not extend out beyond the current building footprint or you wouldn't be able to get past. So, I think you should forget about the glass encasing the Georgian building, and just think of glass encasing a new building.

#21 why does new always have to be mean better? Look at the Balmoral and the Caledonian? Would you have preferred that was knocked down because it was old? Surely it's a better start point to think what is needed, and what must change, instead of starting with the assumption that knocking down old and building new has to be best?
29

Statsman,

Edinburgh 09/09/2008 13:16:42
Not more of this pap! No doubt if tram money is right, the bulldozers will get the nod.
30

Rap,

09/09/2008 13:21:35
Here's the link to the planning application :-

http://citydev-portal.edinburgh.gov.uk/publicaccess/tdc/DcApplication/application_detailview.aspx?keyval=K6POFPEWR0000&searchtype=PROPERTY&module=P1

No details have been uploaded yet, but if any of you are serious about what Princes St look like then check out the plans when they are uploaded, and comment on them (either object or support). Get involved!!!!
31

Bill MacD,

09/09/2008 13:25:07
Berlin is a city that was bombed flat during the war. Edinburgh isn't. Get the difference?

The planners should be preserving and enhancing our history, not destroying it. They care only for the views of other awful modernist wannabes in the architectural journals, and don't give a fig for local heritage and history. Sack the lot of them!

No wonder UNESCO is talking about rescinding Edinburgh's status as a World Heritage Site. This is a disgrace. The planners are a disgrace. The Councillors who let them wreak their vandalism are a disgrace.

Future generations will condemn the lot of you!
32

Wee Keef,

09/09/2008 13:25:07
If you build it...they will point and laugh
33

Duncan in Edinburgh,

09/09/2008 13:34:06
#31 Calm down. First of all, this is a living city, not a museum, and we cannot preserve everything.

Secondly, by no stretch of the imagination is UNESCO talking about rescinding Edinburgh's WHS status. You believe too much of what you read in the papers.

The alternative to a modern style is a Disneyland version of what we think things used to be like. There are very few sites in Edinburgh which would benefit from that approach, and this certainly isn't one.
34

Rap,

09/09/2008 13:36:43
Duncan, UNESCO is talking about visiting Edinburgh to consider whether the new developments (or those with granted planning approval) will impact the WH status. And if they are found to impact the WH status then one possible outcome is to put Edinburgh on the danger list for a year. So, there is a very real risk of losing it's status.
35

Iain Bhern,

09/09/2008 13:46:21
#21 Yes that's right we did have an Empire at one time, Empire Theatre that is. What did they do to that? Demolished the fine old frontage, replaced it with glass and called it the Festival Theatre. Thankfully the auditorium survived in it's original form. The only saving grace with this proposal is that the original frontage will be retained behind the glass and thereby protected from the elements.
36

Duncan in Edinburgh,

09/09/2008 13:47:06
#34 Nope, sorry, your conclusion doesn't match the rest of your paragraph. Yes, UNESCO has decided to investigate recent developments having received representations from some very determined and vocal groups. The idea that anything more than this might happen is pure conjecture.

The likelihood of WHS status being removed because of a slightly ugly piece of development near the bottom of the Royal Mile and an oversized hotel well beyond the western edge of the WHS site is almost zero. The substantial reasons for Edinburgh WHS status remain - the New Town and the Old Town and their linkages.

Demolish the castle or build a motorway through Princes Street and we can talk about a serious threat to Edinburgh's status. The present issues simply don't represent serious change.
37

Rap,

09/09/2008 13:50:17
No offence Duncan, but without knowing what your experience is or position, I'm tending towards what the Edinburgh World Heritage Trust tells me over what you write on a EEN forum. The facts are that UNESCO do have the power to put Edinburgh on the danger list in the visit they will be making.
38

It's me!,

09/09/2008 13:54:31
Edinburgh is being destroyed by architects and developers whose egos and greed is bigger than the city.
39

Duncan in Edinburgh,

09/09/2008 13:55:59
#38 I do not disagree with anything the EWHT say. Of course UNESCO have the power to put Edinburgh on the at risk list, or rescind its status altogether. What I am saying is that they are not going to do so, because there is no significant damage being done, or likely to be done, to the substantial aspects of Edinburgh which earned it WHS status in the first place.

There are too many scare stories doing the rounds courtesy of pressure groups and newspapers trying to sell copies.
40

gggrumpy,

09/09/2008 14:03:39
How does the tram in the picture run without overhead wires?
41

alec splode,

Edinburgh 09/09/2008 14:04:18
Hugh Martins....OMG
42

alec splode,

Edinburgh 09/09/2008 14:05:20
#42
The tram doesn't run. It's only a picture one.
43

alec splode,

Edinburgh 09/09/2008 14:05:21
#42
The tram doesn't run. It's only a picture one.
44

gggrumpy,

09/09/2008 14:13:32
Its only a picture hotel!
45

Rap,

09/09/2008 14:40:08
Mario, Duncan,
I am realistic about the likely outcome of the UNESCo visit, but still maintain there is a possibility that Edinburgh could be put on the danger list (it is possible, even if they only took it off after the developments were finished). However, for me one of the main benefits of the visit is that is scares the daft wee Councillors who blindly listen to the Planning Dept and accept their "professional" opinions when it comes to planning decisions. The Councillors are elected representatives even if we can't vote out the Planning dept. They should be aware of the real, long term impacts of their decisions (and #47 they use these pretty pictures to make these decisions, regardless of how realistic the images are). And, they should abide by the conditions of the WHS and pass pass UNESCO and ICOMOS details of these large developments during consultation, not after planning consent has been granted. And they should also consider the recommendation to intriduce a buffer zone, and consider developments in this zone as carefully as they should in the WHS.

And Duncan, these pressure groups, we do live in a democracy remember. They are doing nothing illegal, and only offers a balance to the pretty pictures the architects present to the media and residents. Fairness in all things. People can write into the council supporting developments if they choose - do they? No.
46

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 09/09/2008 14:43:26
#31 Bill MacD

"Berlin is a city that was bombed flat during the war. Edinburgh isn't."

Some of Edinburgh is so old and delapidated that it would be greatly improved by a good 'bombing'

UNESCO won't do anything other than moan, groan and break occassional wind. Once something is on their list it is damned near impossible to get it off, afterall, they aren't going to throw themselves out of a good job.

Duncan in Edinburgh, you are spot on, towns are for living in, they are not museums, but who knows, perhaps Bill Gates will buy Holyrood Palace and ship it to the States, wonder what UNESCO/Hertitage/Conservationist groups would have to say about that?
47

Joe Smith.,

Goldbergs Toy Department 09/09/2008 14:44:48

Do Unesco still make Shreddies breakfast cereal?
48

Seb,

09/09/2008 14:59:21
An unsurprising piece of pap from SMC Hugh Martin. The upper floors of 121 are indeed shot but Deramore need to employ a better architect if they're serious about getting planning.

When Buttress is away it seems Rap steps into his shoes!
49

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 09/09/2008 14:59:55
#52 Joe Smith

"Do Unesco still make Shreddies breakfast cereal?"

Yes Joe, thats where all their superfluous wind and flatulence comes from, the trouble is I think they've been feeding it to local heritage/conservation groups. No naked flames please or they'll flatten Edinburgh!
50

tomias,

Edinburgh 09/09/2008 15:17:11
and just a tram ride from that hotel in Morrison Street.
51

Duncan in Edinburgh,

09/09/2008 15:20:18
#50 I can agree with pretty much everything you post there. Including the fact that pressure groups have every right to exert what pressure they can to try to persuade people of their argument.

My sole purpose in posting was to respond to the view expressed further up that "UNESCO is talking about rescinding Edinburgh's status as a World Heritage Site. This is a disgrace.". This isn't true.
52

BobW,

in toon 09/09/2008 15:26:11
I wonder if the architects/colour-by-numbers clowns have ever read the Emperor's New Clothes. This is an ugly, second rate, sad copy of Berlin. Do the 'developers' have a brain or just more money than sense?
53

Edward,

09/09/2008 15:32:28
WHen I saw the headline , I just knew there would be the usual moaners and detractors and hey, I wasnt disapointed!
First of I think it looks good
Secondly I sincerly hope it is the strt of regeneration for Princess Street, it is long overdue and it needs it badly!
Thirdly What Georgian Architecture? There is actually hardly any, if there is at all! I see Jenners was quated as being 'Georgian', its actually Victorian (allthough Jenners was established in 1838, the current familiar structure is later)
Most of what was 'Georgian' has been replaced along Princess Street
What is needed is to get rid of the 'BHS' style store frontages.
For those that are not aware, the reason for the 'balcony' style on some of the shops (Boots, BHS, John Menzies) was that at some time during the 60's or 70's/80's there was a hair brained scheme to have a split level street along Princess Street, so when new stores were to be build, the developers had to incorporate the addition of a 'upper street', so eventually they would all be linked up and you were supposed to be able to walk along the upper level. The flaw in this was 1) Different Architects and 2) Time taken for different developments. So it was really a non starter. But in having this design quirk it actually ruined Princess Street.
Hopefully Town planning have learned the lesson and will insist that developers incorporate the overall feel if not designs of georgian/Victorian Edinburgh, with a blend of the more modern Glass
54

Buttress,

09/09/2008 16:09:46
'Not economically viable' - that's what developers always say. Not economically viable for what purposes? Try doing something else with the building then!

But why EWH? It's Historic Scotland and the council planners David Beckett needs to talk to! Tom Buchanan -it's ghastly and you are a fool.

Bye bye historic Edinburgh, Conservation Area, listed buildings... hello ghastly glass clone town.

Not a material which suits northern cities where it rains a great deal and the prevalent building material is stone!

Duncan - I presume you have read this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2008/sep/08/heritage.conservation

and this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/08/heritage.architecture

If Edinburgh is put on the In Danger list, then whatever the reasons cited, unless the government/council does something to improve the situation, the next step would be removal from the World Heritage list. I appreciate that some would look forward to that as it would enable even more ghastly buildings to be erected...

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=3121584&newstype=A§ioncode=453

UNESCO has said it 'deeply regrets' Caltongate being given approval... that's strong language for UNESCO.


55

Buttress,

09/09/2008 16:15:40
I point out that the Guardian article, or something akin to it, was repeated in countries throughout the world!


"Leading architects and conservationists, including Sir Terry Farrell and Marcus Binney, chairman of SAVE Britain's Heritage, have said they share Unesco's anxieties. Farrell, appointed Edinburgh's "design champion", told the Guardian the city urgently needed a proper urban design masterplan. "I'm very supportive of Unesco's position," he said.

Binney said: "Heritage has taken a back seat to Cool Britannia and encouraging everything modern, and we're now uncomfortably in the limelight for failing to have proper policies to protect our world heritage sites, and timely criticisms are now being made." "

56

Buttress,

09/09/2008 16:23:42
Seb - I'm not away, Rap talks informed sense, and I'm not a he!!!
57

Buttress,

09/09/2008 16:25:55
More:

http://independentrepublicofthecanongate.blogspot.com/2008_09_01_archive.html


http://whc.unesco.org/en/sessions/32COM/

58

Buttress,

09/09/2008 17:04:12
As long as you don't call me Ken... :-)

59

Draco Was a Wimp,

Edinburgh 09/09/2008 17:19:45
They can put up as many architectural gems as they like, but so long as the shocking tartan tat emporia are allowed to remain, Princes Street will continue to have all the style of the front at Blackpool.
60

Seb,

09/09/2008 17:28:52
Sorry Buttress but I still find the heritage argument to be unfortunate. It is the lack of quality in new architecture that needs corrected and we therefore need ADS/RIAS to make more of a fuss.

Terry Farrell has spoken out now but was very difficult to get a comment out of when Caltongate was proceeding through planning, and Ricardo Marini was strangely (for him) mute. the fact that complaints are stemming in the main from heritage groups means that developers dismiss it and allege that heritage is an obstacle. If ADS were to have a higher profile they may carry more weight as their lot is really with the construction industry. But that would require some agreement amongst architects and they often seem to percieve the ADS review panels as nothing more than a bitching contest.

61

Howard Moon,

09/09/2008 17:43:56
No. 59, Buttress:

'Tom Buchanan -it's ghastly and you are a fool.'

That almost sounds like a 'personal' remark Buttress - the type you always accuse me and others who happen to sometimes disagree with you of using. I'd respectfully ask that you either apologise for it or (perhaps more realistically) stop using that particular criticism when having a rant.
62

Buttress,

09/09/2008 17:56:56
It wasn't a rant. It was a carefully considered comment.

"Concerns have been expressed about the loss of historic buildings, with a B-listed property earmarked for demolition but city economic leader Tom Buchanan said the hotel would "re-enforce" the council's "string of pearls" concept, under which Princes Street will be divided into sections, such as high street shopping, boutique stores, al fresco dining and a cultural quarter."

"Deramore's proposals send out a strong signal of investor confidence not only in Edinburgh's city centre, but also in the west end of Princes Street as a retail destination," he said.

"It is also encouraging that Deramore is committed to investing in high quality design – this will vastly improve upon the current physical amenity of this part of Princes Street and also help set a benchmark for other major city centre development proposals."


Very foolish indeed. The plans have not yet been submitted, there's to be a proposed demolition of a B Listed building, and he's already given it approval?



So - more personal comments about me and not the article I note... ;-)


63

Buttress,

09/09/2008 18:16:30
Seb - I see a direct parallell with CABE in England, but it's heritage groups which are all that stand between more listed building and conservation area demolitions and developer profits. It's not OK to keep on with the demolitions, no matter what the claims are regarding the proposed replacement buildings, or the 'economics' of demolition. It's not at all necessary. Historic Scotland needs not to be working against heritage but for it.

The problem is in Scotland, heritage protection is actually less strong than it is in England. But also it's years behind the times in thinking that demolition (and facadism) rather than re-use is the way ahead.

With Councillors such as the one quoted above, and Lowrie as Planning Convenor while also serving on EWH Board of Directores (!!!!) then it's going to continue to be a long haul, but maybe eventually some will see the light.

I think Joanna Blythman summed it up:

"Unfortunately in recent years Edinburgh has been plagued by councillors who, though their politics differ, have one thing in common - their egos are bigger than their brains and their judgement is wanting. Puffed up and romanced by developers and modernist architects who feed them the pretentious, self-aggrandising vocabulary of "iconic buildings", "signature architecture", "architectural statements" and "iconoclastic, brave development" - like teenage vandals carving their initials on the ancient stones of the Acropolis - they yearn to leave their hubristic mark on the city for posterity. Hence the spate of fatally misconceived plans that are being given the go-ahead, even though they perpetuate old mistakes and grind their killer heels in the face of Edinburgh's handsome heritage. "


Well, maybe Sir Terry has seen the light... ;-)









64

World class concrete,

09/09/2008 18:17:13
#66: I agree the main problem is a lack of quality new architecture. And it seems to be an unwritten rule that no architect will ever speak out to criticise another architect's work.
65

Buttress,

09/09/2008 18:32:00
Not so - I can cite instances - but the problem is that a listed building in a conservation area should NOT be being demolished. That's the point of heritage protection.

It should be a spur to sensitive and creative re-use. Problem is that developers prefer to get round that, they employ architects without any idea of conservation, 'consultants' who will say the building is rubbish and beyond repair, and hey - UNESCO comes to call.

Education education eductaion - of the council is required.

And Historic Scotland needs to remember what its purpose is - it's not to be hand in glove with developers.
66

awfyvexed,

Gless-Free Auld Toon 09/09/2008 19:00:44
What is it with all this gless aw ower the place?
Are the windae cleaners secretly funding aw these gless erections so that they, if naebudy else,will have a joab fir life?
Ah think there should be some sort of investigation.
This is goin' tae huva devastatin'affect oan windaes aw ouer Edinbru....plumbers aw ouer again..mark ma wurds!

67

Seb,

09/09/2008 19:45:19
Buttress, heritage management means that demolition should be rare rather than never. I believe that the conservation specialist working on this project is rather well respected. As the surface sculpture of 121 is almost all eroded and the facade is detached from the earlier building - you can see daylight through the crack - i would hazard that restoration of the building would be extremely costly and would result in a floor plan only usable as office space (Deramore would be content with offices, it's CEC that want a hotel).

I dislike this proposal but insisting that the buildings must be restored is getting in the way of development. A good piece of contemporary architecture with a lower height may, in my books, compensate for the loss of a badly damaged portion of mediocre architecture.
68

The Geniune Mario Antionette,

09/09/2008 20:40:30
Ah, a hotel - how innotative
69

festerlehearts,

09/09/2008 21:07:23
what a joke i can just see it now fire works display destoys new glass front of a hotel in princess st wonder who will take the blame for that what a massive court case that will be ...olso what the tram in there for .....would olso like to point out wont be long before there is a serious accident castle terrace closed of one week after the fire works fallin rocks ...ok we are always gettin told its the rain that causes the problem dont think so
70

Rap,

09/09/2008 21:57:12
It's ok festerlehearts, the world is going to end tomorrow anyway when they turn on the LHC in CERN. Sleep soundly and don't worry about fireworks.
71

Buttress,

09/09/2008 23:45:11
Seb - there's rarely anything which can't be fixed. And I can cite many a 'well respected' consultant who will say what the piper paying him or her wants them to say.

Sound heritage management should mean that demolition is a very rare occurrence indeed of listed buildings. It seems that it's rather too common in Edinburgh.


72

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 10/09/2008 10:39:45
#77 Rap,

Time 10:40 a.m. 10th Sept 2008.

The Large Hadron Collider started test runs about 2 hours ago and we're all still here, however, maybe the fireworks you refer to will smash the glass edifice some of you appear to hate. Also, what about damage which might result when the 1:00 o'clock gun is fired?

What price the LHC when compared to these hazards?
73

Rap,

10/09/2008 10:44:29
Peter,
I'm pretty sure the Omni cinema is still standing, after a couple of years of one o'clock guns. And H&M. I think we are safe. Assuming the glass edifice gets planning approval of course.

And the LHC is still powering up to full power and collisions, still time for the black holes to appear.
74

DAVID,

Edinburgh 10/09/2008 11:09:52
Glass fronted nonsense.

#69 sums it up perfectly.

Edinburgh will look like the centre of Leicester before we know it. Gret.
75

Howard Moon,

10/09/2008 11:32:38
You're slippery Buttress, I'll give you that. Hope you do think on the personal remarks thing though. It really is irritating when you attack people for doing something you do all the time. I think it undermines some of your other statements.

Anyway, what I really, really want to know is when is 'Caltongate - The Movie' coming out? You know, the one to be made by a 'world famous film director', and which has been described as a '21st Century Local Hero'? I was looking forward to it.
76

Buttress,

10/09/2008 11:34:11
See - another personal attack on me, rather than address the issues in the report.
77

Gary McL,

Edinburgh 10/09/2008 17:43:14
This looks like a refreshing design. Glass-encasing old facades works well - there's an example in Glasgow (Eagle Building). And above entions of Berlin - well there's a city with some brilliant architecture. We'll be waiting all our puffs for Princes Street to return to Edwardian gentrification. Won't happen. What we need to avoid is stuff like the awful awful awful buildng that replaced the dreadful old C&A one... i.e. no progress. This gets our thumbs up at HotelReviewScotland.com anyway, in theory, and we'll watch for the detail.
78

Buttress,

10/09/2008 20:20:40
So we just ignore the listed building and conservation area status do we?
79

Buttress,

11/09/2008 11:58:52
Anyhow - what is the point of encasing a decent historic building in glass?


 

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.