Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 17th May 2008 Change Date

Evening News / Sony Centre Reverse Auction

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.

Caltongate architect hits out at 'thoughtless' objections



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: 18 February 2008
THE architect behind Edinburgh's controversial Caltongate development has defended the scheme, saying the city must "move on or die".
Allan Murray hit out at the development's opponents, saying arguments against the scheme are "lacking in thoughtfulness."

The £300 million redevelopment recently received the backing of city councillors following an eight-hour meeting.

The plans have attracted 2000 objections since they were first submitted three years ago.

Save Our Old Town, the Cockburn Association and Edinburgh World Heritage all fiercely oppose the plans, which involve the demolition of two C-listed buildings.

But Mr Murray, of Harrison Gardens-based Allan Murray Architects, says the objections show "a real ignorance of the city".

The 49-year-old said: "The things we hear are so emotionally charged and lacking in thoughtfulness that it is scary. You just have to walk down the Royal Mile to see the changes.

"Would any of them have wanted to live in the Edinburgh of the 17th century? It was disease-ridden, imploding, untenable, teetering on the brink of disaster."

The architect – who is also responsible for The Tun building on Holyrood Road and the Omni Centre on Leith Walk – believes the Capital would once again be "teetering on the brink of disaster" if it failed to move with the times.

He said: "In the post-war period when the Abercrombie plans were being enacted (in Glasgow], Edinburgh was quick to reject them.

"They were quite right to resist them, but they also stymied development for a good 20 years.

"Cities are like volcanoes, they always have to move. If they don't they're dead."

Mr Murray has particular criticism of the Cockburn Association, the conservation body which was set up in 1875.

"They are like the boy who cried wolf," he said. "They've been attacking developments for decades, saying that each one would ruin Edinburgh forever."

The Caltongate scheme will now go to Scottish ministers for final approval, and protesters are hoping to force a public inquiry.

Architectural historian David Black – the man who sparked a European investigation over the Holyrood parliament building – has already demanded a probe into the Caltongate scheme.

Mr Black has contacted the European Commission with allegations the city council broke competition laws over the sale of land for the massive project.

It is unclear what the result of any investigation would be, but Mr Black believes the EC could technically derail the project.

Mr Murray added: "Democracy has to have its day. It's right we ask people's opinions and it's right that people feel passionate about the city, but decision-making can't be left to pressure groups.

"In a few years' time, people will be wandering around it wondering what all the fuss was about."


The full article contains 459 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 18 February 2008 3:49 PM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Caltongate development
 
1

Raoul Duke,

18/02/2008 12:12:01
And this from the guy responsible for the tun and the omni centre??? 2 of the most hidious new buildings in Edinburgh, who in the cooncil is this guy paying?
2

Old Town Resident,

edinburgh 18/02/2008 12:15:22
So its let me build my glass boxes or you will die? Democracy? Please do not insult the people who care about the city and its residents.
For more
http://www.land-care.org.uk/environment/current_topics/2006/july%202006/linkl_glass_25_07/linkl_glass_25_07.html

3

LUVMACITY,

IN THE LOBBY 18/02/2008 12:17:06
1* AGREE 100% WITH YOU. BOTH ARE A BLIGHT ON THE LANDSCAPE.
4

AbandonAllHope,

18/02/2008 12:20:14
"edinburgh must move with the times or die" Thats a bit ironic coming from a man sporting a mullet !
5

Buttress,

18/02/2008 12:26:29
Mr Murray - if you cannot see how totally inappropriate your scheme is for the historic core of the Old Town, how much clone town 'flavour of the month' architecture it is, and how wrong the demolition of listed buildings is in order that Sofitel can demand a prime site address for its hotel and conference centre, then clearly all those objectors were correct -you were not the person to be given the job of Masterplanning this site. It is appreciated you are in the pay of Mountgrange, set to make a great deal of money out of this, so can hardly be considered impartial of course, and this is smacking of PR desperation.

Your arrogance is unbelievable, and those objecting have far more idea than you have, clearly. The Edinburgh World Heritage Trust says that the plans will damage Edinburgh. They are the body responsible for the World Heritage Site and its management.

UNESCO has already stated it is concerned about Edinburgh. The Cockburn Society isn't crying wolf at all. ICOMOS has expressd concern. SAVE Britain's Heritage is the latest organisation to protest.

Little by little, the historic character of the WHS is being eroded. Many of us have written, and will be writing, to ask UNESCO to visit and see what can be done. Like other plces, there is every reason to ask that Edinburgh be placed on the WHS in danger list, until some halt is called to what is happening in the city.

This MUST be called in and halted by Ministers.

www.eh8.org.uk

http://independentrepublicofthecanongate.blogspot.com/

6

shuggee,

18/02/2008 12:27:27
Yep - Edinburgh's not a museum, it's a city that needs to change and grow.
7

zauberdach,

Old Town 18/02/2008 12:32:15
What a load of rubbish. Edinburgh would die without another terrible development? Perhaps his business of giant box making would die and we'd finally get some decent buildings...
8

20something,

Abbeyhill 18/02/2008 12:35:25
I like the Omni Centre. It looks good and is well used.

Lets move forward. Well said shuggee.
9

Bob 2,

18/02/2008 12:36:18
of course he's going to defend his own projects.

No6...Edinburgh has "world heritage site status" (used loosely)...Edinburghs economy also relys heavily on Income from tourists..who come here for its History
...Imagine a tourist arriving only to discover Edinburgh Castle has been turned into a giant theme park....and the buildings on the "royal mile" have been demolished and replaced with modern glass fronted buildings!
10

20something,

18/02/2008 12:39:08
"...Imagine a tourist arriving only to discover Edinburgh Castle has been turned into a giant theme park....and the buildings on the "royal mile" have been demolished and replaced with modern glass fronted buildings!"

Seems a little OTT
11

Randan,

18/02/2008 12:39:22
Welcome to the Evening News Mountgrange propoganda of the day!
12

Old Town Resident,

edinburgh 18/02/2008 12:41:21
Mr Murray grew up in Glenrothes then after graduating went off to build skyscrapers in America, now he`s rebuilding Edinburgh. just the background for an architect in Edinburgh`s Old Town
13

mad moo,

edinburgh 18/02/2008 12:44:16
"But Mr Murray, of Harrison Gardens-based Allan Murray Architects, says the objections show "a real ignorance of the city".

Ha ha ha! lol
This wee man has very little understanding of the city.
His design and site analysis for Caltongate Development and Masterplan are riddled with inaccuracies.
He is little more than a pattern maker, making pritty shapes and colouring in squares and has no grounding or understanding in the essential qualities which make successfull places.
Urban Design and Placemaking are more complex than he is capable of understanding - people make places all he does is faking places
See how successful his Tun and square on Holyrood Road are.. rarely used 'public' square and still not fully occupied, as for the rooftop resturant which was to be the Tun's crowning glory, non existant
See how successful Omni is....public space outside Jongulars deserted except for occassional punters stepping outside for a fag, the area around the omni is now a magnet for anti social behaviour problems.
Fountainbridge - drafty, overpriced and sterile environment.

He should take his 'understanding' of architecture back to his roots in Glenrothes New Town and give the place the benefit of his modernist training.
14

Fast Phil,

St Neots 18/02/2008 12:47:34
If he wants to build glass boxes the perhaps he should push off to Milton Keynes.
I truly hope this redevelopment gets blocked.
15

Buttress,

18/02/2008 12:50:01
He's amking a great deal of cash out of this too - this and other developments.

He's no great architect, and there are great contemporay architects and masterplanners who could build in Edinburgh given the chance - with sensitivity to the history and context.

Mountgrange is simply in it for the cash. As is Mr Murray.

No doubt Mountgrange chose him as some of his buildings already exist in the city and they thought he was the person to have this all pushed through planning.

Of course, the planners and councillors are daft enough to believe anything.

16

,

18/02/2008 13:07:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
17

Farky,

Edinburgh 18/02/2008 13:15:28
What a lot of nonsense!

lacking in thoughtfulness applies to you Mr Murray and your boring, uninspiring architectural monstrosities which you plan to build!

Quote - "Would any of them have wanted to live in the Edinburgh of the 17th century? It was disease-ridden, imploding, untenable, teetering on the brink of disaster."

The city has indeed moved on and we are not disease ridden, city far from imploding, and we will certainly be teetering on the brink of disaster if you and the Caltongate crowd get their way. I bet you don't live near the area concerned. I bet few of those behind Caltongate for that matter live near the area concerned. You don't care a jot about Edinburgh. You care about your own ego and lining your own pockets!
18

Gothic Rose,

18/02/2008 13:15:58
Don`t let the B***rs get you down Alan.
19

mad moo,

edinburgh 18/02/2008 13:16:49
Oh Dear
Didnt think it would take so long for think tank to jump in and defend their pal Al.

Yes the Cockburn objected to St Andrews Square proposals but not to opening it to the public.

I think it was more to do with the scrappy looking kiosk and removal of trees etc

Think Tank obviously has little understanding of the theory and history of planning and urban design.

the planning process is currently in review to ensure greater community engagement and wider consultation to ensure robust policy framework and transparant balanced decision making.
Think Tank would like to bar anyone they dont agree with from having an opportunity to comment on applications ...mmmm....very democratic!

I can only presume Think tank is part of the ousted previous administration.
20

mad moo,

edinburgh 18/02/2008 13:18:56
Think tank!
wheres you pal Moscow Central 42 today?
21

Buttress,

18/02/2008 13:19:19
Think Tank - as usual, you take the default of accusing anyone wishing to see the Edinburgh protected from the jaws of greedy developers and inappropriate clone town development as 'whingers'.

And the planners are pretty useless - I look forward to a public inquiry and cross examination.

As a group and as individuals, anyone is allowed to object to plans. So I think your idea is patently silly.

The problem is, the planners simply overrode national policies and the Management Plan for the WHS in order to rubber stamp through this crass development. I'd say that was a mockery.

300 individuals is a large number of material objections - added to objectors such as ICOMOS I think that's not a little local difficulty.

Mracus Binney is one of those who has now objected, on behalf of SAVE I gather. He knows a bit about architecture.

This is a World Heritage Site. It should be protected from carpetbagger developers and third rate architecture.

22

Old Town Resident,

edinburgh 18/02/2008 13:19:53
Is Think Tank?
A Trevor Davies
B Donald Anderson
C Anyone in the pay of Mountgrange
23

The Genuine Mario Antoinette,

18/02/2008 13:23:49
The Cockburn Society was founded to object.

A decent piece of journalism would ask the question - why do the C listed Buildings have to be demolished ?

Other than that , i mostly agree with the man. Its a hole in the ground in an almost forgotten part of the town centre , not exactly teeming with alternattive offers. EG , none.

Some of you really need to grow up.
24

Arthur X,

18/02/2008 13:24:33
The Cockburn Society objected to the Balmoral? Do you mean the North British? And even if so, what on earth does that tell us about the Caltongate proposals?

I agree with #4. This man's buildings are as out of keeping with modern Edinburgh as his haircut.

I personally look forward to a little urban direct action to block this development.
25

Jenny MacArthur,

18/02/2008 13:25:53
Architects have a kind of public responsibllity quite different than any other 'artist', because their work is imposed on all of us. That's why it's a pity that the profession is rife with rampant egotists whose main concern is the approval of other architects raised on the same up-your-fundament theories, and don't care one bit about public opinion. Well, wake up guys. We want to live in a city that shows some concern for its unique history and geography, and not just become another showpiece for your fashionable 'talents'. The selfish arrogance of deeply unpleasant people like Mr Murray utterly appalls me..
26

Heartfelt,

EDINBURGH 18/02/2008 13:28:35
Of course he lashes out. Another greedy b whose arrogant self-indulgence is unsympathetic to its surroundings and ruins an area far away from where he lives. All just top fill his already obscenely bulging bank account. yet another example of little talent, massive conceit - and greed of course.
27

The Genuine Mario Antoinette,

18/02/2008 13:30:09
GIven the fact that you all seem to know SO much about architecture, would anyone like to offer cost effective sysmpathetic solutions to what should be built here ?
28

AaronL,

Hillside 18/02/2008 13:38:31
Murray's fantasy land:
"Edinburgh of the 17th century? It was disease-ridden, imploding, untenable, teetering on the brink of disaster."

Looking around at the reality:
No, Edinburgh is not on the brink of disaster.

Murray's fantasy land:
Objectors are "lacking in thoughtfulness" and then he talks about democracy.

Back in the real world:
If you really want democracy then writing off over 2000 objectors as lacking in thoughtfulness is the wrong way to go. Are you saying that not 1 of those objectors had a point? Here is Murray, brain the size of a planet, who has more experience than over 2000 people. Ohhh, kay...

29

Jams,

Edinburgh 18/02/2008 13:39:37
Isn't the point of story about the boy who cried wolf that when disaster was about to strike no-one paid attention to him ?

I do like the statement
"Cities are like volcanoes, they always have to move. If they don't they're dead."

But doesn't a volcano "on the move" leave destruction in its path.
30

snotter,

18/02/2008 13:39:38
If Alan Murray was ANY USE whatsoever as an architect, he would be easily able to give the Sofotel a Royal Mile address WITHOUT knocking down the existing buildings on the Canongate.

Then there wouldn't be any problem as NOBODY is against the development of the New St site.

Well there would still be the Malcolm Fraserbunker proposed for Jeffrey St. to object to.
31

Buttress,

18/02/2008 13:43:03
Something by an architect who has some idea of building in context and who is used to Masterplanning for historic ares, building around the historic buildings, not demolishing them.

Se Farrell's stuff on Smithfield for example:

http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/upload/pdf/Smithfield_Farringdon_20061003lowressingle.pdf



32

mad moo,

edinburgh 18/02/2008 13:46:26
#27
There are already a range of ideas which have been highlighted by objectors but ignored by council and mountgrange.

the big hole created by mountgrange used to be a thriving artists community who were engaged with the community and had been asking for alternative premisis when mountgrange threw them out for demolition.

The canongate venture's continued use as a hub for small businesses and workshop space is cost effective.

The use of the Market building to host regular markets - farmers/craft/exhibitions is also cost effective and could be supported by utilising the arches for workshops and storage.

By allowing the community greater involvement in the management of the land on East Market St these community assets could grow, attract additional funding for future improvements and provide training and opportunities for the local community.

The council recently outlined its intention to develop museums and art galleries in this part of the city. If this was combined with the community development of East Market St, this could provide real culture which attracts tourists and provides support and education for the local community.

Better than the culture of global clone town cafes and chain shops which will result if the Caltongate plans go ahead and the units are ever occupied.
33

The Genuine Mario Antoinette,

18/02/2008 13:46:52
Cheers Buttress.

Just working on the basis that aimless whinging doesnt solve anything...
34

The Genuine Mario Antoinette,

18/02/2008 13:47:14
oops. the file is damaged and coul not be repaired

:)
35

Mallory,

Edinburgh 18/02/2008 13:51:00
This 'award winning' person needs to wake up and smell the coffee. Edinburgh folk have had enough of boring designs driven not by imagination but the
need to maximise developer profit.

With a history of visual civic vandalism - headed by Edinburgh University - and the uncontested arrival of the King James Centre as prime examples - we, those of us who live in the City centre, are more concerned about our quality of life and the aspirations of the many visitors to this city who seek to enjoy sights of the Old and New Towns.

Unlike so many architects, planners and developers we are not interested in 'statements' designed to massage over-inflated egos and enrich the greedy.

The council could try getting some decent tasteful advice on blending the new with the old from the likes of West 8.






36

Buttress,

18/02/2008 13:53:08
Go to EH website and put SMITHFIELD in the search, scroll down... it's there as a PDF.

Smithfield, Farringdon: Reinforcing Urban Identity & Character (6974 Kb)

Also - Mr Murray should be forced to read Gavin Stamp's book 'Britain's Lost Cities'.

See:


http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=3100564

The pics of lost Embra are very, very sad.

And we haven't learned anything, here is all goes again, the same rubbish arguments for demolition.
37

Sheep Worrier,

Standing in front of Caltongate plans, mildly impr 18/02/2008 14:05:31
What's wrong with the Omni centre? I think it looks great.
38

Buttress,

18/02/2008 14:11:07
It's a bit of clone town design (which even now looks dated...) by a second rate architect who hasn't much idea of building in historic cities, that's what's wrong with it.

Apart from that...
39

Ewan C,

Edinburgh 18/02/2008 14:15:34
If there is anyone who displays a 'lack of thoughtfulness' it is the person who came up with the Caltongate designs in the first place. How anything so banal and out of place could be the product of thoughtfulness I have no idea.
40

The Genuine Mario Antoinette,

18/02/2008 14:31:51
36. I'm sure youve seen this one but its good..

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lost-Edinburgh-Hamish-Coghill/dp/184158309X
41

Monique Brown,

18/02/2008 14:36:08
#38

Out of interest, has there been any building development in Edinburgh in the last 20 years that you haven't objected to?
42

Mr H 2u,

Embra 18/02/2008 14:38:30
Ooh! Get him! We're all going to die if we don't worship at the teat of his identikit lego boxes.

Nice to know that being supercilious, condescending and overpaid is still so valued in Embra society. Git.
43

Buttress,

18/02/2008 14:39:54
Here's the 'thoughtless' objection from ICOMOS by the way (note the fact it considers this development should have been referred to UNESCO):

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2055811/Caltongate-Development-Edinburgh-Old-New-Towns-World-Heritage-Site

If that doesn't work, there is a direct link via here:

http://independentrepublicofthecanongate.blogspot.com/

or from the ICOMOS website:

http://icomos-uk.org/news/






44

the good doctor,

kitchens 18/02/2008 14:44:24
bring back hangings to the grassmarket. that's what i say. or at least a modern gallows in the caltongate scheme.
45

senza nome,

18/02/2008 14:50:45
I'm not defending this scheme (it has many flaws) but there seems to be a general assumption that any new building must be rubbish.This is the Prince of Wales school of architectural criticism.This may be true in many cases but not all. The H&M store in Princes Street (next to Top Shop) is a fine modern building.Very simple and clean lines, without the brutal ugliness of the St.James Centre.I would argue that it's a better building than the former Forsyth's store next door, which is an overblown piece of Edwardian fussiness.
The Museum of Scotland extension is also an excellent building, which was criticised by the Prince too, a man who doesn't know his Alvar Aalto from his elbow.
46

Sheep Worrier,

Guffawing from afar 18/02/2008 14:51:07
#43

I could have sworn this development was going up beside New Street. And doesn't Leith Street fall into the World Heritage Site anyway?

Anyway, from what I gather, this development is going to replace an area which had nothing with something. Would you rather have the shed that was there before?
47

the good doctor,

kitchens 18/02/2008 14:56:59
# 47

I miss that old shed. i once browsed it's john lewis-rivalling car boot stalls. i picked up an oasis single there for £1.
48

Buttress,

18/02/2008 14:57:13
This development replaces two listed buildings, and makes a mockery out of conservation area buildings.

Surely it's not a case of anything being OK as it replaces the bus depot? Surely something which actually enhances the place, rather than detracts from it, would be a good thing?

This is a World Heritage Site. The development is appalling in that context.



49

20something,

Edinburgh 18/02/2008 15:01:10
#45, you can't. Me and my 299 friends who are scared of change will send a letter each.
50

Buttress,

18/02/2008 15:02:55
Before rubbishing the Prince of Wales, I would suggest his speeches are read in full, rather than read via selective news reports.

His latest on what is happening with World Heritage Sites, including Bath and Edinburgh, is all too true.

The Storytelling Centre, the Parliament building, both good also... but Caltongate is simply pile it in and no thought at all. It's anywhere architecture, such as is being shoehorned into places all over the UK.

Even the much-vaunted 'public' square isn't public at all.

And if an empty space is about the best that can be said for the development, that's rather telling.

51

,

18/02/2008 15:04:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
52

Gothic Rose,

18/02/2008 15:05:31
41# Good Question.Methinks that you may have,a long wait, for an answer.
53

Heartfelt,

EDINBURGH 18/02/2008 15:09:13
#46 Its not the new building itself thats the main problem. Its that historic LISTED buildings and frontages are being bulldozed just to incraese the size of the development ergo the profits.

However the finished development would look (eg nothing like the plans), it would be created atminimum cost for maximum profit so aesthetics, context and preservation are treated as irrelevances just because some posh wonk with a silly haircut can persuade gullible planners that it will generate profits, sorry, I mean regenerate the area to the benefit of all. Yeah right.
54

Buttress,

18/02/2008 15:09:25
I've had a look. They are rubbish, and I wonder what vested interest Think Tank has in this development? Did Think Tank write the voiceover for the Mountgrange fly by DVD?

I note that the term' whingers' is about all think Tank can say about detialed, serious objections.

Presumably all the other objectors are wrong also - ICOMOS, SAVE, AHSS, EWHT...

There can be jobs and investment without this sort of nasty development, which is simply bad.

See Cockburn Soc site for more details of objections.





55

20something,

Edinburgh 18/02/2008 15:15:04
#54, you guys are the minority here. The silent majority want a new development and are happy with the plans. I don't really care about the 2 listed buildings needing demolished and most of the people I've talked to are the same. So keep crying, screaming and stamping your feet about it because it won't make a difference. Things have to change, it can't always be the same. Aged buildings will all eventually need replaced.
56

mad moo,

edinburgh 18/02/2008 15:15:55
Think Tank have you forgotton the cockburns success over the councils hairbrained scheme to build underground shopping in princes st gardens.
Council were minded to approve their own hugely destructive plans but it was called in and lost at Inquiry. Instead we have a more modest Gallery development at the Mound - still not perfect as the loss of public space (speakers corner) and public toilets but at least the gardens remain protected (as do the monuments within them)
57

Davie08,

a basement at Edinburgh uni 18/02/2008 15:20:37
Think tank, every day I walk past and work in 'fine pieces of modern architecture' award winning even but who will forgive Edinburgh University for the architectural abortion that is George Square. Just because Sir Basil Spence designed much of it does not stop it from being hideous and believe me Mr Murray is no Basil Spence. This is a get rich quick property development that will destroy an important part of the Old Town. I am sure that Mr Murray following his logic and yours would have been infavour of the scheme driving a motorway through the Meadows in the sixties. No one is saying that the city should be pickled in aspic but this is a bad scheme. BTW the Tun is looking pretty shabby already what do you imagine its life span to be?
58

Buttress,

18/02/2008 15:22:58
20 something - gather you know nothing at all about planning, national policies, listed buildings, conservation areas, call-ins, public inquiries... and indeed World Heritage Sites?

There are plenty of aged buildings standing after centuries of use... some of them in Edinburgh.

In fact, we are making high level reasoned objections.
59

Buttress,

18/02/2008 15:26:43
I'm interetsed in the claimed 3,000 new jobs Think Tank says will be created.

In Mountgrunge PR Speak, maybe, but as there has been no real economic justification made for these plans it's all bit in yer dreams.

Or is Think Tank party to information few others are? If so - how?

'This is a get rich quick property development that will destroy an important part of the Old Town.'

Exactly.





60

awfyvexed,

Canongate 18/02/2008 15:28:37
Bring in Sir Norman Foster and that way we can have a cross between Aspreys in Bond Street,The Gherkin,(Ken(he's no daft)Livingstone's work place) and yon awfy impressive bridge thing he built in France....a GOOD ecelectic mix.
Just the job for old bus depot crater!!
Get back to USA Allan Murray.....what you're proposing for auld reekie is shameful and you should hing yer heid in shame!
61

mad moo,

edinburgh 18/02/2008 15:29:30
think Tank "I'm also fairly certain that the vast majority of those that twitter on about the proposed buildings won't actually have had a look at the detailed plans released."

I take it you mean the cooncillors who sat on the committee and prattled on about the al murray housing to be built over the pend being ammended to move the pend down a block and keep one of the Mcrae tenaments as social housing (doh! In the Hotel block?????)

or did you mean the numerous planning committee members who went on about the Hotel having a frontage on the High St (who obviously dont know the difference between the High St and the Canongate)
62

Road Raga,

EDINBURGH 18/02/2008 15:31:03
To all the objectors, what would you suggest is built on the site ? Some tacky retro looking buildings to fit in with the historic surroundings, like the Scanic Crown perhaps ?
I think the proposed development is fine, and so does the ELECTED planning committee, so lets just drop the moaning please and get on with filling this ugly gap site !
63

Ken Mare,

18/02/2008 15:31:39
I think Mr Murray has finally lost it, offering bizarre comments such as:

"Would any of them have wanted to live in the Edinburgh of the 17th century? It was disease-ridden, imploding, untenable, teetering on the brink of disaster."

This piece of social commentry has nothing to do with the plans for Caltongate. Pity Caltongate if the Omni Centre and the Tun are anything to go by - neither are particularly pleasing to the eye.

Maybe its time for him to go.
64

Young Bob,

Back here.. 18/02/2008 15:32:33
Architects…. Mmmmm

Arrogance and incompetence go hand in hand.

On opinion is like a certain orifice… everyone has one.

The CONCEITED ARROGANCE AND LACK OF HUMILITY (and by god given his track record he should have some by now) on display here is quite breathtaking.

If planning had listened to objections 45 years ago we would not have had the cancerous growth in the city that is St. James…. But concrete brutalism was in then so that’s we got another architectural fad foisted on the good people of Edinburgh.

However this piece of work believes that his opinion is somehow more significant and important that those it will directly affect.

This from the man responsible for the omni centre, a building that from a commercial point of view wastes so much valuable cubic metres of space that it’s not funny.

Architects as a profession are an appalling lot.

You would not believe the level of INCOMPETENCE AND IGNORANCE that as a profession they exhibit.

Their lack of knowledge of building materials and how they react in the real world, their lack of practicality, their disregard for any project that cannot earn them kudos within the industry never ceases to amaze.

They are the effete joke of the building industry.

Architects screw it up (on a depressingly regular basis) and everyone else involved in the project has to fix and solve their problems and then take the blame as the Architect blames everyone else in the team except themselves.

Their infantile adolescent mantra is based around.

“If it looks good”

Those are the values of a faddish and facile 15 year old, UNFORTUNATELY THEY COME AS STANDARD IN THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMUNITY.

Building are about what is practical and what is feasible. Somewhere inbetween a gifted and talented architect can achieve a pleasing and occasionally beautiful aestetic.

This is ABSOLUTELY NOT ONE OF THEM.

LOOK ONLY SHOUTING A LITTLE BIT..!!
65

20something,

Edinburgh 18/02/2008 15:33:30
Buttress, I admire your taking an interest in your area. More people should.

But I don't understand why it's better to keep these old 'listed' buildings when an impressive new development is on offer. Could you tell me why these particular listed buildings matter so much?
66

awfyvexed,

Canongate 18/02/2008 15:36:40
Bring in Sir Norman Foster and that way we can have a cross between Aspreys in Bond Street,The Gherkin,(Ken(he's no daft)Livingstone's work place) and yon awfy impressive bridge thing he built in France....a GOOD ecelectic mix.
Just the job for old bus depot crater!!
Get back to USA Allan Murray.....what you're proposing for auld reekie is shameful and you should hing yer heid in shame!
67

mad moo,

edinburgh 18/02/2008 15:39:39
How about some modern zero carbon housing that follows the geography of the site, and a bit of green space dotted about, on the bus depot site.

As for east market street see #32

Community led and heritage led schemes are the future for sustainable development.
If mountgrange cant manage it lets make the bus depot a temp car park and have a play area/park/skatepark until a decent plan can be brought forward.

The council hold a financial bond from Mountgrange to enact exactly this now if appropriate proposals cant be agreed. When the demolition of the bus depot was approved that was the protection put in place to stop a big ugly hole being left.
68

Heartfelt,

EDINBURGH 18/02/2008 15:43:12
It isn't the "gap site" that's in question. Its the buildings on its fringes. The site could be developed without touching the listed buildings. Or it would be so easy and MUCH CHEAPER to include the listed buildings in any type of new development. The argument here is that one man's vision will wipe out a very large section of a heritage site. That vision being statues of himself and £ signs flying about.
69

mad moo,

edinburgh 18/02/2008 15:44:14
lost edinburgh see

http://www.undiscoveredscotland.com/usreviews/books/184158309X.html

70

awfyvexed,

Canongate 18/02/2008 15:45:50
Well said Young Bob....draw up some plans and pass them on to SOOT and incorporate MadMoo's suggestions,we need to challenge them with positive alternatives...come on...
71

Buttress,

18/02/2008 15:48:57
It's not my area as such - I don't live in the Old Town. I care about the city however. I think that too much is being spoilt - and plnners are ignoring sound objections and national policy. Murray isn't the olny arrogant one. The councillors are, in the main, simply ignorant.

But this isn't an 'impressive' new development, it's clone town pile it high cheap build, for profit, and listed buildings are supposed to be protected from demolition for no good reason other than commercial gain. It's national policy. The listed and conservation area buildings are part of the history of the area and its community.

As indeed are World Heritage Sites supposed to be protected from destructipon and inappropriate development.

And this one is in great danger of being placed on the In Danger list if this is allowed to go ahead.

See links at bottom of page:

http://www.ewht.org.uk/Home.aspx

72

Monique Brown,

18/02/2008 15:52:17
#67

Ken Livingstone's workplace is about a kilometer away from the Gherkin. you should hing yer heid in shame!
73

mad moo,

edinburgh 18/02/2008 15:54:52
I just found a letter stuck in a chimney at Harrison Gardens!

Dear Santa,

Please can you give me some real books on architecture instead of my usual dot to dot books and new painting by numbers books as my fans are turning on me and I need to find out some new words to use.

Love Allan
74

AndrewS,

Edinburgh 18/02/2008 15:55:35
He's upset because Mountgrange are getting flak for such hideous idea.
75

Buttress,

18/02/2008 16:19:40
I think maybe he hasn't read the objections from serious people and serious organisations.

Maybe the Moungrunge PR Machine is not now having it all its own way?

Hence the spitting of dummy?



76

Concerned and Lover of EDINBURGH,

Edinburgh 18/02/2008 16:38:26
Mr Murray. You have been determined to bring in your idea of the New Old Town, when you flooded the Old Town in 2001, with propaganda, this was the future of Edinburgh. Well Sir, you were brought down, was'nt you!
Some visitors were through last week, and as we walked by your Omni, their comment was the building was out of character, the rest I would not print. I am inclined to agree. You have used similar expressions in your comments with those of the Planning Department, and Trevor Davis. I also hear you are wanting a foot in the water front in Leith. What you are designing is bland, and uncharacteristic tastless, artichecture. Perhaps monuments to you. By the way, volcanoes are dangerous and devastating to communities.
77

awfyvexed,

CANONGATE 18/02/2008 17:06:07
#73 Sorry mistakenly put brackets....You're right Ken's office isn't The GHerkin but The Glass Testicle!!
Same architect though.
So I'll be huddin ma heid high!!
78

Buttress,

18/02/2008 17:10:53
That one was looking dirty and a bit the worse for wear last time I walked past it.

Glass isn't a great material for places which get a lot of rain, along with dirt.

79

,

18/02/2008 17:12:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
80

Buttress,

18/02/2008 17:23:45
Your comments were frankly risible though - as are the allegations in the post above.

No lost argument I suspect (I am not a SOOT member) simply that you have none.

Calling serious ojectors 'whingers' is no argument at all.







81

Buttress,

18/02/2008 17:27:42
On the other side of Leith Street from the Calton Hill lies the St James Square Comprehensive Development Area, where construction is now in full swing. It is nine years since this area was designated and throughout that period the gross overloading proposed for the site has caused grave anxiety. The sheer bulk of the resultant development will soon be all too apparent, and it will be recalled that the traffic burden which it will place on surrounding roads was the reason for the first publication of proposals for an Inner Ring Road (including the Eastern Link). Last years Report of the Royal Fine Art Commission for Scotland summarises their attempts to have the scale of redevelopment reduced. Their lack of success is due largely to the Scottish Office, who have persisted in demanding central sites for housing their activities, in flat contradiction to their own policies for dispersing office development.

The Cockburn Association 1970

http://www.cockburnassociation.org.uk/default.asp?page=94

Shameful?






82

Buttress,

18/02/2008 17:30:00
The Café Royal


The proposal for redevelopment of the site as an extension to Woolworth's Store brought a sharp public reaction from Edinburgh and throughout Britain backed up by the spotlisting of the building by the Secretary of State. Continued pressure will be needed to persuade the Planning Committee to refuse permission for redevelopment on any terms or (better still) to bring about the withdrawal of this proposal for the destruction of a building of outstanding value in design, craftsmanship and townscape, which is also an important institution in the life of the City.

The Cockburn Association 1969

Shameful?
83

Bob 2,

18/02/2008 17:35:03
10 20something,18/02/2008 12:39:08
"...Imagine a tourist arriving only to discover Edinburgh Castle has been turned into a giant theme park....and the buildings on the "royal mile" have been demolished and replaced with modern glass fronted buildings!"

Seems a little OTT....

comment 10 20something It was a bit of tongue and cheek.

But given the Edinburgh Councils Planners, I wouldn't be surprised what they'd give Planning Permission for
84

Iain fae Elgin,

London 18/02/2008 17:38:27
The man is right, Edinburgh will surely die without another cheap hotel and a windswept square full of jakeys.

Tongue.

Cheek.

Firmly in there.

85

Buttress,

18/02/2008 17:40:30
Also - see the Cockburn Assoc Bulletin May 2006 regarding St Andrew Square, where it wholly supported the proposals, although it made some sensible comments regarding aspects of the design.

As stated in a post above, in fact.

Shameful?



86

Buttress,

18/02/2008 17:46:07
St Andrew Square

'The Cockburn Association has followed with great interest the plans to open up the gardens of St Andrew Square. We are wholly supportive of the principal to allow public access to the gardens but are concerned by the current proposals to create one diagonal path, a water feature and catering pavilion. St Andrews Square is of special importance as the generator of Craig’s grid and the very beginnings of the Georgian New Town. It is therefore vital that we take the time, as a City, to create a design of outstanding quality.

We suggest that a double-diagonal path design, as proposed back in 1865, would be more in keeping with the formal layout of the Square and the anticipated footfall in the area. We are concerned about the visual impact of a permanent catering structure within the gardens and see no real justification for this. Similarly, the existing scheme proposes a pond set within the gardens. This will be expensive to maintain and all it will take is for one crisp bag or bottle floating on top to spoil the effect. We suggest that the money would be better spent on widening the pathways.'

Really, really shameful whingeing, eh Think Tank?

87

mad moo,

edinburgh 18/02/2008 18:05:42
oh dear Think tank has gone home and deleted all it's posts on the way

perhaps feeling a little too embarrassed by the nonsense they posted or been caught posting on Evening News site when at work

I can post them back if anyone wants to see them?
88

Jingling Geordie,

Sunshine on Leith 18/02/2008 18:10:04
What an arrogant man, move with the times, then get a haircut Mr Murray.
The Omini Centre and the Tun have to be the the most unsightly examples of architecture gone wrong since the building of Argyle House and The St James Centre.
89

Buttress,

18/02/2008 18:29:22
Mad Moo - hardly worth the bother.

The allegedly 'shameful' record of the Cockburn Society is there for all to see.

Thank heavenss that there are people like that to 'whinge', rather than allow the likes of Murray to stamp their ' visions' on the city without opposition.




90

,

18/02/2008 19:03:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
91

Think Tank,

18/02/2008 19:07:06
And Butress, can you answer the question above about a new development in Edinburgh over the last 20 years that you have welcomed?

92

Buttress,

18/02/2008 19:14:59
Your comments were hardly 'factually accurate' - and I already have.

Do keep up.

But we are talking here of Caltongate - which is dreadful.

Even the Architecture Correspondent of the Times has opposed it.

Murray is no great Masterplanner.

93

Buttress,

18/02/2008 19:20:54
And until I posted this I suspect you had little idea about the Cockburn Soc - hardly the opposition you at first suggested? Informed proposals, nased on historic precedent:

St Andrew Square

'The Cockburn Association has followed with great interest the plans to open up the gardens of St Andrew Square. We are wholly supportive of the principal to allow public access to the gardens but are concerned by the current proposals to create one diagonal path, a water feature and catering pavilion. St Andrews Square is of special importance as the generator of Craig’s grid and the very beginnings of the Georgian New Town. It is therefore vital that we take the time, as a City, to create a design of outstanding quality.

We suggest that a double-diagonal path design, as proposed back in 1865, would be more in keeping with the formal layout of the Square and the anticipated footfall in the area. We are concerned about the visual impact of a permanent catering structure within the gardens and see no real justification for this. Similarly, the existing scheme proposes a pond set within the gardens. This will be expensive to maintain and all it will take is for one crisp bag or bottle floating on top to spoil the effect. We suggest that the money would be better spent on widening the pathways.'

Really, really shameful whingeing, eh Think Tank? Major objections? Hardly. Positive proposals, based on careful thought.