PRESS RELEASE

EDINBURGH OLD & NEW TOWNS WORLD HERITAGE SITE:CALTONGATE DEVELOPMENT

Members of the ICOMOS-UK Executive and World Heritage Committees have visitedEdinburgh to consider the Caltongate proposals, in the light of the agreed Master Plan for Caltongate. Members had discussions with representatives of the City Council, HistoricScotland and Edinburgh World Heritage.The following summarises ICOMOS-UK’s concerns with the proposed development:

ICOMOS-UK comments on the Caltongate site:

The Caltongate Site extends to 3.46ha between Waverley Station and Canongate, and adjoinsthe new City Council Offices. The whole site is within the Old and New Towns of EdinburghWHS, inscribed on the World Heritage list in 1995. ICOMOS-UK considers that it is essentialthat the proposed development of the site respects the scale and rhythm of the Old Town andthe values for which it was inscribed on the World Heritage list.Part of Caltongate site, the former bus depot, has already been granted planning permission for office development. The current Master Plan approved by Edinburgh City Council in October 2006, sets out planning and design objectives for mixed use including hotel, offices housingand shops.ICOMOS-UK considers that there is no doubt that the majority of the site could be developed beneficially and could provide good links with the rest of the city. ICOMOS-UK considersthat there is therefore no argument over whether the site should be developed – but doesconsider that there are issues about how it should be developed, particularly in relation to theimpact it might have on the WHS and the linkage between the new development and theexisting buildings in the Old Town.The areas for concern relate to the large size of the development site, i.e. the amalgamation of many smaller plots for redevelopment at one time, the massing and height of the proposeddevelopment and how it interlocks with existing buildings and streetscapes.In detail, the issues seem to us to be:Design, bulk and massing of proposed new buildings & unit size of redevelopment plots

◊

Demolition of listed buildingsDemolition of unlisted buildings within the Conservation Area and breach throughinto Canongate (currently 8.5 metres)

We address these in turn:

Design, bulk and massing of proposed new buildings & unit size of development plots

The traditional plot size of the older part of the Old Town is quite small. It is this that gives thearea much of its character. When plot size was respected in the development of the CanongateSouth scheme, the result was widely admired. Currently the draft proposals for Caltongate,drawn up by a consortium of architects, show large footprints in relation to their height – quitethe opposite of the successful Canongate South scheme - and some blocks higher than themaximum height indicated in the Master Plan. The justification for this approach is based onthe fact that the traditional pattern in this area was swept away in the late 18

and early 19

centuries, when breweries, and then other industries such as gas-works, moved into thegardens of declining Canongate mansions.ICOMOS-UK considers that, while it is beneficial that several architects are involved indeveloping the scheme, in order to avoid the whole scheme being monolithic and quite clearlyof a decade, it is essential that each of the proposals should respect the ‘grain’ and scale of theOld Town through creating buildings that respect the traditional footprints and scale of older buildings, rather than the massing of the former bus station or gas works. We do not consider that the current proposals achieve this.

Demolition of listed buildings

Within the site are three listed buildings:Old Sailors’ Ark , by Tarbolton & Ochterlony, 1934-36 – funded by a benefactor tohouse needy sailors; Arts and Crafts style, buff sandstone front brick rear with twolarge assembly rooms on first and second floors.

◊

New Street Board School (now called Canongate Venture), 1900-1901 by RobertWilson; Queen Anne detailing, red sandstone.Retaining wall with arches, Jeffrey Street, circa 1875.The Master Plan indicates that permission might be given for the demolition of the first two.Further it appears that the City Council has actively encouraged the developers to purchasethese two buildings and to incorporate them into the site. ICOMOS-UK considers that it isessential that the presumption against the demolition of listed building should be upheld in theWHS. It also considers that both these buildings contribute positively to the Caltongate site – the former as an interesting part of Edinburgh’s maritime associations as well as a plain butworthwhile Arts and Crafts style building, and the latter as a handsome board school buildingin a good state of repair.There seems to ICOMOS-UK to be no adequate justification for their demolition or for their inclusion within the development ‘envelope’. The land and property which has beenaggregated for the redevelopment proposal is considered to be fundamentally too large. Their removal from the development site would be a step in the right direction.

Demolition of unlisted buildings within the Conservation Area: Breach through intoCanongate

Canongate with its tall buildings on both sides is one of the most memorable streets inEdinburgh and one that epitomises the scale and grandeur of Edinburgh’s tenement blocks.Even though most of the buildings are not listed (the majority are by E J MacRae, the CityArchitect in the 1930s), combined as a streetscape they reflect very strongly the distinctiveEdinburgh building traditions. ICOMOS-UK considers that at most a pedestrian connectioncould be made through an existing

pend

, or arched opening.

Notification to the UNESCO World Heritage Centre

Under the terms of the World Heritage Operational Guidelines, 2005, para 172, major projectswhich might impact on the outstanding universal value of a site should be notified to theWorld Heritage Centre:

172.

The World Heritage Committee invites the States Parties to the

Convention

to inform the Committee, throughthe Secretariat, of their intention to undertake or to authorize in an area protected under the

Convention

major restorations or new constructions which may affect the outstanding universal value of the property. Notice should begiven as soon as possible (for instance, before drafting basic documents for specific projects) and before making anydecisions that would be difficult to reverse, so that the Committee may assist in seeking appropriate solutions toensure that the outstanding universal value of the property is fully preserved.

ICOMOS-UK considers that the Caltongate project should have been referred to the UNESCOWorld Heritage Centre. Furthermore we consider that it would be appropriate for theUNESCO World Heritage Committee to consider these proposals. However, as quoted above,such notification should take place before any approval is given.If the proposals are referred to the World Heritage Centre, then they might be considered bythe World Heritage Committee at its next session in Quebec in July 2008. The Committeewould then have the option to ask for a joint UNESCO WH Centre/ICOMOS Mission toconsider the project and the Mission’s report would be presented to the Committee. If theywere concerned, the Committee could press for changes to be made to the project or they havethe option to consider putting the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger until such timeas the threats could be removed.

February 2008

Factual Notes:UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

Under the World Heritage Convention, sites are inscribed on the World Heritage (WH) list by the UNESCO WHCommittee – made up of representatives of 21 countries elected for between 4 and 6 years.