Newspaper
Edinburgh spat
The masterplanners behind the proposed ‘Caltongate’ redevelopment in Edinburgh’s Royal Mile have strongly defended their proposals and accused their conservationist critics of trying to “instil a fear of change rather than foster an intellectual debate on the future of the city”.
Alan Murray Architects has drawn up a diverse masterplan for developer Mountgrange which will see the creation of new public spaces and a new street, alongside artists’ studios, a five-star hotel, more than 200 houses with an affordable element and offices and community facilities in the Canongate area of the Old Town. Described by AMA as an “industrial hinterland”, the majority of the site is occupied by the former New Street bus garage and the scheme is viewed as a means of integrating it with the burgeoning Parliament area at Holyrood.
The £180 million scheme is deemed contentious by its critics because it proposes the demolition of two C(S)-listed buildings and a breach in a row of 1930s tenements in order to make way for the new road – although the resulting gap is designed to be only 10.7m wide.
The main voices of opposition are the Cockburn Association and Edinburgh World Heritage, who recently issued a joint statement outlining their “serious concerns” about the current proposals.
Zoe Clark, director of Edinburgh World Heritage, said: “The Old Town and Canongate have a strong sense of place and special character which have been built up over many generations, but regretfully this masterplan ignores it. If it is approved in its current form, we will say goodbye to a precious part of the World Heritage Site forever and it will be replaced by ‘anywhere architecture’.”
She added: “I don’t think this is what the people of Edinburgh want. I believe that our planners and developers can produce a masterplan that preserves and builds on the special character of the Canongate as well as delivering economic success.” In response, AMA director Alan Murray told Vista: “I find it a tawdry and unacademic approach to take – with proper criticism you need to think about what you’re saying, but this is just shooting from the hip. They don’t ask us questions and they choose the media as their preferred vehicle rather than engaging with design. They’re afraid of design; they don’t understand it.”
He continued: “You have to illustrate a masterplan with an artist’s impressions of things and those have to be deliberately vague because you can’t predict how the architects are going to respond. So, you leave them vague, sketchy and then critics say ‘Oh, that’s going to be the architecture’ and they know that’s not true.“
On the subject of the proposed demolition, Murray said: “After extensive consultation with Historic Scotland, our proposals have taken a balanced view of the value and contribution of the two C(S)-listed buildings within the area and we believe that the overwhelming benefits of the area’s regeneration far outweigh their limited contribution to the city. “We aren’t actually bulldozing the city, we’re making one, very strategic connection into the Canongate – 10.7 metres wide,” he added.
According to a MORI poll commissioned by Mountgrange, in which more than 500 people were surveyed, 79 per cent of respondents agreed that the area needed regenerating and 70 per cent felt the proposed scheme was a good idea.
In addition to the support of the general public, through consultation, Murray and Mountgrange claim to have the backing of the local Canongate Community Council, Edinburgh Business and The City of Edinburgh Council Leader.
Murray continued: “We take the history of our city and the urban structure very seriously. We have two pieces of the city, the valley and the Canongate, which don’t connect together. There are a series of dysfunctional connections in the city and we were keen to ensure that new linkages were made as part of a truly urban public realm.”
In a parting shot to his critics, he said: “These are the people who have said no to virtually every new idea that has ever come to Edinburgh and when I say that, it’s not just about the past couple of decades. The Cockburn Association criticised the New Town and said ‘You shouldn’t be doing this’; they criticised the railways. There is a fear of change and it’s in their interest to fan the flames of fear because it helps to support their particular view of the world. I don’t share that view of the world – I really don’t want to go back to a medieval city.” Discuss this article
Would you like to read more? To receive your copy of the Landscape Institute's monthly newspaper subscribe today.
