Monday, 23 September 2013

New Caltongate Plans - comment NOW!

After alot of time pouring through hundreds of documents we can now reveal some images of the new plans for the Caltongate Site at Canongate/ East Market St.

The developers Artisan have made big issue of having responded to previous objections and creating a more sympathetic and viable development so it is a great disappointment to see  
another bland scheme presented which is focused on providing more tourist accommodation
 (hotels) with lots of provision for bars/cafes and restaurants to provide 'night-time' activity.

East Market St/Arches before and after development


The new planning application for the 'Southern Site' covers the publicly owned Arches, Common Good land and Canongate Venture,as well as The Ark and neighbouring McRae tenements on the Royal Mile (half of which are council flats)
 
Planning Application 13/03407/FUL  for the Demolition, Redevelopment and Erection of buildings for mixed use development comprises
  • A Hotel over Ark and Royal Mile tenaments with double height pend, cafes/bar and commercial use at ground/mezzaine levels retaining rubble facade but no housing on the Mile.
  • Removal of Railings,playground,terrace and basement to Canongate Venture and erection of a smaller glass extension with roof terrace on East Market St and a glass extension to rear of CanongateVenture (plans indicate the ground floor to become a huge open plan cafe/bar/resturant with conference facilities on the upper floor).
  • 2 x 6 story hotels with commercial uses on East Market St over the Common Good market and CanongteVenture playground. 
  • A Glass fronted 2 story 'leisure' complex to be built over the open space beside the Arches and conversion of the Arches to Retail and Cafe/bar/resturant uses.

Hotel developments over Common Good Market and Canongate Venture playground
 NO housing to be included in this site any more, even the previous approved plan included some housing (8 flats on Common Good land and a number of Royal Mile flats retained). The focus is on providing 3 Hotels.

The plans are uninspired bland architecture and there appears to be unspecified uses for all the buildings proposed, They include lots of possible uses - hotel, club, restaurant, retail, bar. cafe, leisure, office etc - but do not define the balance or what goes where. This makes assessing the impact of the development and the traffic/servicing impossible!

The fear for many is this development will result in the destruction of this unique historic Market Street to become yet another drinking destination for Stag and Hens.
 Recent news of an operator looking to develop a 'pod' hotel for this purpose demonstrates these fears are a real possibility.

If you care what happens to your city centre then now is the time to OBJECT


 You can still comment on this Major Application
 for the development of the Southern Site on the Edinburgh Council
 Planning Portal using the Reference  13/03407/FUL.

Objections need to be submitted 
BEFORE FRIDAY 27th SEPTEMBER

Remember to ensure your objections are considered 'Material'

If you cannot use the planning portal, objections can be submitted by email or handed in (make sure you include the reference number) to

Jennifer Paton (case officer) 
Planning Service
City of Edinburgh Council
Waverley Court
East Market St
Edinburgh

(usually a good idea to get a receipt) 
 Email planning contacts:

jennifer.paton@edinburgh.gov.uk
planning@edinburgh.gov.uk (general help desk)







1 comment:

  1. Looks pretty good to me and surely having hotels in a tourist area is logical. There are houses being built as well by CDA via Places for People so it isn't correct to say there is no housing included in the area being developed.

    Not sure what "bland architecture" means? Just because it doesn't have a mock Georgian facade or Scots Baronial crow stepped gables doesn't mean its bland. A very subjective thing to base your objection is to say its bland, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, one mans Picasso is another mans splodges of paint.

    ReplyDelete