Those with a stated interest in heritage, like e.g.
@theSpurtle @NTBCC
may be interested to read our new section covering the extensive advice given to the Council & Developer by Historic Environment Scotland.

To save people having to read the whole thing here are a few key points. HES conclusion: "the proposed development would give rise to "adverse effects on the OUV of the Old and New Towns of Edinburgh World Heritage Site (WHS) & the setting of the Category A listed Royal Crescent"
Regarding the application brought forward HES "recommended changes to the design of the development which we consider would reduce and avoid the impacts described" (on the OUV of the WHS). These included reduced height.
However, even the 1st pre-application advice issued to the developer & Council said "On the northern part of the site.. six-storey blocks would constrain... views to the Crescent from the north… Reducing the height of the.. blocks…would… protect the WHS topography & townscape"
Then on another occasion "our clear preference would be for the consideration of alternative options for the footprint and massing of development in this area" Referring to the southernmost blocks nearest to Royal Cres
Later, on the same issue of Royal Cres "we did not issue our ‘support’ for this volume of development, and that our clear preference would be for the consideration of alternative options for the footprint and massing of development"
& their comments on the planning application made incl. "Our decision not to object should not be taken as our support for the proposals." Royal Crescents environs show "The characteristic use of topography (&) comes masterfully together to form the very distinctive landmark"
They included mitigating actions to reduce damage to the OUV of the WHS included reducing height (1) on Fettes Row, (2) immediately next to Royal Crescent and (3) next to King George V Park.
Therefore anyone who supports this application is supporting an insensitive development on this site and condoning damage to the Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage Site. (We want development but not this.)
The whole thing could have been avoided if the developer had paid attention to the advice given and changed the design earlier. Now it is up to Councillors to decide #Edinburgh #Heritage #UNESCO

More from World

You May Also Like

The YouTube algorithm that I helped build in 2011 still recommends the flat earth theory by the *hundreds of millions*. This investigation by @RawStory shows some of the real-life consequences of this badly designed AI.


This spring at SxSW, @SusanWojcicki promised "Wikipedia snippets" on debated videos. But they didn't put them on flat earth videos, and instead @YouTube is promoting merchandising such as "NASA lies - Never Trust a Snake". 2/


A few example of flat earth videos that were promoted by YouTube #today:
https://t.co/TumQiX2tlj 3/

https://t.co/uAORIJ5BYX 4/

https://t.co/yOGZ0pLfHG 5/
The UN just voted to condemn Israel 9 times, and the rest of the world 0.

View the resolutions and voting results here:

The resolution titled "The occupied Syrian Golan," which condemns Israel for "repressive measures" against Syrian citizens in the Golan Heights, was adopted by a vote of 151 - 2 - 14.

Israel and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/HoO7oz0dwr


The resolution titled "Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people..." was adopted by a vote of 153 - 6 - 9.

Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/1Ntpi7Vqab


The resolution titled "Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan" was adopted by a vote of 153 – 5 – 10.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/REumYgyRuF


The resolution titled "Applicability of the Geneva Convention... to the
Occupied Palestinian Territory..." was adopted by a vote of 154 - 5 - 8.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/xDAeS9K1kW