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

I'll bite, Mr. Gray. We can even play by your rather finicky rules.

Let's begin with some of the things you have said about Xinjiang, notably absent from your more recent media appearances, but still present in your blog about your 2014 biking trip.


The following is taken from an ongoing list I keep of people who have been to Xinjiang and written/spoken about their experiences. It is separate from the testimony of detainees and their relatives I also keep. Jerry is on this

Jerry, your article for CGTN, as well as your various Medium pieces, belabor themselves to emphasize the smoothness of your time in Xinjiang. Why did you leave out so many details from your log of your 2014 trip? They seem relevant.

For example, would CGTN not let you speak about Shanshan, the town that evidently disturbed you so much?


Why, pray tell, after noting how kind and hospitable Xinjiang police were to you in 2019 for CGTN—and how you were never told where you could or could not go—would you omit these details?

You May Also Like