Report comment

All the comments posted here last week including those re the Tower (Architects hit back in Esinburgh UNESCO row) are still relevant: http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=426&storycode=3121300&c=1 ....And actually it is untrue to state UNESCO called for a halt for this development specifically. I additionally suggest that Murphy finds out what and who UNESCO World Heritage Committee is pretty darned quickly, and why a delegation has been invited by the member state to visit Edinburgh (possibly in November) following the concerns raised (State of Conservation report) at the international conference in July. His rudeness is astonishing and does him no credit. The building is of course right next to the World Heritage Site and in its buffer zone. It still has not received permission from Ministers, and demands for a call-in are growing. UNESCO certainly does not state that WHS cannot be developed, but it should be done with some sensitivity. That's not what is happening in Edinburgh. I suspect the whole developer and architect relationship in Edinburgh is a cosy little club, one designed to rubbish history and heritage and therefore make the maximum cash. "...Only a collective failure of taste can explain the total nullity of the Caltongate scheme, a Basildon clone promoted by the English developer Mountgrange: something even the council can defend only on the grounds that "it will attract investment." Designed by and for David Brent would sum it up." .....Chris Harvie MSP, Scotsman, 3rd Sept.... www.eh8.org.uk for more.