ESJ visual revised

Anyone who has ever read a title deed relating one of the buildings that makes up Edinburgh’s New Town knows that precise guidelines were laid down at the time these pieces of land were sold off. These guidelines restricted the kind of building itself as well as the materials which could be used.

The latest big building development in the city centre is the £850m St James Quarter. The developers TH Real Estate claim that this multi use development will be a significant one. “Situated at the head of the city centre, linking Princes Street with George Street via Multrees Walk, Edinburgh St James will be at the retail apex of the city centre.”

This will  be a ‘new build’ but there is precedent for other new buildings in the city to be made of or at least faced with reconstituted sandstone.  This has been insisted on in the past to ensure that they blend in with the rest of the city centre. Residential developments such as those at the bottom of Dundas Street and at the corner of Cumberland Street may be modern but they have a look and feel of the older neighbouring buildings.

At last week’s planning committee the matter of building materials for the new shopping centre to replace the 1960s St James Centre was discussed in minute detail. Ian Perry explained that specifying that certain stone is used  is a way of trying to protect the World Heritage site.

In the papers for the meeting one report explained the context of the local area: “Sandstone is the dominant external material, being used extensively on both the old and the new buildings. This provides visual cohesiveness. The Omni Centre is an exception, with its frontage being glass.”

However two recent buildings in the city which have used limestone rather than sandstone are the council’s own HQ at Waverley Court and its development site at Atria on Morrison Street.

At the planning meeting the council decided after considerable debate that the development may proceed in limestone.

One city centre councillor Joanna Mowat who is also a member of the planning committee asked about the different qualities offered by limestone and sandstone and also whether weathering affects this. She said: “Preservation of the World Heritage site is dear to my heart. Delivering this project is a huge improvement on the concrete monolith which is there right now which is a detraction from the World Heritage site.

“I am keen that this is built efficiently and to time, and I think this will be achieved if Jura limestone is used. It is the way the building is constructed that causes staining rather than the actual stone itself.”

Councillor Frank Ross said: “I think that Edinburgh World Heritage mentioned there would be a detraction from the ‘universal world value’ and I find that strange. We have a horrendous building there and in replacing it with a well-designed new building I cannot see how that results in any detraction whatsoever.

“The original New Town was originally a residential area. the key elements consistent throughout the development of the New Town have been quality of build and design. We see all of those attributes in this design before us and in the high quality of limestone being proposed.

“This is a £1bn development. I think a further delay on this sends out the wrong message to developers in our city. Now is the time to invest in the future of the city. Other developers have sent out a message that Edinburgh is a difficult place to do business and I do not want that message to be sent out.” He was later rebuked for this comment by the planning convener, who said it was not related to the decision before the committee.

Councillor Milligan said: “Basically we have the most exciting development that has come before us for some years in Edinburgh. We have the opportunity to do something very dramatic.  I think it is a sad situation that instead of being positive here today we are forced to focus in on the one issue.  I think that about 95% of people in Edinburgh don’t care whether this development is created in sandstone or limestone, we have to look at what is practical. The Pyramids are built of limestone, so there is no question about whether it lasts or not!”

Councillor Nigel Bagshaw asked if using sandstone rather than limestone would render the project unviable and this was denied, but the developer explained that all factors have to be taken into account in reducing risk, and that all the stone had to be of the same colour and quality, so risk of delay would be increased by only specifying certain quarries. “We set about this always to do this in sandstone, but balancing all factors ends up with the proposal that we have before us here. We think that the colour match can be close by using limestone.”

A spokesman for Laing O’Rourke explained that he is in charge of two projects in limestone at the moment one sourced from Portland and the other from Portugal. He claimed that the quality and colour has diminished over the period of the contracts, and it depends on what is mined over the months leading up to an individual project what is actually available for the build.

The Edinburgh Reporter invited Marion Williams Director of the Cockburn Association to explain for us the Association’s view on all of this minutiae. Ms Williams writes:

“We find this a quite absurd notion that in order to draw precedent

from the likes of Primark, various bank buildings in George Street and

the red sandstone of the Portrait Gallery (as referenced in the

supporting documents) this entire quarter in the World Heritage Site should be

clad in limestone so as to declare its modernity and difference. We

feel that the designs of the elevations in themselves will be quite

adequate in conveying that these are not 18th Century buildings. Much

of the story of Edinburgh is to do with under-statement and economy of

means, attitudes which gave rise to a remarkable urban fabric of

continuity and homogeneity. Unlike any other development project in

the city St James is about a whole quarter and trying to repair the

urban grain; it is not the place for “standing out”, but for “fitting

in”. The statements that limestone is easier to install or that there

may not be adequate supply – on a building project expected to last

several years – are not convincing. The project could justify the

re-opening of a quarry and there are numerous examples in Edinburgh

(at Fountainbridge) and in other cities of pre-fabricated concrete panels

clad in buff sandstone being used economically and without damage occurring.

  • If Craigleith Quarry was being worked today it could not provide a continuous unvaried consistent stone.  It is a natural material.  There always were variations with sandstones as deeper beds were worked and Craigleith was no different.  Slight variation IS DESIRABLE – it isn’t a problem.
  • “quarters” of Edinburgh in the past were built over time. The whole New Town with its various extensions took over 150 years to build, so naturally there have always been variations in the stones used and we expect this with different city blocks and different street facades, but nevertheless they were all first built in sandstone.
  • ALL limestones look different from sandstone, in their “whiteness”, their tighter, more polished surface, their weathering and their veining and fossil content, characteristics which are very rare in sandstone.

We have to ask, is the intention to blend in or to stand out?  It is as simple as that.  The design team profess one claim whilst doing the other.

The City of Edinburgh Council has a duty to respect Edinburgh’s World Heritage status. This isn’t a single building, it is a whole quarter of the New Town. Nothing on this scale in this sensitive location will be built again. They got it wrong once before in the 1960s and we have had to wait 50 years to put it right.  They can’t get it wrong again!

We urged the councillors to impose a condition that the cladding material has to be a natural buff sandstone to match the New Town of Edinburgh.  It was a perfectly reasonable request.”

So what do you think?

Website | + posts

Founding Editor of The Edinburgh Reporter.
Edinburgh-born multimedia journalist and iPhoneographer.

4 COMMENTS

  1. St James Square was home to Lithographic printers from the mid 19th century. Firstly Schenke, who introduced the technique to Edinburgh and latterly the Harley Brothers who printed with the likes of John Piper and Elizabeth Blackadder. These prints were created on lithographic limestone. There were many such printers in the area making whisky labels and so on. So the use of limestone could be seem as a tribute to the area’s commercial, industrial and creative heritage.

  2. It would be better to use sandstone than limestone, but if the choice is going to be between using limestone and any further delay in replacing what is there at the moment then limestone wins very comfortably.

  3. No way limestone! Check the building corner of Castle and Princes Streets -it’s weathered to look like tacky formica stained with black mould – compare to beautiful sandstone on Debenhams next door. Also it’s just not true there isn’t enough sandstone in the UK for this project – we send shiploads of the stuff over to Barcelona for Gaudi’s great La Sagrada cathedral. The developers are just cheapskates

Comments are closed.