Rhind Lectures 2026 (in person and online)

Friday, June 19-Sunday, June 21

Exploring Scottish martial identity, representation, and memory, 1793–1815.

Book Here

Back to Listings

Middle Meadow Walk

Posted on: May 20, 2026

Festival use accepted, but stronger safeguards needed for The Meadows.

Festival use accepted, but stronger safeguards needed for The Meadows.

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association accepts the principle of a temporary Fringe venue at Middle Meadow Walk, recognising its contribution to Edinburgh’s cultural life and the wider Festival.

However, The Meadows is a highly sensitive and intensively used public green space, and proposals must demonstrate that temporary use does not result in long-term environmental or landscape harm.

In its current form, the application raises concerns regarding:

  • the protection of trees and landscape features
  • the cumulative impact on The Meadows
  • the appropriateness of any permission extending beyond a single festival season
  • the lack of clear, enforceable safeguards for ground and landscape protectio
  •  insufficient evidence that climate mitigation, green-space resilience and restoration have been properly addressed

Support could only be contemplated if a robust Tree and Ground Protection Plan is secured by condition or prior approval

  • permission is limited to a single year, subject to revie
  • clear limits on scale, layout and duration of occupation are defined and enforced
  • post-event monitoring and reinstatement requirements are secured
  • a clear landscape restoration and climate-resilience strategy is provided

Without these safeguards, the application does not adequately protect the long-term character, condition, climate-resilience function and public value of The Meadows, and should not be supported in its current form.

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

George Square Gardens

Posted on:

Support Fringe venue, but stronger tree and landscape safeguards needed.

Support Fringe venue, but stronger tree and landscape safeguards needed.

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association accepts the principle of a temporary Fringe venue at George Square, recognising its long-established role within the Edinburgh Festival Fringe and its contribution to the city’s cultural life.

However, this is a highly sensitive landscaped site, and proposals must demonstrate clear and robust safeguards to ensure that temporary use does not result in long-term environmental or townscape harm.

In its current form, the application is deficient in key respects. In particular:the absence of a Tree Protection Plan and arboricultural method statement is a significant omission

  • the proposed three-year permission is not justified, given the sensitivity of the site and the lack of supporting safeguards
  • the application does not yet demonstrate sufficient compliance with policy expectations relating to trees, biodiversity, amenity, landscape protection and climate resilience

These are not minor matters, but fundamental requirements for the proper assessment and management of development in this location.

The Association therefore recommends that the planning authority should not support the application as submitted, unless, as a minimum, the following are secured:

  • submission and approval of a Tree Protection Plan and arboricultural method statement
  • clear mitigation, monitoring and restoration arrangements for soil, trees, drainage and landscape condition
  • limitation of any consent to a single year, subject to review and monitoring

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

Telecoms Mast George Iv Bridge

Posted on:

World Heritage proposals need stronger evidence, heritage assessment, and visual justification

World Heritage proposals need stronger evidence, heritage assessment, and visual justification

Cockburn Response

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

Henderson Row

Posted on: May 19, 2026

Improved design, but objections remain over scale, roofscape, and conservation impact

Improved design, but objections remain over scale, roofscape, and conservation impact

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association acknowledges that this revised proposal represents an improvement on the earlier submission, particularly through the simplification of the roofscape and a more coherent material approach. These changes reduce some of the visual clutter and improve the overall architectural discipline of the scheme.

However, the Association remains concerned that the proposal does not sufficiently resolve the more fundamental issues previously identified. In particular, the additional storey remains insufficiently justified in relation to the established scale, roofscape character and cumulative townscape qualities of Henderson Row and the wider conservation area.

While the revised design is more restrained, the proposal would still contribute to the gradual erosion of the consistent parapet line and roofscape hierarchy that form an important part of the area’s character. The argument that the surrounding context is already “atypical” is not considered sufficient justification for further upward extension in such a sensitive historic setting.

The Association therefore maintains its objection to the proposal. However, it recognises that the current iteration represents a more considered architectural response than the previous submission and would encourage continued refinement that more clearly respects the established scale and conservation character of Henderson Row.

 

 

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

Centrum House

Posted on:

Improved scheme, but concerns remain over scale, demolition, and design quality

Improved scheme, but concerns remain over scale, demolition, and design quality

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association recognises that the current application represents a material improvement on earlier redevelopment proposals previously submitted for the Centrum House site. The revised scheme demonstrates greater architectural discipline, a clearer urban structure, and a more coherent response to the Dundas Street frontage than previous iterations. The simplification of the programme into a primarily hotel-led development has also resulted in a more unified and legible architectural approach.

The Association additionally acknowledges the opportunity presented by the replacement of the existing buildings, which make a limited positive contribution to the New Town Conservation Area and wider townscape.

However, despite these improvements, significant concerns remain unresolved.

In particular, the proposal continues to appear overly large in scale and insufficiently articulated for such a sensitive New Town context. While materially more restrained and coherent than earlier schemes, the overall massing still risks reading as an overly continuous large-format intervention within a townscape characterised by finer grain, hierarchy and rhythm. Further articulation and modulation would help reduce perceived bulk and strengthen contextual integration.

The Association is also concerned by the increasingly formulaic architectural character of many major redevelopment proposals emerging across central Edinburgh. While the current scheme is more disciplined and coherent than earlier iterations, it nevertheless reflects a wider pattern of commercially standardised hotel-led architecture that risks contributing to a gradual homogenisation of the city centre. Edinburgh’s historic environment was not created through architectural caution alone; many of the city’s most valued buildings and townscapes were innovative interventions in their own time. Development at such prominent gateway locations should therefore aspire not merely to competence, but to a higher level of architectural originality, civic presence and contextual imagination.

The Association also remains concerned by the continued reliance on demolition-led redevelopment. Given Edinburgh’s climate commitments and the increasing importance of embodied carbon considerations within the planning system, the application would benefit from a substantially more robust justification for demolition and clearer evidence that meaningful retention, retrofit or adaptive reuse options have been comprehensively explored.

In addition, the proposal should be considered within the wider cumulative context of increasing hotel intensification within central Edinburgh and the New Town edge. While hotel use may be acceptable in principle at this location, repeated large-scale visitor accommodation schemes risk contributing to the gradual erosion of mixed-use balance, townscape diversity and architectural grain within the city centre.

Overall, the proposal appears materially different from — and improved compared to — the earlier scheme previously objected to by the Cockburn Association. On balance, a robust and critical planning comment now appears more proportionate than a formal objection, while still clearly identifying the remaining concerns regarding scale, demolition, sustainability, architectural quality and cumulative impact

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

Telecoms Mast Cowgate

Posted on:

World Heritage proposals require evidence, sensitivity, and least-impact design.

World Heritage proposals require evidence, sensitivity, and least-impact design.

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association supports the provision of modern telecommunications infrastructure where it is appropriately designed, sensitively located and fully justified.

However, within the World Heritage Site, proposals must meet a significantly higher threshold of:

  • evidence and visual assessment
    • heritage justification
    • demonstration of least-impact solutions
    • design quality appropriate to the sensitivity of the site

In this case, the application does not provide:

  • adequate visualisations demonstrating impact on the townscape
    • a clear and proportionate heritage impact assessment
    • evidence that alternative, less visually intrusive options have been explored

These are fundamental requirements, not optional supporting material.

As submitted, the application does not provide sufficient information to enable a meaningful assessment of its impact or its compliance with development plan policy.

The Cockburn Association therefore considers that:

  • the application should not proceed to determination in its current form; and
  • the necessary visual, heritage and site selection information should be provided and made publicly available prior to any formal assessment.

Only once this information is available can a balanced and policy-compliant planning judgement be reached.

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

Housing as Civic Architecture Vienna: on what a city says about itself when it builds homes for ordinary people

POSTED ON May 15, 2026 BY James Garry

The Karl-Marx-Hof on Vienna’s Heiligenstädter Strasse is hard to miss. Completed in 1930, it stretches for more than a kilometre, rises to six storeys, and announces itself with an entrance archway of palace-like scale. It housed 1,382 working-class families. It was built, quite deliberately, to make a statement: that the quality of homes provided to ordinary people is a measure …

The Karl-Marx-Hof on Vienna’s Heiligenstädter Strasse is hard to miss. Completed in 1930, it stretches for more than a kilometre, rises to six storeys, and announces itself with an entrance archway of palace-like scale. It housed 1,382 working-class families. It was built, quite deliberately, to make a statement: that the quality of homes provided to ordinary people is a measure …

Support the Cockburn

Donate
Join Us

Back to Listings

Rose Street Mast

Posted on: May 12, 2026

Insufficient heritage and visual evidence prevents policy-compliant assessment of proposal.

Insufficient heritage and visual evidence prevents policy-compliant assessment of proposal.

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association acknowledges the need for modern telecommunications infrastructure and supports its delivery where it is appropriately designed and sensitively located.

However, within the World Heritage Site, proposals must meet a significantly higher threshold of justification, evidence and design quality, as required by NPF4 Policy 7 (Historic Assets and Places), Policy 14 (Design, Quality and Place), and City Plan 2030 Policy HE1 (World Heritage Site) and Policy D1 (Quality and Design of Development).

In this case, the application does not provide:

  • adequate visualisations demonstrating impact on the townscape
  • a clear assessment of heritage impact
  • evidence that alternative, less visually intrusive options have been explored

These are fundamental requirements, not optional supporting material.

As submitted, the application does not provide sufficient information to enable a meaningful assessment of its impact or its compliance with development plan policy.

The Cockburn Association therefore considers that:

  • the application should not proceed to determination in its current form; and
  • the necessary visual, heritage and site selection information should be provided and made publicly available prior to any formal assessment.

Only once this information is available can a balanced and policy-compliant planning judgement be reached.

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

Extending the City with Purpose Lyon Confluence: what a governing idea looks like, and what happens without one

POSTED ON May 7, 2026 BY James Garry

Lyon shows what happens when cities hold their nerve — and what Edinburgh risks when they do not.

Lyon shows what happens when cities hold their nerve — and what Edinburgh risks when they do not.

Support the Cockburn

Donate
Join Us

Back to Listings