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

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

109 Princes Street

Posted on: April 24, 2026

Scaffold advert harms Princes Street’s historic character and coherence

Scaffold advert harms Princes Street’s historic character and coherence

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association welcomes the opportunity to comment on this application.

Princes Street is one of Edinburgh’s most important civic frontages, forming part of the World Heritage Site and the New Town Conservation Area. Proposals in this location require a high degree of sensitivity to context, architectural character and townscape coherence.

The proposed scaffold-mounted advertisement, incorporating a full-height façade wrap, raises significant concerns. By replacing the architectural expression of a listed building with a large-scale graphic surface, the proposal results in a clear loss of character and legibility. Even as a temporary intervention, its scale and prominence introduce a level of visual impact that is not proportionate to its stated purpose.

The inclusion of illumination further intensifies this effect, contributing to visual intrusion and altering the character of the street, particularly in evening conditions.

The cumulative impact of such proposals is of particular concern. Scaffold advertising on Princes Street has become increasingly frequent, with successive temporary consents creating a pattern that risks becoming established over time. This proposal reinforces that trajectory and contributes to the gradual erosion of the street’s distinctive qualities.

While the practical requirements of building maintenance are understood, the approach taken here does not demonstrate a sufficiently sensitive or contextually grounded response to this highly significant location.

We object to this application in its current form.

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

London Street – Serviced Apartments

Posted on: April 3, 2026

Objects to conversion harming heritage, residential use, community balance

Objects to conversion harming heritage, residential use, community balance

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association objects to this application.

The proposal seeks listed building consent for the conversion of part of 39 London Street, an A-listed building within the New Town Conservation Area and World Heritage Site, to seven serviced apartments with integral manager’s accommodation. While the re-use of a vacant building is supported in principle, the current proposal raises significant concerns.

The primary issue is heritage impact. The level of internal subdivision required to deliver seven serviced units suggests a substantial intervention in the plan form and spatial hierarchy of the building. The application refers to restoration of original features, but does not demonstrate that the proposed alterations are conservation-led or that the significance of the building will be preserved. The justification advanced is largely functional and economic, which is not sufficient in the context of an A-listed building.

There are also concerns regarding the proposed use. The application relies on the argument that no residential use is being lost. However, this overlooks the importance of maintaining and supporting residential and mixed civic functions within the city centre. The introduction of intensive short-stay accommodation represents a shift towards transient occupation that does not contribute positively to community life.

The applicant suggests that previous concerns regarding amenity have been addressed through management measures, including 24-hour staffing. While these measures may assist operationally, they do not address the underlying issue of use intensity and compatibility with the surrounding residential context. The proposed approach to shared rear garden access further reinforces this concern. Restricting access to staff only, while relying on the garden for emergency egress, introduces a service-based and operational use of a semi-private residential space without providing any corresponding amenity benefit. It has not been demonstrated how this arrangement would be managed or how impacts on neighbouring residents would be mitigated.

Finally, the proposal must be considered in cumulative terms. The application refers to recent permissions for short-term lets nearby. In our view, this reinforces rather than resolves concern. The continued conversion of buildings within the New Town to visitor accommodation risks eroding the character and liveability of the area over time, including through incremental changes to how shared residential infrastructure is used and experienced.

For these reasons, the Cockburn Association objects to the application.

Further Details Here

Back to Listings

Salamander Street – Demolition and Redevelopment

Posted on:

Positive shift, but design quality and place-making remain weak

Positive shift, but design quality and place-making remain weak

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association welcomes the redevelopment of this site and supports the continued transition of this part of Leith towards a predominantly residential neighbourhood.

In particular, we welcome the revised residential mix, including the reduction in purpose-built student accommodation (PBSA) and the increase in mainstream and affordable housing. This represents a positive and policy-aligned shift. We also support the emerging approach to intergenerational living, which has the potential to contribute to a more balanced and sustainable community.

However, while these strategic changes are encouraging, the design quality of the proposal does not yet meet the standard expected for a development of this scale and prominence in Scotland’s capital.

The principal concerns relate to place-making and architectural quality. The scheme remains insufficiently distinctive, reading as a generic development rather than one grounded in the character and identity of Leith. The public realm offer is weak, with limited evidence of a generous and engaging street environment. The development appears inward-looking, with much of the amenity provision internalised.

The ground floor and street interface are underdeveloped, and the proposed active frontage lacks the clarity and robustness required to support a lively and attractive street. In addition, the architectural expression lacks depth and articulation, and does not yet demonstrate the richness of materiality and detailing expected in this context.

There are also outstanding environmental concerns, particularly in relation to air quality and the delivery of a healthy residential environment. The proposal does not yet demonstrate a sufficiently integrated approach to climate resilience and blue-green infrastructure.

In summary, while the direction of travel is supported, the scheme requires significant further design development to achieve the level of quality expected in Edinburgh.

The Cockburn Association would welcome further refinement and continued engagement to address these issues and to realise the full potential of this important site.

Further Details Here

Back to Listings