Granton Lighthouse Building

Cockburn Response

The Cockburn Association welcomes the opportunity to comment on the proposals for the former Northern Lighthouse Board depot at Granton. This is a building of rare historic character whose distinctive industrial form has long served as a familiar marker along West Harbour Road. Much of its history, from the Stevenson engineers’ involvement to the experimental work undertaken by the Northern Lighthouse Board, remains legible in the surviving fabric. For this reason we agree with the accompanying heritage assessment that the structure is of greater significance than its present Category C listing suggests, and we welcome the care that has gone into tracing its evolution. We consider it essential that this rich and layered history is made legible to future users and visitors through well-considered, permanent onsite interpretation embedded within the project from the outset.

 

In principle, we support the aim of bringing the building back into productive use. Its long period of underinvestment has left it vulnerable; the current proposals offer the best chance in many years of securing its future while opening it up to the neighbourhood. The partnership with Out of the Blue has clear potential. Creative workspaces, rehearsal studios, and a publicly accessible café and exhibition area seem well judged for a building of this sort and for a district whose new population is growing quickly. The prospect of some public access to the lantern, handled carefully, would give the lighthouse a renewed civic role without compromising its fabric, particularly if accompanied by interpretation that explains its technological, social and maritime significance.

 

The approach to conservation and repair appears generally sound. We are pleased to see a commitment to repair rather than replace, including reinstating lost slate roofs, refurbishing the lantern, and retaining the cast-iron columns and other early fittings that give the interiors their distinctive atmosphere. We do, however, believe that more weight should be placed on securing appropriate conservation techniques through planning conditions. The building has previously suffered from hard cement pointing and other intrusive interventions, and there is a risk that poorly specified work could do further harm. A clear method statement, approved in advance by the Council’s conservation team, would help ensure that the repairs genuinely enhance the building’s long-term health.

 

The proposal to introduce a new shopfront to West Harbour Road and to remove the unsightly palisade fencing at the entrance is a welcome improvement. At present, the approach to the site is forbidding. The new arrangement should provide a more legible and inviting threshold, although we would encourage careful scrutiny of the detailed design. The laser-cut metalwork and contemporary reveal have some merit as modern insertions, but unless handled with restraint they could sit somewhat awkwardly alongside the robust industrial character of the original building. It is important that the new elements feel subordinate and that any signage or illumination is modest. The lantern, if lit at night, should be treated gently to avoid glare across the wider harbour landscape.

 

The public realm within the courtyard also deserves close attention. The drawings suggest that it will remain a working yard accommodating movement to the property to the south. At the same time, it is presented as part of a developing network of public routes between future residential blocks. There is nothing necessarily contradictory in this, but the arrangement must be very clear. Pedestrians should not feel as though they are entering a service yard by mistake, and those working on the site should not face avoidable conflicts with delivery vehicles or visitors. A coherent and clearly marked shared-surface strategy would help, ideally supported by subtle interpretive cues that reinforce the site’s historic identity rather than treating the space as purely transitional.

 

We welcome the commitment to improve access within the building, especially a new lift to the upper floor. We recognise that the historic layout makes full step-free access impossible, but simple interpretive measures for those unable to climb to the lantern would allow more people to appreciate the building’s story and significance. The quality of internal wayfinding will also matter, particularly where several uses overlap and the building has more than one entrance. Ensuring that the main route is obvious, accessible and interpretively coherent should be a priority.

 

The environmental strategy is one of the strongest aspects of the submission. Retrofitting historic structures of this age and type is seldom straightforward, yet the choice to retain the existing fabric, introduce breathable insulation, and avoid unnecessary replacement is very welcome. The adoption of air source heat pumps and discreet solar panels is sensible and reflects the wider ambitions for a low-carbon Granton Waterfront. We would simply encourage the Council to satisfy itself that overheating risk in the upper spaces, particularly those with enlarged rooflights, has been properly tested, and that maintenance arrangements for the PV panels and gutters can be carried out safely without compromising the building fabric.

 

Noise is likely to be the most sensitive operational issue, given the continuation of music rehearsal and recording uses and the proximity of emerging residential development. We note the applicant’s intention to undertake a fuller assessment and would expect the Council to require this before works begin. Conditions governing plant noise, studio breakout, and hours of late-evening activity would be advisable. The café element will bring welcome animation but should be managed so that deliveries, waste collection and any evening events do not cause avoidable nuisance.

 

One area of continuing concern is the exclusion of the storekeeper’s cottage from the present application. While we understand that the boundary line may be pragmatic, the cottage and the main complex clearly read as a single historic ensemble. We regret that the current proposals do not extend to the cottage, as fragmenting their treatment risks a future mismatch in tone, quality or conservation approach. It would be helpful if the Council sought clear assurance that any subsequent proposals for the cottage will be developed in parallel, follow the same conservation-led principles, and contribute positively to the understanding and integrity of the site as a whole.

 

Taken as a whole, the proposals represent a thoughtful attempt to secure the long-term future of a highly distinctive historic building. They offer a realistic balance between conservation, public benefit and environmental responsibility, and they appear capable of giving the lighthouse a renewed place within the life of the growing Granton community. Subject to conditions ensuring appropriate conservation techniques, careful detailing of new elements, firm noise controls, a clear and well-integrated onsite interpretation strategy, and a properly coordinated approach to the wider site, we would support the granting of consent.