THE developer behind the controversial luxury hotel planned for one of Edinburgh’s most celebrated landmarks has accused heritage bodies of falsifying images of the project and “deliberately misleading” the public.
David Orr, of joint Urbanist Hotels and Duddingston House Properties has claimed Edinburgh World Heritage photo-shopped images of his plans for the old Royal High School building revamp ahead of a public meeting that was followed by a surge in opposition.
EWH, the watchdog charged with policing the city's Unesco World Heritage Site status, insists any discrepancy in the images were an "unintended inaccuracy", although this was not accepted by Mr Orr.
The unusual exchange comes ahead of a critical Edinburgh City Council meeting where councillors will decide on the latest version of the £75 million hotel plan for the former Royal High School on Calton Hill.
Urbanist claims that after the images were used at a meeting by the Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland a flurry of negative submissions against the project were lodged.
EWH and AHSS joined other heritage bodies Cockburn Society and the Scottish Civic Trust in writing an open letter calling for councillors to reject the hotel proposals, a move council officials recommended.
Mr Orr said: "Not only do these organisations attempt to cast doubt on our economic case but the letter places great weight on stewardship and reputation.
“I am therefore extremely disappointed that EWH chose to foment opposition to our scheme by creating false images at the public meeting on the March 14, hosted by AHSS.
"Immediately following the meeting, there was a substantial increase of objections to the scheme.
"In writing to me recently, EHW were unapologetic about deploying false images in misinforming the debate to bolster these objections."
He continued: “I am concerned that if EWH are prepared to deliberately mislead in pursuit of their cause then what does that mean for the reputation of our city and how does that align with their role in our opining on our world heritage status?
"It is deeply worrying that EWH is unashamedly unapologetic in the use of tactics that mislead the public, which is deeply damaging for Edinburgh’s reputation.”
An Edinburgh World Heritage spokesman said: "The accusations coming from DHP are a further example of the lengths they will go to in order to get their plan approved, create unhelpful distractions from the core issues, and criticise the people and organisations that disagree with them.
"At no stage were images deliberately falsified by Edinburgh World Heritage.
"The images generated by the developer themselves more than adequately demonstrate the inappropriateness of the hotel proposal in terms of both scale, design and lack of respect for the unique World Heritage setting.
"As a final point, Edinburgh World Heritage worked tirelessly with DHP for a period of five years in order to find a solution that would meet the needs of both the developer and the city.
"Only when it became apparent that our advice was being ignored did we withdraw.’
The developers have said the proposal would see the A-Listed Thomas Hamilton building become a "world class" hotel facility.
The planning report to be presented to councillors on Thursday said the hotel plan would have a "significant adverse impact" on the site.
A £35m rival proposal for a new home for St Mary's Music School already has planning permission.
The joint letter, the first of its kind by the heritage bodies, stated: "There is an overwhelming case to respect their judgment on this highly sensitive site. To disregard these policies would destroy Edinburgh's credibility for stewardship of its World Heritage Site."
The AHSS declined to comment on the images issue.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel