Newsletter - Links - Advertise - Contact Us - Privacy

Apartment surgery to repair Morningside broken tooth

July 13 2021

Apartment surgery to repair Morningside broken tooth

Planning and conservation area consent is sought to infill a broken tooth plot at 265-360 Morningside Road, Edinburgh, with apartments above ground-floor retail.

Work will necessitate the demolition of a Sainsbury's store for a replacement retail unit below 10 apartments to designs by McLaren Murdoch & Hamilton. Initially the site was host to a tenement subsequently lost at some point before 1967, likely owing to subsidence linked to the culverted Jordan Burn.

In a statement, the architects wrote: "The façade has been partially retained to the south end of the site to act as shoring to the adjacent block and there is additional shoring within the site.

"There is a basement level below which does not take up the full footprint of the ground floor. Part of the ground floor and basement lie below the adjacent tenement to the south."

Finished in ashlar sandstone with non-combustible cladding panels the replacement block will offer cycle parking off a rear access lane.

The street line will be reinstated for the first time since the 1960s
The street line will be reinstated for the first time since the 1960s


#1 Posted by Robert on 13 Jul 2021 at 12:21 PM
I believe that a previous application along the same lines was rejected by planning. If the windows were aligned with the surrounding buildings (I.e. one floor less squeezed in), I suspect that the chances of planning approval would be enhanced.
#2 Posted by Ben on 13 Jul 2021 at 12:49 PM
Pretty dreadful effort. Really poor proposal.
#3 Posted by TheFakeArchitect on 13 Jul 2021 at 14:00 PM
I could hazard a guess what that was going to look like even before I opened the elevation image. Why is Scottish and in particular Edinburgh architecture so predictable at the moment?
The Bairn
#4 Posted by The Bairn on 13 Jul 2021 at 16:06 PM
Will somebody pay attention please...and the major clue in the photo and also described by the architects themselves is 'partial fa├žade retention' - no doubt to comply with an earlier 1960s Planning Consent.
Looks like its being conveniently forgotten about and erased from history.
Why does anyone bother to preserve our heritage when this proposal rears its ugly head?
I suppose its too complicated and expensive (as usual) to have 50/50 solution of left side 3 and a half storeys and right side 4 and a half storeys to match existing tenements and have a split level roofing configuration.
Not perfect but it just might work!!
Damp Proof Membrane
#5 Posted by Damp Proof Membrane on 13 Jul 2021 at 17:12 PM
When are we going to be collectively embarrassed enough for this kind of stuff to stop. What. A. Joke.
#6 Posted by Disappointed on 14 Jul 2021 at 13:54 PM
This is a conservation area. Should the front (at least) be made to visually tie in with its surroundings? Lazy design.
#7 Posted by McAdam on 14 Jul 2021 at 16:41 PM
Another 'lazy architectural outing. They obviously believe predictable equals good. How sad.
#8 Posted by Matt on 15 Jul 2021 at 08:12 AM
Given the rigour of the streetscape, the floor levels need to tie through...end of.

Post your comments


All comments are pre-moderated and
must obey our house rules.


Back to July 2021

Search News
Subscribe to Urban Realm Magazine
Features & Reports
For more information from the industry visit our Features & Reports section.