A new set of plans has been submitted for a much-discussed derelict building in the middle of Kirkwall.
The developer’s original plan for 1 King Street was to knock it down. But that was rejected by the local council, Historic Environment Scotland, and the Scottish Government.
The latest plans would, instead, result in the demolition of the building’s existing two-storey wing and the garage.
The slates on the roof of the remaining two-storey detached house would also be stripped.
The purpose of these plans is to make the site safe, according to the attached design document.
Work would begin as soon as possible, pending approval from the council.
These plans are currently with the council’s planning department, although no verdict on whether they can go ahead has been given yet.
A response from one consultee is attached from the chair of the Orkney Heritage Society Spencer Rosie.
In a letter, he states that the society “is glad to see something being done with this site and looks forward to seeing plans for its redevelopment.”
What was the previous plan for 1 King Street, Kirkwall, and why was it stopped?
These are the latest plans from local developer Lyall Harray and his agent S. J Omand.
Previously, they had sought permission to completely knock down the empty building.
If that had gone ahead, Mr Harray planned to build two houses on the site.
In the design documents, they said 1 King Street has been an “eyesore” in Kirkwall for 50 years.
They claimed there is no public benefit to keeping the building.
However, these plans were rejected by Orkney Islands Council’s planning department following consultation with Historic Environment Scotland.
the developer appealed the decision to Scottish Government ministers, but this was also turned down.
The basis for this refusal came partly from the fact that the building is within the conservation area.
As such it is afforded some additional protection.
In their previous consultation response, HES said the building still contributes to the conservation area.
The council also said that the developer hadn’t done enough to prove there was no other viable option than knocking the building down.
While the developer and his agent said there was subsidence at 1 King Street, HES disagreed saying there wasn’t enough evidence to prove it.
The replacement buildings proposed by Mr Harray were also found to be unacceptable due to lack of external amenity space.
Conversation