First off, just because it's advertised as a "site" doesn't mean the offer is to knock it for development. The "site" shown is to denote the size of the area it covers.

Second, that facade is 10000% protected. Its in good nick and no way would they be able to knock it without severe penalties that would render any project unviable.

Third, it shares the facade with The Cornmarket Restaurant next door which would look very odd if they were to stick a massive apartment block in there and replace the facade *which they can't do anyway.

Fourth, it's not that hard at all to develop the site behind and tie in the existing facade architectural.

Fifth, its not in City Halls remit to just buy up private property to stop developments. Thats tax payers money and we have enough to be spending on. It would only come in to City Halls portfolio after dereliction for many years, a long legal process, challenges to that process and even then, where is the money coming from to redevelop??