The Water Tower

The Water Tower
The Water Tower at Dusk

Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Any Day Now

Interesting times as I prepare for a woodland open day for local folks and have started my article for the small woodlands owners group. Still writing walks for Midlothian Advertiser as well. Now completed walk article No 5.
Gerry has been shortlisted again - sorry the house has been shortlisted again - for a design award with Homebuilding and Renovating along with the Telegraph newspaper. Just to be shortlisted is quite an achievment for a National award. Should know the result any day now. Fingers crossed.

Appeals Reporter also due any day now and thankfully no delays after the planning officer submitted a most bizarre e mail that was wide of the scope for the appeal. We did respond - briefly - and then the officer submitted even more e mail comments. Digging a deeper hole where none was required really. In the end common sense ruled from the Reporters office, although the initial bizarre e mail is still on their e site which I think is dis-proportionate. What a complex matter an appeal is. What an experience though.

I should have some updated photos soon because I have really worked hard on the woodland landscape these last few weeks. Finding all sorts of materials in the woodland and bringing them into areas to create some quirky planting schemes. A mini Springfield Mill for example. Created to look like a mini version of the woodland works at Springfiled with things such as old post and wire fencing that has been rotting away for years laid out in a small patch with a red and green ivy planted through it. A pile of moss covered pieces of brick - again similar to Springfield where industrial waste has been kept and allowed to become moss covered and then planted with ferns. A mini grass meadow edge, 1st year foxglove plants and a few small birch trees complete the scheme. Some cornflower seed and lets see how it develops. It can't last for ever and in the end I'll probably just plant a tree in the patch but for now it is a bit of fun.

In the centre of the wood chip area - now dug up after the soil has been conditioned with nitrogen fixing green manure plants - I have placed a large old dead tree trunk that Gerry and I lugged round from the very back of our woodland at 7am this morning! Being awake early and thinking about how to plant out woodland areas is becoming all to regular. Lots of ferns and woodland primrose to be planted. The tree trunk is well rotted and has holes and decaying matter that will hold some plants. With pole wood edging and paths it is all looking very magical.

Here is the Reporters office correspondance today.

Our ref: PPA-290-2014
30 August 2011

To: Susan & Gerry Goldwyre Kingsley Drinkwater Midlothian Council


TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (SCOTLAND) ACT 1997

PLANNING PERMISSION APPEAL: RP9, THE WATER TOWER, CEMETERY ROAD, DALKEITH, MIDLOTHIAN, EH22 3DL

The Reporter has asked me to let you know that although there have been several recent email exchanges in relation to the above appeal, he has all the information he requires. These additional emails have not been forwarded to the Reporter.

Yours sincerely

JANE ROBERTSON on behalf of Christopher Kennedy

Case Officer

Thursday, August 18, 2011

Appeal Final Stages and SWOG

Couldn't believe that Midlothian council advised they were submitting another (late) response to our response to their appeal statement. How many responses can there be? Kingsley said he had been reviewing the appeal documents (?really) and when he read the letters from the DPEA he though he could have another bite at the cherry. I didn't think this was correct and right enough, the DPEA wrote to advise it wasn't correct procedure and the comments have not been accepted.

Just as well. If Armstrong and Bowie had late comments returned then even if procedure had been followed, the fact that the councils attempt was late would have irked.

Then we had a discussion with Kingsley about our far away wood stores that have been in-situ for well over 10 years. What a surprise, someone raised an enquiry about them and planning had to check it out. 

I'm actually getting ready for a bunch of local folks who are coming to see the woodland soon and join us for a house party. I have asked that no one brings us wine or gifts but to bring a plant or quirky woodland item that they might want to leave for posterity. I have designs on making the woodland a community woodland and have an annual event - bit like the gardens open scheme but for woodland. There is so much to do to improve the woodland and I am looking forward to everyone coming in and giving me their ideas.

Some interesting news today is that I have been asked by Small Woodland Owners Group to write 2 good length articles on our woodland and planning matters. I'll look forward to doing that next month by which time we should have the DPEA report as well. I'm also looking forward to exploring the suggestion that our woodland activities might in some way have compromised the Scottish National targets for improvement of woodlands.......as my nephew used to say - I kid you not.

This is the swog link.



Here's the letter from the DPEA to the council

Our ref: PPA-290-2014

Dear Mr Drinkwater

PLANNING PERMISSION APPEAL: ERECTION OF TIMBER DECKING, BOUNDARY FENCE, ALTERATIONS TO PATH, FORMATION OF ACCESS STEPS AND ERECTION OF GUARD RAIL; RP9, THE WATER TOWER, CEMETERY ROAD, DALKEITH, MIDLOTHIAN, EH22 3DL

I refer to your email of 17 August 2011 which attached further comments. The appeal procedures do not allow for your Council to submit further comments in response to the appellants submissions on the Planning Authority Response Form and supporting documents lodged by your Council.

As all exchanges of information have now taken place, the statutory process is now complete. The Reporter has decided not to accept your further comments.

Yours sincerely

CHRISTOPHER KENNEDY

Case Officer

Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals
4 The Courtyard
Callendar Business Park
Callendar Road
Falkirk

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

Armstrong and Bowie representations rejected by DPEA

Correspondance with DPEA posted on the site today states that 2 recent letters of representation have not been accepted. Below is an extract of the letter advising this to one of the representors and the posting detail on the DPEA site. Now you might think it is harsh to have rejected these letters but (a) they were outwith the time limit and (b) both writers had made formal representations already. The latter is probably not a reason for rejection but one does wonder how much more people could possibly write regarding our planning application.

I am seriously considering writing as book since it is easy nowadays to do so. Only people wishing to read the subject matter choose to download the book, keeping costs down by negating the need to have a publishing run. I think that after blogging there will be personal e-books with extracts on line to tempt purchasers. What opportunities we have with technology these days. I'm hoping that the monthly walk articles in Midlothian might use this technology as well as our planning story. Just need to come up with some tempting titles.

From the Scottish Office for Planning Appeals to Mr Armstrong and Mr Bowie
I refer to your letter dated 3 August 2011 regarding the above appeal. The reporter has closed the exchange of written submissions for this case and has decided not to accept and consider your comments. For this reason, I am returning your letter to you.


15/08/20111General LetterPPA-290-2014 - General Letter - to Mr William Bowie - advising that comments have been received out of time and are being returned - 15 August 2011


15/08/2011



1



    General   
Letter



PPA-290-2014 - General Letter - to Mr Michael Armstrong - advising that comments have been received out of time and are being returned - 15 August 2011


Tuesday, August 9, 2011

Third Party Representations

Gerry and I have the right to make representation to our third party comments on our planning appeal. Mr Culshaw visited yesterday for the DPEA site assessment and I really don't think he should have to read any more - he must have had enough. I prepared this response but am in 2 minds whether to send it in. At least I can blog it knowing that the relevant people will probably read it.

More interesting for woodland lovers - I was in Dornie last week and looked in at the Balmacara Woodland. It is no longer managed due to lack of funding which is a shame. It still looks fine though at the moment. Woodlands .co . uk had a large sign up stating woodlands for sale! so its not just England. There are many beautiful areas in and around Dornie - even the highly commercial Eilen Donan (spelling? will check later) castle. It lifts the soul to visit this area and it was sunny!!!!! for 4 whole days!!!!!  To my USA friends - you will have to come back and we will keep trying to get a visit to the Highlands in good weather.

Here is my draft letter. Do you think I should just keep it to myself?


Third Party Representations – Response by Mr and Mrs Goldwyre.
 

1.       Ms Adrienne Findlay and Ms Nichola Lyons. Just to note that neither of these persons made representation to Midlothian Council at the time of the original application. They state that they did. They are related to 2 other persons who did make representation.



2.        Mr Tony Galloway – no comment other than to make clear that the hedge is not planted on a public path. It is planted on our own property. It has recently been damaged. The issues raised by Mr Galloway have nothing to do with planning matters. They are defamatory.



3.       Mr Joseph Tucker. There are no new planning issues raised. He was called by Mr Goldwyre to seek his view because (a) his letter bore a striking similarity with others and (b) we wished to invite him to see the woodland for himself. In order to understand the facts rather than believe that there had been “industrial deforestation”. Other representors were also contacted. No one has ever been bullied.



4.       Mr William Bowie – no relevant planning matters to raise but just to comment on 4 points in the interests of 3rd party comment clarification;



(a)    The helpful suggestion regarding connecting the broken tennis club water pipe to a drain. The pipe is not broken – it doesn’t do what it was designed to do and no water comes through the pipe.

(b)   There are 2 woodland management plans – year 2000 and 2011. Both commissioned and paid for by ourselves.

(c)    The burdens in the feu were never served on the land occupied by the Gazebo. The feu burden notice that was served contained a fundamental error that was made by the server. The complainants concerns belong with the error made by the feu superior. The planning files note that the burdens in the legal disposition cannot be enforced. None of these matters are however relevant to planning and it is shameful that a planning application has been hijacked to document and air these matters in a system that is open to the public allowing widespread dissemination of wrongful information.

(d)   The planning department have never instructed the removal of any viewing platform.

 5.       Mrs Bowie – similarly with Mr Bowie, in the interests of accuracy

(a)    A building warrant was applied for at the correct time.

(b)   Park users could only read our sign on A4 paper if they used a telephoto lens and even then, it might be difficult.

(c)    Photographs of other bin stores and sitting out areas in Eskbank was advised to us by the council. To provide the officer with evidence of similar structures in the area.

(d)   We have never applied to build 3 chalets on the land.

(e)   We also seek to protect the tranquillity of the wooded valley and it is not true that there are lights and noise beyond that of any other dwelling house. If lights or noise are ever an issue we would expect to be contacted by a neighbour or the Police.


6.       Mr Donald Marshall makes claim of the utilitarian structures but we consider that the tennis club fence presents the most utilitarian structure on view to the park users. The structures in this application actually serve to soften that view and will hold climbers such as woodland ivy and woodland clematis in the future. Patience is required. The natural presentation of the valley is not lost.



7.        Mr M Armstrong for the EAS. We have already commented on this letter.  It is clear following the site visit that Mr Armstrong as the representative chairperson, has served to misguide its group of local volunteers and failed to bring a balanced perspective to the planning matters. Some matters are potentially libellous and some are verging on the ridiculous. An example was the woodland matter raised in the face of documented professional opinion from an individual highly respected in his field, Mr Donald Rodger. It beggars belief that another professional could state that the woodland management at water tower wood has compromised the national targets for the expansion and improvement of Scottish native woodlands. The area that water tower wood occupies relative to the entire woodland around Ironmills Park amounts to the equivalent of a pen dot mark on a bath towel. Try expanding that to its relativity to the entire Scottish native woodlands. To state that our sitting out area, paths, fences and woodland works within the whole woodland in some way compromise these national targets shows a complete lack of respect for the management of the woodland, to us as the owners of this woodland and the reports covering its management. Oh that these efforts by the society might be served by reviewing Midlothian Councils woodland management activities instead. And especially when the clearance of large numbers of trees in a nearby woodland in Newbattle was never commented upon by this society, despite the fact that the local community council raised this as a serious potential concern. Not one word emanated from the EAS.



The inconsistency in application of the society’s aims and objectives raises doubts as to the society’s credibility, especially when the society members’ views are not canvassed before some representations are submitted. This is evident from an EAS member who wrote to support our planning application and who effectively recorded “I have never had my views canvassed despite being a member of the group”.


Like the society I am raising matters that are not material to this planning application and for that I apologise. But matters relating to trees and woodland are passionate and cannot be left as one sided. Our aims are to improve this woodland and always have been.


This society has done nothing to consider our woodland activities in the wider context of other AGLVs such as Vogrie Country Park where woodland works of a similar nature are all acceptable in terms of woodland protection and biodiversity.
 

It is time this society took stock and considered whether or not their intrusion into matters which direct neighbours might understandably have a concern, have served to create disharmony to the point where neighbourly actions to allay fears and mend small issues have been unable to be resolved. They may even have played a part in the demise of a Friends of Ironmills Park group through actions documented in the Councils’ files as “collusion”. We even offered to use mediation services with the EAS through the council and this offer has been refused twice. The actions of the society (or most probably only its committee members) have been instrumental in creating the neighbour disharmony and animosity that has developed as a consequence. They should be ashamed of themselves.


Monday, August 8, 2011

Search terms used to find this site

Its interesting to see the words used in a search engine to find this blog site. Especially the one that was used today! first one on the list below.

We are just about to start renovating the water tower after some serious water damage in the winter. Lots to do; and now that the woodland works have been assessed by the DPEA we can get on with our life.I am so looking forward to upgrading the tower to current standards. I wonder who wanted to check up on conversion of towers in a green belt? just as well it has already been converted.......

I wonder who was interested in our land purchase? Just remember you can't believe everything you read on the internet - it's not validated. Even Wikipedia isn't validated although the info it contains is really useful.


conversion of water towers in green belt

gerry goldwyre land purchase from Council
eskbank amenity society hustings

susan Goldwyre blog
institute of company secretary.suggested answers i.e.winter 2010 & summer 2010
history of towerwood waterway association

permission for tree removal
kirsty e towler m phil glasgow university

kingsley drinkwater
water tower statistics

Gerry Goldwyre - RP9, Eskbank
Scottish Designer House of the Year for RP9, Eskbank last night at the Edinburgh International Conference

Oh and one from a while ago;

Susan Goldwyre Red Cross charity



Sunday, August 7, 2011

Copy Paste from a .pdf File

OK this story is not particularly woodland orientated but it is yet another planning related letter. This time it's a recent letter sent for information to Midlothian Council and copied to the DPEA who put it on their site for a few hours. It was then removed. I took a copy as soon as I saw it.

The DPEA now have become embroiled in confusion. They didn't include the full text of the application title provided by MC (interestingly having removed the words "bank stabilisation") and they have posted a letter and then removed it. None of these actions can be credited to anything that we have said or done.

Moral of the story is - if you complain about confusion, look to yourself for the source before blaming someone else. And if you make something available to the public domain (and remember we have Freedom of Information in this country) then expect that it can be reproduced for ever after. Bit like our out of date web site showing our gazebo and a trial brochure that is out of print now. Some people have used this in a defamatory context and think they can get away with it. Now what is the legal status of the internet I wonder?

Here's the letter. You will have to stick with the text conversion out of a pdf file, it doesn't copy/paste all that well. I'm sure some fellow community councillors and councillor Beattie will be interested to read the version of events quoted in this letter.

I blogged it recently - the suggestion that we waited until just before a committee meeting to raise issues with the wording of our application - well this is now so well documented that the reporter from the DPEA will have a wealth of info at his disposal. Or can he not consider a letter that has been submitted for information only and was meant to be kept out of the public domain? But then why submit it to the DPEA at all if it wasn't meant to influence or guide. The reporter will be well versed in planning disputes I'm sure. I'm hoping he sees the wood for the trees! We can. Thank goodness for a blog site.

The Old Iron Mill,
Iron Mill Road,
Dalkeith EH22 UP.
25th July 2011.

Mr.Ian Johnson,
Head ofPlanning & Development,
Midlothian Council,
Fairfield House,
8 Lothian Road,
Dalkeith EH22 3ZN.

Dear Mr Johnson,
Planning Appeal Ref: PPA-290-2014
Appellant: Mr & Mrs Gerry Goldwyre
Planning Permission Ref: lO/006941DPP

In the course of reading the DPEA's on-line documents for the above Appeal, I was
horrified to read the contents of some ofthe documents submitted by the Council as
part of this. I am sorry to revisit this yet again, (you must be as weary as the rest of us
with this Application) but I'm afraid I cannot let some ofthe content go unchallenged.
Midlothian Council Documents (emaits to/from applicant) (doc 4 I think)
Your department reproduces an email from Mr Goldwyre, as part of your submission.
It was addressed to Ms Erika Pryde and dated Monday 29th March 2010. The subject
was: "Bowies complaint about our maintainance programme" so it is reasonable
to assume that the "couple" Mr Goldwyre is referring to is my husband and me. I
have no idea to which ofmy letters it refers, as in March 2010 I had no thoughts that
it might be useful to keep a file, in case I still needed it in 2011 !

There is a paragraph within this email which has no relevance whatever to the appeal
and I do not know why it has been included, as elsewhere you have extracted relevant
excerpts from documents. And what its inclusion has done is to reproduce and place
in the public domain a scurrilous attack on us which has no foundation in truth. I
have never seen this letter before, nor knew ofits existence, and have therefore never
had an opportunity to set the record straight.

The paragraph to which I object reads verbatim "The complaint you have received has
comefrom a couple who made complaints last year about the woodland that were
confirmed as completely unfounded *(my asterisk - see end of letter.) Such was the
extent ofthe intrusion into our property andpersonalisation ofthe issues with
complainants that we had to register these with the Police who then paid them a visit.
The complainants actually asked a councillor to raise an ASBO against myselfand
since this time these people have actually received our hospitality in our home!
Should this most recent complaint progress in a similar manner we will be compelled
to add this to the Police file. Apologies ifthis sounds in any way aggressive or
excessive in reaction but there is a long and complex history here and we have no
wish to waste further council nor Police time ifthis can be avoided In fact - ifwe
could have some council time, it would be better ifthis was directed at helping with
the root cause ofthe problem; the water run offfrom the tennis courts. "

We have NEVER been visited by the police in connection with Mr and Mrs
Goldwyre.

Last Friday I visited Dalkeith Police Station and have been assured by Station
Assistant 8529E that there was never any such complaint made, and that if there had
been it would have automatically been followed up with a visit, which it was not.
We have owned the Mill for 22 years. Much ofthis time we were not in residence, as
we lived abroad, and our first encounter with Mr & Mrs Goldwyre, was when trees
came crashing down the hillside and we walked up to investigate. I am therefore not
sure what the "long and complex history" refers to!

With regards to the ASBO story, here is what ACTUALLY happened. My husband
went up to Cemetery Road to see what was happening, because we had been shocked
to see so many large trees being felled. He was accosted by Mr Goldwyre and was
treated to a harang ofabuse because we did not like what was going on on the hillside.
Mr Goldwyre subsequently met Councillor Lisa Beattie in the street, and regaled her
with the story, making a fool ofmy husband in the process, and saying he had lodged
a complaint with the police against him. Councillor Beattie I believe, made a light
hearted remark to the effect that he should be careful or he might get an ASBO.
Councillor Beattie later recounted this story to us, unsolicited, and also said that Mr
Goldwyre was spreading unpleasant stories about my husband.

We can no longer walk with any comfort on Cemetery Road, a public road, and an
approach to our own house, as Mr Goldwyre always seems to materialise from
nowhere, to watch, or taunt.
We have never had hospitality from Mr & Mrs Goldwyre. We have twice been in
their house whilst attending the meetings ofan unrelated organisation, and whose
meetings rotated around members' homes. We also hosted a meeting at our house,
which they chose not to attend.

In a further email to Ms Pryde dated 30.4.10 Mrs Goldwyre then has a go. Again I
have never seen this email before, and again the part to which I object, has no
relevance to the Appeal in hand, nor does it represent the truth ofwhat happened. It
has no place in these documents either, and is equally scurrilous.
It begins: "Regarding the suggestion that trees were beingfelled, it is now somewhat
tiring " And ends with a second paragraph ".. before Gerry and I lose hair
(well mainly Gerry) and sleep over this nonsense."

The facts. Having spent much ofour life overseas until recent years, we had never
been involved with local affairs. And it was suggested to us that the correct forum for
voicing concerns about Mr & Mrs Goldwyre's various projects, at that time, was the
Eskbank and Newbattle Community Council. We decided to attend the next meeting,
and we tabled a question in advance, as had been requested. But the item on the
Agenda was passed over without our being given the opportunity to speak! At the
end ofthe meeting, the Chairwoman then invited questions from the floor under "Any
Other Business." Several people, including some committee members, had now left.
When my husband rose to raise his concerns he was cut short by the chairwoman who
said she would not preside over a spat, and then gave the floor to Mrs Goldwyre (her
colleague and fellow Committee Member,) and who spoke at length, according to her
own lights. The meeting was then adjourned. It took me several months to get hold
ofa copy ofthe Minutes ofthat meeting, which, when I eventually did, were not
representative ofwhat took place.

In this same email Mrs Goldwyre also claims that they had instructed their lawyer to
write to us. We have never received any such letter.

All ofthese diatribes cast doubt on our good name, and they have no relevance to this
Appeal. I ask therefore that Midlothian Council remove the relevant paragraphs
from its documents, with a published apology therein, for including this ''nonmaterial"
infOImation, and a note that I utterly repudiate the foregoing referred to malinformation.
For the record there are further inaccuracies in Mr Goldwyre's email. His first
paragraph reads: "Following your visit last week I have looked closely at our water
tower wood management plan. It clearly states ""as a main point ofconcern that the
erosion of the bank next to the tennis courts is likely to increase very quickly and
could become significant.,,,,
The phrase "as a main point ofconcern" is actually lifted from an earlier paragraph
(Conclusion) and refers to the safety of the large trees next to the steps etc and not to
erosion! Whilst this may seem a trivial misquote, if not corrected, it becomes
FACT! Mr McPhillimy's Management Plan does not raise bank erosion as a main
point ofconcern. It simply forms a part ofhis report. I draw attention to this because
it is indicative ofMr & Mrs Goldwyre's creative writing style!

A further example ofmisquoting comes from your own department, where you
misquote PP RP9. The policy states that development within this river valley
protection area "will NOT be permitted unless there is a specific locational need"
Whereas your department quotes the document as saying "development WILL be
pemitted where there is a specific locational need." This small alteration allows quite
a different interpretation to be put on the policy viz: your Department's interpretation
that because the Goldwyre's have built RP9 Cottage, there is an automatic locational
need for the hotch potch developments which form this Application!Appeal. No
there isn't! Perhaps had your department been more punctilious in its handling of
the various projects on this hillside, matters would not have reached their current
parlous state.

I regret the need to add further to the voluminous correspondence your department
has had to deal with in connection with Mr & Mrs Goldwyre, but I feel unable to
allow the fabricated content ofthese emails to go undefended. Mrs Goldwyre seems
unable to accept that we have a perfect right to object to her application, as she has to
defend it. And she seems unable to confine herself to the proper channels! My
family has been subjected to harassment and mischiefby both Appellants over the
course ofour objections to their activities on this hillside, and we consider this
beyond the bounds ofacceptable behaviour.

Just to be clear, I am not asking your department to take a partial view on this. I
simply ask you to acknowledge the irrelevance ofthe above paragraphs in your
Appeal documents, and to include my repudiation.
I do appreciate that you are busy, and that there is a world beyond Mr & Mrs
Goldwyre's woodland (would that they did!) but I would very much appreciate your
early reply to this letter.
Yours sincerely,
Millie Bowie.
* Confmned as unfounded by whom?
The Old Iron Mill,
Iron Mill Road,
Dalkeith EH22 UP.
25th July 2011.
Mr Ian Johnson,
Head ofPlanning & development,
Midlothian Council,
Fairfield House,
Lothian Road,
Dalkeith EH22 3ZN.
Dear Mr Johnson,
Planning Appeal Ref: PPA-290-2014
Appellants: Mr & Mrs Gerry Goldwyre
Planning Permission Ref: lO/00694IDPP

In connection with the above Planning Appeal, I note from the online documents
published by the DPEA that Mr & Mrs Goldwyre are now claiming that they have
never included bank stabilisation in their Planning application. This item has now
been removed from the description of their appeal by the DPEA

I have various letters on file to the contrary including one from Mr Peter Arnsdorf of
your department, dated 31 st May 2010 describing in some detail the "Bank
Stabilisation." And over the course ofthe last eighteen months or so, the structure in
question has been regularly referred to as such. I wonder why Mr & Mrs Goldwyre
have waited until just prior to the Planning Committee Meeting to dispute this?

If however, as Mr Goldwyre asserts, this is not Bank Stabilisation, perhaps we could
seek clarification from him, as to what is the purpose ofsome particularly ugly works
at "MiUie's Leap" and why, ifit is not bank stabilisation, does it not feature in this in
this application, under any other name? I note there are a couple of un-annotated
photos of this structure in the Goldwyre's original planning application.

The confusion over this planning application has now reached epic proportions, and
the volume ofmodifications, alterations, denials, assertions, changes ofdescription,
and direction, emanating both from the Goldwyres, and your department, make it
well nigh impossible for a third party to keep abreast ofmatters or even to make sense
ofthem.
Yours sincerely,
Millie

Thursday, August 4, 2011

Says It All

Gosh even the DPEA have considered comments being made about our planning appeal may be defamatory. This is the descriptor used by the DPEA with regard to a most poisonous letter from a Mr Tony Galloway - the man who thinks we have a garage in our garden. Mr Galloway quotes another person in his letter who has apparently commented on our character. Thats very interesting.

Today Midlothian Council has felt compelled to write to say these comments have gone  beyond planning matters.

I have always been aware of the poison but really this letter from Mr Galloway says it all. Please Mr Galloway come up to the house on Monday 8th for the reporters visit. You can point out directly to him what your complaint is. We can all look at the hedge that used to be there which has been pulled out by someone.

Oh and we did very politley invite you once before to see the woodland and the grounds, but you declined - remember.

Anyone interested - have a look at the site if you want to read the letter.

http://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/CaseDetails.aspx?T=0&so=16&id=qJ13523&ps=10&pg=7#Categories

PPA-290-2014 - General Letter - to Mr Tony Galloway - seeking clarification on possibly defamatory representation - 28 July 2011