Now I could go on about this family connection to Cemetery Lodge House but its pretty hard going as a casual read. I'll stop here and instead move on to that other topical subject that crops up for me from time to time. Planning! And this time it's planning matters for Cemetery Lodge Cottage.
I always think that fostering a good community spirit is key to life. It brings joy and the feel good factor when someone does a good turn or even makes you aware of potential pitfalls ahead. Where I live I am happy to say I find that good community spirit exists and it is indeed a joy to live here. But a very small faction of our community seem hell bent on making life difficult, maybe not just for me?
Cemetery Lodge Cottage is a sweet little building and bizarrely was Grade C Listed in 1992, 3 months before we purchased the building (for the second time - long story). Last year Gerry arranged to replace the windows after a major repair to the roof which led on to the walls and then the windows. Most of the wood was rotting and the windows were beyond repair. He went ahead, replaced them with timber with an identical glazing pattern, but double glazed and side hung. What a difference to the fuel bills.
Then some 14 months after the windows were replaced we received a Planning Contravention Notice (PCN) and were advised that someone had complained, not about the windows per se, but about the fact the we had not applied for listed building consent. A criminal offence, the planning officer was at "panes" to point out it could warrant a jail sentence and meant he would not discuss as matters were sub judice. OMG as they say on Facebook.
If you foster good community spirit and you discovered this sort of matter, wouldn't you let the person know in order that they could address it? rather than make it a complaint. Clearly the complaint comes from someone that does not foster good community spirit.
Gerry and I discussed. He genuinely did not know it was listed, although I was aware of it from the internet. But that was not something I ever bothered to share with Gerry and when he replaced the windows I left planning matters up to him. The windows were fit for conservation area purposes and he had checked that.
We completed the PCN request and started to investigate. Sad to say I found this really interesting. I researched planning and listed buildings, looked at applications that were accepted/refused and got a feel for what was required. It might just be that not retaining sash and case opening method would be an issue and some of the windows on the cottage might have to be replaced. That was the worst case scenario. Then we looked at the listing. It was odd. It was listed for it's association with the Grade B water tower but it has no architectural merit to make that association. The buildings are very different and their only link is that we owned both. Not only was the listing strange but we had no record of being notified. And our filing system is first class. That was one to take up with the council.
We had a meeting with the council planning officers and they asked for a retrospective application for the windows which we agreed to do. We queried why we had no notification of the listing and were told that this was the responsibility of Historic Scotland and not up to the council to notify. It would have been issued by Historic Scotland and the lawyers search would reveal the listing at point of sale. We checked. Of course we checked.
On the bus into town for the festival and with some spare time, we got off the bus early at Longmore House where Historic Scotland have their offices. We met a most helpful person who, unlike the council employee who loved to tell us it was a criminal offence, shared the story of someone who demolished a grade A listed castle in Scotland and was fined £500. Oh good, were not going to go to jail after all. Hingin was still an option though (for Denise).
What was most interesting though was that Historic Scotland produced all the legislation that clearly states that it is the council who are responsible for advising of listed status. So I guess that means the council officer Bruce McLeod told us a lie, or was he just incompetent. Is hingin too good for him? I guess so.
We hot footed to the council the following day. Where's our letter advising listed status we asked. A very red faced officer returned with no letter to be found and no idea if one existed for our house or for any other house that is listed for that matter. You may want to think about that if you are the owner of a listed building in Midlothian.
I researched further. Eskbank and Ironmills has a conservation area appraisal. Not dated nor signed, but the text gives away that it was prepared around mid 1994, 2 years after the cemetery lodge was listed. Cemetery lodge though is not included in the list of Grade C listed buildings on the appendix of the appraisal. Help, it was missing again!
Late 1994 an extension on the cottage had listed building consent. The application, prepared by an agent and signed off by me (because Gerry was in hospital at the time recovering from a serious event), would have gone the rounds of listed building consent checks. It should have been advertised by the council, in the Edinburgh Gazette. Other C listed buildings can be found advertised in the early 90's but nothing can be traced for Cemetery Lodge Cottage extension in 1994. Yet another anomaly.
So the cottage is listed but not all the boxes have been ticked with the listing and its merits for listing are very odd. With advice from Historic Scotland we applied to have it reviewed.
Now If you don't know what a Catch 22 is you are about to get a great example. But first the Wikipedia definition
The phrase "Catch-22", "a problematic situation for which the only solution is denied by a circumstance inherent in the problem or by a rule,"[4]has entered the English language.
Historic Scotland agree to review and even sound slightly hopeful of removing the cottage from the list when they see our photos and look at their own files. But nothing can be done whilst there is an ongoing planning issue. Catch 22.
I completed the review form and since the PCN had been completed I duly recorded that there was no planning application pending. Because at that stage there was no application, only the promise of one to come. Once a quality assurance manager always a quality assurance manager. Always answer the question and only the question.
We went off on holiday for a month.
Week one of our holiday we receive an e mail from Historic Scotland that they are in discussion with the council regarding the listing of Cemetery Lodge Cottage. Interesting.
On return from holiday we take legal advice and decide not to progress the application until we have something in writing from the council with regard to the original notification of the listing in 1992. Our lawyers check and no listing notice was found during the searches when the cottage was purchased in 1992. It all just seems so odd.
We wait, and we wait, and we wait. We almost forget about it all. Until this week.
A very trivial complaint rears its head about wood chip on the path outside our home. It is trivial in the extreme but yet again the manner used to deal with the complaint and the niggle factor contribute way more than the substance of the complaint. It actually turns into a great deal of fun over a blue plant pot, but that's another story. The cynic in me tells me that this trivial complaint has the same source as the listed building complaint and lo and behold 2 days later we receive advice from Historic Scotland that the cottage has been removed from the list. A phone call to Historic Scotland reveals that the council have had this info before we did. I am guessing our complainers have also "found out" before us and hence the wood chip complaint in a desperate attempt to taint me with something. Or am I putting 2 and 2 together and making 5?
It appears unprecedented that a building can be removed from the list whilst there is an ongoing planning matter but we make case history I guess. It feels good but more importantly, it feels right. the cottage is not that special in architectural terms and I really do not think it merited being on the list. The new windows are actually beautiful and do not compromise the look of the building nor the conservation area. Nonetheless if it had been of merit and our changes to the windows affected that merit, we would have changed the windows accordingly. Because it is the building that is important. Not Gerry and I, not the council, not the complainers; the building. I have to say though if we had had to change the windows I know where the bill would have been sent!
Here's the cottage before we purchased it and now with the new windows. See what you think. Love to hear from anyone locally regarding the family connections and folks who lived in the cottage.
From Historic Scotland (1992)
What we purchased initially (1989)
New window at cemetery side
New windows at street side
Oh and finally - that wood chip complaint.
E Mail correspondence. Done and dusted within the week.
Dear Mr Venton
I write to offer to meet using the council mediation services with whoever has cause for concern for the path at Cemetery Road. It is clear there are continuing concerns and I fear that without a mediated meeting these concerns will fester and continue to deplete council resources. If you were able to enlist the council mediation services and arrange for myself to meet with the party concerned I would appreciate the opportunity to highlight my concerns and hear the concerns of others.
Regards
Susan Goldwyre.
The Reply
Thank you for your email and the offer to meet. I have responded to the enquiry stating we have no issue with the woodchip and therefore hope there is no reason for a meeting.
Justin Venton
Land and Countryside Manager
Corporate Resources Division
Midlothian Council
62 A Polton Street ,
Bonnyrigg
EH19 3YD
Tel 0131 561 5220
Fax 0131 654 2797
To the complainer. Good luck with whatever you find next. x
.jpg)
