11 Rosefield Street

[Bob Jefferson]

Please take a look at this planning application to demolish and re-build 11 Rosefield Street. As the owner of the adjoining property, I declare an interest and will be objecting. Also objecting (so far) are:

Portobello Community Council
Portobello Amenity Society
Brighton and Rosefield Residents Association

Portobello Heritage Trust, the Cockburn Association (Edinburgh Civic Trust) and the Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland have all been alerted.

Along with (hopefully) lots of local residents like yourself, who will appreciate the significance of this application. The house was built around 1870 and lies, like most of Portobello, within the Conservation Area. If the owner is allowed to demolish, it could set a dangerous precedent for others to do likewise. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have regarding the application and why I am objecting to it. Please use your contact lists, Facebook pages etc to pass this on.

[Bob Jefferson]

rosefield action group.pdf

3rd revision

(52.21 KiB) Downloaded 499 times

Hope to get this distributed over the next couple of days. Feel free to circulate.

[wangi]

Playing devil's advocate... I've no reason not to believe the claim that the house is not mortgageable. I'd hate to be in the situation, and it could well cost an absolute fortune to repair. Demolish & rebuild might well be the only financially viable approach.

The design statement () is a good read; but after reading it I was left thinking that the proposed new build actually does not live up to the statements in it (e.g. existing house mediates between the different scale of housing on either side; it closes the vista; existing building is incongruous with others (e.g. no stone facing) but then to propose harling anyway...)

It's the replacement design that does it in.

[Mark Cameron]

Bob is it the design of the replacement that you're unhappy with or the fact that the existing propery is being proposed for demolition?

If it's the latter and there really is no cost-effective option for the current owners due the reported isues I think I'd be in favour of replacement BUT only if that replacement was sympathetic to the surroundings of the street.

[Bob Jefferson]

Unable to post at length right now but suffice to say I'm unhappy with both. As for a cost-effective solution, remember he only paid £50 k for it in the first place and has probably collected more in rent than he has spent on improving the property.

[Pal of Porty]

[Porty]

[Bob Jefferson]

[Bob Jefferson]

Just a quick reminder regarding this planning application. I'm hoping that a large number of local residents will demonstrate their support for our architectural heritage by objecting to the demolition and re-build of this property. Interestingly, I have learned recently that there is original stone underneath the harling. It may be an ugly duckling right now but there's a swan desperately trying to get out. Hmm, not sure about that metaphor but I'm sure you get the picture.

Let's send a clear message to the owners of older properties in the conservation area that they have a duty to look after our heritage. It's a privilege to live here and it comes at a price. Like many of you, I've spent a small fortune over the years addressing damp, dry rot etc. and accept it as part and parcel of owning a property that was built 130 years ago. Demolition should be a very last resort, not a way of making a quick buck.

[Bob Jefferson]

Great response so far. I have seen copies of letters of objection from Portobello Community Council and from Sheila Gilmore MP and know that we can expect support from many other Portobello, Edinburgh-based and national groups, along with a large number of individuals who appreciate the significance of this application. You still have time to object. Protect the conservation area, keep Portobello special.

[David Raine]

The submission made by Sheila Gilmore MP is available here: . This submission has been circulated to residents in the immediate vicinity of 11 Rosefield Street.

[Bob Jefferson]

The deadline for comments on this application is tomorrow, Friday 22 July.

[Bob Jefferson]

[Bob Jefferson]

Our current view of 11 Rosefield Street.

[Dadaist]

Bob, have you considered asking television's Sarah Beeny to help?



Should she take this property under her wing as part of her show, the "Help! My House Is Falling Down" show, your and your neighbour's problems may soon be beaten into shape.

Although when I watch her shows I'm mainly watching her, I do understand that she can not only provide innovative restoration solutions to allow properties to not fall down, she can by mere dint of making a show in a given crumbly house encourage contractors to give of their time and materiel for free and gratis.

Why not then join forces with your neighbour and pursue a common goal of getting La Beeny et entourage to make Porty their next port of call?

These shows normally add emotional appeal by contrasting the aspirations of the decrepit home's occupants with their current plight - I suggest that you and Mr Thomson pose as the current residents and start rehearsals now so that your routine is pat by the time the researchers begin to probe.

[Bob Jefferson]

I hadn't considered this, but I have been thinking about television's Rachel Riley quite a bit recently. I'm not entirely sure how she could help, but she does seem to take my mind off the problem with my neighbour.

[Bob Jefferson]

It looks as though the application has been withdrawn but I will try to get clarification today:

fast_track.pdf

(49.86 KiB) Downloaded 406 times

[Bob Jefferson]

The Case Officer is currently on leave but I managed to speak to one of his colleagues. The application has been withdrawn and it is now expected that the applicant will submit a revised application. I can only assume that this follows discussions between the applicant and the Planning Department. Perhaps the revised drawings will omit the controversial first floor viewing platform, for example? However, any new application that includes demolition of the original property is still likely to meet considerable resistance from local residents and other interested parties. Watch this space.

[Bob Jefferson]

And since then? The property has been effectively abandoned. The hedge hasn't been cut, the garden is full of weeds and rubbish and the windows have now been boarded up. Suggestions?

[Epykat]

You could paint "Welcome to Rosefield Street" on the roof for passing planes?

[Porty]

[Bob Jefferson]

A new application has been lodged for 11 Rosefield Street, still involving the demolition of the existing property and a new build. The only document lodged thus far is the Neighbour Notification List, dated 8 December. As of 10 December, no neighbours have in fact been notified.

[Bob Jefferson]

Amended plans now online. Structural Engineer's report claims existing building is effectively irreparable. Neighbours still not notified of application. Still pretending to be building a 'family home' for applicants. Aye, right. Applicant has still not addressed problem of water from overflow pipe leaking into my garden, despite being aware of problem for months.

[Bob Jefferson]

Deadline for comments is 25 January.

[Bob Jefferson]

[Franck]

So it's his employed engineer against the councils as conflicting opinion has been given.

Bob, is your concern about a new build being built in the conservation area? You might know my sister lives in your street and I think it's a lovely place to stay.I'd suggest that replacing the eyesore with something modern-ish would enhance the street, irrespective of the owners ultimate intentions.

[Bob Jefferson]

Hi Franck. Now I'm wondering who your sister might be. It is an eyesore but I don't think that's sufficient reason to demolish it. I think ideally, most of us would like to see the house restored to its original condition, minus the ugly extensions and the ghastly harling, which conceals the orginal stone.

[Bob Jefferson]

Interestingly, the Case Officer wasn't aware of the Council's own structural report on the property. He is now.

[Bob Jefferson]

Still waiting for a decision. In the meantime, the word 'DANGER' has been painted on the boarded-up ground floor windows to make the building appear more, um, dangerous I suppose.

[Bob Jefferson]

The THIRD application for 11 Rosefield Street is now online, following the withdrawal of the previous two.

[fresian]

Not entirely sure that the building would be out of keeping with the surroundings, but the language and expression used in the design statement is typical of that used by planning consultants and architects when they try to justify inappropriate proposals.

[Scoop]

Pot. Kettle. NIMBY.

[Bob Jefferson]

Your point, if directed to me, is rather lost. Care to elaborate?

[Bob Jefferson]

And by the way, the applicant has still not addressed the problem of water from his overflow pipe leaking into my garden, despite being aware of the problem for over a year. Nor has he bothered to cut his hedge in that time. His neighbours eventually disposed of the rubbish he left in his front garden and persons unknown have brightened up the boarded-up windows by painting some curtains.

[sandstorm]

i looked at the link but dont see a design statement that Freesian talks of- where do we find that?

admin: posts moved to schools thread