The application to demolish the end-of-terrace house at 91 Annandale Street and build a modern replacement has been refused (Ref. 13/02489/FUL).
As reported in Breaking news (10.7.13), the proposed new structure comprised the same floor levels as its predecessor, but with an extra occupied attic level and flat-roofed dormer. The basement and ground floor areas were to be increased with an extension into the garden at the back. The existing garden area was to be landscaped with a new, stone, boundary retaining wall.
Neighbours objected on grounds of likely stress during the work and the potential for blocking drains and sewers (both grounds ruled non-material), and loss of residential amenity and inappropriate size and design (material).
A Council Planning officer noted that – although the building does not lie within a Conservation Area – the larger and more horizontal-looking design of the new windows at the front would detract from the neighbourhood’s character and appearance. Similar concerns were had about the size of the proposed dormer window. The large extension to the rear was felt to be potentially conspicuous and out of keeping with surrounding properties’ rear gardens.
Rejection of this application, therefore, appears to have been reasonably straightforward and emphatic.
But the case still raises interesting questions about how and if similar Miller homes outwith a Conservation Area should be valued for possessing architectural/heritage merit in their own right.
The extent to which very many of these buildings across Bellevue and Logie Green have already been altered and extended over the years may mean any attempt to preserve them is already futile. There may not even be a public appetite to look after them. After all, the buildings are not fashionable, nor are they startlingly beautiful by today's mainstream taste; and if the truth be told, this Spurtle correspondent actually preferred the design of the proposed replacement.
On the other hand, surely it would be a shame if large numbers of these testaments to Edinburgh’s optimistic pre-war housing boom were lost piecemeal through neglect or indifference in future?
What do you think? Should Broughton's Miller Homes be preserved, or should they be allowed to disappear naturally whenever need, money and good design combine to offer decent alternatives?
Share your opinion with us by email spurtle@hotmail.co.uk on Facebook Broughton Spurtle or Twitter @theSpurtle
----------------
Napier Bathrooms & Interiors Ltd. Edinburgh, don't be so terrified of change and innovation, what a shame the City has blocked something that would have added innovation, architectural change and individuality to a space that is currently most unattractive. Glasgow and the rest of Europe embrace change with a far more innovative eye and the often juxtaposition of buildings is the character of a city.
Former Leith Central Community Council planning convener Annette O’Carroll – who completed a PhD on this and claims she can ‘bore for hours on the subject’ – has been in touch to say: ‘These interwar houses should definitely be preserved, as should the bungalow developments’. She recommends: M. Glendinning and D.M. Watters (eds) (1999) Home Builders: Mactaggart and Mickel and the Scottish Housebuilding Industry (RCAHMS).