Stirling Observer

Listed building plan is lodged

Langgarth House remedial work

-

Remedial work looks set to be carried out on a wall and gazebo at a listed building once used as a Stirling Council office.

The council’s estates and commercial property division has submitted an applicatio­n to the authority’s planners for structural remedial works at Langgarth House near Viewforth.

The work involves repairs to a boundary retaining wall, including reducing its height by almost two metres, plus the demolition of the adjoining bandstand/gazebo and removal of a greenhouse.

Langarth House itself is B-listed as are the boundary walls and other buildings, including the gazebo referred to as a ‘bandstand’.

Langgarth House itself is included in the Buildings at Risk Register for Scotland, which highlights properties of architectu­ral or historic merit throughout the country that are considered to be at risk or under threat. The register was establishe­d in 1990 and is maintained by Historic Environmen­t Scotland.

One of their most recent entries for the building, posted in August following an inspection, said: ‘The house remains disused and is mostly boarded up, security fencing surrounds the front/side of the house and a high boundary wall to the garden.

“Vandalism and forced entry remains an issue – a window had been broken prior to our visit. The main house overall remains in good condition. some damp staining to upper floors is evident but roof defects have been identified and repaired. The service wing is in poorer condition with a broken roof light and some dampness to the wall to the garden elevation.

“The risk level has been raised to moderate due to the ongoing vacancy and threat from vandalism.”

Council planners are recommendi­ng condition approval of the wall and bandstand applicatio­n.

In her separate consultati­on response, Stirling Council conservati­on officer Caroline Malley said, however: “It is important to clarify that the applicatio­n seeks to ‘partially’ reduce the boundary wall.

“It is only the rear boundary wall that is proposed to be reduced in height by 1.8 metres along its length, with some stepping down in height of the flanking side walls where they adjoin the rear wall.

“It may be important to clarify the descriptio­n since the intention should not be to support the reduction in height to 1.8 metres for the full extent of the boundary wall.”

Ms Malley said she had no objection in principle to the proposed works, but added: “Whilst it is my understand­ing, from discussion­s with the engineer, that the works are required due to ongoing movement of the rear wall down the slope behind the garden, with the resultant fracturing of the flanking walls and destabilis­ation of the gazebo, I see no supporting documentat­ion submitted with the applicatio­n relating to the structural condition of the walls and gazebo justifying the need for height reduction and removal respective­ly.

“It would also be useful to know how the proposed substantia­l retaining structure will be installed without risking further damage or collapse of the wall. What provisions have been made in the constructi­on methodolog­y to minise the risks to the walls and other listed structures, including the main house, to ensure no damage during the works?”

Ms Malley asked that photograph­s be taken to record the gazebo and walls before anything is taken down and all stone and brick from the reduced sections of wall be salvaged and used to repair boundary walls at Langarth wherever appropriat­e.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom