mound (wound?) inbetween. 17 September 1992.

this notice should be complied with as a matter of urgency”. Demolition resumes. Two-thirds of courtyard wall to east wing demolished and digger attacked the core, shunting rubble against the south elevation and south-west corner.

2 September 1992: Lord Minto’s surveyor quoted in The Herald: “It is difficult to say at this stage where the demolition will stop. If you knock down one unsafe wall an adjoining wall may well then become unsafe”. Remainder of core demolished, also south elevation and south west corner. Second Dangerous Building Notice served on site at 12 noon. The first breach of the courtyard wall had destabilised other parts of the east wing. Works progress. Third Notice served on site at 5pm. The whole of the east wing must be demolished.

3 September 1992: The Building Control Officer, quoted in The Herald: “As you can see, we have taken down a fair bit. The thing is, where do we stop?”. Demolition of east wing completed. Just the west wing (one-third of the main house) and the Lorimer service wing remain, together with

the garden terraces, and a large mound of category A listed stonework. Listed building consent application advertised.

7 September 1992: The Building Control Officer, in discussion, advised the following additional matters: first, that a crane was introduced, standing in the courtyard, to finish off the east wing (if used earlier, instead of the digger, a crane could have reached over the courtyard wall); secondly, “no one is seeking to deny” what happened in relation to the initial breach, namely progressive destabilisation and rapid destruction of the east wing (lack of understanding of the pack of cards effect?); thirdly, the works still to be completed comprised the bricking up of the openings to the west and the Lorimer wings, the erection of a fence across the diagonal of the courtyard, and of fences to the garden side to prevent access through the now- demolished south elevation and corner.

Around 24 September 1992: Forceful representations lodged by SAVE and numerous other corporate and individual conservation interests against the new

application to demolish. These included objections to its retrospective element, and strong concern that it will be put before the self-same planning authority that has been so instrumental in the post-listing demolition and whose political leader is the house’s owner. Application due to be tabled at the November Planning Committee meeting. Outcome awaited.

9th October 1992: Colin Bell, a Radio Scotland reporter, described Lord Minto’s actions as a “textbook example” of what an owner should do when he objects to his building being listed.

SOME COMMENTS

Minto House stands on a secluded estate in one of the most sparsely populated areas of the United Kingdom. The interests of public safety, without which there is no context to issue a Dangerous Building Notice, may be served by:

Only after two-thirds of the main house was demolished were the first two options pursued. A variant of the manner proposed for these options, of bricking up openings and erecting fences, could have been adopted without the need for any demolition works, to serve as a containment of the house whilst a new use (and presumably owner) were found. The recent precedent of Mavisbank, Midlothian, is most helpful here: the terms of a Notice to demolish (totally) were overturned by interdict (injunction) in the Scottish courts and satisfied by the alternative of constructing a secure enclosure.

The Dangerous Building Notice procedures are problem enough to conservationists without such a case as this to encourage their use where the collective will to demolish exceeds the will to conserve.

Dennis Rodwell acquired and restored the derelict category A listed Me/rose Station, Roxburghshire, in 1985-86. from where he now conducts his architectural practice.

Minto House from the north, showing the west wing (right), the Lorimer wing (left) and the category A listed