Tuesday July 7th 2026
The new homes would occupy garden ground behind the existing lodge house, new access would be through breaches in the stone wall of the old estate boundary.
Written by Local Democracy Reporter, Stuart Sommerville
Plans to build two new homes in the grounds of a historic lodge house have been rejected.
The plans for East Calder would have seen a boundary wall breached and open garden ground developed.
The site marks the southern gateway to Almondell Park listed by Historic Environment Scotland for its Victorian stone archway.
The applicant sought planning permission in principle to build two homes in what is garden ground facing the lodge house. The lodge, archway and wall mark the southern boundary of the now demolished Almondell House.
Planners had recommended refusal. In a report to West Lothian Council’s Development Management Committee they said:
“Whilst the lodge house sits just within the fringe of the settlement boundary, the application site does not, being land within the rural countryside estate designated as a Special Landscape Area (Almond and Linhouse Valleys).
“The lodge house and garden ground area are enclosed by the stone boundary walling and listed archway to the roadside, an agricultural field to the west, and woodland trees to the north.
“In addition to the landscape designation, the site falls within an Area of Built Heritage and Townscape Value intended to embrace the traditional properties adjoining Main Street – this includes the lodge property and its curtilage (defined by a significant stone wall fronting Main Street).”
The indicative plans showed the wall breached to allow access to the proposed homes which would sit low behind the remaining wall as the ground slopes away from the road.
A neighbour objected to the loss of privacy, telling councillors in a letter:
“The new house will be directly opposite and will look directly in through the front windows of our house – the rooms in question being the living room and bedroom accommodation of my elderly parents who live with me. They will not wish to live with their blinds constantly closed for privacy, nor to keep the lights switched on all day all year round.
“Privacy would be virtually non-existent should this go ahead.”
The neighbour also pointed to the disruption and traffic issues which the development would bring.
An agent for the applicant said the design kept the buildings at a lower level behind the remaining wall and argued that the housing would not be out of place on a relatively busy main road.
Planners argued: “At this point in the landscape, the land on the northern side of the main street is different in type, character and appearance to that on the southern side.
“As you traverse along the main route, given the presence of the estate wall, listed archway and lodge house, the public perception of the historic character of the area, is one of more rural nature.
“The perception of the lodge house and grounds is that it is clearly enclosed and set within a rural landscape, with the land falling away to the north.
“This is distinct and in contrast to an appreciation of the land on the south side which displays houses that directly front the main street, representing a more urban character in layout and pattern of development.”
Councillors agreed to support the planners recommendation for refusal.
Tweet Share on Facebook
