Venue: Conservation Advisory Working Party - Hybrid Meeting - Conference. View directions
Contact: Geoff Durham
No. | Item | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
APOLOGIES Minutes: There were no apologies |
|||||||||||||
Declarations of Interest To receive Declarations of Interest from Members on items included in this agenda
Minutes: There were no declarations of interest stated. |
|||||||||||||
Minutes of previous meetings PDF 189 KB To consider the minutes of the previous meeting(s) Minutes: Resolved: That the Minutes of the meeting held on 6 October, 2020 be agreed as a correct record. |
|||||||||||||
Previously Considered Applications PDF 117 KB To receive the decisions of applications which have been previously considered by this Working Party
Minutes: Resolved: That the report on the decision on applications previously considered by this Working Party be received.
|
|||||||||||||
New Applications Received PDF 12 KB To make observations on new applications received. Additional documents:
Minutes: Resolved: That the following observations be made on the applications listed below:-
|
|||||||||||||
Conservation and Heritage Fund To consider any applications for financial assistance from the Conservation and Heritage Fund which may have been brought to this meeting by the officer Minutes: There were no applications |
|||||||||||||
Urgent Business To consider any business which is urgent within the meaning of Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act, 1972. Minutes: The following item was considered urgent due to the timescales involved for a decision to be reached on the Planning application.
Linen Cottage, Main Road, Betley 20/00751/FUL & 20/00788/LBC
The Working Party was extremely disappointed with this proposal - the plans were not accurate enough. The new lean-to roof would interfere with the timber frame and the decorative gutter brackets. The structure would harm the integrity of the existing building and would probably present breathability and drainage issues given the irregular plane of the walls at the rear elevation. They felt that more thought and sensitivity to the practicality of this proposal was required by an architect not an interior designer.
|