Venue: Astley Room - Castle. View directions
Contact: Geoff Durham
No. | Item |
---|---|
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 88 KB To consider the minutes of the previous meeting(s) Minutes: Resolved: That the minutes of the meeting held on 14/05/2024 be agreed as accurate record. |
|
PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED APPLICATIONS PDF 122 KB To receive the decisions of applications which have been previously considered by this Working Party.
Minutes: Resolved: That the report on decisions on applications previously considered by this Working Party be received.
|
|
NEW APPLICATIONS RECEIVED PDF 17 KB To make observations on new applications received. Additional documents:
Minutes: Resolved: That the following observations be made:
24/00133/FUL 36, Ironmarket
The Working Party objected to the proposed and existing replacement windows in this prominent gateway building within the Conservation Area.
Members felt that the windows should be timber, not UPVC, and should be uniform throughout rather than a mix of casement and sash. They considered that there was no reason why the original windows could not be refurbished to ensure that they provided sufficient thermal performance, met fire regulations and retained the character of the Conservation Area.
It was also considered that the submitted information was of insufficient detail and quality to fully understand the proposal.
24/00332/FUL Blakeys
The Working Party felt that the proposal would result in overdevelopment of the site and that it lacked thought in the external layout.
Particular concern was raised regarding the car parking to the front and the lack of any positive change to the current site. Some concern was also expressed regarding the impact of the proposal on the operation of the adjacent public house.
24/00318/LBC Aston Cottage
Most Members objected to the removal of the wall and felt that the damp problem in the property could be resolved in another way. In particular, given that the tree was not protected, this should be removed rather than the wall. Another suggestion was for the wall to be separated from the house.
Some Members felt that the remaining boundary fence should be replaced because with the removal of the wall, it would become the dominant boundary feature and was not of an acceptable standard or appearance.
24/00375/FUL 41, High St, Wolstanton
The Working Party considered that the specification of the replacement render should be agreed and that the original features within the current render should be retained. Members objected to the replacement of the windows and felt strongly that the existing windows should be retained and restored. |
|
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: A grant application was considered under Urgent Business. |
|
To consider any business which is urgent within the meaning of Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act, 1972. Minutes: Resolved: That the application for a £ 4,670 Historic Building Grant towards roof repairs be agreed. |