Although some documents and reports are still incomplete, Council Leader Phil Grove said tonight "At this stage we have no plans to postpone the meeting"
- 1. Who now owns the land and have they been served with the appropriate notice/certificate/documentation that a planning application is in progress.
It appears that the former owners, Chase Tenbury LLP have been struck off for failing to complete statutory returns, and in theory all their assets have passed to the Crown.
- 2. Tesco's have not put in a Conservation Area application to demolish the Old Infirmary.
As far as can be ascertained, they originally planned to make an application that would be considered at the same time as the planning application. It is understood that they have now decided/been advised that they needn't make the application until after the planning application has been decided as the need for the demolition is intrinsic to the scheme. Therefore if the scheme is passed, that automatically grants them permission to demolish.
- 3. Tesco's have not put in a Listed Building Consent Application to demolish the buildings behind the Old Fire Station and to remove some of the railings.
Once again they appear to be relying on the "intrinsic to the scheme" theory.
- 4. The Environment Agency has raised concerns that not enough information has been supplied and therefore at this stage they are objecting to the scheme.
If Tesco's are correct and they can reply on the "intrinsic to" how do MHDC allow agencies such as English Heritage to comment on the demolition as they would not be consulted about the planning application.
I have asked Cllr Grove that "IF" there is a need to defer the decision, this is publicised prior to the meeting (which will need to go ahead as it is considering other planning applications at the same time) and not once everyone has braved the December night and turned up at the school.
Posts
5 comments:
Unless MHDC's planners intend to do a substantial [and I would imagine rather awkward] full about-turn their policy on the RBB building is still:
“The 19th century building is considered to be too important [to demolish] because it frames views into the former Cattle Market site from both Teme Street and the bridge over the river.”
They are also very clearly on record as saying in the same article: "...planning officers decided demolition would harm Tenbury Wells Conservation Area."
Quotes from: Shropshire Star, 26th Jul, 2010
. . . just as it was Lib Dem policy not to raise university tuition fees! The reality of governance and economics sometimes cause an amazing volte face.
"It appears that the former owners, Chase Tenbury LLP have been struck off for failing to complete statutory returns, and in theory all their assets have passed to the Crown" - struck off what? I'd be amazed if actual ownership can be transferred in this way.
Struck off from Companies house.....
MHDC have confirmed that the legal advice they have received says that the uncertainty over the ownership has no effect on the planning application which will continue on it's current timetable.
Post a Comment