Nottingham Buildings

I wrote to Councillor Chris Gibson, Chair of the Planning Committee regarding the loss of the tiled roof and small windows under it. Here is what he had to say:

Quote

"Dear Mr Teece,

Thank you again for your enquiry. I have looked back on the planning history for this site and I understand that the Planning Committee formerly considered it in February 2015 and made the decision to approve. At that time the committee  took account of the proposed scheme together with any comments and consultations received.

May I now say that the Planning Committee is of a “quasi-judicial” nature; it has to follow planning rules very carefully and it is often in a position where the choices  and implications are quite complex.

This scheme, as considered, was of a considerable size, but included the retention of certain heritage elements regarding the Art Deco frontage of this particular building. I understand that all the  buildings had been standing empty for sometime.

I can confirm, upon checking, that the recent planning approvals for the site have always included the replacement of the tiled roof with a new flat roofed element. Talbot House is in the Canning Circus conservation area, but it is not a listed building, So in assessing the application, under Conservation Area rules, we were required to test whether the alterations preserved and/or enhanced the character of the area.

The planning committee took the view that it was the main element of the Art Deco frontage that needed to be retained, and that the tiled roof above was of lesser significance. The committee were satisfied that the design for the new top section was appropriate, and that it was a modern but worthy addition that did not detract from the character of the main elements of the Art Deco façade below.

It was then (later) in August 2016 that our “letter exchange” in the Nottingham Post took place regarding the handrails and lights.

With regard specifically to the entrance handrails and lights, I have been assured again by our planning officers that the developers have previously confirmed to them that these will be replaced. The scheme is still in construction, but I have no reason to believe that the developers will not honour the undertakings they have given when the scheme is finally completed.

I have asked the officers to advise me if they become aware of any alterations to the development that depart from the scheme as approved.

I am sorry that you have been disappointed by the way the scheme appears to be turning out and you may not agree with the Planning Committee's decision but I hope you will appreciate that the complex decision making process was correctly followed.

Yours sincerely,

Chris Gibson"

By E-Mail - 4th May 2017

Ray Teece  04-05-2017

RETURN