I would like to contrast two planning decisions.
In your Courier article page 18 planners say “Ugly tiles must go” This relates to some tile cladding on an historic building which apparently detracts from the traditional style of the original building. I am not in a position to comment other than the fact the building has still been retained as part of the street scene. To me this seems a relatively minor issue. What really dismays me, and seems to have attracted little publicity, is the fact the same planning department has recently passed an application to demolish the historic and much loved Pump Room Public House. Over 200 years as an attractive community landmark serving quality ales and it is felt appropriate to approve its loss for a car park! This is what I get angry about, not whether some tiles might not be quite appropriate. It seems to me planners are perhaps concentrating on something relatively trivial and missing what is really important and worth saving? These two decisions seem incongruous to me .
Mr M Clements