Agenda, decisions and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

To provide an opportunity for Members and Officers to declare any disclosable pecuniary and non-pecuniary interests in any item on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

In accordance with Procedure Rules Nos.11 and 35 a period of 10 minutes is allocated for members of the public to address the meeting on any matter relating to the work of the body in question.  Individual members of the public may speak for up to 5 minutes but the Chairman or person presiding will decide how the period of time allocated for public speaking will be apportioned where there are a number of speakers. Members of the public are not required to give notice to use this facility. However, as a matter of courtesy, a period of 24 hours’ notice is encouraged.

Members of the public wishing to ask a question at the meeting should provide at least three clear working days’ notice in writing and should include the question with that notice. This will enable an informed answer to be given.

No members of the public were present.

To consider a request for Rose Cottage to be removed from the Cheshire East Local List of Historic Buildings.

That officers be authorised to remove the property from the Local List as the extent of the changes to the building since its inclusion have resulted in substantial erosion of its heritage significance, such that it no longer adequately satisfies the selection criteria set out in the Local List Supplementary Planning Document. 

Consideration was given to a request for Rose Cottage, Prestbury, to be removed from the Local List as the original justification for its inclusion could no longer be justified.

The building had originally been included because of its presence at the site since the mid 1800s (but potentially earlier), evidenced by the Tithe map; it’s modest size and scale, set against a backdrop of larger, grander properties in the locality, and lastly, it’s simple cottage vernacular and character.    

Since its inclusion on the Local List, however, a number of events had resulted in the property being substantially altered; much of which had received planning permission.   The works included substantial demolition and re-build of the cottage, extensions to the building and works within the cartilage involving a rebuilding and enlargement of the detached garage and creation of a very formal vehicular entrance. 

The net effect of the work undertaken to the building was a substantial erosion of the heritage significance and authenticity of the building. When assessed against the criteria for selection of buildings set out in the Local List SPD, it was considered that Rose Cottage inadequately fulfils the adopted criteria.  It was stressed however that was a finely balanced case.

It was also stressed that if the building were to be removed from the local list it would still retain some heritage significance and would be considered as a non-designated heritage asset, albeit one that no longer adequately meets the Local Listing criteria.  The provisions within the NPPF with regards to the assessment of development proposals upon its historic significance would therefore remain. The NPPF stressed the need to recognise that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource and needed be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance, and this included both designated and non-designated assets.

Members expressed considerable disappointment with the chain of events leading to the irrevocable changes to this property such that it no longer fulfilled the necessary criteria to be on the Local List.  In response to the request of the Portfolio Holder and the Local Ward Member Officers agreed to investigate the history of this, and any similar cases, and to ensure that processes were put in place to ensure that such a thing could not be repeated elsewhere.

RESOLVED

That officers be authorised to remove the property from the Local List as the extent of the changes to the building since its inclusion have resulted in substantial erosion of its heritage significance, such that it no longer adequately satisfies the selection criteria set out in the Local List Supplementary Planning Document.