[Bell Historians] Hanley Stoke on Trent

[Mark Regan]

I was just thinking that!

 

Advocacy is everything especially when dealing Councils and amenity groups.
At the least the CCCBR weren't involved - that would have made it even
worse.

 

M

 

Mark Regan

22 Sebright Avenue

Worcester

WR5 2HH

 

01905 354339

07971 573688

 

-----Original Message-----
From: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com [mailto:bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Andrew Higson
Sent: 15 October 2009 08:58
To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Bell Historians] Hanley Stoke on Trent

 

  

Is this going to be another Malvern where an inadequate argument from the
side that actually wants to do something positive has lost the day?

 

Andrew Higson

 

  _____  

From: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com [mailto:bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Richard Offen
Sent: 15 October 2009 08:54
To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Bell Historians] Hanley Stoke on Trent

 

  

Was the fact that they are rotting away in their present home and
potentially at risk from severe vandalism put forward in the proposal, not
to mention they are unusable in their present state.

R



On Thu Oct 15 15:42 , 'John H Allen' sent:

  

Richard,

 

1)    The set of 10 bells are important artefacts of the listed church and
form an integral part of its special character. The applicant has supplied
no over-riding reason, special merit or significant justification why the
bells should be removed from their setting and present location at this
time. Removal of the bells would be contrary to policy NC18 of the
Staffordshire and Stoke on Trent Structure Plan 1996 - 2011 and to advice in
PPG15 Planning and the Historic Environment.

 

This is the link to the Stoke City Council web site.

 

 

http://www.planning
<http://www.planning.stoke.gov.uk/dataonlineplanning/AcolNetCGI.exe?ACTION=U
NWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeResultDetail&TheSystemkey=55693>
.stoke.gov.uk/dataonlineplanning/AcolNetCGI.exe?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.P
geResultDetail&TheSystemkey=55693

 

 

John

 


  _____  


From: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com [mailto:bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Richard Offen
Sent: Thursday 15 October 2009 01:36
To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Bell Historians] Hanley Stoke on Trent

 

  

On what grounds was the refusal made?

R



On Thu Oct 15 6:17 , Robert Lewis sent:

  

At 22:38 14/10/2009, John wrote:





Earlier today, Stoke on Trent City Council refused Listed Building Consent
to remove the 10 G & J bells as the first step towards a transfer to Stone
Staffs.


That is an unfortunate set-back.  What is the plan now?

RAL 

 

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.17/2436 - Release Date: 10/14/09
18:32:00

 



           
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20091015/76edd702/attachment.html>