Agenda item

This item was being presented to the panel for the second time following amendments to the scheme based on previous comments and recommendations.

The members agreed this is a striking building on a prominent corner plot with an important symmetrical character. They were pleased to see the recent amendments resulted in an improved scheme which addressed their previous concerns.

Some queries were raised during the discussion, including whether the supporting written statement had also been updated in line with the amendments to the drawings. One member noted this document still made reference to widening the principal entrance to improve access. Other queries were raised over the proposed hard landscaping to the front of the building. Members enquired about the intended use of this space and whether details had been provided on the type of paving proposed, particularly whether it would be permeable. Members noted that two of the columns were proposed to be painted grey and expressed a desire to see all the columns painted the same colour to retain the symmetrical character of the building.

In general, the panel welcomed the amendments to the scheme and agreed to remove their previous objection but wished to seek clarification on the points noted above.

NO OBJECTIONS

Construction of detached three storey building to provide 8 flats (2 x 1 bed, 6 x 2 bed) (Class C3); provision of soft and hard landscaping, car and bicycle parking, bin store, drainage infrastructure and boundary treatment; removal of trees; alterations to existing accesses and frontage boundary wall; and demolition of single storey structures adjacent to 190 London Road.

This item was being presented to the panel for the second time following previous comments and recommendations.

The members welcomed the amendments to the boundary treatments fronting London Road. They were in agreement that retention of the railings and gates as existing would preserve their positive contribution to the Conservation Area. Some queries were raised over the hard landscaping and SUDs scheme, with clarification sought that features would be integrated (i.e. permeable paving and landscape features).

Two options were presented on the treatment of the north-eastern elevation, following previous comments and recommendations from the panel. Members agreed that this was a positive step forward and away from a typical “rear elevation” approach of the previous scheme, providing an improved backdrop to the terrace on Oxford Avenue. The members debated the merits of both options, and while there was support for certain elements of both designs, in general the panel felt that neither option was entirely satisfactory. Some members felt the option with three gables appeared stretched, with uncharacteristically shallow pitches and an unsatisfactory solid:void ratio. Others felt the option with six gables was preferable as it was more compact and maintained a vertical symmetry that related well to the adjacent terrace. However, there was concern that detail here still needed more work. It was felt either option needed more work and detail on articulation, with a desire to see this element carried through to the principal elevation in terms of a cohesive relationship.  

Queries were raised over the proposed materials and decorative finishes as these details were not specified in the drawings.

In general, the panel welcomed the amendments as a positive step forward but felt that further work was required.

SEEK AMENDMENTS

Demolition of garage; construction of single and two storey extensions at side and rear of house (Class C3); alterations to house and boundary.

The panel were in agreement that the property as existing was an attractive building which contributed positively to the settings of the Stoneygate and Knighton Village Conservation Areas. They further agreed that the property occupies an important gateway location, and characteristics of the existing building form an integral part of the approach to both conservation areas.  In particular, the panel felt the eastern elevation was of special note with bay windows, a double pitched roof profile and prominent brick chimney stacks.

The panel felt the proposed development lacked finesse and did not respond well to the existing character of the host building. They felt the loss of certain elements, principally the Swithland slate roof and double pitch gables, would undermine  the feel of the conservation areas at this important transitional location.

Members agreed that it would fail to preserve or enhance the settings of the Stoneygate and Knighton Village Conservation Areas and resolved to formally object on these grounds.

OBJECTION

Retrospective application for freestanding double-sided non-illuminated sign at front of nursery

Alterations and installation of external stairs, balustrade, pergolas and roof to create external seating area (with lighting) at ground and first floor levels at rear of restaurant (Class E) and public house (sui generis)

Internal and external alterations to Grade II listed building

Installation of one externally illuminated fascia signs; two non illuminated fascia sign; two internally illuminated projecting signs; six vinyl signs; one frosting; one 5mm dibond panel sign

Non-material amendment to planning permission 20201018: amendments to façades including louvre arrangement

Change of use from two self-contained flats (2 x 2 bed) (Class C3) to a single dwellinghouse (Class C3)

Installation of two uPVC windows at front of house (Class C3)