Agenda and minutes

There were apologies from T. Abbott, S. Bowyer, S. Dobby and Cllr. Garrity.

Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed.

K. Chappi declared in interest as his company was doing work with the agents for some of the applications although he was unaware exactly which.

S. Britton declared an interest in Appendix C, item N, 15 Church Lane, Knighton as his employer owned land opposite the building.

The minutes of the meeting held on 16 February 2005 are attached and the Panel is asked to confirm them as a correct record.

RESOLVED:

that the minutes of the meeting of the Panel held on 16 February 2005 be confirmed as a correct record.

There were no matters arising from the minutes.

The Service Director, Environment submits a report on decisions made by the Development Control Committee on planning applications previously considered by the Panel.

The Service Director, Environment submitted a report on decisions made by the Development Control Committee on planning applications previously considered by the Conservation Advisory Panel.

Members of the Panel enquired about the approval of the Junior Street, Former Richard Roberts’ Factory application which the Panel had recommended for refusal. Officers informed the Panel that the application which was for the roof extension was approved despite the spot listing because the listing came through very late in the day and it was considered that it would have been unreasonable to refuse it.

RESOLVED:

that the report be received and the decisions taken be noted.

The Service Director, Environment submits a report on planning applications received for consideration by the Panel.

 A) VAUGHAN WAY, BURGESS STREET, CAUSEWAY LANE, EAST BOND STREET

Planning Application 20050628

Redevelopment – extension to Shires

The Director noted that the Panel had previously made observations on an outline application for new development ranging from 2 to 8 storeys in height for retail, residential and leisure use and car parking on the site north of the Shires bounded by Causeway Lane and East Bond Street to the east, Highcross Street / Vaughan Way to the west / north west, and land north of Vaughan Way running along Burgess Street to Long Lane and east of All Saint’s Churchyard. This application was for reserved matters.

The Panel commented on each of the buildings as follows:

Highcross Street:

The Panel felt that the corner building would be an interesting contrast with 59 Highcross Street, but had reservations about the possible use of fair-faced concrete for the frame. A different material/finish that would reduce the thickness of the frame was preferred.

The Infill building between 59 Highcross street & Grammar school was considered to be unacceptable – It was felt to be a poor 1960s retro style that didn’t reflect the scale of surrounding buildings or the rhythm of rooflines.  The flat roof didn’t reflect the rhythm of rooflines and the building appeared truncated; a different treatment of the top storey, it was suggested may help.  A reduction of one storey was suggested on the side overlooking the Grammar School square to reduce the impact.

High Street/Shires Lane:

The design of the new build was considered unacceptable – a bland contribution to an interesting streetscape. Its rectangular, rigid format and lack of articulation was out of character and didn’t offer variety. The Block would also be too high in relation to adjoining former post office building. It would also be the only flat roof on the High Street. Corner features were noted as being a characteristic feature of Leicester and that this should be reflected here. The Panel thought that the colour of the brickwork on the image was too washed out and that orange/red brick was more in keeping with High Street.

With regard to Shires Lane, there was confusion about whether the street was intended for vehicular access or pedestrianised; the floorscape needed to be different if pedestrians were to be encouraged.

Bond Street/St Peters Lane:

The panel expressed the same opposition to the bland 1960s retro. architecture. The repetitive horizontal bands; scale, proportion and relationship to other buildings did not appear to have been taken into account, particularly the height in this sensitive to historic location where the Great Meeting Chapel was situated.

Shires mall extension:

There were concerns about large expanses of bland flat roofs.  The quality of the floorscape and the surface treatments for new “streets” was felt as being important. On Causeway lane – there was a fear that the bus dominance of the High Street was merely being transferred.

B) 2-4 COLTON STREET

Planning Application 20050477

Change of use and rooftop extension  ...  view the full minutes text for item 84.

To consider such other business as, in the opinion of the Chair, ought, by reason of special circumstances, to be considered urgently.

Members are asked to inform the Chair and Committee Administrator in advance of the meeting if they have urgent business that they wish to be considered.

The Panel expressed their regret at the loss of the Frisby Jarvis building on Woodgate.

The meeting closed at 7.10pm.