Agenda item
CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
The Service Director, Environment submits a report on planning applications received for consideration by the Panel.
Minutes:
A) CHARLES STREET, FORMER POLICE STATION
Planning Application 20051900 & Listed Building Consent 20051895
Change of use, extensions and redevelopment
The Director said that the application was for the change of use of the former Police station to offices and restaurant, extensions to the rooftop and rear and a new five to seven storey building to the rear for 40 flats and office accommodation.
The Panel accepted the principle of the proposal but made some observations on the proposed design:
· The new build was too dominant in relation to the listed building and perhaps too much was being crammed into this space.
· The link between the rear extension and the listed building should be more fragmented.
· There might also be a solar gain problem as this elevation faces the sun for much of the day, but Panel members liked the way it acted as a back drop for the listed building.
· The plant room on the rooftop was unsightly and should be less bulky
· Breaks in the frontage of the office block should be introduced to allow views of the church. The fenestration within the main office block needed more imagination.
· Some members did not like the materials and thought brick rather than red render should be used for the residential block.
· The relationship between the office block and the residential element reads as a solid block and should be broken up in some way. One suggestion was a glazed link between the two buildings where the stairs are proposed.
· It was also noted that on a previous scheme the glass stairwell on the St George Street side had a twin, which acted as a gateway into the courtyard and the Panel felt that this should be reintroduced.
· The courtyard was considered to be uninviting.
B) THE NEWARKE, NEWARKE HOUSES MUSEUM
Planning Application 20051754
Proposed disabled persons lift
The Director said that the application was for a lift to provide access to the upper floors. The Panel had considered various locations for this proposal over the last couple of years. This current proposal was to provide disabled access to every room in the museum but it would require a new opening in part of the original 16th century rear wall of Skeffington House.
Members of the Panel raised no objections.
C) 4 QUEEN STREET
Planning Application 20051710
Outline consent for new residential development
The Director said that the application was for the demolition of an existing warehouse and the erection of a new residential development of seventeen flats. A previous scheme for 21 flats was refused earlier in the year. The current application was seeking outline consent for siting and access matters only.
The Panel felt that the proposed development was acceptable in principle, subject to the replacement being a well-designed building and a maximum height no greater that the adjacent buildings.
D) REAR OF 195 NARBOROUGH ROAD
Planning Application 20051704
Demolition and redevelopment
The Director said that the application was for the demolition of garages to the rear of 195 Narborough Road, facing Westleigh Road and the redevelopment of the site with a three storey building for three self contained flats.
The Panel thought that the coach house made an important contribution to the street scene and the conservation area and did not wish to see it demolished.
E) 8-10 MILLSTONE LANE
Planning Application 20051702
Alterations to shopfront
The Director said that the application was for alterations to the shopfront, seeking to create a French style street cafe.
The Panel had some reservations about this proposal. They recommended that the scheme be simplified and asked for a reduction in the number of signs shown. The Panel was also opposed to awnings on the building. They also pointed out the unfinished nature of the ground floor elevations flanking the shopfront and asked that they be ‘finished off’. They commented on the white strip beneath the first floor windows and asked that this be returned to brickwork or at the very least the strip should be painted a brick red to match the upper floors.
F) LONDON ROAD, RAILWAY STATION
Listed Building Consent 20051867
Cleaning and repairs
The Director said that the application was for cleaning and repair of the clock tower.
The Panel was concerned that if the building were cleaned it might end up covered with algae like others in the city (the Robert Hall Memorial Chapel was named as an example). They also raised concern over the proposed method of cleaning which might erode the façade unless used by experts.
G) 56 STOUGHTON ROAD
Planning Application 20050721
Change of use
The Director noted that the Panel had previously considered both the demolition of the building and its conversion to flats involving a rear extension at previous meetings. The Panel considered a revised scheme reducing the size of the rear extension.
The Panel reiterated previous comments that the building should be converted as it is with no additional extensions. They did not wish to see any demolition of the existing building and also pointed out the proposed loss of the garret window on the west elevation – which was considered to be an important feature of the building and should be retained
H) 64-66 HUMBERSTONE GATE
Advertisement Consent 20051660
Retention of signage
The Director said the application was for the retention of an internally illuminated wall sign and internally illuminated projecting sign.
The Panel welcomed the reduction in signage but felt that the first floor vertical sign should be externally illuminated.
I) 19 BOWLING GREEN STREET
Planning Application 20051717
Change of use
The Director said the application was for the change of use of first and second floors from public house to two self contained flats. The proposal involved external alterations.
The Panel raised no objections to the proposed alterations but some members raised concerns over policies regarding flat conversions in commercial inner city areas.
J) 25-27 UPPER KING STREET
Listed Building Consent 20051787 & Planning Application 20051764
New boundary wall & gates
The Director said that the application was for alterations to the building and a new two metre high rear boundary wall with access gates to Trinity Lane. The Panel previously made observations on a similar proposal at 17 Upper King Street at the last meeting.
The Panel welcomed the brick wall enclosure, which would reinstate the garden status of the original Georgian terrace but recommended that it be lowered from 1.8 metres down to 1.5 metres. They also recommended that it be built with a traditional English garden wall bond – three courses of stretchers alternating with one course of headers on the face of the wall.
K) MANSION HOUSE, GLENFIELD HOSPITAL
Listed Building Consent 20050709 & Planning Application 20052469
Disabled Access Ramp and associated lighting
The Director said that the application was for the removal of the existing non compliant ramped access to the rear of the building and replace it with a new compliant ramp with stepped access. The work also involved new emergency lighting and electronic door opener.
The Panel raised on objections.
L) 225 AYLESTONE ROAD
Listed Building Consent 20051781
Single Storey rear extension
The Director said that the proposal was to build a single storey extension to the rear of the house. The proposal involved the demolition of an existing outbuilding.
The Panel were happy with the proposal except for the proposed window, which it was felt should be more in keeping with the original small light windows within the terrace.
M) 127 MERE ROAD
Planning Application 20051180
Replacement windows
The Director said that the application was for the replacement of the existing sliding sash, stained glass windows for new mock sash double glazed units.
The Panel commented on the high quality of the existing windows and did not wish to lose them unnecessarily.
N) 134 MERE ROAD
Planning Application 20051863
Dormer window
The Director said that the application was for a dormer window to the front roof slope.
The Panel expressed a preference for the window to be on the rear but if it had to go on the front then it should be situated to sit directly over the central bay so that the line of the bay is carried up into the dormer.
O) 102 WELFORD ROAD
Planning Application 20051603 & Listed Building Consent 20051674
Repair and replacement windows, secondary glazing
The Director said that the application was for repair and replacement of windows and the introduction of secondary double glazing.
The Panel raised no objection to this proposal.
P) 24 GOTHAM STREET
Planning Application 20051709
Replacement windows
The Director said that the application was for the replacement of the rear windows with double glazed uPVC units.
Q) 17 NEWARKE STREET
Planning Application 20051730
Change of use
The Director said that the application was for the change of use of the building to 12 flats. The Panel had previously considered a similar proposal for 11 flats earlier in the year.
The Panel raised no objections.
R) 222 FOSSE ROAD SOUTH
Planning Application 20041304
Alterations to porch
The Director said that the application was for alterations to the existing porch.
The Panel raised no objections.
The Panel raised no objection to the following and they were therefore not formally considered.
S) 25 HORSEFAIR STREET
Planning Application 20041832, Advertisement Consent 20051809
Alterations to shopfront, new signs
T) 9 ST NICHOLAS PLACE
Planning Application 20051662
Security Gates
U) 8-10 HIGHFIELD STREET
Planning Application 20051810
Rear fire escape
V) 29 SHAFTESBURY AVENUE
Planning Application 20051812
Retention of external alterations
Supporting documents:
PDF 17 KB