Agenda item

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

A) CORAH FACTORY, VAUGHAN WAY

Planning Application 20081362

Redevelopment

 

The Director said that this was an outline application for the redevelopment of the site for mixed uses including commercial, residential, community and offices with new roads, car parking, public spaces and landscaping.

 

The Panel noted that the earliest part of the site dated from 1865 and had a very modern design for its time. They conceded that this area has become a very depressing part of the City and in general welcomed the redevelopment. The Panel were concerned that St Margaret’s Church would lose its significance because of the height of the new hotel behind it, especially when viewed along Sanvey Gate.  They thought there was scope to retain more of the original fabric rather than just the central 1865 building.  The Panel commented that they would have liked to have a site visit to make a proper appraisal of the site. It was noted that this was the St Margarets works and the Panel thought both St Margarets and Corah should come into the name of the site, rather than St. Johns.

 

A site visit was arranged for the Panel to take a closer look at the site.

 

B) 109-133 GRANBY STREET

Planning Application 20081428

Variation of condition

 

It was noted that consent was granted for demolition and redevelopment of this site last year. The Director said that application was for the removal of condition three of the approved Conservation Area Consent to allow immediate demolition of the existing buildings.

 

The Panel opposed the immediate demolition of the site, which they thought would set a bad precedent. The removal of the condition was essential to avoid unsightly gap sites in historic areas. The Panel commented that in the present economic climate no one was quite sure what was going to happen, there was a concern that the developers could go bankrupt and the buildings would be needlessly lost. The Panel requested that their objection to the loss of the existing buildings be noted which in their view could easily be incorporated into a redevelopment scheme.

 

The Panel recommended refusal on this application.

 

C) SPENCEFIELD LANE, LEICESTER GRAMMAR SCHOOL

Planning Application 20081275 & Listed Building Consent 20081285

Change of use to apartments and new housing in grounds

 

The Director said that the application was for the conversion of the Old Hall to six residential apartments. It involved internal and external alterations including the removal of the modern extensions and restoration of the external façade. The Panel were informed a planning application had also been submitted for new housing development within the grounds of the listed building.

 

The Panel were satisfied with the removal of the later additions to the main hall. They commented that the subdivision and internal alterations were thought to be too severe. The Panel were of the view that three very fine flats would be better than six and this would be better for the interior of the building.  It was noted that the setting of the Old Hall was important and some of the new houses seemed to be very close to the building.  The view of the Panel was that fewer bigger houses would be better than lots of small ones. They commented that the artist’s Douglas Smith’s scheme on Landscape Drive would be a good model for the layout. There were also concerns raised that the shared entrance with the school would intensify traffic.  The Panel thought that the quality of the indicative elevations shown was poor and did nothing to enhance the listed building.

 

The Panel recommended refusal on this application.

 

D) NEDHAM STREET, CHARNWOOD STREET SCHOOL

Planning Application 20081411 & Listed Building Consent 20081311

Alterations to school

 

It was noted that the Panel made observations on a modern extension to the school a few months ago. The Director said that the applications were for a new entrance and internal alterations.

 

The Heritage Regeneration Officer stated that the application would be brought before the Panel in October.

 

E) THURMASTON LANE, WILLOW COURT

Listed Building Consent 20081458

Additional windows

 

It was noted that the building was formerly the stable block to the Beeches and had been in use as offices for many years. The Director said that the application was for additional windows to provide extra light into the building.

 

The Panel thought that it would be better to remove a section of the wall and have a glazed feature 'wall' rather than lots of extra windows, which would perhaps be more, damaging to the original functional characteristics of the building.

 

The Panel recommended seeking amendments to this application.

 

F) MAIN STREET HUMBERSTONE, WARREN LODGE

Planning Application 20081436

New boundary wall and railings

 

The Director said that the application was for the replacement of the unauthorised wall fronting Keyham Lane discussed by the Panel earlier this year, with a dwarf wall and railings.

 

The Panel thought that this scheme was better than the existing wall but opposed the retention of part of the breeze block & rendered wall. They also stated that the dwarf wall should be brick.

 

The Panel recommended seeking amendments to this application.

 

G) 86-92 REGENT ROAD, ENKALON HOUSE

Planning Application 20081231

External cladding

 

The Director said that the application was for the external cladding of the building, which dated from the mid 1960s.

 

The Panel noted that this was a good example of a 1960s office block and cladding and also commented that the application would be detrimental to the building and the conservation area.

 

The Panel recommended refusal on this application.

 

H) 59 HIGHCROSS STREET

Listed Building Consent 20081376

New signage

 

It was noted that the Panel made observations on the conversion of this building earlier this year as part of the new Highcross development. The Panel were informed that the conversion and glazed extension were now almost complete. The Director said that the application was for new signage for the restaurant.

 

The Panel raised no objections to the new signs and menu boards

 

The Panel recommended approval on this application.

 

I) 14 JUBILEE ROAD

Planning application 20080995

Change of use and extension

 

This application is for the conversion of the building to flats. The proposal involved a two storey roof top extension.

 

The Panel noted the fine quality of the building, which was thought to be by Harvey and Simpson. The Panel commented that the roof extension was completely out of character with the building and would ruin the fine roofscape. They conceded that a roof extension on the rear flat roof element would be acceptable if well designed.

 

The Panel recommended refusal on this application.

 

J) 23 PORTLAND ROAD

Planning Application 20081116

Roof lights

 

The Director said that the application was for two rooflights to the front and a dormer window to the rear elevation.

 

The Panel accepted the dormer at the rear but recommended that the roof lights at the front should be refused.

 

The Panel recommended seeking amendments to this application.

 

K) 36 AVENUE ROAD, FLAT 1

Planning Application 20081305

Single storey extension

 

The Director said that the application was for a single storey extension to the side and rear of the property.

 

The Panel thought that the form of the extension did not relate to the existing building.  They commented that the extension needed to be well designed, picking up on the design elements and scale of the existing building.  They also commented that they would have preferred it to be built at the rear rather than at the side.

 

The Panel recommended seeking amendments to this application.

 

L) 14 NORTH AVENUE, THE WHITE HOUSE

Listed Building Consent 20081277

Internal & external alterations

 

The Director said that the application was for internal alterations to the building and removal of ramp to the main entrance.

 

The Panel had no objections to the alterations

 

The Panel recommended approval on this application.

 

M) 166 ST SAVIOURS ROAD

Planning Application 20081435

Change of use

 

The Director said that the application was for the conversion of the building to flats. The proposal involved external alterations.

 

The Panel had no objections to the change of use although were against the loss of another single dwelling. They commented if the windows at the front were to be replaced they should be in timber to match the existing ones.

 

The Panel recommended approval on this application.

 

N) 71 PARK VALE ROAD

Planning Application 20081229

Change of use

 

The Director said that the application was for a rear dormer and a disabled access ramp to the front of the house.

 

The Panel noted that the dormer to the rear was more like a 'roof extension' and it should read as a dormer by decreasing its size. The Panel commented that the ramp at the front was acceptable but they would have liked the hand rail reduced in height if possible to hide it behind the front wall

 

The Panel recommended seeking amendments to this application.

 

The Panel raised no observations on the following applications, they were therefore not formally considered.

 

O) 17 RATCLIFFE  ROAD

Planning Application 20081148

New windows and door

 

P) 70 HIGH STREET

Planning Application 20081120

New signs

 

Q) 80 REGENT ROAD, REGENT HOUSE

Listed Building Consent 20081297

Internal & external alterations

 

R) 1A BELVIOR STREET

Listed Building Consent 20081059

Internal & external alterations

 

S) 12 LOSEBY LANE

Listed Building Consent 20081385

Internal & external alterations

 

T) 92 GRANBY STREET

Planning Application 20081314 & Advertisement Consent 20081315

Alterations to shopfront and signage