Agenda item

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

A) FIRE STATION, LANCASTER ROAD

Planning Application 20081625 & Listed Building Consent 20081623

Internal & external alterations

 

It was noted that the Panel made observations on alterations to the building in August. The Director said that the application was a revised scheme for the proposed alterations.

 

The Panel supported the revised canopy and the replacement windows provided that they were exact replicas. 

 

The Panel recommended conditional approval on this application.

 

B) 1 WEST WALK

Planning Application 20081471

Extension & new offices

 

The Director said that the application was for a two storey extension to the rear of the office building and a new three storey office building in the adjacent 'garden' space.

 

The Panel thought that the new build looked quite interesting and showed some imagination but commented that the first floor balcony looked as though it was in front of the building line. The Panel also thought the building would be a bit overpowering from some angles and would obscure the view down West Walk.  They requested that the building be set back and more glazing added to reduce the bulk. 

 

The Panel were less keen on the rear extension which they felt should complement the design of the new build better. They were satisfied with the proposed height but commented that the elevation facing Princess Road East needed to be improved. They requested that the extension be altered to form part of the new build in an L shape instead and that the rear elevation of the existing building be restored.

 

The Panel recommended seeking amendments to this application.

 

C) 136 WESTCOTES DRIVE

Planning Application 20081464

Change of use to 15 flats

 

The Director said that the application was for the conversion of the nursing home to 15 self-contained flats. The proposal involved a new extension to the rear replacing the existing flat roof extension and external alterations to the existing 1960s extension.

 

The Panel thought that this was a particularly attractive site and Westcotes Drive was very distinctive. The Panel opposed the extra extension to the rear and the reworking of the existing extension. They felt that the 1960s part did not detract from the main building but only the windows did. They also stated that the new proposals created an over-intensive development on the site that would not enhance the conservation area. The Panel opposed the loss of the rear garden space for the new extension however they did support the change of use to flats.

 

The Panel recommended refusal on this application.

 

D) UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER

Planning Application 20081427

Extensions to student union

 

The Director said that the application was for extensions to the Percy Gee Building.

 

The Panel thought that the new extensions would completely alter the appearance of the building, but agreed that it needed improving. Some members thought the end result would be more interesting than the drawings suggested.

 

The Panel recommended approval on this application.

 

E) 20 – 22 GRANBY STREET

Planning Application 20081447, 20081404, 20081642

Signage, new shop front, change of use of ground floor to café and upper floor to flats

 

The Director said that the application was for the conversion of the ground floor shop to a café, and upper floor to a flat. The proposal involved a new shopfront and signage and a separate entrance door to the upper floors.

 

The Panel thought that Granby Street needed livening up and that the new signage would be an improvement. They queried whether the new door could be central, but accepted that this would not be possible because of the location of the internal staircase.

 

The Panel recommended approval on this application.

 

F) MIRCH MARSALA, 37 – 39 MARKET STREET

Planning Application 20081053

3 Projecting signs

 

The Director said that the application was for three banner signs to the first floor.

 

The Panel thought that the proposed banners would destroy the rhythm and integrity of the façade and would set a bad precedent for other shops in Market Street to do the same.

 

The Panel recommended refusal on this application.

 

G) 20 MARKET STREET

Planning Application 20081681

New shopfront

 

The Director said that the application was for a new shopfront.

 

The Panel queried the providence of the existing pilaster and what was behind the existing fascia. They queried whether the pilaster could be removed to achieve a symmetrical shopfront. They stated that if the pilaster stayed then they would prefer a slightly asymmetrical shop front.  The Panel welcomed the removal of the existing roller shutter.

 

The Panel recommended seeking amendments to this application.

 

H) 12 LOSEBY LANE

Advertisement Consent 20081626

Signage

 

The Director said that the application was for two non illuminated fascia signs and one non illuminated projecting sign to a new café. It was noted that the change of use had been approved last month.

 

The Panel noted that the building in question was a handsome building with a nice shop front.  They had no objection to the signage but queried how the canopy would be attached to the fascia. The Panel questioned whether the box would be recessed.

 

It was agreed that more information was required for this application.

 

I) 15 CARISBROOKE ROAD

Planning Application 20081529

Single storey extension

 

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

 

The Panel had concerns about the proposed extension as the buildings coherence and historic shape would be lost. They acknowledged that the extension wouldn’t be visible from the street but it would be very large and close to the trees. After some discussion the Panel decided to reluctantly support the scheme provided that the materials matched the existing ones and there was no damage to the trees.

 

The Panel recommended conditional approval on this application.

 

J) 6 RATCLIFFE ROAD

Planning Application 20081546

Single storey extension

 

It was noted that the Panel made observations on the conversion and partial redevelopment of the site in 2003. The Director said that the application was for a single storey extension to the building.

 

The Panel opposed any extension in the location as they felt it would have a negative impact on a fine quality building and the wider conservation area.

 

The Panel recommended refusal on this application.

 

K) 18 VICTORIA PARK ROAD

Planning Application 20081566

Change of use to flats

 

It was noted that the Panel discussed the previous scheme earlier this year.. The Director said that the application was a revised scheme for the conversion of the house to five self contained flats.

 

The Panel reiterated their previous objection to the change of use to 5 flats.

 

The Panel recommended refusal on this application.

 

L) THE LODGE, BRAUNSTONE PARK

Planning Application 20060737

Revised landscaping

 

It was noted that the Panel made observations on the refurbishment, extension and change of use of this building in 2006. The Director said this was a revised landscaping scheme to the one approved.

 

The Panel thought that the bollards were very dominant and needed to be of a better quality and design. They commented that the recently installed fencing at Western Park could be used as a template for the proposed fencing around the lodge.

 

The Panel recommended seeking amendments to this application.

 

M) 34 – 36 CHURCHGATE

Planning Application 20081645

Canopy

 

The Director said that the application was for a new canopy to the front of the shop.

 

The Panel thought that two smaller canopies, one over each window would be more appropriate.

 

The Panel recommended seeking amendments to this application.

 

LATE ITEM

 

CHARLES STREET POLICE STATION

Listed Building Consent 20081720

Banner sign to front elevation

 

The Director said that the application was for a new sign to replace the existing one.

 

The Panel were opposed to the banner sign, which they felt was more of an advert for the agents than the building and would be too high and dominant. They queried whether the flagpole could be used for a new sign instead.

 

The Panel recommended refusal on this application.

 

LATE ITEM

 

8 GUILDHALL LANE

Listed Building Consent 20081638

Change of use and alterations

 

The Director said that the application was for a general restoration scheme to the building, which included the replacement of the windows and doors at the change of use to a house.

 

The Panel thought this looked like an interesting building with lots of aspects to it, and requested an archaeological impact assessment be carried out. They welcomed the change of use to a house but saw no need to change the rear window.  They had no objection to the proposed doors from the kitchen.

 

The Panel recommended seeking amendments to this application.

 

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

 

N)  126 MERE ROAD

Planning Application 20081587

Change of use to flats

 

O) 28 WESTLEIGH ROAD

Planning Application 20081473

Solar panels

 

P) 8 BOWLING GREEN STREET

Planning Application 20081624

Internal alterations

 

Q) 31 - 37 LINCOLN STREET

Planning Application 20081303

Extension

 

R) 14-20 HIGHFIELDS STREET

Planning Application 20081556

Lighting

 

S) 14 CHEAPSIDE

Advertisement Consent 20081515

Signage

 

T) 174 ST SAVIOURS ROAD

Planning Application 20081518

Replacement windows

 

U) 50 RATCLIFFE ROAD

Planning Application 20081501

Extension

 

V) 93 LONDON ROAD

Planning Application 20081476

Change of use

 

W) 91 LONDON ROAD

Planning Application 20081621

ATM machine

 

X) AYLESTONE ROAD GAS DEPOT

Planning Application 20081337

Access ramp