Agenda item

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

A)  BELGRAVE HALL

Listed Building Consent 20100040

Replacement of rainwater goods

 

The Director said that this proposal was to make castings of the originals and fit Glass Reinforced Plastic (GRP) 'lead lookalike' replicas.

 

The Panel were sympathetic to the problems of lead theft. However GRP was not an acceptable replacement for lead on a Grade II* listed building and the Panel would like to see the original lead-work reinstated. They suggested that copies of the decorative brackets and hoppers were made so that if the lead was stolen at some point lead replicas could be made.

 

The Panel recommended refusal on this application.

 

B)  230 LONDON  ROAD

Planning Application 20091727

Demolition and redevelopment

 

The Director said that this application was for a new four and five storey building for commercial use and student flats.

 

The Panel accepted the principle of a building in these proportions. However they did not like the heavy massing of the design and would like to see some additional drop in height in the roofscape to create some drama. They thought that the proposal did not address the sweep around the corner from London Road to Mayfield Road and the introduction of a landmark feature would create more visual interest. This was a very desirable and important site and the Panel felt a building of real quality is needed to do it full justice, and the building as proposed was not good enough.

 

The Panel recommended that amendments be sought, refusal of this application in its current form.

 

C)  215 & 219 EVINGTON LANE

Planning Application 20090668, Conservation Area Consent 20090697

Demolition, redevelopment with four detached houses

 

The Director said that this proposal was to demolish both houses and redevelop the site with five detached houses.

 

The Panel maintained their views that the two Edwardian Houses should be kept. They noted that these could be retained along with the two additional houses previously granted outline consent, and the addition of one at the rear of the site currently proposed would achieve the five detached houses that the applicant wanted from the site.

 

The Panel recommended refusal on this application.

 

D)   56 ST JAMES ROAD, 69 EVINGTON ROAD

Planning Application 20091633

Change of use.

 

The Director said that this application was for the change of use of the building from offices to two houses in multiple occupation.

 

The Panel were in the main supportive of a scheme that tidied up this rather unsightly rear. They would like to see access retained for car parking and some members thought that stepping the roofline as it falls down the hill would be an improvement. The rooflights on the main building were visible but they were not on the front elevation and therefore reluctantly acceptable, providing they were the flush conservation style.

 

The Panel recommended that amendments be sought.

 

 

E)  68 DERWENT STREET

Planning Application 20100134

Rear dormer

 

The Director said that this application was for a new rear dormer.

 

The Panel did not like the large dormer proposed to the rear roof slope and recommended smaller dormers to match those on the front elevation. They thought that the alterations to the side window could not be achieved without some unsightly scarring and therefore did not support the alterations to it.

 

The Panel recommended that amendments be sought.

 

F)  34 PORTLAND ROAD

Planning Application 20091603

Single rooflight to front three to rear roof slope

 

The Director said that this application was for one roof light to the front and three roof lights to the rear of the building.

 

The Panel reiterated previous views that they do not like rooflights at the front of buildings but reluctantly accepted this one as they had approved others within the area.

 

The Panel recommended approval of this application.

 

The Panel made no objections to the following applications, they were therefore not formally considered:

 

G)  32 CHURCH GATE

Planning Application 20100014

Change of use

 

J)  63A KING STREET

Planning Application 20100074

Change of use

 

K)  31 ST JAMES ROAD

Planning Application 20091670

Replacement UPVC Window

 

L)  158 LONDON ROAD

Planning Application 20100104

3 shroud antennas on roof

 

M)  33 SAXBY STREET

Planning Application 2010

Change of use