Agenda and minutes
PDF 128 KBVenue: City Hall, 115 Charles Street, Leicester, LE1 1FZ
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Minutes: M. Richardson (RTPI), S. Bird (DAC) |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed. Minutes: None. |
|
|
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING The Minutes of the meeting held on 26th August are attached and the Panel is asked to confirm them as a correct record. Minutes: The Panel agreed the notes. |
|
|
CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS The Director of Planning, Development and Transportation submits a report on planning applications received for consideration by the Panel. Minutes: Planning Application 20201190
The Panel criticised the level of detail and the mismatch between the submitted floor plans and the elevation drawings, as well as the lack of detail in the supporting documents. The lack of information regarding external finish & materiality as well as the level of proposed demolition were highlighted. As a result, members found it difficult to judge the exact impact of the proposed scheme on the Conservation Area and the historic building under consideration.
From the information provided, the upward extension was considered detrimental to the former school as well as the streetscene of the Stoneygate Conservation Area, of potential to disrupt the visual balance of the frontage and its relationship with the adjacent properties. Its position and massing, encroaching upon the existing chimney and positioned above the existing ridge, in line with the existing frontage (not recessed), were considered as inappropriate for the site under consideration.
Creation of new vehicular access to the site, created by partial removal of the boundary wall to Aber Road, was regarded as detrimental to the setting of the asset under consideration, encroaching upon its ‘attractive’ curtilage. The Panel sought clarification on works to the curtilage, including any works to vegetation, soft & hard landscaping.
The installation of uPVC windows was considered as grossly inappropriate for the site under consideration, where traditional timber windows survive throughout, and the Stoneygate Conservation Area more broadly. The argument of improved U-value was not considered to be adequate as a counterpoint; members noted that improved U-value can be achieved through more appropriate course of action (e.g. refurbishment of existing windows).
The members of the Panel agreed that the scheme will fail to preserve or enhance the non-designated heritage asset and the Stoneygate Conservation Area and thus raised objections to the development as currently proposed.
OBJECTIONS
B) Fleet Street, Fleet House Planning Application 20200942
Part demolition and conversion of Fleet House; construction of four storey extension to Fleet House fronting Byron Street; construction of five 5 - 6.5 storey buildings comprising 359 flats (146 x Studio, 211 x 1 bed, 2 x 2 bed) (Class C3); communal ancillary facilities to include residents gym; indoor amenity space; outdoor landscaped amenity space; pedestrian access (amended plans received 12/10/2020)
The Panel found it difficult to decipher the totality of amendments introduced since the last iteration of the scheme. Members noted that some concerns initially raised were not adequately addressed, including the relationship between the existing building and the adjacent new buildings, including position, massing and elevation definition (lack of fenestration in particular). The altered elevation treatment of the block abutting the Locally Listed 80 Wharf Street South was appreciated, considered an improvement.
The Panel agreed that more information, clarification and amended visuals would be useful to provide more comprehensive and conclusive ... view the full minutes text for item 144. |