Venue: City Hall, 115 Charles Street, Leicester, LE1 1FZ
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
R. Lawrence (Vice Chair), C. Sawday, Cllr S. Barton, N. Stacey (LSA), K. Durkin (Student)
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed.
The Minutes of the meeting held on 18th March 2020 are attached and the Panel is asked to confirm them as a correct record.
The Panel agreed the notes.
The Director of Planning, Development and Transportation submits a report on planning applications received for consideration by the Panel.
A) 14 Southernhay Road
Planning Application 20200652
The Panel commented on the lack of contextual drawings and visuals, which they considered would be beneficial for understanding the relationship of the proposed new dwelling to its streetscene. Some members questioned the lack of a more contemporary design style and the excessive footprint of the rear extension, as well as the loss of garden space. The odd geometry and massing of the new dwellinghouse were also commented on, as was its ‘pastiche’ design, but the loss of the existing close boarded fence was considered a potential positive. The general form and use, such as building height, was broadly supported.
Members unanimously criticised the impact and extent of hard landscaping to the front, with particular regard to the lack of front boundary treatment and planting to this part of the curtilage, considered of high potential do adversely affect the character and townscape of the Conservation Area. They requested that this is amended, with a brick (dwarf) boundary wall and soft landscaping introduced to the front of the property.
B) 64-66 London Road & 17 Glebe Street
Planning Application 20200663
The Panel agreed that the top-storey extension to the modern (rear) portion of the building will not have a notable impact on the character and significance of the South Highfields Conservation Area.
Whilst some members commented on the integrity of the 1920s block to London Road, with special regard to its roofscape, most concluded that the addition of dormers would be welcomed, as adding visual and architectural interest to the building. Amendments to their design, to better match the design and proportions of the existing glazing to frontage, were recommended. More information regarding materiality and finish of glazing and dormers was requested.
C) 2 St James Road, 200 London Road
Planning Application 20200429
Members first discussed the principle of the development. The erection of a two-storey dwelling on site was criticised, considered to have a negative impact on the character of the Conservation Area, leading to a cramped appearance in the streetscene and detracting from the prominent dwellings adjacent to the plot.
The pastiche design and materials (uPVC windows and doors) were also criticised, considered inadequate in its context.
D) 101-107 RATCLIFFE ROAD, MARY GEE HOUSES HALLS OF RESIDENCE
Planning Application 20190433
In reference to previous comments on the scheme, the Panel concluded that the conservation concerns regarding the excessive mass and ‘institutionalised’ architectural definition of the development were not addressed by the amendments. The materiality and finish were criticised, especially in regard to concrete tiles and uPVC windows. Although some amendments were welcomed, including the recessed balconies, these were considered insufficient to render the scheme acceptable from conservation perspective and address the aforementioned concerns.
The Panel retained broader concerns on the basis of the development being contextually inappropriate, with dominant massing and excessive visual impact on the Conservation Area.
E) 115 Abbey Park Road, Land Adjacent
Planning Application 20192102
Members welcomed the reduced height of the scheme, considered ... view the full minutes text for item 132.