Agenda and minutes

Conservation Advisory Panel - Wednesday, 21 November 2012 5:15 pm

Venue: THE OAK ROOM - GROUND FLOOR, TOWN HALL, TOWN HALL SQUARE, LEICESTER

Contact: Angie Smith 

Items
No. Item

27.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillor Unsworth, Richard Gill, Catherine Laughton and Jenny Timothy.

 

Richard Lawrence took the Chair for the meeting.

28.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed.

Minutes:

The were no declarations of interest made.

29.

MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING pdf icon PDF 80 KB

The minutes of the meeting held on 17th October 2012 are attached and the Panel is asked to confirm them as a correct record.

Minutes:

RESOLVED:

that the minutes of the meeting of the Conservation Advisory Panel held on 17th October 2012 be confirmed as a correct record.

30.

MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES

Minutes:

There were no matters arising from the minutes.

31.

CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS pdf icon PDF 63 KB

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

Minutes:

A) FORMER SOUTHGATES BUS DEPOT, SOUTHGATES/PEACOCK LANE

Planning Application 20121532

Four and five to nine storey building

 

The proposal was within the Cathedral/Guildhall Conservation Area and would affect the setting of a number of listed buildings within the area.

 

The application was for three new buildings, one 4 storey, one 6 storey and a 5-9 storey building to provide a total of 434 flats and two retail units.

 

The Panel supported the principle of the development, as they considered this area of the city was in need of enhancement. They were also in favour of the general design of the new development, as it was quite elegant and potentially of a high aesthetic quality. The Panel were particularly in favour of the articulation of the buildings.

 

The Panel did however raise concerns over the sheer size and scale of the development, and how it would impact upon long distance views, in particular from New Street. The Panel did not want the development to bleed into historic views.

 

The Panel therefore requested that additional visualisations are provided, showing how the development would impact upon those views. The Panel asked if the information could be given to the architects on the Panel, to make further observations on behalf of the Panel.

 

The Panel stated FURTHER INFORMATION WAS REQUESTED

 

 

B) ST MARTINS CATHEDRAL AND ST MARTINS HOUSE PEACOCK LANE, GUILDHALL LANE

Planning Application 20121529

Alterations to the grounds of the Cathedral and Cathedral Centre

 

The proposal was within the Cathedral/Guildhall Conservation Area and would affect the setting of a number of listed buildings including the old school (Grade II), the Guildhall (Grade I) and the Cathedral a Grade II* listed building.

 

The application was for alterations to the grounds of the Cathedral both on the St Martins side and the small area facing Guildhall Lane and the playground of the former Grammar school and involved resurfacing and landscaping and removal of sections of the listed wall and railings and headstones.

 

The Panel supported the principle of the development, but were concerned with its current form. The Panel considered that the idea of creating a single wide open space was undesirable, and that a series of intimate areas would be more favourable.

 

The Panel wanted the space to reflect St Martin’s parish church origins, with a more intimate relationship with its immediate surroundings.

 

The Panel had strong reservations over the amount of historic features proposed to be removed. Of particular concern was the loss of the existing field wall, iron railings to St Martins West and the curve in St Martins East.

 

The Panel did however consider that the proposal would enhance the appearance of the existing car park, which at present was unfriendly. The proposal would also encourage people into the site – which was welcomed.

 

The Panel where keen to stress that they thought that the proposal was a good concept, creating a good use for the space and didn’t want concerns over individual aspects of the scheme to overshadow the positive  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

32.

CLOSE OF MEETING

Minutes:

The meeting closed at 7.18pm.